And it's not like anybody forced Nintendo's hand, for one thing; they agreed to it.

Do you have proof of this?

Because if they agreed to remove it for the Western release, then people should absolutely not be crying over this.

There's no defense.

No one legally forced them to censor their own game.

Well, yeah. That doesn't necessarily mean they'd agree to it, though.

not that i care--if they disagree, they're wrong

Don't like it, don't support the artistry and let the free market do its job better than any government mandated censorship will ever achieve.

Why is this such a difficult concept to people.

Me not buying this won't destroy it. People will buy this.

Should I kill them?

Quote from: Mordo on January 27, 2016, 09:26:10 AM

Don't like it, don't support the artistry and let the free market do its job better than any government mandated censorship will ever achieve.

Why is this such a difficult concept to people.

Me not buying this won't destroy it. People will buy this.

Should I kill them?

eh idk probs

Quote from: Psygnirish on January 27, 2016, 09:00:56 AM

Even if all you learn from the experience is "I should never do that" or "This is disgusting and I completely abhor it" then it's worth keeping it.

But those are good messages to convey. Those are rational responses. This touching thing is designed to elicit some sick sense of pleasure, clearly. That's what it's there for. It's a virtual foreplay doll. What is the artistic value of that?

What is there to take away from a pedophilic foreplay game?

Well to certain people it's elicited a reaction that requires boycotting. That's worth taking away from this. Case in point:

FUCK no. I am NOT supporting this franchise at all.

And neither should anyone else.

It's not like you'll be recommending Nintendo games to anyone unless they're second hand or just pirating them, and even this thread has you exposing others to this crazy thing so that (hopefully) we would avoid it. Nothing artistic out of it, but art can be a lot worse than some concept based on exploiting the lonely perverted-ness of people who play video games.

No?

If censorship occurs, it shouldn't be due to external influence. It should be because the artist itself believes that it would make it better.

Revising a script, and remove a tit or two from final production? Perfectly fine.
Someone throwing a protest over the fact that an R rated movie had nudity in it, and buckling? No.

Quote from: Fuddy Duddy II on January 27, 2016, 09:36:08 AM

objectively

I mean, using this word constantly (and inappropriately) doesn't make your arguments any more or less opinionated.

Except I'm using it appropriately.

I've proven sexuality to be objectively undesirable by any rational standard. Nobody has proven me wrong.

Quote from: Ender on January 27, 2016, 08:20:02 AM

I mean, if it's something like a gory or shocking video on the news or a video of a guy runing around streaking, then yeah, censor that stuff.

Why? Wouldn't that qualify as you being overly-sensitive?

Not really, I just don't want to be seeing what the weather will be like while helping my mom do daycare stuff (she does it while I'm at school) and all of the sudden they play a video of Isis or someone else decapitating people or have them accidentally see a video of a naked guy running around at a football game.

Quote from: Fuddy Duddy II on January 27, 2016, 08:55:39 AM

Quote from: Ender on January 27, 2016, 08:20:02 AM

I mean, if it's something like a gory or shocking video on the news or a video of a guy runing around streaking, then yeah, censor that stuff.

Why? Wouldn't that qualify as you being overly-sensitive?

Not really, I just don't want to be seeing what the weather will be like while helping my mom do daycare stuff (she does it while I'm at school) and all of the sudden they play a video of Isis or someone else decapitating people or have them accidentally see a video of a naked guy running around at a football game.

Why not? Because someone might be... too sensitive to handle that imagery?

Being sensitive isn't a bad thing--I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Quote from: Ender on January 27, 2016, 09:44:03 AM

Quote from: Fuddy Duddy II on January 27, 2016, 08:55:39 AM

Quote from: Ender on January 27, 2016, 08:20:02 AM

I mean, if it's something like a gory or shocking video on the news or a video of a guy runing around streaking, then yeah, censor that stuff.

Why? Wouldn't that qualify as you being overly-sensitive?

Not really, I just don't want to be seeing what the weather will be like while helping my mom do daycare stuff (she does it while I'm at school) and all of the sudden they play a video of Isis or someone else decapitating people or have them accidentally see a video of a naked guy running around at a football game.

Why not? Because someone might be... too sensitive to handle that imagery?

Being sensitive isn't a bad thing--I'm just playing devil's advocate.

Because stuff like the news is really easy to access, a kid could accidentally switch to a news channel and witness something like a video of a guy or girl getting killed or anything else that's nsfw and news worthy.

I don't mind gore, I wont flinch at it or anything, but I don't want someone that's really young or has a serious problem with seeing that stuff to witness something by accident.

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 27, 2016, 09:48:24 AM

It's already warned by the rating.

"Warning: This game has unjustifiably stupid shit in it."

Okay, but that doesn't make it any less unjustified, or something that should be forcefully taken out.

Quote

Being an original work, it is the artist's job to convey an idea through his medium. If that includes a scene with nudity, that's his business.

Sure, except he's selling the product to an audience of people. If he were an independent artist who wasn't a part of a LARGER business, then sure, "it's his business" would be a sensible argument. But no, it's not just his business. It's his business's business--and it's in a business's best interest to appease as many people as people.

You're not going to do that if you have abhorrently disgusting shit in your work.

Therefore, if a protest leads the business to change the product, that's absolutely 100% okay.

The difference here is that you're looking at it as a product-- I'm looking at it as art.

Will Fire Emblem Fates, for example, probably be good art? Probably not. But that's the freedom you have to make an idea reality; you have the freedom to make bad art alongside the good.

Even from a business perspective, if you advertise Magic Mike, being that they are strippers, are you going to really give a shit if the afterschool children's club doesn't watch your movie? No, that's not your demographic. Both in art and business, you have a demographic to target: quite obviously, The Enemy isn't for the blockbuster audience, it's an art-house style film: it targets the niche audience that looks for something attempting at "high-art". Deadpool isn't for eight year-olds, so Fox doesn't give a damn if eight year-olds don't watch it. The business makes money by selling to their demographic. Why does it matter what elderly golf players say or think about a video game for 18 year olds?

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 27, 2016, 10:01:39 AM

The difference here is that you're looking at it as a product-- I'm looking at it as art.

I'm looking at it as both. Because it's both. They are not mutually exclusive, quite obviously.

Quote

Even from a business perspective, if you advertise Magic Mike, being that they are strippers, are you going to really give a shit if the afterschool children's club doesn't watch your movie? No, that's not your demographic. Both in art and business, you have a demographic to target: quite obviously, The Enemy isn't for the blockbuster audience, it's an art-house style film: it targets the niche audience that looks for something attempting at "high-art". Deadpool isn't for eight year-olds, so Fox doesn't give a damn if eight year-olds don't watch it. The business makes money by selling to their demographic. Why does it matter what elderly golf players say or think about a video game for 18 year olds?

I'm not an elderly golf player, though. Not even... Not even close.

I just don't see what the problem is when it comes to protesting a game and demanding it to be changed. At all. That, in itself, is part of your guaranteed 1st amendment rights. All I'm saying is, "I don't like this. If you don't change this, I will not buy this game, and I will speak out against your game, and I will tell others to avoid your game, you bunch of disgusting cunts."

I'm not holding a gun to their head--I'm just saying, if they keep pulling this shit, I will do whatever I can to boycott them. Until they change.

They don't HAVE to change--but I will refuse to support them unless they do. Because I don't support their art product.

Why is that wrong?

It's not necessary wrong, it's just that not very many people would give support and people would mock the protestor.

Quote from: Ender on January 27, 2016, 10:14:31 AM

It's not necessary wrong, it's just that not very many people would give support and people would mock the protestor.

Well, this is what she said.

Quote from: Prime Megaten on January 27, 2016, 09:38:45 AM

Revising a script, and remove a tit or two from final production? Perfectly fine.
Someone throwing a protest over the fact that an R rated movie had nudity in it, and buckling? No.

So, it's either okay, or not okay. "Perfectly fine," or "no."

Apparently, protesting a game you don't like is a "no." For... some reason. Especially if the protest actually works.

R rated movies are allowed to have sex and nudity in them, so it would be pretty silly to protest it.

R rated movies are allowed to have sex and nudity in them, so it would be pretty silly to protest it.

I agree. I never said anything about that, though.

It all depends on the movie.

If we're talking Serbian Film levels of sex, where there's an extended scene of a man raping a newborn baby, you might want to reconsider that stance.

let the consumer decide on this one....


basically what mordo said.