Nintendo Censors Costumes in Xenoblade Chronicles X

Friday, October 30th, 2015

Share this page

We are proudly a Play-Asia Partner


Ads support the website by covering server and domain costs. We're just a group of gamers here, like you, doing what we love to do: playing video games and bringing y'all niche goodness. So, if you like what we do and want to help us out, make an exception by turning off AdBlock for our website. In return, we promise to keep intrusive ads, such as pop-ups, off oprainfall. Thanks, everyone!


Xenoblade Chronicles X

After last this month’s news of  Fatal Frame V’s swimsuit outfits being taken out of the game, Wii U owners and Xenoblade fans have wondered if the same would happen to a few of the costumes that are available in Xenoblade Chronicles X. Well, it seems they were right to question Nintendo. We have received word that Lin’s most revealing outfits are going to be taken out of the European version of the game.

xenoblade censore

PAL ver. (Left) Japanese ver. (two on the Right)

The outfit has been replaced with a more adventurous looking outfit that seems to be just a knock off of a previously announced costume for the Japanese version.

Xenoblade Chronicles X Character Custom 4

We will update you when we receive more information.

Xenoblade Chronicles X is set to release in North America and PAL regions on December 4th for the Wii U.

Thanks, @_Teikage

  • bloblord

    Outfits for of age characters are unaffected so it’s a change for the

    • Montana Szobonya

      There is no such thing as a change for the better when it comes to censorship. Nintendo is making a bad name for themselves by censoring every Japanese product that comes through the west. The gamers shouldn’t be punished for our repressed society and I’ve already voted with my wallet when it comes to the train wreck that was Fatal Frame. We have a rating system in these countries for a reason. Nintendo needs to use it and stop censoring these releases.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      If you want the original Japanese releases, you’re free to get them. The Western versions are localized for Western audiences.

    • Montana Szobonya

      It’s not localization it is censorship plain and simple. We have a ratings board in the US/UK and they already changed the characters age to 18 (which is just as ridiculous) so slap “partial nudity” on the rating and problem is solved. What you foolishly advocate is the decimation of artistic freedom and what starts as a costume here and there ends in something much much worse. Companies like XSeed have already taken a stance against censorship (unless the title would be pushed to AO, which is understandable) and as with most things Nintendo is simply behind the times and stuck pandering to sensitive social justice warriors so that no ones feelings will be hurt by the pixel girl in small cloths.

    • Gecks

      I for one am glad Nintendo has the sense to recognize the problem with pedophile-ish content like this and remove it.

    • Montana Szobonya

      Good for you Gecks, your a real champion of exploited digital images everywhere.

    • MKohanek

      What an idiotic thing to say, considering the original is uncensored…

    • Gecks

      The original has pedophilic sexualization of young girls. How is it idiotic to remove it?

    • MKohanek

      That is not what I said. I am saying that Nintendo obviously has no problem releasing it on their platform in Japan, so it is not that Nintendo is recognizing any problem, as you put it. Their censoring of it has nothing to do with a problem with pedophilia, their reasoning has no moral basis.

      By the way, I apologize for saying it was idiotic, that was a jerk thing to say, I was just annoyed by this article.

    • Gecks

      Thanks for the apology.
      I do think that recognition of the audience’s mores in this case is good business for Nintendo, whether or not they themselves possess the same mores.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      It’s localization. The costumes didn’t meld well with Western audiences, so they changed/removed them. That’s part of what localization is: adapting to the new audience.

      My understanding is that they changed the age to 15, not 18.

      Ironically, you’re the one against artistic freedom here. Xenoblade is Nintendo’s art. They can do whatever they want with their art. You’re saying they can’t.

      And again, nothing’s keeping you from getting the original Japanese version if that’s what you want.

    • Montana Szobonya

      Nintendo is the publisher not the creator. Monolith Soft did all the hard work and created all the assets for the game. So it is not Nintendo’s art. Your free to call it “localization” if you want but that doesn’t change the fact that it is wrong. There is zero reason to cut content because we have ways to inform the customer of the products that they buy and If they are offended that is their problem. Don’t like it, don’t use it. I rarely if ever use alternate costumes in games but I sure don’t want costumes, or story, or subplots cut from the game just because we live in a sexually repressed country.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Monolith Soft is part of Nintendo. To say Nintendo didn’t make the game is like saying I didn’t type this because my hands did. My hands are part of me, and Monolith Soft is part of Nintendo.

      So in other words, you don’t care if people avoid the game, or if it sells poorly, as long as you get the exact same thing Japan got, in English? Part of localization is making a game suitable for a region. In America, and at least most of Europe, people don’t like the idea of dressing up young girls in barely-there outfits.

      If you think being against pedophilia is sexually repressive, yes, America is sexually repressive.

    • Montana Szobonya

      So clearly just because there is art of young girls in suggestive cloths that automatically equals pro-pedophilia? How dare they let those perverted developers at Monolith near real living breathing children because obviously they are MONSTERS!!! Personally I am very much against the exploitation of carbon based lifeforms of anykind, but I think it’s a little ignorant to try and police art.

      America is known for being heavily against sexual content of any kind just like parts of Europe has similar issues with violence and Australia is pretty much against everything. Also your analogy makes no sense. EA is a publisher, EA owns bioware, bioware makes Mass Effect, EA had nothing to do with mass effect they just produced it. Monolith is a subsidiary of Nintendo just like bioware is a subsidiary of EA. Your hand is not a subsidiary of your body.

      Clearly you have some personal issue with sexual content in video games but this isn’t about that. It’s about censorship and if we start with lewd costumes it only legitimizes further censorship in this industry. There is no good reason for censorship! Not in books, or movies and certainly not in Video Games.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Wanting to sexualize a 13 year old child is generally considered pedophilia, yes. In Japan, it would be considered okay, but not in the West, which is why they made the change they made.

      Monolith Soft is a part of Nintendo. They might be a subsidiary, but Nintendo completely owns and controls them. What they make is a product of Nintendo.

      That’s not the topic here. We’re talking about something much more specific and much more taboo, which is sexualizing children. And yes, I do have a problem with that, but so do most people.

      And I still hold that this isn’t really censorship at all, but simple localization, making the game suitable for a wide Western audience. If you want the original, you can buy it. It’s not censored or banned.

    • TachyonCode

      The only topic on which I will opt to disagree with you is the matter of censorship vs. localization.

      Localization is a marketing concept. Censorship is a matter of limits on freedom of expression, in whatever form it may take.

      In this case, the developers expressed an idea in the form of a two-piece underwear set that they chose to call a “costume”. A fashion object, if you will.

      To localize such content, all one would need to do is to compare the fashion featuring in the form of said “costume” to “costumes” available in the target market; in this case, the West. They could then adapt the costume to suit the target demographic.

      Localization implies a conversion of available content into the form of other available content. It does not necessarily entail making something unavailable; this is a stretch of the definition of localization which largely overreaches.

      A localization of the “costume” in question would involve expanding on its artistic themes, possibly changing its colors and expanding the amount of skin it covers, to support the same accepted conceptual associations it was associated with in its original market, but for the new market instead.

      It is fair to say that there is no way to “localize” the public exposure of a youth in a market which generally disagrees with doing so (albeit attitudes towards this in the West *are* becoming more diverse, but *not* shifting per se), without simultaneously engaging in censorship.

    • Montana Szobonya

      These are not children! This is fiction and art…you must be one of those people who think there is no difference between video game violence and real world violence. Noone is getting abused, noone is getting sexualized because these are not real people and honestly Lin is significantly more sexually developed than any 13 year old I have ever seen so even the illusion of sexually objectifying a child is gone.

      If Lin was say a male put in a little speedo noone would blink an eye but the problem is that in the west we have a stigma around nudity, especially female nudity that it must be hidden away and shamed.

      If this was localization as you claim Nintendo would just change everyones age to 18+ and keep it the same but just like with Bravely Default, Fatal Frame, and eventually the new Fire Emblem which has some pretty spicy mini game sub plots. Nintendo will choose that we are not capable of handling such material and censor it. You act like Nintendo would never censor anything, during the 80’s and 90’s thats all they did.

      Removing crucifixes from games, beer from games saying that these are milk bars….seriously…MILK?!, blood from Mortal Kombat which defeated the purpose of the game.

      While there are many companies that censor products they are now learning that it’s not in their best interest but Nintendo is always a step behind. From Internet connectivity, to graphics, to not tampering with the artistic work of their developers. Once again no amount of censorship is okay, just like Jerry Seinfeld says about comedy “Kids Are Too PC Now, Censorship Hurts Comedy” well it hurts everything else as well.

    • chrgby

      I can agree with a lot here, but we part company when it comes to how much you want to directly attribute blame to Nintendo and your notion that they should stand up and fight for this. If we both accept the premise that Nintendo shouldn’t do things that aren’t in their best interest, then I’d certainly say Nintendo’s decision is a reasonable one. Pushing back on censorship of sexual content may be in someone’s best interest, but not Nintendo’s, as you seem to imply.

      Look no further than the flak they caught for New Leaf and Tomodachi Life; completely trumped up nonsense that was a hundred times more inane than this that actually created a legitimate PR problem for Nintendo, to the point where they eventually had to give in. They were being ridiculed in the news, on late-night television, by some of the West’s principal cultural taste-makers. And as much as you want to say, “Well don’t kowtow, fight back,” it’s important to understand that Nintendo just can’t fight that battle. They are in a weird, ironic position of being the one entity in gaming most maligned for their “kiddiness” AND the most dependent on maintaining a family-friendly image. Even though we’ll all have a laugh at the idea one could get drunk off milk, let’s not pretend Nintendo does this BS for no reason. There are cultural challenges that they need to be aware of and perhaps, unfortunately, act on, to indeed maintain their interests.

      Again, there’s a cruel irony about Nintendo’s situation when you compare them with say, Disney. Nintendo has the largest, highest-profile stable of universally recognized all-ages IP after Disney. But within gaming, they’re hated and shunned by plenty in the “core” gaming consumer segment, AND YET, they also can’t get away with being sly about relatively suggestive content the way Disney can. If you take a line of dialogue out of a Disney movie that could possibly be interpreted as a double entendre and insert it into the speech bubble of an NPC in a Nintendo game, reading and context identical between both works… Nintendo is far more liable to be targeted by general public/family/value groups/political protests AND the bigoted SJW lunatics who’ve come to the fore in recent years.

      Current events make that all very clear. There’s a reason why the whole insane, militant PC narrative has not gained the same traction with film, television, music and literature as it has with video games. Video games are still the “other”, and so for the foreseeable future they are always going to be suspect #1 before any other media when a mass shooting goes down, or even when it comes to being implicated in the delirious imaginations of the desperate morons looking for attention based on how much of a “victim” they believe themselves to be. This is reality Nintendo has to deal with, man. I’d love if they could just go on about their way without giving a damn, but it’s not fair for you to place the onus on them; this problem is bigger than Nintendo. And not taking these countermeasures is a lot more likely to make trouble for them than it is to be the first domino that falls in a defiant battle that sees unequivocal freedom of expression emerge the victor.

    • Montana Szobonya

      Great post and I understand all of this which is why I personally don’t encourage boycotting because Monolith shouldn’t be punished in sales for things being the way that they are. I bought the C.E of Bravely Default and I will buy the C.E of XCX. All I can do is speak out against what I feel is wrong. Because while it may make sense on a business level to remove culturally offensive material Censorship quickly becomes a slippery slope and lewd costumes one minute becomes gameplay differences the next similar to what games in Australia go through. The problem is Australia has a completely ineffective ratings system which allows material to be banned while we in America have the ESRB and Europe has PAL both of which are effective in letting the customer know what they are getting themselves into which should negate the need for censorship unless it would push the product into AO. Nintendo started to push for a mature audience with the release of RE4 on the cube and working with Kojima and Silicon Knights on the MGS: Twin Snakes and capitalized once again with Bayonetta and Devil’s Third. on the Wii U They have proven themselves capable of shedding that kid friendly image with T rated games with mature themes like Fire Emblem but when it comes to showing that they understand that westerners love quirky Japanese crap like panty costumes and risqué bath house scenes they edit the crap out of it which defeats the purpose and proves they don’t really understand their audience at all and are willing to sacrifice artistic integrity just to stay out of any potential hot water.

    • chrgby

      Yeah, it is a slippery slope, and frankly… Even if — hypothetically and quite impossibly — you could definitively say it’ll never slide any further down said slope, the principle of the matter remains. But one of my favorite games of all time did in fact have gameplay elements censored in its western release, so I definitely relate to that anxiety and frustration. And this is going on twenty years ago, a time when the industry and community was much less contentious on these issues, so I still feel indignant about it to this day. Alas, times have changed.

      The situation is much more fraught now — fraught over frivolity no less. I also want to speak out against all the wrong in this community and industry, but Nintendo is as badly positioned as anyone to aid in that, even if the aid is simply them leaving content intact. Without ever conscripting them into the vanguard, their liability is enormous. Again, Tomodachi Life man… How depressing. Nothing that even pertained to content of the game or what it affirmed, and yet, idiots driven by narcissism and aspiration to the glorious status of “victim” managed to extrapolate a great and serious offense from the most innocuous of games, and it fucking worked. If Nintendo has to face vulnerabilities no sane or rational person could have ever anticipated… It’s very hard, I feel, to say that trying to avert allegations of “endorsing pedophilia” is a risk aversion that is beyond the pale.

      You’re absolutely right about the actuality that Nintendo’s offerings are not uniformly for the family, but I’m sure you know that it’s not like this conversation hasn’t been had many times already: CERO has a bigger problem with violence, whereas ESRB and western culture has a bigger problem with sexual elements. Devil’s Third, Bayonetta and others are certainly cheeky and have obviously risqué elements, but depicting “underage” characters in sexual ways is a bridge too far for our society, and not something the aforementioned games do. So the challenge facing Xenoblade is unique still, and further complicated by the fact that Nintendo cannot afford — or at least, really, really doesn’t want — this game to get an M Rating. So it’s already working in a much smaller margin than something like a Metal Gear or Devil’s Third, to say nothing of possibly transgressing boundaries that even those games steer well clear of.

      What can you do? It’s frustrating, it’s annoying, and yes, the stakes of this cultural war are high, viewing the whole picture. But my contempt here can’t belong Nintendo. I don’t have any impulse to go and wag my finger in their faces. It’s easy to say they’re doing wrong by us and bankrupting their own designers’ creative integrity when we’re not the ones who have to try and navigate these sorted issues in managing the future of a very influential billion-dollar multinational with thousands of employees. It could cross a line in terms of their personal responsibility in the matter that demands personal rebuke, but I think context tells us that line has not been crossed.

      It’s like… If your sibling has children, and you don’t, and you watch your brother/sister, with great frustration, surrender to the whining and bratty behavior of their kids. You know it’s fundamentally bad. You know it’s not setting a helping precedent. But how can you blame them, at the end of the day? The burden on them is real and it fucking sucks.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Not real, living children, no, but it is a child in the game. Generally in America people will accept most things. They might not support them, but they’ll leave them alone. One thing that they will not accept is pedophilia, even if it is animated pedophilia.

      Again, we’re talking about a child here. Adult nudity isn’t at all rare in media.

      That would change the game much more than changing/removing a couple costumes. The goal of localization is to keep the game as intact as possible while making it suitable for the new region. The censorship of the 90’s was not just taking out a couple costumes. Wolfenstein, for example, underwent massive changes to release on the SNES. What happened then is not comparable to what’s happening now.

      That depends on what they’re censoring. Most developers/publishers never have to deal with underage girls in tiny outfits. And no, it’s not about political correctness.

    • chrgby

      Irrespective of whether or not the American people “accept” pedophilia, it isn’t right or reasonable for them to not accept it. But before we ever have to litigate the nuance of what pedophilia is in the real world and its implications, it bears stating that you are incorrect in attributing the term and reality of pedophilia to the phenomenon that is a depiction both fictional AND digital.

      Illustrated, polygonal, computer-generated… The likeness and body is not real. It has no physical substance. It is not a person. It is NOT a child; it is a DEPICTION of a child, if we are even to agree on the definition of “child” or what we mean to connote by the term. But when it comes to actual reality and DEPICTION, this is not a false distinction of semantics, but an entirely valid one critically important to humanity so long as we create things. If I had to guess, I would say you’ve probably played games before with hyper-violent content before. Or I can at least say you don’t take issue with them like you do this, right?

      But that is hypocritical. You cannot carve an exception out for anything. What you see in film, literature or video games is not actually transpiring or instructing the audience to cause it to transpire. “I don’t have a problem with adult characters being depicted sexually, but doing so with thirteen year olds is a whole other story!” No. No, it’s not. Because it is subsumed under unreality BEFORE ALL ELSE. You can depict in fiction anything you want, because IT IS FICTION. Whether someone can be aroused by, or is being pandered to, with an effigy of an actual human is immaterial. Because it is only effigy. That isn’t to say that a pedophile wouldn’t enjoy and, shall we say, “take advantage” of depictions of characters a given work tells them are under the age of consent we have in the real world. Of course there is overlap there, but on the principle, fictional depictions drawn, polygonal, CG or otherwise fabricated by hand can not possibly be pedophilic. Pedophilia pertains to attraction to blood-and-flesh bodies. Reference is not the same as reality.

      AND, I’m not saying you have to like it either. I’m not saying you can’t personally find any of this stuff gross or majorly off-putting, but it’s that old adage that’s lost on faaar too many people these days: “I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.” No matter how much you dislike something or find it anathema, you should not seek to silence, stop, halt, or efface that which you hate.

      To whatever extent you’re simply assessing the wisdom of Nintendo’s decisions, for their own interest, I can agree with that. But wherever you argue that this is actually a good and understandable a thing on the whole, and not merely a necessary response to a big problem we have in our world and culture, that is the disagreement.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I, along with most people, would disagree. It’s entirely right and reasonable not to accept pedophilia. I’d also disagree about what you think can be considered pedophilia.

      Any picture is not an actual person. It’s a picture. Despite that, child pornography is illegal. Obviously this is digital, and therefore not a picture of an actual living child. While that keeps it from being considered abominable, it still doesn’t sit well with most people.

      Actually, I tend to avoid “hyper-violent” games. If it’s more violent than CoD, I’m generally not interested. You’re right that I don’t take as much issue with violence as I do with the sexualization of children, though, but that isn’t hypocritical. Violence is not always wrong, but the sexualization of children is. And no, pedophilia is not limited to “flesh-and-blood bodies”. Pedophilia just means sexual attraction to children, which would include depictions of children. Obviously some guy looking at a fake child doesn’t hurt anyone, which is why it’s legal, but it’s still pedophilic.

      As much as I disagree with these types of images, I’m not trying to “silence, stop, halt, or efface” them. People are free to do pretty much whatever they want, as long as they don’t hurt anyone. That doesn’t mean I won’t praise and defend a company’s decision not to support them, though. And what is the “big problem we have in our world and culture”, exactly?

    • chrgby

      One thing I need to make clear up-front is that I am not saying that you’re misrepresenting Americans, who really all
      just want to roll up their sleeves and get in on some pedophilic action! I do not contend that pedophilia is accepted, or otherwise looked upon in a positive light by the masses. I think that goes not just for America, but all the civilized world. However much I might take issue with the severity of the taboo, it is of course extremely taboo in the eyes of most of global society.

      But enough of majority view; onto the substance. When I say that I don’t consider it right and reasonable to “not accept” pedophilia, I am not saying Mom and Dad should take the view that, “Well, if our darling little 8 year-old Daisy could just find the right 35 year-old gas station operator, we’d give her our blessing. We just want the best for our daughter.” Abso-lutely not. A colorful example, but I do not demand that anyone be at peace with pedophilia or personally open-minded to the idea of being a pedophile. I am not saying people cannot be repulsed by the idea of being attracted to children, or having sexual interaction with a child.

      What I am saying is that people who are pedophiles should not be viewed as the basest of creatures and persecuted to the extent that they are. If someone were found out, or whatever, as a pedophile and only a pedophile, they should not automatically be flung from society as a monster of the highest order.

      And the “only” is very critical here, because while I can imagine the text of this comment so far being liable to make millions and millions of heads explode in seemingly righteous fury, the reality of the situation is extremely simple: There is pedophilia. And there is child predation and pornography. A child predator and a child pornographer is always a pedophile (one would think), but a pedophile is not always a child predator or pornographer. It’s just that simple. Saying you don’t accept pedophilia is like saying you don’t accept homosexuality. It’s merely another type of sexual paraphilia, a fetish. A person can carry any desire they want. The only difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is that, to act on a pedophilic impulse or pursue the objects of pedophilic desire is, indeed, unacceptable. Wrong. Indefensible. But the mere desire, and how that could be depicted in effigy, should not be vilified.

      The whole reason why pedophilia can be considered bad is because it could lead to harm being brought to others, when it’s acted upon. It is not something you can call reciprocal sexuality. What if, when we were born, our brains were fully formed and we had already established and developed the intellects, wisdom and personalities we carry throughout our lives, at the point of birth? Even though the thought of touching a child like that might make mine or your skin crawl, if such an impossible hypothesis were reality, we could not rightly take issue with others having sexual relations with children. We could be disgusted or freaked out by it. But there would be no reason to prosecute and ostracize people for that behavior, in that circumstance.

      That’s not reality, but the point is the harm is the thrust of the OBJECTION, not how weird or deviant you consider the behavior to be. That is separate. So if harm is not brought to others, why look down upon those who somehow find themselves attracted to the physique of a child? Why make someone the ultimate pariah and destroy their existence simply for a desire that they can very well hold, but deny themselves?

      I always remember when it was reported that a female teacher was having a relationship with a 17 year-old male student, with whom she was photographed laughing and smiling in a park… Positively beaming. Who knows if you could call it love, but she looked to be on cloud nine. And that revelation, brought to the public awareness, destroyed her life. The situation is different from being attracted to children, and because she was in fact having a real relationship with this “underage boy”, but it really frames the absurdity of ruining people’s lives and essentially forcing them into exile or prison for no reason. Someone who somehow finds themselves in a reciprocal relationship with a seventeen year old should not be destroyed, nor should someone who carries DESIRE for children but never, ever ACTS on it with real children, or CONSUMED materials that took advantage of real children. No sex with children. No child porn. But mere desire? We can’t allow that to be policed.
      So while I imagine a pedophile’s existence to be a most unenviable one, we do have fiction and effigy… Instruments that can be used to answer sexual desires and impulses, which includes those depictions which references not only real-world AND accepted sexual phenomena — like an adult man having sex with an adult woman — but also the unaccepted. Description of pedophilic acts in literature, and even explicit illustrations or animations should always be protected as a freedom of expression. Because everyone, no matter how weird their shit is or how much we don’t get it, should be able to get their rocks off when it brings harm to absolutely no one. When it is purely fantasy. No matter how you slice it, fictional effigy and depiction only references pedophilia. It is not pedophilia.

      I assure you, people have been attracted to, and frankly, having sex with people we now consider underaged since antiquity. Pederasty was quite plainly an element of ancient Greek culture that did not carry one billionth the stigma that the same, pederast practices would carry today. I can only imagine how our early human ancestors and nomadic peoples had sex with children with nary a second thought… My point being, pedophilia predates fiction. All of the literature, plays, films, and now video games, anime, whatever that depict someone underaged or even a very young, completely fictional child sexually, they can only reflect reality.

      This is sort of a weird, recondite philosophical thing I don’t want to get carried away with here, but even the most abstract, bizarre and avant-garde art still technically reflects reality. So reality ALWAYS comes first, then fiction. And fiction has this relationship with reality as reflection and reference, but it is still only that, i.e. a depiction. So some sort of anime or manga that shows little girls having sex or whatever? No, it is not wrong to sexualize these DEPICTIONS, 100% not real but drawing on a real desire to create something that is different from what you might desire in the real world. Someone made a great comment below about how not all lolicon (I can assume you know the term?) who, y’know, partake in the fictional materials are pedophiles, and perhaps not even all pedophiles would be interested in lolicon manga, drawings or anime.

      I can think of no more perfect example than rape role-playing. Lots of people do it, you know. Quite the popular fetish. Because despite the fact rape is obviously wrong, there is SOMETHING at the core of that real phenomenon that, when you extract it into a safe context, is fun and arousing for human beings to play with. Is a man or woman who likes to pretend they’re raping their spouse a rapist? Is a woman who gets off to both role-playing rape and infantilization of her husband a pedophile AND a rapist? No, no, no. Of course not. It is not. Actually. Rape. In the same way, any attraction to or…”use” of an illustrated fiction of underage sex is not actually a sexual interaction OR attraction taking place between bodies in the real world. Therefore, it is not. Actually. Pedophilia.

      And furthermore, there should be a distinction between what XBX does with Lin and say, Senran Kagura. Senran Kagura is totally driven by sexualization and fanservice. That is the WHOLE premise of the game. And I don’t like it either, but it also should never be censored or changed. Lin on the other hand, is not a creation of loli sexual fantasy. She is a perfectly normal, decently-written character not founded or based in fetishism. Making it possible to throw one or two skimpy swimsuits on her is like OLD-SCHOOL Japanese anime/game fanservice, where it’s just kinda thrown in and really isn’t that important. It’s just cheekiness…so to speak! Resident Evil’s been doing it forever with the secret wardrobes, for one example we have that crossed over to the west long ago. The only difference is that Lin is younger than a Jill or a Claire, but it doesn’t ultimately matter since no part of her body or her character is real. So this really is not perverted in the same sense SK is, it owes mostly to quirkiness. It’s more goofy than hot-and-heavy, to put it another way.

      In terms of what you’re saying about how you do not want to maim, kill, cannibalize, censor or shut down people with different opinions and preferences from yourself, but how you want to praise and defend a company for making a “decision not to support them”… Well, at the end of the day, it is censorship. It’s not a decision not to support them so much as it’s as a decision to alter a sincere creation to avoid controversy. If it had never occurred to anyone at Monolith to do what they did with the sexy costumes, I wouldn’t care. None of it would have ever happened, so no one could comment on it. The point is Nintendo has to change a genuine quirk which is itself harmless and already there in the game. The fact that societal pressure from the West foists that upon them is NOT something to be praised or defended. Like I said, I don’t like Senran Kagura, but I would never praise or defend censorship of its content. And the “big problem we have in our world and culture”, to put it very broadly before this gets much longer, is our lack of critical thought and ability to engage in nuanced discussion and understanding of things.

      And yes, I did include the thing about you wanting to maim, kill and cannibalize people because I got bored at the end of writing this. Good day!

    • TachyonCode

      The theory (under which censorship of this sort tends to operate, at least in the West) seems to be that the psychological impact of seeing content like this influences those who *can* develop pedophiliac inclinations (perhaps as they are growing up, themselves), both to develop such inclinations based on this content, and to seek more content like it.

      Following this logic (and I’m not saying I agree or disagree with it), there’s no reason to assume that the inclinations of pedophiles (emerging or otherwise) would be limited to seeking *virtual* fuel for their pedophilia.

      Thus, to continue following the above logic, censoring any such content limits the exposure of developing pedophiles to any content in line with their inclinations, and thereby also limits the culpability of game publisher and game developer alike in the given market, with regard to inadvertently producing more pedophiles (not to mention, it limits their culpability in pandering to that demographic).

      Additionally, I would like to point out that what is being censored is nudity, not clothes. This article makes the mistake of presenting the process as the censorship of clothing; it is actually the censorship of lack of clothing.

      That means this is not a debate open to the fashion police, but is rather a debate open to the public morals police.

      Again, I don’t have any opinions regarding this change. I just would like to point out what is actually going on, and explain what I perceive to be the impetus for it.

    • Firefox

      You aren’t free to get them because the wiiu is region locked.

    • TalesOfBS

      Region lock.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      That’s only stopping you from playing the game on an American Wii U. You’re free to buy the Japanese system and game.

    • TalesOfBS

      Yeah, only $500, not counting taxes and shipping.
      Thanks Nintendo.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Yeah, region locking stinks, but you’re still able to get the Japanese version of the game.

    • Keichi Morisato

      nope, all the outfits for the game are the same coding that simply change size to fit the character in question. so take 1 outfit in the game for any reason for 1 character, you take it out for all characters. even male characters wear the outfit that was taken out.

    • No, they altered the way this one character appears when wearing a certain set of outfits… they are unchanged for all other characters who are able to wear those outfits.

  • SiliconNooB

    Nintendo yes!

  • Samaeru Kuro

    Nobody cares.

  • darkgamer001

    Censorship is never a change for the better.
    Don’t like it, don’t use it. I for one think it’s a bit extreme for this character. But you know what? It’s the original devs vision, and that should stay there. Our job, and more importantly, Nintendo’s job…is not to police content. If ratings are a problem, take out controversial outfits and release them as free DLC soon after launch. Problem solved, everyone wins

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Actually, that is Nintendo, and our, job. It’s Nintendo’s job to decide what they release and how they release it, and it’s our job to buy only content we want.

    • darkgamer001

      Which is were I disagree. You see, a part of why the company can’t get rid of the “Nintendo is just for kiddies” reputation is also down to this. I would say it actually started from a censorship case, specifically Mortal Kombat on Ninty systems. And that is down to the fact that Nintendo is acting like some kind of concerned parent, rather than a gaming company.
      As for the latter part, yes….fair enough. But I was referring to people who are all too keen to judge the ones who are against censorship in Project Zero and XCX

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I think that reputation started when Sega basically made Nintendo out as a childish alternative to their own mature, edgy games. As it is, removing the option to dress young girls in tiny outfits doesn’t make this game, or any game, “kiddier”. It just makes it more suitable for the Western audience.

    • darkgamer001

      Again, I disagree on both fronts
      Sega yes, did that…but clearly they were given material to work with, so to speak
      As for making it more suitable for Western audiences – it’s called an option for a reason. If you were forced to use those costumes, you and Nintendo would have a point

    • TrueWiiMaster

      They kind of made up the material. Yes, Nintendo made decisions against some “mature” titles back in the day, but before that games weren’t really considered childish or mature (outside of games made for young kids). People of all ages played Nintendo’s colorful games. Nowadays people think a game needs to have elements that aren’t kid-friendly to be for adults, but in reality that isn’t the case.

      Most people in the West would not want such an option in their game, hence its removal.

    • darkgamer001

      “Most people in the West would not want such an option in their game, hence its removal.”
      I’m sorry you can’t make such a far-reaching statement without proof. I can just be like “Most people in the West don’t give a toss about an optional costume” too.
      But that’s an assumption. And I’m going to assume that your belief is down to a very vocal SJW minority, which is a minority nonetheless and does not, in any way, represent the majority of people in the West

    • TrueWiiMaster

      You really think the majority of people would vote to include the option to dress a 13 year old girl in a tiny bikini? Really?

      That’s the first time anyone has called me an SJW… You couldn’t be further from the truth. If this was about an adult woman, I wouldn’t be arguing. I wouldn’t care either way. But it’s not. This is about sexualizing children, which is something the vast majority of Americans are against.

    • darkgamer001

      What in the world??
      Dude go to bed, you’re tired, and it’s affecting your reading comprehension skills.
      1) I never said people would vote on anything. They don’t give a toss about it means they don’t care – period. No one mentioned anything about votes, so I don’t know where that came from
      2) “I’m going to assume that your belief is down to a very vocal SJW minority” – i.e. your belief is influenced by what you hear from a vocal SJW crowd =/= you are also an SJW, seriously.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      1) It came from you saying I would need proof to back up my statement that most people would be against the option. That proof would be a vote, which I think would be much more likely to be against the option than for it. I was asking if you seriously thought it would go the other way. I should have made that clearer.

      2) Ah, okay. Either way, I still don’t think this has anything to do with SJW’s or their influence. Like I said, this is mostly about the girl’s age.

    • darkgamer001

      Very well then. Unless it’s been made before, I would like to see Operation Rainfall staff make a poll on this. Either way, it should be quite interesting to see the results.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      That would definitely be interesting, but I don’t think they’d make a poll asking if people were okay with young girls in skimpy outfits.

    • darkgamer001

      It doesn’t need to have any kind of bias in the question.
      Actually, if any of the OpRa staff are reading this….why not do something like this – one page, two polls

      Are you okay with the Japanese exclusive costumes being removed in Project Zero?
      – Yes – No
      Are you okay with Lin’s costumes being altered in the Western version of XCX?
      – Yes – No

      I think the results would make for a pretty interesting editorial later on and would settle this once and for all

    • TrueWiiMaster

      The problem is the vagueness of the questions you suggested. If someone asked me if I was for the removal of costumes from a game without telling me what the costumes were or who was wearing them, my first response would be no. In both cases, however, the costumes that were removed/swapped were basically lingerie worn by kids, which I would vote to remove. That’s why I worded my question the way I did. I’m generally against the removal of content from games, but I have no problem with a company removing skimpy outfits for kids.

      I would be interested in the result from your questions, but I don’t think it would really be definitive.

    • darkgamer001

      I don’t think they will be vague to the OpRa viewerbase, but even if that were the case, a couple of comparison pictures included in the poll article is all it would take.
      In any case, the way the question is worded would have to be as free from bias as possible. For example, notice how I also used the word ‘removed’ and ‘altered’ instead of ‘censored’, even though, from a personal point of view, I do believe it’s the latter.

      As for the results…definitive, no? Clearer idea? Maybe.
      But at the end of the day, these are issues that should be further discussed in a mature way. Much better than endless speculation articles I see elsewhere

    • Melody

      I personally prefer the altered or new costume, whatever it is over the original. But I’m not okay with forced censorship. If it affects one gamer it affects me is what I’m saying. I’m not a fan of blood in my games. I like the option to remove the blood. But others like it, so the fact it is an option allows all of us to be happy whether we like to have blood turned on or not.

      So if I turned on the game and it gave me a choice, I would choose the cooler looking outfit. And if my neighbor turned on the game and chose the skimpy outfit, that would also be fine. How other people play does not affect how I play. That is what it means to be mature in my opinion. The fact that so many people are okay with the removal or alteration or whatever it is just reveals them to be childish. Nintendo gamers always bitch about Nintendo being viewed as a kiddy company, but the censorship and reward for their censorship practices does not help.

      The stuff they censored is actually very tame, anybody with internet can easily find stuff that makes that outfit look modest in comparison. People justifying the removal because it might attract pedophiles or something should realize that a skimpy costume on a pubescent character isn’t technically wouldn’t attract pedophiles, but hebephiles (hebephilia is attraction to individuals generally aged 11-14) and if her age was bumped to 15, then it would then be ephebephilia (ephebephilia is attraction to individuals aged 15-19. Studies have also shown that fictional material tends to be harmless because even if somebody was a hebephile or even pedophile, and they were attracted to a fictional character that character is fictional and not truly harmed, just like fictional people aren’t truly harmed by killing them in games like gta. While there are many studies and the general evidence shows that videogames do not cause people to become violent, there is actually more evidence to support that than there is to support even hentai with underage characters causing people to become pedophiles. People who like underaged fictional characters are often called or identify as lolicons. A lot of people like porn of adults, but not hentai of it, and others like hentai but not regular porn. Just like with most people, there is overlap with lolicon, but it isn’t a 1:1 thing either way. It’s more of a venn diagram where the two circles overlap a bit but there are people that meet one criteria but not the other. Access to hentai doesn’t endanger anyone, but rather makes the world safer. And that is if this was a hentai game. Since this is just a normal game with from what I figure no sex scenes or even much fanservice beyond some of the outfits, I would not be worried at all. People are worried over a boogeyman they’ve created.

    • TalesOfBS

      “Most people in the West would not want such an option in their game, hence its removal.”

      Most people in the west wouldn’t even play Japanese games. So by your logic Nintendo shouldn’t even localize any of them anymore.

  • Brimfyre

    So is it just Lin who has revealing costumes? Or can costumes be applied to all characters? Her character design is so hideous I don’t know who would want to see her in those costumes anyway.

    • Moof chan

      People are saying it’s just Lin.
      I understand why, cultural reasons for changes like this (Even though we have kids in America going around like this on the beach.)

      Also apparently this ‘censored’ outfit was already in the Japanese version.
      This could all be based on one big mistake and people could just be overreacting.

      Time will tell.

    • Brimfyre

      I think Nintendo fans are feeling burned lately when it comes to having their content changed, so I don’ t think it’s an over raction. It’s called once burned twice shy.

    • Moof chan

      Other things to consider is how he got a copy so early.
      And how the screenshots don’t show everything.
      And how he hasn’t shown any proof that the costume he equipped on Lin didn’t appear censored on Elma as he claims and that the costume he says is the ‘censored’ version was already in the Japanese version of the game.

      There’s a lot of unknowns about all this. This could be just trolling for all we know.

      I’m taking this with a grain of salt, and I think news places and everybody in the comments should too.

    • Keichi Morisato

      all characters, as all characters wear the same costumes.

    • Moof chan

      Which is odd, considering the guy who is being credited for “discovering” this said Elma wears the uncensored costume just fine.

      Granted, he posted no pictures to prove this, so who knows what he’s not telling. He also claims he had to take the pictures “quickly”

      I’ll believe it when I see it.

  • Wolfe

    Glad I stopped doing business with Nintendo. Pity Monolith is stuck with those clowns.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Poor Monolith. The barely-there costumes they put on a 13 year old won’t be viewed by their Western audience. Clearly they’re terribly oppressed.

      Nintendo, including Monolith, makes some of the best games in the industry. Having costumes like these swapped or altered doesn’t change the high level of quality in their games. The fact is, you’re going to miss out on an excellent JRPG here, which won’t be any less excellent if a teenager doesn’t show as much skin as in the Japanese version.

    • Keichi Morisato

      she is 18 in the US version.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Are you sure? My understanding is that they changed her age from 13 to 15.

    • No, she’s still 13 in the EU and US version according to people on the Localization team.

    • Wolfe

      Ah, you again. Still in love with your own voice I see.
      Not taking the bait this time. Have a great weekend, fanboy.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Like I said last time, I’m not a fanboy, and saying “you’re a fanboy” doesn’t negate what I say. But yeah, have a great weekend.

    • Draco Breach

      You’d rather Monolith still be owned by Bandai Namco whom stifled their creativity by requiring Xenosaga II to be released before it was ready and stopping Xenosaga IV through VI because of [honestly predictable] bad sales of said title?

      Rather, what do you say to censored costumes (and entire character models) in games on other systems – such as Criminal Girls on the Vita – for a game where fanservice is a central theme of the game?

      Xenoblade is not a fanservice game, and I’ve never been terribly fond of the bikini costumes. I am not opposed to localization altering or removing certain costumes for certain characters to fit the “market taste” of a given region. It’s a practice not at all unique to Nintendo.

      It’s also a practice which will continue for as long as there are varied sensibilities.

    • Wolfe


    • Draco Breach

      I’m sure I shall.

      Now answer the questions, fanboy.

    • darkgamer001

      Monolith Soft were in a much worse position when stuck with flippin’ Square Enix and Namco. Look it up.
      Look, I’m against this censorship as much as the next guy, but let’s not use this for pointless kneejerk reactions and/or as an excuse to crap on a company you don’t like.

    • Wolfe

      Nintendo has a long history of censorship. This is just the latest round. I find that unlikable and said so. Have a good evening.

    • Draco Breach

      As does Square Enix, Atlus, Nippon Ichi Software, Idea Factory, and a plethora of other developers. How is Nintendo any worse than other developers who have (just as recently) altered costumes and even character models to suit the region?

    • darkgamer001

      ^What he said. Yes, I also dislike Nintendo’s long history of censorship and ofc this latest round with PZ and XCX. But it’s not like Monolith Soft moved away from companies with spotless track records on this front.
      Recently, SE censored Bravely Default costumes. Monolith Soft was once part of SE. Just one example.

    • TalesOfBS

      Don’t worry, at this rate soon there won’t be even sheeps to support them anymore.

  • 66outsyber

    Why Nintendo? why you have to be so conservative and outdated? Let the players choose. If someone finds offensive or absurd, wearing bikini on an jrpg, then do not wear it. But, men, let the player choose. I hate censorship at any levels, cause i believe everyone should be capable to choose freely.
    I don’t think the point here is the bikini, or the age or the taller characters in Japan; I’m still going to enjoy as I enjoyed the first Xenoblade. I think the worrying thing is that nintendo isn’t moving forward on this kind of political issues, and the times are not the better for the big N.

    Oh dear Nintendo, you are losing so much territory.

  • Alex

    I’m torn. It’s gross and I highly doubt I’d use it but I like to feel like I’m getting an unrestricted product.

  • Cameron Ward

    Well, I don’t care.

  • Raymond

    I don’t care about costumes because it dose not matter and will not change the way I play the game.

    Plus the revealing costume looks really really bad. Who in the hell would use it?

  • Firefox

    The problem with this is not that we don’t get “sexy costumes to jerk off to” the problem is that this is removing content from the game. They didn’t just edit the outfit (that would be fine by me) they removed it from the game and took another outfit game and pasted it over the old outfits slot. This is not acceptable when we have to wait 8 months for localization and then we end up getting content removed rather than just edited when they had 8 months to do this.

    • They haven’t removed the content from the game, they altered the way one character appears when wearing a certain set of costumes.

    • Firefox

      And the altered costume is identical to other costumes she can already wear, therefore there are less unique costumes in the US version than the Japanese version. If there are less than something had to have been removed which it was, it wasn’t altered, it was removed and an armor that already exists in the game was put as a placeholder. If the armor that replaced it wasn’t already in the game and was unique like the armor that was removed I would have no complaints.

  • Thomas Johnson

    To all the people saying that content was removed or that this was the original devs vision: I read another point of view that makes a lot of sense. According to what I read, more than one dev have lamented that they feel like they need to include skimpy outfits when making games for Japan in order for the games to sell well. If that’s true, then the fact that these are only in the Japanese version might not have anything to do with artist’s vision or censorship.

  • Jeff Neuenschwander

    For those that want to know, it seems like a good chunk of our contributors like the new costume. However, most of that chunk also feels that they would prefer to have the choice of having Lin wear or not wear the outfit instead of Nintendo not giving them that choice at all.

  • TrueWiiMaster

    I don’t really care. I was buying this game for the huge, beautiful world, epic story, and fun gameplay, not for any particular costumes. The game will be virtually unchanged, and just as great as ever.

    And to those who consider this censorship, I’d say it’s more localization. Localization oftentimes isn’t just directly translating from one language to another, but making the new version make sense for its new region. The original costumes made sense in Japan, but not so much in the West.

    • Steve Baltimore

      When you change content in this matter it’s censorship plain and simple. You can use all these other pretty words like modified, but ti’s still censorship.

      Also they need to actually start localizing these games rather than Westernizing them. They clearly don’t know the difference.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Like I said, localizing often means changing things, not just directly translating. It’s not unusual for things that don’t make sense in English, like some Japanese jokes, to be replaced with completely different jokes, for example. That’s the case here. In Japan it’s common and accepted to depict young girls like this. In the West it’s generally frowned upon (to put it lightly). We aren’t talking about book banning. We’re talking about localizing a Japanese game for a non-Japanese audience.

    • Firefox

      It’s not frowned upon in the West. Many tv shows have teenage girls in bikinis (or even younger). And the problem isn’t about what the content is, it’s the amount of content. Bravely default censored the costumes, but they kept them in the game and just edited them. Nintendo is completely removing the costume and replacing the armor set with the costume of an armor that is already in the game. This means the west release is in fact getting a less complete version as the number of unique armors is less.

      In my opinion a lot less less people would be bothered if they simply changed the costume (give her a Melia swimsuit) rather than remove it in it’s entirety and replace it with a costume that is already in the game.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      There’s a difference between having a girl in a bikini at the beach and putting her in a tiny outfit to traverse the world.

      Considering that there are likely dozens of armors, missing a couple is fairly trivial, and technically we don’t know for sure that they didn’t add a couple to replace them, since the game isn’t out yet in the West.

    • Firefox

      I don’t see how under any circumstances that it is ok to pay the same price for a game in one region and get less of a product than you would if you were in a different region. Not only that, but we are getting the game 8 months later.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Japan actually pays more than America. In Japan, Xenoblade Chronicles X costs $64.

      That said, how much of a discount do you think removing 2 of the many outfits, which are of course a small part of the whole game, deserves? $0.10?

    • Firefox

      I’m done, I don’t have anything more to argue. It’s clear you’re not only ok with buying a lesser product (I’m purchasing the game regardless) but are even defending the practice of cutting content from the game, I have nothing to say, you clearly have a very different view and are all right with content being cut for localization. The problem with this is it sets a standard that is not good, similarly to the concept of dlc that has gotten completely out of hand where we have day 1 dlc’s or on disk locked content. But you’re probably ok with that too, I mean it’s only 1 or 2 characters or 1 or 2 costumes or maybe in the future it will 1 or 2 missions.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I’m fine with buying a product that is 99.9% the same, yes. If they had made major cuts and changes, especially if they changed the storyline, I’d be mad, but they didn’t. They altered/removed 2 outfits out of dozens.

      And yes, I’m okay with reasonable localization, including changing things that either don’t make sense or simply don’t fit with the new region. If you aren’t, I recommend buying the Japanese version, so you can play the game as it was meant for Japan. There’s nothing stopping you.

      I’m not okay with day 1 DLC (unless it’s free), but legitimate DLC (content made after the original production) is fine, as long as the game is full and complete without it.

    • Firefox

      The wiiu is region locked so there is something stopping me. Unless you think it’s logical for me to buy a 2nd console so I can play a game without having the content cut from it.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I don’t think it’s logical to buy the Japanese version of the game for two outfits, but if you really want those outfits, there’s nothing stopping you from buying the Japanese version of the game and the system to play it.

    • Specialist

      >>> If you aren’t, I recommend buying the Japanese version, so >>>you can play the game as it was meant for Japan. >>>There’s nothing stopping you.

      That is the most ridiculous thing pro-censorship people have to say. You guys really need to stop using it.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I’m not pro-censorship, and what I said isn’t ridiculous. If you want Japanese games in their original forms, get them that way.

    • Specialist

      It’s beyond ridiculous.

      Nintendo is an international company with presence in my region and console that has region lock.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I don’t know of any real defense for region locking. It’s terrible. That doesn’t change the fact that you are able to buy the Japanese version of the game if that’s what you want.

    • Specialist

      It’s not a realistic option. That’s why companies establish divisions in other regions which they have to pay for, but that’s the only way to sell their products reliably.

      Not many people will import the game, import the console, pay extra import fees, create account in another region, establish some sort of payment system in foreign currency to fund that account so they can get DLCs etc. and on top of it they need to learn foreign language which in the case of Japanese happens to be one of the most difficult languages on this planet.

      Telling someone to import will most likely translate to lost sale.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      It’s entirely realistic, and possible. It’s just not reasonable. That said, freaking out over the removal of 2 costumes that were cut for localization, or skipping a great game you want because of that removal, isn’t very reasonable either. My point was that, if you really, really want those 2 costumes, you can still get them, just not in the Western version.

    • Specialist

      I was talking about it from general point of view. It doesn’t matter what the reason is. You can stick to it as an option if you like, but typically it’s going to result in lost sale.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Only if the potential buyer absolutely has to have those two costumes, or they won’t buy it. Otherwise, they can just buy the Western version. My point was simply that they can buy the original Japanese version.

    • Specialist

      Forget costumes in this game. Like I said I was talking in general. It doesn’t matter that an option is there if people aren’t going to take it for one reason or another. If you wave such option in front of peoples faces it’s just going to anger them even more. That was my point I was trying to make in my original post.

      NOA isn’t exactly popular and there is more than one reason for it.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      I can’t just “forget the costumes in this game” because they, specifically, are what I’m talking about. Unlike severe censorship, in which major plot or character points are changed or removed and which anyone would be mad about, the costumes are an incredibly minor removal. My point this whole time was that, if they care so much about something so trivial, they can get it. If they don’t want to go through the inconvenience to get it, but refuse to play without it, they can just miss it. For those of us who don’t mind such a minor (and arguably appropriate) removal, we’ll enjoy a great game.

      I’ve had my issues with NoA (still annoyed that they didn’t bring the SNES Wii remote to Club Nintendo), but in general I think they do a good job. They should have handled the first Xenoblade better, but I think they learned from that, and are doing much better with Xenoblade Chronicles X.

    • Steve Baltimore

      Other companies seem to no issues with this.

    • Draco Breach

      Other companies don’t alter costumes or characters to fit localization? So Criminal Girls (PSVita) didn’t happen?

    • TrueWiiMaster

      That depends on the company. Square Enix altered outfits in Bravely Default, for example. It also depends on the games, as most localized games don’t need to be changed in the first place.

      As I understand it, there are only a very small handful of companies that bring over games that “need” to be changed and don’t change them, and they tend to be small, with very small audiences, and almost no reputation outside of that audience.

    • Keichi Morisato

      sadly, the story isn’t all that good… which is why i am not going to buy it, and this made the game from a “wait for a sale” to “not buy at all”

    • TrueWiiMaster

      How do you know the story’s not good? The idea of exploring a new planet, discovering new creatures, and building up society sounds pretty awesome to me.

    • Keichi Morisato

      Japanese reviews, things Japanese players have said, and what importers have said. mechanically the game is very good, but story wise it’s shit.

    • Keichi Morisato

      the fault of the story lies with the fact that they made the main character a silent protagonist late into development in order to shoe horn in an online multiplayer aspect.

    • Gerginaut

      Thank you for being understanding. It seems a lot of folks don’t understand all the factors that go into localization.

    • Specialist

      The game already had a perfect solution for you before censorship. The costumes were optional. You never had to use them.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      The inclusion of an option to put a young teenage girl in such a tiny outfit was itself the problem. Most people in the West are not okay with that, and they’re the audience this game is being localized for.

    • Specialist

      Eh, I’ve been saying for a long time Japan would have easier time exporting their games if they get rid of underage characters from most of their games completely.

      Regardless of her outfit, you’re sending 13 year old to fight building sized aliens with a shield. I’d say that’s a problem?

      Personally, I’m not yet convinced this news is not fake. After what they did to FF, I actually expect Nintendo to censor all the bikini outfits for all the characters. Just my opinion.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      Even in FF, the characters were underage when first seen in the costumes (in a flashback), and one of them is underage (17) throughout the game.

  • Keichi Morisato

    looks like ANOTHER Nintendo exclusive game i am not buying.

  • Thomas

    I wish they edited the original outifts to seem less risque instead of swapping them out with a pair of shorts from another character’s outfit and a metal breastplate and a bunch of halter tops sewn together for the other outfit. Though its likely these outfits will be in the NA localization, but i’m more worried about the amount of memes that’ll be in the NA localization.

    • TalesOfBS

      BD at least got an acceptable edit. But what NoA did here is just pure laziness and lack of respect with consumers.

  • Mechanical Rhythm

    Really I don’t understand what the problem is. What exactly are you losing out on by not getting to see a 13 (or 15, whatever) year old girl in a skimpy outfit showing underboob? Moreover, why are we arguing over something which in all honesty shouldn’t have really been in the game in the first place? What exactly do these costumes add to the game that we should be so desperate to fight for them?

    At the end of the day you can’t really argue against the censorship of close-to-naked underage girls in any medium, let alone a video game. It’s frankly just not acceptable (and it ultimately degrades perception of the art form). What else do you really expect?

    • TalesOfBS

      Censorship plus a lazy shtty edit and yet you can’t understand?

    • Mechanical Rhythm

      So what if it’s censorship? 13 year old underboob is unnaceptable in western culture. There is literally no way that would ever be allowed and if you have such a problem with not getting your underboob then that raises big questions about your mentality.

      If it were an older character getting this treatment then yes, I could understand. But it isn’t. So this will always happen, no matter how much you scream “censorship is evil!” because ultimately censorship is not the important issue here. Child porn is illegal, and while these “costumes” are not explicitly pornographic they come about as damn close as possible. This shit would never ever fly, and for very good reason. It has next to no impact on your ability to enjoy the game.

      Quite frankly if you don’t buy the game because of that, it’s your loss, everyone elses gain.

  • Melody

    I stand against forced censorship as a matter of principle even though I actually like the censored version.. No matter what is cut, I stand with my fellow gamers. It’s like the golden rule. There may be times where content I do care about gets cut, And I don’t want to feel like I was alone or in the minority. When you get right down to it, everybody can be a minority on this issue, there may be things that others may care about getting cut, and unless we all stick together and stand against censorship, no exceptions, then eventually they will cut something you care about. Maybe you are here today justifying this cut, and another day lamenting something you like being cut. I will be there with you. Even if you may not deserve it. Even if it is something that doesn’t particularly affect me.

    • Draco Breach

      If some articles I’ve read are to be believed, interviews with many developers actually indicate that the “sexy” or “fanservice-y” costumes are a form of censorship in-and-of themselves. How do I mean?

      Well, certain interviews seem to indicate that developers feel “forced” into adding these costumes just to be able to sell to the Japanese market. Taking those words to heart, it could mean they feel a freer form of expression in Western markets because the same sentiment isn’t shared.

      Now, I can’t provide links to these articles. It’s been a REAL long time since I’ve read them, and it was some comments elsewhere that jarred my memory in the first place.

      Besides, we know that Monolith Soft has worked extremely closely with Club Treehouse on the localization. If that’s the case, I’m far more concerned with the developer’s take on the alterations (if they even exist as there is no evidence to back up the Twitter post) then the, frankly, outlandish reaction of gamers.

    • Melody

      “Censorship” I don’t think you know what that means. Developers get paid to make games. Removing the outfits did not uncensor anything. They didn’t censor it to feel freer, they censored it because they were afraid of public backlash that would be included. They censored it for the very reason you say that they include it in the Japanese region. Maybe some developers don’t really want to include it, but they did, then they sold the game to other people and took out what they sold to their own people. To the japanese gamer, they don;t have to use that outfit. There are plenty of outfits to choose from for that character. The outfit isn’t really even all that fanservicy from what I’ve seen. It doesn’t look like somebody was forced to put it in there. I’m sure while many might not have cared too much they were perfectly willing to put it in there because they were getting paid to. It’s just one outfit anyway, it’s not like having your entire plot line altered or a character you worked on scrapped. It’s an addition not a subtraction, one that they got willingly paid to put in. If the worst thing anybody can say about their job is that they got paid to make a bikini for an underaged character, then I’d say they’ve got it pretty good, especially considering what was revealed about how Konami treats it’s employees. Adding optional content is not censorship.

    • Draco Breach

      I know perfectly well what “censorship” means. However, it is only the FORM of “censorship” to which I was referring.

      I don’t know the developer’s side of things, so I’m simply making a plausible assertion only.

      I’m not a “kneejerk” kind of person. As I stated, I’m FAR MORE interested in what the developers have to say than what gamers with no innate knowledge of the field whine about.

    • Melody

      You’ve probably heard the old saying “The customer is always right.” The developer got paid to make a product, that product is already being sold somewhere, then that product got altered by somebody else to be sold in another place. People have been pointing out how the new costume is actually already in the game. Nothing is new. At least with the Fatal Frame costumes they were actually new as far as I know. This is not a case where the developer got to make “what they really wanted” for the American audience. Especially since by “developer” we aren’t talking about one singular person.

      Even so, I don’t consider selectively forcing one’s values on others to be principles. Imagine going to a restaraunt, and ordering a meal with meat in it. The chef makes that meal for a few tables, but when it comes time to make yours and a few others he takes out the meat because he is a vegetarian. You all paid for the same meal so why is it that some of you receive a lesser meal?

      When you make a product to sell, with the expectation to profit on it, you have to make certain concessions. If they truly need the fanservice to profit in Japan, then perhaps there is something wrong with that market (although I contest that because there are plenty of games made for Japan that make great profits with little to no fanservice), but even so, taking out the fanservice for another market because they are okay with getting a lesser product is just having your cake and eating it too. But again, I’d wager that if the worst thing somebody could say about the place they worked at was that they had to design a bikini for an underaged character and they got paid to do so that they must have a pretty good job. From many a gamer’s standpoint they are already in the ideal career. Many kids grow up dreaming of making video games. While no job is perfect, most people end up doing jobs completely unrelated to their hobbies, much of the time hating them and at the end of the day don’t get paid that well much of the time. It is interesting that nobody seems to bring up those who abhor violence. What of the people who don’t want to make games with violence or gore? If Japan’s market has a problem with fanservice, America’s market has just as much of a problem with violence and gore. When No More Heroes was developed, Americans (and probably Europe as well) got a game with a lot of blood, but Japan got a game where the blood got replaced with smoke. While I probably would have preferred the smoke and I’m sure others did too, I don’t like how we didn’t get a choice in the matter. Over here, you had the blood even if you didn’t like it. And over there you had the smoke, even if you didn’t like it. In that case the content was not something that was optional. There’s other cases such as Saint’s Row 4 being censored for Australia iirc. They had a weapon and mission removed entirely. Over here, you don’t have to use the weapon, or do the mission, it’s entierely optional. over there they can’t even choose to use the weapon or do the mission. SR4 had to be censored to be released legally over there. They couldn’t have done it otherwise. Even so, I stand against such censorship. In those cases I would be against their policies that made such censorship mandatory for release. When there is no law against such content however, the blame lies with the ones who made the decision (usually the publisher). I don’t believe it was the developer that wanted to censor it, I consider it NOA’s desire to do so. But if it was Monolith’s desire to censor it, I don’t consider such to be principles. Censoring for one region because you can get away with it but not another because you couldn’t get away with it is not a principled stand. And they’ve already taken payment as well to make the content.

    • Draco Breach

      First of all, your wall-o-text(TM) is difficult to read, so my reply was late in coming. I enjoy a good discussion, so I can only kindly request spacing, my friend 😉

      (No sarcasm.)

      Second, I have learned that the “the customer is always right” idiom is only for businesses who desire the poorest customer service. Far too often, the customer has no idea what he or she needs or wants. (lol)

      As far as your argument, please understand I am not arguing FOR censorship. I am merely stating a difference of censorship form. In effect, society and market can cause as much interference to freeform expression as any other factors.

      In general, video gaming “suffers” (and I mean rather loosely) from censorship the most. The reason can be attributed to the process of localization. Also, here is where part of your argument falls flat on its face, sad to say 🙁

      Before going further into my meaning of localization, I have to address where you seem to make a poor assumption. We are most certainly NOT paying for the same product, and I certainly hope we are not!

      In localization, the NA, EU, and AU version(s) vary quite a bit from the JP version. For example, the Japanese keyboard is removed and replaced with an English version. You also typically see the removal of the Japanese VA in favor of an English VA. The UI is altered to better fit English instead of Japanese.

      You also see modifications to the script to better suit the market. You’ll find that a large number of jokes and cultural nuances don’t translate well across regions. The localization team has to modify these parts of the script. In a sense, this is again censorship (something EVERY company participates in), but it is necessary to both market the game successfully and build audience understanding.

      In short… In order to gain the widest appeal, much of the “Japanese cultural content” is lost to the translation process. (Though perhaps this gives a sense of hope that SMTxFE won’t altered as much as I expect XCX to be.)

      Not to mention, we aren’t even paying the same cost when you take exchange rates into account! I haven’t calculated for EU or AU, but NA is paying approximately $4.50 less! However, I digress 😉

      As such, I come to your analogy. We are most certainly not talking about the same chef in the same restaurant at this point. We are talking about two different chefs at two different restaurants serving nearly identical dinners. However, one chef offers teriyaki, and the other offers A1. It is a more apt description, especially once I get to my next point.

      In video games, localization differs vastly from nearly every other form of entertainment. For convenience, I’ll only compare anime to video games.

      When an anime is localized, the studios involved don’t typically plan on the whole cost of multiple markets at once. If you can understand Japanese, it is by far less expensive to import new shows than to wait for dubbing (or even subbing). It is up to the localization studio to hire script translators and dub actors, often raising the cost for the localized market.

      In short, anime does not have pricing parity across regions, and often product parity isn’t even attempted as the original production studio won’t bother to reprint or license additional materials for other markets.

      (Perhaps ironically, dub studios can further inflate the costs of anime they may consider particularly niche and spend less time modifying the script for more marketable jokes and cultural nuances. Basically, they know they can market these anime to an audience that may understand Japanese culture more.)

      When a video game is localized, the publisher often plans the entire mass distribution from as early into development as possible. When they know they are going to market to additional regions, they begin building in costs for multi-market scripts and dubs. This allows for as close to price and product parity as possible.

    • Melody

      Both Manga, and anime tend to be localized without issue. For instance, even if you get a dubbed anime, they don’t “censor” things (and when they do it is incredibly rare and controversial). Beyond that though, there are also a lot of fan subs. Some of the times they translate more literally, and things come out just fine. Other times they translate to fit the region more, and again they come out just fine. I’ve read manga that has been translated this way and they often point out what has been changed either on that page, or at the end. This is not censorship. Nobody considers this censorship as far as I know. But if they got a manga and they saw that the artwork was modified, that would be seen as censorship. Both anime and manga may have in the past had been censored. But these days, it is pretty difficult aside from shows produced entirely for children to find any actual censorship. Even then, they sometimes have the show uncensored on dvd and bluray or something.

      The problem with games is that it is more difficult to translate games. But for Nintendo games it is even more difficult. This is because Nintendo has always had region locking. This means that even in cases where a game is actually playable (as in it has little to no real text) you can’t without importing a Japanese console as well. Most gamers in this day and age consider this anti-consumer. Before they were officially released, people were importing and playing games like Project Diva f/F and J-stars Victory Vs on their ps3 and/or vita because those platforms are not region locked. Other more text heavy games have been teaching people the language.

      But did you know that Bravely Default For the Sequel is in English? For the Sequel was the version of Bravely Default that the western versions were based on. The only things that were changed was that it was censored. And yet you can’t play this version without either owning a Japanese 3ds or using homebrew such as Region Five or Hans. So whether the game is perfectly playable without any knowledge of Japanese, whether it is playable but with the need of a guide (but generally this would teach you a bit of Japanese along the way), or even if the game is already in English (though I understand that this tends to be rare, though that said there are times where the asia release of a game may have English subtitles and text). Nintendo doesn’t like it when western people play Japanese games. Xenophobia is starting to die down for sure, especially among the younger adults, but it’s still rampant among a lot of older Japanese folks.

      As somebody who watches a lot of anime and reads a lot of manga, I don’t need them to go all out and Americanize each and every joke. Most of the time, VAs (though I must give credit where due in that videogames tend to have better western VAs than anime) in the west are horrendous and so I prefer to just play it with the Japanese VAs.

      But I disagree completely with the idea that gamers don’t know what they want. Or rather I disagree with the implied “but Nintendo knows what they want. What has the market shown? That the Wii U has failed to meet the expectations set upon Nintendo by the success of the Wii. It’s failed to even sell what the gamecube sold. The gamecube sold less than the N64, the N64 sold less than the SNES, the SNES sold less than the NES. It’s been a downward trend since the beginning, albeit at first it was because of the rise of competition from SEGA. I will say that even though the SNES sold less than the NES, the competition from SEGA caused Nintendo to step up their game and vice versa. This is why I never really care about who is “winning”. Just as long as they are competing, that should be good enough, as competition breeds progress. But for a while Nintendo has seen fit to not compete in the usual sense, at least with Sony and Microsoft. Even as a pc gamer I can see those companies know what gamers want. This is why they are doing better this generation.

      Each platform has casuals, loyalists, and core gamers. The former don’t really care what games or platform they are on. This is why they tend to play games on mobile. The latter again do not care what platform they game on, but what differs is that they focus instead on more complex games (complex in that it is more than a minigame or time waster). Loyalists are the only ones who care about the actual platform they are on. Right now the Wii U has sold mostly to loyalists. Nintendo knows what their loyalists want, but not what core gamers want. Or if they do know they don’t care. This is why core gamers are mostly on other platforms such as pc, ps4, and xb1 (though each of those platforms also have their own loyalists).

      All three of those other platforms show that you don’t have to censor all of your games. PC is especially open. If Xenoblade were released on PC, there is no way it would stay censored. And there is little chance it would be released in that state.

      As much as I like Nintendo, I’m starting to see that maybe they shouldn’t be trusted with more adult franchises. While Bayonetta 2 turned out just fine, Fatal Frame and Xenoblade have been marred with the news of being censored. And in both instances what got censored (besides one of he scenes in FF) was no worse than what you would see at a beach.

    • Draco Breach

      First, I said customers FAR TOO OFTEN (not always) don’t know what they want. I never said (or implied) that gamers never know what they want. My response was only meant for the idiom “the customer is always right” which, as I stated, is something I’ve found through life experience to be wrong.

      As far as Bravely Default: For the Sequel, I do know it was released in all languages, and I do know Square Enix censored the costumes for NA, EU, and AU. Frankly, I thought they looked better. Not an argument for censoring, just a general observation.

      Also, go back and read what I said about “Westernizing” the jokes and cultural nuances. I said that to reach the widest market/audience possible, this has and likely will remain a part of the localization process.

      You or I (and indeed most of the people who frequent this site) may not need or even necessarily like the process, but it is a necessary part of maximizing sales and [therefore] profits. Whether you like it or not, it’s part of market appeal. You’ll also notice that I didn’t deny this as a form of censorship.

      Also, since when do video games have better VAs than anime? O_o

      Last time I watched, I rather liked what Sentai Filmworks and Funimation were doing with shows like (only for example) Log Horizon or Full Metal Alchemist Brotherhood. I even liked Show by Rock!!; though, I still prefer that subbed because singing. I have been playing with English VAs in video games more often as they have become more tolerable, but I still often play with Japanese on.

      I also admit that I am rather fond of the English VA cast for Tales of Zesteria (at least so far).

    • Melody

      Censorship actually narrows the market though. Which is why these things are never really publicized. They don’t want you to notice. But when you censor things that your customer base wants, in order to reach a customer that in actuality doesn’t care either way (because they probably weren’t going to buy it in the first place) that’s biting yourself in the ass. The only other thing they have going for them is the language barrier, and for Nintendo, the region lock. Take away the latter, and this would happen less. Take away the former, and it would hardly happen at all. Put it on an open platform and it would have even less chance of happening. The more influence the customer actually has on the product they buy the less they get stiffed. What we’re seeing is not an example of that, but rather an example of a minority pushing their values on people.

      Look at it this way.Game comes out over here, outfit stays the same as in Japan, outfit is overlooked and game is praised. Alternatively, game comes out, change is made but people don’t notice, game is praised. Either way, the majority probably don’t care either way, but then again, the majority might don’t care in all other aspects of their lives. People go out all of the time advocating to harm their neighbors and themselves in some way or another. What happened was that the change was made silently, but Nintendo got unlucky because somebody noticed the change. This is one of the things Nintendo doesn’t want, which is why they have region locking Preventing most of your customers from even playing an out of region game prevents most of this kind of thing from happening. but they can’t really stop people from importing and all it takes is for one person to have consoles and games from both regions to see them. That, or for two people to each have one version each, then they can compare. Either way slim chance, but it happened just as it happened with Fatal Frame. So right now it’s more like a 50/50, maybe more, maybe less. Usually, this kind of thing does cost sales, it almost never increases them. Again, they don’t really want people to notice or else they would have gone all out. With Fatal Frame they tried making up for it, but this time they just essentially flat out removed content without adding anything else. Square Enix did the same with Bravely Default. While they did alter some of the outfits, they actually removed a few of them entirely.

      But here is one thing the change could bring. The whole fanbase being entirely divided, each promising not to buy the game if the game is or is not censored. Up until now, this was not a problem. Everybody was hyped for it. You say the change was to widen the customer base, but if the anti-censorship crowd doesn’t buy it because of the censorship then that is less fans. But what was ultimately cut was actually quite tame. I have a feeling that the change probably wouldn’t appease anybody that truly had a problem with it. And the crowd that is that opposed to the content are even more of a minority than even those who are so against censorship that they would be willing to not buy it. So all the censorship ended up doing is marring a perfectly good game with a controversy. Xenoblade had much the same fanservice. The Xenosaga series as well. There are plenty of games where a character who is or who looks underage is wearing a skimpy outfit and those games released without controversy. And they’re not all rated M.

      It’s probably a bit much to say the customers are getting F**ked. They’re getting fingered instead. And I think we all know what comes after that kind of foreplay. This why it’s a good idea to not make exceptions, people should speak up even before it becomes too big of a problem, and those who are justifying it just because of the content itself are justifying everything else. You can’t be against censorship, but be for THIS censorship. I’m not saying you are, but others have been showing a lack of principle on this. It’s like saying “I am for free speech but…”. 99% of the time you can tell that they don’t really mean the part before “but…”.

      As it is, Nintendo can only hope that the change is seen as small enough to not really harm the sales, but each generation they have been losing more and more customers. The Wii was an outlier as they had focused most of their attention catering to casual gamers who have since largely stopped gaming on consoles and have moved onto other platforms. It’s a real shame, but I fear Nintendo will never really learn from their mistakes. All of their efforts are always undermined by their other efforts. Like Xenoblade and Fatal Frame are supposed to be games that would supposedly attract older audiences, but they censor it which doesn’t help the image they have made over the years. Ever since the Nes days they had the image of being kiddy, and each gen they try to shake it off, but they keep doing things like this which only reinforce the image. And when they try to bring in core gamers they undermine their own efforts and end up having to rely on the loyalists of their customer base which has been getting smaller and smaller. Years ago I was practically a fanboy for Nintendo, but their flaws just kept piling up more and more. Even still, each generation I tend to buy Nintendo’s console, only to feel like they gave me a middle finger.

      The content itself isn’t the problem imo. Like I’ve been saying I actually like the one they supposedly replaced it with. Though if what others are saying is true that that costume is already in the game, then to me that is not an alteration but a removal. That’s not the point I am making in this paragraph. Those who just want to fap to the character are not stopped by them censoring the costume on the game. Rule 34 ensures that if something exists, there will be porn of it. Most of said porn is produced by Japanese fans anyway. I guarantee you can find all manner of content right now of the character in all sorts of situations. But the way some people justify the removal of the content, you’d think their plan would be to somehow starve some pedo of their fap material. Not only that, but by doing so said pedo wouldn’t get any stronger, like said material is some sort of energy source. In an ironic twist, the evidence points toward porn and hentai access actually lowering incidence of sexual crimes.

      Either that, or they’re afraid of being attracted themselves to it.

      BTW, while games don’t always have good VA’s, in my experience they improved much quicker than anime did. And recently, they have gotten even better. Not only that, as many games are western as opposed to Japanese, that probably plays a part. And even games made for kids tend to have a decent set of voice acting. Anime VA is frequently bad. It’s even worse if the show is being marketed towards children. Like Inazuma Eleven, which has a large periphery audience. It has great voice acting in the original language, but the english dub is horrible and the names were changed entirely. This extends to the games as well unfortunately. Heck, one of the characters (Miyasaka Ryou) was changed from a boy in the original to a girl in the English anime (though they kept his gender in the English game). There are certainly cases with videogames like the aforementioned Inazuma Eleven, as well as games like Chaos Wars, but most of the time the dubs on videogames are at least decent, and as I mentioned if they are made in the west that tends to not be a problem anyway.

    • Draco Breach

      One thing you missed that made your post entirely longer than it needed to 😉

      I said localization – changing jokes and cultural nuances – has the goal of widening the marketable audience. I never said alteration of costumes or character models was intended to widen the marketable audience.

      My biggest complaint on this whole incident has been the fact that it has received bigger attention and outrage than other companies who have done much the same (and often times worse). At this point, we don’t even know what has replaced Linlee’s bikini costumes. I can sure as anything bet they have been altered, but I won’t believe anything until I see the gold.

      I do agree that I want the market to move towards less change, alteration, and censorship, but I am forced to recognize that won’t be changing as long as we have strict or unpredictable ratings boards and “targeted” ratings.

      I have seen the slow, inevitable change. I’ve even seen more murmurs that Nintendo is indeed interested in reversing their region-locking policies.

      As a note, the DS was region-free. Nintendo “justified” adding region-lock to the 3DS because not enough people imported “region-targeted” games to overcome the supposed cost.

    • Draco Breach

      Oh, not to mention…

      1) The overreaction to this [at the moment] rumor is part of the reason “gamers” are stigmatized.

      2) The Tweeter provides no actual evidence to back up his claim.

      As others have asked, how did this individual get a hold of the game? I doubt the gold has even entered production yet for NA, EU, and AU. If I remember my timetables correctly, gold enters production about three weeks before distribution.

      At best, he would have Tweeted images from a [PRODUCT NOT FINAL] review copy. In that case, it still feels too early, and the Tweeter would have broken any and all sorts of embargo agreement.

    • Melody

      It’s 2015 and publishers/developers are still censoring their games for different markets. Often they do this AFTER promising not to. You can only get screwed so many times before you’ve had enough. It may indeed just be a rumor, but guess what, this is the perfect time to express the outrage at censorship. At this point, it might not be too early for them to keep the game uncensored. After it’s released, they probably won’t do anything.

      It isn’t overreaction. In fact, the change has largely been ignored due to just what got changed. But in my experience, these kind of things set not only precedents, but it’s also hypocritical to ignore.

      Nothing will change how people stigmatize gamers, it’s just something everybody goes through in their life with newer mediums. One day gamers will probably stigmatize some newer medium than even videogames and the people using them as well. People still think videogamers are violent due to violent video games, but I haven’t quit playing violent video games just because of that. I’d much rather not have games be censored and be thought as overreacting than to be not seen as overreacting and have my games forcefully censored.

    • Melody

      Oh, and “it’s just a rumor” has always been said about these things, and they’ve always been proven true. There is no evidence to suggest that it won’t be censored unless people stand against it now. Even that might not be enough. It would not surprise me at all if it was censored. This is Nintendo we’re talking about.

    • Draco Breach

      I’m not saying this rumor won’t be proven true, but it’s too early to see what has actually been altered. I want to hear from the developers, too =/

      At least you openly admit that Nintendo isn’t the only publisher/developer to alter the game for release. Some people act like it doesn’t happen to other consoles. Still, even the bits that are censored are slowly decreasing. I think perhaps some publishers and developers have learned when it is perfectly reasonable not to censor and to market to the invariably more niche market.

  • DariusQ

    This is a lot less ridiculous since XCX is T rated. It still doesn’t excuse Nintendo’s wildly inconsistent standards though. Even XC1 had bikinis which weren’t censored from the 3DS re-release and it still made it’s T rating.

  • TK

    What a relief. Glad Nintendo knows meaningless, empty fanservice when they see it.

  • Lord Ackercocke

    Censorship – I fucking hate that word.

  • TalesOfBS

    Yay Nintendo. America’s nany.

    Glad the Wii U has been getting hacked for a while, soon this gonna iso’ed and patched.

    • TrueWiiMaster

      That would only makes sense if Nintendo was somehow controlling what Americans could see or do. All Nintendo’s doing is controlling what they themselves release, and they’re choosing not to release a game with barely dressed children in it. If you really want that in your game, there’s nothing stopping you from getting the Japanese version of the game, and the Japanese Wii U to play it.

    • TalesOfBS

      Actually, you don’t need a Japanese Wii U anymore, just a 5.3.2 console. The Japanese version was reported to boot fine on it with a loader.

  • Proteus

    More reason to hack the Wii U so that modders can bypass this censorship nonsense no thanks to SJW nutjobs.

  • Holy crap!!!!!!! Those original outfits looking frikkin TERRIBLE!!! LOLOLOLOL. Sometimes censorship works on the side of good. Really, what were they thinking?

  • Sandman83

    Personally I think all censorship is horrible. Especially in gaming. Games are our times greatest work of art. There is no other medium that better captures our times best music, artwork, storytelling etc. and simply put you in the middle of it all. To censor this is as horrible as if one would paint over a painting because it was consider to violent, or to sexy or whatever. And really, Xenoblade Chronicles X is especially bad as that game from my point of view is the best game ever created and truly is breathtaking in every way.

    Not a single censorship in that game even makes any sense (you’ll understand if you played the game).

    Still great game worth to pick up on but it’s just sad that it would be censored in the aspects:

    * Lin was censored because she introduces her self as 13 years old if you ask for her age (*Spoiler* she might be alot older). In other words if you find a bathing suits and equip her whit it it’s less revealing. Besides, laws should be for humans that need the protection and not for fictional characters.

    * Breast sliders was removed, woman can in other words not create an avatar that looks like themself in this aspect. This is a little sad as one of the fun aspect of the game is to create an avatar that looks like yourself and thereby putting yourself in the game as one of the last survivors of mankind.

    This is also pretty stupid as even kids game like the sims have this now addays. It’s like a standard feature and just on of like 30 other things you can customize about you’re character.

    * The creator is the mastermind behind final fantasy 4 – 8, Chrono trigger, Secret of mana, Xenogears. Some references to Xenogears was removed for some reason witch from my point of view would have been cool as it’s the same person that created them (not same company).

    In other cases the censorshop actually managed to even change the story (Xenogears, Final fantasy 6, project Zero 5 for example).

    That we do this is as stup as the times trough history when we decided to burn every book of something for whatever the reason or executed great cientists just because we didn’t agree whit them.