|
|
Post by Christopher on Dec 31, 2015 9:04:31 GMT -5
I don't consider it censorship until it's a change made post release of some sort based on criticism and not their personal decision. Up until that point, it's feedback. But if they made a stupid decision, and making the change benefits them financially, is it still censorship? Was the Xbox One censored then? Just close this thread already, lol. Fixing broken things isn't censorship. I assumed we were talking about creative/artistic changes. |
|
|
|
Post by coolbeans on Dec 31, 2015 9:15:10 GMT -5
I don't consider it censorship until it's a change made post release of some sort based on criticism and not their personal decision. Up until that point, it's feedback. But if they made a stupid decision, and making the change benefits them financially, is it still censorship? Was the Xbox One censored then?Just close this thread already, lol. False equivalence. You're talking about changes addressed to a specific kind of hardware after overwhelmingly negative feedback. If we're to go by the notion of games being an artistic medium, this main example and the others I've referenced are about creative artistic works. Why close the thread? It's a topic that has to do with gaming and it's been beaten around the bush quite often since GamerGate. |
|
|
|
Post by xHeavYx on Dec 31, 2015 9:41:50 GMT -5
But if they made a stupid decision, and making the change benefits them financially, is it still censorship? Was the Xbox One censored then?Just close this thread already, lol. False equivalence. You're talking about changes addressed to a specific kind of hardware after overwhelmingly negative feedback. If we're to go by the notion of games being an artistic medium, this main example and the others I've referenced are about creative artistic works. Why close the thread? It's a topic that has to do with gaming and it's been beaten around the bush quite often since GamerGate. So, you get to pick which changes forced by consumers are censorship and which ones aren't? Anyways, I think Wild said what I think better than I can. And I don't want this thread closed, it was just a joke, you know, asking the boss to close a thread? a censorship related thread? |
|
|
|
Post by coolbeans on Dec 31, 2015 10:21:35 GMT -5
False equivalence. You're talking about changes addressed to a specific kind of hardware after overwhelmingly negative feedback. If we're to go by the notion of games being an artistic medium, this main example and the others I've referenced are about creative artistic works. Why close the thread? It's a topic that has to do with gaming and it's been beaten around the bush quite often since GamerGate. So, you get to pick which changes forced by consumers are censorship and which ones aren't? Anyways, I think Wild said what I think better than I can. And I don't want this thread closed, it was just a joke, you know, asking the boss to close a thread? a censorship related thread?This thread's original post delineates what we're going after: artistic work and the freedom of expression. Responding with anything like "what about accommodation changes made for X tool/product?" is not the same type of argument. Just in the same way a painting company who 180'd on only wanting to sell wire paint brushes + 1 primary color isn't equivalent to a painter's work being petitioned for removal from a public art gallery. They're not the same argument unless games are just considered products with no artistry involved, which I already presumed was not the case for this discussion. I do think Wild made a good, surgical response too. Oh okay, that one just flew over my head. lol |
|
|
|
Post by garrettbobbyferguson on Dec 31, 2015 11:12:45 GMT -5
I think everyone is misconstruing feedback for censorship. Feedback is telling Microsoft that the previous Xbox plans are terrible. Censorship is asking for the cancellation/banning of the xbox because the plans are terrible. Feedback is criticizing the clothing the characters wear. Censorship is demanding that clothing be changed or there will be consequences. It's all entirely in the attitude and what is within the demands.
|
|
|
|
Post by coolbeans on Jan 13, 2016 18:02:05 GMT -5
I think everyone is misconstruing feedback for censorship. Feedback is telling Microsoft that the previous Xbox plans are terrible. Censorship is asking for the cancellation/banning of the xbox because the plans are terrible. Feedback is criticizing the clothing the characters wear. Censorship is demanding that clothing be changed or there will be consequences. It's all entirely in the attitude and what is within the demands. Would you say a campaign like 'Retake Mass Effect' would fall under that umbrella, then? Edit: Sorry this is quite a late response but I was just curious. |
|
|
|
Post by coolbeans on Mar 5, 2016 13:54:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by lukejrl on Mar 19, 2016 15:39:41 GMT -5
Not censorship. This is not obscene or truly offending. It is called free market capitalism. They are putting out a product that people don't want and are being told that people will not buy. Simply a bad idea. It is the same if I invented something nobody would use and someone I approached to invest told me so.
|
|
|
|
Post by coolbeans on Mar 19, 2016 16:17:17 GMT -5
Not censorship. This is not obscene or truly offending. It is called free market capitalism. They are putting out a product that people don't want and are being told that people will not buy. Simply a bad idea. It is the same if I invented something nobody would use and someone I approached to invest told me so. That comparison isn't logically consistent for one reason: the investors in this situation already gave the creative team a green light on producing this. All the resources seen in video games+capitalism, such as market research, suggested this could be successful and went through with it. A party not involved in the creative nor financing process now calls for either of two solutions: a.) get rid of this altogether b.) DO NOT call it a Metroid game (which obviously goes against what the creative team seemingly wants) |
|
|
|
Post by lukejrl on Mar 19, 2016 20:29:04 GMT -5
Or they slapped the metroid title to the game in order to get some brand recognition and it back fired. Like any game the player you control is just a skin. It may not have started as a metroid game and they got caught.
There is too much weirdness happening at nintendo. No big name games for the wii u other than mario stuff for 2 years after launch for the wii u. Yes games Bayonetta and what not sure great games. But no zelda, metroid, Star fox etc... without a hint of those games releasing they announce federation force . Had wii u been successfully and had more of the brands out this game would not seem like bastardization we see today. I am looking forward to it though, but I understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by richasliodo on Apr 3, 2016 22:08:13 GMT -5
lol at blastforce, Rocket league in metroid form
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpower on Aug 29, 2016 15:04:11 GMT -5
I think this is not so much of an SJW situation as much as it is of how divided the Metroid fanbase has become. One game is to blame, unfair or not: Other M. Yeah, we get to talk about it again.
And yes, six years after that game was released, and the people who HATED every piece of data to that game continue to hate it as if it was released yesterday. And if it's not Samus, the way they want her to be, then it will never be accepted as any sort of Metroid game. The problem is that those that liked Other M never really get a chance to say why they like it without feeling like they are not considered Metroid fans. It's THAT divided right now.
Because of ONE game! That's six years old! That they cannot seem to get over!
That wasn't even that bad of a story! That's what's killing people over that game: the Samus characterization.
She was "out of character", when her character was never fully established within the official canon. She was scared of an archenemy that she faced before - for a full 30 seconds out of a game that might take you around 2-3 hours to complete - when we don't know the half of either if she has always been fearful of him or the ever complicated issues surrounding PTSD and how it actually works. She should've never been saddened of her CO's demise...even though that would be the default reaction of seeing someone you would care about being killed without you being able to do anything about it. She should always be a silent protagonist...even though she more or less hasn't ever been, has always shown a soft side, making her one would be too "Nintendo formula", and isn't really something that is worth complaining about.
We ask for three dimensional characters, but when they mess with Samus, a character that never got her back story, or anything about her as a character, explored, suddenly she's out of character, and we start over analyzing the game as if we created the damned character to begin with.
And there are plot holes...in a game that's part of an ongoing series in which you were SURE there would be another game (at least until this rift between fans of the series began that seems to never even slow down) that would answer you're nagging questions about that last game...if you LET THE DAMNED GAME HAPPEN!
Never said the game was perfect (the game is shorter and easier than I remember Metroid games to be, but that's not something that couldn't be fixed in other games or in a director's cut), but I don't know why gamers just suddenly forgot every rule that had to do with serial storytelling when they saw Other M. We were allowed to give characters new challenges, characteristics, and directions in Metal Gear Solid, Castlevania, and other story-driven games, but Other M had to play by a completely different set of rules. We allowed characters to toe the OOC line in other games (especially MGS3).
But Samus is NEVER allowed to show any kind of fear, contempt, anger, sadness...or even a single shred of emotion or even a reaction, for some weird reason.
So, this is WHY Nintendo is creating THIS kind of Metroid game. Because...who do you want to piss off by making a new, "actual" Metroid game? It's no longer fans of Metroid. It's "fans who loved Other M" and "fans who HATED Other M", and if you appease one of them, you risk pissing the other off, you will never hear the end of it, and there's no such thing as a push here. It's not Other M's fault, but rather those that refused to keep an open mind about anything associated with the franchise.
I think Nintendo might be wondering if the Other M haters are ever going to move on with their lives and just allow them to even touch the franchise proper again.
|
|
