There, Fire Emblem Fates Now Has Officially NO Censorship

The Sage Continues™

Originally, it had been reported that Fire Emblem Fates was going to be changed for English release, with the facerubbing and associated dialog being cut out from the game. This was largely a change for the better, though many somehow took issue with it and called Nintendo out for 'censorship.'

A week later, it was announced that everything except for the facerubbing was in- a good half step, since all the content would now be in the game, except for the creepy minigame. Nope, still not good enough for some people, it seemed like.

Gamespot today reports that the facerubbing minigame is in the game too- only the conditions to access it have now been changed (you can only access it for characters you have achieved an S rank with).

There, are you happy now?

That actually makes a lot of sense.

Now give me mah boobeh slider in Xenoblade.

What was the dialog in that rubbing minigame again?

According to khoofia's post in that first thread, it goes a bit like this. I imagine a lot of this doesn't apply any more, since you need an S rank to access the dialog (and I don't think you can reach S rank with your sibling, but I may be wrong on this one):

Users on Reddit have translated a number of suggestive dialogue lines from this feature. Here are a few examples:

• Camilla: “The way you’re using your hand feels so good. Very skillful.”
• Lazwald: “I also want to touch you, will you come closer?”
• Takumi: “You can touch me wherever I like, but don’t say I didn’t warn you…”
• Joker: “We can’t… it’ll have to wait for tonight.”
• Camilla: “When you do it this much, it’s embarrassing…”

The story of Fire Emblem Fates follows the main character and a number of their siblings. The dialogue can become sexual even when interacting with siblings, and may border incestuous.

For example, Takumi, the player’s brother, may say “If mother saw this, what would she think?” during a petting session.

NO! Still NOT Happy! MUST HATE Nintendo because... NINTENDO!

Wait, Did Nintendo actually make these changes because people complained about them for it on the internet, or were these changes that were going to happen naturally/planned ahead of time anyways? It would be kind of really stupid that, out of all the things that Nintendo gets s*** for, that a dumb, creepy fiddle&diddle mini-game is the one the few they decide to negotiate with gamers on.

Just as dumb as hows gamers like to hate on censorship/editing for the sake of hating on censorship/editing.

There was no censorship, just miscommunication and misreporting, and now that outlets actually have their hands on the final copy, they can report the issue accurately.

Good to know.

That aside, restricting the face rubbing stuff to S-relationships makes some sense atleast anyways.

Peter is daft as hell, "I don't know why people are up roar about them censoring the stuff in FE", if you knew the fraking meaning of censorship instead of making yourself look like a pretentious pos trying to come off like YOU DO KNOW what it means, just please stop talking.

People are pissed cause it's been happening to A LOT of games recently and it's getting annoying. Personally I don't give a damn if there's a "rub a persons face" mechanic in a FE game, what I do care about is if they remove something cause they might fear backlashing from SJW pricks cause they're afraid of something sexualized in a damn game.

stupid thing to have in the game to begin with and an even stupider thing to get mad about them removing. everyone involved is stupid.

Yes.

That makes sense. I bet some people will find issue with this too, though. It's Nintendo, after all, why give credit where it's due

Couldn't care less about this particular case, but zero censorship is always good for everything.

@charizard1605: Except you're completely wrong. Don't spread misinformation.

The petting minigame is still completely removed. It's not in the game at all, even for your spouse.

What IS in the game is a completely separate feature that was also in the Japanese version, where you can wake up your spouse by tapping them on the face. This does NOT include special dialogue like the petting minigame did.

And there was nothing creepy about the minigame, don't act like you're some kind of moral enforcer. This game is half romance simulator, and you can BET people who are interested in that aspect of the game want to have all the romance features in their version. There's NOTHING wrong about that.

I got reminded of this.

Disgusting.

What is facerubbing?

A Japanese fetish that Weeaboos and Otaku's enjoy a lot in video games.

I'm still not happy. Where is the Wii U version?

"Oh no, no more heavy petting with my sister? CENSORSHIP!"

Aww, this sucks, the touching is still removed. They left everything else in, but removed the touching. Horrible localization, worst ive seen in a long time.

Sign the petition if you want the rubbing added back. Its a small feature, but its still cool.

https://www.change.org/p/nintendo-do-not-censor-fire-emblem-fates-for-it-s-worldwide-release

I take issue that homosexual relationships are limited to just one character and one sex per game.

I'm still not happy, because reasons.

I like this.

I am beginning to see changes in Nintendo. Slight, but they're indicators. This is good to see. Optimism meter rising.

lol you people

They took out the actual skinship minigame. If I decide to hang out with Xander. I can't do the skinship minigame. They left in a certain tidbit where you can tap your husband/wife's face to wake them up but skin ship is still gone but of course that's A ok with sheep.

Face it, there's nothing anyone could do that would satisfy you, simply because the game is for a Nintendo system. You are never this critical with Sony games and products, for some un-explainable reason...

@Bigboi500: Can you read? I like Nintendo games. I'm getting Fire Emblem day one. I don't like having my games being censored and being treated like a child. Sony and MS don't do that.

And how important was the skinship minigame to the game? How does it impact the gameplay, its mechanics, its strategy elements? I heard something about minor stat boosts I think but it's not like they can't find other ways to get those stat boosts outside of the facerubbing minigame.

How is the plot or whatever themes it's trying to convey being silenced? As far as I have heard all facerubbing does is make the character getting rubbed say some suggestive or dopey line. Wow how meaningful...

How is the games styles, visuals, mood being significantly impacted?

The music and sound?

Is Fire Emblem Fates still going to have the things that actually matter and build the experience in the game? Because if so you are seriously crying over nothing and just complaining about censorship/editing for the sake of censorship/editing, and not because the censorship is actually hurting he game experience. This isn; to mention that people are actually upset they aren't able to grope pixelated video game...

And quite frankly I'm okay with the skinship stuff being removed because that creepy fanservice BS should have never been in the game in the goddamn first place. It's insulting both to the fire emblem name and my intelligence.

**** what you like.

@DJ-Lafleur: How is the game being impacted? You're taking out content that's in another version of the game. Content that's supposed to let you interact with your comrades. Is it stupid? Is it goofy? Yes and yes. Doesn't mean it's OK to just rip out. Fire Emblem Fates will still be a good game but this pointless censorship will be a stain on the game. A stain that can't even be argued for removable? It's not obscene. It's just their faces. It's not offensive. So why then? Why take it out? Especially when there's so much other stuff in the game that you could take out? When it gets down to it DJ, this was a nonoffensive mini game that took out because they thought it could somehow cause controversy and ironically by taking it out they did make controversy.

If you're gonna take it out, take it out of EVERY version.

That makes sense.

What is wrong with that? Censorship is not nothing, it is (what I'd argue) the most valid of grounds to lay criticism at just on general principle.

Not saying it's censorship, but it is an unneeded feature that doesn't belong to Fire Emblem.

Here's the thing, though: Nintendo can (and should) be allowed to decide what content gets released on their machines. Arguing against censorship just for the sake of censorship is to imply that Nintendo has some kind of obligation to facilitate the release of content that (for whatever reason) they might find objectionable.

I can buy the game now. Nintendo did the right thing.

@Bigboi500: Someone's pissy because they don't know how to hold an argument and know they're on the wrong side. Sit down. The men are talking.

@FireEmblem_Man: Your opinion on the content doesn't change the fact that it was ripped out of the game.

You could have bought the game before, you know.

I am going to go against the grain and say they should really just leave whatever weird shit was in the Japanese game in the English version. Isn't part of the fun of playing these games experiencing the strangeness of their culture? I don't mean strange in a bad way. Just that it's nice to experience their culture instead of changing it to fit ours.

...and I'd be all fine and well with that, but Nintendo is (or was) censoring predicated upon territorial distinctions. I don't consider it censorship had these dichotomies never existed in the first place (how could I?), and you're right, Nintendo holds no obligation to release something they find objectionable. However, held in contrast to what was originally envisioned and to be released, they originally didn't find it objectionable, so it's a different story. When they put out one product in one territory but decide to alter it for another, yea....I'll accept that, but don't try to convince me it's not censorship, for whatever reasoning Nintendo (or any other company) might find suitable to their bottom dollar, public image, or desire to concede to audience predilections towards cultural norms.

It remains a departure from artistic discretion in favor of corporate's...the artist holds no say. The company, by right of ownership, has stepped in and laid dictates to that form of particular expression post creation, be it for financial, cultural, economic, practical, or whatever types of considerations they deem relevant to that product's impact in the region of which it resides. The only time I'd agree it's not censorship is when an artist holds complete monopoly over their works, irrelevant of its exposure.

Or, someone knows arguing with you is like arguing with a child whose mother was infected with the Zika virus.

But the artist does hold a say, seeing as how the artist gets to choose who they do business with. If you're making a videogame and you're that adamant about your game not being censored at all, then you're entirely within your rights to either stay the hell away from Nintendo or make sure that your contract specifically prohibits them from censoring anything. No one can MAKE YOU do business with a company that's going to misrepresent your artistic intentions against your will. You can either make some concessions because that's in your best interests, or you can take your business elsewhere.

Of course, but that concession still doesn't mean it's not censorship....agreed to or otherwise. It's just the nature of the compromise between artistic and corporate realities.

I'm not saying that it's not censorship, I'm saying that even if it is censorship that it's not necessarily a problem. Both parties are out to get something, they think it's in their mutual benefit so they come to an agreement, and that may or may not require one or more party to make sacrifices. I don't see anything wrong with that. There's nothing inherently wrong with Nintendo censoring a game (even if only in certain countries). Hell, they're taking some risk by putting it on their console, so it's not unreasonable for them to say "we'll release this on our console, but we retain the right to make some changes if." If the artists are cool with those terms, then fine, and if the artists have a problem then they're absolutely free to take their business elsewhere.

@MrGeezer: Jesus Christ. It's a problem BECAUSE it's censorship. If they didn't want the content in the game, why is it in the Japanese version? You shouldn't be OK with this censorship. This isn't the freaking 90s.

@Capitan_Kid: Its alright to agree with Nintendo's self-censorship, sometimes they make some good choices when they localize. But its not always gonna be perfect, sometimes the changes are for the better, sometimes they might not be.

Different regions have different sensibilities, so it's perfectly acceptable to make appropriate changes accordingly. There's really nothing else that needs to be said.

See, here's the thing. I place more relevance upon artistic merit than I do on corporate priorities, mostly due to the fact that I find monetary gains to be fleeting and quickly forgotten whereas art holds much more of a permanent relevance in many aspects that far eclipses ones dictated by business. If the artist is fine with it, ok....that's their perogative, it's their work, and their compromise. I can't much argue against that, but it doesn't mean I agree with it. To get the art out there, you have to entangle yourself with something that at times runs antithetical to the means of revealing its true form. That's just the way the world functions.

I don't know man.....something in that still strikes me the wrong way, even despite a common ground found among parties to mutual benefit. I suppose the phase "selling out" would be applicable here. The conceding of personal expression for monetary gain.....fighting against that is idealistic, sure. But morally justifiable? In that case I don't think there's an argument to be had, frankly. But that's because I view all art to be priceless.

It's NOT censorship! It's removing a worthless feature that wouldn't interest anyone other than weeaboos, otaku's, and the Japanese!

Nintendo doesn't want to deal with fake outrage from keyboard warriors who wasn't going to buy the game anyway. And can you blame them? They made a perfectly innocent game like Tomodachi life and the KBW blew up that game to hell. Could you imagine the fury if they release their normal games in all their glory? They'd be fighting mock outrage all day. And the worst part is that even if Nintendo fought the good fight, and released the games in all their uncensored glory, and shouldered all that bad press, those games wouldn't sell. Because Nintendo only does kiddy games.

Lets face it. Nintendo is doomed either way.