I'm confused about this censorship controversey

[Hunter (BloodyMoonlight)]

I don't get why the new devs decided that they needed to censor the game after the third new DLC character. I mean I get it could be for EVO. But then again this game could have easily had a toggle on or off feature when it came to censorship.

I personally still love Skullgirls but the move to censor it without any type of way to have it uncensored feels icky to me.

I remember playing this game back on the Ps4 and loving the characters and the story.

Stuff like big bands origin hits hard nowadays, The fact they censored it feels oddly disrespectful and shameful.

This is not a kids game, Its T rated for sure but it has a lot of dark elements in it.

Sure we all could go "ME LOVE CUTE GIRLS OOOH OOH AA AAH" but I rather take a unique perspective on it.

The devs can censor the game all they want but they will never remove what was one of my favorite fighting games.

anyway, Whats all your opinions? (please be professional)

[1.2M | Missingno.]

If this is an honest question and you really are looking to understand, you could read the devs' own explanation.

[Tanoomba]

Here is the official explanation from the developers:
https://forum.skullgirlsmobile.com/threads/official-skullgirls-content-updates-revisions.20180/

Originally posted by Hunts:

But then again this game could have easily had a toggle on or off feature when it came to censorship.

The changes weren't made out of concern for players who might take offense at certain content. They were made because the devs saw that content as fundamentally "wrong" and wanted to fix it. They wanted the game to reflect their values, and offering a toggle wouldn't actually accomplish that.

Originally posted by Hunts:

Stuff like big bands origin hits hard nowadays, The fact they censored it feels oddly disrespectful and shameful.

Big Band's story hasn't changed. One image was replaced without changing the plot, and it wasn't a "disrespectful" or "shameful" change.

Originally posted by Hunts:

This is not a kids game, Its T rated for sure but it has a lot of dark elements in it.

It didn't lose any dark elements.

Originally posted by Hunts:

The devs can censor the game all they want but they will never remove what was one of my favorite fighting games.

Indeed, the game is fundamentally the same game it's always been. Most of the player base will likely never notice anything has changed at all.

[赤ちゃん]

I think the 'dark elements' could easily include the nazi imagery that was removed right? The armbands where a very noticeable detail that immediately tells this audience "these are the characters your dealing with" in a recognizable way.

[Tanoomba]

Originally posted by Baby:

I think the 'dark elements' could easily include the nazi imagery that was removed right? The armbands where a very noticeable detail that immediately tells this audience "these are the characters your dealing with" in a recognizable way.

But the connection was purely superficial and, as such, was arguably misleading. The Egrets are not Nazi-like in any way except visually, so what's the point of that connection?

[Loot Hunter]

Originally posted by Tanoomba:

devs saw that content as fundamentally "wrong" and wanted to fix it.

Could you please elaborate what do you mean by "wrong"? Why in quotes? Is content not actually wrong? Then why fix it? And if content is actually wrong - why?

Originally posted by Tanoomba:

They wanted the game to reflect their values, and offering a toggle wouldn't actually accomplish that.

Why? What in devs' values is reflected by removing armbands and recoloring panties?

[Zytel]

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

Originally posted by Tanoomba:

devs saw that content as fundamentally "wrong" and wanted to fix it.

Could you please elaborate what do you mean by "wrong"? Why in quotes? Is content not actually wrong? Then why fix it? And if content is actually wrong - why?

Originally posted by Tanoomba:

They wanted the game to reflect their values, and offering a toggle wouldn't actually accomplish that.

Why? What in devs' values is reflected by removing armbands and recoloring panties?

They want to elevate themselves by displaying how they don't engage in certain areas if entertainment.

Wonder why they would be working on it if they don't like it.

They should all be fired and make their own original material, but I doubt they are capable of doing anything worthy of consequence without attaching themselves to something successful.

[1.2M | Missingno.]

Again, read the devs' own explanation. Continuing to repeat a question that you should already know the answer to doesn't sound to me like you're acting in good faith.

[Loot Hunter]

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

read the devs' own explanation.

Already done that many times. That "explanation" doesn't actually explain:
1. Why do devs feel so much discomfort when seeing armbands that may or may not be a reference to some "groups" whose members don't even play Skullgirls?
2. What do devs have against fetishes and why do they think panty shots to be "imposed sexualization"?
3. When devs talk about "poor taste", whose taste are they talking about? I'm specifically interested in the answer to this question since many of Skullgirls' players consider this remark to be about them. Are they wrong? If they are, then whose "poor taste" devs talk about?
4. Why did devs decide to "clean house" now and not almost a decade prior? You yourself claimed that all they do is correct their mistakes in an early version of the game, yet it doesn't make sense for them to wait for so long.

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

Continuing to repeat a question that you should already know the answer

Yes, I SHOULD know the answer but comrade Tanoomba many times made a claim that I don't, yet refuses to explain further.

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

doesn't sound to me like you're acting in good faith

The only people here, who are not acting in good faith are the ones who engage in fallacies, and emotional manipulation and refuse to answer direct questions.

[1.2M | Missingno.]

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

1. Why do devs feel so much discomfort when seeing armbands that may or may not be a reference to some "groups" whose members don't even play Skullgirls?

Because it's one of the most solemn events in human history, one that should not be taken lightly.

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

2. What do devs have against fetishes and why do they think panty shots to be "imposed sexualization"?

They're pointing out a difference between a character expressing their own sexuality versus having it imposed upon them. In other words, consent. Valentine's teasing would be an example of the former, Filia being groped would be an example of the latter.

They also pointed out the fact that Filia is underage. Sexualizing her at all was kind of a bad decision in hindsight.

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

3. When devs talk about "poor taste", whose taste are they talking about? I'm specifically interested in the answer to this question since many of Skullgirls' players consider this remark to be about them. Are they wrong? If they are, then whose "poor taste" devs talk about?

Their own. You're overthinking this. Honestly this just sounds like you really want to find a way to read malice into it.

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

4. Why did devs decide to "clean house" now and not almost a decade prior? You yourself claimed that all they do is correct their mistakes in an early version of the game, yet it doesn't make sense for them to wait for so long.

Hindsight is 20/20, and they've always been busy with a lot of other things anyway. Better late than never. I don't see how this matters, let alone is something to try and treat as a gotcha.

[Loot Hunter]

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

it's one of the most solemn events in human history, one that should not be taken lightly.

And? There are plenty of solemn events in human history, including the Spanish Inquisition that tortured and executed lots of "heretics" and the USSR where in GULAGs arguably more people died than in an entire WWII. All of them are taken seriously, yet at the same time parodied in the media. And people don't have a problem with that. Why Nazism is any different? In fact, Nazis are quite often shown as cartoonish baddies. So, again, why devs have any problem with Nazi uniform in particular?

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

Valentine's teasing would be an example of the former, Filia being groped would be an example of the latter.

I didn't see any groping. But I did see panties color changed - what it has to do with any of that?

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

They also pointed out the fact that Filia is underage. Sexualizing her at all was kind of a bad decision in hindsight.

Again. Where exactly is sexualization? Why is it bad? You accused me of acting in bad faith because I ask the same question over and over again, but what am I supposed to do if you avoid answering?

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

3. When devs talk about "poor taste", whose taste are they talking about? I'm specifically interested in the answer to this question since many of Skullgirls' players consider this remark to be about them. Are they wrong? If they are, then whose "poor taste" devs talk about?

Their own.

"We have poor taste and that's why we remove the joke in poor taste?" - this doesn't make any sense.

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

You're overthinking this. Honestly this just sounds like you really want to find a way to read malice into it.

No, I'm not overthinking anything. "Poor taste" is usually an attribute of a person. When people say that something is "in poor taste" that means only people with such taste would like it. If you are suggesting anything else, then you are the one who goes out of your way to read a meaning that isn't actually there.

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

they've always been busy with a lot of other things anyway

That's a demonstrably false statement. In 2015 devs had time. How do I know? Because in 2015 they did exactly that - changed all the content that they weren't happy with. And not only did they promise not to change content any more, but they also addressed their principles for depicting panty shots specifically.

[1.2M | Missingno.]

Originally posted by Loot Hunter:

I didn't see any groping. But I did see panties color changed - what it has to do with any of that?

She gets groped in story mode, that was one of the scenes adjusted, that is what they were talking about when they say "imposed upon". As for the panty shots, they darkened it to make it a little less glaring. Because again, she is underage.

Look, the way you're just trying to move onto more and more and more nitpicks, I can see that this will never end. I'm not gonna go point by point by point by point with you because I already know that no matter what answers you get you will find something else to continue picking at. They've given a pretty clear explanation and I clearly cannot explain it to someone who doesn't actually want to understand it.

[Loot Hunter]

Originally posted by Broken Stick Missingno.:

Look, the way you're just trying to move onto more and more and more nitpicks, I can see that this will never end. I'm not gonna go point by point by point by point with you because I already know that no matter what answers you get you will find something else to continue picking at.

In other words, your claims and arguments are BS that wouldn't stand any scrutiny. And you know that your claims and arguments are BS that wouldn't stand any scrutiny. Thanks for the confirmation.

[1.2M | Missingno.]

No, you're just too stubborn to actually understand what you don't want to understand.

[Loot Hunter]

Originally posted by Hunts:

I don't get why the new devs decided that they needed to censor the game after the third new DLC character.

Because it's 2023 and we can't have lewd or edgy things, especially ones that resemble anime and other media that don't conform to DEI values. At least according to the socialists who managed to get in charge of most franchises big and small.

[1.2M | Missingno.]

No.