Support NeoGAF

[MayauMiao]

That costume was never shown/advertised so they never promised that particular item. They said 30 outfits and we are getting DOUBLE of that, among other many features that usually aren't free.

Customers do a great disservice by not being able to separate the good from the bad.

By the way, Shift Up's CEO has already confirmed that this is THEIR VISION. So, by going against their vision people are literally censoring him, for the sake of "liberty".

Liberty hawks should acknowledge they are doing the dirty job of wokies in this drama. IGN France and Kotaku wouldn't do a better job.

So was it THEIR VISION when they had to change the Hard R graffiti due to the media fake outrage?

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

So was it THEIR VISION when they had to change the Hard R graffiti due to the media fake outrage?

Of course not, and there was a public statement on that, too. That was Sony's censorship, confirmed by both parties.

Same as in this one, Kim has already stated what it is. If people prefer to ignore him it's pretty evident they have an agenda and won't let truth get in their way.

 

[Crayon]

Consumers have rights. Consumers do not like it when the advertised product was not what they received.

Do you WANT companies to get away with false advertising? The fact is the changes were hidden from the public until the game was purchased, that is deception.

It was unacceptable with No Man's Sky back then, it is unacceptable now.

All good. One can still keep a cool head about it. Internet-antisocial behavior is not a product of wokeness, it's the other way around. Getting a bunch of people mad and commenting does not always work. In fact it seems like it doesn't most of the time.

For someone feeling like they are fully engaged in gamergate 2, my recommendation to them would be to show full support for the changes. Just strategically. War is deception, after all.

If you feel like this is more like false advertising (nms) then maybe that's different. I'm talking about people who've turned this wonderful game and a talented studio's breakout moment into a culture war football.

 

[MagiusNecros]

ShiftUp changed their "vision" on wall graffiti and 2 outfits and the game has less ketchup spray 5 days after release. Do whatever mental gymnastics you need to do but they censored their own game they said they weren't going to censor in any way and lied to the consumer and are playing a PR semantics game with their own playerbase.

The game itself isn't bad at all. It's ShiftUps integrity that's in question and it's only because they partnered with Sony who has pulled this kind of crap before.

Unlike the Senran Kagura dev, ShiftUp is willing to bend the knee to Sony's demands. Money > Vision after all in their case.

 

[midnightAI]

All good. One can still keep a cool head about it. Internet-antisocial behavior is not a product of wokeness, it's the other way around. Getting a bunch of people mad and commenting does not always work. In fact it seems like it doesn't most of the time.

For someone feeling like they are fully engaged in gamergate 2, my recommendation would be to show full support for the changes. Just strategically. War is deception, after all.

If you feel like this is more like false advertising (nms) then maybe that's different. I'm talking about people who've turned this wonderful game and a talented studio's breakout moment into a culture war football.

I can see these Devs making the next game completely safe, no skin showing, no blood, have SBI look through it just because they don't want the internet mob on their backs scrutinising every little thing they do.

 

[LegendOfKage]

By the way, Shift Up's CEO has already confirmed that this is THEIR VISION. So, by going against their vision people are literally censoring him, for the sake of "liberty".

Liberty hawks should acknowledge they are doing the dirty job of wokies in this drama. IGN France and Kotaku wouldn't do a better job.

While it's true that a lot of people like to express concern about the vision of artists being compromised to fight against changes being made to media in recent times, I just addressed why I don't think that's the most accurate way to view the topic.

I would argue that the creative vision of a product has nothing to do with determining when censorship has taken place. What matters is the intent behind the change. Is content being changed or removed for reasons related to subjective moral, political, or religious values? If yes, that's censorship.

 

[midnightAI]

ShiftUp changed their "vision" on wall graffiti and 2 outfits and the game has less ketchup spray 5 days after release. Do whatever mental gymnastics you need to do but they censored their own game they said they weren't going to censor in any way and lied to the consumer and are playing a PR semantics game with their own playerbase.

The game itself isn't bad at all. It's ShiftUps integrity that's in question and it's only because they partnered with Sony who has pulled this kind of crap before.

Unlike the Senran Kagura dev, ShiftUp is willing to bend the knee to Sony's demands. Money > Vision after all in their case.

Are people still getting this 'uncensored' thing out of context? They meant the same version across all regions so one region isn't censored compared to another.

 

[MagiusNecros]

Are people still getting this 'uncensored' thing out of context? They meant the same version across all regions so one region isn't censored compared to another.

Altering outfits, textures and amount of gore after release in the way they did is censorship. You aren't going to win this one. Promises and bullshit. What are you really holding onto?

 

[Three]

The game itself isn't bad at all. It's ShiftUps integrity that's in question and it's only because they partnered with Sony who has pulled this kind of crap before.

Unlike the Senran Kagura dev, ShiftUp is willing to bend the knee to Sony's demands. Money > Vision after all in their case.

If you knew about Shift Up's other games like Nikke and Destiny Child you'd know they've done more outfit changes in those games than they have here and the Skin Suit outfit that's not censored in Stellar Blade is more revealing than pretty much any character design they've done before. This has nothing to do with integrity.

 

[FeralEcho]

Who the fuck buys one month subs?

People who don't give a shit about psplus offerings and only get it for online mp every now and then, thats how I buy it,either 1 month or 3 months depending on what games I play that month/months.

I buy my games and play them whenever I want,I don't play them on a roulette whenever Sony decides to make x game available on plus or howeverlong they decide to keep it there.Unless you only play a game once and you're done all these subscriptions are garbage which is why I also canceled Gamepass and decided to buy the Xbox games I'm interested in instead.

 

[Fabieter]

What about them? GaaS games at their best are still games that could be much better with the gambling aspect removed. So by definition they are worse games than they could have been. You go you if you enjoy lootboxes, but i am not going to defend their practices if people still pay them money.

Single Player games have different rules. Trying to argue that we got given skins for free is laughable.

My point is things change during development.

 

[Crayon]

I can see these Devs making the next game completely safe, no skin showing, no blood, have SBI look through it just because they don't want the internet mob on their backs scrutinising every little thing they do.

I hear you but seems like shift up have been down this road before with their other games. Push the envelope, pull it back a little, repeat. They've gotten away with Sony backing a AAA where I can still see reflections off pussy lips just climbing a latter. Seem to be pro's at this lol.

 

[midnightAI]

Altering outfits, textures and amount of gore after release in the way they did is censorship. You aren't going to win this one. Promises and bullshit. What are you really holding onto?

What promises? Just curious, did they say that it will have those things unaltered? Devs change stuff all the time during development, is that all promises and bullshit? If so then I'm really in the shit because I have changed crap loads of the game I'm working on.

I'm not holding onto anything other than this is the first console game for this Dev and all they have had is shit thrown at them for too lewd, not lewd enough, apparently now untrustworthy, these Devs don't deserve this crap, luckily it's the vocal few as usual so hopefully they'll take it in their stride.

Anyway, 2 outfits modified slightly (we don't know the actual reason yet because people won't wait on an answer from the Devs even though they said they would talk internally about it), a texture on a wall changed so not as to cause any offence (even if it's a reach) and some blood no-one would have noticed until someone who is actively looking for changes spotted something. Yeh, deserves all the rage /s

 

[ManaByte]

I guess it's now 7 costumes they found that were changed?

So after promising it won't be censored they shipped the uncensored game to reviewers, then did a day 1 patch to censor it?

And people have a hard time understanding the anger over that?

 

[Toons]

An artists changing their stance on an aspect of their own work isn't what I'd chalk up as censorship... no in the connotation it tends to carry in modern times.

Sometimes you create something and then you reevaluate it and decide you dotn want a part of that to be there any more.

They have every right to do so and it can still be their vision.

 

[Snake29]

Some of the comments in this very thread makes it sound like they changed a ton of costumes...

It’s why this outrage is so fucking fake and stupid.

I find the small cover for her cleavage more sexy than before, because it doesn’t reveal everything, it has more class.

 

[Topher]

So after promising it won't be censored they shipped the uncensored game to reviewers, then did a day 1 patch to censor it?

The disc version is the uncensored one. Reviewers received the digital version which already had the changes.

 

[ManaByte]

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

An artists changing their stance on an aspect of their own work isn't what I'd chalk up as censorship... no in the connotation it tends to carry in modern times.

Sometimes you create something and then you reevaluate it and decide you dotn want a part of that to be there any more.

They have every right to do so and it can still be their vision.

There is a reason they are talking about it "internally". They can't reveal who was responsible because it is a senior leader outside the studio. If it was truly their own decision they would say so. Standard practice to shut up when the blame goes to someone higher up the chain.

 

[InterMusketeer]

An artists changing their stance on an aspect of their own work isn't what I'd chalk up as censorship... no in the connotation it tends to carry in modern times.

Sometimes you create something and then you reevaluate it and decide you dotn want a part of that to be there any more.

They have every right to do so and it can still be their vision.

Yup. That's exactly how it went. The devs for this horny game about a sexy lady wearing skimpy outfits, had a realization post-release. The bunny girl outfit was simply too revealing. They quickly jumped into action and sloppily added a shirt and some strips of cloth. After spending additional time and money to slightly alter a couple outfits to be less revealing, they breathed a sigh of relief. They were finally able to make the game they had envisioned all those months ago. Truly, a crisis was averted and their artistic vision preserved.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

My point is things change during development.

Their marketing suggest otherwise.

 

[Punished Miku]

Such a clown.

 

[ToneyJ]

You have to be really dense to think what was worked on for 4-5 years and printed on the discs isn't Shift Up's original vision. Or to think these rushed, "touched up" patch costumes with random fabric slapped in weren't made at Sony's request. Shift Up can't simply throw Sony under the bus for this because Sony is publishing their game and they have total control of what appears on their Playstation platform.

So when Kim says "our intent was for you to play what you received in the day 1 patch", what he is saying is "you weren't supposed to experience the unpatched version in early, street date broken copies".

Is this whole situation ridiculous? At surface level, yes. It's 2 modified costumes in a game that is otherwise filled with T&A everywhere. But the reason people are getting pissed is because Sony's continues to censor Asian games like Stellar Blade and Devil May Cry 5 for no apparent reason while allowing western games like Baldur's Gate 3 and The Last of Us Part 2 to have full blown nudity.

 

[Valt7786]

She really is such a hypocritical piece of shit. I bet she's seething at the the review on her own website being somewhat favourable of the game.

 

[Three]

There is a reason they are talking about it "internally". They can't reveal who was responsible because it is a senior leader outside the studio.

Yeah, that isn't computing. What exactly would they be discussing internally if the person responsible is not internal. How much they hate that guy's guts or something?

If it was truly their own decision they would say so. Standard practice to shut up when the blame goes to someone higher up the chain.

They did say so:

"However the final costume we wanted to show you is indeed the costume in version 1.0.0.2."

The "we're discussing it internally" means they're discussing what to do with this now. Means nothing about responsibility, especially when they're explicitly telling you they wanted to show you these costumes.

 

[Toons]

There is a reason they are talking about it "internally". They can't reveal who was responsible because it is a senior leader outside the studio. If it was truly their own decision they would say so. Standard practice to shut up when the blame goes to someone higher up the chain.

That sounds more like jumping to a convenient conclusion when there's a bunch of equally if not more likely scenarios here.

And even if that WAS the case that doesnt mean they don't agree with the decision. The studios have higher ups for a reason, and in many cases those higher ups hired these people so have just as much a say in how the final product comes out.

All of which I neither here or there, but again the connotation of "censorship " implies far less agency than seems to be present.

 

[Toons]

Yup. That's exactly how it went. The devs for this horny game about a sexy lady wearing skimpy outfits, had a realization post-release. The bunny girl outfit was simply too revealing. They quickly jumped into action and sloppily added a shirt and some strips of cloth. After spending additional time and money to slightly alter a couple outfits to be less revealing, they breathed a sigh of relief. They were finally able to make the game they had envisioned all those months ago. Truly, a crisis was averted and their artistic vision preserved.

Its post like these that make me wonder if some commenters really think higher ups walk into a studio and say "hey guys we didn't piss off enough gaffers; add some more clothes to the models!!"

With any piece of media theres always market considerations, economic considerations etc outside of just making the actual art. Many times an artist starts off with a idea and starts making it bur tweaks it over time based on observations, new information or reconsideration. I say its folly to immediately jump to the conclusion that it was some machiavellian grand order the studios had no say in.

 

[ToneyJ]

That sounds more like jumping to a convenient conclusion when there's a bunch of equally if not more likely scenarios here.

And even if that WAS the case that doesnt mean they don't agree with the decision. The studios have higher ups for a reason, and in many cases those higher ups hired these people so have just as much a say in how the final product comes out.

All of which I neither here or there, but again the connotation of "censorship " implies far less agency than seems to be present.

Agreed on the part about studio higher ups. And now's where it can get interesting lol.

If The Shift Up higher ups internally decide "our fanbase will be happy, our reputation will be restored and game will perform better if we do a go-back on the costumes and return them to 1.000.000 disc form"
and
The Playstation higher ups say " no you can't do that"

They could battle it out. Sony has far more leverage, granted, but you never know.

 

[Fabieter]

Their marketing suggest otherwise.

After they changed the hard r shop thing, than any further change wouldn't matter anyway.

 

[BennyBlanco]

on one hand it is extremely lame that Sony forced them to patch this. On the other hand GRUMMZ is a failed game dev who was last seen in the industry with a massive flop and embarrassing branded bus.

How people eat shit up from weird social media grifters like him is kind of weird to me. He is just baldly trying to attach his brand to any and all game controversies no matter how big or small.

 

[InterMusketeer]

Its post like these that make me wonder if some commenters really think higher ups walk into a studio and say "hey guys we didn't piss off enough gaffers; add some more clothes to the models!!"

No, I don't. I'm just aware of Sony's history of censorship. I'm making some educated guesses based on that. I'm not gonna pretend I have it all figured out or anything, but all information we have points that way. None of the other scenarios sound very likely.

Case in point:

With any piece of media theres always market considerations, economic considerations etc outside of just making the actual art. Many times an artist starts off with a idea and starts making it bur tweaks it over time based on observations, new information or reconsideration. I say its folly to immediately jump to the conclusion that it was some machiavellian grand order the studios had no say in.

This is extremely unlikely. The game has been promoted as a fanservice heavy game from day one. Its entire identity and reason for existing is to provide that kind of experience. They would need to have a damn good reason to justify these changes after the game had already been rated and shipped. It would also need to be something they only figured out shortly before release. And I don't buy that such a reason exists.

 

[midnightAI]

Agreed on the part about studio higher ups. And now's where it can get interesting lol.

If The Shift Up higher ups internally decide "our fanbase will be happy, our reputation will be restored and game will perform better if we do a go-back on the costumes and return them to 1.000.000 disc form"
and
The Playstation higher ups say " no you can't do that"

They could battle it out. Sony has far more leverage, granted, but you never know.

'If' the reasoning behind it is to satisfy regional ratings then its going to be more complicated than that (and I suspect this is exactly why it has happened as some of these regional rating boards have some very specific specifications and I'm guessing one is cleavage visibility or something, but that's purely a guess). If it is that then they may need to scrap the idea of uncensored in all regions and go with region specific changes (which will no doubt cause more backlash, because... reasons)

 

[Clear]

After they changed the hard r shop thing, than any further change wouldn't matter anyway.

Is anyone actually offended by that change?

The way I see it, there never was anything to it. It was literally some reactionary idiots conjuring up a controversy out of nothing more than the proximity of a graffiti decal to a shop-sign.
So that being the case, why would anyone care that it was changed to another generic decal? Nothing was lost,

Oh right. Its about the "point". Its about not letting those people have their way.

If that's the only basis for the argument, I don't see it being about freedom of expression, its simply about who gets to dictate to the developers.

Sorry. Not cool in my opinion.

 

[ToneyJ]

'If' the reasoning behind it is to satisfy regional ratings then its going to be more complicated than that (and I suspect this is exactly why it has happened as some of these regional rating boards have some very specific specifications and I'm guessing one is cleavage visibility or something, but that's purely a guess). If it is that then they may need to scrap the idea of uncensored in all regions and go with region specific changes (which will no doubt cause more backlash, because... reasons)

The thing is, didn't the game essentially get approved by all regions when it went gold and the discs were printed? Though it is possible the approval was conditional upon the day 1 patch.

Either way, whole situation is weird considering the game has "hornier" costumes that weren't censored.

The nerf to gore and blood is disappointing though, that blood splatter on the boss kill in the demo version looked cool af.

 

[ManaByte]

Is anyone actually offended by that change?

The way I see it, there never was anything to it. It was literally some reactionary idiots conjuring up a controversy out of nothing more than the proximity of a graffiti decal to a shop-sign.
So that being the case, why would anyone care that it was changed to another generic decal? Nothing was lost,

Oh right. Its about the "point". Its about not letting those people have their way.

If that's the only basis for the argument, I don't see it being about freedom of expression, its simply about who gets to dictate to the developers.

Sorry. Not cool in my opinion.

People aren't mad about the Hard R change. They're mad at 7 costumes being sloppily censored.

 

[skyfall]

Is anyone actually offended by that change?

Yes. That’s actually worse than the outfits or the gore censor as it’s pandering to the people who call everything racist, which is on the bigger issues in our society at the moment

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

ly. The game has been promoted as a fanservice heavy game from day one. Its entire identity and reason for existing is to provide that kind of experience.

Wrong. Like Nier Automata and many others, SB was always advertised as a full-fledged AAA action RPG. The lewd factor and the outrage over costumes started after the last State of Play. Devs have made countless interviews explaining every aspect in the game, from music to combat. It's not on them that many people couldn't get past a sexy character.

And this is the sole reason why they haven't released Photo Mode, so the conversation is about the actual game instead of tits and booties. To think that Sony funded and helped in the game development only for the sex factor is stupid.

 

[Clear]

Yes. That’s actually worse than the outfits or the gore censor as it’s pandering to the people who call everything racist, which is on the bigger issues in our society at the moment

Its a nothing-burger!

Look, if you didn't have an ideological horse in the race, you'd just shrug and change it too. Because it doesn't matter!

 

[Three]

People aren't mad about the Hard R change. They're mad at 7 costumes being sloppily censored.

What 7 costumes?

 

[midnightAI]

Though it is possible the approval was conditional upon the day 1 patch.

That's my thinking, not unusual either, especially if they got version 1.0.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Its post like these that make me wonder if some commenters really think higher ups walk into a studio and say "hey guys we didn't piss off enough gaffers; add some more clothes to the models!!"

With any piece of media theres always market considerations, economic considerations etc outside of just making the actual art. Many times an artist starts off with a idea and starts making it bur tweaks it over time based on observations, new information or reconsideration. I say its folly to immediately jump to the conclusion that it was some machiavellian grand order the studios had no say in.

 

[ManaByte]

Though it is possible the approval was conditional upon the day 1 patch.

A game won't go gold without approval.

 

[skyfall]

Its a nothing-burger!

Look, if you didn't have an ideological horse in the race, you'd just shrug and change it too. Because it doesn't matter!

Who are you to say what does or doesn’t matter to individuals? Clearly it matters to a lot of people who have anti-censorship as a principle

 

[InterMusketeer]

Wrong. Like Nier Automata and many others, SB was always advertised as a full-fledged AAA action RPG.

None of what you said counters my statements. A game can both focus heavily on fanservice and still be an action RPG. Those things are not exclusive.

The lewd factor and the outrage over costumes started after the last State of Play. Devs have made countless interviews explaining every aspect in the game, from music to combat. It's not on them that many people couldn't get past a sexy character.

This is just plain revisionism. Just go back to the original Project EVE announcement trailer from 5 years ago, and look at what's on screen and what people most commented on. I'll wait.

And this is the sole reason why they haven't released Photo Mode, so the conversation is about the actual game instead of tits and booties. To think that Sony funded and helped in the game development only for the sex factor is stupid.

Source?

 

[Dr. Claus]

Who are you to say what does or doesn’t matter to individuals? Clearly it matters to a lot of people who have anti-censorship as a principle

Principles are a concept that is totally alien to many of those decrying folks who are annoyed by the changes. They project their own anger and emotional outbursts onto others.

 

[miklonus]

...and similar censorship hellholes...

You mean like America?

 

[Nydius]

I'm no fan of Mark Kern but I'll absolutely sign his petition, based solely on the principle of the matter. I don't really care about the minor changes they made as they don't really affect me, but coming out saying they wouldn't censor anything in order to get pre-release marketing buzz and preorders only to turn around and do a slap-dash censorship job (and a largely meaningless one, at that, given the other available outfits) in a day one patch is pretty scummy.

 

[Pejo]

It's kinda funny/interesting to me that the usual gaffers that are firmly on the side of, we'll say, certain progressive opinions, suddenly have a lot of interest in and support for the developer's supposed vision where it selectively censors a handful of costumes. I don't remember seeing these posters discussing or being interested/excited for Stellar Blade until this censorship controversy popped up.

Just kinda funny, don't you think?

 

[Mr Moose]

A game won't go gold without approval.

 

[Dr. Claus]

It's kinda funny/interesting to me that the usual gaffers that are firmly on the side of, we'll say, certain progressive opinions, suddenly have a lot of interest in and support for the developer's supposed vision where it selectively censors a handful of costumes. I don't remember seeing these posters discussing or being interested/excited for Stellar Blade until this censorship controversy popped up.

Just kinda funny, don't you think?

Yea everyone sees through them.