Current Events > Skullgirls devs alter old artwork they felt was in 'poor taste'

(+) Yeah! (+)

Yeah this was a typical response from the outrage crowd. There are very few committed players of the game who are actually upset it seems. Its the casuals who spend a lot of time ogling and get very loud about censorship and whatnot who seem to take offense, like the Bridget situation months back.

Tyranthraxus posted...

It's more about not wanting to make symbols of genocide a game. They're not saying they're opposed to having depictions of symbols just that they feel those things are actually serious business and not material for a video game about big tiddy goth cat fights.

It doesn't even have those symbols anyway, there were no swastikas. Just red armbands lol
What's even funnier is that the very character that leads the Notzis (get it? heh) has an upside-down cross but no one pretends to care about that one. WEIRD

An upside down cross isn't a hate symbol.

Unless you're going to take the stance that Christianity itself is a hate group at any rate.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/3/1/AARLwzAAEnWD.jpg

Fair, next

Solar_Crimson posted...

Is it considered "censorship" if it's the creator themselves altering their own work of their own will?

When its not the creators who edited it, and just the inheritors of the copyright who did, perhaps it is censorship.

Tyranthraxus posted...

An upside down cross isn't a hate symbol.

Unless you're going to take the stance that Christianity itself is a hate group at any rate.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/3/1/AARLwzAAEnWD.jpg

She's not Christian.
But anyway, the game doesn't contain swastikas either.

I see a lot of arguing centered around the artist changing the artwork. Is it or is it not the original artist?

Kloe_Rinz posted...

When its not the creators who edited it, and just the inheritors of the copyright who did, perhaps it is censorship.

Well, there have been countless cases of IP holders altering the original work. As a society that values private property, we shouldn't have a problem with this.

If someone inherits a piece of land with a house on it and decides to renovate it, you'd never think twice about what the original constrictor would have thought. Use that mindset here.

ssjevot posted...

I see a lot of arguing centered around the artist changing the artwork. Is it or is it not the original artist?

Yeah that's not even a real argument, it's just used to excuse censorship by defining censorship as the government specifically mandating a change.
But no the original artists aren't behind these changes

StateofZen posted...

Well, there have been countless cases of IP holders altering the original work. As a society that values private property, we shouldn't have a problem with this.

If someone inherits a piece of land with a house on it and decides to renovate it, you'd never think twice about what the original constrictor would have thought. Use that mindset here.

A more apt analogy would be a family renting a house having rooms of their house removed by the current owner who used some sort of legal loophole to oust the original builder, who happens to be alive and well

Also they stole some of the paintings that family painted themselves on the way out

tehzeldafanboy posted...

A more apt analogy would be a family renting a house having rooms of their house removed by the current owner who used some sort of legal loophole to oust the original builder, who happens to be alive and well

A more apt analogy would be a family renting out of a house that has rooms painted over and a general gutting of the old Victorian aesthetic for a more post-modern style. While the methods of the owner can be criticized, they still have to manage the property, and thus it should be their right to make any alterations they see fit.

>Also your defending animu cringe

StateofZen posted...

A more apt analogy would be a family renting out of a house that has rooms painted over and a general gutting of the old Victorian aesthetic for a more post-modern style. While the methods of the owner can be criticized, they still have to manage the property, and thus it should be their right to make any alterations they see fit.

>Also your defending animu cringe

That analogy makes 0 sense
Doesn't even mention removal of content with no replacement. 0/10

P.S.
you're*

Seaman_Prime posted...

I will complain about Solid Snakes ass being nerfed in Smash until the end of time.

YES THANK YOU IT LOOKS SO FUCKING BAD

StateofZen posted...

Well, there have been countless cases of IP holders altering the original work. As a society that values private property, we shouldn't have a problem with this.

If someone inherits a piece of land with a house on it and decides to renovate it, you'd never think twice about what the original constrictor would have thought. Use that mindset here.

I honestly dont care about that. All what matters to me is if the change is good or not

StateofZen posted...

Well, there have been countless cases of IP holders altering the original work. As a society that values private property, we shouldn't have a problem with this.

If someone inherits a piece of land with a house on it and decides to renovate it, you'd never think twice about what the original constrictor would have thought. Use that mindset here.

What a terrible analogy. It'd be like if you bought Ocarina of Time when it first came out, then one day, Nintendo decides that Ganondorf's red blood needs to be turned green. So they sneak into your house and switch your cartridge that you bought with the new cartridge.

The turn towards puritanism continues.

gmanthebest posted...

What a terrible analogy. It'd be like if you bought Ocarina of Time when it first came out, then one day, Nintendo decides that Ganondorf's red blood needs to be turned green. So they sneak into your house and switch your cartridge that you bought with the new cartridge.

And then they switch it out again with new firetemple music.

twanderer posted...

The turn towards puritanism continues.

I was actually in a renaissance art gallery last weekend and I was surprised how horny a lot of art was back then. So much of it was just naked women. Kind of an interesting cultural shift in the West with that.

Japan also got affected. Almost all bathing used to be mixed gender, but I have only ever been to one mixed gender onsen ever, and I go to them pretty often (and it was mainly old people, so don't get too excited). It's definitely a cultural shift and I am not sure if we can ever go back to nudity just not being a big deal.

tehzeldafanboy posted...

That analogy makes 0 sense
Doesn't even mention removal of content with no replacement. 10/10

You'remissing the point. The point of the analogy was to point out that the owner has control over the way the product is presented. This isn't about quality, this is about defending the right of private property.

Foppe posted...

The owner decides whats canon or not.

Never has been like that.

StateofZen posted...

You'remissing the point. The point of the analogy was to point out that the owner has control over the way the product is presented. This isn't about quality, this is about defending the right of private property.

So you agree that Nintendo could've just snuck into everyone's homes and swapped red blood Ganondorf with green blood Ganondorf?

gmanthebest posted...

So you agree that Nintendo could've just snuck into everyone's homes and swapped red blood Ganondorf with green blood Ganondorf?

No, that would be invasion of private property. But they're justified for changing it with the remake.

Rev has his own canon about the concept of canon.

StateofZen posted...

No, that would be invasion of private property. But they're justified for changing it with the remake.

And in what way (besides the obvious home invasion aspect because no analogy is ever absolutely perfect) is that different that changing the art people paid for with a patch?

Dabrikishaw15 posted...

Yeah this was a typical response from the outrage crowd. There are very few committed players of the game who are actually upset it seems. Its the casuals who spend a lot of time ogling and get very loud about censorship and whatnot who seem to take offense, like the Bridget situation months back.

Is this a gatekeeping argument? The overwhelming negative reviews on Steam all come from people who own the game. The people who casually played the game have a right to not like these changes. Reminds me of how some people argue women don't count as gamers since they aren't "hardcore".

YellowSUV posted...

The overwhelming negative reviews on Steam all come from people who own the game. The people who casually played the game have a right to not like these changes. Reminds me of how some people argue women don't count as gamers since they aren't "hardcore".

Let's not pretend that sad idiots wouldn't review bomb a game that altered some cosmetics because their waifu's hair changed color.

Cemith posted...

Let's not pretend that sad idiots wouldn't review bomb a game that altered some cosmetics because their waifu's hair changed color.

Changing the hair color of a waifu is an unforgivable offense.

Seems like they could had just made a new game in the style they wanted instead of just looking for attention lol.

i don't play this game but what's wrong with panty shots?

Fanservice bad violence good

pokedude900 posted...

Fanservice bad violence good

America in a nutshell

--Zero- posted...

Seems like they could had just made a new game in the style they wanted instead of just looking for attention lol.

Simply put, because they most likely can't. Autumn Games is primarily a publisher that hires & licenses the work of actual developers. Reverge Games/Lab Zero Games are the actual creators of Skullgirls.

Given the original Skullgirls launch cast can be mapped to a Venn diagram of "large chest" & "short skirts for copious panty shots", then Peacock on the sidelines, there's zero point trying to rebrand this game from what it is; there's a character whose most prolific grapple involves her ending with a headstand, so her short skirt can make her panties clearly visible. Then you have another character who is quite bluntly just Mai Shiranui, but in a sexy nurse cosplay. Trying to "correct" Skullgirls is like trying to revise Dead or Alive: that ship sailed a LONG time ago.

Cemith posted...

Let's not pretend that sad idiots wouldn't review bomb a game that altered some cosmetics because their waifu's hair changed color.

Let's not pretend that review bombing wouldn't be justified.

tehzeldafanboy posted...

Let's not pretend that review bombing wouldn't be justified.

It would be rather sad

Baha05 posted...

It would be rather sad

It would be if they made a new Skullgirls and toned things down. However, it's hard to vote with your wallet when you bought the game over ten years ago. So review bombing is a-ok here

I skimmed the reviews the other day. It wasn't just casual players or people buying the game just to review the game. There was somebody with 2k hours in the game giving a negative review.

gmanthebest posted...

It would be if they made a new Skullgirls and toned things down. However, it's hard to vote with your wallet when you bought the game over ten years ago. So review bombing is a-ok here

Revelation34 posted...

I skimmed the reviews the other day. It wasn't just casual players or people buying the game just to review the game. There was somebody with 2k hours in the game giving a negative review.

Yep. Hopefully it continues, bootlickers stay simpin'

It's also interesting that even recent positive reviews express distaste for this content cutting and sympathise with those leaving negative reviews.

People can probably just mod it back in, especially if old versions of the game exist somewhere.

YellowSUV posted...

America in a nutshell

America is actually pretty liberal in such regards.

Just look China/russia.

Quezovercoatl posted...

The other thing people mentioned I noticed was removing a scene of a black man named Big Band apparently being beaten up by police officers.

Was this to show racism and corrupt police as a negative and us to sympathize with him?

Ever see Robocop? That's basically Big Band's backstory.

tehzeldafanboy posted...

Yep. Hopefully it continues, bootlickers stay simpin'

It's also interesting that even recent positive reviews express distaste for this content cutting and sympathise with those leaving negative reviews.

Saw one or two linking to youtube vids on how to downgrade your game to a previous state, wew.

dancing_cactuar posted...

Ever see Robocop? That's basically Big Band's backstory.

Saw one or two linking to youtube vids on how to downgrade your game to a previous state, wew.

Downgrading is bad since you'd miss any bug fixes. Modded content is the way to go.

Revelation34 posted...

Downgrading is bad since you'd miss any bug fixes. Modded content is the way to go.

The games like a decade old, bugs aren't really a concern. In fact this patch doesn't even fix any bugs according to the full patch notes

tehzeldafanboy posted...

The games like a decade old, bugs aren't really a concern. In fact this patch doesn't even fix any bugs according to the full patch notes

I meant any future updates that might fix one.

tehzeldafanboy posted...

I don't understand the pearl clutching around Nazi shit at all tbh. Unless they're presented as heroes or the good guys, wtf is the problem with invoking Nazi imagery? Would these people be offended by the Nazi-marching hyenas in the Lion King, for instance?

People seem to not want to be reminded that they existed at all. It's very weird

In this case someone literally just told me they were being presented as heroes and I was replying to that.

Solar_Crimson posted...

Is it considered "censorship" if it's the creator themselves altering their own work of their own will?

Yes.

Not saying its always a good or bad thing, but its definitely still censorship.

fuck desexualization, going to go drop my own negative review on the Steam page

Even if it was the old creators it's still censorship because they are being pressured to do it.