• Post New Message
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
tonberrymasta posted...
Dissidia_Crazed posted...
It's very interesting how no one complains about Ifrit missing his crotch...but Hyne forbid we can't see Siren's vagina. What's the difference? Why is Ifrit's missing crotch not an issue to people? You don't want to see a penis, but covering up a vagina is "censorship"?


I know I am probably talking to a very young man here, and this is not intended to be an insult, but you should know that you can't actually see Siren's vagina or Ifrit's penis in the original game. They are both covered up by a hairy patch. The vagina is actually not visible at all on the surface of a woman even if all the hair is removed because it is an internal compartment (the part most people "call" the vagina is actually the vulva).


I'm almost 30.

And while I mislabeled the private area, confusing the two, you still knew what I meant, so there really isn't a problem there.
My signature does not define me. It is just a signature.
(edited 1 week ago)

User Info: tonberrymasta

tonberrymasta
1 week ago#42
I did know what you mean, but I was just trying to let you know without being a jerk.
Sir_Elan posted...
@tonberrymasta, @Algur_the_Evil,

It would seem both it you need to go back and actually read my original post as you both seem to have ignored the evidence provided.

Again, Occam's Razor. If neither of you understand what that is, allow me to explain it:

It means that the conclusion that uses the fewest assumptions is the one that's likely correct.

In this case, the comparison image of Rinoa and concluding that it is censorship has no basis in fact; it is an assumption that it was censorship. There has been no official, or even unofficial, announcement from SE.

The fact is, the remastering process can change graphical details and result in things looking slightly different. Just because things look slightly different doesn't mean it was deliberate.

Two, the only real censorship we've seen in this remastered version is Siren, and that was pretty bloody obvious.

Three, contextually, and allow me to put this socratically, why would they go through the effort of censoring a few pixels of cleavage, yet ignore other pretty obvious instances? Ie, Shiva, Edea, and Ultimecia?

It makes absolutely zero sense.

The only real conclusion here, based upon the evidence, is that Rinoa was not censored.

It’s funny that you cite Occam’s Razor and then apply it inappropriately. The stance that Siren was censored requires an extra layer of assumption. The more assumptions you make the more evidence will be required to prove that stance.
MSA. CPA.
AUD - 80, BEC - 83, FAR - 77, REG - 75
Algur_the_Evil posted...
Sir_Elan posted...
@Algur_the_Evil,

It would seem both it you need to go back and actually read my original post as you both seem to have ignored the evidence provided.

Again, Occam's Razor. If neither of you understand what that is, allow me to explain it:

It means that the conclusion that uses the fewest assumptions is the one that's likely correct.

In this case, the comparison image of Rinoa and concluding that it is censorship has no basis in fact; it is an assumption that it was censorship. There has been no official, or even unofficial, announcement from SE.

The fact is, the remastering process can change graphical details and result in things looking slightly different. Just because things look slightly different doesn't mean it was deliberate.

Two, the only real censorship we've seen in this remastered version is Siren, and that was pretty bloody obvious.

Three, contextually, and allow me to put this socratically, why would they go through the effort of censoring a few pixels of cleavage, yet ignore other pretty obvious instances? Ie, Shiva, Edea, and Ultimecia?

It makes absolutely zero sense.

The only real conclusion here, based upon the evidence, is that Rinoa was not censored.

It’s funny that you cite Occam’s Razor and then apply it inappropriately. The stance that Siren was censored requires an extra layer of assumption. The more assumptions you make the more evidence will be required to prove that stance.

Unless I'm completely misreading this or missing something, fairly certain you're both on the same side, and your post here about Siren is more an extension of the post that you're quoting. O_O
No dream is too big, no challenge too great, nothing we want for our future is beyond our reach. When somebody challenges you, fight back; be brutal, be tough.

User Info: Pellegrin

Pellegrin
1 week ago#45
What did I just read here....? How did we get from some tiny graphics tweaks to a heavy philosophical debate incorporating Occam's Razor?

Guys, guys. It's just a couple of tweaks. Rinoa looks more modern and Siren's now more palatable. Let's go back to fighting sorceresses and not each other.
Pellegrin posted...
What did I just read here....? How did we get from some tiny graphics tweaks to a heavy philosophical debate incorporating Occam's Razor?

Guys, guys. It's just a couple of tweaks. Rinoa looks more modern and Siren's now more palatable. Let's go back to fighting sorceresses and not each other.


I'm all for this.
My signature does not define me. It is just a signature.

User Info: sano83

sano83
1 week ago#47
Pellegrin posted...
Let's go back to fighting sorceresses and not each other.

Zell!!!!
[Your hair is winter fire, January embers, My heart burns there too.]

User Info: dillydally123

dillydally123
1 week ago#48
Deanyzy posted...
Screaming censorship at someone isn't feedback, it's whining and it's ignorant whining since you aren't even using the term censorship right. There's nothing to be taken away from some manchild screeching about their waifu. They just want to force their standards on your work and any input they have is worthless since their ultimate endgame is 'we want tiddies'. Worthless and believe me, my creativity doesn't hinge on some eternal virgin's thirst.


Dissidia_Crazed posted...
If people are so obsessed with seeing t*** in video games, play the damn Dead or Alive games. Those games are, literally, sold on sex. Look at how they design the female characters, especially Tina and Christie.

I mean, you have Final Fantasy fans actually pining for Lightning's breasts to be exposed, too. Give me a break. Maybe they wouldn't be so thirsty for sex if they stopped chasing after fictional characters for it. No wonder they're not satisfied. "I can't get sex, so I'll just pine for a fictional character for it." I love that logic: because you're so much more likely to get screwed, or screw, someone whom doesn't even exist.


I just want to point out that logic like this - assuming people have never had sex or can't get sex because they like looking at fictional characters - is incredibly flawed. People can have sex on a regularly basis and still enjoy looking at porn or fantasising about fictional characters (whom many people actually form an emotional attachment to).

I also want to point out that attempting to insult people by calling them eternal virgins and saying they can't get sex is very unhelpful. Insults like this are not only incredibly immature, they don't help your argument and they just make people take you less seriously. There's also nothing inherently wrong with being a virgin or not having regular sex and spreading that opinion can make people insecure about themselves (not only those you are insulting but other readers, too).

On topic, Siren has clearly been intentionally covered up for whatever reason and I personally think it looks pretty silly. I think it should either have more feathers or be like the original because the design just looks weird to me as is. With Rinoa it's unclear why she is slightly more covered up. It's a new model, rather than an improved version of the old one, so it may have just happened without really been considered. Or they may have just thought it looks better. Or maybe they did want to make her look more innocent (she is unfairly criticised for liking Seifer before Squall, previous relationships are sadly viewed as negative by certain Japanese audiences). But we don't know for sure.
Rinoa clearly got censored (may be bc She's underage)
Siren got the "skirt" wich is stupid, yet looks great, still the saddest part is that, you can see her old design in the card, that makes this change stupid.
My old Siren action figure is now inaccurate.

All this being said, and even If I think censorship in any kind shouldn't be condoned, I don't think is reason enough to freak out about this and not buy the game or whatever ppl are saying.
[1779-2186-9788] [IGN: X and Sun/UM=Lezard // AS=Lenneth] [TSV is 32 & 2760]PSN Hitokiri33 pwn Lenneth
dillydally123 posted...
I just want to point out that logic like this - assuming people have never had sex or can't get sex because they like looking at fictional characters - is incredibly flawed. People can have sex on a regularly basis and still enjoy looking at porn or fantasising about fictional characters (whom many people actually form an emotional attachment to).

I also want to point out that attempting to insult people by calling them eternal virgins and saying they can't get sex is very unhelpful. Insults like this are not only incredibly immature, they don't help your argument and they just make people take you less seriously. There's also nothing inherently wrong with being a virgin or not having regular sex and spreading that opinion can make people insecure about themselves (not only those you are insulting but other readers, too).


Funny you say that, because in today's world, apparently, being a virgin is "laughable" and "sickening". You're actually the first person not to attack me for saying something like that. I'm sorry if my logic there was "flawed"...but I didn't have any other way to perceive it, especially when I got nothing but mockery for not thinking about sex 24/7. I said what I said because most gamers are male and the constant gags about wanting to f*** a fictional character have seriously grated me; it's disturbing to me.

The way I see it: if people take offense to something like that, it's probably because it's true. But that's just me. Like they say, "the truth hurts" -- and if something doesn't apply to you, or you are comfortable enough in it, you won't take it personally.
My signature does not define me. It is just a signature.
(edited 1 week ago)
  • Post New Message