MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here-)

Mugen Mugen! Rock the Mugen! Mugen Souls Z!
User avatar
Ringwraith
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 10399
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 11:33 am

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Ringwraith » Sat Jul 05, 2014 10:15 am

Which, in itself, is a change. Quite a large change actually, seeing as that probably leave all sorts of weird oddities in the script you'd have to either write around or just replace with equivalent phrases anyway.

Edit: This is what I get for typing out an explanation! Ninja-ing!(?)
Image
<SaturnineTenshi> and we can play with solice because he likes it
<Solice> i hear it's better than playing with myself

<Solice> celtic had a hard time getting his ball out?
<Kana> oh man, you have no idea

User avatar
kanade2
Netherworld Count
Netherworld Count
Posts: 1012
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:25 pm
Location: Right behind you !

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby kanade2 » Sat Jul 05, 2014 10:37 am

It's true that it's still a change,but I think it's a change that would be preferred over just cutting the whole character from the game.

User avatar
Seventh
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 29268
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:49 pm
Location: Zawame City

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Seventh » Sat Jul 05, 2014 10:40 am

kanade2 wrote:It's true that it's still a change,but I think it's a change that would be preferred over just cutting the whole character from the game.

That's not the point. The point is it shows that it couldn't have come through with doing nothing.
Image

User avatar
BDSMKane
Netherworld Count
Netherworld Count
Posts: 1157
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:17 am

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby BDSMKane » Sat Jul 05, 2014 10:52 am

Seventh wrote:
kanade2 wrote:It's true that it's still a change,but I think it's a change that would be preferred over just cutting the whole character from the game.

That's not the point. The point is it shows that it couldn't have come through with doing nothing.

That's not true at all. She wasn't a "child" in the JP version as such, the game was localized. She was turned into a "child" by Ghostlight, and they could have just as easily used a different term. The only way that this argument would hold any water is if Ghostlight didn't redo the entire script in another language already, but they -chose- to refer to her that way in the first place.

Now, it could be argued that, if in the Japanese version she is called a child in Japanese, that using any other term would be creative localization and would potentially upset people. But I'm pretty sure most people would prefer a word changed when translating(localizing) over content completely cut out.
BDSMKane wrote:A defective product was released by NIS America on March 25, 2014.....and any support for that product is(by all appearances) non-existent. That's the core issue, and it reeks of poor business ethics.

User avatar
Seventh
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 29268
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:49 pm
Location: Zawame City

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Seventh » Sat Jul 05, 2014 10:53 am

And that changing of a word or a term is still changing something.
Image

User avatar
BDSMKane
Netherworld Count
Netherworld Count
Posts: 1157
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:17 am

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby BDSMKane » Sat Jul 05, 2014 11:05 am

Seventh wrote:And that changing of a word or a term is still changing something.

Theoretically. We don't even know for sure if she is, in the Japanese version, called a "child" in Japanese. And while I know almost no Japanese, changing ichi > one is -also- still changing something, and the entire localization process is about changing something, but what exactly is getting changed, and how, is something that you personally have debated continuously in another thread. And if she was called "child" in Japanese, in the Japanese version, and Ghostlight would of localized that word as "young", would that have been crossing the localization line for you personally?

And what if she simply isn't called "child" in Japanese at all in the original release? What if she is just "Fiona", and they let the text and story display her growth instead of relying on expositional commentary to indicate an approximate age? What if Ghostlight truly added the word "child" on their own, when it wasn't necessary or in the Japanese version of the script, and created the entire issue on their own?
BDSMKane wrote:A defective product was released by NIS America on March 25, 2014.....and any support for that product is(by all appearances) non-existent. That's the core issue, and it reeks of poor business ethics.

User avatar
Esper
Geo Master
Geo Master
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 5:12 pm

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Esper » Sat Jul 05, 2014 11:09 am

Are we REALLY arguing semantics over changing the world "child" to "young"? It's localization. Going from おはよございます to "good morning" is change. The goal when localizing a game should be to change as little of the MEANING of what you're translating as possible while making it readable in the other language. Removing an entire section of a game goes completely against that.

User avatar
ArmyofDarkness
Netherworld Nobility
Netherworld Nobility
Posts: 531
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:10 pm

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby ArmyofDarkness » Sat Jul 05, 2014 6:14 pm

Seventh wrote:
kanade2 wrote:
Ringwraith wrote:They still changed it though. So not sure what you're getting at.

Clearly a change was necessary, they just had options as to what to change. It still shows the whole thing is a ebbing minefield.

I think the point that Esper is trying to make is that Ghostlight didn't have to remove the younger generation Fiona from the mini game as long as they removed any mention of the word " child" from the script .

Which is still a change.

omission of a phrase or a few numbers is infinitely better than removing mini games. If they went and changed all the characters ages in MS so that they could keep the mini game I'd probably buy it. I mean sure its dumb to change ages, but if its an option instead of removing the mini game then I'll take it.

User avatar
Seventh
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 29268
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:49 pm
Location: Zawame City

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Seventh » Sat Jul 05, 2014 7:06 pm

Whether it's better or worse isn't the point here - I'm not arguing with that. The point is it's still a change.
Image

Asianwarwallabe
Vassal
Vassal
Posts: 24
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:43 pm

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Asianwarwallabe » Sun Jul 06, 2014 1:03 am

Seventh wrote:Whether it's better or worse isn't the point here - I'm not arguing with that. The point is it's still a change.


And your point is utterly irrelevant to the topic they were discussing, wherein they deliberate that a harmless change is vastly preferable to outright removal (and would serve to adequately solve the AO issue.)

So, really, what's your point?

User avatar
Seventh
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 29268
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:49 pm
Location: Zawame City

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Seventh » Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:27 am

That a change of some kind would still have needed to take place. This has been said multiple times now.

I'm not disagreeing the point (if you can call that a point at this point) you're making, but that's a given - it doesn't have anything to do with what Ringwraith or I have been saying (which was the topic that's been being replied to here if you'll actually look at the posts, so it's actually plenty relevant as it's been what we've been saying from the start) and it certainly doesn't require repeating over and over.

Furthermore, the topic has been censorship and changes in games, and it's certainly on topic to recognize that a lesser change is still a change.
Image

User avatar
ArmyofDarkness
Netherworld Nobility
Netherworld Nobility
Posts: 531
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 8:10 pm

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby ArmyofDarkness » Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:30 am

Seventh wrote:That a change of some kind would still have needed to take place. This has been said multiple times now.

I'm not disagreeing the point (if you can call that a point at this point) you're making, but that's a given - it doesn't have anything to do with what Ringwraith or I have been saying (which was the topic that's been being replied to here if you'll actually look at the posts, so it's actually plenty relevant as it's been what we've been saying from the start) and it certainly doesn't require repeating over and over.

Furthermore, the topic has been censorship and changes in games, and it's certainly on topic to recognize that a lesser change is still a change.

Don't you agree though, that at least getting the mini games in the Western retail versions is a much larger step than constantly removing them? As people have stated before you can't have everything in one go, you gotta slowly build up towards the goal. I just imagine that removing some words to allow the controversial parts of the game to remain intact is a much more progressive path.

User avatar
neonie
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 5625
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Variety In All Things
Contact:

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby neonie » Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:37 am

ArmyofDarkness wrote:
Seventh wrote:That a change of some kind would still have needed to take place. This has been said multiple times now.

I'm not disagreeing the point (if you can call that a point at this point) you're making, but that's a given - it doesn't have anything to do with what Ringwraith or I have been saying (which was the topic that's been being replied to here if you'll actually look at the posts, so it's actually plenty relevant as it's been what we've been saying from the start) and it certainly doesn't require repeating over and over.

Furthermore, the topic has been censorship and changes in games, and it's certainly on topic to recognize that a lesser change is still a change.

Don't you agree though, that at least getting the mini games in the Western retail versions is a much larger step than constantly removing them? As people have stated before you can't have everything in one go, you gotta slowly build up towards the goal. I just imagine that removing some words to allow the controversial parts of the game to remain intact is a much more progressive path.


It's only a larger step if the loli's aren't removed from it. It every flat chested or loli type character has the CG's for her rubbing session removed then we're stuck back in status quo hell and Monomonpiece all over again.
Image
Houk wrote:THE HYPOTHETICAL CENSORSHIP OF BABIES!

Spoiler:

User avatar
Seventh
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 29268
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2011 6:49 pm
Location: Zawame City

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby Seventh » Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:38 am

Certainly. I'd rather no changes or censorship at all if possible, even. The point that was being made though, or at least attempting to be made, was that a change at all, and of any kind, was still apparently necessary in the first place, which is something that is worth noting, even if that alternative change seems small compared to what we got.
Image

User avatar
neonie
Netherworld Grand Duke
Netherworld Grand Duke
Posts: 5625
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Variety In All Things
Contact:

Re: MSZ Content Editing Discussion Thread (Please Post -Here

Postby neonie » Sun Jul 06, 2014 11:48 am

Seventh wrote:Certainly. I'd rather no changes or censorship at all if possible, even. The point that was being made though, or at least attempting to be made, was that a change at all, and of any kind, was still apparently necessary in the first place, which is something that is worth noting, even if that alternative change seems small compared to what we got.


You're not actually making a real point here anymore you know lol. You're repeating that "a change had to be made" but everyone already knows that. We already agree with that, so why do you keep repeating it? Here let me reiterate for everyone one last time:

1.A change had to be made.
2. Yes but it didn't have to be as bad of a change.
3. Loop points one and two as necessary.
Image
Houk wrote:THE HYPOTHETICAL CENSORSHIP OF BABIES!

Spoiler:


Return to “Mugen Souls Z”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests