Aselia the Eternal official thread/FAQ

JAST Games Game Discussions
#141

Yeah, sure. So, if I chose to release in my country IE7 instead of IE8, it’s censorship? WTF? JAST didn’t ask for a special version or anything, they chose one of the released versions over another; it’s hardly censorship; the reasons behind their choice don’t matter in this case.

The “sheer number of people complaining on the various VN community news sites” should just stop acting like spoiled brats. The Japanese fans got the special edition as a very limited edition, after they made Aselia XUse’s biggest success, enough for XUse to create countless sequels and versions. The western fans are a tiny market compared to them, they never showed (with their money) their support for the franchise and yet they want a better treatment and complain if they don’t? Mayhap they should turn it into the commercial success of the century then they’d be entitled to claim they deserve the more complete version.

#142

If they deliberately did not release IE8 because of concerns over inappropriate content, then yes, that would be censorship. By definition. It was also censorship when Microsoft removed swastikas from a font. It’s also censorship that many h-games bleep out certain offensive words (which I just think is hilarious).

Never said I thought it was the wrong decision *. But that doesn’t mean I’m not going to call it what it is. It’s censorship, and there’s no point trying to pretend that it isn’t.

  • – Just said I would have preferred the edition with everything.
#143

If picking one over the other is censorship, then it would be equally censorship if they released the H version.

Picking one thing over another is, by definition, not censorship, and it’s bizarre to try and pretend that it is.

I’m not very familiar with the swastika issue, so I’ll spin a few different scenarios.

  1. The font providers offer a selection of possible fonts to Microsoft, and Microsoft picks some that they wish to distribute with Windows. The one with the swasties in it is not chosen. This is not censorious behavior, even though the ‘objectionable’ content may have played into the decision. They have to make decisions somehow, and the font is not prevented from existing elsewhere.

  2. Microsoft ships the font with Windows, not realising there are swasties in it. When it is brought to their attention, they go “Oh crap” and force-delete the font from people’s machines without asking or explaining. This is clearly censorious behavior, as well as reflecting badly on their QA skills. However, the font content isn’t prevented from existing once it’s packaged in a new font outside of the official distribution, so they aren’t necessarily acting as a controlling body in the way necessary for the full definition.

  3. Same as the above, except that they quietly change the font to remove the offending symbols and pretend the whole thing never happened and that this version of the font is the only version of the font that ever was. That’s even more censorious and also creepy. The original font content isn’t necessarily prevented from existing in a new package, but if no one knows what they’ve done, they can’t go looking for the lost content, and the pretense that this is the “real” version confuses the issue a lot and makes the original content harder to find. I frown on this nonsense.

  4. Microsoft had nothing to do with the font in the first place but heard that someone somewhere had released a font with swasties in it, and set out to find and destroy all fonts with this content. That is clear censorship and abuse of authority.

#144

I’m sorry, not trying to be rude, but I don’t follow your point. How woud it be censorship if they released a version with no missing content? And how is picking one thing over another “by definition, not censorship” if the decision was made because one thing was felt to contain inappropriate content?

#145

Surely the only people responsible for ‘censorship’ are XUSE and Nippon Ichi for making the Playstation 2 version in the first place. JAST USA are doing no such thing by choosing to localise this version, no matter what the reason was.

#146

Perhaps a clarification is in order. Many people seem to go by a narrow and concrete definition of censorship: alteration or banning of existing works by an overseeing body. I take a more philosophical perspective based on the circumstances and justification involved (note: “who” is on the receiving end is also important, making the problem a relativistic one).

I think we could agree that content being suppressed for political reasons is censorship. Now, let’s look at this problem in context:

  1. Eien no Aselia PC (18+) is released in Japan. Eien no Aselia is then ported to PS2 with the ero removed, because Sony doesn’t allow ero on their consoles. Censorship has occurred (for PS2 users).

  2. Eien no Aselia PS2 (the censored version) is backported to PC in Japan. Censorship has not occurred (because both versions are available on PC–users have a choice).

  3. Eien no Aselia PC all-ages version is chosen for localization by JAST, because loli content has questionable legal status in the US. Censorship has occurred.

  4. Hypothetical: JAST instead chooses to localize the original 18+ version of Eien no Aselia, because their existing fanbase consists mostly of ero fans. Censorship has not occurred (the added content in the PS2 version was not overlooked for political reasons; they would’ve included ALL content if they could, all else equal).

  5. Hypothetical: JAST would love to localize Sumaga. However, they determine that the game has loli content that would require editing to release to a Western audience. They decide to localize Muramasa instead. Censorship has occurred (JAST passed on a game they would’ve otherwise localized because it had politically objectionable content).

An important difference between my philosophy and the “concrete” one is that mine is essentially a thought problem, while the concrete one is meant to be simple and easy to recognize (to aid in activism against it). It’s sort of analogous to how child support could be determined:

  1. Consequentially (did the man consent to procreation activity that resulted in a child, making him responsible for the consequences?)
  2. Concretely (genetic testing proves the man is the father of the child beyond a reasonable doubt–even if the man was raped, or the female pretended to be on birth control but actually went off it in order to have a child)

Courts go with 2), because it’s expedient to do so (just say “no” to ugly legal battles). It’s easy to see how the male could get the short end of the stick, though.

#147

I think that’s a bit of a ridiculous definition that does not fit into established definitions for what the word means. By this analogy everyone is engaging in censorship all the time simply by choosing to NOT do things that could potentially result in undesirable outcomes. This is not censorship. The only stage in this process where anything approaching the established definitions of censorship occurred is in the creation of the PS2 version, which resulted in some content being removed because it would not be acceptable under Sony’s content guidelines. Backporting it to the PC was not censorship, DakkoDango choosing to fan-translate that version was not censorship and JAST choosing to localise that version was not censorship. People, both creators and distributors, make decisions all the time about the sort of material (and not just in terms of 18+ but in terms of genre, medium etc.) is suitable for them and none of this is censorship. Whether or not you consider it a good or bad thing is irrelevant; my point is that you cannot use the word ‘censorship’ to describe the sorts of actions you are describing. Neither historically nor in modern contexts is this use of the word correct. Call it something else if you like, but don’t call it censorship because it is not censorship.

Sources:
[1] http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/censorship
[2] http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/censor
[3] http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=censorship
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

#148

You’re going to have to provide more than just a few unqualified links to prove your point. But I’ll dissect one of them, if it pleases you:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/censorship

I would argue that the government passage of the Protect Act was censorship. That initial act of censorship has contributed in large part to JAST’s decision to localize the all-ages version of Eien no Aselia, instead of one of the 18+ versions. Censorship has occurred. You can argue at what points censorship occurred and who’s responsible, but it’s pretty clear–it occurred.

You’re right that censorship is constantly occurring. Your extension of the logic, however, is inaccurate. Censorship has no necessary nor sufficient connection to “undesirable outcomes”. It’s simply restriction of free speech.

It’s puzzling to me when certain people rage against JAST’s handling of Family Project, saying it should’ve never been chosen for localization in the first place if it required editing. What are these people arguing against? Against 1) JAST making content-altering edits to games they release? Or against 2) removal of an idea–in this case, the loli archetype?

I mean, they’re obviously arguing against edits. But why? Edits are just one means of snuffing out an idea. You can also snuff out the idea by nuking anything that contains the idea (in this case [of Family Project], the entire game). I would argue that the latter is a more severe form of censorship. It seems to me like those claiming the latter isn’t censorship at all are just dancing around the central issue to promote the anti-censorship agenda (which doesn’t want to acknowledge problems that don’t have clear solutions). Activism is foiled by shades of grey, and therefore is best served by portraying the landscape as black and white–even in cases like this where they end up putting the cart before the horse.

#149

The issue with Kazoku Keikaku was that it was edited, yes, but more specifically that it was edited without prior notification. People who got the game had no idea that it was edited and no information was given out before release to suggest that it would be. That’s what made most people upset, I think.

So, the justification that you use to call the selection of Eien no Aselia Kono Daichi(ry for localisation ‘censorship’ is that:

  1. The US government passed an act, the PROTECT Act of 2003 that, among other things, “Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene”
  2. XUSE contacted JAST USA looking to localise one or more of their products for a foreign audience
  3. JAST USA, following the PROTECT Act of 2003, determined one or more titles that XUSE was looking to distribute would not be legal
  4. JAST USA informed XUSE that they wished to translate Eien no Aselia Kono Daichi(ry.

So, in short, nobody except the US government is engaging in censorship at all. JAST is not engaging in self-censorship, as they are not making modifications to the game. XUSE is not engaging in censorship, as they are not making modifications to Eien no Aselia for the US market. JAST could thus freely call the game ‘uncensored’ because it was not censored- nothing was censored. The presence of censorship laws affected the decision-making process JAST used to determine how to negotiate with XUSE, but no censorship took place.

Continuing on:

  1. XUSE then went and either translated the game (quite quickly, judging by the timeframe this must have happened in) or produced an existing translation.

If the latter occurred, which situation is the most likely?

  1. XUSE created translations for all or a large portion of their games
  2. XUSE created translations for a number of games, including Kono Daichi(ry.
  3. XUSE created translations for all the Eien no Aselia builds, which aren’t quite perfect subsets of Special Edition as Kono Daichi(ry by necessity contains some text Special Edition does not.
  4. XUSE created a translation for only Kono Daichi(ry

I suspect the answer might be somewhere between 3 and 4; looking at Shingo’s comments (“in the 18+ version of the game”), it seems as though only the original game and Kono Daichi(ry were on the table. This makes sense, because if you think about it, it’s unlikely XUSE would want to offer something that was only released in a very short print run (essentially, a collector’s edition) more widely to foreign users. As such, the censorship the US government is engaging in (if we are to believe this was the main influence for Kono Daichi(ry being chosen over the original game) results in a better game being released to English users.

#150

I’m not referring to most people. I’m referring to a vocal minority (on this board at least).

I follow you until the underlined, which conflicts with the sized part. Other than that, the perspective seems valid enough. Valid, but not necessarily exclusively valid. I should add I have no problem with JAST calling the game “uncensored”, because they’re not misleading anyone. The way JAST means it, and the way fans read it is “We’ve made no edits to the content of this (version of the) game, and any mosaics have been removed”.

Quite possibly. Like Nandemonai, I’m not arguing whether JAST’s decision was justified or for the best. In fact, I’ve actively promoted the game, despite personal misgivings. I love this game. I want to see more eroge with gameplay. And I want to see Seinarukana. I’d rather pass on the “opportunity” for more all-ages games though…

Honestly, what gets me upset is tangental to this discussion. I’m upset that JAST has finally made it clear that visual aesthetic is part of their loli “vetting” process. Until this point, JAST made it sound like loli graphics could be excused if the text didn’t imply they were underaged (or was cosmetically altered to remove this implication [not possible in Family Project]). Peter stressed that the text in Family Project could’ve been altered such that Matsuri’s CG didn’t need to be altered, but that the text alterations would’ve hacked up a major theme (that Matsuri wasn’t ready for a sexual relationship early in the game). Now they come out and flatly say that Eien no Aselia was too loli-looking to localize the 18+ version. I feel deceived. The implications are far-reaching: any game with a loli-looking character in sexual situations could be off the table. That pisses me off. As a lolicon, this is NOT what I wanted to hear. In any case, I realize I can’t lay all the blame on JAST here. But I think I have the right to be angry, as a fan whose fetish is very clearly getting the shaft for reasons that don’t seem to be market-motivated.

#151

Because it wouldn’t be a version with no missing content, it would be missing the content from that version. If, as I understand, the h-scenes were written around rather than simply chopped out, there is text that exists in the non-h version that does not exist in the h-version.

Because in most situations where you have limited resources you HAVE to make a decision, and that decision is influenced by multiple factors. If a library has the funds to license one movie for their collection and they pick a documentary instead of a porn flick, that isn’t censorship. Nothing is being suppressed.

That’s why I got so rambly in my swastie font example. :slight_smile: Simply not licensing things with content that requires edits is preferable in my opinion because it means the original is still out there. Fan translation groups can target those games as good prospects, or they can end up getting official translations if the political climate changes.

Not licensing the games is not snuffing out the idea/existence of the games; they’re still out there.

Licensing the games with new mandatory edits and not labeling it “the special no-lolis edition” attempts to snuff out the idea by hiding the fact from casual view that the idea ever existed.

You get Sailor Moon fans who have no idea about the proper genders and so on of some characters in the original work because that was hidden from them in their localisation, and they’ve become invested in the versions of the characters they were shown, who they think are correct.

#152

Except we’re not talking about a library here. We’re talking about a porn shop. A porn shop that started selling documentaries.

From a brief conversation I had with a friend who played the all-ages version recently, the cuts change the context of some of the scenes, sometimes greatly. I played the game in machine translated Japanese years ago, and I seemed to have a better grasp of the core story “logic” than he did. It would appear the cuts left some plot holes.

The eroge fan translation scene doesn’t hold a candle to the anime fansubbing scene. Also, an edited game is more likely to be “unedited” than it is to be fan translated from scratch. And again, I’m not arguing in favor of the cover-up. I’d just rather have covered lolis (funny, I know) than no lolis at all. And just so you know, my game didn’t have covered lolis.

In any case, an idea in a language you can’t understand isn’t of much use. It might as well not exist, for all it’s worth to you. Thankfully my dependence on localizations diminishes with each passing year. Eventually it won’t matter much whether JAST localizes the games I want.

#153

Ah, okay. If the choice were between the (h) and (non-h) versions of Aselia, then yeah, you would be correct. If what I read in the beginning pages of the thread is accurate, Xuse did write around the h-scenes in the non-h version.

However, then they released a super-special Omnibus edition (don’t remember the actual title) that started with the added content from the non-h version, and then re-edited all the h content back in. The non-h version is a proper subset of the Omnibus edition, not a choice between exclusive content A and exclusive content B.

Unless I misread what Shingo wrote, Jast and Xuse got together and looked at the Omnibus edition, concluded the content was problematic, and opted for the non-h version instead. And to me, that’s censorship.

[sigh]

Here I was hoping to avoid pouring more gasoline on the fire in this thread … oh well :frowning:

#154

Except there’s no “restriction of free speech” in this case, no more than when when a journalist goes to his publisher with 2 texts, wants one published, has no preference about either version and the publisher chooses one over the other (because, well, he only wants to publish one text no two). It’s no more censorship than it is censorship if the reason why the publisher chooses one text over the other is because “Oh, in this one, you talk about flowers and I don’t like flowers so I’ll take the other text.” He has to make a choice so what reason he soever uses to make it isn’t censorship, not since he doesn’t ask for any modification of any of the texts.

To be honest, Shingo talked about the 18+ version, which may just be the original game rather than the Special Edition. As Lancer-X and I pointed out, “it’s unlikely XUSE would want to offer something that was only released in a very short print run (essentially, a collector’s edition) more widely to foreign users.”

#155

So the concern is because Peter’s company has only released adult titles in the past, he somehow cannot choose to release a non-adult title? On a dollar comparison, I’d actually be surprised if J-List (the supreme parent) has sold more from it’s pure adult side than its ‘all ages’ storefront. There’s just so much more product on the latter. For the purpose of this discussion I’m referring to what all of us recognize as adult, not such things as pencil boards or Megami subs. Even if sales are the other way around, we are still talking a significant portion of Peter’s proceeds that do not come from H.

He now owns whatever is left rights wise and product wise of the Hirameki catalog. Several of us have purchased the Japanese copy of Remember 11 through him as well. The Hirameki stuff is sold on the western based site right along with the adult matter, so I really don’t think you can claim Peter is wronging his clientele by selling something that has no h content.

#156

Blah, this is becoming a bit tiresome.
Let’s change the topic into something funnier! Who was people’s favourite character/girl in each of the Sword of Eternity series? Or, for people who didn’t play, who looks like she would be? For my part:
[list][]Eien no Aselia/EXPANSION/Kono Daichi no Hate de: Aselia obviously got to the top! I think it’s hard to resist her charming personality! Second place goes to Lesteena because of her strong will and morality. So Blue wins.[/]
[]SpiTAN: Nim always got my heart, probably because she’s a tsundere of my favourite type (the original type). Here Green wins.[/]
[]AneTAN: Nanaruu because she’s so laincursed powerf-- cute with her will to develop a personality despite her lack of one (or so she thinks). Her jokes are a bit hard to get though. Of course, the fact that she’s the most powerf-- professional Minor Spirit is a plus as well. Victory to the Red![/]
[]Seinarukana: Talia. ^^;;;;; I know, she’s not a main heroine but, alas, there’s no main heroine I really liked. Well, OK, let’s say Naaya because, as a Red Unit, she’s the deadl-- most efficient early unit, and a geek of sort. Red then, even if that’s not totally true.[/]
[]Seinarukana: Special Fandisk: Talia, obviously, though Nanashi would be a close second for her love and devotion to Zetsu. Truly Blue this time.[/]
[]Seirei Tenshou: honestly, I’d say it’s kinda hard because I like most of the girls equally (and I do like them, contrary to in Seinarukana where I just don’t like them). Probably Ruu or Zeu, though, Ruu for her sharp and thoughtful mind and Zeu for her… cynicism. ^^;;;; Zeu then Ruu? So, finally a win for Black! (To be honest, the girl who caught my interest the most was Suuruudo but, well, you know? :p)[/]
[]Seirei Tenshou CRYSTAL FRIENDS: I didn’t play yet so I don’t know whether my aforementioned choice would change but I’m interested into Leeoliner so, mayhap. Little hope for Lily but who knows? That would give White its first victory![/][/list]

#157

Aselia from Eien no Aselia, naturally. She’s one of my favourite heroines in eroge (although not quite top 5… definitely top 10). Gameplay-wise, though? Uruka in her Eternal form. Just insanely powerful.

Seinarukana I don’t really like many of the characters in because everything about it enrages me. I didn’t mind Narukana though, she was pretty awesome.

#158

I think you know how much I agree with you. :wink:
OTOH, there were characters I liked, not just main ones; namely: Talia and Nanashi first, then Solraska and Zetsu for their dynamics with the former.

Lain-sama! She annoyed me to a point you cannot imagine! >_<

#159

Aselia’s my favorite from Eien no Aselia. She’s one of my favorite heroines of all time.

…I liked Euphoria from Seinarukana. Bah. I ended up picking Naya, and being disappointed. Satsuki looked promising though.

I didn’t really like Seirei Tenshou. I didn’t find the story all that interesting, and the gameplay didn’t grab me like the previous games in the series did (I should say I’m heavily biased towards RPGs). But really, I feel like even Seinarukana’s story grabbed me more. The story was just too…thin in Seirei Tenshou. I didn’t really care about the characters or the world. In Seinarukana at least, the characters were interesting, even if the dialogue often wasn’t. And the world lore was still interesting–perhaps the most interesting part of the story. For what it’s worth, I picked Ru. She was ok, I guess.

#160

^^;;;;;
Aside from not disliking shooting games (though I suck at them!), I think I enjoyed Seirei Tenshou thanks to… Suuruudo because I just… agree with her personality, philosophy and actions. ^^;;;;;; People in the galgame channel in where I hang would be able to tell how, whilst playing, I regretted I couldn’t side with and go for her instead of the heroines! ^^;;;;;;;