New Game+ reported on the 1.000 SKU

[Eraezr]

 

Finding originally pinged from a reply to Grummz, which had the original costume configuration but in the NG+ colour variant of yellow. Normal playthrough is red in colour.

 

 

 

[ThatMuttGuy]

Jfc

[dezzed]

Guys, it's literally a few centimeters of fabric. It's alright to goon, but caring this much about it is just a tiny bit insane.

[BENJAM1N_LINUS]

5 minutes ago, dezzed said:

Guys, it's literally a few centimeters of fabric. It's alright to goon, but caring this much about it is just a tiny bit insane.

For real.

 

Be horny on main, it's absolutely fine- but this is NOT an issue. This is NOT censorship.

 

Honestly, for the people who are actually, legitimately upset by this "situation", I'm sorry but there is something truly wrong with your brain... and it may be beyond hope for you.

[BloodyRutz]

God, I hate gamers.

[yowzagabowza]

Color swaps are censorship now? Adding and deleting content is censorship? What about changing things between concept art and final product!? Censorship!???!!

 

All these dweebs complain when a woman looks "normal" in a game instead of super sexualized but then we GET a super sexualized character and it's just more complaining? 

This kind of crap is why video games and those who play them have such a shitty reputation. 

[Eraezr]

15 minutes ago, yowzagabowza said:

Color swaps are censorship now?

 

I think your proclivity for recreational outrage has made you misunderstand the details.

 

In a normal playthrough, whether patched or un-patched, that costume is red. When starting a NG+, that same costume becomes yellow.

Edited May 2 by Eraezr

[yowzagabowza]

Just now, Eraezr said:

 

I think your proclivity for recreational outrage has misunderstood the details.

 

In a normal playthrough, whether patched or un-patched, that costume is red. When starting a NG+, that same costume becomes yellow.

And? So what? 

[MidnightDragon]

Play it or don’t, it’s whatever. Just sick of all the talk about it.

[Milktastrophe]

21 minutes ago, yowzagabowza said:

Color swaps are censorship now? Adding and deleting content is censorship? What about changing things between concept art and final product!? Censorship!???!!

I feel like the last point was supposed to be a joke, but there's legitimately people who deride Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart as being censored for that very reason. And I believe that one's a design concept that nobody but the devs have ever even seen.

Edited May 2 by Milktastrophe

[kidson2004]

My goodness, can we just enjoy the game and NOT be up in arms about a damn costume for a character that no one can touch in real life? SMH 

[Eraezr]

3 minutes ago, MidnightDragon said:

Play it or don’t, it’s whatever. Just sick of all the talk about it.

 

Honestly, the altruism people have for how others play video games is baffling to me.

 

Even after explaining that this isn't inherently about "gooning" or inches of skin exposure, they're still fixated and frothing at the mouth, 'wHy dO yOu gAmErS cArE?'. It's like an inherent addiction to react to everything that doesn't concern their palette.

Edited May 2 by Eraezr

[yowzagabowza]

1 minute ago, Milktastrophe said:

I feel like the last point was supposed to be a joke, but there's legitimately people who deride Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart as being censored for that very reason.

It was a joke, but I should have expected it to have a real life example. 

And Ratchet and Clank of all games? Like, they're furry little animals, man. What the fuck.

[MidnightDragon]

3 minutes ago, Eraezr said:

 

Honestly, the altruism people have for how others play video games is baffling to me.

 

Even after explaining that this isn't inherently about "gooning" or inches of skin exposure, they're still fixated and frothing at the mouth, 'wHy dO yOu gAmErS cArE?'. It's like an inherent addiction to react to everything that doesn't concern their palette.

I could say more, but rather not get warned for it.  

[CelestialRequiem]

Anyone is free to remain on whatever build of the game that they would like; but the game is less responsive on older builds.

 

My enjoyment as an action-game player does usurp my degeneracy in cases like this.

[Xillynoc]

Y'know what, fuck it. If these idiots who already spent $70 on a game want to jump through hoops to play a WORSE version of it for the sake of seeing 3 more pixels of bare skin jiggling around, who are we to stop them, fellas? We all know they'll never really know happiness or contentment in life, that in 3 weeks' time they'll have moved on to something else in gaming to froth at the mouth over, most likely related to a woman too - what's the point of trying to change their mind when they barely have a mind to change? I thought nothing could top the sheer stupidity of the Hogwarts Legacy discourse from last year, and yet...

[Dreakon13]

56 minutes ago, Eraezr said:

Even after explaining that this isn't inherently about "gooning" or inches of skin exposure

 

I missed the explanation, what was it again?

 

If I had to guess it's the slippery slope of censorship, false advertising, etc?

 

EDIT: Unfortunately if there is some kind of valid argument to be made... I don't think there is... making this particular example (as tame and reasonable as the changes are and as thirsty as it makes these people seem) the hill to die on is just embarrassing and it deserves to get broken down to the two factors in the quote.  And I think the people making that case need to realize that and cut their losses.  There's tact in choosing your battles, not every instance of something brushing against your sentiments is worth selling out your dignity.

Edited May 2 by Dreakon13

[Eraezr]

30 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

 

I missed the explanation, what was it again?

 

If I had to guess it's the slippery slope of censorship, false advertising, etc?

 

It was wrong to promise not to censor a game and then censor it on the first day of its release but this ties into a larger picture.

 

Fans of this demography (and I would presume, people who consume entertainment), aren't okay with a specific subset of cultural ideology dictating what they can and can't see. Naturally, some people start accusing "Oh you just want to see more skin on a fictional woman," which completely distracts from the main point attempted to be made. or  "it's just a piece of lace over some cleavage" - like that is a major cognitive dissonance.

 

This small group of individuals working at PlayStation (America) are making these decisions on behalf of everyone else (a worldwide market of adults). They are deciding what's appropriate for us to view. They are deciding what we get to consume and how. Self-appointed arbiters of morality that are enforcing their will and cultural beliefs.

 

Speaking as a resident of the Oceania, this socio-political sect has no business deciding anything. A great deal of American politics itself, is guilty of some of the worst hatemongering/ foreign policy damage and bigotry in the modern era; it wears the mask of would-be social causes and claims about being fair that have no basis in reality (e.g 'The way EVE is designed will spur a wave of violence against women').

 

Essentially that's what it boils down to. A cultural ideology that has pre-emptively decided what I can see/cannot, without letting me sample something proper first, then making up my mind on the creative and moral merits of Shift Up's product. Or any other Asian developer's game.

Edited May 2 by Eraezr

[dezzed]

Yapping a whole lot to say a whole lot of nothing.

 

I swear, I wish Gamers with a capital G could care enough about legitimate issues this much.

Edited May 2 by dezzed

[CelestialRequiem]

11 minutes ago, Eraezr said:

Fans of this demography (and I would presume, people who consume entertainment), aren't okay with a specific subset of cultural ideology dictating what they can and can't see.

 

I know that it's typically the usual suspects who are quick to claim that sexuality of any form is wrong for humanity, but I think you've gone too deep in the culture war to assume that the changes were for that reason. Like changes to this game were to placate specific people from ResetEra or something?

 

I don't buy it. Obviously ResetEra is a shithole that has losers that contest with our largest ones here, but we shouldn't jump to conclusions that these minor changes were made with individuals in mind. What I think is much more likely, is that the game had a rating issue across one of the various ratings organizations throughout the world. Likely, this would involve GRAC due to the game originating from South Korea.

 

I don't think Stellar Blade made it this far into development, this close to release, for someone at Sony to go "Whooaaaaaaaaaaaa there's nudity in this game?!"

 

Obviously, I'm all for the losers who want to dictate what someone can/cannot experience to fuck off and eat shit, but I think you're getting in your own way to analyze this more critically.

Edited May 2 by CelestialRequiem

[Doodlebawp]

The all-or-nothing internet crowd hilariously ending up with nothing as always.

 

If you're into fanservice games like this one then it's a massive step in the right direction.  Yes, you got 97% of what you wanted with Stellar Blade instead of 100% and yes, you have a right to be annoyed by the last minute changes. But there's no reason to obsess over taking one step back when you just took 50 steps forward.

 

It's like someone offered you tap water after being stranded in the desert without supplies for a week, only for you to refuse the offer because you wanted spring water.

[EcoShifter]

24 minutes ago, Doodlebawp said:

The all-or-nothing internet crowd hilariously ending up with nothing as always.

 

If you're into fanservice games like this one then it's a massive step in the right direction.  Yes, you got 97% of what you wanted with Stellar Blade instead of 100% and yes, you have a right to be annoyed by the last minute changes. But there's no reason to obsess over taking one step back when you just took 50 steps forward.

 

It's like someone offered you tap water after being stranded in the desert without supplies for a week, only for you to refuse the offer because you wanted spring water.

(No offense but...)

You're making an argument for settling for less (and against what was advertised). "It's okay because you got 'most' of what you wanted, so shut up. Accept what you 'did' get." Would love to see yall faces if Sony took some weeks away from your PS+ subscription. That'd be okay because you'd still have most of the time you paid for.

 

This is an utterly incompatible analogy. You're comparing an advertised paid product to a kind gesture you weren't owed to begin with.

Edited May 2 by EcoShifter

[CelestialRequiem]

On 5/2/2024 at 12:37 PM, EcoShifter said:

(No offense but...)

You're making an argument for settling for less (and against what was advertised). "It's okay because you got 'most' of what you wanted, so shut up. Accept what you 'did' get." Would love to see yall faces if Sony took some weeks away from your PS+ subscription. That'd be okay because you'd still have most of the time you paid for.

 

This is an utterly incompatible analogy. You're comparing an advertised paid product to a kind gesture.

So not only did you say that their analogue wasn't compatible, but you also couldn't help yourself to make a comparison that doesn't make sense? 

Edited May 4 by Beyondthegrave07

[Doodlebawp]

6 minutes ago, EcoShifter said:

(No offense but...)

You're making an argument for settling for less (and against what was advertised). "It's okay because you got 'most' of what you wanted, so shut up. Accept what you 'did' get." Would love to see yall faces if Sony took some weeks away from your PS+ subscription. That'd be okay because you'd still have most of the time you paid for.

Thank you for proving my point for me 😎

Edited May 2 by Doodlebawp

[HaserPL]

Sometimes I wish my life would have been as carefree and oblivious as these people's lives. I could waste time being angry about some game's costumes, instead of important stuff.