This is fine, no issues really, but if you're offended by something in a video game fictional story that was made over 20 years ago you should go touch grass.
eh. i get the 'need' for these companies to have the disclaimers and i honestly appreciate that they are not changing anything here. but the mob is fickle and seemingly can't distinguish real life from the online life where being offended somehow gives them clout.
Yeah the Japan level made my jaw drop... the early 2000's really were the last time you could be this blatantly racist against the Asian Community in popular media.... But I'd rather go "Oooof" than pretend the game and by extension society was never like this.
Even if I agree some games have gone too far on censorship, I don't like having this totalitarian attitude to any kind of "offense".
There are certain weird themes I really like in niche games, but I acknowledge if they were "thrown in" to a game about shooting or adventure, would sour the experience for a lot of common players. I'd point to perverted character designs as a common one - sexualized character designs are obviously appealing to some players, but to others they can actually make it hard to get absorbed in the story of a game like Xenoblade Chronicles 2 or Nier Automata. Even for a series like Persona, there have been players that decided "What weeb shit" and abandon the game because of the way female characters get harassed at times.
It's easy to call it "political", but politics comes from personal opinions - and it can genuinely affect how people view the media. These days I have a much more vehement reaction to stereotyped Native-American depictions ("Indians") over when I was a kid. I doubt it'd make me hate Tomb Raider, but I can see why they'd have a warning.
Do you see any merit to the pushback against such media?
You sound like you favor rationalism, and I agree with dismissing people who are crazy, but setting crazy people aside, do you see potential harm in promoting negative racial and ethnic stereotypes?
Stereotypes exist for a reason. They aren't made up, non-existent characteristics. 90% of people that are getting offended by such things are not even part of the group that's being stereotyped. It's usually white liberals that are "offended" by any of this. Are they beneficial? probably not, but they sure are not nearly as harmful as people like you make them out to be. As a straight white man, I'm vilified by the mob regardless of my positions on anything, and that in itself is a stereotype. So I don't put any stock into hypocritical perceived slights against humanity.
While Crystal Dynamics didn’t specify which content it’s referring to, it’s speculated that it could be the animalistic depiction of Pacific Island natives in Tomb Raider 3, who are implied to be cannibals.
There might be others, but The Dagger of Xian plotline in Tomb Raider II is a little "woo woo Chinese mysticism". You plunge it into your heart and turn into a dragon.
I'm not offended by it but I'd imagine that's not the kind of thing you'd write in a video game today.
While Crystal Dynamics didn’t specify which content it’s referring to, it’s speculated that it could be the animalistic depiction of Pacific Island natives in Tomb Raider 3, who are implied to be cannibals.
Like the fictional Indiana Jones style villages? Or the real life North Sentinel Island Sentinelese? I'm scratching my head too...
The North Sentinel Island Sentinelese are not cannibals. They just want nothing to do with anyone not born on the island.
Which is a good policy to have, seeing as how the British genocided the rest of the Andaman Islands. They even landed on North Sentinel, kidnapped a few old people and children, and then sent the survivors back as plague bearers. (this was in 1880)
In what world is that a question for a reasonable person?
A media company remade and re-released a piece of media and acknowledged that there may be problematic content, but that we should consider the time the media was made.
You don't need to know what the problematic content is, just accept their statement on it.
you don't need to know what the problematic content is
You seem like the kind of person who would become a moderator, start banning people and when they ask why they were banned you would block them after replying "lol get fucked"
In what way is acquiring more knowledge a bad thing? If I don't recognize any possible problematic content, but other people say it's there, why shouldn't I be a Le to ask what's problematic about it? Have I been going around being casually racist without knowing?
Like damn my dude you're getting pissed at people for wanting to better themselves.
Honestly I'm glad we've moved from "Censor out anything that might be slightly objectionable" (Like they did with Sam & Max for example, and I believe the GTA Trilogy got hit with a bit of this), to "Look the game is old and from a different time, what society deems acceptable is always changing, deal with it or move on."
I'm so beyond tired of being told I can't have a steak because a baby can't chew it.
I actually bought this three pack solely because it didn't censor Tomb Raider, a game I was very sure they were going to censor
I had to look that one up since I had no recollection of anything that stood out as offensive. Most seemed silly to change to me, but I do agree with changing the line about the goggles being designed for special needs children after Sam referred to Max's "hideously oversized skull."
Genuinely struggling to remember what that could even be about.
I mean, it's been like 25 years since I played them, but I don't recall any obviously bad things in there. It's not like it was filled with old Jackie Chan film levels of cartoon racism.
The voice acting has quite a range of stereotyped accents. Nothing they say is overtly racist, but the over the top accents themselves are insensitive.
I haven't played it but that doesn't sound racist to me if the context is right. There are cannibal tribes today. They are black skinned. This is fact.
And is what they should do rather than trying to delete it.
Provide context so that future generations can enjoy what's good about the media and acknowledge how parts of the content/media are problematic and not appropriate.
No but they have to make it news before some teenager who just learned about virtue signalling goes off on one because their mum paid more attention to Candy Crush than them
I'm glad they did that, change on a remake or something, I don't recall if they actually did it for Anniversary since it was still a ps2 game, but if games are art they should be preserved as they were, this is just a remaster that you can even play with the old graphics if you want.
Isn't this what the ESRB rating description is for? We label games M for Mature if there's swearing, blood, violence, and sex, but not for insensitive cultural stereotypes?
Neat, I'm with everyone here when I say this is the much better solution.I'd prefer it to be a bit more clear of a warning and a bit less of a company apology so people who do need the warnings such as younger kids are informed and not immediately put off by playing something almost immediately presented as 'inexcusable'.
Disney does this with their older movies too. No issues with it here, rather they address it this way and let it be an actual remaster instead of a redo