Nintendo of America replaced Trunks' sword with a stick when they localized Dragon Ball Fusion.
Saw this on GameFAQs and wanted to share. Tell me what you guys think? Here's the video showing that I'm not blowing smoke.
So let me get this straight: it's completely okay to have Link stab Ganondorf in the fac,e but it's not okay for Trunks to wield his characteristic sword? Not to mention Smash Brothers... Seriously, wtf? <_<
So let me get this straight: it's completely okay to have Link stab Ganondorf in the fac,e but it's not okay for Trunks to wield his characteristic sword? Not to mention Smash Brothers... Seriously, wtf? <_<
Comments
I'm not even angry about it, just more confused by it. I think it's an unnecessary change, and I find it hard to believe that someone out there is so stringent with the media that they or their child consumes that the use of swords in a game where people blast others with energy, punch each other, and fly would prevent them from buying this game. And if that person does exist, I doubt that they'd play video games at all, or let their kid play them.
Censoring weapons? What year is this, 1992?
Bandai Namco is also censoring Tales of Berseria because of a weapon. What a company...
I'm not even angry about it, just more confused by it. I think it's an unnecessary change, and I find it hard to believe that someone out there is so stringent with the media that they or their child consumes that the use of swords in a game where people blast others with energy, punch each other, and fly would prevent them from buying this game. And if that person does exist, I doubt that they'd play video games at all, or let their kid play them.
It also flies in the face of capitalism. How does making said changes positively affect sales? It's not like that change allowed the game to get an E rating. It's also is hard to push that as a selling point to fans if the IP, '...featuring Trunks now brandishing a long stick instead of his trademark ultra-cool sword!'. This is an odd choice indeed.
I'm not even angry about it, just more confused by it. I think it's an unnecessary change, and I find it hard to believe that someone out there is so stringent with the media that they or their child consumes that the use of swords in a game where people blast others with energy, punch each other, and fly would prevent them from buying this game. And if that person does exist, I doubt that they'd play video games at all, or let their kid play them.
It also flies in the face of capitalism. How does making said changes positively affect sales? It's not like that change allowed the game to get an E rating. It's also is hard to push that as a selling point to fans if the IP, '...featuring Trunks now brandishing a long stick instead of his trademark ultra-cool sword!'. This is an odd choice indeed.
Agreed. The only plausible explanation is the focus groups made up entirely of eighty-year-old grandmas they must have used to back this decision. WHY CAN'T I HAVE FUN, GRANDMA? Or maybe sticks are in again and are the new "it" toy. It's beats the crap out of Hatchimals, both figuratively and literally, and they are in the National Toy Hall of Fame.
In all seriousness, though, I find it hilarious that the company that published Dark Souls III this year censored a sword. It's not only a questionable decision because it's going to upset the fanbase, but it's also not even in line with their company values. You're also right that it hurts their bottom line, but I also think it affects company trust when handling IPs. If they're willing to take something as iconic as Trunks' sword away for seemingly no good reason, what's next?