This frequency of English localization issues is unacceptable

[Lunaxia]

The type of characterization that was Haurchefant, his archetype, and other characters which embody this trope are literally designed to make light of sexuality and perversion.

Yes, making a joke of creepy behaviour absolutely makes light of perversion, and subsequently downplays the seriousness of the issues it can cause. I'm glad you agree.

They are harmless jokes, and they're not intended to be permission slips

Okay, but to those so inclined, that's exactly how they come across. Funny, "loveable" protagonist makes inappropriate comments or awkward advances and gets merely laughed off while continuing to be seen in a positive light, so it's seen as harmless and increasingly acceptable to emulate. Times that by 1000 across various media, and an unfortunate message starts to sink in whether that was the intention of the developers or not.

Knowing the difference between a joke in fiction vs. actual acts is key to media literacy.

Separating what you're shown to what is actually being said and the impact it has is key to media literacy, actually. Would you argue omitting homophobic or racist jokes to be a form of "censorship" or "suppression", even though they're supposedly only intended as a form of "humour" not to be taken seriously?

Lmao it's not, not in the West and certainly not in Japan. I can point to dozens of still-running Netflix shows which feature character jokes and archetypes like that of Haurchefant, and no shortage of those which appear in anime.

Such as?

And I said in time. Japan has a long way to go as of yet, unfortunately.

It's this same type of philosophy...

Uh, you're more than a little deluded if you think the tone, diversity and degree of inclusivity in not only video games but other media content has not changed considerably in recent years in response to the likes of MeToo, Gamergate, the increasing visibility of Trans rights, myriad racist controversies, and so on. I don't know what else it is you were actually expecting in the current cultural climate or what your source is for these bizarre presumptions.

SE LITERALLY admitted that the way they went about...

I was actually there for that time in the game's history, and it was a brief flash in the pan wherein a group of players felt "cheated" because they learned the cutscenes possessed notable distinctions not only in the dialogue, but in how they played out. After this became common knowledge, most wound up agreeing that the changes were actually for the better, and notably the character did not go on to have any major revisions in how he was presented in the ENG version, nor did they add in his proclivity for creepy behaviour. In spite of this (!) he became, and remains, one of the most loved characters of the game to this day, something I daresay wouldn't have happened otherwise.

If the writers wanted to convey him as a sincere sexual deviant who relishes in the discomfort he causes, then they would have done so by having the other characters treat it as such, not hand-wave it like the audiences is expected to.

For someone who waffles on about media literacy, you sure seem ignorant of basic concepts like intent not equalling impact and the effect unconscious internal programming actually has when it comes to creating media. That they did not intend him to be a creep doesn't mean that he isn't, lol.

You can still have content like the canon Haurchefant and still have it align with values of sexual harassment being bad.

No.

It's a video game, not real life.

Also no.

Haurchefant's iteration was well-written. He was a good comic-relief character

Three for three, and by now not entirely unsure I've become entangled with another alt. Alas.

In the EN text he comes off as vague and uncomfortably 'personal', and gives me the feeling that he has ulterior motives. The whole thing felt weird and uncomfortable, and it obviously wasn't how he was initially written.

And inviting you to his chambers and frequently lusting after your sweaty body and toned physique aren't personal? You're kidding, right?

[Telkira]

Yes, making a joke of creepy behaviour absolutely makes light of perversion, and subsequently downplays the seriousness of the issues it can cause. I'm glad you agree.

Making jokes does not downplay, nor affect the seriousness one would take the matter of sexual harassment within a serious context. This is the same logic that people use when trying to argue in favor of censorship/suppression of content or jokes they find offensive.

Okay, but to those so inclined, that's exactly how they come across. Funny, "loveable" protagonist makes inappropriate comments or awkward advances and gets merely laughed off while continuing to be seen in a positive light, so it's seen as harmless and increasingly acceptable to emulate. Times that by 1000 across various media, and an unfortunate message starts to sink in whether that was the intention of the developers or not.

Again, no. This is not how any of that works.

People may try to emulate qualities or characteristics that are admirable, but that's because those are traits that they already feel so strongly about whose value stands on their own merits. They're not going to try and emulate a debauchee like Haurchefant because anyone with the most remote sense would be able to identify that they would be inappropriate in real-life. If someone were to behave this way, it wouldn't be because the media they consume influenced them to do so.

There is literally zero evidence, scientific or otherwise, to make the claim that people who have acted inappropriately wouldn't have done so had they not been exposed to adjacent or similar material, especially when done so in the context of comedy in anime/manga or fiction. Even in Japan, where issues with harassment and assault on public transit, sexism in the workplace, etc. cannot be attributed to their lax standards with anime/manga, especially since their harassment rates aren't that much higher than in the West when measuring reported/unreported statistics.

This is also why the same rhetoric that critics like Anita Sarkeesian and Andrea Dworkin tried to push was soundly rejected (before it turned from criticism. It draws upon intuitively sound presumptions with no evidence to back them up. Like I said, companies are aware of this and leverage it into their products, hence why they have not and will not stop creating and marketing 'problematic' content like what we had here. Pearl clutching over depictions in fiction and other media does not help women who are victims of harassment.

The sooner people like you see that, the better.

Such as?

And I said in time. Japan has a long way to go as of yet, unfortunately.

Literally look for yourself. There's an ecchi anime about highschoolers that was announced, and after looking at both its 'adult' and 'TV' variants, it's going to be riddled with the so-called 'filth' that such content is known to have.

Also, Japan is under no obligation to conform to the arbitrary and unjustified standards of what you, or others like you, and fortunately they're showing absolutely zero signs of changing, hence why the LOC team did what they did to censor Haurchefant and why they admitted fault when doing so.

Uh, you're more than a little deluded if you think the tone, diversity and degree of inclusivity in not only video games but other media content has not changed considerably in recent years in response to the likes of MeToo, Gamergate, the increasing visibility of Trans rights, myriad racist controversies, and so on. I don't know what else it is you were actually expecting in the current cultural climate or what your source is for these bizarre presumptions.

It has increased, but none of it actually had the effect of making things better or influencing the culture as a whole. It was also, generally, one of those things were ever a problem when it came to media, and trying to pander to those causes or pundits has done nothing to actually influence or cause any real change. MeToo has had literally nothing to do with sexuality in video games, it was about sexual harassment and abuse going unaddressed and Gamergate was something else entirely. I agree with including trans characters in video games, but that has nothing to do with politics. It has to do with the fact that writers and creators are and should be free to create content however they want, which is why I also openly supported the inclusion and depiction of gay relationships and characters in material aimed general audiences.
That type of content doesn't try to break barriers, though, it does so by virtue of existing. Quality always speaks for itself.

I was actually there for that time in the game's history, and it was a brief flash in the pan wherein a group of players felt "cheated" because they learned the cutscenes possessed notable distinctions not only in the dialogue, but in how they played out. After this became common knowledge, most wound up agreeing that the changes were actually for the better

I've done my research on this, and it wasn't some 'flash in the pan' moment like you keep trying to claim. It was actually a very vocal uproar, because a lot of people weren't happy finding out that the whole "preserving the intention of the writers" assurance was backpedaled on, because people don't like having things being censored. If it truly were some brief 'flash in the pan' moment, then SE wouldn't have acknowledged it and admitted fault, and committed to reverting his characterization to be in-line with his canonical iteration going forward.

And no, most people don't agree that it was better. The consensus has always been mixed, but a handful of vocal supporters of the censored version on Reddit are not the majority. The backlash received from censoring him transcended multiple communities, and to this day still riles people up who would prefer to experience him the way he was initially intended to be.

In spite of this (!) he became, and remains, one of the most loved characters of the game to this day, something I daresay wouldn't have happened otherwise.

A vocal base of redditors and forum users doesn't count as making him one of the 'most loved' characters. It's far more likely he's more liked by the Japanese audience, in his proper iteration, than by Westerners, because he still retains all of the redeeming qualities of the EN one while also being a funny character with a broader purpose in the narrative as comic relief. Slapstick and abrupt disruptions in tone are some of my most favorite ways to break up the tension when necessary, so having him there felt so right.

No.

Yes, because it's fiction and intended to be comedic, because jokes are not intended to be taken seriously.

Also no.

But yes. It IS a video game, not real life.

And inviting you to his chambers and frequently lusting after your sweaty body and toned physique aren't personal? You're kidding, right?

Because it's obviously meant to be taken as a joke in the broader narrative, and his upfrontedness about his preferences only made me feel better about the character because it was clear what he was all about. He was also such a welcome and boisterous energy, given the cold and dreary setting and the emotions of the other characters.
In his EN iteration, he's written to feel more and more like a 'big brother' character, which is very bothersome given that the WoL's relationship to him at that point wasn't really that fleshed out. I kept thinking "why does he care this much? is there something I missed or a quest I should have paid more attention to?"
It also just felt like it was wrong, like something was missing. All my previous interactions with him had a different energy, and after a little bit of research, I finally found out why, and I wasn't happy. I was angry. I shouldn't have had to watch a Youtube video or read a transcript of the written dialog to experience this, it should have been that way when I played thru the MSQ my first go-around since I was playing with JAPANESE audio!

[Lunaxia]

Making jokes does not downplay, nor affect the seriousness one would take the matter of sexual harassment within a serious context..

Yeah, it does, though.

Again, no. This is not how any of that works.

Yeah, it is.

because anyone with the most remote sense would be able to identify that they would be inappropriate in real-life. If someone were to behave this way, it wouldn't be because the media they consume influenced them to do so.

The clueless don't, though, and the more unsavoury sort don't have any qualms about it to begin with. They just see it green lit as something they can get away with.

There is literally zero evidence, scientific or otherwise, to make the claim that people who have acted inappropriately wouldn't have done so had they not been exposed to adjacent or similar material...

You have to be a troll, there is no way someone can be this obtuse.

Like I said, companies are aware of this and leverage it into their products, hence why they have not and will not stop creating and marketing 'problematic' content like what we had here

Like what? Like who?

I've done my research on this, and it wasn't some 'flash in the pan' moment like you keep trying to claim. It was actually a very vocal uproar

You weren't even there, lol. Digging up an old post circa. 2015 that suits your narrative isn't "research" or proof of understanding of the matter.

If it truly were some brief 'flash in the pan' moment, then SE wouldn't have acknowledged it and admitted fault, and committed to reverting his characterization to be in-line with his canonical iteration going forward.

They committed to keeping the cutscenes largely in line with each other, while also continuing to state the importance of localisation and the reasons why they do it and why they continue to do it.

And Haurchefant was already dead by the time this came to light. Nothing changed, and no one actually cared.

a handful of vocal supporters of the censored version on Reddit are not the majority. The backlash received from censoring him transcended multiple communities, and

Imagine trying to pretend that there are a "substantial" number of people who care about the translation differences while claiming the only people who like Haurchefant are a bunch of supporters on reddit.

to this day still riles people up who would prefer to experience him the way he was initially intended to be.

So you, basically.

A vocal base of redditors and forum users doesn't count as making him one of the 'most loved' characters.

The fact that you're not aware how out of touch you are with the game and the community to even make this statement speaks for itself.

It's far more likely he's more liked by the Japanese audience, in his proper iteration, than by Westerners.

We're just pulling things out of the air now, are we?

Yes, because it's fiction and intended to be comedic, because jokes are not intended to be taken seriously.

You can keep on pretending that media exists in a vacuum apart from general society all you like, but no one else is.

Because it's obviously meant to be taken as a joke in the broader narrative

??? Haurchefant was 100% serious.

In his EN iteration, he's written to feel more and more like a 'big brother' character, which is very bothersome given that the WoL's relationship to him at that point wasn't really that fleshed out. I kept thinking "why does he care this much? is there something I missed or a quest I should have paid more attention to?"

I think you have some personal issues to maybe work on if someone slobbering over you makes you more comfortable than friendly courtesy.

Anyway, as funny as this was and as much as I admire your continued audacity to speak on subjects you have absolutely no understanding of or were even around for, I'm out. Good luck with the crusade and whatever it is you're actually looking for, though I have a feeling you're not going to get it.

[Telkira]

Yeah, it does, though.

No, it doesn't!

Saying that jokes about things is the same as minimizing or downplaying the severity of the subject matter would imply that jokes have a magical way of changing how people engage with and understand the subject matter. It's a drastic and biased oversimplification of how people engage with and address comedy that relates to a given subject, one that is contingent exclusively on misrepresenting the psychological and sociological aspects of humor in a way that validates the biases of those offended.

If it truly had this effect, then people like myself and others who are vehemently against sexual harassment, wouldn't find Haurchefant funny, nor would we defend his initial incarnation, and neither the West nor Japanese certainly would continue to perpetuate these specific literary devices in their media and media culture.

Yeah, it is.

It's not.

I'd suggest you actually pick up a psychology and sociology textbook, or do proper research into the consensus behind media effects on behavior, attitudes, and perceptions. You're going to find a lot of people claiming that there's an effect, citing correlational and largely anecdotal evidence, but you'll an almost equally robust set of papers critiquing this, and also find that the consensus is largely unmoved because none of these are able to outline or demonstrate causation.

The way fiction is perceived and how it affects people is not simple. It, like fiction, is complex and highly nuanced, with the only real standard is that things depicted in fiction do not 'normalize' things that would be considered harmful or problematic outside that context. You'd be surprised how often subjective biases override objective judgement in this regard.

The clueless don't, though, and the more unsavory sort don't have any qualms about it to begin with. They just see it green lit as something they can get away with.

People can be really dumb and completely devoid of media literacy, but inferences into media depictions and how it affects people has consistently failed to demonstrate a causal relationship between continued exposure and promulgation of these things. People often claim to find inferences, but they can't demonstrate anything more than minor correlations grounded by a selection effect.

The fact that people are able to differentiate and compartmentalize, at the conceptual level, something that is hypothetical, as opposed to merely fictitious and inconsequential is proof of this lack of an effect.

It always comes down to this back-and-forth with debates like this.
Even with the way many studios or media companies have radically changed their approaches to how controversial material can be depicted or marketed, the rates of abuse and all of these other harms these measures seek to address have never actually gone down. In fact they may have increased, but that alone isn't evidence of anything.

Like what? Like who?

-South Park
-Family Guy
-American Dad
-Big Mouth
-F-Is-For-Family
-Brickleberry
I can name more TV shows which feature perverts who behave just like Haurchefant, but that would make this already-long post that much longer. These shows are marketed by their raunchy comedy, and of course, it's going to break into territory that will make people uncomfortable. I'm not even going to touch up on JP content. That'd be cheating lol

You weren't even there, lol. Digging up an old post circa. 2015 that suits your narrative isn't "research" or proof of understanding of the matter.

I don't have to have been there, literally all of the evidence is already there from that time. It's not a matter of picking stuff that 'suits my narrative', it's about quoting a representative from Square Enix themselves who admitted fault and apologized. You casually casting all of that aside just to disagree with me on this is extremely petty.

Imagine trying to pretend that there are a "substantial" number of people who care about the translation differences while claiming the only people who like Haurchefant are a bunch of supporters on reddit.

There are. People want to have a quality experience that's consistent with the original vision of the game and not feel like SE is behaving like 4kids Lite, where all the characters have different names and plotlines are significantly changed to account for 'cultural differences'.

They committed to keeping the cutscenes largely in line with each other, while also continuing to state the importance of localisation and the reasons why they do it and why they continue to do it.

They also said that any further incarnations of him would be consistent with his canonical characterization, so that way there's one true Haurchefant. For things like side media or merchandise or events. All he wanted to do is ride the WoL like a pony...
They also admitted that changing him was wrong, and that they would have done things a lot differently given the severity of the blowback from fans and a general sense of disappointment in how they handled it. I admit, I wouldn't have been as concerned if the EN localization of Haurchefant was consistent across all regions, because it meant that one region wasn't getting something that another region was, and vice versa. If the Japanese script signed off on and integrated the changes, then it would have been through their internal processes to do so.

We're just pulling things out of the air now, are we?

Nope. It would just make sense, wouldn't it? I've also checked, his JP characterization is generally more well-liked by Japanese fans than the EN is, whereas in the EN there's this mixed-reaction with political implications. Over in JP he's literally just a character people like. There are stickers in LINE where he's depicted shirtless, and I think those are hilarious.

You can keep on pretending that media exists in a vacuum apart from general society all you like, but no one else is.

It's not about media 'existing in a vacuum', it's about actually knowing and understanding the effects. If you had been paying attention to anything, and didn't object to factual statements about the game being a pure work of fiction, you'd know better.

Just because bad people gravitate towards things which may, at a glance, glorify bad things doesn't mean it has a reinforcing or 'normalization' effect on those antisocial beliefs or attitudes. No evidence exists to conclusively demonstrate that, contrary to what people claim, and as stated previously, the winding down of those depictions will not make those people any less likely to 'change' or adjust these attitudes.

??? Haurchefant was 100% serious.

Maybe in some aspects. He functions as a supporting role and is helpful to the WoL either way, just in one he feels more like a proper character whose trope has function, but as a character, he was not intended to be taken 100% seriously. Learn the difference between a fictional character as a literary device and an actual personality, and how those concepts intertwine based on mood, tone, and broader context, I guess.

I think you have some personal issues to maybe work on if someone slobbering over you makes you more comfortable than friendly courtesy.

Maybe unwarranted emotionally-charged 'bonds' just aren't all that appealing, and maybe much of the infatuation with his EN iteration is motivated by something else? I'm not going ton assume things, but that's just my evaluation. Most of why I didn't like him was because it felt wrong, like he wasn't supposed to be this way.

Anyway, as funny as this was and as much as I admire your continued audacity to speak on subjects you have absolutely no understanding of or were even around for, I'm out.

I'd suggest you familiarize yourself with the actual effects of media and not just the biased takes of what political commentators say. Your entire rhetoric reeks of something uniquely foul, and that foulness is shared by people like Dworkin and Sarkeesian, but also more sinister forces, like conservative pundits such as Richard Nixon. Do with that as you will, you might learn something!