PixlBit

generally, the games that get censored are ones that appear on Nintendo systems, right?

Usually but then there are some on other platforms.

I have a couple of thoughts.  One on review scores and another on the topic of scoring "censored" games.  I tried to absorb as much as I could from your response and the intial post, but I may have missed something.

First, scores.  I don't really like them.  They really don't tell me anything useful, or whether or not I will enjoy a game.  I don't like GTA games, but they always end up with near perfect scores.  The only way I would know if I would like the game is to read the review, and I fall into the awful habit of skipping down to the score and ignoring a bulk of the written word.

Secondly, scoring "censored" games.  What does it matter if a game was censored or not?  I think that you need to focus on the game that you have in your hands and the fact that the game is apparently missing something should have no bearing on the score.  If the censorship does have a negative affect on the game, you should notice it and it will most likely be reflected in the final score.  I don't think that you can go in and take off points just because you know the game was censored...  Maybe that wasn't the point of the article, 

For the first point that's essentially why I don't enjoy putting a score on a game. Sure the number looks good but does it say anything about the gameplay, graphics, music, and story? With my previous user reviews I stayed away from scores, but now it's apart of what I write for The Gaming Ground. I can't really argue with what was established before I joined.

For your second point I have to say exactly. I think I should focus with what was left and if any censorship did impact the game negatively then it should be taken into consideration.

I should first mention first that i'm in the camp that is against the butchered localized version of Fates (and to another extent, Xenoblade Chronicles X), though even with that, I feel that the censorship and bad alterations should weight in the score if the cut and/or altered content actually affects the game experience in a negative light. Though then again, what affects a reviewer is different from the individual, so someone angered by what they've done with the story won't mean another one is angered by that aspect, or is as strong as the other. Though an argument could me made on the fact that even people that don't care about certain aspects can see what's wrong right away. For example, coming back to Fates, Totalbiscuit, who had played and loved Awakening but never cared about its story and characters, still managed to see the bullshit they pulled on the characters and story on Conquest alone.

In the end, I feel that it's posible for a reviewer to choose wheter or not to mention the alterations a product has suffered. If I have to make a review conserning a product with censorship and/or negative alterations, I do think it should weight my opinion on that and mention right there why those aspects affect negatively the product. Now, if the reviewing policy does not allow for that, then I can just link on the review to another article or editorial that talks more about those things.

I can state my opinions about censorship, even when I wrote the review for Fates Conquest I could have brought it up. But since some of the other members of the site already covered this particular topic I decided to bring those articles up in my review and go over the game on its own merits.

But it does boil down to the writer when it comes to the review. Though as I mentioned in the comment I posted in this blog and on the article about reviewing censored games I believe that a review is an opinion that can be used to help decide if the game is for the audience or not.

This is a weird topic for me because I'm actually in the camp where I don't care. I like playing a lot of anime JRPG games and they typically use sex appeal to sell them which is not something that appeals to me, it's just there, and I just accept it as a cultural difference, which is what I think happened with games like Fates.  I don't knock a game down for making me uncomfortable, but I do mention that it makes me uncomfortable. I'm not talking about Bayonetta, but more or less of Neptunia type games where the protaganists look like toddlers made to look sexy. Even a lot of the Atelier games that I enjoy use very "sexy" imagery to sell them, but they aren't really sexual games at all. Also, there is a difference between "editing" and "censorship". If games are products, then companies can edit them to fit the region they are selling to. Australia is very strict about violent games for example and US is more conservative about sex, unlike Japan. Censoring art and editing a product are different things, but these two things get mixed when it comes to gaming. 
This is from Atelier Sophie, a new game:
 
 
I read different reviews and can usually enjoy a game that has bad scores, so it doesnt mean much. However, if you're tight on a budget and see a new release get poor reviews, saving your money is very helpful. So I feel like reviews are important, if you veiw games as products and not art or whatever. 

That is a good point and normally I would be in the same boat about accepting how a game was localized. However it became difficult to ignore the changes when I joined on the reviewing staff. But to be honest sometimes I think we get too caught up into movements, myself included.

After the Miitomo/Fates article I wrote sometime after the reviews for those two I decided to try to back away from the censorship topic so I don't get too swept into it. Of course I ended up posting that comment on an article about censored games...

Too be honest, I don't like the way commenters can intimidate reviewers. I hate those whiny little bitches! I want to read a reviewers full opinion and I don't want them to censor themselves because they're afraid of backlash. Just go back and read @whatsacows experience after criticizing game of thrones and then recieving death threats for it. Realistically, commenters can be so vile and abusive, that writers have to mind them when they are reviewing games which is very hypocritical of some gamers. God forbid you take issue with a game and point it out, but because you want to avoid death threats and flame wars, reviewers have to hold back to please the audience. How fucking stupid! I am not criticizing you in anyway. I am pointing out the hypocrisy of some gamers who censor writers with their vitriol, yet don't want their precious games EDITED. I take issues with pervy games not because they are pervy, but because it's added as a shallow feature to sell games, and otherwise brings nothing to the experience. I haven't played Fates, but I believe there was some weird rubbing/petting game that was removed or whatever and it was used to build relationships. It wasnt featured in the previous Fire Emblem, and I am not looking for it in a new Fire Emblem. You seem like a cool dude GamerFoxem. Unfortunately a lot of commenter are not and it isn't worth bating them into fights, so I say let them win. Whiny little bitches! It's not worth the stress.

To be fair on the petting minigame, it was actually an entirely optional feature, so you could simply go your own way and never bother with it if you weren't into it. Besides, from the looks of it, it had no difference to being caring in real-life with an intimate partner.

Was the petting minigame removed or not? I haven't played the game yet but my understanding is that it was left intact for the Western release minus the tactile ability for the petting mini-game. So the outrage is over not being able to rub the screen and doesn't affect the core mechanics of the game? The strategy game should be reviewed poorly because you cannot rub the screen in an optional mini-game? In either case, I'm complaining about the bad behavior of commenters. Anything will set them off for whatever stupid reason. Fates is probably a bad example for this argument, I don't know?

Well, the mechanic is still on the western release, but was very much downgraded to just blow on the microphone and look the character.

Really, the outrage wasn't for the minigame alone, but of the shitty localization in general for Fates, which aside from censoring stuff that wasn't neccesary (some of them from cultural missunderstandings between US and Japan), it also altered characters interactions and personalities in a very negative way, which on the argument Foxem did, it's posible that affects the scoring of the product if it has that thing going on. Now, it's posible that the downgrade on the minigame doesn't affect that much the scoring, and indeed if it was me, I wouldn't think it changes that much of the game experience and point that those adverse to the mechanic can skip it entirely. I think it may affect the scoring when combined with the other shaddy aspects, which in the case of Fates, has to do with the screw-ups that came from the localization.

I actually understand very well your point of the asshole commenters since i've run into some comments that make want to strangle a cat, though even on websites with some of those types of comments, I haven't run into those that want articles changed or altered and some have said that the writer has any right to voice what they want, as stupid as they think it is. Then again, I visit pretty especific websites, mostly run independently and had ignored since 2014 mainstream websites, so maybe it's more common in the latter sites like IGN and its ilk.

I typically mention whatever controversy in a review/criticism but I usually just take into account the base game. Foxem avoided the controversy all together and referred to seperate articles for that and just focused on the core mechanics of the game, which is fine. But I still feel that those types of controversies are avoided to suppress vitriol from commenters which is just plain wrong. Bigger sites like IGN are the worst, while smaller sites like AV Club have more civilized communities. I cannot really speak about Fates since I've yet to play it. I was only aware of the petting controversy and not bad localization. People dont usually want articles changed or altered, that usually affects review scores, but I for one tend to be more cautious when I criticize something because of assholes. I once suggested that Kingdom Hearts needed to stop repeating itself with claustrophobic level design and complicated combat moves and just focus on making the games fun. Of course, some asshole then created a duplicate account with my username just to talk shit about everything I posted thereafter, just because. All I said was KH was getting to complicated for its own good, but otherwise love the games. But, no. Assholes have to be assholes.