Kamitani responds to Kotaku criticism of the characters.

@endurancefun: Sorry. Guess I should have used the word "quote" instead of "article". My bad.

@mordeaniischaos said:

Dude, the entire history of art has been one of "pandering" to whatever group of people pays for the paintings.

You can draw your cock on a napkin and it will totally be art, you don't even have to justify it by calling it satire for that to be the case. Whether it's good art or bad art is another question entirely.

The playable characters in Dragon's Crown don't need to be as uniquely designed as Alyx because she's a major character in a character-driven story, whereas the Sorceress & Co. are just playable classes in a game with a story that isn't driven by specific characters (or at least not the playable ones). They don't even have names. They're supposed to be little more than exaggerations of fantasy stereotypes like "sexy witch", "huge armoured knight" etc.

Even so, I'd be be far more likely to recognize Vanillaware's unique and instantly recognizable art style when shown a part of these characters than the Alyx model.

First off, the painting doesn't depict "struggles between life and death" or any shit like that, which you would know if you knew the story behind the painting -- it's just a bunch of witches flying into the air, and they are hot and naked because that shit is nice to look at. Second, I have never said anything that even so much as implies that the painting is "less a piece of art" than the Dragon's Crown designs.

Finally, I have never said that the sorceress design is good. In fact, I have repeatedly said the exact fucking opposite. What I'm arguing is not that the design is good, but that some people are criticizing it for reasons that are stupid and irrelevant.

You didn't.

I have never said that it has depth. Depth and artistic expression are completely different things.

You people are the fucking worst.

Kotaku is a joke.

Stop linking their pointless click-bait articles.

It's funny how you entirely dismissed "artistic expression" as a meaningless term and repeatedly and cheaply used it as a shallow buzz word in hope of adding to your argument, and now all of a sudden it's an entirely defined thing that's completely different from "artistic depth". Maybe in a serious discussion about art it has to be, but that sudden shift you took certainly is telling.

This debate club has been fun but it's been reduced to bickering over abstract terms. That design looks like a cringe-inducing bad parody, only it isn't even that. I suppose that's a proper way to resume all I had to say.

I think this post provides the cultural context that has been lacking from this entire thread.

Artistic expression is a meaningless buzzword -- except when used to literally mean "expressing something through art", which simply means making art of any kind. In both cases it's different from depth.

Fucking brilliant rebuttal to a yet another stupid sexism article. Are all game journos fucking man children or something? They really get offended by this shit? Fuck off with that.

From my point-of-view, the dude made a very poignant argument, underpinning how you can dislike a piece of art without dismissing it as not art simply because of your own opinion. Wrongly accusing artists of being harassment-enablers, that is threatening their artistic expression. Depth is something that comes from analysing the art itself.

Personally I see plenty of depth in the art here. You can ignore the analysis in this thread; there's definitely a consistency to the art style. It wasn't dreamed up solely to appeal to boys or women-haters, the very notion is ridiculously ignorant.

And Gawker is laughing all the way to the bank.

Why did I ever even say that? The guy in the article feels embarrassed to play these games, and rightfully so. That is a pathetic design that looks like a bad parody, but isn't. I find it tasteless, but maybe it's a cultural thing. Maybe in Japan it makes complete sense, and that's just lost in translation when exported to the majority of western audiences. But that's not even the argument you're going for, though it happens to be a concession I would most likely agree to.

Since I have responded to you via PM at this point, I'd rather continue the conversation there in order to bump this thread less.

Why I'm considering going against my better judgement and installing an ad-blocker and only blocking gawker sites.

I admit I initially took the follow-up artwork to be a bit of an immature, "you're gay" joke. Reading different cultural perspectives, as well as this one from a comment on PAR, I'm not so sure anymore.

I don't think it says anything like that at all. I know that I have a number of friends, gay and straight, that tease me about being gay, which I'm not. It isn't meant negatively, it's just because I have sometimes been assumed to be gay by people who have known me for a while, and it's funny when people are then surprised when they realize that I'm not. I don't take offense, because it isn't meant as any sort of insult. It could only be an insult to me if I, myself, thought being gay was bad, or was overly sensitive about being politically correct.

I don't think it's any stretch to say that the artist's post could be read as "if you don't like that, maybe you're gay and want some burly dwarves." I think it is the reader who is assuming that gay = bad, in this case, though. This is likely due to the fact that there still are a lot of people who still believe that there's something wrong with it, and we're becoming overly sensitive to any possible implication of that position.

OMG stop trying to compare breasts with dicks. That makes no sense whatsoever...

@snail said:

Why? Why is he right to feel embarrassed? What about that character should make a person feel embarrassed? That the design is unrealistic? You're in a fantasy setting with elves and demons, nothing about that is realistic. Is it that she's sexually exaggerated? Everything in this world seems exaggerated. If anything, her design is consistent with the rest of the blown out proportions of this world. That she isn't as "mighty" as her companions? Maybe she isn't! Maybe that's exactly what she is going for? Who the fuck knows, and why does that matter? Because it is pandering? When did that become a crime? "Oh no, they think I like this! I can't play this in public because people will think I like naked cartoon pussy and I fear social ostracization!" Give me a fucking break.

Jerry from Penny arcade said it best:

Now, I'm not going to accuse you of attempting to censor this game. But I really don't know what the fuck you are arguing about. If you want to say you dislike the design, that's fine. If you want to say it has no "artistic merit" or any other bullshit like that, well, that's your opinion. But you've just been running around in circles saying "it's pathetic!" or "this looks like a parody!" as if that should condemn it to some kind of lower strata of thought, and that those who play (or heaven forbid, even enjoy) such things are doing so for reasons that they need to be vilified for (or have to be 15 year old boys; you've made enough insinuations that they're the only ones who are getting anything out of this artwork that I can't believe you are saying otherwise), and that the slightest chance of a negative association is enough for a person to rightfully shun it.

Nuh-uh. I'm not buying it. It's just a drawing. It holds as much weight as you decide to give it. I can accuse you of not seeing the depth in the design (she's obviously using her looks to lure her enemies into a false sense of security and to distract them long enough for her to summon an army of undead dudes and wipe them out, duh) as easily as you can say I'm reading far too much into it. That doesn't get you anywhere.

But beyond all that, I'd like you to explain why a person should feel rightfully embarrassed about playing this game due to her inclusion. At worst, she doesn't fit with the world. I've played a million games like that and never once did I fear the thought of someone looking over my shoulder and judging me based on it. Let's assume I'm stupid, here; what about her in this game should make a person feel embarrassed? Since the best you can come up with is "I don't think she fits or has depth in her design" and that is just an "agree to disagree" kind of point, you need to give me more than that. Otherwise you're just making a lot of posts with no real convincing argument behind them.

The sorceress looks like a walking pair of giant, saggy tits. And part of me believes that this is exactly what she is supposed to be.

Are you a child? Because this kind of goony "every man is an island" horseshit only makes sense if you are an actual child. In which case, C- see me after class.

Between the general art style of this & the rather unreadable logo, think I'd definitely pass on it, gameplay might be okay but so much of the art style for this is just not that great looking on a technical level.Seen enough unproportional japanese characters of anime/games in my time that just doesn't make sense for me.

Trying to belittle someone's opinion by calling them a child while also failing to actually address a single thing that they said is, of course, the domain of mature adult conversation.

Holy shit, this thread got as dumb as I possibly could have expected. I just want to point out a few things:

1. Of course this is art. That semantics argument is a waste time. Now is it shitty art? I don't know. You decide.

2. The developer was absolutely making a gay joke. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have immediately apologized. Stop saying the response was "brilliant" unless you think saying "lol u gay" is brilliant.

3. Who is saying that this art or this game shouldn't exist? I don't see anyone saying anything even remotely close to that. I see criticizing the art but I see no one saying "ban this sick flith."

As you were.

hey does anyone remember back on pages 1 and 2 where people just chuckled or rolled their eyes at this story?

Anyone?

@grantheaslip: No, they're not basically saying that at all. There's a difference between saying "this is shitty" or "this is sexist" and saying "this shouldn't be released to people." Is Alex's 1 star review of The Walking Dead: Survival Instinct censorship? Is Jeff talking about how he thinks Yoshi's Island is garbage on the podcast censorship? You are free to make whatever kind of art your heart desires but in doing so, you're opening yourself up to criticism. I think the DOA Xtreme games are creepy, juvenile pieces of shit. But that doesn't mean that I think that they shouldn't exist.

By the way, citing "cultural differences" doesn't really fly. You're releasing a product to the entire world. You can't then say "oh, well you're not Japanese so you just don't get it!" If the rest of the world wasn't going to understand, then you shouldn't have released it to the rest of the world.

I can't believe this thread is still going strong.

So the artist has no problem characterizing a female character by her sexual characteristics, makes a gay joke in response to criticism, and apologizes for being "rash". The amount of verbal and cultural gymnastics some of you are doing to justify this is silly. Those boobs are ridiculous! Be smart enough to reject shit like this and live in a nicer world. It's way easier and far more rational.

well, allow me to be perfectly clear- speaking for myself, when i say that this material is somewhat juvenile, pubescent, or akin to something-a-14-year-old-hetero-male might produce or enjoy, i am not saying this work has no place in the universe, and thereby must be destroyed. i am saying this creator is clearly really into tits, just like 14-year-old-hetero-males are. the association is there- and for me, there's no avoiding it. just as i look at this game in motion and roll my eyes at the frames of animation devoted to bouncing breasts, there's something (albeit fleetingly) endearing about creating material that speaks to a younger, crasser, and oftentimes dumber (in terms of sensibilities, not intelligence) segment of the population. kinda like me listening to an old blink 182 record as a 27 year old- it's dumb and immature, but it still can be enjoyable.

but really, this isn't the sort of game you defend with art history, artistic merit, or seemingly innocuous jabs that inadvertently come off as homophobic. the guy really likes tits and barely dresses his women. someone called him out on it to move a slow-news day. the creator then fanned the flames by making a visual and verbal misstep. there's sex and violence on tv. the government is putting flouride in the tap water. film at 11.

Yeah, be smart enough to reject your own opinions and tastes and go along to get along, you guys.

That's an incredibly stupid statement. "Ur gay" does not exist as an insult in Japanese culture. He did not know his response could be misconstrued in that fashion, but once he realized what had happened, he apologized because he's not an asshole. Let go of your cultural bias.

It was never about it being art, but that art shouldn't be censored. The games journalist makes it clear, in future he wants this type of art style to no longer exist because it is "embarrassing." He makes direct implications that Dragon's Crown is inclusive and that it backs up prejudices, linking into his pretentiously calling Vanillaware's founder homophobic. Conjuring non-existent connections between works of art and "amoral" groups is one of the most historically abused ways of forcing censorship.

It's not a waste of time to highlight the double standards and corrupt practices of these games journalist sites that are supposed to represent gamers. If we don't speak out, the developers may actually get the impression we allagree with Kotaku.

@starvinggamer: I didn't say he was an asshole or anything at all about his character. I was referring to the people who think that he was making some sort of profound statement about the west's perceptions on sexuality. He wasn't. And again, just saying "BECAUSE CULTURE" doesn't give people the freedom to say whatever the fuck they want.

@endurancefun: He's allowed to think that the art is embarrassing. Just as you're allowed to think it's not. That's not censorship. It's just differing opinions. Your point that he makes it clear that this art style should no longer exist makes no sense. If I say "this game sucks", am I making it clear that games that I think are bad should no longer exist? Is that censorship?

@milkman: You totally ignored my point. He is entitled to his opinion. But saying something sucks is not anywhere near the same as saying you hope it ceases to exist. That alongside the baseless generalisations he made about 14-year-old boys and sexism would make it seem as though he is pushing for self-imposed censorship. Maybe that isn't what he wants, it's likely he exaggerated his argument to hyperbolic levels to make it more of a story, as the article has already been called clickbait by about a dozen users.

@endurancefun: He apologized for the 14 year old boy comment, which I agree was a stupid thing to say. But again, you're inventing an argument that isn't there. Where are you people getting that he thinks this art shouldn't exist? Especially when he says LITERALLY THE EXACT OPPOSITE in his article. It's a critique and nothing more. I'm not saying the article is good or even that I agree but he has every right to say what he said.

Look, I'm not a censor. I'm not going to say that an artist shouldn't draw what he or she thinks is beautiful. But just as I champion an artist's right to respect themselves, I believe that it's essential for critics—and for regular people—to discuss that art. All art has its fans. And all art deserves exposure to critics. I'm not saying this particular piece of art should not exist, but I have no qualms about saying I think it can hurt this game and gaming as a whole. I think it repels more than it attracts. It doesn't challenge viewers in interesting ways. And I don't consider it beautiful.

My god this have evolve into a real Ethnocentrism conversation. People who accuse me of "cultural gymnastics", I feel you guys wrote that out of rashness of emotion and I take no insult from it but for future reference if you are going to dismiss other people's culture you may not want to do it on a message board because unlike saying something thoughtless in public, it is still there after you wrote it.

Are you a perv if you go to Japan and in your ignorance ask a schoolgirl who just happen to be walking around where the closest hotel is? Because that's kind of not OK to do in this day and age over here. Now you think it was a perfectly normal thing to ask and it is in most places but in Japan a lot of foreigners and Japanese businessmen use that line to try to find cheap schoolgirl prostitute. Now lets do what a lot of us are doing now and take that whole context thing out of it, or the fact that you didn't know any better and now you are screw, you are going to jail for a few days.

Now you are doing the same thing to Kamitani, who drew what he wanted and call him sexist and then when he send the person who call him a 14 year old boy a perfectly cool picture that is the exact opposite of what the author of the article ridicules as a joke now he is a homophobes? You guys realize you just call a guy who live in the part of the world with the most openly gay/les/transgender population in the world? Being gay/les or transgender is not a slight people throw around here. We don't have Fox news openly promoting hate like you do.

You see the problem here?

The most annoying part of this whole situation is how fad-like and impotent it is. Everyone deciding to be offended at the same time, because they've found a new fashionable problem to have with all of their friends on twitter.

I think these articles would be a lot better if they were written from more than one perspective, or maybe put it up with a companion piece featuring an opposing opinion. As it is, it seems like preaching from a mountaintop and when the comment sections erupts calling you an asshole, you can remind yourself that you are up here and they are down there.

So when an actual creator speaks out, whether I see it as crass or not, I think it's extremely important.

Standing fucking ovation.

What the fuck. He wasn't making a gay joke because they don't exist in Japan. The only reason you, and many others, interpreted it as a gay joke is because you were viewing it through a specifically Western lens. In reality, it was a demonstration of the complete opposite extreme from hypersexualized femininity, using artwork from the same game. Comedy through juxtaposition, and proof that his artwork goes a bit beyond the simple adolescent desires of a 14-year-old boy.

Do you seriously not understand that? He wasn't saying whatever the fuck he wanted, he was saying something that he thought was an innocuous jest, and apologized once he realized how his message could be distorted when viewed by a Western audience.

@milkman: Here, read this:

That quote is actually BS. Schreier talks about a discussion about art, but he never actually discusses the art in question. He talks about sexism in the gaming industry. No one is disputing that. He goes from "boy's club", to E3 and booth babes, to straight male power fantasy.

Let's be serious, the grotesquely muscular dwarfs are not a male power fantasy. The majority of men don't want to look like that. Not all women would want to have the large breasts that the sorceress has, but I would say that there are more women who would want those breasts than there are men who would want those muscles. Kratos' muscles are closer to the maximum that men would want, and they could easily settle to be more like Nathan Drake. It's a very lazy argument to simply label something "male power fantasy" when it doesn't conform to the way you want the debate to go.

He barely talks about the actual artwork, because he's already made his mind up about it, and he assumes everyone either has to have the same viewpoint as him or be wrong. He says, "I don't want to look at this game in a vacuum," but the problem is that he is looking at Dragon's Crown in a vacuum when he doesn't bother talking about the style of the artwork, what inspired it, why it is what it is. He could still come to the same conclusion, but at least he'd actually say why and have laid the groundwork for it, instead of simply saying women are uncomfortable playing games (not just this one), working in the industry, or attending gaming events. None of which touches on this game, but somehow blames the game for all of that.

I can do it for him. Dragon's Crown artwork is very reminiscent of Frank Frazetta's fantasy works, but takes the proportions of four of the six characters, both men and women, to the extreme. One may consider Frazetta's depictions of women sexist. Therefore, Dragon's Crown's homage to Frazetta's work can be construed as equally sexist, especially the way the Sorceress' breasts continuously bob about. Blah blah blah, insert click-bait here.

His "Look, I'm not a censor," is the equivalent of "I'm not a racist, but..." It's something to be said so that someone can't accuse him of being one, even though he's basically saying this artwork shouldn't be used in this or any other game. It's a greater leap to accuse Kamitani of calling him gay based on a picture (and I waver on that opinion too), than it is to realize what he's driving at when he believes the artwork of this one game hurts gaming as a whole.

I am so done with this conversation but one last thing in regards the above statement: Nope.

The problem to me was Kotaku tried to be snarky toward the picture and got called out on it. Then, they doubled down on the idea that somehow Vanillaware is sexist ...or something.

Even more interesting was that other Kotaku authors tried to backpedal around that, as if to distance themselves from it. That all said, Kotaku is about shock and awe/pageviews. Gawker sites are notorious for the sensationalist "clickbait" articles that come up every couple of months to generate some $$$, then keep on.

...Which is why I'm not really a fan of them to begin with. I feel Kamitami's response was more a snark filled (to the same degree) return fire, but naturally, voice and tone are lost over the internet. If Kotaku thought that Sorc design was bad, I hope they never saw the promo art for Scarlet Blade. The author's head might have exploded.

@milkman: The guy in this thread did say, Japan jokes about "converting" straight men and that is the humour they went for in that match. It is not "oh look he's gay, and gay people are bad." There's nothing to suggest Kamitani was being homophobic, but the writer went ahead and made that terrible accusation.

On the bright side, the Elf trailer's out.

See, this is why we can't have nice things because people don't want to have an open mind to different artistic designs and assuming it is offensive. Fine, I wasn't planning on getting this game right away on launch day but I want to support this type of style in our video game media. I mean don't we want more style in our games instead of Fucking military man shooting foreign people in the face?

for the record, the artist wrote an official letter to kotaku.

a revealing excerpt:

-

"I believe that the basic fantasy motifs seen in Dungeons & Dragons and the work of J.R.R. Tolkien have a style that is very attractive, and I chose to use some orthodox ones in my basic designs. However, if I left those designs as is, they won’t stand out amongst the many fantasy designs already in the video game/comic/movie/etc. space. Because of that, I decided to exaggerate all of my character designs in a cartoonish fashion.

I exaggerated the silhouettes of all the masculine features in the male characters, the feminine features in female characters, and the monster-like features in the monsters from many different angles until each had a unique feel to them. I apologize to those who were made uncomfortable by the art’s appearance, and did not see the same light-hearted fantasy in my designs."

-

so let's drop the pretense of 'fertility gods' and the cultural/artistic merits of the artist's work. he's a fantasy artist that wanted to garner attention and distinguish his work (which is no crime), and it appears to have worked. but he enlarged sexual features- he didn't redefine the possibilities of what can and cannot be in video games.

and he also wrote about the dwarves:

-

"In regards to the Dwarf image I posted on my Facebook page: This image was never intended to attack Jason. Originally, it was a promotional image that I created for my fan base in Japan, which I posted to the official Vanillaware Twitter account earlier.

We receive many requests from companies to create publicity illustrations for the game, but we never received any requests for the Dwarf. Also, as the game’s street date nears, most retail shops start requesting exclusive art for their retailer-exclusive bonus items. In Japan, these illustration requests can even be as specific as something like female characters in swimwear. In these requests as well, the Dwarf was nowhere to be seen.

So, I decided to unofficially draw a sweaty Dwarf in a bathing suit, with a bit of cynicism towards those retailer requests. I drew 3 of them to show that there are character color variations available.

However, this image is something I created on my own, and will not see the light of day in any publication. I felt it was a shame to just throw it out, and thought I’d just post it on my own Facebook. That’s when I remembered Jason’s article and thought that I’d post it as a little joke with a comment. I used an automated translator to try and make a lighthearted joke in English, but clearly that wasn’t the case. I was very surprised to see the crazy aftermath."

-

so in the end it really does appear to be a giant misunderstanding- which is especially unfortunate, as it seems the dwarves-bear-art was originally created to be a subversive joke to the japanese-games-media.

moral of the story: there's a lot lost in translation, and it's probably best not to attempt jokes across country-lines, especially those that deal with gender and sexual identity, no matter how lighthearted. cuz guess what- you'll probably end up making an inadvertent mistake.

@mellotronrules: I can't speak for anyone else, but it's never been a pretense for me. It's always been about no one knowing what went behind the design decisions because Schreier never did any research. Personally, I took it as Frank Frazetta fantasy hyper-exaggerated, which is pretty close to his explanation. He enlarged a lot of features, including sexual, but people have gotten hung up on the sexual.

I'm including the whole note and not just sections, because no one should need to go to Kotaku, and because Katimani also says its okay to criticize his work.

Thank you for contacting me; I am George Kamitani from Vanillaware.

I’ll go into detail about the reasons behind some of Dragon’s Crown design concepts.

I believe that the basic fantasy motifs seen in Dungeons & Dragons and the work of J.R.R. Tolkien have a style that is very attractive, and I chose to use some orthodox ones in my basic designs. However, if I left those designs as is, they won’t stand out amongst the many fantasy designs already in the video game/comic/movie/etc. space. Because of that, I decided to exaggerate all of my character designs in a cartoonish fashion.

I exaggerated the silhouettes of all the masculine features in the male characters, the feminine features in female characters, and the monster-like features in the monsters from many different angles until each had a unique feel to them. I apologize to those who were made uncomfortable by the art’s appearance, and did not see the same light-hearted fantasy in my designs.

I don’t harbor any ill-will to Jason Schreier for the article he originally posted about the Sorceress or his follow-up. Although it may be negative feedback, I am very thankful for having one of our titles being covered. I do understand what Jason and the rest of the discussions on the internet are saying for the most part. I am not sure if I can implement the critiques from him and others around the internet into my future artistic creations, but I will definitely keep in mind that these opinions are out there and affect people on a personal level. I feel that any form of media content faces death when it doesn’t receive attention at all. So, be it criticism or support, I am truly thankful for the people talking about Dragon’s Crown and the people discovering Vanillaware for the first time.

In regards to the Dwarf image I posted on my Facebook page: This image was never intended to attack Jason. Originally, it was a promotional image that I created for my fan base in Japan, which I posted to the official Vanillaware Twitter account earlier.

We receive many requests from companies to create publicity illustrations for the game, but we never received any requests for the Dwarf. Also, as the game’s street date nears, most retail shops start requesting exclusive art for their retailer-exclusive bonus items. In Japan, these illustration requests can even be as specific as something like female characters in swimwear. In these requests as well, the Dwarf was nowhere to be seen.

So, I decided to unofficially draw a sweaty Dwarf in a bathing suit, with a bit of cynicism towards those retailer requests. I drew 3 of them to show that there are character color variations available.

However, this image is something I created on my own, and will not see the light of day in any publication. I felt it was a shame to just throw it out, and thought I’d just post it on my own Facebook. That’s when I remembered Jason’s article and thought that I’d post it as a little joke with a comment. I used an automated translator to try and make a lighthearted joke in English, but clearly that wasn’t the case. I was very surprised to see the crazy aftermath.

It’s okay if it was just me who was criticized, but it is not my intention to cause problems for Dragon’s Crown publisher (ATLUS) and all the other people who are involved in this project. From now on, I will limit myself about transmitting something personal out in the public.

Also, it would be very appreciated if you could please contact Index Digital Media, Inc. if you plan to make anything related to this matter, including this e-mail, into an article.

Lastly, please tell Jason that I am sorry for causing him trouble, and also to please don’t let my actions cause him to shy away from Vanillaware products…

Good bye, and thank you.

I think Jason's response to Kamitani is pretty good:

http://kotaku.com/the-real-problem-with-that-controversial-sexy-video-ga-478120280

Japan has been making games where the females are nothing more than coquettish "exaggerated silhouettes" for years now, complete with giant anti-grav tits, and large thighs. It's time to grow the fuck up.

And saying Japanese women are totally cool with it, just completely ignores what a parochial society Japan is, for starters. I've always known Japan exists in some sort of bizarro-world when it comes to portraying female sexuality, where jiggly, floppy, massive tits on every female is lauded as a "design choice", and not "immature sexual repression in visual form", but this just goes almost hilariously over the line.

Oh, and did I misread, or did someone above seriously just claim there are no gay people in Japan?

I keep seeing the terms adolescent and juvenile tossed around as pejorative. I think CS Lewis best sums up my thoughts on this and why I have little respect for the current state of games criticism:

"Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves.To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - On Three Ways of Writing for Children (1952)

Criticism of lewd or saucy character designs is essentially anti-sexual puritanism, but because people don't want to be seen as unfashionable prudes they rarely present their gripes in those terms. Instead they will claim something is 'harmful', or where that comes across too much like censorship they say it's 'pathetic' or 'childish'. This kind of reactionary, goalpost-shifting detraction is all over the place. If we're lucky, people will grow out of it.

I want highbrow content in video games, sure. That doesn't make lowbrow sexualised stuff pathetic and shameful. The way to more mature games design is not shaming and censuring the makers of lowbrow stuff. This game was never going to be The Grapes of Wrath.

I hope that new statement is mostly lip-service because the idea that the western games press has made the head of Vanillaware apologize for his work, second guess his aesthetic choices and withdraw behind the PR wall makes me retch.

Oh, for fuck's sake...

This is a Japanese game with a busty woman. There is literally NOTHING new about that. It's part of the culture, and funny enough, they don't get offended over it!

ABUNAI SISTERS is VASTLY more offensive than anything in that trailer or this game. Sheesh.

PROOF:

I weep for the swaying wheat fields of Muramasa and the unit designs of GrimGrimoire that get overshadowed by some witch's tits.