Super Seducer 1 & 2 Refused By Nintendo Due To “Explicit Content” – Nintendo Life

No. Your post reveals the number one issue with people who don’t like to hear criticism
, you interject yourself personally into the argument that has nothing to do with you personally.

I say “I think this game is creepy and morally suspect”

You say “why are you the arbiter of morality or/and what is on sale” it’s as if you feel personally judged because you don’t have a problem with the game or content he puts out. It’s not about you.

Did I sign a petition to ban the game? Am I a top exec at Nintendo with influence? Did I criticise those like his games or books. Did I declare myself superior to them. NO I DID NOT

Comment #153 is the kind of comment I was referring to (which you claim isn’t a thing) there are a number of these above my comments

I didn’t technically even state my position. I simply defended my right to critique a game the same as those who harp on about freedom of expression. I highlighted the contradiction to expose the weak argument used to shut debate down.

For clarity I do think all pick up artists are creepy men teaching others to be predatory and making society a little more unsafe for women. Please note, this opinion doesn’t critique yours or anyone’s relationship to pick up artists. You could make an educated guess how I feel but you don’t actually have the answer.

In my last post I touched on how the game is an extension of his brand, including the books he has published. In his book he promotes techniques I would say are predatory such as negging and increased physical contact. The game cannot be ringfenced from the rest of his work because it’s the same branding and subject matter. So saying the game is just fun or a joke seems silly to me.

You don’t understand capitalism is all I can say to your last point. You have this naive idea that it’s a purely democratic system of delivering goods to people. Companies have always concerned themselves with reputation and image - to sell more. It’s the reason there are little to no porn games on consoles. Why Nintendo added no political messaging allowed in online animal crossing so that the potential sale of the game in China wasn’t affected. It’s partly why gay representation was almost non existent for many decades in tv and film etc etc. By your understanding we have been living with capitalism fascism our whole lives (whatever that means lol)

@Muh-ario
At this point we are having different conversations. I never once talked about the legality of his content or mentioned the word sexual abuse. Predatory is not a simile of sexual abuse. I was very careful with what words I used yet you came away from my written statement with positions I never stated or believe or remotely implied.

In my first post I wrote “that’s pure capitalism which I know many of you would die for”
I don’t know how you could read that and not pick up on the obvious sarcasm. I was making fun of people who approach such a topic with their idea of pure objectivity like they are the next Jordan Peterson. But whatever. To say I’m hiding behind a capitalism argument when I explicitly wrote in my response to you that I find PUA creepy is wild.

Citing YT and twitch means nothing to me. They are social media platforms with their own TOS. Playing a game as opposed to watching someone play a game and apply commentary are two different things. With the amount of antisemitism, white nationalism running wild on YT I don’t see it as an example of a strict TOS. that’s just me though so. ..

I see no equivalence between games that depict graphic sex and the ideology of coercing women to date/sleep with you. I have no hang ups about nudity or consensual sex. If grown adults want media that deals with that then fine. There are games on Nintendo platforms that seem obsessed with sexualising pubescent girls which I also think is gross. I have said as such but those two issues can exist at the same time. I’m not sure why I can’t voice my opinion on this because there is other questionable content out there.

Capitalism does not operate in an objective bubble. Small and large businesses have always responded to public demand including the morality of the day. That’s why the NFL tried to originally clamp down on BLM protests from their players to appease their large white fan base and why Nike chose Kapernick to be their ambassador to appeal to their large black user base. Both sides cashing in on the moral stance of their base. What Nintendo did does not meet the definition of Corporatism. Part of its definition is that it is a political system. Japan is a parliamentary system with the same capitalist economy like mine.

So let’s leave it their you can continue to defend the game and simultaneously accuse me of making wild accusations about the game I never said, never wrote, never implied. And I will critique the content and hope in the future I come across someone who is capable of addressing the points being made and not everything else.

Author: Gamer/ Source