• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Project Zero/Fatal Frame 5 Review Thread

kunonabi

Member
Some of you would really completely skip a game you might enjoy because it removes silly bikinis that have butt cleavage?

You're not making much of a statement when you do, you know.

Statement or not, I'm not paying for a product I don't want. I'll buy the Japanese version which gets me the uncensored retail copy we should have gotten in the first place. Besides, if this is how NOA is going to treat the last few wii u releases then having a Japanese Wii U might come in handy for SMT x FE too.
 

Haganeren

Member
I hate those costume, i even hate the Nintendo ones as i think they have no place in a survival horror game.... So i don't really care.
 
What? Nintendo games are constantly on sale or have some type of discount at retail stores. Unless you mean e-shop games specifically then idk.

This rarely happens much in the UK unless the game really bombed. Super Mario 64 DS is still basically the original RRP here. And this game being e-shop only... not a chance. Wonderful 101 is still £49.99 on eshop which is insane. (Worth it, but still insane)
 

RpgN

Junior Member
It's very unfortunate how Nintendo handled the distribution of this game. The low to decent scores are surprising to see but I was still willing to get the game eventually...with a cheaper price or used. That's not going to happen anymore because the game's physical version is limited edition, it will be sold-out soon and sellers will ask high prices for knowing it's going to be rare. I don't like buying digital versions but would have made an exception for this. The problem is...I have a 8gb Wii U that is almost full. I can't even try the demo :/

I'm getting really tired of this...I can't afford €60, let alone gambling that much money on a franchise I have interest in but not sure about. It's annoying when Nintendo have low stock of physical copies...they hold their stuff hostage. I will most likely have to miss on this game.
 

-shadow-

Member
I wouldn't consider the game hostage by being limited. The Wiimake bombed spectacularly, it's fully understandable they're limiting the physical release after that. But they're at least making a print. Can't say the same for NOA..
 

TheMoon

Member
It's very unfortunate how Nintendo handled the distribution of this game. The low to decent scores are surprising to see but I was still willing to get the game eventually...with a cheaper price or used. That's not going to happen anymore because the game's physical version is limited edition, it will be sold-out soon and sellers will ask high prices for knowing it's going to be rare. I don't like buying digital versions but would have made an exception for this. The problem is...I have a 8gb Wii U that is almost full. I can't even try the demo :/

I'm getting really tired of this...I can't afford €60, let alone gambling that much money on a franchise I have interest in but not sure about. It's annoying when Nintendo have low stock of physical copies...they hold their stuff hostage. I will most likely have to miss on this game.

Do you have a USB thumbdrive that's larger maybe? You could use that (though not officially recommended) for the trial version.
 

Bowl0l

Member
gaf, what's the potential that NoA will discount this game next year Halloween since NX reveal @2016 will drive all WiiU game prices to the ground ($20). I guess it might drop to $20 since it has worse rating than ZombiU.
 

OmegaX0

Member
This is sad.
Not the reviews (I'll get to that in a second) but the reaction to the "censorship" of basically skimpy added costumes that add nothing but titillation. Go ahead and justify it however you want but that IS what the added costumes were. They add no purpose, no added "artistic integrity" to the game other than existing for the sake of fan-service at its worst.

So just like the costumes they replaced them with for no reason? This whole "they have no purpose" thing is an utterly ridiculous stance to take considering they are optional bonus costumes. Especially when survival horror games often have silly bonus costumes.
 
Do we have confirmation yet if the supposed toned down boob jiggle and removal of the original skimpy optional outfits are present in the western release of the game?
 
Am I actually reading that the lack of bikinis is seen as cut content? It literally has no impact on the game at all and this localisation has Nintendo themed costumes which is easily more impressive. Even if they didn't replace the costume with something else it would have 0 impact on the game itself.
 

OrochiJR

Member
Do we have confirmation yet if the supposed toned down boob jiggle and removal of the original skimpy optional outfits are present in the western release of the game?

So are there supposed to be even more changes beside just the removing of the bikini costumes? I hope someone, possibly someone who also played the Japanese version, can do some kind of changelog of all the differences between the versions after launch.

I already posted this in another thread, but in 2015, where stuff like Senran Kagura, Akiba's Trip and others are released in the west removing this stuff is unacceptable. The game is rated M and the main theme is "wetness", nobody should be surprised that such a game might contain a little eroticism. If the issue is that one of the characters is underage they should have just pulled a Team Ninja and tell everyone she's 18 and it's ok. That would have saved them the work of removing and editing things.
 

Jimrpg

Member
Damn, the problem is I highly doubt this game is going to get discounted much if any at all. The Wii U platform is at the end of its short life and there are only limited physical copies. This game is $90/$100 in Australia. I haven't paid that much since the ps2 era.
 

kunonabi

Member
Gore and violence sells more than niche Japanese horror game.
Let's face it, Devil's Third is going to sell more than FF 5 simply because the latter will have no retail presence at all.

Not every violent game sells well. Fatal Frame at least has a small legacy and following. It's also a horror game coming out before Halloween. Devil's Third is coming out days after Xenoblade Chronicles X and got lambasted in reviews. It's no more deserving of a retail release by any stretch of the imagination. Heck, Nintendo was going to pawn off it on xseed in the first place.
 
This rarely happens much in the UK unless the game really bombed. Super Mario 64 DS is still basically the original RRP here. And this game being e-shop only... not a chance. Wonderful 101 is still £49.99 on eshop which is insane. (Worth it, but still insane)

101 physical fluctuates between $20-$40 in the US on Amazon. And plenty of Nintendo Wii U games are steadily climbing down- Smash Bros Wii U is already $45, Mario Party 10 is $41, Toad is $34, Tropical Freeze is $40, Kirby is $30, Mario & Sonic Olympics is $20. Hell, even Mario 3D World is down to $40 on Amazon. You're citing examples of evergreen Nintendo games that sold in the millions on popular platforms.
 
Not skipping, but not gonna pay full price, especially for digital.

Sure bikinis are a big part of the full price justification.... I now understand why these things are often DLC :/

Yeah Dead or Alive Extreme 3...

I'm not sure if I'll get the game because it seems to be very special (haven't played any game of the franchise) but I surely won't make my choice based on bikinis... but we're in a free world, your choice.
 

Namikaze

Member
Seeing a lot of people refusing to buy the game because it's digital and censored, I mean yeah it's their money so their choice but do they realise that Nintendo is just going take that to mean the US market doesn't care for Project Zero and that they made a mistake in localizing it?

Do you really want to take the risk of any future games in the series not getting localized?


From what I have heard superior (lewd) European got the uncensored version. But the getting the copy will be difficult as it's either sold out or can't be shipped out of Europe/UK.

I really don't care if Nintendo is pleased with the sales numbers or not. From my perspective, they are offering a gimped release of a product that is expensive for a digital game and will barely fit on my 32GB HDD. I have other consoles and I'm not obligated to support Nintendo's mediocre treatment of the series. I hope the NX is region free so we'll have the choice of importing. If not, I'll live without Fatal Frame.
 

Danny Dudekisser

I paid good money for this Dynex!
Story cutscene is censored:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3U07cZ9-7Y

I don't think it works nearly as well in the new version. Original is much creepier and depressing. The new one doesn't really work at all if you ask me.

The fuck? They censored the game beyond just the costumes?

Fucking dumb, Nintendo.


In any case, reviews are pretty underwhelming... though I'm wondering if it's more because the game feels like old-school survival horror rather than what the genre's become in the last few years.
 

L.O.R.D

Member
congrats , some of you on kotaku

http://kotaku.com/players-say-fatal-frames-new-costumes-are-censorship-1737632217

edit : weird , where that screen shot taken ?

1482703874189983812.png


wait..is this another game ?
 
Story cutscene is censored:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3U07cZ9-7Y

I don't think it works nearly as well in the new version. Original is much creepier and depressing. The new one doesn't really work at all if you ask me.
Wow. Wtf?

I probably won't grab the game anyways (too spooky) but come on now... All the throat slitting (and whatever else) scenes are presumably in and A-ok but bikinis are some sort of horrid filth?

While it's dumb to remove bonus costumes deemed inappropriate, the argument can be made that they exist solely for objectification and add nothing to the game. I don't think that necessarily makes it ok to remove them but it's a fair argument to make. Straight up altering a scene intended to be viewed a specific way is changing the original vision (for the worse here)

If you'd like to argue that changing the bonus costumes isn't censorship, that's fine, but it's hard to say this isn't when it is most definitely sacrificing the intent of a scene in favor of covering up the character
 
You know, I was critical of NoA's decision to make it eShop only.
Now I think I support it, this would have been a flop at retail.

Edit: Seems EU/NA versions are censored. Lame.
 

kunonabi

Member
New thread on censorship made so we might want to move that conversation there since this was supposed to be a review thread.
 

-shadow-

Member
The fuck? They censored the game beyond just the costumes?

Fucking dumb, Nintendo.


In any case, reviews are pretty underwhelming... though I'm wondering if it's more because the game feels like old-school survival horror rather than what the genre's become in the last few years.

Well technically it's still only the costume they've censored.
 

GuardianE

Santa May Claus
Well technically it's still only the costume they've censored.

It's still only the costume, but a lot of the justification brigade were hanging their hat on it being a completely unrelated Fanservice extra that served no purpose in the original story.
 
Are noa doing a retail run for devil's third?

Devil's Third is getting a small one-time run available only to big-box retailers like Best Buy, GameStop, etc. Smaller, independent shops cannot order it. It's a very limited release.

Why Fatal Frame 5 isn't getting the same treatment, I have no idea. (The review scores are averaging at least a point above DT!)
 

Nerrel

Member

Wow, that really kills the point of that scene. They actually portrayed the costume with some restraint in the original by covering her back with the scarf; it wasn't a lewd or perverted moment to leer at the character, it was a sad scene where a character is being exploited. Now, with the same outfit she wears normally, she just looks like she's camera shy.
 

Bowl0l

Member
Wow, that really kills the point of that scene. They actually portrayed the costume with some restraint in the original by covering her back with the scarf; it wasn't a lewd or perverted moment to leer at the character, it was a sad scene where a character is being exploited. Now, with the same outfit she wears normally, she just looks like she's camera shy.
It could be worse. Imagine NoA replaced it with Zelda's or Zero Suit Samus costume.
 
Wow, that really kills the point of that scene. They actually portrayed the costume with some restraint in the original by covering her back with the scarf; it wasn't a lewd or perverted moment to leer at the character, it was a sad scene where a character is being exploited. Now, with the same outfit she wears normally, she just looks like she's camera shy.

But the scene didn't worked in the original anyway, because the game itself exploited its characters with the hilarious "sex sells" costumes.
 
Top Bottom