Larian Studios Forums Divinity - Original Sin Divinity - Original Sin - General Why did you censor the cover art?

I really want to try this game, but I honestly cannot abide buying something that has been censored in any form--even if it's something as arbitrary as the digital cover of the game. It just goes against my own personal code. At the very least, I just want to know who made such a decision, and why--if possible--the decision to censor it was made. I'd really appreciate it.

Not this crap again...

There have been pages and pages of friggin' flamewars and complaining on this topic.


It has nothing to do with censorship. The developers decided that since the point of the game was to appeal to couples and such, it was a reasonable idea to have both people wearing approximately the same level of armour protection.


Is that REALLY so unreasonable?

I think the male character models are far more unreasonable because hulk-hogan-style-amphetamine-doped Aside that.. meh? ;p

I know for a fact that the armor isn't the same within the game. I'm guessing it was actually more of a marketing stunt than anything. It's still censorship for the sake of pleasing feminists, but the realism argument doesn't really hold water in a game that isn't realistic to begin with.

I still want to know who was responsible and why. I'll at least know who to blame, and whether or not I should avoid their next game as well. Even if a single swastika were censored in a game--it means I'm not buying it.

Back during the Kickstarter campaign, there were also people who said that they would not buy the game with the old, revealing armour on the cover.

Some people would refuse to buy the game with the revealing armour, other people refuse to buy the game if they changed it.

Either way, some people would be unhappy and refuse to buy the game.


If you are so hung up by that issue that you refuse to buy a game not on its merits, but because of the goddamn cover art, then that is your choice.

The point is that the game was changed because people were offended. I just can't find it in me to support a company that folds in the face of criticism, but at the very least I still want to know the who and why of the censorship.

And it's still censored. It doesn't matter what was censored, but the mere fact that it was censored at all that bothers me. If I support devs that willingly censor their games, then I'm willingly supporting censorship.

The original cover art was not an accurate depiction of the game.
People being offended was not the only objection to the original artwork, nor was it even the main objection (in forum discussions it wasn't even a significant objection). Who are these people who were offended by the original artwork, and yet were fine with the design of the female orcs, or a nature spirit you meet periodically wearing only a vine?

There were many, many changes to the game (including to the main plot, quests, skills, attributes, the magic system, etc), as part of the normal development process and as a result of feedback during and after the Kickstarter and Early Access periods. The only change anyone ever cried censorship over was the cover art (and the same group went into high gear over a request to have an option for a female character to wear something other than high heels).

Recalling it now, I think the statement about the change was - and I am paraphrasing from memory here - that the devs didn't realize that some people would take offense to the the skimpy armor, and the unbalanced armour was conveying an unintended message.

I appreciate the help everyone, and I guess they're sjws after all. Sorry I bothered you all, but at least I know I made the right decision now. You all have good one.

Feel free to group everyone who has a different view under a label you can easily use to ridicule and dismiss, without having to use logic or engage in an actual discussion.

Sounds to me like he has the view that "women do not have the right to get offended, and they should just shut up if they are".

Sorry man, but I just can't support their agenda. It's all good. It's just a video game.

That has nothing at all to do with what I've said. =( People can be offended all they want, but it doesn't really mean anything. "I'm offended" holds no significance whatsoever. To some people homosexuals are offensive. So? It doesn't matter.

What agenda? You are assuming (incorrectly) that everyone who doesn't fully support the original cover art is a SJW, and that that was the reason it was changed.

The "agenda" of a business is not to push some secret mind-control onto gamers, or to trample people's rights, or to make political statements.

The "agenda" of a business is to MAKE MONEY.

Specifically, to make enough money to stay in business and create another game (preferably with enough resources to make it a better game).

The million units manual

The route to the very big RPG that will dwarf them all

I wasn't too bothered about the old armour (other than the impracticality, though I'm glad they kept the heels!) but the mischievous part of me is now glad they changed it.

You should try Dragon Commander, if that game wasn't censored, DOS definitely wasn't either

Ohhhh nooo, please not again ... don't feed the "Gamersgate"-Trolls

@larian: your (signed) Poster is framed and presented in my living-room. This would never had happen with the old version of the cover art. So thumbs up from my side

@SnugRailgun: take some ordinary asian style rpg/mmo. There you have enough ballon-breast girls wearing nearly no armor.

OMG.

The cover art wasn't censored. It was IMPROVED due to valid feedback from the kickstarter backers (among others). I was one of those who raised the issue of the female WARRIOR wearing ridiculous bikini armor. Much credit to the devs for modding the cover.

Peace.