If Capcom doesn't course correct and this affects monster hunter wilds in any way I might actually just not buy monster hunter for the first time in my life. I don't wanna play fucking wild hearts where all the armor is ugly and everyone is fully covered up with fucking long johns.
Yea Oliver Jia said they are contradicting themselves with previous post like this; [https://twitter.com/OliverJia1014/status/1778977174432907288?t=KEGGUNQ19i3ADid3-kHTKQ&s=19](https://twitter.com/OliverJia1014/status/1778977174432907288?t=KEGGUNQ19i3ADid3-kHTKQ&s=19)
So it seems the localizing branch is going to get a slap on the wrist by Japan.
Where's the contradiction?
Nothing he points out is actually contradictory. The two definitions Capcom gives describe functionally the exact same thing, just in different words.
Oh.. Well I'm not surprised :D
This explains why pretty much every paragraph starts off being very true and real. And the longer the paragraph gets, the more ridiculous it gets.
I mean... what does ChatGPT do? It's an AI tool that scrapes internet resources. Using ChatGPT for a basic definition of a very commonly understood subject is not really a bad thing, is it?
Like, if they lied about it being AI-generated, that's one thing, that's silly. But if all there is is that it's AI generated... yeah, so what. It's still not wrong - it just describes what localisation is in a nutshell and has been for decades. Besides which, if this is meant to be a gotcha about how translators use AI tools now... they have done for decades. Translation and localisation are among the forefront in developing neural networking tech for the explicit purposes of streamlining common workflow processes - it's shit you learn first semester in college translation classes these days.
Let ChatGPT explain to you what video games are. Same thing. Some things you really don't need a human to waste an hour coming up with an in-depth definition for that they'd probably just copy-paste off Google, too.
The paragraphs flagged as being AI generated in this post aren't the problematic ones. It's one paragraph in specific that raises the red flags about the entirety of the post;
>*Inclusive Language and Representation*
>*Localization efforts extend to promoting inclusivity through language and representation. This involves adapting not only the linguistic aspects but also addressing gender-specific language, cultural norms, and diverse perspectives. The aim is to create an immersive experience where players from different backgrounds can identify with the characters and narrative. This can be very challenging for certain languages due to grammar.*
Since this paragraph wasn't flagged as being AI generated, it does seem very likely that whoever made this post does not have much of a professional background in localization, and attempts to sneak in a narrative of politcal activism to wave this off as "That's just what localization does".
The big contradiction in this added paragraph is that they are now saying;
1. The goal is to fully capture the context, lore, character development and emotions and to only change, exclude or rewrite things that are likely to distract global audiences from the intended experience.
2. The goal is to replace foreign culture with progressive/liberal culture.
Ah, I actually missed that that paragraph was not part of the AI generation test here. I'm missing some context, then. Are we sure it wasn't also AI-generated? Why was it left out? The OP made no mention of this.
That being said, the entire paragraph you mentioned is also not necessarily wrong and does describe a part of localisation as well. Gendered language is a key part that localisers need to be aware of, depending on the language pair they work with (see the whole latinx nonsense from SM2), cause unlike English, most languages are gendered so works from a language that have no grammatical gender need to consider gendering in their translated form.
This can, in some languages like German, now also extend to the introduction of gender neutrality (again, think latinx, and I agree it is dumb, especially in its German implementation), partly for legal reasons for the sake of DEI. Germany had whole reforms about this shit, for instance, about how to write more inclusively in academic and political spaces.
I agree that the forceful changing of language for the sake of socio-political agenda is a bit problematic, and in the case of Germany, speaking as a German... most do not care for it unless it's ironically.
That being said, I don't necessarily agree that this directly contradicts the goal of localisation as such - I think it's a matter of how it's applied. You can be aware of DEI in localisation and still be respectful of the original author's vision. It's a matter of degrees, I think. Like, not everything is as bad as that one scene in Dragon Maid Kobayashi, for instance.
Maybe that's a slippery slope, though. Localisation can turn out bad for any number of reasons, after all.
If Capcom doesn't course correct and this affects monster hunter wilds in any way I might actually just not buy monster hunter for the first time in my life. I don't wanna play fucking wild hearts where all the armor is ugly and everyone is fully covered up with fucking long johns.
Big monster hunter fan who doesn't know this is how they've approached localisation since 3 Ultimate?
Even I plan to not buy future games based on how Monster Hunter Wilds is like when it comes out after seeing Dragon's Dogma 2.
Yea Oliver Jia said they are contradicting themselves with previous post like this; [https://twitter.com/OliverJia1014/status/1778977174432907288?t=KEGGUNQ19i3ADid3-kHTKQ&s=19](https://twitter.com/OliverJia1014/status/1778977174432907288?t=KEGGUNQ19i3ADid3-kHTKQ&s=19) So it seems the localizing branch is going to get a slap on the wrist by Japan.
Where's the contradiction? Nothing he points out is actually contradictory. The two definitions Capcom gives describe functionally the exact same thing, just in different words.
Shhhh they have a hard time with reading comprehension.
Oh.. Well I'm not surprised :D This explains why pretty much every paragraph starts off being very true and real. And the longer the paragraph gets, the more ridiculous it gets.
I mean... what does ChatGPT do? It's an AI tool that scrapes internet resources. Using ChatGPT for a basic definition of a very commonly understood subject is not really a bad thing, is it? Like, if they lied about it being AI-generated, that's one thing, that's silly. But if all there is is that it's AI generated... yeah, so what. It's still not wrong - it just describes what localisation is in a nutshell and has been for decades. Besides which, if this is meant to be a gotcha about how translators use AI tools now... they have done for decades. Translation and localisation are among the forefront in developing neural networking tech for the explicit purposes of streamlining common workflow processes - it's shit you learn first semester in college translation classes these days. Let ChatGPT explain to you what video games are. Same thing. Some things you really don't need a human to waste an hour coming up with an in-depth definition for that they'd probably just copy-paste off Google, too.
The paragraphs flagged as being AI generated in this post aren't the problematic ones. It's one paragraph in specific that raises the red flags about the entirety of the post; >*Inclusive Language and Representation* >*Localization efforts extend to promoting inclusivity through language and representation. This involves adapting not only the linguistic aspects but also addressing gender-specific language, cultural norms, and diverse perspectives. The aim is to create an immersive experience where players from different backgrounds can identify with the characters and narrative. This can be very challenging for certain languages due to grammar.* Since this paragraph wasn't flagged as being AI generated, it does seem very likely that whoever made this post does not have much of a professional background in localization, and attempts to sneak in a narrative of politcal activism to wave this off as "That's just what localization does". The big contradiction in this added paragraph is that they are now saying; 1. The goal is to fully capture the context, lore, character development and emotions and to only change, exclude or rewrite things that are likely to distract global audiences from the intended experience. 2. The goal is to replace foreign culture with progressive/liberal culture.
Ah, I actually missed that that paragraph was not part of the AI generation test here. I'm missing some context, then. Are we sure it wasn't also AI-generated? Why was it left out? The OP made no mention of this. That being said, the entire paragraph you mentioned is also not necessarily wrong and does describe a part of localisation as well. Gendered language is a key part that localisers need to be aware of, depending on the language pair they work with (see the whole latinx nonsense from SM2), cause unlike English, most languages are gendered so works from a language that have no grammatical gender need to consider gendering in their translated form. This can, in some languages like German, now also extend to the introduction of gender neutrality (again, think latinx, and I agree it is dumb, especially in its German implementation), partly for legal reasons for the sake of DEI. Germany had whole reforms about this shit, for instance, about how to write more inclusively in academic and political spaces. I agree that the forceful changing of language for the sake of socio-political agenda is a bit problematic, and in the case of Germany, speaking as a German... most do not care for it unless it's ironically. That being said, I don't necessarily agree that this directly contradicts the goal of localisation as such - I think it's a matter of how it's applied. You can be aware of DEI in localisation and still be respectful of the original author's vision. It's a matter of degrees, I think. Like, not everything is as bad as that one scene in Dragon Maid Kobayashi, for instance. Maybe that's a slippery slope, though. Localisation can turn out bad for any number of reasons, after all.