Imagine not knowing that you can express discontent without raging like an incel

It’s a super minor change but technically it is censorship.

"So they took an old game from another period and made changes not to offend modern gamers."

So your criticism is that it's modernized? Modernization of gaming takes many forms. Even MGS3∆ has made modernizations. I don't know how old you are, but, believe it or not, people who were young-ish when these games came out are not the target audience of these remakes and remasters. Games get modernized for a modern target audience. Just as some mechanics are dated, so too are some themes. I think you unintentionally described it best: the game is modernized (i.e., made for the modern target demographic). It's not all about us.

"But if you buying a remaster you just want higher definition and frame rate and having same experience as the game originally launched."

This makes zero sense. So based on your argument here, higher definition and frame rate would not change the experience... But an undershirt on a supporting character does? What are you even saying?

@DarXyde mgs3 delta is a remake not a remaster.
Remastering something means just increasing the frame rate, texture and resolution while the core game stays the same.
Remasters prime targets are the original gamers not the new one.
If it was a remake then the censorship would been understandable. But doing censorship in a remaster because political climate changed is wrong. Goal of remasters is to be a HD zeitgeist.

MDTunkown,

" Remastering something means just increasing the frame rate, texture and resolution while the core game stays the same."

This definition isn't a good one. Following this logic, Shadow of the Colossus PS4 and Demon's Souls PS5 aren't remakes because they tick all of those boxes (and then some). Those are very faithful remakes.

You're also ignoring context: this is a remaster of a game that came out decades ago. It's very unrealistic to suggest there wouldn't be a need to make adjustments. I also don't really see why you'd consider this a "political change". sure, we can say that "everything is political", but there isn't really any connective issue to policy with this decision. They did it because... They decided to do it. That's the long and short of it. This is not at all a decision that affects gameplay. It's not a remaster, but one example of a game missing content /altering the expected experience would be GTA IV, which omits flying planes entirely (a feature that came to be entirely expected in GTA) because Liberty City is modeled after New York. That I would say is consequential. An undershirt? No. And I'm willing to bet it only cuts one way where if Oyu had pasties, this wouldn't be an issue. Either way, I'm saying "if no one is making you make this change and it's not destructive to the experience, go for it". Just to be clear, I don't support censorship. But I also don't consider this censorship. If the esrb said this was necessary and that prompted the change, yes, that's bad.

I guess I'm just thinking about it differently. I really don't see any reason for people to be jumping up and down about it.

"Goal of remasters is to be a HD zeitgeist."

Well, there are plenty of games released in the HD era that for remastered so it's not just about bringing SD to HD. That aside.

If you mean "as a product of its time at the time of the original product", I think that defeats the purpose of any modernization efforts, wouldn't you say? control schemes, for example: why improve upon them or utilize new controller features if it's just intended to be an HD Zeitgeist? I think it's more than that. It's about bringing in new blood as much as it is about speaking to the older generations.

You would say that, as you come in with this straw man argument?

They're not removing half the game. They're not making you pay a subscription. They covered up a pair of tatas.

That's it. That's literally it. In no world is your silly comparison even remotely the same thing or indicative of a slippery slope.