Sakurai commenting about "extra features"

[Dark Sage]

@Folt: I have to wonder if you're being deliberately obtuse to win an argument or if you really did miss the point that hard.

Also while the imagery I used may be rather intense, I still stand by my comment. Yeah, there's probably an audience for a "Severa rape mode" and yeah, it could be optional but that doesn't change the fact that adding it in said theoretical mode would be a very bad idea, no matter how optional it is. Yet according to Sakurai, it's perfectly fine to add such morally repugnant content.

Note to those of lesser intellect: I am not saying FE Amie is comparable to a literal rape minigame. FE Amie is not even the main problem, it is a symptom of a much larger one and a lot of the complaints about the game would still apply if you cut the feature from the game.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Dark Sage

[Folt]

Sakurai has said plenty of times before that the Smash4 clones were all alts for other characters and that he just changed a few properties to give them their own slot so that he can pad the roster.

This is not free desert, this is cutting a piece of the steak and then when the giving it to the customer after they're done eating saying it's a "free extra."

It's harmless in the sense that you still get the same amount of steak and you can't really switch it for something else,

but you can't help but feel contempt for the chef since of their dismissive attitude when you call them out on it.

Making Dr. Mario, Lucina, and Dark Pit into costumes didn't suddently decrease the amount of palette swaps to 7-4 for the aforementioned characters. If anything, the roster did get expanded, and Dr. Mario makes my dream of having both Mario movesets and having Dr. Mario with his properties back in the game come true. Also, fans of those characters are rightfully cheering and in the end, that's all that matters because there'd be no way for the developers to make one more unique character, even if they weren't in. Quite frankly, in some ways, the clones are among some of the most interesting characters in the franchise because it's way fun to see what kind of differences they have.

@Folt: I have to wonder if you're being deliberately obtuse to win an argument or if you really did miss the point that hard.

Also while the imagery I used may be rather intense, I still stand by my comment. Yeah, there's probably an audience for a "Severa rape mode" and yeah, it could be optional but that doesn't change the fact that adding it in said theoretical mode would be a very bad idea, no matter how optional it is. Yet according to Sakurai, it's perfectly fine to add such morally repugnant content.

Note to those of lesser intellect: I am not saying FE Amie is comparable to a literal rape minigame. FE Amie is not even the main problem, it is a symptom of a much larger one and a lot of the complaints about the game would still apply if you cut the feature from the game.

Oh, I got the point, alright. I'm just wondering if dondon got mine.

Basically, I get what he's trying to say, but I do not agree with him, and I frankly wonder if he's even trying to understand where I come from: Amie isn't some sort of "I-must-do-this-even-if-I-hate-it" kind of feature, it's just something put in so that players who want to use it can use it. It's not the main thing but a something added so that people who'll enjoy it can enjoy it. It's not like I don't get where you and dondon come from, but it's not like it actually takes away from the main experience. It's just some optional stuff that you can do or not do. After all, sometimes I can ignore the veggies just fine, as easily as I can choose to bear with it and eat them (and maybe even be pleasantly surprised).

[Dark Sage]

What part of atmosphere, interconnectivity of features, and tone whiplash do you not understand?

It appears we are at an impasse. Pistols at dawn?

[Folt]

Given that My Castle is essentially there to allow you to take a breather, I don't see how tone whiplash would be. After all, you are the one who decides if you need to take the breather and do non-war related things after a Chapter is done, so the interconnectivity between My Castle and the story is actually kind of refreshing. It having a calming atmosphere even if the story does not would also be for the best in this case.

I can see why you feel like that's an issue, but it's quite frankly an issue that I do not share with you.

[NeptuniasBeard]

I just fucking said in that paragraph how it affects the story. Actually, you said it yourself, it's at odds with the story. How is that not a valid complaint? Most of the examples you gave of extra costumes to unlock are almost entirely postgame fluff and they don't affect the story in any way. This stuff actually does.

I said it's at odds with the story, that is not the same as affecting the story. Rubbing on your units face does not once leave an impact on the actual plot. You have yet to give an example of it doing so. It is, again, fluff, just like those costumes. Hell, the costumes are "worst", because you can be in a silly suit while being fucked by zombies.

I am allowed to think that Sakurai is incompetent because he has done shit to make me believe he is incompetent. Just because you're butthurt over the fact that I insulted your idol Sakurai doesn't negate any legitimate points I made.

Let's look at those "legitimate points" again. He introduced tripping, which even he admitted was a mistake and removed it for the next game. That certainly doesn't make him incompetent. That makes him a responsible adult that owns up to his mistakes. And the other I believe was that he "routinely goes out of his way to fuck over melee players and advanced players for more casual fans". How does he do that exactly? Brawl was certainly made for a more casual audience, but that is only one game, one event. How does he routinely fuck them over? Did he build a time machine and retroactively turn each copy of Melee into Brawl or something? Hell, did Nintendo even send a cease and desist to the project M guys? I'm starting to wonder if you know what these words mean.

You're certainly free to disagree with his choices, but if you're throwing criticism at the guy, at least make them sound mature and well structured, you know, like a grown ass adult. What you're doing is throwing a hissy fit because he did something you didn't like. That is not him being incompetent, that's you being childish.

This is the closest you've gotten to actually addressing my points. It's true that there's different levels of optionality but they still exist in the game and they're still open to criticism and their existence still affects the game in some manner. It's asinine to deny this.

I didn't deny any of that. No where did I say it that it can't be critcized, nowhere did I say it doesn't affect the game in some way. I said it doesn't affect the story or the characters, which is 100% true. Nobody stops to say, "Hey Kamui, remember that time you rubbed my face? That was weird, but now I have enough strength to defeat my cancer!"

Also while the imagery I used may be rather intense, I still stand by my comment. Yeah, there's probably an audience for a "Severa rape mode" and yeah, it could be optional but that doesn't change the fact that adding it in said theoretical mode would be a very bad idea, no matter how optional it is. Yet according to Sakurai, it's perfectly fine to add such morally repugnant content.

This is just... a stupid analogy. Like, I wanted to literally facepalm that was so stupid.Adding a "rape simulator" would bump this game up to porn, literally costing them 10 shit tons of yens, and forever driving their name into the dirt. Obviously, just from a business standpoint, pretty much nobody would greenlight such an idea, and Nintendo once owned love hotels.

Just because someone says they are cool with something, does not mean they are cool with everything. Forget equivalent, the two aren't even comparable

Edited August 8, 2015 by NeptuniasBeard

[NeptuniasBeard]

doesn't matter; the entire mechanic is optional. the associated story is optional and this piece of gameplay is optional. it's all optional! therefore, it can't be bad. not one thing about GBA supports is bad, because it adds non-zero value for some players and it's optional.

The funny thing is that you think you're being clever. But your logic fails because the argument here is that not all game features are created equal. If you don't give a damn about the story and wanna skip it, by all means, do so, but that doesn't change the fact that it is definitely a bigger part of the game than poking people in the face.

[Shrouded In Myth]

Making Dr. Mario, Lucina, and Dark Pit into costumes didn't suddently decrease the amount of palette swaps to 7-4 for the aforementioned characters. If anything, the roster did get expanded, and Dr. Mario makes my dream of having both Mario movesets and having Dr. Mario with his properties back in the game come true. Also, fans of those characters are rightfully cheering and in the end, that's all that matters because there'd be no way for the developers to make one more unique character, even if they weren't in. Quite frankly, in some ways, the clones are among some of the most interesting characters in the franchise because it's way fun to see what kind of differences they have.

I don't think you understand what I'm saying. I'm not saying scrapping those character's would do anything, but giving them slots expanded on nothing and he says it does.

Giving the Kooopalings their own individual slots and slightly changing their properties wouldn't expand anything.

And many people have voiced complaints that the roster is way too big, which makes All-Star and completionism a chore.

Turning them back to alts won't decrease the roster at all, since they were never their own character, just an alt. Their fans would still be cheering because they can still play them.

Dr. Mario is the only justifiable clone, I'll give you that.

[saifors]

I have a question for all who defend the "it's optional so you can ignore it":

When passing from one side of a road to another and you don't look at the car that's driving at high speed because it's optional to pay attention make the car stop existing?

[Minischew]

I have a question for all who defend the "it's optional so you can ignore it":

When passing from one side of a road to another and you don't look at the car that's driving at high speed because it's optional to pay attention make the car stop existing?

? I wasn't planning on entering this debate, but what are you asking? I'm going to sound pretty rude here, but I think this is a pretty asinine comparison.

People who are defending that viewpoint are saying it's okay to ignore the optional material because they don't impact the gameplay, story, etc. In essence, their argument is that the optional features are negligible to the core value. So let's say we're going to use your example. In this case, crossing the street-- and I would presume safely-- would be the core value. You can't ignore the car, because if you do, there's a chance you'll get hit by it and die. And this collision would obviously forbid you from crossing the street. Therefore, the car would have an impact on the core value, and thus, it would not simply be something optional that could be ignored.

Not to mention that it's common sense to look both ways before crossing, so I don't really get what your example has to do with anything. Personally, I can see where the opposite side comes from, so I'm not 100% on the "ignore the optional material" side, but I think you're trying too hard.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Minischew

[saifors]

Not to mention that it's common sense to look both ways before crossing, so I don't really get what your example has to do with anything. Personally, I can see where the opposite side comes from, so I'm not 100% on the "ignore the optional material" side, but I think you're trying too hard.

Yes it's common sense for you to look at it, is it also not common sense to look at what everything a game has to offer? It's still part of the game that you pay 40$/€ for.

Is it it not also in many games to go through the entire game and not use a glitch that let's you skip huge parts of said game?

Also the FE Amie may be optional but unlike Hot Springs, it helps raise support levels, anyone who uses it will be able to play more efficiently thanks to the support boosts characters get.

And lastly, even if it's a side feature, there's still a part of the budget that went into paying the person who coded it.

This coder could have been hired for coding mechanics like rescue, shove or ledges.

[arvilino]

doesn't matter; the entire mechanic is optional. the associated story is optional and this piece of gameplay is optional. it's all optional! therefore, it can't be bad. not one thing about GBA supports is bad, because it adds non-zero value for some players and it's optional.

no, not at all. i said that good restaurants don't have massive menus. a good restaurant doesn't aim to serve as many dishes as possible. a good restaurant aims to serve a select number of dishes well.

In this case amie is the difference between a restaurant having fork and knives, spoons and chopsticks or just having chopsticks. It is only an extra option when it comes to a means(building supports) to an end(unlocking supports) and accessing the same content.

There's content you miss out on by only having GBA type supports which forces a tedious method to unlock them, access the bonuses and read the conversations. There's players who would like to use the bonuses, read the conversations who won't because the method to do it isn't good at all. This would be analogous to a restaurant having something a potential customer would want to eat but the customer never went to the restaurant because its chopstick only and the other customer's scoffing over the concept of forks and knives being added to the restaurant.

The GBA supports buiding method and supports are "optional" but you'll never get what is known to be the true ending of Blazing Sword to Binding Blade without them, you'll never get the combat boosts(outside Pent and Louise). Those do devalue the GBA games because something that is supposed to add value is only available through a single channel that was very poorly thought out and makes it frustrating and annoying for a number of players who do actually want to read the supports or did want to use the bonuses, you can't say "it's optional so don't do it" when the player would be missing out on content they would enjoy.

Though I'm not saying there needs to be a thousand or ten ways to build supports. But there's more value in flexibility and a set of multiple avenues that different player's might enjoy or value in the way they play or access the same game and content.

Edited August 8, 2015 by arvilino

[Ryo]

And lastly, even if it's a side feature, there's still a part of the budget that went into paying the person who coded it. This coder could have been hired for coding mechanics like rescue, shove or ledges.

I know you were just raising an example but rescue and shove do exist in this game, but just restricted to people who have the corresponding skills.

[Wyvern_Lord]

I have a question for all who defend the "it's optional so you can ignore it":

When passing from one side of a road to another and you don't look at the car that's driving at high speed because it's optional to pay attention make the car stop existing?

Ahh yes, the "If your friends jumped off a bridge would you do it?" argument. Stop using this argument; it's dumb and can be easily refuted

[Minischew]

Yes it's common sense for you to look at it, is it also not common sense to look at what everything a game has to offer? It's still part of the game that you pay 40$/€ for.

Is it it not also in many games to go through the entire game and not use a glitch that let's you skip huge parts of said game?

Also the FE Amie may be optional but unlike Hot Springs, it helps raise support levels, anyone who uses it will be able to play more efficiently thanks to the support boosts characters get.

And lastly, even if it's a side feature, there's still a part of the budget that went into paying the person who coded it.

This coder could have been hired for coding mechanics like rescue, shove or ledges.

I typed up three responses before settling on this one. Like my previous reply, they were all pretty rude, and I was being way too passive aggressive. I honestly don't want to attack you and start a flame war, so I'm going to drop out of this topic after this response.

The main reason I responded to your post was because I found your comparison a bit far-fetched, and I felt that you were treating the arguments of the opposing side too callously. I'm honestly not itching to argue with you about the perceived value of the game without the optional features, because I don't know a lick about how game development works. So I'm going to concede that point to you and move on.

Yes, it's definitely advised that you look at every feature the game offers you. However, is it also not common sense to ignore the features you dislike? If I try out the skinship feature and decide that I detest it, I would ignore it afterwards. I can argue about how the feature degrades the reputation of the game and how it dehumanizes the characters, but either way, I'm not going to use it anymore as a part of gameplay. I acknowledge that it's natural to examine all the given features in a game, but that's not what we're discussing here. The opposing side is referring to the behavior after you have examined those features-- your freedom to choose to ignore the optional features. And unlike looking at the given features, continuing to use optional features that you dislike is hardly common sense.

Also, sure, the skinship feature allows you to build support levels. And? You mainly build support levels through battles, and wisely positioning your units. If you want to S support Felicia, you don't have to pet her face for 24 hours. You can simply have Kamui fight next to her. (Also, I was under the impression that you could raise support levels through the Hot Spring. If you can't, I'm going to be a tad disappointed, because I'd rather not build the Hot Spring simply for Fuuga.)

Lastly, I'm positive Rescue and Shove are already implemented into the game, as select skills. I know that's not the point you're trying to drive, but... this game already has a lot going for it in terms of strategy. Some of you seem to argue that if the optional material wasn't there, the gameplay would be better... but I personally think that if the optional material wasn't there, there would simply be other optional material. As in, if skinship wasn't a thing, there would be other fanservice. Given how much (certain) fans appreciated fanservice in Awakening, I highly doubt the developers would have gone, "Oh, wait, I don't want the skinship feature. Let me fire that coder and instead hire another coder for the strategy!"

Edited August 8, 2015 by Minischew

[Mighty Kamina]

Also, sure, the skinship feature allows you to build support levels. And? You mainly build support levels through battles, and wisely positioning your units. If you want to S support Felicia, you don't have to pet her face for 24 hours. You can simply have Kamui fight next to her. (Also, I was under the impression that you could raise support levels through the Hot Spring. If you can't, I'm going to be a tad disappointed, because I'd rather not build the Hot Spring simply for Fuuga.)

The Hot Spring does not build support level at all.

Skinship gives the same support bonus of 1 round of combat (And the amount of times you can do it in between chapters is limited, starting at once in between chapters), so it doesn't even make a noticeable effect on the speed of supports, and is thus basically worthless from a mechanical stand point. The game also never stops and forces you to use skinship at all. While it's unlikely a new player would never check out "My Room" at least once, it's possible to play the game and never know that this feature exists, and you're not missing out on an advantage.

It's a pointless inclusion that only makes some people uncomfortable, (And it's far from an H-game, LMAO) and I would be far from surprise if it's removed in the North American release.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Monado Boy

[KP Joey]

it's not that the dialogue or w/e within the minigame is important and I have to miss it, it's that it's mere existance illustrates how the characters are just playthings for the omnipresent, godlike player, and only exist for the player's sake instead of their own sake.

I stand by what I said earlier in that you're only ruining the game for yourself if you feel this way. There's a reason why so few people have this opinion about the game as a whole just because of an optional feature.

I also don't understand how supports in general or having the option to let any character you don't like die at any moment doesn't leave the same feeling for you (both of these options are not new in this game). I have no idea why this idea you have specifically applies to skinship, because there are multiple reasons as to which the game makes you feel as the player that you're in control of all the characters and that they exist to give you the most pleasurable experience possible through the units you let live/die, supports you choose, etc.

[Irysa]

I stand by what I said earlier in that you're only ruining the game for yourself if you feel this way. There's a reason why so few people have this opinion about the game as a whole just because of an optional feature.

1. There is not a insignificant amount of people who dislike this feature.

2. If you think logically sustainable emotions about exploitative gross shit like this is something that one can simply just magic away, then you clearly haven't felt strongly about anything in your life.

3. Being true to one's self can never ruin something for oneself, and living in hypocrisy is one of the most deplorable things I can think of.

4. Thoughts, feelings and reasonings don't just come out of nowhere with an ability to wave a wand and make them go away. The absoloute best I can do is accept the reality of the situation, which I am trying to do, but even if/when that happens I'm not going to somehow come out in favor of it. Rather, I'll just stop getting emotionally invested in arguments concerning something I used to care about. It's like hearing something shitty happening on the news, people just don't have the capacity to live constantly despairing about things, but just because they accept the reality and try to move on means they're trying to break with an emotional connection to the subject matter.

5. This is not the only thing in the game that makes me dislike it, far from it.

Seriously, fuck you for even thinking that's an appropriate counterargument.

I also don't understand how supports in general or having the option to let any character you don't like die at any moment doesn't leave the same feeling for you (both of these options are not new in this game). I have no idea why this idea you have specifically applies to skinship, because there are multiple reasons as to which the game makes you feel as the player that you're in control of all the characters and that they exist to give you the most pleasurable experience possible through the units you let live/die, supports you choose, etc.

This is tiresome to reply to because I already went over this repeatedly a few pages ago. Some features are neccessities to the mechanical systems of the game that interlock in various ways, and most function within a reasonable bubble of suspension of disbelief.

There are some unelegant realities to the changing nature of FE as a series, but again, there is no real sustainable comparison between "choosing where a character moves is not giving them a choice in battle when you're the tactician undermines their agency" and "getting to grope and fuck all your barely-legal-technically-not-sisters undermines their agency". The former has at least has reasonable justification unless the tactician is a fucking asshole and suicides their units repeatedly, which is not productive in any strategical sense, and the vast majority of players intuitively see this as a bad thing and get frustrated at themselves (or the game) if it happens. Heck, this is why we have casual and phoenix mode. It's a non-argument, we intuitively recognise that letting units die is undesirable and should be avoided, and if we make tactical errors and someone dies, then a mechanical metaphor would be that that is in fact what happens in war sometimes. The game won't accomodate for units refusing to suicide themselves because as an option it only exists to be a state of failure. Groping minigames are a reward.

There are also countless complaints about how bad opposite sex supports are for the majority of the cast in Awakening, and especially the S supports, and it's because the mechanics of free for all marriage are not adequately lived up to by the basic support system. Many people have expressed preference to either having less possible pairings and better supports or a reworked support system that doesn't make the mechanic feel artificial as hell.

Additionally, characters don't respond to an in-universe request in the same manner as they do for this, nor do those systems inherantly lack tact or undermine character preferences. Kamui requests you come and get groped, characters obey. Comparatively, supports and battle actions can be viewed as dynamic within the world. Obviously, because a game is prewritten and preprogrammed, characters cannot truly be individuals, but proper verisimilitude lets us accept them anyway. When you have a feature like this present, it acutely highlights how inhuman and doll like, how manufactured-for-the-sake-of-indulgence they are. That fact wouldn't really change if this didn't exist, but it would be less blatantly obvious. Really, even if this is "removed" in later versions, it's still going to factor into the impression I have of the game, I'm still not buying it.

If you don't give a rat's ass about having characters to enjoy that can be viewed as existing for their own sake within the context of the world, then what the fuck ever. People who just don't care are severely holding this medium as a whole back, beacuse fiction and fictitious individuals within fiction have limitless potential to invoke geninue emotion and thought, and seeing the prevelance of superficial, lowest common denominator garbage like this is unbelievably tiresome and dissapointing. There's room for both, but the space for the former is getting squeezed to near nonexistance.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Irysa

[The DanMan]

^Though Irysa could have been a bit calmer, I 100% get and agree with what he's saying. He's repeated himself multiple times, yet people seem to ignore/not fully process his statements and answers.

[NeptuniasBeard]

^Though Irysa could have been a bit calmer, I 100% get and agree with what he's saying. He's repeated himself multiple times, yet people seem to ignore/not fully process his statements and answers.

I think it's more like we simply don't take it a seriously as he does. I'm not gonna say he's wrong, different strokes for different folks. If he and others truly feels so strongly about it, then fine, that's them, as long as he doesn't start insulting people who don't mind it, i don't see why we can't just leave it be.

[Twylis]

Sakurai just doesn't want to admit what a waste of time Smash Tour was

[Thor Odinson]

Okay, for the fucking record, it would not be a better allocation of budget to fire the programmer who codes amie and hire a new programmer to program whatever you think would be better because that's also not how development works

Programmers can program more than 1 damn thing in their life. Now, there's some level of specialization (for example you would not hire me to do internet security, My focus is front end and graphics and I know jack shit about internet security) but within each specialization, a programmer is expected to know how to program a wide array of things. Thus, the programmer who programmed in Amie should know how to program in rescue and shove. Hell, they could even be the same person who programmed in rescue and shove (let's be real shove would take like maybe 30 minutes to program). However, the programmer's boss told them to program in amie, or they had a collective meeting and decided to add amie with the approval of the higher ups. whatever. But it's definitely not "this programmer can only program amie let's just fire this guy"

Now would some of these strategic things people proposed enhance gameplay? Possibly, I've also heard a lot of good things for the gameplay itself, so it's possible that they HAVE considered these strategic elements, possibly have put them in (most of them are not difficult to implement), decided that it doesn't necessarily make things more strategic or enjoyable in the way the see them, and actually took them out. You don't know what exactly went on in the development process and it's difficult to quantify what would actually make things more strategic on paper. People complained about the swapping of weapon usage for stat bonus/deductions when it was announced, but from what I heard it turns out to be more beneficial to strategy than weapon uses. And conversely, ideas that sound good on paper are not necessarily good in practice. Since the devs have not made public their process, you cannot make assumptions about what exactly and how much time they put in.

There are times when you can make criticise dev teams about budget/time/whatever, and that's when they actually come out an use it as an excuse. Remember the whole Assassin's Creed "women are too hard to animate" bullshit? Yeah. Fire away at that. They made it about their budget (pls Ubisoft you have a 600 person team) and time and whatever, then they can be held accountable for that. Otherwise since you don't know actually what's going on, it's possible and very likely there's more than you're assuming they're going for.

To those of you who are criticizing Amie about things other than "dev time", I actually agree with most of your points, carry on that line of conversation.

[The Fir Coat]

Sakurai just doesn't want to admit what a waste of time Smash Tour was

^ He could have just put in Smash Run from the 3DS version and it would have been a better game. Soccereye likes to wast time on awful features, so of course he'll defend any feature that people think is awful.

[Tamarsamar]

Sakurai: "From a developer’s point of view, I suppose it’s better not to force users to play these extra features in order to beat a game. Making users play a bunch of minigames only invites unwanted criticism, and I think that makes sense."

Me: . . . *stares at all the Smash Tour-related Wii U Challenges*

[Jedi]

^ He could have just put in Smash Run from the 3DS version and it would have been a better game. Soccereye likes to wast time on awful features, so of course he'll defend any feature that people think is awful.

Lol as if Smash run or tour have any bearing on Smash 4's quality. Considering the balance is much better then Brawl and somewhat Melee because there is a larger group of viable characters, its safe to say he spent more time on the actual focus of Smash in 4.

With it being a balance between Melee and Brawl, and for the record there ARE advanced techniques in Smash 4, they just aren't as apparent as say Wavedashing or Smooth Landing.

We have perfect pivots and quite a number of characters have their own unique ATs. Among other things. Sure there are some very questionable design choices in terms of how some characters work, be it good or bad, but thats in every Smash.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Jedi

[Fly or Die]

To me, the inclusion of "bad" (to put it in general terms) features clearly lowers the quality of the game overall, even if they're optional.

Why? Consider this question: does the removal of optional, good features lower the quality of the game? For example, would removing support conversations in FE make it a worse game (since support convos don't effect gameplay)?​

I hope the answer is clearly yes.

Then, why doesn't the removal of optional, bad features raise the quality of the game? The fact that it's optional doesn't matter here. All that matters is that it's included (and advertised!) The fact that you don't have to participate in questionably intimate contact with your 12-year-old sister doesn't erase the fact that you can.

EDIT: Although, I suppose this isn't an issue if you like Amie. In that case, ignore this post. For me, I find it completely unnecessary and cringe-worthy at the S-rank.

Edited August 8, 2015 by Fly or Die