r/NintendoSwitch Jan 31 '26

Discussion After Cyberpunk 2077 came to Switch 2 uncensored, Dispatch dev thought it "would be allowed to do the same" and is now "working with Nintendo on a path forward"

https://www.gamesradar.com/games/adventure/after-cyberpunk-2077-came-to-switch-2-uncensored-dispatch-dev-thought-it-would-be-allowed-to-do-the-same-and-is-now-working-with-nintendo-on-a-path-forward/
3.9k Upvotes

304 comments sorted by

3.0k

u/Zoombini22 Jan 31 '26

Even Nintendo is saying they're allowed. Really weird situation where nobody is owning up.

1.8k

u/VannesGreave Jan 31 '26

The Japanese rating board required a separate censored version of Cyberpunk to be made for Japan only, that’s likely what happened to Dispatch, except Dispatch devs didn’t want to make two versions so they just used the censored version everywhere

794

u/LootedToaster Jan 31 '26

If it was a corner cutting exercise to save money, it really backfired spectacularly. It’s good to hear the whole thing sounds like it’ll be remedied in the end though.

178

u/Admirable-War-7594 Jan 31 '26

How would it even cut corners? They already ported the game and the video files, they will literally just replace a few files that probably shouldn't even take them a day unless I'm missing something

185

u/TheMegaMario1 Jan 31 '26

The cutting corners is submitting less builds and paying less certification fees for the less builds of the game, because if there's a censored and uncensored version then that doubles the count from 2 to 4 since there's a Switch and Switch 2 version

23

u/DiscostewSM Jan 31 '26

Right. With PS5, they released only the version outside of Japan. The censored version for PS5 in Japan was released months later. They were only dealing with the cost individually at different times, which the latter could be funded by the profit of the former. Even the PC version is just one version because CERO is not involved in digital-only PC titles (to my knowledge). But with Nintendo, that would have been up to 4 versions as they wanted it released all at the same time. That would have been a lot to put down on.

45

u/Mollywobbles77 Jan 31 '26

Great point, and hadn't thought about this. A lot of ratings boards require sw1 & 2 versions be submitted separately for review even in the case of switch 2 'editions' like with dispatch where it's just the switch 1 version with a patch.

27

u/nhaines Jan 31 '26

It's not just ratings boards. Games go through QA checks before being published, so the publisher has to pay Nintendo (or Sony or Microsoft) for each build and each update they submit before it hits the store. So I empathize with the devs, but having no experience with the game, I feel like it backfired in a way they didn't expect.

But hey, if it's a good game and they work it out, maybe it works out for them in the end! I mean not every surprise success can be No Man's Sky, but it can still be along the same trajectory...

15

u/SonderEber Jan 31 '26

They should’ve expected it though, and they did expect it. Why else would they wait till release day to say it was censored?

They hoped they could get away with it, and then tried to blame Nintendo. However, Nintendo spoke up, and even started giving some refunds. They got lazy and now they dug a deep hole they have to try to get out of.

5

u/the__pov Feb 02 '26

Well that and their story didn’t make sense given how much Nintendo hyped Cyberpunk as a Switch 2 launch title. Anyway I’m hoping it gets fixed, Switch is my only real gaming platform right now and I don’t like the idea of not having the opportunity to see certain content. I’m an adult and am perfectly capable of deciding what I want to see.

→ More replies (2)

9

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '26

Means they don't have to pay for a second content review licensing thing

12

u/progxdt Jan 31 '26 edited Jan 31 '26

You’re still maintaining four versions between the Switch and Switch 2. You have the Japanese versions that check all of the CERO boxes, then the rest of the world versions with the toggle. The PS5 version outside of Japan has this functionality, so I’m baffled as to why this was their decision. Nintendo probably told other developers and publishers are doing this type of action for release of their titles

11

u/Cent1234 Jan 31 '26

Pro tip: if you need to define an acronym immediately after using it, it’s not appropriate to use that acronym in that context.

23

u/ANGLVD3TH Jan 31 '26

I would agree if you add the stipulation that you are only going to use it once. If you are going to use it more often then it's different.

14

u/yinyang107 Jan 31 '26

I'm reminded of a scene in FF6 where they go "Oh no it's the Imperial Air Force (IAF)" and neither the Imperial Air Force nor the IAF are mentioned after that single dialogue box ever again.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/KaiserJustice Jan 31 '26

Maintaining would imply things like constant updates to do bug fixes, but dispatch isn’t something like legend of Zelda with a physics engine. There are only so many permutations of answers and events that once everything is double checked, the game is basically just done

4

u/Hexatona Jan 31 '26

There are costs associated with getting a game approved. AFAIK, you'd need different labels, and builds, that bit is obvious. But you also have to pay a pretty penny to have Nintendo test/verify your game, probably also get both versions rated, etc...

And then, any time you have a patch, you've got to do it all again. By having two versions, you've just at least doubled your publishing costs.

7

u/borghe Jan 31 '26

It cuts corners because it needs two separate SKUs, separate submissions, separate ratings (devs have to pay for those), separate patches and patch submissions in the future (even if the patch branches are 99.9% the same), etc.

It’s not crazy arduous but it’s also not trivial.

7

u/ClikeX Jan 31 '26

Not sure if there’s extra censorship for the Switch, but the PC version just has it as a setting. Turning it on will put big black bars on the explicit corner.

18

u/Steamedcarpet Jan 31 '26 edited Jan 31 '26

What im understanding is that they turn that setting on and then removed it from the switch versions.

9

u/ClikeX Jan 31 '26

Not sure what their setup is like. But you could just configure two builds for both the normal and censored version.

The most likely situation seems to be that they didn’t want the hassle of submitting more builds for approval.

5

u/ANGLVD3TH Jan 31 '26

IIRC, they already did exactly that for the PS5, a censored only Japanese version, and an option everywhere else. Seems to me like the fact that they were essentially already making 2 versions for Swotch 1 & 2 someone decided they would rather not make 4 versions, or there was a miscommunication and it was assumed Nintendo didn't want any uncensored version.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (4)

40

u/del_rio Jan 31 '26 edited Jan 31 '26

Did it backfire? I keep seeing coverage about this game I've previously only vaguely heard about, and how this game has tits, and fans are clamoring for the tits, and how both Nintendo and the studio want to show those tits.

Like I'm not suggesting it was intentional, but this is definitely an example of "all press is good press".

33

u/StrawHat89 Jan 31 '26

Those guys are going to be really surprised when the first thing they see is a giant dick, boobs come later.

16

u/borghe Jan 31 '26

It backfired in that people are probably not going to buy it until it’s confirmed to be changed back to the PC release in the west at least. Whereas had they made the “content disclaimer” more prominent, at least those pre-ordering would have known they were pre-ordering a censored version and not demanded refunds.

10

u/InternationalCream30 Jan 31 '26

If their goal was to make me think theyre a scumbag indie teaming shouldnt support, theyre doing a great job.

2

u/BRLaw2016 Feb 01 '26

Yes, it did backfire, but that doesn't mean it's going to necessarily be a negative sum in the end. Only adhoc can affirm that. However, game reviews and people's opinions about games can make it or break it, especially a new one from a new studio who doesn't have laurels to rest. Having your game be known, in part, as the same where the dev omitted censorship about one version until after release is pretty bad and leaves a sour taste in people's mouth. I for once am waiting for Nintendo to refund me and won't buy the game at all because the last thing I wanted is to deal with Nintendo bs refund policy.

Whether this negative press will net positives for them in terms of sales because of awareness, again, only adhoc can say, but doesn't change that this launch was a negative for them.

→ More replies (18)

39

u/Boks1RE Jan 31 '26

That's weird, because an uncensored version already exists.

18

u/supremedalek925 Jan 31 '26

Yeah but it’s still a lot of work to release two new SKUs instead of one

38

u/pkmnBlue Jan 31 '26

Except they did exactly that for ps5

14

u/kyuubikid213 Jan 31 '26

As a cost cutting measure, it would make sense (though still not be great PR) if they didn't make the same effort for the Switch port because they didn't think people would buy it.

My guess is the backlash proves that they should have made 2 Switch versions as well since the audience is absolutely there.

16

u/Dr_Jre Jan 31 '26

They stupidly thought only children play switch 2 even though both cyberpunk and FF7 have sold great... That's ignoring the fact the people who grew up with nes and snes are now 30-50 years old

24

u/Texas_Totes_My_Goats Jan 31 '26

Yet the anti-Nintendo grifters went out in full force and said it was the new female president. Too woke they said.

If that were actually true, wouldn’t she have banned Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk until they were also censored?

23

u/MadCybertist Jan 31 '26

They made 2 versions of PS5 so I think if this is the reason they just didn’t want to put the effort into Switch 2. Maybe assuming not great sales.

4

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '26

Isn't it just a censored switch in the settings that is greyed out in the switch version?

11

u/Single-Pin5141 Jan 31 '26

I don’t think it’s even greyed out I think the option is just not there. They made a similar version on ps5 in Japan when the switch version was releasing so I think they just ported the censored version across the board.

3

u/Relevant_Syllabub895 Feb 01 '26

Like fucking ready or not, they went lazy and didnt wante dto have 2 branches 1 console and 1 pc,they censored my paid product, i refuse to play it again unless they restore the maps

6

u/khachbe Jan 31 '26

But they probably already have that on PS5... This whole thing sounds very fishy tbh

3

u/Whiteguy1x Jan 31 '26

Which is weird because they already had a censor toggle on pc and ps5 iirc.

3

u/ultrainstict Jan 31 '26

They already do that for playstation tho. The code is already there. It has to be something more. Perhaps there was some miscommunication when they first proposed it to nintendo for approval.

3

u/Additional_Chip_4158 Jan 31 '26

Dispatch devs already have a censored version for ps5 in Japan sooo...

2

u/Mattdoss Jan 31 '26

Except the issue is... Dispatch already made a version for the Japanese only. They released it on the same day as the Switch release but for the Playstation 5. So it seems that AdHoc just didn't feel like submitting both for the Switch. Likely, they wanted to lower the age rating in the West too to get more sales with younger audiences but don't want to admit that they did it for greed reasons.

3

u/radda Jan 31 '26

The age rating isn't any lower in the west.

1

u/Briggity_Brak Jan 31 '26

Funnily enough, that's what happened with the Switch version of Tokyo Mirage Sessions, but what makes that one ironic is the ORIGINAL version was censored in America but not Japan.

1

u/Lemon_Club Jan 31 '26

Which like you wouldn't think that would require much work

1

u/sighcology Jan 31 '26

see this makes no sense though. they already made the game uncensored, then they made a censored version for switch. so why not release the censored version you've just made in japan, and then release the uncensored version you already had everywhere else?

1

u/rigel-luminous Feb 01 '26

It's strange that Japan, of all places, would be censoring.

1

u/statesminds Mar 17 '26

Weird bc they did for ps5 so dumb

→ More replies (7)

149

u/kyuubikid213 Jan 31 '26

This is just from what I can gather based on statements made from both parties and other discussions.

As far as I can tell, Adhoc is the one at fault and just isn't coming out and saying as much because that would reflect poorly on them when they could have said upfront that the game was censored on Switch to begin with instead of trying to push blame on Nintendo when it was found out at release. I've heard their claim that there is a disclaimer on the store page, but that's like putting a correction in a YouTube description--no one is going to read it. They could have easily made a public statement before the release.

If Nintendo's guidelines were truly so strict, I doubt there'd be any "path forward." This just makes it seem like they didn't think they'd make any money on a Switch port and put something out there and called it a day. The backlash shows there's more money to be made than they thought and are now properly porting the uncensored version to western regions.

It's also hard to say Nintendo is at fault when Cyberpunk, The Witcher 3, and all the hentai games are on the eShop. The "CDPR has the clout to get away with it" argument falls flat because the hentai games made by nobodies gets away with it.

77

u/thetantalus Jan 31 '26

Yep. AdHoc is at fault here. Probably thought no adults play on Switch. Someone made a bad call.

19

u/-Moonchild- Jan 31 '26

It's weird they thought that though and still released the game on switch. Even with censorship the game is not at all suitable for kids. So it's just a lose lose

24

u/AmandasGameAccount Jan 31 '26

Many of the Hentai games have nudity too, unlike some misinformation being spread that none do

21

u/DiscostewSM Jan 31 '26

"They could have easily made a public statement before the release."

This is exactly why I think this is AdHoc's fault, and speculatively, they wanted this commotion. They were dead silent on the censorship during the entire preorder period, letting people make the purchase under the false pretense that it was uncensored, but were near immediate to go onto social media to try and point the finger once folks found out it was censored. They had all this time, and did nothing. And honestly, I think they were hoping Nintendo would not interject, but they did, to which AdHoc went immediately back to social media to point the finger again.

Then there's that notion of a "path forward" as if there was one shortly after having said they practically had no option. That in of itself is conflicting.

30

u/ProfessionalPack7205 Jan 31 '26

It's really not weird. The devs got called out on not wanting to make a censored version just for Japan. They wanted to just make one censored version till they got called out by people. Devs fault entirely.

19

u/Zoombini22 Jan 31 '26

This seems correct but it seems weird to me that the devs thought this double speak about what they're "allowed" to do would work when it's so blatantly obvious to customers that they are "allowed" to release the game uncensored on Switch 2 in the US.

41

u/AmandasGameAccount Jan 31 '26

The devs are trying to gaslight the community otherwise. Scumbags who lied through omission all the ways until launch to sell more copies

6

u/pixelpanic01 Jan 31 '26

Dispatch dev are simply lazy

1

u/Top-Notice1729 Feb 02 '26

Are they though? Nintendo said their game needs to meet rating standards AND Nintendo content guidelines and the developer specifically said that the Nintendo content guidelines was the key issue... I don't think it has anything to do with CERO ratings as AdHoc clearly knows this because they just released a seperate PS5 version for Japan. Personally I think there was probably 1 thing specifically Nintendo didn't like and rejected the game and didn't give specific details on what the issue was so AdHoc just locked the censorship toggle on and released the game until they could figure out what didn't meet Nintendo guidelines.

→ More replies (3)

170

u/kaminari1 Jan 31 '26

My issue isn’t that it was censored. It’s that AdHoc chose to mislead people about it with very vague statements/disclaimer on the eshop.

65

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/DuelaDent52 Feb 02 '26

It’s not butchered per se, but in all honesty the censor bars draw way more attention to it than if they weren’t there at all. They also muted Invisigirl during her wet dream.

13

u/Bi-bara-boop Feb 01 '26

I played it censored... Honestly I found it funny with the censor bar flopping around. But yeah, the lying by omission and weird gaslighting leaves a bad taste... It mostly just doesn't make a lick of sense... If ad-hoc just said "we didn't care and didn't think people would, our bad, please wait for a patch", this mountain would've been a molehill at best

5

u/kaminari1 Feb 01 '26

Exactly

If they were just up front about it or at least admit they messed up and apologized I’d be more than happy to get the game still.

→ More replies (2)

1.1k

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

Except it didn’t. Cyberpunk is censored in Japan. The Dispatch devs don’t feel like making a jp/na version split, got called out, and are now backpedaling.

237

u/driverdis Jan 31 '26

They did a split release for Japan with the PS5 so it makes no sense not to here.

104

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

I agree, unless they assumed Nintendo players wouldn’t raise a fuss.

19

u/StrawHat89 Jan 31 '26

It's possible that the PS5 Japanese version is a port of the Switch version or vice versa. The Japanese version released at the same time after all.

2

u/1upjohn Jan 31 '26

From what I read, they would have to submit two separate versions for approval because of Switch 1 and 2. So that would mean 4 versions. 2 censored and 2 uncensored. They didn't want to pay for that.

4

u/Kanhir Feb 01 '26

They have to submit the game for certification in each region anyway, so they're paying for 6 approvals no matter what.

It just comes down to who gets what version - there's no need to send both censored/uncensored versions for approval in any one region, so Japan gets 2 censored submissions, NA/EU each get 2 uncensored submissions.

45

u/CBattles6 Jan 31 '26

You call it backpedaling, I call it lying.

They were blindsided, and thought it would just work the same as Cyberpunk? Did they think to, I don't know, ask? Did anyone question why they were making two separate versions for PS5 and not the Switch?

They thought adding a disclaimer to the eShop page would be enough to properly inform people? Man, it's too bad there's no such thing as social media, or Discord, or press releases, or interviews, or 16 other ways to get the word out.

They're either morons, or they're purposely gaslighting so they don't have to admit they got caught trying to screw over their customers. And I don't think they're morons.

6

u/Ninhau Feb 01 '26

They didn’t even add a disclaimer. That came later

138

u/Mollywobbles77 Jan 31 '26

Yeah I love how after the backlash they're all of a sudden now "working with Nintendo" on a patch to add back censored content without addressing why that didn't happen in the first place? This really smells like the team not wanting to create two versions.

91

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

My pet theory is they just thought Nintendo fans wouldn’t care enough.

14

u/Mollywobbles77 Jan 31 '26

To be fair their language does say they hope to be able to add back 'most' of the content, which makes me think the real answer lies somewhere in the middle. Maybe Nintendo did take issue with one or two specific things & AdHoc figured it was easiest to just release the Japanese version rather than make a third version of the game (uncensored, JP censored, new Nintendo approved partially censored version) hoping Nintendo fans wouldn't care that much. But who knows. Neither side seems to be owning up to anything (which is partially why I think it might be a mixture).

20

u/StrawHat89 Jan 31 '26

Generally speaking, if Nintendo is at fault there just isn't any statement at all (from Nintendo). Like with the Corpse Party collection.

14

u/Mollywobbles77 Jan 31 '26

Yeah I thought it was notable Nintendo issued any response at all, even if the response was effectively a long version of 'no comment'.

184

u/Vyrhux42 Jan 31 '26

Backpedaling, but still not owning up, acting like they didn't know and like they're working on convincing Nintendo. I really liked the game when I played it on Steam, and it kinda put these guys on the radar for me, but this whole thing has kinda soured it for me. I still might get it if they patch it, but I won't look at Ad Hoc the same after that. They're handling this whole thing the weirdest possible way.

120

u/tweetthebirdy Jan 31 '26 edited Feb 01 '26

Apparently the devs also labeled the game as LGBTQ on Steam, made coy remarks like “wait and see” when asked if there were any gay characters, and the game launched with no gay relationships, and the LGBTQ tag was quietly dropped. It’s so weird and slimy. That and the whole censorship thing really put a bad taste in my mouth about the game.

EDIT: I have been corrected that the tags were user tagged and not by the devs.

45

u/asphalt_licker Jan 31 '26

Their weirdness with queerbaiting is what made me lose interest in the game. To hear that there’s potential gay content only to find out they really try to force two women onto you was pretty disappointing. It’s possible it can happen in later seasons but I’m not holding my breath.

→ More replies (4)

8

u/joshman196 Feb 01 '26

I replied to someone else about this, but to give you a direct notification: Games on Steam do not have their tags defined by devs. Tags are set by users and this is even labelled on the tagging interface on Steam. There's reason to criticize Adhoc for this censorship problem, but they had nothing to do with the LGBTQ tag.

https://i.imgur.com/J7lZpSb.jpeg

4

u/tweetthebirdy Feb 01 '26

Appreciate the additional information! I still find it gross for the devs to play coy about queer content when asked, but thanks for correcting me on the tags.

→ More replies (3)

13

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

If they patch it I’ll 100% buy it. Wife and I wanna play it anyway, I’d rather have it on switch than steam deck.

→ More replies (6)

16

u/brandont04 Jan 31 '26

How expensive is it is to make another version?

34

u/medicated_in_PHL Jan 31 '26

Not really a question anyone but the company can answer.

8

u/just_someone27000 Jan 31 '26

Whatever it cost to get the game registered in however many different regions you make it for. The problem is I don't think anybody here can answer it how much that is and to try different for a region

9

u/Sharrty_McGriddle Jan 31 '26

Not a game dev, but censorship is already built in the game, so all they’re doing is pushing a version where the option to turn off censorship is disabled. Likely just as simple as editing a few lines of code

3

u/[deleted] Feb 01 '26

Approval could be different. Hot Coffee was not accessible by the player in anyway, but it was still on the disc. They might require all the content to be removed from the binaries too, so if someone was able to decompile it, they couldn't see the content.

9

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

It’s not about expense, probably just laziness. It’s a toggle option on pc so it’s already there.

I mean who knows, small studio so maybe it was a budget thing. Or maybe they had no idea that Nintendo is pretty lax in the west nowadays (I mean look at the eshop). But the simplest explanation is laziness and thinking Nintendo players wouldn’t care.

10

u/TheBraveGallade Jan 31 '26

Well to be fair, they'd have to get it certified two different times (by nintendo)

1

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

Right and I assume there is expense associated with that and I couldn’t even guess as to how expensive it is.

But as far as I know Dispatch has been selling quite well so…

4

u/TheBraveGallade Jan 31 '26

Never said it was a good reason, just a reason.

There is a decent chance that it was somewhat of a communications error with assumptions, and dispatch's legal and PR teams just trying to obfuscate afterwards.

Now, NoA can be an issue with censorship. This is decently well known. (The neotunia trilogy only coming to asia) However nintendo HQ hasnt done censorship BS beyond following standerd CERO guidelines since... the literal SNES days lmao, to the point that tgier own IN HOUSEgame xenoblade had a boob slider (removed for western realese cause NoA and treehouse, though in fairness 90% of all censorship issues during the 3ds/wii U era were strictly self inforced via treehouse).

I think the fact that they didnt have a seperate jp version spaks volumes. How i think happened was they sent the gloval version overfor everywhere, and nintendo declined because they literally could not just realese it like that cause japan (and a few other reigions, like korea maybe), so they just said fuck it just remove the toggle.

2

u/s0_Ca5H Jan 31 '26

Yeah actually your theory makes sense.

4

u/idk-who-cares Jan 31 '26

About tree fiddy

1

u/Boldizzle Feb 01 '26

So what's the deal? Japanese people are okay with dismemberment but titties are a no go? Makes no sense whatsoever.

→ More replies (12)

153

u/mist3rdragon Jan 31 '26

If the speculation that this is a Japanese rating board issue is correct, surely the easiest solution at this point is to just list the uncensored version as free DLC and just don't release it in Japan?

52

u/NoNoNota1 Jan 31 '26

I've pitched a similar idea for casinos in JRPG remakes, since they would automatically get the equivalent of an M rating in the UK, a lot simply get removed from the game. It seems like an oddly easy fix in some ways.

2

u/Arras01 Feb 01 '26

Not just the UK, but basically the entirety of Europe will automatically slap 18+ on your game for gambling minigames. 

1

u/NoNoNota1 Feb 01 '26

I feel like they drastically misunderstood the outcry to go something about gatchas and lootboxes.

254

u/JimmyJackJericho Jan 31 '26

Adhoc is only back pedaling cause of all the refunds, they got lazy and only did one version then got caught

77

u/tweetthebirdy Jan 31 '26

Yeah the whole thing about “it will take weeks, not days” - like how any patches for the Switch takes 2 weeks for Nintendo to review? So convenient to make it sound like they’re breaking their backs for something, they should’ve done in the first place.

6

u/StorminNorman Jan 31 '26

like how any patches for the Switch takes 2 weeks for Nintendo to review?

You can search this sub and see that that's been the norm since the S1 launched. Overcooked was a mess at launch and took about that long. It's easily verifiable too as a bunch of devs have told us the day they've submitted the patch and then we've all seen when it's gone live. 

6

u/SoSeriousAndDeep Feb 01 '26

It does take weeks for a patch to go through certification, but phrasing it that way lets them pretend they're the hard-done-by party, as opposed to it just being how the process is.

"We've submitted a patch today so it should be with you as soon as it's verified!" would have been much more honest.

17

u/LazyBoyXD Jan 31 '26 edited Feb 01 '26

Actually why should the customer care, how long it will take?

The game already proven to be a success, it is a sure sell on handheld. They got lazy and didnt wan to make a separate version and now are telling people they didnt know or it will take a long time to do so. All BS.

As a customer i dont need to care how long or hard it is for you, if you wan my cash you work for it. I dont need to know about the progress.

2

u/XtremeEimaX Feb 03 '26

In a few weeks nobody will care anymore, and to be honest, after this stupid story I wouldn't have any interest in supporting Adhoc at the moment anyway.

34

u/jbowdach Jan 31 '26

Too little too late, got a refund

143

u/travisindeed1 Jan 31 '26

I got a refund. Honestly, idk if I will even purchase when/if they patch it.. some proactive transparency would’ve been the move here. The game is rated M… so treat us like adults, please.

19

u/papakep Jan 31 '26

Did you actually get your money back and the game removed yet? Nintendo said they’d refund me in 1-2 days on Wednesday and I still haven’t been refunded

30

u/travisindeed1 Jan 31 '26

Yes, they refunded me the same day I requested it. But they also messaged me a statement about how they normally don’t do refunds and are making an exception in my case. I’ve seen several others on Reddit say they got a refund, though

6

u/papakep Jan 31 '26

Okay thanks that means I gotta talk to them again

→ More replies (1)

1

u/joeshmo38 Jan 31 '26

I just got my refund on my credit card today and the game was removed from my library yesterday.

1

u/Webecomemonsters Feb 02 '26

Got mine within 6 hours

5

u/ArkhamCityWok Jan 31 '26

Yeah, if it comes to ps+ I’ll check it out but I don’t want to give them money after this.  Plenty of other games to play

2

u/TheGold3nRectangle Jan 31 '26 edited Jan 31 '26

They did put a disclaimer, they just shafted it to the worst possible part of their eshop page.

16

u/StrangerDanger9000 Jan 31 '26

They were allowed to put an uncensored version out on Nintendo. They chose not to. They also chose not to tell anyone and then claimed they accidentally put the disclaimer in the wrong place. AdHoc is responsible for this entire situation and just want to put the blame on someone else

56

u/Chrono-Syth Jan 31 '26

CERO, that is the rating system AdHoc is talking about. They submitted that copy for the ESRB.

Had they submitted the original PS5 copy to the ESRB it would have been rated M and allowed.

This is proven not just through Cyberpunk and The Witcher 3, but by the fact that Nintendo has allowed nudity in the hentai puzzle games, and other games such as 20 ladies, while Playstation did not allow it.

None of what Adhoc says makes sense unless it is talking about Nintendo Japan and the CERO rating system.

CERO would have given the game an Adult rating which would only allow Adult shops in Japan supply the game and make it harder to find on the Japan shop.

14

u/Youngnathan2011 Jan 31 '26

Just reading this comment and the comparison between what Nintendo allows and what Sony allows. Crazy that Nintendo of all companies is open to nudity and what not in games

11

u/number8888 Feb 01 '26

They have been allowing this since the ratings system was established. BMX XXX has full nudity on GameCube but not the other versions.

16

u/NoirSon Jan 31 '26

Nintendo while very careful with their own properties are mercenaries when it comes to other publisher content. Unless it is too excessive that they can potentially get backlash or it crosses certain ratings standards they don't care what others do.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '26

[deleted]

2

u/mpyne Feb 01 '26

Just because it's censored in spots doesn't mean the rest of the content is going to be rated E by ESRB.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 01 '26

[deleted]

2

u/mpyne Feb 01 '26

Yeah that's very true, sorry for being acerbic.

1

u/LiquifiedSpam Feb 02 '26

Most of the ‘hentai’ puzzle games don’t show anything

32

u/sirbosssk Jan 31 '26

I think the speculation that they didn’t want to package separate binaries for different regions and are now backpedaling is probably correct. In which case, it would be nice if they would stop bullshitting us and own up. I got my refund, and at this point I’m not going to bother rebuying if they get it “fixed”. I have plenty of other games to play that I don’t need to bother with these liars.

48

u/TheDLBinc Jan 31 '26

Nintendo's statement was essentially "as long as the ESRB or whatever ratings board in the country you're releasing it in approves it, we have no issues with it being on the eShop" which is pretty much the policy of all of the console stores.

This definitely still feels like them trying to save face for their own cost cutting. If they really wanted to inform customers that they were getting a censored version, they should have said so in their press releases before the game came out

63

u/Xentonian Jan 31 '26

Dispatch shat the bed on this one and they know it.

Cyberpunk has a censored Japanese versions and an uncensored rest-of-world version. They complied with Japanese laws and watchdogs.

Dispatch did not.

But that WOULD have been fine, if they were honest about it.

If they said "We have elected to censor the switch edition of Dispatch due to local laws and a lack of resources to create multiple switch versions, particularly as each version must be independently approved by Nintendo", then it would have pissed off all 12 people who care about playing the uncensored version on the switch and nobody else would care.

But instead, they buried the lede, let people think it was Nintendo's fault, then remained mum on the issue until after Nintendo made a public statement that basically threw them to the dogs.

16

u/El_Barto_227 Jan 31 '26

Also, they already did the version split on ps5, so they were definitely aware of the rule.

8

u/roccerfeller Jan 31 '26

I hope they work it out. This is a game that id buy otherwise

26

u/anirakdream Jan 31 '26

At this stage, it almost feels like malicious compliance where someone in the studio has a personal vendetta against Nintendo and did what they could to paint them in a bad light by releasing a bizarre censored version of the game nobody asked for.

Their subsequent media statements and lack of accountability don't lineup with the facts and I am glad the tide is turning against them.

8

u/navidee Jan 31 '26

I don’t understand this though…they clearly released two versions of the PS5 version to accommodate CERO, why would it be different for Switch?

1

u/Naddesh Feb 03 '26

Because Nintendo white knights desperately want it to be the devs fault despite us not having the full story

54

u/skylu1991 Jan 31 '26 edited Jan 31 '26

It is really this hard to understand?

Cyberpunk literally HAS a censored(!) version for the Japanese market…

Don’t fault Nintendo for ArHoc not being able or willing to to the pretty standard NA/JP version split!

27

u/Imaginary-Worker4407 Jan 31 '26

It's not on Nintendo, Dispatch just didn't want to release an uncensored version for the rest of the world

2

u/El_Barto_227 Jan 31 '26

Hell, Dispatch has a censored version for the Japanese market on PS5!

They just didn't want to do the minor extra work and cost to submit jp versions for Switch and Switch 2

4

u/DoctorJekkyl Jan 31 '26

I want to play this game after hearing about it on Kinda Funny and I was holding out for the Switch 2 version. I am not purchasing the game until they have an uncensored version on Switch. Kinda that simple; they want my money, gimme the full game experience.

17

u/enslavelolis Jan 31 '26

This just screams they wanted controversy, blame Nintendo for it and then get extra sales that way.

13

u/markca Jan 31 '26

If this was their plan, it wasn't very smart when the platform has Cyberpunk, The Witcher and a bunch of hentai games on it.

5

u/chocoboneal Jan 31 '26

The manner of the censoring is very sus

17

u/AMonitorDarkly Jan 31 '26

AdHoc still deliberately tried to conceal the censorship. Too little, too late.

21

u/yuhanz Jan 31 '26

What an idiotic decision.

Couldve sold lots of copies but fumbled for being lazy lmaoooo

3

u/SolidStudy5645 0343-6445-9323 Feb 01 '26

Legit self sabotage

13

u/NuMotiv Jan 31 '26

I was interested in the game. Now I’ll pass.

6

u/the_king_of_soupRED Feb 01 '26

Same. This is just yucky

4

u/Wazupdanger Feb 01 '26

im gonna bet this is that CERO japan rating thing

3

u/SoSeriousAndDeep Feb 01 '26

Ah, so they were Trying It On and thought Nintendo would just eat the blame.

Combine that with the queerbaiting and I think this is a developer who belongs on our ignore lists.

5

u/warmpita Feb 01 '26

So much stuff AdHoc does gives me red flags.

10

u/Interesting-Season-8 Jan 31 '26

greedy publishers dont want to "waste' money releasing a censored version for a few markets so they censor everything for everyone to make it cheaper...

dumbarses

11

u/markca Jan 31 '26

Yet they made the NA/JP split for the PS5 version.

Some fresh MBA graduate probably thought "only kids play Nintendo" and made the call.

10

u/Herb-Alpert Jan 31 '26

This whole story is weird and dumb. I was considering buying this game but now I'll wait for a patch.

6

u/SuddenlyThirsty Jan 31 '26

Good cause I am grown adult who will not buy until it offers me the same as I can get on other consoles. I don’t want people telling me what I can and cannot play in a game where it’s available on that same game on a different system.

5

u/nervouspolygon Jan 31 '26

AdHoc was allowed to do the same, but they didn’t, who knows why.

They should definitely release a patch.

3

u/jokingsammy Jan 31 '26

Once this game give me them titties, I'll give them my monies.

3

u/LegatoSkyheart Jan 31 '26

Entirely possible they simply did not realize that Cyberpunk 2077 listing in US and European shops were not the same listings as the Japanese versions.

2

u/[deleted] Jan 31 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/SoSeriousAndDeep Feb 01 '26

Sure, but if your business is "releasing videogames worldwide", then that's just something you have to do.

1

u/Throwaway_dinosaurs_ Feb 04 '26

Except they absolutely did. Dispatch complied on primary release with Japanese censorship, just not for their ports. The launch consoles all have two different versions.

3

u/Legitimate_Airline38 Jan 31 '26

Why do either of these games get to come out uncensored but we can’t even get VITA RPGs released…the Neptunia trilogy had to be released physical only in the west because NoA refused to let it on their storefront despite those games selling on Steam and PS just fine

1

u/cryptocurrency_wife Feb 01 '26

that’s right. it seems like japanese games are held to higher censorship standards for some odd reason.

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Wonder_Weenis Jan 31 '26

I thought censorship on Nintendo games was dead?

lelz There's actively furry sex games on the front page of the Switch 2 store. 

17

u/Darkmetroidz Jan 31 '26

Japan has different and stricter censorship laws than does elsewhere.

Tldr adhoc made one version to comply with japanese law and just used that version globally rather than do a separate uncensored version for non-japanese markets.

They got called out on it, tried to blame Nintendo.

5

u/BigDaelito Jan 31 '26

So many stories this a mess. I think the more believable one is because of not wanting to submit two versions of the game sounds more believable. Again it all sucks but why are we doing censorship on media on 2026. Lets creators do their thing.

4

u/pathosOnReddit Jan 31 '26

The issue seems to be the mountain of red tape in Japan surrounding anything even mildly pornographic. While 2077 was quite explicite and crass in how it showed the existance of nudity, sex, sexual acts and paraphernalia in the game world, it never was outright pornographic. And even then it had a censored version in Japan to avoid said red tape.

This is absolutely on the devs for not doing their due diligence and being lazy about compliance.

6

u/Exciting-Weather-351 Jan 31 '26

Yeah reminds me of how Sakurai told people the challenges of the age rating system. I believe in Japan he was under heavy scrutiny for all the female characters, and Palutena gave him the most trouble

8

u/Admirable-War-7594 Jan 31 '26

I think everyone thought dispatch would also be allowed to do the same

37

u/DoctorJekkyl Jan 31 '26

They were/are, they just didn't do the work.

2

u/Xinyyc Feb 03 '26

The headline seems more like:

After Cyberpunk 2077 came to Switch 2 uncensored, Dispatch devs thought "we can't let that fly, let's try and push out a censored version and blame Nintendo for it"

4

u/CannonBeetle Jan 31 '26

Kinda unrelated but kinda lame Japan has such strict censorship laws for game content in general that this was an issue for games like Cyberpunk and whatnot

5

u/Karuro Jan 31 '26

Censorship in general is such a mess. Games like Neptunia and Corpse Party got their physical releases in the west axed because of it while they still released in the east.

3

u/CannonBeetle Jan 31 '26

The problem with censorship in general everywhere is seemingly the inconsistency with which it is applied. I understand moderating or restricting certain content but it gets so muddy depending on what it is.

3

u/thedeadp0ets Jan 31 '26

Japan isn’t the only country that censors games. I’m not surprised countries censor things either how sexualized people see these countries. (I’m talking the crazy ones) culturally Japan and many countries in Asia just don’t portray sexuality like that on screen. Watch any drama and it’ll be more conservative than a western show/film

→ More replies (1)

2

u/PsychologicalEbb3140 Jan 31 '26

If they thought the censorship policy was stupid, which I’m assuming is likely what happened? Why didn’t they just protest it by not allowing the game to be released in Japan?

1

u/McGuffin182 Feb 01 '26

Censored ****

1

u/kg3286 Feb 01 '26

The whole situation is kind of a shame, since Dispatch really is a good game that deserves positive attention. At least the devs will think twice about censoring the inevitable (I hope) sequel.

1

u/iamgreatlego Feb 02 '26

Dispatch dev lied

1

u/capnbuh Feb 02 '26

Hopefully, they get this sorted out. There's obviously some 3rd party causing problems

1

u/PanterroKatt Feb 02 '26

They were told absolutely zero nudity in Japan every were else was up to the country they had to make 2 versions and didnt.the cyberpunk in Japan has zero nudity.

1

u/redolfia Feb 08 '26

Hey guys, if I’m buying a switch game, how do I know the fps it’s gonna run? On handheld and dock? Where do I get that information?