>>296729
The problem here is that it's a rather minor change. It IS censorship but also a rather minor one.
Not saying we should not be opposed to it, but even if we bring it up and make an argument that it is censorship, it's very likely it'll be laughed off and claim that we're overreacting, even though it's a potential slippery slope.
I admit that the term "Slippery slope" tend to be overused, but in this case I think it's a definite possibility. It shows that they can fall under the pressure if people whine enough about something that essentially boils down to subjective morals.
And it also gives publishers reason to further censor and change things in games because "They did it, so it's okay and not going to far". I am fairly certain I've seen devs mention this.
Though to be honest, I think the main problem here is that people keeps buying games that gets censored. If people actually voted with their wallet, SJW would have much less power and influence since it has been proven again and again that they do not actually buy games.
That's my 2 cents at least. I really don't think it's a good idea to blacklist games and that it should be up to each and everyone to decide whether changes should affect their willingness to buy. So I think the best thing to do would be to inform people about the censorship, leaving it up to each person to decide if they are okay with it or not and also possibly mail the publishers about it.