Yes it is. There´d be sanctions from the TV station for showing the uncensored versions and not just angry parents calling in.
With the background that it is supposed to protect children from picking up bad language.
Something that is arguably debatable for a movie where the same guy who says that also pierced some guys eye out with an icicle…
So if there are no sanctions from the law and it’s just a TV station / publisher who wants to look good in front of parents (or more likely advertisers), suddenly the version is not censored but a creative change? That’s not very convincing. Whatever is the case you get the same result, there’s something missing from the original vision that was truncated in order to satisfy taste of somebody else than the artist. That’s censorship to me.
I´m not saying this is a creative change, and that´s the part I disagree with @Nor_Treblig as well with 
.
Censorship is a serious thing that basically someone else is in control of and not you.
If you change something for business reasons that´s not a creative change.
If you change something because you yourself find it better that way then it´s a creative decision and I think that´s the rarest case we see. Whether that was the change in this particular case I find debatable myself, but I can´t judge because I don´t know these people.
I don’t think they made those changes because of fear. I think they made those changes because they believe in them.
They believe having spoken the one recurring black role in their game by a racist white dude is not something they want to have anymore.
Then in that process, since the voice overs of this character are re-recorded anyway, they have gone through his dialogue and made changes based on the persons their are now and the believes they have now in 2020, not 2006.
I don’t think they made those changes because of fear of others, but because they think it’s the right thing to do.
Call it whatever you want, but it’s not censorship in the first place.
People like to use this word only because they want to infer a negative thing.
Sure. Didn’t you bring up Star Wars in the first place in this conversation?
You can have such controlling bodies censor something for multiple reasons. I don’t like censorship.
But still this doesn’t apply here!
It seems like you aren’t clear about who is involved in this remaster:
Let’s start with Dan Connors, former CEO of TTG and producer of this very game, followed by Dave Grossman and Steve Purcell who were (besides Brendan Q. Ferguson) responsible for the main creative input of this game.
Whose baby is it if not theirs?
Now you make it sound like “being woke” is a bad thing and you don’t want Skunkape Games to be woke.
I don’t think they made those changes because of fear of others, but because they think it’s the right thing to do.
Yeah, that’s possible. Doesn’t change anything in the outcome.
Call it whatever you want, but it’s not censorship in the first place.
People like to use this word only because they want to infer a negative thing.
I use this word because that’s what it is. Censorship is a tool which has its place and it’s not a bad thing as such (but most often is, so yeah the connotation is usually negative). I don’t think I can add more than what I’ve written to Milan. You get an original vision truncated for some moral (?) reasons. You can call it editing instead of censoring, but the outcome is the same.
Sure. Didn’t you bring up Star Wars in the first place in this conversation?
No, I did not, because it’s a bad example (it was Milan : ). SW was changed because GL wanted to tweak it. I think it’s just as bad in the end result, but it’s not censorship. If he cut out Leia’s bikini scenes from ROTJ or added CGI clothes on her, because it’s not appropriate in 2020, yeah, that would be something else.
Let’s start with Dan Connors, former CEO of TTG and producer of this very game, followed by Dave Grossman and Steve Purcell who were (besides Brendan Q. Ferguson) responsible for the main creative input of this game.
Whose baby is it if not theirs?
All in all I don’t think it matters that much if they censored it themselves or not, BUT anyway it doesn’t seem like the remaster is by Grossman or Purcell. I get that at least Purcell was consulted but to say he willingly okayed axing sissypants seems like a stretch. Maybe he did, but who really knows, I bet dude who created Sam and Max has more balls than that. According to Wikipedia none of the original writers were the main force behind the remaster but you can be right, I don’t know.
Now you make it sound like “being woke” is a bad thing and you don’t want Skunkape Games to be woke.
That’s right, I never heard it in a positive sense (but obviously I’m not a native speaker!). It’s the same thing with Political Correctness. The idea is very good, it’s the execution that made it into an insult. So, I don’t think being woke in the original meaning is bad, it’s just Skunkape kind of woke is bad.
Exactly, all this stuff about being afraid of exterior forces sounds like a lot of assumptions to me.
Uh-oh. You brought up “Han Shot first” before I ever said anything about Star Wars!
Oh yeah, that’s right, but that was in a different context. I mentioned this as something I wouldn’t remember either but is actually important when you think about it.
Apparently we will never agree on that.
Yeah, when it was a stupid vision why not. And moral reasons is the best reason.
Yes, a better game in my eyes, a worse game in yours.
Well, actually it’s not such a bad example: Creators fiddling with their creation 
(btw. you brought it up here)
He may have found logical or continuity or other story reasons why he wants to alter such bikini scene.
Then suddenly this kind of alteration would be censorship?
I think you are right, Dave Grossman was in the release live stream and posted about the remaster on Twitter but it doesn’t look like he worked on it.
Yeah, when it was a stupid vision why not. And moral reasons is the best reason.
The bottom line to me is the whole thing should be just communicated better. If they made S&M Politically Correct, Safe Even For Sensitive French People Edition, I don’t think the whole issue would make so much noise. Personally, if something was out of line in the game I want to see it and say “wow, that wouldn’t fly today” and that’s it. I don’t want some dudes, even the original authors decide in 2020 whether it’s appropriate now according to their high moral standards.
He may have found logical or continuity or other story reasons why he wants to alter such bikini scene.
Then suddenly this kind of alteration would be censorship?
Interesting question. While technically it wouldn’t be censorship, I don’t think anyone would believe him. Funnily enough, we had something like this in Polish cinema. Director Andrzej Wajda (life time achievement Oscar winner) cut out a very famous titty flashing scene in a restoration of his classic movie, claiming it was done for artistic reasons. Nobody believed him, especially given that the actress went to become a very religious person. At this point Wajda himself was probably a very different person than the young guy who directed the movie and that smelled like the auto censorship.