I wouldn't have noticed the inconsistencies in the translating if someone more fluent in Japanese didn't point it out in that image posted earlier in this thread. As a casual english player, reading the Eris route was smooth and coherent.
We'll see how things goMore importantly though, it would be great if I can get feedback on the prologue and Fione's chapter, because those 2 chapters are translated by me, and there hasn't been any major feedback on those 2 chapters.Eris' chapter is also the reason why I'm translating this VN solo now btw.Edited May 18 by eplipswich.
#Aiyoku no eustia download japanese Patch
Hence, I'm currently relooking into Eris' chapter (now that I'm done translating Licia's chapter) and ironing out the spotty translation mistakes in there.That said, I might release another partial patch which will not only feature the fixes in Eris' chapter, but also adds Saint Irene's chapter (Chapter 3). But as you say, I was not addressing that, and neither was Ange.That said, asking the patchmakers about their grasp on Japanese because what you've seen has cast it in doubt is a fair thing to do.If the makers and thread owners say they don't want this sort of comment publicly is one thing, but until their stance is known, let's not discuss the validity of the post over it being a bit disrespectful towards the work that was regardless put into making the patch.As it often is, it's not about what you say but how you say it. In this instance, they have presented evidence and concrete problems in the lines (I do not know Japanese, but those with cursory understanding of it. Game description, information and VPK/DUMP/ROM/ISO download page. Oh, the post was absolutely disrespectful. Aiyoku no Eustia: Angel's Blessing (JPN) MaiDump V233.2zEx PS Vita Download for the Sony PlayStation VITA/PSVITA. But as you say, I was not addressing that, and neither was Ange.That said, asking the patchmakers about their grasp on Japanese because what you've seen has cast it in doubt is a fair thing to do.If the makers and thread owners say they don't want this sort of comment publicly is one thing, but until their stance is known, let's not discuss the validity of the post over it being a bit disrespectful towards the work that was regardless put into making the patch. This shouldn't have to be explained now should it?Oh, the post was absolutely disrespectful. If someone wants to be constructive, pm the one who needs it and don't try to publicly humiliate the ones working on it unless you post it in a proper manner without being insulting.
0 kommentar(er)
