I think it was the paragraph on "sexualized children' that did it.
With all due respect to the editor; I have a hunch this is just hyperbole brought on by an unfamiliarity with the subject material, also backed up with the fact that same Editor did not review AT3 (which is the penultimate example of sexualizing under aged characters) nor made any comments in the old AT3 thread which implied he even played it (thus has no point of reference).
This is also strikes me because he does cite 'exactly' what this so called sexualization is. AT3 you can clearly point it out.
-Most 'romantic/interactive' dialog with Reyvatiels are sexual double entendres specifically made to be as such, not by accident or misinterpretation.
-The entire premise of the battle system is stripping characters clothing away; without having any real justification in game that won't make you go "Yeah, bull***."
The most the review says is 'allusions to'. Which is incredibly vague at best. Not only does the word 'allusion' imply said content is never explicitly presented (ala AT 3 style) but it also makes it sound like this is something the reviewer isn't even sure is sexualization to begin with and could just be him connecting the dots from 3-5 when he should really be going from 3-4.
Yes, I admit to being defensively nitpicky here. XD But with such huge loopholes in a single
review; it shouldn't be enough to dissuade you from even looking at the game without more definitive proof. It's no better than a "Witch Hunt" mentality.
John McCarroll: "Hey, I think that girl is a witch because she made allusions to spells."
Dice: "Who needs proof or confirmation? Burn her!"
Edit: I realize I missed the section about 'an enemy having a sexual obsession'. (I'll still leave the upper partition because odds are it's already been read and a healthy dose of egg on face will remind me to read more properly in the future). To which I say: "So?"
Umm...you mean a villain is being evil? Le gasp. :-P We praise and worship Kefka around here as one of the best villains because he was an unbridled genocidal maniac and somehow we're supposed to be up in arms this time because a designated evil individual
is committing evil acts
by the codes of society?