It Never Ends

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Father Time:

Mahoshonen:

Father Time:

And what harm will come to you by ignoring this game?

Yeah, and everyone should have paid no attention to Triuph of the Will because it was nothing but a collection of film strips that no one had to watch.

(Yeah I know, Godwin's Law. But I feel these threads are so stupid that they deserve it)

And this is why we have Godwin's Law. You just compared scantily clad women to Nazis. The fictional characters are not trying to convey any message or morals, they're just scantily clad and you compare them to Nazis.

image

Wow you showed me with your clever image you found doing a GIS search!! Bravo! You deserve a Pulitzer Prize!!!!!!!!1!

And this lesson can be applied to so many other instances, too! If only blacks hadn't gone in droves to watch The Birth of a Nation. They never would have suffered from the resurgance of the Ku Klux Klan!

psijac:
By your logic, if your niece has played with a Barbie doll or watched Who Framed Roger Rabbit then she is already forever ruined.

Okay, psijac, I'm going to have to ask you to point to anything I said that so much as implies I think any one, specific piece of entertainment will constitute the whole of her worldview, or that it will "ruin her forever," whatever that even means. Or actually, don't bother trying to find that statement of mine, because I didn't say any such thing and you're not actually arguing with me or with anything I said; you're conversing with some hysteria-driven strawman you want me to be. I will thank you to stop doing that.

But because I have apparently somehow been unclear, let me state my position as explicitly as I know how. It is a deeply ingrained habit of mine to speak in simile and metaphor, so if I am ambiguous at any point during the following explanation, please forgive me for my bad habit and let me know what I can clarify for you.

I believe that most of what children learn, they learn at an unconscious level, through observation of the world around them. For example, no one teaches a child to walk by sitting her down and explaining the mechanics before running her through test trials; the kid just watches, and imitates, and eventually learns it through mimicry.

I believe that everywhere an American looks, there's an image of a woman who fits within a very rigid definition of beauty. I further believe that the way those women are presented is much more likely than not aimed at heterosexual men, as if women exist not as individuals but rather by definition of their relationship to men.

I believe that all of the above factors combine to form a society that is silently and subliminally teaching girls that their value as people is defined by their sexual attractiveness. I believe that the sheer weight of this influence is almost completely overwhelming, to the point that I believe anyone who says "It's the parents' job to teach them different" is speaking from motivations I can't even fathom but that I kind of suspect are based on a territorial desire to maintain the volume of wank material flowing in his direction.

I believe that the Sorceress is just one character. I believe all characters are, individually, just one character. I just so happen to believe that they have an additive effect, so that the Sorceress and Lara Croft and Other M Samus Aran and Tifa Lockhart and Tina Armstrong and Ivy Valentine and all the rest of them combine to send the unambiguous message that women should be valued for their sexual attractiveness first and foremost, and for any other characteristics second if at all.

I believe my niece is just one child, but I believe there are probably a whole bunch of other girls her age who are learning the same things she's learning by the same methods she's learning them, and as such I believe it's perfectly fair to use her as a symbol of all girl-children who are being taught to base their worth on their weight and measurements. I also believe boys are learning the same lessons about how women should be judged, and that it is equally problematic, but for personal reasons I am more concerned with what the girls are learning.

I believe that, though a lot of baggage is being inflicted on girls as we speak, everyone has baggage and the idea that they are "ruined forever" is nothing but useless hyperbole meant to dishonestly depict my position as one that overreacts to the problem so immensely that it should be ridiculed and ignored rather than considered. I further believe that "Muslim women have it worse" is an intellectually harmful idea, encouraging people to accept a base of relativism for their morality so that anyone who can provide an example of something worse than whatever he's accused of will become immune to moral evaluation and judgment.

Those are the things I believe. If you have a problem with them, then I invite you to discuss them with me calmly and rationally, because another thing I believe is that reasonable people can disagree honorably. If, however, you are not interested in an honest exchange of ideas with the intention of increasing one another's understanding, then I invite you to please keep your comments to yourself, as I find such conversations useless and tiresome.

Pogilrup:
There will still be games featuring eyecandy at every turn, it is just that they would not be taken as seriously as the games that don't pander to such a base instinct.

Not necessarily true.

The sleek, sexualised design of nearly all of the human characters of Mass Effect with reoccurring screen time did not stop some fans from taking the series so damn seriously that the debacle over the Mass Effect 3 ending went down. There were no ugly humans, overweight humans or freakish humans in the far distant future as envisioned by Bioware. Only science-fiction themed Ken and Barbie dolls all dressed up for space war. Some people took it plenty serious.

The majority of games that utilise a sexualised design aesthetic have their fair share of good-looking blokes to go along with the good-looking babes. Simply because putting fugly male character models up alongside the digital hotties looks jarringly out of place. Outrageously sexualised characters like Ivy Valentine, whom Dragon Crown's Sorceress is clearly parodying, are typically created to be the 'sexy girl' in a field where damn near everyone, male or female, could at least pass for Hollywood ugly.

Pogilrup:
I know you will say "You are in no position to judge whether or not the things I like are crap." I'm not sure how to respond to that.

Again, there is a difference between constructive criticism and a politicised beatdown. It is painfully obvious that a fair amount of the 'criticism' that is being leveled at games from some gamers and game journalists is not only politically motivated, but also doesn't come from a place of genuine affection for the game genres that are coming under attack. As Jason Schreier proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, it all too easy for a person to casually slag a game that they've taken an active dislike to, without having any real understanding of what they're criticising.

Because criticising Dragon's Crown for it's depiction of the Sorceress is akin to attributing the positive effect that the film Top Gun had on military recruitment to the spoof parody, Hot Shots!, and near damn every single time people go off half-cocked in this manner the commentary box groans under the weight of those who betray their own ignorance of what is being discussed. There is no shortage of people like Mr. Schreier in this world.

Pogilrup:
Ok tell me what would be so bad about having the future hit games feature more anatomically possible women wearing more practical clothing and not having to do sexy poses every so often?

First things first, you would have to first show me where all these games with the anatomically incorrect women who wear impractical clothing are in the current gaming market going back five to seven years. The following stipulations apply.

A) The game cannot have been made overseas primarily for a foreign market, and then localised on the cheap before being dumped on the domestic market.

B) If the game does feature an overtly sexualised design aesthetic then that overarching choice of aesthetic needs to be clearly sexist. The game has to have little to none sexualised imagery that might prove pleasing to either women or gay men.

C) Must be a hit game.

And then I want you to take that list, compare it all the other games that were released during that period, and then you can get back to me on that one.

VMK:
I get that sexy girls sell well, but a bit more class is always welcome.

Every problem on this Earth could be solved with THAT mate.

Mahoshonen:

Father Time:

Mahoshonen:

Yeah, and everyone should have paid no attention to Triuph of the Will because it was nothing but a collection of film strips that no one had to watch.

(Yeah I know, Godwin's Law. But I feel these threads are so stupid that they deserve it)

And this is why we have Godwin's Law. You just compared scantily clad women to Nazis. The fictional characters are not trying to convey any message or morals, they're just scantily clad and you compare them to Nazis.

image

Wow you showed me with your clever image you found doing a GIS search!! Bravo! You deserve a Pulitzer Prize!!!!!!!!1!

And this lesson can be applied to so many other instances, too! If only blacks hadn't gone in droves to watch The Birth of a Nation. They never would have suffered from the resurgance of the Ku Klux Klan!

Still waiting for you to show what harm these things will cause.

Lee Oyd:
Here it goes again. Buzzwords everywhere.

Here's a quick summary. If you find yourself typing any of the following terms or variants:

sexualize
objectify
eye candy
sex object
feminazi
realism
fantasy
don't buy

stop typing and read this. You're missing the point, whatever your side is.

Enough with the fucking buzzwords already.

Also, the other problem. The designer is a homophobic cuntwad.

It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

I'm just curious...

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intelorant than what we've seen from the game industry.

How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

TazTheTerrible:
Trying to keep this short and to the point:

The problem isn't the Sorceress' design. The problem isn't that she exists or that characters like her exist. The problem isn't even that female characters are portrayed as sexually appealing. The problem is the pervasive trend which this character design is an example of, which is to treat women as ONLY sex objects.

There would not be any problem with characters like this at all (not even as part of a trend) if they were only ever enjoyed as silly little indulgences on the side, with the full understanding of what it was you were indulging in.

The problem is that we're not at that level of maturity yet.

Only if "we" are the blockbuster and porn audiences.

Here's an analogy to film: when you want to watch an intelligent production, when you don't want sexual content and you want a piece devoid of stereotypes and old rolemodels, you obviously won't download a porn, but you also won't find what you're looking for in the vast majority of hollywood blockbuster movies.

Triple-A games are the blockbusters of gaming. The publishers cater to young men and their business model revolves around getting as many as possible to part with 60 bucks in the first weeks post release. This locks most of these titles in that simple formula of action plus titilation. AAA is the wrong place to look for maturity.

More cerebral genres like turn-based strategy, puzzle platforming and puzzle adventure are a much better places to look for mature games.
Generally such games are more intelligent and the audiences are more likely to be sympathetic to the issue here. They don't need that shit to enjoy the gameplay.
If action is your main thing, then you'll be mostly resigned to indie games, where the focus is more on gameplay.

Game feminism ignores all the low hanging fruit and that makes it such a terribly lost cause.
You cannot fix japanese fetish fueled games and western triple-A titles in the same way cannot fix pornos and blockbusters. Such games and recordings exist because there are very big, paying audiences in the market for it and as such they will always be catered to with many products. You CANNOT FIGHT this.

What people can do, is SUPPORT such games that they think are mature. The only sacrifice for some will be getting used to more basic graphics and that is all there is to it.

^ Did you just imply blockbusters are for straight white men? Maybe they are. But why? To my knowledge, most of humanity isn't a straight white man.

Smilomaniac:
Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

Yes. Exactly. Women are stupid and gay and they hate sex unlike the poor oppressed rational men like you.

This is what gamers actually believe.

Requia:
It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

Fenix is a stupid hyper-roided dudebro design in a stupid hyper-roided dudebro universe. He's ugly, but he fits.

The Sorceress and Amazon come along actively strutting their stuff in the middle of a forest/dungeon/fortress/whatever for absolutely nobody but the creep on the other side of the fourth wall. If its devs gave the slightest fuck about aesthetic consistency, then why aren't the Wizard, Dwarf and Warrior strutting about in a snug chainmail G-string graciously outlining their thick, throbbing, permanently erect cocks?

Oh god, my eyes!
These characters just look so ... weird. Their bodys don't look really stylised, but rather deformed. And the motions of those breasts in the video. ugh..
Don't get me wrong, i like big boobs, even virtual ones, but this character, or rather all the characters in that game don't look alluring to me, but rather repulsive.

Smilomaniac:
I'm just curious...

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intelorant than what we've seen from the game industry.

How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

The better question is, why do they need to be oversexualized at all? Why do they need to have a figure that has such a small waist that it couldn't possibly hold up her upper body? Why does she need to have boobs that make it look like if she leans too far forward, she will fall over?

Again, there are mediums where you can have that. Go to a porn site. There is plenty of that.

One of the reasons no one takes video games seriously as a medium, and why they are blamed for everything in our society, is because they are seen as immature and juvenile. Having monster boobs on women doesn't help us in that regard. It hurts us.

veloper:

TazTheTerrible:
Trying to keep this short and to the point:

The problem isn't the Sorceress' design. The problem isn't that she exists or that characters like her exist. The problem isn't even that female characters are portrayed as sexually appealing. The problem is the pervasive trend which this character design is an example of, which is to treat women as ONLY sex objects.

There would not be any problem with characters like this at all (not even as part of a trend) if they were only ever enjoyed as silly little indulgences on the side, with the full understanding of what it was you were indulging in.

The problem is that we're not at that level of maturity yet.

Only if "we" are the blockbuster and porn audiences.

Here's an analogy to film: when you want to watch an intelligent production, when you don't want sexual content and you want a piece devoid of stereotypes and old rolemodels, you obviously won't download a porn, but you also won't find what you're looking for in the vast majority of hollywood blockbuster movies.

Triple-A games are the blockbusters of gaming. The publishers cater to young men and their business model revolves around getting as many as possible to part with 60 bucks in the first weeks post release. This locks most of these titles in that simple formula of action plus titilation. AAA is the wrong place to look for maturity.

More cerebral genres like turn-based strategy, puzzle platforming and puzzle adventure are a much better places to look for mature games.
Generally such games are more intelligent and the audiences are more likely to be sympathetic to the issue here. They don't need that shit to enjoy the gameplay.
If action is your main thing, then you'll be mostly resigned to indie games, where the focus is more on gameplay.

Game feminism ignores all the low hanging fruit and that makes it such a terribly lost cause.
You cannot fix japanese fetish fueled games and western triple-A titles in the same way cannot fix pornos and blockbusters. Such games and recordings exist because there are very big, paying audiences in the market for it and as such they will always be catered to with many products. You CANNOT FIGHT this.

What people can do, is SUPPORT such games that they think are mature. The only sacrifice for some will be getting used to more basic graphics and that is all there is to it.

I agree, yet feminists will find issue with anything that doesn't conform to there ideal, while failing to realize that many other genres exist and that they can make/support "good" games.

snowfi6916:

Smilomaniac:
I'm just curious...

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intelorant than what we've seen from the game industry.

How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

The better question is, why do they need to be oversexualized at all? Why do they need to have a figure that has such a small waist that it couldn't possibly hold up her upper body? Why does she need to have boobs that make it look like if she leans too far forward, she will fall over?

Again, there are mediums where you can have that. Go to a porn site. There is plenty of that.

One of the reasons no one takes video games seriously as a medium, and why they are blamed for everything in our society, is because they are seen as immature and juvenile. Having monster boobs on women doesn't help us in that regard. It hurts us.

The only people not taking the video game industry seriously are non-gamers and gamers. Developers, companies and investors are taking the industry quite seriously as there jobs and financial well-beings are on the line.

All I can think of when I see pictures of characters like this is how much their backs/spines are suffering. Living with boobs gives a whole different perspective on them than just looking at them. Do I get annoyed when I see female characters like this in video games? No. Do I get annoyed when I see /the vast majority/ of female characters like this in video games? Yeah. These games aren't geared towards me though. I roll my eyes and move on, looking for the next Professor Layton game.

I don't mind a large chest. Heck, the latest rendition Lara Croft is highly attractive and has a large chest. But attention isn't drawn to it as a selling point. I think that's what ticks some people off; not the fact that they have a large chest, but the fact that it's there either as an obvious selling point, or they're exaggerated to the point of ridiculous (which leads back to the first reason).

Lee Oyd:
^ Did you just imply blockbusters are for straight white men? Maybe they are. But why? To my knowledge, most of humanity isn't a straight white man.

Smilomaniac:
Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

Yes. Exactly. Women are stupid and gay and they hate sex unlike the poor oppressed rational men like you.

This is what gamers actually believe.

Requia:
It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

Fenix is a stupid hyper-roided dudebro design in a stupid hyper-roided dudebro universe. He's ugly, but he fits.

The Sorceress and Amazon come along actively strutting their stuff in the middle of a forest/dungeon/fortress/whatever for absolutely nobody but the creep on the other side of the fourth wall. If its devs gave the slightest fuck about aesthetic consistency, then why aren't the Wizard, Dwarf and Warrior strutting about in a snug chainmail G-string graciously outlining their thick, throbbing, permanently erect cocks?

In no way shape or form would erect cocks be comparable, in order for that to be the case the Amazon would have to have swollen genitalia of her own. And oh wait, the dwarf isn't wearing anything but a miniskirt anyway.

Smilomaniac:
Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

Sure, there's room. There's also room to design black characters who wear bib-alls without a shirt and crow, "Sho nuff, massa!" every time a white person speaks. That there is room to do so does not mean it's a good idea, or that it's being done in good taste or context, or that no one has a right to be offended.

Smilomaniac:
If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intolerant than what we've seen from the game industry.

Arguable, since the game industry's position seems to be that they will market to heterosexual, male gamers to the exclusion of female gamers, who are not welcome.

Smilomaniac:
How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

If you insist on belittling others' priorities as irrelevant, I think it is incumbent upon you to prove that their priorities are genuinely harmless.

Jonathan Braun:
I agree, yet feminists will find issue with anything that doesn't conform to their ideal, while failing to realize that many other genres exist and that they can make/support "good" games.

You seem to be arguing that hanging a "No Girls Allowed" sign on your clubhouse is not hateful and exclusionary because girls can go to their own, smaller clubhouse; and as best I can tell, you're calling feminists jerks for disliking what you like without offering any argument as to why they shouldn't take issue with something they find problematic. I think that argument is ridiculous on its face.

Since comics have not moved on from the mostly male demographics I do not see gaming doing it anytime soon.

Requia:
in order for that to be the case the Amazon would have to have swollen genitalia of her own.

This is what gamers actually believe.

Jarimir:
Someone just needs to make a male video game character whose performance and progress through the game is entirely measured by his masculinity and superficial sexual attractiveness. His only outfit is a speedo. Maybe later you get to unlock armor that covers his legs and arms but never his torso or groin. As he is damaged by enemies he loses muscle tone and/or genital size. Once he is reduced to a "small" man in all regards he dies (of embarrassment presumably).

How would any of you males out there feel if you saw your wife, girlfriend, sister, or girl you were crushing on playing this game? Chances are you wouldn't like it. Chances are you would be turned away by the apparent lack of respect for men and the issues men face. Chances are you would want to yell, "there is more to a man than the size of his junk and how well he can display it while doing completely NON-SEXUAL tasks!" ; or "That armor makes no sense!"

You would feel awkward walking into a room with a bunch of girls squealing and giggling over a man being reduced to "not-a-man" simply because he is losing the superficial qualities of a sexualized male.

Then and only then would you understand what female gamers and simply female witnesses to gaming have felt 1000's of times towards 1000's of games both new and old.

In case you were wondering, this is a male writing this.

Don't think so. because such a game, would never sell. Thusly no one would experience it; thusly the point would be moot. Besides i think there are actually games like that. 'Cho-Aniki' a game where fly around as a speedo clad guy shooting 'bullets' at other 'guys'. As for armour that doesn't cover his Torso or groin... that didn't slow Conan the barbarian down one bit. Heck only reason he had a loincloth at all was censorship issues, and in a more on-topic example. have you seen the dwarf in this game?

The long and short of it is, there are people ho get off on being morally outraged, it's their thing. Some people like baseball, some people like basketball, others like to jump on soapboxes over the slightest thing and claim moral superiority.

As I mentioned look at the rest of the cast an the sorc fits right in, she is a ludicrous over-exaggeration of a trope (set of tropes). Both the males and females in that game are the same. Heck it's literally the same, the Sorc has an impossible bust than monly %1 of women could ever hope to attain, the dwarf has an impossibly sized pecs and abs that maybe 1% of men could hope to attain). The amazon has legs and butt that are biologically impossible, the knight has shoulders wide enough to land a harrier jet on. Do you here anyone griping about how the dwarf and knight portray impossible and unrealistically idealized male body images? No.

The question to ask, does the sorc kick any-less ass than her male cohorts? No. Well then we have a game that treats women exactly as they do men.

I like her!

I like the well-rounded asthetic of the game. It has a planned and executed look and feel. I think it's sexy, but not in a sexual way- I think that the characters all convey a whimsical, colorful style that appeals to me. Although some of the individual characters sexuality is heavily exaggerated, it feels congruous to the style.

The problem is that no one really gives a good god damn about the aesthetics itself, they care about how the aesthetic reflects on themselves. It's not Jason Schreier saying "this seems like it might be a problem in the design" or even "I don't like how it looks. The entire complaint is about what he thinks the rest of society will think of him, or about gamers, as a result of this.

And that's the kind of silly "OMG what will people think about me because I play this/read this/watch this" that is anathema to creating art. And it's self-censorship of the wimpiest kind, a statement that you hold yourself in so little regard that you would forgo things you otherwise like because of what other people might think about it. I can respect anyone saying "I don't like how it looks", but the people saying it's bad because of what it makes the player appear to be need to grow a spine.

If you feel like you can't play this game without being viewed as a repressed sexual deviant/immature person, you are a repressed sexual deviant and immature person. Because nowhere in Mr. Schreier's post did he say he disliked it, just that he worried about what other people would think about him.

I'm reminded of my younger brother, who when he was 13 set about tearing up all of the Pokemon cards he'd ever gotten (most from me or my older brother). And the reason for this is that he didn't want to seem childish, especially not in front of an older girl whom he admires. But maturity doesn't come from giving up childish things, it comes from being willing to say "this is what I like, and if you think that says something bad about me, you can go away."

But instead, we're worried about what our media says about us, because we're secretly worried that it's true. My brother rejects Pokemon because he's worried that he might still be a little kid. And Schreier rejects Dragon Crown because he's worried about the fact that he might just like big breasts and improbable figures. And what's sad from the other side is that instead of saying "go for it, like it, but it's concerning that there are very few female leads who aren't built like this", they stick with "OMG if you like this you're a pig."

Lee Oyd:
^ Did you just imply blockbusters are for straight white men? Maybe they are. But why? To my knowledge, most of humanity isn't a straight white man.

Smilomaniac:
Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

Yes. Exactly. Women are stupid and gay and they hate sex unlike the poor oppressed rational men like you.

This is what gamers actually believe.

Requia:
It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

Fenix is a stupid hyper-roided dudebro design in a stupid hyper-roided dudebro universe. He's ugly, but he fits.

The Sorceress and Amazon come along actively strutting their stuff in the middle of a forest/dungeon/fortress/whatever for absolutely nobody but the creep on the other side of the fourth wall. If its devs gave the slightest fuck about aesthetic consistency, then why aren't the Wizard, Dwarf and Warrior strutting about in a snug chainmail G-string graciously outlining their thick, throbbing, permanently erect cocks?

Because that's not male sexualisation. Giving them giant cocks in the same way women are given giant breasts is just intimidating. Instead they're just heaps of muscle, where the female characters have their feminine features exaggerated, the men have their masculine features.

And our sexual organs are not really our masculine features. Women might compare their breasts to their friends, but how many men do you see patting each other's crotches and going "Ohh bro your cock is so much bigger than mine I'm soooooo jealous of how good it looks in those CKs."

Well said, Bob. Diversity is actually the answer to this. The more alternatives we see to over-sexualised women (non-sexualised women and over-sexualised men, for example, and no, a dude being shirtless is not over-sexualising him), the less harmful it will be for creators to over-sexualise women.

Diversity, socially and biologically, is always good, because more options is never a bad thing, and having a wealth of different choices and options maximises benefit for the maximum amount of people.

EDIT:

Thyunda:
how many men do you see patting each other's crotches and going "Ohh bro your cock is so much bigger than mine I'm soooooo jealous of how good it looks in those CKs."

I've seen porn that goes like that, actually.

grigjd3:
Wall o text.

Basically: Since I didn't read about 6 to 7 pages of this I'm the worst thing to happen ever?

Just know this: There's a lot of people that are looking at games like this and screaming sexist and ban this sick filth, yet more popular games get a free pass? Thats a bit sad.

Fleaman:
This is the Diablo 3 Barbarian, capable of filling out the armor of a Chaos Space Marine Terminator Lord.

Then why she doesnt?

just an idea:
for this kind of fighting game you often can unplay costumes.
why not 2 or 4 sets of costumes, 2 pre set to choose for your fighter and 2 to get if you play good enough-so that everybunny can choose whether ze likes a naked burly dwarf or one inside an armor or a naked amazon only clothed with a few bits of ripped of cloth or an amazon in some FUCKING UNIFORM like a FUCKING AMAZON would do if she was FUCKING REASONABLE*

*because the last time i looked my muscles werent any bulledproof-not to mention magicproof.
(but the naked dwarf would have that same problem-except most dwarf (according to lore) are magicproof^^)

i dont like this half naked stuff if its dumb like that. if its tna for the horny but dumb masses. and well, most female character wear pieces of clothing which would dress nicely on a hooker but not on somebody who fights horde of undead (muscles aren´t zombie-proof either)the men get clothing-here the magic guy and the fighter have clothing-and even enough to make any wahabi muslim proud.
so here you have two-in-clothes vs one-naked-(2c, 1n)ratio on males and on the other side: two naked, one in clothes-but male gazed subjugated loli nonetheless( 2 1/2n 0,5c) on female side

and this pattern you´ll find every-fucking-where. more in games than in real life but annoyingly enough everywhere as well.(advertising. tits for lätta. yay..)

Smilomaniac:
I'm just curious...

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intelorant than what we've seen from the game industry.

How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

you arent curious, you are derailing, trolling and you are kissing a strawmen.(doenst that suck? such strawwy s´tongue. and all the dust.. but well, i don't know but maybe you are the reason why there is straw on the ground..

that´s !?§($&)/)%!!! and maybe you want to stop and READ bobs text as well as look at Jim´s show and them READ comments.

and then you should think about that stuff you´ve read, if you´re able to do so (because after so much information you might be tired-but dont be scared, this will go away). and be silent. and then you might get that this idiotic shit is annoying because reasonable people have to tell people like you the same stuff over and over again-stiff you might hav read yourself if you weren't so lazy and want other people to make work for you(which is rude)

so read thoroughly, the whole thread and then tell me 1 to 5 comments here of people who vote for the bullshit you are strawman-ing right now.

maybe you´ll find some.

i bet not

and i bet you know this. (if not:then your are only rude and lazy.)
and if you knew, then you are a annoying troll and therefore after that best be ignored.

JimB:

Gunjester:
The art style is meant to be ridiculous, it's meant to be cartoonish, and if a man sees the Sorceress and says "THAT is what a woman should look like!" That's something wrong with him, not the artist.

I, at least, am not worried about what men think a woman should look like. I'm worried about what my six-year-old niece is learning she needs to look like.

Why would a six-year-old be playing this game? It's clearly going to be released as either M or T, if your niece is impacted by it because she doesn't get the joke, as she shouldn't, maybe you should take a look at the parents letting her play it. You shouldn't restrict the artist because you or your sibling is stupid enough to let their child play a game made for a much older group.
And for the record, if a six-year-old girl was playing this game, it's far more likely she'd emulate the character who she relates to the most, probably more like the Elf, who's only strange feature is thick legs: http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/22700000/Dragon-s-Crown-dragons-crown-22778778-720-800.jpg
EDIT: Having just watched the Jimquisition on this very topic, I humbly apologize for the points I've made above are extremely harshly worded. I do not mean to offend, I merely saw your comment as an illogical shouting-spurt at me and thus react illogically. I merely say that this game is meant for older audiences, and my point about the elf was in fact mentioned in the video. I won't change anything about the above post, however, as I feel a before/after shot of this argument is necessary for it to become a discussion.

Gunjester:
Why would a six-year-old be playing this game?

As I said in my previous post in this thread, I am using my niece as a symbol for all the girls out there who are still trying to figure out what it means to be human and female, and I am using this character as a symbol for every character like the Sorceress.

Gunjester:
I merely saw your comment as an illogical shouting-spurt at me and thus reacted illogically.

I kind of worry that these conversations are doomed to failure if what I said came across to you as shouting, because I really do not know how I could have phrased it differently to make it more clear that I was only correcting one point that I felt was misapprehended. I worry that there's too much baggage attached to this topic for most people to see the other side as anything but a horde of gibbering goblins who are out to destroy everything the other side stands for out of pure hate.

Oh, well.

Gunjester:
My point about the Elf was in fact mentioned in the video.

I would argue that the Elf is also sexualized to a fetishistic degree, but by Japanese standards rather than Western. I'm by no means an expert, but as I understand it, the Japanese standard for female sexual attractiveness is innocence and childlike presentation, such as the Elf offers.

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
I agree, yet feminists will find issue with anything that doesn't conform to their ideal, while failing to realize that many other genres exist and that they can make/support "good" games.

You seem to be arguing that hanging a "No Girls Allowed" sign on your clubhouse is not hateful and exclusionary because girls can go to their own, smaller clubhouse; and as best I can tell, you're calling feminists jerks for disliking what you like without offering any argument as to why they shouldn't take issue with something they find problematic. I think that argument is ridiculous on its face.

And? The AAA game industry as it is now is like only being able to choose summer action movies, when you go to a theater. Many people voice disdain for Micheal Bay and the Twilight films, but there are other films you can watch. Why is it so hard for many "people" to realize that they should be investing in more genres, rather than conformity?

Remember if it can be proven profitable, then will companies and investors take it full force.

Jonathan Braun:
And?

I...don't know what you expect me to say to this that I haven't already said. And excluding women from the gaming community is deliberately cutting the market off from fifty-one percent of the people on the planet? And it's an insult to human dignity to be told what games I am allowed to play based on my crotch? And there is nothing worth defending in the AAA boys-only paradigm, so I find it baffling that you do so as if you think women being invited to enjoy the games you play would somehow reduce what you have?

JimB:
And excluding women from the gaming community is deliberately cutting the market off from fifty-one percent of the people on the planet?

Actually, taking into consideration that not all games are design by gender (gender neutral orientation games such puzzles and especially casual ones) AND that the world population of gamers (according to "unofficial" numbers) are around 67% of the world population (which I really doubt) and from those 67%, 45% are females, so the percentage of the market cut off by the exclusion of woman (based on gender issues with the games)represent much less than 30% of the people of the planet (I would guess 16%)...

Just a guess, though.

JimB:

Gunjester:
I merely saw your comment as an illogical shouting-spurt at me and thus reacted illogically.

I kind of worry that these conversations are doomed to failure if what I said came across to you as shouting, because I really do not know how I could have phrased it differently to make it more clear that I was only correcting one point that I felt was misapprehended. I worry that there's too much baggage attached to this topic for most people to see the other side as anything but a horde of gibbering goblins who are out to destroy everything the other side stands for out of pure hate.

Oh, well.

Gunjester:
My point about the Elf was in fact mentioned in the video.

I would argue that the Elf is also sexualized to a fetishistic degree, but by Japanese standards rather than Western. I'm by no means an expert, but as I understand it, the Japanese standard for female sexual attractiveness is innocence and childlike presentation, such as the Elf offers.

Not literally shouting, more just that it was too short to seem anything but angry. Needless to say, I have no pure hate, only was annoyed at you adding a different element that I believed was not the responsibility of the artist to worry about, it's the parents' problem. As for your point on the Elf, I disagree completely, the only "innocent" or "childlike" presentation in the character would be her face, when in which case, all the characters look like that.
Anyways, when I look at the elf, yes, I see cutesy, but in that regard it doesn't matter if a creepy consumer sees a childlike character and thinks "I want my d*ck in that", because if your niece or any other girl were to see a likewise character she wouldn't react the way that person would, nor would I or most men I assume, they would merely look and say, "Huh, she's cute." Jim says he finds her sexy, but even then it seems like he is attracted to her design solely out of the overall shape and features, which many men find attractive. The Elf doesn't come off as innocent or childlike, she just looks like a elven anime adeventurer. That's literally all I gather from images of her.

Gunjester:
Not literally shouting, more just that it was too short to seem anything but angry.

That's...not me angry. That's not really even close.

Gunjester:
I have no pure hate; I only was annoyed at you adding a different element that I believed was not the responsibility of the artist to worry about; it's the parents' problem.

You ever hear the saying (and I could be getting it somewhat wrong) that every painting is a self-portrait? It means that every piece of art an artist in any medium produces is a statement about how he sees the world, since every single element of the art in question is something he put effort into adding. There's obviously only so much I can infer about the artist's worldview here, but based on the characters he's drawn and the "lol if u dun like it ur queer!!!111!eleven" response he offered to being criticized, I kind of have to assume what he's saying here is, "Hey! Here are some warm, soft, almost gelatinous fuckslots for you to masturbate over! Now pay me!"

And the problem with saying things is that people hear them.

Gunjester:
As for your point on the Elf, I disagree completely, the only "innocent" or "childlike" presentation in the character would be her face, when in which case, all the characters look like that.

She has two braided pigtails; her costume could pass for a schoolgirl's with only minor corrections (make the boots white and they're her socks; her mantle is basically that kerchief thing schoolgirls tie around their necks; replace the squared edges of her skirt with pleats and her dress becomes Sakura's from Street Fighter. More than that, compare her body language to that of the other female characters. The Sorceress shows off how adult she is by clutching the head of a skeleton to her lace-clad breasts (which are 3/7ths clothed, tops) as if to motorboat her, and I'm not entirely sure she isn't flossing between her butt cheeks with her staff like it's the pole at a strip club and she's polishing it with her G-string. Then look at the Amazon, who's reclining so her coyly and mostly-concealed vagina is in the center of the page and the eyes travel up her may-as-well-be-naked body, over breasts that seem to be individually larger than her head, until only then do you spot her face.

Now contrast that to the Elf, whose body is positively prepubescent by comparison to the previous two, and who seems to be climbing a tree like a little girl.

Yeah, I do not feel guilty about thinking she's being deliberately fetishized for Japanese sensibilities.

Gunjester:
It doesn't matter if a creepy consumer sees a childlike character and thinks, "I want my d*ck in that," because if your niece or any other girl were to see a likewise character she wouldn't react the way that person would.

I'm not entirely sure what your point here is. Are you saying that sexualized imagery doesn't affect the people who see it, or are you arguing that only a man's perspective matters because a girl wouldn't respond the same way, or what?

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
And?

I...don't know what you expect me to say to this that I haven't already said. And excluding women from the gaming community is deliberately cutting the market off from fifty-one percent of the people on the planet? And it's an insult to human dignity to be told what games I am allowed to play based on my crotch? And there is nothing worth defending in the AAA boys-only paradigm, so I find it baffling that you do so as if you think women being invited to enjoy the games you play would somehow reduce what you have?

"Why is it so hard for many "people" to realize that they should be investing in more genres, rather than conformity?"

More genres, ie Mens AAA, Womens AAA, etc.

If you truly like "games", like you claim, you'd realize that other games exist. If you are truly incapable of finding a game you fancy, make it, or seek ways to get it made. The problem with yours and the majority of peoples arguments, is that they feel that whatever they do not agree with "hurts" the industry. What is hurting the industry most is focusing too much money on graphics engines and the like, bloating there expected sales figures to stay afloat.

Having had a look through the character art for Dragon's Crown I have come to the conclusion that what is being depicted here is your average D&D group as seen from the reality distorting point-of-view the grey-haired wizard.

The high charisma sexy Sorceress archetype is a giggling, wobbling joke, barely in control of her own tits let alone the magic she is using. The stereotypical animal loving, salad eating and tree worshiping Elven Ranger is recast as a naive child. The Fighter and the Dwarf are grotesquely muscled to the point of parody, and the Amazon closely resembles a man apart from a handful of feminine parts that are bolted on.

Compare all that against the Wizard.

He's looking pretty suave and hip for someone whose dump stat is probably charisma.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here