It Never Ends

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

My main problems here is that for me, there's no relevance to this that could have amounted to a discussion in the first place.
Dragon's Crown in itself is a niche product that would have probably came out regardless of the nature of mainstream titles.
It only amounts to being a scapegoat in comparison to say Far Cry 3 or Hitman:Absolution where you can argue its exploiting the audience than understanding and appealing to it.
Same going with Bioware's weird bisexuality angles, but that's for another day.
Vanillaware has proven to have beautiful and subtle females. Games like Muramasa and Odin Sphere show this very well, but one game apparently removes that.

Meanwhile, Jason did not apologize in reality, unless I'm missing an article.
You can say you're not a censor and that you now understand what the artist was intended all you like, but Jason shames the artwork on a very popular game site and makes his stance seem better by forcing the implication that George is being homophobic. Seriously, I should see a witch hunt for Muscle March and Cho Aniki if implied homoeroticism gets everyone in a twist.
In fact, I can definitely assume the defensive points on Kotaku are intentionally separate articles for more views and sensationalism.

All in all, its like complaining about an indie buddy cop movie because of exploitative action thrillers.
Why don't you bring up the main picture of why you dislike it as a trend, represent individuals as only potential/mild samples, not representations. Give examples of what you want instead of going back on this "untapped market" that's all faith in statistics. Show you know the reason behind these and you've researched things.
It will be doing like, I don't know, an actual constructive criticism.

JimB:

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.

As long as there's room for it, it's fine. The whole point is that we can't be a tolarant society or gaming community if we wrinkle our brow at all that isn't just and politically correct.

Also, did you just compare blatant racism to a caricature? Shame on you :)

JimB:
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.

Ah yes, I forgot that for every game where women are sexually depicted, ten games that don't do it, disappear from the shelves. It's simply not true what you're saying, the entire industry isn't some sort of patriarchy that's out to keep women out of gaming.
It's just that once in a while when there is a game that offends someone, people rage so much that they forget about everything else.

JimB:

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

Except it is irrelevant, since it's not hurting anyone. Unless of course, you believe that every game that is slightly politically incorrect forever damages half of the planet in some irreversable way.

Please note there's a difference between whether the opinion is important or relevant. The opinion itself is fine, it's a noble intention(although misguided for the most part), but it's not terribly relevant. It's not going to change and it's certainly not going to change by talking about it on a forum.
If you're so upset with it, write the company a letter stating your dissatisfaction.

Here's the hard part though; Why would you? The company isn't doing harm or intentional discrimination. You didn't buy it and then get shocked by the contents. You're not a dissatisfied customer.
Do you realize how big of a douche you'd sound like if you complained to them because their female characters have exaggerated curves in a caricatured game?

In comparison, I could complain about Bulletstorm for having me play a dumb fuck oaf who acts like a stereotypical 80's sci-fi action hero which is inherently derogatory to my person, since I'm not like that at all. The premise is the same and no one considers it at least important and certainly not relevant(which I don't think it is either).

So, again, let's save our rage for something that actually matters in the realm of gaming, such as customers getting reamed by DRM, poor releases, unfair prices across gaming platforms and stores, customers getting treated as third rate moneycows, poor customer service, limited availability and the fact that you lease games not and don't own them.

Your problem is one of perception, not something that does anyone harm. Girls and women can find plenty of enjoyment in our current library of games and it doesn't necessarily need to be rid of all percieved sexism for them to enjoy it either. Just like I don't wig out and throw a tantrum every time I play a male character that is the diagonal opposite of who I am and makes me feel out of place.

Take it for what it is, if you feel that I'm wrong, then do something about it, but you can't convince me otherwise because you'll never be able to prove that there's any harm done by this game that is intentional or irreversable. It's just political correctness for the sake of being on a high horse.

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

I let it go the first time because I wasn't sure how strong your English is, but that's the second time you've done it, so I have to ask, what's up with you putting quotation marks around the word "people?" Are you trying to use irony here to say they aren't people, or what?

Jonathan Braun:
More genres, i.e. Men's AAA, Women's AAA, etc.

Please explain to me why you are arguing in favor of segregation. What about the current state of affairs makes you say to yourself, "This situation is good the way it is, or at least, making it more gender-inclusive would make it worse?"

Jonathan Braun:
If you truly like "games," like you claim[snip]

Except I didn't say I like games. Anywhere. Are you sure you're even talking to me and not some fantasy you want your opposition to be?

Smilomaniac:
Also, did you just compare blatant racism to a caricature?

Yes, because I consider the caricature to be roughly as sexist as my example is racist.

Smilomaniac:
Ah yes, I forgot that for every game where women are sexually depicted, ten games that don't do it, disappear from the shelves.

You are arguing against a strawman. Please stop.

Smilomaniac:
It's simply not true what you're saying, the entire industry isn't some sort of patriarchy that's out to keep women out of gaming.

Do you have any further argument to back this up? If not, I have to say, you seem to be expecting me to accept "Nuh-uh" as a convincing rebuttal.

Smilomaniac:
It's just that once in a while when there is a game that offends someone, people rage so much that they forget about everything else.

Are you talking about me, or about someone else? Because what I've been doing is not rage. At all. It's disappointment and dissatisfaction over something that I think is shameful and low but that is not especially important when compared to how sexism affects rape victims, like that girl who committed suicide when her friends blamed her for getting raped, or to genital mutilation or to girls who get shot in the head by the Taliban because she wants to go to school.

Those things will make me rage. This topic will just make me heave a sigh of resigned disgust.

Smilomaniac:
Except it is irrelevant, since it's not hurting anyone.

Okay, what's your offer of proof for this statement?

Smilomaniac:
Unless of course, you believe that every game that is slightly politically incorrect forever damages half of the planet in some irreversible way.

I'd say sexism hurts men too, since, for example, the assumption that mothers are and should be primary caregivers means men often get screwed during divorce proceedings, and since idea that women are weak and need to be protected means only men are allowed in front lines combat.

Smilomaniac:
It's not going to change and it's certainly not going to change by talking about it on a forum.

I find this statement despicable for suggesting that it is better to simply shut up and accept an inequity rather that try to correct it. I further suggest that you misunderstand my intentions completely if you think I believe I will magically make games stop having jiggle physics by talking about it here.

Smilomaniac:
The company isn't doing harm or intentional discrimination.

I disagree that it's doing no harm, and I disagree that only intentional discrimination counts as discrimination. I judge actions by their outcomes more than by their intent.

Smilomaniac:
You didn't buy it and then get shocked by the contents. You're not a dissatisfied customer.

I also didn't buy an iPod. Does this mean I'm not allowed to complain to the producing company in China about its inhuman treatment of workers and the suicide rates in its dormitories?

Smilomaniac:
Do you realize how big of a douche you'd sound like if you complained to them because their female characters have exaggerated curves in a caricatured game?

I do not care how people who produce artwork that offends me choose to perceive me based on my complaints.

Smilomaniac:
In comparison, I could complain about Bulletstorm for having me play a dumb fuck oaf who acts like a stereotypical 80's sci-fi action hero which is inherently derogatory to my person, since I'm not like that at all. The premise is the same and no one considers it at least important and certainly not relevant (which I don't think it is either).

The premise is the same, but the context is wildly divergent.

Smilomaniac:
Take it for what it is; if you feel that I'm wrong, then do something about it, but you can't convince me otherwise [snip]

Then you have been arguing in bad faith, and I really wish you'd put this at the beginning of your post rather than the end. I suppose it doesn't really matter, though, since I would have responded the same way; convincing you of anything was never my goal, because the person you're arguing with on the internet will never change his mind. The point of this argument has been the audience.

Smilomaniac:
It's just political correctness for the sake of being on a high horse.

You do not understand my motivations as well as you think you do.

JimB:

Yes, because I consider the caricature to be roughly as sexist as my example is racist.

Well if you're going to stand for something, might as well stand so high that you think you're perfect. I see your point, why differentiate when it's so much easier to simply comb over everything and everyone as something lower.

JimB:

You are arguing against a strawman. Please stop.

You're ignoring reality. Please continue, it amuses me.

JimB:

Do you have any further argument to back this up? If not, I have to say, you seem to be expecting me to accept "Nuh-uh" as a convincing rebuttal.

You mean for example my steam library of 188 games and 4 of them have remotely sexual content that might be considered sexist?
And how would I know that? Why because I have an interest in this and base my opinion and statements on facts. Of course, as arrogant as you are, you didn't even consider that I could do that. Or at least that's my impression of you.

JimB:

Are you talking about me, or about someone else? Because what I've been doing is not rage. At all. It's disappointment and dissatisfaction over something that I think is shameful and low but that is not especially important when compared to how sexism affects rape victims, like that girl who committed suicide when her friends blamed her for getting raped, or to genital mutilation or to girls who get shot in the head by the Taliban because she wants to go to school.

Those things will make me rage. This topic will just make me heave a sigh of resigned disgust.

How hard your days must be when a game targeted at a specific audience delivers a bit of crass entertainment, and you can't help but roll your eyes at the horrible world we live in. I'd hate to see you react in a situation of real adversity.

Oh, I wasn't talking specifically about you, but if you count yourself among the people who "sigh in resigned disgust" then sure, why not. Same sort of people. It's all emotional overreaction, whether you type it in caps or with a smug attitude.

JimB:

Okay, what's your offer of proof for this statement?

Burden of proof is on you. I'd like to see you prove that a game caused any significant grief.
If you believe there is no room for a bit of crass, tasteless entertainment, then you're no better than what you claim to be against.

JimB:

I'd say sexism hurts men too, since, for example, the assumption that mothers are and should be primary caregivers means men often get screwed during divorce proceedings, and since idea that women are weak and need to be protected means only men are allowed in front lines combat.

Wow, you really think there are men hurt by sexism out there? How delightfully enlightened you are! Tell me more about how we're all people and we all have our problems, sometimes just because of our gender, and how it's not exclusive to women.

Careful though, don't want to make it look like we're even remotely equal in the grief department.

JimB:

I find this statement despicable for suggesting that it is better to simply shut up and accept an inequity rather that try to correct it. I further suggest that you misunderstand my intentions completely if you think I believe I will magically make games stop having jiggle physics by talking about it here.

Of course that's how you'd see it. If you bothered to take it in context you'd realize the point was that you're no better yourself if you don't do something actively about it.

JimB:

I disagree that it's doing no harm, and I disagree that only intentional discrimination counts as discrimination. I judge actions by their outcomes more than by their intent.

Feel free to point out the harm done. Intent is useful to discern what's wrong and what's unfortunate or just crass or distasteful. Something that people on this forum have a hard time figuring out it seems.

JimB:
I also didn't buy an iPod. Does this mean I'm not allowed to complain to the producing company in China about its inhuman treatment of workers and the suicide rates in its dormitories?

If I didn't know what I wrote, I might almost take that sentence seriously.

JimB:
I do not care how people who produce artwork that offends me choose to perceive me based on my complaints.

No? Don't expect to be taken seriously or have an impact then.

JimB:
The premise is the same, but the context is wildly divergent.

Also, no one cares about my example or anything else in regards to male discrimination. Because hey, men can take it, right?
In the end, no one cares because it makes no difference. I see no reason to believe that this game would have any higher impact, apart from setting off a slew of white knighters and put them on a rampage of righteous justice.

JimB:
Then you have been arguing in bad faith, and I really wish you'd put this at the beginning of your post rather than the end. I suppose it doesn't really matter, though, since I would have responded the same way; convincing you of anything was never my goal, because the person you're arguing with on the internet will never change his mind. The point of this argument has been the audience.

The point is to learn. You neglected to bring up anything valid or constructive.
The whole point is to put things in perspective; Assess the problem, find proof, mark it out as clearly as possible, come up with a solution, implement said solution and spread it.

I've not seen a single post in years that states anything but a general dissatisfaction of this woeful world of gaming. Everyone has problems with it, but no one has solutions, meaning one of two things:
Either it's a conspiracy that we are powerless to do something about it or no one gives enough of a shit to take it seriously. Or, you know, there's not really a problem and it's a matter of perspective.

JimB:

You do not understand my motivations as well as you think you do.

I don't believe you understand them either, but the thing is that I don't think you believe in whatever motivation you might or might not have.

Honestly when this all started i though this was more a stylistic issue than a gender issue. The designs were super exaggerated to the point of utter lunacy and i thought people were getting annoyed that the character's, moth male and female, were simply ugly and had a baffling style.

It took me two days of scratching my head to realize this was being pinned to the wall of "Look at how sexist this is!". I don't really get the argument though, there are many things that seem to needlessly turn off a female audience but this isn't one of them. Those designs are bad yes and would turn off almost any audience but their style isn't one of exploitation but of exaggeration, to beyond cartoony levels. They are not sexy designs, they are a weird logical extension of old DnD drawings and off-colour manga designs. All i see is a bit of a mess.

There are plenty of fights worth picking with gender issues but this fight just baffles me, they are simply too ridiculous to hold to any argument. It's not really worth attacking or defending and certainly not the most interesting point to debate in terms of gender issues in games. If the gaming community was more healthy the reaction would have been "Wow this game has really odd, unappealing character design how disappointing"

To me, this is the key here:

I find myself being able to agree on the point of the omnipresence of this character type (the only remarkable thing about The Sorceress is how un-remarkable she is

Making female characters in video games attractive - even comically so - is only a bad thing if they also lack depth. A chick with nice tits is only wrong if she also lacks a brain, basically.

Lilith from Borderlands 2, Trishka from Bulletstorm, and many other female characters in many games have a nice rack and it doesn't prevent them from being detailed, well thought out characters with ample back story and character. (I almost included Bayonetta in this list but TBH I've never played those games and I don't want to jump to a conclusion there.) Even the latest Laura Croft's rack isn't what you'd call tiny. Those are what, like a C cup? For a supposedly mid-20's college student who is otherwise very slim, those are pretty damn large. Yet nobody would accuse post-reboot Laura Croft if being a 1-dimensional know-nothing.

Of course, in certain genre's, there just isn't any backstory to begin with. Fighting games like Street Fighter and their ilk spring to mind, and I don't see how there even is any way to remedy that, but perhaps a simple gameplay time rule would suffice? As in, if there's less than 2-3 hours of non-repeating gameplay in a game, it can skip attempting to be fair about the characters' appearance. Anything where ANY of the other characters have depth, though, should require that most of the well-endowed female characters have equal depth, though.

But yeah, depth is the answer. It's what solves the conundrum. If all the female characters in games that have a lot of character development only for the males had equal development for the females, and only the titles that lacked such development for any gender had this problem, then it wouldn't be a problem to begin with.

chuckdm:

Lilith from Borderlands 2, Trishka from Bulletstorm, and many other female characters in many games have a nice rack and it doesn't prevent them from being detailed, well thought out characters with ample back story and character.

No, being in Borderlands 2 prevents her from being a detailed, well thought out character with ample backstory and character.

BL2's characters are all pretty flat. In fact, it looks like this would demonstrate a different point: it doesn't matter if the character is deep. A woman who isn't completely ridiculous won't draw that much flak, even if she isn't all that deep.

Those are what, like a C cup? For a supposedly mid-20's college student who is otherwise very slim, those are pretty damn large.

They really aren't. They're a bit above average, but pretty damn large? No.

Yet nobody would accuse post-reboot Laura Croft if being a 1-dimensional know-nothing.

Which is a different point entirely.

MovieBob:
It Never Ends

MovieBob discusses the recent Dragon's Crown controversy, and why we really need more diversity in our videogame characters.

And yet he willingly praises every single Mario game for being the exact same game again with slightly better graphics, because copying the same game over and over again is fine...but character designs are A-OK.

castlewise:
It is unclear to me why Dragon's Crown gets to be star of the show in this latest round of internet drama but a game like Starcraft 2, for instance, gets a free pass on their character design. Why is the Sorceress over the line but Kerrigan with her impractical zerg heels and meticulous non-chitin covered ass is somehow ok?

Well I seriously doubt she was meant to look attractive.

Wait, do people find her attractive? ...Actually don't answer that. I don't want to know.

But to reply to the article, I don't fully understand why fanservice is immediately condemned lately but only in gaming. I mean this IS just fanservice, it isn't a statement towards the capability or "responsibilities" of women. The character isn't any less capable than any other character in the series.

I mean is this about realistic representation? If so that's absurd. Media isn't meant to be realistic.

Is this about overt sexualization of women in video games? If so that may be something I would recognize as a legitimate complaint, but isn't the fact that these characters are represented exactly as capable as the male characters more relevant than how they dress?

I mean sure my Janna in LoL is dressed sexually, but she's still as good as every other champion in the game. Her character has her own ambitions and drive independant of any male. Is that all really completely overbalanced by the fact she has a sexualized outfit?

You know, Smilomaniac, usually when I respond to someone in a forum conversation like this, I tend to tackle his post line by line kind of like you did to mine. Go check out my post history if you don't believe me; not that I'm saying you probably should spend time confirming such a worthless fact, but since I'm sure I have no credibility with you, I just thought I'd point out that the evidence is there if you want to go looking for it.

I'm not going to do that with your post. Instead, I'm going to treat this line here as being representative of almost the entire post:

Smilomaniac:

JimB:
Okay, what's your offer of proof for this statement?

Burden of proof is on you.

In the second place, I already provided the source of my beliefs, but in all fairness, I did it a page or two ago without specifically referencing you, so maybe you ignored it. That's not a judgment, incidentally; lord knows I skipped every page between the first one and my first post in this thread.

But in the first place, if you had actually offered any evidence of your affirmative belief, it would have been absolutely devastating to my position. I might not have been able to recover from the loss, at least in terms of my credibility, but you didn't deliver that blow despite how much it would have done to definitively prove you right. From that failure I have to assume that you have no such evidence to offer and could think of no response except to change the subject to me.

In light of this, I will not be bothering to respond to most of your post, since you seem to think that backing up your assertions is an inferior debate tactic to calling me an asshole, and I have no particular interest in validating that. You do say a few things I want to mention, though:

Smilomaniac:

JimB:
Do you have any further argument to back this up? If not, I have to say, you seem to be expecting me to accept "Nuh-uh" as a convincing rebuttal.

You mean for example my Steam library of 188 games and 4 of them have remotely sexual content that might be considered sexist?

Without mentioning what games you have, this is an essentially useless response. I am asking you to explain to me why I ought to accept you as an authority, and you answer, "Because I'm an authority."

Smilomaniac:

JimB:
I find this statement despicable for suggesting that it is better to simply shut up and accept an inequity rather that try to correct it. I further suggest that you misunderstand my intentions completely if you think I believe I will magically make games stop having jiggle physics by talking about it here.

Of course that's how you'd see it. If you bothered to take it in context you'd realize the point was that you're no better yourself if you don't do something actively about it.

This confuses me a lot too. Are you suggesting that because I spend seven minutes of my day typing these responses to you, I must therefore spend none of the remaining 1,433 minutes doing anything else in regards to it? What on Earth would be the basis for such an assumption? I really do feel like you're responding to what I actually say only about half the time, and the rest of the time you're responding to some fictional narrative of events you've created that justifies your insults.

I'm late to this, but I like the designs, I find them all very funny to look at and I get what the joke is meant to be. It's impractical; it's way over the top and it's completely sexist, stupid and downright offensive but on the other hand it's also a homage to the exact same thing that went on in 80's art with the kind of fantasy titles that dealt with it. Anyone who'd even glanced at a Boris Vallejo painting or read a Conan comic can back me up on this.

I get that this is everywhere in the gaming industry, but I honestly don't see why this particular game is such a big deal because it's just a joke, lighten up.

This is no different than when Double Dragon: Neon started with Mariam getting punched in the gut and carried off just like in the original; it's just a tribute to the stupidity of 80's design, you can hate it for being stupid all you like, but don't hold this up as an example of sexism when it's simply parodying subject matter that is inherently sexist and stupid to begin with in order to highlight how sexist and stupid it is.

Jonathan Braun:
"People," because you think feminist wasn't the best term.

I don't understand what you're talking about. Are you referencing that time when I asked you to stop calling feminists jerks?

Jonathan Braun:
So FPS/RTS/4x = segregation to you?

No, you explicitly saying men and women should have distinct games is segregation to me.

Jonathan Braun:
We cannot homogenize gaming into a single genre that everyone loves.

I don't think you and I mean the same thing by the word "genre." How do you define it?

Jonathan Braun:
If you don't even like games, then why are you on the Escapist?

I also didn't say I don't like games. My point was that you keep telling me I said things I didn't say, because when you do that it makes me question either your reading comprehension or your bias.

Jonathan Braun:
Oh right, you're just a troll.

Please stop that. Disagreeing with you does not make me a troll, and I really wish we could talk about this like adults.

MovieBob:
It Never Ends

MovieBob discusses the recent Dragon's Crown controversy, and why we really need more diversity in our videogame characters.

Read Full Article

The thing is, Dragon Crown no only had the outrageous females, people whined about for decades now... but also did it with the males. Equal rights people, both sides got the treatment.

As with lots of art, people have a opinion. I think it's just very sloppy animation myself, nothing very real at all.

Honestly, exaggerated characters always exist and always will. Mostly no one will believe a 400lb Samus is saving the universe. Same time, you make her a bodybuilder, chances are in reality those G cup boobs made of fatty tissue are first to vanish.

People want pretty heroes. Always have. And in not real videogames, where people jump 50 feet in the air, take enough bullets to kill a small country and yet the problem most insecure complainers have....is breast size or to many muscles on the men.

Make believe people. Deal with it.

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
"People," because you think feminist wasn't the best term.

I don't understand what you're talking about. Are you referencing that time when I asked you to stop calling feminists jerks?

Jonathan Braun:
So FPS/RTS/4x = segregation to you?

No, you explicitly saying men and women should have distinct games is segregation to me.

Jonathan Braun:
We cannot homogenize gaming into a single genre that everyone loves.

I don't think you and I mean the same thing by the word "genre." How do you define it?

Jonathan Braun:
If you don't even like games, then why are you on the Escapist?

I also didn't say I don't like games. My point was that you keep telling me I said things I didn't say, because when you do that it makes me question either your reading comprehension or your bias.

Jonathan Braun:
Oh right, you're just a troll.

Please stop that. Disagreeing with you does not make me a troll, and I really wish we could talk about this like adults.

So you would say that "chick flicks" and romance novels, shoujo manga and alot of fanfiction (50 shades of grey) are segregation and should be more inclusive?

Many non-gamers some female don't play games, because it just does not interest them. Bioshock Infinite has a rich story and a very well written and presented female character, but this means nothing to people turned off by it being violent. The Walking Dead had violence, but played out more as a film and can appeal to a wider audience than Bioshock Infinite.

So what is so "segregating" by implying that female gamers and non gamers should help to create games that appeal more to them? These genres exist in all other media, why not video games.

Jonathan Braun:
So you would say that "chick flicks" and romance novels, shoujo manga and a lot of fan fiction (Fifty Shades of Grey) are segregation and should be more inclusive?

I don't know enough about their marketing to say for sure, but if they are created for the specific and explicit purpose of appealing to women to the exclusion of men, then yeah, probably. The principle at work here is whether a product is being aimed at [people who would like this or that product] rather than being aimed at [specific marketing demographic because we've already decided whose money we want and whose we don't]. If it helps, think of it like that thing Romney said last year about how he wasn't going to bother talking to poor people because they're not going to vote for him anyway.

Jonathan Braun:
Many non-gamers, some female, don't play games because it just does not interest them.

That's fine. I'm not talking about them, though.

(I'm not really talking about gamers, either--I'm talking about the effect the culture has on women--but I guess this tangent isn't completely unrelated to that topic.)

Jonathan Braun:
So what is so "segregating" by implying that female gamers and non-gamers should help to create games that appeal more to them?

Okay, look, here is the definition of the word "segregation." When you say the solution is for women to have their own, separate category of games, you are saying that the separation of people into categories that are not self-chosen but are rather being determined for them by the industry is a thing you approve of.

You're also misusing the word "implying," which I only mention because I really am trying to understand you, but it's hard to do when you use words that don't mean what you think they do. That's why I asked you to define the word "genre" and why I asked what you were talking about with the "you don't like it when I say feminists" thing: Before I can understand your position, we have to be speaking the same language. I would really appreciate it if you would answer the questions I've been asking.

JimB:
snip

I see something problematic in your logic, both points in [] are the same, and of course an American presidential candidate would ignore a large portion of the country, it's how there elections work. Now if they had proportional representation (everyone matters, like games sales figures, anyone can purchase them) Romney wouldn't be able to ignore anyone.

Ok I'll be blunt then, why is segregation bad to you? No game can appeal to every demographic. Also why is "determined for them by the industry" in your rebuttal, clearly I have been advocating for people like you (who seem to not enjoy how the industry is handling it) to take it into your own hands and design games you'd actually enjoy. This would show said industry what you'd actually want more clearly then "that's sexist" and can then further be augmented by complaints or voting with your wallet. If you can't actually make said game, there is someone who can. What I'm suggesting seems more impactful and useful.

Jonathan Braun:
I see something problematic in your logic[...]

I just want to take a moment to thank you for this statement you just made. It's a lot more like how I wanted the conversation to go.

Sorry to interrupt. Please continue.

Jonathan Braun:
[...]both points in brackets are the same.

No, they're not. The difference is subtle, but it's real. The first group is people who are interested in the subject matter; the second group is people whom the developers target. The groups are only the same to the degree that there's overlap. In this specific instance, I think the character design of Dragon's Crown has nothing to do with the game itself--with its mechanics and the way it tells its story--and everything to do with trying to give heterosexual, male consumers erections that will make them want to see the Sorceress bend over and wink.

Jonathan Braun:
Why is segregation bad to you?

I believe that for an act to be responsible, the demonstrable good of its outcome has to outweigh the demonstrable bad. No one has been able to demonstrate to me how games, the gaming industry, American society, or even how my personal enjoyment of games are improved by the fetishization of female characters; and I can demonstrate how it has negative effects. Therefore I conclude, because no one will present me with any evidence to the contrary, that the current marketing paradigm behind AAA game design in particular and the gaming industry in general is irresponsible.

Jonathan Braun:
No game can appeal to every demographic.

I am not asking for that. I am asking for designers to stop deliberately excluding women.

Jonathan Braun:
Also, why is "determined for them by the industry" in your rebuttal? Clearly I have been advocating for people like you (who seem to not enjoy how the industry is handling it) to take it into your own hands and design games you'd actually enjoy.

If I am unhappy with the state of American government, I can begin an armed rebellion to replace the government; but I'd be happier if the current government just listened to me and stopped behaving like children.

Jonathan Braun:
This would show said industry what you'd actually want more clearly than "that's sexist" and can then further be augmented by complaints or voting with your wallet.

And if I had any skill in designing games, and if I had an income that was above the poverty level with which to finance a game, that option would be more appealing to me.

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
I see something problematic in your logic[...]

I just want to take a moment to thank you for this statement you just made. It's a lot more like how I wanted the conversation to go.

Sorry to interrupt. Please continue.

Jonathan Braun:
[...]both points in brackets are the same.

No, they're not. The difference is subtle, but it's real. The first group is people who are interested in the subject matter; the second group is people whom the developers target. The groups are only the same to the degree that there's overlap. In this specific instance, I think the character design of Dragon's Crown has nothing to do with the game itself--with its mechanics and the way it tells its story--and everything to do with trying to give heterosexual, male consumers erections that will make them want to see the Sorceress bend over and wink.

Jonathan Braun:
Why is segregation bad to you?

I believe that for an act to be responsible, the demonstrable good of its outcome has to outweigh the demonstrable bad. No one has been able to demonstrate to me how games, the gaming industry, American society, or even how my personal enjoyment of games are improved by the fetishization of female characters; and I can demonstrate how it has negative effects. Therefore I conclude, because no one will present me with any evidence to the contrary, that the current marketing paradigm behind AAA game design in particular and the gaming industry in general is irresponsible.

Jonathan Braun:
No game can appeal to every demographic.

I am not asking for that. I am asking for designers to stop deliberately excluding women.

Jonathan Braun:
Also, why is "determined for them by the industry" in your rebuttal? Clearly I have been advocating for people like you (who seem to not enjoy how the industry is handling it) to take it into your own hands and design games you'd actually enjoy.

If I am unhappy with the state of American government, I can begin an armed rebellion to replace the government; but I'd be happier if the current government just listened to me and stopped behaving like children.

Jonathan Braun:
This would show said industry what you'd actually want more clearly than "that's sexist" and can then further be augmented by complaints or voting with your wallet.

And if I had any skill in designing games, and if I had an income that was above the poverty level with which to finance a game, that option would be more appealing to me.

Do you find offense with fashion magazines and the like, showing how women and young girls should dress to be "accepted by society"? They have a market, sure fetishism might have little point (compared to game play), but it has demonstrated it too has a market. I still don't fully comprehend why the developer would be in the wrong for targeting to a specific demographic, it's how marketing works. Sure they could've done other choices that might've translated to more money, but without proof of concept it'd just be wishful thinking. Your inexperience or lack of funds does not stop you from knowing what you'd think you'd like. You could talk with many like-minded individuals and try to come up with either a guideline or outline, of what would sell you on a game. If I were in marketing/development I'd rather know just what would truly appeal to that demographic, rather than assume and blindly fix things until my studio closes and another studio learns from my mistakes and reaps the reward.

50 shades of grey targets women as it is written by a woman, I find that ok since I can find other media.

BigTuk:

Jarimir:
Someone just needs to make a male video game character whose performance and progress through the game is entirely measured by his masculinity-

snip

You make some compelling points, however, the argument isn't that only one kind of sexism is prevalent in video games. It's that it's so one sided.

Also, the male characters you described: their features are meant to appeal to other males in their hypermasculinity. As a male you are meant to identify with their maleness and ability to express and wield such masculine power. You would be hard pressed to find a woman who found these males attractive.

Here is a list of popular female crushes-

Prince
Taylor Lautner (Jacob from Twilight)
Robert Pattinson
Justin Timberlake
Michael Jackson (at least early in his career)
Mathew McConaughey

Even if you ignore the more effeminate males, masculine males have to display a sensitive side or a passion for something that could involve a woman for women to show any interest. This actually compounds the problem of objectified women in video games. The portrayal of men is exaggerated to an extreme that is clearly not even meant for women. The telling of the story is from and for the male point of view only. Women get to be accessories, eye candy, scenery.

That sorceress, she wouldn't be there if she had modest breasts and wore sensible clothes, and so many other female characters wouldn't be either.

A few listed examples does not disprove the TREND that people find disturbing.

What about people whose pastime is telling other people that their feelings are unfounded and invalid? Can we dismiss you as easily as we could a baseball or basketball fan? Basketball fans don't go around trying to tell baseball fans heir sport is silly or marginalizes a segment of the population, ignores the stuggles of another, or unfairly claims accuses them of being sexist.

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.

I missed that reply earlier, but I guess it still deserves an answer.

Consider this: most hollywood romcoms are arguably worse than the big actions movies, when it comes to insulting your intelligence and casting stereotypes and old rolemodels.
Atleast with dumb action, you can just watch for the fights and the big explosions, so there's a small excuse for the characterisation to be simple. Not so for romcoms.

The implication here is that most blockbusters cater to the dumb, or more precisely, the largest audience through lowest common denominator and that will not change.
Should triple-A game development ever see the rise of a romcom equivalent, I still won't expect such titles to be any more intelligent or socially progressive than the AAA titles marketed to boys.

Jonathan Braun:
Do you find offense with fashion magazines and the like, showing how women and young girls should dress to be "accepted by society?"

I'm not sure "offense" is the right word; I do find them troubling, and I do think they contribute to an untenable and insupportable culture of oppression, but I'm not outraged enough to call myself offended by them because I detect less malice in them than I do in other industries.

Jonathan Braun:
They have a market, sure fetishism might have little point (compared to game play), but it has demonstrated it too has a market.

So does child pornography. I'm not saying Dragon's Crown is as morally repugnant as pedophilia, but I am saying "People will buy it" cuts zero ice with me. People will buy a hollowed-out golf club designed to be peed in while on the golf course, for god's sake.

Jonathan Braun:
Your inexperience or lack of funds does not stop you from knowing what you'd think you'd like. You could talk with many like-minded individuals and try to come up with either a guideline or outline of what would sell you on a game.

I am not clear what your point here is. Are you saying I am only allowed to describe what I want to see, but not what I don't?

Jonathan Braun:
Fifty Shades of Grey targets women as it is written by a woman; I find that okay, since I can find other media.

Okay, two things, Jonathan Braun.

First, I find the implications of "a woman wrote it, so it targets women" to be extremely telling. Why should we expect or incentivize gender-segregated marketing; that is, men should buy stuff men make and women should buy stuff women make? Because if that's the case, women have just been barred from going to movies.

Second, your argument seems to be that a bad thing isn't bad as long as there's a better alternative out there. It reminds me of something Yahtzee said once. If you stick your dick in a pudding, there will be plenty of parts of the pudding that your dick has not touched, so I could eat those bits; but I would rather people stop putting their dicks in pudding.

Why are people in the gaming media so quick to defend a minority of tumblr white girls pretending to be feminists that don't play video games and hate them personally. For all the accusations of gamers hating women, they aren't shy about hating you... yes you. (or transgendered) I'm not even joking...

Want an adventure? Search Misandry 4 Lyfe on tumblr
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/misandry+4+lyfe

image

Battle Catman:
Though I wouldn't call myself a feminist, more like someone who wants true gender equality;

Um, what exactly do you think feminism is? Feminism is the radical notion that women are people. It, as a discipline, is not only concerned about the limiting roles our society places on women, but the limiting (though dominant) roles our patriarchal society places on men as well. That's why the 'men's rights' movement is largely bullshit; we already have a movement that is trying to free men along with women. It's called feminism.

Nurb:
Why are people in the gaming media so quick to defend a minority of tumblr white girls pretending to be feminists that don't play video games and hate them personally. For all the accusations of gamers hating women, they aren't shy about hating you... yes you. (or transgendered) I'm not even joking...

Want an adventure? Search Misandry 4 Lyfe on tumblr
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/misandry+4+lyfe

image

Oh noes! The feminazis are taking our MANHOOD!

Lol. You and that site is certainly making a good CASE for women in general adopting M4L as their life motto :D

But in regards to the topic. Men tend to be "exaggerated" in ways that show power and toughness - in ways relevant to beating the game. Females tend to be exaggerated to make them "eye candy" (to SOMEONE, at least) - in ways that would not be relevant to beating the game.

There would be no issue if women had been made tough, rugged bad*sses, they could even still be portrayed as somewhat sexy (think of the orc warrior women from K.T. Anderson's Elfwood art) That would have been relevant for the game. But I guess showing women as TOO tough and capable would just be overly intimidating - much better to give them a look that clearly screams - "this is just make believe, women really can't do things like this, and look how HAWT she is!"

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
Do you find offense with fashion magazines and the like, showing how women and young girls should dress to be "accepted by society?"

I'm not sure "offense" is the right word; I do find them troubling, and I do think they contribute to an untenable and insupportable culture of oppression, but I'm not outraged enough to call myself offended by them because I detect less malice in them than I do in other industries.

Jonathan Braun:
They have a market, sure fetishism might have little point (compared to game play), but it has demonstrated it too has a market.

So does child pornography. I'm not saying Dragon's Crown is as morally repugnant as pedophilia, but I am saying "People will buy it" cuts zero ice with me. People will buy a hollowed-out golf club designed to be peed in while on the golf course, for god's sake.

Jonathan Braun:
Your inexperience or lack of funds does not stop you from knowing what you'd think you'd like. You could talk with many like-minded individuals and try to come up with either a guideline or outline of what would sell you on a game.

I am not clear what your point here is. Are you saying I am only allowed to describe what I want to see, but not what I don't?

Jonathan Braun:
Fifty Shades of Grey targets women as it is written by a woman; I find that okay, since I can find other media.

Okay, two things, Jonathan Braun.

First, I find the implications of "a woman wrote it, so it targets women" to be extremely telling. Why should we expect or incentivize gender-segregated marketing; that is, men should buy stuff men make and women should buy stuff women make? Because if that's the case, women have just been barred from going to movies.

Second, your argument seems to be that a bad thing isn't bad as long as there's a better alternative out there. It reminds me of something Yahtzee said once. If you stick your dick in a pudding, there will be plenty of parts of the pudding that your dick has not touched, so I could eat those bits; but I would rather people stop putting their dicks in pudding.

Not that you can't complain, but I, personally see no benefit in doing so and that my suggestion is what I'd do. So you would prefer homogenization (how else would you get rid off all the "bad" things)? Everything is created for everyone, not a single demographic left except for "everyone". I don't see how that can possibly work, we, men and women differ on a biological basis. There is quite a bit of overlap though.

"a woman wrote it, so it targets women" Well 50 shades was her own fantasy that many women share. Women can and do write other things that appeal to other audiences, but women also write many things they themselves are fond of.

shifter85:

Oh noes! The feminazis are taking our MANHOOD!

Lol. You and that site is certainly making a good CASE for women in general adopting M4L as their life motto :D

But in regards to the topic. Men tend to be "exaggerated" in ways that show power and toughness - in ways relevant to beating the game. Females tend to be exaggerated to make them "eye candy" (to SOMEONE, at least) - in ways that would not be relevant to beating the game.

There would be no issue if women had been made tough, rugged bad*sses, they could even still be portrayed as somewhat sexy (think of the orc warrior women from K.T. Anderson's Elfwood art) That would have been relevant for the game. But I guess showing women as TOO tough and capable would just be overly intimidating - much better to give them a look that clearly screams - "this is just make believe, women really can't do things like this, and look how HAWT she is!"

You mean that you'd like female bodybuilders? It's a videogame, where 5" nothing woman dressed in battle bikini can take all the damage plate does and kill anything that the muscular giant of a man can. Though this games a lil' better even if you seem to all dislike the art style, at least the female warrior has muscles.

Jonathan Braun:
Not that you can't complain, but I, personally see no benefit in doing so and that my suggestion is what I'd do.

Is this like that other guy I was arguing with a few pages ago and you think complaining about it on an internet forum is all I do, or do you think complaining in general never achieves anything? Because I only had to write one letter of complaint to the managers of the movie theaters in town to get them to stop playing advertisements after the movie's printed start time. Complaining works.

Jonathan Braun:
So you would prefer homogenization (how else would you get rid off all the "bad" things)?

This might be the result of sloppy language on my part. I do not consider the industry's stance toward its depiction of women as a bad thing because of how it affects a game's attractiveness to me; I consider it bad because I think it contributes to a harmful environment. So I want to get rid of the harmful things.

Jonathan Braun:
Fifty Shades of Grey was her own fantasy that many women share.

Yeah, I'm gonna need to see your source before I accept that "many" women share that fantasy.

Jonathan Braun:
Women can and do write other things that appeal to other audiences, but women also write many things they themselves are fond of.

Of course they do, but that isn't what you said earlier. Still, I'm willing to drop this line of discussion if you are, mostly because it's early in the morning for me and I'm afraid my morning grumpiness is coloring my interpretation of your argument right now.

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
Not that you can't complain, but I, personally see no benefit in doing so and that my suggestion is what I'd do.

Is this like that other guy I was arguing with a few pages ago and you think complaining about it on an internet forum is all I do, or do you think complaining in general never achieves anything? Because I only had to write one letter of complaint to the managers of the movie theaters in town to get them to stop playing advertisements after the movie's printed start time. Complaining works.

Jonathan Braun:
So you would prefer homogenization (how else would you get rid off all the "bad" things)?

This might be the result of sloppy language on my part. I do not consider the industry's stance toward its depiction of women as a bad thing because of how it affects a game's attractiveness to me; I consider it bad because I think it contributes to a harmful environment. So I want to get rid of the harmful things.

Jonathan Braun:
Fifty Shades of Gray was her own fantasy that many women share.

Yeah, I'm gonna need to see your source before I accept that "many" women share that fantasy.

Jonathan Braun:
Women can and do write other things that appeal to other audiences, but women also write many things they themselves are fond of.

Of course they do, but that isn't what you said earlier. Still, I'm willing to drop this line of discussion if you are, mostly because it's early in the morning for me and I'm afraid my morning grumpiness is coloring my interpretation of your argument right now.

My only personal evidence for 50 shades of grey is some anecdotal and the fact that her twilight fanfic got 3 books and a movie deal, that means a large market of mostly girls had to be into it. Not that I'm saying every women shares her fantasy, but enough to justify publishing a fanfic into 3 books. Complaining can lead to many things, I was just offering up my ideal, rather than complain about a harmful environment drown that environment in what you'd like. You and some friends or like minded individuals do a little research and hash things out and figure out whats best. I only really brought this up, because I got the impression you felt there were no female friendly games.

I'm fine to end this conversation, I just don't understand what is so "harmful" about this industry. Especially when Fashion mags and celeb rags are far more likely to cause a young prepubescent girl into thinking she is just a sexualized object. Easier access (it's on TV) than M or T rated games, depending on the parents/friends.

shifter85:

Nurb:
Why are people in the gaming media so quick to defend a minority of tumblr white girls pretending to be feminists that don't play video games and hate them personally. For all the accusations of gamers hating women, they aren't shy about hating you... yes you. (or transgendered) I'm not even joking...

Want an adventure? Search Misandry 4 Lyfe on tumblr
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/misandry+4+lyfe

image

Oh noes! The feminazis are taking our MANHOOD!

Lol. You and that site is certainly making a good CASE for women in general adopting M4L as their life motto :D

My point is Misandry 4 Lyfers aren't a threat, they're just annoying 13 to 20 middle/upper class white girls pretending to be feminists that "HATE ALL MEN, CEPT MY BOYFRIEND LOL, AND TRANNIES".

They're a very narrow spectrum of people that the gaming media should be smart enough to see it and ignore them. They're the Westboro Baptist Church of feminism; intentionally offensive, invasive, and inflamatory, but laughably harmless.

Jonathan Braun:
My only personal evidence for Fifty Shades of Grey is some anecdotal and the fact that her Twilight fanfic got 3 books and a movie deal, that means a large market of mostly girls had to be into it.

Uh...no. No, it doesn't. It means people are buying the books, nothing else. Pretty much every comedian I can think of has a copy of the book because they think it's funny and want to mine it for material. That's not even close to proving that anyone actually shares the fantasies.

Jonathan Braun:
I'm fine to end this conversation.

I meant the bit where I stopped a toe away from calling you a liar there toward the end of my last post.

Jonathan Braun:
I just don't understand what is so "harmful" about this industry.

It contributes to the deeply rooted belief that women should be treated as sex objects.

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
My only personal evidence for Fifty Shades of Gray is some anecdotal and the fact that her Twilight fanfic got 3 books and a movie deal, that means a large market of mostly girls had to be into it.

Uh...no. No, it doesn't. It means people are buying the books, nothing else. Pretty much every comedian I can think of has a copy of the book because they think it's funny and want to mine it for material. That's not even close to proving that anyone actually shares the fantasies.

Jonathan Braun:
I'm fine to end this conversation.

I meant the bit where I stopped a toe away from calling you a liar there toward the end of my last post.

Jonathan Braun:
I just don't understand what is so "harmful" about this industry.

It contributes to the deeply rooted belief that women should be treated as sex objects.

Unless your going to turn humans into cybermen we will still think of sex, it is what makes as human and not robots. Also i'm sure some might "laugh", but would you really publish a book if comedians really was there target audience? Let alone offer her a movie deal? That is a lot of money spent on a lost cause, if as you believe barely anyone shares such fantasies. Look, I'm not saying your a sexual deviant who enjoys being a submissive in a BDSM fantasy, but they do exist.

"It means people are buying the books, nothing else" "I am saying "People will buy it" cuts zero ice with me."

So you deny that many women who like 50 shades do so since they share a fantasy with the author, yet you deny that people just like overly sexually attractive women in gaming, because it is "hurtful".

There is always a reason something sells, and why it is made.

Nurb:

shifter85:

Nurb:
Why are people in the gaming media so quick to defend a minority of tumblr white girls pretending to be feminists that don't play video games and hate them personally. For all the accusations of gamers hating women, they aren't shy about hating you... yes you. (or transgendered) I'm not even joking...

Want an adventure? Search Misandry 4 Lyfe on tumblr
http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/misandry+4+lyfe

image

Oh noes! The feminazis are taking our MANHOOD!

Lol. You and that site is certainly making a good CASE for women in general adopting M4L as their life motto :D

My point is Misandry 4 Lyfers aren't a threat, they're just annoying 13 to 20 middle/upper class white girls pretending to be feminists that "HATE ALL MEN, CEPT MY BOYFRIEND LOL, AND TRANNIES".

They're a very narrow spectrum of people that the gaming media should be smart enough to see it and ignore them. They're the Westboro Baptist Church of feminism; intentionally offensive, invasive, and inflamatory, but laughably harmless.

Unlike feminist lobby groups who actively deny legislation MHRA's try to pass to equal the playing field, now there harmful.

Jonathan Braun:
Unless you're going to turn humans into cybermen, we will still think of sex.

I don't know what this statement is in response to. Where did I say I want anyone to stop thinking of sex? Is this a reference to my line about sex objects? There's a difference between thinking about sex and seeing women as objects whose personalities are less important than their orifices.

Honestly, man, I don't like to rag on someone for his writing style, but it's getting really hard to keep reading your posts when you won't break up posts so I can know what you're responding to.

Jonathan Braun:
I'm sure some might "laugh,"[...]

It is demonstrably true that they do. Look up videos on Youtube.

Jonathan Braun:
[...]but would you really publish a book if comedians really were the target audience?

I'm very confused by this statement. Who said comedians are the target audience? Like, um, okay, take Disney movies as an example. They're targeted at kids, but they (for reasons I have forgotten but that I think have to do with people looking for subtext) attract a lot of gay viewers too.

Jonathan Braun:
Let alone offer her a movie deal?

Look, I think the hang-up here is that you think if the book is successful, then it must be successful for exactly the reasons its author intended it to be. I don't see how you can come to that conclusion.

Jonathan Braun:
I'm not saying you're a sexual deviant who enjoys being a submissive in a BDSM fantasy, but they do exist.

Yes, I know they exist, but when did my sexual tastes become part of this? What are we even talking about?

Jonathan Braun:
So you deny that many women who like Fifty Shades of Grey do so since they share a fantasy with the author, yet you deny that people just like overly sexually attractive women in gaming, because it is "hurtful."

No. I never said either of those things. I said you're going to have to prove to me that a lot of women share those fantasies, and I never even touched on the other topic, but if anything, I said the opposite of "people don't like overly sexual women."

Jonathan Braun:
There is always a reason something sells, and why it is made.

The reason something sells may not be the same as the reason it's made.

JimB:

Jonathan Braun:
Unless you're going to turn humans into cybermen, we will still think of sex.

I don't know what this statement is in response to. Where did I say I want anyone to stop thinking of sex? Is this a reference to my line about sex objects? There's a difference between thinking about sex and seeing women as objects whose personalities are less important than their orifices.

Honestly, man, I don't like to rag on someone for his writing style, but it's getting really hard to keep reading your posts when you won't break up posts so I can know what you're responding to.

Jonathan Braun:
I'm sure some might "laugh,"[...]

It is demonstrably true that they do. Look up videos on Youtube.

Jonathan Braun:
[...]but would you really publish a book if comedians really were the target audience?

I'm very confused by this statement. Who said comedians are the target audience? Like, um, okay, take Disney movies as an example. They're targeted at kids, but they (for reasons I have forgotten but that I think have to do with people looking for subtext) attract a lot of gay viewers too.

Jonathan Braun:
Let alone offer her a movie deal?

Look, I think the hang-up here is that you think if the book is successful, then it must be successful for exactly the reasons its author intended it to be. I don't see how you can come to that conclusion.

Jonathan Braun:
I'm not saying your a sexual deviant who enjoys being a submissive in a BDSM fantasy, but they do exist.

Yes, I know they exist, but when did my sexual tastes become part of this? What are we even talking about?

Jonathan Braun:
So you deny that many women who like Fifty Shades of Gray do so since they share a fantasy with the author, yet you deny that people just like overly sexually attractive women in gaming, because it is "hurtful."

No. I never said either of those things. I said you're going to have to prove to me that a lot of women share those fantasies, and I never even touched on the other topic, but if anything, I said the opposite of "people don't like overly sexual women."

Jonathan Braun:
There is always a reason something sells, and why it is made.

The reason something sells may not be the same as the reason it's made.

You did though, you feel that "people will buy it" is not a good enough reason when you believe it's just a "sex object" and thus harmful. When you call something harmful, generally you want to see it gone. Yet in 50 shades case you ignore any validity that many women share Erika's tastes, saying that it's popularity just means people bought it. What I mean is if you were the publisher backing her and only believed it's worth was to be mined for material, then you wouldn't publish her book. Yet she published 3 books and got a movie deal and it was not comedians who wanted the movie, but her fans who share her views and are women. You always bold 50 shades, as if saying it is taken as a personal offense to you, just wanted to clear my point up.

Mostly tongue in cheek, though cybermen have no gender there all just one, sounds like your problems would be fixed that way.

"The reason something sells may not be the same as the reason it's made."

Videogames and books boil down into base emotions that we want to feel, so we consume them. Books being simpler are easier to target to an audience, while games being complex as they are can get there wires crossed and a "horror" game can turn into an action game. A sexualized character generally invokes the same response (even if the game flops) it entices with sexual attraction, to both market and pander to both the artist and the end user. Yet you want this industry to cut back on such characters (not even that many) to pander to a smaller audience with some of its members not even interested in the base game.

Why not create women centric games and pander to them for balance? Currently I can only think of a few dating sims or barbie games that are actually made for girls in particular. Most games want as wide an audience they can, yet there main supporters are male gamers. What would such a game even look like to you? Or would it just be any other game with anything you disagree with cut out?

"Look, I think the hang-up here is that you think if the book is successful, then it must be successful for exactly the reasons its author intended it to be. I don't see how you can come to that conclusion."

So you believe that 20 million people, bought 50 shades to make fun of it? To be generous maybe a mill or 2, plus people easily goaded into buying "best sellers" say 7 mill that leaves 11 million people (rough estimate) who actually enjoy the subject matter to some extent. Twilight was able to make 4 films not because people laughed at it, but because it had a large fandom that connected with the book.

 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