Well I won't be buying the new Tomb Raider...

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

Wow, so if games are made with over sexualised, impossibly proportioned women there's a problem. Then if they decide to tone it down to normal sizes then there's also a problem?

It sounds like you are just complaining for the sake of it.

RazadaMk2:
Yes, its been handled badly. But does that mean companies should stop trying?

IMO its not turning a strong female character into a "Believable" character. In this case it is taking a 2 dimensional wank cloth and giving it a backstory to try and explain how they became a badass, runny jumpy sociopath with giant breasts.

And if they want to do this by telling a brutal tale of death and pain, all the power to them! I, personally, am fucking bored with characters that I cannot sympathise with. Someone shit scared going through hell and finding reserves of strength? Sounds awesome to me. Heh, the general themes of this put me in mind of a one man Lord of the Flies.

I say we hold off judgement until the bloody game has been released.

I'm not saying that companies should stop trying. I'm saying they should learn how to portray female characters. They're going down the exact same path with this game as they did with the Other M, and I see serious problems for the game's future.

They should not be aiming to get you to want to protect her, they should be aiming to get you to sympathize with her. There's a MASSIVE difference between the urge to protect and sympathy.

TimeLord:
Wow, so if games are made with over sexualised, impossibly proportioned women there's a problem. Then if they decide to tone it down to normal sizes then there's also a problem?

It sounds like you are just complaining for the sake of it.

If you actually read anything in this topic, no one gives a damn about her breast size (and if they do, they are in a very small minority).

cynicalandbored:
Is it just me that's a little disgusted by this?

I really fucking hope you are the only one. She's not being made weaker and more vulnerable because she's supposed to be a more realistic female protagonist, it's happening because it's her God damned character. This Lara is a child in comparison to all the other Lara appearances, she's out on, pretty much, her first real adventure. She has no idea what she's getting into and it's all blowing up in her face. You're supposed to want to protect her because she's helpless as a character, as a person, not as a woman.

Basically, you're looking at the whole sexism thing through the eyes of some try-hard white knight who doesn't know what actual sexism is. Try and think of things less in terms of men and women and more as in character, because until you start doing that you're a sexist, you're the enemy.

Lara's huge boobs are like her superman symbol she would not be the character she is without them.

to be honest men are always muscularly in games, women like muscles so that could be over sexualisation.

To all those people who dont want sexualised video game characters and want someone average and unattractive. FUCK YOU if you want average and realistic go and look round your local super market.

I'm cool with it.

Still not going to buy though. The topic line is the only good thing about the OP.
Gamers need to grow thicker skins and stop trying to be offended.

Raven's Nest:

Sixcess:
Lara was the iconic female video game hero of the 90s. She didn't need a justification for going on adventures and kicking ass any more than her male counterparts did. Now it's a reaction to an attempted rape. How can this possibly be seen as a step forward?

This is going to be worse than Other M.

It's fine because it'll be a moment that defines Lara Croft's character...

Last I checked, the worth of woman world wide was not determined by one game character. That kind of thinking is hyperbole at it's most extreme.

Which would be a relevant observation if I'd implied otherwise. I haven't.

As I've said elsewhere, most recently in the post I wrote before reading yours, this should have been a new IP. I'd have no problem with that, other than probably thinking it was the usual bad video game writing.

My entire problem with the reboot is that it's Lara Croft, who shouldn't need some Freudian motive excuse to do what she does.

It seems all the people crying "OMG THIS IS SEXIST!!!" are failing to notice one simple little thing: Lara Croft is a character in a story. Guess what type of character in this story she happens to be. Yup, a weak, helpless person who goes on a journey and grows into a strong individual.
The plot wouldn't work if she was already an empowered young woman. The ones who are getting offended don't seem to realize that there isn't going to be one concrete archetype for a character. Honestly, I don't think people would be getting mad if Lara didn't just so happen to be a woman in this game. If she was, say, "Larry, the young, helpless man who almost gets raped on an island" people would be astounded at how unique of a character Larry was. But no, since it's a woman its incredibly sexist. Like women can't be interesting unique characters in videogames. Good god, some of these posts made me sick.
I just wanted to point out one post in particular for being the single most well thought out post I've seen on the Escapist. I'm sure it's been acknowledged already in this thread, but I got pissed at about page 2 and decided to post my thoughts.
This is simply here for recognition:

Elamdri:
SNIP

Can we have a game that people won't flip their shit over for petty reasons, the Hitman trailer was great, I'm interested in the game now because of the trailer, it did it's job, but because some skin is shown, people flip the fuck out.

Not that I'm likely to play it but it does appeal to me because...

... it's a character I might actually be able to care about...

the fact that it is portrayed as having an additional x chromosome is beside the point to me...

I have held the opinion for a while now that Lara Croft is a seriously fucked up individual who needs to spend the rest of her life in a padded room, and the only reason she doesn't is because she would (and could) slaughter every cop in the county where they sent to arrest her.

This new game looks like it's going to explain just how she got that screwed up, and I welcome that... even if I did cringe like hell at some of the trailer. Still, nothing I've seen implies to me that "being tortured makes you a badass." No, what it said to me is that when you've been pushed beyond the point of physical endurance, you have two choices; surrender and die, or push back. Most people would choose the former. Lara chose the latter.

Wargamer:
I have held the opinion for a while now that Lara Croft is a seriously fucked up individual who needs to spend the rest of her life in a padded room...

This new game looks like it's going to explain just how she got that screwed up, and I welcome that...

Wow, I really hope not. I'd rather this 'reboot' just eschew the previously established notion that Lara is the caricature of a psychotic bitch and consider that a mistake and instead show Lara become a successful hero who's actually empowered.

You see, if she were to ultimately become how she's been portrayed previously would be to see her character fail and that would seem very tragic to me... on many fronts...

I was more turned off of the game by her getting tossed down a crazy waterfall and somehow having the God like ability to raise her shotgun, aim, and fire at, and then successfully breaking large blockages of logs multiple times like it was nothing

Sixcess:
Which would be a relevant observation if I'd implied otherwise. I haven't.

As I've said elsewhere, most recently in the post I wrote before reading yours, this should have been a new IP. I'd have no problem with that, other than probably thinking it was the usual bad video game writing.

My entire problem with the reboot is that it's Lara Croft, who shouldn't need some Freudian motive excuse to do what she does.

Exactly, this is my opinion as well. If it were an entirely new IP, I would probably have no real problems with the game (or at least not to the scale that I have currently).

connall:

Windknight:

-snip-

kortin:

-snip

You two said the same thing which bug me a bit. I will probably be called sexist or whatever, but on the internet I don't think I could give a damn.

While I understand that the idea of "You want to protect her" makes it sound derogatory but is it really? I mean essentially they want to make her a character you will like so will want to protect her, since you will have hopefully feelings with the character herself, otherwise it would be a character we don't find any need to protect and if that's the case what's the point? We protect every player character in our games through our actions. This is supposed to be Lauras first time out on one of these adventures, she is not some badass bringing guns to the battle she is the equivalent of a University student being lost in the wild, never having to deal with something like this before and is weaker for it. Be it male or female you should want to protect this character as they evolve and eventually begin to come to grips with their surroundings (much like Far Cry 3 I might add, but hey it's a male so that makes it alright!)

People are getting really sensitive with these sort of issues and while I have no problems with it, unless the two people I have quoted are themselves female then are making speculations on what females find offensive which I find slightly derogatory. But what do I know I'm a 16 year old male spouting opinions on a forum that doesn't give a damn, so there is that :p.

We're getting a prequel for Gears of War. Are we going to 'want to protect' Baird and Cole?

Thats the language that bugs me badly.
We're not going to see lara 'grow and become the hero she is'. The implication is we're not interested in seeing a woman grow and become strong, we have to see someone weak and feel the urge to protect her.

Can you imagine prequels where we 'wanted to protect' Marcus Fenix, Nathan drake, Kratos, the Master Chief, Max Payne, Soap or Snake?

And again, the big crux here is the rape aspect. because Rape is being used here as the writers think its Something That Only Happens To Women. It should NEVER be used in a story unless you know what your doing, and the way its being used here makes it pretty clear they don't know what they're doing

speaking as someone whos been through a fair bit of shit in life i wont mention most of it but the nicest thing i can think of is having to hold my guts in after someones bayonette rammed into it and having to get rid of him shit can change you can make you insane or trigger in my case berserk modes or nightmares,

now in gaming the character being tortured brings empathy often rage against the interogator so it can be a helpful tool in developing a vengeful spirit in the game. Look at Max Payne 1 the first scene where you enter the house and find the dead child of max payne and his wife, whey that came out it was a little disturbing and it got you into the characters head a little bit better

and from what ive seen of others playing CoD theres pretty much torture going on the entire game to the main character but they reckon it adds to the atmosphere of the game, I wouldnt know I dont intend on playing it but fair enough to them

now as much as i dont like it ill admit i dont care about the torture part its just the attempted rape that pisses me off

REASONS

1# rape is a very sensitive destructive crime and should be dealt with by one ruling IMO LIFE IN JAIL PERIOD

2# even under the revised game classification code its not keen to show attempts and say the good guy arriving just a few seconds too late or the after effects or the act itself is actually bannable material hence why we dont have manhunt in australia anymore i heard the last few of the 7 theyve made have really gone off the psychotic deep end

3# i know kids arent spose to play games with MA15 rating but you know they will they always do, only until they get a R rating in should they even suggest the fact it could have happened not that i support that,for instance LA Noire apparently had a mention of a PAST TENSE which is passable under new classification slightly pisses me off but doesnt make my rage boil

4# now GTA sort of crimes (shooting mayhem stealing you know the drill) if its a game like gta and its not glamourised im all for it, even shooters like Syndicate where apparently you blast the bodies apart piece by piece because in games like gta you expect it its what its known for bedlam, and Syndicate and CoD well its a game about war what do you expect. but putting this sort of content in a game that was originally a third person adventure shooter is dispicable it shouldnt be in any game

5# that fact they thought of it means their out of ideas and they are trying to reach the people who have a few screws loose in their heads, the ones that arent neccesarily bad people just have some restrained bad tendancies in their head. id realistically say 80% of people do not want to see it or an attempt or anything to do with it. id like to say the other 20% probably dont give a crap but realistically 15% probably dont care 5% probably get a tickle from it

Theres alot of other ways to make a game dark without it being trashy and without the need to use a dispicable thing, i know im going to get alot of flame for mention the game that should not be named but ME3 was a dark game yes it had about 70% of it being sort of calm before the storm but it was dark they had people dropping dead in a dramatic or honourable way (i am the very model of a scientist salarian) the low lighting in TR i can understand the frantic barely ahead of disaster yeah why not worked well before

also id like to say she cant have been that piss weak in the first place if she doesnt sit there shivering in fright after waking up in a cave, i mean come on she had a ribcage or big ass stick couldnt see what it was, stabbed into her gut and she yanks it out and groans and rolls for about 5 seconds, seen someone react like they were dying when theyd been nicked by a bullet and i mean graze on their neck not even a burst vein (behind left ear)

So maybe its not that shes weak its playing upon a fear and rage of part of the audience and the sick headed side of another part and the nightmare of that happening to another. so maybe its shock and gloom to distract us from her qualities already pre-existing through shitty writing and shock tactics

sorry for the rant just pisses me off, worm in the apple kind of thing aint buying it unless they cut that out

take it easy folks and off to bed i go

PS id also like to point out it doesnt only happen to women too.

Male American soldier held captive by insurgents in the middle east came out 1 month later with 9 STIs force fed viagra he is now incapable of intercourse as well as mentally scarred

Male Russian burgler burst into beauty salon to rob the joint blind got knocked out and fed viagra for 3 days then let go (not being mean but this russian paní was about 150 kilos from the reports i heard, he would not have enjoyed it) mental damage fairly high but happy to not go to a gulag

Kotaku:
The new Lara Croft isn't just less battle-hardened; she's less voluptuous. Gone are her ridiculous proportions and skimpy clothing. This Lara feels more human, more real. That's intentional, Rosenberg says.

cynicalandbored:
Isn't this description of the "new" Lara Croft much more offensive to female gamers in particular, and women in general? It manages to imply that large breasts make a woman less human for starters.

No, and no it doesn't imply that. What it is saying is that the old Lara Croft was a caricature, and the new one is a human being. It's you and that crazy Rachel Fogg that interprets Kotaku's statement as: 'large breasts make a woman less human'. It's certainly not my interpretation, and I don't see how anyone with any kind of reading comprehension could interpret the statement your way.

cynicalandbored:
It also makes a point that gamers (who are ideally supposed to be projecting onto the characters they are playing) will want to "protect" her, because she's "more vulnerable." Yes, you make a woman more realistic by ensuring she's less sexually empowered and needs a lot more looking after by the (presumably target male demographic) gamers that play her. *sarcasm*

Putting aside for a moment the contention that the old Lara Croft is sexually empowered (she isn't), what is so wrong with the player wanting to protect a character? If I as a male gamer want to protect a character in a game, and that character happens to be the main one, what is wrong with that? Is it wrong to encourage male gamers to protect a female character? Not all female characters have to be tough bitches that refuse help from men, you know. There is fuck all wrong with chivalry. If I want to see the game as me helping a woman who's in a bad situation, there is NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT.

cynicalandbored:
Fair enough, original Lara was a caricature, sexualised to the point of hilarity, and completely unsuitable as an aspirational model of womanhood. But she was at least able to look after herself. She was a bit of a badass, no denying, and that was something she had going for her. Men may have been more focused on her breasts, but the fact that she had an attitude was inescapable, albeit an attitude that occasionally spilled over into parody. In some ways original Lara was much more honest than this new, "realistic" Lara.

Essentially what you want from a female game character is a bad-ass bitch with attitude. Do you know how tired that cliche is? It's fucking boring and it certainly isn't realistic. It may appeal to you but it sure as hell doesn't appeal to me. Furthermore, it sure as hell isn't realistic or honest. A strong woman isn't a cold bitch who hates men and refuses their help. And I don't find a woman with attitude interesting or appealing. That's part of the problem with modern society - a woman with a bad attitude is viewed as a good thing.

I'd also like to point out the idiocy of claiming that this new look for Lara is even more sexist than the old one. This absolutely reeks of rebellion without a cause. If Lara is sexualised? -> Fucking male developers always making female characters with big tits and ass! If Lara is less sexualised? -> Fucking male developers always taking away sexual empowerment from our female characters! Man, nobody can win against this type of retarded argument.

cynicalandbored:
at least she wasn't just a pair of breasts bouncing above a hot-pants clad arse.

That's exactly what she was, and you think she was a better character.

cynicalandbored:
Here is a young woman who is portrayed as being totally helpless and vulnerable.

Untrue.

cynicalandbored:
This wilting violet of a girl has to be subjected to more hideous torture and brutality than any of us are ever likely to experience.

Some statistics I've read rate the chance of a woman in the US being raped at some point in their life as around 25%. That's a 1 in 4 chance.

cynicalandbored:
The implication of this is that the only way for a woman to develop an attitude and be able to look after herself is for her to undergo unspeakable hardship.

That is not the implication at all. The implication is that to make a character like Lara Croft, unspeakable hardship has to occur. Lara Croft is not any woman.

cynicalandbored:
And of course to have the big male ego of the gamer caring for her at every step.

This is a meta-view of what happens to her. A man is not physically there in-game helping her. The PLAYER helps her. If that player happens to be a man, and that man happens to perceive the game as him helping her, that doesn't mean that the implication of the game is that Lara needs a 'big male ego' helping her at every step. The story won't make reference to this man. It's not going to say "AND SO LARA BECAME A TOUGH BAD-ASS HERO BECAUSE THE MALE PLAYER HELPED HER. GOOD ONE MALE PLAYER." This is merely a possible interpretation in the mind of a male player.

cynicalandbored:
The fact that this hardship has to be rape as opposed to anything else is truly despicable.

So let's talk about rape being portrayed in games. I think there's a lot of fear at work here when you and Rachel Fogg rant and rave about rape being used as a plot device. Rape happens. It happens often. It's very likely to happen to an attractive woman who's being attacked by a gang of men. So let's not pretend that it doesn't exist. You're arguing that it shouldn't be used as a plot device because it's such an awful thing to happen to a woman. I say that's exactly why it SHOULD be used.

Issues that are never portrayed in media, never talked about by anyone for fear of offending others - that's a sign that those issues are a problem. Just look at how afraid everyone is of offending religions like Islam. Nobody will talk about it, because everyone's scared shitless of offending. It's like the skeleton in the closet. Same thing with the holocaust and Germany. Nobody wants to talk about it, because to talk about it would be to attempt to address these issues. Nobody wants to do that. It's not healthy.

It's exactly the same with rape. Nobody wants to talk about rape. Hell, I'd be afraid to bring it up in a conversation with work colleagues for example. It happens a lot more than people think, and it needs to be discussed. The only way modern society is going to deal with this issue is by talking about it, portraying it in media, generating debate.

So yeah. It should be portrayed. And IF it's portrayed in a cheap, nasty and degrading way, THEN we should come down like a ton of bricks on this game. But rape doesn't get automatic protection from portrayal. You can't shit on the game before you've seen what it has to say. For all you know, it could be the most fucking intelligent, sensitive and thought-provoking portrayal of rape that's ever been shown in media. I seriously doubt that it will, but I will defend vigorously the game's RIGHT TO TRY.

Anything less, anything like this reaction of OH MY GOD YOU CAN'T PORTRAY RAPE IN A GAME, just reeks of fear. Fear of confronting a very real problem that affects millions of women every year all around the damn world.

cynicalandbored:
Why couldn't we have a Lara we could try to identify with?

Yes, who could identify with a human being that's stuck in a shitty situation on an island all by themselves, who's forced to fight her way tooth and nail for survival and eventual freedom. Nobody could identify with that.

Windknight:

connall:

Windknight:

-snip-

kortin:

-snip

-Snip- -Snip-

We're getting a prequel for Gears of War. Are we going to 'want to protect' Baird and Cole?

Thats the language that bugs me badly.
We're not going to see lara 'grow and become the hero she is'. The implication is we're not interested in seeing a woman grow and become strong, we have to see someone weak and feel the urge to protect her.

Can you imagine prequels where we 'wanted to protect' Marcus Fenix, Nathan drake, Kratos, the Master Chief, Max Payne, Soap or Snake?

And again, the big crux here is the rape aspect. because Rape is being used here as the writers think its Something That Only Happens To Women. It should NEVER be used in a story unless you know what your doing, and the way its being used here makes it pretty clear they don't know what they're doing

Again I would like to point to what I said in reply to someone else.

"Here's the thing right. No-one is protecting her in game. So, it's not throwing all her traits out the window, she's just a little bit more inexperienced. She is still surviving on her own with no help and is using her intelligence to get out of situations. So... yeah."

Also who says we are not wanting to protect her at the start, but her actions and her learning and a thing called character development evolves her into a independent woman. The bottom line is, we have no idea what happens in the game so can make no knee jerk reactions what has been said, once, as trying to advertise her. They aren't trying to make her sound weak, that's a stupid move, they are just trying to say she's "likeable", poor choice of words? Perhaps. However, this one instant, of one guy saying one thing says nothing about the game and it's character.

This reboot of Tomb Raider in general and Lara Croft in particular at least makes me curious about the franchise again. I've been ignoring it for years.

I agree with Yosharian: if Crystal Dynamics wants to try and humanize the character and deal with very tough, very uncomfortable issues, they should be allowed to do it. They may or may not do it well, but I'll wait and see the finished product before I pass judgment.

Finbark:
It seems all the people crying "OMG THIS IS SEXIST!!!" are failing to notice one simple little thing: Lara Croft is a character in a story. Guess what type of character in this story she happens to be. Yup, a weak, helpless person who goes on a journey and grows into a strong individual.
The plot wouldn't work if she was already an empowered young woman. The ones who are getting offended don't seem to realize that there isn't going to be one concrete archetype for a character. Honestly, I don't think people would be getting mad if Lara didn't just so happen to be a woman in this game. If she was, say, "Larry, the young, helpless man who almost gets raped on an island" people would be astounded at how unique of a character Larry was. But no, since it's a woman its incredibly sexist. Like women can't be interesting unique characters in videogames. Good god, some of these posts made me sick.
I just wanted to point out one post in particular for being the single most well thought out post I've seen on the Escapist. I'm sure it's been acknowledged already in this thread, but I got pissed at about page 2 and decided to post my thoughts.
This is simply here for recognition:

Elamdri:
SNIP

Ty, it's nice to be appreciated.

People think way too much about this stuff. Just play the damn game and enjoy the characters and story for what it is.

I'm still trying to decide if i want it or not since i haven't seen enough of it. its amazing how quickly people resort to calling something sexist or what ever they choose

verdant monkai:
Lara's huge boobs are like her superman symbol she would not be the character she is without them.

to be honest men are always muscularly in games, women like muscles so that could be over sexualisation.

To all those people who dont want sexualised video game characters and want someone average and unattractive. FUCK YOU if you want average and realistic go and look round your local super market.

If you look at the screens, the new Laura is pretty damn attractive. She just doesn't look ridiculous.

the genius of kotarku , they have zero journalistic skill or integrity , no editorial ability and for a social commentary well you may as well listen to a cows second stomach.

But they can bait nerds like pros

character gets overhauled, new clothes new more normal shape , the story and events are made darker and everything is done to try and make us care for our protaganist.

one smaller aspect of this is the toning down of the breasts. which they leap on
"big tits makes a woman less human!"

watch the rage and the hits fly! its money in the bank and a damn site easier than being accurate clever or useful

cynicalandbored:
And of course to have the big male ego of the gamer caring for her at every step

cynicalandbored:
I see no fundamental difference between one that men only play because they want to ogle her tits and one men only want to play because they feel the need to take care of the poor little girl

In regards to this, what if it's a girl who's playing the game? why do you presume it's a guy who's playing it?

can it be that you are the one who is being sexist?

Also, related to the game, I actually think it's a good step to the saga, I never got into Tomb Raider, but I might just get this one, why?, because it looks like a better told story.

How to be called sexist in the videogame industry:

1. Have a female character in your videogame.

THE END

I will be getting it and I think you are overreacting.

It's an origin story of Lara and how she got to be what we know her for, so I would expect she's going to have to deal with a ton crap heading her way. Otherwise, what's the point in all this and they're just doing it for the sake of it.

Also, the whole rape thing? Apparently ole boy Ron Rosenberg screwed up in what he was talking about and actually that little scene doesn't have any rape connotation.

http://www.tombraider.com/us/base/brandsite?refer=19&

Anyways, Lara is now just a regular old person in this story rather than what she was before and we can now relate to her character here, so I have no problem with this game.

matrix3509:
How to be called sexist in the videogame industry:

1. Have a female character in your videogame.

THE END

Kinda sad isn't it?

matrix3509:
How to be called sexist in the videogame industry:

1. Have a female character in your videogame.

THE END

Actually, you're sexist if you don't have a female in your game, as well.

What I find offensive is some people seeming implication that this supposed near rape and abuse is made "for the male audience". Because clearly that's what we men like, right? It couldn't possibly be just a gritty story about someone overcoming adversity without being anyone's twisted fantasy. Clearly men are incapable of such. Get over yourselves.

You know what other iconic strong female characters suffer but still come out on top? Sarah Connor and Rippley for example. Sarah Connor gets sexually harassed in T2, I dare you call her a weak character. Those characters are actually interesting as opposed to the bland 'Mary Sue' types.

Don't jump to conclusions before you actually see the final result. I'm personally interested in TR for the first time now that it is getting away from the 'Mary Sue' sex doll Lara and are trying something new.

SecretNegative:

matrix3509:
How to be called sexist in the videogame industry:

1. Have a female character in your videogame.

THE END

Actually, you're sexist if you don't have a female in your game, as well.

Hahahaha... this somehow reminded me of my conversations with my girlfriends.

Boils down to whatever I do or say, nothing's right. :P

You know... if a game with a male lead character had the same amount of torture and damage inflicted on them, nobody would blink an eye. Since the new Lara isn't overtly sexualized (like certain stripper nuns), we're simply seeing a story in which a main character runs into painful adversity, plain and simple.

So, just to clarify here... Now it's a problem that Lara DOESN'T have enormous and ridiculous breasts!? I like this newer more realistic take on Lara, those boobs were kind of obnoxious and silly before.

But I won't be buying the game either... they have long since forgot what made tomb raider fun. I will stick to the original three, thanks.

Sixcess:
"And then, Rosenberg says, those scavengers will try to rape her. "She is literally turned into a cornered animal," Rosenberg said. "It's a huge step in her evolution: she's forced to either fight back or die."

Wow.

And I thought I was maybe reading too much into the trailer when I saw it last week, but this, coming from one of the producers of the game, just raises it to a new level of creepy.

I'm dreading this. I don't want to see Lara pick up her iconic handguns as a reaction to an attempted rape. That's not a strong believable female character - that's just sleazy, and I am really concerned that this is the kind of exploitation movie thinking that's driving the reboot.

Lara was the iconic female video game hero of the 90s. She didn't need a justification for going on adventures and kicking ass any more than her male counterparts did. Now it's a reaction to an attempted rape. How can this possibly be seen as a step forward?

This is going to be worse than Other M.

Unfortunately a huge part of any game getting released these days is having some kind of "controversy" that people can bitch about or try to boycott the game over. MW2 did it and look how well that turned out.
Since MW2 however, theres not much else you can do to get someones attention. This isn't to say that rape should never be featured in a game. It's a powerful card to play in any story involving a female protagonist. But when they advertise the rape before the actual game release...yeah, they just want to get the attention for it.

cynicalandbored:
Yes, you make a woman more realistic by ensuring she's less sexually empowered

Um... yes? Lara's undercurrent of sexuality in previous games was VERY unrealistic. In the new one, it appears to be all but gone, which sounds good for a survival story.

Anyways, they're paying lip-service to the hordes who were saying that previous Lara Croft was too ridiculously badass. It's nothing to freak out over. What exactly is wrong with "wanting to protect" the new Lara? Who said it's specifically because her breasts are now possible and she can't currently triple handspring out of a quad-boulder clap? Maybe you'll want to protect her because she IS relateable.

Anyways, I refuse to ever take trailers at face value, so if the game consists of more than a few incidents of actual torture, I'll eat my hat. Most of the game (from a practical standpoint, anyways) should consist of getting from point A to point B while staying alive. With that in mind, it's still one of the two games from this E3 that I've got my eye on.

Fiz_The_Toaster:
Also, the whole rape thing? Apparently ole boy Ron Rosenberg screwed up in what he was talking about and actually that little scene doesn't have any rape connotation.

http://www.tombraider.com/us/base/brandsite?refer=19&

From the Crystal Dynamics statement, today:

"Sexual assault of any kind is categorically not a theme we cover in this game."

From Penny Arcade, 1 week ago:

"You see that in the beginning of the game, where we begin to build her up and give her confidence to cross the ledge, cross the plane, she forages for food and she's feeling really successful," Rosenberg said. "Then towards the end we start to really hit her, and to break her down. Her best friend is kidnapped, she's taken hostage, she's almost raped, we put her in this position where we turned her into a cornered animal."

So what they're saying is that the team that put that scene together in a way that definitely implies sexual assault didn't mean to do that? That the producer of the game uses words as charged as 'almost raped' by mistake? When talking to Penny Arcade?

I'm facepalming so hard it'll give Patrick Stewart a concussion.

The most charitable spin I can put on this is that Crystal Dynamics are a pack of idiots who have no fucking idea what they're doing and (like most developers it seems) should be forbidden to talk to the gaming press.

But that's not what's happening. They've tried to be edgy and 'dark' and all the rest of what passes for maturity in mainstream gaming, and they didn't get the reaction they wanted.

This is damage control, pure and simple.

Sixcess:

http://www.tombraider.com/us/base/brandsite?refer=19&
From the Crystal Dynamics statement, today:

"Sexual assault of any kind is categorically not a theme we cover in this game."

From Penny Arcade, 1 week ago:

"You see that in the beginning of the game, where we begin to build her up and give her confidence to cross the ledge, cross the plane, she forages for food and she's feeling really successful," Rosenberg said. "Then towards the end we start to really hit her, and to break her down. Her best friend is kidnapped, she's taken hostage, she's almost raped, we put her in this position where we turned her into a cornered animal."

I love the smell of industry backpedal in the morning. Smells like victory.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked