Sly is furry, so where is the hate?

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

With the new Sly game out, I find myself being a bit introspective about furrys and their current state. This might be because Dust:an Elysian Tale kind of changed my mind about them for the better, especially after hearing the whole game was actually made by one; and he soloed the project. Color me impressed. I guess Sly has always had furry characters, but I am just now starting to realize how furry they are. I always saw them as gaming mascot characters in the past, like Sonic or Bubsy. But it's kind of hard to see them in that innocent light after seeing something like this:


I see anthropomorphic art met with spite and horror in a lot of places I brows on the net, even if the picture posted is entirely innocent and work safe. There are people who absolutely loathe this stuff, if just for fact that it reminds them of the more seedy pictures they saw. Now we have a game (from a franchise that seems to be almost almost universally loved) a tad over-sexualizing one of it's anthropomorphic characters, yet I still have no doubt that this game will do well. Hell, this game may even push some PS3s.

I am going to come right out and say it: I'm confused. Are we becoming more liberal with the roles anthropomorphic characters are allowed to take? Or does Sly get a free pass because of a double standard I'm not seeing?

You forgot Krystal in Star Fox. Though if I remember right, I think she gets hate for other reasons too.

Maybe when it comes to video games people don't care, but when it's drawings or real people it somehow triggers a "THIS MAKES ME ANGRY!" reflex in their brains? I don't know, I don't have any issues with furries myself. If it's not for sexual purposes, then making a fursuit or whatever isn't really any different than cosplaying.

EDIT: And I'm really going to give the benefit of the doubt to people here and believe that the majority of them don't look at it as a sexual fetish, as all of the people spewing hate seem to ascribe to them.

shrekfan246:
You forgot Krystal in Star Fox. Though if I remember right, I think she gets hate for other reasons too.

That's actually a good point, and I am happy you reminded me of that. Star Fox certainly doesn't get the same 'free pass' Sly does. It might be because that particular game was quite an awful Star Fox game, and only a sub-par adventure game. Still, that's not helping my fear that we may just be inherently biased about this, like you also just mentioned.

The reason you don't see hate for them is because they actually like them. They don't want to admit they like this game therefore acknowledging that not all things furry related is evil so they stay quiet.

Just what I think anyway, could be wrong. XD

Sly gets a pass because no one cares. The games review well enough, or so Wikipedia tells me, but they don't really make any impact on the general populace. It is kind of like that thread asking why no one objected to same sex marriages in Fable 3. Because no one cared enough about Fable 3 to turn it into a scandal. Outside of fans of the series, no one will even think about Sly Cooper in two weeks.

I don't think that the characters in the game are sexualized because some people in the audience has a fetish for it, I think more likely that they're sexualized because its their not so subtle way of the game telling you one of three things; "THIS CHARACTER IS A SLUTTY SLUT MCWHORESLUT", "THIS IS THE LOVE INTEREST AND YOU KNOW SHE'S A LOVE INTEREST BECAUSE SHE HAS BIG BREASTS", or lastly "THIS CHARACTER IS A RIVAL AND YOU KNOW BECAUSE OF HIS RIPPLING ABS AND CHISELED CHIN". Like I said, not so subtle. Anyways, I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt for being creative and intelligent enough to not do that.

And if it is shameless furry fanservice, which I highly doubt, who the hell cares? I don't see most of these people who complain about the sexualization of non-human anthropomorphic characters getting up in arms about every woman in "insert game here" having DDs. Its usually people complaining that they're somehow entitled to not see things they find icky, which reminds me a lot of people being against gay rights just because they think it means they'll have a higher chance of seeing two men kiss. I really could care less, unless I have to watch an X-rated sequence to finish the game.

Ahem, I may not like the furry culture, but that doesn't stop me from loving games like Star Fox or Ratchet and Clank. Why should Sly Cooper be any different? People can put prejudices aside you know.

Sounds like a fun game, don't see any problem with the characters if I was a console guy I'd try it.

Because the first thing I think of when I play a Sly Cooper game is sex with Anthropomorphic Animals, right?

Who else DOESN'T think of that?

Real response:

In all seriousness, no one cares. Seriously. No-one cared about Star-fox being furry, everyone is a little furry for crystal. "furries" have gone back since this, EVEN BEFORE THIS:

image

Do I give a shit now? No. Did I give a shit then? No. Hell, I play as an Argonian in Skyrim, my main character in world of Warcraft is a Worgen Deathknight. For a time, I played as the Elites in Halo 2 and 3, then I swapped to the Spartans.

I would only give a shit, if a furry decided to try and "convert me" or act crazy like believe they are a wolf spirit in a human body. I have yet to have this happen and I prefer to keep it that way.

Capcha: It's Super Delicious

Not perfect for this topic.....

Because even if most of us see it like this as you said, I don't really care for being a furry. They will buy the game because they like the series, not because there is sexy furry on it.

Also as I said in my Serious Sam Thread, we don't any real problem with this, because let be honest here, there are a lot of games/cartoons/movies that have this kind characters on them and we don't have a problem seeing them.

*Copy/Paste same example*

So let me ask you:
You will see this episode because a furry kiss the Batman and you think is sexy, or because....well, it is DC cartoon show?

I'll admit furry makes me raise an eyebrow, but I'm just as opposed to any animal character with human characteristics being defined as creepy fetish.

When it comes to deciding whether an animal character steps over the line into furry fetish, I have no set rules, but I'll know it when I see it. This video, eh... I think here it's more a case of she's sexy because that's her character, rather then she's sexified because she's an animal. Seeing as every character in the Sly world appears to be an animal.

Anthropomorphic characters are not creepy by default. In fact, some of my favourite game character -Crash Bandicoot, Blinx, Sly Cooper or Jak- are anthropomorphic. It's when they're specifically being used for fap purposes that I want nothing to do with them.

VanQQisH:
Anthropomorphic characters are not creepy by default. It's when they're specifically being used for fap purposes that I want nothing to do with them.

This.

Though overall, I don't see the problem with any form of sexuality (as long as it includes informed consent), so I have a very low carefactor for any of these quarrels.

shrekfan246:
You forgot Krystal in Star Fox. Though if I remember right, I think she gets hate for other reasons too.

Maybe when it comes to video games people don't care, but when it's drawings or real people it somehow triggers a "THIS MAKES ME ANGRY!" reflex in their brains? I don't know, I don't have any issues with furries myself. If it's not for sexual purposes, then making a fursuit or whatever isn't really any different than cosplaying.

EDIT: And I'm really going to give the benefit of the doubt to people here and believe that the majority of them don't look at it as a sexual fetish, as all of the people spewing hate seem to ascribe to them.

I think most (normal) people only get weird out when it's used as a fetish.

I have no problem with Disney films, children's cartoons, breakfast cereal mascots, or any other anthropomorphic animal character. What I don't like is when people depict such characters in a sexual context. Firstly because in many cases it feels like an inappropriate depiction of a fictional character intended for children (e.g. pornographic images of Sonic the Hedgehog or Disney characters), and secondly because some of the images come uncomfortably close to bestiality (e.g. pornographic images of dog-people with fully canine genitalia).

I am aware that most "furry" art is child-friendly, and even most of the "adult" stuff is only pip-up style images. But the hardcore stuff really makes my skin crawl, and I try to avoid seeing it.

Because furries don't clamour to it?

Anthromorphic animals are not hated by default, that only happens when people with a furry fetish show up out of nowhere and start making something out of nothing.

Bugs Bunny dressed in drag?
Pre-furry connotations = Hilarious 4th wall breaking scene.
Post-furry connotations = Creepy childhood ruining nightmare

I think you're all forgetting that furries are kinky as shit.

I feel like it's a mix of these two things:

shrekfan246:
Maybe when it comes to video games people don't care, but when it's drawings or real people it somehow triggers a "THIS MAKES ME ANGRY!" reflex in their brains? I don't know, I don't have any issues with furries myself. If it's not for sexual purposes, then making a fursuit or whatever isn't really any different than cosplaying.

ThePuzzldPirate:
The reason you don't see hate for them is because they actually like them. They don't want to admit they like this game therefore acknowledging that not all things furry related is evil so they stay quiet.

Just what I think anyway, could be wrong. XD

Along with a dash of this fear:

Terminate421:
I would only give a shit, if a furry decided to try and "convert me" or act crazy like believe they are a wolf spirit in a human body. I have yet to have this happen and I prefer to keep it that way.

The Sly Cooper games are of a good quality, and anthropomorphic animals on their own are fairly prevalent in media (and have been for a long time) without getting all weird and furry. But when you see people dress up as these things, or worse when it gets fetishized, it sort of makes the whole thing off-putting. Sort of like those creepy people who marry anime body pillows. After you see something like that, saying you like anime has a slightly new connotation that you just can't shake.

So it's frustrating to say you like Sly Cooper or Star Fox knowing that there are a lot of people who take it to a level that is miles beyond your comfort zone. It makes you feel like it's being misrepresented, because neither Sly nor Star Fox are supposed to be fetishistic. And in turn if the media you like is being misrepresented, then in a way that means you are also being misrepresented.

And yes not all furries are in it for the fetish, but the same thing goes with the creepy body pillow people. The part of a group that is the loudest and most audacious tends to set the image for the whole group. Unfortunately, the creepy over-the-top furries are the ones who attract the most attention to the group, so that is what most people think of when they think of furries.

Daystar Clarion:
Anthromorphic animals

This, when I played the Sly Trilogy I just saw talking animals, like many others I'd think. Sometimes that's it.
Also, saying Sly is furry (just wut?) and ask why that's not hated is real stupid in my book.

It's an issue of popularity really.

There's significantly more Renamon and Krystal stuff out there than there is... Uh... Whoever this is.

Always found it kinda shallow and disrespectful to the original source, but, it seems I'm not most people.

I don't think the anthromorphic characters are "furry", people with a specific lifestyle that heavily involves anthromorphic characters are.
Also tits have been slapped on animals in gaming ever since conkers bad fur day, later sonic games or breath of fire 2 so this is hardly a new thing and if the sexualization of 14 year olds is a thing in gaming then I don't see why anthromorphic animals should be the big problem where we have to draw "the line" now.

In the end, it's just a bunch of pixels.

god dammit, i knew that there was something wrong with donald duck not wearing any pants, he is just another oversexualized caracter

xPixelatedx:
Snip

The reason no one cares/hates on anthro game characters is because most people don't see them as furries, they see them as game characters. While the fox in that video is certainly oversexualized, she's still just a game character (though I'd imagine the furry community has more than enough Rule 34 for game characters like her).

The stigma comes from the fact that most view furries as trying to sexualize animals. By extension, trying to sexualize animals implies a taste for bestiality. Those aren't necessarily my views, but that's the general conception. Most people tend to see real-life furries as a depraved sexual fetish.

The reason game characters get a pass is because there's no reason to hate on them. They're game characters, made by a game company, to be interacted with inside a game. It's the same with cartoon characters, the fact that we know they were designed purely for entertainment rather than to induce sexual arousal makes it hard to see them as anything sexual, even when looking at a character like Carmelita. Furry game characters were around a long time before furry was a big deal.

In short, it's the tie-in to sex that generates the most ire towards furries. And it's hard to see that tie-in when you know there's not going to be anything sexual in the game.

Never had a problem with these characters I liked Sonic, Ratchet, loads of Disney characters, Crash bandicoot etc. People will make a fetish out of anything thee people are the minority most people dont care that Bugs Bunny is naked for instance. If you do get turned on by this stuff well fine I dont car either like all things its only the fanatics that people tend to get pissed off about.

Games should be judged on many factors not just what characters they use. I have never played Sly Cooper but I have always meant to give it a try as it seems to get generally good reviews and looks like it may provide a break from RPGs and FPS for a while.

Think it also has to do with the mindset they had, the moment the first played the coopers games. I was maybe 11 or something and wasn't relating anything I knew with sex. I didn't even know what furries were back then. now with this release I do have some conflicting ideas about the cooper characters, because I see my childhood characters in their awesomeness, but is also see human-like animals who want to get it on with each other.

But in the end it are still awesome characters from cool games. furry or not.

Well considering that efforts to anthropomorphisize animals dates back millenia and has been a common trope when it comes to fiction for at least two hundred years now...I guess not. Not everything that includes anthropomorphic animals has to be connected to furrydom to be made. In this particular case, the most reasonable explanation is that it's basically just using the old trope of the funny animal and then going the way Mars Atlas essentially described

MarsAtlas:
I don't think that the characters in the game are sexualized because some people in the audience has a fetish for it, I think more likely that they're sexualized because its their not so subtle way of the game telling you one of three things; "THIS CHARACTER IS A SLUTTY SLUT MCWHORESLUT", "THIS IS THE LOVE INTEREST AND YOU KNOW SHE'S A LOVE INTEREST BECAUSE SHE HAS BIG BREASTS", or lastly "THIS CHARACTER IS A RIVAL AND YOU KNOW BECAUSE OF HIS RIPPLING ABS AND CHISELED CHIN". Like I said, not so subtle. Anyways, I'm not going to give them the benefit of the doubt for being creative and intelligent enough to not do that.

It's a common way to represent this kind of stereotype. It has been done I don't know how many times before and I really cannot see how one can immediately jump to a conclusion that this is intended as a means of fanservice - it kind of reminds me of that thread of whether the ponies from MLP are oversexualized because of their "feminine, quaint gestures" as one put it. Well, guess what? They are meant to be girls and giving them feminine qualities is a clear way to relay this message, not any kind of crazy fanservice.

Aynway, this also highlights what the problem with this whole thread, or rather the whole discussion here is: people have been so traumatized by the vocal part of furrydom or the ickyness of fetish porn they stumbled upon that even such harmless things immediately come under scrutiny. Frankly, I think we could all benefit if we kept the porn (or accusations of pornographic intend, for that matter) where it belongs: in it's fucking obvious niche.

Wow... I am not liking her new look... or her apparently new personality. I think she looked way better in sly's 1-3, and from this it seems like they kinda invalidated the character arc she went through in the first series of games just as an excuse to have her back exactly how things were at the start. :X
Maybe it plays out better in-game.

As for your question OP... i don't know, probably not popular enough to garner attention.

Anthropomorphic characters have been around since friggin' ancient times. There's nothing wrong with anthropomorphism. The thing most people are bothered by is furry fetishism, and the weird overly defensive culture that sprang up around it.

Transgender makes sense to me. If you were born a woman but you identify as a man, I'm totally cool with that. But if you were born a human and you identify as a purple fox or whatever, that seems fucking weird to me. Is that hypocritical? I don't think so, but I could understand someone who might feel like it is.

HavoK 09:
god dammit, i knew that there was something wrong with donald duck not wearing any pants, he is just another oversexualized caracter

Kinda off topic but I read that post in the Soldier's voice and it was hilarious. Only thing that could have made it better is if you had said "Damn it, son" instead of "God damnit."

I honestly don't care much. Sly Raccoon is a damn good series and coming to think of it, it's suited that he's a Raccoon. Infamous for stealing, agile, the character's suited to it, so I guess in a way, it helps.

Most times though, I'm not entirely sure as to why there are anthropomorphic characters. That's one of the things that actually annoyed me about "dust". It seemed to be almost going out of it's way to feature these characters.

So, basically, people want to make fiction with these creatures in, fine, I just don't understand quite why they do sometimes.

Furries as a whole? I ain't got any problems with them. They wanna do what they wanna do, and it'd be the worst kind of hypocrisy to hate something or someone for being wierd coming from me. Hell, I've even stumbled upon some of their fiction, and some of the less wish fulfilment/sexual ones can actually be pretty good.

BrainWalker:
Anthropomorphic characters have been around since friggin' ancient times. There's nothing wrong with anthropomorphism. The thing most people are bothered by is furry fetishism, and the weird overly defensive culture that sprang up around it.

Transgender makes sense to me. If you were born a woman but you identify as a man, I'm totally cool with that. But if you were born a human and you identify as a purple fox or whatever, that seems fucking weird to me. Is that hypocritical? I don't think so, but I could understand someone who might feel like it is.

I dunno, personally it just seems like another step. Hell, I don't really identify as a human an awful lot of the time. However, I don't identify as anything else, just not human. I sometimes wonder if it would be, in a way, healthier to find something to fill that void in my identity.

Still, I'm not sure whether it could be looked at in the same way as gender dimorphism. For one thing, we can do something about that. There is no species change operation. That, and in some cases you might just be able to trace it back to the most extreme form of misanthropy, that you're simply so tired, angry, or simply lack so much understanding of your fellow human, that you refuse to identify as one yourself.

Y'know, I always find this subject interesting to talk about.

xPixelatedx:
With the new Sly game out, I find myself being a bit introspective about furrys and their current state. This might be because Dust:an Elysian Tale kind of changed my mind about them for the better, especially after hearing the whole game was actually made by one; and he soloed the project. Color me impressed. I guess Sly has always had furry characters, but I am just now starting to realize how furry they are. I always saw them as gaming mascot characters in the past, like Sonic or Bubsy. But it's kind of hard to see them in that innocent light after seeing something like this:


I see anthropomorphic art met with spite and horror in a lot of places I brows on the net, even if the picture posted is entirely innocent and work safe. There are people who absolutely loathe this stuff, if just for fact that it reminds them of the more seedy pictures they saw. Now we have a game (from a franchise that seems to be almost almost universally loved) a tad over-sexualizing one of it's anthropomorphic characters, yet I still have no doubt that this game will do well. Hell, this game may even push some PS3s.

I am going to come right out and say it: I'm confused. Are we becoming more liberal with the roles anthropomorphic characters are allowed to take? Or does Sly get a free pass because of a double standard I'm not seeing?

Nobody is calling out furry hate because it's meant to look like a cartoon. Character design varies, voices are wacky, and it feels more like your watching a cartoon than playing a video game at certain points. Plus there's a wider variety of species and less influence on sex appeal. I mean: do you see furry hate towards SWAT Kats or Thundercats?

MetalMagpie:

shrekfan246:
You forgot Krystal in Star Fox. Though if I remember right, I think she gets hate for other reasons too.

Maybe when it comes to video games people don't care, but when it's drawings or real people it somehow triggers a "THIS MAKES ME ANGRY!" reflex in their brains? I don't know, I don't have any issues with furries myself. If it's not for sexual purposes, then making a fursuit or whatever isn't really any different than cosplaying.

EDIT: And I'm really going to give the benefit of the doubt to people here and believe that the majority of them don't look at it as a sexual fetish, as all of the people spewing hate seem to ascribe to them.

I think most (normal) people only get weird out when it's used as a fetish.

I have no problem with Disney films, children's cartoons, breakfast cereal mascots, or any other anthropomorphic animal character. What I don't like is when people depict such characters in a sexual context. Firstly because in many cases it feels like an inappropriate depiction of a fictional character intended for children (e.g. pornographic images of Sonic the Hedgehog or Disney characters), and secondly because some of the images come uncomfortably close to bestiality (e.g. pornographic images of dog-people with fully canine genitalia).

I am aware that most "furry" art is child-friendly, and even most of the "adult" stuff is only pip-up style images. But the hardcore stuff really makes my skin crawl, and I try to avoid seeing it.

I don't know, I've seen plenty of hatred being thrown at people who have anthropomorphic characters as forum avatars or other similar situations, much like how about a year and a half ago all of the people with My Little Pony avatars were being bashed.

As for Rule 34, it's a bit off-topic but I guess I must just be a sexual deviant, because I have no problems with Rule 34 of... practically any characters, really. It's just fan-art, and generally easy to avoid, so I don't see it as inappropriate or disrespectful because... well, it's porn. All of it is pretty inappropriate. And between all of the shitty MS Paint drawings, there are some really good artists and some people who make really humorous, albeit sexual, "comics" including the characters.

And really, when it comes to cartoons I believe that pretty much anything is fair game. You can't really make the claim that a skeleton getting it on with an elf is necrophilia, and none of it is real in the first place so what does it matter?

RJ 17:

The reason game characters get a pass is because there's no reason to hate on them. They're game characters, made by a game company, to be interacted with inside a game. It's the same with cartoon characters, the fact that we know they were designed purely for entertainment rather than to induce sexual arousal makes it hard to see them as anything sexual, even when looking at a character like Carmelita. Furry game characters were around a long time before furry was a big deal.

In short, it's the tie-in to sex that generates the most ire towards furries. And it's hard to see that tie-in when you know there's not going to be anything sexual in the game.

Except I see Starfox getting hated on all the time for it, particular after the inclusion of Krystal. But a more recent example would be Dust. When that game came out I saw message boards and comment sections explode with venom being spewed at that game. While your logic seems interesting, the fact that Dust is also a video game pokes a hole in it.

Sorry, maybe I'm confused, I thought furries are people who dress up like rabbits and fuck each other? How does that translate to cartoon animals in a game that aren't real/fucking each other?

I have no time for furries because it annoys me that they try to make out the are persecuted for their fetish when, in actual fact, most people just think they're really weird. When people start putting you into concentration camps or you don't get a job because of being a furry, then you can maybe claim persecution (that doesn't count if you insist on turning up to work in your fursuit, by the way.)

As it stands, Sly Cooper is just a game with cartoon animals and one of them is a sexy fox just like Lola Bunny is a sexy rabbit. Except she's only sexy in a relative sense because animals aren't sexy no matter how human-like their design.

And for the record, I always assumed the reason Krystal from Starfox got a hard time is because the internet is chock-full of crudely drawn porn of her.

xPixelatedx:

Except I see Starfox getting hated on all the time for it, particular after the inclusion of Krystal. But a more recent example would be Dust. When that game came out I saw message boards and comment sections explode with venom being spewed at that game. While your logic seems interesting, the fact that Dust is also a video game pokes a hole in it.

You're assuming that these people represent popular opinion as a whole. Most of us don't care if a video game character is an animal --sexy or otherwise-- so long as the game is good.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked