Anita Sarkeesian + Hitman Absolution = Epic Fail

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Windknight:

SUPA FRANKY:

Killing people brutally is a-ok! It's only when they are wearing skimpy clothing when it gets creepy...

The mental gymnastics people go through to be offended :o

Sex and Violence are different things. Mixing them together brings on a third thing, sexual violence, which has creepy and unpleasant undertones.

Barely any gymnastics there, just simple logic. Do you struggle with simple logic?

For the sake of even-handedness - I agree that there's plenty thematically "iffy" with Absolution. There's plenty of stuff you could make valid criticisms of - including some of the depictions of women - which makes it all the more bewildering why Sarkeesian chooses to focus her criticism on grassroots stuff like the very inclusion of strippers, or the fact that they're not immortal and can thus be killed like every other character in the game.

I think the creators of Hitman Absolution tried very hard to channel an almost Tarantino-esque vibe in the game, in that the aesthetic is kind of a love-letter to classic Americana while simultaneously showcasing the utterly fucked-up Americans who are ruling the roost. Think of the kind of stylised badassery present in Kill Bill, or the dark and corrupt depiction of the US seen in Pulp Fiction, and so on. In trying to achieve this I think IO Interactive played it a bit fast and loose and, with only the cut-scenes to really deliver exposition and character-building, ended up providing caricatures rather than characters.

For example, The Saints could have been handled a bit more subtly - it is possible to depict femme fatales in ways that don't seem forced or ridiculous even though they're heavily stylised - think Daryl Hannah in an eye patch and nurse's uniform in Kill Bill 1. Instead, they're presented to the player as little more than "Look, nuns with guns, sexy, eh? Now kill them". It's not misogynist per se but it's done clumsily enough for it to undoubtedly turn some people off.

Elsewhere it seems like decisions in the game were made in a sort of hand-wavey, shoulder-shruggy way that IO hoped would all fall into place and nobody would question them - many of the female characters for example. To give an example, the opening cinematic where 47 dutifully shoots the woman in the shower, a shower curtain conveniently appears and drapes itself over her so we can see neither her tits nor the exit wounds, and there's just enough time for her to make a brief soliloquy before bloodlessly expiring - it's completely gratuitous. Completely bloody gratuitous and rather silly and hackneyed to boot. The scene could have hypothetically worked if the minor, piffling details of context had been set up properly - motivation, character relations, and so on - but instead it's just presented as something that we should either view as a neutral act or else give it the benefit of being edgy and cool in a tryhard kind of way.

Additionally, the few female assassination targets (non-nuns) seem to be included in a sort of carelessly perfunctory kind of way. Most of the male targets are given a fair bit of in-game characterisation: they're either bullies, or sexual perverts, or psychopaths. The female targets seem to have no flaws apart from being associated with the male characters and need to be taken out as they "know too much".

In summary: Hitman Absolution tried to provide an edgy and stylised experience, but cut too many corners to do it really convincingly - and unfortunately a lot of these cut corners coincided with the female characters. I don't believe IO Interactive set out to make a sexist game, but the finished product is sadly very easy to pick apart viewed through a feminist kind of lens. A bit more effort next time would go a long way.

Gethsemani:
Don't get me wrong, I realize that everything put into the game serve as 'decoration' and helps establish the mood of the game. But why are we so intent on having sexualized female bodies as a standard decoration? What would we lose if we changed them out for something that doesn't have close ties to archaic gender stereotypes?

What part of it is an archaic gender stereotype?

Gethsemani:
Also, why include a strip club just to include a strip club? Why is it a location that's preferable to a location that doesn't reinforce gender stereotypes of women as passive objects to be ogled by men? Just saying that it should be in there "for the sake of it" isn't a convincing argument for perpetuating shitty gender stereotypes, just like throwing in some casual blackface into a game or movie would be deeply offensive even if "it is just some humor".

Its inclusion in the game is probably partly due to IO Interactive wishing to provide an "edgy" aesthetic including locations that the majority of players will find simultaneously interesting and gritty. It's unfortunate that you have a moral objection to strip clubs in general (just out of interest, what's your stance on male strippers and strip clubs/events?) but surely you acknowledge you're in a minority here. Other locations in the game include a munitions factory (including an area where they test landmines on live pigs) and a prison - both institutions that plenty of people would find controversial, but few people would say that their inclusion in the game is making a positive statement about the arms industry or the prison system. I'd personally say that the strip club section is portrayed just as negatively as any of the other locations in the game.

Gethsemani:
Didn't say that. I am merely pointing out that the whole "the game punishes it!"-argument rings very hollow. Punishment in-game would be forced game overs, less assets on later missions (like Blood Money, for example) or other things that impeded player progress.

Killing civilians lowers your score, makes achieving the Silent Assassin rating impossible, and generally blows your cover and causes all armed NPCs in the area to turn hostile, requiring you to either fight back in a one-sided and possibly suicidal firefight, or else hide for a lengthy period of time. How can you say that doesn't constitute a punishment?

Knight Templar:
One of the more set up kills involves a rifle, but that also lowers my score, it would be absurd to suggest that the gun placed where I don't need to move in order to get a kill isn't being offered to me as a way to solve my problems.

Personally, I don't consider those two things to be equivalent.

If a gun is presented as a way to kill a target, that's a means to complete your objective.
But the strippers are not means to complete your objective. By interfering with them in any way, you're making it HARDER to complete your objective. It's easier and more logical to leave them alone and sneak past them.

IceForce:
If a gun is presented as a way to kill a target, that's a means to complete your objective.
But the strippers are not means to complete your objective. By interfering with them in any way, you're making it HARDER to complete your objective. It's easier and more logical to leave them alone and sneak past them.

Many are actually obstacles, and can be witnesses to crimes. For example, on the strip club mission, there's one particular signature kill where you kill the target during or after getting a private dance. There's a room with a one-way mirror that the player can hide in while the dance happens, and the player can essentially do one of two things.

1. Use a silenced pistol found elsewhere in the strip club to shoot target during or after the dance. If done during the dance, the stripper needs to be killed, or else you'll incur a major score penalty. Edit: I should add here that if you shoot him, it will make a pool of blood appear, which the stripper will then see and investigate, most likely alerting a nearby guard.

2. Sneak around behind him after the dance is done, once the stripper leaves the booth, and garrote the target. This one is more difficult, because the stripper has a good chance of spotting you while killing the guy.

Now either way, if you get spotted by the stripper tresspassing, your score will tank, so really the safest way to get this kill is to kill both the target and the stripper. There's even a container that you can dump both of the bodies into in the room that lets you peer into the booth.

MarsAtlas:

Many are actually obstacles, and can be witnesses to crimes. For example, on the strip club mission, there's one particular signature kill where you kill the target during or after getting a private dance. There's a room with a one-way mirror that the player can hide in while the dance happens, and the player can essentially do one of two things.

1. Use a silenced pistol found elsewhere in the strip club to shoot target during or after the dance. If done during the dance, the stripper needs to be killed, or else you'll incur a major score penalty. Edit: I should add here that if you shoot him, it will make a pool of blood appear, which the stripper will then see and investigate, most likely alerting a nearby guard.

2. Sneak around behind him after the dance is done, once the stripper leaves the booth, and garrote the target. This one is more difficult, because the stripper has a good chance of spotting you while killing the guy.

Now either way, if you get spotted by the stripper tresspassing, your score will tank, so really the safest way to get this kill is to kill both the target and the stripper. There's even a container that you can dump both of the bodies into in the room that lets you peer into the booth.

This really just makes it like any other scenario in the game. And, really, any other game with some sort of moral bent. Easier routes are usually skewed toward the dicks, while harder routes are generally "better" or "good." The only difference seems to be that one of the people involved is a stripper...

So, were the genders of the two NPCs involved reversed, and this were taking place at a Chip n' Dales or something, would you consider it to be sexist?

And, frankly, every enemy NPC is an obstacle to your forward progress, not just in this one scenario, but I do get where you're coming from.

Personally, I'd go with route 2. What can I say? I'm a nice guy.

LostGryphon:
So, were the genders of the two NPCs involved reversed, and this were taking place at a Chip n' Dales or something, would you consider it to be sexist?

Probably. Also, that isn't a very good counter argument. It's trying to turn things into the oppression Olympics.

erttheking:

LostGryphon:
So, were the genders of the two NPCs involved reversed, and this were taking place at a Chip n' Dales or something, would you consider it to be sexist?

Probably. Also, that isn't a very good counter argument. It's trying to turn things into the oppression Olympics.

Not really my intention for it to be an argument in and of itself. Just curious. As long as you view both situations as similarly displeasing on those grounds, then I can at least rule out hypocrisy and value the argument as a difference in consistent opinion/worldview, rather than fault ya for just being biased.

Good though, glad ya probably would see it that way.

LostGryphon:

erttheking:

LostGryphon:
So, were the genders of the two NPCs involved reversed, and this were taking place at a Chip n' Dales or something, would you consider it to be sexist?

Probably. Also, that isn't a very good counter argument. It's trying to turn things into the oppression Olympics.

Not really my intention for it to be an argument in and of itself. Just curious. As long as you view both situations as similarly displeasing on those grounds, then I can at least rule out hypocrisy and value the argument as a difference in consistent opinion/worldview, rather than fault ya for just being biased.

Good though, glad ya probably would see it that way.

Fair enough. And yeah, things just get really fucking creepy whenever sex and violence get mixed. It's one of the few things that can consistently make me feel like I'm going to be sick.

LostGryphon:
This really just makes it like any other scenario in the game.

Yeah, but thats not the point. The point is that I'm responding to somebody who says that these situations don't occur on the strip club mission, which is wrong. In fact, if you go for Death by Discoball, you're liable to kill additional NPCs as well. There are times where you're incentivised to kill the stripper in that level, which was the point. I'm not necessarily that its a significant matter that sexualized violence is present, but it is there.

Easier routes are usually skewed toward the dicks, while harder routes are generally "better" or "good."

That would sound correct, but Absolution uses a score system. You can kill the stripper for a 3,500 point penalty, or leave her alive and risk 90,000 points. Obvious decision is obvious.

So, were the genders of the two NPCs involved reversed, and this were taking place at a Chip n' Dales or something, would you consider it to be sexist?

Is the gaming industry dominated by women, where quite often male character only exist to serve the female gaze and be eye candy, and even if they're actually good character, they still have to meet a standard of being very sexually appealing, no matter how impractical it is for them to be running around in a thong? Is "Male Armor Bingo" a drinking game that people play whenever they get their hands on a new RPG?[1]

Like I said earlier, this mission only exist because "lol titties amirite guise?!?" But to answer your question, depends. It could be commentary on the part of the developer, criticizing how the industry feels the need to shove female breasts in everybody's face, like they were twelve years old showing all their friends a pornomag they found, and that such experiences have reached a point where they're rather jarringand disconnect the player from the experience. Or it could be because the developer just likes cock bulges, in which case I would say yes.

Knight Templar:
I have played Absolution, there are many times when the game offers me a solution to my problem and even encourages me to use it, when that option makes my score go down. There is for many events in that game nothing but practical upsides, where the score may go down, but the action is implicitly encouraged.

One of the more set up kills involves a rifle, but that also lowers my score, it would be absurd to suggest that the gun placed where I don't need to move in order to get a kill isn't being offered to me as a way to solve my problems.

You shouldn't go "look at the score go down you dumb broad", that is the most irrelevant and ineffective way of guiding the player in the entire game.

So...is it also your view that Bioshock advocates child killing because there are more immediate rewards for harvesting the Little Sisters than saving them, Dishonored is anarchistic because it's easier (and honestly more fun, seeing how you get to use your toys to far greater effect) to go around murdering people and getting a high chaos score than it is skulking about and avoiding everyone, and the Knights of the Old Republic franchise is a love letter to the Dark Side because it's usually more lucrative than the Light? Let me be blunt here, when a competent writer wants to portray morality in their work (either implicitly or explicitly), more often than not the good choice will seem less immediately desirable. That's what makes evil so seductive in the first place. It's easy.

erttheking:

Fair enough. And yeah, things just get really fucking creepy whenever sex and violence get mixed. It's one of the few things that can consistently make me feel like I'm going to be sick.

Agreed, actually. Though I can pretty easily separate the two concepts once they're introduced (the violence overwhelms any sexual implications completely for me) I can certainly understand what ya mean. Just kind of how we all respond to and internalize media, I suppose...or any experience for that matter.

MarsAtlas:

Yeah, but thats not the point. The point is that I'm responding to somebody who says that these situations don't occur on the strip club mission, which is wrong. In fact, if you go for Death by Discoball, you're liable to kill additional NPCs as well. There are times where you're incentivised to kill the stripper in that level, which was the point. I'm not necessarily that its a significant matter that sexualized violence is present, but it is there.

It sounds like there's only the one instance where it could, I'll admit, reasonably (should you be viewing it from that perspective) be construed that you're being incentivized. And I don't personally view that act as sexualized within the context of the game/narrative. I don't really mind what a person is or isn't wearing, even in this instance, when they're simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, which is what that situation screams at me.

That would sound correct, but Absolution uses a score system. You can kill the stripper for a 3,500 point penalty, or leave her alive and risk 90,000 points. Obvious decision is obvious.

I don't really agree with you on this point. I don't view the risk, in and of itself, to be an incentivization to kill the girl. My response is the polar opposite, simply due to the context I'm presented with...it's evil murdering guy in room with woman who works for him and, in all likelihood, is only doing her "job" at present in an effort to avoid being harmed by said guy.

It isn't my objective to hurt any of the people there aside from immediate armed threats and the target itself.

Is the gaming industry dominated by women, where quite often male character only exist to serve the female gaze and be eye candy, and even if they're actually good character, they still have to meet a standard of being very sexually appealing, no matter how impractical it is for them to be running around in a thong? Is "Male Armor Bingo" a drinking game that people play whenever they get their hands on a new RPG?[1]

Like I said earlier, this mission only exist because "lol titties amirite guise?!?" But to answer your question, depends. It could be commentary on the part of the developer, criticizing how the industry feels the need to shove female breasts in everybody's face, like they were twelve years old showing all their friends a pornomag they found, and that such experiences have reached a point where they're rather jarringand disconnect the player from the experience. Or it could be because the developer just likes cock bulges, in which case I would say yes.

That is...quite a lot of baggage to throw onto that simple question. I do get that ya feel quite strongly on the subject, and I do think that media in general is oversexualized, but I appreciate the honest, if brusque, response.

Batou667:

In summary: Hitman Absolution tried to provide an edgy and stylised experience, but cut too many corners to do it really convincingly - and unfortunately a lot of these cut corners coincided with the female characters. I don't believe IO Interactive set out to make a sexist game, but the finished product is sadly very easy to pick apart viewed through a feminist kind of lens. A bit more effort next time would go a long way.

I think this is the big point. A lot of the sexist stuff that happens in games (and in general) is not done because there's mustachio twirling sexists trying to keep women down. A lot of sexism is unconscious and/or unintentional, and happens through not putting enough thought and effort into what your putting out is going to mean (this is precisely Sarkeesians message, though a lot of people like to overlook that when they just want to bash her). It doesn't really make it any less problematic, unpleasant, damaging or excusable, but shows the way forward the companies need to take.

LostGryphon:
I don't really agree with you on this point. I don't view the risk, in and of itself, to be an incentivization to kill the girl. My response is the polar opposite, simply due to the context I'm presented with...it's evil murdering guy in room with woman who works for him and, in all likelihood, is only doing her "job" at present in an effort to avoid being harmed by said guy.

It isn't my objective to hurt any of the people there aside from immediate armed threats and the target itself.

You're framing your objective in a way that disregard the score counter. Thats fine and all, but the score counter directly benefits the player in Absolution by giving upgrades the higher you score, so leaving the stripper alive jeopardizes your chance at getting the reward, while killing her is really just a drop in the bucket in regards to the score. If you're playing the game the way that the developers are clearly trying to get you to play it, giving you tangible reasons to play it that way, then its being incentivised. You can disregard the score all you wish, the incentives for killing the woman are tangible.

That is...quite a lot of baggage to throw onto that simple question. I do get that ya feel quite strongly on the subject, and I do think that media in general is oversexualized, but I appreciate the honest, if brusque, response.

Well maybe I'd be less brusque if at least the sexualization was present both in men and women to similar extents (I don't necessarily always count the strong, rugged man since that is an idealization as well as being generally appealing). Why is there a stripclub level in Absolution? Because titties, thats why. Why are the assassin's wearing a well-known fetish outfit? Because titties, thats why. Why is a 14-year old girl being sexualized by putting her in a relatively skimpy schoolgirl outfit? Because titties, 14-year old girl titties to be specific. This isn't Duke Nukem, where its part of the charm, and this is present in a quite frankly obscene amount of games. Not only does it objectify women in a way that men typically aren't in a lot of these games[1], it should be insulting to the intelligence of anybody who is capable of seeing through the act of using sex appeal as a marketing gimmick or a theme when the player wants to play a stealth game, not look at porn.

[1] Men often have negative occupations, like being gangsters, but they usually have a character behind them that truly defines them. Thats how one of the villains in L.A. Noire was a cop and the heroes in Grand Theft Auto and Saints Row are violent criminals with a body count in the quadruple digits. Women, however, are more abundantly defined not by their character, but by their position, sexual characteristics, or both when they coincide. In GTA V, the male characters have evil jobs, but are characterized as good guys, whereas the women don't really have personalities and are defined either by their position, ie a nagging wife, or a sexual appearance. They're not redeemed by character traits because they don't have them, they exist to be objects and plot devices, often there just to upset the male protagonists whom we're supposed to sympathize with, while the men exist as actual people.

People kill characters all the time in games (especially in games with names like Hitman). Hell, the trailer is of him shooting an unarmed woman in a shower. Not sure why it becomes a feminist issue when it can happen to women. There are also far more male civilians in the game and you get penalized just as much for killing them too. There's also non-civilian females who are every bit as capable of killing you as their male counterparts if not even better armed.

Is the goal to have equality or is it to have things both ways?

Have we considered that these games were not made for feminists? That the studios are not morally obligated to cater to feminists? If the issue is due to there being a strip club in the game then sure, feminists aren't generally going to like strip clubs. Doesn't mean they get to have a say in whether or not they exist physically or digitally in our world. If the issue is just the ability for the player to penalize their score by causing violence to female civilians then they're going to have to explain why this is any different than the violence incurred on male civilians in the game. Seems to me like we've got clearly sexist reasons for arguments against sexism. Isn't doing the opposite of what you set out to do a form of irony? Being sexist in the name of gender equality is hilarious droll.

Matthew Jabour:
Well, let's look a bit broader. Why don't we start with the fact that there IS a strip club level in the first place. The game does not need to have a strip club level for the plot to progress

Strip clubs exist in real life, they are in every city. Feck, movies doesnt have to have strip clubs either. I hope one day there are NO strip clubs in movies or games, nor prostitutes for that matter. In fact, all women in movies/games should be highly educated women.

Guy from the 80's:

Matthew Jabour:
Well, let's look a bit broader. Why don't we start with the fact that there IS a strip club level in the first place. The game does not need to have a strip club level for the plot to progress

Strip clubs exist in real life, they are in every city. Feck, movies doesnt have to have strip clubs either. I hope one day there are NO strip clubs in movies or games, nor prostitutes for that matter. In fact, all women in movies/games should be highly educated women.

Because every videogame that features a strip club level also features extensive levels covering every age level of school, private schools, hospitals, homeless shelters, community centers, police stations, jewelry stores, convenience stores, libraries, baks, resturaunts, hardware stores, sewers, barbershops, furniture stores, toy stores, supermarkets, department stores, wholesale stores, autobody shops, parks, car dealerships, churches, synagogues, community colleges, bars, motels, diners, drug labs, orphanages, nursing homes, and the DMV, all at similar lengths to the strip club level, right?

Let me put it this way - how many games have you gone to a library to do something? How many times has a game required you to attend a meeting for recovering drug addicts? Both of those are far more common than strip clubs, yet I can't think of any for either of them.

I'm not going to even mention Anita's videos and reasoning since I talked on that topic far an wide quite a few times on this board alone. But now, what there is a strip club in Hitman and other games, not n any semblance of order of significance.

1) It's atmospheric. Strip club and crime/underworld go together like coffee and cream. It gives the game more of that specific tone games like that need.

2) It gives developers excuse to put skimpy dressed female models in game. Games are visual medium most often second only to interactivity (sometimes even more important than interactivity). Also, men and women like looking at super-imposed, realistically unobtainable beautiful bodies. Those Greek statues that are considered pinnacle of realistic sculpting are not realistic, no human can look that perfect or they would look monstrous. Just like in game models.

3) I bring's allure of "forbidden fruit" to the game. In reality in most strip clubs if you touch dancers or even if you are particularly rude, you are removed. Sometimes with additional consequences. In games you are free to roam, do as you please or even own such establishment. Not to mention that quite a few gamers are to shy or socially awkward to even visit such establishment in real life.

4) It can be, and is, used to portray someone, usually owner, thought state of club, staff and dialogue between NPCs.

Now, that we covered almost every possible reason, would someone tell me what is bad there?

Female gamers I know are more self aware and more conservative dressers with less wild behavior in public than female non gamers I know. Only person I know personally that was violent towards women never played any game outside FIFA/Winning Eleven.

Is it because they are skimpily dressed and you can be violent to them? Would that be OK it here were make dancers and you could use power drill on their genitals (so specific just for them)? I wouldn't have problem with either as heterosexual white male that works two jobs to support him and his fiancee that is more far educated than him but still stuck in university which has low pay and mother that is sick with multiple chronic diseases and barely able to take care of her basic needs.

The Hitman series in general has some sexist, creepy stuff in it involving sexual violence against women. But the player is never told to do that unless the actual target is a woman (Pretty darn rare in the series). Even then, they're not told to pose them (I don't think? I know some posing was involved in some missions, right?) or do anything remotely sexual. But that's always been part of the tone. Absolution took it to the extreme, thanks to writers who decided the previous games were too subtle.

The series has always had the creepy, grimy atmosphere to it in an effort to either look "real" or exaggerated and pulpy (Could never decide which one it was...). So, saying Hitman features violence against women is kind of a "no shit" moment. It's like saying porn has naked people or horror films have violence.

Thinking about it, the player is never told to do anything remotely sexual towards any character. People are sexual towards him at times (who wouldn't, am I right?) but he never really reacts. You're offered some freedom, to do some nasty things but even then you can do it to anyone. 47 Has no interest in anything sexual, so it says more about the player when it comes to any in game violence against women (or men). You're punished for killing anyone other than the target you're paid to kill. If you're killing anyone else you're not playing the game properly. You are not actively encouraged to perform all that much violence in this series, really.

In fact, bit of a side note, isn't there supposed to be some debate over 47's sexuality? Isn't there a chance he's bi sexual or something? Or am I making things up? It's been a while since I got stuck into the series (heh...) but that sounds like something that people are debating.

POINT IS: I think Sarkeesian kind of just saw something she thought would fit her point and ran with it without doing any real research, e.g. playing the game itself.

MarsAtlas:

IceForce:
If a gun is presented as a way to kill a target, that's a means to complete your objective.
But the strippers are not means to complete your objective. By interfering with them in any way, you're making it HARDER to complete your objective. It's easier and more logical to leave them alone and sneak past them.

Many are actually obstacles, and can be witnesses to crimes. For example, on the strip club mission, there's one particular signature kill where you kill the target during or after getting a private dance. There's a room with a one-way mirror that the player can hide in while the dance happens, and the player can essentially do one of two things.

1. Use a silenced pistol found elsewhere in the strip club to shoot target during or after the dance. If done during the dance, the stripper needs to be killed, or else you'll incur a major score penalty. Edit: I should add here that if you shoot him, it will make a pool of blood appear, which the stripper will then see and investigate, most likely alerting a nearby guard.

2. Sneak around behind him after the dance is done, once the stripper leaves the booth, and garrote the target. This one is more difficult, because the stripper has a good chance of spotting you while killing the guy.

Now either way, if you get spotted by the stripper tresspassing, your score will tank, so really the safest way to get this kill is to kill both the target and the stripper. There's even a container that you can dump both of the bodies into in the room that lets you peer into the booth.

Or option 3 which I thought was obvious. Get behind the two way mirror and watch the show. When he is under the Disco ball, hit the button that has the sign telling you to not hit the button. You do that, disco ball falls and kills the target and that is a clean kill with no risk to you.

MarsAtlas:

Let me put it this way - how many games have you gone to a library to do something? How many times has a game required you to attend a meeting for recovering drug addicts? Both of those are far more common than strip clubs, yet I can't think of any for either of them.

I used to go to the library back in the 80's and 90's. Who goes to the library today?
Please provide me with strip club vs recovering drug addicts statistics.

Asita:
Let me be blunt here, when a competent writer wants to portray morality in their work (either implicitly or explicitly), more often than not the good choice will seem less immediately desirable. That's what makes evil so seductive in the first place. It's easy.

That isn't how hitman games work, they don't really pose moral questions, you're a clone made to be the perfect assassin. Morality is only there to make you feel less guilty about all the fantastic and creative ways you're about to murder a bunch of people.

IceForce:

If a gun is presented as a way to kill a target, that's a means to complete your objective.
But the strippers are not means to complete your objective. By interfering with them in any way, you're making it HARDER to complete your objective. It's easier and more logical to leave them alone and sneak past them.

Not at all, they are in the way, if I go right for my target then the only thing standing in my way is them, ignoring them just leads to the alarm being called.

But I think my point is being missed here, you cannot just look at one part that isn't encouraging the act and say "well that makes it impossible for the game to encourage the player to do these things". Particularly when the ways it discourages you is something so entirely empty, and the reasons to do it are entirely practical.

kiri2tsubasa:
Or option 3 which I thought was obvious. Get behind the two way mirror and watch the show.

Thats actually how you achieve 1 and 2 - you have to sit through him getting a private dance so you know when to strike.

When he is under the Disco ball, hit the button that has the sign telling you to not hit the button. You do that, disco ball falls and kills the target and that is a clean kill with no risk to you.

Actually, that tends to have quite a lot of collateral damage. I've seen it done with none, and I've seen it done where four extra people end up dead.

Guy from the 80's:
I used to go to the library back in the 80's and 90's. Who goes to the library today?

Because your experience is representative for everybody's.

Please provide me with strip club vs recovering drug addicts statistics.

I can't tell if you're talking about real-life or videogame occurances, but in either case - you're joking, right?

Alcoholics Anonymous, as well as other similar programs like, say, Narcotics Anonymous, have millions of members across the country, and people are there often times under court ordered mandates. You mean the millions and millions of people who seek help dealing with drug addictions, whether in big cities or towns with less than a thousand people?

If you're referring to videogames, well, there's that one time you go into a rehab center in Blood Money, versus all the strip clubs in Duke Nukem, the strip clubs that appear in every installment in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, one in Mafia 2, one in Max Payne 3, one in The Saboteur (had to look up the name, remembered the game though), the one in Metro Last Light that had many players sit through an extremely uncomfortable lapdance sequence, there's Chora's Den in Mass Effect and arguably Afterlife in Mass Effect 2 (the lower floor is the strip club, the upper one a nightclub), a brothel with strippers in Dragon Age: Origins, and the peepshows in Red Dead Redemption. That is all just off the top of my head.

Not going to discuss what degree of separation between violence and sexualization is or isn't "disturbing" (to someone), because it has no relevance on the subject and the only proof is simply "I feel so". Well, granted. But that still offers no direct sexual motive behind player-inflicted violence.

If contemporary and "improved" term is to be used, a woman in Hitman would have to be target of violence because of being a woman or because of being "sexualized". Neither is true, the most common reason is "being in the way", which is not the same as "being a sex worker therefore sexualized therefore being in a strip club therefore having a chance of interfering therefore violence is sexualized". With that mindset of going back as many steps as convenient we might as well ask about her education or genes.

If it was that simple, every game where a character kills NPC of a different race would be automatically adding racial undertones to violence. Or where killing a templar as a devoted muslim = there's something "jihadist" about it. As it is now, we only have "violence against sexualized characters" or, in cases where even that is unsubstantiated, "violence against sexually attractive characters". Not even remotely the same.

If PoV of the authors is to be of any help, then finding a proof for "sexualized violence" claim is not going to be that easy as "tittilation". The latter is pretty much a given, considering there's money and specific target demographic involved***. "Strip club was added because tittilation therefore sexualization therefore sexualized violence", though? This convenient number of steps again. About those "it's unconscious" explanations from lalaland - let's see at least a shred of evidence about that specific group of designers - you know, the owners of that unconsciousness we are talking about. Like... can we at least know what is their consciousness doing first? But I guess that would be hard, because actual research would have to be conducted and that's... not what certain "controversy surfers" are known for.

What are we left with? Players can kill women if they decide them being women is enough of a reason? That's... new? We already know it's hardly encouraged by the game. Any claims that sexualization in-game encourages sexualized violence in-game on its own? Good luck with researching that, not even mentioning proving the existence of any phenomenon that has significance worth more than a footnote to a footnote, let alone this whole thread. "Hitman research shows players tend to kill overly attractive prostitutes, prostitutes, random women, nuns in that order" would make a hell of a clickbait though.

We've already seen various claims of "experts" on many related and unrelated subjects. Trying to tell what "players" or "gamers" think or feel often ends up so hilariously bad that even arrogance on claimant's part, ie. insisting they have a clue "because research" and "data"(promptly taken apart by random people without academic background), tends to be overlooked. Then there are cases where the arrogance is, for one reason or another, not overlooked, generates emotions, a lot of vitriol and we end up with... oh, right, Anita Thompson Threads.

As someone else mentioned, there's a niche of games that *are* thriving on "sexualized violence", easily jumping into sexual violence. But they're too far from mainstream - which is a bad thing only for one type of a person: the one who wants to stir a controversy but lacks a material that "mainstream" audience actually recalls from somewhere. So, rather than talk about "sexualized violence" using a game that sells itself on that, she picks one with... optional violence against sexualized characters. As if it was the same. Also, that "mature" word? - there's a world of difference between Hitman being a "mature game" and a "game intended for mature audiences". Not sure how one could have the same expectations from the former and the latter.

*** Not that I consider "sexualized characters" to be significantly different (or more "problematic") than reducing a person to *any* single aspect of their "self". If it's being done to sell a game to a bunch of 45-y old gay Asians, then so be it. If it's being done to convey a message, to parody something, for the sake of consistency - or for whatever similar reason, even if badly, then so be it as well. If it's being done because author doesn't know any better then, ugh, so be it. If I ever grow sick of any particular "reduction", a number of different games (ie. with other issues) is so large I have zero chances of properly playing even significant portion of them during a lifetime. The industry already reached the same point books, movies or music did. I don't see a need for any kind of "parity" in any case, where such reduction takes place, certainly not if we are talking about an optional product with entertainment as its primary purpose. If a product needs a simple(ton) way to appeal to men, there will be a disparity in sexualization department for as long as people behind market research are convinced men are more attached to "visual side". Which, at least so far, seems to mean: "forever". For the same reason there will be substantial niches for people who feel guilty about it and for those who don't give a damn.

For the same reason there's more than enough money and attention randomly flowing around to sustain a number of people who will go out of their way to build mountains out of molehills. If, as it's often the case with incompetent people, molehill is quickly shown to be a molehill, then it's not a big deal either - there's always at least a rock or two around it that surely came from a mountain... somewhere. By the time it happens, there's enough followers talking how they tripped on a molehill and how awful and scarring it was to notice.

SeanBeanDies:

I think the new Lara Croft in Tomb raider (2013) isn't at all sexist though, I'd like to hear your opinion her.

Unfortunately not a game I've played I may do in the future but I really know little about her characterisation in it.

grimner:

The_Kodu:

The problem is if all you take from the trailer is physical appearance then it could be described as an issue with the person perceiving it.

Well, not necessarily, especially if physical appearance and sexualization is all we have to characterize them. In this case, we have a group of women all dressed in highly uncomfortable/impractical clothing and shoes pulling out guns and start shooting. It is very hard, not to say downright impossible, to deduce from their presentation that these women will be anything other than sexualized cannon fodder. They could all be a lot more than what they appear, but if your presentation is so sternly focused on just one aspect, then it is that one aspect that people will take away from it, and you can't rightly blame them. Even Bayonetta's launch trailers had a teensy bit more nuance than that, and (much as I actually like Bayonetta) she is pretty much the epitome of a sexualized character.

This is partly an issue with people analysing a trailer which often isn't the most story rich item and plenty of people seem to take a lot from what's essentially meant as a hype piece for the game. It is the fault of the developer for not trying to make all the required data available to stop the rumour mill kicking off though.

grimner:

If they failed to come up with a reason for the clothing in the game itself (not sure I haven't played it myself yet) then it could be written off. If they didn't and it was a "Well we wanted them to look sexy" then you could argue there was an issue of sexism at work.

However again it's all about perspective.

The actual background for the women in this trailer is thus :

They are ex-strippers and prostitutes and victims of domestic abuse who converted to catholicism and are hired by an assassin agency and molded into an assassin task force.

The premisse is hard to swallow, but not impossible to make it work. But even if we accept it wholesale, it really doesn't explain why they have to carry out their hits wearing stilettos and latex clothes under a nun's habit. My goth ex-wife could pretty much testify that that stuff ain't confortable even for clubbing, let alone carrying out assassinations (granted, she hasn't, to my knowledge, actually tried to kill someone while in latex clothes). In addition, in the game their religious grab and demeanor is meant to work as a disguise so... well, let's just say they don't exactly blend in outside of a BSDM club, rendering the whole set up and backstory moot.

Yeh that does sound a bit stupid. The developers could have made a simple claim that it was done because it was wipe clean.

grimner:

They're not even a central part of the game or plot, being pretty much henchwomen and stop gap antagonists. You could swap them in with, say, FOXHOUND without much prejudice to the story. Which doesn't help making their inclusion in the actual game that much more coherent and may lead to the logical conclusion that their inclusion in the main game trailer is to serve the purpose of eye candy and very little else.

True if the developer screwed up then fair enough, I'd hoped they played a larger part in the game as far as being an antagonist or at least one of multiple main antagonists.

grimner:

The best example being the Dead Or alive characters. When the developers aren't being idiots and using them as dress up dolls if you look into them as characters they've got some pretty good stuff there. I mean head of a multi national business, a renowned female assassin. A world leading geneticist. But you don't generally hear about that.

Just curious, not that I have played or ever will play a DoA game, but do these women flattering backgrounds ever materialize or are meaningful parts of their characters? Or are they merely backstory elements? Because, the way you describe them, they seem a bit tacked on (though I am assuming and allowing my distaste for the franchise to guide perception). You could have a woman being President of the free world, but if all she ever does is poledance in skimpy clothes, then her job becomes pretty much irrelevent and an alibi.

To an extent they do show up or at least show up as much as most fighting game stories ever do, maybe slightly more than most simply because of the dialogue between characters sometimes and cutscenes at points other than right at the end.

Dead or Alive 4 revolves round the idea of a corporate conspiracy which leads the new head of the company to investigate if something is going on. Also it features the said geneticist trying to create the ultimate bio weapon.

MarsAtlas:
Not gonna read five pages just to point out that you can actually non-lethally subdue civilians, such as the strippers, and as long as you hide their unconscious selves, you won't get a score pentalty. Additionally, they can bust your cover, so a lot of times it makes sense to knock them out, and you can't take off somebody's clothes to use as a disguise if they're not wearing any clothes in the first place.

Also, coming from a fan of the Hitman series, she doesn't need to make up shit to call the Hitman series miosgynistic, because it already treats pretty terribly.

Lets use Absolution as a starting point. The first woman you see in the game is naked in the shower. Okay, I'll let that one slide, because shower = baptism, religious symbolism and themes of pennance and redemption throughout the game. The second woman you see in the game is a rather highly sexualized teenage girl. She's wearing a catholic school girl outfit with a skirt short enough to get her kicked out of Catholic school[1]. Oh, and she's wearing a school girl outfit when when she explicitly doesn't go to school because sexy schoolgirl outfit guys, amirite? I'm not letting that one slide as being "thematic". Its contrived and doesn't make sense within the game, and if they wanted to be thematic, they could've given a 14-year old girl a skirt that is about the length of something you'd see in a porno. How about the dominatrix nun assassins? Couldn't they have just made assassins with actual clothign? Nope, this is the Hitman series, can't do that. They put them in lingerie because titties, amirite? I've heard people say that they're dominatrix nuns for thematic reasons, but I don't buy that because they're not fleshed out at any length, and because the Hitman series has a history of making female targets always dress in skimpy outfits.

Finally, the stripper level. This mission has no reason to exist. Game spoilers will follow in this paragraph from this sentence onward. Why do you kill this target, the owner of the strip club? Because he'll tell Blake Dexter where Victoria is. Except that Dexter finds out anyways, through Birdie. So why does Birdie send 47 here? I could infer that its so that Birdie can get paid for the information on Victoria, where the target, the owner of the strip club, would be unable to because he's dead. The game never makes a point of that, though. It also comes right after Birdie sends you to kill Dexter. The real reason is so that Birdie can distance himself from 47 so he can sneak out and inform Dexter, but Birdie could've done that anyways without forcing distance between him and 47. Birdie could've done this without having to kill the competitor though, because he already has access to Blake. Birdie did not need to fake his kidnapping either. The entire reason why this mission exists in the first place doesn't make sense. So then the question has to be asked, why a strip club, of all places? The answer? The owner coincidentally owns the strip club. This level was obviously designed first around a strip club, and then they failed to give a solid narrative reason to be there. Its in there because titties, amirite guise? Gotta have fap material in a videogame that is rather polarizing to anybody older than fourteen.

Again, I like the Hitman series. I love the stealth genre, and I own all of the Hitman games. The series, however, has kind of had this history of miogyny... and racism, and arguably homophobia, but thats for another discussion about the series.

Hitman was Published by Square.
Sure it was developed by IO but there's not denying the possible influence of the Japanese company Square.
Let me re-iterate, Japan is weird.

That doesn't excuse it's problems but it gives a pretty good reason why the exist as to an extent it's a representation of Japanese culture and it's showing how it clashes with western culture.

erttheking:

LostGryphon:
So, were the genders of the two NPCs involved reversed, and this were taking place at a Chip n' Dales or something, would you consider it to be sexist?

Probably. Also, that isn't a very good counter argument. It's trying to turn things into the oppression Olympics.

Sorry but I'm really missing something here. When did Sexualised character = automatically sexist ? is the painting the Birth of Venus sexist because it shows a naked woman ?

erttheking:

Is the gaming industry dominated by women, where quite often male character only exist to serve the female gaze and be eye candy, and even if they're actually good character, they still have to meet a standard of being very sexually appealing, no matter how impractical it is for them to be running around in a thong? Is "Male Armor Bingo" a drinking game that people play whenever they get their hands on a new RPG?[2]

I throw down this challenge every time someone claims this.

What is the generic traits of a sexualised Male character ?

Unlike the fairly ingrained ones present for a sexually attractive female character, there seems to be far less known generic traits for a sexually appealing male character. Most are social pressures and not related to ingrained biological beliefs which actually go back to pre-historic times.

Essentially as I've said before the reason guys like boobs, curvy hips and nice arses is seriously related purely to the idea of continuing the species. No matter how much people would like to think otherwise this is deeply ingrained possibly even to a genetic level. As much as people would like to suggest as a species we're far beyond our origins and acting on instinct, plenty of it still remains.

erttheking:

Like I said earlier, this mission only exist because "lol titties amirite guise?!?" But to answer your question, depends. It could be commentary on the part of the developer, criticizing how the industry feels the need to shove female breasts in everybody's face, like they were twelve years old showing all their friends a pornomag they found, and that such experiences have reached a point where they're rather jarringand disconnect the player from the experience. Or it could be because the developer just likes cock bulges, in which case I would say yes.

The game "Mount your friends" is the perfect example that you can enjoy a heavily sexualised game, if you can look past said content or it doesn't bother you in the first place then you can enjoy the game. However if you can only focus on the physical appearance then it could constantly impact your enjoyment of the game.

Windknight:

Batou667:

In summary: Hitman Absolution tried to provide an edgy and stylised experience, but cut too many corners to do it really convincingly - and unfortunately a lot of these cut corners coincided with the female characters. I don't believe IO Interactive set out to make a sexist game, but the finished product is sadly very easy to pick apart viewed through a feminist kind of lens. A bit more effort next time would go a long way.

I think this is the big point. A lot of the sexist stuff that happens in games (and in general) is not done because there's mustachio twirling sexists trying to keep women down. A lot of sexism is unconscious and/or unintentional, and happens through not putting enough thought and effort into what your putting out is going to mean (this is precisely Sarkeesians message, though a lot of people like to overlook that when they just want to bash her). It doesn't really make it any less problematic, unpleasant, damaging or excusable, but shows the way forward the companies need to take.

Considering at one point she called people who play games with violent or sexualised content rape apologists. It's pretty apparent her message at least on one level is "I don't like this content in games and I don't think anyone else should like it either so I'll make it a negative thing to enjoy games with said content."

Also I'd argue here that intent should be considered along with perceived result as then it can be judge on an artistic level as to how well it portrays it's intended message.

If we take the idea of Sexism down to the basic meaning of treating men ad women differently.

Then you could say Human papilloma virus (HPV) is sexist because it has potentially very serious consequences for women and comparably minor ones for men. Now is HPV a virus sexist ? By the strictest definition of sexism then yes it is. But viruses don't have a conciousness infact they only do one of the processes of life.

MarsAtlas:

You're framing your objective in a way that disregard the score counter. Thats fine and all, but the score counter directly benefits the player in Absolution by giving upgrades the higher you score, so leaving the stripper alive jeopardizes your chance at getting the reward, while killing her is really just a drop in the bucket in regards to the score. If you're playing the game the way that the developers are clearly trying to get you to play it, giving you tangible reasons to play it that way, then its being incentivised. You can disregard the score all you wish, the incentives for killing the woman are tangible.

Except it is still placing a penalty there.

It is placing your own safety above the life of a witness but that would be present in most scenarios regardless of the gender of the witness.

MarsAtlas:

Because every videogame that features a strip club level also features extensive levels covering every age level of school, private schools, hospitals, homeless shelters, community centers, police stations, jewelry stores, convenience stores, libraries, baks, resturaunts, hardware stores, sewers, barbershops, furniture stores, toy stores, supermarkets, department stores, wholesale stores, autobody shops, parks, car dealerships, churches, synagogues, community colleges, bars, motels, diners, drug labs, orphanages, nursing homes, and the DMV, all at similar lengths to the strip club level, right?

Let me put it this way - how many games have you gone to a library to do something? How many times has a game required you to attend a meeting for recovering drug addicts? Both of those are far more common than strip clubs, yet I can't think of any for either of them.

Also many of those locations are perceived as less seedy / places with where less explosive action could take place and there are less likely to be criminals. or in some cases are generally smaller locations to wouldn't work too well as an entire level. I mean a full level set in a Barber shop ?

Also I have to say, a lack of sewer levels in games ? Is that really a perceived thing at present ?

Knight Templar:

Asita:
Let me be blunt here, when a competent writer wants to portray morality in their work (either implicitly or explicitly), more often than not the good choice will seem less immediately desirable. That's what makes evil so seductive in the first place. It's easy.

That isn't how hitman games work, they don't really pose moral questions, you're a clone made to be the perfect assassin. Morality is only there to make you feel less guilty about all the fantastic and creative ways you're about to murder a bunch of people.

See again, "implicitly or explicitly". I am not saying that there is a moral choice system in Hitman, I am saying that it presents you with an easy option and then penalizes you for it both for killing a civilian and for killing someone who is not your target, and that this would not be at all out of place in a game with an explicit moral choice system as befitting the common theme that the quick and easy path is rarely the best one. This follows a distinctly similar methodology to the standard 'good choice, bad choice' dynamic, but for some inexplicable reason while we're perfectly ok with players being incentivized to kill Little Sisters in Bioshock, being actively and blatantly penalized by the game for killing strippers (or any other non-target npc) in Hitman crosses the line because - just like in Dishonored - it was often easier and/or more fun to be less discriminate in your killing and thus implicitly incentivizes you to take that route and - unlike when Dishonored did it - that is a very bad thing because reasons.

Point being that we are apparently being inconsistent in the standards we are using to criticize Hitman in this case. We don't care that it's practical to kill Little Sisters in Bioshock, we don't care that the Dark Side is more lucrative in KoTOR, we don't care that lethal options are more practical than stealthing through Deus Ex, we don't care that it's practical and fun to make chaos inducing actions in Dishonored, so why do we care that it's practical and/or more fun to be less discriminate in Hitman? Because instead of incentivizing you for the sake of trapping you it directly penalizes you for the act and leaves it at that? What makes that so much more worthy of scorn than getting extra Adam for killing little children in Bioshock at the cost of a more sinister ending cinematic?

Asita:

This follows a distinctly similar methodology to the standard 'good choice, bad choice' dynamic, but for some inexplicable reason while we're perfectly ok with players being incentivized to kill Little Sisters in Bioshock, being actively and blatantly penalized by the game for killing strippers (or any other non-target npc) in Hitman crosses the line because - just like in Dishonored - it was often easier and/or more fun to be less discriminate in your killing and thus implicitly incentivizes you to take that route and - unlike when Dishonored did it - that is a very bad thing because reasons.

Then there's Crusader Kings, where you are quite often penalised for not executing a number of people (your children, grandchildren, infants included) who end up inheriting your kingdom and joyfully tearing it apart due to Gavelkind laws. You sometimes can deal with it in a "civilised" way, but more often than not it requires luck, money and specific circumstances. The best solution (on average) = murder all males (sexism), preferably those with inferior statistics (ableism) and with potentially troublesome skin color (racism). Did I mention surviving one should also be *ehem* willing to provide an heir at some point? Or that game actually provides a conveniently pre-made plot to kill your spouse?

How is this possible CK has not caused a huge scandal yet when such small potatoes do?:)

The_Kodu:

Windknight:

Batou667:

In summary: Hitman Absolution tried to provide an edgy and stylised experience, but cut too many corners to do it really convincingly - and unfortunately a lot of these cut corners coincided with the female characters. I don't believe IO Interactive set out to make a sexist game, but the finished product is sadly very easy to pick apart viewed through a feminist kind of lens. A bit more effort next time would go a long way.

I think this is the big point. A lot of the sexist stuff that happens in games (and in general) is not done because there's mustachio twirling sexists trying to keep women down. A lot of sexism is unconscious and/or unintentional, and happens through not putting enough thought and effort into what your putting out is going to mean (this is precisely Sarkeesians message, though a lot of people like to overlook that when they just want to bash her). It doesn't really make it any less problematic, unpleasant, damaging or excusable, but shows the way forward the companies need to take.

Considering at one point she called people who play games with violent or sexualised content rape apologists. It's pretty apparent her message at least on one level is "I don't like this content in games and I don't think anyone else should like it either so I'll make it a negative thing to enjoy games with said content."

She said 'it makes them more likely to accept rape myths and victim blame'. Very different thing. Not a causation, but an influence, and a negative one, one that's hard to argue with.

Anyone else surprised the mods have not closed this yet?

Windknight:
I think this is the big point. A lot of the sexist stuff that happens in games (and in general) is not done because there's mustachio twirling sexists trying to keep women down. A lot of sexism is unconscious and/or unintentional, and happens through not putting enough thought and effort into what your putting out is going to mean (this is precisely Sarkeesians message, though a lot of people like to overlook that when they just want to bash her). It doesn't really make it any less problematic, unpleasant, damaging or excusable, but shows the way forward the companies need to take.

While I'm glad you thought what I wrote was reasonable, I just want to point out that if Anita Sarkeesian is correct in calling Hitman Absolution slightly problematic, it's for entirely the wrong reasons (even a broken clock is right twice a day). As I mentioned back in Post #48 I think her analysis of the game's violence against women is at best naive and at worst purposefully misleading in an attempt to score a point about how severe and widespread misogyny is in games.

Corran006:
Anyone else surprised the mods have not closed this yet?

Far as I know "No Anita Sarkeesian threads!" isn't one of the forum rules. Besides, it's all been civil enough so far, hasn't it?

Windknight:

She said 'it makes them more likely to accept rape myths and victim blame'. Very different thing. Not a causation, but an influence, and a negative one, one that's hard to argue with.

Actually she doesn't use the term "more likely." She states it will as a fact.
Also being a rape apologist isn't about committing the act but believing rape myths and victim blaming which is exactly what she said would happen to people, not could, not might, but as a fact does.
That's the problem she states it as an absolute conclusion and the evidence for this, the paper she used, says that it is by no means conclusive proof, more studying and research is needed and that the methodology was flawed.

I'm not joking the research paper used by Anita did it's test by having 30 male (at most) and 70 females in a test group and 30 in a control group with 70 females and then having them watch a 10 minute looped slide show for 30 minutes and then tested their responses to a deliberately ambigious situation.

The questions were scored based on tick box responses to questions such as

What punishment should the girl in question push for if she believes it was sexual harassment

No punishment

forced apology

Forced written apology and face to face

Force public apology

Forced public apology and sent on a sexual harassment course

Forced public apology, Sexual harassment course and suspension

Forced public apology, Sexual harassment course and suspension and suspension without pay

Immediately fired

Immediately fired and required to pay compensation for mental anguish caused

Immediately fired and prosecuted for the harassment

Immediately fired and prosecuted with jail time for the harassment

Immediately fired, Jailed and paced on the sex offenders register

Immediately fired and jailed for life.

The lower down the answer the more points it was worth. So say a girl pushed for life in prison and a guy picked say the mid range option he'd be scoring only half as much as her already.
(note not the actual answers but to give you an idea of the questions)

This is also not taking into account there was no initial test done on the people it was assumed out of a random group of first year university students that everyone would have the same starting belief and attitude and it was only the stimulus which caused the results.

Corran006:
Anyone else surprised the mods have not closed this yet?

Considering the past threads we've had this is tame.

No-ones called anyone else a rapist yet or called for anyone to be scrubbed from the face of the earth for the good of humanity.

TopazFusion:

WhiteNachos:

TopazFusion:
Anita should have used footage from the previous Hitman game, Blood Money, instead.
That game is rife with examples of the sort of thing she's talking about.

image

Scantily-clad women standing around, who serve no other purpose than for fully-clothed male NPCs to ogle at them. Objectified and sexualized women who are the very definition of "background decoration".
One of them even serves as your target.

And you can't even argue that they're "strippers" in a "strip club", so you would "expect" them to be there, ... because they're not strippers, and it's not a strip club.
So, why are they dressed like that?


There's also that other mission, that takes place at a 'porn mansion' in the freezing cold Rocky Mountains, which also has scantily-clad women standing around, with fully-clothed men ogling at them.
Though, in that particular case, it being a 'porn mansion', maybe you could argue that they're "part of the background decoration"... But whatever.

Have you never heard of Hugh Heffner? That mission was clearly a take on him and his mansion.

True. And I admit that's the weaker of the two examples I presented.

The stronger example is the one included in the screenshot above. That 'masquerade party' mission, full of scantily-clad women.
It's not a reference to anything, ... porn mansions, strip clubs, or anything else. And how many masquerade parties have you been to, that have women dressed like that?

None but I've also never heard of a heaven and hell party before but I love the idea. They are background decoration but I'm not seeing the big issue. They aren't presented as objects they're just people milling around that you don't care about because they're not your targets and they're not going to get in your way. Those women are servers, so they were hired to wear that and be part of the party. They are not victims and the game doesn't encourage you to oggle them so if you're not bothered by skimpy outfits then I'm not seeing the issue.

It's not like every woman in that game looks like that.

Edit: Now that I think about it those angels do provide some commentary. Not by themselves but in contrast with the rest of the level.

You have a heaven party and a hell party, the heaven party is very fancy and formal and everyone wears white. The hell party is a huge dance party with big thumping music and it looks like a club. It even has a pyrotechnic show and a shark tank. And yet with all this lack of subtlety the people working the hell club don't show as much skin.

"Look, it's not our fault players are having sex with kids in our game! Our game is about having sex with ADULTS, so we programmed it so you could have sex with anyone. Of course we're going to have kid NPCs though, it wouldn't be believable otherwise! Besides, you lose points if you have sex with the kid NPCs!"

(Also, losing a few points isn't "discouragement." Making you feel guilt for callously ending an innocent human life, in a way that happens all the time and rarely receives any sort of justice... now that's discouragement. I'd like to see one of these "dark, gritty, mature" games try that.)

bobleponge:
"Look, it's not our fault players are having sex with kids in our game! Our game is about having sex with ADULTS, so we programmed it so you could have sex with anyone. Of course we're going to have kid NPCs though, it wouldn't be believable otherwise! Besides, you lose points if you have sex with the kid NPCs!"

(Also, losing a few points isn't "discouragement." Making you feel guilt for callously ending an innocent human life, in a way that happens all the time and rarely receives any sort of justice... now that's discouragement. I'd like to see one of these "dark, gritty, mature" games try that.)

so, you take no issue over the fact you can literally mow down entire crowds of innocent bystanders in hitman absolution, as well as security guards that are simply doing their job, the strippers are the only lives that matter?

bobleponge:
"Look, it's not our fault players are having sex with kids in our game! Our game is about having sex with ADULTS, so we programmed it so you could have sex with anyone. Of course we're going to have kid NPCs though, it wouldn't be believable otherwise! Besides, you lose points if you have sex with the kid NPCs!"

(Also, losing a few points isn't "discouragement." Making you feel guilt for callously ending an innocent human life, in a way that happens all the time and rarely receives any sort of justice... now that's discouragement. I'd like to see one of these "dark, gritty, mature" games try that.)

Way to be overdramatic lol. Those "innocent lives" will surely respawn and even then, they are just data that you can bring up anytime.

And how is getting negative points in a game thats about getting a good score not punishment? Do you want the game to reroute a nuclear strike to your house if you just brush past the female NPCs lol ( But the males? Nah, fuck em, break their necks like fleshy breadsticks!)

Windknight:

NuclearKangaroo:
?

regardless, this woman, chose to dress like that, how is that sexualization?, and if it is, who cares, is her choice, your political correctness is actually condemning her freedom to dress as she pleases

is ironic now that your argument has had both discriminating and oppressive tones towards women

Ok, give me a second to gather myself so I don't laugh in your face over that argument.

I made no comment about the cosplayer. she is free to choose what she wears.

I made comment about Rikku, a 15 year old character who's design includes a string bikini, detached sleeves and a semi transparent skirt. that is a sexualised design, or a design with some sexualised aspects. She did not choose that outfit - it was chosen for her by her creator. You like her as a character? Thats fine. You like her design? That is totally fine too. Just have the goddamn honesty to accept you like a character who is sexualised as part of her design.

this is Litchi Faye-Ying

I think she's aweseome - she's a warm, kind and highly intelligent character who shows a lot of caring and is a strong fighter. I also like her looks, and I fully accept her design is sexualised. Doesn't stop me liking her, but I am fully prepared to acknowledge that aspect, problematic as it may be.

Rikku is 15....? I've not played X in a long while, but I don't ever remember her being that young. Entirely possible though, playing that game when I was like 7 or whatever doesn't exactly help the memory....

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked