Injustice 2 really triggers my feminism. There, I said it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

MC1980:

EternallyBored:
snip

Yeah, no. It seems like you're the one who isn't up to date on how Koei operates. They are still localising musous on the Vita with 100$ collectors editions. Games that, if you combine all versions (PS4, PS3, Vita, PC depending) of the games, in both NA and EU you'd get maybe 30000 units sold.

Games that sell like absolute garbage, where the descriptor 'tepid' would be a 270% improvement in sales figures, are still being localised by Tecmo. The average Omega Force musou is lucky to hit 30k sales in NA. Guess what? Both Xtreme 1 and 2 have sold more than a 100k each in NA alone. These numbers would literally make it rival mainline Dynasty Warriors games, and would make this DoA spin-off their 4th or 5th highest selling series per release in the west. (These are all specifically referring to launch window, LTD are a far harder number to get.)

So don't propagate this nonsense about them not bringing Xtreme 3 over due to bad sales, when it's blatant that you aren't in any way aware of anything related to sales and how low the bar is for Koei games. The 'puritan' angle is farfetched, but the 'bad sales' angle is literally an ignorant lie.

musou is a fucking poor comparison because their entire strategy for years with their Warriors style games is to make them fast and spam them, which even then they still have had weird localization issues with, i.e. They went to the trouble of localizing dynasty warriors all star crossover for NA but arent localizing the PSP version despite the PSP version existing in Japan.

That's getting off track, my point isn't that they didn't bring it over solely due to bad sales projections if you think that was the point then either I fucked up my rambling or you read something wrong, but the point is more that KT has done arbitrary export fuckery in the past and has no issue bringing over sexy games that draw criticism. So they will definitely release such games regardless of Western criticism, I don't know why exactly they didn't release Extreme 3, my only contention as far as sales is that if it had drawn mainline DOA sales I very much doubt they would still be trotting out the "western criticism" justification.

Although your numbers seem off, the numbers I can find for extreme beach volleyball 2 puts them at around .23 million worldwide, the first sold over 100k in NAthe second dropped massively, and the third was an even cheaper cash in. The only mainline warriors sales that approach that seem to be DW 8 and that's still over 500k worldwide, so still twice as much as extreme beach volleyball 2, and DW 8's sales was not something they were just fine with considering dynasty warriors was selling multi millions years ago, part of the speculation I've heard for DW going open world is due to trying to revitalize the series, dunno how true that is though. After the disappointing sales of 8, I can't imagine they are just going to stumble forward without some kind of attempt at changing things.

I can't find anything nearing 30k cross platform NA/EU sales, are you sure you aren't seeing something else? NA numbers alone are almost impossible to get accurately. The omega force musou games regularly hit above 30k NA sales if you break down world wide sales, and the ones that got anywhere near 30k are either re-releases of older musou games or shit like Samurai Warriors Katana for the Wii, which surprise surprise, never got a sequel at all. I am pulling numbers from the Musou warriors forum in case you want to look, on my phone so I can't post their graphs and sales charts, most of their numbers seem to be pulled from investors meetings.

EDIT: sorry, it's the KOEI Warriors forum I put the word musou into my post so much I got my source fucked up.

Dalsyne:
snip

Drop the mic!

I think that is the best way to put it really. It leads me to wonder how many feminists just don't see the difference in attraction. Maybe there is a lot of lesbian demographic amongst feminists and as a result they are looking for that same "MAture, sauve, mysterious, romance" That the men in films like "50 shades" or "Twilight" or even "James Bond" exude. But because the general audience looks at sexy women in a different way, the feminists are trying to adapt a false equivalence to the comparison.

That's just speculation of course. But maybe there is a grain of truth to it. They look at the sexualization of men, and don't see it because they aren't interested in men, but they like how they act and behave and want to see that in the woman (of whom they ARE sexually interested in) and they don't see the same appeal being applied. So instead of having a discussion on it, they call it sexist and ignore any truth to their accusations.

EternallyBored:

MC1980:

EternallyBored:
snip

Yeah, no. It seems like you're the one who isn't up to date on how Koei operates. They are still localising musous on the Vita with 100$ collectors editions. Games that, if you combine all versions (PS4, PS3, Vita, PC depending) of the games, in both NA and EU you'd get maybe 30000 units sold.

Games that sell like absolute garbage, where the descriptor 'tepid' would be a 270% improvement in sales figures, are still being localised by Tecmo. The average Omega Force musou is lucky to hit 30k sales in NA. Guess what? Both Xtreme 1 and 2 have sold more than a 100k each in NA alone. These numbers would literally make it rival mainline Dynasty Warriors games, and would make this DoA spin-off their 4th or 5th highest selling series per release in the west. (These are all specifically referring to launch window, LTD are a far harder number to get.)

So don't propagate this nonsense about them not bringing Xtreme 3 over due to bad sales, when it's blatant that you aren't in any way aware of anything related to sales and how low the bar is for Koei games. The 'puritan' angle is farfetched, but the 'bad sales' angle is literally an ignorant lie.

musou is a fucking poor comparison because their entire strategy for years with their Warriors style games is to make them fast and spam them, which even then they still have had weird localization issues with, i.e. They went to the trouble of localizing dynasty warriors all star crossover for NA but arent localizing the PSP version despite the PSP version existing in Japan.

That's getting off track, my point isn't that they didn't bring it over solely due to bad sales projections if you think that was the point then either I fucked up my rambling or you read something wrong, but the point is more that KT has done arbitrary export fuckery in the past and has no issue bringing over sexy games that draw criticism. So they will definitely release such games regardless of Western criticism, I don't know why exactly they didn't release Extreme 3, my only contention as far as sales is that if it had drawn mainline DOA sales I very much doubt they would still be trotting out the "western criticism" justification.

Although your numbers seem off, the numbers I can find for extreme beach volleyball 2 puts them at around .23 million worldwide, the first sold over 100k in NAthe second dropped massively, and the third was an even cheaper cash in. The only mainline warriors sales that approach that seem to be DW 8 and that's still over 500k worldwide, so still twice as much as extreme beach volleyball 2, and DW 8's sales was not something they were just fine with considering dynasty warriors was selling multi millions years ago, part of the speculation I've heard for DW going open world is due to trying to revitalize the series, dunno how true that is though. After the disappointing sales of 8, I can't imagine they are just going to stumble forward without some kind of attempt at changing things.

I can't find anything nearing 30k cross platform NA/EU sales, are you sure you aren't seeing something else? NA numbers alone are almost impossible to get accurately. The omega force musou games regularly hit above 30k NA sales if you break down world wide sales, and the ones that got anywhere near 30k are either re-releases of older musou games or shit like Samurai Warriors Katana for the Wii, which surprise surprise, never got a sequel at all. I am pulling numbers from the Musou warriors forum in case you want to look, on my phone so I can't post their graphs and sales charts, most of their numbers seem to be pulled from investors meetings.

Sorry, I myself was in a bit of a mood when I wrote my response. I was being needlessly catty. Apologies. DOAX1 sold 80k in its first month, according to NDP. DOAX2, I don't have the launch window for, but LTD in NA according to NPD puts it at 200k. In the current climate, that would put it above something like Dragon Quest Warriors, but One Piece and Dynasty would be above it. Not sure how well Attack On Titan or Berserk did. I'm pretty sure Berserk sold like shit though.

The 30k number was senseless hyperbole by me, sorry. I was either thinking of Arslan or one of the Samurai Warriors games when I wrote that, but it's most certainly inaccurate.

:O oh noes game developers making what they want to make how terrible. Maybe this is a sign that the industry is getting over political correctness.

Magmarock:
:O oh noes game developers making what they want to make how terrible. Maybe this is a sign that the industry is getting over political correctness.

"Getting over"

Did it start?

Huh. Well, I must say I'm rather shocked to find out that there are people thinking Injustice 2 is overly sexualized. Everyone I knew thought that most female characters are deliberately made ugly so the game won't be criticized for for making them overly attractive. I know it's not true - Netherrealm just has a problem with faces and they get deeper into the Uncanny Valley every time they upgrade the visuals. Still, I find it rather surprizing that this game can "trigger feminism". I love fanservise and I do wish this game I could think of this heroines as sexy... but it's not that much easier than with Andromeda.

But I guess to each their own.

SirSullymore:

Ravenbom:

Wonder Woman has a troubled history of sexuality in comics, especially with her creator who put her in a lot of bondage situations. But she became a strong symbol for female empowerment

Question: What's troubling about bondage? Empowered women can't be into it (or at least not in the position of sub)?

As far as I know, the story was about her being in bondage against her will. Of course, empowered women can do anything, including choosing to allow themselves to be overpowered and derive pleasure from it and such, but to some people this kind of thing will come off as just people treating women badly and not many will take it as content aimed at females with rape/forced bondage fantasies.

Oh man, this just game me a fantastic fighting game idea! It's basically Injustice, but with the roster is populated solely by Rob Liefelds female characters! SPines that ben in impossible ways! Torpedo boobs that allow you to defy the laws of physics before the match even begins! Hands and feet that are always conviniently obscured by foreground objects! A bandolier of pouches for ever situation! TOO MANY POUCHES!

Syzygy23:
Oh man, this just game me a fantastic fighting game idea! It's basically Injustice, but with the roster is populated solely by Rob Liefelds female characters! SPines that ben in impossible ways! Torpedo boobs that allow you to defy the laws of physics before the match even begins! Hands and feet that are always conviniently obscured by foreground objects! A bandolier of pouches for ever situation! TOO MANY POUCHES!

You know, I think I'd probably play that.

CritialGaming:

Dalsyne:
snip

Drop the mic!

I think that is the best way to put it really. It leads me to wonder how many feminists just don't see the difference in attraction. Maybe there is a lot of lesbian demographic amongst feminists and as a result they are looking for that same "MAture, sauve, mysterious, romance" That the men in films like "50 shades" or "Twilight" or even "James Bond" exude. But because the general audience looks at sexy women in a different way, the feminists are trying to adapt a false equivalence to the comparison.

That's just speculation of course. But maybe there is a grain of truth to it. They look at the sexualization of men, and don't see it because they aren't interested in men, but they like how they act and behave and want to see that in the woman (of whom they ARE sexually interested in) and they don't see the same appeal being applied. So instead of having a discussion on it, they call it sexist and ignore any truth to their accusations.

Ok, so.... uhm.

It will come as a shock to you, apparently, but yes, WOMEN LIKE HALFNAKED MEN IN SEXUAL POSES.

Female sexualization is the same as the male sexualization. In both cases, an halfnaked figure in a sexually provocative pose is a turn on. Because that's how biology works.

The difference is the kind of pose - the halfnaked woman may more often be in a feminine, elegant pose, showing her sexuality. While the halfnaked man may more often be in a masculine, strong pose, showing his sexuality.
Both in BOTH scenarios sexualization comes from them having a hot body and showing it. Showing the butt, showing the abs/boobs, showing the penis/vagina.

But yeah, I'm sorry to break it up to you, but women like sexy halfnaked men showing their butt to the screen just the same way men like halfnaked women showing their butt to the screen.

The reason many women aren't going to tell this to YOU is because society doesn't allow women to act in a openly lewd manner. But stumble into a conversation between women who know each other well, and you'd find more pervert comments than drunk frat boys at a pub.

The mentality of "men like halfnaked sexy things, women are pure angels who aren't into hot sweaty bodies" harkens back to medieval times where a woman's sexuality was seen as weird and dangerous. I would hope we're way past that.

But apparently if you're into hot sweaty bodies like men do, it means you're lesbian.... because you are like a man.
*sigh*

kitsunefather:

Also: would all of this bother you less if they had included Orca (female killer whale monster)?

image

Ahahahah oh my gosh, it's a musclebound furry fish with boobs. I.... I like it.

Yes, you got it right.

Let's assume they had put this giant bodybuilder whale furry in the game.

Hey presto, you would then hear absolutely zero complaints from my side if they also put Ivy shaking her boobs to the camera.

That's the entire point, you know? Variety. I don't mind some nice hot babes. I like them.
It's the feeling of being forced into that which irks me.

Nature Guardian:
snip

I noticed that you replied to someone who was basically agreeing with my comment.

Why not take a look at mine as well, specifically at the "bunch of men shoving their cocks in the camera" part and see if that specific scenario would make women as a demographic buy a game?

Because you're replying to a thing none of us have said - that women aren't turned on by sexy male bodies. That wasn't the context of the argument, the context was that they're not turned on in the same way as men are and there's evidence for this in media made specifically for females that holds sales figures as the only thing that's sacred.

To say that's rooted in some mentality is to say everyone, from writers to Hollywood, is trying to keep women down. That's a conspiracy theory and a half.

I don't deny that there's a niche of women out there that enjoy hypersexuality such as male strippers and comment on bulges and the like, but they're proportionally small as a demographic. Which is what matters.

Dalsyne:

Nature Guardian:
snip

I noticed that you replied to someone who was basically agreeing with my comment.

Why not take a look at mine as well, specifically at the "bunch of men shoving their cocks in the camera" part and see if that specific scenario would make women as a demographic buy a game?

Because you're replying to a thing none of us have said - that women aren't turned on by sexy male bodies. That wasn't the context of the argument, the context was that they're not turned on in the same way as men are and there's evidence for this in media made specifically for females that holds sales figures as the only thing that's sacred.

To say that's rooted in some mentality is to say everyone, from writers to Hollywood, is trying to keep women down. That's a conspiracy theory and a half.

I don't deny that there's a niche of women out there that enjoy hypersexuality such as male strippers and comment on bulges and the like, but they're proportionally small as a demographic. Which is what matters.

What I'm trying to say is that yes, women like a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera.

The difference being that women are NOT socially encouraged to say it out loud, while men are socially encouraged to loudly declare they like hot women showing their vaginas in the camera.

I invite women in this forum to take advantage of internet' anonimity to come forward and explain why men and women are both naturally attracted by hot bodies and reproductive organs.

Satinavian:
But when filling a rooster with figures from a timescale when female comic characters were mostly damsels, sidekicks or femme fatales and male comic characters were mostly Marty Sues, evil geniuses or brawny villians, it is utterly forgivable and even expected, if the result matches the source.

That is not sexism as far as the game is concerned.

Yeah this is essentially the point everyone is trying to point out to OP. The DC heroes/villains were created during a different time, they're essential over-exaggerated super humans with everything with everything turned up to 11. Attractive female hero becomes incredibly sexy and over-sexualised. Scary male villain becomes horrific creature of evil. Muscular male hero becomes massive bag of muscle with paving slabs for pecks and tree trunks for arms. They are simply stereotypes.

Nature Guardian:
If anything, teen titans proved you do not need to make "sex fantasy" the key element of the heroine. Injustice 2 could have made Catwoman and even Starfire into cool heroines. Because them being sex fantasies is NOT what really makes them.

Teen Titans was a fantastic example of meaningful characters, but it was also a kid's show and you can bet that if it wasn't there would be some sexualization going on. And are you suggesting that because Starfire and Ivy are attractive they can't be meaningful characters? Is it mutually exclusive? Can only unattractive characters have depth?

Nature Guardian:
Batman? But he has always used seduction to lure criminals! Superman? But please he is a sex symbol, he is called Superman! Green Arrow? He's a scoundrel, being seductive is part of his identity.

If were to look at this from a DND morality perspective, Batman is lawful neutral and never seduced anyone in his life unless you count Bruce Wayne whole does it to flesh out his role as a playboy philanthropist. Superman is lawful good, pretty much fell for Lois Lane and that was the end of it. Green Arrow could be considered chaotic good depending on which iteration of him we're talking about but he is a roguish type. You completely left out The Flash who has consistently hits on members of the Justice League and villains they go up against too.

Basically I'm calling out OP, I want to know if you think NetherRealm purposefully sexualised their fermale characters or if you think they're just staying true to source material (bear in mind it is an adult rated game so there's going to be be things like partial nudity, drugs, alcohol, swearing, etc) or is it simply the stereotypes they represent?. And the whole "sex sells" while it hasn't been entirely debunked, it has been sorta downgraded to "sex draws attention to our products" and you can bet nowhere when WB was discussing with NetherRealm how to develop Injustice 2 did they say "yeah, nah, make the female characters ugly as humanly possible."

And as for the Grodd vs Cheetah and Ivy vs Swamp Thing, as it's already been stated - Cheetah gained her power through magic while Ivy's DNA was basically spliced with that of plants while Grodd is a goddamn telepathic gorilla and Swamp Thing is literally a dead guy's consciousness that has been reanimated to be a guardian of the forest.

I'm not trying to make OP look bad or start anything but I'm genuinely curious to know.

KissingSunlight:

maninahat:
[snip]

You don't find Gorilla Grodd sexy? What's wrong with you! I'm kidding. However, that does point out that "sexy" is subjective.

You are assuming that the character designs are being rooted in sexism. Do you actually believe that the creators of this videogame are sexist? I don't. I don't think any rational person will think that either.

Both men and women prefer to look at attractive women. It's not a matter of sexism. Would a game be more interesting if there are monstrous looking women? Sure. Then you do have to understand that the source material is from comic books. The motivation for putting in the female characters that they did weren't sexism. They are the most popular female character from the source material.

I have just one more thought. The Swamp Thing and Gorilla Grodd are two exceptions to the male roster. Most of the male characters look alike as well. Also, it can be argued that the male characters are sexualized as well. It is interesting that an attractive male design is "male power fantasy" and an attractive female design is "sexual objectification".

The sexism isn't in the fact that men and women prefer to look at attractive women. The sexism is in exclusively having attractive women. That any female character who isn't sexy, doesn't get to be in the game. This complaint can be expanded to the comic book industry in general as well in how it tends to portray women, but at least the comics have characters like Big Barda or Amanda Waller - women who are less conventional looking but still cool, and would have been a good addition to the game. Males get a bit more range, you've got the weird looking Grodd and Thing, but you've also got beefcakes like Batman, wirey guys like Robin, and hideous villain equivalents in Darkseid and The joker. Meanwhile all the female characters come with the same body shape, and all are sexy, regardless of who they are.

As for your final thoughts on male power fantasy vs sexual objectification; this is an old argument that has been covered a billion times already. Go look up Jimquisition's take on it. The short answer here though is that if these male characters were genuinely designed to be sexy to women, they wouldn't look or act a damn thing like they do now. Obviously there are some women out there into beef tanks like Batman, but that is incidental more than anything else.

SirSullymore:

Ravenbom:

Wonder Woman has a troubled history of sexuality in comics, especially with her creator who put her in a lot of bondage situations. But she became a strong symbol for female empowerment

Question: What's troubling about bondage? Empowered women can't be into it (or at least not in the position of sub)?

Actually, this is kind of an issue. This isn't a case of Wonderwoman consenting to a being someone's rope bunny, this is a case of how the superpowered amazon constantly gets subdued with ropes and gags and chains, largely so the writer had an excuse to indulge in kink. It completely undermines the whole female empowerment symbol thing, and serves as the main inspiration for the the NSFW comic Empowered. Empowered parodies how the portrayal of a superstrong woman is a paper thin illusion, and only leads to them being regularly disempowered and fetishised for an audience.

As a Wonderwoman fan, I just accept them as contradicting elements that make the books all the more peculiar and interesting.

MercurySteam:

Basically I'm calling out OP, I want to know if you think NetherRealm purposefully sexualised their fermale characters or if you think they're just staying true to source material (bear in mind it is an adult rated game so there's going to be be things like partial nudity, drugs, alcohol, swearing, etc) or is it simply the stereotypes they represent?. And the whole "sex sells" while it hasn't been entirely debunked, it has been sorta downgraded to "sex draws attention to our products" and you can bet nowhere when WB was discussing with NetherRealm how to develop Injustice 2 did they say "yeah, nah, make the female characters ugly as humanly possible."

Nobody has asked for Netherrealms to make the female characters as ugly as possible. I wouldn't want that either.

Think about it, how does one guess "all female characters should be as ugly as possible" when someone else asks "not all female characters should be superhot fantasies if not all the males are"?
Because this is what invariably happens in these discussions: asking for variety gets somehow turned into hating attractive characters.

As I said, simply add a character like that Orca in the game and already I feel the developers aren't telling me all female characters must be limited to a specific standard. I enjoy female sexuality in videogames, and it's because I want to enjoy it that I don't want it to also be related to sexism.

So in answer to your question, yes, I do feel the developers actively strived to make sure each and every female can be 100% bangable according to generic sexual standards, while they certainly did not have the same concerns when designing the male cast.

As a feminist you should know that sexualization is general term mainly adopted in the west and not to long ago. Knowing that, not every culture and person on this planet finds ever women with huge chest or an butt hot. In certain cultures it's based upon weight and size, while In other part of the world its can be based upon eye color or even how long your neck is. It is also not just aimed at women but also at men as well. Norway the taller you are, the sexy you are, for both men and women, no joke. So sexualization concept is not standard around the world nor from person to person, heck, there was an art project done about it.

What I am saying is that what triggers you is only from your perception. What you consider a sexualized character; another person will just see them as a video game character. What you are not willing to consider as a sexualized male character, can be considered sexualized by someone else, in other words this is a very deep rabbit hole to tread.

For me personally, i have seen the characters, they are over the top and are fictional. They were never made to actually be like us, they were always over the top from their source material. Do they cross some sexual barrier no, at least not within the confines of what the comics were. Should it change, No, because that would be editing the artist intent and the intent of what they thought characters personality were.

MercurySteam:

SirSullymore:
Starfire made me cringe, but other than that it didn't seem any more cheesecakey that the first one to me.

I'd say that out of the many DC heroes, Starfire is one of the most sexualized of them all, bearing in mind she is a model by day.

People need to remember the source material for this game, in many of the DC heroines are incredibly over-sexualized (yes, even pre New 52) and as for Injustice 2, I'd say the only female characters that are portrayed heavily that way (apart from Starfire) are Poison Ivy, Catwoman and maybe Harely Quinn. At least two of those examples are well known for using their looks to their advantage so if nothing else the game portrays them quite well. Even then I'm sure there will be a variety of costumes for each of the characters.

One thing I would like to add about Starfire is I really think she gets thrown around as the prime example of looks over substance far too often. I'm reading Red Hood and the Outlaws now (just finished volume 2) and while vol 1 is full of those T&A shots and focuses on her body over any thing else, she is the most capable fighter of the group and is on a whole 'nother level than where Jason and Roy are mentally and physically. She survived imprisonment on a foreign planet and became captain of her own warship which she uses to thwart an alien invasion and save her planet while Jason stands around uselessly entertaining his date.

Sure she's got nice boobs but she's a fucking bad ass as well.

Dreiko:

SirSullymore:

Ravenbom:

Wonder Woman has a troubled history of sexuality in comics, especially with her creator who put her in a lot of bondage situations. But she became a strong symbol for female empowerment

Question: What's troubling about bondage? Empowered women can't be into it (or at least not in the position of sub)?

As far as I know, the story was about her being in bondage against her will. Of course, empowered women can do anything, including choosing to allow themselves to be overpowered and derive pleasure from it and such, but to some people this kind of thing will come off as just people treating women badly and not many will take it as content aimed at females with rape/forced bondage fantasies.

Her whole origin in sado-masochism and bondage is really complicated. Marston, her creator and also the inventor of the lie detector (hence the lasso of truth), lived in a relationship with his wife and their outside girlfriend. This third member of the sexual triangle is who Wonder Woman is visually based on. Marston however wasn't about about tying up women and beating them. His idea was that women should actually rule the world and place men in "loving submission". Sort of a form of subservience but without any malice- kind of like being enslaved by someone who really loves you and cares for you. Amazon society is kind of what's left of that idea after men are gone- so all the women live with these rituals from the past that revolve around bondage and submission. As time has gone on some artists have eschewed that stuff and some have embraced it, but I don't think it was really ever the misogynist and sexist thing people say it is before looking into the issue.

Nature Guardian:
Yeah, the problem is that I can't actually pinpoint an example and say "look, this is why it's sexist". And Supergirl looks great and Wonder Woman is in character.

Yet, how can I explain.... I feel that vibe. I know it's there. And the creepy comments you can find on character trailer videos seem to prove it.

Some games can be an endless parade of tits and ass and be awesome for me, other games may appear nonsexualised yet they bother me in their gender depictions.

In fact, I myself would like to understand why this game triggers me. But it does. Something's off......

Maybe you just don't like the design? Do you have to attach some -ism to it?

I mean, I think that basically anything to do with comics or anime looks like absolute trash. Has nothing to do with x-ism, I just don't like it.

Nature Guardian:

Syzygy23:
Oh man, this just game me a fantastic fighting game idea! It's basically Injustice, but with the roster is populated solely by Rob Liefelds female characters! SPines that ben in impossible ways! Torpedo boobs that allow you to defy the laws of physics before the match even begins! Hands and feet that are always conviniently obscured by foreground objects! A bandolier of pouches for ever situation! TOO MANY POUCHES!

You know, I think I'd probably play that.

CritialGaming:

Dalsyne:
snip

Drop the mic!

I think that is the best way to put it really. It leads me to wonder how many feminists just don't see the difference in attraction. Maybe there is a lot of lesbian demographic amongst feminists and as a result they are looking for that same "MAture, sauve, mysterious, romance" That the men in films like "50 shades" or "Twilight" or even "James Bond" exude. But because the general audience looks at sexy women in a different way, the feminists are trying to adapt a false equivalence to the comparison.

That's just speculation of course. But maybe there is a grain of truth to it. They look at the sexualization of men, and don't see it because they aren't interested in men, but they like how they act and behave and want to see that in the woman (of whom they ARE sexually interested in) and they don't see the same appeal being applied. So instead of having a discussion on it, they call it sexist and ignore any truth to their accusations.

Ok, so.... uhm.

It will come as a shock to you, apparently, but yes, WOMEN LIKE HALFNAKED MEN IN SEXUAL POSES.

Female sexualization is the same as the male sexualization. In both cases, an halfnaked figure in a sexually provocative pose is a turn on. Because that's how biology works.

The difference is the kind of pose - the halfnaked woman may more often be in a feminine, elegant pose, showing her sexuality. While the halfnaked man may more often be in a masculine, strong pose, showing his sexuality.
Both in BOTH scenarios sexualization comes from them having a hot body and showing it. Showing the butt, showing the abs/boobs, showing the penis/vagina.

But yeah, I'm sorry to break it up to you, but women like sexy halfnaked men showing their butt to the screen just the same way men like halfnaked women showing their butt to the screen.

The reason many women aren't going to tell this to YOU is because society doesn't allow women to act in a openly lewd manner. But stumble into a conversation between women who know each other well, and you'd find more pervert comments than drunk frat boys at a pub.

The mentality of "men like halfnaked sexy things, women are pure angels who aren't into hot sweaty bodies" harkens back to medieval times where a woman's sexuality was seen as weird and dangerous. I would hope we're way past that.

But apparently if you're into hot sweaty bodies like men do, it means you're lesbian.... because you are like a man.
*sigh*

You say all that, but then you say that half naked-Aquamen isn't there for his sexuality. You can't have it both ways. The women pose "sexy" because men like sexy poses. The Male characters stand there strong and buff with rippling six-pack goodness, because as you said, woman like to see sexy men like that.

So in one post you say it isn't sexualization with the men. Then in another post you say it is?

This is what confuses me so much with feminist posts, because there are a lot of things that are okay when you "give permission" for it to be okay. But it isn't okay if it doesn't have the stamp of approval, when often times the two things are identical. To me, it means these kinds of discussions can't hold water because Feminists tend to move the goalpost at random and it becomes just ranting for the sake of ranting.

If the talk is about equality, then it is plainly clear that the sexualization is equal. Women are sexy, the men are sexy, but how they handle that sexiness is different because of the natural differences between how men and women view objects of their lust.

What I can't understand is why people don't leave shit alone. Okay, you don't agree or like the way the female characters behave. That's fine, but there are people who do enjoy that so what gives you the right to say that they are wrong to enjoy it?

Don't like it, don't buy it. But don't tell other people that they shouldn't buy it either. It isn't your right to tell people what they should and shouldn't enjoy.

At the same time, it is your right to also question why they have the women doing these poses and not men. To which you have been given answers in this very thread. You don't have to like the answers, but you should be able to acknowledge and accept them right? Just say, "Well that's stupid. I'll pass on Injustice 2." And boom thread over.

Nature Guardian:

What I'm trying to say is that yes, women like a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera.

The difference being that women are NOT socially encouraged to say it out loud, while men are socially encouraged to loudly declare they like hot women showing their vaginas in the camera.

I invite women in this forum to take advantage of internet' anonimity to come forward and explain why men and women are both naturally attracted by hot bodies and reproductive organs.

Are women socially encouraged to buy certain video games for themselves? Do you think demographics are purely a matter of social encouragement?

If women are so maleable that social encouragement can change their personal taste for their entire lives, how do you know what their default state is? "Because I'm a woman and I like X" doesn't count. You are a particularly small sample size.

Was it social encouragement that made Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey so popular among female demographics? Was it the patriarchy? Is there a conspiracy to control what women like and dislike, and if so, what was special about those pieces of media?

I'd like it if women posted here and shared their opinions. Not holding my breath though, this thread is pages long already.

CritialGaming:

Nature Guardian:

Syzygy23:
Oh man, this just game me a fantastic fighting game idea! It's basically Injustice, but with the roster is populated solely by Rob Liefelds female characters! SPines that ben in impossible ways! Torpedo boobs that allow you to defy the laws of physics before the match even begins! Hands and feet that are always conviniently obscured by foreground objects! A bandolier of pouches for ever situation! TOO MANY POUCHES!

You know, I think I'd probably play that.

CritialGaming:

Drop the mic!

I think that is the best way to put it really. It leads me to wonder how many feminists just don't see the difference in attraction. Maybe there is a lot of lesbian demographic amongst feminists and as a result they are looking for that same "MAture, sauve, mysterious, romance" That the men in films like "50 shades" or "Twilight" or even "James Bond" exude. But because the general audience looks at sexy women in a different way, the feminists are trying to adapt a false equivalence to the comparison.

That's just speculation of course. But maybe there is a grain of truth to it. They look at the sexualization of men, and don't see it because they aren't interested in men, but they like how they act and behave and want to see that in the woman (of whom they ARE sexually interested in) and they don't see the same appeal being applied. So instead of having a discussion on it, they call it sexist and ignore any truth to their accusations.

Ok, so.... uhm.

It will come as a shock to you, apparently, but yes, WOMEN LIKE HALFNAKED MEN IN SEXUAL POSES.

Female sexualization is the same as the male sexualization. In both cases, an halfnaked figure in a sexually provocative pose is a turn on. Because that's how biology works.

The difference is the kind of pose - the halfnaked woman may more often be in a feminine, elegant pose, showing her sexuality. While the halfnaked man may more often be in a masculine, strong pose, showing his sexuality.
Both in BOTH scenarios sexualization comes from them having a hot body and showing it. Showing the butt, showing the abs/boobs, showing the penis/vagina.

But yeah, I'm sorry to break it up to you, but women like sexy halfnaked men showing their butt to the screen just the same way men like halfnaked women showing their butt to the screen.

The reason many women aren't going to tell this to YOU is because society doesn't allow women to act in a openly lewd manner. But stumble into a conversation between women who know each other well, and you'd find more pervert comments than drunk frat boys at a pub.

The mentality of "men like halfnaked sexy things, women are pure angels who aren't into hot sweaty bodies" harkens back to medieval times where a woman's sexuality was seen as weird and dangerous. I would hope we're way past that.

But apparently if you're into hot sweaty bodies like men do, it means you're lesbian.... because you are like a man.
*sigh*

You say all that, but then you say that half naked-Aquamen isn't there for his sexuality. You can't have it both ways. The women pose "sexy" because men like sexy poses. The Male characters stand there strong and buff with rippling six-pack goodness, because as you said, woman like to see sexy men like that.

So in one post you say it isn't sexualization with the men. Then in another post you say it is?

This is what confuses me so much with feminist posts, because there are a lot of things that are okay when you "give permission" for it to be okay. But it isn't okay if it doesn't have the stamp of approval, when often times the two things are identical. To me, it means these kinds of discussions can't hold water because Feminists tend to move the goalpost at random and it becomes just ranting for the sake of ranting.

If the talk is about equality, then it is plainly clear that the sexualization is equal. Women are sexy, the men are sexy, but how they handle that sexiness is different because of the natural differences between how men and women view objects of their lust.

What I can't understand is why people don't leave shit alone. Okay, you don't agree or like the way the female characters behave. That's fine, but there are people who do enjoy that so what gives you the right to say that they are wrong to enjoy it?

Don't like it, don't buy it. But don't tell other people that they shouldn't buy it either. It isn't your right to tell people what they should and shouldn't enjoy.

At the same time, it is your right to also question why they have the women doing these poses and not men. To which you have been given answers in this very thread. You don't have to like the answers, but you should be able to acknowledge and accept them right? Just say, "Well that's stupid. I'll pass on Injustice 2." And boom thread over.

I'll address your points.

1) The sexualization is NOT equal in the SLIGHTEST. I am sorry to sound rude, but this is a way to throw sand in the face and trying to hide the problem. Give every single male in the game a hot body, make them halfnaked, make them strike sexual poses and have the camera often lingers in their exposed buttcheeks, and make sure they make cringey sexual comments "do you think you can handle my full package?". THEN they would be equal.

2) I never said, NEVER, that I don't want people to buy that product. I just want to buy that product too. Can't we have both? With so many female characters, why can't YOU get your sexy babe and I get my badass nonsexualized lady? Or is your point that all female characters should be sexy and shame on me for suggesting to add some variety to increase the audience?

Dalsyne:

Nature Guardian:

What I'm trying to say is that yes, women like a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera.

The difference being that women are NOT socially encouraged to say it out loud, while men are socially encouraged to loudly declare they like hot women showing their vaginas in the camera.

I invite women in this forum to take advantage of internet' anonimity to come forward and explain why men and women are both naturally attracted by hot bodies and reproductive organs.

Are women socially encouraged to buy certain video games for themselves? Do you think demographics are purely a matter of social encouragement?

If women are so maleable that social encouragement can change their personal taste for their entire lives, how do you know what their default state is? "Because I'm a woman and I like X" doesn't count. You are a particularly small sample size.

Was it social encouragement that made Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey so popular among female demographics? Was it the patriarchy? Is there a conspiracy to control what women like and dislike, and if so, what was special about those pieces of media?

I'd like it if women posted here and shared their opinions. Not holding my breath though, this thread is pages long already.

No, women aren't so malleable.

HUMAN BEINGS are so malleable. Please don't think you're special and immune to social conditioning, because no one is.

Twilight and 50 Shades Of Gray are designed for girls. So, what is the problem? Men get stupid fantasies about huge-boobies chick and harem animes all the time; when the same stupid thing happens for a female audience, suddenly it's wrong or it's what women ever wanted.
Hello, just like not all men are into harem animes but harem animes are marketed at them, not every woman is into Twilight or 50 Shades Of Grey because those things are marketed at them.

Nature Guardian:
I never said, NEVER, that I don't want people to buy that product. I just want to buy that product too. Can't we have both? With so many female characters, why can't YOU get your sexy babe and I get my badass nonsexualized lady? Or is your point that all female characters should be sexy and shame on me for suggesting to add some variety to increase the audience?

I think it's just that this particular game isn't for you. Your "issues" with the game are features most fans of comic book media accept as a feature. Nothing's wrong with, it just doesn't suit your tastes.

Shadowstar38:

Nature Guardian:
I never said, NEVER, that I don't want people to buy that product. I just want to buy that product too. Can't we have both? With so many female characters, why can't YOU get your sexy babe and I get my badass nonsexualized lady? Or is your point that all female characters should be sexy and shame on me for suggesting to add some variety to increase the audience?

I think it's just that this particular game isn't for you. Your "issues" with the game are features most fans of comic book media accept as a feature. Nothing's wrong with, it just doesn't suit your tastes.

And your argument comes apart when I inform you that I am an avid comic book collector.

Because we're in 2017 now, so not every superhero comic book is made exclusively for the benefit of straight male white teenagers.

Why can't Injustice 2 have the variety that actual comics books now have?

And why do some people have problems with the idea of throwing an Orca once in a while inbetween a Poison Ivy and a Starfire?

And excuse me, having only sexualized female characters as if no other female character is allowed to play a role is a "feature"?

Nature Guardian:

Syzygy23:
Oh man, this just game me a fantastic fighting game idea! It's basically Injustice, but with the roster is populated solely by Rob Liefelds female characters! SPines that ben in impossible ways! Torpedo boobs that allow you to defy the laws of physics before the match even begins! Hands and feet that are always conviniently obscured by foreground objects! A bandolier of pouches for ever situation! TOO MANY POUCHES!

You know, I think I'd probably play that.

CritialGaming:

Dalsyne:
snip

Drop the mic!

I think that is the best way to put it really. It leads me to wonder how many feminists just don't see the difference in attraction. Maybe there is a lot of lesbian demographic amongst feminists and as a result they are looking for that same "MAture, sauve, mysterious, romance" That the men in films like "50 shades" or "Twilight" or even "James Bond" exude. But because the general audience looks at sexy women in a different way, the feminists are trying to adapt a false equivalence to the comparison.

That's just speculation of course. But maybe there is a grain of truth to it. They look at the sexualization of men, and don't see it because they aren't interested in men, but they like how they act and behave and want to see that in the woman (of whom they ARE sexually interested in) and they don't see the same appeal being applied. So instead of having a discussion on it, they call it sexist and ignore any truth to their accusations.

Ok, so.... uhm.

It will come as a shock to you, apparently, but yes, WOMEN LIKE HALFNAKED MEN IN SEXUAL POSES.

Female sexualization is the same as the male sexualization. In both cases, an halfnaked figure in a sexually provocative pose is a turn on. Because that's how biology works.

The difference is the kind of pose - the halfnaked woman may more often be in a feminine, elegant pose, showing her sexuality. While the halfnaked man may more often be in a masculine, strong pose, showing his sexuality.
Both in BOTH scenarios sexualization comes from them having a hot body and showing it. Showing the butt, showing the abs/boobs, showing the penis/vagina.

But yeah, I'm sorry to break it up to you, but women like sexy halfnaked men showing their butt to the screen just the same way men like halfnaked women showing their butt to the screen.

The reason many women aren't going to tell this to YOU is because society doesn't allow women to act in a openly lewd manner. But stumble into a conversation between women who know each other well, and you'd find more pervert comments than drunk frat boys at a pub.

The mentality of "men like halfnaked sexy things, women are pure angels who aren't into hot sweaty bodies" harkens back to medieval times where a woman's sexuality was seen as weird and dangerous. I would hope we're way past that.

But apparently if you're into hot sweaty bodies like men do, it means you're lesbian.... because you are like a man.
*sigh*

While that's true, one has to wonder why it is so, at least to that degree. Testosterone is linked to a more baser level of physiology, ie visual stimulation whereas estrogen has a stronger tie to emotional stimuli.

Having said that, emotions can be unpredictable to say the least.

Elijin:

erttheking:

silasbufu:
Sex sells maybe?

Ok, show of hands, who is going to be buying this game purely for T&A?

Depends on how you view it. Watching the trailers showing off the variety of armour variants kinda of makes me want to get this just to play dress ups. Like, I'm not really a fan of fighters. But that looks like some sweet dress ups.

So, technically, my interest in purchasing it is purely for the aesthetics of the game, does that count?

(I probably wont buy it unless its super duper cheap one day tho)

Kinda? It seems like everytime someone says they're interested in the game's aesthetics there's a couple of other modifiers they add on. People say "Sex sells" like it's all you need, but clearly you need more than that. I didn't say sex sells was BS, just that it was an oversimplification.

SirSullymore:

Ravenbom:

Wonder Woman has a troubled history of sexuality in comics, especially with her creator who put her in a lot of bondage situations. But she became a strong symbol for female empowerment

Question: What's troubling about bondage? Empowered women can't be into it (or at least not in the position of sub)?

As someone who's super into bondage, early WW comics weren't really about her in bondage, it was about someone forcibly taking control away from her. Don't get me wrong, those early comics are kind of what made me realize I was into bondage, but they were there for other people to enjoy, not her. Our enjoyment came at her expense.

I'd love to see more modern comics that depict WW in a more consensual BDSM relationship though, particularly if it covers the guidelines of Safe Sane Consensual. (though modern WW seems more like a top than a bottom TBH, but who knows, she could be a switch)

Nature Guardian:

Dalsyne:

Nature Guardian:
snip

Snip

What I'm trying to say is that yes, women like a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera.

The difference being that women are NOT socially encouraged to say it out loud, while men are socially encouraged to loudly declare they like hot women showing their vaginas in the camera.

I invite women in this forum to take advantage of internet' anonimity to come forward and explain why men and women are both naturally attracted by hot bodies and reproductive organs.

Even though I'm a man, I'm going to cite my wife as anecdotal (ie: the worst kind) evidence against the broad generalization here.

My wife is, and has always been, very open about what she likes and doesn't like. She is not one to mince words nor to spare feelings (one of the things that first drew me to her). She is an avid viewer of porn, and frequents a fanfiction site of a very specific pairing of characters expressly to read the "lascivious" stories.

She is likely a 2 to 2.5 on the Kinsey Scale, with a more then incidental attraction to women, but a favoring sexually of men. I say all this as preface to give an idea of the source of my anecdote, and also to remind people that there is a fairly sliding scale when it comes to attraction.

For her, she prefers "thicker" women; not necessarily athletic but definitely not skinny, with more rounded hips, asses and, to a lesser extent, breasts. She's more of a "booty" person when it comes to women, really.

With men, it's more about the presence and voice they possess; Alan Rickman and Gary Oldman are two of her standouts, as are Idris Elba and Hugo Weaving. This isn't to say she doesn't like the idea of them having huge thick ones, but what attracts her to them is their presence and the tones of their voice.

For my part, assuming my opinion matters, I'm closer to a 1 on the scale, maybe a shade below it; I've no interest in having sex with men, but I can appreciate the form and shape of men, and understand why someone would find this or that attractive. For me, in person, it's about how a person holds themselves, rather than the some of their parts. That said, I'm like my wife (more to breasts than hips/rump than her, though) when it comes to people who catch my eye at random.

Nature Guardian:

And your argument comes apart when I inform you that I am an avid comic book collector.

Because we're in 2017 now, so not every superhero comic book is made exclusively for the benefit of straight male white teenagers.

Why can't Injustice 2 have the variety that actual comics books now have?

And why do some people have problems with the idea of throwing an Orca once in a while inbetween a Poison Ivy and a Starfire?

And excuse me, having only sexualized female characters as if no other female character is allowed to play a role is a "feature"?

To this: for the first part, "comic book collector" can mean a lot of things, and many people who carry that title eschew super hero comics as being "childish" "awful" or the dreaded "corporate". Saying you're an avid comic collector doesn't mean you enjoy or are have any more than a passing interest in DC Comics, or its characters. That said, the fact that you are arguing this vehemently about Injustice 2 means you likely are, and I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt.

Injustice 2 doesn't have the variety that actual comic books have for three primary reasons:

1. The people making and designing the games are putting their favorite characters in, basically. This isn't so much a game for fans of the DC universe as much as it's an authorized fanfiction.

2. The company paying for the game to be made want to put in recognizable, bankable characters, and to maximize the amount of money they make without having to create too many actual assets. It's why the majority of male characters have the same basic skeleton. It's also why there are going to be more Mortal Kombat characters in this one, and why Jason, Alien, Leatherface, and Predator were all in MKX.

3. Characters like Orca are relatively unknown. I only remembered the character because it was mentioned in the Lego Batman movie, and didn't know she was a Batman villain until someone here mentioned her. I have been reading comics (off and on) since Crisis on Infinite Earths, and had never heard of this character.

Further on number 3, as it relates to the quoted section, no one (as far as I know) has a problem with putting Orca, but also no one is campaigning to put Orca in. What I'd suggest, honestly, is rather than running the circle of arguments you have been here, also take some time to start a hashtag or something on twitter. I'm not kidding when I say I think it'd be a blast to have characters like her, Killer Shark, and the like appear in fighting games, which would also give some love to more obscure characters.

As to the "only sexualized female characters", I'd remind that they are pulling from source material as fans of it, likely from the 90s era of DC Comics. Seriously, Injustice 2 (and 1 to an extent) feels like they are trying to top the 90s when it comes to the "dark and edgy and MATURE" stuff, which feels so pathetically dated and awful.

maninahat:
The sexism isn't in the fact that men and women prefer to look at attractive women. The sexism is in exclusively having attractive women. That any female character who isn't sexy, doesn't get to be in the game. This complaint can be expanded to the comic book industry in general as well in how it tends to portray women, but at least the comics have characters like Big Barda or Amanda Waller - women who are less conventional looking but still cool, and would have been a good addition to the game. Males get a bit more range, you've got the weird looking Grodd and Thing, but you've also got beefcakes like Batman, wirey guys like Robin, and hideous villain equivalents in Darkseid and The joker. Meanwhile all the female characters come with the same body shape, and all are sexy, regardless of who they are.

As for your final thoughts on male power fantasy vs sexual objectification; this is an old argument that has been covered a billion times already. Go look up Jimquisition's take on it. The short answer here though is that if these male characters were genuinely designed to be sexy to women, they wouldn't look or act a damn thing like they do now. Obviously there are some women out there into beef tanks like Batman, but that is incidental more than anything else.

Did the videogame creators specifically said they don't want unattractive female characters in the game? I don't think they did.

Again, "sexy" is subjective. Who's to say that a woman wouldn't be attracted to Darkseid or Gorilla Grodd? Even a man being attracted to Amanda Waller or Big Barda? Can you be honest and say that you find these women attractive? Because people can find Harley and Poison Ivy unattractive. One is too pale and the other is green and have plants growing on her.

As for your second point, this is why I stopped taking claims of "sexism" seriously. "Feminists" are always up in arms about how "sexualized" women are. When it gets pointed out that the men are also sexualized in the same media, they always dismiss it. It indicates to me that these "feminists" are not really concerned about gender equality. They just want to complain that some character design offends their personal sensibility. Which is fine. Not everybody is going to like the same things.

This thread is a throwback to a time where every week there was an article or thread complaining about how some game is "sexist". For a while, I took those claims seriously. This is an opportunity to say now what I wished I said then. It's not "sexist". You are being a prude. If you don't like the game, then don't play it. There are three video game consoles and games for the personal computer. You can find a game that won't offend your sensibility. Stop trying to shame people for liking games that you don't like.

Nature Guardian:
What I'm trying to say is that yes, women like a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera.

The difference being that women are NOT socially encouraged to say it out loud, while men are socially encouraged to loudly declare they like hot women showing their vaginas in the camera.

I invite women in this forum to take advantage of internet' anonimity to come forward and explain why men and women are both naturally attracted by hot bodies and reproductive organs.

I'm sorry. I can't let this claim go unchallenged.

If women like seeing "a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera", then why do women complain about receiving "dick pics"?

KissingSunlight:

Nature Guardian:
What I'm trying to say is that yes, women like a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera.

The difference being that women are NOT socially encouraged to say it out loud, while men are socially encouraged to loudly declare they like hot women showing their vaginas in the camera.

I invite women in this forum to take advantage of internet' anonimity to come forward and explain why men and women are both naturally attracted by hot bodies and reproductive organs.

I'm sorry. I can't let this claim go unchallenged.

If women like seeing "a bunch of hot men shoving their cocks in the camera", then why do women complain about receiving "dick pics"?

My assumption would be two-fold:

1. Most are unsolicited, and almost no one wants close ups of genitals without any sensual or sexual context. As far as I've ever seen or heard, the complaints tend to center on the unsolicited ones.

2. There's a difference between pictures of a meat bishop that lacks any context, and an attractive man in a piece of media performing an action that is sexually suggestive.

Nature Guardian:

Shadowstar38:

Nature Guardian:
I never said, NEVER, that I don't want people to buy that product. I just want to buy that product too. Can't we have both? With so many female characters, why can't YOU get your sexy babe and I get my badass nonsexualized lady? Or is your point that all female characters should be sexy and shame on me for suggesting to add some variety to increase the audience?

I think it's just that this particular game isn't for you. Your "issues" with the game are features most fans of comic book media accept as a feature. Nothing's wrong with, it just doesn't suit your tastes.

And your argument comes apart when I inform you that I am an avid comic book collector.

Because we're in 2017 now, so not every superhero comic book is made exclusively for the benefit of straight male white teenagers.

Why can't Injustice 2 have the variety that actual comics books now have?

And why do some people have problems with the idea of throwing an Orca once in a while inbetween a Poison Ivy and a Starfire?

And excuse me, having only sexualized female characters as if no other female character is allowed to play a role is a "feature"?

If you're a comic book fan, you'd have the context to know all the stuff you're complaining about is internally consistent. The women look idealized same as the men. Most of the exceptions are the nonhuman characters who're villains, ergo, not really meant to look pleasing.

Sure, throw in orca. I'm sure how many people actually know who that is compared to the rest of the roster. And You already have Cheetah as your non-sexy female character, so I fail to see the problem.

Nature Guardian:

I'll address your points.

1) The sexualization is NOT equal in the SLIGHTEST. I am sorry to sound rude, but this is a way to throw sand in the face and trying to hide the problem. Give every single male in the game a hot body, make them halfnaked, make them strike sexual poses and have the camera often lingers in their exposed buttcheeks, and make sure they make cringey sexual comments "do you think you can handle my full package?". THEN they would be equal.

2) I never said, NEVER, that I don't want people to buy that product. I just want to buy that product too. Can't we have both? With so many female characters, why can't YOU get your sexy babe and I get my badass nonsexualized lady? Or is your point that all female characters should be sexy and shame on me for suggesting to add some variety to increase the audience?

1. The sexualization is equal if you account for the different way in which men and women process sex. You also negate the characters almost in totality by ignoring not only their personalities but also the source material in which they originate. The source material being the most important thing here because it dictates how these characters behave. What you are asking is that the characters themselves be completely remade from the ground up and forego the decades of development and history that has made these characters who and what they are. You are only looking at two seconds of behavior and getting triggered by it.

2. We CAN have both. But you can't have both if you don't overlook your bias's. Adding a female monster doesn't solve your "issue" because your issue is fiction. Made up in your own mind to serve your own purposes. Adding a monster Orca isn't going to bring in a new audience to the game, because unknown and unpopular chracters are unpopular for a reason, either the character wasn't very good, or the audience doesn't WANT monster characters.

Look at other fighting games. How many chisled hunky hunky manly men and women do you see in Street Fighter or Tekken? How many monsters?

You can have your feminist views, and you can get mountains of support, but the one thing that really matters speaks far more truth than you can ever hope for. And that's money. People buy it, and because of that, this sexy lady "problem" will continue to happen forever and ever.

So in truth. The answer to question 2 is, no. You can't have both. Because not enough people like monster characters in fighting games, and it isn't worth the developer dumping resources into a character that they already know people don't care about. Video games are in the business of making money, and that is the only thing they care about it.

And "Diversity" doesn't sell.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

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