Neoriceisgood
Member
I find it interesting how the simple touch of a slightly grayed out name makes posts like this suddenly a delight to read.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Feminist Frequency: All the Slender Ladies: Body Diversity in Video Games
- Thread starter lightskintwin
- Start date
I find it interesting how the simple touch of a slightly grayed out name makes posts like this suddenly a delight to read.
fvng
Member
yeah i dont care, it's meaningless to me and i'm still not co-signing on that..
You clearly dont understand that the number of people that agree with you has no bearing on my opinion? What does quantity have to do with the quality of your argument? I don't believe anyone should demand changes from an artist to change their vision or end product. Period. Sure, they can listen to criticism, but as long as no one is forcing their hand, or are being pressured to the point of HAVING to change, then that should be the extent of it.
You're dodging my question. It's a pretty clear question. If an executive told Kubrick to change one of his endings, do you think he should have complied? This is a yes or no question but feel free to elaborate.
I'm all for diversity, but i'm not for strong arming artists into changing their vision to appease a political or social movement. I dont even like the idea of executives interfering with an artist's vision. This is not an argument of increasing revenue for me, so i'm not sure why you're bringing that up. Stay on topic
I'm a realist, and I actually acknowledge that there are certain products made for certain audiences in mind, male, female, straight, gay, etc.... Take a look at romance novel section, or 50 shades of grey, those were marketed towards women. I've seen a lot of media that sexualizes men, and is clearly geared towards straight women, so the male gaze is a shit argument in my opinion. Besides, I see nothing wrong with any product being targetted towards a specific demographic. Feminists have demonized this, but there is nothing wrong with media made for men or women in mind. I dont care if DoA3 was made for men in mind, it can be enjoyed by gay women as well, or women who enjoy cheeky video games.. There is nothing inherently wrong with DoA3 other than people taking issue with anything being made for straight guys in mind.
that's sad
Brushguy Woodthreep
Member
Great! Then Anita Sarkeesian's videos should fit the bill exactly. She expresses her opinion and in no way forces anyone to change their games.
You got the argument wrong. There is nothing wrong to cater to specific segments of the population. The problem with the male gaze is that it's considered the default view. Men media have a male gaze, women media have a female gaze, family friendly media have a male gaze, most media without a specific gender target have a male gaze. And that's the problem: the default standard point of view is most always through the male perception, even when men are not specifically the target of the art/medium.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Well... this is certainly open minded and invites constructive dialog? Seriously, how does someone respond to that when it is a constantly them And us kind of mentality...
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Then the solution is not to cover the DoA XXX threads with omg so ashamed posts, but to ignore them and post in threads about games you like.
It is not about raising awareness against those games but to support creation of new content.
Sometimes people are not happy with being moral unless other people are also forced in the same moral standard/code.
partyphone
Banned
no need to respond to it. Eden is referencing bad arguments that get trotted out in every single one of these threads. they're made in bad faith and have been thoroughly debunked countless times. do you have any actual criticism of the video or do you just want to whine impotently about it?
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
You could have waited ten minutes and another post, beside he had as much right as to whine himself than me to address that post with a comment. This thread is quite aggressive already... it risks being either a echo chamber of people super pro or super against this, but have it your way.
It's an emotionally charged subject. People are going to be vehement on both sides. The tragedy is that there are indeed sides
Brushguy Woodthreep
Member
Part of expressing interest in things you like is expressing a lack of interest in things you don't like.
Let's say, for example, Nintendo makes a Metroid game that's so far from what their audience wants that most of the discussion about it online is negative, the reviews are mediocre, and the sales are poor. Is discussion about the game (though primarily negative) some kind of moral crusade? Isn't it just players expressing the fact that they're not interested in that kind of content?
The same goes for games like DoA Xtreme. You're entitled to like them, but you're not entitled to be in the majority, or to have an echo chamber where you don't get to hear negative opinions about the thing you like.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
It's odd, you keep implying you're an artist yet you seemingly have no idea how the field works. I would take the L on that one.
Here's the thing, you, as a non-artist, keep speaking for us as if you know about the industry, yes, keep spouting your opinion, but meanwhile, me and other artist are telling you FACTS about the industry.
Because we actually know wtf we're talking about.
Then just to reiterate, you don't know anything about what it's like being an artist, or game development, or the industry, here's a not very shocking fact, there have been many MANY instances in this industry where artists have had to change their vision due to higher up in the company wanting to appeal to a broader audience, and many projects that didn't get greenlit because of that, Remember Me barely got made because many companies rejected the idea of a female protagonist, Bioshock Infinite's cover had to be as creatively bankrupt as possible to appeal to "fratgamers." Many artists, (at least the ones i've talked to), prefer working on more inclusive things than appealing to the same exact status quo. You don't understand how much feedback is incredibly important during EVERY part of the process when it comes to making a game, otherwise a game wouldn't get made and if it did, it wouldn't be very good.
Then you should have absolutely no issue with the Femfreq video series as that's EXACTLY the extent of it's effect on game developers.
False equivalency, changing an ending, which can be crucial to a film, is way more important than sexist character design, same face and body types, and sticking to overused tropes, all of which are never crucial to a project.
We've already outlined what extent the Femfreq series has on game developers, critique is not strong arming. Devs aren't being forced to make changes, they're accepting feedback from someone who actually gives a shit about the state of the industry.
You've doubled down on the argument that an "artist's vision" is the single most important aspect of a piece of art and that no outside forces whatsoever should interfere with that while discussing the artistic medium that has more iteration before and sometimes even after a product is finished than other art fields. There are literally multiple artists telling you that's not how it works and explained in detail how and why you don't know what you're talking about. So no you're not.
Menaresexualizedtoo™, we're discussing the male gaze in the context of prevalent tropes in video games, no young adult romance novels aimed at women.
The issue is trying to maintain a boys club during a time where inclusiveness is incredibly important. And when news flash, there are just as many women playing games as men.
Except for when it skews vastly in favor of one gender over the other. Feminists have not demonized jackshit except for clear cut examples of sexism. FFS stop complaining about feminist and feminists.
The devs absolutely don't have the bolded in mind at any point during the development of games like DoA3. Don't even start.
Except for the sexism ofc, the creepy voyeurism aspect, and the harassment simulator part, and the character designed to look like a child or at best a teenager, and the exploitation of whales who feel the need to buy digital bikinis, or the fact that it's not even a good game in the first place. There's plenty to critique there as a game and as an artistic product.
I'm calling out the incredibly transparent mindset behind shit like that. None of those things ever lead to constructive dialogue in the first place but serve as a deflection from the actual topic.
Gormenghast
Member
Appeasing a feminist public even for a political message is exactly as legit as appeasing to teen boys.
The only "problem" with this is the high moral perch they think they represent.
PatThePassive
Member
Is it fair to say the other female characters in the series take away from The Boss?
Zarya Mei and Ana are examples of members of a cast that have different body shapes then the standard slender body, but overwatch also has mercy, tracer, widowmaker, Etc. Do those characters erase any of the goodwill of Zarya, Mei, and Ana.
Why is The Boss "the woman in the fridge" trope? She is the mentor archetype if anything.
The unzipped suit bit I don't know the exact reason for but yeah its not for titillation. I assumed it was so when
snake has to shot her its extra rough to have to shot her exposed chest
I also remember hearing Kojima wanted The Boss's original design to have an exposed breast, so with the c section scar the unzipped suit may be calling back on the maternal aspect of her design.
Mr_Antimatter
Member
It's perfectly valid to highlight what one thinks is wrong as well as promote what you think is right. DOA as a series has some good things, but it's often overshadowed by the endless pandering and whale hunting. I say that as someone who owns several games in the series.
No one is forcing someone to follow a moral code via criticism.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
There's nothing moral high ground about pointing out prevalent sexism in an industry by pointing out it's various tropes. She's raising awareness first and foremost, not trying to placate a "feminist public."
Brushguy Woodthreep
Member
First of all, my point was that game devs are able to ignore Sarkeesian's videos if they want to. I'm not clear on how this is a response to that.
But to respond to your post: If I had to sum up what Sarkeesian is asking for throughout all her videos, it's more variety. She argues that the way women are represented in games falls into a bunch of set patterns, and this comes across as lazy, repetitive, dull, and (yes) unappealing to certain audiences.
Which means the response from teen boys amounts to: nah, we want the characters in games to stay repetitive and dull. Variety sucks.
It's not really a question of legitimacy, but of which is the more interesting direction for the industry to go in. I know which one I'm hoping for.
I love people denying things because "it happens elsewhere like movies".
This means if you go to attack this in movies the person will say "but it happens elsewhere like games" and it is an infinite cicle of NOTHING BEING DONE
No but they make it sound like Boss was a happy accident or the exception that proves the rule
This means if you go to attack this in movies the person will say "but it happens elsewhere like games" and it is an infinite cicle of NOTHING BEING DONE
No but they make it sound like Boss was a happy accident or the exception that proves the rule
I literally said DoA wasn't the problem. Go express yourself in the DoA thread. Do you have an opinion about the male gaze in entertainment for the general public? Like, stuff that was discussed in the OT video?
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
That tends to happen when your main arguing point boils down to deflecting what's being said and saying nothing of value about the thing you suddenly care about
-Starving children in Africa
-That men are sexualized too in young adult novels specifically aimed at women
-violence in video games
-that the person critiquing the issue hasn't made a game themselves
etc. `\_(ツ
_/¯That is one that I will never understand ... does Roger Ebert needed to make a movie to be respected as a critic ? Does every feminist needs to have male children to criticize the patriarchy ? Do you need to make feminist videos to criticize feminist videos ?
Like how she always end her videos with positive examples, right ? =D
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
It makes as much sense as all lives matter, as in it completely misses the point entirely as a it's a emotional response that doesn't hold up when put under any sort of scrutiny. They are all similar in that way and just as disengenous.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
The notion that criticism is a demand is so unfathomably stupid, it's actually kind of funny.
Just how sensitive are those Gamergaters, to think that the mildest of criticism is an attack on their artistic integrity and a crushing demand for censorship? Maybe they need safe spaces to stop being triggered by Anita.
As Joe Abercrombie said, if you find your worldview is profoundly threatened by the gentlest counter-arguments, there's a good chance your worldview is bullshit.
Just how sensitive are those Gamergaters, to think that the mildest of criticism is an attack on their artistic integrity and a crushing demand for censorship? Maybe they need safe spaces to stop being triggered by Anita.
As Joe Abercrombie said, if you find your worldview is profoundly threatened by the gentlest counter-arguments, there's a good chance your worldview is bullshit.
Hellwarden
Member
Good video. Enjoyed it. Think the dota example could be better, but it's fine.
I will say I disagree with some views in this thread. I don't think body suits don't need to go away. Games like DOA don't need to away. We just need better representation to balance it out. The problem is sexualized characters are the norm when they shouldn't be.
I will say I disagree with some views in this thread. I don't think body suits don't need to go away. Games like DOA don't need to away. We just need better representation to balance it out. The problem is sexualized characters are the norm when they shouldn't be.
Can gamers stop using artists as a shield for their base arguments? Artists aren't wizards that conjure up perfect products all the time, nor are (most of us) arrogant snobs that balk at the social conversation that automatically occurs by releasing a product into a public that has the right and the will to tell us what they think of our art; rather, we actually want to improve. We want people to tell us where we messed up. That is impossible without a public that doesn't exalt the "artist's vision."
Imagine how that much further far behind this blasted medium would be if we never took feedback from the public. How much longer would games be badly-designed "Nintendo Hard" games because the developers had no context for how difficulty changes would be perceived in a neutral environment? How many technological innovations would've never come to be if there wasn't an expressed need for that innovation to exist or a problem that innovation could solve? How many games and franchises would be worse off without public betas to expressly gain feedback and extensive backlash to their mistakes? How many more companies would be pulling a Gearbox or Sean Murray and getting away with falsely advertising their products and lying? And does anyone still actually want a DRM-riddled Xbone? Furthermore, at what point does this attitude become pure dogma and conflict with criticism? Show of hands: who here is willing to go to bat for Sonic 06 and say I was wrong for shitting on it and demanding Sega do better- demanding Sega change their artistic vision- in order to better serve me as a loyal customer and to do right by the franchise that keeps them relevant? Under the more nihilistic conclusion, who was I to even say that Sonic 06 was fucking bad in the first place? It was "the artist's vision," was it not?
I am not some sacred cow above reproach just because I can draw. I am also not some sniveling coward that needs protecting from the dreaded SJWs whenever I put my work online for people to see and comment on. I'm an artist. That's nothing special. So stop using me and my colleagues as a buffer for your own argument and grow enough of a spine to tell us you just want to see more titties.
Imagine how that much further far behind this blasted medium would be if we never took feedback from the public. How much longer would games be badly-designed "Nintendo Hard" games because the developers had no context for how difficulty changes would be perceived in a neutral environment? How many technological innovations would've never come to be if there wasn't an expressed need for that innovation to exist or a problem that innovation could solve? How many games and franchises would be worse off without public betas to expressly gain feedback and extensive backlash to their mistakes? How many more companies would be pulling a Gearbox or Sean Murray and getting away with falsely advertising their products and lying? And does anyone still actually want a DRM-riddled Xbone? Furthermore, at what point does this attitude become pure dogma and conflict with criticism? Show of hands: who here is willing to go to bat for Sonic 06 and say I was wrong for shitting on it and demanding Sega do better- demanding Sega change their artistic vision- in order to better serve me as a loyal customer and to do right by the franchise that keeps them relevant? Under the more nihilistic conclusion, who was I to even say that Sonic 06 was fucking bad in the first place? It was "the artist's vision," was it not?
I am not some sacred cow above reproach just because I can draw. I am also not some sniveling coward that needs protecting from the dreaded SJWs whenever I put my work online for people to see and comment on. I'm an artist. That's nothing special. So stop using me and my colleagues as a buffer for your own argument and grow enough of a spine to tell us you just want to see more titties.
I don't get this.
First, you can do both.
Second, what with the who?
This is so abstract, I don't know what you're saying. Pretty sure you can address anything in more than two ways, for what it's worth.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Thank you. Especially the bolded. I mean ffs it would be so much less of a waste of time to just be honest instead of all these deflection bullshit. We've had a shit ton FF threads, we know the rhetoric and how disengenous it is.
Going back to your original post, I see what you're getting at, but no one's being forced to think or feel anything. This is a bit of a personal example, but I'm a slender guy, and I happen to like women who are "bigger" (for want of a more eloquent expression, sorry) than myself. My wife is not what you might consider "supermodel" build, and I'm not ashamed to say I've developed a crush for Zarya since playing Overwatch.
I can definitely appreciate a more slender female figure (sexualised or otherwise), and can understand how it's the majority preference these days (due to what's generally advertised, health being an important factor, etc.). I'm not saying I want "my preference" to be the norm in games or any other media, but I wouldn't mind seeing more of it. Games don't have to be a super realistic representation of reality - they are fantasy, and I can certainly appreciate a more "fantastical" portrayal of both the female and male form. If "fantasy" to most men is slender/curvy in a skintight suit, then so be it, but surely you can understand the desire for a little more diversity?
Again, I recognise what you're saying, and I'm sure you made this comment in good faith. But understand it's not about normalising obesity. You've kind of stretched the argument to the extreme with that remark. In my last post, I said something along the lines of "Is the answer as simple as having more female Roadhogs?" Of course, it isn't the only answer, but it might spell progress to some. Games aren't necessarily there to define social trends or make us believe what's good for us. They're there as escapism and to make us feel good. It's easy to see that some people would feel better if there were more characters (both female and male) representing the middling region of the spectrum. It's obviously not just about making a game full of overweight characters.
This attitude is sad. No one cares whether you get your jollies from another stranger's mistake/misfortune. Just leave posts like that well enough alone and keep the discussion civil.
It's just a tactic to shut down the conversation and basically have the people rocking the boat shut up and be silenced.
Human beings are inherently social and trying to somehow deny social relations by referring to some divine "artistic vision" free from all interactions with any other external impression or influence is just so fucking disingenous that I feel a kindergarden class would laugh at it.
Like I said, it's just a silencing tactic employed by people who want to maintain the oppressive status quo.
Audioboxer
Member
Bingo.
But Anita actually does a much better job than some forum goers hence why she is in the position she is, has the fame she does, gets the money she does and ultimately gets the respect of many devs to listen to her (but no, not be forced to change).
In the battle of ideas there are many forum goers (I don't just mean on GAF) who are far more forceful about what they want, and are very dogged in their approach (swearing left, right and centre and posting other dismissive language at dissenting opinion, or the constant "us vs them"). Often being a little too quick to want to class everyone who offers criticism as part of a herd. Thankfully that hasn't happened with me, but given I tend to try and post respectfully and offer detailed opinion it would be absolutely hilarious for anyone to try and say I'm a GGer or "insert x" (I'm also a Brit, don't give two shits about GG and think you need to have a massive lack of brain cells to attach yourself to such a fucking ridiculous movement, or nearly any movement if I'm honest. Be an individual). Most just disagree with me as seen by the GAFer and I who had a debate earlier and both walked away from each other with heads held high. The grand end game for a massive forum is that sort of debate across the board. Passionate, sure, but if heads lock and are going to remain that way just people then walking away with no bad feelings. Not some insane obsession to get anyone you argue with to conform and bow down to your train of thought.
To say that is for me to also give that as advice to those criticizing Anita. She is not the person you are are arguing with online, don't project her onto someone else. Largely she cannot even respond to your criticism as she is not on GAF (as far as we know). People have their own thoughts and agendas, even if parts of what they say mimic Anita. Heck I give Anita criticism (and praise! *shock horror*, imagine it being possible to do both) but I sure as heck think she is far more balanced than some that appropriate the work she does and then ramp it up to over 9,000. That is life though, we're all individuals and all react to art/artistic merit/genres and content differently. Lets all just try and be respectful unless someone is actually guilty of shitposting or aligning themselves with a childish and offensive movement. If that is the case they usually get banned, but there is no conspiracy on GAF's end to create a utopia where everyone agrees about everything. I mean if that were true we wouldn't have our consoles wars and NPD threads
Nor would we have a topic about your favourite sandwich followed up by a 20 post essay on how to get pegged properly. Diversity everyone.Any thread to do with females or dating.
I am perfectly ok with the original critique. I am also perfectly ok with critique of the critique, and also with critique of the critique of the critique, and of course with critique of the critique of the critique of the critique. My opinion is most non-heinous, and anyone who disagrees should be sacked (along with those responsible for the sacking).
She is better than the rest, we can all agree i think.
But is she that great ? I didn't liked the focus about the fact she can't have any child and the fact soldier on the battlefield are like her children... oh sure, she would be one tough mama but it seemed like something we wouldn't do if she was a male for exemple.
But yeah, at this point it's nitpicking, for Kojima standard she is incredible and the only female character i have liked in the serie.
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Could you please explain in what way a woman perceives the world fundamentally different (so, only referencing the difference that is coming directly from the sex, I am aware that different people have different backgrounds in their upbringings and different experiences forming their views on things) from me? Since I have never been one (and am neither a psychologist, nor a biologist dealing with these topics a lot), I am not aware of the differences.
By the way where did fvng say that male fat characters should be in games but female fat characters shouls not? Following the quote history, I cannot find such a claim.
Reagrding the skin-tight suit: It of course depens on what is meant with "this needs to go". Does it mean "I want to see an increase of different clothings" or does it mean "I want this clothing for female characters eliminated entirely"? Going by the words, it is closer to the second meaning, but sometimes people are sloppy in their wording and use too strong words to describe their wishes. If it actually is the latter, then I can completely understand the argument, because removing one variant completely certainly does not increase the diversity. On the contrary, this move in isolation reduces it. I can also see a point in retaining these looks for some characters (especially those that are already established this way), because there are people who enjoy these looks - and even skimpier ones, take a look at the size of the DoAX thread, where I doubt many people play this primarily for its gameplay. Why would you want to take away from their enjoyment?
However, I think that this of course does not stand in the way of increasing diversity, because everyone is free to start new projects with different body types. However, for a game that is of the very common athletic type, where the characters need to perform a lot of extremely athletic tasks, fat characters as playable main characters still seem to be exceedingly bad ideas to me, if it is not for comedic reasons (like with Wario). Of course there are several different kinds of body types that are athletic (and, when talking about male gaze, also very different body types that appeal to males), but just flat out fat is not among them (though for certain males it might be among the appealing ones). So for acutally playable characters in mechanically oriented games I feel that a full range of bodytypes is not a good choice, though certainly more than one bodytype has merit there (and is also already being used).
If you say so. Sometimes i just need to blow off steam after reading the same arguments I've seen repeated for the last 2-3 years. Arguments that I know from experience are incorrect and flawed. So every now and again I just have to laugh at them. Childish I know. But i'm one of the ones here trying to give tiny insights into how the industry works and like rule #1 of that is that the artist's vision means shit. Get ready to have your vision ripped apart critiqued, questioned and drastically changed every day for a period of ~2 years. Because your vision was likely flawed in many ways to begin with. And character designs are most definitely not above that process.
I personally would never want to work with someone who subscribes to the idea of "artistic vision" and being sensitive towards criticism of their own work. It would be a horrible colleague that's for sure. And as someone working in academia where harsh criticism is the norm and expected, there are no 'safe spaces' for people who believe that criticism is infringing on their own person and their own divine artistic vision. It's a complete bullshit standpoint and frankly I don't know how people who subscribe to this "artistic vision" notion ever are able to function in human interaction and professional settings.
How they got through elementary school with all the feedback from teachers and co-students I don't know either. And I wonder if they also screamed 'censorship' when their parents told them how to go to the bathroom or how to eat properly.
They would be literally impossible to work with. Infact it's unlikely they would have got the job in the first place if they are unable to work in a very iterative and feedback heavy role.
haha I just had the thought of a game studio full of these people where they each believe that their artistic vision is paramount. Game artist's designers and programmers all shouting at each other insisting their idea cannot be changed because changing it is "censorship" and an affront to their free speech. "you can't critique my code, that 'bug' is intended behaviour, I want players heads to fire off like a rocket when they die!"
I know its not what people are arguing for, but still it made for an amusing image in my head.
I feel like people are still conflating two distinct types of criticism. Obviously the developers of Sonic 06 didn't intend their game to control like shit. But the developers of DOAX definitely intended that the game be about ogling on virtual girls who look like teens. I guess it could be summed up as(Using DOAX as an example):
Is your criticism of a game aimed at
A) making the game better at achieving the developer's intended effect (Ex. You guys should include a photo mode so I can take pictures of the girls! *breathes heavily*)
or
B) changing the intended effect? (Ex. This game is about voyeurism, and I think that's creepy and sexist, make it... less so!)
Is your criticism of a game aimed at
A) making the game better at achieving the developer's intended effect (Ex. You guys should include a photo mode so I can take pictures of the girls! *breathes heavily*)
or
B) changing the intended effect? (Ex. This game is about voyeurism, and I think that's creepy and sexist, make it... less so!)
The criticism is at the industry at large, using DoAX as an example. It's not saying "get rid of this" but "look how prevalent it is, we need more variety"
Intent is not above reproach either. People are free to criticize the intent of an artist, either in the context of that specific work or in reference to a systemic problem, and the artist is free to take that criticism however they so choose. If we aren't allowed to criticize intent, then you automatically end up with a gaming industry that is far more hostile to consumers and exclusionary to minorities than it is already because the lies, the deception, the greed, and the Silicon Valley libertarian feel are very much intentional.
This attitude also has no way to reconcile artistic intent with unintended consequences. If an artist set out to make a gender-friendly work but intentionally makes some decisions that are unintentionally sexist, then by the logic of intent being off-limits you can't call them out on it, and now subsequent works have a higher likelihood of remaining worse off than they would be if someone tipped the artist off about it. Artists are not computers who make perfect mathematical calculations. We're human beings who make mistakes.
Nothing is off limits. Nothing is forbidden. That includes the right for the public to respond to any piece of an artwork in any way they so choose. This entire "artist's intent" hoohaw is a gaming-exclusive dogmatic deflection that derails the implied contract between the artist and the audience that has already been going on for centuries, if not millenia, within other mediums of art such as painting, writing, and film, mediums of art that have proven themselves just fine in the face of much bigger scrutiny than gaming has seen. If gaming can't pass this simple smell test because it hurts the consumers' feelings to like stuff that is flawed, then I would be less inclined to call games a true art form and more of a toy or a weird hobby that includes artistic disciplines but with which true artistic appreciation does not apply.
Ultimately for gamers going forward, they need to figure out what kind of culture they're willing to settle for and all of the baggage that comes with that instead of hiding behind their favorite developers and trying to pass this issue off as some noble fight for censorship and free speech and sticking up for the poor "oppressed" artist. If you want more jiggling titties, more crotch shots, more sexually-charged grunt tracks, more worrisome lolicon, and less body diversity, less gender diversity, less sexual diversity, and less ethnic diversity, and you don't care what anyone else thinks about that, then just say that's what you want. Just be prepared to have you and your hobby rightfully shit on as hostile to women, LGBT, and ethnic minorities.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Straight savage. Also really relevant, it's truly not that difficult to create varied character design where many women don't have the exact same body type. Even slight adjustments adhering to the idea of a spectrum work.
This artist understands that.
Post like this, which serve no purpose other than to gloat over someones banning, should also be "greyable."
Also I can not believe people are holding Overwatch up as some example of "body positivity." There are two heroes, out of how many, that show any kind of divergence from the "expected." Nevermind they still "have it going on" (Arrested Development, "Inner Beauty Peagent") in the traditional sense.
In terms of DOA and Tecmo, that's just low-hanging fruit and isn't likely to change it's formula. "Beefcake" as a game, especially from a different culture with wildly different sensibilities, shouldn't be the first target that people bring up. Western developers and there lack of body variety; absotootly.
You can even be successful doing it! Look at Steven Universe. Amethyst isn't built like Garnet, who isn't built like Pearl, who isn't built like Jasper, who isn't built like Peridot, who isn't built like Rose Quartz, etc.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Yep.
Be real, both are "I didn't ask for this".
Jerry Orbach
Member
Oh man, you would not believe some of the arguments I have heard about bathrooms lately.
And another thread for mods to bait people to ban them because of their preferences.
(And the best thing: they are 100% aware of that)
Cool. ;-)
Similar threads
- Locked