Pretty poor metric you've got there.
-
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.
Now that the dust is settled, Quiet's probably the most embarrassing gaming character
- Thread starter ZombiePlatypus
- Start date
Pretty poor metric you've got there.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
Can you explain why you think this is? I'm aware of the various shots that highlight her naughty bits a little more than they probably should, but those exist in Bayonetta as well. Regarding her sexualisation being "removed from her personhood", though, she's clearly aware of her actions in the ACC because she checks if Venom is actually seeing her showing off, her poses get more revealing and personal based on the growing bond with Venom, the cheesy rain scene is her taking off her clothes and playing with Venom, and the famous shower scene is her interrupting Ocelot from dousing Venom in water so she can have a shower with him. The camera reinforcing this in those scenes (not talking about the ones where she's not being intentionally sexy) and highlighting it is also common in Bayonetta and something I don't think diminishes the purpose of the character's actions.
Therefore, I wouldn't say her sexualisation is removed from her personhood. Not entirely, anyway. The details about her person are very sparse, but intentional sexiness does seem to be part of it, at least if measured by her outward behaviour. She's clearly far away from Bayonetta on this gradient, but not on the opposite end of the spectrum either.
Disclaimer before people argue about something I consider beside the point: Yes, Quiet, like any character ever, was clearly written to have this behaviour because the designers wanted something from her -- in this case, copious displays of her fulsome pair of funbags. But this point is about her behaviour in the game world and how she's characterised through it, not the development process.
Messofanego
Banned
LOL great bump
BTW all of that is also an "absolutely opinionated statement" so don't know where you were going with that. Not to mention how off the rails and overly reactionary this post is. Maybe it really is time to quit gaming if you can't handle criticism of some fictional videogame character.
This was a damn copout excuse for the character to be almost naked. It's fairly obvious that Kojima likes fanservice as is evident by the B&B Corps in MGS4. This does not make him sexist in any way but it clealry shows objectification.
Great character heavily marred by visual design.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Controversial is synonymous with quality. Hatred is the best game of 2015 confirmed.
Messofanego
Banned
I mean, objectification is kind of sexism already when the women are not on a level playing field with the men. He has history of this all the way back to Policenauts and Snatcher, so there's a long history of objectification to the point where most of his work could be considered sexist.
Yup. Glad someone called out Snatcher and Policenauts.
Because Quiet is equally as titillated in scenes that have nothing to do with her affection for Big Boss. We get the sexual objectification shots regardless of her will, knowledge, or consent. If she only displayed sexual actions in private and intimate settings, then maybe, but that's not whats happening here. When she is being oogled while being fucking tortured, then there is no ambiguity, and her sexuality is firmly out of her hands. From the moment she's introduced, in the outfit she has, she's meant to be objectified.
Bayonetta, on the other hand, revels in her sexuality for her own pleasure. She will dance and swing her hips and get naked regardless if someone or no one is watching. Now, regarding your linked post, does that mean that the camera necessarily has to engage in that? No, not really. In Bayonetta's case, I don't mind it, because it is the characters 'choice' to do it. Like you said, I too understand fictional characters don't actually make their own choices, but the fact that Bayonetta is a character whose personality is that she wants to engage in these kinds of teases, and not because she is trying to win the affection of anyone else, but simply because the displays of her sexuality are pleasing to herself, while also being a character that is not solely defined by that sexuality, it goes a long way. The camera plays to the male gaze, sure, and you can argue that it's not necessary and you may not be wrong, but nothing is perfect and I would much rather have more sexual depictions more akin to Bayonetta than Quiet.
However, if you'll permit me to take an example from another medium, look at how the sex scenes were done in Jessica Jones. Jessica is a very sexual character, and she's hardly the only one, and she's a very attractive woman and she takes a lot of pleasure in sex (though not with spoiler related hangups). However, the camera doesn't really sexualize the sex scenes. They don't really oogle her body, focus on her in erotic ways or...anything. They just show her having sex, which from the viewers point is her showing some small degree of nakedness from an angle we can't really see much T or A, and motion wise we mostly see some bouncing and that's it. It is strangely not very erotic at all, but it works very well. That is an example of depicting a sexual character without depicting much sex, and certainly no sexual objectification. Perhaps a tiny bit of eroticism is kind of unavoidable, because hey, they're two people having sex, but they minimalize it so thoroughly, and the important thing is we focus on how she is taking pleasure in the sex, not us taking pleasure in her sex.
The thing JJ and Bayonetta have in common is that, regardless of how the camera is behaving, the focus is firmly on the characters, while the focus on Quiet is on her body.
Derek Smart must be the greatest game developer of all time then.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
So let me posit on my thoughts in long form.
First, I want to talk about the 'In-lore' explanation for her dress. To bring up another female character who gets scantily clad, Bayonetta, she uses hair to power her strongest moves. The bigger combos and moves you can pull off, the more nude she gets, and the camera certainly doesn't shy away from her. But that's ok. It's in-lore, it's fine. Let's talk about the hypocrisy surrounding Quiet in this regard-her in lore suggests she breathes through her skin. This is instantly rebuked and said to be a stupid reason.
So let's knockdown the strawman given. 'But the End isn't half naked. But Code-Talker isn't half naked'. Good points! They both use something similar to Quiet. Well, that's that, right? Wrong, Both The End and Code Talker do NOT have burned up lungs. We see Quiet get burned, and are later offered the explanation that her lungs are dead inside. So the parasite, to keep her alive, uses her skin in order to 'breathe'. That's why comparing her to Code Talker and End, whilst being alike, is actually quite a short-sighted comparison. The End also, his camouflage was special, providing the players the same regenerative ability and camo ability. The Ends powers are being able to call upon nature itself to regen himself-a sort of photosynthesis. Code-Talker can communicate with the parasites and use them as a sort of second sight, to be able to see beyond himself. Quiet uses her parasites as a crutch of sorts-she relies on them giving her the ability to breath and drink, and she also gets the nifty super running powers that other Skulls get.
So 3 very similar cases, however they each manifest their powers in different ways. Quiets being the most revealing. She's given an in-game explanation, but at times this is handwaved as being a stupid excuse.
Let's talk about her design. Is she a badly designed character? Well, no. Aesthetically she works as a character, much like Bayonetta works wearing an all-black garb. She's a well designed character in that design. Is she a well written character? I would lean on 'yes'. Yes she starts out trying to kill you, becomes an uneasy ally after she is about to get bombed by her own allies and is forced to take down a jet, and eventually she wants to help you out in the field. Then there's that one shower scene, the one everyone brings up, but we'll get to that shortly. So she's a well written character as far as writing goes. So she definitely isn't the most embarrassing game character, that's a bit hyperbole. However...here's the important bit..Is she a well designed character for female representation in a video game? This is where things get a bit murky. This is where the discussion lies, despite some wayward thoughts going here and there.
So on to the shower scene. You are in the eyes of Snake, looking at her as she stares back into your eyes. Ocelot is in the background disapproving, with a bunch of gawking idiots surrounding the cage in a manner not seen elsewhere in the game. Immediately you think: "So this is what Kojima wants us to do, to gawk at Quiet like all the soldiers. This is what Quiet is here for, to be gawked.". It's a natural reaction if you don't interpret the scene closely. If your first reaction is to put yourself in the eyes of the soldiers around the cage, then you're instigating this casual sexism they display. No, you control Snake. You can look around as Snake. You can turn away from Quiet-you can look at the gawking idiots. That scene serves as a looking glass of sorts-You're SUPPOSED to notice the idiots around the cage, you're SUPPOSED to be disgusted at how they're acting. That's why Ocelot is there in the background, shaking his head with his arms folded. He's telling you, without words, 'Look at how disgusting the men are acting around her, boss. Are you just going to stand there?'. I reckon alot of people were disgusted at that scene. The noises the soldiers made, how they stared at Quiet...I think that's the point of that scene. Because you're in the bosses eyes, you just see Quiet in the cage-in a way, it's telling you upfront how she's being treated. If you saw the scene and went 'Oh yeah baby mhmhmhm clean yourself' then that scene completely went over your head. If you saw the scene and went 'Disgusting so this is what Quiet is here for, to pander at the audience'....again that scene went over your head.
It's a weird scene, out of place. But it's the circumstances surrounding that scene that make me think, 'No I'm not supposed to be enjoying this. I'm not like the soldiers outside the cage. Ocelot disapproves. I'm Big Boss-I can look away'. And yes, you can look away physically as Big Boss. You are given the option to do so. Control isn't taken away from you. I believe that scene is there to show you how disgusting some soldiers-in extension men-can be when affronted with a beautiful, half-naked lady. During that scene you are not in the eyes of the soldiers, you're Big Boss. Unlike previous incarnations, like in MGS3 where BB will gladly take a peak at Eva, or even Snake who will make lewd noises at a sexy poster, you emit no noise.(Insert 'Kiefer too expensive' joke here) No, you can just look away.
...As for the rain scene, that's just anime as fuck. And yeah, MGS is western influenced, but at times it is anime as fuck. Since MGS1. It's not completely western, not completely Japanese, just a weird mix between the two.
First, I want to talk about the 'In-lore' explanation for her dress. To bring up another female character who gets scantily clad, Bayonetta, she uses hair to power her strongest moves. The bigger combos and moves you can pull off, the more nude she gets, and the camera certainly doesn't shy away from her. But that's ok. It's in-lore, it's fine. Let's talk about the hypocrisy surrounding Quiet in this regard-her in lore suggests she breathes through her skin. This is instantly rebuked and said to be a stupid reason.
So let's knockdown the strawman given. 'But the End isn't half naked. But Code-Talker isn't half naked'. Good points! They both use something similar to Quiet. Well, that's that, right? Wrong, Both The End and Code Talker do NOT have burned up lungs. We see Quiet get burned, and are later offered the explanation that her lungs are dead inside. So the parasite, to keep her alive, uses her skin in order to 'breathe'. That's why comparing her to Code Talker and End, whilst being alike, is actually quite a short-sighted comparison. The End also, his camouflage was special, providing the players the same regenerative ability and camo ability. The Ends powers are being able to call upon nature itself to regen himself-a sort of photosynthesis. Code-Talker can communicate with the parasites and use them as a sort of second sight, to be able to see beyond himself. Quiet uses her parasites as a crutch of sorts-she relies on them giving her the ability to breath and drink, and she also gets the nifty super running powers that other Skulls get.
So 3 very similar cases, however they each manifest their powers in different ways. Quiets being the most revealing. She's given an in-game explanation, but at times this is handwaved as being a stupid excuse.
Let's talk about her design. Is she a badly designed character? Well, no. Aesthetically she works as a character, much like Bayonetta works wearing an all-black garb. She's a well designed character in that design. Is she a well written character? I would lean on 'yes'. Yes she starts out trying to kill you, becomes an uneasy ally after she is about to get bombed by her own allies and is forced to take down a jet, and eventually she wants to help you out in the field. Then there's that one shower scene, the one everyone brings up, but we'll get to that shortly. So she's a well written character as far as writing goes. So she definitely isn't the most embarrassing game character, that's a bit hyperbole. However...here's the important bit..Is she a well designed character for female representation in a video game? This is where things get a bit murky. This is where the discussion lies, despite some wayward thoughts going here and there.
So on to the shower scene. You are in the eyes of Snake, looking at her as she stares back into your eyes. Ocelot is in the background disapproving, with a bunch of gawking idiots surrounding the cage in a manner not seen elsewhere in the game. Immediately you think: "So this is what Kojima wants us to do, to gawk at Quiet like all the soldiers. This is what Quiet is here for, to be gawked.". It's a natural reaction if you don't interpret the scene closely. If your first reaction is to put yourself in the eyes of the soldiers around the cage, then you're instigating this casual sexism they display. No, you control Snake. You can look around as Snake. You can turn away from Quiet-you can look at the gawking idiots. That scene serves as a looking glass of sorts-You're SUPPOSED to notice the idiots around the cage, you're SUPPOSED to be disgusted at how they're acting. That's why Ocelot is there in the background, shaking his head with his arms folded. He's telling you, without words, 'Look at how disgusting the men are acting around her, boss. Are you just going to stand there?'. I reckon alot of people were disgusted at that scene. The noises the soldiers made, how they stared at Quiet...I think that's the point of that scene. Because you're in the bosses eyes, you just see Quiet in the cage-in a way, it's telling you upfront how she's being treated. If you saw the scene and went 'Oh yeah baby mhmhmhm clean yourself' then that scene completely went over your head. If you saw the scene and went 'Disgusting so this is what Quiet is here for, to pander at the audience'....again that scene went over your head.
It's a weird scene, out of place. But it's the circumstances surrounding that scene that make me think, 'No I'm not supposed to be enjoying this. I'm not like the soldiers outside the cage. Ocelot disapproves. I'm Big Boss-I can look away'. And yes, you can look away physically as Big Boss. You are given the option to do so. Control isn't taken away from you. I believe that scene is there to show you how disgusting some soldiers-in extension men-can be when affronted with a beautiful, half-naked lady. During that scene you are not in the eyes of the soldiers, you're Big Boss. Unlike previous incarnations, like in MGS3 where BB will gladly take a peak at Eva, or even Snake who will make lewd noises at a sexy poster, you emit no noise.(Insert 'Kiefer too expensive' joke here) No, you can just look away.
...As for the rain scene, that's just anime as fuck. And yeah, MGS is western influenced, but at times it is anime as fuck. Since MGS1. It's not completely western, not completely Japanese, just a weird mix between the two.
hurricanes
Member
It's all good, because it's ANIME!
BreezyLimbo
Banned
I mean, if you wanna get reaaaaaallly technical, if the parasites did what they're supposed to, Code Talker and the End would never get old because they'd constantly be getting regenerated, they'd be young studs.(Seriously though, her lungs might've been removed, thus not being able to be regenerated?)
Look, the lore is obviously a convenient justification if we stretch it far enough, but it's completely empty. It's nonsense written to justify the outfit, not some brilliant and concrete reasoning.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
But examples of it already exist in the series. You're just hand-waving it because it's not suiting your argument. If the End was missing his lungs, I'm sure he'd have to be half naked too. If this was just in this game-"Oh she has photosynthesis", and it only existed in this game, I would agree with you. But The End exists. Code Talker exists. They all exhibit a similar power, but the situations are different, but it's all in lore.
But he wasn't. Weird huh? The "lore" only justifies having the woman naked and not the man. He's got all his clothes on.
I'm sure that's a coincidence.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Yes, like I mentioned, her lungs are dead.
But if she had her lungs removed, she wouldn't be able to speak at all
BreezyLimbo
Banned
I'm sure the parasites push the air they absorb into her throat so that when she talks it creates a talking noise. I dunno.
It's like those horror movies with the talking heads. They talk whilst missing their body. Why do you hate Jack Skellington. Or Sally for that matter.
Are you like purposefully missing the point?
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Are you? I explained why The End and Code Talker are different circumstances. Is the lore not allowed to have multiple examples of 'like' entities?
Radical Edward
Member
It's been reiterated a shit ton of times that "It's metal gear" isn't a valid excuse. I think people who use that shit as an excuse have forgotten what series this is.
The comparison to Bayonetta is unfounded as well because that game is a shit ton more honest about it's intentions. It most certainly isn't a North American male thing, (keep that kind of thought to offtopic pls). You've basically used every cliche argument in this one post instead of actually addressing the criticisms of the character.
She's the only character that has a dissonance this major because of sex appeal. No doubt the only reason it happens is because she's the woman in the game. It's sexist. We need to stop dancing around it and call it what it is man.
Mute people don't behave the way Quiet does when they're attracted to someone, she's also not meant to be a seductress because she starts wearing that outfit offscreen after discovering that the only thing that didn't survive her burning was her lungs despite the fact that she can still talk.
Sorry, but I think you have forgotten what this series is/was. Yes, is can have serious ideas but you posted a picture of the Boss which isn't her skin-tight suit zipped down to her pubes. Let's not forget meryl in her undies, tapping pics of girls in their crotches to cause alert status, photo mode, B&B Unit, Eva's overly jiggly assets in an unzipped jumper not to mention the shit she moans while dragging her around when she's unconscious. And all of that is just a fraction of all the pervy stuff in these games.
partyphone
Banned
you'd have to be if you think her situation is well justified. she's just here to look sexy the justification for her attire is post hoc. it's painfully obvious.
You know, the danger of rhetoric is that you get in super deep with micro justifications that you eventually don't see the forest through the trees. It's like how lawyers justified the Rodney King video in court. Despite being presented clear evidence of a man being beaten, they went super in depth in the analysis of Rodney's position, how this particular posture looked threatening, or how that twitch of the arm could be interpreted as a hostile gesture. Bit by bit, they explained how each frame justified the police brutality.
I'm not going to respond to each instance you give because there's a greater point to be made here. You can go out of your way to take the most generous interpretation possible for each instance of sexual objectification, but the all this proves is that Kojima went out of his ways to repeatedly find excuses place quiet in sexually objectifying positions, something he has done to varying degrees of taste with just about every female character he's written. And even at the end, you throw up your hand at the obvious truth: She's sexually objectified in the rain scene. Except you don't say sexually objectified, but "anime as fuck", as if its inconceivable to have a nonsexually objectifying anime, so naturally since MGS is a bit anime, it HAS to objectify women.
No. Quiet is a sexually objectified for the titillation of the presumed straight male viewer, something she was intentionally designed for, and it is obvious to anyone with eyes. You can't possibly fumble into depictions of sexual objectification this frequently and this consistently by pure accident in your attempts to depict something else entirely.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
It's rebuked because it's incredibly disingenuous just for the sake of tits. Bayonetta is a witch, the idea that she can control hair isn't that farfetched, Quiet however gets burned at the beginning of the game, receives a deus ex machina that specifically can't heal her lungs yet can heal everything else, (but she can still speak and hum because reasons because fuck logic).
She doesn't need to be covered to that extent, plus the game even disallows this logic
Because it's a contrived almost desperate way to try and justify her outfit.
Bayonetta works because she has a fantastic silhouette, her outfit makes sense right down to the little details because it says a lot about the character, Quiet's outfit makes very little sense under scrutiny, and because we know very little about the character herself, (because she's essentially a sex doll), like why is she wearing a super log glove if the entire point is that she breathes through her skin and needs to have it exposed, why are her leggings randomly ripped up in random ass places, in fact, why is she even wearing leggings? It makes very little sense from a design perspective because all of the above can't be answered by lore or character motivations but because "bewbz"
No she's not, because it's incredibly contrived.
^ She's not well written in anyway shape or form. Because she's not a character, she's almost an object that does whatever the writer says instead of having believable actions that make sense. This is exacerbated by the fact that this is all because she's the main woman character in the game and Kojima wanted her to be sexualized so badly that he came up with a shit ton of contrived reasons for her actions. Right down to the ending segment where she has an entire conversation yet doesn't infect VS because reasons.
Bullshit, that scene is immediately proceeded by this
There wasn't a deep meaning behind it, it was yet another scene meant for titillation. You're projecting and misconstruing the intentions, if this was the only scene where Quiet was sexualized and gawked out not just by the camera but by others, maybe you'd have a point, however, it's not. It's just one of many scenes that is totally out of place with the tone of the game.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Ah yes, my opinion and analysis is akin to what the lawyers said in the Rodney King case.
It's objectified men numerous times. Volgin degrading Snakes body, the constant torture of half naked men, if we're supposed to be seeing the forest through the trees, then you must acquit.
And it's fine for you to think that. I gave my argument regarding that point.
Yeah but if the parasites conduct gas exchange through diffusion, they wouldn't be able to expel the air with enough force to speak. Lungs are only able to do it because they are a large reservoir for air with unimpeded access to the vocal cords as well as using intercoastal muscles and the diaphragm.
John Kowalski
Banned
Hmmmmmmm nep. I'm an anime expert and it really isn't all that anime. In fact very few things from Kojima are especially anime. Most of his work is an export of mildly Japanese icons and themes strongly modified to accommodate a western palate. ZOE is the only that's not especially done with western tastes in mind, being more of an object of love for classic mecha/space operas.
Not your opinion. Your rhetoric.
Simply showing skin isn't sexual objectification. The torture scenes in 3 were not done for the purposes of fetishization the way the various depictions of women are. Besides, this is one tree. List all the instances of sexualized objectifications of men in the whole series you can think of (keeping in mind there is a distinction between sexualization and sexual objectifications) and I'll list all sexual objectifications of women in MGS4 alone, and we'll see whose list comes out longer.
As far as I can tell, Volgin's molestation is not meant to be attractive or erotic. Volgin's crotch grabbing comes across as comedic if anything. The most you can argue is the camera focus on the protagonists ass' as they're sneaking on the ground. Beyond that, I don't think there's much sexual objectification for males.
It's fine for me to think that the same way it's fine for me to think evolution is real. It's not really an opinion.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
The scenes I listed were focused on Venom because that's whose perspective the story is told through and thus there were more examples of that, not because I wanted to suggest her sexuality being exclusively tied to Venom. She wore her revealing outfit long before she met Venom, so her showing off her goods is something that predates her affection for Snake. Yes, she has the parasite nonsese to blame for most of her attire, but given the amount of skin that's still covered there's obviously wiggle room she didn't use to protect her modesty. This revealing nature of her outfit is then also behind the bulk of what could be considered titillation in other scenes. If you look at her torture scene, the camerawork is basically like Huey's torture, with the difference being Huey is clothed during it. The supposed "oogling" isn't the camera giving her special treatment to make her more sexy, it's just showing a woman in peril who dressed sexy, like it showed a man in peril who dressed formally. I will concede her torture starting off with her having a bag over her head might visually give her exposed body more undue focus as opposed to Huey's, but I always explained that detail as a callback to Naked Snake's torture.
Again, I just want to say for a lot of what is to be considered "sexy" about Quiet, she did have a choice in. I'm not trying to put that level of choice on the same level of Bayonetta and want to stress it not being a binary state.
This is Venom's view from first person.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
There's alot of illogical things in the logical things in the series. Snake Liquid and Solidus are perfect clones, but Solidus aged faster, Liquid can live through his arm(Until he can't), and Snake can't have babies but ages super fast between in the 5 years between MGS2 and MGS4, compared to about the same time frame of MGS1 and Plant Chapter of MGS2(5 years). Why? What's the scientific reasoning behind it? They're deus ex Machinas. To give more credence and more analysis to one facet over another is a bit disingenious.
Right, the gameplay itself lets you cover her in her Ops outfit or Sniper Wolves outfit, but we never take that into account when talking about her scantily dress, because it's a gameplay bonus thing.
Only because you're positing it as that. It has it's justifications that make some sense within the game worlds, just like Bayonettas witch powers.(Which, until Bayonetta, I don't think witches controlling their hair to cover themselves and to attack was a very common thing) The point with bringing up Bayonetta is that, if Quiet is sexist despite the in-game reasons given, then so is Bayonetta full stop. It's hypocrisy to follow one games lore as law and to handwave another games in game lore despite doing the same thing(Giving reasons).
As far as designs go, both Bayonetta and Quiets are great. I was talking about cohesion, aesthetic, not in game applications when talking about the characters design.
..Because you handwave the in-game explanation given. Again, this is a common hypocrisy I'm trying to point out. I bet you could defend Bayonetta getting nude the better combos the player does, 'Rewarding the player for skilled play', using the in game lore. "Well her lore says she wears her hair as clothes and uses that hair to attack!". Yeah, Quiets lore says her lungs are a crisp and wearing heavy clothing would suffocate her(Again, I'm not taking into account the bonus costumes you get for her.).
But she is well written? She's a strong character. If you want to get meta, every character in every series is an object the writer creates. Bayonetta is like she is simply because the writer made her be sexy and have these sexy taunts and to get naked when the combo rises. Again, why are you cherry picking quiet as being a created character and suffering the same thing Bayonetta does-Being a created object to serve the writers needs and to guide through a story? As for what you think Kojima wanted, I have not gone in my own thoughts to say 'Kojima wanted this or that' because I don't assume and then present it as fact in order to suit my argument. Also, they don't have a conversation. Snake is about to go unconscious, Quiet is talking to the helicopter pilot through the radio, but Quiet doesn't talk to Snake. By the time the Helicopter makes it over them, she's gone. She didn't talk to snake once.(Except through the cassette, but the parasite doesn't infect over recordings.) Hell, she explains to you her reason of why she's there.
I'm going to assume you mean preceded, because that scene comes BEFORE the shower scene. You think I'm projecting and miscontruing, but I'm not the one hand waving in lore reasons, I'm not the one obfuscating things(She had a conversation with Snake!) when no such thing happened.
The problem is that you can't really remove that from the context of the rest of the game. If she's having her tits oogled in a skimpy outfit when she's just standing there AND actively pursuing romance AND being tortured, from Venom's PoV AND the PoV of anyone else, then you can't separate those things to justify an instance of objectification here, but not there. She's not a character who can be objectified in the process of another scene, she's just flat out objectified regardless of what she is doing.
If Kojima only depicted her sexually in particular scenes, otherwise wearing more normal cloths that still worked with her powers, then yeah, we might be having a completely different conversation. But the context we're working with doesn't allow for that.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
The thing is, at times it did diminish the personhood of the character. Several times in fact, and it was clearly going for a conflicted tone, simultaneously saying to the player "hey, go ahead and enjoy this, it's totally hot, right? She's totally an object for your pleasure" and "you're a sick fuck if you think this is hot!"
It seems your argument is that a character cannot be objectified (with a very subjective interpretation of the term) at any point in time or they forfeit their status as anything more than eye candy. My argument is that presentation and tone and even cinematography, no matter how explicit, do not necessarily give us enough information to purely judge intent or how others interpreted the scene.
This is an artistic product with many interpretations, not scientifically proven facts. You can't say he's objectively wrong based on the analysis he's given. You can just disagree with it.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Which I'm guessing are about the torture scenes. Again, like the shower scenes, it's a weird juxtaposition. Simultaneously challenging the player to ogle Quiet as an object, while she's in obvious pain. 'You're sick if you like this."..."You like this don't you? Look at her breasts."
Replace the pain with(Coincidentally) Ocelot in the Shower scene. The camera with the soldiers. Again Ocelot, who is replaced by the torture, is challenging you against enjoying Quiet like the soldiers are. The soldiers are replaced by the camera, the unneeded zooming in of Quiet while she's being tortured.
It's a juxtaposition that is, IMO, meant to challenge the player. The shower and the torture scene are both very similar in this regards. Ocelot-Pain, Soldiers-Camera, Quiet is in pain(Or Ocelot disapproves of the soldiers), the soldiers are wetting their pants(Or the Camera is zooming into her sexually). Ocelot disapproves, yet the soldiers make you want to approve at Quiets treatment. It's two forces against each other, both vying for the attention.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
My point was that it's not oogling in all of these contexts.
Personally I don't think objectification in art on its own can be considered sexist as long as you don't consider all people of the opposite sex merely as an object. He has written respectable female characters so I would say he is not a sexist. More so than other games I would say. There is however a great deal of what seems like almost soft pornography in his games. The art of titillation is not inherently sexist even if most of your work is what you yourself know. There is a natural bias there. One where you are perhaps inexperienced if you were to try and be less one sided. Ofcourse you are perhaps inadvertantly enabling systemic sexism by making your game less accessible, you are contributing to a wider problem, but you yourself nor your work is inherently sexist. Leonardo was likely a homosexual but was very good at drawing women with the purpose of titillation. He was also very good at drawing men but most of his work was of women and he was very proud of the fact his paintings were erotic. This itself isn't sexism. It's what you like, what you know.
It would be like walking into a boys room full of pinups of women and saying "why haven't you put up pictures of men are you sexist?" The clearly more appropriate response in my opinion is "this is crass, this will not attract women to your room". That boy may be juvenile, that boy may be crass, that boy may have alienated the opposite sex but he is not sexist. Those pinups say nothing about how he treats women as a whole. I think quiet is crass. I think she is there to titillate. I do not think Kojima is sexist because of Quiet though. Academically if anything it would be B&B corps and Haven Troopers that would be considered sexism even if they are fully clothed. Ofcourse skin and sex brings more controversy though.
Well, I can't judge as I have no idea what visual novel your talking about, so if I disagree with your position, I don't know until I go out to play it.
But it's interesting your interpret my argument like that when I specifically go out of my way to argue the opposite in another post. Bayonetta is slightly subject to the male gaze. The fact that she is a willing participant in her sexual teases helps mitigate a lot of the objectification, but not all of it.
At then end, objectification is subjective, as you say, because it works in two parts, the products presentation and the players reaction. And yes, stories have used objectification of people (in sexual terms or otherwise) to effective ways. But that is typically done because either you or the game grants them personhood, while the other objectifies them, creating the dissonance. I've yet to see a case where a game objectifies someone and the player agrees with the objectification, and that alone makes for an informative scene.
Science is based on observation. Something being an artistic product doesn't mean it's not observable. It's like saying I can't say the mona lisa uses the color green because it is an artistic product. It does, all you need to do is look at it to verify that it does, making it essentially a factual statement. Granted, some people may disagree. Perhaps they're colorblind, so from their perspective they don't see the green, so sure, it giving an aspect of subjectivity that I haven't denied if you really stretch it to the farthest possible reaches of interpretation. I will admit, in some cases, sexual objectification is less clear, and I would happily agree Bayonetta can be debated over. But Quiet? No, the frequency and consistency in which she is either oogled or placed in sexual positions for frivolous and arbitrary reasons make it make it an opinion that has so much evidence in favor of it that there's little room for disagreement to be had, as far as I see it.
It is though, or else it allows for the opportunity for oogling in any case, which given how the rest of the game has conditioned us to see her, makes for the same sexual objectification as any other context. You can argue that the camera panning is similar to that of a clothed person who isn't sexualized, and that might even be true...but the fact that Quiet isn't very clothed in outfit she wears makes the camera sexualizing. Which would be a completely different argument if she was specifically stripped for that purpose alone, because nakedness is a strong psychologically vulnerable position, and if they were trying to make her feel uncomfortable, then maybe. Even then, it'd be iffy, but you'd have something to work with then. But as it is...nah.
Dutch Microwave
Member
Are you guys seriously arguing about artistic intent of different scenes made by a guy who thought that PTSD make women get down on all fours and start moaning like a hentai 1000 yr old dragon loli in heat while the camera is hovering just below their groin area,zooming in on a visible cameltoe? okay,lmao
I cant help but laugh at the effort put into justifying pure juvenile fanservice t&a by Kojima though
I cant help but laugh at the effort put into justifying pure juvenile fanservice t&a by Kojima though
Scrooge McDuck
Member
I feel that you are missing the point with your focus on lore and in-game justifications. Do you think people don't consider Code Talker and The End's backstories are stupid and flimsy? Because they are. However, it just so happens that out of all these characters with all these dumb backstories, Quiet's is the only one who has a background seems to be specifically crafted to support her being half-naked for the entire game.
Yar, this series tend to forgo logic and consistency for the sake of storytelling and visual design. So if the game is not really scientific to begin with, why the insistence on putting importance on Quiet's "logic?" Do you think the writers were all "oh dang, we burned her lungs. Now we have no choice but to have her half-naked at all times!"
Radical Edward
Member
Bayonetta works because she has a fantastic silhouette, her outfit makes sense right down to the little details because it says a lot about the character, Quiet's outfit makes very little sense under scrutiny, and because we know very little about the character herself, (because she's essentially a sex doll), like why is she wearing a super log glove if the entire point is that she breathes through her skin and needs to have it exposed, why are her leggings randomly ripped up in random ass places, in fact, why is she even wearing leggings? It makes very little sense from a design perspective because all of the above can't be answered by lore or character motivations but because "bewbz"
I am a fan of both Bayonetta and MGSV but I don't get how you can dismiss Quiet's design and laud Bayonetta's in the same breath. Both were designed because "bewbz"
why doesn't Bayo have undies under her hair or wear a full outfit underneath and use her hair as a kind of armour. What part of her lollipop, which she is constantly mouthing, makes sense besides to titillate? When did witches get magical hair powers? She was designed to be undressed by her target audience while using her special powers. Quiet's leggings would get torn up the moment she climbs a tree, sprints or lays down in a sniping position. Both games have lingering shots on their private parts and Quiet's design makes as much sense as Bayonetta's. They were designed to be strong women with sex appeal, "cool" outfits and all around badasses.
I am a fan of both Bayonetta and MGSV but I don't get how you can dismiss Quiet's design and laud Bayonetta's in the same breath. Both were designed because "bewbz"
why doesn't Bayo have undies under her hair or wear a full outfit underneath and use her hair as a kind of armour. What part of her lollipop, which she is constantly mouthing, makes sense besides to titillate? When did witches get magical hair powers? She was designed to be undressed by her target audience while using her special powers. Quiet's leggings would get torn up the moment she climbs a tree, sprints or lays down in a sniping position. Both games have lingering shots on their private parts and Quiet's design makes as much sense as Bayonetta's. They were designed to be strong women with sex appeal, "cool" outfits and all around badasses.
cosmicblizzard
Banned
This is where our arguments differ. With what I'm referring to, the characters are NOT willing participants.
The visual novel I'm talking about is Euphoria, an infamous and super twisted Utsuge that might be the most extreme piece of media I have ever experienced. I won't go into detail as it's kind of too fucked up for non-VN gaf, but it attempts to frame some pretty messed up scenes as both arousing and disturbing. At several points, I was actually questioning whether it really was made to disturb the player or arouse the ones with some unsavory fetishes, or maybe even both.
There are technical aspects and there are subject matter aspects. Colors that were used for the Mona Lisa fall under the former. These are, in pretty much all scenarios, factual statements.
For the latter, it's a bit trickier to outright prove, if not impossible. You can get extremely close, but something that is based almost purely on visual cues and cinematographic framing will always have a degree of interpretation to it.
I say this all as someone that DOES think Quiet is objectified in several situations, but not someone whose entire existence is objectification.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Anything to not admit MGS is full of sexism, I guess.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
My argument is very mechanic-Yes I'm stick to the 'lore is bible' pathos right now, I've seen Bayonetta thrown around(One of my more recent posts earlier today quoted another person talking about Bayonetta), but it's to point out the hypocrisy that when Bayonetta is brought up, her in-lore reasons are enough. Full stop. The same credence not being given to Quiet.
As a tidbit, I've always hated the Cobras because they didn't have an indepth backstory like Cell or Foxhound from MGS1. They have great designs sure(Well....a couple), but I hope you see my point for the forest from the trees.
Yeah, we can go for days talking about MGS' inconsistencies. I'm focusing on Quiets logic in retention to the logic provided to End and Code Talker(Which are brought up as strawman to knock down and discredit Quiet) whilst credence given to Bayonetta for having alot of similarities with Quiet(Sexual camera, how she gets more nude the better the player does, basically being eye candy like Quiet) because it makes for a good discussion. If I can poke holes in other peoples arguments, then it stands to reason that there is more to be discussed.
Willingness (or lack there of) isn't really the sole factor of objectification. I mean, one easy example is Neon Genesis Evangelion, which has Asuka sexualized sometimes against her will, but somewhat appropriately as Shinji is a teenager whose noticing Asuka's sexual aspects but not sure how to approach her about it. It's sexualization, and it's unwilling on part of Asuka, but the game itself never fails to depict Asuka as her own person despite that. That's the important factor for me. If the game is depicting it's characters as people, then even if they're being objectified by other means.
There is a degree to interpretation even to science, you realize. That's why it's possible for people to disbelieve in evolution, whether it's rational or no. Science is the discernation of what has the most evidence supporting it, making it most likely to be true. The reason people basically espouse evolution or gravity as fact is that so many people see SO much evidence that the opinion that evolution is true might as well be true, similar to how Mona Lisa's use of color isn't an objective fact, but enough people see it that it might as well be objective. But at the same time, it's just means there's a lot of evidence supporting the position, the chance that it's true closer and closer to 100%, but never reaching it. It's similar to the whole 0.999~ is essentially equivelent to 1. And yes, sexual objectification can be pretty dicey at times. In quiet's case, I think it's there's enough evidence to make it an opinion that has so much evidence it might as well be fact. The support the position's gotten is close enough to 99.9999999~% that it might as well be 100%.
But since you do agree that Quiet is sexually objectified in several situations, I feel that we're quibbling over minor details. The point is she's sexually objectified, and not to any degree that offers artistic value. Even if you disagree that it's the case in literally ever instance, you seem to agree it's in the vast majority of them, and I can settle the argument for that.
Palculator
Unconfirmed Member
No, the camera is neutral in those scenes. Quiet dresses sexy, that's why she looks "sexy"* on camera, which had been my point about her sexualisation not being completely removed from her personhood for this entire exchange. She dressed like that, she shoves her bottom into the camera/Venom's face, she pulls him into the shower. When they tried to rob her of her sexual self-determination, this happened:
* Put the latter "sexy" in double quotes because the torture scene isn't really sexy despite whatever exposure of her cleavage people consider to be titillating.
This is a good post overall but I cannot agree with the bolded. Even though I personally find these moments in MGS to be juvenile and crass I cannot say it offers no artistic value because there is no such thing. People enjoy Leonardos Leda.
John Kowalski
Banned
Ah yes, Asuka.
Did someone say thermal expansion?
Did someone say thermal expansion?
And I see what your saying, but my argument that because you can come up with instances where the camera is neutral doesn't eliminate the inappropriate sexualization factor inherent within those scenes, including the ones that are removed from her personhood, and the context of the game has her sexually objectification such a prominent part of just about every scene she's in.
At some point, she just becomes the woman whose sexually objectified regardless of what else the camera is doing if there is so much of it in the other areas of the game.
Little artistic value, then. You know what I meant.