Criticising, boycotting, saying you're not buying and so on, absolutely fine. I said earlier constructive criticism does indeed help the industry and devs. It's the destructive scorch the earth approach that is often borne out of frustration and demands which can be toxic and often leads to shaming, guilt tripping and widespread accusations.
You don't understand that people have different ideas of what this means and how it can be achieved. You have one narrow interpretation of it and wish to foist it on everyone else and strongly insinuate stupidity if/when they don't agree. This is why you're not really helping anyone and just brow beating everyone with the same tired, unconvincing arguments.
To me, OP reads like sexualization of females is bad and they should be covered up. And Crossing Eden, in my opinion, your follow up posts also read like that. It seems to be that you have a specific vision of female representation in gaming, and your vision is: Women cannot be sexy or provocatively sexual to be good empowering characters.
A female character can be utterly sexy, provocative, flaunts her sexuality and still be empowering to women. Female gamers I know in and out of real life, love characters like Bayonetta, Kaine, RE3 Jill, Zero Suit Samus etc etc.
To me, you sound like "A woman cannot be proud or her natural attractiveness, or flaunt her attractiveness as a weapon. That is always male gaze. Women must be covered'". But
Ok we're on the same page. I agree the hyperbole/shaming that criticism is often covered in can be overwhelming and destructive, especially in this age where people are often trying to grab as much attention as possible through inflammatory 140-character jabs.
How do you think it can be achieved then? By shutting down all discussion with the same excuses and rhetoric we've seen over and over, because that happens quite often. And is a issue with why these things can't progress pass feminism 101 into the nitty gritty.
Nope.
B-but i was talking about popular console games bacause those are mostly the ones with actual characters and narrative,being crticized and discussed in this very thread
This doesn't work because attractive is not equivalent to sexualized. A character is sexualized if her or his design and presentation have a primary function of titillation.
How do you think it can be achieved then? By shutting down all discussion with the same excuses and rhetoric we've seen over and over, because that happens quite often. And is a issue with why these things can't progress pass feminism 101 into the nitty gritty.
Sex does sell video games. There are plenty of games like Bayonetta and DOA I would not have bought if not for sexy characters. If you want to have an honest discussion about this topic, you can't blow your credibility by denying reality.
Both Bayonetta games were flops and DOA does well but hardly lights up the charts vs the actual best selling franchises (it's on the list, but below a lot of others), so they're not really helping the case.
Nevermind that in DOA's case I'm pretty sure the main "sex" focused part of the franchise (beach volleyball) is much more niche than the mainline part of it.
Every game with exposed female characters gets loads of free press from it though, which in turn gets sales.
Same reason 9/10 pop stars wear next to nothing in their videos, so "OMG watch this video it is outrageous!".
Both Bayonetta games were flops, sadly (and it's somewhat "different" approach to sexuality was likely a part of that if anything), and DOA does well but hardly lights up the charts vs the actual best selling franchises (it's on the list, but below a lot of others), so they're not really helping the case.
Nevermind that in DOA's case I'm pretty sure the main "sex" focused part of the franchise (beach volleyball) is much more niche than the mainline part of it.
I thought he was annoying.mummy dudeWe can all agree that the sexiness of the Prince helped move some copies of PoP.
Doesn't change the fact that those games would have sold less with more modest characters. Sex doesn't guarantee success. It just guarantees more attention and with it likely more sales. As another example, I never bought Lollipop Chainsaw, but I definitely gave it a second and third look because of the main character.Both Bayonetta games were flops and DOA does well but hardly lights up the charts vs the actual best selling franchises (it's on the list, but below a lot of others), so they're not really helping the case.
Nevermind that in DOA's case I'm pretty sure the main "sex" focused part of the franchise (beach volleyball) is much more niche than the mainline part of it.
But...again, I really don't think it is helpful to take "sex sells" as sex (and a particular sort of it), completely alone, unfiltered, undisguised, etc. sells the most of anything...
You don't have to think that to believe that sex sells.
TBC...Bayonetta is in a niche genre from a small developer and pushes the sex angle in a very obvious and strong way.
Funny thing about DOA is didn't the recent one just skip the west entirely to avoid the inevitable flak?
Then it's a meaningless statement though. Yeah, "sex sells", so does gameplay, graphics and general hype and marketing. The actual unspoken implication when people say this statement is "sex sells more", which is when it starts to fall apart if you actually look at what games do sell in massive amounts, and what games fail or are extremely niche.
No, it skipped the west because the developers realised there was nowhere near enough interest to justify localising it. Which is pretty ironic when "sex sells".
Then it's a meaningless statement though. Yeah, "sex sells", so does gameplay, graphics and general hype and marketing. The actual unspoken implication when people say this statement is "sex sells more", which is when it starts to fall apart if you actually look at what games do sell in massive amounts, and what games fail or are extremely niche.
Then it's a meaningless statement though. Yeah, "sex sells", so does gameplay, graphics and general hype and marketing. The actual unspoken implication when people say this statement is "sex sells more", which is when it starts to fall apart if you actually look at what games do sell in massive amounts, and what games fail or are extremely niche.
Posts like this are why Crossing Eden always gets pissed off in the first place.
It really feels like the thread title is about A, but then the topic veers violently to talk about B instead.
Eden's "huurrr durrrr you disagree with me you're an idiot" way of discussing with other people does not help matters too :/
It really feels like the thread title is about A, but then the topic veers violently to talk about B instead.
Eden's "huurrr durrrr you disagree with me you're an idiot" way of discussing with other people does not help matters too :/
No, it skipped the west because the developers realised there was nowhere near enough interest to justify localising it. Which is pretty ironic when "sex sells".
Sex sells more for games that don't have a lot else going for it. A great game isn't going to be made better by promoting sex, but a middling game will.Then it's a meaningless statement though. Yeah, "sex sells", so does gameplay, graphics and general hype and marketing. The actual unspoken implication when people say this statement is "sex sells more", which is when it starts to fall apart if you actually look at what games do sell in massive amounts, and what games fail or are extremely niche.
Women are absolutely allowed to participate in these discussions and often do what are you talking about? I even noted how the context of things like female artists making sexualized content with their music is entirely different from something like Quiet and thus not a very good comparison.You could let women take charge in these discussions, for starters. In threads like these you just come across as another man with extremely specific criteria for how women should be portrayed in popular media. I doubt that there are many "feminism 101" professors who appreciate that.
That's not much of an argument. And vague "I work in marketing" mumbo jumbo still doesn't convince me that sexy female designs is a bad thing.
What to know something personal? That cosplayer friend I have, that I studied for years with, in the trade I work with? She got stalked. By a friend of a friend. And no one took it seriously because "Well she dressed as sexy characters and provoked him she could just stop it if she just stopped...". A girl who doesn't even like anything other than Nintendo games. A girl who was stalked for weeks because she dressed as Sexy Link on Halloween. He followed her on her bus ride home for weeks and he lived a town over. A girl we had to wait in the parking lot of the Smash Bros tourney she played in, because she was afraid he'd be there. The security team? "She just has to not dress sexy" He was there. Nothing happened. And guess what. She cosplayed sexy. And felt happy and proud.
You know what she's obssessed with right now? Olivia from Pokemon Moon. Because she's sexy. She does sexy Link, sexy Pikachu, sexy Samus, sexy Peach. She loves sexy.
The fact that I'm seeing a legit IRL friend of mine, the sweetest person I know, get denied her voice and tastes by a bunch of dudes who think that women don't want to see sexy ladies in games or that it's a problem, is profoundly infuriating to me.
Again, you're not paying attention to the difference between sexual attractiveness and sexualization.And they are. Purposeful and intentional attraction is sexualization. What is titillation for some is not that for others. It's a flawed argument to orchestrate a point that surface shallow levels of sexual expression is the base moniker of what defines sexualization. It's bullshit.
These characters are designed to be sexually attractive. If the audience is sexually attracted to the character, then that is sexualization regardless of how low or high brow that expression may be.
That isn't the implication at all, and the belief that it is, is part of the problem. Saying silly things like Dead or Alive Extreme would beat Call of Duty every year if sex sells is a ridiculous argument that you have to be pretty disingenuous to even pretend to put forward.
Bayonetta would have all but disappeared from gaming consciousness if it wasn't for the sexy lead.
Actually adding this to the OP.I only ever see "sex sells" used in defense of stuff like characters with appearances that make no sense in the context they're in outside of sex appeal. The only reason to use that justification (beyond a bypass of any actual discussion) is if the person genuinely believes that that character design is making a very notable difference to sales beyond a couple of % either way.
Again, if that isn't what people who spam "sex sells" to any analysis or criticism of certain designs mean, then it's a literally meaningless thing to say, or an intentional attempt to derail. I mean, even shitty things frequently sell on the basis of morbid curiosity of just how shitty they are.
I only ever see "sex sells" used in defense of stuff like characters with appearances that make no sense in the context they're in outside of sex appeal. The only reason to use that justification (beyond a bypass of any actual discussion) is if the person genuinely believes that that character design is making a very notable difference to sales beyond a couple of % either way.
Again, if that isn't what people who spam "sex sells" to any analysis or criticism of certain designs mean, then it's a literally meaningless thing to say, or an intentional attempt to derail. I mean, even shitty things frequently sell on the basis of morbid curiosity of just how shitty they are.
You know what she's obssessed with right now? Olivia from Pokemon Moon. Because she's sexy. She does sexy Link, sexy Pikachu, sexy Samus, sexy Peach. She loves sexy.
That's not much of an argument. And vague "I work in marketing" mumbo jumbo still doesn't convince me that sexy female designs is a bad thing.
What to know something personal? That cosplayer friend I have, that I studied for years with, in the trade I work with? She got stalked. By a friend of a friend. And no one took it seriously because "Well she dressed as sexy characters and provoked him she could just stop it if she just stopped...". A girl who doesn't even like anything other than Nintendo games. A girl who was stalked for weeks because she dressed as Sexy Link on Halloween. He followed her on her bus ride home for weeks and he lived a town over. A girl we had to wait in the parking lot of the Smash Bros tourney she played in, because she was afraid he'd be there. The security team? "She just has to not dress sexy" He was there. Nothing happened. And guess what. She cosplayed sexy. And felt happy and proud.
You know what she's obssessed with right now? Olivia from Pokemon Moon. Because she's sexy. She does sexy Link, sexy Pikachu, sexy Samus, sexy Peach. She loves sexy.
The fact that I'm seeing a legit IRL friend of mine, the sweetest person I know, get denied her voice and tastes by a bunch of dudes who think that women don't want to see sexy ladies in games or that it's a problem, is profoundly infuriating to me.
Lolwut, Bayonetta would still be a masterpiece of the character action genre regardless of how "sexy" the lead is. Setting aside that the gameplay is inherently derived from the protagonist's nature... I find Bayonetta the kind of game that muddies the water in this regard because it actually makes sexual themes a central part of it's aesthetic, style and world, rather than just randomly throwing them in for no reason (it's also not really comparable to much else because it's so singular). Outside a few awkward things I'm with the people who believe that Beyonetta actually does making sexuality a major part of the game correctly. Bayonetta's pseudo nudity is a central aspect of the aesthetic and not just a random half-naked character thrown into a world where everyone else important dresses "normally".
I'm not saying that argument is incorrect. In fact you could even argue some merit to the over sexualisation of someone like R.Mika or even Hot Ryu. I can't imagine there are many men or women that compare themselves to those characters, because they are both, utterly riddiculous. Yet you could argue that characters like Nathan Drake and Lara set unrealistic standards for body-image.
My personal problem about sexualisatiom/sex sells is that it's almost always the female characters that get the treatment, while male characters get as de-sexualised as possible. This is especially prevalent in some Japanese games, but it's notable in West too. It brings about a weird disconnected in how the media treats female characters versus how it treats male ones. Obviously, there's exceptions.
I usually feel like (and this is personal opinion!), that when a piece of media goes for sexualisation/sex sells argument, while still trying to be otherwise serious product, it feels like the dev is not confident on their product, and tries to entice customers with unnecessary elements. It's a bit other story if the game is actively about sex. In a sense, I have more respect for Sengan Kagura/DOAX since they don't shy away from what they are, in comparison to Quiet from MGSV, which just feels like Kojima tried to sell the game on completely disconnected sex appeal for no reason.
Bayonetta is so great that Bayonetta 2 wouldn't have been made if Nintendo hadn't stepped in to help out.Lolwut, Bayonetta would still be a masterpiece of the character action genre regardless of how "sexy" the lead is. Setting aside that the gameplay is inherently derived from the protagonist's nature... I find Bayonetta the kind of game that muddies the water in this regard because it actually makes sexual themes a central part of it's aesthetic, style and world, rather than just randomly throwing them in for no reason (it's also not really comparable to much else because it's so singular). Outside a few awkward things I'm with the people who believe that Beyonetta actually does making sexuality a major part of the game correctly. Bayonetta's pseudo nudity is a central aspect of the aesthetic and not just a random half-naked character thrown into a world where everyone else important dresses "normally".
Bayonetta is so great that Bayonetta 2 wouldn't have been made if Nintendo hadn't stepped in to help out.
Bayonetta has more going for it than sex, but the sexy lead is nothing but extra free advertising. All these arguments against sex sells boils down to setting up the strawman that sex is the only factor. That is not the case being made. The case being made is that sex is a guarantee easy way to get more attention for a game than would have existed without it.
What is your descriptor for "desexualised as possible"? If you're using your male brain to project that women must want their male characters to be running around in a Borat thong that's often not what is going to "sell". I'm a bit tired to rehash posts I made very early on but often what stimulates the female mind isn't always 1:1 with the male, speaking generally. Confidence, strength, height, humour, quick wit, success and other tropes often come before outright nudity for many females. Imagination is more important for getting to sex, than jumping right to here's a six pack and a penis. Hence the skewed numbers of females who prefer romance novels over men who's equivalent may be "guy magazines". Titillation through imagery has often been/skewed to a male inclined fantasy.
This is not to say it isn't for females too. That's never the point of speaking generally. Of course females enjoy nudity and male bodies that are objectively fit and beautiful. However, we do have a lot of data in the fields of marketing and human behavioural evolution to fine tune and understand what tends to tick the boxes in amongst a large audience base, generally speaking.
It seems you literally only looked at the pictures and not the actual context of the text. Btw, look up the design docs for those characters as they were 100% NOT designed with sex appeal in mind but heroic idealism.
I mean, I don't see why sex need be reduced to classic cases of 'insert nearly naked, huge busted woman with no character into the game.'
This whole thread, that has been my chief point. I find those "classic" cases off-putting personally, but I do see sex enhancing the appeal of a product to me and other people in other ways.
The idea that the 'sex' in 'sex sells' must be 'gratuitous sexualization of female characters, after a certain classical fashion' is just bonkers to me.
So no, I haven't been trying to defend Quiet and such. And I still think it is silly to say sex doesn't sell.
...
That said, I do also think the leap from game with classically sexy lady didn't sell well to classically sexualized women don't sell is fallacious.