The Sane Psycho
Banned
I will agree that Rockstar is a great example of a Western dev not pushing leftist politics in their games. Most Japanese devs are like this too.
Yup, they have been but it was never done in a forced manner and they never made a big deal out of it. They always had minorities in their games where it actually made a lot of sense or when they had a really cool story to tell like in the Ballad of Gay Tony. It never felt like a checklist to avoid getting scolded by the regressives in games journalism.
I remember last E3 where A way out, Wolfenstein 2, Mafia 3, Beyond Good and Evil 2, Uncharted Lost Legacy all basically had the exact same "super diverse and inclusive" character in their video games, a sassy black woman that doesn't take **** from anyone with a big afro.
I don't think they intentionally focus on being diverse and ^ female with large puffy hair is pretty common dating back to the disco era.
Yup, they have been but it was never done in a forced manner and they never made a big deal out of it. They always had minorities in their games where it actually made a lot of sense or when they had a really cool story to tell like in the Ballad of Gay Tony. It never felt like a checklist to avoid getting scolded by the regressives in games journalism.
I remember last E3 where A way out, Wolfenstein 2, Mafia 3, Beyond Good and Evil 2, Uncharted Lost Legacy all basically had the exact same "super diverse and inclusive" character in their video games, a sassy black woman that doesn't take shit from anyone with a big afro.
At least with Mafia III the character made sense based on the time period the game was set in. She wasn't just shoehorned in for inclusivity's sake.Yup, they have been but it was never done in a forced manner and they never made a big deal out of it. They always had minorities in their games where it actually made a lot of sense or when they had a really cool story to tell like in the Ballad of Gay Tony. It never felt like a checklist to avoid getting scolded by the regressives in games journalism.
I remember last E3 where A way out, Wolfenstein 2, Mafia 3, Beyond Good and Evil 2, Uncharted Lost Legacy all basically had the exact same "super diverse and inclusive" character in their video games, a sassy black woman that doesn't take shit from anyone with a big afro.
At least with Mafia III the character made sense based on the time period the game was set in. She wasn't just shoehorned in for inclusivity's sake.
Nintendo is the one that really rejects any form of politics.
They continue to make games and focus on gameplay. They don't give a shit about your opinions. They just want you to have fun.
I agree, but I don't think you're referring to who I'm thinking of.but it seems like if you are a minority or LGBT, your very existence is a liberal agenda to some people!
It's a good thing too, they're sticking with pure unadulterated story telling and gameplay.
That's packed with satire and social commentary.
They really are being intentionally obtuse.
"but it seems like if you are a minority or LGBT, your very existence is a liberal agenda to some people!"
Exactly. I think some people are ridiculous in how hard to make sure a non-white character (or non-straight, or even female sometimes) "makes sense" in the story (not counting specific historical stories, I can understand why a Hispanic guy playing a large role in an American Revolution film would feel out of place) and "how well they are written" but white characters (and males, and LBGT) are almost never given the same scrutiny by these certain people.
My preferred one: "Nintendo's conservative game development politics" of "cowering out of saying anything")
Now it's very clear Rockstar and many Japanese developers aren't into political advocacy and "playing it safe", falling squarely in that category of "coward developers".
And you don't think Team Ninja is saying something when they make many of their game's female characters have extra large boobs?
That women are to be gawked at physically. Look at the jiggly boobs and booty. Pay less attention to the skill of volleyball or fighting please. Just DEM BOOBS!!!! Like we all remember with every generation we guys cared about the new "Jiggle" tech that Team Ninja would put into their next-gen games. I'm in my 30s so I clearly remembered caring about that stuff years ago. I got older and more mature and realized how silly that stuff really was.I'm curious, what they are saying?
That women are to be gawked at physically.
I don't think they are saying that, because that would be like saying that people should breathe to be alive.
I don't think they are saying anything, they are just taking advantage of sex and erotism because sex and erotism sells.
I don't think they are saying that, because that would be like saying that people should breathe to be alive.
I don't think they are saying anything, they are just taking advantage of sex and erotism because sex and erotism sells.
Now you have controversies about:
- Tomodachi Collection NOT having same-sex weddings (it's a late localization for a game made in a country where the concept doesn't exist legally)
- Final Fantasy XV having an all-male party, and the "unjustified existence" of Cindy
- Zelda's Link NOT reincarnating as a female
- Ubisoft's games with a gender selector with a dialogue NOT perfectly gender neutral, or some leftover signs of a male-ish writing that wasn't purged enough
- Games NOT having an obvious, active real life political statement (so you have "bigot developers" who should be chased out of all storefronts, "woke developers", and "coward developers" who didn't insert their political opinion in a conclusive way, so it wasn't obvious to people who used to think that "everything is political", and all they see in a game without politics is a game "that doesn't say anything". My preferred one: "Nintendo's conservative game development politics" of "cowering out of saying anything")
what he saumid
You just defined sexploitation, so you are im agreements with mckmas8808 that Tecmo is objectifing women.
What?
You know they aren't real women, do you?
And of course they are objectifying their characters, every videogame does it. But some people like you act like radical puritans every time a boob or an ass is showed because that is wrong.
Erotism is awesome, sex is awesome, games that appeal to sexual fantasies are awesome. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
fwiw I agree with you that eroticism has its place. It'd be a shame if we lost that from the world. What you're not seeing though is the (I hate to say it) bigger picture. If there were as many games aimed at objectifying men for women then as far as I'm concerned no problem. If there was as much media in general that treated men and women the same, whatever than treatment be, then no problem, but that's not how things are and that's the issue. Basically, one game isn't the problem, the volume of games like it is the problem
Women and men are not the same, despite what some people say, women and men function differently, specially in a certain range of age.
Visual erotism sells much more to men, because our sex drive works that way. If nobody has made a game of ripped boys doing sexy poses in the beach, is not because they hate women, it's because that doesn't sell. If any product targeted at men has used erotism to sell, it's because we always fall for that trap, because it's our nature.
Not everything has to be equal between men and women, because men and women are not equal in the first place.
respectfully, you're wrong. Women find men attractive the same way we find them attractive. Look at the Diet Coke ads, the Chippendales, sexy fireman calenders, romance novels, David Beckham. That stuff exists, it just exists to a lesser extent than for men. Which again is the point, games don't exist separate from everything else
you are right that it wouldn't sell if there wasn't a market, but that's not really the point (there is a market and I have no problem with it)
sex sells to both genders. Your last point, I don't even know how to respond to that, as far as I've seen literally no one has argued thatI'm not wrong because I never said that women don't find attractive men attractive. They just simply don't work the same way as we do when we see some flesh.
Sex sells among men much more because that is our nature, not because the patriarchy apparently hates women so much they don't even want their money.
sex sells to both genders. Your last point, I don't even know how to respond to that, as far as I've seen literally no one has argued that
I don't think they are saying that, because that would be like saying that people should breathe to be alive.
I don't think they are saying anything, they are just taking advantage of sex and erotism because sex and erotism sells.
Women and men are not the same, despite what some people say, women and men function differently, especially in a certain range of age.
Visual erotism sells much more to men, because our sex drive works that way. If nobody has made a game of ripped boys doing sexy poses in the beach, is not because they hate women, it's because that doesn't sell. If any product targeted at men has used erotism to sell, it's because we always fall for that trap, because it's our nature.
Not everything has to be equal between men and women, because men and women are not equal in the first place.
Tell that to all the book companies that put half naked men on the front of all of those non fiction fantasy books that you see in Walmart and Target. Like just stop it bro. Seriously have you ever been to a celebrity driven blog site ran by women? They love looking at dudes on the beach with their shirts off talk about how hot they look.
Danielle Fernandes Dominique Schuelein-Steel(born August 14, 1947) is an American writer, best known for her romance novels. She is the best selling author alive and the fourth bestselling fiction author of all time, with over 800 million copies sold
No the difference is you find one to be an issue where as you don't find the other to be an issue at all. You're okay with the company selling you sex and eroticism. You are not okay with some of the things that companies like naughty dog have put into their games.
Tell that to all the book companies that put half naked men on the front of all of those non fiction fantasy books that you see in Walmart and Target. Like just stop it bro. Seriously have you ever been to a celebrity driven blog site ran by women? They love looking at dudes on the beach with their shirts off talk about how hot they look.
There are still a lot of Western RPG developers in Europe that aren't bowing down to the SJW left. I think it's because they realize that their fans don't care about it in the slightest. Like Larian Studios, Warhorse Studios, CD Projekt Red, etc.
Rockstar is indeed a bright spot when you have EA, Sony Interactive Entertainment, Activision, etc., all bending over backwards to satisfy a super-tiny minority of outspoken progressive activists.
I think it's hard to tell their stance because they seem to criticize everyone.
Southpark used to be liked that.
I think Rockstar is doing it right. They've had all kinds of characters but I can't recall that any of them have felt pushed or misplaced for the sake of diversity.
I wouldn't be able to say the same thing about Naughty Dog for instance, one of my favorite studios. They're definitely pushing more political statements into their games than necessary.
Why the condescending tone?How old were you when Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas released? And you don't think Team Ninja is saying something when they make many of their game's female characters have extra large boobs?
That women are to be gawked at physically. Look at the jiggly boobs and booty. Pay less attention to the skill of volleyball or fighting please. Just DEM BOOBS!!!! Like we all remember with every generation we guys cared about the new "Jiggle" tech that Team Ninja would put into their next-gen games. I'm in my 30s so I clearly remembered caring about that stuff years ago. I got older and more mature and realized how silly that stuff really was.
Okay, I do remember the first one being an issue, but I don't think the next three are the best examples considering how the developers chose to handle the response (and plenty of people merely asked or calmly criticized these games, not everyone was freaking out).
I will agree that Rockstar is a great example of a Western dev not pushing leftist politics in their games. Most Japanese devs are like this too.
One of the last western devs not infected for sure
It was pretty nice to hear about all the journos and bloggers got so pissed about GTA V and then the game goes on to set records. Hope it continues
Rockstar is indeed a bright spot when you have EA, Sony Interactive Entertainment, Activision, etc., all bending over backwards to satisfy a super-tiny minority of outspoken progressive activists.
I think what people mean when they say unaffected by politics they simply mean that the political climate in society won't affect censorship in GTA games, not that it won't be something to poke fun at within the games themselves.Again, I feel like half the comments in this thread are confusing having violent or sexual content to mean that Rockstar is unaffected by politics - Grand Theft Auto satires Americanism, masculinity, violence, the far left, the far right, wealth & excess, social media, etc. While I certainly wouldn't support a blogger who criticizes the sexual/violent content in GTA (because I think they're missing the point), I also don't like people suggesting that GTA doesn't contain politics. Because it does. A lot.
Also Aquamarine, you named hugely successful devs/publishers - if they're truly bending over backwards to satisfy a "super-tiny" minority then I guess it's been working out okay so far. Is it possible you're in the minority for thinking they're not actually satisfying the majority?
I think what people mean when they say unaffected by politics they simply mean that the political climate in society won't affect censorship in GTA games, not that it won't be something to poke fun at within the games themselves.
I suppose you're right, most of the people here seem to be talking about something differently than I was thinking initially.I think if this thread was about a genuine concern that Rockstar would have to censor themselves in some way I would be on board, but this thread has been a bit... broader than that.
As OP said: "they tend to avoid that trend of inserting really leftist political ideals in their games unlike Naughty Dog or Bioware" and I think this is a claim based on a couple false premises. 1) That Rockstar doesn't have really leftist political ideals in their games and 2) that Naughty Dog/Bioware are inserting these ideals into their games as some sort of trend bandwagoning.
I think the real trend is that the current climate is more open to (and even wants) a wide range of stories featuring more diverse characters. Druckmann went "awesome, here's a story about survival, loss, and hope featuring a lesbian character" and Bioware went "cool, here's a bunch of different romance and player options".
And some people are upset by this.
It's all a satire. Let's take GTA V: Michael is the rich american that has marriage problems, Trevor is the insane american that wants what he wants, and Franklin is the american dreamer that doesn't know that much and get on problems
Not in his heartTrevor is Canadian!