Enygger_Tzu
Banned
Quote me where I said it does.
I am asking you, does it? Do you have a problem with this scene or not?
Quote me where I said it does.
It’s not exactly a thing that people shy away from. It’s common knowledge amongst everybody. You can say they are of legal age all you like, or a 600 year old witch, or a 100 year old demon who drank some magical potion... None of that matters when they make her look like an 12 year old school girl.
Making the character 14 and engaging in a lesbian kiss with another 14 year old character does it, however?
(The Last of Us: Left behind)
Yeeeeeeah... making the character look 12 and saying "IT'S ACTUALLY A MOON CAT GODDESS A MILLION YEARS OLD" doesn't really fix the problem for me.
I think TLOU is a good example. Somehow its acceptable in TLOUS but as soon as you recreate the scene in a Japanese art style people lose their shit.Making the character 14 and engaging in a lesbian kiss with another 14 year old character does it, however?
(The Last of Us: Left behind)
You are missing my point and you do it deliberately at this point.
You do the exact same in realistic art style and its ok do it in anime art stlye and you get banned.
This without even speaking about that sex scenes in wrpgs are ok but in jrpgs get you banned do you get it now or do i have to send you a newsletter?
It’s about context. That 14 year old girl finding her sexuality in a none sexualised way. She’s portrayed as confused and searching for herself, and kisses in unsure way, once. There’s not full of snog, no clothes ripped off with convienetly placed camera angles to show just a hint of boob. It’s done in a dramatic way.
Finally at least some honesty behind the facade. Again do you think gta strip clubs will be banned or wrpg sex scense will be banned? You think mr witcher nailing some whore will be banned?The other is 200 hours of tit RPG stat juggling.
I don't. Because I don't think it sexualizes them. And I still have a problem with sexualized 12 year old girls in japanese games/comics/anime.I am asking you, does it? Do you have a problem with this scene or not?
Yes, the 14 year old girl finding her sexuality in a sexual way is good, the 16-22 year old girl/woman who also is depicted in a sexual way is bad because, oh, my sensitivities.
I believe they knew who the target audience of the 14 year old scene were! To claim otherwise is irresponsibility.
Problem is a lot of mentioned games and examples, especially on console releases, would belong to the equivalent of pulp magazines and comics.
Why waste so many resources analyzing this "filth"....
Do people go to the video store or book store complaining about obscene stuff nowadays?
Intellectual level hit rock bottom....
explain why sex scenes in wrpg are ok but not in jrpgs anything else you say next is basically bullshit avoidance.The difference is quite obvious. One of these characters will likely have her tits covered by a belt, while wearing a school dress and making over sexualised noises. The other will be a normal looking girl.
How am I even having to explain this?!
The difference is quite obvious. One of these characters will likely have her tits covered by a belt, while wearing a school dress and making over sexualised noises. The other will be a normal looking girl.
How am I even having to explain this?!
Finally at least some honesty behind the facade. Again do you think gta strip clubs will be banned or wrpg sex scense will be banned? You think mr witcher nailing some whore will be banned?
Of course not stop fooling yourself this crap is arbitrary and based on "muh anime evil".
explain why sex scenes in wrpg are ok but not in jrpgs anything else you say next is basically bullshit avoidance.
Again mr witcher nailing some "women of the night" is ok do it in anime style and its a ban explain that.
Yeah but you painted a bullshit picture because its your only way out, again sony has now censored anime characters meaning a unrealistic art style and censored characters with double Ds no less so not anything you described that is my point, you do same in a realistic art style in a big aaa western rpg game and there is no issue.My last post here because it’s quite clear I won’t win this.
But if you REALLY can’t see the differences, you need to take a seat over there. Because one of them is modelled on a mature actress, the other is modelled on the ideal Japanese female form, which is a very young looking girl.
It’s not exactly a thing that people shy away from. It’s common knowledge amongst everybody. You can say they are of legal age all you like, or a 600 year old witch, or a 100 year old demon who drank some magical potion... None of that matters when they make her look like an 12 year old school girl.
Look, Japan is a very old school type development environment. They make good shit. But let’s not beat around the under age bush here, they are also one of the most perverted places when it comes to making things overly sexual.
This isn’t a taboo subject or something people don’t think or say... it’s common knowledge. They love a certain look and feel to their games. But that look doesn’t gel with the rest of the world. Works the same the other way around either, they don’t want dude bro shooters like we do.
I fucking LOVE rpgs from both sides so your point t is daft.
But again, one is a strip club scene that’s set up as a mature area, in a mature game, showing female models of an OBVIOUS age which is appropriate. The other, shows doll like underage looking women, where they can say whatever age you want, they still look it.
It’s the same as searching for porn and looking for women who look under age. It may say 21 on her id, but man, you’re jacking it to somebody who looks like a kid.
Now I’m not saying people play these games to jack it, not at all. But you’re comparing two vastly different visual styles in vastly different situations that are not comparible.
If a woman takes her top off in an 18 rated film, you don’t bat an eye lid. If our young hero’s sister kisses a girl in the lips in our tv, you don’t bat an eye lid.
Now, if you make these characters look like they are underage, while at the same time upping the sexuality on these characters, dressing them in a sexual way, giving them none mature voices etc... then it crosses the line.
I’m all for all forms of entertainment that’s legal, yes including what japan etc had to offer. It’s up to the viewer to make the decision that “hey this girl is old enough it’s ok”. But you can’t just sit there and NOT see that a 21 year old 4 foot tall girl with the voice of a 8 year old holding a teddy with tots bigger than my Nan at Christmas jumping up and down with them totally ignoring the laws of physics is pushing it.
His description is a cop out anyway when you have the developers of catherine coming out stating they go as far as they can under sonys new censorship rules its basically already eye rolling, a puzzle game with a story about some dude being torn between his long time girlfriend and another chick with a hand full of sex scenes that are already censored by the TV and only teased at and the dev has to tip toe around but on the other side of the ocean you have bioware, cd project and rockstar and everyone expects their games to have some sex scenes and they dont even have to think about sonys policy.You can't speak for the whole western civilization. Generalizations are stupid. Individuals have unique tastes and there are plenty of people in the west who likes japanese games and art just as they are. You can also find Japanese fans of dudebro games.
Naked age regressed Polnareff didn't do it for you?Yeeeeeeah... making the character look 12 and saying "IT'S ACTUALLY A MOON CAT GODDESS A MILLION YEARS OLD" doesn't really fix the problem for me.
This shit grinds my gears. I hate it when they do thatYeeeeeeah... making the character look 12 and saying "IT'S ACTUALLY A MOON CAT GODDESS A MILLION YEARS OLD" doesn't really fix the problem for me.
Well, I seem to notice that your ignorance hits astronomical levels, does your "game development" career is tied with Kotaku, IGN or Polygon? Because I am sure only then you would claim to work in the vg industry and still hold those views.
So, about the bolded, it's common knowledge to whom exactly? To what exactly?
And it does not gel with who exactly? Or are you speaking for the rest of us?
You can't speak for the whole western civilization. Generalizations are stupid. Individuals have unique tastes and there are plenty of people in the west who likes japanese games and art just as they are. You can also find Japanese fans of dudebro games.
His description is a cop out anyway when you have the developers of catherine coming out stating they go as far as they can under sonys new censorship rules its basically already eye rolling, a puzzle game with a story about some dude being torn between his long time girlfriend and another chick with a hand full of sex scenes that are already censored by the TV and only teased at and the dev has to tip toe around but on the other side of the ocean you have bioware, cd project and rockstar and everyone expects their games to have some sex scenes and they dont even have to think about sonys policy.
Rdr literally has a more graphic sex scene than anything in Catherine but its not a issue lol
I think it's good if more thought is put into characters. There is room for idealized female characters, even from a male perspective but some of those designs are more immature or misogynistic than others. I finished Metro Last Light recently and it's striking how the only few female characters are a sniper who is a barbie doll, strippers, and rape victims. There's some old women models (with no dialogue) but anything remotely fuckable is sexualized in an awkward way.
Hope you're not upset. I saw how people were treated at the purple forum and I really don't want to get banned .
I mentioned in my post that all this sexuality in games is some what a flavor. As in flavor of ice cream. a preference in the way you like you're women. Why is it that men who enjoy these things shamed for liking these things. Why can you not have a preference. The videogame market is capitalizing on what the "majority" of men enjoy. Men is the majority of the people buying most of these core games.
"ugly feminist"
It just seem from my point of view that less attractive women are very vocal on this subject. While attractive women dont even know there is a problem. I mentioned Mila kunis and WOW because Kunis is found attractive by most men. WoW has sexualized ( less armor is better trope) for female characters in that game. But when she metioned she played the game and the fact that she was a gamer she never mentioned any thing about over sexulalition and that it was a problem with our society.
When Felicia Day came on the scene with the little show the Guild. Was there any mention of over sexualiztion in games?
Olivia Muun was on a videogame show and i did not hear anything about characters being to sexy or that fact being uncomfortable to play games. Maybe they got on boat later on in theyre career ...
conjecture: an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information. I had to look it up : >
All that I type was my opinion. I didnt provide any source. No thesis . I posted about what I observed. Checking social media, FB Twitter, Instagram. If you go to the main search/display i dont see any major uproard, memes or hastags about sexuality in games and how its a spit in women face. Granted these pages are catrered to what you previoulsy liked (mine social is geard at art, drawing, games).
"instead they want to open a dialogue on tropes, representation, and, games starring more unconventional character types/designs."The dialogue has been started, and developers even listened there has been stride made to make characters non sexulized whether it was in
animation
Steven Universe
She-Ra 2018
or games.
Celeste
Chick in new Assassin Creed
Lara Croft (new)
Nora
So... yea some gamers feel .. dare i say it feel attacked. Sony new censor force. Feminist even though being a small group is being very loud about the "sexualization in games". Things are changing. Even though there are Games like Horizon Zero Dawn . An excellent game. It isnt enough for some people. As not only game industry is introduction "strong females" they have to remove the eye candy that is the entertainment for others.
Because that's more than likely going to be the shape the solution to these issues is going to take. Or do you have a suggestion as to how we could deal with content existing that a certain group hates to the point they want to reduce its prevalence as much as possible?
The way I see it, there is no compromise to be made. Either you like or just don't mind sexualized characters, or you dislike 'em and they need to go. There is no in between and no discussion to be had. That's why these types of threads are circle jerks. The same is true for the ResetEra thread, just the opposite way. There's no discussion going on there either. The real question is: Are you complaing to them too?
I am not so sure, as I said, all people want power. In the beginning when you don't have power it is "let's just have a little dialogue" - and the more power you get the more fun it gets
I'm pretty sure the depiction of woman in Metro:LL is intentional, you go trough both nazi and communist territory, I think the way women are shown in the game is for world building purposes and not because the developers are themselves sexist in any way.
The sex scene with Anna was a bit eye rolly but more for being a shitty plot device than anything else.
And the problem to be had with the side that keeps raising the issue is that they don't seem to want to meet the bare minimum requirements for a rational debate, such as defining sexualization, stating why it's [allegedly] morally reprehensible and identifying its [alleged] signs.
Because they act as though their position is self-evident and as such are excused from arguing their case, their stance should be met with civilized contempt, until, that is, they show the will to engage in rational debate.
Pardon me, but the underlying yet never proven assumption behind the concept of sexualization is that, ultimately, sex is bad, lust is bad. Those are the cornerstones of the idea, without which it becomes instantly devoid of any real content and leverage. And if lust were indeed morally reproachable, the holder of the lustful eyes, the proverbial male gamer, would be inviting reproach upon himself, wouldn't he?
They want to start a conversation, but can't even define their terms? Their basic thesis? Their basic argument? Present the supporting data?
Some dialogue.
Me, I'll start the discussion by denouncing the notion of representation in fiction as fraudulent. It's up to the people who bring it up constantly to establish that a fictional character is not simply a metaphor created for specific storytelling purposes but instead, lo and behold, should be read as a representative of real-life groups numbering in the billions, people all grouped together by virtue of one arbitrary characteristic. Representation is intersectionality applied to fiction and the result is no more serious, no more accurate or truthful than usual.
even if that were true about the intent behind it the way they handle it is juvenile. I don't want to single them out too much considering the strength of the game is the environments not the awful dialogue or themes drawn from bad 80s action movies
edit:
https://www.mweb.co.za/games/view/t...d-the-objectification-of-the-female-body.aspx
I would argue that if you're already being represented, and have plenty of options, then you really can't say what it would mean to someone to not be represented. If a minority group says "I'd sure like to read about a [minority] superhero" then what is the response you'd give them? "You shouldn't care about that because you're focused on an arbitrary characteristic that doesn't impact the story".
Who are you to say that someone shouldn't want that? I'm sure plenty of minorities consume all kinds of fiction with various main characters, but if someone said "yeah I read about plenty of straight, white guys, but an occasional gay black women would be nice" I guess I don't see an issue if someone wants to make that comic.
even if that were true about the intent behind it the way they handle it is juvenile. I don't want to single them out too much considering the strength of the game is the environments not the awful dialogue or themes drawn from bad 80s action movies
edit:
https://www.mweb.co.za/games/view/t...d-the-objectification-of-the-female-body.aspx
Why not? 80s aaction movies were the fucking best. If you want to create this nostalgic atmosphere and tropes etc you should be able to fucking do that. How about you just say it is not for me and move on? The market will decide if people want it or not. But Kotaku and co do not even just criticize these chices no they often also attack and villify everyone who buys these gameseven if that were true about the intent behind it the way they handle it is juvenile. I don't want to single them out too much considering the strength of the game is the environments not the awful dialogue or themes drawn from bad 80s action movies
edit:
https://www.mweb.co.za/games/view/t...d-the-objectification-of-the-female-body.aspx
I would argue that if you're already being represented, and have plenty of options, then you really can't say what it would mean to someone to not be represented. If a minority group says "I'd sure like to read about a [minority] superhero" then what is the response you'd give them? "You shouldn't care about that because you're focused on an arbitrary characteristic that doesn't impact the story".
Inconsistent usage and identification of sexualization kind of gets at what I'm talking about - which is that there are different groups talking about this with different limits on what is "reprehensible". I remember this type of discussion around violence. And "raising the issue" can mean different things. Are they raising the issue because they want it banned? Or are they raising the issue because they thing we can do better in terms of variety? My guess is that different people have different answers.
I guess you've only really had this discussion with people who were irrational? In which case yeah, don't engage with them because there is no point. But I'm here, let's have a rational debate.
I like fanservice and DOA Xtreme. I also like that we have Ellie and Aloy. I don't like censorship. And I think that voting with your wallet is more powerful than noisy people online.
You're conflating things. Sexualization doesn't mean that sex or lust is bad in an of itself. In this context the issue is the prevalence of sexual objectification. If someone is using the term wrong then either educate them or don't engage.
Again, if you're arguing with people who can't define their terms then just move on.
I would argue that if you're already being represented, and have plenty of options, then you really can't say what it would mean to someone to not be represented. If a minority group says "I'd sure like to read about a [minority] superhero" then what is the response you'd give them? "You shouldn't care about that because you're focused on an arbitrary characteristic that doesn't impact the story".
Who are you to say that someone shouldn't want that? I'm sure plenty of minorities consume all kinds of fiction with various main characters, but if someone said "yeah I read about plenty of straight, white guys, but an occasional gay black women would be nice" I guess I don't see an issue if someone wants to make that comic.
This is closer to my view. Making more games like Horizon or the Last of Us would be great! But people here have to see that there is a never ending attack on games with sexy art or fan service. The gaming press is a big part of this problem. They lean heavily towards the less tolerant side.Forgive me for interjecting myself in the discussion, but this caught my eye and I wish to offer my prespective on it, if you don't mind.
I would answer them with: "That is great and novel, and all the more power to you and all the best and even my support on that endeavor, however, let me ask also; who is stopping you? Who is impeding you from creating your own stories, your own comics, your own games, your own fanservice, instead of:
1. Asking of me and others similar to me to do the same thing for you that I did for me and others like me instead of doing it yourself?
And
2.Wish to (a lesser extent) co-opt the creation and works of me and others similar to me be injecting your own standards, your own story twist, your own agenda, your own opinions, your own beliefs in it that may or may not be antithetical to mine and me, instead of like I mentioned create it your own?"
Because I think this is the problem, mostly, with the censorers (for lack of better word) and co-opters (also for lack of better word), they don't wish to start something from scratch, and create something for them and like-minding individuals, they wish to be handed the creative keys to the traditional and core valuable work, and getting access to it, pushing the original people, the original cast and the original meaning of the creation out in favour of their own.
And to me, this is unacceptable, to me this is not a creative process, it is at best a disruptive process and at worst a destructive process.
Forgive me for interjecting myself in the discussion, but this caught my eye and I wish to offer my prespective on it, if you don't mind.
I would answer them with: "That is great and novel, and all the more power to you and all the best and even my support on that endeavor, however, let me ask also; who is stopping you? Who is impeding you from creating your own stories, your own comics, your own games, your own fanservice, instead of:
1. Asking of me and others similar to me to do the same thing for you that I did for me and others like me instead of doing it yourself?
And
2.Wish to (a lesser extent) co-opt the creation and works of me and others similar to me be injecting your own standards, your own story twist, your own agenda, your own opinions, your own beliefs in it that may or may not be antithetical to mine and me, instead of like I mentioned create it your own?"
Because I think this is the problem, mostly, with the censorers (for lack of better word) and co-opters (also for lack of better word), they don't wish to start something from scratch, and create something for them and like-minding individuals, they wish to be handed the creative keys to the traditional and core valuable work, and getting access to it, pushing the original people, the original cast and the original meaning of the creation out in favour of their own.
And to me, this is unacceptable, to me this is not a creative process, it is at best a disruptive process and at worst a destructive process.
Some people don't give two fucks about representation.
My favorite characters are usually anthropomorphic animals, monsters, shit like that. Being represented is overrated as fuck. Fiction is cool because you can get to play with different creatures.
Kotaku and Polygon are the most biased sources you could get.
Could you explain that spectrum? Give some examples of the gradients between "I'm fine with certain content existing" and "I'm not fine with certain content sexisting" ?That group will always exist. Different groups, however, may fall within some kind of spectrum. That's my point.
I'm afraid I don't quite understand your hypothetical. If someone said to me they didn't like violent games I'd just do... nothing? I don't have to convince them of the greatness of violent games or whatever. There's plenty of violent games I don't like so I don't play 'em. Frankly, I don't think there's much of a discussion to be had in such a case.If someone doesn't like violence in video games, what do you counter that with? My strategy would be to figure out why. And if they are even willing to discuss. If they just want to preach like those religious people I pass going into comic con then you can just ignore. But if they actually want to discuss then you can start a dialogue.
In my view, this discussion is only happening because people have expressed the desire for games to change in a big way. And that change would mean greatly reducing or even leaving behind aspects of games we currently enjoy. The people who didn't advocate for that change... There's nothing much to discuss with them.What I'm trying to get at is that there is a difference between people who say "I don't like Ivy's breasts BUT I don't want to remove that content from existence" vs "I want to remove that content from exist". I would agree that there is no compromise with the latter group. And you don't have to agree with the former group but that conversation may be interesting to have. That's all I'm saying.
Maybe I'm wrong, but I remember you expressing your disappointment before with how discussions on controversial subjects are going on this forum, and I wonder if you do the same elsewhere. Maybe you just have a very high opinion on GAF and want its members to do even better?Also, that's not the "real" question. I'm not the forum police. I'm on this forum because I want to be here and have this discussion here. I don't need to present the same idea to a different forum in order to prove which forum is better/worse or that I'm fair or something.
What I'm hoping you can clarity though is: "Asking of me and others similar to me to do the same thing for you that I did for me and others like me instead of doing it yourself?"
What are you being asked to do? And what did you do yourself that now you're having to do for others? Are you getting at content creation and what types of content you're now having to put out?
Just want to make sure I understand what you're saying.
The question is is it worth to listen to these people or not. Right now it seems it is not. AKA Andromedaas huge exampleOkay. But some people do care.
Why not? 80s aaction movies were the fucking best. If you want to create this nostalgic atmosphere and tropes etc you should be able to fucking do that. How about you just say it is not for me and move on? The market will decide if people want it or not. But Kotaku and co do not even just criticize these chices no they often also attack and villify everyone who buys these games
And honetly 80s action movies dialogue is well more rememerable then the PC fucking bullshit you often get in todays games like Andromeda. If you for example compare Andromeda with the Witcher one feels totally lifeless and artifical while everything in the world of the Witcher feels more real and memorable.
I wrote “bad 80s action movies” i.e. clumsy use of cinematic language and tropes from 80s movies that are out of place in an atmosphereic shooter like Metro Last Light. I can see how if Metro 2033 is Alien, Last Light is trying to be Aliens but as a developer at that time they weren’t well equipped to tell a more human story and it shows in their treatment of the female characters i.e. immersion is broken when the world feels more like the product of a juvenile mind trying to mimic a genre they dont understand, than it does a lived in universe. The way the game is constructed the longest stop is a strip club, basically the pirates den or saloon of that universe. Unfortunately it’s one of the few instances you visit civilization. And the other stations not well developed enough to set up in contrast so women are mostly presented as one dimensional sex objects in the game.
By “80s movies” I wasn’t referring to larger than life, over the top characters killing hundreds of dudes while saying snappy one liners. As much as I like those movies there is a context for the tropes. That’s why some of the one man army action movie nonsense in Breaking Bad seemed out of place. Not that misogyny is central to male power fantasy movies but it has more of a place in that type of fantasy than it does in the Metro universe
Okay. But some people do care.
Given how the world is total shit do you not believe that will happen? Do you not believe that things like sex, drugs etc becoming a real desireable good? Do you believe that people will bound together in such a szenario and help each other? Be respectful etc?. In such szenarios the last thing you will see is civil behaviour. So in fact I think it is way more realstic in terms of possibility it is a fucking rough world, this is exactly How I would imagine an apocaliptic setting.I wrote “bad 80s action movies” i.e. clumsy use of cinematic language and tropes from 80s movies that are out of place in an atmosphereic shooter like Metro Last Light. I can see how if Metro 2033 is Alien, Last Light is trying to be Aliens but as a developer at that time they weren’t well equipped to tell a more human story and it shows in their treatment of the female characters i.e. immersion is broken when the world feels more like the product of a juvenile mind trying to mimic a genre they dont understand, than it does a lived in universe. The way the game is constructed the longest stop is a strip club, basically the pirates den or saloon of that universe. Unfortunately it’s one of the few instances you visit civilization. And the other stations not well developed enough to set up in contrast so women are mostly presented as one dimensional sex objects in the game.
By “80s movies” I wasn’t referring to larger than life, over the top characters killing hundreds of dudes while saying snappy one liners. As much as I like those movies there is a context for the tropes. That’s why some of the one man army action movie nonsense in Breaking Bad seemed out of place. Not that misogyny is central to male power fantasy movies but it has more of a place in that type of fantasy than it does in the Metro universe
And I and others say that the way woman are represented in Metro is fine because it's part of the atmosphere, it shows that the setting those women are living in is oppressing. You're basicly saying developers should do things your way because you don't like the way they do it.
And that's fine but they can't force everyone else to care aswell.
Given how the world is total shit do you not believe that will happen? Do you not believe that things like sex, drugs etc becoming a real desireable good? Do you believe that people will bound together in such a szenario and help each other? Be respectful etc?. In such szenarios the last thing you will see is civil behaviour. So in fact I think it is way more realstic in terms of possibility it is a fucking rough world, this is exactly How I would imagine an apocaliptic setting.
Look how women in real life become basically trade good in war town countries. How women get abused, and yes also raped. In war torn countries women become exactly that. a piece of meat. And strong independant women would become non existend because of this. So no I do not think it is juvenile but rather a terrible realstic perspective of what would happen. And developers in eastern countries like CDred or the Metro guys want to have a way more realistic view on their world and setting. And in between the boring scenarios of strong independant female characters which by the way has become a fucking boring trope to me. such a realsitic and terrible setting is a breath of fresh air to me.
No I am saying that it is a way more realsitic look at such a future. And right now we have this either or. more western developers have creating a fucking boring strong independent women character trope. while European/eastern developer have gone to a more realstic view in certain settings.The so-called realism you’re admiring rings hollow when it’s dominated by one perspective and female characters only have a handful of lines. It’s a false dichotomy to suggest it’s either prostitutes/rape victims or independent strong female
I “don’t like the way they do it” because it’s poorly written not because it doesn’t fit the setting. I’m pretty sure in the original books there’s more of a vestige of civilization than a failed state like Syria, under ISIS. Part of the story is in the contrast between the stations and the areas outside.