• 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.

Anita Sarkeesian: 'What I Couldn't Say'

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mael

Member
Sorry had to go to class(midterms week), but yeah here's something I easily found on my phone.

http://the****************/quoted-anita-sarkeesian-insults-japan-jokes-about-atomic-bombing-121714/

Just look at her coworkers twitter account, I think his name is Josh McIntosh or something. He said Tetris has a communist agenda, it's freken Tetris...

Phone is being dumb the article is about her thoughts on Japan and the atomic bombs you can Google it.

It's quite clear that something like Tetris indeed has a message about the country it originated from.
That the message is inherently procommunist is however pretty far fetched.
But seriously there's a reason the whole marketing surrounding the game was centered around a clear distinct USSR imagery.
Thinking about it, I think it's a clear message about bureaucracy more than communism.
 

Palculator

Unconfirmed Member
Further, the designers clearly thought it important to limit who you can interact with. You can't interact with children in the game, because you'll either end up killing them or not being able to kill them. The former is just awful, and the latter creates a weird disconnect. The designers consciously decided that players should want to take strippers to a secluded place to have sex with them and kill them.

Foregone conclusion. You're asserting this teleological approach where such situations are inserted into the game willingly from the top-down while it's much more likely they added killing cilivians as a feature, then added them dropping cash or their items and then added sex workers. The "kill the hooker to get your money back" possibility emerges from all the various little sandbox aspects introduced into that world.

They recover the player-character's health.

But so do the hot dog guys (or any food vendor in general) Griss mentioned in his initial rebuttal who are even more ubiquitous than sex workers.
 
Sex workers were introduced before hotdog vendors, and Rockstar had to consciously give them the health recovery utility.

maybe well that kind of attitude on yout response its why some people dont want to interact and learn

If the reason why they're remaining ignorant is "they aren't being polite", politeness will not and cannot work.
 
99% sure it's fake:

http://zennistrad.tumblr.com/post/105499678818/trust-but-verify
http://notyourexrotic.tumblr.com/post/104659656336/randomthefox-im-sure-the-cultural

No source whatsoever, just unsubstantiated hearsay from some super sketchy source. So yeah don't worry.

You are also correct that it's not in the realm of CT to say she's had fake quotes attributed to her, as it happens all the time, as shown in the link above.

So the proof that is fabricated is that another person, fabricated an entirely different lie at some point?

The other proof is that Anita sure would never say anything like that because she knows any better?

I feel I heard those arguments before....
 

Kadayi

Banned
It's incredibly hard to read "prove that sex workers get targeted more often" and say "that's a good faith post right there." Statistically, sex workers are inevitably going to be the most targeted because they're one of the only civilians that are a part of a gameplay mechanic. Most players of GTA enjoy killing civilians, and I would hope that this isn't something you need a citation to believe. Skepticism is a fine thing, but not in the face of common sense.

Your making a case for, but you're not actually providing what was asked for, namely some factual evidence to support assertions, built on assertions. Here you are again making another statement with absolutely no factual evidence to back it up. I've never gone out of my way to kill civilians deliberately in the game ever. The only time I've ever end up killing Civilians is when they become collateral damage, when I'm fighting other criminals or the cops. There's absolutely no reward to doing so, all it does is make your life harder.
 
I'm seriously seeing someone ask for a citation that sex workers are by far the most specifically targeted civilians in GTA...

113696.gif

what.. you take it for granted that they are? why? seems very unlikely. strange assumption to make, definitely.

i've played through San Andreas, GTAIV and GTAV with my gf and other friends and i don't think we've ever specifically targeted a prostitute with violence. why would we? nothing special happens if you do. they are just random NPCs like everyone else in the game, subject to the same mechanics/physics.

last night when i was playing and walking around as Franklin, three white women came up and beat the SHIT out of me for no obvious reason. what does that make the game? sexist towards men? racist?
 
So the proof that it fabricated is that another person, fabricated an entirely different lie?

Common sense as proof?

I feel I heard those arguments before....

It feel like you're assuming that the quote is accurate even though every single thing in front of you screams dubious.

It's weird how willing you are to give the benefit of the doubt to the person who claimed she said something, even though no one can find examples of her saying that she said it.

what.. you take it for granted that they are? why? seems very unlikely. strange assumption to make, definitely.

i've played through San Andreas, GTAIV and GTAV with my gf and other friends and i don't think we've ever specifically targeted a prostitute with violence. why would we? nothing special happens if you do. they are just random NPCs like everyone else in the game, subject to the same mechanics/physics.

last night when i was playing and walking around as Franklin, three white women came up and beat the SHIT out of me for no obvious reason. what does that make the game? sexist towards men? racist?

"why would people who drive on the sidewalks and kill civilians for fun kill sex workers?"

k.

People kill sex workers because they're the most prevalent and obvious civilian type in Grand Theft Auto. I'm amazed by how people are so (willfully?) ignorant of this.
 

Morrigan Stark

Arrogant Smirk
So the proof that it fabricated is that another person, fabricated an entirely different lie?

Common sense as proof?

I feel I heard those arguments before....

What are you talking about?

I didn't say it was proof that it was fabricated. Because you can't prove a negative. There is no video, no tweet, no record of her saying that quote, therefore, the burden of proof is on the person who attributed the quote and this person has no evidence. Not to mention it's rather out of character for her to say something like that.

Worse, that person is sketchy as hell and has an agenda. Moreover, other people with such agendas have falsely attributed quotes to her before. So why do you give the benefit of doubt to this blogger, instead of to Anita?

So yeah, if you believe the quote is real, you are doing it 100% on faith.
 

Mael

Member
Foregone conclusion. You're asserting this teleological approach where such situations are inserted into the game willingly from the top-down while it's much more likely they added killing cilivians as a feature, then added them dropping cash or their items and then added sex workers. The "kill the hooker to get your money back" possibility emerges from all the various little sandbox aspects introduced into that world.

The fact that they made the hooker wear the wad of cash you gave them is actually proof that they expected people to harm them to get their money back.
After all unless I'm mistaken this wad of cash isn't going to make the hooker go take a sandwich instead of doing something else.
Heck if the issue with not implementing it this way would be since you can harm, kill, maim everyone why is there no kids that the player can unleash their fury on?

But so do the hot dog guys (or any food vendor in general) Griss mentioned in his initial rebuttal who are even more ubiquitous than sex workers.
But they're in pretty public place, so usually you face repercussion when killing one.
Unlike sex workers.
 
By the way, the difference between hot dog vendors and sex workers is that you take sex workers to private places where you can't possibly be punished for killing her.

But they're in pretty public place, so usually you face repercussion when killing one.
Unlike sex workers.

Damn, beat me to it!
 

Chmpocalypse

Blizzard
Way off, but you already know this, so I'm going to try to say this and pray it doesn't fall on deaf ears.



Have you ever seen the part of a sit-com where a husband and wife are arguing over paint colors and they can't tell the difference between different shades of blue? To one person, they're entirely different and the choices represent the variety. But they're still just shades of blue.

"A variety of target audiences" is a misnomer. You inherently can not target a variety of audiences. What you see as a variety is just different shades of blue. If you're not into blue, this kind of sucks for you.



I like this idea that if you don't like something, if you want it to change, people paint it as this unreasonable sin and that you must simply be offended it exists. It conjures up the image of you being this Victoria-era woman in a frilly dress who is fainting at the sight of something that disturbs her delicate sensibilities and all other onlookers, being normal people, view this as weak.

It's never presented the other way. It's never shown that people who feel marginalized or left out by something that should be inclusive are stronger or more courageous for wanting to share the highs everyone else gets to experience all the time. No, they're offended ninnies, because we have no concept of people aren't us being, you know, people.



She fundraised a video series to point out problematic aspects of games with regard to how they treat women. She then released a breakdown of where all that money went. None of it was a "Fuck you" to an industry any more than, say, a kickstarted Shovel Knight is a fuck you to modern video games.

As an aside, as someone that's preparing a similar kickstarter this year, I can't wait to be accused of hating video games despite dedicating the better part of my life to them.



This is not David fucking with a sleeping Goliath here, Goliath's been awake for a while and a dick for longer than that. The industry has problems - all industries do. None of them are perfect, but the video game industry has been the only one that rejects criticism of it angrily. Movies, TV, they all say "We can do better." They don't, but they recognize there's a diversity problem and try to fix it. Video games, and especially fans of video games, find the idea repulsive. We've become a bubble and will kill to keep anyone from popping it.



An actual industry debate would be GREAT. I'd love that. What you simplify as a backlash is, in actuality, people with poor social skills who are taking years of angry frustration out on others because they have been raised in an age where there's no consequences for anything. Which, I'll grant you, can effectively describe the industry, but I don't think we want it to.



Is "Fuck You" German or something for "I'm going to rape you, murder you, tell the world you're a slut, send nude pictures of you to unrelated people and accuse them of cheating on their spouses with you, find your address, post it on the internet, then openly discuss how I want you to be thrown in jail"?

Because, wow, German is a really efficient language, if so!



Criticism is not picking a fight. Anyone who thinks it is is a caveman who does not belong in a creative medium because they can not actually take it. Criticism is the silver bullet of artistic expression because it lets artists grow and it lets the medium reach people who never thought they could be touched by particular works. It allows us all to keep moving toward something better without leaving anything good behind.

A teacher grading your essay is not picking a fight. A person going to a movie and not liking it is not picking a fight. Pointing out that Song of the South is an incredibly racist depiction of black people and is better left on the Disney vault floor is not picking a fight.

Describing it as "picking a fight" is picking a fight.

Terrific post!
 

ryuken-d

Member
No, do not avoid the comments.

Look at them.

Look at them.

This is what the current state of our hobby has bred. This is the new generation that represents our hobby, formed by the media they consumed.

Look at them.

You want to change this, stop supporting what creates them. And actively rebuke it, and them.

Do not cover your eyes and ignore it. Anita sure as hell doesnt have that luxery.

I couldn't be more embarrassed by the ridiculous fucked up comments some assholes have made and I think that they must be beyond stupid. But, I don't think that "the current state of our hobby" has bred them or "creates them" that's all wrong. Just like people that are still racist and hate gay people. This is a huge almost impossible problem to solve. I believe that education, empathy and good parenting is the solution but good luck with that at a global level. Its like living in the fucking dark ages of the 21st century. It would be smart to start working in our own community but honestly the only way I can think of to fix it would be to ridicule any all of the people spewing this shit, don't make it about feminism or men's rights, whatever. just aim to smash intolerance and hate.

also Anita playing/being a victim, "the money" and "fame" has not helped the situation.

Its a conspiracy!!!! ha ha
 

Kadayi

Banned
"why would people who drive on the sidewalks and kill civilians for fun kill sex workers?"

k.

People kill sex workers because they're the most prevalent and obvious civilian type in Grand Theft Auto. I'm amazed by how people are so (willfully?) ignorant of this.

Again, where is the evidence to support this assertion that most GTA players spend all their time mowing down civilians?
 
also Anita playing/being a victim, "the money" and "fame" has not helped the situation.

I like that you suggested that she's playing the victim but added "being" to make it seem like you weren't suggesting that she was playing the victim. I have a feeling that she's not a big fan of being a victim, either.
 

Mael

Member
Again, where is the evidence to support this assertion that most GTA players spend all their time mowing down civilians?

Ahah, yeah sure most GTA players spend their time trying to wrestle the controls to make sure to never run a red light that's for sure.
 
"why would people who drive on the sidewalks and kill civilians for fun kill sex workers?"

k.

People kill sex workers because they're the most prevalent and obvious civilian type in Grand Theft Auto. I'm amazed by how people are so (willfully?) ignorant of this.

again, where do you get this info from..? they are certainly not the most prevalent or obvious civilian type in the game. often it's difficult to find any of them.
 

Riposte

Member
It's quite clear that something like Tetris indeed has a message about the country it originated from.
That the message is inherently procommunist is however pretty far fetched.
But seriously there's a reason the whole marketing surrounding the game was centered around a clear distinct USSR imagery.
Thinking about it, I think it's a clear message about bureaucracy more than communism.

Meaning (messages) is created by the viewer. The reason people have a hard time accepting elaborate symbolism of Tetris because it's a bunch of fucking blocks that disappear when you line them up. Yeah, you can twist and bend it into something fancy, or perhaps multiple completely contradictory things (e.g., putting things together destroys them OR if you don't work together chaos will make you lose OR the phallic lines are preferable to the more feminine Zs). Meanwhile, others may just see someone staring very intensely at their navel.

Additionally, that it was released in Soviet Russia or how it has been marketed as a product doesn't really concern the analysis of it's audio-visual sensations. Or maybe it does, if you are desperate enough to say something "interesting" and "useful".

EDIT: The Sarkeesian quote comes off as false. And if certain parties really believed in it, they would have used it nonstop.
 
there is no evidence of that,but its a common argument for gta detractors

So what you're saying is that I'm a detractor because I criticized it. God forbid that anyone say anything of a game that isn't the highest of praise eh

It's amazing how willfully ignorant people are. I would sooner expect people to ask for proof that Mario can jump. The sheer absurdity of people disputing the common sense fact that you can do things like that, and that people DO do things like that, is amazing. It happens in any sandbox game, and as someone who has seen many a people play GTA and has played GTA myself, it's amazing to see people deny such a basic truth of it.

again, where do you get this info from..? they are certainly not the most prevalent or obvious civilian type in the game. often it's difficult to find any of them.

Very well. Please make sure that your next reply contains a civilian type that is more common AND more relevant to the player than sex workers (with the exception of gang members and other characters who you often interact with as part of gameplay).
 
What are you talking about?

I didn't say it was proof that it was fabricated. Because you can't prove a negative. There is no video, no tweet, no record of her saying that quote, therefore, the burden of proof is on the person who attributed the quote and this person has no evidence.

Worse, that person is sketchy as hell and has an agenda. Moreover, other people with such agendas have falsely attributed quotes to her before. So why do you give the benefit of doubt to this blogger, instead of to Anita?

So yeah, if you believe the quote is real, you are doing it 100% on faith.

There's no faith on it, he quoted Anita, Anita never denied it.

If he did it once and was caught, if he somehow put bad sounding quotes on other feminists GG hates or something, if he did it in the midst of GG rising and not in 2013, if he actively took part in the movement and just didn't liked a few videos regarding GG, that could be, basically anything or from the time some people suporting it, weren't the bunch of mysoginist that are behind it and didn't know any better.

Maybe, but right now, this is just like when GG used google searches and speculation to reinforce their ideas. And count me in the park that someone can be a great person and sometime smakes uninformed remarks about any possible theme.

So yeah, is that bad is she actually said that? I don't think it destroys all she did, not really contradicts her ideals...
 

Mael

Member
Meaning (messages) is created by the viewer. The reason people have a hard time accepting elaborate symbolism of Tetris because it's a bunch of fucking blocks that disappear when you line them up. Yeah, you can twist and bend it into something fancy, or perhaps multiple completely contradictory things (e.g., putting things together destroys them OR if you don't work together chaos will make you lose OR the phallic lines are preferable to the more feminine Zs). Meanwhile, others may just see someone staring very intensely at their navel.

Additionally, that it was released in Soviet Russia or how it has been marketed as a product doesn't really concern the analysis of it's audio-visual sensations. Or maybe it does, if you are desperate enough to say something "interesting" and "useful".
There's USSR's imagery everywhere in Tetris.
That's even part of its appeal.

Start screen of Tetris :
tetris_main_screen_nes_lg.png

Stat screen
Picture+2.png

Rewards for playing well
hqdefault.jpg

I mean we're talking about a success story of a game from across the iron curtain.
I guess if you remove all context, nothing has any meaning.
And really propaganda movies have no message to pass, they're all just there to make the audience have a good time!
 

Riposte

Member
Very well. Please make sure that your next reply contains a civilian type that is more common AND more relevant to the player than sex workers (with the exception of gang members and other characters who you often interact with as part of gameplay).

I'm really bewildered by what you are trying to say. You conditional on top of being more common (because they are plainly not) makes no sense to me. In what ways are they relevant? The whole sex thing amounts to a tiny mini-game thing that is entirely optional. And how does that relevancy supersede "interact with as part of gameplay"?
 
I'm really bewildered by what you are trying to say. You conditional on top of being more common (because they are plainly not) makes no sense to me. In what ways are they relevant? The whole sex thing amounts to a tiny mini-game thing that is entirely optional. And how does that relevancy supersede "interact with as part of gameplay"?

Because you interact with enemies as a matter of mandatory gameplay. You do not, at all, need to interact with sex workers. You do, however, gain health from sex workers, and from a gameplay perspective, killing sex workers is objectively better than not.
 

Palculator

Unconfirmed Member
The fact that they made the hooker wear the wad of cash you gave them is actually proof that they expected people to harm them to get their money back.
After all unless I'm mistaken this wad of cash isn't going to make the hooker go take a sandwich instead of doing something else.
Heck if the issue with not implementing it this way would be since you can harm, kill, maim everyone why is there no kids that the player can unleash their fury on?

The wad of cash does make it questionable, you're right. But I should mention I wasn't even really aware of that cash since I haven't used hookers to replenish my health in GTA because they are not at all the focus of the game, but the focus of media coverage due to the controversy surrounding violence against them.

And I'd wager kids are still "off-limits" whereas sex workers in a game about criminals and the culture surrounding criminals are far from out of place. It would feel weirder if a satire of gangsters and mobsters completely overlocked that part, especially considering Rockstar seems to draw reference mostly from crime movies in which kids are also somewhat sacred.
 

Kadayi

Banned
It's amazing how willfully ignorant people are. I would sooner expect people to ask for proof that Mario can jump. The sheer absurdity of people disputing the common sense fact that you can do things like that, and that people DO do things like that, is amazing. It happens in any sandbox game, and as someone who has seen many a people play GTA and has played GTA myself, it's amazing to see people deny such a basic truth of it.

You keep throwing this 'willfully ignorant' phrase around, but all anyone is asking is for you to provide some factual evidence. If you say it's a fact, then there surely has to be evidence to support it? If it truly is so abundantly self evident then why is it so hard for you to deliver on it?

What you're claiming simply doesn't align with my GTA experiences as a player.
 
Very well. Please make sure that your next reply contains a civilian type that is more common AND more relevant to the player than sex workers (with the exception of gang members and other characters who you often interact with as part of gameplay).

well all other civilian types are more common, since most people you see walking on the street are not sex workers... right? and uhm.. you said prevalent, not relevant. and sex workers are hardly relevant NPCs. you can have sex with them in a car and your character makes pathetic noises like crying out for their mommy etc (which doesn't exactly give a very macho view of the male playable characters :p), and that's pretty much it. funny maybe once or twice. IMO you are reaching if you call them relevant NPCs.
 
Having sex with sex workers is a gameplay mechanic that recovers health. Killing them is a gameplay mechanic to recover your money. Sex workers are treated differently from other civilians. All of the NPCs are basically the same, except for cops, gang members, and sex workers. The rest are treated as the same, but with different voice samples and skins.

Even if we assume that players don't do this, the designers explicitly made them a special type of NPC, so they intended people to interact with them (or to try), so in the end it does fall into their lap. Now, if I could interact with office workers and get my taxes done, I'd be more willing to assume that they weren't encouraging player behaviour.
 

Kadayi

Banned
Having sex with sex workers is a gameplay mechanic that recovers health. Killing them is a gameplay mechanic to recover your money.

No ones denying that the mechanics and opportunity aren't there, but whats the reality with regard to the motivation? To recover $100 when you could better spend your time doing a mission or a side quest and making much more?
 

Riposte

Member
Because you interact with enemies as a matter of mandatory gameplay. You do not, at all, need to interact with sex workers. You do, however, gain health from sex workers, and from a gameplay perspective, killing sex workers is objectively better than not.

It's only mandatory in a number of missions. But beyond that, what of taxis, shop owners, and so on? These seem a lot more relevant than a poor way to gain back your health (and generally more common).

Moreover, killing a sex worker is not objectively better than killing almost anyone else. It may be better than not killing one (or anyone), but that's somewhat questionable too, given the wrong scenario.

The issue is really simple. Game system A interacts with game system B, which creates game scenario C. It's up to you to decide/create meanings X, Y, or Z from this. Someone may not make the leap it takes for meaning Z (or fail to ignore the evidence of X or Y).


There's USSR's imagery everywhere in Tetris.
That's even part of its appeal.

Start screen of Tetris :
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2009/01/tetris_main_screen_nes_lg.png[IMG]
Stat screen
[IMG]http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_AT4TGW4R1UM/SlQCjy9ouWI/AAAAAAAAAFk/JX-iRJNCatQ/s400/Picture+2.png[IMG]
Rewards for playing well
[IMG]http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pERQ-n3oJCA/hqdefault.jpg[IMG]
I mean we're talking about a success story of a game from across the iron curtain.
I guess if you remove all context, nothing has any meaning.
And really propaganda movies have no message to pass, they're all just there to make the audience have a good time![/QUOTE]

You seem to be posting from several different versions of the game, with different assets and made by different people (e.g., those not in the USSR). And even then, the imagery in these games are very generic, superficial and, at times, nonsensical. Pretty understandable why it comes across as navel-gazing to paint a broader picture, even with some Russian landmarks thrown in.

Everything has messages. For example, the letters of this post, the images on your monitor, or even the monitor itself. The images your brain conjures up from the light your eye receives are given a meaning by your brain. Now, what's the difference between propaganda and any other sensation? How we categorize their meaning. To cut to the chase, one can see something as propaganda (which usually means promoting prominent (i.e., shared) messages they judge as harmful or antagonistic) even if others don't follow along. The bigger the leap, the less people are keen on jumping along. You have to "prove" to them, make them see, what you see, probably through logic. This can be difficult (strangers with different views agreeing can be very difficult in general), but might become impossible when you are trying to do this fucking Tetris.
 
Having sex with sex workers is a gameplay mechanic that recovers health. Killing them is a gameplay mechanic to recover your money. Sex workers are treated differently from other civilians. All of the NPCs are basically the same, except for cops, gang members, and sex workers. The rest are treated as the same, but with different voice samples and skins.

does it still recover your health in GTAV? i haven't even noticed. but so what if it does? it doesn't necessarily imply anything sexist IMO. the character got laid so he feels more energized or something. so..? that's what sex sometimes does. it's not like you sapped the sex worker's energy and now she has less health or something.

and do you really get your money back? i thought it was just a random amount, like with any NPC. and again, i don't see what's particularly sexist about it if you do get the exact same amount back. feel free to prove me wrong though, why does the amount of dollars matter?

have you tried having sex with the sex workers in GTAV? surely i can't be the only one who thinks the female NPCs come off as more confident and less pathetic during the whole thing, while the male playable characters are often pathetic as hell, like i said sometimes they cry out for mommy or make really sad sounding noises (i'm pretty sure Trevor sometimes cries and tells the prostitute he loves her lol), while the sex workers sound confident and like they don't give a fuck. frankly i think it's sexist towards men, i don't think most men are quite THAT pathetic heh.
 

mjp2417

Banned
You say this because someone brought a biased quote of a whole blog post or because you have evidence?

From reading his blog posts on Gamergate and related topics.
http://notplayed.com/2014/09/
http://notplayed.com/2015/02/26/games-journalism/

Some samples:

"What is the disgusting part is that people make money off of all this. Regardless of what Zoe Quinn and Sarkeesian have done or not done, regardless of who is right – the spectacle around them has made them a ton of money. Zoe Quinn’s patroen has shot up to over 3000 USD a month in support of her plight. Sarkeesians video has received a much increased number of hits. Both have received a ton of media attention and favour."

"The vast majority of male and female developers simply want to make games. Games and content they are passionate about. Not games and content which is tailored to suit either side of the Social Justice debates. We don’t want our games analysed on some arbitrary social or moral scale. We don’t need people who never in their lives have gone through the process of creating a game, putting blood sweat and tears (and many extra hours) in it, to tell us “oh well.. this scene is sexist”. We don’t need people taking elements of our game completely out of context to try and make their point – in fact using our materials to further their agenda, using our work to make money for themselves."

"Enforcing your worldview, your moral compass, on content you do not create, judging others for what they make and how they think, that is bordering on censorship. That never works and it only gets people upset. If you want content that conforms to your views, make it. Publish it, if enough people like it, you can life of it. And if you work in the industry and you make games you don’t agree with, but still bitch and moan about content – get off your high horse."

And there's plenty more where that came from. I mean, if you are looking for a catalogue of gater apologetics and general stupidity, dude's blog is pretty worthwhile. If you are looking for a reliable source on Anita Sarkeesian? Probably not.
 

stufte

Member
Having sex with sex workers is a gameplay mechanic that recovers health. Killing them is a gameplay mechanic to recover your money. Sex workers are treated differently from other civilians. All of the NPCs are basically the same, except for cops, gang members, and sex workers. The rest are treated as the same, but with different voice samples and skins.

Even if we assume that players don't do this, the designers explicitly made them a special type of NPC, so they intended people to interact with them (or to try), so in the end it does fall into their lap. Now, if I could interact with office workers and get my taxes done, I'd be more willing to assume that they weren't encouraging player behaviour.

There are plenty of opportunities in GTA5 to make moral decisions out side of interactions with Sex workers. http://gta.wikia.com/Random_Events

I've personally helped a random NPC get his/her wallet back, get a reward and kill him/her to gain a bit of extra. I don't have to do this, and many won't, but singling out the sex worker npcs is always frustrating to me because they are part of a LARGE ecosystem of gameplay variables presented to the player.
 
They're singled out because they were elevated from GTAIII up from just being a random NPC to being an NPC that the game encouraged and rewarded you for interacting with. This invariably leads to them being more likely to be killed by the player more than any one specific type of NPC.
 

Opto

Banned
No ones denying that the mechanics and opportunity aren't there, but whats the reality with regard to the motivation? To recover $100 when you could better spend your time doing a mission or a side quest and making much more?

The question is why it's there in the first place. Developers, actual human beings, put that in there. Then juxtapose that with the story where the women are 1-dimensional negative stereotypes of women. or that the player character will ,WITHOUT your prompting, say awful shit to trans women for no reason. Sex workers already get killed in real life with little done about it, why should a game make that part of the mechanics?
 

Riposte

Member
They're singled out because they were elevated from GTAIII up from just being a random NPC to being an NPC that the game encouraged and rewarded you for interacting with. This invariably leads to them being more likely to be killed by the player more than any one specific type of NPC.

As opposed to the NPCs I mentioned, like shop owners and taxis?
 

stufte

Member
They're singled out because they were elevated from GTAIII up from just being a random NPC to being an NPC that the game encouraged and rewarded you for interacting with. This invariably leads to them being more likely to be killed by the player more than any one specific type of NPC.

I've never killed a sex worker in the game, many people don't. They aren't encouraged to be killed and they are killable like every other npc in the game. The ability to kill them is not the reason they exist.
 
Sorry, does it bother you when I make a factual observation that people are feigning ignorance that people enjoy doing criminal things in GTA?

As opposed to the NPCs I mentioned, like shop owners and taxis?

Punishment for killing shop owners: Increased wanted level.
Punishment for killing a taxi driver: Increased wanted level.
Punishment for killing a sex worker: nada
 
no..but it favours the feminism critique of the game...and thats why they used ad nauseam

Or because you almost never get punished for killing sex workers because the context they are in is almost always in a secluded area.

But hey, don't let me stop you from ignoring arguments whenever they flat-out destroy your point.

This is only true, like killing anyone else in the game, if no one witness you doing it.

If you start shooting up a store, you get in trouble. Most taxi drivers are in public (logically). When sex workers are specifically evident, they are almost always in a secluded area.
 

Opto

Banned
Sorry, does it bother you when I make a factual observation that people are feigning ignorance that people enjoy doing criminal things in GTA?



Punishment for killing shop owners: Increased wanted level.
Punishment for killing a taxi driver: Increased wanted level.
Punishment for killing a sex worker: nada

Not neccessarily on the last part. I did some experiments in GTA V to make sure what people were saying about getting their money back after killing them was true. (It is, mostly) Even using silenced weapons would sometimes get me a star ranking.

Needless to say I felt like garbage after doing this just to make sure I knew what was up.
 
Not neccessarily on the last part. I did some experiments in GTA V to make sure what people were saying about getting their money back after killing them was true. (It is, mostly) Even using silenced weapons would sometimes get me a star ranking.

Needless to say I felt like garbage after doing this just to make sure I knew what was up.

You don't need to use a gun though, one such example was when Video Games Awesome had sex with a sex worker, and then ran her over.
 

stufte

Member
Or because you almost never get punished for killing sex workers because the context they are in is almost always in a secluded area.

But hey, don't let me stop you from ignoring arguments whenever they flat-out destroy your point.



If you start shooting up a store, you get in trouble. Most taxi drivers are in public (logically). When sex workers are specifically evident, they are almost always in a secluded area.

So it's set up like it is in real life to some degree. Are you saying the developers did that in order to make it easier for you to kill Sex workers? Or is it just a side effect of the profession made virtual.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom