Support NeoGAF

[KurtSloane]

It means that the artists should pay heed to it. If every artist was surrounded by yes men who never critiqued their art than the art would would've crumbled long ago. The movie industry has had a shit ton better representations of women since it's inception, it's an older medium and even in older films there are many examples of female characters that put the best written game characters to shame, so while there is still a systemic issue in the film industry, and still pointless sexualization, the industry has evolved. In this case it's not supporting an instance of varied work, you're supporting the status quo.

Is it not OK for pointless sexualization to exist alongside other works?

What about those whose tastes include pointless sexualistion? Or artists who prefer to work within that space?

Critique is only a point of view but you are talking about tackling a systemic issue, that is more than simple critique is it not?

As does sound your objection to any form of "pointless" sexualization.

 

[Palculator]

I didn't say the entire media does it because that obviously isn't true. I said the games that target the audience that like this kind of content does it. Strib Clubs are good analogy for this. Not all strib clubs have female dancers, but the ones that do are targeting the male audience that favors them. Likewise female strip clubs with male dancers are targeting women who like that.

But you didn't say this initially. You said complaining about nude women in video games is like complaining about them in a strip club. If you were saying complaining about nude women in a game targeted at people who like nude women is like complaining about them in a strip club where women undress then yes, you would have a good analogy.

By your logic aren't each of them making less money by excluding half their potential audience? Your theory says strip club with both male and female dancers should make the most money and put the other ones out of business. Yet here we are with separate strip clubs which indicates that going for the largest potential audience might not always be the best thing to do.

I never said any of this. Your comparison being wrong is what I pointed out and I never said anything about anyone's profits.

 

[nded]

I just want to point out that even though some male character are somewhat sexualised there's still a huge difference in the depiction of males and females as a whole in the series.

The series' got a huge variety of male characters: different body shapes, ages, ugly guys and handsome guys, etc. The ones that are sexualised are in the small minority.

On top of being a lot fewer of them (which does make sense in the context), almost every single female character is designed to be sexy and almost all are sexualised.

It does feel somewhat exploitive.

I'm not going to disagree. It started out so promising too; Sniper Wolf, Fortune and Olga had elements in their designs that were obviously meant to be sexy, but I felt they were on more even footing with the shirtless Snake bros, big buff Alaska Man, spry pretty boy in skintight suit and whatever the hell Vamp is up to. Even Eva's cartoonish sexiness kinda made sense for her character, but that's probably where Kojima figured he could get away with a lot more.

 

[Shrike_Priest]

There are certainly more games and television these days with nonsexualized heroic female protagonists than ever. That's a great victory an there's a market for it and that's awesome. Certainly more serious stories can be told with more realistic female characters.

You think this is a coincidence? You don't think developers have been influenced by the criticism aimed at the industry and media in general? You think that Assassin's Creed Syndicate was the just randomly the first AC game to get a female playable character and that it had nothing to do with the shitstorm around previous AC games lack of it?

The reason we are getting more badass non-sexualized female characters is that people are critiquing the lack of it.

And I fail to see how gaming is worse because of it. I fail to see how artistic expression is being limited and how we're missing out on all these pieces of sexualized artworks.


Also, there's room for every game. There's room for games about sex, there's room for games about violence, there's room for games about grief. etc. etc.

The thing is, it's VERY rare that games that feature heavy sexualization are actually "about" sex in any meaningful way. Catherine was one example where the main character's attraction to sexualized female characters legitimately played into the story and the theme of the game. But MGS isn't about sex. Halo isn't about sex. God of War isn't about sex. GTA isn't about sex. Heavy Rain isn't about sex. They're games which feature sexualized content as a bonus to male players.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Nope, just intended for primarily a male audience.

So if it contains only sexy women,.most men won't care. That's called playing to the market.

Or maybe Kojima only wants sexy women in his game, and if so that's his prerogative as its his creation.


Here is an idea, go make a game (supposedly) where the male body is exploited.

Holy crap, I think I got bullshit on my eyes from reading this.

 

[Peterpan]

How can you take an opinion of a man who hasn't even done his research seriously. He then questions if anyone at 343 industries has seen a vulva knowing very well that there is probably women at 343 industries. Seriously what am I reading, beside that implication, it's like what are you saying only horny lonely men design half naked women. Only horny lonely artists paint naked women. There is so many things wrong with this article. Petty insults, no research. The article looks like it was written by a teenager.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Is it not OK for pointless sexualization to exist alongside other works?

It would be OK if the industry didn't skew so much to one side.

What about those whose tastes include pointless sexualistion? Or artists who prefer to work within that space?

They've been pandered to for decades.

Critique is only a point of view but you are talking about tackling a systemic issue, that is more than simple critique is it not?

Critique is not only a point of view. Critiquing while bring up social issues because a work of art can say a lot about social issues or reinforce them is still a critique.

As does sound your objection to any form of "pointless" sexualization.

There's no point in putting pointless in quotations here, there's rarely any deep thought behind sexualization besides appealing to males. Most of the time at the expense of a character, something that could've been avoided if more thought was put into them besides boobs.

 

[Zomba13]

I see... the animations are part of it, though. If only females ever do that sort of stuff in the games and males don't, then that's certainly a significant difference. (Of course, our society tends to consider slightly different things sexy for men and women so it may be a bit more complicated than just "oh, no male character ever bent over suggestively" but still.) Also, I'm not sure if torture scenes are much better than "for the lulz". I mean, were those torture scenes actually sexy? I mean, I'm pretty sure most people wouldn't find actual, non-porn torture scenes sexy . It's basically all about whether the males were purposefully presented in a sexually titillating way to the same exaggerated extent as the female characters.

Yeah there are definitely many more women in MGS that are meant to be sexualised than not and much fewer men played that way. The stuff about the torture and played for laughs stuff was mainly because so many people just say "it's played for laughs though" when it's not. I agree that naked/half naked torture isn't sexualisation but I just feel that it shouldn't get lumped in with "played for laughs" like Raiden running around naked could be.

Actually Beyond Two Souls iirc sold less copies than it's predecessor. And like it was stated before, many

Eh I doubt that has anything to do with the target audience. Though maybe. It does just feature the one, female, protagonist as opposed to the 4, mostly male, cast from Heavy Rain. It also features less shower scenes with just the one (that I remember? I think? Articles says two but I just remember the date one.). Beyond Two Souls is much more like a movie though, as in it has a shower scene because movies have them. From what I remember it's just one of the things you can do to get ready for a date.

 

[Falk]

You think this is a coincidence? You don't think developers have been influenced by the criticism aimed at the industry and media in general? You think that Assassin's Creed Syndicate was the just randomly the first AC game to get a female playable character and that it had nothing to do with the shitstorm around previous AC games lack of it?

The reason we are getting more badass non-sexualized female characters is that people are critiquing the lack of it.

And I fail to see how gaming is worse because of it. I fail to see how artistic expression is being limited and how we're missing out on all these pieces of sexualized artworks.


Also, there's room for every game. There's room for games about sex, there's room for games about violence, there's room for games about grief. etc. etc.

The thing is, it's VERY rare that games that feature heavy sexualization are actually "about" sex in any meaningful way. Catherine was one example where the main character's attraction to sexualized female characters legitimately played into the story and the theme of the game. But MGS isn't about sex. Halo isn't about sex. God of War isn't about sex. GTA isn't about sex. Heavy Rain isn't about sex. They're games which feature sexualized content as a bonus to male players.

Think we'd have a lot less shit-flinging if everyone thought this way. Taking one argument and applying it to something else essentially just gets people arguing past each other without realizing it.

 

[Palculator]

It would be OK if the industry didn't skew so much to one side.

They've been pandered to for decades.

So we should now cease all female sexualisation and let male sexualisation have its turn for a few years? Because that's how you're making it sound.

 

[Crossing Eden]

So we should now cease all female sexualisation and let male sexualisation have its turn for a few years? Because that's how you're making it sound.

No, we should create more female characters who aren't sexualized instead of adding to the hundreds that already are. And stop coming up with terrible excuses not to do so.

 

[Village]

Kamitami ftw.

Eh didn't basically illustrate an accusation of being gay against the guy who wrote that infamous article about his game?

 

[Palculator]

No, we should create more female characters who aren't sexualized instead of adding to the hundreds that already are.

And add a few sexualised males too. But lashing out at every sexualised female like that implies there being no room for them, when there very much is and should be in the future.

 

[Dio]

Eh didn't basically illustrate an accusation of being gay against the guy who wrote that infamous article about his game?

No.

 

[aspiegamer]

Video games + sexy ladies = best of both worlds

Reasons can fuck off.

You're misunderstanding. Not having a reason isn't inherently wrong. Trying to excuse it with some ridiculous bullshit is the problem and it prevents a mature conversation. I couldn't care less about nudity or sexual content in games, but I cannot stand when anyone tries to explain it away. Explicit gore and language don't get run through the ringer the same way because it's obviously why it's there. Sex needs to be treated the same way. If you're too immature to talk about it, it shouldn't be in your game.

The recent discussion about DOAX3 has been hilarious because, at the end of the day, basically no one cares. That game doesn't pretend to be something it's not, thus even the "SJW"-iest of us aren't particularly offended. Games with sexual content are allowed to exist, but mansplaining a functionality for it is insulting to players and developers alike.

"Artistic vision" is fine, even if it's just a cheesy phrase! Just don't try to cover it up with some bullshit excuse. Just say what your goal was. People who are legitimately offended by this stuff mostly just want games to be honest with themselves about it. Then we can have a new discussion from scratch on a level playing field (about things like representation or character tropes). What many people seem to forget about this is that very few actually beg for games to be banned or censored. A societal critique doesn't mean someone wants to crush your right to expression. Eye rolling is far from trying to wield a ban hammer.

 

[Shrike_Priest]

Is it not OK for pointless sexualization to exist alongside other works?

The problem is that it's not an "alongside"-thing here. The sexualization and under-representation is prevalent in many, many, many major titles. I'm fine with DoA Extreme. Those players who want to ogle girls in bikinis, that's their game. What I don't like is when I buy my fighting game, and still get bikini-girls. Not MMA-style gear, but actual, on the beach bikinis. Or when I want to play my action game about covert ops in Afghanistan and Africa, and still get that damn bikini. etc. etc. I want to be able to play fighting games where sexualization is not a theme (which by the logic of consumer choice should be just as valid as those who do want sexualization), but since it's being implemented in games that are not inherently about sex, I can't avoid it. And it's not like I can NOT by the latest God of War and assume that the developers will figure out that my particular lost sale was due to it having needless sexual content (hence, I've bought them all). So since voting with my wallet is out, all I can do is critique.

What about those whose tastes include pointless sexualistion? Or artists who prefer to work within that space?

Video games should be diverse. Like you said. There should be games that include pointless sexualization, but the problem is that it's being shoehorned into titles where it doesn't belong, where it doesn't add to the story or the character, then explained with some nonsensical justification.

Let there be AV Idol games. Let there be summer lesson. Let there be interactive 3D porn porn games. But stop trying to undress women in every game just for the sake of the male audience.

Critique is only a point of view but you are talking about tackling a systemic issue, that is more than simple critique is it not?

Critique of a single work for propagating a systemic issue is nothing problematic. Critique is not the same as review. A lot of literary criticism are based in systemic issues.

 

[Crossing Eden]

And add a few sexualised males too. But lashing out at every sexualised female like that implies there being no room for them, when there very much is and should be in the future.

No it doesn't, it's called critique. Since the industry isn't an implied boy's club more common critiques when the status quo is getting reinforced are natural. Devs feelings aren't being hurt when they receive critique for doing so, they're adults, they can handle it.

 

[memoryswap]

Is the ole 'but sex sells' defense making sense for anyone?

Sex sells but sometimes a certain level of believability in fiction sells even better.

Alien's Ripley would not have been what it was if she was played by Kate Upton, even if Upton could act. The movie experience would not have been better if the cast was replaced by a group of actors that looked like the cast of Fast and Furious who, instead of wearing baggy drab overalls, were wearing tight catsuits and showing amazing tits, ass and abs in every frame.

Gamers and people in the industry keep deploring the fact that games aren't taken seriously but in these discussions, I always get the impression that they themselves have a sort of contempt for the medium.

 

[KurtSloane]

Holy crap, I think I got bullshit on my eyes from reading this.

Nice addition to the conversation, instead of being a dick about it, why not contribute, like the rest of us.

 

[Paracelsus]

No it doesn't, it's called critique. Since the industry isn't an implied boy's club more common critiques when the status quo is getting reinforced are natural. Devs feelings aren't being hurt when they receive critique for doing so, they're big boys, they can handle it.

At the end the whole argument is going circles: don't make excuses -> ok, I won't. And what then, what if they don't care for your further original criticism and keep on doing their thing? Is that fine? In a way, whatever Kojima and 343 pulled to me feels like they were just blowing smoke up the arse in order to deflect whatever further discussion about it.

 

[Dio]

Gamers and people in the industry keep deploring the fact that games aren't taken seriously but in these discussions, I always get the impression that they themselves have a sort of contempt for the medium.

Depends on how you look at things. Even on Neogaf I've encountered people that believe videogames are toys that are meant to be disposable.

 

[Breads]

If it is quite simply criticism then that is fine, all that simply boils down to is a piece of content not being something you liked and why.

Does that mean anyone should pay heed to it? No.

Critique of movies has not stopped movies with naked women in them for arbitrary reasons, so did that medium not evolve.

The existence of one is not a roadblock to the evolution of a medium, creation of content to suit a broader range of tastes rather the abolition of a certain type is how a medium evolves. A medium where all types exist at the same time is an evolved medium.

Decrying a piece of content does not help create more variety, supporting instances of varied work does.

Believe it or not not all criticism is a rallying cry for control over the media. There are more ways for criticism to be productive to a medium than trying to force immediate and specific changes based how one feels and just because you disagree doesn't mean what is being said is unproductive and should stop. Criticism is an ever evolving narrative that permeates the entire medium over time and regardless of what your point actually is in the end everything said does influence the direction things go.

My question to you is why you care about criticism so much? How do you think criticism can adversely affect you or the media?

 

[Palculator]

No it doesn't, it's called critique. Since the industry isn't an implied boy's club more common critiques when the status quo is getting reinforced are natural. Devs feelings aren't being hurt when they receive critique for doing so, they're big boys, they can handle it.

But your critique isn't objectively correct and it's each author's choice whether they want to address them in any way. Some of them probably don't care about gender representation in their fiction and that's their right, as it is yours to disagree with them. It doesn't really address my original point about you being against any and all female sexualisation. Usually, I see people saying games like Senran Kagura or DOAX3 are fine because female sexualisation is their raison d'être and they openly embrace it. Yet, I saw you shitting on DOAX3 in the recent threads too, giving me the impression you object to female sexualisation in video games as a whole.

It is implied that strip clubs with women in them are targeted towards the men that go there. Did you somehow think I was referring to the vast number of strip clubs with female dancers who weren't there to entrain their male audience? I really don't see your point.(...)

No, dude. It was really just focused on equating an entire medium -- which isn't inherently for sexualisation -- to a place that inherently is for sexualisation. It's rather pedantic, I know, but that's my thing. I even agree with your overall point, I just didn't think it was a fitting analogy.

 

[EventHorizon]

But you didn't say this initially. You said complaining about nude women in video games is like complaining about them in a strip club. If you were saying complaining about nude women in a game targeted at people who like nude women is like complaining about them in a strip club where women undress then yes, you would have a good analogy.

I never said any of this. Your comparison being wrong is what I pointed out and I never said anything about anyone's profits.

It is implied that strip clubs with women in them are targeted towards the men that go there. Did you somehow think I was referring to the vast number of strip clubs with female dancers who weren't there to entrain their male audience? I really don't see your point.

My point is simple. Games that do this are going after a segment of the audience who like it. That doesn't mean that other segments don't exist. I used strib clubs to go along with the provocative nature of the title of this topic. If you want a less inflammatory analogy closer to video games then how about this.

Complaining about naked women in video games is like complaining about the lack of FPSing in a Telltale Games game. Surely Telltale Games is excluding part of the much bigger FPS market by not including that content. This isn't a perfect analogy because I'm talking about excluded content not included content but it goes to the broader point I'm making. Complaining about a game that isn't targeted towards you isn't very constructive. I hear a lot of the argument that "you are excluding half of the market" by making sexy video games. That argument simply doesn't make sense because those games, just like a Telltale game, weren't trying to go after the entire market in the first place.

 

[Crossing Eden]

Is the ole 'but sex sells' defense making sense for anyone?

Sex sells but sometimes a certain level of believability in fiction sells even better.

Alien's Ripley would not have been what it was if she was played by Kate Upton, even if Upton could act. The movie experience would not have been better if the cast was replaced by a group of actors that looked like the cast of Fast and Furious who, instead of wearing baggy drab overalls, were wearing tight catsuits and showing amazing tits, ass and abs in every frame.

Gamers and people in the industry keep deploring the fact that games aren't taken seriously but in these discussions, I always get the impression that they themselves have a sort of contempt for the medium.

Exactly, I would honestly argue that gamers are the biggest factor holding the industry back truth be told. Especially an alarmingly large amount's vitriol towards the discussion of these issues and the treatment of women whether they are game devs or gamers as well. See the reaction to more women owning consoles than men being met with accusations of mothers buying consoles for their sons. Gaming atm is the biggest industry where part of it's audience is trying to adhere to the idea of a "boy's club/no girls allowed" for the medium as a whole

At the end the whole argument is going circles: don't make excuses -> ok, I won't. And what then, what if they don't care for your further original criticism and keep on doing their thing? Is that fine? In a way, whatever Kojima and 343 pulled to me feels like they were just blowing smoke up the arse in order to deflect whatever further discussion about it.

If they keep doing their thing instead of accepting critique then they probably aren't gonna end up as successful.

But your critique isn't objectively correct and it's each author's choice whether they want to address them in any way. Some of them probably don't care about gender representation in their fiction and that's their right, as it is yours to disagree with them. It doesn't really address my original point about you being against any and all female sexualisation. Usually, I see people saying games like Senran Kagura or DOAX3 are fine because female sexualisation is their raison d'être and they openly embrace it. Yet, I saw you shitting on DOAX3 in the recent threads too, giving me the impression you object to female sexualisation in video games as a whole.

I would say it's correct in some form since it's opposing social issues such as sexism, (in the case of Quiet, that was objectively sexism), and yes they should care about issues of representation because they are artists in an industry that's relatively starved of auteurs.

 

[Panajev2001a]

"I’m starting to wonder if anyone at 343 Industries has ever actually seen a vulva."

^Condescending and... just corny.

Why is this a fucking topic. YOU KNOW WHY THEY'RE HALF NAKED....why does this shit need to be explained?

if this shit offends you outside all of the killing and profanity... you need your head checked.

It is hilariously sad that one could play through those games and give a pass to brutality and violence as making sense in war games, but put the foot down at nudity...

 

[Doukou]

Is that picture of Cortana from Halo 4? Journalist integrity aside

The point is pretty much spot on. Bending logic to accommodate sexual elements never results in interesting logic.

 

[Crossing Eden]

It is hilariously sad that one could play through those games and give a pass to brutality and violence as making sense in war games, but put the foot down at nudity...

The violence is given a ton on context, the nudity however isn't, it should be no wonder whatsoever why
-violence that is contextualized 99.9% of the time

is more accepted than:

-pointless sexualization with a flimsy excuse.

Which is why the "b-b-b-but violence" deflection is another example of false equivalence.

 

[The Technomancer]

The violence is given a ton on context, the nudity however isn't, it should be no wonder whatsoever why
-violence that is contextualized at every moment

is more accepted than:

-pointless sexualization with a flimsy excuse.

Which is why the "b-b-b-but violence" deflection is another example of false equivalence.

Bingo. I mean, there's also a conversation to be had about normalized violence but that's much larger and more of a cross media issue, games in particular are still stuck at the "advertising" level of sexualization, "eh sure, put some tits on there, sex sells"

 

[Palculator]

I would say it's correct in some form since it's opposing social issues such as sexism, (in the case of Quiet, that was objectively sexism), and yes they should care about issues of representation because they are artists in an industry that's relatively starved of auteurs.

Really not interested in further trying to argue with you when you openly state you consider your views to be objectively correct. Art isn't a science and even science leaves more room for opposing views than you.

 

[bobbychalkers]

Spoiler

Quiet's cool.

Pretty much, I'd rather devs just own up to it instead of trying to make us feel shame for our words and deeds

 

[SapientWolf]

The violence is given a ton on context, the nudity however isn't, it should be no wonder whatsoever why
-violence that is contextualized 99.9% of the time

is more accepted than:

-pointless sexualization with a flimsy excuse.

Which is why the "b-b-b-but violence" deflection is another example of false equivalence.

Context or no, the violence exists solely to entertain the players.

 

[The Technomancer]

Is the ole 'but sex sells' defense making sense for anyone?

Sex sells but sometimes a certain level of believability in fiction sells even better.

Alien's Ripley would not have been what it was if she was played by Kate Upton, even if Upton could act. The movie experience would not have been better if the cast was replaced by a group of actors that looked like the cast of Fast and Furious who, instead of wearing baggy drab overalls, were wearing tight catsuits and showing amazing tits, ass and abs in every frame.

Gamers and people in the industry keep deploring the fact that games aren't taken seriously but in these discussions, I always get the impression that they themselves have a sort of contempt for the medium.

This too

 

[Crossing Eden]

Bingo. I mean, there's also a conversation to be had about normalized violence but that's much larger and more of a cross media issue, games in particular are still stuck at the "advertising" level of sexualization, "eh sure, put some tits on there, sex sells"

Exactly, honestly the most grating thing about "But violence" is that whenever it's brought up it never comes from a sincere place and is almost always only brought up when the discussion is about the treatment of female characters or anything remotely related.

Context or no, the violence exists solely to entertain the players.

Context for the basic interaction between the player and the enemies and/or npcs/objects in the game world is in no way shape or form equivalent or related to the treatment of female characters from a design standpoint or narrative standpoint. The two issues are not related. And ffs, Not everyone who opposes sexism is also a lover of violence and/or accepts violence and/or has never commented on violence. Hence the reason why bringing it up is a ridiculous deflection.

Really not interested in further trying to argue with you when you openly state you consider your views to be objectively correct. Art isn't a science and even science leaves more room for opposing views than you.

I do consider less sexism and better treatment of female protagonists/antagonists to be the better point of view in this case. I am not advocating for the eliminating of any and all sexual content whatsoever, hence the reason I specified

it's correct in some form

Not gonna apologize for that. Try dissecting the arguments of the opposing view. Can you imagine some of these excuses being said out loud and taken seriously?

 

[Noobcraft]

Is that picture of Cortana from Halo 4? Journalist integrity aside

The point is pretty much spot on. Bending logic to accommodate sexual elements never results in interesting logic.

Yeah that's Halo 4 Cortana. Seeing all the Halo 5 mentions has me cringing because it's totally false.

 

[EventHorizon]

No, dude. It was really just focused on equating an entire medium -- which isn't inherently for sexualisation -- to a place that inherently is for sexualisation. It's rather pedantic, I know, but that's my thing. I even agree with your overall point, I just didn't think it was a fitting analogy.

No dude. It wasn't focused on an entire medium at all. It was focused on this specific complaint of that medium. Here is what I actually said.

"Complaining about naked women in video games is like complaining about naked women at a strip club. It's a feature not a bug."

I was specifically talking about the complaints about naked women in video games. Obviously video games have more complaints than just that and not all video games have "naked" women in them, so it's impossible that I'm talking about the entire video game medium.

 

[family_guy]

Um you think the Quiet thing was a spoiler but

Spoiler

divulging that Cortana is in the game which was never advertised

isn't?

 

[DSix]

Spoiler

Quiet's cool.

Yep, just be upfront about it. No use finding cheap excuses. I'm fine with it that way and Dragon's Crown was a pretty amazing game.

 

[Doukou]

Yeah that's Halo 4 Cortana. Seeing all the Halo 5 mentions has me cringing because it's totally false.

It's annoying and detracts from the article greatly, I don't know much about MGS 5 but I would assume it was false if it weren't for reading this topic.
The picture just annoys me so much with the little citation which is clearly bullshit, since the way its cited would mean that the author took it which is a lie.

 

[petran79]

As an American born in Europe I don't understand America's obsession with vilifying nudity. Act like you've seen a titty before for gods sakes. Its not some magical forbidden fruit, its just part of the female body.

Same trend exists in the UK too. You're unlikely to see a nude body in giant poster advertisements or TV, eg for parfume or hygiene products.
Not to mention that erotic movies are edited as well.

France and Germany are more open though

 

[Shrike_Priest]

No dude. It wasn't focused on an entire medium at all. It was focused on this specific complaint of that medium. Here is what I actually said.

"Complaining about naked women in video games is like complaining about naked women at a strip club. It's a feature not a bug."

I was specifically talking about the complaints about naked women in video games. Obviously video games have more complaints than just that and not all video games have "naked" women in them, so it's impossible that I'm talking about the entire video game medium.

So, you're saying that it was supposed to be read as "complaining about naked women in video games that have naked women in them is like complaining about naked women at a strip club"?

 

[hiex_]

You don't need a smart reason to include nudity. Put tits in your game, if people get upset then they can fuck off and not play it.

 

[SapientWolf]

Exactly, honestly the most grating thing about "But violence" is that whenever it's brought up it never comes from a sincere place and is almost always only brought up when the discussion is about the treatment of female characters or anything remotely related.


Context for the basic interaction between the player and the enemies and/or npcs/objects in the game world is in no way shape or form equivalent or related to the treatment of female characters from a design standpoint or narrative standpoint. The two issues are not related. And ffs, Not everyone who opposes sexism is also a lover of violence and/or accepts violence and/or has never commented on violence. Hence the reason why bringing it up is a ridiculous deflection.

They're related because they're both examples of how the narrative tends to serve the design in gaming rather than the other way around. We are not discussing a medium where narrative is king. We aren't even discussing a game where that's the case. You don't need a smart reason to put anything in a game.

The argument against how Quiet was depicted in MGSV is that it's not entertaining, because whether it was smart or credible is completely irrelevant.

 

[EvB]

I actually thought that Halo 4's Cortana was a fairly realistic representation of the female body and as a result wasn't overly sexualised.

Metal Gear tho....

Quiet would have to be a sniper, just so she could lie to to rest from the chronic back pain

 

[Not]

Nope. Naked women are fine. Sex is fine. You just gotta balance it out with a li'l of that male objectification goodness. Like imagine if most of the big sex scenes in the Witcher games had a woman with a bra or shirt on or something fucking the shit out of the fully nude male character. Pegging scenes included. Rimjobs, eating out, the works. And we'd see the briefest glimpses of our hero's boner. You could choose male encounters if you wanted. You think anyone would give a damn about naked women appearing in that game?

 

[Shrike_Priest]

You don't need a smart reason to include nudity. Put tits in your game, if people get upset then they can fuck off and not play it.

It's not about being upset.

I want to play MGS. I fucking love MGS.

I don't see the need for Quiet to look the way she does. I see that constantly designing women that way is exclusionary and objectifying. And I think that it makes gaming less inviting to women.

I still want to play MGS. I am, and Quiet is my main buddy cause her tranq snipes are awesome. I still think it's bullshit that I have to sit in an Aerial Command Center with her presenting her ass to me like I was pornography. I'm not offended, I'm not upset. I just don't see the point in including that design. And since I think the design has negative consequences, I critique it.

It's that simple.

They're related because they're both examples of how the narrative tends to serve the design in gaming rather than the other way around. We are not discussing a medium where narrative is king. We aren't even discussing a game where that's the case. You don't need a smart reason to put anything in a game.

I agree that MGS5 uses narrative to serve the design (we want a half naked chick, let's come up with a reason to want her half naked), just like the narrative of the main conflict is what serves up the possibility of violence. But the thing is: the narrative needs to justify the violence as that is the core mechanic of the gameplay. Without that narrative to set up the combat design, the game would be something else entirely (this goes for most games, obviously). However, the narrative doesn't need to justify a half naked chick, because the game would have been just as good or bad without it. Nothing would change in the gameplay or the quality of the game if the Quiet had clothes on. You'd have to change some cut-scenes and jokes, but I guarantee that no one, or at least very few, would have said "yeah, MGS5 is cool and all, but I wish there was more T&A".

 

[Coolio McAwesome]

There's no smart reason why a spy would be sneaking around a military base in a cardboard box. Ridiculous things happen all the time in ridiculous games. Coming up with an explanation for Quiet's attire is no different than coming up with an explanation for cyborg ninjas or telekinetic soldiers.

This is the part the worst part of the article:

If you want to see her naked write a tender love scene. Don’t have her sunbathe topless and try to convince us it’s her genetic heritage or something.

I found this quite to be a heck of a lot more pretentious than the storytellers who he's shitting on. For what it's worth, I'd much rather have a topless sunbathing scene than a "tender love scene." In a fictional video game, a girl who needs to sunbathe topless due to her "genetic heritage or something" is every bit as valid as a tender love scene.

People obviously have the right to criticize things they don't like, but the author's solution to this supposed problem is laughable. The notion that nudity (or anything else) should only be presented in a realistic manner is completely absurd.

 

[old manatee]

I hope the next Metal Gear has a soldier that can only breathe through her vagina.

 

[Cloyster]

And add a few sexualised males too. But lashing out at every sexualised female like that implies there being no room for them, when there very much is and should be in the future.

Imagine, for a minute, that you were in a room with a bunch of people. Let's say, 9 people. You and 9 people. And all of your jobs are to have this totally awesome animal party, where you keep bringing in awesome animals into the room for this party. 8 of the people in the room REALLY like goats. Like, they like some other animals SOMETIMES, but they really like goats a lot, so while sometimes they might bring in a lion, or a bear or some other animal, they bring in a LOT of goats. You are okay with goats, you might even like goats. But you like other animals too. But they keep bringing in a lot of a goats.

One other person in the room, gets really sick of the goats. This person and you go to the other 8 people and keep asking "why do you keep bringing in so many goats? Maybe there could be some other animals?" and they just keep telling you "Well, we can bring in any animals we want, and most people in the group like goats, so that's what we bring in. Maybe you should try bringing in some animals yourself if you want something else." So you and this other person try to bring in other cool animals, but the other 8 people keep complaining to you, because they want more of their animals, so they use really sneaky tricks to get rid of your animals, like drugging them and shit. So you have a lot of trouble getting in different animals. Meanwhile, the other people keep bringing in more goats, and maybe like, the occasional penguin. Or a goat dressed liek a penguin.

And then you realize, hey, there are some people outside that want to come in the room. So you try to tell everyone "Hey this party would be a lot better if more people could come in." And at first everyone agrees, but those people try to come inside, and all they see is goats and they are like "Uh...it looks like there is just tons of goats, this doesn't look like a fun animal party." And there might be like, a Rhino in there somewhere, but with so many goats, it's hard to see anything else. But, these people try to add something to the party anyway, so they try to bring in their favorite animals, like zebras, and platypi and shit. But, all the people who love goats see this and some of them REALLY like goats so much, that they use those same sneaky methods to keep those other animals and people who like those animals from getting in, but they really fucking love the goats.

The people who are trying to get these other animals in get angry. They want to join the animal party too! And you start to get angry! You want people who are like you in the party, instead of just feeling like a loner in this room. And all the people who like goats get really defensive, saying that you are trying to stifle them, and take away from their freedoms to have goats.

And you look around, and it's really hard to see anything but Guys with Goats.

I wouldn't blame you if it made you really mad at every new goat.

 

[Fonds]

Happy now?