Depends on the context, the problem with what you're arguing, is that very same line of thought is what leads to games, and many other forms of media being banned, even when they -aren't- out-rightly racist or sexist but still manage to cause offence through whatever way they end up expressed.Gralian said:It's not just a "group of pixels". It's a visual representation of an entire gender. That's like painting a picture of a woman being raped and saying "what? Why are people getting offended? It's just a load of paint on canvas! It's not representative AT ALL."Lukeman1884 said:Objectification? Wait, I don't get it. What's wrong with treating a group of pixels which we created ourselves as an object?
Right?
Once more, just because something ISN'T REAL doesn't suddenly make it non-representative and okay. If there was a game showing a racist scene where a black guy or whatever was being abused, would that make it okay? I mean it's not real, right?So basically, my point is that I don't think there's anything wrong with making a female character just to stare at their boobies because they AREN'T REAL. And it's probably better to get it out of your system so you don't go staring at real women all the time.
I don't know that I agree it's an all or nothing deal, that, you can't only have inoffensive media (a rather silly notion really, since anything is capable of offending everyone depending on the person), but at the same time, I do realise that certain creations do go far beyond the realms of good taste. The only question remains as usual, who gets to decide that, why, and is it right to ban such media?