- Sep 23, 2014
I personally think it depends on the context. If the game is a straight-faced "serious" experience then I'd like to see little to no sexualisation in it (unless it is somehow central to the plot and delivered tastefully but let's face it, the planets need to align for that to ever happen).endtherapture said:Recently I've seen a lot of ripping on characters like Bayonetta, older Tomb Raiders, Liara in ME, Morrigan zero suit Samus, Tifa, even characters like Dante etc. for being "hyper sexualised". It is spoke about as a bad thing.
In campy, less serious games like Bayonetta I think the sexualisation is very welcome. It's a celebration of the male/female form, something expressed in other kinds of art (cosplay, stage shows, modelling, fashion). But there needs to be a distinction between "objectified sexuality" and "non-objectified sexuality".
Bayonetta is not objectified. She is an extremely adept fighter who uses her sexualised movements to destroy her enemies en masse with grace and finesse. Lara Croft was only really objectified in promotional material back in the 90s, apart from that she's basically a female Indiana Jones but with extremely increased agility and athleticism. Even her portrayal in the latest Tomb Raider isn't entirely realistic, she shrugs off a lot of injuries like they're nothing.
I absolutely hated some of the ridiculous female armour in Skyrim. Big holes in the chest place to show a bit of cleavage/collarbone. I didn't dislike it because it was skimpy, but because it made absolutely no sense. This problem extends to many of the designs in the game such as the weapons (spikes on a sword's handle, really?) so I think it's rampant "artistic licence" rather than sexualisation.The wave of "pop culture" critics acting like it is awful, how dare you dress women in skimpy clothes, this is terrible, it distracts focus from the game. Now I'm not the kind of person to play these games and I think that stuff like bikini-chainmail looks stupid from a design point of view. But what is wrong with having female characters that are sexualised when it makes sense?
Absolutely. I much prefer playing an attractive woman than a hairy man with the physique of a wrestler. To be fair I prefer playing attractive women that dress appropriately (not dressed unattractively, appopriately for the situation. Lara Croft in the Peruvian mountains with shorts? No. I'm sure there's a way to make her look attractive in a parka).Inevitably, some men and women are going to be hot. Some of these are going to use their bodies and attractiveness as a weapon. What is so wrong with this? Isn't there a whole host of characters in fiction who are based around their great beauty?
The argument against this is that women in real life "choose" to dress that way and women in video games are "chosen by the (male) designers" to dress that way. Now this is a flimsy argument that has a point (kinda) but makes a generalisation. Bayonetta and Skullgirls' characters were designed by women. They're women that chose to dress women in provocative clothing. Are they sexist?By complaining about "hyper-sexualisation" aren't we effectively slut-shaming these characters and those who dress skimpily, something the feminist sect complains about?
When men do it I only think it's sexist if it's completely unpractical while every male character has practical attire and the female character is weaker/less reliable as a result.
Absolutely. I'd much prefer a relatable character with a great personality that happens to have great T&A rather than great T&A attached to an entity I can't connect with at all. Video games and pin-up art are not the same thing and I wish more designers realised this.F.Dubois said:I personally disagree that it is a rampant problem but I can also see how someone who spends a significant amount of time looking for such things might get the feeling that developers and writers use a pair of boobs and an ass instead of wasting energy and making an interesting character.
Many of the most popular female characters are non-sexualised (Alyx Vance, Chell, Jade, most depictions of Samus, Lara Croft's more recent depictions, and so on). But I don't entire disagree with your point. Those characters are popular because they have... well... "character". Good characters resonate with people. "Sex appeal" appeals briefly but there's no substance. Publishers often think that a quick buck is better than lasting appeal which is why they'll resort to it.Irick said:It's not bad that sexualised characters exist. It's not bad because non-sexualized characters exist.
I agree with most of your opinion actually and it's refreshing to have a good outlook rather than some of the doom-and-gloom opinions many have with gender representations.Luckily, there are a lot of well fleshed out characters that speak to us out there, so it doesn't bring me down too much :3
I think the kind of sexualisation males and females have in pop culture are different. Women are depicted in visual ways usually and men are depicted in ways relating to their roles. For example anything Stephanie Meyer has written and 50 Shades of Grey. Twilight's sex appeal relies on the eagerness of a male (two actually) to provide for and protect the main female character, sometimes in ways that are extremely problematic. 50 Shades does the same thing but throws in BDSM (or the author's interpretation of BDSM). The males are considered attractive physically, but it's their actions that form most of the appeal.Gorrath said:So is there a broader problem with in games with sexism? I'm inclined to say yes. The levels of female sexualization VS male sexualization seem to be out of proportion.
Oh my god I hope so. I'd love to see more depictions of lesbians for women by women, rather than the weird fetishised version (aimed at men) that's been all too prominent.Anime, books and now more than ever movies have caught on to the fact that there is a huge mostly untapped market for female (and LGBT!) fanservice.