NuclearKangaroo said:
Falling said:
NuclearKangaroo said:
criticism is acceptable, but not if it doesnt contribute to making a game better, if a game has a "sexist" character it doesnt become a worse game, is not less entertaining
That's a rather bold statement. How do you know that a game having a sexist character does or does not make a game worse? Would that not depend on the game, and perhaps even who is playing it? Perhaps a person is bored out of their minds over stereotypically limiting characterizations of certains sets of people. Would that not make the game worse for them? And would not better characterization make for a better game, thus validating the criticism?
let me put it like this
the birth of a nation, is an extremely racist film about the KKK, it was still praised for its innovative film tachniques (for the time), the fact it was racist didnt really affect the quality of the film
why should making a "sexist" character affect the quality of a game
one could argue the characters are cliche, that would indeed be a valid criticism, but a sexist character doesnt have to eb cliche
Being horribly racist has hurt the reputation of Birth of a Nation to the point where it's one of the tougher films to get a theatrical viewing. It's an undeniably great film for technical reasons, but it's not something many people will say "you have to watch this film" for entertainment value. The same is not true of Citizen Kane, which is frequently recommended for entertainment value, especially to anyone who enjoys films of its era.
I'm going to break up the sexism response into two parts, one for the two aspects I see.
First is for sexist works which reflect the sexism of their time or creator. One of the problems with Birth of a Nation is it was racist for its time and there was controversy out of the gate, but there's plenty of films whose racism/sexism is in line with its era and we often give these films a bit of a pass. They're still the subject of well-deserved critiques. I'm a Doctor Who fan and this is frequently a subject of discussion as there's a lot of racism and sexism in a show that's been around for 51 years. Thankfully, the show has largely been a bit progressive within its respective eras, so it's not judged too unkindly; but lots of very valid critiques of those stories exist and rightfully so.
Secondly, deliberately using sexism in a story not intended to be sexist. This is pretty common on TV these days with the anti-hero shows. The Shield, Sons of Anarchy, Mad Men, etc. are all shows in which the sexism of the men involved is part of their character and attempt to show how it's an undesirable part of their character, although that sexism might be intertwined with noble aspects of their character, so it's not a black/white issue. Generally speaking, these shows don't take the issue head-on. Maybe a female character will complain about how she's being treated. And broadly speaking, they don't get called out too much, because I think most people understand these shows are acting as criticism of these behaviors, even if they're sort of reveling in it. Certainly the critiques I've read have been fairly careful of laying down blanket statements, although there is a growing feeling that it's time to move on a bit.
Anyway, in the past, I've criticized games like Watch Dogs because even if their heart is in the right place, the writing isn't up to snuff. It's tough writing a sexist character/scene which is designed to be a criticism of sexism. Hit it too hard, then it's just a heavy handed message (such as Trevor's after-torture conversation in GTA V is just the writers trying to make sure you know that they know that torture is stupid and bad), don't hit it hard enough then you're unwittingly endorsing sexism... and let's face it, people miss the obvious intent of these kinds of things easily enough.
