It Never Ends

[psijac]

The art style is meant to be ridiculous, it's meant to be cartoonish, and if a man sees the Sorceress and says "THAT is what a woman should look like!" That's something wrong with him, not the artist.

I, at least, am not worried about what men think a woman should look like. I'm worried about what my six-year-old niece is learning she needs to look like.

Your videos games are not suppose to raise your niece, your niece's parents are.

 

[JimB]

Your videos games are not suppose to raise your niece; her parents are.

I'm not sure how to interpret this statement. Are you arguing that her parents are or should be or could be sufficient to the task of installing bone-deep self-image beliefs that run contrary to what she sees in every video game, TV show, movie, magazine, and advertisement on a billboard or bus? That, in short, they should somehow overpower the influence of the entire world? Or am I misreading you?

 

[psijac]

Almost all media should be consumed with parental guidance, if not that Parent need to be at least aware for that their children are putting into their brain box.

By your logic if your niece has played with a barbie doll or watched who framed Roger Rabbit then she is already forever ruined

If her parents wanted to raise a girl divorced from the idea of female sexuality a Muslim Country. I am sure their women there don't have any problems with body image.

 

[grigjd3]

The difference is in quality. Starcraft is generally an excellently made game (if completely lacking in innovation in the sequels). I mean, Skyrim on the PC often gets converted to an effective porn sim and yet no one complains about some of the characterizations done there either (note a certain red-head werewolf in the fighter's guild). The truth is, people don't mind hyper-sexualized characters nearly as much as they may seem to. What people really don't like is mediocre and poor games using hyper-sexualized characters as a crutch to up their sales. This problem would go away if people refused to play bad games. On the other hand, many game developers make bad games before they make good games so sometimes it pays to support even the bad games on the idea that the risk could lead to something really good.

So you've played it? A sexy character or two automatically means its bad? Logic at its finest.

So you've read the rest of the conversation you're jumping into? Oh, wait, you didn't because if you did you'd specifically realize that I later say that I have no idea how good this game is. Your real problem not being with me or what I have said but being that you are simply internet-rage obsessed and don't bother to use the reading skills you were taught in school.

Now since we are simply making assumptions about each other and each other's positions, let me make some assumptions about you. You are so scared that people don't like you that you throw a fit every time someone gives the slightest hint of disliking something you like. You crave external validation so much, that you hunt through forums desperately searching for that reinforcement and you've become so desperate for it that you throw a hissy-fit if you see comments that are anything else than praising your thoughts and ideas. The sad thing is, the only reason you are so desperate for that validation is that you haven't learned any self-confidence. If you had some self-confidence, you might be able to separate a comment on society (which you misinterpreted in the first place) from your own self worth.

As it is, you seem stuck on some sort of identification process that connects you personally to people's thoughts of this game. At any rate, it's not worth it. There is nothing for you to prove to me or for this game to prove to me. My opinion of the game, of you, or even of your ideas has absolutely no bearing on you, the world or what fate holds in store for anyone. I'd suggest you give up on your self-appointed holy quest to defend pseudo-chauvinist imagery because it does you and no-one else any good, but you've probably already stopped reading and are writing some rage based response where you suggest some attribute to me that you believe is an insult but won't have any meaning to me what so ever. However, I appreciate the chance to confirm my belief that no matter what lengths you go to, the internet will always respond with poorly thought out rage. Good job assuring that this process continues.

 

[TTYTYTTYYTTYTTTY]

Honestly, I think before anyone decides to make a comment about "feminism" or the "objectification of women in fantasy" that they should be forced to read at least a dozen or so fan fictions written by girls, and at least a similar number of fantasy series written by women largely for women. Starting with say "My Immortal" on the fan fiction front (the pain is part of the point), and things like Kim Harrison's "Hollows" series, Llith Saintcrow's work, or "Women Of The Otherworld" on the published fantasy side of things. Start by making note of the cover art. As odd as it sounds when a lot of these discussions get going, half the time in reading the responses I feel like I'm the only one who even has the grounding or experience to have a fair opinion here (which to be honest is grounded enough where it's pretty much solid fact at this point, which is why I'm making the referances). Nothing directed at you (the person I'm actually responding to) just in general. To be honest for all of his knowlege of geekdom, I can't help but wonder if MovieBob (who isn't speaking against this kind of imagery) himself has much familiarity with women's fantasy and paranormal romance, sometimes disparigingly called "Powder Puff Fantasy". I'd imagine if he did have his usual level of expertise with geek culture in response to that area, he'd be in agreement with me, at least on this subject.

I agree with you, read enough fanfics to know that.

Somehow people completely ignore this and seem to simply want their beliefs seen as facts and that other beliefs should not exist. Feminists have caused this, through all there whining and complaining to turn this simple character design, into "controversial news", yet no male character would cause a similar case of news (Unless it was Hitler or something like that).

 

[Mahoshonen]

Every character in Dragons Crown is drawn with absurd levels of exaggeration. So what if one of the characters has large breasts?!

Western society is too prudish.

If you don't like the look of a character, then don't play as her, or simply don't buy the game at all.

Unfortunately, not looking at a fire doesn't extinguish it.

And what harm will come to you by ignoring this game?

Yeah, and everyone should have paid no attention to Triuph of the Will because it was nothing but a collection of film strips that no one had to watch.

(Yeah I know, Godwin's Law. But I feel these threads are so stupid that they deserve it)

And this is why we have Godwin's Law. You just compared scantily clad women to Nazis. The fictional characters are not trying to convey any message or morals, they're just scantily clad and you compare them to Nazis.

Wow you showed me with your clever image you found doing a GIS search!! Bravo! You deserve a Pulitzer Prize!!!!!!!!1!

And this lesson can be applied to so many other instances, too! If only blacks hadn't gone in droves to watch The Birth of a Nation. They never would have suffered from the resurgance of the Ku Klux Klan!

 

[JimB]

By your logic, if your niece has played with a Barbie doll or watched Who Framed Roger Rabbit then she is already forever ruined.

Okay, psijac, I'm going to have to ask you to point to anything I said that so much as implies I think any one, specific piece of entertainment will constitute the whole of her worldview, or that it will "ruin her forever," whatever that even means. Or actually, don't bother trying to find that statement of mine, because I didn't say any such thing and you're not actually arguing with me or with anything I said; you're conversing with some hysteria-driven strawman you want me to be. I will thank you to stop doing that.

But because I have apparently somehow been unclear, let me state my position as explicitly as I know how. It is a deeply ingrained habit of mine to speak in simile and metaphor, so if I am ambiguous at any point during the following explanation, please forgive me for my bad habit and let me know what I can clarify for you.

I believe that most of what children learn, they learn at an unconscious level, through observation of the world around them. For example, no one teaches a child to walk by sitting her down and explaining the mechanics before running her through test trials; the kid just watches, and imitates, and eventually learns it through mimicry.

I believe that everywhere an American looks, there's an image of a woman who fits within a very rigid definition of beauty. I further believe that the way those women are presented is much more likely than not aimed at heterosexual men, as if women exist not as individuals but rather by definition of their relationship to men.

I believe that all of the above factors combine to form a society that is silently and subliminally teaching girls that their value as people is defined by their sexual attractiveness. I believe that the sheer weight of this influence is almost completely overwhelming, to the point that I believe anyone who says "It's the parents' job to teach them different" is speaking from motivations I can't even fathom but that I kind of suspect are based on a territorial desire to maintain the volume of wank material flowing in his direction.

I believe that the Sorceress is just one character. I believe all characters are, individually, just one character. I just so happen to believe that they have an additive effect, so that the Sorceress and Lara Croft and Other M Samus Aran and Tifa Lockhart and Tina Armstrong and Ivy Valentine and all the rest of them combine to send the unambiguous message that women should be valued for their sexual attractiveness first and foremost, and for any other characteristics second if at all.

I believe my niece is just one child, but I believe there are probably a whole bunch of other girls her age who are learning the same things she's learning by the same methods she's learning them, and as such I believe it's perfectly fair to use her as a symbol of all girl-children who are being taught to base their worth on their weight and measurements. I also believe boys are learning the same lessons about how women should be judged, and that it is equally problematic, but for personal reasons I am more concerned with what the girls are learning.

I believe that, though a lot of baggage is being inflicted on girls as we speak, everyone has baggage and the idea that they are "ruined forever" is nothing but useless hyperbole meant to dishonestly depict my position as one that overreacts to the problem so immensely that it should be ridiculed and ignored rather than considered. I further believe that "Muslim women have it worse" is an intellectually harmful idea, encouraging people to accept a base of relativism for their morality so that anyone who can provide an example of something worse than whatever he's accused of will become immune to moral evaluation and judgment.

Those are the things I believe. If you have a problem with them, then I invite you to discuss them with me calmly and rationally, because another thing I believe is that reasonable people can disagree honorably. If, however, you are not interested in an honest exchange of ideas with the intention of increasing one another's understanding, then I invite you to please keep your comments to yourself, as I find such conversations useless and tiresome.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

There will still be games featuring eyecandy at every turn, it is just that they would not be taken as seriously as the games that don't pander to such a base instinct.

Not necessarily true.

The sleek, sexualised design of nearly all of the human characters of Mass Effect with reoccurring screen time did not stop some fans from taking the series so damn seriously that the debacle over the Mass Effect 3 ending went down. There were no ugly humans, overweight humans or freakish humans in the far distant future as envisioned by Bioware. Only science-fiction themed Ken and Barbie dolls all dressed up for space war. Some people took it plenty serious.

The majority of games that utilise a sexualised design aesthetic have their fair share of good-looking blokes to go along with the good-looking babes. Simply because putting fugly male character models up alongside the digital hotties looks jarringly out of place. Outrageously sexualised characters like Ivy Valentine, whom Dragon Crown's Sorceress is clearly parodying, are typically created to be the 'sexy girl' in a field where damn near everyone, male or female, could at least pass for Hollywood ugly.

I know you will say "You are in no position to judge whether or not the things I like are crap." I'm not sure how to respond to that.

Again, there is a difference between constructive criticism and a politicised beatdown. It is painfully obvious that a fair amount of the 'criticism' that is being leveled at games from some gamers and game journalists is not only politically motivated, but also doesn't come from a place of genuine affection for the game genres that are coming under attack. As Jason Schreier proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, it all too easy for a person to casually slag a game that they've taken an active dislike to, without having any real understanding of what they're criticising.

Because criticising Dragon's Crown for it's depiction of the Sorceress is akin to attributing the positive effect that the film Top Gun [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092099/] had on military recruitment to the spoof parody, Hot Shots! [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102059/], and near damn every single time people go off half-cocked in this manner the commentary box groans under the weight of those who betray their own ignorance of what is being discussed. There is no shortage of people like Mr. Schreier in this world.

Ok tell me what would be so bad about having the future hit games feature more anatomically possible women wearing more practical clothing and not having to do sexy poses every so often?

First things first, you would have to first show me where all these games with the anatomically incorrect women who wear impractical clothing are in the current gaming market going back five to seven years. The following stipulations apply.

A) The game cannot have been made overseas primarily for a foreign market, and then localised on the cheap before being dumped on the domestic market.

B) If the game does feature an overtly sexualised design aesthetic then that overarching choice of aesthetic needs to be clearly sexist. The game has to have little to none sexualised imagery that might prove pleasing to either women or gay men.

C) Must be a hit game.

And then I want you to take that list, compare it all the other games that were released during that period, and then you can get back to me on that one.

 

[PunkRex]

I get that sexy girls sell well, but a bit more class is always welcome.

Every problem on this Earth could be solved with THAT mate.

 

[Requia]

Here it goes again. Buzzwords everywhere.

Here's a quick summary. If you find yourself typing any of the following terms or variants:

sexualize
objectify
eye candy
sex object
feminazi
realism
fantasy
don't buy

stop typing and read this. You're missing the point, whatever your side is.

Enough with the fucking buzzwords already.

Also, the other problem. The designer is a homophobic cuntwad.

It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

 

[veloper]

Trying to keep this short and to the point:

The problem isn't the Sorceress' design. The problem isn't that she exists or that characters like her exist. The problem isn't even that female characters are portrayed as sexually appealing. The problem is the pervasive trend which this character design is an example of, which is to treat women as ONLY sex objects.

There would not be any problem with characters like this at all (not even as part of a trend) if they were only ever enjoyed as silly little indulgences on the side, with the full understanding of what it was you were indulging in.

The problem is that we're not at that level of maturity yet.

Only if "we" are the blockbuster and porn audiences.

Here's an analogy to film: when you want to watch an intelligent production, when you don't want sexual content and you want a piece devoid of stereotypes and old rolemodels, you obviously won't download a porn, but you also won't find what you're looking for in the vast majority of hollywood blockbuster movies.

Triple-A games are the blockbusters of gaming. The publishers cater to young men and their business model revolves around getting as many as possible to part with 60 bucks in the first weeks post release. This locks most of these titles in that simple formula of action plus titilation. AAA is the wrong place to look for maturity.

More cerebral genres like turn-based strategy, puzzle platforming and puzzle adventure are a much better places to look for mature games.
Generally such games are more intelligent and the audiences are more likely to be sympathetic to the issue here. They don't need that shit to enjoy the gameplay.
If action is your main thing, then you'll be mostly resigned to indie games, where the focus is more on gameplay.

Game feminism ignores all the low hanging fruit and that makes it such a terribly lost cause.
You cannot fix japanese fetish fueled games and western triple-A titles in the same way cannot fix pornos and blockbusters. Such games and recordings exist because there are very big, paying audiences in the market for it and as such they will always be catered to with many products. You CANNOT FIGHT this.

What people can do, is SUPPORT such games that they think are mature. The only sacrifice for some will be getting used to more basic graphics and that is all there is to it.

 

[Lee Oyd]

^ Did you just imply blockbusters are for straight white men? Maybe they are. But why? To my knowledge, most of humanity isn't a straight white man.

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

<url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.406654.16934894>Yes. Exactly. Women are stupid and gay and they hate sex unlike the poor oppressed rational men like you.

This is what gamers actually believe.

It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

Fenix is a stupid hyper-roided dudebro design in a stupid hyper-roided dudebro universe. He's ugly, but he fits.

The Sorceress and Amazon come along actively strutting their stuff in the middle of a forest/dungeon/fortress/whatever for absolutely nobody but the creep on the other side of the fourth wall. If its devs gave the slightest fuck about aesthetic consistency, then why aren't the Wizard, Dwarf and Warrior strutting about in a snug chainmail G-string graciously outlining their thick, throbbing, permanently erect cocks?

 

[Amaror]

Oh god, my eyes!
These characters just look so ... weird. Their bodys don't look really stylised, but rather deformed. And the motions of those breasts in the video. ugh..
Don't get me wrong, i like big boobs, even virtual ones, but this character, or rather all the characters in that game don't look alluring to me, but rather repulsive.

 

[snowfi6916]

I'm just curious...

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intelorant than what we've seen from the game industry.

How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

The better question is, why do they need to be oversexualized at all? Why do they need to have a figure that has such a small waist that it couldn't possibly hold up her upper body? Why does she need to have boobs that make it look like if she leans too far forward, she will fall over?

Again, there are mediums where you can have that. Go to a porn site. There is plenty of that.

One of the reasons no one takes video games seriously as a medium, and why they are blamed for everything in our society, is because they are seen as immature and juvenile. Having monster boobs on women doesn't help us in that regard. It hurts us.

 

[TTYTYTTYYTTYTTTY]

Trying to keep this short and to the point:

The problem isn't the Sorceress' design. The problem isn't that she exists or that characters like her exist. The problem isn't even that female characters are portrayed as sexually appealing. The problem is the pervasive trend which this character design is an example of, which is to treat women as ONLY sex objects.

There would not be any problem with characters like this at all (not even as part of a trend) if they were only ever enjoyed as silly little indulgences on the side, with the full understanding of what it was you were indulging in.

The problem is that we're not at that level of maturity yet.

Only if "we" are the blockbuster and porn audiences.

Here's an analogy to film: when you want to watch an intelligent production, when you don't want sexual content and you want a piece devoid of stereotypes and old rolemodels, you obviously won't download a porn, but you also won't find what you're looking for in the vast majority of hollywood blockbuster movies.

Triple-A games are the blockbusters of gaming. The publishers cater to young men and their business model revolves around getting as many as possible to part with 60 bucks in the first weeks post release. This locks most of these titles in that simple formula of action plus titilation. AAA is the wrong place to look for maturity.

More cerebral genres like turn-based strategy, puzzle platforming and puzzle adventure are a much better places to look for mature games.
Generally such games are more intelligent and the audiences are more likely to be sympathetic to the issue here. They don't need that shit to enjoy the gameplay.
If action is your main thing, then you'll be mostly resigned to indie games, where the focus is more on gameplay.

Game feminism ignores all the low hanging fruit and that makes it such a terribly lost cause.
You cannot fix japanese fetish fueled games and western triple-A titles in the same way cannot fix pornos and blockbusters. Such games and recordings exist because there are very big, paying audiences in the market for it and as such they will always be catered to with many products. You CANNOT FIGHT this.

What people can do, is SUPPORT such games that they think are mature. The only sacrifice for some will be getting used to more basic graphics and that is all there is to it.

I agree, yet feminists will find issue with anything that doesn't conform to there ideal, while failing to realize that many other genres exist and that they can make/support "good" games.

 

[TTYTYTTYYTTYTTTY]

I'm just curious...

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

If so, that would make all the angry peeps far more intelorant than what we've seen from the game industry.

How about we save all the rage for things that matters, eh?

The better question is, why do they need to be oversexualized at all? Why do they need to have a figure that has such a small waist that it couldn't possibly hold up her upper body? Why does she need to have boobs that make it look like if she leans too far forward, she will fall over?

Again, there are mediums where you can have that. Go to a porn site. There is plenty of that.

One of the reasons no one takes video games seriously as a medium, and why they are blamed for everything in our society, is because they are seen as immature and juvenile. Having monster boobs on women doesn't help us in that regard. It hurts us.

The only people not taking the video game industry seriously are non-gamers and gamers. Developers, companies and investors are taking the industry quite seriously as there jobs and financial well-beings are on the line.

 

[AgentShiver]

All I can think of when I see pictures of characters like this is how much their backs/spines are suffering. Living with boobs gives a whole different perspective on them than just looking at them. Do I get annoyed when I see female characters like this in video games? No. Do I get annoyed when I see /the vast majority/ of female characters like this in video games? Yeah. These games aren't geared towards me though. I roll my eyes and move on, looking for the next Professor Layton game.

I don't mind a large chest. Heck, the latest rendition Lara Croft is highly attractive and has a large chest. But attention isn't drawn to it as a selling point. I think that's what ticks some people off; not the fact that they have a large chest, but the fact that it's there either as an obvious selling point, or they're exaggerated to the point of ridiculous (which leads back to the first reason).

 

[Requia]

^ Did you just imply blockbusters are for straight white men? Maybe they are. But why? To my knowledge, most of humanity isn't a straight white man.

Does this mean there should never be an oversexualized woman in a game ever? That there is absolutely no room for designs like these?

<url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.406654.16934894>Yes. Exactly. Women are stupid and gay and they hate sex unlike the poor oppressed rational men like you.

This is what gamers actually believe.

It might help if your rant had anything at all to do with the game at hand. The design *is* the same ridiculously overexagerated style for both genders, and the Amazon that's meant to slice open dragons as opposed to cast spells looks like she can actually do it (hell, she looks more qualified than either of the men, the dwarf would have trouble walking and the warrior couldn't stand period). Also, Marcus Fenix is good design, seriously? He's a joke, another hypersteroid character from an artist who doesn't understand basic human anatomy, at least Dragon's Crown characters aren't billed as realistic.

Fenix is a stupid hyper-roided dudebro design in a stupid hyper-roided dudebro universe. He's ugly, but he fits.

The Sorceress and Amazon come along actively strutting their stuff in the middle of a forest/dungeon/fortress/whatever for absolutely nobody but the creep on the other side of the fourth wall. If its devs gave the slightest fuck about aesthetic consistency, then why aren't the Wizard, Dwarf and Warrior strutting about in a snug chainmail G-string graciously outlining their thick, throbbing, permanently erect cocks?

In no way shape or form would erect cocks be comparable, in order for that to be the case the Amazon would have to have swollen genitalia of her own. And oh wait, the dwarf isn't wearing anything but a miniskirt anyway.