Jimquisition: Boob Wars and Dragon Crowns

[otakon17]

I'll be honest, I like all the designs. I find the Amazon, Sorceress and Elf all attractive in their own way. Then again, I have things for chicks with big thighs, huge boobs or just tall and statuesque. Hell, I don't find the male designs sexy but I do find them nice to look at. He went with several extremes with the character designs, like one being "soft", one being "hard" and one being "average". And he shouldn't have had to apologize to ANYONE for drawing those characters the way he did. Hmmm, not sure if still on topic or not. Anyway, still can't wait till the game comes out, looks awesome.

 

[Kittyhawk]

Saw this one going into meltdown on Dtoid.

I don't think the designer chap should have to apologise for his character designs as Dragon's Crown is a japanese game and they have a different view (not necessarily a positive one on the female front) on things. However, since Dragon's Crown is being sold globally, I do feel that while he's being creative, he should also be mindful of what he's creating and how they might be seen to different audiences. Sometimes an editor is a good thing.

There are female gamers as well as females that want to enter the industry. If we want to move forward it helps if they can tag along too.

Good to see some discussion come out of it, though. I feel the Kotaku chap should have done the right journo thing and approached the designer for an interview, to find out why the characters are the way they are. Its too easy to misunderstand and sound off online sometimes, without that magic word 'context'.

I hope Dragons Crown sells well. I'll be using some points on it.

 

[DarkhoIlow]

Way too much arguments about this particular topic. It's the game designers choice to make the women/men how they please. If they are sexualized then fine, it's their decision.

If you don't like it then don't buy it, easy.

 

[Paragon Fury]

9) Would you hold it against someone if they decided to (or not to) buy this game for the design of 1 character and ignored the other characters.

yes(??) I don't play GoW because of Coltrane (whom i find offensive on an intellectual level), I'm not wowed by the game in general.

Actually, the Cole Train (WHOO BABY!) is actually one of the better characters in the series (along with Baird). They do a terrible job of it in the games, but in the books he is a much more-fleshed out character and a lot of his attitude in the games is made clearer by the books.

 

[Arnoxthe1]

Did we REALLY have to do another episode on this? This horse has been beaten, shot, stabbed, burned, and then served as burgers.

 

[Atmos Duality]

The last Story and Xenoblade had pretty good female characters (Seiren is my favourite)

"A drop of water in a desert."
If you will pardon the pretense in that metaphor.

should it? I mean the world is funny where if know one says anything it's assumed everyone accepts the way things are.

Right out the gate, I cannot even express disgust with the topic without running into the "Silent Conformity" angle.
That is how touchy it is.

To be crystal clear: I am tired of the argumentation as it exists; where it goes nowhere or devolves into semantics and assumptions. More people are trolling with those threads than discussing the issue at hand.

And I am tired of it. It defeats the point of trying to engage in any sort of meaningful discussion when the gender card is the first thing on the table.

Kamitani's work I don't think should have sparked this whole "blargh" but at least it can bring up even more important examples.

Unfortunately I'm in a bit of a hurry right now, so I'll just ask:
Examples of what?

 

[Frission]

I like seeing these Jimquisition episodes, but I've never commented on them before. Well this ends now.

Jim, it takes a big man to admit he has made mistakes. I like your main message that productive discussion is something that's desirable, which is something I could learn from.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

I try to be calm Jim I really do but some people just don't listen and that's frustrating.

As for the sorceress I didn't realise that she looked that way when she moved. That's...pretty bad. A character can be sexy and not sexualised.

As for those saying media doesn't have any effect on the way you view women, if a woman can get an eating disorder from being exposed to images like this (as someone bravely admitted earlier in this thread) it can psychologically effect men as well. Just saying.

 

[leviadragon99]

Mm, in the unlikely event that I do end up playing Dragon's Crown (given the platforms its on) I would most likely end up playing the elf...

 

[Terminal Blue]

It may be a Japanese style but it's still has western sensibilities.

And?

This (Japanese) game we're talking about is clearly (and explicitly) inspired to some degree by western fantasy artists. Like it or not, there is considerable cross-pollination between Western and Japanese art styles and in both cases there is considerable difference between characters who are meant to be attractive and characters who are meant to give the impression of physical strength or prowess.

And regardless, the point remains.. When you post a picture of a bunch of naked dwarves which you drew for your Japanese game and suggest they're closer to someone else's "direction" than a couple of female characters which you also drew for your Japanese game using the exact same art style and the exact same influences, in what way can this possibly be read as a comment on the differences between national aesthetic standards. All these characters come from exactly the same source, exactly the same culture, exactly the same aesthetic standards, exactly the same person. The only difference is that one is a half-naked woman and the other is a half naked dude (or three).

Read the apology.. seriously.. it's quite informative. Apparently, he was only getting requests for publicity images of the female characters, including blatant fan service images like female characters in swimwear so he drew a picture of sweaty dwarves in bathing suits to express cynicism at the fact that retailers were only requesting pictures of the female characters.

..incidentally, this is merely an aside, but pause at this point.

Go look at the concept art of the female characters in question and keep the above statement in mind..

Anyway, apparently he was going to post his sexy dwarf picture on facebook for the benefit of fans, but then thought about Jason Schreier's article and decided to make a "lighthearted joke", which turned out to reference Schreier's implied preference for the images over the images of women which he had also drawn.

Seriously.. join the dots.

 

[bunji]

In the beginning of the last onscreen appearance of Jim in this episode i really got the feeling there was some mad feminist pointing a gun at him from off-camera. "I didn't know I was wrong, but then they educated me, and now I know I was a horrible person. Now I have fully embraced the 's agenda, and that has made me a better man."

Also - no less oversexualized silly women, just more plain realistic ones. Everyone wins.

 

[Belated]

Once again people are pursuing the wrong target. There is nothing morally wrong with the mere existence of a sexually attractive character in a video game, even an exaggerated one. People who are attracted to her have a right to be attracted to her. That's their sexuality, and it's morally wrong to hate them for it. You don't choose what you're attracted to. And it's wrong to hate anybody for something they didn't choose, provided it's hurting nobody else.

And artists have a right to market to that sexuality. I thought this argument was already settled ages ago, that masturbation is not evil, and that puritan values towards sex are outdated and oppressive. You're supposed to explore your sexuality. You're supposed to exercise it, and indulge in things that make you horny. It's a natural urge, it doesn't make you a monster, and it doesn't make you sexist. But websites like The Escapist and Kotaku seem to hire "journalists" who have been unfrozen from the dark ages. "Oh how dare that woman expose a part of her body! It is impure! Stone her artist to death, for he is a sinner!"

The problem isn't that sexy characters EXIST, it's that they're so common, and not done evenly down the line. It's that there's not more variety. The issue shouldn't be "This one character is sexy! That's bad!" because it's not bad. The issue should be "Look at all these sexy characters across all these games. Why do all of these characters have to be sexy? Why not just half as many? And where are all the hunks and the pretty boys?" But this one witch character being sexy does not make the game sexist. This is just a writer leading a witch hunt (snrk!) because he didn't have anything better to write about.

And my fellow men, "feminazis" aren't at fault. I've had an argument with a feminist before. And I mean the kind of feminist who you knew right away was a feminist. She fit all of the stereotypes. And yet, when I had an actual debate with her, I found that her opinions were quite reasonable. I got her to admit that there is nothing morally wrong with the mere existence of sexy female characters, as long as society doesn't treat it like an obligation, as long as society doesn't act like it's the way things SHOULD be all the time. If you actually get to know your opponent and talk to them, you will often learn that their positions aren't as radical as you think. Sure, there are some feminists who flat out believe that sexiness is evil and that we should ban it all, but most of those types of feminists... are men. Men who call themselves feminists, but really just protest sexuality out of some misguided desire to "protect" women, ironically making them the most sexist out of all of us. Most real feminists don't want to put an end to all sexuality for good. Most real feminists just want equality, and to be treated not as a woman, but as a person.

Now, if anybody disagrees with the above, you are objectively wrong.

The above is verbatim what I posted on The Escapist's Facebook page about the subject, and people seemed to like it a lot so I decided to post it here as well.

 

[ObsidianJones_v1legacy]

I would like to have a discussion with people like me, who fit into an 'other' category. A category of 'other' that is usually depicted in a certain... negative or laughable light in media and gaming and who is tired of hearing about just men vs women and ready to talk about wiping all stereotypes clean and doing the ultra hard task of just design... and not falling back on the easy crutches.

Until then, men keep saying that breasts and butts are fair game because male chests are sexy to women too, and women keep going about how you aren't just sex objects. When we're ready to open the discussion to include the problems with everyone, I want in.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Not that I _disagree_ that people on the internet should stop being jerks and discuss things rationally, but, um... an internet video series characterized by shouting repeated insults at people in most episodes is not perhaps the proper high horse from which to admonish people for responding rudely to things on the internet.

Yep. Additionally, if he wants to have a discussion, why doesn't he participate in the comments section? At most he will post a reply or two on the front page, but as we have seen from previous Jimquisition comment threads, he doesn't show any interest in engaging with other people, and only comments to either dismiss other points of view, or agree with his own.

 

[Fiairflair]

...
Why? Because no man is an island. The nature of exchange is inclusive and exchange directly influences those who produce. The values of an artist are proliferated by the success of any one game or film or show they create. They are enabled through profits to produce more works which in turn further promote their values. Hence, we have a marketplace of ideas. No market is truly free when only those who enjoy a product are given credence. Products are not purged by criticism. Criticism is the mechanism by which produces evolve. Those unable to evolve fail.

Assuming it's on target.

Criticism without the aim to improve the particular product, but instead of replacing it with something else entirely, is worthless.

Pointlessly negative criticism is pointless. This is self-evident. However, not all criticism is either pointlessly negative on the one hand or constructive on the other.

I posit that it is essential that interested people discuss and debate the nature of games, films, and the like. The Sorceress from Dragon's Crown is an ideal example. Because of the portrayal of the Sorceress, and regardless of the intentions of the artist, many consumers may feel further isolated from the gaming market. If an artist holds the view that the objectification or overt sexualisation of women is okay, they will likely reflect that view in their work. If that work is successful, an argument is made for the promotion of material that in turn promotes the objectification or overt sexualisation of women. Rational discussion tempers that process; it allows for consumers and potential consumers to voice their preferences, which can then lead to the artist reviewing their work and changing their approach in the future. That said, there is another way to rid the market of questionable and offensive content. If a rational criticism makes readers less inclined to support the artist and that sentiment grows, the artist's work and its messages stop spreading. This is the harsher but just as effective method of ideas evolving.

A critic is not defined by the constructive nature of their criticisms but by the simple fact that they critique things. To critique something is nothing more or less than to judge that thing critically and make a critical assessment.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

1. This reasoning seems to be a blatant double standard. Why must it be true that all sexy female characters are objectification and all sexy male characters are power fantasies?

It's not.

But this particular case appears to be blatant objectification, regardless of gender. Because it's treating the characters literally as objects.

2. Lets say a studio were to make a game based around fulfilling a female power fantasy. Am I correct in assuming that the main character would be very sexy?

Depends on your definition of sexy, I guess. The characters in this particular game are hideous and completely unsexy to me. I'm not exactly sure what they were trying to achieve with such ridiculous proportions. But I guess there must be some people who are into boobs the size of basketballs that seem to have their own gravity field.

 

[Zer_]

The argument is that it objectifies women and reduces them to nothing more than sexual fantasies. There are also those that argue that it affects the perception of women in real life. As well as people who say it makes them uncomfortable that there are not many normal women to play as so they have to play as overly-sexual characters instead.

Personally I think the first one is very much a case-by-case basis. Games where the women are literally nothing more than T+A as far as design is concerned are a problem (Rachel Ninja Gaiden 2), but I don't see the problem when they actually have decent character design as well. If they are good characters as well as being sexy then they are not "reduced" to anything.

There's nothing really wrong with a game pandering to someone's sexual fantasies. This kind of pandering is something that happens in all forms of media. We all like to knock on 50 Shades of Grey for portraying BDSM in a juvenile light (Heck, even the people who are really into BDSM are all like "Nope."). The fact is that there's really no real harm being done by 50 Shades of Grey. Let's ignore people with serious mental disabilities for a moment. If someone were to treat women as objects because of some skewed view of reality perpetuated by media, who is to blame for this? Really, the answer is weak education. Someone with such a skewed view on sexuality is only like that because they lacked the education or experience to know otherwise.

The second point I don't think is even worth responding to normally, as I view it as the exact same argument as claiming violent media causes real life violence.

Exactly right. It amazes me that so many people fail to make that connection. Once again, it's our responsibility to our younger generations to teach them that violence is wrong.

The third one I completely agree with, and I dislike games where the male characters are properly outfitted and proportioned, whereas the women are wearing bikini chainmail for no apparent reason.

Then again, I am also fairly desensitised to this kind of thing, so when I see skimpy outfits I more or less blank them. People kept on talking about Elizabeth's dress in Bioshock Infinite having massive cleavage, but I didn't even notice until somebody mentioned it.

While I don't mind games that pander to a male power fantasy in a world where the women dress in bikini armours, it would definitely be nice to have a greater number of games where the characters have a bit more depth than a puddle.

Now, if you really don't like T&A games, then you need to realize that big publishers and game developers are very resistant to change. They'll very rarely try something new. When they do try something new that ends up doing well, they'll milk it until we're all sick and tired of it, because they're just too afraid to fail. On a more positive note, we have seen more and more depth added to characters. While the new Lara Croft is most certainly sexualized to a degree, she's also a character that has depth. She's so much more than a walking pair of breasts and bosoms. We're slowly starting to see more characters that are more than just a showcase for jiggle physics. The best way to go about changing the industry's direction is to encourage the developers to give us more sensible and realistic characters.

So really, instead of discouraging T&A, why not encourage Brains and Personality? Don't get me wrong, you're definitely free to share your opinion on a game, but like Jim said, it's up to you to share it in a non antagonistic way.

 

[the December King]

The way I see it, is when you spend months and months working on something, and then a troll tells you you are a 14 year old boy, you can get pissed off whether you are a boy or girl. Did he do the right thing? I don't think so, it was feeding the troll. But I can see WHY he'd be upset by a thoughtless stab like that. And I wonder how I'd react in a similar situation...

More aptly, it was essentially proving him right.

But the thing is, a lot of artists deal with criticism in a more mature fashion. Not everyone is George Lucas.

Touche!

(However, it could be seen as a brilliant way to respond, too, as no average 14-year old could churn out a pic like that, and in doing so as an amusing snub, suggests that he was well aware of the irony. But again, I know no more on the actual events, it's just an observation in hindsight.)

 

[Agayek]

Boob Wars and Dragon Crowns

Dragon's Crown has become the latest game involved in a big argument. Big boobs, burly dwarves, and Kotaku were all involved.

Watch Video

So this is pretty irrelevant to any of the discussion, but I have to ask:

What's the source for the image you used at 3:12? It's a woman riding on a velociraptor-type thing and holding a flaming sword. Is that actually from a game or something? Because that image alone has me rather intrigued.

 

[Jimothy Sterling]

Boob Wars and Dragon Crowns

Dragon's Crown has become the latest game involved in a big argument. Big boobs, burly dwarves, and Kotaku were all involved.

Watch Video

So this is pretty irrelevant to any of the discussion, but I have to ask:

What's the source for the image you used at 3:12? It's a woman riding on a velociraptor-type thing and holding a flaming sword. Is that actually from a game or something? Because that image alone has me rather intrigued.

Golden Axe: Beast Rider, but forget it. It's a mediocre game.