Jimquisition: Boob Wars and Dragon Crowns

[Reyold]

Thanks Jim! Communication is one of the greatest and most underutilized skills on the planet. What's great is when truly communicating, even when you both end up disagreeing with each-other, you are still both left with a greater respect for the others opinion.

Just imagine if we did this with politics, religion, even day-to-day conversations. The world would be a hundred times better.

 

[MPerce]

I think what we should all take from this is....

Beyond Good and Evil is a fucking great game.

 

[Roger]

Aside from just being funny, the point isn't that the sorceress looks unrealistic, it's that the parts of her that are unrealistic are the parts that are perceived as appealing to a particular gender/sexuality. A guy might say that they have no problem with the unrealistic male characters, but if there was a male character whose junk was enormous and wobbly, it probably would make you feel at least a little bit uncomfortable.

One might counter by saying that they still wouldn't mind because they could just pick a different character who doesn't have weird junk, but imagine if almost every male character in the industry had weird disproportionate junk and the women didn't. Doesn't that seem a teensy bit alienating? What if this game had three male characters, two of them had enormous balls, and only one of them looked normal? Wouldn't you feel a little bothered that you essentially only have one character choice that didn't make you feel uncomfortable?

Again, this isn't necessarily a condemnation of this particular style. I actually kinda like it in a weird perverse way. But it's not difficult to understand why a lot of women feel alienated by this industry, and it's also not difficult to remedy that. We don't have to get rid of these character designs, but the people who complain about them have a right to be upset and to feel uncomfortable with how their sex is portrayed in general.

That some people think a breast is on par with a penis really shows how puritanical of a culture we live in.

 

[jluzar20]

Is anyone else reminded of the phrase "undo concern for women is what leads to contempt for them"?

 

[Kinitawowi]

Nazi

143 posts into the thread and it's Godwin time.

This is why the internet isn't capable of having these sorts of discussions; as was noted a couple of pages earlier, as long as it's a flame war with a hypothetical winner and a hypothetical loser, as long as the combatants are arrogant shits who will never contemplate a micrometre of budging in their position lest it be seen as a sign of weakness, as long as the parties are ideologically opposed, as long as the Nazi card is still in the hand, as long as all this goes on, this wheel will continue to turn and roll round with the exact same non-outcome every time some new title appears.

I'd love a discussion, with a rational and reasoned debate between people willing to help each other find a mutually agreeable resolution. It's never going to happen.

 

[QtheMuse]

Nothing too see here but American's getting bent out of shape from a huge set of digital tits, move along.

 

[QtheMuse]

Is anyone else reminded of the phrase "undo concern for women is what leads to contempt for them"?

This is basically why no one likes a white knight in real life. They usually are just trying to pave over there misogyny with a thin layer of chivalry. When underneath they probably thing just as many nasty thoughts about women as they let you know. Which is why several women I know who have decided to date a "white knight" turn into a controlling domineering bf, which then leads to a break up because the said white knight is all YOU ARE A WOMAN YOU SHOULDN'T ACT LIKE THAT!! Or one bf who broke up with a gf because she farted. Bodily Functions are serious business.

 

[Terminal Blue]

I don't no, to my understanding the slender, effeminate male is the standard of sexiness in Japan, the dwarves where the western extreme of muscle bound me which was what he was going for.

That doesn't even make sense.

Maybe if Schreier had said something about Japanese games in general, or implied that Japanese depictions of women were particularly bad, but he didn't do that. Moreover, the Dwarf in question is a character in the same game as the aforementioned Sorceress and the Amazon, a game being developed by a Japanese studio with artwork drawn by a Japanese man. Indeed, despite the clear influence from certain genres of Western fantasy art the art style is still unmistakably Japanese in visual style. So why? How would that point even work?

Is he saying that the dwarf character is only in the game to take the piss out of Western character design, because firstly that directly contradicts his apology, and secondly.. no.. the preference for "effeminate" character designs is extremely genre specific in Japanese art. If you only look at material designed for young girls, then I can see how you'd get that impression, but really..

Spoiler

Unless you can show that a commercially significant segment of gay people were going to buy "Dragon's Crown", and now won't, then whether or not gay people buy games in general has no relevance.

I do not need to do any such thing, because you already made the assumption that there aren't a statistically significant number of gay people who might be interested in this game. Why?

Either there is something about this game which would prevent gay people from buying and enjoying it, or you believe that gay people are a "statistically insignificant" section of the population. Which is it?

And you might have noticed, this is actually why I'm commenting here, because this event is being reported as being purely about the boobs. I can pretty much guaruntee that if anyone but Kotaku itself was reporting the story as "Dragon's Crown dev is homophobic ****", which is actually closer to what happened, the number of people drawn to the game by that publicity would be far, far lower.

 

[Talvrae]

Good one Jim, i really like it better when you don,t trow shit on the wall to pass your message, i agree with you Jim again this time, now i expect flying pig cause i agree with you 2 weeks in a row

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Nazi

143 posts into the thread and it's Godwin time.

Invoking Godwin's Law (incorrectly) is actually the opposite of promoting discussion. The idea that any mention of Nazis is inappropriate is not the actual meaning behind Godwin's Law. The Nazi regime and the events involved in WWII are perfectly legitimate discussion material. Why would you want to ignore history?

WWII was only the most significant event of the 20th Century - and we're supposed to pretend that it didn't exist because of some internet meme?

I'd love a discussion, with a rational and reasoned debate between people willing to help each other find a mutually agreeable resolution. It's never going to happen.

If you'd like a discussion, how about discussing what I said, rather than reflexively saying that my post is inappropriate because I mentioned an artist who happened to be a Nazi, even though the topic under discussion is largely about art, taste and censorship?

 

[jluzar20]

Is anyone else reminded of the phrase "undo concern for women is what leads to contempt for them"?

This is basically why no one likes a white knight in real life. They usually are just trying to pave over there misogyny with a thin layer of chivalry. When underneath they probably thing just as many nasty thoughts about women as they let you know. Which is why several women I know who have decided to date a "white knight" turn into a controlling domineering bf, which then leads to a break up because the said white knight is all YOU ARE A WOMAN YOU SHOULDN'T ACT LIKE THAT!! Or one bf who broke up with a gf because she farted. Bodily Functions are serious business.

I instantly thought of that Southpark episode. You know the one.

Idunno. I appreciate a little titillation as much as the next guy, and I see the video game industry making strides with female characterization enough to think that its just the growing pains of a young art form.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

...what?

Unless you can show that a commercially significant segment of gay people were going to buy "Dragon's Crown", and now won't, then whether or not gay people buy games in general has no relevance.

Why? I was not aware that only people who intended to buy a game were allowed to comment on a game. Since when was the only thing that mattered about games was their commercial success?

 

[m19]

http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/i-svhrTpg/0/950x10000/i-svhrTpg-950x10000.jpg

Aside from just being funny, the point isn't that the sorceress looks unrealistic, it's that the parts of her that are unrealistic are the parts that are perceived as appealing to a particular gender/sexuality. A guy might say that they have no problem with the unrealistic male characters, but if there was a male character whose junk was enormous and wobbly, it probably would make you feel at least a little bit uncomfortable.

The problem with that image is it is a false equivalence. The sorceress was made to appeal to men. The guy with a giant member was made to annoy... men. The equivalent would be something made with women as the target.

 

[Gigano]

...
I do not need to do any such thing, because you already made the assumption that there aren't a statistically significant number of gay people who might be interested in this game. Why?

Either there is something about this game which would prevent gay people from buying and enjoying it, or you believe that gay people are a "statistically insignificant" section of the population. Which is it?

I believe the number of gay people with interest in this game prior to the controversy to be insignificant from a commercial point of view, when compared to the amount of people interested in it after the controversy happened. Hence the losses incurred from the controversy are insignificant, even assuming that every last gay person with prior interest is now boycotting the game (which would be doubtful, as I doubt all are equally easily offended, or intend to punish a game release for a debacle one designer on it got himself into).

Some straight people with prior interest might of course boycott it as well, be it over breasts or dwarves. But given the exponential increase in exposition, the amount of new potential customers reached through this whole controversy business more than makes it worth it. Hence there is little in the way of "damage" from it.

And you might have noticed, this is actually why I'm commenting here, because this event is being reported as being purely about the boobs. I can pretty much guaruntee that if anyone but Kotaku itself was reporting the story as "Dragon's Crown dev is homophobic ****", which is actually closer to what happened, the number of people drawn to the game by that publicity would be far, far lower.

Well, they aren't, are they now?

And really, I'm pretty sure the idea of a game designer posting some homoerotic dwarves in response to overdone criticism of his work won't offend that many people to the point of boycott. Might even attract some groups.

 

[Joseph Cortinas]

The Facebook comments below the video are actually for the most part very calm and orderly discussions. its only in here that things seem more on the side of arguing and petty assumptions about people. We all need to get off our high horses, stop assuming we are 100% correct about other people's motives for the opinions they have, the games they like, ect. And as Jim said, try and be understanding.

I'm VERY sad for the people(not just women) who are dying for more well developed, interesting, and multidimensional female characters in games. I feel your pain, I really do, and I'm right there with you praising every game that releases with said characters. However we cannot go around attacking every game on the opposite end of the spectrum. We'd all love to see games with more, and we have every right to be disappointed when a new game releases that has less. But we shouldn't go around throwing out insults towards the developers, and fans of that game, and start using terms like misogynist and "boys club" just because we feel left out.

Instead express your interests to developers. Let them know what a large market there is for something outside the realm of over sexualized characters, and unrealistic proportions. Get a POSITIVE movement going for the CREATION of something new instead of leading the NEGATIVE charge of the attempted DESTRUCTION of the old.

Bottom line, criticizing and complaining about games that offend or don't appeal to you doesn't work. Because there will always be a market for those things, and just like you, that market has a right to like what they like, and have things made for them. Instead focus efforts onto something more positive.

Hope we can all get along and agree that MORE games is the answer, not LESS games. PEACE!

 

[MB202]

You know, if it weren't for The Sorceress, I'd say the game looks awesome, it reminds me of Muramasa: The Demon Blade... Oh wait, it was made by the same people... That's a little embarrassing. Anyway, I personally don't like the design, especially, it makes me feel awkward and uncomfortable looking at it. Still, I DO think that yeah, decrying the design artist involved wasn't cool... Although implying that the complainer is gay in response is definitely NOT cool.

 

[Colt47]

I find the entire art set for Dragons Crown kind of creepy with the exception of the Archer Girl and Wizard, who are the least exaggerated of the bunch. I just can't understand why someone needed to make the art style like that when Dungeons and Dragons games often become parodies in themselves, regardless of the artwork.

 

[Fiairflair]

...
What you are doing is leading the entire notion of critique ad absurdum. Sure, pointing out that Twilight or Transformers 2 are stupid, pandering drivel won't keep millions from watching them, but it needs to be said nonetheless.

Why?

If people are enjoying Twilight, what business do you - who don't have to go see it, and don't have any stake in the franchise - have criticizing it? People can figure that out for themselves, and the people who're actually vested in the thing should determine which path it should take. Let 13 year old girls and desperate housewives be the judge of products aimed at 13 year old girls and desperate housewives.

The problem at large here, and the reason for all this, is the self-conscious reaction of a large segement of the gaming population which does not want to be perceived as the kind of people who enjoy this kind of pandering, since it plays right into the stereotypes about our community held by the general population.

Well, since there's nothing harmful about enjoying pandering, they should simply own up their desires instead. If the target demographic weren't actually that kind of people, then it wouldn't be created. Which would lead to the same reaction, as they obviously won't be standing idly by to watch the games they enjoy being purged.

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.

 

[Flaery]

I'm not sure where I stand on this matter. It is up to the individual to decide whether or not he (or she) wants to objectify these characters. After looking at a few of the character and other miscellaneous designs, I buy the idea that this is some funny, satirical 2-D hack n' slash based off of universes like Conan. However, I can't really be upset at the detractors for looking down upon the Amazon and the Sorceress because I see where they're coming from and their heart is in a good place. Not only that, but I don't particularly care for "well-developed" female bodies anyway so I couldn't care less if they were to change the designs.

Also, the Elf is the prettiest out of all of them so she's the one I'm most likely to lust after. (If I were like that at least.)

I suppose I'll end on this: If I were making a historical movie based on slavery in North America, then I'd include the N-word quite a bit. If I were to make a game designed around medieval fantasy movie tropes, then I'd have a lot of busty women and overly-muscular men.

 

[DrOswald]

I have a couple genuine questions I would like answered.

Whenever there is a gender issues thread I always see the following logic applied by someone who takes issue with a highly sexual woman character: A highly sexual female character it is offensive to women because it is objectifying women. However, a highly sexual male character is not offensive to men because that character is a male power fantasy.

My questions:

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?

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?