Jimquisition: Boob Wars and Dragon Crowns

reciprocal

New member
Jun 4, 2009
77
0
0
My questions are:
1) How small do breasts have to be before you're considered a paedophile?
2) How big do they have to be before you're considered a pervert?
3) Is it entirely dictated by how much clothes she is wearing?
4) How thin is anorexic?
5) How heavy is obese?
6) What's a good guideline that someone can use so as to not offend people?
7) Should an artist / developer be allowed to offend people?
8) Should you let character designs decide if you buy a game or not?
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.

My opinion is that it was a small matter that got overblown but got resolved reasonably. Everything after that was just trying to re-ignite the flames.
 

Hakazaba

New member
May 1, 2009
90
0
0
I'm of the mind that it doesn't matter if its sexual or not.
It would be hypocritical for me to think it matters and still be a consumer of pornography wouldn't it?

Or find anyone sexually attractive for that matter.
 

Joseph Cortinas

New member
Apr 29, 2013
9
0
0
@Nurb So much win in your post was lost among the angry/fed up tone and the "side note" conclusion assuming that you know what group of people ALL the recent complaints come from, and promptly labeling them. So right and yet oh so wrong. I am disappoint.

@fwiffo I actually often prefer 2d spell effects over 3d ones, so 2d doesn't automatically mean "bad" but most of the rest of what you said Seems right.
 

Gunjester

New member
Mar 31, 2010
249
0
0
Before watching this video I made a response to a post where someone quoted me on how I mentioned the art style was satirical and therefore a bad example for gender issues arguments, only half-defending the game, and they said that their child etc. etc. would be effected and told that's how they should look etc.etc.
I answered rather violently, saying they shouldn't let their child play and it's their fault not Vanillaware's and then pointed out a girl would probably prefer playing as the elf anyways. I was humbled after watching this and although I made essentially the same points as Jim in this video, I made them the wrong way. Thus, thank God for you, Jim, you calmed me down and I edited the post to be more friendly and change an argument to a discussion.
 

Uhura

This ain't no hula!
Aug 30, 2012
418
0
0
Yes! I wish there would be less mud slinging in sexism discussions. And I think it's frustrating that so many of these discussions derail into some sort of meta-zone where we discuss wether we should have discussions about sexism in video games or not, instead of, you know, discussing sexism in video games.

To me the problem with these characters stems entirely from the over-saturation of sexualized female characters and personally I absolutely want more games to have more "sensibly" dressed female characters.
 

Prosis

New member
May 5, 2011
214
0
0
Nurb said:
So what?
Women get their "mommy porn" with the likes of 50 shades of gray with powerful, assertive men, girls get their "romance porn" with many shows/movies/books now of hunky, shirtless forever-teen-looking creatures fighting for their love and attention... Can't us guys have our own fantasies? It's sexualized like everyone else's escapism, just a different medium, so why do we have to have to catch so much shit for enjoying the sight of pretty girls in various situations? It's no different. (I didn't even mention the yaoi fangirls).
Yup. The tradeoff, though, is that there is a ton of books. You can find books on anything and everything, running the gamut of possible characters. While undoubtedly a few types prevail at different times (Harry Potter, Twilight, 50 Shades, etc.) there is always a huge number of books for any type of character through which the reader can feel some sort of connection/association with. Same for manga, same for movies.

And there's nothing wrong with games pandering to men. Nothing at all. The problem, however, is the lack of games which pander to women. The number of games with decent, interesting male characters (or at least a male protagonist) is pretty good, while the number of games with decent, interesting female characters that also lack jiggle physics is very low.

Do characters like the Sorceress need to be banned? No. Freedom of expression and all that. Could we use some more variety in the gaming industry, a few more games with female protagonists or interesting female characters? Definitely.
 

Joseph Cortinas

New member
Apr 29, 2013
9
0
0
I take issue with the idea that a female character has to BOTH be interesting/multidimensional AND have a specified yet not specified boob size. Whats wrong with a very well endowed character who is ALSO fun, interesting, quirky, smart, ect. why does it have to be all or nothing? why do people so quickly write off characters after the first look at their breast size? don't we usually hate it when that kind of quick judging is done irl?

why then is it ok for us to not even play the game, not even care about anything else other than the size of a characters breasts? because unrealistic or not there is always(or at least SHOULD always be) more to a woman than her breast size. and we should all be able to look past that both in games and in life.
 

Something Amyss

Aswyng and Amyss
Dec 3, 2008
24,759
0
0
Zombie_Moogle said:
Yes, but it was much more muted than many other such discussion/arguments were

Could be that Bayonetta was more tasteful about it(no DoA-style jiggle physics)
Could be that the arguments for it were more valid in her case, as she was a better realized character in general
Could be because it was a good game & people were more willing to forgive it
Or maybe just that it was made by some of the same people that brought us Devil May Cry's Dante, another pretty, stylish, hardcore, swaggering, sexy character. Both are essentially the same character, just with the gender flipped. Lazy writing perhaps, but it makes for an interesting example on the subject
If it's worse now, there also exists the possibility that things have simply become more aggravated in the last couple of years. Bayonetta dropped about 3 years ago, well before Anita Sarkeesian (EDIT: Specifically TVW in video games, which is what really got people up in arms) and all that jazz. Well before we found out that common publisher logic says women can't sell games.

the December King said:
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.

emeraldrafael said:
But the dwarf isn't making many people uncomfortable, because men don't get sexually harassed at PAX East. Because male designers don't get mistaken for receptionists. Because male reporters are never asked if they really play video games.

Because the sorceress is symbolic of a much bigger problem.
But he has a point in this, doesn't he? I mean, you can argue whether or not this is actually endemic of a larger problem (and yes, for the record, I think it is), but even if you don't agree it's clear he's pushing towards the point that the reason the sorc makes people uncomfortable is because of the overall treatment and perception of women in the media and the culture.

He's not just saying "it's okay because male power fantasy." In fact, he goes farther than I would in saying that the male models are as sexualised as the female models.

The point that both are tailored for men, however, is quite valid. There is no one "type" of man that women like any more than there's a "type" of woman men like, but if you look at what's commercially successful with women, it's generally not the type of thing referenced here. This is what guys like to see.
 

Otaku World Order

New member
Nov 24, 2011
463
0
0
Actually, the Elf kinda looks like a mix of Velvet and Gwendolyn from Odin Sphere... which is definitely a good thing.

Once again, it just goes to show that knee-jerk reactions are usually the worst kind. Next thing you know, everyone is hurling bile at each other and the end result is just a bunch of stains and the stench of puke everywhere.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Regardless of where the discussion (or lack thereof) on gender has gone, or where the gaming business stands on gender issues (or how they profit), I know only two things:

-I don't see many well-written, believable female characters, in or out of leading roles and would like to see more for the sake of variety and exploring the related themes through the medium of gaming (C-culture? In video games???)

-I am really fucking tired of gender topics trolling the forums, and I know they aren't going away any time soon.
 

Nurb

Cynical bastard
Dec 9, 2008
3,078
0
0
Prosis said:
Nurb said:
So what?
Women get their "mommy porn" with the likes of 50 shades of gray with powerful, assertive men, girls get their "romance porn" with many shows/movies/books now of hunky, shirtless forever-teen-looking creatures fighting for their love and attention... Can't us guys have our own fantasies? It's sexualized like everyone else's escapism, just a different medium, so why do we have to have to catch so much shit for enjoying the sight of pretty girls in various situations? It's no different. (I didn't even mention the yaoi fangirls).
Yup. The tradeoff, though, is that there is a ton of books. You can find books on anything and everything, running the gamut of possible characters. While undoubtedly a few types prevail at different times (Harry Potter, Twilight, 50 Shades, etc.) there is always a huge number of books for any type of character through which the reader can feel some sort of connection/association with. Same for manga, same for movies.

And there's nothing wrong with games pandering to men. Nothing at all. The problem, however, is the lack of games which pander to women. The number of games with decent, interesting male characters (or at least a male protagonist) is pretty good, while the number of games with decent, interesting female characters that also lack jiggle physics is very low.

Do characters like the Sorceress need to be banned? No. Freedom of expression and all that. Could we use some more variety in the gaming industry, a few more games with female protagonists or interesting female characters? Definitely.
Well you're talking about demographics now. In regards to E-Lit and young-adult romance novels, women make up the majority of the fans there and are made to appeal to them, while guys are the majority in games. Just how things work out.. probably something to do with brain wiring.

A problem in games, as with any female main characters in any medium, are hard to write for because they are judged so much more by groups of people who have different ideas of how that character "should be", even when written by another woman. An example would be any female character that steps up to fight off an antagonist in a game is typically seen as an improvement in number of roles they have, but some groups and people like Anita Sarkeesian claim that is a negative role for female characters because they are "forced to act like men". Then they raise a fuss on youtube or tumblr or whatever.

So I agree and think the number of characters out there could use a boost, but they are not going to satisfy someone's checklist and that person could raise a stink in the gaming community, contiually trying to say any effort isn't good enough.

Gamers are getting more diverse, so it'll happen as there's more demand. Gay and bisexual characters that aren't defined by their sexuality are even rarer, but that attitude is changing too. It's all positive for the future.
 

Mahoshonen

New member
Jul 28, 2008
358
0
0
Urm, I feel kinda dumb for joining in the mud slinging yesterday. I blame booze. Booze and the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory.

I will say that anonymity really hurts any chance of having an intelligent discussion. I never have to worry about my family and co-workers finding out I act like an ass on the internet as long as I have a username that I thought was clever a decade ago to hide behind. I'm not recommending getting rid of anonymity either in general or on the Escapist, at least not yet, just pointing out that forums like these are not good venues to have this debate.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
I was glad that some sort of civilized discussion finally came from this. I stand by my original point though: of all the fights to pick, this one is not the one to fight. They are just character designs for character who are not actual characters in the sense they have a strong and interesting back story and that is wrecked by the terrible art direction of this game. Also, who gives a shit about what a writer from Kotaku actually thinks. We get it, he has opinions, so what. Complaints like this are just for click throughs, nothing else. It's the hot button issue of the moment so of course people like him are going to go and find things to contribute that that particular "discussion".
 

duchaked

New member
Dec 25, 2008
4,451
0
0
as I foray into a career which will likely involve writing, I agree with Jim that sometimes I will likely be mistaken or have an opinion that goes in an unintended direction. people who are willing to respond with a calm and thoughtful discussion in opposition is much appreciated. but only if it can be done without snark and sometimes a really emotional reaction just barely withheld heh...that's like asking for the moon tho :/
 

Pat Hulse

New member
Oct 17, 2011
67
0
0
Roger said:
Pat Hulse said:
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.
m19 said:
Pat Hulse said:
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.
I'll respond to both of these because they're kind of in the same ballpark of "false equivalence".

Roger, people will find attractive what they find attractive. However, the power of any visual medium is the ability to impart your own vision onto the audience. To illustrate my point, I personally don't find anything inherently sexual about feet, but some people do. That said, I find it really hard to watch a lot of Quentin Tarantino films and not see that he's trying REALLY hard to sexualize a lot of feet. I love those movies, and I don't have a problem with QT's tastes, but I can tell just by how the material is framed that he is portraying these body parts sexually.

When you see the sorceress, it's pretty obvious that the intent is to titillate. Pretending otherwise is silly. Are breasts sexual organs in the same way a scrotum/penis is? No. Do they provoke responses that are inherently sexual in nature when portrayed in this particular manner as much as actual sexual organs would? I'd say yes.

Which brings me to m19's point, which implies that the explicit intent of the fighter's design in the Penny Arcade comic is to annoy men rather than to appeal to women, which makes it a false equivalence.

First of all, I'd imagine that a lot of straight women who first saw designs similar to the sorceress had a moment of "Does anyone actually find this attractive?" And then they quickly found out that quite a few men do, and lost a little bit of faith in humanity. In that light, you'd probably be surprised to learn that this kind of male anatomy would probably be appealing to more women (and probably men) than you'd think. Probably not a LOT, but honestly, not all that many straight men would find the sorceress particularly appealing. Most men would probably not be BOTHERED by it, but it's not like every single straight man would find the sorceress sexy. Many would probably just find it comical. Similarly, I doubt a lot of women would be terribly bothered by the Penny Arcade fighter design and likely just find it humorous.

But still, you're right. Penny Arcade's intent was to make a point by creating a design that explicitly annoyed/discomforted men.

Now... you do realize that a great deal of women find the sorceress' design to be annoying/discomforting, right? Just because it isn't INTENDED to doesn't mean it doesn't. The fact that this was designed with the intent to appeal to the sort of people who find it appealing doesn't really help. If anything, it just says that the desire of some to stare at unearthly breasts outweighs the discomfort of those who find that appearance annoying.

That said, I'm not suggesting that one person's discomfort towards a design is enough reason to discredit someone else's enjoyment of it. However, it's important to acknowledge that this dynamic when it comes to sexualized character design is SERIOUSLY one-sided in western media, particularly in video games. The fact is, there are very few male characters in western media that are sexualized to the point of making straight men uncomfortable.

So what's my point? Just that it's very easy for men to disregard the annoyance/discomfort of women who are bothered by this kind of character design when we don't really have to deal with anything like it ourselves. Even if the Penny Arcade comic and things like the Hawkeye Initiative aren't an exact equivalence, they still provide a certain degree of context to help give men an understanding of what this kind of representation feels like.

It isn't that women are bothered that the sorceress looks ridiculous or that some men find her attractive. It's that the design is just generally unappealing to a lot of women, makes them uncomfortable because of the overt sexualization, stating their discomfort often gets them chewed out by those who like the design, and this sort of design decision is practically inescapable in the medium.