Jimquisition: Neutered

[Thanatos2k]

There's a reason why many of the very best games in the gaming history has the player either controlling an everyman/non-human protagonist or allows you to design your own character.

I don't believe that to be true in the slightest.

Deus Ex? Forced Male main character.

Final Fantasy 7? Forced Male main character.

Xenoblade? Forced Male main character.

Suikoden 2? Forced Male main character.

Nier? Forced Male main character.

Metal Gear Solid? Forced Male main character.

God of War? Forced Male main character.

Planescape Torment? Forced Male main character.

The list goes on. It really has NOTHING to do with the gender of the protagonist. Nothing whatsoever.

 

[Pebkio]

What if Saint's Row had a giant purple floppy vagina give away that had a real game equivalent?

I am almost, almost afraid to ask how one would use a "giant purple floppy vagina" in the game as a weapon...

Use your imagination.

That's right, we're trying to be all inclusive here so get creative! How about it could be like a giant plunger and you can get some quick-motion suffocation kills. Or maybe it can shoot dolls that look like babies... baby action figures... at high speed that explode on contact.

And then, in co-op, it could pair up with the big floppy purple dildo so that you hit the baby action figures to make them go further and do more damage.

 

[Gunjester]

Also, people might be worrying that characters like the sorceress wouldn't be allowed if detractors got their way, which would be stifling creativity somewhat.

More character diversity would be nice though.

Jim's not asking to stop characters like her, he's more asking for them to become less common.

 

[Eve Charm]

Neutered

Why do gamers defend their favorite titles from criticism with such volatility? According to some, it's because they don't want to see their genitalia removed.

Watch Video

Can i just point out one of your other things on here is " movie defense force "

 

[leviadragon99]

Oh dear Christ... this phenomenon is actually a thing? People really use that argument? Goddamn...

It's just another way for the ingrained bigotry to try and find excuses for itself.

 

[leviadragon99]

Neutered

Why do gamers defend their favorite titles from criticism with such volatility? According to some, it's because they don't want to see their genitalia removed.

Watch Video

Can i just point out one of your other things on here is " movie defense force "

Oh yeah, because challenging people to see things the mainstream audience dismiss as terrible in a new light is EXACTLY the same as ravenously demanding that all reviews of a game give it perfect scores.

 

[leviadragon99]

Oh dear Christ... this phenomenon is actually a thing? People really use that argument? Goddamn...

It's just another way for the ingrained bigotry to try and find excuses for itself.

Ingrained bigotry is people who like having big boobed women in their games?

Honestly the people who make games don't owe you anything, they are not obligated to make games that appeal to you.

No, the ingrained bigotry is people trying to chase female gamers out of the community, it's the ludicrous level of hostility Anita Sarkis-whatever gets for even suggesting that maybe some games out there might not have the best depiction of women, it's the rape threats on twitter, the "make me a sandwitch" meme, and the idea that a game has to alienate people to remain pure and creative.

And they are indeed not obligated, where in my argument does it say that? But it might just help them out if they did make games that genuinely appeal to a market beyond the brogrammer demographic from time to time.

 

[Lilani]

Give 'em an inch they take a mile.

Not to be "that person," because I did read the rest of your post, but isn't that exactly what was said about things like suffrage, integration, and gay marriage? Every time a group wants to stop being marginalized, the groups that want to keep them marginalized argue "we can't treat them fairly because things will just get out of hand!"

That isn't an excuse for not doing the right thing. EVER. The flaws that come with extreme feminism don't excuse keeping sexism alive, just as the flaws that come with extreme civil rights ("reverse-racism," as some call it) don't excuse keeping racism alive. If those issues arise, then we'll deal with them just as sexism and racism were dealt with. Otherwise, don't impede progress because of a bunch of myths and maybes.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

So tell me, Jim, what exactly separates Dragon's Crown from Saints Row other than a hell of a lot more money and staff to work in specific scenarios for all those extra options? Last I checked, the sorceress wasn't the only option for a playable female character, and the other two had radically different body types from her. You are effectively complaining that comically large breasts are an option, even though you listed that among the strengths of Saints Row. Maybe you think there should have been multiple body types for every class in Dragon's Crown, a game made by a team of about 20, some of whom were working on other projects at the same time? Do you have any idea how much money and work it would take to make that many additional art assets, given that Vanillaware actually painted them all, instead of using easily modifiable CG models? From where I'm standing, you just come off as a hypocrite.

Also, 'feminist types' don't create the kind of media you seem to think they do. They publish stories full of centaur gang-rapes and savage African cannibals, or novels of which the first third is devoted to browsing child pornography on future-4chan, or occasionally make movies about how gay men are motivated exclusively by the desire to harm women. An awful lot of well-regarded creative endeavors by actual feminists would have 'feminist types' like you crying bloody murder the length and breadth of the net; just look at all the ignorant third wavers calling 'straw feminist' at Angela Carter novels, as if they were in any position to talk about feminism compared to her.

 

[Lilani]

There is no right thing to do in this situation other than not trying to get or threaten censorship.
This isn't a moral issue, the game publishers do not owe you anything and they aren't harming anyone with games like Dragon's Crown.

I really like using this quote so I'm going to use it again. It was talking about music censorship but it applies here.

I wasn't talking about Dragon's Crown. Dansrage was acting like asking for the abandonment of certain trite and cliche tropes was akin to calling for the castration of all men whose eyes ever lingered on a pair of breasts. I was pointing out that that line of thinking is both untrue and flawed.

 

[Ihateregistering1]

Call me nuts, but isn't the simplest solution to pretty much all of this to let developers make whatever the heck games they want, and then we choose whether to buy them or not? I mean, if the makers of 'Dragon's Crown' lost 50,000 potential buyers because they decided to give the Sorceress a G-cup, or the makers of GTA V lose 100,000 customers because they made all the leads male, the only people who really 'lost' anything there are the developers, as they devoted money and time to the game's development. I certainly didn't invest any money in it, and the only time I spent was looking at previews.

Now if the game was a Kickstarter, well, ok, then I can understand someone saying "I devoted money to this, you need to listen to me", but for most games that simply doesn't apply.

 

[Redd the Sock]

One of the issues in this area is that at least some people only use the "inclusive" and "more variety" labels as lip service when, yes, they seem to want anything they find offensive put away, and most of the rest really don't know they can come off that way. Bringing Dragon's Crown to light by wagging you finger at one character, or poorly reviewing it because you don't like want it was so much you couldn't ask how well it did it, these are not things that get me thinking these people want variety. Most people on forums aren't big into censorship, but when the discussions are about going "this is bad and needs to happen less" more than they're about contributing to the new ideas, it's hard not to think that variety isn't the real goal.

I realize this is the internet, and as such, it's full of people that want to take the easy route and tear things down and leave the new idea creation to someone else, but that's the majority of the problem. We get nothing but angry attacks and finger wagging, but few new ideas. Even your Saints Row 4 praise is less a new idea, than a call for every game to have a customizable avatar (which seems to reduce every complaint down to the aesthetic looks of the main character and little else.) The DiD debate was full of people tired of the trope, but few that could answer "what would you prefer to do instead?" We need to quit passing the creativity buck and start providing developers the concepts we want to see. What we do know might have the opposite of the desired effect as companies decide these "inclusive groups" are just full of complainers while the old demographic is there doling out cash for anything with fanservice.

 

[Eve Charm]

Neutered

Why do gamers defend their favorite titles from criticism with such volatility? According to some, it's because they don't want to see their genitalia removed.

Watch Video

Can i just point out one of your other things on here is " movie defense force "

Oh yeah, because challenging people to see things the mainstream audience dismiss as terrible in a new light is EXACTLY the same as ravenously demanding that all reviews of a game give it perfect scores.

Really it's different from people JUST saying a movie is awful and no one should ever see it and it should die in a fire then the people that take one look at the art of a game and call it trash? Defend movies on their merits but don't defend games?

It's not about the scores, it's about the existence. You can't and never will be, able to homogenize art. For the good or bad, it should exist and shouldn't have to be watered down for anyone. You can't put a boob slider on Hand-drawn characters, just like the statue of david in real life doesn't come with an "sex appeal slider" often imitated but never duplicated, whether it's your thing or not, it's better to exist then not to exist at all.

 

[Erttheking]

I'd like to point out that just because one piece of media can be inclusive and not lose any of it's appeal doesn't mean the same is true for everything else.

I give you 12 Angry Men (if you've never seen it, it follows the journey of 12 men on a jury as they argue over whether or not a boy murdered his father, it's one of my favorite movies).

If you had some women jurors in 12 Angry Men the character interactions and the dialogue would play out noticeably differently for the simple reason that (as a general rule of thumb) men interact with each other in different ways when they know there's a women listening.

I don't mean they'd try to hit on her or that they'd kill all sex jokes but that they'd be less hostile with each other, and less blunt. Yes there's exceptions like if the woman is someone they've known for a while and consider one of the guys but that's not going to happen in a room with 12 strangers.

And the way the characters interact is the film's strong suit. So altering that for the sake of inclusion/appealing to people might've hurt the movie.

There might be a similar effect if you gender swapped one of the protagonists in GTA V.

I can give another example too. Taming of the Shrew by William Shakespeare. Long story short, a man wants to marry a woman for her money. The woman is incredibly hostile and insults people a lot (hence shrew). He tames her by out-performing her in a 'be a terrible spouse' competition while pretending he's doing it all in the name of love. And he's the hero of the story.

You can guess how that's been changed to make it more inclusive. And you can't tell me with a straight face that that wouldn't have stifled creativity if Shakespeare had made it today and had been pressured to make those changes.

That's an interesting argument that kind of loses some of it's weight because Shakespeare's works were a product of their time. He specifically wrote them to be about the then modern day world, basising them on the then values. If Shakespeare lived in modern day, he would never write anything like that. He would write plays based on modern values.

No one is saying that developed should be forced to go in and change what they wanted to do. They're saying that they want more variety and for people to step out of their comfort zone. When people criticize Call of Duty for doing the same thing over and over again, people don't rush to it's defense, saying that people should stop trying to oppress Infinity Ward's creative vision. Why is it ok for people to criticize call of duty for doing the same things over and over again, but not to criticize the gaming industry as a whole for doing the same things over and over again.