Jimquisition: Stupid Sexy Bayonetta

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

very nearly spot on.

I'd again argue the "Save the Damsel" thing is merely lazy writing and can subjectively be claimed to be freedom of choice vs no choice and not merely a goal to be won.

My only other nit pick.

Team ninja have problems but it's odd just what the problems actually are.

This shows it better

Tina Armstrong a Female wrestlers & female wrestlers Mickie James and Paige

Helena a former opera singer and a real life Opera singer called Debora

Mila a female MMA fighter & former MMA fighter Gina Carano (soon to be Wonderwoman on film screens)

The problem is when they decide to do things like this.

Although they are getting better with sexualised male characters too. This is from their latest DLC

Spoiler: Large Image of a guy in pants click to reveal

Minor point: Gina Carano is NOT playing Wonder Woman, Gal Gadot from Fast and Furious is; much to my irritation.


OT: Bayonetta was one of my favourite games on PS3 because I appreciate shit that sees what over the top is, and decides it can do better. Or to quote Mel the Marine from ME3 "Take the raunchiest thing you can imagine; and hang a hanar off it".

This is truly the first time I've regretted not owning a WiiU

 

[Erttheking]

"I think Bayonetta is sexist because it has gratuitous ass and crotch shots" <- Gets across that it's opinion, won't cause any issue from me.
"Bayonetta is sexist because it has gratuitous ass and crotch shots" <- Immediately earns my ire, expressing opinion as fact.

Also, the first 50 seconds of that video was the most condescending assery I've experienced in a long time. People were dicks to you on twitter, that's awful. Don't take it out on your audience.

Hey, uh, member of Jim's audience here. I KNEW he wasn't talking about me. Kindly don't claim that I'm being attacked when I know for a fact I'm not. People really need to stop freaking the Hell out and assume everything is directed at them. Did you ever perform the "I don't condone harassment but-" action? If not, he wasn't talking about you and you can relax.

OT: When you get down to it, this is really just the same old people getting pissy because a game they were looking forward towards got a bad review with a new coat of paint. People just want to shut up opposing views.

Thank fucking god for you, Jim. This video should be required viewing for participation in any online discussion anywhere.

Also, the first 50 seconds of that video was the most condescending assery I've experienced in a long time. People were dicks to you on twitter, that's awful. Don't take it out on your audience.

If that statement pissed you off that much... I think a bit more introspection might be in order on exactly why you found that offensive...

I am not one of the people who did that. Regardless, he faced the camera in the opening portion of his video and made that statement. It may not have been directed at me specifically but it came across that way. And whether or not it came across that way, it was still extremely condescending to do that. I don't need a lecture on harassment and not from Jim of all people.

I know he looked at the camera. He ALWAYS looks at the camera. It's kind of his thing. Really? It came across that way? Because clearly there's some dispute about that. Condescending to whom exactly? All the people who want to glaze over sexual harassment?

When Jim says something to criticize a group, it's pretty clear what group he's criticizing. And if you don't do this, I don't know why you think he's talking about you.

 

[Redd the Sock]

While I expect this to get lost in all this, my own view is that a personal dislike is not a flaw in the product, and reviewers need to realized that. An example springing to mind is USgamer giving Xblaze code Embryo .5 out of 5 becuas ethe reviewer didn't like visual novels. He doesn't have to like them, but if you like VNs, and opinion from someone that doesn't, and doesn't seem to be open minded is a waste of time.

When it comes to socio-political issues this gets more problematic. We can laugh at the above, but the free flow of ideas gets jammed when quality is related to how much you agree with the argument. For an example, let's start here with the article referenced here:

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/06/23/official-nintendo-magazine-uk-calls-senran-kagura-2-filth-xseed-producer-responds-in-kind/

Clearly the original reviewer has issues with fanservice games and cares nothing about anything else. I'm not saying he has to like the game, or even be quiet about it in editorial, but if Senran Kagura wants to be a fanservice game it should be judged as it stands as a fanservice game, not raked over the coals for daring to go against the reviewer's morals. While it sounds like I'm defending my porn, put yourself in the other side's shoes. Imagine a game like Mass Effect getting 5/10 by a nutjob christian reviewer because it was a violent shooter, said homosexuality was okay, and used a sci-fi setting that goes against the teachings of the lord. Imagine if the bayonetta scores were lower because "who wants to play as a woman". These are reasons people may not like the games, but they'd be lynched for that we'd consider unfair, but are no less vested in politics than making down for sexist outfits, just a less agreeable side.

Grading based on how much you approve of the politics of something is a sign of a closed mind not open to letting the other side have its voice. If something gets to sexy or violent for you, sorry, but it wasn't tailor made for you either, and you have to accept it for what it is, and judge it for what it wants to be, not what you want it to be. It can still fail horribly at that, but to view it as worse due to your morals or politics is to say works are less worthy if they don't prop up your views, and by connections, you are afraid of the other view, be it gay people aren't evil, or sexualized women are okay.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

With regards to the "they shouldn't review based on their tastes, they should review based on our tastes" argument:

How the bloody hell are they going to know what your tastes in games is? Or my tastes in games is? And what are they supposed to do if your tastes and my tastes conflict?

It's better that a lot of different folks review games from different perspectives so that you can find some people who have tastes like yours and I can find some people who have tastes like mine.

Publishers being stupid about Metacritic isn't an excuse for inflating game scores.

 

[Caostotale]

And I've got a bit of of a secret tip for you Jim! When two sides are colliding in a very heated debate and someone is trying to appear as neutral and understanding as possible, it's important that you make it appear as though you are chastising both sides for the negative actions of some individuals in their camps, not just one side.

I'm pretty sure he's not trying to appear very neutral or understanding, and I don't blame him. He doesn't owe either 'side' anything. Gamergate's not signing his checks and, if anything, its loudest mouthpieces would probably like nothing more than to see his career fucked up, i.e. for having the gall to say he respects Leigh Alexander as a person, for suggesting that nasty gamers were very responsible for Sarkeesian's meteoric rise in popularity, that objective game reviewing is impossible bullshit and people should stop asking for it, and other grievous comments against the sanctity of the medium. At all points since they've showed up, whether he's acted patient with them or expressed irritation at their endless badgering, his name has remained plastered on all of their boycott lists and all of their McCarthyist SJW riders.

Even if the movement magically came to represent 50% + 1 of the game-buying public (i.e. a situation that wouldn't happen in a million years), he still wouldn't be bound to hand out some sort of fair hearing. He's not a judge and the Escapist website is not a courtroom.

 

[leviadragon99]

Ehhh, honestly I'm just indifferent about Bayonetta, she's a character that exists, and there's certainly far worse out there if you want to focus on the elements of her that could be seen as offensive.

Wait, is that kid wearing the millennium puzzle?

 

[Rellik San]

Publishers being stupid about Metacritic isn't an excuse for inflating game scores.

Nope, but it is an excuse for abolishing review scores that may reduce a nuanced and carefully written opinion into a flame bait article, intentional or not on the authors end.

 

[major_chaos]

I support the Polygon review's right to exist even if I find it 100% worthless, but the issue is the stupid obscene power of metacritic making that stupid arbitrary number effect everything from a game's success to how much the devs actually get paid. Get rid of Metacrtic (or at least render it irrelevant) and Kotaku and Polygon can give games with fanservice a "0/10, literaly hitler" for all I care.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

But Bayonetta was designed by a woman as her own personal power fantasy. Someone who's sexual because she wants to be, not because there's a man she wants to bang.

But does SHE want to be? I guess this gets into a very technical debate, one probably unnecessary as its just a video game, but Bayonetta doesn't WANT anything. She's a character. A fiction. Someone who is being written by someone else. So Bayonetta doesn't want to strip, her writers want Bayonetta to want to strip. And I guess that's my sticking point. We seem to accept casually that what Bayonetta does is okay because someone wrote that Bayonetta is okay with it. She herself was never asked, and her actions are driven by a) the writers and b) the player. But that's seen as okay because someone wrote a line of dialogue, gave it to a voice actress and then boom, instant 'not sexist' shield.
Left to her own devices, I don't think Bayonetta strips too much, as again, she's not real.
I guess I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between Bayonetta and like the DoA Volleyball series. Yes, in DoA they're on a beach and that's out of character for them, again, only because someone somewhere declared it so. But what if a writer said it wasn't? If a writer came out and said Tina and Kasumi like bikinis and sun-bathing, would the game be okay? If someone wrote a stupid 30sec monologue explaining why they're on a paradise island, would it be okay then? What if we threw in random giant monsters fights? Would their pole-dancing be okay then? Is a pole dance any less absurd on monster's back than it is in an empty room?
Or would it still be the desperate refuge of the perverted?
To me, Bayonetta is the exact same. She's sexual and strips and grinds/humps/sucks/kisses/whips, etc...only because we and/or the writers arbitrarily said it was okay. We dubbed her 'not offensive' and just shield behind that. Bayonetta isn't sexist because we said 'Not to be sexist, but...' therefore debate is over.

 

[Rellik San]

Left to her own devices, I don't think Bayonetta strips too much, as again, she's not real.
I guess I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between Bayonetta and like the DoA Volleyball series. Yes, in DoA they're on a beach and that's out of character for them, again, only because someone somewhere declared it so. But what if a writer said it wasn't? If a writer came out and said Tina and Kasumi like bikinis and sun-bathing, would the game be okay? If someone wrote a stupid 30sec monologue explaining why they're on a paradise island, would it be okay then? What if we threw in random giant monsters fights? Would their pole-dancing be okay then? Is a pole dance any less absurd on monster's back than it is in an empty room?
Or would it still be the desperate refuge of the perverted?

I'm gonna answer in an almost absolute here:

Mostly yes... if the characters were previously written in a way that doesn't make those actions out of character, yes it would be ok. I maintain people are still allowed to find it tasteless and gratuitous, that's their opinion and that as Jim said... is fine. But it would contextually change a part of the game and the way it's interpreted.

The game play mechanics would still make it absurdly voyeuristic, but if the characters were aware and consenting to that voyeurism, then yes, it would change the context and the way I feel about that game. (I wouldn't deign to speak about others opinions on it).

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Man, (gal? fish?) I am all for getting rid of review scores. Useless, arbitrary numbers at the end of a review to inform people who didn't want to read.

 

[Rellik San]

Man, (gal? fish?) I am all for getting rid of review scores. Useless, arbitrary numbers at the end of a review to inform people who didn't want to read.

I'm so hairy I think "Beast" is more accurate.

Well in that case, I suggest the TLR format of summarising, a brief sentence "Game is good because..." and followed by "Game is bad because..."

In that case it gives you a quick overview on the talking points and if you want to, it's then easy enough to read further.

 

[Glen Compton]

I support the Polygon review's right to exist even if I find it 100% worthless, but the issue is the stupid obscene power of metacritic making that stupid arbitrary number effect everything from a game's success to how much the devs actually get paid. Get rid of Metacrtic (or at least render it irrelevant) and Kotaku and Polygon can give games with fanservice a "0/10, literaly hitler" for all I care.

Yes this i agree with 100%. If i disagree with their reviews enough I will find a better site that actually reflects my interests. Let them carve themselves a smaller niche audience that feels that way as well.

The power of meta critic is stupidly important, for some reason, and that is were the bigger problem lies.

 

[Something Amyss]

But Bayonetta was designed by a woman as her own personal power fantasy. Someone who's sexual because she wants to be, not because there's a man she wants to bang.

No, Bayonetta was commissioned by the designer of the game (a man), who had input throughout the creation process. Hideki Kamiya is the only one of which I'm aware of saying she was his ideal woman. He had insisted on several design points.

he's a character. A fiction. Someone who is being written by someone else. So Bayonetta doesn't want to strip, her writers want Bayonetta to want to strip. And I guess that's my sticking point. We seem to accept casually that what Bayonetta does is okay because someone wrote that Bayonetta is okay with it. She herself was never asked, and her actions are driven by a) the writers and b) the player. But that's seen as okay because someone wrote a line of dialogue, gave it to a voice actress and then boom, instant 'not sexist' shield.

Well, on the latter part, "LOOK, A GIRL DID IT!" has been a bread and butter cop-0ou for decades. Also, women totally can never be sexist. But to the former, that logic would mean no character has agency, so I'm a little lost on the argument here.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

I hope we see more Bayonetta games on the Wii (and hopefully maybe a PC port?). It's one of the highest rated games on the console. Perhaps Nintendo will see this, that they should make more like this.

 

[Darth_Payn]

OK, that "sex is always positive" line got a full belly laugh from me! What you said about sexuality being exaggerated brings to mind what Yahtzee said about that: "Just because its portrayal is "ironic" doesn't mean somebody isn't getting off to it."

I'd ask you quote me in context please: "Because when done right, sex is always positive" see the removal of the "WHEN DONE RIGHT" changes the context in incredible ways and ways that infer a lot of potential unpleasantness... so please, don't misquote me again.

Now to address your main point: Absolutely, just because something is "ironic" doesn't mean someone isn't jacking off to it, but why is that a bad thing? People are turned on by all manner of things, from girls in jeans and sweaters to men in jock straps lifting weights, the means of how someone is turned on are so varied and wild, who are we to judge what others find sexually alluring or don't?

Right, right sorry if I messed up what you said earlier. I just thought saying half that line was enough to bring it back to mind. I first read "When sex is done right, it's always positive" in a deep baritone like Billy Dee Williams, with a smooth jazz soundtrack.

 

[Darkmantle]

SNIP

But Bayonetta was designed by a woman as her own personal power fantasy. Someone who's sexual because she wants to be, not because there's a man she wants to bang.

But does SHE want to be? I guess this gets into a very technical debate, one probably unnecessary as its just a video game, but Bayonetta doesn't WANT anything. She's a character. A fiction. Someone who is being written by someone else. So Bayonetta doesn't want to strip, her writers want Bayonetta to want to strip. And I guess that's my sticking point. We seem to accept casually that what Bayonetta does is okay because someone wrote that Bayonetta is okay with it. She herself was never asked, and her actions are driven by a) the writers and b) the player. But that's seen as okay because someone wrote a line of dialogue, gave it to a voice actress and then boom, instant 'not sexist' shield.
Left to her own devices, I don't think Bayonetta strips too much, as again, she's not real.
I guess I'm having a hard time seeing the difference between Bayonetta and like the DoA Volleyball series. Yes, in DoA they're on a beach and that's out of character for them, again, only because someone somewhere declared it so. But what if a writer said it wasn't? If a writer came out and said Tina and Kasumi like bikinis and sun-bathing, would the game be okay? If someone wrote a stupid 30sec monologue explaining why they're on a paradise island, would it be okay then? What if we threw in random giant monsters fights? Would their pole-dancing be okay then? Is a pole dance any less absurd on monster's back than it is in an empty room?
Or would it still be the desperate refuge of the perverted?
To me, Bayonetta is the exact same. She's sexual and strips and grinds/humps/sucks/kisses/whips, etc...only because we and/or the writers arbitrarily said it was okay. We dubbed her 'not offensive' and just shield behind that. Bayonetta isn't sexist because we said 'Not to be sexist, but...' therefore debate is over.

Okay, but what's the solution? Define for me what an acceptable female character is. Is it ever acceptable for a female character to display her sexuality? How would one write an acceptable character who embraces their sexuality, male or female?

I find a lot of people won't stop saying what's wrong long enough to say what's right. And I am of the opinion, that most social change is a lot like driving, you have to look where you want to go. If you stare at an obstacle or hazard too long, you will crash into it.

So tell me, where do you want to go.

 

[ObserverStatus]

Hey, she's a witch, after all. They're all about some lovely sex.

Wot? I thought witches were all about warts, broomsticks, and eyes of newt?

 

[Grampy_bone]

With regards to the "they shouldn't review based on their tastes, they should review based on our tastes" argument:

How the bloody hell are they going to know what your tastes in games is? Or my tastes in games is? And what are they supposed to do if your tastes and my tastes conflict?

It's better that a lot of different folks review games from different perspectives so that you can find some people who have tastes like yours and I can find some people who have tastes like mine.

Publishers being stupid about Metacritic isn't an excuse for inflating game scores.

It's not that hard. Gamers collectively decide what standards are based on genre. People expect certain features from an RPG, sports game, shooter, puzzle game, etc. There are levels of criticism and expertise which can make one opinion more valid than another.

Standards also come from the developers. What did they say about the game? What features did they promote? How is it being marketed and sold? If the game's creators say the game features purple singing frogs, but the finished game has no singing frogs of any color, than you are valid in calling them out and demanding to know why the singing frog feature was promised but not delivered. Similarly, it makes no sense to attack a game for containing the exact type of content it is promoted for. Is your RPG full of experience points and leveling? No puzzle solving in your racing sim? These would be unfair complaints.

The problem is that feminists think feminism belongs everywhere. They think it transcends all genres and mediums. Why the @$#@& are football players wearing pink shoes? What the #@%$^& does football have to do with breast cancer?

Demanding a feminist perspective in every game is like demanding purple singing frogs in every game. It makes no sense. If your game is about feminism, or otherwise features it as an important theme, then go ahead and comment on it. What does sexism have to do with a GTA game? When you watch movies which inspired GTA (Goodfellas, Scarface, etc) do you see an abundance of feminist dogma or critique?

The people pushing this ideology claim that there is an economically significant demographic of gamers who make their purchasing decisions based on a game's sexism, and they are serving these customers by informing them of the important issue of a game's sexist content. I contend that no such demographic exists, and as evidence I cite the strong sales of so-called sexist games, as well as the weaker sales for a game which promotes feminism ideology or even features a female main character.