Jimquisition: Stupid Sexy Bayonetta

[grassgremlin]

While I agree with Jim about the points he was making, the reasons he were making the points seems a bit off
From what I've heard about the Polygon review thing centres around a certain level of hypocrisy from the reviewer, who is known to often visit a smut site where women in various arrays of undress post up for viewer enjoyment, which reach and even surpass the levels of "Fanservice" Bayonetta has become partly known for; which has let many, quite rightly in my opinion, to call foul on the reviewer for condemning it while indulging in an extremely similar thing in his own time.
Makes the whole thing sound a tad disingenuous.
As for the whole discussing of these sorts of things, yeah that would be awesome... however the whole mess that the community at large is currently embroiled in is in no small part due to a lack to out right refusal to discus things

Sexism in Gaming =/= Actual Porn.
I need to point this out. That isn't argument.

I draw porn constantly and can still criticize games for sexist shit.
It's about leaving your porn at the door when you create a product as much as you can.

Bayonetta isn't porn. It's a product sold to the masses.
I may not agree that she's sexist, but that reviewer is well in there right to criticize it for sexist tropes.

 

[grassgremlin]

SNIP

Quite right but I do disagree with you. Bayonetta is a sexy character most likely written by a man, but that doesn't cheapen her representation, she is displayed and written as a strong woman, enjoying herself and her life as much possible and using her power to achieve her goals in a way she finds appealing. She is, as much as I hate these terms "Sex Positive" (I don't hate what it means, I just hate that they call it "sex positive" because when done right, sex is always positive).

And whilst yes, her personality and actions are restricted by the writer/player relationship, the way it's presented is key, one could argue that her sexuality is overt and over the top it transcends "sexy" into camp absurdism, Bayonetta is to video games, what the sexually charged and motivated Rocky Horror Picture Show is to movies, the sexiness, sexualisation and erotically charged characters of both, were indeed written by men. But given the lack of Janet Weiss' agency in the story, other than engaging in sexually dramatic moments and later being literally brainwashed with sex and sexuality, wouldn't that be just as troubling a story? Assuming of course you read it that way.

Art is always about interpretation beyond the surface and both views are just as viable.

So come at me with your well reasoned opinion bro/sis. Let's discuss this further.

I guess I would ask, and forgive me if this details the conversation, but why are the writers Bayonetta given such a pass? I mean Bayonettas sexuality, her sucking and humping of things, theyre almost irrelevant to my larger thought really. It's not WHAT she does, it's why no one looks at the men behind the curtain.
For example, when Mass Effect 3s ending pissed everyone off, the rage was directed at the writers. How could they write this?! No one stepped up and said the Reapers have agency and Shepard made his/her choice so deal with it.
When Lara Croft was almost raped, everyone was disgusted someone wrote that in a game. No one just shrugged and said the bad guy was just confident in his sexuality. He has agency and choose this life.
When the new assassin creed demo had no women, everyone called it terrible and non inclusive. No one said well it was the women's choice to not be assassins. They decided to not be in the demo and we should respect that choice.
Dead or Alive extreme beach volleyball? Absolutely terrible! sexist! Disgusting. No one steps forward and says it's their choice to dress up in skimpy bikinis and bounce around in slowmo. No one respects Helena or Kasumi for their confidence in their bodies. Nope, they're sex doll.
But Bayonetta strips naked and grinds her enemies to death with her crotch? GOSH! what strong female characterization. How respectable. How progressive and confident she is!
No one bats an eye that writers made her this way. No one asks why she strips, it's just part of who she is, forgetting who she is isn't up to her.
I would go so far to say Dead or Alive Volleyball is a progressive game compared to Bayonetta. Yes DoA is trash, but it's not trying to hide it's naughty bits behind artsy filters or smoke monsters DoA isn't trying to pretend it's here for anything but cheese shots and doesn't throw in boss fights as part of a needless delaying tactic between strip shows. It's honest that this is fap material, pure and simple. where as Bayonetta has to pretend it's erotica, i guess so as not to piss off family friendly Nintendo or the moms who bought Wiis for their toddlers.

Bayonetta's creator is female.
http://www.destructoid.com/platinum-only-a-woman-could-design-bayonetta-148258.phtml

There's an interview of her talking about the character on youtube.
Actually the reason why Hideki Kamiya is such a asshole is because people keep asking him a question about Bayonetta when he wasn't responsible for the game's creative decisions only responsible for directing the game.

In fact he didn't even work on Bayonetta 2.

Edit: He's only credited because he was part of the creation of the first game.

 

[c3p]

The first segment: Thank You!

Gamergate has so much similarity to discussions with racists "I'm no racist, but [racist stuff]". If you feel like you have to put a disclaimer in front of the stuff you want to say, you probably shouldn't say it. Or stand to your opinion without distancing yourself from it immediately beforehand.

 

[grassgremlin]

Gonna add. Bayonetta's conception is by a woman.
Hideki Kamiya was a director and writer of the first game only.
Here's some info on Bayonetta's creator Mari Shimazaki

This is for clarification.
http://www.destructoid.com/platinum-only-a-woman-could-design-bayonetta-148258.phtml
http://platinumgames.com/2014/06/27/character-design-pt-1-bayonetta-and-jeanne/
http://platinumgames.com/2014/10/17/character-design-pt-3-new-characters-extras/
http://platinumgames.com/2014/09/19/character-design-pt-2-luka-rodin-and-enzo/

Sorry, I can't find her interview. I've seen gifs, having trouble finding.
There is a interview where she says that Bayonetta is wish fullfillment for her.

You milleage may vary on Kamiya's involvement, but i'll do more research in the development.
Kamiya states to never ask him questions on Bayonetta 2 as he says he didn't work on it.
On wikipedia he's credited as a writer and developer, but likely it's a holder over to his previous work being used.

Bingo Morihashi is listed as writer.
Other People involved include

Producers:
Atsushi Inaba
Hitoshi Yamagami

and Programmers
Minota Kenshin

Edit: I MIGHT BE WRONG! THAT IS OKAY! PLEASE DON'T RIP OFF MY HEAD AND DRINK THE BLOOD FROM THE STUMP >=o

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Sigh, I should've know it was going to be Thunderfoot. It's always Thunderfoot. It's the Rickroll of GamerGate, I swear. About as useful for discussion too.

I'd be shocked if that video came within the same timecode as a "point." Let me guess:

"The police didn't think the threat would be carried out because, like the earlier threats, it was made by a dickless wonder tittering away behind a keyboard.

Somehow, this "proves" that the threat was entirely made up, probably by Sarkeesian herself. No, don't ask for concrete evidence, because that's harassment, #notyourshield."

 

[Seneschal]

Never played Bayonetta, PC master race and all that,but I agree that developers should be allowed to create a character like that. Its simple artistic freedom.

Huh?! The artists' freedom isn't being contested at all. There has been no demand for the artists to be reprimanded, censored or, god forbid, fired.

On the other hand, the freedom of a critic to say "I'm uncomfortable with this particular artistic choice; I find it tacky, cheap and exploitative, diminishing my overall enjoyment of the game," without his publication being accosted by mobs trying to cut off their funding, is being contested.

My interpretation is that many journalists haven't been content with that kind of critique though. They are saying I should feel ashamed, that I'm a monster, a terrorist, and a misogynist because I'm a man who likes playing games like Bayonetta. I'm not allowed to have a differing opinion, I'm not allowed to think, I MUST agree with the critic because they know better than I do.

Meanwhile we have many gaming journalists fawning to publishers in the hope they get offered a PR job so they have a chance of keeping the gaming media in the pockets of the industry and have an easy ride - it's a publishers wet dream. Over the last decade PR has been influencing game design more and more which has pissed off gamers and developers alike (at least the ones I know.) Hype has become more important than quality and so many games have largely been mediocre while getting reviews that don't match what gamers think either. As a gamer I'm on the side of the developer who wants to make the gamers I want to buy, I'm on the side of the critic/journalist who isn't the tool of a PR rep and who doesn't paint me as a subhuman. I though this was all obvious.

Choosing to interpret that The Critic Cabal are bearing down on you, emasculators in hands, when the exact opposite has happened with Bayonetta 2 reviews, takes some impressive mental gymnastics.

Arthur Gies was in the tiny minority when he argued that Bayonetta's crotch-massaging camera did a disservice to the game - a valid beef even if you do enjoy ogling female bodies, as it's not hard to imagine that such a thing may become grating if senselessly repeated. Most every other reviewer, on the other hand, held that the sexualization added to the game's style.

So, it's a minority opinion that perhaps being stuffed with seventy cheesecakes isn't for everyone - and it isn't even directed at you, but at those that aren't lovers of cheesecake in the first place. You have no grounds to feel besieged and threatened by that. A while ago, there would be no one speaking for the non-cheesecake enthusiasts, and you'd have me believe that we were better off then?

 

[grassgremlin]

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.

I actually get what you're trying to say, that does open a new can of worms then.
I get it. The character is fictional, but that kind of detachment can really drive home. It's like. The movie is only entertaining because the writers make it so. Actors act because they are reading a script.

That's fine, but it loses audience connection to the piece all the same. I get people shouldn't read into fantasy, but it seems that you're framing that there is something wrong with people imagining and escaping into the thing they consume.

Would you rather the game had no story. Bayonetta did not speak unless you told her too. Ultimate control where you're driving the plot and refusing to participate. Sure those games might exist, but that sort of basically impying an anti-story kind of stance.

I get the argument. She's not real. I get when people take to much into what they enjoy, but it can also lead down a pretty bland path. This isn't real therefore I shouldn't enjoy it. I'm not actually doing the things here.

. . . or you could make the argument. I hate when game developers force me to do things in there games. I agree with you 100%, I kind of hate that too, but I don't think every game should be designed entirely to cater to every single player wish for that sort of thing.

So with that in mind. I still agree. In your logic, I agree Bayonetta is sexist and has no agency, but it does leave a certain sour, well, that means its bland cause I can't do what I want feel.

 

[Rellik San]

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.

Ahhh sorry for going a little aggressive there, I misread your tone entirely.

But yeah, in issues like this so many whispers can easily spread from misquoting something like that, I know it's not intentional and seems like a small thing, but small things can make big ripples in these issues.

As I said man/woman "When done right, sex is always positive" is a lot groovier a statement we can all get behind more so than just "sex is positive"... which would then devolve in peoples minds to "all sex is positive" which then becomes "even abusive sex is positive"... sounds like a leap I know, but I've seen it happen sadly.

But yeah, glad I made you smile with my initial comment anyway.

 

[Kuro Serpentina]

While I agree with Jim about the points he was making, the reasons he were making the points seems a bit off
From what I've heard about the Polygon review thing centres around a certain level of hypocrisy from the reviewer, who is known to often visit a smut site where women in various arrays of undress post up for viewer enjoyment, which reach and even surpass the levels of "Fanservice" Bayonetta has become partly known for; which has let many, quite rightly in my opinion, to call foul on the reviewer for condemning it while indulging in an extremely similar thing in his own time.
Makes the whole thing sound a tad disingenuous.
As for the whole discussing of these sorts of things, yeah that would be awesome... however the whole mess that the community at large is currently embroiled in is in no small part due to a lack to out right refusal to discus things

Sexism in Gaming =/= Actual Porn.
I need to point this out. That isn't argument.

I draw porn constantly and can still criticize games for sexist shit.
It's about leaving your porn at the door when you create a product as much as you can.

Bayonetta isn't porn. It's a product sold to the masses.
I may not agree that she's sexist, but that reviewer is well in there right to criticize it for sexist tropes.

I get the feeling you need to read through some of the other comments in here, cause I thing you'll find them more useful for the argument

 

[szaleniec1000]

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.

It's not Metacritic's fault if a publisher uses it as an excuse to screw over a developer, and it certainly isn't the fault of any individual reviewer whose score gets thrown into the aggregator. A publisher being a dick is the responsibility of nobody but the publisher. Get rid of Metacritic, and they'll just find another excuse.

 

[Wisq]

It shows disrespect because he was judging the game by his own tastes, not his audience's.

I can't help but feel like you're missing the point of criticism. Of course a reviewer judges a game based on their own tastes, that's their job. If their views don't line up with the audience, then that audience needs to go somewhere else.

You're free to disagree, and to challenge them on certain points of contention, but don't expect meaningless arguments such as "you're not representing your audience" to sway them.

Yeah, especially because I'm betting a lot of people who are complaining about the Polygon review wouldn't have read it if they hadn't been drawn to the controversy.

No, I'm not accusing Polygon of clickbaiting. I'm just saying that if you only show up to an article to complain that they're not judging the game by your ("the audience's") tastes, well, you're not really their usual audience, are you?

 

[VectorSlip]

I just have a quick question. I've seen a lot of arguments for subjectivity vs objectivity in reviews ITT and I wanted to ask something. If a reviewers piece is just 100% subjective and opinion then where does its value lie? Im not asking this to disparage any reviews in particular, I'm just genuinely curious.

If its just another person's opinion about a game then whats the point? Even if their opinion lined up with my own i'd still find it hard to see any use the review would have since im not that reviewer and my experience would be different from theirs since we are different people. I don't really use or care for reviews in the first place so Im having trouble wrapping my mind around this whole thing and would like a little help to understand it all.

 

[ThreeKneeNick]

edit: actually, I don't wnna get into this.

But I wonder if "stupid sexy Flanders" is the inspiration for the title.

 

[Wisq]

I just have a quick question. I've seen a lot of arguments for subjectivity vs objectivity in reviews ITT and I wanted to ask something. If a reviewers piece is just 100% subjective and opinion

... which they actually always are (even so-called "objective" judgements are based on the reviewer's notion of what "objective" means) ...

then where does its value lie? Im not asking this to disparage any reviews in particular, I'm just genuinely curious.

If its just another person's opinion about a game then whats the point?

Well, for starters, they can detail what they liked and what they didn't like, and from their description, they can decide whether you would like those things or not.

But also: Really, unless something is a very very niche title and you're not part of that niche audience, most people are going to have fairly broadly similar opinions about a lot of things. Even the Polygon review in question was 7.5, not (say) 3, and said it was an "otherwise great game". If you look beyond just the score and read the article, I think you can come to a similar conclusion.

There are, of course, exceptions. I don't like MOBAs and MMOs as a rule. If I read good reviews of a new (traditional-style) MOBA or MMO, I'm still going to be skeptical. If I see bad reviews, no chance I'll be touching that. On the other hand, if I found a critic who disliked MOBAs/MMOs as much as I do, and they said they actually liked it, I might pay more attention.

It's all about context, and how much you agree with the principles and tastes upon which a reviewer judges a game.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

SNIP

SNIP

SNIP

Bayonetta's creator is female.
http://www.destructoid.com/platinum-only-a-woman-could-design-bayonetta-148258.phtml

There's an interview of her talking about the character on youtube.
Actually the reason why Hideki Kamiya is such a asshole is because people keep asking him a question about Bayonetta when he wasn't responsible for the game's creative decisions only responsible for directing the game.

In fact he didn't even work on Bayonetta 2.

Edit: He's only credited because he was part of the creation of the first game.

Yes I understand that, but does that mean Bayonetta isn't sexist? That she isn't pure fap material?
Are we to just assume women can't objectify other women, or indeed write a character that strips naked to kill monsters and it's all on the up and up?
Forgive me, but that sounds an awful lot like the whole "I have a black friend" argument. And wasn't it Jim who said in the Earth year 2066 episode that you can't claim to have done something 'ironically' while still selling it for full price and whatnot. Is Bayonetta supposed to be an ironic parody of the over sexualization of women in games, or is she the personification of it?
How deep does the irony REALLY go? If it's a selling point, and the game needs to make a profit, my guess would be not that deep.

Also I'll let you in on a dirty secret. Dominatrix power fantasies? Yeah, the dominatrix has no power what so ever. That's what the safe word is for. She, the dominatrix, dances entirely to her 'victims' tune. She stops when the victim says so, otherwise she's just a torturer.
It's the same logic when porn scenes involves a women pretending to be a teacher. Yes, we pretend and what not, but everyone knows she's not really a teacher and that her 'strong female character' isn't why any of us are here.
if Bayonetta whips monsters because we press buttons, if she does splits in front of the camera because we hit the QTEs, if she dances around in fetish outfits because we bought the DLC,if she strips naked and dances around because her writer, a female, wrote that was her character...
how much power does Bayonetta REALLY have?

 

[grassgremlin]

Yes I understand that, but does that mean Bayonetta isn't sexist? That she isn't pure fap material?
Are we to just assume women can't objectify other women, or indeed write a character that strips naked to kill monsters and it's all on the up and up?
Forgive me, but that sounds an awful lot like the whole "I have a black friend" argument. And wasn't it Jim who said in the Earth year 2066 episode that you can't claim to have done something 'ironically' while still selling it for full price and whatnot. Is Bayonetta supposed to be an ironic parody of the over sexualization of women in games, or is she the personification of it?
How deep does the irony REALLY go? If it's a selling point, and the game needs to make a profit, my guess would be not that deep.

Also I'll let you in on a dirty secret. Dominatrix power fantasies? Yeah, the dominatrix has no power what so ever. That's what the safe word is for. She, the dominatrix, dances entirely to her 'victims' tune. She stops when the victim says so, otherwise she's just a torturer.
It's the same logic when porn scenes involves a women pretending to be a teacher. Yes, we pretend and what not, but everyone knows she's not really a teacher and that her 'strong female character' isn't why any of us are here.
if Bayonetta whips monsters because we press buttons, if she does splits in front of the camera because we hit the QTEs, if she dances around in fetish outfits because we bought the DLC,if she strips naked and dances around because her writer, a female, wrote that was her character...
how much power does Bayonetta REALLY have?

I get it . . . none.
I'm not making much a argument, I think you make a good point. You're right.
In that sense, yes, Bayonetta is sexist.

The problem lies in the fact the game itself is ridiculously campy.
It has refuge in audacity in of itself and her pandering attitude seems to be fueled from certain aspects of her development . . .


. . . but I can't defend. I think you've convinced me that I like a really sexist character archetype.

 

[FFMaster]

Ok, with regards to the reviews and why marking games down for reasons of progressiveness or not being socially acceptable is bad, mainly because otherwise Jim loses his age old argument that people are not coming for the games you like and trying to remove them from the market. Bear with me while I explain.

Metacritic is generally hated for what it is, but its a necessary evil in the current world and is used by publishers with regards to bonuses. We also know that some companies rely on said bonuses to stay afloat as the devs get only a small part of the money pie and so tend to run on lowish margins. Because they need the margins they need the scores in some case.

This is why a lower scores for reasons of "i don't like the content because its not progressive" CAN have the effect of removing the games some people like from the industry. It directly threatens said bonuses, so people won't make the games and so they don't happen. Ones that do make the games don't get the publisher bonuses and so fold etc etc

Classic case of "I'm not saying you can't have it, but if you do get it I'm not being your friend any more" (a very specific kind of emotional abuse)

When people found a christian review site that seemed to handle it better than polygon it at first made me laugh, but then i was unhappy cause at lest they scored the game separately on the game and its christian values, whereas polygon seem to shoehorn the game and its "social value" together into one score.

Now before someone strawmans this (as i know someone will due to the tendency of some people to read the first line and then go keyboard warrior) and go "well you would be with a rape simulator by that argument", no of course I sodding wouldn't. Thats an extreme where maybe mentioning it and hitting the score would be appropriate.

 

[theruraljuror]

Reviews are personal opinions. Neither you, the developers or the world at large are under any obligation to care what someone at Polygon thinks, if you don't align yourself with their views.

To suggest that someone shouldn't be allowed to post a review because you disagree with their reasoning is the most thoughtless, backwards nonsense imaginable. Even if people are put off by the game, they are people who take that reviewer's opinions into account when making a purchasing decision. It's their choice to buy or not to buy. If you want that sort of influence, write reviews yourself and maybe someone will pay you for them one day. If not, fuck off.

But doing it on a fairly generic and "appeal to everyone" website?

This isn't a thing that exists. No reviewer (and by reviewer I mean person, not publication) sets out to create a blanket view for everyone to follow. That's ludicrous.

People can post reviews about whatever they want. As soon as they expect monetary compensation they need to provide some form of (in this cas informational) value. The Bayonetta 2 review was unhelpful for me as a potential customer, and in my opinion possibly detrimental to the game developing industry as a whole. The effect is probably infitesimally small but if it isn't opposed it could grow. My critical view towards the review also has a very small effect for the publisher. Only in case enough people agree an adjustment becomes economically sensible.

But let's be honest, negative repercussions for a publication like Polygon are far away. Critical objections can however be useful for them to adjust their content to be more valuable (which shouldn't be mistaken with agreeable) for their potential audience.

Of course there is the argument that criticism should be laveled in comments sections and not via advertisers and developers. Doing so would however have the exact undesired effect for the consumer. Disagreement still leads to clicks and therefore to revenue, writers would be encouraged to write controversial articles which hold little actual value, but garner (negative) attention, aka clickbait.

For more Bayonetta 2 reviews and comments on gender see this article "So let's talk about Bayonetta 2 and Gender"

http://www.digitallydownloaded.net/2014/10/so-lets-talk-about-bayonetta-2-and.html

and this video by Inside Gaming Daily asking "Is Bayonetta 2 too sexy?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBCCh3E8O8U

 

[theruraljuror]

Ok, with regards to the reviews and why marking games down for reasons of progressiveness or not being socially acceptable is bad, mainly because otherwise Jim loses his age old argument that people are not coming for the games you like and trying to remove them from the market. Bear with me while I explain.

Metacritic is generally hated for what it is, but its a necessary evil in the current world and is used by publishers with regards to bonuses. We also know that some companies rely on said bonuses to stay afloat as the devs get only a small part of the money pie and so tend to run on lowish margins. Because they need the margins they need the scores in some case.

This is why a lower scores for reasons of "i don't like the content because its not progressive" CAN have the effect of removing the games some people like from the industry. It directly threatens said bonuses, so people won't make the games and so they don't happen. Ones that do make the games don't get the publisher bonuses and so fold etc etc

Classic case of "I'm not saying you can't have it, but if you do get it I'm not being your friend any more" (a very specific kind of emotional abuse)

When people found a christian review site that seemed to handle it better than polygon it at first made me laugh, but then i was unhappy cause at lest they scored the game separately on the game and its christian values, whereas polygon seem to shoehorn the game and its "social value" together into one score.

Now before someone strawmans this (as i know someone will due to the tendency of some people to read the first line and then go keyboard warrior) and go "well you would be with a rape simulator by that argument", no of course I sodding wouldn't. Thats an extreme where maybe mentioning it and hitting the score would be appropriate.

I agree about the christian review site. I think it's pretty ingenious to be honest. They do have a very specific clientel and are doing well to cater to their sensibilities. They also wear their ideology on their sleeve and seem to be able seperate the ideological concerns from the overall game focused critique.


About "the strawmanning": Actually there is a game called "Consensual Torture Simulator" which seems to be some sort of text based adventure. I know about it because Leigh Alexander likes to talk about it at Gamasutra, at Jezebel and in her Facebook feed. She also likes to sing the praises of it's creator Merrit Koppas. As far as I know the game is available for 2$.
How about the reviewers disclose their ideological tent and don't implictly condemn games and gamers who disagree with their point. Let the market decide what is valuable and don't try to subvert it by punishing games (like Tropico 5) that don't reflect the authors or publications agenda.

 

[OldNewNewOld]

Could anyone tell me why sexualization and objectification of a fictional character is bad and sexist? I have yet to read a reasonable argument for that.

And to anyone saying she isn't sexy because she wants but is written that way by a male writer, why not go one step further? She is a bunch of polygons, nothing but a virtual object. She can't be objectified since she was nothing more than an object to begin with?
Also why do you always put such emphasis on male writer/developer? Would it be any different if it was done by a female developer/writer? Some shit, different source.