Let's talk about the games that don't use mysogynistic, transphobic or racist tropes.

Here Comes Tomorrow

New member
Jan 7, 2009
645
0
0
erttheking said:
CannibalCorpses said:
I'm going to answer your question with another question...can you tell me some games that are definately sexist/racist etc-ist? For all the crap i've been reading here recently i haven't heard of a single one. Sure, they use tropes *shudders at the pathetic word and it's connotations* but i'd be more amused if a game left the princess to die in the tower because the PC crew think men shouldn't help women in games because it makes them look weak...in their respective imaginary, pure fantasy, not-based-on-life-fiction worlds. Let's make some games that are pure fact so we can dispel the madness...we could have classics like 'avoid the catholic priest pacman', 'rape of a teenager 2 - back for more', 'human trafficking saga' and 'exploitation of white girls - street grooming' just to name a few.

Of course i'm taking the piss...

But to answer your question about games that aren't blah blah blah-ist i've got to say every game i have ever played.
Metro Last Light. I love that game...I really freaking do, but it's portrayal of women is fucking APPALLING! They have three flavors. Domestic caretakers, strippers who show off their boobies, and victims. The sole exception is the lone soldier Anna, who helps you twice in combat, once in a starting piss easy battle and the other was a boss fight where I don't recall her doing much, then she gets kidnapped, rescued by the main character she had mockingly called rabbit at the start of the game, has sex with him despite their lack of chemistry or anything resembling a romantic relationship, then drops off the face of the Earth and doesn't go to the final battle, and is only seen in one of the endings after that, taking care of the main character's baby. So she dips into all three of the archtypes that Metro can seem to have about women.

I love that game, I freaking do, but it just makes me want to break something every time I see an otherwise brilliant game delve into such uninspired cliches
I find it rediculous that you would consider Metro "appauling".

Its a story about humanies survival, specically a community forced into hiding and on the brink of extinction.

It makes no sense that you would put women, the only people who can continue your species survival, in any sort of danger. If anything, the game is actually fairly lenient in how it treats women.

You also said having strippers is sexist, again, this is offence to actual strippers, and makes sense in the context of the story. It keeps up the morale of the men, who do all the dangerous stuff. Unless you think the WW2 shows of chorus girls for the soldiers were also sexist?

You're pushing your modern day society ideals onto a world that is in no way related to ours. The circumstances of Artyom's society are far harsher and brutal than ours, and unfortunatly, feminism has no place in a society where theres only a few thousand people left l, and going outside can kill you in a few minutes if you aren't immediatly attacked by a flying mutant with bulletproof skin.
 

grassgremlin

New member
Aug 30, 2014
456
0
0
Stg said:
Anyone else remember a time when video games were meant to be just about losing yourself in a world of fantasy instead of all this pissing and moaning about "diversity"? What's next? Why is there no gay character in Tom & Jerry? Where is the LGBT support in Dexter's Laboratory? Loony Toons is made by bigots because the very few female characters are depicted as motherly or stereotypical? Perhaps people should complain about books next because they don't cater to the people who prefer pictures.

People, it's getting silly now and it's only making gamers look a lot worse. The more you dwell on these topics the more people see us in a bad light.
I don't see a problem in discussing this stuff, though I agree a little with the sentiment.
However, This thread is less about complaining about games that don't have diversity, and praising and raising awareness of the ones that do.

One of my problems with this discussion is that their is no real topics about games old and new that did decide to buck the usual gender, race or sexuality trends. I think that's one of the main reason I saw a problem with these discussions is their was not enough talks about the games trying something at least a little different. Pointing out examples so to speak.

I lament some of the games mentioned didn't sale very well. Beyond Good and Evil is a good example of a game that had a lead female protagonist but not many purchased. Those were different times in the PS2 era.

I honestly think developers took a lot more risks during that generation.

--------------

On another note, someone got suspended pretty quick in this thread, totally didn't expect that. Try to keep it classy guys.
 

Vibhor

New member
Aug 4, 2010
714
0
0
erttheking said:
Social importance? They aren't shown any social importance! They don't lead, they don't build, they don't farm, they don't salvage, they cook and look after children! When they aren't almost getting raped and shaking their asses! It isn't about them having a different but still important role in society, it's lazy writing pure and simple.
Except they do. They and all the non soldiers are the one which keep the society going. There is no such thing as leading in Metro. What the fuck are you gonna lead against? The Nazi army fighting the commies or the mutants who want to feed themselves?
Seriously, think about it. Without the soldiers they can run the society without a hitch. Without the workers, nothing gets done. As I said before, it all comes to personal interpretation. You are putting too much value to "action hero man" when in reality that gets nothing done. You are pretty much dismissing the entire female cast just because they can't fire a gun.

erttheking said:
Yes, being a soldier isn't a glory job, but it's a very needed one, so why would they limit themselves? The strategy of the Red Line is to just give every able bodies person a rifle and throw them at the enemy till the enemy dies, but they don't have female soldiers? Why? What sense does that make? The Red Army that they're based on did that! Why would they give up perfectly good cannon fodder? And don't say it's because they're trying to preserve the population of the Human race, trust me, the Red Line does not care at all about that.
Being a soldier isn't a necessary job,especially for common people. The people you meet in Metro aren't "those filthy commies" who conscript people. The war is still going but the society isn't the part of it. You know jack shit about the topic you are spewing here. Why would I trust you in something you clearly know nothing about?
Even if I amuse your ass backwards view, there is literally zero reason for females to be used as conscripts in war. The "Red Army" would see the females as baby machines and considering most females wouldn't know how to handle weapons and the general uneasiness of male soldiers working with females it would be counterproductive for their war efforts to use females as soldiers.


erttheking said:
I did not mean to imply that. They are however bad when they exist to do nothing but show a bit of skin for the sake of titillation, especially in a game that has a bad track record with women already.
What do you think is a job of a stripper, especially to someone of opposite gender?
You are complaining that a bandit in game exists purely to get shot or stabbed. They aren't developed beyond their job because of lack of relevance to the plot. I am honestly curious what exactly you expected.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Here Comes Tomorrow said:
erttheking said:
CannibalCorpses said:
I'm going to answer your question with another question...can you tell me some games that are definately sexist/racist etc-ist? For all the crap i've been reading here recently i haven't heard of a single one. Sure, they use tropes *shudders at the pathetic word and it's connotations* but i'd be more amused if a game left the princess to die in the tower because the PC crew think men shouldn't help women in games because it makes them look weak...in their respective imaginary, pure fantasy, not-based-on-life-fiction worlds. Let's make some games that are pure fact so we can dispel the madness...we could have classics like 'avoid the catholic priest pacman', 'rape of a teenager 2 - back for more', 'human trafficking saga' and 'exploitation of white girls - street grooming' just to name a few.

Of course i'm taking the piss...

But to answer your question about games that aren't blah blah blah-ist i've got to say every game i have ever played.
Metro Last Light. I love that game...I really freaking do, but it's portrayal of women is fucking APPALLING! They have three flavors. Domestic caretakers, strippers who show off their boobies, and victims. The sole exception is the lone soldier Anna, who helps you twice in combat, once in a starting piss easy battle and the other was a boss fight where I don't recall her doing much, then she gets kidnapped, rescued by the main character she had mockingly called rabbit at the start of the game, has sex with him despite their lack of chemistry or anything resembling a romantic relationship, then drops off the face of the Earth and doesn't go to the final battle, and is only seen in one of the endings after that, taking care of the main character's baby. So she dips into all three of the archtypes that Metro can seem to have about women.

I love that game, I freaking do, but it just makes me want to break something every time I see an otherwise brilliant game delve into such uninspired cliches
I find it rediculous that you would consider Metro "appauling".

Its a story about humanies survival, specically a community forced into hiding and on the brink of extinction.

It makes no sense that you would put women, the only people who can continue your species survival, in any sort of danger. If anything, the game is actually fairly lenient in how it treats women.

You also said having strippers is sexist, again, this is offence to actual strippers, and makes sense in the context of the story. It keeps up the morale of the men, who do all the dangerous stuff. Unless you think the WW2 shows of chorus girls for the soldiers were also sexist?

You're pushing your modern day society ideals onto a world that is in no way related to ours. The circumstances of Artyom's society are far harsher and brutal than ours, and unfortunatly, feminism has no place in a society where theres only a few thousand people left l, and going outside can kill you in a few minutes if you aren't immediatly attacked by a flying mutant with bulletproof skin.
If you're gonna criticize me for a typo, don't make a typo in the exact same sentence.

I know.

Considering that the main factions of the game regularly throws massive portions of their population at enemy lines (Reds), execute their own civilians (Reds AND Nazis) and are trying to use weapons of mass destruction to wipe out massive portions of the Metro's population (Reds), doing nothing to help people in need and instead just jacking up the prices of vital supplies they need (Hansa) and fighting wars that the main character says constantly will wipe out the Human race (All of them) it's pretty clear none of the factions really care about the survival of the human race, with the exception of the Rangers. So I don't buy the explanation. Heck, the Red Army that the Red Line was based on included female soldiers, just because they had two arms, two legs and could carry a rifle. Considering their destructive Human wave tactics, I fail to see why they would pass up on more fresh meat for the front lines.

As I recently explained in another post, I'm not saying that strippers are sexist. I said they're sexist when they're just there to provide pandering, ESPECIALLY in a story that already has pretty bad female representation. Also, they did nothing to keep morale up in this game, unless you're talking about the importance of the villains visiting them.

I can accept that to a certain degree, but certain things just don't make any sense. No woman in game with the exception of Anna seems to be able to defend themselves. And even Anna's ability to defend herself goes pretty quick And in a world where there are rampaging mutants, swarms of bandits and hostile factions, you need to be able to defend yourself! Even if you don't want women on the front line, wouldn't it be logical to have women know how to shoot guns in case their station ever comes under assault? That way they can look after themselves and not divert the attention of the soldiers who would be fighting for the security of the Metro. Mutants break into stations, bandits attack caravans, and war is brewing at every corner. I have no idea why every person isn't trained to use a gun at the age of twelve, because that would be the logical thing.

And really I'm missing the bigger problem through all of this mess. You can not have female soldiers, leaders, or other important members of society and still have interesting female characters. Mad Men proved that. Metro Last Light utterly fails at writing female characters. They have no agency, no character, no development, no real impact on the plot, no real reason to be there other than background decoration. Anna is a horribly written character, she's a Faux Action girl. We're told what a great soldier she is, and she doesn't live up to those expectations in the slightest. We're told A but now shown A. This is one of the most basic writing pitfalls that you are trained to avoid, you don't create character inconsistencies! She isn't a character! She's a thing for Artyom to put his dick in! No female characters in Metro Last Light have any agency, development, clever writing, any ANYTHING! Even the lone prostitute in 2033 had it slightly better, because then at least you got the impression she had some form of agency in that she was tricking people to get money. Metro Last Light has nothing.

It really is sad, because I love Last Light, I always will. But when it comes to writing women, it's just pathetic. It didn't try at all.
 

grassgremlin

New member
Aug 30, 2014
456
0
0
Nanondorf said:
What is this. Political correctnes sucks a lot of fun out of the games. Okay, I understand the whole need for diversity, and am all in for it, but the negative elements of society are a great source of conflict in all games that seek to depict realism as far as humans are concerned.
Take racism out of Bioshock Infinite, you get a city in the clouds where everyone is flinging crows at one another for fun.
Take racism out of The Witcher, you got no Scoia'Tael, nor discrimination against witchers, and the story becomes more bland.
Conflict is what makes stories like that, and disparity in privileges between is a great source of conflict.

Now since my objections are slightly off topic, I suppose I should add my two cents on diversity.
Bioware games tend to be very free-spirited as far as sexuality goes, but in Dragon Age Origins, they give you a bisexual bard, a bisexual elf and a gay mage(Awakening). (and if you let the former two tag along with you, you just might end up having an orgy in a part of the game) So we got that covered at least.
well, actually, the reason why we're having this discussion is because they tend to permeate a good majority of mainstream games. Sure, I'm not going to knock these games for taking these issues and spinning a narrative around them, but so many other popular video games are non-chalant about it. It doesn't even come up in the story when it comes to how these characters may feel.

Most of the time, it's just so casual it can be seen as sexist, racist or transphobic even when the developer did not intend it to be.

My purpose with this thread is talking about the games that we know exist but are never discussed.

LostGryphon said:


I'm going to err on the side of "most of them" as well.
This I believe. That's why It's better we discuss these games more. So many people don't know their are good examples hanging around of games that aren't falling under the usual tropes.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Vibhor said:
I have to say, it seems like men are the ones who do all the important jobs that keep society running. I never saw a female engineer keeping the power on, or fishing for food. They most I saw them doing was manning a few stalls, cooking some food, and dancing on stage. They're not doing nothing, but I'd hardly call them the backbone of society. And yes there is such a thing as leading. There was an entire gathering of the leaders of the Metro, the people in charge. Moskvin, the Fuhrer, the leader of Hansa, they lead their factions. And they're all men. Not being able to fire a gun in the world of the Metro is nothing short of suicide. With rampaging mutants, bandits and enemy armies, you need to be able to defend yourself So yes, I will get angry that women can't do that in this world, because apparently no one thought it was important to take a few hours to show a woman how to load and shoot a revolver. And you know what? I wouldn't have minded if we had already gotten some interesting female characters in non-combat roles. But we didn't.

Oh insult me. Nice. Classy. And question, why should a trust a thing you're saying?

"They don't know how to use weapons" Well...teach them The Metro was building up to an all out war! Stations were going to become battle grounds as people fought for control of the Metro and D6. The population of the Metro went from 200,000 to 50,000 in twenty years. No one is safe, everyone is in danger, and for some reason someone thought it wasn't important to teach women how to shoot a gun. And the Red Line doesn't give a crap about how skilled their soldiers are. I also doubt their uneasiness of male soldiers would be a huge faction. And if that's the case, why not all female units?

Titillation for the audience of the game, not the in game characters. That's what I'm against. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear.

Also, insult me again and this conversation is over.
 

Here Comes Tomorrow

New member
Jan 7, 2009
645
0
0
erttheking said:
Vibhor said:
I have to say, it seems like men are the ones who do all the important jobs that keep society running. I never saw a female engineer keeping the power on, or fishing for food. They most I saw them doing was manning a few stalls, cooking some food, and dancing on stage. They're not doing nothing, but I'd hardly call them the backbone of society. And yes there is such a thing as leading. There was an entire gathering of the leaders of the Metro, the people in charge. Moskvin, the Fuhrer, the leader of Hansa, they lead their factions. And they're all men. Not being able to fire a gun in the world of the Metro is nothing short of suicide. With rampaging mutants, bandits and enemy armies, you need to be able to defend yourself So yes, I will get angry that women can't do that in this world, because apparently no one thought it was important to take a few hours to show a woman how to load and shoot a revolver. And you know what? I wouldn't have minded if we had already gotten some interesting female characters in non-combat roles. But we didn't.

Oh insult me. Nice. Classy. And question, why should a trust a thing you're saying?

"They don't know how to use weapons" Well...teach them The Metro was building up to an all out war! Stations were going to become battle grounds as people fought for control of the Metro and D6. The population of the Metro went from 200,000 to 50,000 in twenty years. No one is safe, everyone is in danger, and for some reason someone thought it wasn't important to teach women how to shoot a gun. And the Red Line doesn't give a crap about how skilled their soldiers are. I also doubt their uneasiness of male soldiers would be a huge faction. And if that's the case, why not all female units?

Titillation for the audience of the game, not the in game characters. That's what I'm against. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear.

Also, insult me again and this conversation is over.
You seem to be confused about what consistant world building is.
The women of Metro are kept inside guarded gates, protected by men. They are ESSENTIAL to keeping humanity alive. They do not get to leave their stations or put under any threat because they are needed for the continuation of the species.

The Metro is building up to a war, but women are too valuable to slaughter en masse.

Bullets are so valuable, they are currency.

Why would they waste money training women to use a gun that they will never need to use.
They do not lead because it will threaten them.
They do not fish because they might die.
They are not engineers because they might have an accident.

You are STILL imposing contemporary societal issues on a society with no need for them.

EDIT: still waiting for a list of games with outright hate speech in it that isn't part of the narritive.
 

Erttheking

Member
Legacy
Apr 23, 2020
10,845
1
3
Country
United States
Here Comes Tomorrow said:
erttheking said:
Vibhor said:
I have to say, it seems like men are the ones who do all the important jobs that keep society running. I never saw a female engineer keeping the power on, or fishing for food. They most I saw them doing was manning a few stalls, cooking some food, and dancing on stage. They're not doing nothing, but I'd hardly call them the backbone of society. And yes there is such a thing as leading. There was an entire gathering of the leaders of the Metro, the people in charge. Moskvin, the Fuhrer, the leader of Hansa, they lead their factions. And they're all men. Not being able to fire a gun in the world of the Metro is nothing short of suicide. With rampaging mutants, bandits and enemy armies, you need to be able to defend yourself So yes, I will get angry that women can't do that in this world, because apparently no one thought it was important to take a few hours to show a woman how to load and shoot a revolver. And you know what? I wouldn't have minded if we had already gotten some interesting female characters in non-combat roles. But we didn't.

Oh insult me. Nice. Classy. And question, why should a trust a thing you're saying?

"They don't know how to use weapons" Well...teach them The Metro was building up to an all out war! Stations were going to become battle grounds as people fought for control of the Metro and D6. The population of the Metro went from 200,000 to 50,000 in twenty years. No one is safe, everyone is in danger, and for some reason someone thought it wasn't important to teach women how to shoot a gun. And the Red Line doesn't give a crap about how skilled their soldiers are. I also doubt their uneasiness of male soldiers would be a huge faction. And if that's the case, why not all female units?

Titillation for the audience of the game, not the in game characters. That's what I'm against. I'm sorry I didn't make that clear.

Also, insult me again and this conversation is over.
You seem to be confused about what consistant world building is.
The women of Metro are kept inside guarded gates, protected by men. They are ESSENTIAL to keeping humanity alive. They do not get to leave their stations or put under any threat because they are needed for the continuation of the species.

The Metro is building up to a war, but women are too valuable to slaughter en masse.

Bullets are so valuable, they are currency.

Why would they waste money training women to use a gun that they will never need to use.
They do not lead because it will threaten them.
They do not fish because they might die.
They are not engineers because they might have an accident.

You are STILL imposing contemporary societal issues on a society with no need for them.
Considering the way Anna gets treated, the developers seem to be confused on what consistent characterization is too.

Considering that humanity is going belly up anyway, it seems like a waste of time and resources.

So the Red Line considers it an acceptable risk to use biological weapons, but not having women fight? That doesn't make any sense.

Never need to use? 75% of the original Metro population died, one of the journals flat out said 200,000 people made it into the tunnels when the bombs fell and that only 50,000 people are left. No only did 150,000 of the original population die, but a good number of people born in-between then and now probably died too. what makes people think that they'll never have to use a gun with those numbers?

Threaten them? They'd be the most well guarded people in the Metro. There were no in game situations that implied that the main leaders were ever threatened. Not the Fuher, the leader of Hansa, Miller or the Polis Council. The only time I saw anything like this is with the Secretary General, and that only happened because of very risky manipulations.

Fishing is not made out to be a very dangerous job, the Shrimps attacking in game was seen as very odd.

So what? All engineers could die, but their knowledge is too useful to let go to waste.

You know what my main problem is? I wouldn't be saying any of this if Metro had made this theory of yours part of their universe, made it canon, explored it, and gave us female characters that show the way this world works in a unique way. We did not get any interesting female characters, exploration of these concepts or anything. We only got one female character with a name, who suffered from horrible inconsistent characterization and being shoved to the side, and all other female characters were background decoration. The writing in Metro when it came to women was just lazy. It's why I don't let all these other treatment of women go, because it's not there to help build the world. It could have been. As it stands it's just a cop out.

EDIT: Does it need to say "I hate women" to be sexist in your book? Because I know from experience that a lot of sexist practices tend to be a lot more subtle. Twilight was sexist as all Hell because it showed a lot of sexist practices and treated them like they were perfectly normal. Sexism isn't going to just jump out at you and say "Hello, I'm sexist" Sexist people rarely call themselves sexist.
 

Mandalore_15

New member
Aug 12, 2009
741
0
0
TheKasp said:
Mandalore_15 said:
And this is the true face of 3rd wave feminism my friends. "Yes, these are the ONLY games that aren't sexist, and if you don't agree with me you can fuck off and die!"

I would also point out that this person posted on a recent thread of mine her desire to create a game where she could oppress "cis white males", and on pressing about whether she was joking or not she refused to confirm. I don't like to throw the word misandry around but I honestly don't know what else you would call that.
Yes, lets use one person to judge a whole movement / community.

Cross Assault: All gamers are sexist and racist and they try their best to keep their 'space' racist and sexist because it is the way they want it to have.
OK I accept your point. Perhaps I overreacted as this person had been getting on my last nerve.

However, you have to admit the difficulties within the 3rd wave feminist community and its propensity to eat its own. There is genuine misandry in that community, and people within it who stand against it frequently get excommunicated.
 

Montezuma's Lawyer

New member
Nov 5, 2011
324
0
0
runequester said:
Among all the talk of bad things, it's easy to forget that we've made a lot of progress too.
Fallout New Vegas had at least one gay character and didn't make any big fuss about it.
Skyrim lets you marry another dude (lady) and it's no big deal.

Heck, the old Ultima games let you get it on with a same-sex partner and at least one of them had "other" as a gender option :)


Now, if the discussion is games that aren't about murdering people, that's a little harder :)
There is one quest in skyrim that involves slut shaming, but it seems justified because you're asked to do it out of petty revenge.
 

GoodNewsOke

New member
Jan 30, 2014
29
0
0
The first Resident Evil.

Both characters have advantages and disadvantages, yet still equally viable and capable. Jill's costume (and her unlockable) is reasonable designed, at least as far as fictions uniforms go. Both get a partner of the opposing sex that need helping and that helps you out. So yeah, while it is an incredibly bad written game, it is very fair as far as misogyny and all that jazz goes.
 

carnex

New member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
You're correct about those games, but missing the point. Those games frame racism negatively, not positively. Just because a game includes racism doesn't mean it frames anything in a racist way, see: the first Mass Effect vs Ethnic Cleansing. I mean, even Dragon Age Origins, a game you mention, has homophobia, sexism, and racism in it, yet nobody accuses DA:O of being any of those things because of how it is framed. Some RPGs aren't accused of being sexist because the world in which the game takes place contains sexism, but rather because the game does this:


Compare that to Dark Souls, where it gives female characters actual armour instead of lingerie with scraps of iron bolted to it.


Oh look, actual clothing, rather than underwear and stockings with ornate metalworks attached to them. Its almost as if they're going spelunking in dungeons with monsters rather than on a fashion show catwalk. And guess what? People like that. Never heard anybody complain about the armour in Dark Souls not showing enough skin.
If we leave interpretation of clear pandering to tastes of certain demographics which is predominantly male but never the less have a noticeable percentage of female gamers in it i have another observation that will add a bit of thought.

There is a significant difference in tone between those two games.

My guess is that the picture above is of figurines from Lineage 2, or perhaps Terra or another similar MMO. Those games are light in tone even when their stories are sad or serious and the mood is supposedly dark. Staying with the theme equipment is equally ridiculous. Regardless of their basic design both armors are highly impractical and on first tight recognizable as unusable in real world even to the layman's eye. Everything is in service of pure happy fun.

Dark Souls on the other hand is dark, serious, challenging. And the armor design reflects same ideas. It's serous and seems practical.

Just a thought.
 

carnex

New member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
0
MarsAtlas said:
carnex said:
If we leave interpretation of clear pandering to tastes of certain demographics which is predominantly male but never the less have a noticeable percentage of female gamers in it i have another observation that will add a bit of thought.

There is a significant difference in tone between those two games.

My guess is that the picture above is from Lineage 2, or perhaps Terra or another similar MMO. Those games are light in tone even when their stories are sad or serious and the mood is supposedly dark. Staying with the theme equipment is equally ridiculous. Regardless of their basic design both armors are highly impractical and on first tight recognizable as unusable in real world even to the layman's eye. Everything is in service of pure happy fun.
So "pure happy fun" for women in a power fantasy is... walking around naked? I don't think so. You're right that its pandering, but in both instances, its pandering towards men. Its pandering towards the power fantasy of men with the male avatar, and its pandering towards the sexual fantasy of men with the female avatar.
Please, don't infer meaning onto my words. I didn't imply any of what you said. My comment was in totally different tone and meaning and was centered on reasons why Dark Souls has sensible armor.
 

Frozengale

New member
Sep 9, 2009
761
0
0
Honestly in the last few months I've played

Dark Souls II : A game where you can play as either a man or a woman, and then proceed to kill a plethora of men and women (and hey Dark Souls even has a Trans which leads a secret holy organization)

Child of Light : A game where you play as a small white girl.

Walking Dead Season Two : A game where you play as a small black girl.

Bravely Default : A game with two male protagonists, two female protagonists, and so far in the story (I'm up to the end bit of Chapter 4) the entire story has focused on the two female leads.

Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate : A game where you can play as a man or woman and go kill ALL the monsters.

Super Mario 3D World : A game where you can play as Peach (who is usually the Damsel, but sometimes gets upgraded to a protagonist) and where the "super secret OMFG gotta work to unlock them because they are so awesome" character is Rosalina.

I guess my point being that even if there are games that are Trans-phobic, Misogynist, Racist, etc. The majority of them aren't.
 

carnex

New member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
0
LostGryphon said:

I'm going to err on the side of "most of them" as well.

I've played many, many, many games in my life and I don't recall a single one being what I'd truly consider to be "sexist, transphobic, or racist." Though, to be fair, subjective things are subjective. *shrug*
Show characters and their actions/lines from Hot Shot/Everybody's Gold World Tour to five feminists and there is a high probability that one will find racial portrayals problematic.

I would like to add LoadOut, multiplayer F2P third person shooter to the mix. Even if it is just to get opinions. You can pay good money to get female characters naked (they get huge pixelation so nothing is seen) but developer really went out of the way to avoid "Babe'n'gunz" stereotype. Only female character looks like this


and everything you can to with her you can do with both male characters or the male equivalent.

So, does this fit the description?

Also, interestingly enough, Fallout 2 was first game i played where player character could engage in same sex sex act and even end up as part of same sex shotgun wedding. But, also, in that game you can pull every single -ism out there.