Poll: Jiggle Physics on Man Parts

[Atmos Duality]

Why not? Lets not discriminate; bring on the equal-opportunity awkward.

 

[someonehairy-ish]

Pretty sure the Dragon's Dogma thing is all done with 2D animated sprites rather than actual physics based models, but I could be wrong. Anyway, I imagine this could be hilarious, so yeah, go for it.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Mens junk 90% of the time is not appealing visually to the opposite sex. Most women experience sexuality on a different level usually in the realm of touch and imagination. Like Ive got one friend who finds them visually appealing but she also finds creepy vampire squids to be cute. the rest of the women Ive asked think that our junk looks like something god haphazardly put together and all in all a joke.

 

[DarkB]

I don't have any objections but, I have to wonder if anyone would even notice. I mean Doctor Manhatten's junk was given jiggle physics in Watchman, and can any of you really say you noticed without having it pointed out?

 

[mbarker]

That's ridiculous, how would you be able to move and fight properly in a banana hamock with a huge bouncing shlong?

Now, sarcasm and irony can be difficult to communicate in written form so I can't tell if you're being serious with this; but I hope you realise the exact same argument can and should be leveled at the Sorceress' stupendous balcony.


Voted: 'Sure, why not?'. With no small measure of OLOLOLOL. That would be hilarious to see, please please someone make it happen.

Yeah, it was my attempt at being ironic.

Even though what I had posted didn't translate so well it seemed to have made its point.

 

[I.Muir]

those would have to some massive bawls
where is that scene from epic movie

 

[Gatx]

I don't think big dicks are the equivalent of big breasts. For one thing they don't noticeably jiggle the way under normal conditions.
I think something like this is more or less enough.

EDIT: Double negative... see quoted below for evidence of ignorance.

 

[EstrogenicMuscle]

I don't think big dicks are not the equivalent of big breasts.

Well, there's the fact that one is a reproductive organ used in the conception of a child.

While the other is a piece of body fat.

 

[Teoes]

However until then, I think it's a great idea that for every wobbly-jugged top-heavy lady, we get some hilarious swingin' meat between some chap's legs. No, dongs and jugs are not strictly equivalent. No, that's not the point and nor does it strictly matter either.

From a developer/publisher perspective I think it could very much matter. Games cost money to make, they don't grow on trees. The industry is an especially volatile state right now with alarmingly huge investments needed to make even simple games.

Think if Gears Of War started off as a franchise about mostly-nude marines packing huge bulges - storyline/gameplay remains unchanged. Do you really think that sales wouldn't have been negatively affected once the word got out? I'm sure there's a market out there for such characters, but do you believe that market as big as the "regular" market that would've bought the non-sexy-man Gears i.e. the core demographic?

Or hell, lets use a more relatable example. Say they made a Dead Or Alive:Xtreme Beach Volleyball spin-off where it's a whole bunch of sexy males at the behest of a single extremely-rich woman whom you almost never see. The goal is to keep the men happy, pit them in minigames against each other, dress (or undress) them up, take photos of them posing at exotic locations, etc.
Do you believe such a game would've even made back the development costs? Genuine question, because that's one thing the publisher will definitely want to know

Now, see, you've quoted a post of mine where I said this particular thread was being treated far too seriously.. and you stripped out that important part to then take me too seriously.

However, speaking from my perspective, as someone not affiliated to the publishers or their purse-strings, as a consumer of the products of this medium: yes, I do think we should have huge swinging man-sacks in our games, if we're going to have to keep getting huge swinging shirt-potatoes in our games. It could mean that we get a few games that I get to look at/play and roll about on the floor laughing at; it could mean sales suffer and maybe, just hopefully maybe, folks start to wise up that perhaps it's not such a good thing to have such cartoonish sexualisation as such a prevalent aspect of games. Maybe they'd start to tone it down a bit and please a lot of people.

Two other points.
1) I'd disagree that "alarmingly huge investments [are] needed to make even simple games". Surely the state of the indie scene contradicts this. Alarmingly huge investments are needed to make the bloated AAA games whose industry can barely support its own weight any more, sure; but they're not simple games and that's a situation that should change for everyone's benefit.
2) Just because something sells, does not a good idea make. Frankly I don't care how many units a game shifts - so long as good ideas keep being made and bad ideas stop being made. That part after the hyphen is important.

 

[Boris Goodenough]

While the other is a piece of body fat.

Well back in the day breasts were needed if the baby had to survive.

 

[Yuuki]

However, speaking from my perspective, as someone not affiliated to the publishers or their purse-strings, as a consumer of the products of this medium: yes, I do think we should have huge swinging man-sacks in our games, if we're going to have to keep getting huge swinging shirt-potatoes in our games. It could mean that we get a few games that I get to look at/play and roll about on the floor laughing at; it could mean sales suffer and maybe, just hopefully maybe, folks start to wise up that perhaps it's not such a good thing to have such cartoonish sexualisation as such a prevalent aspect of games. Maybe they'd start to tone it down a bit and please a lot of people.

As already stated by others in this thread, males don't have a body part that equates to female breasts and the world doesn't see the balance/trade between male genitals and female breasts. It's fruitless to try and impose this "rule" of yours - I mean nothing's stopping you from trying, go ahead with the thread. The true equivalent to female breasts are male chests, and we get to see PLENTY of that all the time so there you go. Women find male chests sexy, right? Especially the nicely-toned ones? What makes female breasts so sacred anyway?

But breaking away from the biology and coming back to the reality of people's perceptions, the world sees breasts falling into their own category. They can be freely exposed in M-rated/R16 movies and half-exposed in general media without issue because they don't count as genitalia. Males have no such equivalent.

I'll ask you a fair question - tell me, when was the last time you saw hyper-sexualized GENITALS in videogames? Hmm? That's right, never. So why are you only applying it to males?

Hope I'm not taking things too "seriously".

You mentioned Indie developers being able to pull such a thing right? Well I sure hope they can, because just like you I'm waiting to see for the release of such a game.
If it is a total flop and the developer ends up losing money, rest assured they won't be trying that again. However if it is a winning formula then we will be seeing the rise of something very new and interesting.

 

[Windcaler]

If youre going for an overexagerated art style then sure thats fine. Its not something I would personally like to see but then I dont really approve of hyper sexualized characters unless theres a reason theyre hyper sexualized (even if its just them wanting to look that way).

However I think were going to have issues convincing gamers that its ok. I mean I remember the outcry that the cyclops in God of war might have a penis, leaving it to being removed and them putting on a loin cloth. They wanted them to seem more like wild animals but it just didnt work out

I just wish we could get back to more realistic art styles

 

[Teoes]

snip

As already stated by others in this thread, males don't have a body part that equates to female breasts and the world doesn't see the balance/trade between male genitals and female breasts. It's fruitless to try and impose this "rule" of yours - I mean nothing's stopping you from trying, go ahead with the thread. The true equivalent to female breasts are male chests, and we get to see PLENTY of that all the time so there you go. Women find male chests sexy, right? Especially the nicely-toned ones? What makes female breasts so sacred anyway?

But breaking away from the biology and coming back to the reality of people's perceptions, the world sees breasts falling into their own category. They can be freely exposed in M-rated/R16 movies and half-exposed in general media without issue because they don't count as genitalia. Males have no such equivalent.

I'll ask you a fair question - tell me, when was the last time you saw hyper-sexualized GENITALS in videogames? Hmm? That's right, never. So why are you only applying it to males?.

Those other people talking about males not having a body part that equates to jubblies - that includes me. Another part of my earlier post that you part-quoted acknowledged that wing-wangs and chebs are not equivalent; so there's no need to level that particular point at me. We are actually in that respect in agreement.

Also, I never said it should be a rule, that's you twisting my words. I said I thought it was a great idea and hilarious at that.

To answer your question, I can't think of a point where hyper-sexualised genitals have been shown in videogames. But I think that comes back to a similar point as dongs/jugs not being equivalent, in that for the purposes of the topic in hand (that is in having a bit more "equality" (LOLOL) in jiggle-physics/animations) schlongs/vajayjays aren't equivalent either; because one moves waaay more than the other. Just like how male and female chests aren't equivalent in this respect because one tends to move waaay more than the other. We're not exactly talking about gender equality here in this exact topic, we're talking about jiggle equality. I checked the OP and he/his wife don't seem to be talking about one of anything being equivalent to the other, they were just saying if we're going to have jiggly parts for one, why not have jiggly parts for all and have lulz all round? If we're having jiggly parts for all then we need to pick something on the male that could conceivably jiggle - and his chap is the best fit.

Really, the OP posted a suggestion and asked: 'do you think this is a good idea? We think it would be hilarious' - I do and I do too. That's pretty much all I have to say (or feel should be said) on it and deeper readings on the matter are perhaps best saved for a different time/thread. This is Gaming Discussion, after all, not R&P!

 

[spartandude]

snip

i agree with the conversation.

i dont think sexualisation of women is an issue (although i would like more sensible art styles) what is a problem is that its exclusively women. C'mon give us more more naked men! balance it out!

but in all seriousness i would like to have more sexualised men or more attention given to male organs. one thing that pissed me off in Wicther 2 is that several women, like triss for example, which have fully nude character models but not Geralt. i mean one of the first scenes has him waking up next to triss (who is completely naked) yet he is still wearing trousers. even sex scenes show full front nudity for girls but not boys
as a bisexual i say i want more cock

 

[Risingblade]

I think women would be more creeped out than aroused by jiggling man parts but who knows.

 

[CloudAtlas]

I think women would be more creeped out than aroused by jiggling man parts but who knows.

Some would welcome it. Some would be creeped out. Just like men are by breasts that jiggle like this. The shares might differ, though.

Anyway, I doubt portraying male characters this way would be very popular with quite a few male gamers who don't see any problem if it was about boobs.

Edit: I am amused by the people who object to jiggling shlongs for reasons of realism, while that doesn't seem to be such a big concern for boobs.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Accept? I guess. I wouldn't play any game like that whether it be male or female parts, so whatever. If people like that, uhh... power to them? Think that is about all I can say here without getting another warning.

 

[Yuuki]

Looks like PennyArcade may (or may not) have been reading this particular thread, because they sure as hell summed up the response to OP's question!

I'm sure female gamers find that last panel veerrrrry attractive.

 

[Dark5tar1]

I don't like breast jiggle physics so I'd sure as hell would raise my eyebrow at male jiggle physics.

 

[kuolonen]

Sure why the hell not. But, since fair is fair, I will also demand all the games women to wear skin-tight pants that clearly define the female genitals's form and movements.

... or alternatively, have male warriors not wear any upper body clothing at all, and have the body type of a professional bodybuilder i.e. "unrealistic".

I guess the dwarf character does not count on account of being, well, a dwarf. The developer really should have included a time tested Conan the Barbarian copycat in his game, since that would have been 100% flameproof shield against this sort of thing. Well, against logical people at least.