Poll: Male Gamers: Do you consider Kratos aspirational?

[monkey_man]

A lot of people here think kratos just kills for the lulz or something, that isn't entirely true. at first he thought for the glory of his army. raised and trained as a spartan, he was taught the glory of war and combat. His entire personality was made for battle. HOWEVER, the god of war games only happened because kratos sought revenge. He was brutally tricked into murdering his own family, by the very god he was serving. Do note that if you give your soul to a god, you're not getting it back. After Ares finally got what he deserved, kratos stopped the murdering. he only did what the gods asked of him to stop his endless visions of pain and suffrage he had to invoke as a young spartan and divine servant. The worst part is, the gods blatantly lied to him about that. And when kratos finally snapped, and decided to end it all (so he could presumably rejoin his family in the greek idea of heaven, something he already tried once in a psp spinoff, only then the stupid world had to almost end, and guess who had to mop that shit up?), he was made the god of war. He was literally the embodiment of combat. You can't just hang up your chainblades because you don't feel like it, because you're a god, it's your duty. SO Kratos decided to do what he did best. Wage war for the spartan army. However, Zeus stopped him and killed him. You can't reason with a stubborn spartan, and you certainly can't play the boss over him.

So Kratos wanted to kill zeus to get even. He did not intend for 85% of the pantheon to get killed. He tried to reason with poseidon but he had to defend his brother, Hades was too angry with him for killing his wife Persephone, Hephaestus wanted to keep his "child" safe and attacked Kratos, Hercules wanted to defeat kratos to regain his honour, Hera was being a loudmouthed ***** until Kratos finally killed her, after just ignoring her and even just pushing her off. Hermes was an annoying twat who kept on taunting the one man you should not anger, and apollo flat out attacked him, and then tried to lie to Kratos. They could have lived on, but got killed either for zeus, or because they were idiots.

If Persephone had not tried to wreck everything along with atlas (at least that's what i think happened) Kratos would have stayed with his girl in Elysium. He'd be a father, he'd be at peace. He's not a mad guy who brutally murdered everything, he's a complex antihero, who got fucked over really bad quite often. And he's not the type to take it like a slave either, Kratos is THE definition of "don't mess with"

So yeah, he is someone who's perseverant, who's resourceful, who has honed his skill, he's rather intelligent (some of those puzzles did require some logic), He is at the peak of human strength, he's got a certain way with the ladies, he has a very strong code of honour.A ANd he doesn't give up. He will not stop until he has won. He's got flaws, certainly. He has got anger management issues, he's got a very big ego, he's often in a way, disrespectful (but does have respect for those that deserve it). So yeah, Kratos could be worse.

 

[Extra-Ordinary]

Heck no.

I admire him in way way, I admire his determination and his sheer willpower that can overcome the very Gods of Olympus. Sure, that doesn't really give him an excuse to kill *everything* that moves.
"Come on, Kratos, those guys are just servants, they're scared of you, they're actively fleeing from you."
But man, when he has a goal, there is no stopping him.
Anyway.
No, he's not exactly a role model for me.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

No, my role models are more like aspects of different characters; the physical prowess of Thor, the intellectual acumen of Captain Picard, the grace under pressure of James Bond.


Or this guy

 

[Lady Larunai]

As anyone who has been here for any length of time will have noticed, debates on gender equality and depiction in media flare up quite frequently on this forum. One of the key points raised is that whilst female characters (such as Mileena in Mortal Kombat, or Lara Croft in Tomb Raider) are manipulated in order to be sexually appealing to young men, male characters (such as Kratos in God of War, or Marcus Fenix in Gears of War) are manipulated so that they reflect ideals of what said young men want to be. Therefore, I felt it might be worthwhile actually gathering some actual data on the subject.

So, male gamers, let's test you with an example: do you find the character, actions, or appearance of Kratos personally aspirational, or are expressions of characteristics you wish you possessed? If so, please outline what it is about him that you find appealing. If not, outline why you find him so reprehensible.

To give you some help on this, you're not quite framing this one right. It's not necessarily that these male characters represent an ideal version that someone must aspire to. It has to do with the purpose for particular characteristics, as it relates to the idea behind the character.

For instance, whether we aspire to be Kratos or not, his physical presence informs us about his capabilities - he is physically imposing and heavily muscled, so we know from even a casual glance that he is physically capable. His "war paint" style facial decor and his attire tell us that he has a certain primality to him -- this is not a man of peace. So just from that, we know that he is both willing and able to wage war.

The physical appearance of many game characters is intended as shorthand that tells us what that character is good at. Is the character wearing glasses? Probably good at "smart stuff." Wearing plate mail armor? He's good at absorbing incoming damage.

Then we look at, say, zero-suit Samus. What does her physique and clothing choice tell us at a glance? What does her general appearance tell us she's good at? Well... nothing having to do with gadget-centric space bounty hunting. Hell, not even basic marksmanship, or any sort of combat at all. She is designed to look, quite frankly, like she'd be really good for sex. The features that are highlighted are not the ones that make her character capable of the role, but rather the ones that make her sexually appealing.

That's where the line is found that borders on sexualization. Character design in games often comes down to a player being able to say, "Wow, this character looks best suited for X." And when X = "giving a twenty-something male an erection" rather than, say, whatever that character is supposed to be doing?

(Hint: Muscles are used for combat. Breasts aren't. Showing off muscles, then, is about demonstrating strength and combat capability. Showing off breasts is pretty much about sexual utility.)

Maybe your breasts aren't used for combat purposes, but mine have lasers so combat wise I have an advantage

The fembots also had breast guns, and then there are many large breasted girls that joke about being able to beat people up just by swinging from side to side, then there is combat via the sexual power of breasts usually portrayed in cartoon..

In short my breasts are combat ready

 

[The_Scrivener]

Totally no
I'm more Adam Jensen type
Also I personally prefer sci-fi over fantasy in general

Would it not be better to ask how many women find his depiction sexualized or objectified? This seems like red herring research.

Why women?
When we talk about female characters, perspective of women has more weight.
But we are currently talking about male character, so reverse situation should be true.
Are you implying that only women can tell if someone/something is objectified?

Because the issue that's been at the forefront for years now isn't about how uncomfortable men are with the objectification and sexualization of video game characters. This is about getting traction on what defends/detracts female gamers and what their opinions and values are regarding this issue.

 

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Totally no
I'm more Adam Jensen type
Also I personally prefer sci-fi over fantasy in general

Would it not be better to ask how many women find his depiction sexualized or objectified? This seems like red herring research.

Why women?
When we talk about female characters, perspective of women has more weight.
But we are currently talking about male character, so reverse situation should be true.
Are you implying that only women can tell if someone/something is objectified?

Because the issue that's been at the forefront for years now isn't about how uncomfortable men are with the objectification and sexualization of video game characters. This is about getting traction on what defends/detracts female gamers and what their opinions and values are regarding this issue.

This thread doesn't negate any of what you mentioned. You seem to be saying that people shouldn't be having this conversation, with the justification being that this isn't trending right now. Something to think about.

Petty, don't you think?

 

[Zhukov]

Actually yes. Kinda.

He's a miserable arsehole, and becomes an ever bigger one throughout the series. So no, I wouldn't want to be like him.

On the other hand, he's a hyper-masculine powerhouse capable of solving basically any problem he runs into with brute force and has sex with Aphrodite in his off hours. I'm certainly not denying the appeal of that.

 

[Erttheking]

Not really, I mean from what I've heard about the guy he's a extremely pissed off megalomaniac who runs around killing everything that moves because...daddy didn't love him or something. I mean apparently he started out sympathetic but then he got a little too murder happy and is actively fucking the world over in his quest for revenge. Yeah, he seems like a bit of a twat.

 

[conmag9]

Let's put it this way. I frequently find myself apologizing to his victims. Yeah, I know.

So no, not really. I don't mind violence (the monster fights are lots of fun), but some of the asshole moves he makes throughout the series make me roll my eyes. Some of it's not functional, it's just being a jerk for the sake of it, and it's inefficient.

The one character trait I appreciate is his sheer determination. I don't agree with what he used it for, but the level of unstoppable he reaches is definitely impressive.

 

[JamesBr]

I'm gonna go with no, there's nothing redeemable or aspirational about the character, because he's a two-dimensional archetype made of testosterone poisoning. While I'll admit I've had fun playing the games, indulging in a bit of escapist carnage is not the same as finding the character an acceptable role-model in anyway shape or form. He's a flat character with idealized proportions (idealized, not unrealistic) and no personality trait that isn't RAGE AGAINST THE HEAVENS.

 

[Battenberg]

Physically? Sure why not, he looks like the embodiment of peak physical health for an adult male.

Emotionally/ psychologically? Christ no, he's self centered, obsessive, and furiously vengeful to the point he doesn't care who hurts. He literally only seems to show 2 skills: killing and causing pain and he shows no self restraint when it comes to using either of them. Frankly I'd be concerned if I found out I knew out anyone who does think of him as some sort of role model.

 

[sumanoskae]

Superhuman strength? Sure.

Violent, self destructive, petulant sociopath? No.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

I don't think people tend to aspire to be batshit insane and kill ALL the people.

 

[EternallyBored]

Considering the topic is vague, leading the question, and showing a profound misunderstanding of the power fantasy topic, you're probably not going to be getting any actually useful data out of this.

A power fantasy does not have to be about wanting to be like the character featured in the fantasy, Kratos is pretty much a textbook power fantasy, but I doubt many people actually want to be a genocidal monster on any realistic level. A power fantasy hinges around experiencing a sense of power, people like the visceral combat, they like that Kratos is a driven, competent, badass, and playing as him can give players a sense of power and control that thrills them. That's part of why the God of War games are popular, they present a fun sense of power that allows players to cut loose in ways they wouldn't or couldn't do in reality.

But people don't actually aspire to BE Kratos, they just like playing as him because he fulfills a sense of fantasy that people know is impossible or undesirable in a real setting. Now power fantasy characters can have aspirational traits, people may not want to be an ugly psychopath like Kratos, but they can find his determination and competence admirable. The existence of admirable traits doesn't really effect his status as a power fantasy though, so whether he is aspirational is irrelevant to his status as a power fantasy character. Plenty of deplorable villain characters (like the various GTA protagonists) can exist as power fantasies, they exist to give the player, reader, or watcher, a vicarious experience that we can't or won't experience in reality.

In relation to gender politics in gaming, the crux of the issue is that male characters are generally designed by, and targeted at Male audiences, while female characters are also primarily designed by and targeted at male audiences. The power fantasy argument crops up when people try to pretend Kratos running around shirtless is the exact equivalent to chainmail bikini armor and sexualization in female game characters, i.e. the: "See! male characters are sexualized too!" argument. The rebuttal to this is to state that skimpily dressed female characters tend to be sexual fantasies, while skimpily dressed male characters are power fantasies.

To elaborate, the key difference is intention and presentation. Kratos is shirtless to express his power and fighting ability, him showing skin plays into a narrative to make him look more powerful to players, the camera doesn't focus on his ass or try to paint Kratos as something female players should desire to have sex with. Conversely, Rachel from ninja gaiden poses for the invisible camera, and her outfit is in service to attempts to sexually excite the male players and audience, rather than trying to say anything about her character. In one case, the character exists primarily as a power fantasy, in the other, the character primarily exists as a sexual fantasy.

 

[randomrob]

He's a murderous thug. Rockin' body, but a murderous thug. How is he aspirational?

 

[scw55]

I find Garrus is more of an aspirational ideal, and he's a different species.

 

[Dense_Electric]

Hell no. Personality-wise he's a murderous psychopath, and physically he's so patently unreal that I don't see how I could ever look like that (even if I wanted to, which I don't. I've always found the body builder look repulsive).

 

[UberPubert]

Kratos isn't really ideal by any definition. I think people are too busy trying to narrow it down to the physical or mental or what his actions say about his character but by design Kratos is flawed, and that's not an ideal.

An ideal is a broad characteristic that exists without contradiction, strictly adhering to a central idea. Kratos's very quest is a contradiction of his previous actions: He mourns and then rages at the murder of his family (even at his own hands) and seeks revenge against those he trusted. If he were ideal, no mistake would've been made, his attitude and actions were not ideal.

And even though it's not the central point of this topic, I'd like to say that Marcus Fenix is much closer to ideal. He is depicted as physically strong, mentally stalwart, socially amiable and generally a man of principles. He sticks by his friends and loved ones, is true to his word and in spite of his circumstances is fairly calm and rational. The only time he shows weakness is when his friends die and by then it becomes totally appropriate. His only real "flaw" (which I hardly mind) is that he's a butt ugly old man.

EDIT: (Seriously, look at his winkled face some time, his soul patch is grey. Marcus looks like he's pushing fifty)