Poll: So Castle Crashers was awesome -- until it forced me into being a lecherous jerkface

[Agente L]

Games can't always cater to your specific taste (in this case, being a straight women in games you want to play.)

You are also making a huge tempest in a teapot, waaaaay overeading in your analysis. Being a parody of your average "save the princess" game (even more considering the makers of the game), I think it may be a tad too much saying that beating your fellow soldier for the princess being "lecherous man who would beat up his fellow soldiers -- on whom his life depends, by whose side he just fought for dear life".

 

[Something Amyss]

Exactly. I mean, I actually remember when this forum had intelligent discussions and intelligent people. Not just little kids trolling. -Shakes walking stick-

So you're mad that punk kids are on your cybergrass? XD

Anyway, I just think this sort of thing reflects the community as a whole. And it's kinda troubling there's such a knee-jerk response.

But he's right. The OP was partially upset that her player character (who she made female, no biggie, I've done similar things to faceless characters) suddenly kissed a girl. Who...cares?

Well, he's not right. The problem wasn't with lesbians in games but specifically player choice. She didn't want to have her character kiss a(nother) girl. Not because "lesbians are bad" but because the game decided for her. Now, granted, this is a weird issue to bring up with any straightforward game, but it comes up a lot and people complain. It usually doesn't get this kind of hostile response, either.

So...a lot of people care. People will flip their internet tables if a story doesn't turn out the way they like. Even a linear action story.

It only seems to be a "who cares?" issue here because it's a GIRL bringing up GIRL issues in gaming brought up by a GIRL.

For me, there was a similar jolt, at least in principle, in Saint's Row 2. I was having so much fun doing silly things like insurance fraud and rag dolling around the city, racing taxis full of clients to destinations and spraying poop, that when I eventually did come back to the plot as a gang boss murderer, it was a sobering and jarring experience. I had it in my head that I was a goofy weird clown that could wander the city jigging in front of the elderly and jumping from rooftops as I pleased.

Well, I mean, the Boss is already played up as a cold-hearted murderer by the time you have the freedom to roam around the city. And, I mean, you only have to play about two more missions in to get a good idea of how far the Boss will go. At least with Castle Crashers, there's not much of an established narrative (Save the Princess doesn't require a protagonist who wants to bone the princess). With SR2, there's not only the fact that the last game happened, but also the establishment in the intro scenes. I get why you might be upset, but you created a character despite the narrative.

And while I'm sorry you feel that way, I freaking loved SR2 and especially those darker moments. Far as I'm concerned, it was a "what the hell, player?" narrative.

But, whether I agree with you or not, you are not alone.

And that's kind of my major point in quoting you. The question of "who cares?" This is a game where a lot of people cared. They complained about the story having you as the aggressor, about a story where you do drugs, about a story where the boss always goes to a strip bar for a titty show, about a story where the Boss arguably crosses the moral event horizon (I would argue s/he's already crossed the border before this game, let alone the big spoiler points). People contrasted it to GTA, where they felt you could better determine what kind of guy Niko Bellend or Tommy because they weren't taking on the cops, civilians, whatever. I admittedly never played enough of either VC or IV to know how true this is, but that was the complaint. Mostly, they were pissed off that their character did things they didn't agree with.

And you know, maybe I would have felt the same way if I hadn't already imagined my character as a card-carrying psychopath. The bastard daughter of the Joker and Eric Draven. Diamanda Hagan's long-lost, evil twin. Hitler with juggalo facepaint. But I guess I'll never know. The point isn't so much whether or not I agree, but whether or not people care. And they do. You do, Persephone does, and a lot of other people have.

 

[Elijin]

It's not that I object to lesbians in games. If I'd decided I was playing a lesbian or bisexual (which, for the record, I have done before, more than once, in other games), then that particular aspect wouldn't have bothered me. I almost regret bringing that part up, given it was rather secondary to the rest of the post. It wasn't about the lesbianism, anyway, it was about the game giving me a blank character then dictating that character was a lecherous, selfish person (and a man).

I hadn't thought of the scene as satire or parody, but now that enough people have pointed it out, I can sort of see their point. Yes, that attitude was common in medieval times, but ... if you play it completely straight, is it really a parody? Cause I saw no levels of parody or satire there, I just saw it being played straight. If the woman had, say, rolled her eyes before going along with it, or at least been briefly disgusted at the fighting, or there had been some kind of wink or nod in there that indicated some kind of parody, it would've been a lot easier to swallow. But it was simply a straightforward, "here is your woman, she is a mindless prize with boobs, fight over her and whoever wins gets her."

I can also see people's points about the game not being deep, but I wasn't expecting (or even wanting) anything deep, honestly. I was just expecting the game to not trivialize women. That's not about depth or a good plot, that's about basic common sense. That should be a given.

Still, it was a serious gut punch, and in my case at least, it wasn't effective as parody/satire at all. The next time my sister and I play Castle Crashers, I plan to just give up at the end and let her win, because I don't want to fight my teammates in a context like that. Or go smooch a mindless woman-prize.

Its been a while since I played, but doesnt it come up with an over the top arcadey 'FIGHT!' the second you untie her and she shuffles out of harms way? That seems like an indicator that it was parody to me. The way it is so backhandedly thrown at the player in a 'Oh so you beat the boss and rescued the hostage and uh hmm FIGHT TO THE DEATH!' seems like just a set up and delivery for a joke to me.

I mean the combat before that point had been pretty straight forward and also pretty leaning towards letting you mess with your buddies anyway. Sure, you couldnt hurt them, but you could knock them down and mess with them constantly.

And the tone is pretty light too, even in that first level, you start finding things which spell out 'Nothing you're seeing here is serious'

Truth be told, past the first time or two, the joke wears thin. After getting our achievements, my friends and I just let whoever had the most hp (and would therefore take the longest to die) take the victory, because it was just an annoying halt to our gameplay by that stage. Because....unless you're ultra competitive, who cares about the token victory at the end of the co-op stage?

Parting thoughts: Riding poop propelled deer to escape from a giant cat.

EDIT: Afterthought after re-reading the poll title a few times and having it bump me off side;
The princess has the exact same body as the player characters and regular enemies. The only difference is she wears a dress. Where is the sexualisation? Its the exact same character model in a dress, not some curvey temptress with her cleavage out. So on that note, while I can see why you might have gotten put off side by the sudden change in game type, you're blowing smoke up this just to justify your little rant.

 

[Something Amyss]

This isn't an excuse but when Castle Crashers was released feminism in gaming wasn't really a thing and there wasn't that much of a discussion about not trivializing women in the gaming industry.

Yes it was. In 2010, the only real difference is that nobody had threatened to rape Anita Sarkeesian yet and someone could ask for a female protagonists without the entirety of the MRM showing up to yell at them.

Speaking of Anita Sarkeesian:

and to think a certain internet person made a video about why mario and link rescuing their princesses was all kinds of wrong, but well i guess thats a story for another day kids! people will complain about me bringing HER again

If you ever again wonder why I doubt your sincerity, NK, just look back at that post.

 

[Something Amyss]

Its been a while since I played, but doesnt it come up with an over the top arcadey 'FIGHT!' the second you untie her and she shuffles out of harms way? That seems like an indicator that it was parody to me. The way it is so backhandedly thrown at the player in a 'Oh so you beat the boss and rescued the hostage and uh hmm FIGHT TO THE DEATH!' seems like just a set up and delivery for a joke to me.

Parody should be more than simply referencing and doing the exact thing you're parodying.

Yahtzee partially addresses that here:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/columns/extra-punctuation/9889-Its-All-In-Good-Humor

 

[BarkBarker]

Honestly, you could just presume you play as either a straight male or a lesbian to help ease the pain. I DO think its a poke to double dragon except you do it after nigh every stage, I'm sure you could amusingly approach it by stating that your character has been turned off women by the proposition of murder for a kiss and that the unholy powers of forced narrative is trying to make you seem petty and horny.

....or you could realise its putting you into the role of a selfish bastard and thus you do selfish bastard things like murder for a kiss.

 

[the December King]

Well, I mean, the Boss is already played up as a cold-hearted murderer by the time you have the freedom to roam around the city. And, I mean, you only have to play about two more missions in to get a good idea of how far the Boss will go. At least with Castle Crashers, there's not much of an established narrative (Save the Princess doesn't require a protagonist who wants to bone the princess). With SR2, there's not only the fact that the last game happened, but also the establishment in the intro scenes. I get why you might be upset, but you created a character despite the narrative.

And while I'm sorry you feel that way, I freaking loved SR2 and especially those darker moments. Far as I'm concerned, it was a "what the hell, player?" narrative.

Woah now, I logged over 300 hours with my character in SR2- I freaking loved it, too! I was merely pointing out that, while bouncing around the city I could easily forget that I wasn't necessarily a murderous thug, whether I wanted to or not. And there WERE times when the killin' was spot on. S'pecially with some of those cheats like the one with the lethal cars, and the people all constantly fighting...

I was merely saying that I sympathize with Persephone, and can see how someone can easily slip into their own narrative, especially if they ignore, or aren't constantly subjected to, elements that contradict that.

 

[NuclearKangaroo]

and to think a certain internet person made a video about why mario and link rescuing their princesses was all kinds of wrong, but well i guess thats a story for another day kids! people will complain about me bringing HER again

If you ever again wonder why I doubt your sincerity, NK, just look back at that post.

im not being insincere, i really freakin' hate anita

 

[Redflash]

Personally I think its quite disgusting the way the game depicts male characters as blindly driven by lust for the lost princesses, implying battle hardened knights will butcher their comrades in an instant because of a pretty face.

I'm pretty sure that actually happened quite a lot during the Middle Ages...

And I can't tell if OP is being serious, or is just baiting.

To be fair, although medieval society was obviously an armed one with more violent tendencies than ours, it was actually pretty well organised when it came to dealing with the aforementioned pretty faces. There was a lot of permission-getting involved, and men often had to wait until the prime of their life was behind them until they were considered properly established and ready for marriage - all the hacking and slashing in the world wouldn't help you if the woman's father and your overlord didn't approve.

Granted this was not due to anyone being especially enlightened - pretty faces were handled with care because they were effectively walking and talking land deeds that held the key to their father's inheritance. Now that's real objectification!

Never fear though, there was a lot of comrade-butchering going on over just about every other thing you can imagine.

As far as the OP goes, I couldn't agree more. They're really blurring the lines between sincere yet ridiculous SJW-overreaction and insincere and cynical flame-baiting. Castle Crashers just can't be analysed on that level. The only significance of the end fight against your co-op mates is just that - a fun way to wind down the play-session and maybe see who's got the best skills. There's no deep and hidden sexual objectification behind it.

 

[Saulkar]

well shit whatever you do, don't play Battle Block Theatre, you can push cats in to water. Would hate for you to go on another pointless tirade.

Dude, don't be a prick, how would you feel if after beating the last boss in gears of war you suddenly had a scene with Dom and Marco fucking each other in the butt?

What the fuck is wrong with you people? She encountered a situation that kind of came out of no where and made her uncomfortable and you shitheads are just pilling crap on her? WHY!?

You don't even seem to try and understand what is bugging her about this, you just assume she wants to take away your videogames.

This. Also I don't think the people in this thread know what over-analyzing means, form the op she did not analyze any thing she was playing the game, than this came and smacked her in the face. Overall think the satire defense that has come up might hold water but I doubt it given the things like shit propelled dear being its general level of humor.

I will have to quote you, because wargen was suspended, in order to say that I also agree. I am often sadly reminded by how passive-aggressively-vitriolic these forums agree when someone does not adhere to the common consensus. I have often heard that it is alright to be offended...

Spoiler: Steve Hughs!

But then people take it a step forward by inflecting indignation into everything they say to address those who were offended. While I do not agree with the OP completely I am saddened by the retorts she is receiving rather than politely asking her to elaborate...

No one in particular: THEN PASSIVE AGGRESSIVELY ATTACK THE PERSON AND THEIR ARGUMENT, while leaving enough breathing room for me to deny it, BWAHAHAHAHA!

NO! Just ask her politely to further elaborate, polite discourse, why is that something I seldom see in these topics? How dare anybody be offended and express it without attacking anyone. How dare they.

 

[Atmos Duality]

I havent played Castle Crashers but I wouldnt be surprised if its inclusion was a nod to double dragon in some way.

It is unquestionably a nod to Double Dragon, though it could also be a nod to Streets of Rage, River City Ransom, Super Mario Bros and all those other arcade/NES era games that featured damsels. For context, Castle Crashers is STUFFED with in-jokes and references to other games; with a healthy emphasis on side-scroller beat-em-ups.

For whatever context is worth these days anyway.

 

[RJ 17]

I'm with the OP's sister on this one. I think you're putting just a touch too much thought into it. It's a game about proverbial "knights in shining armor" saving the "damsels in distress". It's also a game based around violence, so a pvp scuffle here and there isn't out of place.

But then again, no one has the right to tell you what should or shouldn't offend you...as you're the only one that knows what you find to be offensive.

Personally I honestly never think of gender or racial issues when I play a game...seems to me that's politicizing my favorite pass time. And since I play games for a momentary respite from the issues of the real world, I don't enjoy bringing politics into them. So yeah, I've never really viewed anything in any game as being an attack on a gender, race, or sexuality. They're just games, no need to think that every little thing in them is a social commentary on something or that it's condoning/promoting any particular view towards a gender, race, or sexuality. Then again, I'm a straight white male so I'm probably not the best person to be talking about what is and isn't offensive.

As I said: to each their own. If you find it to be offensive then ok, your reasons are your own (though likely shared by some others as well).

 

[Saulkar]

I'm with the OP's sister on this one. I think you're putting just a touch too much thought into it. It's a game about proverbial "knights in shining armor" saving the "damsels in distress". It's also a game based around violence, so a pvp scuffle here and there isn't out of place.

But then again, no one has the right to tell you what should or shouldn't offend you...as you're the only one that knows what you find to be offensive.

Personally I honestly never think of gender or racial issues when I play a game...seems to me that's politicizing my favorite pass time. And since I play games for a momentary respite from the issues of the real world, I don't enjoy bringing politics into them. So yeah, I've never really viewed anything in any game as being an attack on a gender, race, or sexuality. They're just games, no need to think that every little thing in them is a social commentary on something or that it's condoning/promoting any particular view towards a gender, race, or sexuality. Then again, I'm a straight white male so I'm probably not the best person to be talking about what is and isn't offensive.

As I said: to each their own. If you find it to be offensive then ok, your reasons are your own (though likely shared by some others as well).

I just want to say that you should be a model in discourse on this site. You disagree but are polite about it. Sadly something lacking across the great interwebz.

EDIT: I might want to add, and this may be my own cynicism showing through, the Escapist as well. As much as I feel this to be one of the safest forums on the web, its own cynicism seems to be its own downfall.

 

[Riotguards]

i can see how on one hand you could look at it and point "Look women being subjected to maiden in distress again, boo hoo!" but then what about the man who has to do all the hard work, have no personality other than killing everything in his way, risking his life to save a women whom is just as faceless as the male except she's pretty much the driving force for the entire adventure

would you say it was fairer if the man said "no F*** it i'll let that person die" and thus the game ended with the man leaving


i've said it once and i'll say it again, it doesn't matter if its a man / women protagonist or a man / women goal the only thing that matters in games is gameplay and story, if you want to make it a man / women thing then quite frankly you're not a gamer in my opinion

 

[Dr. Crawver]

I appreciate the sentiment you have, and 9 times out of 10, I would agree with you, but thank you for putting context as an option as context is always the key. In castle crashers it's a stylised over the top portrayal of knights in medieval times. I mean the boss you just fought before that was a barbarian who must've been 20+ foot tall. It's all taken from tales of old and made more ridiculous. And old medieval stories are full of duels to fight for the fair maidens affection. It was just another trope taken from the old stories and made absurd again by the fact that you go right to the duel before she's even had time to dust herself down.

As for you deciding you're playing as a woman, that's fine I guess. They are designed to be ambiguous as to who they are. But to get upset when they're not pure blank slate characters is not a fair thing to do I feel. And equally they are designed to be male, once again a trope the setting (no female knights, women were ALWAYS the damsels).

If this happened in a different beat'em up that didn't have this context, then I do agree there might be more of an issue here. But as it stands, it's a comedic game in a setting with a set-up that I believe it is ok.

 

[Bombiz]

This isn't an excuse but when Castle Crashers was released feminism in gaming wasn't really a thing and there wasn't that much of a discussion about not trivializing women in the gaming industry.

Yes it was. In 2010, the only real difference is that nobody had threatened to rape Anita Sarkeesian yet and someone could ask for a female protagonists without the entirety of the MRM showing up to yell at them.

really? cause I remember it being released in 2008.

 

[RJ 17]

I'm with the OP's sister on this one. I think you're putting just a touch too much thought into it. It's a game about proverbial "knights in shining armor" saving the "damsels in distress". It's also a game based around violence, so a pvp scuffle here and there isn't out of place.

But then again, no one has the right to tell you what should or shouldn't offend you...as you're the only one that knows what you find to be offensive.

Personally I honestly never think of gender or racial issues when I play a game...seems to me that's politicizing my favorite pass time. And since I play games for a momentary respite from the issues of the real world, I don't enjoy bringing politics into them. So yeah, I've never really viewed anything in any game as being an attack on a gender, race, or sexuality. They're just games, no need to think that every little thing in them is a social commentary on something or that it's condoning/promoting any particular view towards a gender, race, or sexuality. Then again, I'm a straight white male so I'm probably not the best person to be talking about what is and isn't offensive.

As I said: to each their own. If you find it to be offensive then ok, your reasons are your own (though likely shared by some others as well).

I just want to say that you should be a model in discourse on this site. You disagree but are polite about it. Sadly something lacking across the great interwebz.

EDIT: I might want to add, and this may be my own cynicism showing through, the Escapist as well. As much as I feel this to be one of the safest forums on the web, its own cynicism seems to be its own downfall.

Thank you. I really try to remain polite and civil even when I disagree with someone. There's a couple reasons for that:

1: I don't know anyone on this site. And chances are, anyone I've ever gotten into a discussion with on the internet is someone that I don't know either. So why should I care about what they think? It's not like their opinions have any affect over me or my opinions what-so-ever. As such, I just prefer to offer up my own opinions without adding any venom to them because there's simply no need for it at all. I mean seriously, what's the point of getting all nasty with someone you've never even met?

2: At this point, most people expect a venom-fueled argument and names and nastiness to be found in disagreeing posts. I like to go against expectations. :3

 

[Depulcator]

If you are this offended by a small part of a rather old(ish) game, then maybe consider doing more research on a game before you buy it.

 

[Dragonlayer]

Personally I think its quite disgusting the way the game depicts male characters as blindly driven by lust for the lost princesses, implying battle hardened knights will butcher their comrades in an instant because of a pretty face.

I'm pretty sure that actually happened quite a lot during the Middle Ages...

And I can't tell if OP is being serious, or is just baiting.

While women were used a lot as war booty (heh) during the Middle Ages (and indeed, to this day really), brothers in arms didn't just snap and slaughter their friends because a woman could now be kissed.

Personally I think the OP is a master of satire, hence why I gave an equally nonsensical "problem".

 

[Something Amyss]

I was merely saying that I sympathize with Persephone, and can see how someone can easily slip into their own narrative, especially if they ignore, or aren't constantly subjected to, elements that contradict that.

And I was merely using your statement as a launching point. Which I explained.

im not being insincere, i really freakin' hate anita

Yes, we know. And your willingness to stop at nothing to express your hate for her, even attributing to her things she doesn't say, is obvious. Your response here, however, was the equivalent of the "I'm not touching you" argument. It's so blatantly insincere to bring it up in that sort of way, yet you claimed you didn't get why I wouldn't take you as sincere in another thread.

really? cause I remember it being released in 2008.

My bad. I went to check the release date and I guess I got the PSN release date. I couldn't, offhand, remember when it came out.

However, if you replace "2010" with "2008" in my prior statement, it still holds. This isn't something that sprung up in the last couple years.