Sexuality in gaming, your stance?

[Phasmal]

What pisses me off is that you can't turn anywhere for tits and Fenris doesn't even lose his shirt in the so called `sex scence` in DA2.
The ratio is too skewed.

If I was a dude, I'd probably be a little bit offended at how game developers thought of me.
It's always funny how people react to other people's sexuality being catered for, though (think Anders hitting on you and many people's reaction to that). It's like - `Hey! Stop pandering to THEM and pander to ME MORE`.
And that's my hope for the future of games.
More shirtless elven men.

 

[Yuuki]

Speaking as a 16 year old girl, if your female characters 'need' to be sexualized, so do your male characters.

That is a VERY good point. If game developers are going to say "hey, we listen to the community", they're going to have to listen to the FEMALE community as well, because they make up a fairly sizable chunk of gaming demographics.

Sizable chunk of which gaming demographics? That's kinda important. A developer wouldn't ask for the opinion of a Battlefield veteran about how he should design his next iPhone game.

 

[King Zeal]

There's a difference between expressing sexuality and exploiting sexuality.

Expressing sexuality means that one is exploring themes or characters that consciously and tastefully address the nuances of that sexuality. For example, a lesbian woman who has a hard time coming to grasp her feelings, and finding it hard to be herself in a world that is so against it. Expressing sexuality in a work can, and usually should, leave someone feeling more secure, understanding, or even interested in the sexuality in question.

Exploiting sexuality means taking only the parts of that sexuality that suits your ends and to hell with anything else. For example, jiggling breasts to sell copies or portraying a gay man as a weak, flamboyant drama queen. Exploitation typically leaves people more confused or misinformed than they already were; watching Ivy jiggle and shake during battles does nothing to help a heterosexual man, lesbian woman, or bisexual, come to grips with how to handle their sexuality. It makes them horny, but that's it.

You can find a suitable balance between the two, but that takes more skill than most creators are willing to try.

 

[rumdumconundrum]

Speaking as a 16 year old girl, if your female characters 'need' to be sexualized, so do your male characters.

That is a VERY good point. If game developers are going to say "hey, we listen to the community", they're going to have to listen to the FEMALE community as well, because they make up a fairly sizable chunk of gaming demographics.

Sizable chunk of which gaming demographics? That's kinda important. A developer wouldn't ask for the opinion of a Battlefield veteran about how he should design his next iPhone game.

I mean gender demographics, not system demographics. There are plenty of women who play Battlefield and that number is growing all the time.

Girl gamers are becoming much more common, and I find this kind of gender-exclusive fanservice to be more of a relic of the time when serious video games were considered to be a man's thing and women were only expected to play Barbie games and pet simulators when they weren't too busy in the kitchen. It either needs to satisfy both genders involved equally, or it needs to go away.

 

[EternallyBored]

The examples called "sexy" look like kids. I can't help but be put off by that.

I'm not saying Ivy gets me off, mind.

If it's immersion breaking or inconsistent, then it can tend to be a bit of a problem. See: Chainmail bikini.

I honestly don't understand how this breaks "immersion."

I would prefer more practical armour, but that's not an "immersion" issue.

That is a VERY good point. If game developers are going to say "hey, we listen to the community", they're going to have to listen to the FEMALE community as well, because they make up a fairly sizable chunk of gaming demographics.

Yes, but as I'm sure you know, "we listen to the community" is full of crap in general. When it comes to something like this, it tends to be more "we think you're all walking penises with wallets, have some BOOBS!"

Besides, pandering to women is pandering. Pandering to men is...Umm...Different? Somehow?

By immersion breaking, I think people are mostly referring to it being jarring. In an otherwise consistent universe, you've got this one aspect that seems to serve no purpose except to speak directly to the audience. It's like when a character gets up on a soap box to make a speech that ends up just being a thinly veiled rant of the authors political or moral views, except with the chainmail bikinis it's less, "let me unsubtly tell you about my politics", and more "I am trying to speak directly to your libido, and I'm sacrificing setting consistency, character traits, and common sense to do it".

The skimpy armor can work, barbarians and amazons get away with it all the time, it mostly becomes an issue when it doesn't make sense within the setting. Like my previous observations on Mass Effect, the first game established how armor and shields worked within the universe, but the second and third game threw that out the window in favor showing cleavage and ass cracks, even getting to the ridiculous point of putting characters on alien planets and in hard vacuum, with no protection against the temperature or the effects of vacuum on an unprotected person. Basically the only female character that wouldn't die from exposure in Mass Effect 2 is, ironically enough, the character with the compromised immune system, Tali, and technically Female Shepard, since they at least have the common sense to wear body armor and proper EVA gear into hostile environment combat.

 

[Yuuki]

For example, jiggling breasts to sell copies

If jiggling breasts didn't sell copies, they wouldn't do it
I agree with Yahtzee that if Mass Effect wasn't advertised with having sex in it, the result would've been lower sales.

or portraying a gay man as a weak, flamboyant drama queen.

It doesn't help that some gay men ARE like that though, and as bad it is to generalize, it is something that grabs attention easier and makes it more flat-out obvious. It's easier to exploit stereotypes especially if one isn't particularly interested in representing them whole-heartedly, like Japanese games that always depict black people as the "aw hell naw" crowd :S

Exploitation typically leaves people more confused or misinformed than they already were; watching Ivy jiggle and shake during battles does nothing to help a heterosexual man, lesbian woman, or bisexual, come to grips with how to handle their sexuality. It makes them horny, but that's it.

If it made them horny, that's mission accomplished as far as the developer is concerned.

You can find a suitable balance between the two, but that takes more skill than most creators are willing to try.

Amen to this.

I mean gender demographics, not system demographics. There are plenty of women who play Battlefield and that number is growing all the time.

Girl gamers are becoming much more common, and I find this kind of gender-exclusive fanservice to be more of a relic of the time when serious video games were considered to be a man's thing and women were only expected to play Barbie games and pet simulators when they weren't too busy in the kitchen. It either needs to satisfy both genders involved equally, or it needs to go away.

Hence gender-exclusive fanservice games are becoming less and less common, assuming they were even in any significant numbers to begin with (they weren't). The scene will change in direct proportion to how many women are getting drawn into "serious" gaming, i.e. at an extremely slow and gradual rate. There's still a ways to go: http://venturebeat.com/2013/09/19/gender-inequality/

Although I completely disagree with gender-exclusive fanservice games going away completely. We see movies and anime occasionally targeted at certain genders, and they ABSOLUTELY have their place. Free! [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free!_-_Iwatobi_Swim_Club] is an anime that's risen a lot in popularity, and speaking as a heterosexual male I'm 100% fine with ladies getting fanservice aimed at them.

 

[Epicspoon]

Let me put this as simply as I can. Sexulization exists in real life. Video games and all forms of media are meant to emulate life in ways that real life cannot, no matter how unrealistic. Therefor the only boundaries that exist in video games and other media are the ones we set in real life. Pushing the boundaries in video games has the same effect as pushing them in real life and vice versa so there is no reason for us to NOT have sexualization. My point is sexualization belongs in video games and if you don't think it does then stop having sex in real life unless you like being a hypocrite.

 

[Fireaxe]

Overt sexualisation in games tends to result in me putting them in the same category as lads mags, they exist and I don't have any real objection, but I'm not going to buy one; mostly because if their best selling point is "LOOK BOOBS" then they're not going to be very interesting gameplay wise (this is kind of like how one wouldn't purchase Playboy for the articles). If I buy a game, it's presumably to play the game.

Attractive characters, so far as they make sense, don't cause me to object though.

 

[Bombiz]

snip.

so basically other forms of media are allowed to have Sexualization but video games are not?

don't get me wrong. we still; need less Sexualization in video games but it doesn't mean we need a scorched earth policy about it.

 

[Caiphus]

I honestly don't understand how this breaks "immersion."

I would prefer more practical armour, but that's not an "immersion" issue.

If I was running about in Skyrim, say, and I was doing just as much damage against a heavily armoured orc as a half-naked elf, that would probably ruin immersion somewhat*. It's not game breaking, it just doesn't make sense.

Trying to think of other examples...

Miranda wearing heels while fighting in Mass Effect is a common example. It just doesn't make any sense in the context of the game.

*Edit: Clearly some people don't mind at all, judging by all the half-naked elf mods. This is a personal preference discussion, of course.

 

[The Lunatic]

snip.

so basically other forms of media are allowed to have Sexualization but video games are not?

don't get me wrong. we still; need less Sexualization in video games but it doesn't mean we need a scorched earth policy about it.

Nope, in general, I think if you want sexy stuff, go for it.

I don't see why that has to cross-over into every form of media however.

Have sexualised video games, but don't have almost every female character in almost every video game be sexualised.

 

[runic knight]

OP
So... as long as it is the sort o sexuality you like it is ok? Isn't that, I don't know, horribly selfish of you to determine what is or isn't alright for the rest of people?

don't get me wrong, an oversized bust doesn't do anything for me either, but it is just too self righteous to start deciding what is acceptable.



Should games pander? Well, I think the better question is why shouldn't they? They are a medium just as any other, and if pandering exists in movies, literature, music and art, why should gaming be any different? And much like all the above, the amount of pandering is dictated by the response it gets and the profitability of it. With male gamers, yeah, I would say there is a bit of a market there for pandering sexuality in gaming. Why not? Obviously the entire industry, not even the entire triple A industry is going to do it. It is still more niche then not, so if it doesn't suit your taste, that is fine, there is plenty other games out there to play. And if the games you want aren't being made, well, my sympathies, help bring them into existence by supporting kickstarters or channeling demand and funding to related projects.

Honestly, anyone actively trying to say gaming shouldn't pander would need to give me a real good reason why it makes any sense at all. And no, "because we already have porn" isn't a good reason any more then the flipped argument of "well, you already have twilight books, no need to make video games with female leads". Not everyone wants porn, and not everyone reacts the same to different types of titillation and appeals to sexual excitement. As long as there is a market and no one is harmed, I see no reason to try to pretend games need to be somehow protected from this.

 

[Yuuki]

I honestly don't understand how this breaks "immersion."

I would prefer more practical armour, but that's not an "immersion" issue.

If I was running about in Skyrim, say, and I was doing just as much damage against a heavily armoured orc as a half-naked elf, that would probably ruin immersion somewhat. It's not game breaking, it just doesn't make sense.

Trying to think of other examples...

Miranda wearing heels while fighting in Mass Effect is a common example. It just doesn't make any sense in the context of the game.

Ooh I know one from Skyrim. Being able to take multiple sword slashes and arrows to the face while staying alive. That completely booted my immersion out the window

 

[Seracen]

My stance on sexuality in gaming? Yes. That's it, just yes.

Have it, if it serves a purpose, even if that purpose is fanservice. Crossing certain boundaries render the product glorified porn, but taste and whatnot are a personal choice.

There's aesthetics for every taste and preference. Social commentary is a much broader concern than can be addressed in gaming alone.

 

[Caiphus]

Ooh I know one from Skyrim. Being able to take multiple sword slashes and arrows to the face while staying alive. That completely booted my immersion out the window

Possibly*. Although I personally modded my game to make melee combat more deadly in that regard, so maybe I'm the weird one.

Vanilla Skyrim actually has consistent armour sets for all characters though, so I don't really have complaints there.

Edit: Fucked up the quoting.

Further Edit*: I mean, that's definitely another way in which immersion can be ruined. Now, it doesn't have anything to do with sexy clothing or whatever, but yes the melee combat in Skyrim can be a bit dull and floaty. Where you sort of whale on people with the LMB or right trigger (don't know what console players use) until they fall over.

I would suggest looking at Locational Damage and SkyRe or Duke Patrick's Combat Overhaul. The latter was a little bit too realistic for me, ended up kicking my ass, and didn't seem to (?) overhaul magic perks at the same time, so I went with the former.

 

[runic knight]

snip.

so basically other forms of media are allowed to have Sexualization but video games are not?

don't get me wrong. we still; need less Sexualization in video games but it doesn't mean we need a scorched earth policy about it.

Nope, in general, I think if you want sexy stuff, go for it.

I don't see why that has to cross-over into every form of media however.

Have sexualised video games, but don't have almost every female character in almost every video game be sexualised.

That is a disingenuous statement there. No one is arguing for that here, why are you presenting it like anyone is? No one wants every character, or near every character sexualize, people are just arguing that games shouldn't be somehow unique in how they are treated. That includes the pandering sexualizing aspects. It isn't a question of "should most female characters be sexualized", the starting question was should characters be sexualized in general. The pictures provided by the OP also helped set this up as a discussion about what sort of sexualizing is "right" as well, for all the silliness that matters.

 

[Bullfrog1983]

This sort of post has been done to death. Sexuality in games isn't a bad thing but sexualization of characters isn't really that interesting to me.

Looking at the character Ivy from Soul Calibur if you take her and compare her to other characters in the same series she isn't that ridiculous either as most of the characters in the games are deformed in some fashion. I guess what I'm saying is it all depends on how it compares to other aspects in the same game if it will be off-putting or not.

Overall, I don't really care unless the game is constantly showing T&A. The design/plot of a game is what interests me.

 

[The Lunatic]

That is a disingenuous statement there. No one is arguing for that here, why are you presenting it like anyone is? No one wants every character, or near every character sexualize, people are just arguing that games shouldn't be somehow unique in how they are treated. That includes the pandering sexualizing aspects. It isn't a question of "should most female characters be sexualized", the starting question was should characters be sexualized in general. The pictures provided by the OP also helped set this up as a discussion about what sort of sexualizing is "right" as well, for all the silliness that matters.

It depends upon your opinion of "Sexualised" really.

I argue any character designed with any aspect to "Appeal" towards a certain group of people is being "Sexualised".

And it's fine to an extent, there's nothing wrong with attractive characters, I'm not suggesting that every character in video games should be a 240lb transsexual called "Sunset".

But, in my opinion, I'd say even the more tamer examples, like Cami (Or basically any female character in a fighting game.), female armour in video games which exposes the thighs, boobplates, that kinda stuff is a bit unneeded in games.

Even the first link which the OP posted is a bit much, girl is wearing some form-hugging latex shirt thing, some dominatrix stockings, and high heels, and she's supposed to be a fighting character?!

 

[Islandbuffilo]

If the game is fan-service, let it be fan-service: HDN
If the game used it for fan-service and comedy (My favorite) let it be fan-service and comedy: Mugen souls.
If its and art style the has symbolism behind it let it be: Dragon's crown
If its just one token fan service character, don't kick up so much of a fuss about: most jrpgs.
If it a comes out of nowhere and is completely out of place with the rest of the game's setting, by all means be offended: Don't play many games that do this so I can't think of one off the top of my head.

 

[runic knight]

That is a disingenuous statement there. No one is arguing for that here, why are you presenting it like anyone is? No one wants every character, or near every character sexualize, people are just arguing that games shouldn't be somehow unique in how they are treated. That includes the pandering sexualizing aspects. It isn't a question of "should most female characters be sexualized", the starting question was should characters be sexualized in general. The pictures provided by the OP also helped set this up as a discussion about what sort of sexualizing is "right" as well, for all the silliness that matters.

It depends upon your opinion of "Sexualised" really.

I argue any character designed with any aspect to "Appeal" towards a certain group of people is being "Sexualised".

And it's fine to an extent, there's nothing wrong with attractive characters, I'm not suggesting that every character in video games should be a 240lb transsexual called "Sunset".

But, in my opinion, I'd say even the more tamer examples, like Cami (Or basically any female character in a fighting game.), female armour in video games which exposes the thighs, boobplates, that kinda stuff is a bit unneeded in games.

Even the first link which the OP posted is a bit much, girl is wearing some form-hugging latex shirt thing, some dominatrix stockings, and high heels, and she's supposed to be a fighting character?!

Appealing to reality in any form of fiction is usually a waste of time and breath. It really is. The work of fiction sets up the rules for itself, it is what allows fighters to throw fireballs, leap 20 feet straight into the air and yes, wear bathing suits, heels and yet never once have a wardrobe malfunction. Reality can be as selective as the developer wants in fiction. Hell, look what they did with the ending of ME3, and that game had much more defined rules then your average fighting game.

While no one is saying that chainmail bikinis are needed, that was never the argument. What was the argument, and seems to always be it is if games should do that. Obviously you don't think they should and that is fine, you opinion and all that, but that is as far as it goes. The people making the game, the people playing it, their opinions may differ and for whatever reason, chainmail bikinis and the like are popular enough, either for the player or just the developers that they persist. It is not a question of them having to justify that choice, it is a matter of personal opinion is all. While I know it does suck when it comes to having to compromise on the game's acetic in order to enjoy the gameplay, arguing that the game doesn't need top heavy women in stilettos doesn't amount ot anything but personal griping. Games don't need a lot of things that they end up saddled with, from QTE, to bland as dirt grim protagonists, to DLC. Rather then just complain that this specific example of something over used is somehow unique in not being needed, a better method would be to understand why it is included in the first place and try to use that to determine how to encourage the likelihood of it being used less.

As someone else in the thread said, if the game doesn't appeal to you to the point you don't buy it, that is fine for you, but that means your opinion on it means as much as a vegetarian's opinion on the quality of KFC chicken. At that point you aren't the audience, so no one selling the product will care too much what you have to say. Compare that to the recent announcement of female character models for the next generation of FPS in response to paying customer demand. A lot of the discussion here revolves around understanding the motivations for why companies make the decisions they do and understanding the demographic's responses and demands. But you'll always have some demand for skimpy heeled protagonist, so I don't think we will ever be rid of them in gaming, "no need" for them or whatever.