Agreed. She was also a bit of a seductress type character, someone who definitely didn't have a problem with breaking trust just to save her own hide. The revealing clothing was something that reflected that attitude very well.Gypsyssilver said:
Sexualized characters that were done right.
- Thread starter Erttheking
- Start date
Sexualized is "to make something sexual". To me this would usually imply some form of tampering or emphasis coming from the material. But may not necessarily exclude characters that are quite sexual in nature, as they are created that way for varying purposes by the material and most often come with complimentary emphasis anyway.Lieju said:
Interesting that no mention of Kerrigan from the Starcraft series yet. She's been "sexualized" since the 90's, but has been pulling it off because her character makes sense and works with the plot. What's interesting about her is that she's sexy even after becoming part of the "disgusting" zerg, but that works based on her and Raynor's relationship and how completely she can control him.
...is that really a good enough excuse, though? 'We can see her cleavage because she's got attitude!'? We don't have weather reports to tell us what the temperature is like in various parts of Ferelden (I'm not sure if anyone mentions it. been years since I played DA:O), but I'm not sure her attire is overly practical; better to be alive and warm, than at risk of death-by-exposure and 'seductive'.TravelerSF said:
Is practicality the only thing that should define character design? No, clearly not. But DA:O was going for a more grounded aesthetic and tone, so I'm hesitant to let the get 'em out for the lads design quirk be justified because it's somehow synonymous with 'attitude'. Ditto if that's how CD Projekt Red justified the cleavage happy female characters of Witcher 2.
(btw, I'm not trashing Morrigan's design, per se. I'm just questioning your reasoning)
In fact I think this whole thread is poorly named, or just a bad idea, frankly. I don't really believe 'sexualised' can really be done right. I think what people are actually referring to is elements of exploitative design which they subjectively find 'sexy'. That's fine, but call it what it is.
And yeah, Alyx Vance is famous for not being sexualised, so that's a truly bizarre pick.
To be fair, I thought Witcher 2 did this MUCH better than Witcher 1 if nothing else. One thing that really bothered me about Witcher 1 was the fact that the female character designs almost ignored the lore. Tris, for example, had this monstrous cleavage unlike anything I've seen before. It was unreal. Except in the books, she never wore a cleavage. It was a PTSD thing. So at least they fixed that in the second game.Darth Rosenberg said:
Just out of curiosity, who gets to determine when and for what topics certain opinions are less valid than others? And who gave that person the authority to make said judgement over other people's opinions?Vault101 said:
No, I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the people that you've been having a discussion with in this topic, but I was just made curious by the above statement. Are you saying that male opinions on female-related subjects are less valid simply because they're male? Well wouldn't that conversely mean that all female opinions on male-related subjects are less valid simply because they're female?
I might've worded that a tad poorly. I meant that I'm okay with her looks (practically bare chested) because they are in sync with her characteristics, personality and attitude (someone who uses every mean possible to deceive people. So why wouldn't she use one of the easiest and simplest ways to give herself an edge over certain types of men?)Darth Rosenberg said:
This was purely my personal view on the subject. Things that bother me most are when a) An otherwise well written character is sexualized for no proper reason b) When a character serves no other point but to exist as a sexual object and throws off the tone of the game (imo a game can be all tits/guns/violence if it wants, but it better be aware of it and recognize it).
And btw, as a personal pet peeve, I hate Witcher 2 because of the way it handled some of it's female characters.
Just out of curiosity, who gets to determine when and for what topics certain opinions are less valid than others? And who gave that person the authority to make said judgement over other people's opinions?RJ 17 said:
No, I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the people that you've been having a discussion with in this topic, but I was just made curious by the above statement. Are you saying that male opinions on female-related subjects are less valid simply because they're male? Well wouldn't that conversely mean that all female opinions on male-related subjects are less valid simply because they're female?[/quote]
well...no one really, its an incredibly sticky subject
it really depends on whats being said too, I think its pretty obvious when someone is talking about something they don't actually know.....I mean should I go and tell poor people they should just "go get jobs" or "get their parents to support them like mine did" and if not their CLEARLY just too lazy/stupid/complacent to change their situation?
of course we should look at what people say and judge that...but where they're coming from is also something to consider
I would kind of agree with this, but kinda not. Even though her sexuality doesn't come into play even in her romance, there is some attempt at sexualization with appearance as a zerg, but like with everything with the zerg it is very perverted(not in the sexual meaning) from its original intent. She has the form, but it comes out looking more like a diagram of the human skeletal - muscular system and I was never one to wank off to my 9th grade biology book. I guess you could say she takes nudity too far. XDAvaholic03 said:
I would classify it more as an intentionally failed attempt at sexualization than an actual sexualization, personally.
Catherine, from Catherine, was a decently done sexual character. It's difficult to discuss why without spoiling a whole ton of the game, but I'd recommend it if you can find it for 5-10 dollars.
The entire game is built around how you determine the important aspects of life and relationships, with Catherine and Katherine both representing the extremes of those aspects.
The entire game is built around how you determine the important aspects of life and relationships, with Catherine and Katherine both representing the extremes of those aspects.
"I want to be aroused by hot girls but I don't want to feel bad about it"
The only time there's something wrong with sexualized characters is when people try to justify their existence with bull shit. It's okay to be aroused by things stop feeling shamed by that. When you start trying to convince me eye candy is some deep statement on feminism or liberated women is when my 'this is the new 52 starfire bull again' alert starts going off.
Okay, it is possible that a fan servicey looking character is more than that, but for the purposes of video game and comics I'd wager you could count them all in one hand.
The only time there's something wrong with sexualized characters is when people try to justify their existence with bull shit. It's okay to be aroused by things stop feeling shamed by that. When you start trying to convince me eye candy is some deep statement on feminism or liberated women is when my 'this is the new 52 starfire bull again' alert starts going off.
Okay, it is possible that a fan servicey looking character is more than that, but for the purposes of video game and comics I'd wager you could count them all in one hand.
Her outfit makes perfect sense in the "she uses her looks to get what she wants" -regard. Just being attractive gives you an advantage in basically every human interaction. So looking good whenever you have to interact with people is a very big bart of using your looks to get what you want.AntiChri5 said:
Exactly. I often think people who call her a sexist character are the sexist ones, because they are the ones reducing her to her looks. Bioware never did that, they just made a strong and awesome female character that happens to also look hot as hell.Hixy said:
You are not sure whether a character wearing basically the proverbial chainmail bikini is sexualized at all? Please.Khanht Cope said:
Indeed. Maybe the poster confused "sexualized" with "attractive", which are two very different pairs of shoes. Well, at least for some. As for myself, there's little overlap between both groups of game characters. I just don't find the cheap porn aesthetic that is usually used to sexualize female characters not very attractive; quite the opposite.Darth Rosenberg said:
I am not sure if I understand the concept of this thread. What is said here is that if women are dressed too sexy, it can still be good if fitting their personality. In fact I find it neither good or bad, but that's not because of the character background.
In reality, most of the time the female character have sexy outfits just because we males like to watch some skin. And the character story is complementary but doesn't always explain these outfits. I mean,. I do enjoy a good character background, but I don't think the boobs were there to complete the character personality.
For example near-naked outfits. Maybe Bayonetta mentioned too. Ok, she looks bad ass. I do remember a funny video testing if Kitana and Milena in Mortal Kombat could practically fight with that outfit (it's a pitty I can't find it right now). And their clothes where ripped and fell apart, that's expected with 20% clothes covering their bodies. I think one outfit of Bayonetta is 90% revealing too. Would that be practical for combat? Why not Yoga Pants? It's good for sports and eye candy at the same time. It's just eye candy for male gamers.
However I don't agree with how sensitive some people are getting with this. Gaming was a male world initially, I do understand about the arguments on objectification and sexism, but I do not believe them. I feel like my sexuality is attacked, if I am not allowed to stare at boobs and enjoy that stuff. Sometimes however there are more nicely dressed girls, and I might enjoy more a female with good personality and not so focused on sexy stuff, for example see classic adventure games (Longest Journey, Syberia, Grey Matter) and that's because they are more mature than your average hack and slash. Maybe things will change in the future, who knows.
In reality, most of the time the female character have sexy outfits just because we males like to watch some skin. And the character story is complementary but doesn't always explain these outfits. I mean,. I do enjoy a good character background, but I don't think the boobs were there to complete the character personality.
For example near-naked outfits. Maybe Bayonetta mentioned too. Ok, she looks bad ass. I do remember a funny video testing if Kitana and Milena in Mortal Kombat could practically fight with that outfit (it's a pitty I can't find it right now). And their clothes where ripped and fell apart, that's expected with 20% clothes covering their bodies. I think one outfit of Bayonetta is 90% revealing too. Would that be practical for combat? Why not Yoga Pants? It's good for sports and eye candy at the same time. It's just eye candy for male gamers.
However I don't agree with how sensitive some people are getting with this. Gaming was a male world initially, I do understand about the arguments on objectification and sexism, but I do not believe them. I feel like my sexuality is attacked, if I am not allowed to stare at boobs and enjoy that stuff. Sometimes however there are more nicely dressed girls, and I might enjoy more a female with good personality and not so focused on sexy stuff, for example see classic adventure games (Longest Journey, Syberia, Grey Matter) and that's because they are more mature than your average hack and slash. Maybe things will change in the future, who knows.
Its good to see a light hearted gender talk on the forums. Id say Red from Transistor which im currently playing. She is just soooooooo evocative.
looking forward to cosplays of this.
looking forward to cosplays of this.
That's exactly what I said, though? I called it 'The Witcher', so maybe you thought I was referring to the series sexism, as opposed to the first game's (I've not read the books, btw).Johny_X2 said:
Yeah, I get that, and I'm not trying to call you a raging sexist 'cause clearly you're not. But couldn't there be better ways of tying her character design into her character? Must 'I always get what I want' always translate to 'look at my tits!' for female characters?TravelerSF said:
And that reading of Morrigan could be a little dicecy, too. Like I said, not played Origins for years, but I don't recall her being a seductress for most of the game at all (ergo why should that trait define her whole aesthetic). For the most part, she couldn't give a toss what anyone else thinks of her - men especially, it seems. So if she's living in the wilds, practicality - not manipulation - would be paramount.
Morrigan works as a character, as does - I reckon - Miranda Lawson. But I don't think anyone can deny that they are also fanservice for straight male gamers.
I can get that, and it's problematic, sure, but it didn't stop me loving the game. All in all, Dragon Age Origins does handle its female characters (and designs) better.
And that's the sad part about it, some characters are likable but a part of me also knows "this is not realistic and may be systematic of something"Coruptin said:
Let me put this into context, Until I saw your post, I wasn't going to post because the person I would use as a reference is very debatable
.png)
In game and supplemental side material, Makoto has been characterized as very upbeat with a deadpan streak around some people (cough, Kagura, cough), Extremely devoted to her friends, Smart enough to get into military academy on scholarship, strong enough to compete with an entire cast of insanely powerful people, and strong-willed enough to avoid losing her mind after being thrown into the void.
Issue is that I left out one thing that I think makes her somewhat popular in the fanfic community: she has been portrayed as a bisexual. Don't misunderstand, bisexuality is fine but a part of me is constantly thinking "my god, this is fetish bait" so i'm left between a rock and a hard place. One half says "this character is fun, lovable, and has a backstory that intrigues me", the other half is like "do I like this character for or despite of her kemonomini and underboob".
I really do not like this conversation because it can be so hard to justify why we like something but if we do, we may be seen as perverts