The Witcher 3's Sex Scenes Came From 16 Hours of Mo-Cap Data - Update

[Hagi]

I'd wait to see how the scene actually turns out.

Certainly, there's porn sex which is fan-servicy in the extreme and shows little beyond as much genitalia as possible and with a rather clear focus on pure physical release, be it of the participants or the viewer. If it turns out like that then it's indeed a rather lazy attempt at making people care.

But there's more genuine sex as well. Which doesn't even have to show any explicit details whatsoever nor any focus on the eventual orgasm. Where it's entirely possible to convey emotions and relationships beyond simple lust. Don't see any problem with that, it's perfectly realistic writing and, if done right, does depict a very intimate relation between two characters.

 

[Amaror]

As i allready said later, there isn't even a real sex scene. But when you're that afraid of sex that the mere implication that sex exists and that people do it counts as fanservice to you then there's really no point in arguing with you.

See, again with this moronic "Afraid of sex" "Prude" type bit. Why must you say things about me that are malicious and untrue? I didn't say I was afraid of sex. Or that I had a problem with sex. Again, it's a poor way of filling the player in. Even if it is some post sex cuddling, Geralt fucks every other woman he meets. Something that people who actually have a single clue about the game would know. That's why it gives you no information. Even when you clutched at straws to try to find anything that the scene says about their relationship, you got that they'd bang, and that she's maybe not evil.

But hey, if you wanna flounce, do it. Hell, it's not like you or your ilk have contributed anything to the discussion apart from refusing to read.[/quote]

AH so i contributed nothing to the conversation. Interesting since i recall you going on and on about saying how sex equals bad writing because I SAY SO!
Geralt has a lot of sex, so what? Sex is different for different relationships between people. If two people just want to f**k, you see it when you see them have sex, if they deeply care about each other, you also see that when you see them have sex. That what makes it good at portraying a relationship.
This isn't bioware "Barbie dolls pressed together"-sex scenes, which people with any clue about the series would know.
If it turns out to be badly written, then fair enough, but just because there is a sex scene, or the implication of sex, doesn't mean that it's going to be badly written in the slightest.

 

[Casual Shinji]

It's so weird. Everyone on this site seems really cool and liberal but whenever sex or nudity is brought up everyone goes all puritan and says how immature and disgusting it is. It's a huge level of outrage and is really weird.

All I've seen is people arguing that there's better ways to establish a bond between two characters in a short amount of time, then just simply having them bump uglies. And there are. Especially if one of those characters is Geralt, who magnetically attracts anything with an orifice within a one mile radius, and has the expressive capabilities of an empty jar.

And given how the sex scenes in the previous games turned out, it doesn't fill one with confidence for this supposed actual emotional one.

Here I go again with the fanwanking, but Wolfenstein: The New Order had two sex scenes -- one of which was a very unflattering pants-down, over-the-table quickie -- and they both worked brilliantly, because of proper characterisation, writing, performance, and context.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

You criticize me for supposedly not acknowledging what people are saying while simultaneously not acknowledging that I already responded to that comment in the post right before the one you quoted. Ironic.

Funny how in your supposed acknowledgement you end with "No one admits that it's the sex scenes in general that makes them uneasy (probably because they usually aren't consciously aware of it), but instead they deal with their discomfort with a scapegoat like bad writing." So, you're right, you acknowledged them for the sake of saying they're liars who are just uncomfortable with sex.

I didn't accuse anyone of lying. It's called the subconscious. Believe it or not, your brain makes a lot of decisions without actually informing you of the entire thought process.

Explain to me how it's lazy. Not within the context of The Witcher (since we're obviously talking about more than just this cut scene), but in general.

Tell me, how hard do you think it is to write "the two characters have sex" as compared to some scene that shows that the two characters are close and care about each other without it? And, within the context of The Witcher series, it can't be said to be very productive laziness since, you know, this is the series where Geralt has sex with lots and lots of women.

And how hard is it to write "the two characters fight" for my hypothetical scenario? Keep in might that we're talking about an intro cinematic, not an entire movie, and that cinematic is probably establishing a bit more than just Geralt's relations with Yennefer (keep in mind as well that all this outrage is based on a cinematic we haven't even seen yet, and about which we only know a single detail). And yes, I'm aware that Geralt has sex with a lot of women in the series, but he also cares very deeply for some of them. Obviously, if this cinematic has him charging to her rescue, she's not just some one-night stand to him.

If you're gonna use quotes, then get the quote right. I said that Americans are raised to be ashamed of sex. Obviously that lesson doesn't take with everyone, and maybe that's been changing in recent years, but in general, Americans raise their kids to be ashamed of the idea of sex.

So what is your actual point here? That if you simply say that Americans were raised to be ashamed of sex that you aren't saying that Americans are generally ashamed of sex? Even if it meant something completely and utterly different, it still doesn't change the fact that instead of responding to the actual criticism in this thread, you simply decided to fall back on Americans just being (raised to be) ashamed of sex.

I'm saying that there's a societal bias as a result of the way that a lot of schools and parents teach their children that causes the idea of sex being in the "wrong place" to make a lot of people extremely uncomfortable (even some people who are generally open about their sexuality). Hence why any sex scene gets put under the tightest of scrutiny (to the point that a lot of people will tell you that there's never a place for it in a proper story), while we're content to just enjoy a sweet action scene without giving it too much thought. Sure an action scene that doesn't move the plot along can be omitted and might get called out, but when was the last time you saw someone commenting about having a rule that a movie with a fight scene within the first 5 or 10 minutes is probably not going to be very good? Heck, I've disliked and harped on a lot of movies for having a terrible story, and the response is generally along the lines of, "Who cares of the writing was any good? The action scenes were awesome!" People are so quick to dismiss the merits of a good story as long as there's an explosion or a sweet fight scene, but the instant there's physical intimacy between two characters and that story had better have needed it or the story writer was just being lazy.

 

[Steve Waltz]

Projeckt could put as much effort and money as they want into their sex scenes, but it still won?t be as good as Saints Row 4?s.

 

[sumanoskae]

I feel sorry for the people who had to do the motion capture. 16 hours in those stupid suits pretending to hump each other. Gah.

Incidentally I have a rule regarding films that if there's a sex scene within the first 5-10 minutes, then it's probably a bad film and I'm going to guess that the same applies to video games.

... May I ask why?

 

[sumanoskae]

I'm honestly kind of surprised how much negative feedback this statement is generating. The developers clearly think this aspect of their game is important; why is sex less worthy of attention than any other aspect of life?

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Incidentally I have a rule regarding films that if there's a sex scene within the first 5-10 minutes, then it's probably a bad film and I'm going to guess that the same applies to video games.

... May I ask why?

I'm honestly kind of surprised how much negative feedback this statement is generating. The developers clearly think this aspect of their game is important; why is sex less worthy of attention than any other aspect of life?

We've been debating that ever since I provided an answer to a similar question at the top of Page 3.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

I didn't accuse anyone of lying. It's called the subconscious. Believe it or not, your brain makes a lot of decisions without actually informing you of the entire thought process.

Right they're just subconsciously ashamed of sex and making up reasons why this idea is wrong. Putting forth falsehoods for reasons you don't really understand is so much better than lying.

Your lack of understanding of basic psychology does not equate me putting forth falsehoods. Although yes, your first sentence is (while a bit cynically-worded) basically what tends to happen when the subconscious decides something without the conscious self being aware of it. All the person knows is that they feel a certain way about a certain thing, and without the benefit of introspection (and/or someone to talk to about the issue), they often leap to what seems like the most obvious conclusion to them.

And how hard is it to write "the two characters fight" for my hypothetical scenario? Keep in might that we're talking about an intro cinematic, not an entire movie, and that cinematic is probably establishing a bit more than just Geralt's relations with Yennefer (keep in mind as well that all this outrage is based on a cinematic we haven't even seen yet, and about which we only know a single detail). And yes, I'm aware that Geralt has sex with a lot of women in the series, but he also cares very deeply for some of them. Obviously, if this cinematic has him charging to her rescue, she's not just some one-night stand to him.

Not very hard. The thing is, if you wanted to establish two characters as hating each other, just having them fight would be lazy and shallow compared to something that might actually require some writing.

Yet one of the reasons I liked the intro to Final Fantasy 8 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2LCSzmjPj8] so much is because it does such a great job of establishing Squall's rivalry with Seifer with nothing more than a scene of them fighting. Can it really be called "lazy" when I already have a good idea of how those two characters feel about each other before a single line of dialogue has been spoken? Do I know their entire history? No, but before even meeting Seifer I already know he's a character I'm not going to like very much. When he makes his appearance, the player already has a bit of antipathy for him simply because that one scene helped set the stage for who he is in the story.

People are so quick to dismiss the merits of a good story as long as there's an explosion or a sweet fight scene, but the instant there's physical intimacy between two characters and that story had better have needed it or the story writer was just being lazy.

Well a story better have needed or been improved by an action scene or the writers were being dumb, lazy, or overruled by a director who wanted an action scene. If not, it's a dumb movie with some nice action scenes. Do you want to know what you call a dumb movie with nice scenes of physical intimacy that outweighed the bad writing? Porn. You'll notice that most people don't go on about the bad writing in porn very often.

The key difference being that people don't look down on the actors of bad action movies the same way that they look down on porn stars. In fact, people often damn-near worship the people in action flicks, openly and proudly declaring their love for The Transformers movies despite the stories being trite. Meanwhile, ask people about their favorite porn star, and they'll hem and haw over the answer. Maybe they'll coyly give the name of a runner-up, or just flat-out deny having one. Yet when one takes a look at sales figures, there's obviously a high demand for both types of movies. So explain to me why, if people aren't uncomfortable about sex and sexuality, does one type of "brainless" movie get a pass, while the other is often shamed?

 

[MrCalavera_v1legacy]

Seriously? Holy shit, that is just pathetic. Just go watch some porn! You can get a ton for free. Sex in video games is not automatically bad (hell I actually kinda liked the one with Triss) but if you're putting this much effort into it you need to get your head checked.

Uhh, why is that? Why is putting effort in any element of a game pathetic? Haven't we heard enough complaining about sex scenes in video games looking 'wooden' and badly acted?

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I feel sorry for the people who had to do the motion capture. 16 hours in those stupid suits pretending to hump each other. Gah.

Incidentally I have a rule regarding films that if there's a sex scene within the first 5-10 minutes, then it's probably a bad film and I'm going to guess that the same applies to video games.

... May I ask why?

Because 9 times out of 10 sex scenes in movies are superfluous and if they're already putting it in before the movie is even a 10th of the way through than the movie clearly doesn't have much to go on.

I'm honestly kind of surprised how much negative feedback this statement is generating. The developers clearly think this aspect of their game is important; why is sex less worthy of attention than any other aspect of life?

It's not, but when the developer feels the need to brag about the sex scenes in their game I question the quality of the rest of it.

 

[barbzilla]

I too, do not enjoy a woman's company unless I have recently fucked her.

This is a known true fact (on MRA websites)

Given what was written by the devs, I don't think that is what they meant. What the meant was, if the player witnessed the character having sex with a woman, it is very likely that the character has some feelings for her.

OT: I don't really care for the Witcher games overall, but it has nothing to do with the sex, and everything to do with the gameplay. I have a feeling that the 16 hours of mocap was aimed at making it feel more intimate as opposed to how most video game sex comes off (like you would imagine someone with little experience in the subject would think of it).

 

[Mr_Spanky]

What the holy beefcakes? Why is this even something people even give enough of a shit to discuss? Except in terms of holy shit FINALLY a games producer who is at least TRYING to take sex in a serious light.

And how about we don't judge by some tiny sound-byte by a dev and see what the finished product looks like? If the way sex was handled in "Witcher 2" (and certainly the quantum leap from Witcher 1) is anything to go by I have absolutely no problem with it.

The number of people saying the equivalent of "sex in video games is bad and I can't take it seriously - the end" is, quite frankly both horrifying and not a little disgusting.

If you don't think that attention to detail in regards to the MOST SIGNIFICANT IMPERATIVE OF ALL OF HUMANITY is important at all in gaming you need to get your head checked.

Frankly the insane obsession with being so pathetically "soft" where sex is concerned is part of a totally diseased and damaging perspective I simply have no time for.

Get over yourselves please.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Your lack of understanding of basic psychology does not equate me putting forth falsehoods. Although yes, your first sentence is (while a bit cynically-worded) basically what tends to happen when the subconscious decides something without the conscious self being aware of it. All the person knows is that they feel a certain way about a certain thing, and without the benefit of introspection (and/or someone to talk to about the issue), they often leap to what seems like the most obvious conclusion to them.

I know full well what you meant by subconscious and never accused you of putting forth falsehoods, I accused you of accusing others of putting forth falsehoods for reasons they don't understand. And all because you have this weird idea that criticizing a sex scene can only ever come from a place of shame.

Well, when you word things that vaguely, it's kind of open to the interpretation of the reader. In any case, I wasn't accusing people of lying, more just accusing them of having not put as much thought towards a matter that they maybe never really realized is worth thinking about.

Yet one of the reasons I liked the intro to Final Fantasy 8 [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2LCSzmjPj8] so much is because it does such a great job of establishing Squall's rivalry with Seifer with nothing more than a scene of them fighting. Can it really be called "lazy" when I already have a good idea of how those two characters feel about each other before a single line of dialogue has been spoken? Do I know their entire history? No, but before even meeting Seifer I already know he's a character I'm not going to like very much. When he makes his appearance, the player already has a bit of antipathy for him simply because that one scene helped set the stage for who he is in the story.

From a writing perspective, yeah it can be called lazy. Take things like choreographing the fight out and what are you left with? The two characters fight, one who looks angry and another who looks cocky, and the cocky one wounds the angry one and maybe the opposite happens as well but we cut out at the last minute. That said, being lazy isn't the same thing as being ineffective.

So you admit that "lazy" writing techniques can be an effective method of bringing-about an intended message. Which then brings us back to the original question: Why is automatically bad when said "lazy" writing is about sex, but potentially forgivable when it's violence?

The key difference being that people don't look down on the actors of bad action movies the same way that they look down on porn stars. In fact, people often damn-near worship the people in action flicks, openly and proudly declaring their love for The Transformers movies despite the stories being trite. Meanwhile, ask people about their favorite porn star, and they'll hem and haw over the answer. Maybe they'll coyly give the name of a runner-up, or just flat-out deny having one. Yet when one takes a look at sales figures, there's obviously a high demand for both types of movies. So explain to me why, if people aren't uncomfortable about sex and sexuality, does one type of "brainless" movie get a pass, while the other is often shamed?

So we've changed the question from "why do badly written action scenes get a pass but badly written sex scenes don't?" to "why are action stars and porn stars treated differently"?

Because it stems from the same core. Action movies are good, yet porn is bad for seemingly the same arbitrary reasons that using violence is okay while using sex apparently never is.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

Because 9 times out of 10 sex scenes in movies are superfluous...

Hyperbolic evidence does not make for good support of one's claims. Not to mention that this line in particular completely ignores any post in which I compare "superfluous" sex scenes with "totally awesome" action scenes in order to illustrate how sex is arbitrarily just plain bad all the time no matter how appropriate for the story it might be, while action scenes can be as superfluous as they want to be and people will still defend them because, "It's just an action movie dude, don't get so hung-up on the story."

I'm honestly kind of surprised how much negative feedback this statement is generating. The developers clearly think this aspect of their game is important; why is sex less worthy of attention than any other aspect of life?

It's not, but when the developer feels the need to brag about the sex scenes in their game I question the quality of the rest of it.

I love how suddenly the developer is bragging, seemingly just for the sake of being able to attach another ugly word to the subject of the news post.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Because 9 times out of 10 sex scenes in movies are superfluous...

Hyperbolic evidence does not make for good support of one's claims. Not to mention that this line in particular completely ignores any post in which I compare "superfluous" sex scenes with "totally awesome" action scenes in order to illustrate how sex is arbitrarily just plain bad all the time no matter how appropriate for the story it might be, while action scenes can be as superfluous as they want to be and people will still defend them because, "It's just an action movie dude, don't get so hung-up on the story."

I'm not saying sex is arbitrarily bad. Although I do hate seeing it. However as I said Hollywood filmmakers often throw it in there for now good reason. Besides sex scenes are rarely done well in my experience. As for action scenes. Well action scenes tend to get the adrenaline going so it's easier to ignore that fact that a lot of it is superfluous. However when it comes to sex scenes, at least for myself, I find myself wondering "why the hell am I seeing this?"

I'm honestly kind of surprised how much negative feedback this statement is generating. The developers clearly think this aspect of their game is important; why is sex less worthy of attention than any other aspect of life?

It's not, but when the developer feels the need to brag about the sex scenes in their game I question the quality of the rest of it.

I love how suddenly the developer is bragging, seemingly just for the sake of being able to attach another ugly word to the subject of the news post.

Well as Jim Sterling once mentioned, romance and sex in particular, rarely amounts to more than a token mini-game which makes it even worse than when it's arbitrarily thrown into a film for no reason. So when news about the developer wasting 16 hours worth of mo cap on sex scenes comes out I have to wonder if the game has much else going for it.