I'm just going to put this here.
http://doubleplusgoodgames.com/editorial-objectivity-vs-dragons-crown/
http://doubleplusgoodgames.com/editorial-objectivity-vs-dragons-crown/
Jimquisition: Dragon's Frown
- Thread starter dmr87
- Start date
TaroYamada
Member
Denial of a conspiracy counts as conspiracy insertion? That's an unusual stance. The poster implicated there were signifnicant differences in how the touching occurred, I disagree. I said so because this is a forum, where discussion takes place.
I never said two wrongs don't/do make a right because I don't believe anything wrong occurred, so on this argument we'll just have to agree to disagree I suppose. The troll argument is weak tripe considering you also just became offended in this very thread about "judgments" on your personal character by another poster and then copped out and refused to reply to him on that basis.
Hobby defenders? I don't know the implication here but given your general condescension I assume it's negative and I'm supposed to be deeply hurt/offended. I'll take the title though and redefine it for my needs: I support different types of games existing, I will absolutely defend Dragon's Crown and its right to portray men and women as it does. I will also defend games like Portal or Beyond Good and Evil that have strong female leads who aren't scantily clad. I don't believe there's anything wrong with either.
Trotting out false logic to make the other poster's opinion wrong? I never said the other poster's opinion was wrong, maybe you should take some time, drink a cup of coffee and slowly reread my original post. I said I didn't see any particular sexism, keyword there being I, which within this topic inherently means subjective. Also if we reuse your heavily flawed metric, aren't you telling me my opinion is wrong? I guess it's a good thing we aren't, because that'd be rather hypocritical.
RoninChaos
Member
So after playing the game, and looking through the art book, I've come to the conclussion that ANY ONE who tells themselves the sorceress and the amazon aren't sexualized is blind or insane.
For amazon, as stated previously, she's face down ass up when she's grounded, her kicks expose her crotch (unarmed attack 4) all of her jump animations pretty much only show her ass. You don't see the dwarf's package or the fighter's package at ALL during any of their animations, and neither of them fall down face down ass up when stunned.
Then you have the nun and everybody else.
Then there's the art in the back of the art book of the soceress with gravy (or something) dripped all of her tits while she's eating food. This poster has a pic of it. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=75055939&postcount=2253
Let's not get into the whole touching thing either.
At this point I cant see how any one could say these characters aren't highly sexualized with a straight face. I don't particularly care that they are this way, it more has to do with the people in this thread that are saying that the characters aren't. It's so blatant it's kind of hilarious. Lets call a spade a spade.
I will be returning my ps3 copy to amazon tomorrow because I intended to play this with my wife, and she wasn't interested at all. But she liked Bayonetta. Hrm.
Anybody want to buy the artbook?
For amazon, as stated previously, she's face down ass up when she's grounded, her kicks expose her crotch (unarmed attack 4) all of her jump animations pretty much only show her ass. You don't see the dwarf's package or the fighter's package at ALL during any of their animations, and neither of them fall down face down ass up when stunned.
Then you have the nun and everybody else.
Then there's the art in the back of the art book of the soceress with gravy (or something) dripped all of her tits while she's eating food. This poster has a pic of it. http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=75055939&postcount=2253
Let's not get into the whole touching thing either.
At this point I cant see how any one could say these characters aren't highly sexualized with a straight face. I don't particularly care that they are this way, it more has to do with the people in this thread that are saying that the characters aren't. It's so blatant it's kind of hilarious. Lets call a spade a spade.
I will be returning my ps3 copy to amazon tomorrow because I intended to play this with my wife, and she wasn't interested at all. But she liked Bayonetta. Hrm.
Anybody want to buy the artbook?
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
I actually didn't know there were any touching deals until looking at the thread today. I've just been powering through the cut-ins.
Was your wife not interested because of the gameplay, or put off by the art?
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Just one question: Do you watch Game of Thrones with your wife or any other show/movie involving nudity and sex or is kinda taboo all that kind of stuff when sharing entertainment?
RoninChaos
Member
The art. My wife is a feminist and has no issue with a woman displaying her sexuality but this game crossed a line with her. And to be honest, it kind of has with me. It's a fun game but the purpose of that sexualization isn't for anything else than to titilate. If I wanted that we'd just watch porn together, not get what is the equivalent of an upskirt every time there's an attack animation.
It's a shame too because I really like Vanillaware and I want to support them. I pre ordered both the ps3 and the vita version and now I'm not sure if I'm just going to send both back. The game is fun, but it's repetitive and the issues with sexualizing (like that touching thing, jesus. Go jerk off, don't put that in a game) have really taken the fun out of it for me.
The last time I had a reaction like this was with Arkham city, the catwoman thing being dlc/behind a paywall and the from the ashes DLC with Mass Effect 3. The issues surrounding the game have rendered the game a lot less fun overall for me. This one is probably the most blatant, as I normally wouldn't have an issue playing a beat em up in front of my wife and child, but this one I would simply because the sexuality serves no purpose. I don't have an issue with anything sexual, and my son has seen women naked, he knows what sex is etc. I'd rather him see a pair of tits than someone getting gunned down.
However, the Amazon looking the way she does, as stated, is just to titilate. I wouldn't have any issue if they had her animations not go out of the way to show off her ass, her tits, or her crotch but unfortunately that isn't the case. If they had her not have her face down and ass up, with her crotch visable then this would be a different conversation. Again, you don't see the dwarf's stun animation have his ass in the air, his metal kilt up and his under wear showing. This is specifically towards the sorceress and amazon.
RoninChaos
Member
First of all, there aren't a lot of taboo's in my house. I already saw you try this game of thrones thing once. I also saw you act completely blind to why someone would see the nun's pose as sexual.
Now, to the point; if you want to frame your argument as "Oh so the nudity and violence in X are okay but this isn't?" I'm not going to bother replying to you. Based on the example you've decided to throw out, I think it's safe to say you've already assumed things about me and the situation at hand and you aren't interested in why I have the opinion I do. Your reply will be to basically tell me that my reaction to this game, and my wife's reaction to this game are incorrect or hypocritical based on a comparison of something like game of thrones. I know you don't have an issue with the game or what it displays and that is fine. I explained my reasoning in the post above. Feel free to take a look at that. If you want to have an actual conversation and compare things that are similar in nature we can do that. However, I won't be drawn into an argument where we're comparing apples to cadillacs.
Sexuality without context or cause is pointless. This is the Hooters of video games.
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Yeah, honestly at first I was like "ahh, it's just T&A, people!' but I'm actually getting kind of tired of looking at the Amazon, and I LOVE thick women. Luckily the gameplay itself is fun, especially multiplayer, but I can definitely understand people being turned off by the art.
RoninChaos
Member
Agreed. I love thick women as well but after some time with the game its distracting and doesn't add anything to the game. That's really the key here that doesn't seem to be focused on.
Especially after playing it I've had the thought of "If the artist wants to draw sexually explicit drawings he should go hard and go full out porn or not at all." lol
If you have it on Vita we should play. I need to drop my name in the list in the official thread.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I said taboo, because I didn't know a better way to describe what I was trying to say, I'm sorry if it had a negative connotation.
That said, I was genuinily interested if the view of sexuality, or let's say the limits of the display of it, if was directly only towards games (because they involve more interaction or whatever any other reasoning) or just all kind of entertainment.
If you find it a too personal matter, you don't have to answer.
RoninChaos
Member
The view of sexuality in what context? This game, or in general? Or with your comparison of something like game of thrones and this game?
As for the display, do you mean how it's displayed in the game or display as in who would be looking at it?
Relaxed Muscle
Member
In general (other media like movies or shows). Like if shows like Game of Thrones or Spartacus pushes the line in gratuitous/explotation of sex too.
RoninChaos
Member
I don't have much of an issue with what is displayed in game of thrones because I don't feel that a lot of what happens in that show is without consequence. Without going into spoilers for folks who haven't watched the show or read the books, GoT has instances where things happen and the actions suit the story and further the plot. GoT has instances where things happen and the actions suit the story and further the plot. That's why something like half the amazon's poses being overly sexual doesn't really make sense to me. None of those things add to the game overall. They don't strengthen the character, they don't even reflect how a warrior would even fight. It's there purely because "Hey, big TITTIES!" This game doesn't have it's setting, it's backstory, or anything else to fall back on to justify why those choices were made. Even the artist himself basically said "I like big ass titties" which is fine. I like big breasts too, but as stated, there's no real reason for the oversexualization of the character because it doesn't add anything to the game.
The violence in the show is real to a fault due to the timeline it's trying to recreate. When acts of violence happen they're rendered relatively realistically and the violence in the show rarely is without consequence.
That being said, there have been things that I've found bothersome in GoT in the vein of "What was the point of even doing that?" because it doesn't serve the story. For example, there's a running joke about sexposition instead of exposition on the show. There's been quite a few times where two characters are engaged in sex and they talk about plot points and things like that. It's completely pointless and only there because "Hey! It's HBO so show some TITTIES!" It was pretty egregious in the first season, started to die down in the second, and didn't seem to really happen much in the third. But it doesn't serve a purpose. It's just there. What's different with game of thrones and this game is people aren't fucking every 30 seconds in game of thrones. A character like Daenerys isn't falling down and shoving her ass in the air. If a character like Cercei hits someone, her tits don't damn near fall out of her dress. If Sanza is put restrained, her tits don't pop up and practically hit her in the head. In Dragon's Crown, the majority of the Amazon's move list is sexualized. When she's on the grown, her ass is in the air. When she jumps, her ass is the most promonent thing you see. When she's restrained her tits are jammed together. When the sorceress slows to a halt she squeezes her breasts together. Even the artbook has some almost comical oversexualization of the sorceress. It's pointless. Add it's sexualized just to do it. It doesn't add to the gameplay at all. Just like how the frequent "sexposition" scenes in game of thrones didn't add anything. It was like HBO was trying to fill a boob quota.
Spartacus is graphic just to be graphic in terms of the violence. It's more flashy and the violence doesn't carry the same kind of weight that GoT does. I haven't watched much past the first season so I can't really comment on that.
In regards to both pushing the line of what is acceptable I think they both do. The 8th episode of the third season of game of thrones made me feel sick.
There's also a very real difference between violence and sexuality and how our (American) society accepts it as well. As I stated, I don't have many taboos in my house. Sex is real and violence is real. I feel like glorification of something just to do it doesn't really serve any purpose and in most instances takes away from the overall product. That's not to say certain genre's don't carry certain preconceptions of what you're going to see. If I went into a slasher movie and got offended by the violence or the blood I'd be a fucking idiot.
So the sexual overtones/undertones (there are heaps of both) in DC made you and your wife uncomfortable and you'll be returning it as it has turned you off the game. That's A-OK. I think the general argument in this thread is more about whether said sexuality constitutes sexism (and why DC is being singled out) than whether someone should or shouldn't feel uncomfortable with it. It's reverted to the same argument that's been going on since April.
RoninChaos
Member
That's a much more concise way of putting it, yes. lol
I don't know that it's sexism per se. The game's art itself is extremely exagerated but I could see how someone could say "Well, look at these animations for the women, look at how they're drawn, look at the whole "Touching" thing" and say it's sexist. In that sense, it probably is. However, if anything, I'd say the art is a pretty clear glimpse into what the artist thinks about women and what he finds attractive. I guess that could be considered sexist but that's not my argument. My argument was against the people I'd seen in this thread who have said, specifically, that nothing in the game is sexual and if you see it as sexual it's your own preconceived notions rather than the fact that the animations in the game and the art work as a whole is very sexual. At least in relation to the women.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Well, talking with some of my friends (that have the books) is that GoT show has way more sex than the books which already have it's share, and also violence have been upped too. And I wacthing the show I realized that some nudity and sex are just there so people can see tits and sex, they barely have any other purpose than that and same can be said about Spartacus for the little I watched. And also some could argument about women treatment in those or other shows. There's even a forced sex scene on Spartacus, you could say it shows the position of women and men abuse during those in the past, couldn't be said the same about Dragon's Crown, which bases it's fantasy on a similar era?
I just feel that in seems that the line for what is acceptable seems way more further in other media, like shows and movies, in which progressively that line have been pushed forward by the years, decades ago you could barely show a frontal nude without raising a few eyebrows and now directors and writters have the freedom to do so.
I'm not saying Dragon's Crown is not sexualized, I'm saying...is that bad compared other media? It dosn't have nudity or sex, and for the most part of it's art is enriched with numorous classic and modern art references. The touching part has both males and females and I don't even know if it's optional and you can even avoid it if you want. I can see raising an eyebrow over the fact that her movements are there to highlight their sexiness, but aren't they powerful females that stand on their own? Even so, you can avoid using both the Sorceress and the Amazon and gow with the Elf.
Of course you don't have to go against your own opinion that the game definetly pushed the line, I was just asking because it seems a common opinion between the people I know and talk about videogames and all kind of stuff, not only you. I mean the fact they can't enjoy some games with their couple or wives, but they enjoy highly violent and sexual other media without problem or that it never pushes the line of "no, I'm not watching this".
The sexism that people talk about regarding videogames is more of a systematic thing across the entire medium, not just whether or not one game does it. Sexualization of women like this is not new, it's actually too common and dumb at this point. It's just one of the many dumb/shitty ways that girls get included into many videogames. The idea that it's so common, to the point of being status quo, is the sexism. Dragon's Crown just throws a few more nickles in that pot.
People who are freaking out because one bad review is going to damage the metascore and affect the sales of the game don't seem to realize that if developers want more sales, they could try making games that are less off-putting to certain groups of people.
Developer makes game that at times comes off like juvenile male sexual fantasy -> female game reviewer expresses negative opinion about those things. Exactly what part of this cause/effect was surprising or unreasonable?
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Kneejerking about one game sexualization of women and giving it less points is not going to change the fact that if we want to a more equal representation of women we should start from the base. Involving more women in the process of creating games and in the management, so naturally more women will play games and feel better represented.
That's something the industry should do and that's where the focus and effort should go. Bullying and throwing rocks at one niche japanese game is not going to do shit. Developers should be free to create the content they want.
Why should any review score not reflect the reviewer's opinion? It's pretty damn ludicrous to treat a number like some absolute measure of objectivity. It's still an opinion. I guess GAF doesn't learn from things like Twilight Princess or Uncharted 3, though. You're right that one review score isn't going to change anything, but at the same time...if a reviewer feels a certain way about a game, why shouldn't they express it? Just to uphold status quo?
I agree that more women should be involved in game creation. I also don't think it's impossible for men to be better at it, either.
Also, GAF can't gripe about review scores affecting the sales of the game while also protecting the game developers' creativity like it comes before anything and money doesn't matter. Either you treat game developers like starving artists, or you don't. If GAF wants to get behind developers on suicide missions to go bankrupt while making stuff that nobody likes (like Grasshopper), that's fine...but don't complain when they don't make money or are unliked by other gamers who aren't in their clique. It's all fair.
Let's be real: most game developers have to work within the boundaries of the reality that they're a business and need to hit targets and please people to continue being a business. Furthermore, as I said...no developer is really doing anything new or edgy by sexualizing women, and it predictably turns off people who might otherwise be down to play their game.
Antiwhippy
the holder of the trombone
Reviewers are also free to give the opinion that they have.
Freedom of expression is not freedom from criticism. Which goes both ways I guess.
Like, I support kamitani in doing what he wants to do, but people bemoaning at the criticism is starting to sound ridiculously defensive.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
This is not a matter of not agreeing with an opinion, is more of if we start considering the abuse of sexuality to rate a game (like Polygon editors and reviewer did), why only in this game?, is really that bad that that should be penalized?, is something reviewers will start doing now or they will go back to games released 20 years old and start rating them again?
And again, why stop there? why racism is not considered in Bioshock Infinite? Why voices were raised against mysoginy on the witcher 2 but no score reflected that and lowered the points for that reason? why GoW sexuality is ok and this not? Why juvenile representation of violence and war dosn't have the same reactions?
And another large of questions will left unanswered. It's the culmination of an hypocrital biased attack by west media from months against this particular game. No other game received such bashing, leading into the fact he was penalized (probably the first one in the history) because of it's sexualization when gaming showed way worse cases that were left out of the hook. And as I said, why not tacke other social problems as reasons to penalize the score of game then?
KuwabaraTheMan
Banned
Did the reviewers who docked Dragon's Crown for these matters also review all those other games and not raise a fuss? Because otherwise this is a ridiculous statement. Reviewers aren't a monolithic entity; some reviewers will be more bothered by these issues than others, and it doesn't make sense to trot out these other examples.
The people reviewing The Witcher 2 evidently didn't have problems with its content (taking your word for this, I haven't read every single review of The Witcher 2). A couple of reviewers of Dragon's Crown did. Different reviewers are allowed to have different perspectives.
Moon_frogger
Member
Gender equality in gaming is a serious issue that needs all the attention it can get. Unfortunately certain sites are clearly using it to get clicks and certain writer are being so obnoxious about it I'm embarrassed to be associated with them in even a small way. One thing I've learned is that polygon are a bunch of thin skinned babies. I've read through the comments section of the dragons Crown review and its not nearly as bad as they make it out to be. There's plenty of great discussion going on there.
http://youtu.be/vtMIXwdp_Vo?t=3m5s
Here is a video of a person flipping through the art book that comes with the game.
It starts with the fighter and he flips through each of the characters. Go full screen and pause the video at each of the character "pauses collection" pages. The animation pages or whatever.
There is a very distinct difference between how the male and female characters are depicted.
The months of arguing that both genders are super exaggerated in a fair manner is, quite frankly, hogwash. And it is completely understandable to be offended by this and that this could affect your enjoyment of the game.
Here is a video of a person flipping through the art book that comes with the game.
It starts with the fighter and he flips through each of the characters. Go full screen and pause the video at each of the character "pauses collection" pages. The animation pages or whatever.
There is a very distinct difference between how the male and female characters are depicted.
The months of arguing that both genders are super exaggerated in a fair manner is, quite frankly, hogwash. And it is completely understandable to be offended by this and that this could affect your enjoyment of the game.
I agree with you pretty much, except I don't think much will come of just saying "we demand more games without sexually objectified women!". Were it so easy. The flaw I find in your reasoning that 'men can stand to do a better job of not objectifying women' is that sex is a part of the male psyche and there are very strong responses to it. It's not something that's going to go away, so while there will be (and are) developers who wish to create a game that doesn't utilize sex appeal, there will always be many who don't. In terms of objectification as stated by Erin Fitzgerald, I don't think Dragon's Crown is at all sexist that way and agree with her viewpoint. It is certainly much more risque than American societal norms permit and is bound to cause more than a few uncomfortable situations, but at the end of the day I don't think Kamitani and Vanillaware intended for this game to have mainstream appeal. For them it is a very much 'take it or leave it' type of thing, and Atlus's PR response to Polygon's review reinforces that.
That being said, I fully support equal representation of objectification. I see it as a much more obtainable and embracing goal than the alternative of trying to change everyone's minds that sexual objectification or the desire for sex is something to be ashamed of despite it being done since the earliest days of our specie's existence. I don't feel DC has enough manservice to balance things out. Needs more dwarf action.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I don't know, that person only has another review in Polygon, you have to wonder why she was given Dragon's Crown in the first place, but if Polygon Editors considers that their reviews can contain sexualization as a grade modificator, shouldn't the whole site use the same metric?
Is like saying I can't take into consideration graphics on a game if I wish, but many sites has a graphic department to rate graphics and probably the editor will come and say "rate the graphics" or does these rules and metric changes randomly?
Also maybe those people never bothered to name those concers since it wasn't important for them? I know criticisms raised over Bioshock Infinte but no one cared to reflect it on his review or score. They aren't a monolithic entity, but if a reviewer has such problems with a game and feels offended by it, she/he should drop the review and let other people do it while making a statement about why.
Lyot
Member
Applause.gif
RoninChaos
Member
Muscle, I'll respond to the rest of your posts later but let me ask this: how is the review pointing out the art direction and docking the game a point for it... How is that a problem? Especially on a forum who constantly talks about "dudebro" shooters and bitches about how all male protagonists are roided out space marines? Aesthetically if a game has an element that is detracting and it's commented on, how is that an issue?
Metal Gear?!
Member
http://www.samanthablackmon.net/notyourmamasgamer/?p=3228
PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS; I’M NOT PAYING FOR JIGGLE PHYSICS!
"As gamers and consumers we have a certain amount of power. Power that we don’t seem to realize and power that we don’t readily and regularly use. We have economic power. We have the power to throw our support behind a title, a developer, a company…or not. I for one find myself getting better and better at just this thing. I don’t buy Jimmy John’s and I don’t pay for jiggly boobs. So maybe I am unfairly pointing out jiggly boobs here. It’s not so much the boobs that jiggle, but what they represent. The gratuitous sexuality and sexism that runs rampant in games. If your idea of making a female character better is to spend untold hours and dollars on making breasts jiggle and sway in time with music or some such foolishness then you apparently don’t want me to buy your game. I have nothing against breasts. I have a couple myself, but I am more than my breasts and I want the female protagonists in the games that I play to be more than theirs.
It seems that the folks over at Square Enix just don’t get this…or just don’t care. While for many of us hardcore Final Fantasy fans we had hoped that Lighting Returns: Final Fantasy lightningXIII would be the comeback game that we were hoping for. I am the first to admit that the franchise has been waning for a long time and that other than the DS re-releases I haven’t played and enjoyed a FF title since the PS2 (but I have tried them all). But thanks to the recent discussions with developers about the devs’ desire to make Lightning’s breasts larger and jigglier in an attempt to “defeat Skyrim” has just pushed me over the edge. Final Fantasy has historically given us strong female characters who were on par with their male counterparts and now this? Now breasts beat narrative? Final Fantasy has been struggling for a very long time and it seems that XIII is going to be the nail in it’s coffin rather than the savior of the franchise that we had originally envisioned.
The same hold’s true for Vanillaware and Atlus’ latest game, Dragon’s Crown. When I first heard about the game I was super excited for another solid JRPG from the folks who have developed and/or produced the Odin Sphere and Persona games with their edgy takes gender and sexuality. And then I saw the Dragon’s Crown screen shots and my stomach turned. Are we really back at a point where woman with overdeveloped (and ill covered) breasts and butts are seen as being acceptable in games? I canceled my pre-order. Another company taking a huge step backward.thought that it would be.
Negative, over sexualized representations of women aren’t the only reason that I have pulled my economic support from a company (and that is exactly what I see buying a game as…supporting a company or franchise). As an RPG junkie I have NEVER played a Penny Arcade game even though I think that I would be intrigued at the very least. Based on Penny Arcade‘s sexism, homophobia, and embracing of rape in their comics and forum it is no surprise to me that there are regularly reported sexual assaults at PAX cons. And while the folks in charge at PA, Tycho and Gabe, say that they don’t support any kind of violence against women or prejudice in general the very tone of their whole outfit uplifts it. How in the hell do they think that glorifying fruit raping robots, dickwolves, and other casually thrown about misogynistic, homophobic, and racist references not foster a community of bigots. And that is a community that will not be supported by my gaming dollar.
As a gamer, this means that I sometimes don’t play the games that everyone else raves about. (I couldn’t bear to play Red Dead Redemption after the prostitute was taunted, raped, and murdered in the middle of the street because I couldn’t save her fast enough). It also means that, unfortunately, I may actually pay for some games (like RDR) before I realize that I would have rather not have done so, but it also means that sometimes I have enough of a heads up via trailers, images, or word of mouth to know that a certain game or game franchise is not something that I want to have supported in any way shape or form.
And finally, some may ask what does this refusal to engage some games say to my work as a writer and scholar. And the answer to that is simultaneously a lot and nothing at all. As a person who thinks, writes, and talks critically about games and the games industry, my refusal to engage with some companies and games give me the opportunity to put my money where my mouth (or keyboard) is. But that being said sometimes it is necessary to engage with media in order to think and talk about it in the manner that it was intended (interactively) and in those cases I make it a point to rent or borrow the game in question whenever possible. That, in my mind, cuts down on amount of revenue that is gained by company. It is all a bit of a gray area, but it all comes down to whatever helps provide some balance and comfort to my conscience. In short, whatever gets me through the night!"
PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS; I’M NOT PAYING FOR JIGGLE PHYSICS!
"As gamers and consumers we have a certain amount of power. Power that we don’t seem to realize and power that we don’t readily and regularly use. We have economic power. We have the power to throw our support behind a title, a developer, a company…or not. I for one find myself getting better and better at just this thing. I don’t buy Jimmy John’s and I don’t pay for jiggly boobs. So maybe I am unfairly pointing out jiggly boobs here. It’s not so much the boobs that jiggle, but what they represent. The gratuitous sexuality and sexism that runs rampant in games. If your idea of making a female character better is to spend untold hours and dollars on making breasts jiggle and sway in time with music or some such foolishness then you apparently don’t want me to buy your game. I have nothing against breasts. I have a couple myself, but I am more than my breasts and I want the female protagonists in the games that I play to be more than theirs.
It seems that the folks over at Square Enix just don’t get this…or just don’t care. While for many of us hardcore Final Fantasy fans we had hoped that Lighting Returns: Final Fantasy lightningXIII would be the comeback game that we were hoping for. I am the first to admit that the franchise has been waning for a long time and that other than the DS re-releases I haven’t played and enjoyed a FF title since the PS2 (but I have tried them all). But thanks to the recent discussions with developers about the devs’ desire to make Lightning’s breasts larger and jigglier in an attempt to “defeat Skyrim” has just pushed me over the edge. Final Fantasy has historically given us strong female characters who were on par with their male counterparts and now this? Now breasts beat narrative? Final Fantasy has been struggling for a very long time and it seems that XIII is going to be the nail in it’s coffin rather than the savior of the franchise that we had originally envisioned.
The same hold’s true for Vanillaware and Atlus’ latest game, Dragon’s Crown. When I first heard about the game I was super excited for another solid JRPG from the folks who have developed and/or produced the Odin Sphere and Persona games with their edgy takes gender and sexuality. And then I saw the Dragon’s Crown screen shots and my stomach turned. Are we really back at a point where woman with overdeveloped (and ill covered) breasts and butts are seen as being acceptable in games? I canceled my pre-order. Another company taking a huge step backward.thought that it would be.
Negative, over sexualized representations of women aren’t the only reason that I have pulled my economic support from a company (and that is exactly what I see buying a game as…supporting a company or franchise). As an RPG junkie I have NEVER played a Penny Arcade game even though I think that I would be intrigued at the very least. Based on Penny Arcade‘s sexism, homophobia, and embracing of rape in their comics and forum it is no surprise to me that there are regularly reported sexual assaults at PAX cons. And while the folks in charge at PA, Tycho and Gabe, say that they don’t support any kind of violence against women or prejudice in general the very tone of their whole outfit uplifts it. How in the hell do they think that glorifying fruit raping robots, dickwolves, and other casually thrown about misogynistic, homophobic, and racist references not foster a community of bigots. And that is a community that will not be supported by my gaming dollar.
As a gamer, this means that I sometimes don’t play the games that everyone else raves about. (I couldn’t bear to play Red Dead Redemption after the prostitute was taunted, raped, and murdered in the middle of the street because I couldn’t save her fast enough). It also means that, unfortunately, I may actually pay for some games (like RDR) before I realize that I would have rather not have done so, but it also means that sometimes I have enough of a heads up via trailers, images, or word of mouth to know that a certain game or game franchise is not something that I want to have supported in any way shape or form.
And finally, some may ask what does this refusal to engage some games say to my work as a writer and scholar. And the answer to that is simultaneously a lot and nothing at all. As a person who thinks, writes, and talks critically about games and the games industry, my refusal to engage with some companies and games give me the opportunity to put my money where my mouth (or keyboard) is. But that being said sometimes it is necessary to engage with media in order to think and talk about it in the manner that it was intended (interactively) and in those cases I make it a point to rent or borrow the game in question whenever possible. That, in my mind, cuts down on amount of revenue that is gained by company. It is all a bit of a gray area, but it all comes down to whatever helps provide some balance and comfort to my conscience. In short, whatever gets me through the night!"
I figure most of the people who are focusing on the depiction of women in DC aren't planning to buy it, so she's preaching to the choir.
meltingparappa
Member
Did she really just insinuate that Vanillaware has anything to do with Hashino's Persona team other than sharing a publisher money pool?
ONE MINOR FACT WRONG WHOLE OPINION PIECE INVALIDATED.
Edit: Beat!
Also "regularly reported sexual assaults at PAX cons" is quite the mouthful. PA is a spade that deserves to be called a spade but JESUS at that entire paragraph.
Well, you could argue about how , no matter how silly breast enlargement is, it does not make the character weaker or less on par with men or how crude humor in comics does not encourage men to sexually assault women at cons or many other things.
But it's not really worth it.
SolidSnakex
Member
I'm more confused as to how she was okay with Odin Sphere, a game that featured characters that looked like this
But at the same time describes DC's designs as making her stomach turn.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I feel that all her argument didn't even revolved around art direction as a whole (she even states that the monster design is great) rather than being unconfortaable with a very specific part of the artstyle which is women representation and the game artstyle is way more that designed girls with few clothes. That goes beyond the art itself and beyond the overly exaggerated artstyle (which is true for both men and women), is about a more social aspect within the game: "this game is offensive to women". Is not about use of colors, the design of the world itself or even analyzing the numerous classic and modern influences of Katamani's work. Actually if she did that, a full analysis of women in the game vs those influences, supporting her statement, it would have been more valid, but she even accepted Amazon and Sorceress under the "woman enpowerment" and then rages about the overuse of the damsel in mistress troupe. At that point is more related to the narrative than rather artstyle...
At least on my case, when people refer to "dudebro" is not the bald marine design why ppl bitch about, is all that comes into it, paltry use of colors, boring world designs, generic and superfluous artstyle that is much more that "hey, another dudebro shooter". Also it the term dudebro goes beyond the simple aesthetics, it more a way to game design it become a term that embodies way more than art.
Funny her praise to Persona games, when while her compliments may be true, still has a significantly amount of fanservice and the game encourages dating several girls at the same time...
I think "regular" is quite the stretch here, like PA "embracing rape".
A lot of things could be said about PA but I don't think they allow PAX to be some kind of a free reign for sexual criminals...
RoninChaos
Member
Wait what? There are regular sexual assaults at PAX?
meltingparappa
Member
Someone with better long term memory may do a better job, but there's...
A private Minecraft party off-site that was poorly dealt with by hotel security.
A... scandal, of sorts? Between enforcers that may have enveloped male and female attendees. Details are a little more scarce, despite it affecting a seemingly large number of people.
A Lara Croft cosplayer dealing with trashy journalists.
I'm likely missing a lot, but to say that PAX as a bi-annual event "regularly" has sexual harassment at levels that make it an aberration outside of E3 or ComicCon makes it sound like they schedule it into a panel.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Another good Sterling video. He's spot-on, and quite funny too. lol @ "you are the Electronic Arts of people".
I pre-ordered Dragon's Crown and I'm sure I'll enjoy it even if the female designs are mostly off-putting (I won't be playing as the sorceress, thoese bouncing tits are just gonna be stupid and distracting, and it's too bad about those female NPCs being so lame). But I don't fault the reviewer for objecting to that and docking points. She's perfectly entitled to do that. People going apeshit over that review are such idiots.
I pre-ordered Dragon's Crown and I'm sure I'll enjoy it even if the female designs are mostly off-putting (I won't be playing as the sorceress, thoese bouncing tits are just gonna be stupid and distracting, and it's too bad about those female NPCs being so lame). But I don't fault the reviewer for objecting to that and docking points. She's perfectly entitled to do that. People going apeshit over that review are such idiots.
That looks great! If only the art was more like this... sigh.
NoirVisage
Banned
I don't think there are many male gaming personalities who aren't vocal feminists. Not necessarily a bad thing, but the amount of hypocritical finger wagging and white knighting is a sad testament to what that means in the scheme of things. On a related note I still haven't got an answer on whether this was her first review for polygon, and if so, why that fact is glazed over?
meltingparappa
Member
It is not.
Obviously use your own personal discretion of what actual people in your life are comfortable with and what they might find distasteful. That naturally goes beyond videogames, but of course all women aren't the same, it's possible to enjoy something and not enjoy all of it, impressions are through the roof in the OT for those playing alone or online, and it's ultimately your choice if you want to consume this piece of entertainment.
Unless you post a generalizing and vaguely condescending blog/review online, there are no wrong options!
Barack Lesnar
Banned
This is exactly how I felt while watching the video just now. I agree with everything you said. He's putting these singular threads on a pedestal based on the attitudes of a handful of people, and then extrapolating that onto the gaming community. Well, you explained it better than I did.
NoirVisage
Banned
Thank you! Then its not as fishy as a "how can we get away with $#!&canning this Japanese Sony exclusive without being blatantly obvious..FEMALE REVIEWER!:O" Situation. Oh well -__-
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Yeah, loli flat chested women with big eyes like every generic anime out there is what the game really needed...
Because god knows that sexualizing little girls is better!
I prefer the actual art style to that any day. Her proportions are opposite of the official, her head is larger than normal now, making her body look like a preteen.
NoirVisage
Banned
See Total Biscuit for more on view baiting and exploitation/beating a dead horse.
You're spot on.
And I have to say you deserve a medal. Seriously, this thread would be a pitiful vortex of lame if it wasn't for your discussion points. I'm glad you've managed NOT to be banned.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
This is such a weird position to me, it seems to completely ignore the larger cultural context.
Its perfectly alright for someone to be completely comfortable with sex and the human body and still think that, say, certain types of porn are degrading, or that types of art and fashion in a culture that, yes, is still dominated by the male gaze is inappropriate.
Infernal Monkey
Member
Then the internet would just latch onto it as a game for pedophiles or something instead, ie; how 90% of GAF threads go down the instant a flat-chested anime girl is shown.
