Jump to content
NegativeExponents-

Thoughts on FEH's fanservice

FEH and fanservice  

91 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you play FEH for the fanservice?

    • Yes, I play FEH mostly/entirely for the fanservice
      3
    • Yes, but I enjoy other aspects of the game
      19
    • No, but I don't mind the fanservice
      36
    • No, and fanservice sours my enjoyment of FEH
      20
    • I like fanservice, but FEH doesn't cater to me
      4
    • Fanservice doesn't affect my experience with FEH
      9
  2. 2. Do you, PERSONALLY, think FEH needs more fanservice?

    • Yes, I would like to see more fanservice
      10
    • No, I think fanservice is fine as is
      16
    • No, but it needs variety
      33
    • No, and I would like to see less
      20
    • I don't care either way
      12


Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

Is an avatar character as I have described it fictional?

The depiction of a person in a video or photograph (or mirror), for example, is typically considered to be "real".

"Ceci n'est pas une pipe".

A more complex reflection of a person, such as an avatar, is still not a person.

51 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

The person depicted typically identifies the image of them as themselves (e.g. "my thoughts are the person in the image's thoughts and my feelings are the person in the image's feelings because the person in the image is me"). This case is unambiguously not fictional.

A reflection does not think or feel.

51 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

An avatar character is still identified as the person being depicted (e.g. "my thoughts are the character's thoughts and my feelings are the character's feelings because that character is me"), but that character's appearance can be entirely fictional and exist in fictional spaces that the person cannot exist in with their physical body.

I believe we've discussed this before. I am not and have never been to the world of Heroes, therefore Kiran is not me.

51 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

As a relatable example, this is typically the case when a person uses an animated avatar of themselves talking in videos instead of real video of themselves talking (think Extra Credits or Gaijin Goombah).

Does a computer-generated image being representative of a real person grant it sentience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Wonderlandie said:

You say Loki's poses emphasize her chest and butt; but Hawkeye's pose and the lack of upper clothing also emphasizing his abs, chest and arms. 

Hawkeye simply doesn't wear a shirt. He's not posing specifically to draw attention to parts of his body.

To add to what @Johann says, Hawkeye also has the benefit of coming from a game that took characterisation seriously, thus gave him Supports to flesh out his character. Loki just drops vague and empty hints now and then but just shows up once a book to be fanservice. Same goes for Camilla, who may have some tragic backstory, but said backstory is tucked away in a tiny number of the dozens of Supports and other scenes she has of just pandering to Corrin or being provocative for the sake of being provocative.

And neither of them forward the story by doing this either, which is another key point in @Ice Dragon and @Baldrick's discussion: there's no point to the Camilla close-ups in her boss cutscene in Birthright for example - those are just there to fulfil the fanservice quota for that part of the game and because a team of developers wanted them there.

Edited by DefyingFates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

I believe we've discussed this before. I am not and have never been to the world of Heroes, therefore Kiran is not me.

Kiran, Robin, Corrin, and Byleth are obviously not the type of "avatar" I'm talking about if you bothered to read anything that I had said:

4 hours ago, Ice Dragon said:

I'm not talking about the video game concept of an avatar, though. I mean a fictional character that is fully intended to be a representation of its creator (or an aspect of its creator).

I did not create Kiran, so while he may represent me as my proxy, he isn't me.

 

11 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

A reflection does not think or feel.

11 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

Does a computer-generated image being representative of a real person grant it sentience?

An image representing a character and the character itself are obviously not the same thing.

I'm not talking about whether a picture is sentient. I'm talking about whether the person or the character in the picture is sentient.

Edited by Ice Dragon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ice Dragon said:

Kiran, Robin, Corrin, and Byleth are obviously not the type of "avatar" I'm talking about if you bothered to read anything that I had said.

That type of avatar still exists in a fictional space.

Quote

An image representing a character and the character itself are obviously not the same thing.

I'm not talking about whether a picture is sentient. I'm talking about whether the person or the character in the picture is sentient.

The person is sentient. The character is a concept, and so is not sentient.

Edited by Baldrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dislike fanservice. I dislike it on males and females. I play FEH for the characters I love, none of whom are Camilla, Loki, or Tharja, and the constant design choices that appeal to "sexy characters" is a major turn off. It's not why I've almost stopped playing, that's more due to the sheer repetitiveness of the game, but it does contribute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

That type of avatar still exists in a fictional space.

The person is sentient. The character is a concept, and so is not sentient.

And there you have the entire contradiction I'm emphasizing. We have a fictional character that is one and the same with a real life person in mind, but not necessarily in body (entirely possible to share a body, too, just to make things more complicated).

The person cannot be both sentient and not sentient simultaneously unless there is reason to believe that the fictional character can always be divorced from the real life person. It's not as easy as just saying "the image of the person is the character" because not all characters have a visual component, such as in literature. Furthermore, is a character still the same character if you remove its mental faculties, regardless of if they are real or virtual?

I'm no philosopher or literary analyst, but I see gray area that doesn't fit neatly in your black and white response.

 

Anyways, this is getting further and further away from the actual topic.

 

 

... Which I'm now realizing I never actually addressed, so I may as well just do it now.

I personally don't mind fanservice in its narrow definition. Things that cater to my preferences I will obviously like, but I am generally at worst only ambivalent to things that do not cater to my preferences. I've seen pretty much everything, and there are very few fetishes that can actively turn me away. You're actually far, far more likely to turn me away with bad art quality than anything else.

I find that I'll be more likely to enter the door if there is fanservice involved, but it has very little bearing on whether or not I stay. Games, after all, are meant to be played, and if the gameplay is not going to entertain me, then I probably won't stay for sexy pictures or animations because I can easily get those elsewhere (or just draw my own).

As for Heroes specifically, I play mostly for the gameplay and for the characters that I like. In the narrow sense of fanservice, no, I don't play Heroes for it, but I do play for the broad definition as the simple inclusion of characters counts towards that.

While I would say Heroes could use more fanservice simply as a marketing tool, unfortunately, the source material simply isn't quite as suitable for as much variety compared to other games, particularly original IPs. However, in terms of player retention, I think it would be better to focus on improving gameplay and game balance instead.

Oh, and fix the goddamn Allies menu already. It's even worse than Monster Hunter's menus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, thanny said:

I never said he was intended to be sexually objectified. I said his with his character design he COULD BE sexually objectified, not that he isn't already because God bless artists and the Internet.

Also, you've completely skipped out on my question. What if there are a group of people are uncomfortable with topless men? Why do we not criticize and condemn the way Hawkeye is designed, is it because of the societal norm to allow males to be depicted like that? If so, then why is it all of a sudden rallies and pitchforks when females are presented in a scanty or sexualized way?

Personally I always believe that context matter a lot when it comes to fanservice. Hawkeye could technically be seen in a highly sexual light but its likely not happening. The ''bara'' fandom doesn't seem to be all that large and I suspect they'd rather flock to a more conventionally pretty muscle boi like Grima than an ''old man'' like Haywkeye. With Hawkeye very few fans are being served so there's no reason to be suspicious. 

Societal norms do play a big part of that. One could argue that they shouldn't but they very much do. Loki having her tits hang out has a very different meaning than Niime having the same outfit. With Loki its a safe bett that the devs want to players to imagine getting into Loki's pants. With Niime there might be an extremely small part of the fanbase wanting to get into her pants but if she got in wearing a Loki outfit its likely that the devs did it because its hilarious, and not to cater to a fetish. 

Likewise a potential bridal Raigh would have an entirely different meaning than a bridal Sanaki because the lolicon crowd is just that much bigger. Stuffing Raigh in a groom outfit could be done because its clear he would hate it. With Sanaki there's always the chance that it was done because enough people would like it so much they'd pay a lot of money while trying to pull for her. Same for the bunnies. Alfonse and Catria have the same gimmick of being very uncomfortable in their fanservice outfit but if I were to guess then with Alfonse its meant to be funny and with Catria its meant to be hot. I doubt IS expected people to spend a lot of money on Bunnyfonse. 

Sometimes a man without a shirt is just a man without a shirt. Sometimes a woman wearing practically nothing at all isn't just a woman wearing practically nothing at all, but a woman specifically wearing nothing at all because the marketing departments wants your money. One scenario is inherently more off putting than the other. This being a gatcha game can further make fanservice more off putting because its used to get people hooked on gambling. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Johann said:

A person's identity can shape who they are. How is that trivial, especially in a subject that is heavily influenced by gender? If you think it's trivial, then don't bother giving such an empty response.

I understand and see your point. But in my humblest personal opinion, I still think it boils down to his personal tastes as an individual.

8 hours ago, Johann said:

On the contrary, our statements are completely at odds. Expression exists only from the creator. Character actions and designs can do virtually anything, but none of it exists in a vacuum-- it depends on the creator to make those choices. It's really as simple as "it's what the creator wanted", whether those design choices have depth or are shallow. Characters do not make their own choices. Camilla or Loki or whoever doesn't "decide" to dress or behave as they do because they aren't real. Someone chose to make them dress and behave as they do. And to be clear, there are plenty of reasons people can enjoy these characters, even for those qualities, but that doesn't disqualify the criticisms against those design choices and their impacts.

I still don't understand what you're trying to disagree with me, other than Fire Emblem characters are not sentimental living beings, which I am fully aware of thankfully. I have not disagreed with anything you've said regarding this matter, and I have certainly not silenced or disqualified any form of criticisms against their design choices.

All I've said is a character design is presented to allow different opinions and interpretations. Even if you personally don't enjoy the existence of characters like Camilla and Loki for what you think they're worth, other people can interpret and find qualities they deem likable in them in ways you may or may not agree with. I did not literally mean the characters coming alive after being drawn to express themselves...

8 hours ago, Johann said:

To sexually objectify Hawkeye would require a person to do so on their own, but understand that there's a difference between the creators of a game that has a major global platform vs a fan drawing art of him or even just viewing him as some sort of piece of man meat.

I still don't understand what you're trying to prove here and why you keep bringing up a sexualized Hawkeye to me when I've already said that he could potentially, or at this point already sexually objectified since I brought him up, other than to give me deep steamy thoughts about him.. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

8 hours ago, Johann said:

Here's the thing about shirtless men; culturally, it is something we are used to. When it comes to shirtless women, it depends where you go. Some countries/places allow women to be topless in public, whereas others do not. I personally think that women shouldn't be denied the ability to be topless, or in another way to view it, punished for exposure. Now, despite your hyperbole about rallies and pitchforks, you should keep in mind that there are different reasons why people would be uncomfortable with sexualized way. Some are in the puritan "think of the children!" camp, while others do not want to see female characters degraded to objects of sexual desire, which is something present in all forms of media worldwide. In most instances of sexualized fanservice, that objectification is present and it upsets a lot of people to see their characters treated that way. The issue is that the objectification is widespread for female characters. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but the people who are vocal about it in this thread are criticizing the objectification, not any puritanical viewpoint.

In our context, the women in Fire Emblem Heroes are still covered, and that's the main argument and double standards that I am presenting. I'm not going to delve into the shirtless women topic.

Like you said, if it is a societal norm to be used to men being shirtless culturally, then why can't we even normalize women wearing skimpy clothes in a video game? Even if it's for the sake of sexual objectification, I'll concede to your opinion if the female characters are being objectified unfairly in this game, but this case is simply not true when we see male characters receiving the same treatment, even if there are gender disparity ratios.

As I've said before, if a selective group of people are uncomfortable with sexual objectification, it's not the developers' jobs to cater and tippy toe around them, as they have millions of other players to please. If they simply do not like the content they are presented with, they are free to play anything else on the mobile gachapon market. And good luck, 'cause as many posters have pointed out, FEH is already on the mild side of a wildly successful industry.

10 hours ago, Johann said:

while others do not want to see female characters degraded to objects of sexual desire, which is something present in all forms of media worldwide.

I'm quoting this separately because it highlights the double standards vividly.

So why does male sexual objectification get brushed to the side and mainly ignored? Why does no one rally or raise their pitchforks when men (or in our context), male characters get sexually objectified, or at least properly identified as a problem worldwide? Why is it only when women are in the position of objectification, it creates such a hot topic?

One fiiiiiiiiine ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) example would be when Geralt (Henry Cavill) is bathing in the Witcher Netflix series, weren't majority of women swooning and fetishizing him to the point they wish they were his bath water? And why is such a fine, steamy scene allowed to put on air? Probably because most men simply don't care if they are being sexualized or objectified (obviously I cannot speak for everyone). If women can faun over the sight of wet Aquaman (Jason Mamoa) coming out of the water topless, or Magic Mike strippers grinding the floor til there's a hole. Men are perfectly in the right to have the same pleasure.

Either everyone gets the same treatment, or no one can have any fun. Which ain't fun, is it? The world and society are constantly evolving and developing (excluding countries that I will not name), women are not the only ones facing sexism or being objectified, not to mention there are increasingly more medias for the female viewing pleasure. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°) And if they're not into that idea, cover the eyes, change the channel and move on to something less rowdy.

Back to your paragraph, if people do not want to see their Hinokas in a bath towel, they are not forced to play or roll for her, she has her normal and Kinshi Knight alt. The game does not prominently shove Hot Springs Hinoka in their face, and there are plenty of ways to avoid or minimize their exposure to her. I understand if people don't like Summer or Easter Bunny alts, but the game has other audiences to promote to. If they were to cater only to one group who don't like skimpy female alts, it would obviously upset the others who do like them. So the obvious best and easier solution is to just try and please everyone.

I'm not sure why you're mentioning your last point, as I have no quarrel with their criticisms regarding the fanservice. I had problems however, with a rude remark to a certain group of people who enjoys said fanservice, which they apologized for it, which is all good and dandy. So now I'm just responding and having an open discussion with you.

8 hours ago, Johann said:

I mentioned the Hawkeye Project (upon checking it again, it's actually called the Hawkeye Initiative) because it showcases how stark the contrast is between designs of male and female characters. The idea is to get you to notice the trends in design choices and the disparity between genders. As a much more mild example, go through your Catalog of Heroes and observe how many female characters have exposed thighs, and then how many men. I'm not trying to stoke outrage here, but to get you to think hard about why it's such a recurring design choice.

I still don't understand why you're bringing up the Hawkeye Initiative to me. Frankly I don't care if there is a contrast between how the two different genders are portrayed, because no one is preventing men from being absurdly posed or costumed like comic book women. If the author/artist doesn't want to or have the intent to draw male characters in sexually objectified way as they do with female characters, there's nothing wrong with that. Also men are also progressively being depicted and sexualized in the same way as women nowadays, which I'm all for!

I don't know what you're trying to prove here once again, there is nothing wrong with female characters exposing their thighs as a design choice, when I can literally see Summer Helbendi's giant bulge. Don't think you're stroking an outrage here though, don't worry. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

8 hours ago, Johann said:

I explain these concepts because it seemed like you didn't understand them. But judging from the next sentence, it seems more like you don't like the idea of people even talking about it. If nobody is allowed to conclude that something is sexist, then all discussion about sexism is therefore dismissed. People have to be able argue for why something is sexist, or else everything is beyond reproach, and therefore sexism perpetuates.

Making an assumption of me not knowing what sexual objectification is fine, but then your following assumption is pushing it.

I am not actively silencing or denying people from their opinions and ability to feel offended to they're presented in Fire Emblem Heroes, and especially not dismissing any discussion regarding sexism as it is still an on-going prevalent issue for both men and women. I'll just quote what I stated earlier and elaborate it further.

12 hours ago, thanny said:

I don't think anyone holds the authority to decide what is sexist for everyone.

Everyone is entitled to deem whatever they want to be offensive (or sexist in our case), and that's perfectly fine. What is not okay is deeming something sexist and expecting everyone else to comply to what you deem sexist. Everyone has their own individual values and tolerance, no one gets to decide what is or what isn't sexist for everyone.

Also, if I didn't like to talk about anything related to people being opposed to sexual objectification, I would not be having a continuous open discussion with you lot, and immediately dismissed anything you've said regarding to the subject.

8 hours ago, Johann said:

The problem with stuff like Loki art isn't so much a "ahh, I looked! My eyes! Bring the holy water!" situation, but a constant reminder that this is what's the norm. If you were, say, a woman who deals with sexist shit all day and wants to escape from it all by playing a little Fire Emblem, then you're out of luck if you find that kind of design condescending to your entire gender. Part of the issue is that there isn't an alternative per se, whether you want to play Fire Emblem specifically, or just a strategy game on your phone, as these kinds of designs are everywhere.

How is it the norm though? Alfonse, Sharena, Anna, the current Book Hero (which if you haven't noticed yet, are always conservatively designed), plus the units that YOU want to use, are still the main focus of Fire Emblem Heroes, they get majority of the screen time while Loki pops in here and there to taunt or flirt with us, whether we like it or not. Even if Loki does appear frequently, what's wrong with it? Why can't we normalize women with big breasts in revealing outfits? If we limit or completely remove the exposure of said women, how do we normalize it like we did with shirtless men as a society?

Again, I want to make it clear that there is nothing wrong with finding Loki's or characters similar to her, designs offensive. But your hypothetical woman has no right to decide that Loki's design is condescending for her entire gender, it's the character clashing with her own personal beliefs and values. I'll repeat myself again, the game developer cannot feasibly tippy toe and please everyone.

If the designs are successful and everywhere in the video game industry and widely accepted, then where is the apparent or underlying problem? Why are we only getting the occasional articles of complaints of said sexist products? Where's the revolution to overthrow all this sexist bullcrap that is so harmful to consume? Why is it always about women? Why are you still consuming and supporting such problematic and exploitative franchise?

8 hours ago, Johann said:

Incidentally, I dunno if you've heard of it, but Final Fantasy had an issue where a male character was designed with revealing clothing, but was changed because of the extreme outcry. Go figure.

Incidentally, I dunno if you've heard of it, but the Tifa in the 'Final Fantasy VII' remake had her breasts reduced because of people complaining about their 'unrealistic' size.

And what or how do I feel about either incidents? Nothing. (OK maybe that was a lie because there's nothing wrong with a skimpy poster child male character or Tifa's breasts, I like 'em) The point is, the decision ultimately lands to the creators. If they want to comply with the suggestions or criticisms, they are more than welcome to go ahead and change whatever they like. If they want to stick to their original decision and ignore everyone, more power to them. It is not us to dictate what the creators do or how they present their product, after all it is their artistic freedom. Ultimately it boils down to the sales and feedback of the said product, and it is up to the creators if they want to take in results for their future product, or stick to their established vision. I know for a fact that even if some of Tifa's booby fans are crying about her cup reduction, most of them are still going to ultimately buy and play the game, and would not affect the sales in one bit, because it is still FFVII, just chopped into three bits. (Also how wicked were those trailers though?)

But if we're talking in Fire Emblem Heroes' context, it is a wildly successful mobile app that is still raking in millions dollars of revenue every month, with hardly any controversies. So I don't know why this article is in any way relevant to our current discussion. And no, I do not have to go and figure. Thank you for the thought though!

8 hours ago, Johann said:

I'm going to defer you to The Thermian Argument, because that's what using in-universe details to defend design choices is. The point is that Loki's design and personality exist as they do because the creators chose to make her that way, and not due to a consequence of the story or or constraint of FEH's in-universe rules.

I have no interest in watching that video, appreciated if you could just summarize it for me.

I'm just going to repeat myself here again, how is her ultimate motives being shrouded in mystery, and her interest in our powers to summon heroes from multiple universes not directly connected to the overall FEH story, universe and as a secondary antagonist (for now)?

8 hours ago, Johann said:

As for it not harming anyone, here's the thing-- sexist portrayals in media help reinforce sexist notions and worldviews. This is, like the subject of sexual objectification itself, a thread worthy subject, but the bottom line is that the media we are exposed to has influences on how we perceive things and think. There are global problems with how women are treated, including socially, professionally, and so on. Media of all forms have been and continue to be shaped by these problems, and in turn play a key role in maintaining the norms that perpetuate those issues. Through criticism, we can become aware of the influence media has upon us, to mitigate the negative and reinforce the positive. It's not to say people are bad for enjoying that stuff or anything that features it, but if you're paying attention to it and able to criticize it (or listen to criticism), then you'll be more self-aware of how it's affecting you and others.

I'm gonna try and keep this part short 'cause it's not really in our context of FEH.

If sexist portrayals reinforce sexist notions and worldviews, does violence in video games correlate to violence in society? Solely placing all the responsibility and blame on the media isn't fair, as it mainly exists as a form of entertainment. It's our own responsibility as a society to separate fiction and reality. There are consequences in real life, and yes, unfortunately some people do get away with bad things. Yes, I do not deny that women are suffering socially and professionally in society, but that can be applied to literally anybody else in society. That is called censorship.

I have been paying attention, and openly accepting different opinions regarding this discussion. You're the one who's constantly sliding in remarks.

8 hours ago, Johann said:

I brought it up because I have read a wide range of opinions on the internet, and it's overwhelmingly critical. As for the popcorn remark, well, that's what I get for trying to be cheeky on the internet, but I stand by the notion that you will see a lot of opinions in support of what I've said.

If it's overwhelmingly critical, I'm sure the industry would have gone through a lot of change by now.

I know there are people who agrees with your views and I respect that, I'm just spinning your remark back to you to read some opinions that may clash with yours. And since we conveniently have a person with big boobs offer their opinion on the matter, I don't think I need to anymore, not that I had to in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason why I specifically brought up miniskirts in the older games is because the ones that wear them tend to be the mounted ladies.  This really is fanservice, because anyone who's ridden a horse for a long time can tell you what happens to their inner thighs. . .and that's with pants on (don't get me started on Ilia).  Minerva had the right idea.

7 hours ago, KMT4ever said:

I would point out that this entire game is designed to be fanservice (in a more general sense of the word). At long last we get to bring all of our favorite FE characters from across the series together and use them in battle. Spotpass from Awakening was a similar idea, but there we were just getting facsimiles, not the actual characters. We're not playing Heroes for the enthralling story, we're playing for the gameplay and the chance to make like Pokemon trainers and collect 'em all.

But THIS is the kind of fanservice I can get behind (another example is Christmas Zephiel holding a stuffed fox).  The small, subtle nods to other games are little extra gems for those who understand the reference!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2020 at 11:27 PM, NegativeExponents- said:

I know you probably meant that Camilla stuff as a joke but I actually had that happen albeit it was with the much more tame Awakening that actually brought this up and not Fates.

I was in high school and the game had just recently come out and I was going through one of Maribelle's support conversations with Chrom and the grunts that the characters made prompted my mom to check if I wasn't watching porn. I since learned to not play Awakening or the future Fates in the presence of others.

Ha, thats hilarious. I always played with either headphones on or alone for the fear of being called a Weeb and teased by my anti-anime friends, there are a lot of things in those that I would not feel comfortable showing my parents at that time.

 

On 2/2/2020 at 10:53 PM, Benice said:

Pretty much how I feel. I'm not going to use a beach themed character just because they're physically attractive/in a borderline NSFW outfit, nor will I bench someone for being not being in said category. I don't really pay attention to what the characters look like very often either way. I personally prefer characters who aren't designed in a way that requires tons of surgery to attain a similar look. Fanservice is best utilised when it either lines up with a character's role, (I.E a dancer since they basically are paid to look hot.) or if it's not in a blatant way, so the characters aren't in the game because of fanservice.

Still, a game not having fanservice will not affect my opinion on it. (There's a game I have where someone's review is "Boobs aren't big enough." and it's 1/5 stars. That is the oposite of how I feel.)

Of course, all of that would change if Gonzales was given a beach alt. Seriously though. Gonzales needs to make it into FEH soon.

I completely agree. I am much more tolerant of it when it is in charcater or relevant to the story than when it just seems like "hey, look, undies, we've got em, buy a statue why dont ya"?

Edited by Sir Wolfram of Vallora

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thanny said:

I did not literally mean the characters coming alive after being drawn to express themselves...

When somebody made a comment about " fictional, scantily clad women throwing themselves at you ", you replied

On 2/4/2020 at 1:15 PM, thanny said:

 What happened to women can freely express their sexuality?

Which sure sounds to me like you're implying said fictional women can express themselves.

It's very black and white. Real women are sentient and can make decisions such as how to express themselves. Fictional women are not sentient and cannot make such decisions. Interpreting a criticism of one as a criticism of the other is a rather underhanded argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Johann said:

Are we going all in? I'll try to behave. Forgive me, @eclipse

Sexual objectification is very in-depth discussion that merits its own thread, though I think I would check with the mods before creating such a thread to ensure that it meets the site's guidelines, since there's a lot of content to be discussed that could potentially cross lines, and it's a subject that some people get pretty heated about.

Hawkeye, and many buff male characters like him, are not sexually objectified. He is not rendered a sexual object by the artist. A man without a shirt is not inherently sexual. His large muscles are more in line with the male power fantasy of strength than anything sexual. Furthermore, worldwide, men have more social power than women in practically all fields, so there's not the same impact in showing a half naked man compared to a half naked woman. There is a lot more to this than I can express here, and if you genuinely are interested in learning about sexual objectification and why skin exposure is not a 1:1 comparison between men and women, you should seek out people who have written much more and brilliantly than I can on the matter, due to their research and understanding.

Going from the second half of your post, you misunderstand me if you think this is a judgment towards women in any kind of revealing clothing. On the contrary, I support all women in their right to express themselves however they want. I'm not here to police how you feel about content, but to help stand up for people who are argued at or belittled to the point where they aren't comfortable joining the conversation. To be honest, I'm surprised that you'd look at Camilla and say "finally, a woman with big boobs" when there are countless examples in all media forms (let alone FE) of women having above average boobs that predate her, even by decades. If those are your feelings, that's fine, and if I've upset or offended you, I apologize. Please understand that there are a lot of people who argue in bad faith over these subjects simply as a means to harass women, so I'm accustomed to dealing with those kinds of people by being very direct, sometimes to the point where I may seem condescending.

Since I want to respect the site's guideline I won't add any more onto the said subject.

How is it safe to assume he is not rendered a sexual object by the artist? By going along with the assumption the way you interpret it or have you talked to the artist himself? If his large muscles are more in line with the male power fantasy, then why can't Loki or Camilla be the same expressing their own confidence? The definition of how a character is displayed is up to the consumer and what you may think on one character may not be the same for others. The skin exposure is not a 1:1 comparison between men and women is due to the majority of society deciding what's accepted, which you have demonstrated very clearly in the beginning of your second paragraph. If men are able to be accepted for being shirtless, then ladies should be able to wear revealing attire as well. Fire Emblem have demonstrated on treating both gender fairly equally in this factor that I, for one do not see the problem with it. 

That is nice to see you support women in their right to express themselves, as I do too, including male to express themselves however they want. And that could be said same for the artist who dress's their character however they want with their freedom to choose it's personality. The double standard that have been normalized though, are which I find peculiar.

To correct you, I looked at Camilla and said "it was finally nice to see a character with relatable body type"; not "finally a woman with big boobs". Even if one is to look at women with big boobs, it does not mean they have similar body shape, legs and so on. So clearly we can see the first body part you look at when you see Camilla lol, which is fine by the way but I would prefer you not to do that to someone who isn't fictional. Yes, there maybe countless of examples in all media forms, however Fire Emblem as a whole rarely have someone such as Camilla, with her body type (bonus to having empowering personality) as one of the main character. Which is an insight to what I meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can’t we all just agree that artists are horny and it’s fine to express that through their characters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, eclipse said:

The reason why I specifically brought up miniskirts in the older games is because the ones that wear them tend to be the mounted ladies.  This really is fanservice, because anyone who's ridden a horse for a long time can tell you what happens to their inner thighs. . .and that's with pants on (don't get me started on Ilia).  Minerva had the right idea.

That's some pretty interesting less visible fan service. Haven't really noticed it.

The only notable fan service wich I have seen with miniskirts is for example with the female mages or especially the female sword masters in path of radiance radiant dawn.

especially considering the heavy armoured woman who are usually on horseback like titania in path of radiance or minerva in shadow dragon

you mean mainly the Pegasus class than? even if where talking miniskirts I'd say it's not really effective fanservice it's quite a bit less noticable on a horseback compared to an unmounted unit.

fanservice nonethelss but quite allot less noticable I have to say. pretty interesting to know never paid attention to that.

 

Edited by SwordsDude

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, eclipse said:

The second paragraph implies that you don't really believe the first.  Division isn't healed by dismissal.

(I have failed to see the other two reply so I am replying on this post, I apologize.)

No it doesn't. 

First paragraph is meant to say I can comprehend that you are in a position where you want to give empathy to the said perspectives
Second paragraph isn't meant to be dismissal, it is me saying I fail to give sympathy even with the given perspective. It's not really a dismissal, its my point of view.

They see it wild, I don't. You understand why there's two different perspective, I do too, but I am on the, no, Fire Emblem isn't a wild content.

 

9 hours ago, DefyingFates said:

Hawkeye simply doesn't wear a shirt. He's not posing specifically to draw attention to parts of his body.

To add to what @Johann says, Hawkeye also has the benefit of coming from a game that took characterisation seriously, thus gave him Supports to flesh out his character. Loki just drops vague and empty hints now and then but just shows up once a book to be fanservice. Same goes for Camilla, who may have some tragic backstory, but said backstory is tucked away in a tiny number of the dozens of Supports and other scenes she has of just pandering to Corrin or being provocative for the sake of being provocative.

And neither of them forward the story by doing this either, which is another key point in @Ice Dragon and @Baldrick's discussion: there's no point to the Camilla close-ups in her boss cutscene in Birthright for example - those are just there to fulfil the fanservice quota for that part of the game and because a team of developers wanted them there.

Look, if you are fine with Hawkeye's naked body due to your own justification, that's fine. If Camilla and Loki is offensive, censor it yourself by looking away or covering them up with your hands; I don't know. (I will add this here though, the justification you given to Hawkeye, someone else may put equal value justification for Loki and Camilla. I am here to say I disagree with the double standard which have been unfortunately normalized.)

 

10 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Can’t we all just agree that artists are horny and it’s fine to express that through their characters.

I can agree with this conclusion ٩(。•́‿•̀。)۶

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

Can’t we all just agree that artists are horny and it’s fine to express that through their characters.

This. It’s not really that deep. Just some horny guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, SwordsDude said:

That's some pretty interesting less visible fan service. Haven't really noticed it.

The only notable fan service wich I have seen with miniskirts is for example with the female mages or especially the female sword masters in path of radiance radiant dawn.

especially considering the heavy armoured woman who are usually on horseback like titania in path of radiance or minerva in shadow dragon

you mean mainly the Pegasus class than? even if where talking miniskirts I'd say it's not really effective fanservice it's quite a bit less noticable on a horseback compared to an unmounted unit.

fanservice nonethelss but quite allot less noticable I have to say. pretty interesting to know never paid attention to that.

 

You'll have to look at the official art to see the worst offenders.  Which is doubly weird because Minerva/Sheena are both in pants.

I'm not as hard on the swordmasters/dancers, because their get-up makes slightly more sense.  They're infantry, and dancers are supposed to catch the eye.  Mages would most likely be in back, so I'm more forgiving of them, too. . .except Serra.  That skirt impedes her walking, and that's a little too much.

That being said, RD had the best damn outfits from a fashion perspective (especially Micaiah).  For practicality, that's Thracia.

4 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

This. It’s not really that deep. Just some horny guys.

Change can happen!  Remember the zipper panties!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Water Mage said:

This. It’s not really that deep. Just some horny guys.

To be fair there's female artists/writers that make plenty of fanservice as well. Men are not the only producers of that stuff just like they're not the only consumers.

Just from Three Houses even we have things like

Spoiler

FETH_Kronya.png

Fire_Emblem_Three_Houses_Cornelia_Defeat

but Chinatsu Kanahara probably isn't going to be scoffed at as a horny designer. I think that's one of the main issues in the fanservice debates, that people who dislike it don't just dislike it, they look down on it and belittle and dismiss people who do enjoy/create it too often. The former is fine, the latter is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, eclipse said:

Mages would most likely be in back, so I'm more forgiving of them, too. . .except Serra.

You're making me ponder the possibility of mages who don't dress so mage-y. Now that I think about it, why can't, say, Odin, dress exactly like Laslow and still sling spells no problem?🤔

I want this now. If Male Mages are no longer allowed to feel the breeze of Elwind beneath them like they sometimes did pre-FE7, then mages of all genders must dress identical to every single Mercenary or like class in their respective game.

 

Edited by Interdimensional Observer
Felt like leaving out the particularly silly stuff I added later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Interdimensional Observer said:

You're making me ponder the possibility of mages who don't dress so mage-y. Now that I think about it, why can't, say, Odin, dress exactly like Laslow and still sling spells no problem?

I want this now. If Male Mages are no longer allowed to feel the breeze of Elwind beneath them like they sometimes did pre-FE7, then mages of all genders must dress identical to every single Mercenary or like class in their respective game.

That. . .would be pretty damn cool.  "Target the spellcasters?  We can't find 'em!"

Maybe a bit different for the healers, since it's pretty hard to hide a staff!  That, and some of the more honorable adversaries might have a "no killing the doctors" policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wonderie said:

How is it safe to assume he is not rendered a sexual object by the artist? By going along with the assumption the way you interpret it or have you talked to the artist himself? If his large muscles are more in line with the male power fantasy, then why can't Loki or Camilla be the same expressing their own confidence? .

Because muscles tend to empower men rather than titillate women, whereas skimpy clothing and large breasts tend to appeal to titillate men rather than empower women.

To work out the kind of men meant to appeal to women, look at actors to tend to be cast in romantic comedies. Do they have more in common with bodybuilder types like Hawkeye, or pretty boys like Pent?

Pent is the kind of character stereotypically popular with women, a truer counterpart to characters like Loki. His seasonal version is a groom, which I think has a emotional rather than sexual appeal, even compared to brides. 

1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

Can’t we all just agree that artists are horny and it’s fine to express that through their characters.

I’m a fan of both Fire Emblem and Langrisser, one gives me my fill of strategy games with good character development and the other gives me my fill of strategy games with sexy fanservice. When the Fire Emblem series starts to focus on sexy fanservice at the expense of good character development... I go through withdrawal.

Edited by Baldrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Alkaid said:

To be fair there's female artists/writers that make plenty of fanservice as well. Men are not the only producers of that stuff just like they're not the only consumers.

Believe me I know. One of the raunchiest artists in FGO is female. From her comments you can also see she has a pretty dirty mind. Hell, she had some of her designs rejected by the FGO developers because they were too raunchy for FGO. And considering what kind of game FGO, if something is too raunchy for it, then it’s really freaking raunchy.

Edited by Water Mage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Baldrick said:

I’m a fan of both Fire Emblem and Langrisser, one gives me my fill of strategy games with good character development and the other gives me my fill of strategy games with sexy fanservice. When the Fire Emblem series starts to focus on sexy fanservice at the expense of good character development... I go through withdrawal.

I mean why can’t it be both? Really the only egregious examples of this sort of thing in Fire Emblem are Camilla and Tharja. And even then there’s more to their characters beyond just that even if the fanservice gets in the way of that sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ottservia said:

Can’t we all just agree that artists are horny and it’s fine to express that through their characters.

i think so. and that's fine with me. 

 

9 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I mean why can’t it be both? Really the only egregious examples of this sort of thing in Fire Emblem are Camilla and Tharja. And even then there’s more to their characters beyond just that even if the fanservice gets in the way of that sometimes.

 

and i think so too. Tharja and camilla were some of my favourite characters in Awakening and Fates.  It's not just "oh we're dressed like this. hubbahubaba" (not that is my taste or anything, i'm just saying, that i enjoy multiple types of characters.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Ottservia said:

I mean why can’t it be both? Really the only egregious examples of this sort of thing in Fire Emblem are Camilla and Tharja. And even then there’s more to their characters beyond just that even if the fanservice gets in the way of that sometimes.

The key words here are “at the expense of”. Whatever you think of Tharja and Camilla, there’s no denying they would have a better chance at a proper character arc without the creepy obsession with the player’s avatar. @daisy jane Do you agree with this?

Edited by Baldrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...