The portrayal of women and minorities in video games

[msnoodles]

I'll repost these because people seem to be conveniently ignoring them for the sake of calling me racist or acting as though I'm the only person who plays video games and holds this sentiment.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2175-Diversity

It's not like people within the industry don't feel the same way. I want to hear thoughts on these since yeah, as previously mentioned they're pretty relevant.

[Defeatist Elitist]

Because their appearance isn't irrelevant to their personality. They were designed to fulfill a certain purpose. They look a certain way for a reason. IRL, people look the way they look because of their traits at birth and lifestyle choices.

Sometimes a penis is just a penis? They don't necessarilly look a certain way because it's integral to their personality (because personality is not directly influenced by appearance), they might look that way because someone wanted them to look that way, and there's nothing wrong with it. In fact, appearance for appearancee's sake might be BETTER than appearance for the sake of giving a character a typecast personality.

I'm assuming this is over a theology argument or something, which is different than "I think the vg industry as it stands conveys x image".

Regardless of what we are discussing, burden of proof remains pretty pertinent, unless you want to be like "oh this is all just my pure opinion like how I think chocolate ice cream tastes better".

It's still alienization? SC is hypersexualized dude.

StarCraft, not Soul Calibur. Soul Calibur is about as hardcore as Justin Bieber. And I thought the whole argument was that SEXUALIZATION alienated people.

[msnoodles]

They don't necessarilly look a certain way because it's integral to their personality (because personality is not directly influenced by appearance), they might look that way because someone wanted them to look that way, and there's nothing wrong with it. In fact, appearance for appearancee's sake might be BETTER than appearance for the sake of giving a character a typecast personality.

Yeah, but designers want characters to look a certain way for a reason. So maybe some highly-regarded character dresses like a slob; maybe they're trying to convey irony here. Some characters look a certain way to invoke a sort of "feeling", and no, I'm not necessarily talking about jiggletits-- maybe the designer wants to give some important npc a "motherly" appearance for the gamers to associate her with security, or maybe they portray an ex-soldier as "roughed up" to convey how their past had physically affected them. You can't attribute any depth to "they wanted boobies so they put on boobies". Girls have boobs, but big boobs should not be their defining trait.

I'm not sure what you're asking for in the way of proof. I don't think anyone's ever felt there needs to be a poll on girls and how they feel about objectification. They don't like it. :|

[Esau of Isaac]

Because their appearance isn't irrelevant to their personality. They were designed to fulfill a certain purpose. They look a certain way for a reason. IRL, people look the way they look because of their traits at birth and lifestyle choices.

But that doesn't have to hold true in a videogame. It's not infrequent for characters to act completely opposite of how they appear, right?

It's still alienization? SC is hypersexualized dude.

And everyone's going to be alienated by something. I think the Final Fantasy series are some of the most interesting games to date, with deep storylines, interesting characters, and lovable soundtracks. I know multiple people that think exactly the opposite of that. They fucking despise Final Fantasy. I don't think the series should change so that they like it. If it did, I might no longer like it.

And he's likely talking about Starcraft, which isn't hypersexualized. And neither is Soul Calibur --which I'm guessing you're talking about-- for that matter. Some characters are very sexual, but it doesn't lend itself to an overtly sexual plotline.

If tits are its selling point then I'd demand funner games.

A selling point, not the selling point.

We shouldn't cling to it either. Jiggletits are never going to disappear, but with some significant effort developers won't feel the need to include them because oh no loss in profits otherwise!

I can agree with that.

Last page you said guys you knew factored pixel tits into their decision as far as throwing their money at game companies goes.

Yeah, so tell me where I said it's the basis of their purchases?

Their attire and attitude makes sense within the context of the game, e.g. if they're an adventurer then short shorts, miniskirts, dresses, and low-dipping v-necks won't afford as much protection as much as any sort of armor, no matter what kind it is.

So you are looking for realism.

She'd be as capable and independent as any male hero in a similar situation-- that isn't to say she has to be a mindless mission machine, but just take sex out of it entirely. In some games, sex might not be on the main protagonists' minds.

Why does she have to be just as capable and independent as any male hero to be properly represented? Females can't be incapable and dependent?

Because these have always been marketed towards guys. There's undoubtedly games with sexual content in them marketed towards girls, but to such a minuscule degree that it's totally negligible.

Because, and this is going to blow you away, but they are a smaller part of the market.

Games that are marketed specifically towards women are a slowly budding minority because the demographic is just beginning to pick up.

Because bodies=/=objects. Video games? Sure, they're objects. Women? Mmmmmmnope.

Objectification of something doesn't have to make every single thing associated with it an object. Objectification of the female form for purposes of entertainment is not itself demeaning to women, only when said objectification purposely and perhaps explicitly paints all women in some way does it become such.

And even if I were to believe you, it doesn't make it objectively bad.

Nobody's taking away your jiggletits. Let me repeat that: nobody's taking away your jiggletits. They'd just like to see more games with less jiggletits.

I feel you're unraveling at the seams here. Maybe you should take a breather or something.

I don't know what this says about the other companies, considering accessible Wii games basically dominated the top-selling list for that particular year.

This doesn't say anything about the other companies. It says that marketing a product towards everyone by using gimmicky control schemes is going to wear off when people realize that your million games suck ass.

It's ironic that on one hand you vilify companies for using underhanded tactics to appeal to a wider demographic, but then praise a company like Nintendo.

Sorry, games aren't exclusively for young white males like you seem to want for them to be.

Why are you so butthurt?

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[Kanami]

Yeah, but designers want characters to look a certain way for a reason. So maybe some highly-regarded character dresses like a slob; maybe they're trying to convey irony here. Some characters look a certain way to invoke a sort of "feeling", and no, I'm not necessarily talking about jiggletits-- maybe the designer wants to give some important npc a "motherly" appearance for the gamers to associate her with security, or maybe they portray an ex-soldier as "roughed up" to convey how their past had physically affected them. You can't attribute any depth to "they wanted boobies so they put on boobies". Girls have boobs, but big boobs should not be their defining trait.

I'm not sure what you're asking for in the way of proof. I don't think anyone's ever felt there needs to be a poll on girls and how they feel about objectification. They don't like it. :|

And designers want the players to like the character they're playing as. If that means the guy needs to be a muscular then so be it? A motherly NPC? A roughed up ex-soldier with a bad past? These are stereotypes? I bet the motherly NPC also makes you breakfast and gives you a free place to stay overnight. The ex-soldier would be dark brooding and depending on whether they join your "party" lighten up or just remain an alcoholic that sits infront of the window staring at the outside world.

I don't see the point of arguing away stereotypes. They're here to stay.

A Poll would be necessary to determine how much is objectification, personally I've never had a problem with jiggletits. And I know a few other girls who don't either. They, like myself think there are much more important aspects of a game which could be worked on. Toning down on the sex wouldn't be a bad thing. But it's at the bottom of the priorities list.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Kanami

[msnoodles]

I don't really think the "U MAD" warrants a serious response because it's pretty much a lazy placeholder for a real answer. I don't personally care if you like jiggletits, but yeah, I'm dissatisfied with how the industry is currently lagging.

They fucking despise Final Fantasy. I don't think the series should change so that they like it. If it did, I might no longer like it.

I love Final Fantasy but will have to say yeah, the stories can get pretty retarded and the characters bland and shallow. I don't personally want them to "tone it down" or anything like that, but I would understand if they did. Or make a shift to the more traditional, "fantasy" oriented atmosphere of the older games, or something. I just continue to throw my money at them because I do that for most games with "Final Fantasy" attached to the front of the title.

So you are looking for realism.

Fantasy doesn't have to be demeaning.

Why does she have to be just as capable and independent as any male hero to be properly represented? Females can't be incapable and dependent?

Because the latter is represented much more often than the former. People want more women like this because so few of them exist compared to the latter. Etc.

Because, and this is going to blow you away, but they are a smaller part of the market.

Restating what I said isn't particularly mind-blowing.

"These games exist, but they're a tiny part of the market."

"Because they're a smaller part of the market, woah!"

Objectification of something doesn't have to make every single thing associated with it an object. Objectification of the female form for purposes of entertainment is not itself demeaning to women, only when said objectification purposely and perhaps explicitly paints all women in some way does it become such.

Whether it's on purpose or for the sake of simple entertainment, it's demeaning in the same way minstrel shows were demeaning. These were for pure entertainment and its audience may not have necessarily deluded themselves into thinking it represents real life or any of that crap, but that doesn't make it less demeaning by any measure.

This doesn't say anything about the other companies. It says that marketing a product towards everyone by using gimmicky control schemes is going to wear off when people realize that your million games suck ass.

It's ironic that on one hand you vilify companies for using underhanded tactics to appeal to a wider demographic, but then praise a company like Nintendo.

And then somehow your shitty games are still bestsellers? I personally don't enjoy casual games myself, but I don't see how the marketing for Wii Sports et al is underhanded? They just made some fun games with a cool gizmo and people buy it.

[msnoodles]

And designers want the players to like the character they're playing as. If that means the guy needs to be a muscular then so be it? A motherly NPC? A roughed up ex-soldier with a bad past? These are stereotypes? I bet the motherly NPC also makes you breakfast and gives you a free place to stay overnight. The ex-soldier would be dark brooding and depending on whether they join your "party" lighten up or just remain an alcoholic that sits infront of the window staring at the outside world.

Not necessarily? Archetypes=/=stereotypes, though aside from that, an ex-soldier doesn't need to be brooding and a momma doesn't need to be exaggeratedly sweet. Why does a character need to be muscular for you to like him? For me, his attractiveness doesn't factor into whether I sympathize with him as a character-- while designers can totally use character design to extract a certain feeling out of the players, the thought-process doesn't need to be as simple as BOOBS.

[Esau of Isaac]

I don't really think the "U MAD" warrants a serious response because it's pretty much a lazy placeholder for a real answer. I don't personally care if you like jiggletits, but yeah, I'm dissatisfied with how the industry is currently lagging.

See, you're trying to hide your irritation, but you're doing a poor job with your repeated use of "jiggletits". You're looking kind of silly, and you're just not getting at me.

I don't know, keep trying though.

I love Final Fantasy but will have to say yeah, the stories can get pretty retarded and the characters bland and shallow. I don't personally want them to "tone it down" or anything like that, but I would understand if they did. Or make a shift to the more traditional, "fantasy" oriented atmosphere of the older games, or something. I just continue to throw my money at them because I do that for most games with "Final Fantasy" attached to the front of the title.

I really want them to stop their constant changing. I haven't enjoyed any title after X as much as I did at and before it.

Or, uh, if they keep changing, I'd like them to change to something that doesn't suck more and more with each iteration.

Fantasy doesn't have to be demeaning.

Neither does sexualization.

Because the latter is represented much more often than the former. People want more women like this because so few of them exist compared to the latter. Etc.

What are you talking about? These days practically every female videogame character just has to be over-the-top independent and capable. >__>

Restating what I said isn't particularly mind-blowing.

"These games exist, but they're a tiny part of the market."

"Because they're a smaller part of the market, woah!"

You were complaining that they are a smaller part of the market. I was explaining why that is.

Whether it's on purpose or for the sake of simple entertainment, it's demeaning in the same way minstrel shows were demeaning.

No it isn't. One is meant to be sexual entertainment by embodiment of physical characteristics, and one explicitly puts down people of a given race through stereotypes cobbled together for the purpose of being negative.

Objectification of women (and men, for that matter) involves stripping away the person, but that is because sexual interest is associated with physical appearance. If you think that most men watch porn for the deep character-driven plotlines, for example, you're sorely mistaken.

And then somehow your shitty games are still bestsellers?

Implying that your perception of shitty is any more valid than mine.

I personally don't enjoy casual games myself, but I don't see how the marketing for Wii Sports et al is underhanded? They just made some fun games with a cool gizmo and people buy it.

Because they were using the same exact tactic you have complained of; they sought to widen sales by appealing to a larger demographic while not delivering entertaining or well-made gameplay, characters, or story. Or really anything. The Wii practically perfected the use of shovelware to score a buck. Marketing people to pick up a console that is only going to sell because of novelty is pretty underhanded if we're going to use your metric for company morality.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[msnoodles]

See, you're trying to hide your irritation, but you're doing a poor job with your repeated use of "jiggletits". You're looking kind of silly, and you're just not getting at me.

I'm not trying to get at you? Jiggletits is quicker to type than listing out all of the ways in which females are objectified, but if you think I'm trying to slight you by calling them that or something then, uh, I can't really help that.

Or, uh, if they keep changing, I'd like them to change to something that doesn't suck more and more with each iteration.

Eh, I actually enjoyed FFXIII more than 12, but I could probably make a good argument for 12 being a better game.

Neither does sexualization.

Example of sexualization in video games that isn't demeaning? For women, "sexual liberation" doesn't mean what dudes tend to think it means.

What are you talking about? These days practically every female videogame character just has to be over-the-top independent and capable. >__>

The fact that people are griping for independent badass female characters doesn't mean they make up the majority, just that people would like for there to be more, and more beyond the "blank slate hero" that you typically see in Western RPGs.

No it isn't. One is meant to be sexual entertainment by embodiment of physical characteristics, and one explicitly puts down people of a given race through similar characteristics.

At the time it was acceptable because they saw it as harmless entertainment without really damaging the race they're caricaturing. Similarly, I'd say the hypersexualization you see a lot is pretty much comparable to a caricature of, well, female sexuality, mass-marketed and fit for consumption.

Implying that your perception of shitty is any more valid than mine.

You said yourself that they were shitty games. Doesn't change the fact that they sold the most for that year.

The Wii practically perfected the use of shovelware to score a buck. Marketing people to pick up a console that is only going to sell because of novelty is pretty underhanded if we're going to use your metric for company morality.

Erm, Sony and Microsoft are trying to take after it and push a more "family-friendly" image too, especially after witnessing the Wii's success. Games that don't necessarily fall into the typical cycle of exploitative industry-- Mirror's Edge? Portal?-- still have the selling potential. They don't need to be shovelware, but they don't need to be hypersexual either.

[Esau of Isaac]

I'm not trying to get at you? Jiggletits is quicker to type than listing out all of the ways in which females are objectified, but if you think I'm trying to slight you by calling them that or something then, uh, I can't really help that.

Come on, be honest. That's not even a good-sounding excuse on your part.

Eh, I actually enjoyed FFXIII more than 12, but I could probably make a good argument for 12 being a better game.

I would hope so. V_V

Example of sexualization in video games that isn't demeaning? For women, "sexual liberation" doesn't mean what dudes tend to think it means.

I haven't really found much sexualization that I do find to be particularly demeaning to women in video games. It would have to go pretty far to paint a picture of all females behaving a particular way for me to really find it demeaning, and even then I'd probably find it harmlessly so unless it was repulsive in the way it presented it.

The fact that people are griping for independent badass female characters doesn't mean they make up the majority, just that people would like for there to be more, and more beyond the "blank slate hero" that you typically see in Western RPGs.

I honestly can't think of many female leads in popular games the past years that don't fit the independent tough female of some sort.

At the time it was acceptable because they saw it as harmless entertainment without really damaging the race they're caricaturing. Similarly, I'd say the hypersexualization you see a lot is pretty much comparable to a caricature of, well, female sexuality, mass-marketed and fit for consumption.

Because that's what it is. It's not demeaning to women because it's the embodiment of physical characteristics rather than definitive negative behaviors.

You said yourself that they were shitty games. Doesn't change the fact that they sold the most for that year.

Wait, wait, I thought you were talking about other games, not Wii ones.

And yeah, they sold the best that year. As a result of tactics that if you were at all consistent you'd find underhanded.

Erm, Sony and Microsoft are trying to take after it and push a more "family-friendly" image too, especially after witnessing the Wii's success. Games that don't necessarily fall into the typical cycle of exploitative industry-- Mirror's Edge? Portal?-- still have the selling potential. They don't need to be shovelware, but they don't need to be hypersexual either.

I never said all games have to be hypersexual.

Nintendo's success with family-friendly titles has been around for years, by the way. Sony and Microsoft aren't just now trying to appeal to that demographic. They are just now trying to appeal to it as strongly with the inclusion of Move and Kinect, but both are going to do poorly, both because of a lack of any killer-app titles and a distinct adherence to making money off a group rather than producing gameplay.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[msnoodles]

Come on, be honest. That's not even a good-sounding excuse on your part.

I love falling back on U MAD as much as anyone else, but it's not really testament to one's ability to hold a mature discussion... over jiggletits.

I haven't really found much sexualization that I do find to be particularly demeaning to women.

The ridiculous proportions in fighter games is a start. It's "normal" in the sense that it's common to the genre, but it doesn't make it any less demeaning.

I honestly can't think of many female leads in popular games the past years that don't fit the independent tough female of some sort.

Most of the "independent tough female" leading characters are just extensions of the player-- female Shepard? Russian weightlifter/hammer lady hero in Fable 2? They're tough and independent but only because you make them so.

Because that's what it is. It's not demeaning to women because it's the embodiment of physical characteristics rather than definitive negative behaviors.

Commodification is the word here. Girls don't care if you find the female figure aesthetically/sexually pleasing, but it's not a commodity.

Wait, wait, I thought you were talking about other games, not Wii ones.

I'm referring to the link I posted with the list of the top-20 bestselling games for the year 2009.

And yeah, they sold the best that year. As a result of tactics that if you were at all consistent you'd find underhanded.

I'm pretty consistent in my view that objectification and underrepresentation is bad? On one hand you have someone trying to expand their audience, and on another it's marketing keeping a fair portion of potential audience out.

Nintendo's success with family-friendly titles has been around for years, by the way. Sony and Microsoft aren't just now trying to appeal to that demographic. They are just now trying to appeal to it as strongly with the inclusion of Move and Kinect, but both are going to do poorly, both because of a lack of any killer-app titles and a distinct adherence to making money off a group rather than producing gameplay.

Microsoft has been at it for a while, and I don't really have an issue for this. Family-friendly casual games are a good way to pick up a hobby as arguably fun and rewarding as playing video games. Can we please not scare them away?

[Esau of Isaac]

I love falling back on U MAD as much as anyone else, but it's not really testament to one's ability to hold a mature discussion... over jiggletits.

You're only showing how mad u are.

The ridiculous proportions in fighter games is a start. It's "normal" in the sense that it's common to the genre, but it doesn't make it any less demeaning.

I don't find it demeaning.

Most of the "independent tough female" leading characters are just extensions of the player-- female Shepard? Russian weightlifter/hammer lady hero in Fable 2? They're tough and independent but only because you make them so.

I can use characters from those very games to illustrate my point: Ashley Williams, Miranda, Jack, Hammer, Rose.

Commodification is the word here. Girls don't care if you find the female figure aesthetically/sexually pleasing, but it's not a commodity.

It is if products are being bought and sold for seeing them.

I don't think many girls particularly care if the female image is objectified. The women I've known don't have much of an opinion when asked about games with sexy women in them, and the women I've been with were fine with the idea of objectification. Or I assume they were. Having porn and not being fine with objectification are kind of contradictory.

I'm pretty consistent in my view that objectification and underrepresentation is bad? On one hand you have someone trying to expand their audience, and on another it's marketing keeping a fair portion of potential audience out.

They're trying to expand their audience by marketing a product of little quality to potential buyers for the buck itself, then moving on to another gimmick when that dries out. If that is not underhanded in your opinion, I'd say you're being rather inconsistent.

Microsoft has been at it for a while, and I don't really have an issue for this. Family-friendly casual games are a good way to pick up a hobby as arguably fun and rewarding as playing video games. Can we please not scare them away?

Isn't that exactly what's already happening? A halving of sales is a pretty big deal, here.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[msnoodles]

You're only showing how mad u are.

Idk, I could be snarky and dismissive but I've been doing a pretty good job about reigning it in for this particular discussion forum. Am I allowed to start making sexhaver jokes yet?

I don't find it demeaning.

Whether you do or not, women do. Sexual objectification is gonna have negative connotations everywhere except maybe a forum centered around video games, but even then it's not really something you have to explain.

I can use characters from those very games to illustrate my point: Ashley Williams, Miranda, Jack, Hammer, Rose.

All secondary characters. I think Alyx Vance is a well-developed and intriguing character, but she's still just a secondary character.

I don't think many girls particularly care if the female image is objectified. The women I've known don't have much of an opinion when asked about games with sexy women in them, and the women I've been with were fine with the idea of objectification. Or I assume they were. Having porn and not being fine with objectification are kind of contradictory.

The pornography industry has its own set of problems as far as an even playing field goes, but that's a whole other discussion.

Ever heard of feminists? Yeah, they don't like objectification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_objectification

Usually in internet discussions when the word "feminist" is uttered the reaction that follows pretty much tells me whether the discussion is going to get anywhere. I just thought I'd throw that out there.

I don't normally ask girls "do you like the female body to be seen as an object" because it's kind of a given that they don't-- maybe some do for whatever reason, maybe some don't care, but you don't really have grounds to say a whole lot of girls are damaged or at the very least annoyed by it.

They're trying to expand their audience by marketing a product of little quality to potential buyers for the buck itself, then moving on to another gimmick when that dries out. If that is not underhanded in your opinion, I'd say you're being rather inconsistent.

You're the one who seems to have a problem with "underhanded tactics", and it's kind of hypocritical to complain about a selling point carrying bland and easily marketable games to a specific audience. I don't like it in general that money has to be the final word when it comes to games at all, though people in this thread were pretty quick to jump on the "video game industry is a business so shut up" point and it's pretty hard to steer it away from that.

I don't know, the videos that nobody wants to talk about anymore seem to put it pretty well. Video games can be more than moneycows-- the shovelware and jiggletits are equally limiting, and while I equally dislike both, it's nice that a broader audience is starting to get into video games. But you can't really defend trashy design decisions and demand quality in one breath. I think if more people demanded for better-quality writing and gameplay, the industry would meet the demand. And I don't mean saying "it'd be nice if this would happen, but I'm sure it'll happen eventually", because really, we're giving them our money, we deserve better.

If you just like fanservice then that's fine, but I think high-quality storytelling, narrative, game mechanics etc should be at the forefront of the developers' priorities, and yeah, high-quality storytelling does not really lend itself well to fanservice.

I still recommend watching the videos instead of dragging out a "this isn't demeaning because I don't think so and girls don't think it's demeaning because the ones I know didn't say so" argument with me. It probably started constructively and petered out with the headache inducing textwalls.

[Kanami]

Whether you do or not, women do. Sexual objectification is gonna have negative connotations everywhere except maybe a forum centered around video games, but even then it's not really something you have to explain.

Incorrect, I've now several cases were a woman uses her youth, position and body to get what she wants. That's not to say she stripped, but she stilled used herself as an object in a sense. Hell working in a fast food store is probably objectification in your eyes considering the low pay rates and work conditions.

The pornography industry has its own set of problems as far as an even playing field goes, but that's a whole other discussion.

Ever heard of feminists? Yeah, they don't like objectification.

have you maybe considered that what you're whining about may not necessarily constitute as objectification for others?I admit that there have been some games that push the button, however most in general isn't a case of the developers objectifying women. But the fans getting too obsessed with a character design and "objectifying" this isn't solely exclusive to skimpy clad women either. Well unless you consider Mia to be skimpy.

.....Wtf are you arguing about again? It just hit me now, but women in games aren't women <_< It's sketchy whether a feminist would even complain that a character is scantily clad in a video game. Male characters go topless, don't hear anyone complaining about that? Just in case you forget or didn't know. 2D women don't have rights.

I don't normally ask girls "do you like the female body to be seen as an object" because it's kind of a given that they don't-- maybe some do for whatever reason, maybe some don't care, but you don't really have grounds to say a whole lot of girls are damaged or at the very least annoyed by it.

Your statement in accurate, but the issue lies with what they identify as objectification. I live with another girl (22) and a guy (26) and neither of them believe that gaming is objectifying women enough to warrant complaints. (Both are avid gamers). Being female myself, I have to agree with them, I would find females being objectified irritating, but to what extent? Fanservice is fan service and that's not really objectification at an outrageous level.

But you can't really defend trashy design decisions and demand quality in one breath. I think if more people demanded for better-quality writing and gameplay, the industry would meet the demand. And I don't mean saying "it'd be nice if this would happen, but I'm sure it'll happen eventually", because really, we're giving them our money, we deserve better.

If you just like fanservice then that's fine, but I think high-quality storytelling, narrative, game mechanics etc should be at the forefront of the developers' priorities, and yeah, high-quality storytelling does not really lend itself well to fanservice.

Valarevans words were completely lost on you weren't they? WHY can't a game have high-quality storytelling, narrative, game mechanics and fan service? Huh? WHY? Since I've seen games that do all all four relatively well.

-Why can't a game have "Boobs" and quality writing?

-Why must fanservice come at the expense of narratives?

-What the hell has characters wearing skimpy clothing got to do with game mechanics?

You haven't answered this question once yet. Focusing on itty insignificant bits so I'll ask again:

What is restricting game developers from having a good story, good gameplay and fanservice?

And again :/

Why must fanservice come at the expense of gaming quality?

And again <_<

How does characters wearing tight clothes, or having skin exposed detract from the plot and game mechanics?

.... Do I need to say it again?

[Esau of Isaac]

Idk, I could be snarky and dismissive but I've been doing a pretty good job about reigning it in for this particular discussion forum. Am I allowed to start making sexhaver jokes yet?

Go nuts.

Whether you do or not, women do.

Some women do.

Sexual objectification is gonna have negative connotations everywhere except maybe a forum centered around video games, but even then it's not really something you have to explain.

I can't agree with that. In the past time I've been involved in serious discussion about objectification of individuals in media, there has never even been a decidedly strong stance one way or the other. Some found it unacceptable, but most agreed that the presence of objectification is mostly necessary in adult entertainment. It's a sensitive topic, but English professors seem to love in-class discussion of it. Or something.

All secondary characters. I think Alyx Vance is a well-developed and intriguing character, but she's still just a secondary character.

So what if they're secondary characters? They illustrate my point. Protagonists are an even more solid representation of this more often than not. Samus Aran, Jill Valentine, Claire Redfield, Lightning, Joanna Dark, Elika, Jade, Faith, and Lara Croft, from videogames that I can think of with female leads. All of them have strong, independent characters.

The pornography industry has its own set of problems as far as an even playing field goes, but that's a whole other discussion.

Ever heard of feminists? Yeah, they don't like objectification.

Some feminists don't. And?

Usually in internet discussions when the word "feminist" is uttered the reaction that follows pretty much tells me whether the discussion is going to get anywhere. I just thought I'd throw that out there.

I don't normally ask girls "do you like the female body to be seen as an object" because it's kind of a given that they don't-- maybe some do for whatever reason, maybe some don't care, but you don't really have grounds to say a whole lot of girls are damaged or at the very least annoyed by it.

Why am I not qualified to have an opinion on the matter?

You're the one who seems to have a problem with "underhanded tactics", and it's kind of hypocritical to complain about a selling point carrying bland and easily marketable games to a specific audience. I don't like it in general that money has to be the final word when it comes to games at all, though people in this thread were pretty quick to jump on the "video game industry is a business so shut up" point and it's pretty hard to steer it away from that.

I'm pretty sure that I stated that if you were consistent you would find this abhorrent. I never stated that I think it is wrong. It's financially sound. I'm somewhat put off by it since it spawned an effort that will end with all the three big companies having lost pointless dollars, but I'm personally fine with them doing what they want.

If you just like fanservice then that's fine, but I think high-quality storytelling, narrative, game mechanics etc should be at the forefront of the developers' priorities, and yeah, high-quality storytelling does not really lend itself well to fanservice.

It doesn't detract, so long as the fanservice isn't heavily invasive. And I don't think all games should have a strong storyline or narrative. There's no point in having one if it doesn't present a meaningful pair with the rest of the game. The Metal Gear series is notorious by many for using long, drawn-out, convoluted story-telling. Is it deep? Fuck yeah, Chrono Cross is probably the only game more confusing. But does the cinematic nature of the series detract from the gameplay?

Many would say yes. I have a hard time getting people to try playing the games because there is just so much dialogue.

I still recommend watching the videos instead of dragging out a "this isn't demeaning because I don't think so and girls don't think it's demeaning because the ones I know didn't say so" argument with me. It probably started constructively and petered out with the headache inducing textwalls.

I already watched the videos. And you're doing the same thing, but utilizing your own opinion on the matter.

[msnoodles]

Incorrect, I've now several cases were a woman uses her youth, position and body to get what she wants

Society's conditioned young women to believe that the idealized male fantasy of their body is the only path to empowerment... except they're essentially attaining this by manipulating otherwise unattainable power. It's demeaning to her even if she reaps in short term gains.

Hell working in a fast food store is probably objectification in your eyes considering the low pay rates and work conditions.

Slave labor can be considered objectification. The criminals who exploit illegal immigrants' positions of desperation by having them work for below minimum wage? Objectification and Not a Good Thing.

But the fans getting too obsessed with a character design and "objectifying" this isn't solely exclusive to skimpy clad women either. Well unless you consider Mia to be skimpy.

First off, developers objectifying the female figure and using that for marketing are at fault. Fans are always going to take even relatively nonsexual characters and put them in a sexual context, but the portrayal of women in the "culture" as a whole is reinforcing/encouraging this.

It's sketchy whether a feminist would even complain that a character is scantily clad in a video game. Male characters go topless, don't hear anyone complaining about that? Just in case you forget or didn't know. 2D women don't have rights.

http://borderhouseblog.com/

Here are a bunch of nonexistent feminists and minorities who share a variety of concerns on these kinds of issues. You could check it out or you can continue to deny that this isn't an issue for marginalized groups.

Fanservice is fan service and that's not really objectification at an outrageous level.

Yes, it's objectification. You can argue its place as a major tenet of game design, but there's no grounds to argue that it isn't objectification.

Since I've seen games that do all all four relatively well.

I haven't. Unless by "relative" you mean "the majority of stories in games are shit so these stories are slightly less shitty". Examples, please?

What is restricting game developers from having a good story, good gameplay and fanservice?

When it's obviously forced fanservice, e.g. unnecessarily forced panty shots, stripping down, male gaze, etc, it detracts. People are comfortable with cheesy lines, terribly overused tropes, tired stereotypes, cliches-- when there's no bit of self-awareness applied to them, it's poor writing. Fanservice falls under that umbrella. I like certain cliches concerning jrpg heroes, but I concede it to be terrible writing, and I can see why people would want to do away with it.

I still want to know about these games with any significant amount of fanservices but good storytelling.

I can't agree with that. In the past time I've been involved in serious discussion about objectification of individuals in media, there has never even been a decidedly strong stance one way or the other. Some found it unacceptable, but most agreed that the presence of objectification is mostly necessary in adult entertainment.

English professors like to talk about it, but it's probably a bigger issue than you're making it out to be-- or that your English class made it out to be, possibly. Feminism and equal representation for marginalized groups is a pretty huge topic for sociologists, and if I have to point you in the direction of a bunch of books because you don't believe me or something, I would be happy to do it.

So what if they're secondary characters? Samus Aran, Jill Valentine, Claire Redfield, Lightning, Joanna Dark, Elika, Jade, Faith, and Lara Croft, from videogames that I can think of with female leads. All of them have strong, independent characters.

Because people are asking for female leads with agency. I used Jill and Faith as examples of what I'd like to see more of in terms of female characters (or at least mentioned Jill)-- Jade's another good one. Claire hasn't been the protagonist of anything for like a decade now? Samus hasn't really had much of anything in terms of personality, Elika is your sidekick, not a primary character, and Lightning is ridiculously skinny for the grade of work and physical exertion she's constantly facing. Did I still enjoy FFXIII? Yeah, but I recognized it as a stupid design choice. Remove all the sociological implications of a female avatar conforming to the male ideal-- a lot of their body types don't particularly make sense in the context of the game.

Hammer's a good example of what I'd want to see more of, not necessarily to the extent that she's at, but if a girl's doing a lot of heavy lifting, she'd have to have the muscle to support it.

Some feminists don't. And?

http://rcasa.blogspo...n-of-women.html

It's kind of a big deal. :|

Why am I not qualified to have an opinion on the matter?

You have probably seen this checklist before, but just in case you haven't, it's pretty interesting.

http://melancholicfe...-checklist.html

It's possible that you're dismissing why women would see this as a problem because you were never really asked to think about it concretely; if you don't particularly care at all about the objectification of women (or, well, you benefit from it) then you're taking a pretty biased stance.

I'm pretty sure that I stated that if you were consistent you would find this abhorrent.

I think the "sex sells so let's add lots of sex" mantra is stunting growth in the industry. The same thing will probably happen if Wii continues to churn out shovelware. I'd like to see a departure from both of these, but there's nothing inherently wrong with trying to be more inclusive with an audience. Yes, it's for a profit, but you're going to have to quote where I said I had a problem with a business acting like a business-- I do have problems with the means and the tired strategies.

It doesn't detract, so long as the fanservice isn't heavily invasive.

If part of the story called for, say, a female character wearing revealing/sexy clothes and it didn't seem completely shoehorned in to appeal to fans-- however that'd happen-- then I'll roll my eyes, but I won't denounce the writing or anything like that. Having a boss who gradually loses her armor until she's practically naked as the fight goes on is a detractor. It's just embarrassing.

And I don't think all games should have a strong storyline or narrative. There's no point in having one if it doesn't present a meaningful pair with the rest of the game. The Metal Gear series is notorious by many for using long, drawn-out, convoluted story-telling. Is it deep?

Why do hourlong cutscenes and giant textwalls of backstory and information (I'm looking at you, FFXIII) have to constitute as "good" narrative? You can enjoy the Metal Gear series, but I wouldn't use it as an example as the pinnacle of "depth in plot" rather than "the guy who wrote this is crazy wtf is going on".

I would say that it is a huge detractor from the gameplay and poor narrative ability. I like how this dude articulates things so I am going to post another video from him in lieu of more textwalls.

Basically, good writing and gameplay should be complementary. There's honestly a lot more that you can do with the medium beyond "here's the gameplay... aaaand now a cutscene. And now gameplay".

And you're doing the same thing, but utilizing your own opinion on the matter.

The anecdotal evidence or whatever on my part wasn't really used as the crux of my argument because I didn't think stuff like "hey guys minorities like representation!" or "sexual objectification is problematic, especially when it's such a dominating force in mainstream media" had to actually be explained and backed up. Neither are really wild claims.

I think since I posted one ___-privilege checklist I should post another. It's pretty relevant.

http://www.amptoons.com/blog/files/mcintosh.html

Article by the same woman.

Edited October 15, 2010 by msnoodles

[Esau of Isaac]

English professors like to talk about it, but it's probably a bigger issue than you're making it out to be-- or that your English class made it out to be, possibly. Feminism and equal representation for marginalized groups is a pretty huge topic for sociologists, and if I have to point you in the direction of a bunch of books because you don't believe me or something, I would be happy to do it.

Go nuts, but I'm not probably not going to read them. :V

Because people are asking for female leads with agency. I used Jill and Faith as examples of what I'd like to see more of in terms of female characters (or at least mentioned Jill)-- Jade's another good one. Claire hasn't been the protagonist of anything for like a decade now? Samus hasn't really had much of anything in terms of personality, Elika is your sidekick, not a primary character, and Lightning is ridiculously skinny for the grade of work and physical exertion she's constantly facing. Did I still enjoy FFXIII? Yeah, but I recognized it as a stupid design choice. Remove all the sociological implications of a female avatar conforming to the male ideal-- a lot of their body types don't particularly make sense in the context of the game.

Hammer's a good example of what I'd want to see more of, not necessarily to the extent that she's at, but if a girl's doing a lot of heavy lifting, she'd have to have the muscle to support it.

The point was to show female characters that were strong. And Claire hasn't been a protagonist for awhile, but she's a strong character. Samus has lots of personality, especially in the newer game, Elika is a primary character important to the game's plotline, and I have absolutely no clue where you're getting off calling Lightning skinny since she's the same fitness as practically every female in videogames. Are you saying that just because characters in videogames are primarily shown in peak physique that it's unfair to women or something?

http://rcasa.blogspo...n-of-women.html

It's kind of a big deal. :|

I don't understand why you linked this.

You have probably seen this checklist before, but just in case you haven't, it's pretty interesting.

http://melancholicfe...-checklist.html

It's possible that you're dismissing why women would see this as a problem because you were never really asked to think about it concretely; if you don't particularly care at all about the objectification of women (or, well, you benefit from it) then you're taking a pretty biased stance.

Of course I have a biased stance; so do the people who elevate the issue to be as serious as they think it is. They wrap it up in complicated terms and complain about what every person does as though men are somehow unfairly holding women down.

It's preposterous.

I think the "sex sells so let's add lots of sex" mantra is stunting growth in the industry. The same thing will probably happen if Wii continues to churn out shovelware. I'd like to see a departure from both of these, but there's nothing inherently wrong with trying to be more inclusive with an audience. Yes, it's for a profit, but you're going to have to quote where I said I had a problem with a business acting like a business-- I do have problems with the means and the tired strategies.

Just a few posts ago you were complimenting the Wii for its tactics.

If part of the story called for, say, a female character wearing revealing/sexy clothes and it didn't seem completely shoehorned in to appeal to fans-- however that'd happen-- then I'll roll my eyes, but I won't denounce the writing or anything like that. Having a boss who gradually loses her armor until she's practically naked as the fight goes on is a detractor. It's just embarrassing.

So you agree that sexualized characters don't detract from the plot unless it's stronger.

Why do hourlong cutscenes and giant textwalls of backstory and information (I'm looking at you, FFXIII) have to constitute as "good" narrative? You can enjoy the Metal Gear series, but I wouldn't use it as an example as the pinnacle of "depth in plot" rather than "the guy who wrote this is crazy wtf is going on".

I would say it's the pinnacle of depth in plot, since there's so much goddamn plot to sift through.

I would say that it is a huge detractor from the gameplay and poor narrative ability. I like how this dude articulates things so I am going to post another video from him in lieu of more textwalls.

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=1jdG2LHair0

Basically, good writing and gameplay should be complementary. There's honestly a lot more that you can do with the medium beyond "here's the gameplay... aaaand now a cutscene. And now gameplay".

The point is that a strong storyline and narrative aren't require in all games. Are you really going to say that the odd implementation of the Metal Gear series' plot means that it's not strong?

The anecdotal evidence or whatever on my part wasn't really used as the crux of my argument because I didn't think stuff like "hey guys minorities like representation!" or "sexual objectification is problematic, especially when it's such a dominating force in mainstream media" had to actually be explained and backed up. Neither are really wild claims.

I think since I posted one ___-privilege checklist I should post another. It's pretty relevant.

http://www.amptoons....s/mcintosh.html

Article by the same woman.

I think that saying games should not have sexualization based on utilization of claims of its objectification is pretty wild. It requires explaining when you're trying to say that Kasumi and Ayane are insulting to women as a whole.

[msnoodles]

and I have absolutely no clue where you're getting off calling Lightning skinny since she's the same fitness as practically every female in videogames. Are you saying that just because characters in videogames are primarily shown in peak physique that it's unfair to women or something?

dude, she's tiny. Peak physique to guys might be ridiculously thin women, but it looks ridiculous when she's out there kicking ass with her skinny Japanese schoolgirl legs. This isn't a statement about body types as a whole irl, because I'm all for variety-- I'm not necessarily tiny but I'm fairly skinny for my height, and thrown into any sort of action I'd get bowled over. I have a friend who lifts and who's into rugby, and some bulk comes with that physical strength. There is a certain point where girls stop "growing" like guys do when guys are actively trying to buff up, but it sure as hell ain't this.

I don't understand why you linked this.

I don't understand

Of course I have a biased stance; so do the people who elevate the issue to be as serious as they think it is. They wrap it up in complicated terms and complain about what every person does as though men are somehow unfairly holding women down.

Nobody's railing at any particular individual, but structural sexism exists and the guys and gals who deny it are a part of the problem. I'm white, I'm afforded a certain level of privilege-- it takes some nudging to recognize it, but it's there. I don't like the fact that I'm privileged over marginalized groups, and I would put in whatever amount of effort it took to take steps towards equality. Getting defensive about it seems to be a pretty common reaction, but I recognize that I'm not to blame as much as the structure that's given me this privilege is to blame.

Same applies to men and the privileges they enjoy that are denied to women. It's not like a guy wakes up one morning and says "I'm going to keep them wimminz down!", it's more like they're just unaware of their privilege.

Just a few posts ago you were complimenting the Wii for its tactics.

I think the Wii's worth complimenting if it expands the audience. I don't really "get" the faux-elitism directed at casual games. I don't like the shovelware, but I like that Nintendo is bringing in a more diverse consumer-base.

So you agree that sexualized characters don't detract from the plot unless it's stronger.

If the main character is sexualized for the game's entirety then yeah it really does detract. I'm not offended by fanservice, but it's trashy, and like I said you'd be hard-pressed to find a way to incorporate it without garnering a bunch of eye-rolls.

I would say it's the pinnacle of depth in plot, since there's so much goddamn plot to sift through.

Needlessly complex=/=deep. Storytelling 101.

The point is that a strong storyline and narrative aren't require in all games. Are you really going to say that the odd implementation of the Metal Gear series' plot means that it's not strong?

The story can get interesting at times, but the execution is painful. If someone doesn't want to sit through the cutscenes then I'm not going to dismiss them as philistines or some tripe like that.

It requires explaining when you're trying to say that Kasumi and Ayane are insulting to women as a whole.

Women aren't objects. If you like DoA that's fine, but it's even wilder to get defensive about it when someone suggests that this sort of crap can be very off-putting to women and that it shouldn't be the norm. Equal representation is a positive thing. :)

[Esau of Isaac]

dude, she's tiny. Peak physique to guys might be ridiculously thin women, but it looks ridiculous when she's out there kicking ass with her skinny Japanese schoolgirl legs. This isn't a statement about body types as a whole irl, because I'm all for variety-- I'm not necessarily tiny but I'm fairly skinny for my height, and thrown into any sort of action I'd get bowled over. I have a friend who lifts and who's into rugby, and some bulk comes with that physical strength. There is a certain point where girls stop "growing" like guys do when guys are actively trying to buff up, but it sure as hell ain't this.

Because it's a videogame. Everyone is presented as being thin like that, not just Lightning.

She uses magic for chrissakes.

Nobody's railing at any particular individual, but structural sexism exists and the guys and gals who deny it are a part of the problem. I'm white, I'm afforded a certain level of privilege-- it takes some nudging to recognize it, but it's there. I don't like the fact that I'm privileged over marginalized groups, and I would put in whatever amount of effort it took to take steps towards equality. Getting defensive about it seems to be a pretty common reaction, but I recognize that I'm not to blame as much as the structure that's given me this privilege is to blame.

Same applies to men and the privileges they enjoy that are denied to women. It's not like a guy wakes up one morning and says "I'm going to keep them wimminz down!", it's more like they're just unaware of their privilege.

Alright, and what would you say is a means by which to fix the situation?

I think the Wii's worth complimenting if it expands the audience. I don't really "get" the faux-elitism directed at casual games. I don't like the shovelware, but I like that Nintendo is bringing in a more diverse consumer-base.

Can't argue with that.

Needlessly complex=/=deep. Storytelling 101.

While all of the classics are needlessly complex, yeah. >__>

The story can get interesting at times, but the execution is painful. If someone doesn't want to sit through the cutscenes then I'm not going to dismiss them as philistines or some tripe like that.

But you're agreeing that the narrative is strong?

Women aren't objects. If you like DoA that's fine, but it's even wilder to get defensive about it when someone suggests that this sort of crap can be very off-putting to women and that it shouldn't be the norm. Equal representation is a positive thing.

Videogame characters are objects. I don't think it's wild to defend something when someone states it's demeaning to them just because they don't enjoy it. No one ever said anything here about equal representation, and if you found it a repulsive concept then I don't know why you'd want equal representation.

[msnoodles]

Because it's a videogame. Everyone is presented as being thin like that, not just Lightning.

I've played enough retarded jrpgs to look past their ridiculous clothes/terrible stories/bad voice acting/wacky character design, but that doesn't make it any less of a problem. It's a video game, but it's still an absolutely retarded decision.

Alright, and what would you say is a means by which to fix the situation?

A lot of people agree that members of a privileged group should start by becoming aware and learning to recognize their privilege as it crops up in day-to-day life. There's a debate on whether it's really unjust to exercise your privilege; for example, nothing's legally preventing me from marrying since I am a heterosexual, and I wouldn't consider it marginalizing homosexuals by exercising my right to marriage. But beyond supporting legislation that can better empower them, I've also become a lot more scrutinizing and critical about pretty blatant denials of privilege in day-to-day life, in politics, and particularly in the media. I'm a naturally picky person, so maybe this scrutiny befits me better, but I think it'd benefit for everyone to see this lack of representation for what it is.

Others encourage majority groups to "give up" their privilege, though I take issue with the way it's worded because I honestly don't think that entails any major loss. In my opinion, the more exposure and opposition, the better. It's pretty deeply embedded into our system, but it's a completely cultural/social construct, not a biological inevitability. Though if you wanted a simple, overnight quick-fix solution, I'm afraid I can't offer one.

While all of the classics are needlessly complex, yeah. >__>

Classical what? Classical music saw a good variety in the way of complexity-- like with Renaissance music, there's an underlying structure, but it's barely perceptible by ear. Compare it to the monophonic chants of the early 10-13th centuries. In literature? Think of the romance novels (romantic in a classical sense)-- needless to say you'd find some intricacies of character and conflict in the era that spawned the Byronic hero, but some were sprawling, awe-inspiring adventure novels, stories of revolution, fantasy, justice-- you get the idea. And then some Victorian and Russian classics might seem needlessly convoluted, be it for the writing style alone or the plots or themes, but compare these to, say, Hemingway? Simple and masculine, but palatable.

I'd apply the same to films and theater, and, though I'm not a huge opera buff, I'd say the same goes for opera too (I was gonna use the Barber of Seville as an example but just learned that the popular opera is actually a remake, OMG).

You'll probably find tons of needlessly complex classics that are downright palatable, but that isn't the rule. Classics are classics because their ability to be enjoyed transcends generations.

Can the same thing happen with video games? My question is why the hell not? Like I said, there's a whole lot you can do with an interactive medium of storytelling. It adds a new level of immersion when executed effectively, and, I don't know, it just seems like the medium has so much potential yet untapped.

But you're agreeing that the narrative is strong?

Nope. I think parts of the story are interesting, but execution is inextricably tied with the narrative.

Videogame characters are objects. I don't think it's wild to defend something when someone states it's demeaning to them just because they don't enjoy it. No one ever said anything here about equal representation, and if you found it a repulsive concept then I don't know why you'd want equal representation.

There's a difference between not enjoying something and being put off by it. There are lesbians who love boobs who would also agree that the disproportionate amount of objectification in video game characters is demeaning. I don't know where you or the other chick got that anyone's arguing specifically for the rights of video game characters-- they don't have feelings, but from a quality and sociological standpoint, marginalized groups think it'd benefit them and the business to expand their narrow perspective of what can be a leading character, cast, themes, etc.

[Esau of Isaac]

I've played enough retarded jrpgs to look past their ridiculous clothes/terrible stories/bad voice acting/wacky character design, but that doesn't make it any less of a problem. It's a video game, but it's still an absolutely retarded decision.

No it's not. Like every game does this, not just JRPGs.

A lot of people agree that members of a privileged group should start by becoming aware and learning to recognize their privilege as it crops up in day-to-day life. There's a debate on whether it's really unjust to exercise your privilege; for example, nothing's legally preventing me from marrying since I am a heterosexual, and I wouldn't consider it marginalizing homosexuals by exercising my right to marriage. But beyond supporting legislation that can better empower them, I've also become a lot more scrutinizing and critical about pretty blatant denials of privilege in day-to-day life, in politics, and particularly in the media. I'm a naturally picky person, so maybe this scrutiny befits me better, but I think it'd benefit for everyone to see this lack of representation for what it is.

Others encourage majority groups to "give up" their privilege, though I take issue with the way it's worded because I honestly don't think that entails any major loss. In my opinion, the more exposure and opposition, the better. It's pretty deeply embedded into our system, but it's a completely cultural/social construct, not a biological inevitability. Though if you wanted a simple, overnight quick-fix solution, I'm afraid I can't offer one.

As a long-term solution, what concretely would you suggest for the sitaution to improve?

Nope. I think parts of the story are interesting, but execution is inextricably tied with the narrative.

The execution is poorly-done for a video game, to some, but how does this weaken the narrative?

There's a difference between not enjoying something and being put off by it. There are lesbians who love boobs who would also agree that the disproportionate amount of objectification in video game characters is demeaning.

There are also those who would disagree.

I don't know where you or the other chick got that anyone's arguing specifically for the rights of video game characters-- they don't have feelings, but from a quality and sociological standpoint, marginalized groups think it'd benefit them and the business to expand their narrow perspective of what can be a leading character, cast, themes, etc.

I'm not saying that you're arguing for the rights of the characters, but that you're confusing the objectification of women through marginalization of a real person's personality and enjoyment of physical characteristics through an artificial construct.

[msnoodles]

No it's not. Like every game does this, not just JRPGs.

Even if literally every game in the world did this (they don't) it would still be a retarded design decision.

As a long-term solution, what concretely would you suggest for the sitaution to improve?

A call and push for more political agency for marginalized groups, i.e. more women and minority legislators, more involved with the justice system, more in executive positions. Less preferential treatment to the privileged groups-- less "I didn't hire him because he had a ghetto sounding name", less "I don't mind black people when they aren't acting black"/"where's WHITE STRAIGHT entertainment television?

That also means an entertainment media that more accurately represents the variety of people that it profits off. Basically, I think we should cast off notions of "why can't people just be happy where they are?" And no more "I'm sick and tired of hearing bitching about race/class/gender!" because it's going to continue for as long as there's a problem.

The execution is poorly-done for a video game, to some, but how does this weaken the narrative?

A story's a story. Narration is the art of expressing/processing/executing the story, and the Metal Gear series didn't do a great job with that for people who aren't cool with sitting through longass cutscenes like I am. I thought it was cool that you didn't always have a sense of who the "good guys" or the "bad guys" were-- there are elements of the story that I enjoyed, but hell, there are probably elements of a harlequin romance novel that I could cherry pick and say "this is pretty neat".

There are also those who would disagree.

But that doesn't make it any less demeaning. Even if you convinced me that these depictions aren't demeaning towards women, it wouldn't make women feel any less demeaned.

you're confusing the objectification of women through marginalization of a real person's personality and enjoyment of physical characteristics through an artificial construct.

You can like boobs without objectifying women, just fyi. You can look at boobs. Games with characters with boobs aren't necessarily objectifying women until they become a focal point, which they oftentimes do, thereby drawling the association between the female body and how it essentially exists for male consumption. Realistically, it doesn't.

[Kanami]

Society's conditioned young women to believe that the idealized male fantasy of their body is the only path to empowerment... except they're essentially attaining this by manipulating otherwise unattainable power. It's demeaning to her even if she reaps in short term gains.

How is it demeaning? Do you even know what demeaning means? In objectification sure, the man is looking at the woman as an object. That is demeaning. However if a woman voluntarily decides to manipulate her body to get what she wants, how is it degrading her character of value? The manipulation behind the act shows that their is intelligence behind the act and this isn't a case of the woman going "Look I'm an object" <_< If anything she's confident in her physical appearance and can flaunt it. Attractive appearance or an unattractive appearance, do I need to tell you which increases value more?

Before anyone says something stupid it's not "What's inside that counts" Every counts, external appearance as well. The saying is merely indicating the tier of priorities.

First off, developers objectifying the female figure and using that for marketing are at fault. Fans are always going to take even relatively nonsexual characters and put them in a sexual context, but the portrayal of women in the "culture" as a whole is reinforcing/encouraging this.

This is your opinion, citing video's and websites shows that there is support, but if the idea hasn't gotten through to game developers then chances are, there are voices against your opinion as well. Your outlook on objectification reminds me of black people

Kanami: "Reminds me of black people"

Blackie: Don't call me black, black is a racist term and is demeaning

Kanami: So what do you want to be called?

Blackie: African American

Kanami: So you're part African?

Blackie: No, how about dark skinned then?

Kanami: Dark skinned? So what's normal skinned? White?

Blackie: No, but it's insulting being called black because it's negative.

Kanami: And you're calling other people racists <_<

Here are a bunch of nonexistent feminists and minorities who share a variety of concerns on these kinds of issues. You could check it out or you can continue to deny that this isn't an issue for marginalized groups.

I'd be interested in knowing how many of them are actually gamers, but more importantly how many people make up the "feminist" minority. From my perspective (Developed world) feminists stopped fighting for equal rights ages ago. And are moving well into "extra rights." And it's people like you who like playing victim which encourages such behavior.

You said earlier that you knew the value of a discussion after seeing the response to the word "feminism." I can do that too. Anyone who claims to be a feminist is as credible as a Christian saying "cause the bible said so" probably even less because they don't have such a text. But feminists are not qualified individuals, it's not the same as a professor commenting on his area of study.

Next, women not are not a marginalized group, I've pointed out asians before. But claiming women to be marginalized is ridiculous. You yourself originally seem to know this as the topic is "Portrayal of women and marginalized groups." That cite doesn't cite sources, and isn't any different from the rantings of you or myself. Are you honestly just pulling non-creditable sources from the internet? If you want to throw each other at opinions which can't be backed up, and are resorting to numbers your argument is rather flawed.

Yes, it's objectification. You can argue its place as a major tenet of game design, but there's no grounds to argue that it isn't objectification.

Frankly I find it stupid when someone buys a game just for "jiggletits" however it's equally stupid when someone doesn't buy a game solely because it has jiggletits. You can cite as many minor extremists as you want. Looking at the entire gaming populace though, I don't see any cries of outrage over the minorities. Hell I remember a blog a few months back which was complaining FF13 didn't have an original plot. Doesn't mean it's true just because a few websites can link.

As for objectification? Why must there only be unacceptable objectification? It a game character for crying out loud. Why should it be insulting? It's not implying all women are like that or anything <_<

I haven't. Unless by "relative" you mean "the majority of stories in games are shit so these stories are slightly less shitty". Examples, please?

Okay, your logic is extremely immature. You wouldn't happen to be the 12 year old mexican girl would you? With what you're saying a movie with a sex scene in it becomes "shitty" because it had a sex scene in it. Why does that one scene null out all the other scenes which may have been well written and acted out extremely well? What are you? Scared of sex?

As for examples games aren't exactly the best medium for writing. So if you're looking at games and wondering why it's not as good as you average novel, it's probably because of the visual concept and "gameply" which opt to put you in the characters shoes, opposed to just telling you about it.

I can't give you as many examples as I'd like since I don't think about minorities and objectification while playing games. I prefer to just enjoy them. Opposed to looking for issues which I could possibly find offending. Furthermore I don't "own" many west produced games, However while it's not a game produced in the west. I'm a major fan of Visual Art's/Key. Which makes game in the eroge sub-industry of gaming. Yes they have panty shots, bathing scenes and even sex scenes! *le gaps* However I have a serious bone to pick to with you if you're going to say that their narrative/plot isn't well done.

When it's obviously forced fanservice, e.g. unnecessarily forced panty shots, stripping down, male gaze, etc, it detracts. People are comfortable with cheesy lines, terribly overused tropes, tired stereotypes, cliches-- when there's no bit of self-awareness applied to them, it's poor writing. Fanservice falls under that umbrella. I like certain cliches concerning jrpg heroes, but I concede it to be terrible writing, and I can see why people would want to do away with it.

.... So one scene of forced fanservice makes the entire story "shitty?" (Discussed above) And this isn't any different from your racial representation argument really. Developers aren't leaning towards making a black protagonist. So why should they go out of their way to conceptualize a black protagonist? This is what I mean by "forced."

Wait, people are comfortable with cheesy lines, overused tropes, tired stereotypes.... yet you're complaining that stereotypes are insulting and unoriginality is boring? Sorry what?

You keep speaking of "people" but the "people" you seem to be referring to, and the "people" I know seem to be completely at odds with eachother.

A call and push for more political agency for marginalized groups, i.e. more women and minority legislators, more involved with the justice system, more in executive positions. Less preferential treatment to the privileged groups-- less "I didn't hire him because he had a ghetto sounding name", less "I don't mind black people when they aren't acting black"/"where's WHITE STRAIGHT entertainment television?

WTF are you talking about? How does this change anything in the gaming industry?

Edited October 16, 2010 by Kanami

[msnoodles]

The manipulation behind the act shows that their is intelligence behind the act and this isn't a case of the woman going "Look I'm an object"

When a woman uses her body as a means to an end, she's pretty much trying to appease the people in power for a scrap of it.

This is your opinion, citing video's and websites shows that there is support, but if the idea hasn't gotten through to game developers then chances are, there are voices against your opinion as well. Your outlook on objectification reminds me of black peopleKanami: "Reminds me of black people"

Blackie: Don't call me black, black is a racist term and is demeaning

First off, it has gotten through to developers and there are good examples of how games should handle these issues.

Secondly, "Blackie"? Really? How many black people do you actually talk to?

And fyi "black" is socially acceptable; so is African American, because African Americans are part African in that they're genetically of African extent.

I'd be interested in knowing how many of them are actually gamers,

See, it's alienating to people when they come out and say "yeah, I'm a feminist/gay/intersexed, what have you" and you question whether they're actually gamers. Yes, games are capable of being universally enjoyed.

But claiming women to be marginalized is ridiculous. You yourself originally seem to know this as the topic is "Portrayal of women and marginalized groups." That cite doesn't cite sources, and isn't any different from the rantings of you or myself. Are you honestly just pulling non-creditable sources from the internet? If you want to throw each other at opinions which can't be backed up, and are resorting to numbers your argument is rather flawed.

Peggy McIntosh is actually pretty creditable, I'm sorry to say. She's a feminist and a "professor commenting on her area of study".

Looking at the entire gaming populace though, I don't see any cries of outrage over the minorities. Hell I remember a blog a few months back which was complaining FF13 didn't have an original plot. Doesn't mean it's true just because a few websites can link.

Lol the story for FF13 was pretty terrible so it's great that you used this as an example. Uh, your whole "Blackie" crap a few sentences back leads me to believe you're not really exposed to enough minorities to witness an existing outcry, so I'm honestly not that surprised.

With what you're saying a movie with a sex scene in it becomes "shitty" because it had a sex scene in it. Why does that one scene null out all the other scenes which may have been well written and acted out extremely well? What are you? Scared of sex?

Sex scenes in movies usually serve a more emotional purpose as well as to sexually appeal to the audience. They're associating with the characters, not the tits and dicks as objects. Sexuality isn't bad, but objectification is problematic.

As for examples games aren't exactly the best medium for writing. So if you're looking at games and wondering why it's not as good as you average novel, it's probably because of the visual concept and "gameply" which opt to put you in the characters shoes, opposed to just telling you about it.

If games aren't a medium for writing, then why are there writers for games? Books "put you in the character's shoes" too; there are several differences between the mediums, but that's a laughably simplistic way to look at it.

However I have a serious bone to pick to with you if you're going to say that their narrative/plot isn't well done.

I googled the company and had only ever heard of Air and Clannad, and not that extensively. Both look like your generic anime fodder. Though hey, the guy who made Higurashi was influenced by them! Not that I'd argue that Higurashi is particularly exemplary of a great story, as cool as it is.

And this isn't any different from your racial representation argument really. Developers aren't leaning towards making a black protagonist. So why should they go out of their way to conceptualize a black protagonist? This is what I mean by "forced."

Wait, people are comfortable with cheesy lines, overused tropes, tired stereotypes.... yet you're complaining that stereotypes are insulting and unoriginality is boring? Sorry what?

Not all developers are racist, and black protagonists exist, and I've never seen people complain about the "shoehorned ethnic protagonists" for these, at least.

Yes, the more storytellers fall back on the same tropes, the more tired they get. If you're fine with bad writing then that's your prerogative-- other people are comfortable with it too. At the same time, people are also going to call some of your beloved games exemplary of shitty writing. Hell, there are lots of games I love with shitty writing, and it doesn't hurt me to admit it.

WTF are you talking about? How does this change anything in the gaming industry?

Keep up. I was answering his question in reference to two articles I posted.

[Kanami]

When a woman uses her body as a means to an end, she's pretty much trying to appease the people in power for a scrap of it.

That's pretty narrowminded of you, this is essentially saying if a woman and mans relationship result in sex.

First off, it has gotten through to developers and there are good examples of how games should handle these issues.

Some developers, some disagree and have left the whole issue untouched. And I don't see any difference is sales when comparing those that have, and those that haven't. Either way it doesn't warrant complaint. It's more a preference then anything else.

Secondly, "Blackie"? Really? How many black people do you actually talk to?

I'm not going to list the names of real people :/

And fyi "black" is socially acceptable; so is African American, because African Americans are part African in that they're genetically of African extent.

It's not socially acceptable to some? So white Americans would be what? Italian American? British American? Actually lets white Americans Europeans instead! <_<

See, it's alienating to people when they come out and say "yeah, I'm a feminist/gay/intersexed, what have you" and you question whether they're actually gamers. Yes, games are capable of being universally enjoyed.

It's irrelevant that what minority they belong to. The fact is, feminism and games are two separate (linked but separate) issues. Feminism deals with living human people. Games are not living or human.

Peggy McIntosh is actually pretty creditable, I'm sorry to say. She's a feminist and a "professor commenting on her area of study".

And I she also doesn't seem to be making any comments to support your claims.... so?

Lol the story for FF13 was pretty terrible so it's great that you used this as an example. Uh, your whole "Blackie" crap a few sentences back leads me to believe you're not really exposed to enough minorities to witness an existing outcry, so I'm honestly not that surprised.

Nitpicking again huh, can you actually address the question instead of acting high and mighty? The question did not relate to the quality of the story either.

Sex scenes in movies usually serve a more emotional purpose as well as to sexually appeal to the audience. They're associating with the characters, not the tits and dicks as objects. Sexuality isn't bad, but objectification is problematic.

Sex in games can serve an emotional purpose as well? Why does sex need to be connected to "tits and dicks"?

If games aren't a medium for writing, then why are there writers for games? Books "put you in the character's shoes" too; there are several differences between the mediums, but that's a laughably simplistic way to look at it.

Laughably simplistic from you is ironic, even in that comment writers for games=equal medium? You're joking right? ... probably not. In a novel the writer has absolute control of all elements. Whereas in games the player is often expected to control the character. The mere fact that interactivity and graphics come into the picture should be enough indication that games aren't solely about "writing"

I googled the company and had only ever heard of Air and Clannad, and not that extensively. Both look like your generic anime fodder. Though hey, the guy who made Higurashi was influenced by them! Not that I'd argue that Higurashi is particularly exemplary of a great story, as cool as it is.

Wow, a quick search on google and you figured out that much? You must be the omnipotent messiah! Honestly this is the equivalent to your attitude of "skimpy clothing = poor writing" so it didn't surprise me. What's your definition of a great story then?

Not all developers are racist, and black protagonists exist, and I've never seen people complain about the "shoehorned ethnic protagonists" for these, at least.

There no need to exclude them, but there's no need for a push for equal representation either? Do you just like ignoring the points made or are you genuinely that stupid?

Yes, the more storytellers fall back on the same tropes, the more tired they get. If you're fine with bad writing then that's your prerogative-- other people are comfortable with it too. At the same time, people are also going to call some of your beloved games exemplary of shitty writing. Hell, there are lots of games I love with shitty writing, and it doesn't hurt me to admit it.

As said previously, your definition of "bad writing" seems to be equivalent to the plot having one factor you don't like. Hence you citing "bad/poor writing" means nothing to me. Tropes can be used effectively, and doesn't need to be repetitive. I guarantee that any idea you come up with in writing, can nearly always always attributed as a similar/same situation as past works.

Keep up. I was answering his question in reference to two articles I posted.

Your articles which aren't related to gaming at all? Honestly, you seem to be one of those poor people who can't distinuish between games and reality. Doesn't surprise me since you're looking for political messages and what could be potentially offending in your games.

Overall I've just concluded that you're an extremist who likes wailing about being victimized, and your last few posts have been.... less then amusing. I'm not sorry to say that this discussion has lost my interest, so this will most likely be my last post in this thread until someone else presents an interesting view.

Edited October 16, 2010 by Kanami