-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Why women criticise sexualised character designs (READ OP)
- Thread starter Persephone
- Start date
- Status
Well, technically she has something to say, but it really does not go beyond a simple "I can dress however I want". And so we enter the usual discussion about the agency of a virtual character, and so on and so forth...
Anyway, what you say could be true, but it's also true that we don't know if Ves was written like that in the first place and the artists just did what was expected of them.
Yeah, this is one of those cases where a talk with those directly responsible would easily dissipate any doubt, too bad it's not that simple to do that.
Was this remark necessary to make whatever point you were hoping to convey?
This screams overgeneralization, dude. Most feminists are totally nice, I swear.
I want to come back and address this for a second, because I think it warrants discussion.
I see where you're coming from, but I think you're mistaken in a lot of ways. Sure, there are women who post the sexy pictures for male attention, but others just want to look and feel good. A woman's identity is not based upon her inherent sexiness, or lack thereof. The people who post the pictures obviously want to be noticed, and there's nothing wrong with that. Same goes for the men who post shirtless muscle pictures, if you want to go down that road. It's normal for both genders to want their bodies to be appreciated, but in a respectful, non-derogatory way.
The difference between those pictures and media objectification of women is the choice. Women in real life choose to post those pictures, whereas shoehorning an objectified character into a video game for the pleasure of men is not. It's a choice that the dev themselves make, and not a choice that the female consumer base makes. We have no say in the matter, just as you have no say with the inclusion of Buff Shirtless Dude #386.
There is also a choice made in how a female character is presented, which is often drastically different from her male counterparts. It's been said time and time again: women are typically sexualized for male consumption. Men are sexualized as an assertion of power and dominance. We could also go down the rabbit hole of "women on Instagram and real life are also pressured into being sex figures for men", but I really don't want to get into that because I'm tired and my lunch is getting soggy.
Oh, when you quote it like that, it seems a little out of context. I'm from the UK, and we have something called banter. I suppose Anericans, etc cannot tell or "feel" it.
Damn. Over here we can basically rip someone apart just as a little jest, and it would be done back unto us. I forget sometimes Anericans are a bit more sensitive for some reason. I'll try to refrain from inadvertently upsetting you.
I'll edit my original post.
Okay, dude. I don't doubt it. Just like some meninist and cult groups have nice people. No, I'm joking. Damn, I wish banter was universal.
On a serious note; I have had bad experiences in the past. Don't feel comfortable saying it here, but don't mind PMing. So I have only ever seen feminist and meninist in a negative light.
Being in this forum has really shown that there are, indeed, "good" feminist out there.
Sorry again for my Brit humour/banter. I'll refrain from it here.
Edit: Changed my original post slightly. I was thinking my post was quite positive towards OP.
I don't really see how basically saying "most feminists are icky and evil, but not you, so good job" is a take on humor.
I'm British. You were generalising and this post about Americans really isn't any better. Going into a thread about female character design and leading with 'those crazy feminists!' wasn't very clever. Why not just apologise and move on without putting it down to others misinterpreting your 'banter'.
Last edited:
Okay, I re-read by post, and it's definitly a generalisation.
I am sorry about that. It has happened to me in the past too, so I know how it feels. Like I said in another response - this forum has shown me there are good feminist, I was just surrounded by bad ones before here.
Edit: after saying my original post, I actually feel bad for starting it with that. I was in an abusive relationship which put me off woman 10 years ago. I thought it was normal to be abused and all woman were like it, until I met my wife.
What's that got to do with this? Well, guess I'm bad at generalising sometimes because the past can skew your decisions. Thankfully, the current and future can change.
Last edited:
It's oke, Generalize a bit more. I know women that want to be Quiet and men that don't want to be snake.
You might know some women, sure, but that's not really the reason she exists. Now yo7 might say "Kojima created Quiet because he knew women would want to cosplay as her." No, Kojima wanted to see women cosplay her. It was all self indulgence on Kojima's part.
When questions of representation come up, we can always remember these recent statistics from Quantic Foundry:
Across "Casual / Hardcore / Core" divide
aka men seems to have a general problem empathizing and understanding situations different from themselves
https://quanticfoundry.com/2017/08/29/just-important-female-protagonists/
Across "Casual / Hardcore / Core" divide
aka men seems to have a general problem empathizing and understanding situations different from themselves
https://quanticfoundry.com/2017/08/29/just-important-female-protagonists/
Last edited:
Criticism is a form of censorship, and so what? We're not talking about government censorship. There are many things we, as a society, have decided to generally not do in our various forms of media. I think avoiding harmful depictions of women is a good addition to that list.
And more generally, to address some of the arguments I've seen here, remember there are two issues here. One is the issue of women not feeling comfortable playing games with overly sexualized women in them. If that were the whole of it, there might be some argument for "why not just play something else." But the second is the issue that it's reinforcing harmful stereotypes, not to mention inspiring future game designers. And that effect holds even if no woman ever plays another one of these games. So yeah, I'm willing to say that I'm all for pressuring game makers not to do that anymore. And I'm willing to say that's censorship.
Much like any criticism of depictions of people in games, any one specific creative can depict their characters how they like, but when a visable trend across multiple popular franchises occurs (combat lingerie, female characters having skimpier outfits than male ones with the same job), that trend has a far greater impact on the audience than the sum of its parts. Games aren't toys any more, it's a huge media industry, and as such should be used to criticism.
For example, there is no requirement for any individual cop show to have non-white characters that aren't stereotypes. You can write a good cop show about two white detectives in a small town with a mainly white population, that's cool. But if, say, virtually every cop show is two white guys with women only ever shown as prostitutes and non-white chaps as gang members, then you'd say the industry should perhaps be open to criticism rather than just defending the right of individual creatives to make what they want. Of course they should make what they want, but when everyone wants to make the same stuff or often depict women in a certain way, that can be a reasonable status quo for us to critique and the industry to perhaps discuss and address. Hence why cop shows now tend to have diverse casts.
Last edited:
That has absolutely nothing to do with the intent behind their design.
Developers need to do much better with their characters in general, across the board, and they can definitely start with nixing these weird teenage boy fantasies in the bud.
Great post, most will forget this though. This happens on both sides as attraction and generally anything sexual sells due to us being humans.
You could switch it around, fully armored females and males with almost no armor and I wouldn't complain and play it if the game is good.
Have I brought games purely because of female characters? Yes of course, due to a lot of different reasons. Horizon Zero Dawn and Senran Kagura are on the same level for me depending on what mood I am in.
I can also fully ignore fanservice and remove if from gameplay and story of a game.
I can be out of place sometimes but then I simply ignore it or move on. Same goes for games that have a lot of fanservice, if I am not in the mood then I simply ignore it and focus on different things in the game.
Sex always sells, prostitution is the oldest work there is for a reason. Sex is a basic instinct and therefore always sells. The degree may be different from game to game, but it always sells, period!
Pretty much this, make it 50% and everybody is happy. I don't interfere with your male fanservice and you don't interfere with my female fanservice.
Sorry if some of this got addressed, I didn't read 30 pages. =x
nah. it's a terrible post. it was a whole lot of words that say something very obvious without adding to the conversation while obfuscating this person's complete inability to understand what is actually being discussed. it's bait designed to get people to quote it saying "great post".
people are horny. great insight. it's not an excuse for anything and exactly the kind of bullshit deflection we are constantly fighting against in these threads.
No, really this whole sex sells thing is reductive and simplistic and "men creating what they like" doesn't begin to cover all of the issues that feed into this but I've already addressed this and don't particularly feel like repeating it. It's a good start and includes data but if all this was as simple as "men like looking at tiddies!" it would be easier to solve. It's not easy to solve.
I feel this point is overblown. Yes we are """sexual creatures""" but no one has ever died because they didn't get laid (don't joke, I get it haha 'don't use it you lose it' w/e, you still WILL NOT DIE because your bones weren't shook).
If anything the effect of a constantly reinforcing culture are, if anything, overlooked.
I feel a part of the issue of sexy women in games is less "but men liked to look, we're built that way" is way easier explained because the culture at large enforces and constantly reinforces sexual/pleasurable imagery --- especially with women because we constantly enforce the idea sex sells. We are so used to sexual stimulation at this point and the internet and media we have make it easier than ever to be exposed to it (and we are).
Chicken or the egg, basically; does art imitate life or life imitate art (or very likely both; but media can much more easily 'blow up' that message).
Also prostitution might be old work, but i highly doubt it was the ideal work women who get into that work really want to do (we just know men are willing to pay stupid amount for it, which helps a disenfranchised woman).
Last edited:
And honestly I'm totally fine with fan service games out there. There are games that definitely skew to a male audience (senran kagura, onechanbara, DoA), but it's when this shit seeps sooooo often to "mainstream" games it gets annoying, as well as the defenders of the "sacred art" of showing off giant tittied woman and upskirt camera views for the amount of females arbitrarily dressed in miniskirts or tight bubblegum butt spandex
I agree! I have no problems whatsoever with fanservice games. But exactly as you said, fanservice becoming the norm is not something I want, personally. The should be room for games that aim for classier designs, you shouldn't have to be forced to abandon a genre.
Yeah, I think my biggest issue is not even character design (although trust me, some of the costuming leaves a LOT to be desired), but mainly the "camera" or "gaze" of what it does to the female characters. All the low, lingering shots... that's, to me, where it becomes painfully obvious that the assumption is that the player is male. It's coded into it, right there, that this is where we'd want our eyes to linger, to take in, to ogle. And that sucks. A woman is being implicitly told that this game wasn't made for her.
Even if a male character is designed to be this buff, half-naked beefcake (which I would argue also isn't for the female gaze either, but everyone has different tastes), the camera rarely will zoom and linger on their ass, their crotch, etc.
Even if a male character is designed to be this buff, half-naked beefcake (which I would argue also isn't for the female gaze either, but everyone has different tastes), the camera rarely will zoom and linger on their ass, their crotch, etc.
I don't understand the romance novel comparisons. You're comparing an entire medium (video games) to a genre (romance) in a medium (the novel) with far, far more diversity. Call me when the majority of the fiction you find in a library - not just one section - either doesn't include a representative sample of male protagonists/characters and hypersexualizes them when they do include them.
In my opinion if they keep it even I am okay with it. It is fictional work after all and therefore should be free. I will always be for good, strong female characters in all genres and situations.
Art imitates life and life imitates Art to some degree, still, as sentient creates we can differentiate between both of these. That is the reason why I will always stand on the side of creative and artistic freedom. If you want to make some depraved stuff in fictional content I have nothing against it.
I can agree that sometimes the sexual imagery in media is too much and we should take a more layered approach that promotes different stages of sexual imagery. A simple naked body can be sexual but also can be totally normal for example.
Probably doesn't help that humanity always has been a patriarch society due to how biology structured the two genders. If we can level it down to an even level I am totally for it. Totally swinging into the other direction would be bad in my opinion, a female dominated society is as bad as the male one we currently have. I am however positive in that it will change over time to a more even state as gender lines loose their pronunciation and the spectrum of what both or rather all genders encompasses changes.
Of course not all women did it because they wanted to or liked it, the same as it is today. They did it because it made money and let them survive. Doesn't change the fact that sex always sells as long as the general public is not able to discern the difference between various stages of "sexual content" or content in general. You see this a lot in analyzing the story of a game, the art, the game mechanics, etc. . Most only look from one side and never notice the other because it takes mental effort to do so. I think I can make the conscious effort to buy a game because of fanservice while at the same time I can not do it as well.
In the end, make a game with female fanservice how they like it. I would play it if the game is good or I am generally interested and would just ignore the fanservice.
The only problem is that those games wouldn't sell as much and companies would stop down this path fast. =/
Probably doesn't help that men seem to be more focused on visual attraction while women value protection, parent ability and financials more due to instincts of protecting their children.
I may be wrong but I never red about a woman saying "The way he dressed forced me to rape him", only men seem to use sentence.
Yes, I was discussing this with someone else yesterday. We definitely need a re-usable bullet point of all the bad arguments to avoid. The most tiresome ones to repeat, IMO, would be those:
- No, it's not just "fringe feminists" or "American/puritanical prudes" that care about that (aka "it's manufactured outrage");
- Yes, devs are ALLOWED to do what they want, criticism isn't censorship or censorship advocacy;
- Criticism of a product isn't a judgment on people who enjoy the product;
- "I enjoy T&A, I love my fanservice, so I don't care" -- good for you, now go away, this thread isn't about you;
- "My <insert female SO> enjoys it" -- yeah well my boyfriend thinks you're wrong so THERE;
- "Sex sells" is a reductive, dismissive and overly simplified way of looking at things, just coming in the thread to declare that "sex sells" or "men love tits" is not helpful.
- Sex != sexism. Sexual content isn't inherently the problem: sexist content is, and is what is being criticized.
*cringe* You apologize for making generalizations, then you generalize Americans and British people; you refer to your inane generalizations as "banter" or "humour" (no one's laughing, so take the hint), and then you somehow make this all about you. Please stop derailing discussions like that in the future. It's OK to not post. Sometimes, it's better to not post.
Coming in a 30 page thread to say something that's been addressed countless times is obnoxious. I hope you realize that. Read the thread if you're interested in finding out, or leave if you aren't.
Right. It's like the "what about yaoi/otome visual novels, huh?" argument. Comparing specific niches vs comparing mainstream. If the objectification of women were limited to Vita titty games, hardly anyone would care.
Woof. I don't even know where to start, or if it's worth the effort in the first place.
Yup. This shit right here makes me quit games. Talk about being ripped out of any sort of immersion. "Here's the part where you stare at the hot lady"
This is such a good post. And to take it even further, it brushes uncomfortably close to the idea that men don't have any self control, etc., and I doubt anyone wants to forward that kind of damaging, toxic discourse. We do have control. We do understand that there are times for fan service and times for not. We can make decisions about how to do things in certain ways, and when, particularly when dealing with artforms, and even when these artforms are group efforts.
Especially when it's something like the Quiet torture scene in MGSV, which spends an inordinate amount of time focusing on her breasts... while she's being tortured.
That's fun.
I... don't want an over sexualized female character and I am anything but a prude. I just would rather see cool looking armor on a female character rather than a dress with boobs popping out such as Jessica from DQVIII. Thankfully she had great whip skills. At least Martina left a little more to the imagination in XI.
You can send me a PM if you want to further discuss it and it turns Off-topic. If I said anything wrong or you don't agree you can argue with me and I am open to change my mind. =)
Maybe something was misunderstood as I am not a native English speaker.
I'm just tired and a lot of those arguments have been addressed numerous times in this thread.
Not trying to be a bitch, but I would strongly advise you read the thread or at least the last few pages or so to get an idea where we're coming from.
Yeah, that's better than my list.
I think someone upthread said it was 'recreational outrage' which was pretty dismissive too. Presumably it's what those accused of 'manufactured outrage' do when they've clocked off the production line of making 'crazy fem' posts for the day and have their feet up in front of the telly. Why, I've been known to sit in my favourite armchair in the local, relaxing while composing just the right piece of 'recreational outrage' after work, it goes well with a quiet pint in one hand and an outragey post on my phone in the other. I've been told to give them up but 40 a day is a habit that's hard to break.
Last edited:
I don't mind if you or anyone else wants to say it's not a good post, but inferring my posts are "designed bait" is a bit childish. I took the time to write goodness knows how many words covering my thoughts in here, which you might completely disagree with, but these kind of sarcastic quips are hardly going to do anything useful or contribute anything better than my terrible posts.
Sorry if it offended you and it has been addressed. As you correctly assumed I haven't read all 30 pages as I haven't been on Reset for a while. Therefore I am sorry if I said things that were mentioned and corrected before.
No need for apologies, I wasn't offended. It's just tiring, man.
Whether it's a critique of his creative prowess or what consequences this content when aggregated to all other examples in all media has on a society it's all open for discussion. Simply saying "That's what he wanted" doesn't invalidate all criticism.
I have to agree with the OP.
I am finding that the more I play games, the less tolerance I have for overly - sexualized designs. I could understand the position if that extended to both sexes equally, but when it doesn't, then I don't feel the developers have made their case. I do realise that there is an inherent part of our nature that we desire certain things more than others, and that could be the same for both sexes or different. Does that mean that service providers should exploit or pander to those desires as they deem fit? My opinion is that they should not.
In life, we generally, consider out actions and their consequences. Is it beneficial for me, for others? Is it right, is wrong? Is there really a need to do it?
Is it beneficial?
For the developers behind this objectification, yes. At its most basic, they feel this will appeal to the sexually tuned demographic, usually male, and this will hopefully lead to maximised sales, and profit. That's a conceived benefit. Is there a basis? According to this http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2649-sex-sells-more.html from back in 2012, it does. But also it suggests that it takes more explicitness to grab our attention and arouse us. So where do we stand in 2017? And at what point do you draw the line, and say this much and no more? If that statement is true, that we have become inured to such designs and imagery, then reasonably such an approach will eventually be ineffective. The only logical path for continuing in that direction will be to become more explicit, otherwise what's the point?
I'll answer that question. If we exclude the above reasoning, then the point is that designers wanted it due to their predilections. The same consumers who profess to 'love the boob' are of the same mind-set as those producing it, in some, if not most cases. The more explicit, if not outright porn, anime are examples of this. It follows through in other entertainment media, from comics to film. Thus the salacious desire of the consumer is transferred when they become the creator. Then it's not primarily about business, but fulfilling their desires foremost, with the expectation of finding a like minded audience, second.
This reminds me of Gwynevere in Dark Souls. If I recall the interview correctly, her design was initiated by the designer to whom Miyazaki capitulated. To me she stood out in a game filled with the beautifully grotesque. For arguments sake, assume you agree with the following: is she beautiful? Yes. Is she grotesque? Yes. Grotesque in that she is huge in stature and more so her breasts which practically drape on the bed. However, she stands out in the game because there is no deeper meaning to the nature of her grotesqueness. She just has large breasts. No different than a female character that is sexualized in any other game. It's telling that in a later interview, Miyazaki showed doubt about that decision.
To use the already mentioned 'go to' examples of Quiet and Cindy's, characters that are clearly sexualized. Quiet's sexualization is front and center. Her outfit is skimpy, emphasising her body, her scenes in the game are designed to be titillating. The camera manipulates your attention, on occasion taking control and forcing you to be part of that sexualization. With Cindy her breasts are prominent to her design, the red bra actively drawing your attention before your gaze moves to the rest of her design. Both are separate games, both share the same philosophy: the objectification of women by accenting parts of their body and the display of their flesh. I don't believe in MGS V there's a male equivalent comparable to Quiet. Neither do I believe the same is true for FFV. There is no male that has their penis accentuated in a similar fashion.
Is it right?
I believe not. At the stage the work is private, you only have to answer to yourself (assuming the content is not illegal). The moment you offer it to the public for consumption, then you assume the responsibility for your work, its impact, and it's discussion. Are you perpetuating a cycle that has a negative affect on the female population of society? Does your work add anything constructive to it? By that I don't mean the discussion we are having right now, but does your work present an objectified female character and then address that issue in a meaningful way in the work? No? Then you've failed, in my opinion.
There are arguments that this is just fun, and harmless, that people are just being prudish. I think that's being dismissive. Men, mostly, are hot wired to appreciate the female form. That doesn't mean that that desire should be pandered to. As mentioned before, once that desire is met, they'll need to go further to get the same effect, otherwise it will be more of the same.
Is there really a need to do it?
Only if your pandering to your own desires and those of your audience. Then at least be honest for why you're doing it and your intent. If you're saying Quiet is a strong character And her sexualization is part of her character, then you better address that in your game. If you can't, you've failed. The other approach is to include it in your game If you're attempting to use it as a theme in your work, where you are actively examining the subject. Moving the conversation forward.
In conclusion, for every Horizon and Aloy, there are multitudes that are happy to continue objectifiying women. Given the history of women in society, I think self-reflection and being responsible is more beneficial than continuing to perpetrate the same old denigration in the name of fun and self-gratification. This is just from the top of my head, so I expect my opinion might not be fully fleshed out, but I look forward to any examination of it.
I am finding that the more I play games, the less tolerance I have for overly - sexualized designs. I could understand the position if that extended to both sexes equally, but when it doesn't, then I don't feel the developers have made their case. I do realise that there is an inherent part of our nature that we desire certain things more than others, and that could be the same for both sexes or different. Does that mean that service providers should exploit or pander to those desires as they deem fit? My opinion is that they should not.
In life, we generally, consider out actions and their consequences. Is it beneficial for me, for others? Is it right, is wrong? Is there really a need to do it?
Is it beneficial?
For the developers behind this objectification, yes. At its most basic, they feel this will appeal to the sexually tuned demographic, usually male, and this will hopefully lead to maximised sales, and profit. That's a conceived benefit. Is there a basis? According to this http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2649-sex-sells-more.html from back in 2012, it does. But also it suggests that it takes more explicitness to grab our attention and arouse us. So where do we stand in 2017? And at what point do you draw the line, and say this much and no more? If that statement is true, that we have become inured to such designs and imagery, then reasonably such an approach will eventually be ineffective. The only logical path for continuing in that direction will be to become more explicit, otherwise what's the point?
I'll answer that question. If we exclude the above reasoning, then the point is that designers wanted it due to their predilections. The same consumers who profess to 'love the boob' are of the same mind-set as those producing it, in some, if not most cases. The more explicit, if not outright porn, anime are examples of this. It follows through in other entertainment media, from comics to film. Thus the salacious desire of the consumer is transferred when they become the creator. Then it's not primarily about business, but fulfilling their desires foremost, with the expectation of finding a like minded audience, second.
This reminds me of Gwynevere in Dark Souls. If I recall the interview correctly, her design was initiated by the designer to whom Miyazaki capitulated. To me she stood out in a game filled with the beautifully grotesque. For arguments sake, assume you agree with the following: is she beautiful? Yes. Is she grotesque? Yes. Grotesque in that she is huge in stature and more so her breasts which practically drape on the bed. However, she stands out in the game because there is no deeper meaning to the nature of her grotesqueness. She just has large breasts. No different than a female character that is sexualized in any other game. It's telling that in a later interview, Miyazaki showed doubt about that decision.
To use the already mentioned 'go to' examples of Quiet and Cindy's, characters that are clearly sexualized. Quiet's sexualization is front and center. Her outfit is skimpy, emphasising her body, her scenes in the game are designed to be titillating. The camera manipulates your attention, on occasion taking control and forcing you to be part of that sexualization. With Cindy her breasts are prominent to her design, the red bra actively drawing your attention before your gaze moves to the rest of her design. Both are separate games, both share the same philosophy: the objectification of women by accenting parts of their body and the display of their flesh. I don't believe in MGS V there's a male equivalent comparable to Quiet. Neither do I believe the same is true for FFV. There is no male that has their penis accentuated in a similar fashion.
Is it right?
I believe not. At the stage the work is private, you only have to answer to yourself (assuming the content is not illegal). The moment you offer it to the public for consumption, then you assume the responsibility for your work, its impact, and it's discussion. Are you perpetuating a cycle that has a negative affect on the female population of society? Does your work add anything constructive to it? By that I don't mean the discussion we are having right now, but does your work present an objectified female character and then address that issue in a meaningful way in the work? No? Then you've failed, in my opinion.
There are arguments that this is just fun, and harmless, that people are just being prudish. I think that's being dismissive. Men, mostly, are hot wired to appreciate the female form. That doesn't mean that that desire should be pandered to. As mentioned before, once that desire is met, they'll need to go further to get the same effect, otherwise it will be more of the same.
Is there really a need to do it?
Only if your pandering to your own desires and those of your audience. Then at least be honest for why you're doing it and your intent. If you're saying Quiet is a strong character And her sexualization is part of her character, then you better address that in your game. If you can't, you've failed. The other approach is to include it in your game If you're attempting to use it as a theme in your work, where you are actively examining the subject. Moving the conversation forward.
In conclusion, for every Horizon and Aloy, there are multitudes that are happy to continue objectifiying women. Given the history of women in society, I think self-reflection and being responsible is more beneficial than continuing to perpetrate the same old denigration in the name of fun and self-gratification. This is just from the top of my head, so I expect my opinion might not be fully fleshed out, but I look forward to any examination of it.
I see no troublle with portraying an attractive character, both male and female. Because in real life if thet are attractive maybe they want to dress that way. But there is a clear difference between this and sexualization. A lot of japanese games over sexualize, but there are anime/japanese games that have attractive characters without all the sexualizations. Unfortunately a lot of media is targeted to beta males like this in japan because it sells.
I really didn't want to go down the hole in this thread, but i can't understand your stance of it's ok if women choose to do it, but not ok if a fictional character chooses to do it? really makes no sense.
The whole thread really boils down to i don't like "X" and it's irrelevant what X is. living in a free associate means you can not like stuff, you can choose to complain about it, not support , protest it, etc but pushing other people to say they shouldn't like it or trying to make other people see why it's so offensive, is pretty much the same as pushing anything on others. You can voice your opinion protest games, not buy them etc it's your right, but in the same sense you can't argue devs shouldn't have the right to make their characters how they see fit because then it goes into social pressure oppressing other people's freedoms which isn't right
no one is pushing other people to say they should or should not like whatever
devs can and will still make whatever they please
some women are saying we find a few issues with a thing. that we have criticism of how women are widely sexualized in mainstream gaming. THIS IS NOT "pretty much the same as pushing anything on others".
say, a person go and see a superhero movie. then they say, this movie suks. this is CRITICISM. it is NOT censorship.
howwwwwwwwwww haaaaardddd is itttttt geeeeeezus
If it means a future where a game like Street Fighter V wouldn't exist as it is today(with characters like Laura / RMika etc) that's a future I want no part of in gaming
I respect your opinion and I do hope we see greater diversity in characters, but not at a loss of the ones some of us like
Apparently super duper hard. As hard as reading apparently
Also when a woman does it it's a woman's choice
When a woman in a game does it it's a dev's choice
Like what
You're gonna tell me sexy pixels have agency now
How in god's name does an inanimate, fictional character choose to be designed a specific way?
Also, please tell the class where anyone in this thread pushed their evil feminist agenda on you. We're having a debate and discussion. You can have whatever opinion you want. But by participating in the thread, you are therefore subjecting your views to criticism and analysis. No one is telling you to change your view if you don't want to. Jesus fucking Christ.
- Status