Blizzard Dev Offers Apology for Response to Sexualization Question

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT
 

Karnesdorff:

Vedrenne:

Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.

Um, most female WoW player characters once they pick up some gear? Gear that is all enclosing on males and yet somehow little more than a midriff exposing chainmail bikini on a female? And before you say they're not high profile, who do you see more often? A random NPC or the thousands of chars running about?

K.

They were talking about the moba game, you don't see WoW player characters at all.

wizzy555:

Karnesdorff:

Vedrenne:

Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.

Um, most female WoW player characters once they pick up some gear? Gear that is all enclosing on males and yet somehow little more than a midriff exposing chainmail bikini on a female? And before you say they're not high profile, who do you see more often? A random NPC or the thousands of chars running about?

K.

They were talking about the moba game, you don't see WoW player characters at all.

And the person I was replying to said 'focusing on Blizzard' not 'focusing on the MOBA game'.

K.

Karnesdorff:

Vedrenne:

Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.

Um, most female WoW player characters once they pick up some gear? Gear that is all enclosing on males and yet somehow little more than a midriff exposing chainmail bikini on a female? And before you say they're not high profile, who do you see more often? A random NPC or the thousands of chars running about?

K.

So you're pointing to the female PC's? In which case, that isn't a Blizzard design fault, it's the fault of the players for choosing armour sets that show off as much of their character as possible, which by-the-by is not a bad thing, freedom of expression and all that.

I also accept I should have specified Blizzard's main characters who are likely to be designed in HotS.

I literally had to stop reading that site. The rampant and unending accusations of sexism, misogyny, and the like was just out of hand. They constantly vilify members of development teams and publishers for their design decisions. And then you would get the influx of pandering ass kissers who couldn't think for themselves who would just agree with everything a writer said, including when they talked about things they were well out of their depth on.

The way the question was worded was idiotic. It's under the presumption that because a woman is dressed in a scant manner, she is automatically not empowered or only there as an object, which is just stupid. How a character is made or how a person dresses in real life has little to do with empowerment. All the empowerment is in the gameplay. If they create a character who runs around in a bikini with huge breasts and gets one shot, that is pretty much the definition of an unempowered character. They become objects of scorn and dislike. As the guy said, they design characters that look cool. I guess my actual issue is that RPS doesn't report on videogames or the industry, but push an ideology that does nothing but actively seek out events like this and then create problems when someone doesn't feed them the line they want to hear. They are the worst of the worst in this regard.

Here is the thing: They are white knighting for the extreme Feminist movement. That movement is very niche and there are many variations on Feminism that are much more accepted by the media, women, and members of the opposite sex. They are up there with Anita Sarkeesian in that they only acknowledge that extreme Feminism. They walk with a group of people who attack and slutshame women who disagree with them or participate in activities they don't agree with.

That isn't to say they don't get stuff right sometimes though. There have been times they have called stuff out that should be called out, but usually other game media outlets pick up on it. I have seen this on more than one occasion where I read an article that started with or contained the statement, "In a Rock, Paper, Shotgun interview....".

Ugh... I ranted. My issue is that all of this "crying wolf" shit they pull, real bad things happen and when they represent it, it's just another article by a bunch of people who attack everyone for very little, which lessens the impact.

Saying that a game is about empo

Karnesdorff:

Vedrenne:

Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.

Um, most female WoW player characters once they pick up some gear? Gear that is all enclosing on males and yet somehow little more than a midriff exposing chainmail bikini on a female? And before you say they're not high profile, who do you see more often? A random NPC or the thousands of chars running about?

K.

Maybe if you are low level. At higher levels, it's actually prettyhard to find anything above uncommon quality that doesn't cover most (or all) of your body.

Just because a lot of people use/transmog the 5 chainkinis sets that are in game, it doesn't mean all of them are like that.

And if you think there aren't male sets that are also pretty revealing, you are downright wrong. Sure, not as many as female, but the point still stand.

I feel so bad for Browder. Seriously this is the kind of crap I'm talking about. Here we have a person who is completely innocent, enjoying his job and answering questions in regards to a game that is basically a fanfare game in the same vein as the Smash Bros series and he gets this agenda pushed upon him and honestly explains that the content they create are not meant for any sort of political or agenda based use. It is meant to be enjoyed like any other leisure activity.

That journalist really overstepped their boundaries when they made it about the agenda(with a major bias I might add) and not setting up a time for a more appropriate venue for the interview and what the questions would be about. So not only was there major agenda pushing by a person who shouldn't be an activist but also pushes their beliefs on a person as if it were a fact and expect from sort of reinforcement.

Sorry but unless you are designing your game to be some sort of speech such as the recent Sandy Hook game, the games you enjoy are that of a leisure activity. Where the artists, developers, writers are free to create the content they want without any sort of political agenda being pushed down their throats. Sure we can tell them if we like it or hate it but the important part is to know that you don't speak for everyone who enjoys or did not enjoy the product that they chose to consume by choice.

EDIT: I mean it's like people don't realize how actually good the video game industry has become when it comes to creating pandering crap.

Let me ask everyone here this and it might take some research. When was the last time you saw "The Guy Game" created? Or how about BMX XXX? Unless you are specifically looking for an erotic game the type of games I have listed did not exist during this game generation. It is that kind of crap that doesn't exist anymore and that is better for everyone.

Yet you have this movement treating all these successful franchises that either know their audience or are enjoying their ability to create the content they want and be criticized by it(don't get me started on my love/hate relationship with hearthstone) and it is these games that are being attacked as if they were "The guy game" and "BMX XXX".

EDIT 2: It also sucks because the journalist is pushing an agenda based on a presupposition that we should assume that the content being created is actually alienating a majority of consumers. Worse yet there is no actual hard evidence provided by the journalist demonstrating that the appearance of the characters are somehow alienating players.

I'm sorry but opinions are NOT facts no matter how many times you repeat it.

What the fuck. Why did he need to apologize? He was basically just trying to change topics and they kept pestering him trying to make it into some huge issue when there is none. Fucking a man

While I see nothing wrong with his response, really....

VanQ:
He's a game developer, he was there to talk about the game he was developing and not gender politics.

You don't like it, ergo it's 'politics'. Heaven forbid people actually have legit questions on stripper armour.

Karnesdorff:

Vedrenne:

Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.

Um, most female WoW player characters once they pick up some gear? Gear that is all enclosing on males and yet somehow little more than a midriff exposing chainmail bikini on a female? And before you say they're not high profile, who do you see more often? A random NPC or the thousands of chars running about?

K.

I'm sorry what?
My high end female characters have literally 0 skin shown, my Tauren has more skin shown then them, one even has tentacles for a face currently (The mage)
Either you are confusing WoW high end gear for asain MMO, or you never played high end WoW

Wanicochil:

Karnesdorff:

Vedrenne:

Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.

Um, most female WoW player characters once they pick up some gear? Gear that is all enclosing on males and yet somehow little more than a midriff exposing chainmail bikini on a female? And before you say they're not high profile, who do you see more often? A random NPC or the thousands of chars running about?

K.

I'm sorry what?
My high end female characters have literally 0 skin shown, my Tauren has more skin shown then them, one even has tentacles for a face currently (The mage)
Either you are confusing WoW high end gear for asain MMO, or you never played high end WoW

First. Welcome to the Forums!

Second, I also have to agree, sorry but when I played WOW during vanilla and TBC our main tanks were women in both avatar and in real life. Both of their armor sets when it came to raiding even in the start of end game content completely covered the characters head to toe.

Hell I went through most of the game before joining any guild looking like a hobo orc and human. Wasn't any sort of political speech in that, it was just the artistic choice of throwing random pieces of gear together.

VanQ:
What exactly is wrong with what he said? If anything, I think RPS should be ashamed for driving the guy into a corner like that. He's a game developer, he was there to talk about the game he was developing and not gender politics.

I haven't seen many of the HotS character models yet but the ones I have seen seemed fairly reasonable, unless they're considering the naked Zerg Queen Bitch of the Universe as hyper-sexualized?

There's two shirtless men (who share the same model and have different textures). In the scheme of gender politics in video games, that makes things quite equal.

Clovus:

kurupt87:
I am 100% with the dev. The entire gaming industry has taken this whole sexualisation issue to absurd lengths. Frankly, it's embarrassing.

Right, the issue should be mentioned like once a year, and then ignored after that. It should definitely not be brought up when talking with a developer of a potentially huge game that sexualizes most of its female characters in a very boring way.

The only reason this issue is "embarrassing" is that games journalists are able to bring it up so often because it constantly keeps happening. It's embarrassing that games continue to be so juvenile. It's great that Blizzard wants to make awesome looking characters. I don't think anyone would be complaining in a few female characters were sexualized, but it is a problem when it is basically being presented as the norm. Is hyper-sexualization the only way to make female characters "cool"?

Renegade-pizza:
I agree he could've given a better response, but it wasn't a bad one. They want to make cool looking characters. Done.

No, it was a terrible response. He acted like you have to be making a political statement in order to not have ridiculous female characters. He also basically said, "Well, this is a video game, so it doesn't matter", as if video games were just throwaway non-culture.

Video games are the most important new form of popular culture. It is a big problem if that culture continues to perpetuate a demeaning view of women.

It was a loaded question with the usual "you either agree with us or we label you sexist " had nothing to with the game or even character design, it was just another attempt at enforcing their ideology becuase to them their ideology is everything. Was there ever a question about representing Catholic or Muslim belief or minorities, no because their feminists therefore all must be feminists

Also videogames are a hobby, at best a form of art, but never a culture

"Serious topic" my ass.

I have no idea how americans see it, but in Europe it takes a bit more than skimpy armor or tight battle dresses to be considered "hypersexualized". I mean Blizzard gave us Kerrigan, Sylvanas, Nova and other powerful women, not just the usual bunch of token chicks and fanservice-extras. Besides, who says that strong and sexy excludes each other?

Skimpy clothing is the irl norm these days. Just take a walk at summer, you'll see tiny dresses, ultra short skirts and bare midriffes everywhere. I don't see why it's supposed to be a problem when fiction does what is perfectly acceptable in real life.

If you want an example for a hypersexualized MMO, check out Scarlet Blade. I'm not gonna post any links because I can't afford another strike, google it when you feel like it. But here's a hint: topless characters DLC.

Edit: they want a bit further, you can play completely naked for a fee now. Did I mention it's a game with nothing but busty females?

Louzerman102:

Colt47:

Wow... RPS just smashed head long into the fail button with that one. Also, RPS wants to discuss gender politics in reference to titles that are primarily geared towards a male demographic? It's like a guy complaining about the color of the deodorant bars in the womens section of Target or vice versa.

It gets better. Have you read the response article where Greyson whines about the entire event while crying?

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/11/22/re-that-heroes-of-the-storm-interview/

Hollly shit that was funny and so very stupid.

I like how he calls the female heroes of LoL disempowered when they are some of the most powerful characters in the game... And of course its a guy crying about those poor females, while in the comments section there are a few females telling him to fuckoff and not take things so damn seriously.

God damn RPS has really become a cesspool of political correct soapboxing.

Vedrenne:
Ignoring all other game companies, focusing entirely on Blizzard, name three high-profile characters of theirs who dress like pole dancers. I will grant Sylvannas as half-a-point, out of the goodness of my heart.





And that's just Warcraft, I haven't played Diablo or Starcraft in awhile, but I could probably dig something up. After all, Blizzard seems to lack the ability to draw female characters without showing off either their chest or the stomach, regardless of who they might be.

And, furthermore...

Tenmar:

Wanicochil:
I'm sorry what?
My high end female characters have literally 0 skin shown, my Tauren has more skin shown then them, one even has tentacles for a face currently (The mage)
Either you are confusing WoW high end gear for asain MMO, or you never played high end WoW

First. Welcome to the Forums!

Second, I also have to agree, sorry but when I played WOW during vanilla and TBC our main tanks were women in both avatar and in real life. Both of their armor sets when it came to raiding even in the start of end game content completely covered the characters head to toe.

Chaosritter:
"Serious topic" my ass.

I have no idea how americans see it, but in Europe it takes a bit more than skimpy armor or tight battle dresses to be considered "hypersexualized". I mean Blizzard gave us Kerrigan, Sylvanas, Nova and other powerful women, not just the usual bunch of token chicks and fanservice-extras. Besides, who says that strong and sexy excludes each other?

No one, because no one ever fucking says that other than the people bitching about the nonexistent people saying that. What you will see is people complaining that every female character has to be sexy, and has to be put in skimpy, retarded armor or tight battle dresses instead of, you know, actual armor, like the men, who get to just be powerful instead of powerful and sexy fanservice.

Skimpy clothing is the irl norm these days. Just take a walk at summer, you'll see tiny dresses, ultra short skirts and bare midriffes everywhere. I don't see why it's supposed to be a problem when fiction does what is perfectly acceptable in real life.

Maybe Western New York is just different, but when I walk down the street, or on campus, or to a store, I see women in pants, sweats, shorts, t-shirts, business attire, and normal skirts, not this apparent phenomenon of women dressing exactly how men fantasize them dressing as. But anyway, tell me how these women you see in short skirts and bared midriffs go to war with an undead plague, or conquer worlds with a swarm of aliens, or are highly trained special forces members in combat zones.

LifeCharacter:

[spoiler=Head to toe, you say?

Hey, to be fair I did give a time frame of when I played. I was also specific on the class as well. So when I talk about the armor sets this is what I saw.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071226201103/wowwiki/images/d/dc/Wrath_Tauren_Female.jpg

Also when you take the time to quantify the results it does get a bit more skewed to my favor over your samples.

http://www.wowhead.com/transmog-sets

EDIT: I should also mention you could wear a shirt anytime as well as it was a piece of clothing you could have your character wear.

I've always believed in the idea that exposed skin and elements that people would deem "sexy" are stylistic choices that do not deserve condemnation. After all, video games don't make people sexist as much as they don't make them kill eachother. So if a videogame was targeted at a specific demographic, why would you moan that it isn't targeted at the demographics you want it to be? Especially if you're not at all part of that demographic.

Would you criticize nude paintings for "perpetuating a stereotype"? Would you point out verses in a song and demand they be changed to be more inclusive? Why does this happen in videogames, then?

For some reason, some very vocal people on the internet want videogames to be about everyone, and to include everyone. The kind of purist behavior that reminds me of ranting on about the lack of necessity for swearing in music, or for a woman to go outside wearing less than a full-body costume, god forbid she expose any skin.

In real life, this is of course commonly seen as petty and limiting. Yet everyone's so obsessed with the purity, the perfection of their beloved new medium that they forgot that video games have a right to be a medium as any other, reflecting the culture of its makers and the zeitgeist of the time they were created in. It doesn't matter that sexism is an overarching cultural problem whose roots lie in matters far removed from this medium - no, VIDEO GAMES should throw it all away, because we should the noblest and the cleanest bastions of purity, tolerance and inclusiveness - and if we aren't, we'll just continue our futile crusade against the windmills in the hopes that one day we will collectively blow enough air through our lungs to make them turn the other way.

I'm quite tired of people taking their deep-seated cultural indignation and using it as an excuse to try and censor aspects of my entertainment, especially when they use a subtler variant of that one shoddy excuse that never worked for the ignorant and/or Fox News.

Tenmar:

LifeCharacter:

[spoiler=Head to toe, you say?

Hey, to be fair I did give a time frame of when I played. I was also specific on the class as well. So when I talk about the armor sets this is what I saw.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071226201103/wowwiki/images/d/dc/Wrath_Tauren_Female.jpg

Also when you take the time to quantify the results it does get a bit more skewed to my favor over your samples.

http://www.wowhead.com/transmog-sets

EDIT: I should also mention you could wear a shirt anytime as well as it was a piece of clothing you could have your character wear.

Well, that's progress for you; now only some of the female armor designs were purposely modified to show more skin than the male versions. But you can buy a shirt (tabard?) to put over it(!)... because that somehow changes the design choices someone made to sexualize every female character.

Twenty Ninjas:

I'm quite tired of people taking their deep-seated cultural indignation and using it as an excuse to try and censor aspects of my entertainment, especially when they use a subtler variant of that one shoddy excuse that never worked for the ignorant and/or Fox News.

One that that has always entertained me is that a lot of the people complaining about the issues are rather hypocritical, on things like Retake Mass Effect they will be on the side of "You entitled lil shits they dont need to change the game to make you happy, its art!" but as soon as a sexy character is showed off they switch their tune to wanting the artists to change the games to make them happy.

LifeCharacter:

Tenmar:

LifeCharacter:

[spoiler=Head to toe, you say?

Hey, to be fair I did give a time frame of when I played. I was also specific on the class as well. So when I talk about the armor sets this is what I saw.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20071226201103/wowwiki/images/d/dc/Wrath_Tauren_Female.jpg

Also when you take the time to quantify the results it does get a bit more skewed to my favor over your samples.

http://www.wowhead.com/transmog-sets

EDIT: I should also mention you could wear a shirt anytime as well as it was a piece of clothing you could have your character wear.

Well, that's progress for you; now only some of the female armor designs were purposely modified to show more skin than the male versions. But you can buy a shirt (tabard?) to put over it(!)... because that somehow changes the design choices someone made to sexualize every female character.

Dude before even posting that link I took the time and looked through the entire catalog of armor sets that utilize a female avatar and want to know what I found out? A majority of them even WITHOUT the shirt have the entire body covered.

Seriously take a look, cause while you cherry pick the argument the actual evidence in terms of quantity actually supports the evidence that most characters in terms of the display of skin is very minimal. I'm honestly encouraging you to take a look just like I did before posting the link I put in there.

EDIT: Trying to remember cause it's been so long since I played WOW, but do characters also get to choose to wear shorts/pants as well just like the shirt slot?

Desert Punk:

Twenty Ninjas:

I'm quite tired of people taking their deep-seated cultural indignation and using it as an excuse to try and censor aspects of my entertainment, especially when they use a subtler variant of that one shoddy excuse that never worked for the ignorant and/or Fox News.

One that that has always entertained me is that a lot of the people complaining about the issues are rather hypocritical, on things like Retake Mass Effect they will be on the side of "You entitled lil shits they dont need to change the game to make you happy, its art!" but as soon as a sexy character is showed off they switch their tune to wanting the artists to change the games to make them happy.

And the opposite can be said of a lot of people as well. Company using DRM, forced multiplayer, always-online, and so on? Bitch and moan about the company's decisions and only some people will come in to defend the company.

Company making a team of supposedly skilled assassins out to be stripper-nuns? Bitch and moan and get told you're trying to censor creativity, or ruining gaming, or being hypersensitive, or any number of hyperbole-laden BS.

Tenmar:
Dude before even posting that link I took the time and looked through the entire catalog of armor sets that utilize a female avatar and want to know what I found out? A majority of them even WITHOUT the shirt have the entire body covered.

Seriously take a look, cause while you cherry pick the argument the actual evidence in terms of quantity actually supports the evidence that most characters in terms of the display of skin is very minimal. I'm honestly encouraging you to take a look just like I did before posting the link I put in there.

I'm well aware that most of them don't show skin, but I'm not sure how that detracts from the fact that some designer intentionally modified female armor sets to cover less of their bodies for the purpose of showing more skin. Would you like me to make another statement for you to take and twist to something extreme or absolutist, or should we move on?

LifeCharacter:
What you will see is people complaining that every female character has to be sexy, and has to be put in skimpy, retarded armor or tight battle dresses instead of, you know, actual armor, like the men, who get to just be powerful instead of powerful and sexy fanservice.

See, here's the thing. The central point of your argument is in the words "EVERY" and "HAS TO". Without those, you don't really have an argument. There's really no big deal if "SOME" or "MOST" will "CHOOSE" to underdress. So, the existence of examples does not prove your point, but the existence of counter-examples DOES disprove your point.

LifeCharacter:
But you can buy a shirt (tabard?) to put over it(!)... because that somehow changes the design choices someone made to sexualize every female character.

And here, we get at the truth of the matter. You're not upset that people HAVE to be sexualized. You're upset that they CAN choose to be.

Pyrian:
See, here's the thing. The central point of your argument is in the words "EVERY" and "HAS TO". Without those, you don't really have an argument. There's really no big deal if "SOME" or "MOST" will "CHOOSE" to underdress. So, the existence of examples does not prove your point, but the existence of counter-examples DOES disprove your point.

Yes, go find me a few examples of female characters dressed as something other than something crossed with a stripper; that'll prove that there isn't a problem where female characters are disproportionately designed (Because a character can't "choose" to underdress, a designer chooses to put them in retarded outfits) as fanservice first, powerful second.

LifeCharacter:

I'm well aware that most of them don't show skin, but I'm not sure how that detracts from the fact that some designer intentionally modified female armor sets to cover less of their bodies for the purpose of showing more skin. Would you like me to make another statement for you to take and twist to something extreme or absolutist, or should we move on?

Wait what?

What designer specifically and do you have evidence of such a claim? Because there is quite a difference between changing it as a non-employee of blizzard(in the sense of modding) and going through the process of getting said armor design changes approved by blizzard from the inside which wouldn't then one would support?

In either case evidence please if you make this assertion.

EDIT: Also how the hell did the goal posts change from clothing of world of warcraft characters to all women in video games?

Louzerman102:

Colt47:

Wow... RPS just smashed head long into the fail button with that one. Also, RPS wants to discuss gender politics in reference to titles that are primarily geared towards a male demographic? It's like a guy complaining about the color of the deodorant bars in the womens section of Target or vice versa.

It gets better. Have you read the response article where Greyson whines about the entire event while crying?

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/11/22/re-that-heroes-of-the-storm-interview/

Christ, is this guy serious?

"And again, while scantily clad, disempowered female character designs alone aren't going to "turn" someone sexist, they do contribute to an environment in which it feels more natural to disregard or otherwise demean women."

Hell, is he stuck in the 19th century or anything? "Good lord, cover your ankle, you harlot!".

I've played a good deal of games in my time, and it's been a while since I saw a game that makes differences between males and females (there was some RPG where males get an extra strength point and females an extra dexterity point, forgot the title), they're usually equally powerful.

As for the community, there will always be dicks. Unless you feel like establishing a dictatorship of political correctness, there's little you can do. This roots waaaaay deeper than just playing a bunch of video games.

LifeCharacter:

Chaosritter:
"Serious topic" my ass.

I have no idea how americans see it, but in Europe it takes a bit more than skimpy armor or tight battle dresses to be considered "hypersexualized". I mean Blizzard gave us Kerrigan, Sylvanas, Nova and other powerful women, not just the usual bunch of token chicks and fanservice-extras. Besides, who says that strong and sexy excludes each other?

No one, because no one ever fucking says that other than the people bitching about the nonexistent people saying that. What you will see is people complaining that every female character has to be sexy, and has to be put in skimpy, retarded armor or tight battle dresses instead of, you know, actual armor, like the men, who get to just be powerful instead of powerful and sexy fanservice.

Mind to give us an example of that?

I mean there are hundreds of articles and rants about females being portrayed "too sexy", but I yet have to see someone complaining that the robe of his sorceress isn't showing enough cleavage or that he can't see the butt crack of his female scout.

LifeCharacter:
Maybe Western New York is just different, but when I walk down the street, or on campus, or to a store, I see women in pants, sweats, shorts, t-shirts, business attire, and normal skirts, not this apparent phenomenon of women dressing exactly how men fantasize them dressing as. But anyway, tell me how these women you see in short skirts and bared midriffs go to war with an undead plague, or conquer worlds with a swarm of aliens, or are highly trained special forces members in combat zones.

So do I, but tiny skirts and bare midriffes are just as normal.

Ever heard of slutwalks? Women are actually protesting for being able to dress up in skimpy clothing without being considered sex objects or fair game.

Besides, they seem to do rather well.

Exhibit A:

image

Miranda from Mass Effect.

Notice the skin tight latex suit and the boob window. Doubles as potential love interest for the player.

She's also a Cerberus officer, skilled fighter and powerful biotic. And guess what, she has a personality as well.

Exhibit B:

image

Aya from The Onechanbara.

Words can't do her outfit justice, just look for yourself.

She's also an assassin, master sword fighter and professional zombie slayer. Not exactly a role model, but also nobody you'd consider weak or give a slap onto the ass when you value your life.

As you can see, they'd do rather well.

Or at least not any worse than more chastisely dressed women, if that was your point.

LifeCharacter:

Pyrian:
See, here's the thing. The central point of your argument is in the words "EVERY" and "HAS TO". Without those, you don't really have an argument. There's really no big deal if "SOME" or "MOST" will "CHOOSE" to underdress. So, the existence of examples does not prove your point, but the existence of counter-examples DOES disprove your point.

Yes, go find me a few examples of female characters dressed as something other than something crossed with a stripper; that'll prove that there isn't a problem where female characters are disproportionately designed (Because a character can't "choose" to underdress, a designer chooses to put them in retarded outfits) as fanservice first, powerful second.

But that's not a big deal. You admitted it yourself, earlier. Reasonable people don't object if you have the option to play a sexy character. It's when every female has to be sexy that there's a problem.

But you don't really care about that, do you? You want all the sexy options gone altogether. That's the truth of where you're coming from. You start with the reasonable objection to every woman being hypersexualized, but when that turns out to be inaccurate, you have to fall back, and admit what you really want.

Pyrian:

LifeCharacter:

Pyrian:
See, here's the thing. The central point of your argument is in the words "EVERY" and "HAS TO". Without those, you don't really have an argument. There's really no big deal if "SOME" or "MOST" will "CHOOSE" to underdress. So, the existence of examples does not prove your point, but the existence of counter-examples DOES disprove your point.

Yes, go find me a few examples of female characters dressed as something other than something crossed with a stripper; that'll prove that there isn't a problem where female characters are disproportionately designed (Because a character can't "choose" to underdress, a designer chooses to put them in retarded outfits) as fanservice first, powerful second.

But that's not a big deal. You admitted it yourself, earlier. Reasonable people don't object if you have the option to play a sexy character. It's when every female has to be sexy that there's a problem.

But you don't really care about that, do you? You want all the sexy options gone altogether. That's the truth of where you're coming from. You start with the reasonable objection to every woman being hypersexualized, but when that turns out to be inaccurate, you have to fall back, and admit what you really want.

Now, now let's not be just as accusatory. That only gets more people irate and riled up and starts treating what they believe into a religion.

It is better to focus on the understanding and be able to just outright say that you disagree and explain why. You can't go any further than that.

Chaosritter:

Aya from The Onechanbara.

Words can't do her outfit justice, just look for yourself.

She's also an assassin, master sword fighter and professional zombie slayer. Not exactly a role model, but also nobody you'd consider weak or give a slap onto the ass when you value your life.

As you can see, they'd do rather well.

Or at least not any worse than more chastisely dressed women, if that was your point.

And I still regret not being able to be Onechanbara for the wii, as well as madworld. But sadly economics get in the way :_(

wizzy555:
Why pick on blizzard? Their female characters are usually very strong women.

Because we can see their FLESH of course.

All that delicious necrotic pale grey flesh on Sylvanas...

Tenmar:

LifeCharacter:

I'm well aware that most of them don't show skin, but I'm not sure how that detracts from the fact that some designer intentionally modified female armor sets to cover less of their bodies for the purpose of showing more skin. Would you like me to make another statement for you to take and twist to something extreme or absolutist, or should we move on?

Wait what?

What designer specifically and do you have evidence of such a claim? Because there is quite a difference between changing it as a non-employee of blizzard(in the sense of modding) and going through the process of getting said armor design changes approved by blizzard from the inside which wouldn't then one would support?

In either case evidence please if you make this assertion.

So you think the armor designs that I linked you and you yourself linked me weren't designed by an employee working at Blizzard and approved of by said company to be put in the game?

Chaosritter:

LifeCharacter:
No one, because no one ever fucking says that other than the people bitching about the nonexistent people saying that. What you will see is people complaining that every female character has to be sexy, and has to be put in skimpy, retarded armor or tight battle dresses instead of, you know, actual armor, like the men, who get to just be powerful instead of powerful and sexy fanservice.

Mind to give us an example of that?

I mean there are hundreds of articles and rants about females being portrayed "too sexy", but I yet have to see someone complaining that the robe of his sorceress isn't showing enough cleavage or that he can't see the butt crack of his female scout.

I think you've misunderstood me. I said people were complaining about the idea that every female character had to be sexy, or in skimpy armor, and/or have them designed as fanservice; I have no idea where you got the idea that I was arguing that there were people ranting about characters not being sexy enough, though they probably do exist, since, you know, internet. I was not saying that people were saying that every female character needed to be sexy (etc.), but I'm both sure it exists somewhere and understand how you could have gotten that idea.

Though I will take this opportunity to say why the hell not lower the sexualization if not that many people are complaining about a lack of sexiness in video games? It'll stop the feminists from complaining and no one has yet to show me how depriving a game of the random fanservice it throws in would harm its sails in any more convincing a way than just parroting "sex sells," as if people buy CoD or Battlefield because of the sexiness.

Maybe Western New York is just different, but when I walk down the street, or on campus, or to a store, I see women in pants, sweats, shorts, t-shirts, business attire, and normal skirts, not this apparent phenomenon of women dressing exactly how men fantasize them dressing as. But anyway, tell me how these women you see in short skirts and bared midriffs go to war with an undead plague, or conquer worlds with a swarm of aliens, or are highly trained special forces members in combat zones.

So do I, but tiny skirts and bare midriffes are just as normal.

Ever heard of slutwalks? Women are actually protesting for being able to dress up in skimpy clothing without being considered sex objects or fair game.

So most of the women you see aren't walking around in tiny skirts, but it's "just as normal" as the things you do see most of them walk around in? That's some logic there, but, anyway, there is quite the difference between a woman who chooses to dress however she wants, and a female character who was designed to be fanservice for a male audience, such as the two stupidly-outfitted characters you link.

Pyrian:
But you don't really care about that, do you? You want all the sexy options gone altogether. That's the truth of where you're coming from. You start with the reasonable objection to every woman being hypersexualized, but when that turns out to be inaccurate, you have to fall back, and admit what you really want.

I'm just going to back away since I highly doubt this thing with you will lead anywhere productive, but do go ahead and keep telling me what I really want, because it's always hard to figure that out for myself with all these things like my own motivations and thoughts clouding my judgement. Hyperbole and extremism definitely help though. Keep it up.

The interesting thing is that I'm not upset the lack of a social statement. I'm instead disappointed about the lack of an artistic statement. "We're just making characters who look cool," is an artistically empty statement that I expect from a high schooler, but not from a character designer and game developer. I am disappoint.

EDIT: Also, many character designers have a bad habit of not being able to draw ugly women. Blizzard is unfortunately included in this grouping. They weren't always like this. They used to be a company that created the original three classics that we have all grown to love due to their serious atmospheres, but have instead decided to go down a different path. But that's a topic for another thread...

LifeCharacter:
Blah blah posts multiple images of characters using Sylvanas' model

Let me just show you my female WoW characters. Bearing in mind I am a straight male.


Ye Gods, it's like a flesh buffet!

LifeCharacter:
So most of the women you see aren't walking around in tiny skirts, but it's "just as normal" as the things you do see most of them walk around in? That's some logic there, but, anyway, there is quite the difference between a woman who chooses to dress however she wants, and a female character who was designed to be fanservice for a male audience, such as the two stupidly-outfitted characters you link.

It's a matter of temperature, mostly.

When it's 30°c or more outside, the streets are full of women in short skirts, hotpants, tank tops, mini dresses and the like. Seeing women in bikinies or just bikini panties laying in public parks isn't out of the ordinary either. We're not talking about fucking Pakistan here.

And are you really complaining that fictive characters can't decide what they wear by themselves? Seriously?

Also, you asked how female characters in sexy clothes would do conquering planets, lead a war against zombies or act as spec ops in combat zones. And I gave you just the answer: pretty good, actually.

Oh, and before I forget: "I'm sure there are some, because internet" is not a valid response, let alone a point.

LifeCharacter:
And the opposite can be said of a lot of people as well. Company using DRM, forced multiplayer, always-online, and so on? Bitch and moan about the company's decisions and only some people will come in to defend the company.

Company making a team of supposedly skilled assassins out to be stripper-nuns? Bitch and moan and get told you're trying to censor creativity, or ruining gaming, or being hypersensitive, or any number of hyperbole-laden BS.

The Saints were actually rather poorly received because they simply don't fit into the Hitman universe. Not because of their silly dresses (though that did play a role), but because they're goddamn terrorists, not the professional assassins they're supposed to be.

Can't you see we're all being played for sheep?

The writer at RPS doesn't give a shit about this issue. I mean he does, but not in the "I want to make things better" sense, but rather the I can capitalize on the issue.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.