|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 7, 2012 2:18:31 GMT -5
First off, I really wish people would stop mentioned Other M as this destruction of Samus' character, even though a) she didn't have 1 to begin with, and b) was her official source. It's also why I believe that no video game character can be a role model, and trying to associate a character as a fantasy is ludicrous. When the whole point of the game is to control said character, and their actions are being controlled by the player, it's nothing to really bounce off someone, since it's already part of them. And it's not me boiling down the argument when it seems to be the entire point of the "gamers need to grow up crowd" in the recent news: Criminals are being mean to Catwoman, it must stop! Lara Croft is getting mistreated, it must stop! Agent 47 is killing sexualized nuns, it must stop! Someone was mean to Felica Day, is must stop! The FF project is getting bad troll comments, it must stop! That mentality is the same reason we can't have a discussion over this situation, cause the immediate reply is basically "stop being mean to them!" and tossing out all argument of context, logic, and actual discussion aside. Nearly every gaming media site is playing it like this, with a "shame on you" reaction to anyone who says that maybe it's not the best thing to do something like that. Except YOU are the one who tosses out context, logic, and actual discussion. The proof is in how you are framing the arguments in this very post I just quoted. The FF crap was sexism because the people going after her were attacking her for daring to look at sexist trends in gaming, and doing so by attacking her in very specifically gender-based ways. This may come as a shock but telling a woman that she should be silent and that she should get back in the kitchen and show her tits and should be raped is misogyny. Even if they are "jokes" or "trolling". The Lara stuff is causing concerns for a number of reasons that have been painstakingly pointed out to you already are completely dismissing immediately before bitching that those damn white knights just throw out all discussion! Felicia Day was attacked because she is a woman who has gotten success and part of why is because of her sex appeal. There are two sexist things about what was said to her, one was the discounting of all her other efforts, reducing her to just her looks. The other was suggesting that people liking her for her looks is worthy of scorn and makes her undeserving, which is just slut shaming. The stupid nun squad in the Hitman trailer was sexualization for the sake of it, in a series that has always kept it's sexualization within areas where it makes sense. The trailer itself failed to represent how sexuality is represented in the series, and failed to represent the actual gameplay of the series on top of that...all so we could just have a trailer with sexy ladies. While it's not as big of a deal as some of this other stuff, it is alarming that they felt it was necessary to market the game in this way, as it's basically shoehorning in sexual exploitation where it is completely out of place. The problem is not "people are being mean to them!" the problem is the CONTEXT of why those people are being mean and the ways they choose to be mean, a context that is indicative of sexist attitudes. But by all means, keep dismissing everything and then accuse everyone else of ignoring arguments. It really helps you make your point. Contrary to belief, I am pointing out the errors in the thinking and not just tossing things away. The stuff with FF was not soley on some random comments on youtube. There were points made that question her tactics, her judgement on what constituted bad or good role models to follow, what honestly belongs in the topic, and even if her actual fundraising was actually legal. But you don't mention any of those. It's all the youtube comments that made jokes about her. And that's all the gaming media reported on, cause it made them seem superior. And it's not ignoring points in the Lara case when I point out that the genre itself is standard with these types of stories, from execution to the presence of same beat for beat mindset from the video. It's not ignoring logic to state it might entirely rest on the gender of the character making something normally considered fine for drama now suddenly off limits. As for Day, it had nothing to do with someone being a jackass to her cause she was a woman. It did have everything to do with her cult of personality in the gaming community. I've been wondering the same thing for years. I've been wondering when and how did Day become this voice of the fandom. But that really isn't up to Day, as she has no control over it. It's more toward her fandom. And it really isn't wrong to question why she is seen as an icon, to the point of developers of the Fallout:NV game calling it an horor to have her on, or her getting more time than friggin Miyamoto himself at a gaming ceremony, or even how this work in theater gave way to this geekdom legend status. And Hitman, again, isn't any far from it's root, as it's still going with the more outrageous items, and the leather nuns aren't even the most outrageous or sexualized thing from Hitman (the near naked women farming coke would take that), and even the scene itself lends itself to other moments in Hitman like the funeral shootout and the final scene in Blood Money. It just feels like a knee jerk reaction to it. , especially with the purpose of the video as a teaser for some excitement than anything to explain the function or purpose. Finally, the whole issue really is that the majority of press and people using them as their sources are basically putting everyone on the other side into the one mold of a sexist youtube troll. From the repeated cries of why gaming needs to be mature and the many people saying how it is alright for men to be stereotyped and ridiculed and made into these sexist images themselves, cause they "deserve it" or whatever, and even people confusing sexism for sexualization, it does feel like the whole argument is that "your gender is dumb, and you should feel dumb for being that gender." The best way is to stop treating that side like an idiot or someone that needs to be saved from itself. Ad it would also help if the person who is leading this charge would know something about games first.
|
|
|
Post by wallabylikeyou on Jul 7, 2012 2:18:59 GMT -5
It's an issue that is rampant in gaming and the reason it's going to take a long time to go away isn't because sex sells or because men run the industry but because so many are intent on insisting that it doesn't exist. Visit a site like fatuglyorslutty.com and try to tell me that there isn't a problem with sexism in gaming.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 7, 2012 2:24:48 GMT -5
And Lara isn't rugged at this point? From the Game Informer cover to the various shots and the photo of her tying her own bandage around her arm and all the other focus on the aspects for survival, and that doesn't qualifier her in the same circle as the other people? Well I meant rugged looking. And that stuff happens AFTER they've started the process of breaking her. Before the whole rebar through the gut thing, Lara is just a pretty, somewhat naive, young British girl. Which is also a standard device. Xbox live games seem to generate that, like Limbo and Braid. Same with the main character of Prey, and is generally something you see in darker games, like Max Payne. Also, from how she handled the attacker, and how decisive she finished the guy off, I don't think she can qualify as naive orunaware of what she is doing. Not even that pretty, either, since it's been downplayed in general in the game. I'm not calling her ugly, but it's less shown off in this one than the other games had it.
|
|
|
Post by Koda, Master Crunchyroller on Jul 7, 2012 2:31:12 GMT -5
Well I meant rugged looking. And that stuff happens AFTER they've started the process of breaking her. Before the whole rebar through the gut thing, Lara is just a pretty, somewhat naive, young British girl. Which is also a standard device. Xbox live games seem to generate that, like Limbo and Braid. Same with the main character of Prey, and is generally something you see in darker games, like Max Payne. Also, from how she handled the attacker, and how decisive she finished the guy off, I don't think she can qualify as naive orunaware of what she is doing. Not even that pretty, either, since it's been downplayed in general in the game. I'm not calling her ugly, but it's less shown off in this one than the other games had it. How the hell does Limbo use that? There is no characterization in Limbo at all. Hell no story at all, really, besides the premise. And Braid, if anyone is naive in Braid, it is the player.
|
|
|
Post by lockedontarget on Jul 7, 2012 2:33:56 GMT -5
Kratos or Fenix and other characters like them tend to be designed as male power fantasies NO! NO NO NO! I have never, in my entire life, ever looked at Kratos or Marcus Fenix, or Mario, or Link, or Shepard or anyone in the gaming scene and went "I want to be him!" NEVER! In fact, I'm the opposite, I have feared looking like some jacked up guy like Fenix or Kratos. I don't want to scare people, which is all that body types does. I am honestly so sick of this argument being tossed around every time. "Oh, these video game people are male fantasies, but not female ones!"as if all men want to look like the generic grizzled white guy and every woman would never be caught dead wearing any kind of sexualized outfit and body type in general life. You know what I want? I want to be able to be normal, to be someone who doesn't get s*** for looking like he does. I'm pretty sure that's what everyone wants to feel like, not being judged by such an extreme view of a standard. But it seems to be like that point is lost on the other side of the discussion. Gaming bodies is not a male fantasy, it's fantasy. make believe, relics of ancient story telling and focus on the older type of establishing heroes and villains. You're focusing too much on looks. The fantasizing is in the overall portrayals, here. To use Kratos as an example again, he is strong, tough, fearless, anyone who messes with him he can handily deal with, he is some sort of sexual savant who all the ladies with their porn bodies want to bone and even the goddess of love wants to bone and when he bones her the women watching are so turned on by his amazing sex ability that they start sexing each other, he is the alpha male. He is very clearly designed to be a power fantasy and I really don't see how that can be denied. One could actually argue that classic Lara works as a power fantasy for women, even though her appearance was obviously tuned to pander to guys. She was badass and strong and smart and witty and sexy. Which is one of the reasons why people are not liking the decision to take all the agency and power she had away from her. It's not false at all to look at how male characters, in general, are designed and compare it to how female characters, in general, are designed, and see which gender is being given fantasies here. Most female characters are still either just sexpots in subservient, supporting roles, or damsels, or just blatant eye candy. And while none of these roles are inherently invalid or unworthy of existing, the fact of the matter is both male and female characters are traditionally given roles that appeal to male fantasies. And to go back to appearance, just compare how sexy characters of either gender are featured. Even when the male characters are good looking, they are not presented in a fetishized way in the vast majority of occasions. How often do we see the camera conveniently focus on a woman's ass or boobs? Now how often does the same thing happen to attractive male characters? How often do games find an excuse to put a woman in a sexy position or situation? How often are male characters put in super-fetishized outfits? Also, while both genders typically have idealized body types, the men have bodies that are idealized in a practical way(big muscles, yadda yadda) while the women have bodies that are idealized in a sexual way. Like you said, most men don't want to actually look like Marcus Fenix. He is not sexualized but he is still a certain ideal, of the big macho manly man. It is not in any way false to point out how characters of both genders are mainly built to appeal to one.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 7, 2012 2:45:54 GMT -5
NO! NO NO NO! I have never, in my entire life, ever looked at Kratos or Marcus Fenix, or Mario, or Link, or Shepard or anyone in the gaming scene and went "I want to be him!" NEVER! In fact, I'm the opposite, I have feared looking like some jacked up guy like Fenix or Kratos. I don't want to scare people, which is all that body types does. I am honestly so sick of this argument being tossed around every time. "Oh, these video game people are male fantasies, but not female ones!"as if all men want to look like the generic grizzled white guy and every woman would never be caught dead wearing any kind of sexualized outfit and body type in general life. You know what I want? I want to be able to be normal, to be someone who doesn't get s*** for looking like he does. I'm pretty sure that's what everyone wants to feel like, not being judged by such an extreme view of a standard. But it seems to be like that point is lost on the other side of the discussion. Gaming bodies is not a male fantasy, it's fantasy. make believe, relics of ancient story telling and focus on the older type of establishing heroes and villains. You're focusing too much on looks. The fantasizing is in the overall portrayals, here. To use Kratos as an example again, he is strong, tough, fearless, anyone who messes with him he can handily deal with, he is some sort of sexual savant who all the ladies with their porn bodies want to bone and even the goddess of love wants to bone and when he bones her the women watching are so turned on by his amazing sex ability that they start sexing each other, he is the alpha male. He is very clearly designed to be a power fantasy and I really don't see how that can be denied. One could actually argue that classic Lara works as a power fantasy for women, even though her appearance was obviously tuned to pander to guys. She was badass and strong and smart and witty and sexy. Which is one of the reasons why people are not liking the decision to take all the agency and power she had away from her. It's not false at all to look at how male characters, in general, are designed and compare it to how female characters, in general, are designed, and see which gender is being given fantasies here. Most female characters are still either just sexpots in subservient, supporting roles, or damsels, or just blatant eye candy. And while none of these roles are inherently invalid or unworthy of existing, the fact of the matter is both male and female characters are traditionally given roles that appeal to male fantasies. And to go back to appearance, just compare how sexy characters of either gender are featured. Even when the male characters are good looking, they are not presented in a fetishized way in the vast majority of occasions. How often do we see the camera conveniently focus on a woman's ass or boobs? Now how often does the same thing happen to attractive male characters? How often do games find an excuse to put a woman in a sexy position or situation? How often are male characters put in super-fetishized outfits? Also, while both genders typically have idealized body types, the men have bodies that are idealized in a practical way(big muscles, yadda yadda) while the women have bodies that are idealized in a sexual way. Like you said, most men don't want to actually look like Marcus Fenix. He is not sexualized but he is still a certain ideal, of the big macho manly man. It is not in any way false to point out how characters of both genders are mainly built to appeal to one. And only men want to be strong, fearless, tough, etc? I've seen that kind of style applied to the FemShep, even with the sexual aspect. Trying to say that only men are looking for that kind of characterization, just feels off. And, really, Fenix isn't really an ideal of anything, he's just the heroic setpiece. That's the issue, they think of the fantasy in fragments, not the whole picture. I mean, I guarantee no human would ever trade lives with a superhero. Sure, they want the powers, but if you want to be Batman, for example, you just want the gadgets and the money, not the tragic backstory, the guilt with the family, the loss of humanity, and the general hatred from his former proteges that it comes with. In the same way, Kratos and Fenix have their own issues that no one would want. Trying to use bits and pieces of it to say otherwise like "oh he's buff. oh, he's got weapons. Oh, he has great sex". doesn't forget that the fantasy itself is flawed by design to add characterization and such. Fenix or Kratos never act like they feel any superior or great, they're miserable f***s, and all the glee is from the 3rd person perspective of someone else playing them. I might be the same thing if it wa sa game with MLP's Rainbow Dash, that doesn't make Dash a male fantasy just for doing awesome things.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 7, 2012 2:47:18 GMT -5
Which is also a standard device. Xbox live games seem to generate that, like Limbo and Braid. Same with the main character of Prey, and is generally something you see in darker games, like Max Payne. Also, from how she handled the attacker, and how decisive she finished the guy off, I don't think she can qualify as naive orunaware of what she is doing. Not even that pretty, either, since it's been downplayed in general in the game. I'm not calling her ugly, but it's less shown off in this one than the other games had it. How the hell does Limbo use that? There is no characterization in Limbo at all. Hell no story at all, really, besides the premise. And Braid, if anyone is naive in Braid, it is the player. The story of Limbo is of a youth entering this dark and torturous place and how it affects them by the end. Same with Braid, as it deals with the point that things go beyond them. That's what I was talking about.
|
|
|
Post by "Cane Dewey" Johnson on Jul 7, 2012 2:49:35 GMT -5
You're focusing too much on looks. The fantasizing is in the overall portrayals, here. To use Kratos as an example again, he is strong, tough, fearless, anyone who messes with him he can handily deal with, he is some sort of sexual savant who all the ladies with their porn bodies want to bone and even the goddess of love wants to bone and when he bones her the women watching are so turned on by his amazing sex ability that they start sexing each other, he is the alpha male. He is very clearly designed to be a power fantasy and I really don't see how that can be denied. One could actually argue that classic Lara works as a power fantasy for women, even though her appearance was obviously tuned to pander to guys. She was badass and strong and smart and witty and sexy. Which is one of the reasons why people are not liking the decision to take all the agency and power she had away from her. It's not false at all to look at how male characters, in general, are designed and compare it to how female characters, in general, are designed, and see which gender is being given fantasies here. Most female characters are still either just sexpots in subservient, supporting roles, or damsels, or just blatant eye candy. And while none of these roles are inherently invalid or unworthy of existing, the fact of the matter is both male and female characters are traditionally given roles that appeal to male fantasies. And to go back to appearance, just compare how sexy characters of either gender are featured. Even when the male characters are good looking, they are not presented in a fetishized way in the vast majority of occasions. How often do we see the camera conveniently focus on a woman's ass or boobs? Now how often does the same thing happen to attractive male characters? How often do games find an excuse to put a woman in a sexy position or situation? How often are male characters put in super-fetishized outfits? Also, while both genders typically have idealized body types, the men have bodies that are idealized in a practical way(big muscles, yadda yadda) while the women have bodies that are idealized in a sexual way. Like you said, most men don't want to actually look like Marcus Fenix. He is not sexualized but he is still a certain ideal, of the big macho manly man. It is not in any way false to point out how characters of both genders are mainly built to appeal to one. And only men want to be strong, fearless, tough, etc? I've seen that kind of style applied to the FemShep, even with the sexual aspect. Trying to say that only men are looking for that kind of characterization, just feels off. And, really, Fenix isn't really an ideal of anything, he's just the heroic setpiece. That's the issue, they think of the fantasy in fragments, not the whole picture. I mean, I guarantee no human would ever trade lives with a superhero. Sure, they want the powers, but if you want to be Batman, for example, you just want the gadgets and the money, not the tragic backstory, the guilt with the family, the loss of humanity, and the general hatred from his former proteges that it comes with. In the same way, Kratos and Fenix have their own issues that no one would want. Trying to use bits and pieces of it to say otherwise like "oh he's buff. oh, he's got weapons. Oh, he has great sex". doesn't forget that the fantasy itself is flawed by design to add characterization and such. Fenix or Kratos never act like they feel any superior or great, they're miserable f***s, and all the glee is from the 3rd person perspective of someone else playing them. I might be the same thing if it wa sa game with MLP's Rainbow Dash, that doesn't make Dash a male fantasy just for doing awesome things. So people don't think about fantasy as a whole, yet people only fantasize about parts?
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 7, 2012 2:53:54 GMT -5
And only men want to be strong, fearless, tough, etc? I've seen that kind of style applied to the FemShep, even with the sexual aspect. Trying to say that only men are looking for that kind of characterization, just feels off. And, really, Fenix isn't really an ideal of anything, he's just the heroic setpiece. That's the issue, they think of the fantasy in fragments, not the whole picture. I mean, I guarantee no human would ever trade lives with a superhero. Sure, they want the powers, but if you want to be Batman, for example, you just want the gadgets and the money, not the tragic backstory, the guilt with the family, the loss of humanity, and the general hatred from his former proteges that it comes with. In the same way, Kratos and Fenix have their own issues that no one would want. Trying to use bits and pieces of it to say otherwise like "oh he's buff. oh, he's got weapons. Oh, he has great sex". doesn't forget that the fantasy itself is flawed by design to add characterization and such. Fenix or Kratos never act like they feel any superior or great, they're miserable f***s, and all the glee is from the 3rd person perspective of someone else playing them. I might be the same thing if it wa sa game with MLP's Rainbow Dash, that doesn't make Dash a male fantasy just for doing awesome things. So people don't think about fantasy as a whole, yet people only fantasize about parts? It's more people being not going deeper with the character, just taking the outside thing as best, and bits of it at worst. Just cause what a characters does is awesome doesn't make it the ideal.
|
|
|
Post by lockedontarget on Jul 7, 2012 2:57:56 GMT -5
I deleted my post, I was getting too aggressive.
I am bowing out of this. I do not feel like this discussion is going to go anywhere and I don't want to spend any more time just making myself frustrated, so I'm done.
|
|
The Line
Patti Mayonnaise
Real Name: Bumkiss. Stanley Bumkiss.
Peanut Butter & JAAAAAMMMM!
Posts: 36,698
|
Post by The Line on Jul 7, 2012 3:33:52 GMT -5
didn't we just have this same debate like 3 weeks ago with the same 2 or 3 posters arguing the same point?
And the fact that the creator of these videos that is apparently causing so many to get so butthurt has sites dedicated to her being a, in the words of site's creators and visitors, a raving c*** who should die, mean nothing in the grand scheme of things?
|
|
|
Post by "Cane Dewey" Johnson on Jul 7, 2012 3:48:55 GMT -5
So people don't think about fantasy as a whole, yet people only fantasize about parts? It's more people being not going deeper with the character, just taking the outside thing as best, and bits of it at worst. Just cause what a characters does is awesome doesn't make it the ideal. But why do they have to go deeper? Why can't bits and pieces of a character be enough? I mean, all fantasy isn't the same, and no one fantasizes the same way, right? Because there's no conclusive way of knowing what a fantasy is for a particular person when he or she plays a video game, or, for that matter, when fantasy is practiced in any other context. Because of the ambiguity of what fantasy is and how it is experienced, wouldn't this mean that people are going to pick and choose what they want to get out of a character for whatever reason? It might be power, it might be sexuality, it might be escapism, it might be gameplay. Granted, a character's actions might not be ideal, but that's in a real-world setting, no? If someone were to dole out vigilante justice or someone were to go around Grand Theft Auto-ing people... I don't think those acts would be tolerated in the real world. Gaming is a performative act, and thus isn't real in an objective sense, since I don't actually become Samus or Batman or Lara Croft or Kratos. But whatever the desire of fantasy behind the performance of play, that is real in the real world, as experienced by the gamer, not unlike an actor who plays a role, who becomes the character and yet remains an actor all in the same. And games themselves are products of a culture that is real outside the fabulated world of the game. It's not really surprising that video games either reflect, reflect, or critique social phenomena like racism, sexism, homophobia, and ableism, albeit however those phenomena might be experienced a) in the real world by the gamer and b) by the gamer in the video game world. Which means if someone says X video game or Y community is sexist has as valid much bearing as an opinion as someone who X or Y says is not. So these social phenomena, like fantasy, aren't inert concepts, like fantasy, but they have real consequences, sometimes inside the game (like when someone criticizes the depiction of scantily-clad women created presumably for the visual enjoyment of heterosexual men) yet sometimes outside the game (like when transgendered people want to see more representations of themselves in video games, but also accurate representations of themselves that doesn't reduce their identity to stereotypes). Take violence in video games, let's say. It would be silly to say that playing violent video games makes you a more violent person in real life or more prone to commit acts of violence. But there's a disconnect that remains when thinking about violence. Yes, we can say that playing violent video games doesn't make someone violent, but we really don't critique the legitimacy of violence in real life that video game reproduce as a pixellated copy. Violence is everywhere in many ways, and because it's everywhere we don't even see it anymore. It becomes invisible. It becomes instituted socially, culturally, and politically. And while we might hand-wave fictional violence of video games away ('it's not real' thus equals 'it doesn't matter'), it doesn't make real violence in the real world disappear. Through thinking about violence in video games, what it is, how it is, who perpetrates it and against whom, perhaps we can think about violence in a real world context. I think there's something similar with sexism in video games. Yet fantasy can also be a way to subvert something like sexism (however and whoever is defining it) so long as the door is open to fantasize about or live vicariously through a video game avatar. When that door isn't open to people, for whatever reason, that's when the veil of privilege is torn. But if you can't show someone or make someone realize how they have privilege and the effects of that privilege, problems like sexism won't be addressed, let alone be considered. Something of a tangent, I think Louis CK's joke about white privilege (and male privilege) speaks to this point about recognizing one's privilege and the superficiality of inhabiting the space of privilege when it's not even realized as being as such. Language warning... To me, video games and their contents are as socially and culturally determined as an identity marker like gender, but nevertheless what we come to call 'normative patterns' of gaming (the image, perhaps to the point of being cliche, of the white, heterosexual male) is the object by which problematization and resistance operates, broadening the perspectives of what gaming is and can be, for whom, and how. Meaning? Women, people of colour, GLBQT people, and disabled people, among others, have as much access, representation, and power to participating within video game culture as anyone else. The fact that we're having this conversation by way of the locus of sexism proves that there is still work to be done, and at the very least it's an issue for some people. How it is an issue, however, is a matter of whether or not the conversation is equivocating. In some cases, perhaps, in other cases I don't think so. But then again, who's making such value judgments? Which brings us back around to the beginning of the thread and the conversation, but a conversation that already started in the middle. EDIT: Mind you, I say all this as someone who finds post-humanism an interesting supplement to identity politics. 'What if we lived without concepts of gender? Or race? Or sexuality?' But I can't say with certainty that post-humanism is a useful tool or a detriment to those who do do the work of identity politics (especially if I speak from an identificatory position of white, heterosexual male, which doesn't always have to be the case). medieninitiative.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/posthuman-play-or-a-different-look-at-nonhuman-agency-and-gaming/
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Jul 7, 2012 6:13:48 GMT -5
It's more people being not going deeper with the character, just taking the outside thing as best, and bits of it at worst. Just cause what a characters does is awesome doesn't make it the ideal. But why do they have to go deeper? Why can't bits and pieces of a character be enough? I mean, all fantasy isn't the same, and no one fantasizes the same way, right? Because there's no conclusive way of knowing what a fantasy is for a particular person when he or she plays a video game, or, for that matter, when fantasy is practiced in any other context. Because of the ambiguity of what fantasy is and how it is experienced, wouldn't this mean that people are going to pick and choose what they want to get out of a character for whatever reason? It might be power, it might be sexuality, it might be escapism, it might be gameplay. Granted, a character's actions might not be ideal, but that's in a real-world setting, no? If someone were to dole out vigilante justice or someone were to go around Grand Theft Auto-ing people... I don't think those acts would be tolerated in the real world. Gaming is a performative act, and thus isn't real in an objective sense, since I don't actually become Samus or Batman or Lara Croft or Kratos. But whatever the desire of fantasy behind the performance of play, that is real in the real world, as experienced by the gamer, not unlike an actor who plays a role, who becomes the character and yet remains an actor all in the same. And games themselves are products of a culture that is real outside the fabulated world of the game. Its not really "going deeper", it's just initial viewing of those characters, on either side, looks something superficial. Being strong and fearless and kicking ass and all that mentioned that is called fantasy is really just the actions of the characters in the game, and not based on the characters proper. Most of the characters who are suppose to be this male power fantasy are considered that for what the gameplay is and not the character itself. Max Payne is depressed alcoholic and sick and having issues with letting go of the past, but shooting slow mo style and all the gunplay is awesome in Max Payne 3. Same point could be made for the other characters as well. Really, just looking at the box art of a game or teaser and deciding that it's offensive or whatever recalls the "don't judge a book by its cover" tale.
|
|
erisi236
Fry's dog Seymour
... enjoys the rich, smooth taste of Camels.
Not good! Not good! Not good!
Posts: 21,904
|
Post by erisi236 on Jul 7, 2012 6:21:57 GMT -5
Just throwing this out there as I think people really need to understand that people don't like FF for plenty of legitimate and reasonable reasons beyond "hurr durr she's a woman saying things I don't like" She also gave a rather interesting interview over on Destructiod that left more than a few people wondering what the big deal was about her, her views on the game Bastion in particular being a real head scratcher. I'll also throw down this one too as I think she gives a pretty good view on the "hows and whys" on why fiction does things the way they do. Basically I really think people need to sit down a bit and think about the difference between "sexuality" and "sexism", and stop slut-shaming to boot actually.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 7, 2012 6:48:46 GMT -5
Reading this thread makes me very sad, as does all the other threads about sexism in gaming.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 23,574
|
Post by Bo Rida on Jul 7, 2012 7:32:23 GMT -5
Sadly when you're dealing with a young storytelling medium, odds are good that it won't have stories told by real masters who can handle such issues with more maturity or care. The end result involves stories that handle these things in a ham-fisted way, often while trying to come across as earnest and realistic (see: just falling into giving a gay character campy tendencies, the Lara Croft example already mentioned, etc. etc.). The format needs to mature and develop, and better storytelling and character crafting minds need to get involved if they want to tackle issues like these. I'd never argue that fanservice has no place anywhere (look at how many movies will do it, despite there being plenty of movies that handle sexuality wonderfully), but it's true that sexism in "geek culture" is rampant and often times horrifying, and it won't change until the medium itself matures to a higher level. I agree with that, in many cases I don't think they intend for games to come acrosss as sexist, there’s no agenda behind two-dimensional characters, lack of subtly, bad dialogue, too much exposition etc they’re just symptoms of poor writing/direction. I've said it many times before but the average gamer is no longer a teenage boy but the industry still aims the majority of games at that demographic (even within that group there’s a large number that want something better).
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Jul 7, 2012 9:14:15 GMT -5
We'll try this again when posters are ready to rationally discuss their points without snarky personal attacks.
|
|