-
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
I agree with the points that OP and other women in the thread are making, I'm not disagreeing that they perpetuate sexism and harm the industry, but I have two reservations.
1) Can't sexualized designs be self-expression for a director? I agree that bikini armor and such things hurt a narrative, but can't we see (not all, but some) sexualized depictions of women as the developer expressing his own sexuality? (Also, thus, can't games therefore be unrealistic to take advantage of this? I don't mean this in games that rely on narrative or character development, but games like fighters that take their cast less seriously.)
2) Is it because of how prevalent it is that these designs appealing to the male teenager demographic are problematic, or do women find inherent issue with a woman's design being made for titillation?
1) Can't sexualized designs be self-expression for a director? I agree that bikini armor and such things hurt a narrative, but can't we see (not all, but some) sexualized depictions of women as the developer expressing his own sexuality? (Also, thus, can't games therefore be unrealistic to take advantage of this? I don't mean this in games that rely on narrative or character development, but games like fighters that take their cast less seriously.)
2) Is it because of how prevalent it is that these designs appealing to the male teenager demographic are problematic, or do women find inherent issue with a woman's design being made for titillation?
There are other novels that just have the dude with his shirt. Like that last one, there's no reason for him to have his shirt open, it's open because that's what the demographic buying those books likes to see. And there's nothing wrong with that IMO. I'm just saying it's a fantasy. If women want to see a "hunk" with his shirt off even in a laughably unrealistic situation, fine.
When game makers do stuff like that they're doing it because they figure a certain portion of their demographic wants to see that. Is it what I look for in a game, no, but I understand why they do it. I just don't think it works when you start setting rules like "you can't have a girl in a bikini in a game unless the guy is also in a swimsuit or unless the game is in a beach setting". If a game maker just wants to make a game about some sexy girls slaying demons in metal bikinis (a non-realistic scenario to begin with), I'm not sure anyone has the right to tell that designer he can't make that game.
So long as there are alternatives and different representations, I personally don't have a big issue with it, and I also support others having the platform to push for games that are different than that.
And i am not denying that. Visually she was obviously created with fanservice and a male audience in mind. Doesn't change that she is a side character in a game with a cast of main characters made with a female audience in mind. I simply do not see her as a problem or how her being that way genuienly has an affect on the person playing and their view on women in the real world. Its like the video game violence debate. If it affects the person the problem is that person and how fiction could have such an effect on them
Still wish she had more screentime and a bigger role. And again she does not exist solely for fanservice but is a fun character.
Last edited:
Your "you can't blame some people for equating feminism with censorship" crap isn't fooling anyone.
And again, a post discussing potential downsides of sexualization does not need a #notallsexualization at the end just to make it clear that they arent demonizing all things sexy.
Sexual stuff in games is still very juvenile. It's not my fault that things are the way they are. Even games that try to handle it a bit more maturely often fall short. Me saying all this still doesn't mean all sexy things in games are bad. Just that it's about time games moved forward from so commonly pandering to the lowest common denominator.
My issue with sexualized character designs is so often they just don't make sense. The clothes are ugly and mainly skimpy for the sake of being skimpy, support seems to be something most of the designs don't comprehend and they very often clash with the character themselves.
I have no issue with characters dressing sexy when it actually is an outfit I'm like "yeah that makes sense for her to wear." rather than something I feel like the devs just slapped on the character with no rhyme or reason just for some T&A.
Don't give me a stern wants to be taken seriously, front lines fighter character and then put her in fetish gear as everyday wear. Especially not since they so often do this to the blushing "oh you're flirting with me?" character like it makes sense to have that personality and have your tits and ass hanging out and acting as though it's the first time you've been hit on. (literally hanging out at that. My god that gif just makes my chest hurt).
I have no issue with characters dressing sexy when it actually is an outfit I'm like "yeah that makes sense for her to wear." rather than something I feel like the devs just slapped on the character with no rhyme or reason just for some T&A.
Don't give me a stern wants to be taken seriously, front lines fighter character and then put her in fetish gear as everyday wear. Especially not since they so often do this to the blushing "oh you're flirting with me?" character like it makes sense to have that personality and have your tits and ass hanging out and acting as though it's the first time you've been hit on. (literally hanging out at that. My god that gif just makes my chest hurt).
I mean, the implication is that he's taking his shirt off to go fuck a woman. Read between the lines dude. We aren't saying that women should have to wear clothes in porn. We're saying that in a product that has nothing to do with sex, it is in poor taste and can be offensive to women to have the female characters only be there at all to make the gamer's dick hard. It tells women that games aren't for them, and furthers the feelings of objectification that are already latent in all women due to how they are treated by society. If the "me too" stuff hasn't woken you up yet, then you need to realise that women get objectified throughout their daily lives and stuff like this in games only serves to reinforce that.
None of your posts are addressing the issues women already face in society. We understand that you don't feel attacked by the sexy men on the book covers. Well done, you are confident in yourself because society has told you throughout your life that you are worth something beyond having dicks inserted into you. Lots of women don't necessarily feel that way.
EDIT: My argument here is a bit all over the place, so let me just clarify that there are 2 different points I'm making:
1. The romance novel stuff is a ridiculous comparison, because those books are basically pornography. Nobody is saying women should wear clothes in porn.
2. Sexualisation of men is not equivalent to that of women due to their relative treatment by society.
Round hips, full thighs, pretty face, long eye lashes, full lips, nice makeup, pretty hair, clothes that either show lots of skin or highlights the curves. Yeah it's common alright. And my guess is that the reason is simply because there are more men than women working as character designers. I mean this is what most men wants to look at, femininity to the max, plain an simple.
As an artist (who draws lots of sexy women) I talk with and see the work of many female artists as well and honestly they want to look at men with sex appeal too, bulky chest, defined muscles, beard, deep voices if they are voiced, etc. Masculinity to the max. So that's what they draw if they are allowed to draw the ultimate man. One woman even drew the guys with a well defined "package". I loled at first but then realized that it was kinda normal I guess from her perspective. I most definitely go for the classic female features when I draw women too, makes it more fun to draw and look at for me.
So to fix this problem I guess we just need more women in the industry. But with the majority of gamers being boys/men I'm thinking that some suit somewhere will probably still steer the designers into something that render more money. Sex appeal, man or woman, absolutely does sell.
As an artist (who draws lots of sexy women) I talk with and see the work of many female artists as well and honestly they want to look at men with sex appeal too, bulky chest, defined muscles, beard, deep voices if they are voiced, etc. Masculinity to the max. So that's what they draw if they are allowed to draw the ultimate man. One woman even drew the guys with a well defined "package". I loled at first but then realized that it was kinda normal I guess from her perspective. I most definitely go for the classic female features when I draw women too, makes it more fun to draw and look at for me.
So to fix this problem I guess we just need more women in the industry. But with the majority of gamers being boys/men I'm thinking that some suit somewhere will probably still steer the designers into something that render more money. Sex appeal, man or woman, absolutely does sell.
I would support that POV if there weren't any alternatives, but there are plenty of alternatives, there is no singular representation of gaming any more with singular rules.
Beyond that you don't know me, so I don't know how you can confidently make that final claim, but that's neither here nor there.
I don't think game developers should have to make a game a certain way to appeal to everyone in every case, some designers simply want to make a game that is juvenile and aimed at a 13-year-old ... so be it. I don't think there should be some regulation against that.
This argument is so completely disingenuous.
There is no alternative to Metal Gear Solid V. The game is one-of-a-kind. If you want its particular brand of sandbox tactical shooting there is literally no game on the market that will scratch that itch in quite the same way.
Likewise, you can't just tell me to play an "alternative" that plays like Blade & Soul, because there is no game quite like it. It's a non-solution. You may as well be telling me to quit gaming entirely because apparently I'm not allowed to play games that are to my tastes without also having to stomach squicky and unnecessary sexualization.
Since you were actually less aggressive, i'll bite so to speak.
The reason why i got defensive is that at the end of the post, after quoting mine you said:
"TL:DR- The subject of sexualization and objectification of women in games needs to be treated with respect and a certain level of decorum because it can negatively affect people and has societal implications. Comparing it to forum warrior fights misses the important nuances specific to the subject at hand."
If i wasn't quoted it could pass as not direct...but anyway: my original analogy wasn't for the Coca Cola and OJ to equate the two camps with any particular meaning, i could have used red and blue for all that mattered. The only important thing was the behaviour of the two camps. I hope it's more clear this way.
You also have to understand that i got almost roasted some pages back for simply stating what should be a pretty accepted universal truth: "The thought of limiting someone's freedom of expression is a very dangerous one to have and it will backfire in a massive way" after someone implied just that.
Now back on topic:
You said i was comparing it to some forum war...and yes, i am. Look at the last pages.
There's important ACTUAL DISCUSSIONS worth having and we have on one hand people that keep pulling out the cover art of some soft porn books without realizing how much they are missing the point, and on the other hand people posting stuff like this:
trying to make a point while failing to realize that one could argue a tweet like this can also mean that only 0.1% or less of gamers are shitheads and maybe the whole gamer culture isn't as toxic as it's often suggested since 1 out of thousands doesn't seem as tragic.
All while not giving a fuck about having said conversation in a manner that would not make one camp angry and the other scared to object, which pretty much results in everyone calling the others idiots in a subtle way in the hopes of winning or having the last word.
It's like those useless conversations where the other person doesn't really listen but rather just waits his turn to talk, and i believe topics like these deserve better.
Last thing: for sure no hard feelings, who's got time for those? And if i somehow made you pay the consequences of other posters previous behaviour with a harsher reply than warranted i apologize.
Cheers.
P.S. of course there's also some valid and civil posts here and there, too few unfortunately.
Ugh, there's a lot to unpack here
Your first comment, I agree with. There are many different types of games. The ridiculous sexy tits out characters should be limited to the sexy games, like your romance novel examples. If the point of the game is to be sexy, then go all out. When the game is set in a world where people are doing other things and then the women are just casually tits out all the time, then we have an issue.
Your middle comment is fair enough, but I was just trying to reinforce to you that women are treated very differently by society, which you don't seem to understand in any of your posts.
With your third comment, nobody is saying they "should have to" and nobody is calling for regulation, we just want people to acknowledge that it is in poor taste and marginalises 50% of the world's population. Women are right to be offended by it. As a feminist, I am offended by it.
Lastly, the idea that "it's fine it's just for kids!" is even worse. Why should we be reinforcing the idea that it is ok to objectify women to kids?
It's not the design choice I would've made (in reference to MGSV), but at the same time, I don't think anyone has the right to tell Hideo Kojima that he can't have that character in the game and that he must change his character design because there is no game on the market like MGS. He has the artistic license to make what he wants just as Quentin Tarantino does or Patty Jenkins does or whoever.
My dude... nobody is trying to tell him he shouldn't be allowed to. We aren't calling for regulation on this or trying to legally enforce it. We are just trying to get people to acknowledge that it's bullshit.
EDIT: Just because someone has the "artistic license" to do something, doesn't mean they are above criticism for blatant sexism.
Ah, ok, I think I get what you're doing now. You either can't distinguish between "I can see where the impression comes from" and "This is something that is fully justified based on this" or just don't care to try. That said that's fundamentally your problem, not mine. Your desire to insert meanings where they don't exist isn't something for which I can bear responsibility and I'm not really inclined to try.
There was direct equivalence without exception trying to contradict posts emphasizing user preference with no exception for the type of sexualization. Ignoring context is willful ignorance.
But your statement is very different from the ones I quoted. That didn't seem very hard or profound, so why you wouldn't have the same expectations of others and assume they wouldn't/couldn't express themselves as they intended is beyond me. Then again you're somewhat equating a subset of your fellow posters including myself as the lowest common denominator by dismissing current depictions of sexuality, which are liked by many even if not in totality, as pandering that needs to be moved past. That seems like a disservice to the opinions and nuance discussed through the thread IMHO, and yeah, probably would have the potential to influence a passer by, leading us in a circle.
And if you really think that observation is wrong I'd love for you to elaborate by attacking the argument rather than the poster.
Well I'm not sure I agree that it's "bullshit". I think if a designer wants to make a "metal bikini babe killing demons game" or have a sexualized character in their game ... I don't think that that's necessarily wrong. It's not what motivates me to buy a game, but if someone else enjoys that, I don't necessarily think they're bad people or something.
So, women tell you that it offends them and makes it more difficult for them to enjoy the hobby, but you are fine with that because a 13 year old might get an erection? If so, then we have found the fundamental point at which our opinions diverge. Do you feel the same way about racism? Like if there is an offensive portrayal of a black person do you defend it by saying "well it's not my thing, but I could see how a racist could really enjoy that" rather than calling it out as bullshit?
Also you keep going back to this "it doesn't make them bad people" argument, when nobody is saying that it does. MGSV is probably my favourite single player game of all time, but I enjoyed it in spite of the fact that Quiet was a terribly designed character.
No worries, I don't feel picked on. :)
As you suggest, visual stimulation is a huge component of sexualized content for me. The term "eye candy" comes to mind. I am one of those gamers that typically plays as a female character when given the choice simply because I find them more pleasant to look (gawk?) at. Skin and skin-tight clothes, boobs and butts... these visual elements enhance certain gameplay experiences for me.
That said, stuff like "love story roleplay" is also great (I very much enjoy the romances in the Bioware games, for example). Accents don't do much for me one way or the other, but I am certainly inclined to find some voices sexier than others, which does add to the fantasy as you put it. These elements definitely can enhance the titillation effect from sexualized character designs.
Personally, this titillation only goes so far for me though. Video games will never replace porn, just as porn will never replace real intimacy with another living, breathing human being... at least not for me. But CG porn is getting pretty impressive, and I can easily see it becoming more popular and being just as titillating for men as real nudity. So, I could definitely see the video game industry competing with the adult film industry down the line, as the potential for pixels to yield highly erotic experiences is there. Not gonna lie, I'd probably try an XXX RPG or adult Sims-style game if one was ever developed.
For the poster saying I am hallucinating and the other that thinks I am in favor of censorship, my point is that we live in a reality where in some countries 1 out of 10 women suffer harassment / sexual abuse from men and in others the number goes to 1 out of 4. And the way media portrays womens plays a big factor, specially when its media aimed at men that just want to see women as an object for mens desire. And no, I am not demonizing wanting to be sexy, I just want people to see the material repercussions that sexualization, specially the one that the OP describes, can have in this type of reality we live (be it patriarchal, sexist, ableist, racist and so on). And the way womens are sexualized by the media can affect them to the point where wanting / dressing sexy can lead to their deaths (specially form where I am, Mexico and other Latin America countries, where feminicides is sadly a common occurrence).
Well I don't really think that's an equivalent analogy, to me it's more like someone saying "that Tarantino film is awful and offensive, does he really need to show one guy blowing another guy and all the violence and sex?". I'm sure a lot of people are offended by the content in his films. I still think he should be allowed to make his films how he sees fit even if they're not for everybody. And they're certainly not. If we took a poll I'm sure a seizable audience would say that his film's are filth. Do I think he should be pressured into making his films so that everyone can enjoy them?
I think that's what it mainly boils down to is does entertainment content (in this case certain games) need to be all things to all people ... my personal take on that is no, it doesn't.
Last edited:
I mean I can't speak for everyone but from my pov, I don't have a problem if dudes want to make games or designs that are sexualized especially if it's appropriate for what they're making (like fighters or beach volleyball or w/e stuff).
What makes it a problem imo is a combination of the two things you pointed out in your second point -- it's just so prevalent in like everything, even stuff it really has no business being in. Even games guys think aren't sexualized at all, there is almost always an undercurrent of it there. It's in essentially every aspect of life, and I think it just takes being a women and experiencing it yourself to really realize how completely ingrained the sexualization of women is in just about everything. It gets very, very tiring to see it just all the time in our face -- especially when it's as blatant as it is like in a lot of video games. We want to enjoy these characters and stories, too, but it gets old real fast when we're subjected to yet another reminder about how our defining trait isn't being a person but being there to be hot for the camera and males' eyes.
It would be easier and probably less of an issue if this thing wasn't so totally one sided -- or if alternately, you know, tit shots or unnecessarily skimpy outfits just weren't included in games that don't really need them anyway. And again, it's whatever in a game where that's the point, but it just gets frustrating as hell when you're playing something with an awesome story or cast and everything to prop itself up without needing omg boobs and they throw in the omg boobs thing anyway. :/
My racist analogy is more appropriate than yours. Tarantino films are what they are advertised to be. It's not a question of whether something is filth or not, and it's not about should everything appeal to all people. It is the fact that the depictions of women are often just straight up sexist and offensive.
Not all games should be for all people, but MGSV should be for people that enjoy tactical stealth shooters. Not for people that want to see some tits. Again, I'm not saying that Kojima shouldn't be allowed to have tits in his game, I'm saying that he has made an inferior product by having Quiet depicted as she is.
EDIT: You keep talking your way out of the issue to try to remain neutral, and we are just going in circles here. If you are just going to continue to ignore the fact that it is sexist to force sexualised female characters into your otherwise non-sexual game then I don't really have anything else to say.
Ask different people and you'll probably get different answers. This is my take on it as a man. This inadvertently turned into a wall of text, so bear with me.
1. Yes it can, and perhaps. An important thing to remember though is outside of very small indie games, video games are a collaborative effort. It's easy to think of game directors as auteurs who shape games by themselves, but it takes a lot of people and they may not all agree on how it's handled. And even if they're in control of the studio, the publisher and marketing department hold significant sway so I don't think the "self expression/creative vision" argument is a very good one outside of tiny indie teams and even then that's not a shield against criticism. People often talk about realism in these discussions, but something like verisimilitude may be a better word. It's a small distinction, but too often, simply because something is fantasy or has fantastical elements and is thus "unrealistic" that means the sky is the limit. You can add anything "unrealistic" and it won't negatively impact the media because it's already unrealistic. In truth we accept these fantastical elements, but there's almost always a sort of logic that runs through the setting and we form an idea of how this fictional universe functions. When it has parallels to our own world we're inclined to assume certain things based on how our world functions.
So let's say we have a fantasy world where the character wear medieval styled armor, but with impractical spikes and cool extra bits. Ok. The fantasy characters in this world are all apparently superhuman and survive just as easily in the harsh desert as the frozen arctic. Cool. They are repeatedly stabbed, bitten, immolated, and even survived the solar system being destroyed several times in that one boss battle. Neat. All the men wear full plate, studded leather armor from neck to toe, or full length robes and pointy hats. Seems fair. All the women wear metal bikinis, fur bras, or form fitting dresses with cleavage window and high cut leg slit. Wait what? The first ones are fine despite them all being unrealistic because we know what climates people live in and how durable people are and we've suspended our disbelief out of enjoyment for the gameplay or narrative. The last one is a head scratcher because we know how men and women dress in the modern day and historically. It doesn't jive with any of what we know and I've yet to see a setting that did this and explained it to my satisfaction. That right there is the typical realism argument and personal preference can play a role in each individual persons interpretation of what works and what doesn't.
2. The major issue is the ubiquity in media and specifically video games since this is a game forum. Women are frequently sexualized in all forms of media and too often they are objectified. So women portrayed in games usually aren't just sexual, they're treated as the lessers of the male characters who often take center stage. They're damsels in distress, wives who exist to die and fuel the husband's anger, or simply window dressing at a shop or on the hood of a car. This is problematic because these attitudes leak into society in subtle ways. Life inspires art and art informs our lives. Not to mention games, which are often escapist fantasy, don't work if you're seeing the same objectification you experience in your own life. As for how to deal with this, opinions differ. I think most people would stick me in the prude category and I'd say overall we need less sexualized depictions of women. Because I know not all developers are open to that I'd say don't objectify women if you still want to have some sexy women in your game. Try to properly incorporate them and give them agency, make the player feel that the character dressed themselves, not a character designer making what personally gets him going. For games that sexualize their female characters because that's why the director made it and it's the whole point of the game (ie Senran Kagura) consider adding some sexualized men. And don't just slap them in a speedo and laugh it off. Slow pan over their ass, oil them up, have the other characters (and not just a camp gay dude) comment on how hot they are. Whatever they've got to do to make it sexy. I feel like too often when developers (specifically Japanese developers) sexualize male characters they try to make it silly or zany, all too often with a twinge of homophobia. And that's not really sexualizing a character, it's pretending they're the same while treating them differently. I'd feel less strongly about metal bikinis if they magnetically attracted arrows and bullets.
Also, importantly, not all women dislike sexualized female characters. From what I've read in threads like this (not trying to speak for the women in this thread, please chime in!) Most seem to be bothered by how pervasive it is and how poorly it is handled. Some enjoy sexy ladies (regardless of their orientation), but have issues due to how it's commonly handled. And of course women aren't a hivemind who all share the same opinion. But it's definitely worth listening to women in these kinds of debates and maybe giving their words a little extra consideration because they have to deal with issues of sexual harassment and objectification in their lives which gives them a different perspective than most men.
Anyways, my personal opinion is we still need to go a ways with the depiction of women in games and the easiest path there is less sexualization. If things start to even out and we can get evidence that women are being treated more equitably and fewer are put off in the gaming sphere that opens the door in my eyes to more sexualized, but well portrayed characters in mainstream gaming. And then maybe we can get some equal opportunity sexualization. I lay out my thoughts like this because sometimes people will suggest we just do sexualization better or do sexualize both men and women, but due to the factors I laid out I think it needs to be a process. Of course how exactly it should be done is just my opinion and the idea of "how" is an excellent one to debate. And the most important takeaway from all this is pretty much all of us arguing in favor of more progressive representations aren't trying to force a change down people's throats, we're trying to change minds. We're trying to get players and developers to see that this is a perspective worth considering. Bring up the issue with other people who enjoy the same games as you, but consider its possible to bring in more fans if women are portrayed differently. Bring it up during a Q&A session with a developer. Hope a budding game designer on ResetEra sees this and takes it to heart.
It's not about censorship, but getting people to see games can have new fans and a better fanbase if we change how women are portrayed by perhaps dressing them better where swimsuits don't fit, writing them to be more important and more fully fleshed out characters in general, or at least throwing a bone to the ladies and gay men who game with some actually sexualized men. It doesn't mean anyone is a bad person for playing games with objectified women in them or for liking sexy women. Just understand how it shapes our cultural perception of women, how it can push women away from gaming, and how games in general can be better by being more inclusive and having generally better characters.
Last edited:
And that's fair for you to have that opinion. And I think it's valid for Kojima to hear it as well, but if he still chooses to make his games the way he does, I think ultimately he has the right to do that. He's the one spending 5 years making it.
Tarantino films aren't exactly marketed with all the content up front, his last movie looks like a Western, but the content would probably offend some who were expecting a by the numbers Western if they didn't know the context of his past work. Kojima games have characters that are nearly nude and have sexualized women in them and have for decades really. MGSV doesn't do anything all that new for Kojima. That's the type of game Hideo Kojima makes.
It's not really my thing personally either and I am glad there is a broader variety of representation for women in games.
Last edited:
I just wanna say to the OP the reality of the situation.
You'll always find people who are firm in their beliefs that harm women representation in media, something that indirectly protect the male gender hierarchy in society.
But like with every issue on equality, the more exposure it gets, the better it is for the affected group because you're going to win over folks who are rational and has an actual interest in equality for everyone.
Tldr; exposure wins over people who were ignorant before. It's a good thing this thread is made.
You'll always find people who are firm in their beliefs that harm women representation in media, something that indirectly protect the male gender hierarchy in society.
But like with every issue on equality, the more exposure it gets, the better it is for the affected group because you're going to win over folks who are rational and has an actual interest in equality for everyone.
Tldr; exposure wins over people who were ignorant before. It's a good thing this thread is made.
Those people who try to "gotcha" at you by you look like you're sex negative and prudish for not liking sexualised female designs is some disingenuous bullshit especially when the male designs aren't as sexualised. These characters aren't expressing their sexuality, they're just objects.
I think the common occurrence is my main issue.
I don't even mind games like doa. I would never buy or play it and I might even silently judge a friend playing it but ultimately it would not affect my life.
But games that have a narrative and are filled with "normal" characters apart for the oversexualised women are the worst.
For example Mass Effect 2 made me almost stop playing.
Here we have Miranda who is wearing tight clothes with ass sticking out and complains how people see her as a tool.
It fits her character so no biggy. Until one of the cutscenes where she opens up and tells a very emotional story.
During that cutscene the camera moves over her ass and lingers.
In that moment I realised that the devs might realise that women are people with their own stories and interests. But even then they are still just objects for them to look at. A woman can never not be for their pleasure.
also cause the majority of the AAA and AA market still Men, yes,there is more woman than in then 80, 90s and early 2000, Yes, if you tabulate in Mobile market, the balance shift more towards a higher demographic women than men, BUT if you keep the scope among who make and who buy most of the AAA an AA games (which are the ones most criticized), both answers are men
I think that perhaps people would be more OK with him making content that features female depictions such as Quiet if he were honest with consumers (and with himself) about why he does. But instead, we're treated to him making excuses to avoid having that discussion and opting for telling people he has justifications for why he sexualized the woman thematically that will make us regret questioning his auteur vision (excuses that were supremely flimsy), because he doesn't want to admit to what he's really doing and why he's really doing it. And he is not alone in going about things in this manner in this industry.
To fall to your hypothetical, if you ask Tarantino why he makes what he makes, he's going to be honest about why... often quite bluntly so. And that's a major part of the difference. Be honest with what you're making and why you make it so it doesn't look like you're trying to get away with something and then pretending it's so innocent.
Threads like this get exposure, women come in to post and discuss, and then we promptly get shut down with "your're just being sensitive" or "well my girlfriend / wife / sister does it so I think it's okay". Exposure doesn't help. It does nothing. We're on page 19 and we're still dealing with people who do above things.
So obviously the women get tired, we leave, and then everything goes back to square one. But people think that "the problem has been resolved and an answer has been found! Hooray!" It's not as simple as exposure. There needs to be a severe societal shift.
I'd agree with that. He should just say straight up that he intended the character to be that way for sex appeal.
To be honest I think some of (note I said *some of*) the "auteur" stuff that Kojima gets labelled with is a bit overblown. There's a lot of silly, bizarre, juvenile, non-sensical stuff in his games and story telling and I guess that's part of the appeal to some people.
I dont understand why OP is explaining their opinion and worry about being called for out for "taking bewbs out of games" when their opinion is completly valid and definitely right.
Don't be ashamed of your words and deeds OP, Quiet's design is sexist, dumb, ridiculous, ugly, sexist (yes I said it again), shameful and objectifying.
I like good design and I also like attractive characters. But let's be honest, some people are pushing it to the point you feel ashamed just looking at your screen.
It feels patronizing that devs takes the player for a horny 14 years old teenager with the need to throw stupidly oversexualised bad designs. I mean heck, there are games I can't even play on TV because I'd fear someone would spot a weird moment.
And seriously, Quiet explanation made me think Kojima is just a hack nowaday and isnt even able to write anymore hence why my hype for Death Stranding is close to zero.
Have you played MGSV ? It's a step beyond objectification. It's waifuification. It's like Kojima had a weird thing going on and is trying to shove it on the player's face. Quiet is like one of the most embarassing character I saw in gaming. Like 98% of her scene is another moment of embarassement to watch.
Don't be ashamed of your words and deeds OP, Quiet's design is sexist, dumb, ridiculous, ugly, sexist (yes I said it again), shameful and objectifying.
I like good design and I also like attractive characters. But let's be honest, some people are pushing it to the point you feel ashamed just looking at your screen.
It feels patronizing that devs takes the player for a horny 14 years old teenager with the need to throw stupidly oversexualised bad designs. I mean heck, there are games I can't even play on TV because I'd fear someone would spot a weird moment.
And seriously, Quiet explanation made me think Kojima is just a hack nowaday and isnt even able to write anymore hence why my hype for Death Stranding is close to zero.
Have you played MGSV ? It's a step beyond objectification. It's waifuification. It's like Kojima had a weird thing going on and is trying to shove it on the player's face. Quiet is like one of the most embarassing character I saw in gaming. Like 98% of her scene is another moment of embarassement to watch.
Last edited:
I was using the term "auteur" a bit sarcastically, implying that may he see himself as one and using that as a means to think he's above the sexism critique.
It's not unwarranted. Some games, especially those with a fantasy setting, are guilty of giving the female characters basically next to nothing for protection to wear.
The guys on the other hand, have full on armor or at least are clothed as the situation requires.
But I think that is a trend that kinda got transferred to video games when early RPGs were basically variations of D&D. And if you have seen the D&D art from the 80s, ...well.
And of course, sex sells.
The guys on the other hand, have full on armor or at least are clothed as the situation requires.
But I think that is a trend that kinda got transferred to video games when early RPGs were basically variations of D&D. And if you have seen the D&D art from the 80s, ...well.
And of course, sex sells.
How does a fictional character ever choose anything on their own that isn't dictated by their creator(s)?
Last edited:
thatsthejoke.jpg
People have argued that not wanting video game women to be sexualized is slut shaming. That the characters choose to dress that way. If this doesn't make any sense, if you can't understand how someone would even type those words that means you are sane.
It's sad people don't seem to understand the very basic concept that is objectification.
It's not denying women their right to express their sexuality, or even denying men the ability to find a woman attractive and enjoying said women expressing their sexuality. It's showing women their only value is to be sexually attractive and to express their sexuality in ways that only play to male fantasy. It's taking away someone's humanity and turning them into an object, a toy.
It's not denying women their right to express their sexuality, or even denying men the ability to find a woman attractive and enjoying said women expressing their sexuality. It's showing women their only value is to be sexually attractive and to express their sexuality in ways that only play to male fantasy. It's taking away someone's humanity and turning them into an object, a toy.
I feel like in fantasy there's a definite trope where both men and women are scantily clad:
Ax Battler wears a pair of budgie smugglers, and Tyris Flare wears a bikini. Conan isn't running around in a three piece suit either, nor is Red Sonja. I think all of those character designs are fine.
I think the Golden Axe gang are fine too, reminds me of the Barbarian game cover from the 80s too- as you say, the whole 'barbarian' fantasy sub-genre spawned by Conan and co is pretty much loincloths, undies and big swords for everyone. It came from fiction, fantasy art and films, so a slightly different origin. However, there's also loads of far more recent RPGs where high-level male armour options have an increasing amount of platemail and the equivalent high level female armour is basically lingerie with a few tin lids and pointless random armour pieces attached.
Last edited:
There are of course settings or overall designs where scarcely clothed men and women make sense. In the context of Conan, yeah, absolutely.
EDIT: wanted to quote you, endlessflood, but I can't seem to find the button in edit mode on mobile in a hurry.
EDIT 2: Thanks!
Last edited:
Great post. You can't get much more reasonable about it than that.
Black arrow, bottom right corner of their post in mobile mode.
Absolutely. It's not that fantasy has to always be practical, but that some kind of consistency between what male and female characters choose to wear in extreme weather/combat conditions helps to make a world feel a bit more believable to me. Barbarian culture where everyone wears little more than loincloths because it's hot, resources are scarce and they don't have hangups about being naked? Totally cool to me, sounds interesting. If you have a culture of dragon riders but the blokes wear leather trousers to avoid chafing, fur jackets to keep warm and metal armour in case their mounts get a bit bitey, it seems odd if female riders then wear knee-high boots, a bikini, suspenders and a thong when charging in battle from above the clouds.
I've got no problem with sexy fantasy art, I must have seen hundreds of scantily-clad women wrapped around monsters and men with sculpted six-packs in scraps of armour waving bits of metal around, but the characters I really wanted to know more about were where their outfit said more about them and their culture than just about sex appeal to the audience. Show me a pretty female adventurer in sturdy boots, with a backpack and a cute smile and a ridiculous weapon, and after my male brain goes 'she's hot!' I want to know where she's going, why is she travelling so far, why the weird weapon, why does she look so prepared, comfortable and happy, is travel and combat her job, that makes sense. Show me a female adventurer in combat lingerie next to a bloke in platemail and I don't really get past the first part because the outfit's intention to titilate often overpowers anything else going on. I get that visuals are important in male sex appeal, but games are long-form entertainment, often running for dozens of hours. That length engagement means that I like character design for both men and women to go a step further and help with world building rather than just be a clothes rack.
Some characters use sex appeal and nakedness and revealing skimpy clothes perfectly well depending on where they are and what they do. That's cool- if a character's main way out of trouble is being all sultry charisma and making male potential opponents drool then fine. However, if a female mage decides to join an adventuring party with no clear destination and a journey of weeks, possibly years ahead of them while wearing little more than a nightdress and high heels and nobody comments on it, my second thought after 'aw, she's pretty' (and they are usually pretty) is 'and also strangely incompetent'. I appreciate high-fantasy games often have a carnival feel to both the male and female array of costumes but it's definitely one that still feels incredibly unbalanced in terms of which half of the party is more likely to be in their underwear while climbing a frost-covered mountain.
Last edited:
I feel like this post has been completely glossed over.
Everyone talking about how men are sexualized too and how this is somehow equal in context of a fundamentally sexist society, let me ask you this:
Have you ever talked or worried about this subject privately or while debating anything other than female sexualization? Because if not, that means you are literally only using those arguments in order to deflect, distract and shut down discussion. You are actively silencing women from wanting to speak up because you are creating a hostile and dismissive atmosphere where these people KNOW its pointless to speak up. The worst part is you probably don't even realize you are doing it and to you these are just video games and you don't care because why should you. You are a man, so this doesn't bother you. Using these discussion techniques is actually a huge part of propagating and maintaining male supremacy and misogyny which is why so many of us arguing against you are incredibly frustrated when engaging with you. You're not seeing the bigger picture of how your actions impact others who are not like you.
Or, to put it another way: you have your head way too far up your own ass.
Some interesting points of view scattered in the thread and due to that some things that I ignored completely is starting to peek my attention.
Sex sells and will keep doing so. I would add that the oldest "profession" is directly tied to it. Taking into account the demography of people that play games publishers and devs surely know how to put emphasis on things that will make their game peek the interest of a good chunk of that demography. Unfortunately it goes without saying that female and male(quite less by a margin) characters/roles are put into the shameful pedestal objectifying their roles as only that. out of my head examples: Blade and soul and Black desert online where the proportions can be made so out of the ordinary that the character becomes the unrealistic "waifu sex gem" of their player creator, lolis included. More so on fantasy games where the objectification is used as a mean to bring the crowds.
Character design as a whole, in books, mangas, novels, games, movies, etc.. is tied directly to its creators and the audience they want to cater and that comes with its strong and weak suits.
Giving my opinion on the MGSV case ( correct me if I have the wrong view on it). The game develops itself around a couple main characters, one being quiet at a buddy/support. Some animations, details and clothing go erotic beach avenue for sure and I see Kojima touch there. Does it make me see Quiet as an object? As a sex companion? Eye candy for sure but not really.
Sex sells and will keep doing so. I would add that the oldest "profession" is directly tied to it. Taking into account the demography of people that play games publishers and devs surely know how to put emphasis on things that will make their game peek the interest of a good chunk of that demography. Unfortunately it goes without saying that female and male(quite less by a margin) characters/roles are put into the shameful pedestal objectifying their roles as only that. out of my head examples: Blade and soul and Black desert online where the proportions can be made so out of the ordinary that the character becomes the unrealistic "waifu sex gem" of their player creator, lolis included. More so on fantasy games where the objectification is used as a mean to bring the crowds.
Character design as a whole, in books, mangas, novels, games, movies, etc.. is tied directly to its creators and the audience they want to cater and that comes with its strong and weak suits.
Giving my opinion on the MGSV case ( correct me if I have the wrong view on it). The game develops itself around a couple main characters, one being quiet at a buddy/support. Some animations, details and clothing go erotic beach avenue for sure and I see Kojima touch there. Does it make me see Quiet as an object? As a sex companion? Eye candy for sure but not really.
Dude, Morrigan is a woman.
The ones creating a dismissive and disruptive atmosphere are the people who won't fucking listen and bring up non-relevant points (like this one, ironically) and those who try to mansplain for themselves, or do some kind of reverse white knight womansplaining on the behalf of the girls here.
Wut, I was agreeing with Morrigan, saying people were ignoring that part of her post.
- Status