Deleted member 18568

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
944
Fair enough, likewise, I honestly appreciate you're trying to pin me down to something definitive. As a guy I'm probably not the person who should be defining anything here, and so I'm hesitant to start adding links to back up the terminology I'm using. Anyone else want to bail me out here, or has Vibri got me on the ropes :-)

Yeah - look I'm not trying to win any argument here. After all, I only suggested one solution (more content for everyone, not just the perceived market majority).

My wife, mother, sister and daughter would like an answer too.

But we have to cut through the vagueness, emotional baggage and start pinning down the real answers to this. I get the group-therapy value of bitching about the state of life without offering any solutions. But it doesn't answer OP's question.
 

esserius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,373
Yeah - look I'm not trying to win any argument here. After all, I only suggested one solution (more content for everyone, not just the perceived market majority).

My wife, mother, sister and daughter would like an answer too.

But we have to cut through the vagueness, emotional baggage and start pinning down the real answers to this. I get the group-therapy value of bitching about the state of life without offering any solutions. But it doesn't answer OP's question.
What exactly qualifies as a "real" answer to you? Because depending on how you define that, what you're looking for may simply not exist. If you're asking for the impossible it's going to be hard for anyone, here or elsewhere, to deliver. If you want definitions and effects of sexualization and objectification, those are available in the OP. Suggestions for what people and corporations can do is also in there.
 

Aurc

Member
Oct 28, 2017
6,894
The way the camera creepily lingers on every death Lara experiences is definitely not normal of the genre, or normal for games generally. Patriarchy has a lot to do with those death depictions, because the people who were in power that made the decisions to create those animations were males. Maybe females would have made similar decisions, put in the same situation, but I'm going to say I highly doubt it. More than that, they present the character in a completely disempowered state that can only be for the player to watch. The player has no agency, the character has no agency.

I can think of a million ways to better present how nature is cruel, in-game, with both narrative and interactive consequences, far better than simply creating creepy death animations. Coughing up blood, being weakened from hypothermia, showing muscular atrophy as a result of wall-climbing for too long... the list goes on. Those death sequences do not present a, "nature is cruel" message to me. They present a, "these creators are weirdly focused on Lara's death."

As was already presented in the OP, there is a long history of women being used as window dressing and violently discarded. And this has been happening from the very beginning of video games. From Mario to Battletoads.
Again, that's just how the developers opted to depict violence in their game, and I think linking it to patriarchal structures (imposing their will to remove women's agency) is a bit of an overreach. People are too rigid with what they think would be ok, as far as showing the effects of how brutal it is to have to survive harsh scenarios. What you propose as an alternative (muscular atrophy etc.) would be pretty cool too, though.

Also, it's of course normal for the player to have no control over these death scenes, once they've started up. Not much you can do once you're grabbed by a Reaper in RE5, for instance: https://youtu.be/xIIceaSGq0w You can avoid these in the first place through gameplay and quick time event success.

Dont play Yakuza Kiwami then. They have a similar mini game called Mesuking that is equally distasteful.
What's most disappointing about these minigames is that they're no fun, even disregarding the perceived sexism. I tried the cat fight game in Yakuza 0 and it was a nonsensical rock, paper, scissors sort of RNG game where you're asked to mash buttons (that don't actually do anything most of the time). Had no desire to try MesuKing after that.
 

Deleted member 18568

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
944
What exactly qualifies as a "real" answer to you? Because depending on how you define that, what you're looking for may simply not exist. If you're asking for the impossible it's going to be hard for anyone, here or elsewhere, to deliver. If you want definitions and effects of sexualization and objectification, those are available in the OP. Suggestions for what people and corporations can do is also in there.

Then what are we gaining by having this on a discussion platform?
 

spam musubi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,413
Again, that's just how the developers opted to depict violence in their game, and I think linking it to patriarchal structures (imposing their will to remove women's agency) is a bit of an overreach. People are too rigid with what they think would be ok, as far as showing the effects of how brutal it is to have to survive harsh scenarios. What you propose as an alternative (muscular atrophy etc.) would be pretty cool too, though.

Also, it's of course normal for the player to have no control over these death scenes, once they've started up. Not much you can do once you're grabbed by a Reaper in RE5, for instance: https://youtu.be/xIIceaSGq0w You can avoid these in the first place through gameplay and quick time event success.

Trying to pin it solely on survival horror doesn't gel with the very controversial statements from the developers early on about how "they want you to feel protective of Lara". Remember how a cutscene looked super rapey when they initially revealed it, then they made that whole spiel about protecting Lara? I don't believe that the devs weren't looking at Lara from a patronizing patriarchal lens. It has been part of their vision since day 1.

RON: "And then what happens is her best friend gets kidnapped, she gets taken prisoner by scavengers on the island. They try to rape her, and-"

KOTAKU: "They try to rape her?"

RON: "She's literally turned into a cornered animal. And that's a huge step in her evolution: she's either forced to fight back or die and that's what we're showing today."
 

Alexhex

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,881
Canada
Fair enough, likewise, I honestly appreciate you're trying to pin me down to something definitive. As a guy I'm probably not the person who should be defining anything here, and so I'm hesitant to start adding links to back up the terminology I'm using. Anyone else want to bail me out here, or has Vibri got me on the ropes :-)
I mean, not really. I don't think it's even possible to nail down an absolute standard for measuring whether this stuff crosses a line or not. There are grey lines between a charcters being sexy in the context of the universe they're portrayed in, said character being sexualized in a way the real world viewer finds them attractive, and the game itself handling these elements in an objectifying manner.

Part of what makes it hard to draw lines in the sand just comes down art and the way we talk about and explain it. There's no absolute standard for a particular story beat being good or a game mechanic being bad. The hero's journey trope has an infinite number of contexts in which it can used well, and an equally high number in which it can feel generic and played out. Tank controls have tons of great applications, but can be a disaster in some games. You would never try and come up with a definition of these things that can account for every single use case where they cross the line from good to bad. It's about context and application.

The line between "sexy design" and "objectifying design" is the same way. There are sooo many factors to consider (characterization, how the plot treats the character, camera angles, body type, poses the character makes, sexual angency, game mechanics encouraging the player to and rewarding them for degrading women) when deciding whether or not that line has been crossed, and just how far a particlar game has pole vaulted over it. As a result, you'll never get a definition of these terms that can be so all-encompassing as to arm you with the knowledge to discern whether something is immediately sexist or not.

It's art. This stuff is messy. It takes time and discourse to get to the bottom of things. It's not as easy as calling it a wash because some women you know feel differently than the ones talking about it here.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,015
Canada
Yeah - look I'm not trying to win any argument here. After all, I only suggested one solution (more content for everyone, not just the perceived market majority).

My wife, mother, sister and daughter would like an answer too.

But we have to cut through the vagueness, emotional baggage and start pinning down the real answers to this. I get the group-therapy value of bitching about the state of life without offering any solutions. But it doesn't answer OP's question.
Then what are we gaining by having this on a discussion platform?

You have decided for this thread to exist there needs to be definitive answers, but I don't think you're going to find them. You're never going to get people to fully agree on every character. This transcends other artforms, in film I'm sure there would be grey areas where I imagine different feminist critics would disagree on particular movies. To discredit that criticism wholesale because they don't all agree seems crazy.

My understanding here, is that a sexy character is presented with agency, has a costume that's in line with their character and is not ogled by the camera.
Examples being maybe, Tracer, Uncharted women, maybe Eva, The Boss, Triss/Yenn

Once the camera starts panning and lingering on ass and breasts, you are presenting the audience with a piece of meat, not an autonomous character.
 
Last edited:

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
I decided to do what I said earlier and look at the final charts for 2016 to see what the scale of the problem is among the most popular games. Couldn't find more than 5 handheld games as a 'chart'. The main problem with this analysis is that I haven't played a lot of these games and as such my impressions are based on a quick google of a title rather than a thorough knowledge of it. I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on any of them. Games with sexualisation are underlined in italics.

Mobile:
Pokemon Go - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mobile Strike - Don't believe there's any sexual designs
Game of War - Yes, in marketing alone, absolutely
Candy Crush Saga - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash of Clans - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash Royale - No sexual designs / fanservice
CSR Racing 2 - No sexual designs / fanservice
Lords Mobile - Some mildly sexual cartoon female designs
Super Mario Run - No sexual designs / fanservice
Marvel Mobile Champions - Don't know, but assuming yes as it's Marvel
3 out of 10 games

Handheld:
Pokemon Sun / Moon - Nothing out of place for the setting
Animal Crossing New Leaf - No sexual designs / fanservice
Super Mario Maker 3DS - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mario Party Star Rush - No sexual designs / fanservice
Smash Bros for 3DS - A couple of sexual fanservice character designs (ZSS, Bayonetta etc)
1 out of 5 games

Console (you'll have to help me here as I'm not familiar with most of these games)
FIFA 17 - No sexual designs / fanservice, women footballers playable
Call Of Duty: Infinite Warfare - Don't know, suspect not
Battlefield 1 - Don't know, suspect not
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft Auto V - Yes, but it's in context with the horrible, vicious world the game presents and entirely intentional
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - No sexual designs / fanservice (great women in this game)
Call Of Duty: Black Ops III - Don't know, suspect not
Watch Dogs 2 - Don't know at all
Overwatch - Yes, plenty of sexualised character designs and fanservice here, and clearly a major part of the appeal
Forza Horizon 3 - Don't know, suspect not
Presuming 2 out of 10 but really need help with this one.

PC: (as above I'd need help here)
Fallout 4 - No sexualised character designs that I recall
CS Go - No idea, assuming not given youtube vids I've seen
DOTA 2 - Yes
Xcom 2 - No idea, assuming not given it's a military turn-based strategy
No Man's Sky - No
Dark Souls III - No
Civ IV - No
Rocket League - No
Total Warhammer - No idea at all, but I'm going to assume so as it's fantasy
The Witcher 3 - Yes, but I'd argue justified by the game content and narrative
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft V - Yes
Looks like about 4/12 from what I can tell.

Even if my assumptions are off about a couple of games, it's clear that across formats the most popular games are fairly free from sexualisation or male gaze pandering, imo.

That makes for an argument both ways - One is that if the top selling games aren't sexualised, why should any game need to do it? The other is that women have plenty to play that free from sexualisation and as such what the argument is really against is more niche games that are specifically targeting male gamers with pandering to survive against the big hitters. I think there could be some truth in both statements, really.
 

Firaveus

Member
Oct 30, 2017
16
Germany
Fair enough, likewise, I honestly appreciate you're trying to pin me down to something definitive. As a guy I'm probably not the person who should be defining anything here, and so I'm hesitant to start adding links to back up the terminology I'm using. Anyone else want to bail me out here, or has Vibri got me on the ropes :-)

According to Wikipedia:

"Sexualization (or sexualisation) is to make something sexual in character or quality, or to become aware of sexuality, especially in relation to men and women."

So I would say that "sexualisation" the emphasis is on "to make something sexual" with the actual intention of making something sexual.

"Sexy" on the other hand describes the actual state of something to be perceived as atractiv, sexual arousing etc.

This leaves me with the idea that "sexy" can be the result of "sexualisation". However in the definition of sexualisation I stated above I talk about the intention to make something sexual. So following this logic something could be sexy without beeing sexualised. Someone in this thread made an example with clows in antoher context, so I will borrow this idea.

Someone makes a clown-charakter and the intention is to make a "funny" character and clows are funny to this person, hence the design choice. Now there is another person who thinks clows are sexy because they are into clows. For this person the clown-design is sexy without the actual character beeing sexualisied because of the intention.

Don't know if this make sense to anyone besides me, but I tried :)
 

Mesoian

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
27,186
There's a lot of people in this topic with the mindset of "if quiet was not objectified in the game you wouldn't like it any less, meanwhile there are those who can't even play the game because of her"

I feel for those people, I do. But I don't agree I wouldn't like MGSV any less

I mean sure, the gameplay would be the same, and it's a game so that's kind of what matters right?

But truthfully, if quiet was dressed in proper covered up battle gear, I probably would have still enjoyed her character arc but I wouldn't have been as interested in choosing her as my buddy like every mission

The idea of having this really sexy sniper in a bikini as my sidekick definitely played into a power fantasy scenario that I really enjoyed. I found myself ignoring d horse and d dog so I could bring her along on the chopper rides.

I truly feel like Quiet elevated what I would call an 8/10 game to a 9/10 game. I was dedicated to maxing out our bond level and also making sure I unlocked all the cutscenes. Hell I sat there and wasted real time hanging out in a dumpster and smoking the phantom cigar because I heard it would trigger some kind of shower scene

I can see how that would be upsetting and gross to others and again I certainly empathize.

Looking back now I wish that Kojima had defaulted to the XOF costume and maybe hidden some of the pervy helicopter poses behind unlockable buddy options or something

What I'm trying to say is that while I'm not willing to give up what I like in my games even if harmful or damaging, I think there can be way more compromises in customizing how games are presented so the customers so we can avoid people feeling like they are being excluded, I don't want that!

I also love street fighter 5 as is, and will be the first to tell you I was one of those bummed out when R Mika's butt slap was censored a bit... but for everyone's sake why can't there be an option to default all characters to more standard gender friendly designs, and hide the cheesecake stuff behind options for those who enjoy it?

I don't care if someone spent 20 bucks on a new costume, if it would bother someone every game should offer the option to hide these things.

I play almost 99% of my games solo/offline so what I enjoy isn't affecting anyone and that's why I feel comfortable with what I like.

But if I was forced to play online and I knew it was in the company of women or other genders who might find my choices distasteful, I'd definitely think twice about selecting them at that time.

I do care about other people's feelings
Ya'll really did forget about the moments where Quiet is literally reduced to nothing but a pair of breasts on a screen didn't you?

Yrkip2.gif


People's problems with Quiet are not simply, "this woman is in inappropriate clothing." It's the pure fetishism surrounding everything about her. She is sex candy first, a character second, and that sucks for a game that's supposed to have something to say about the horrors and injustices of war.
 

Cranston

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,377
I actually think that the argument between sexualisation and objectification is relatively easy, at least when it comes to video games, and all you need is a ruler.

The childish, teenaged fantasy that infects so much output relies upon a total lack of proportion - ludicrous breast sizes against tiny, slight frames. It shares the same basic vocabulary as pornography. They are literal objects, as objects are designed.

Lara Croft, in contrast, is presented as a healthy young lady (who also happens to be stunningly beautiful). That a character is beautiful is the norm for any lead character. Nathan Drake is certainly a handsome chap too. I don't think we're quite at the stage where people are prepared to play as Compo out of Last of the Summer Wine.
 

Mesoian

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
27,186
I actually think that the argument between sexualisation and objectification is relatively easy, at least when it comes to video games, and all you need is a ruler.

The childish, teenaged fantasy that infects so much output relies upon a total lack of proportion - ludicrous breast sizes against tiny, slight frames. It shares the same basic vocabulary as pornography. They are literal objects, as objects are designed.

Lara Croft, in contrast, is presented as a healthy young lady (who also happens to be stunningly beautiful). That a character is beautiful is the norm for any lead character. Nathan Drake is certainly a handsome chap too. I don't think we're quite at the stage where people are prepared to play as Compo out of Last of the Summer Wine.
Oh I don't know, the Styx games are pretty good.

styx00.jpg
 

Redcrayon

Patient hunter
On Break
Oct 27, 2017
12,713
UK
According to Wikipedia:

"Sexualization (or sexualisation) is to make something sexual in character or quality, or to become aware of sexuality, especially in relation to men and women."

So I would say that "sexualisation" the emphasis is on "to make something sexual" with the actual intention of making something sexual.

"Sexy" on the other hand describes the actual state of something to be perceived as atractiv, sexual arousing etc.

This leaves me with the idea that "sexy" can be the result of "sexualisation". However in the definition of sexualisation I stated above I talk about the intention to make something sexual. So following this logic something could be sexy without beeing sexualised. Someone in this thread made an example with clows in antoher context, so I will borrow this idea.

Someone makes a clown-charakter and the intention is to make a "funny" character and clows are funny to this person, hence the design choice. Now there is another person who thinks clows are sexy because they are into clows. For this person the clown-design is sexy without the actual character beeing sexualisied because of the intention.

Don't know if this make sense to anyone besides me, but I tried :)
Thanks :-)
 

Dary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,471
The English Wilderness
Or how about the Neptunia series? Another all-female cast of highly capable women (arguably except for Nep herself, who is a joyfully adorable idiot, though she steps up to the plate when it counts and her charisma could be argued to be her most "capable" aspect), some of whom enjoy same-sex relationships with one another, and none of whom need men to support them or approve of what they do? So strong is the Neptunia cast in terms of characterisation and personality that they've transcended their original genre and medium; since the original PS3 game, they've appeared in traditional RPGs, beat 'em ups, management sims, strategy games, action RPGs and I have no doubt there will be plenty more enormously varied titles in their future.

I'll address this one, since I tried to play it once. Emphasis on "tried". Because this is the problem, see? You can as many of these diverse, well-developed, three-dimensional characters as you want, but when they all look like this:
Hyperdimension-Neptunia-Re-Birth-3-800x529.jpg

you're alienating an awful lot of people. I couldn't play the game for more than an hour or so because it creeped me the fuck out.

Now, if they could deliver a game filled with well-developed female characters without sticking them all in thongs...
 

SonofDonCD

Member
Oct 26, 2017
398
From my perspective, there are only two things that can help alleviate this situation:

1. Get more perspectives into the field. We need a more diverse group of creatives MAKING the games (both on the developer side as well as the publisher), in order for more diverse stories and characters to be prevalent. Yes, straight white males can and have been allies and made some diverse characters, but they are also the primary ones (at least in western circles) perpetrating the stereotypes the OP mentioned. If you want different types of stories and experiences, you need a different type of people, who can actually bring those other stories and experiences. It seems obvious, but often the problem isn't in recognizing what needs to change; it's in finding the path to get to that change. I don't have the answer to that, unfortunately.

2. In order for us as gamers and as a society to be able to have an actual conversation about controversial topics, ones that are divisive and bring many differing opinions to the forefront, we need one important ingredient: Empathy. Sure, sympathy is good and all, but it's not enough in this case. You need to be able to stop solely thinking about the topic at hand from YOUR perspective, and try to imagine it from someone else's. It actually isn't that hard of a thing to do, so long as you are actively willing to do so.

That's why these "I don't care" replies are so goddamned frustrating (especially when these comments come from people who say they are a minority or under-represented person). IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT YOU!!! You aren't the only game player in the world. You aren't the only type of game player in the world. You aren't the only game player who deserves to have games developed solely for your likes and disposition. There are as many different perspectives as there are players. While you can't satisfy everyone all of the time, you can at least try not to push people away by being purposely dismissive and divisive.

The example I like to use (though I use it less and less nowadays, for obvious reasons) is growing up as a black child in America I didn't see many people in media that looked like me. I was a happy kid, but was starting to gain knowledge about race and how it is a barrier to entry in society. But then The Cosby Show came out and it opened my eyes to different possibilities. Before that, I didn't really think I could be a doctor or a lawyer. I know I'm not the only one to feel that way. Another example: before Obama, most black parent's certainly weren't telling their children they could be anything in the world, even the President of the US. Now, they might.

Even if it doesn't matter to you or it doesn't affect you personally, can't you see how it can matter to others, or how it can affect others directly? Can it really hurt that much to show some empathy?

What harm does it do to you to just be a little bit more understanding of someone else's perspective? Especially someone who is in some way a minority and doesn't normally get represented very well or very often in today's media? Why is it that so many instead feel the need to get defensive or spout out "whataboutisms" instead of addressing the topic at hand directly? It seems to me that they either are incapable of feeling empathy, or they are actively choosing to ignore it.

And I don't know which is worse.
 

esserius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,373
I decided to do what I said earlier and look at the final charts for 2016 to see what the scale of the problem is among the most popular games. Couldn't find more than 5 handheld games as a 'chart'. The main problem with this analysis is that I haven't played a lot of these games and as such my impressions are based on a quick google of a title rather than a thorough knowledge of it. I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on any of them. Games with sexualisation are underlined in italics.

Mobile:
Pokemon Go - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mobile Strike - Don't believe there's any sexual designs
Game of War - Yes, in marketing alone, absolutely
Candy Crush Saga - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash of Clans - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash Royale - No sexual designs / fanservice
CSR Racing 2 - No sexual designs / fanservice
Lords Mobile - Some mildly sexual cartoon female designs
Super Mario Run - No sexual designs / fanservice
Marvel Mobile Champions - Don't know, but assuming yes as it's Marvel
3 out of 10 games

Handheld:
Pokemon Sun / Moon - Nothing out of place for the setting
Animal Crossing New Leaf - No sexual designs / fanservice
Super Mario Maker 3DS - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mario Party Star Rush - No sexual designs / fanservice
Smash Bros for 3DS - A couple of sexual fanservice character designs (ZSS, Bayonetta etc)
1 out of 5 games

Console (you'll have to help me here as I'm not familiar with most of these games)
FIFA 17 - No sexual designs / fanservice, women footballers playable
Call Of Duty: Infinite Warfare - Don't know, suspect not
Battlefield 1 - Don't know, suspect not
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft Auto V - Yes, but it's in context with the horrible, vicious world the game presents and entirely intentional
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - No sexual designs / fanservice (great women in this game)
Call Of Duty: Black Ops III - Don't know, suspect not
Watch Dogs 2 - Don't know at all
Overwatch - Yes, plenty of sexualised character designs and fanservice here, and clearly a major part of the appeal
Forza Horizon 3 - Don't know, suspect not
Presuming 2 out of 10 but really need help with this one.

PC: (as above I'd need help here)
Fallout 4 - No sexualised character designs that I recall
CS Go - No idea, assuming not given youtube vids I've seen
DOTA 2 - Yes
Xcom 2 - No idea, assuming not given it's a military turn-based strategy
No Man's Sky - No
Dark Souls III - No
Civ IV - No
Rocket League - No
Total Warhammer - No idea at all, but I'm going to assume so as it's fantasy
The Witcher 3 - Yes, but I'd argue justified by the game content and narrative
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft V - Yes
Looks like about 4/12 from what I can tell.

Even if my assumptions are off about a couple of games, it's clear that across formats the most popular games are fairly free from sexualisation or male gaze pandering, imo.

That makes for an argument both ways - One is that if the top selling games aren't sexualised, why should any game need to do it? The other is that women have plenty to play that free from sexualisation and as such what the argument is really against is more niche games that are specifically targeting male gamers with pandering to survive against the big hitters. I think there could be some truth in both statements, really.
This is a highly anecdotal analysis of a very small sample of games. I would be wary of extrapolating anything from such a small set of data, much less one where the researcher said they aren't even aware of the treatment of characters across multiple points in the data set (being off by "a couple games" skews your data by 10% or more in the example you've provided). At best this might be used as an extremely limited case study that would need further research to make any reasonable claims.
 

Redcrayon

Patient hunter
On Break
Oct 27, 2017
12,713
UK
I decided to do what I said earlier and look at the final charts for 2016 to see what the scale of the problem is among the most popular games. Couldn't find more than 5 handheld games as a 'chart'. The main problem with this analysis is that I haven't played a lot of these games and as such my impressions are based on a quick google of a title rather than a thorough knowledge of it. I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on any of them. Games with sexualisation are underlined in italics.

Mobile:
Pokemon Go - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mobile Strike - Don't believe there's any sexual designs
Game of War - Yes, in marketing alone, absolutely
Candy Crush Saga - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash of Clans - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash Royale - No sexual designs / fanservice
CSR Racing 2 - No sexual designs / fanservice
Lords Mobile - Some mildly sexual cartoon female designs
Super Mario Run - No sexual designs / fanservice
Marvel Mobile Champions - Don't know, but assuming yes as it's Marvel
3 out of 10 games

Handheld:
Pokemon Sun / Moon - Nothing out of place for the setting
Animal Crossing New Leaf - No sexual designs / fanservice
Super Mario Maker 3DS - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mario Party Star Rush - No sexual designs / fanservice
Smash Bros for 3DS - A couple of sexual fanservice character designs (ZSS, Bayonetta etc)
1 out of 5 games

Console (you'll have to help me here as I'm not familiar with most of these games)
FIFA 17 - No sexual designs / fanservice, women footballers playable
Call Of Duty: Infinite Warfare - Don't know, suspect not
Battlefield 1 - Don't know, suspect not
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft Auto V - Yes, but it's in context with the horrible, vicious world the game presents and entirely intentional
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - No sexual designs / fanservice (great women in this game)
Call Of Duty: Black Ops III - Don't know, suspect not
Watch Dogs 2 - Don't know at all
Overwatch - Yes, plenty of sexualised character designs and fanservice here, and clearly a major part of the appeal
Forza Horizon 3 - Don't know, suspect not
Presuming 2 out of 10 but really need help with this one.

PC: (as above I'd need help here)
Fallout 4 - No sexualised character designs that I recall
CS Go - No idea, assuming not given youtube vids I've seen
DOTA 2 - Yes
Xcom 2 - No idea, assuming not given it's a military turn-based strategy
No Man's Sky - No
Dark Souls III - No
Civ IV - No
Rocket League - No
Total Warhammer - No idea at all, but I'm going to assume so as it's fantasy
The Witcher 3 - Yes, but I'd argue justified by the game content and narrative
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft V - Yes
Looks like about 4/12 from what I can tell.

Even if my assumptions are off about a couple of games, it's clear that across formats the most popular games are fairly free from sexualisation or male gaze pandering, imo.

That makes for an argument both ways - One is that if the top selling games aren't sexualised, why should any game need to do it? The other is that women have plenty to play that free from sexualisation and as such what the argument is really against is more niche games that are specifically targeting male gamers with pandering to survive against the big hitters. I think there could be some truth in both statements, really.
Thanks for doing that- I agree with your first and last points from looking at that (it isn't necessary for big sales, and niche games/genres might have a bigger issue with it).

I don't agree that women have 'plenty to play'. 'Plenty to play' is of little comfort if you don't care about the top sellers. They make up a lot of sales but in terms of a percentage of the number of titles released, that list is by definition a drop in the ocean. With hundreds of games being released each year, I think focusing on the biggest sellers and assigning 'sexualised design' to 'niche' lets some like Metal Gear off the hook, and others like Xenoblade, being made and published and promoted by Nintendo, hide behind being a niche product rather than a key part of the promotion cycle for a platform holder in the runup to Christmas.

If someone told me 'you've got loads to play', then looking at the list above I'd choose two of them, as fantasy RPGs and their various sub-genres make up 95% of what I play.
 
Last edited:

DragonKeeper

Member
Nov 14, 2017
1,662
In any of these discussions my rule of thumb is "sexualization" = "sexual objectification". This is how it's being used within conversations about female representation a lot of the time, rather than its dictionary definition.
 

Deleted member 203

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,899
No, they're not the worst. Of course, as you suggest, it *can* be cowardly. It can be wilfully avoiding the issue due to a lack of courage. Moreover, it could be even worse - perhaps someone actually thinks something unpleasant and doesn't want to admit it, so cloaks themselves in the robes of even-handedness. But that's simply a judgement call we all have to make as individuals.

There are far too many internet wallies around at the moment who despite having absolutely no knowledge whatsoever of 20th Century history like pretend they're living under the Third Reich circa 1941. It's embarrassing. And as Yeats suggested, 'the worst are full of passionate intensity'.
Wow a quote from a dead white guy who thinks people who are passionate are the worst. Sounds like something a cowardly centrist would say. let me throw quote back at you. Also you're literally doing the thing Boogie always does, which is saying nothing and making it seem like that's the intellectual thing to do. Figures you'd defend him.

mlk-cfw.jpg
 

Cranston

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,377
Wow a quote from a dead white guy who thinks people who are passionate are the worst. Sounds like something a cowardly centrist would say. let me throw quote back at you. Also you're literally doing the thing Boogie always does, which is saying nothing and making it seem like that's the intellectual thing to do. Figures you'd defend him.

mlk-cfw.jpg

Great quote.

But he uses the word 'almost'.
 

Mesoian

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
27,186
I decided to do what I said earlier and look at the final charts for 2016 to see what the scale of the problem is among the most popular games. Couldn't find more than 5 handheld games as a 'chart'. The main problem with this analysis is that I haven't played a lot of these games and as such my impressions are based on a quick google of a title rather than a thorough knowledge of it. I'd be happy to be corrected if I'm wrong on any of them. Games with sexualisation are underlined in italics.

Mobile:
Pokemon Go - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mobile Strike - Don't believe there's any sexual designs
Game of War - Yes, in marketing alone, absolutely
Candy Crush Saga - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash of Clans - No sexual designs / fanservice
Clash Royale - No sexual designs / fanservice
CSR Racing 2 - No sexual designs / fanservice
Lords Mobile - Some mildly sexual cartoon female designs
Super Mario Run - No sexual designs / fanservice
Marvel Mobile Champions - Don't know, but assuming yes as it's Marvel
3 out of 10 games

Handheld:
Pokemon Sun / Moon - Nothing out of place for the setting
Animal Crossing New Leaf - No sexual designs / fanservice
Super Mario Maker 3DS - No sexual designs / fanservice
Mario Party Star Rush - No sexual designs / fanservice
Smash Bros for 3DS - A couple of sexual fanservice character designs (ZSS, Bayonetta etc)
1 out of 5 games

Console (you'll have to help me here as I'm not familiar with most of these games)
FIFA 17 - No sexual designs / fanservice, women footballers playable
Call Of Duty: Infinite Warfare - Don't know, suspect not
Battlefield 1 - Don't know, suspect not
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft Auto V - Yes, but it's in context with the horrible, vicious world the game presents and entirely intentional
Uncharted 4: A Thief's End - No sexual designs / fanservice (great women in this game)
Call Of Duty: Black Ops III - Don't know, suspect not
Watch Dogs 2 - Don't know at all
Overwatch - Yes, plenty of sexualised character designs and fanservice here, and clearly a major part of the appeal
Forza Horizon 3 - Don't know, suspect not
Presuming 2 out of 10 but really need help with this one.

PC: (as above I'd need help here)
Fallout 4 - No sexualised character designs that I recall
CS Go - No idea, assuming not given youtube vids I've seen
DOTA 2 - Yes
Xcom 2 - No idea, assuming not given it's a military turn-based strategy
No Man's Sky - No
Dark Souls III - No
Civ IV - No
Rocket League - No
Total Warhammer - No idea at all, but I'm going to assume so as it's fantasy
The Witcher 3 - Yes, but I'd argue justified by the game content and narrative
The Division - Don't know, suspect not
Grand Theft V - Yes
Looks like about 4/12 from what I can tell.

Even if my assumptions are off about a couple of games, it's clear that across formats the most popular games are fairly free from sexualisation or male gaze pandering, imo.

That makes for an argument both ways - One is that if the top selling games aren't sexualised, why should any game need to do it? The other is that women have plenty to play that free from sexualisation and as such what the argument is really against is more niche games that are specifically targeting male gamers with pandering to survive against the big hitters. I think there could be some truth in both statements, really.
1.) The argument of, "don't know, I assume not", is a bad stance to take in any argument about anything.
2.) The suggestion of, "just stick to nintendo if you don't want oversexed stereotypes or ultraviolence" isn't a meaningful suggestion. It's just telling people to ignore what most of the game industry is doing.
3.) We are in a year where many of the games being offered as suggestions for game of the year are smaller independent titles, why you would choose to ignore those is baffling.

Because according to this list and your argument, the solution for women is "play competitive shooters, sports games or games that don't actually have characters in them." Do you understand how demeaning that is? And if even if you didn't mean to talk down to women with this post, other people are using this exact same argument to say, "there's no problem, there's still stuff for you to play, so shut up."

Try this. Imagine your girlfriend, who doesn't play games for some reason, decides she's going to take an interest in gaming. What games would you recommend for her to play? What games would you suggest she avoid? Start there, at the point where an outsider, regardless of gender, might feel invited by the concept of video games.
 

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
This is a highly anecdotal analysis of a very small sample of games. I would be wary of extrapolating anything from such a small set of data, much less one where the researcher said they aren't even aware of the treatment of characters across multiple points in the data set (being off by "a couple games" skews your data by 10% or more in the example you've provided). At best this might be used as an extremely limited case study that would need further research to make any reasonable claims.

I'm not an analyst, I'm not a researcher, I'm not working with 'data sets'. I'm just a guy trying to make a point on a discussion forum, using some basic charts to try and get a grip on the scale of this problem and asking for input. But it's better than nothing (better than some vague idea that almost all games are sexualised) and it does make a clear point even if you ignore the games I didn't play - the majority of the most popular game in 2016 were free from sexualisation. Use that point to make whatever argument you want, but I think the point is a fair one and it stands. That point doesn't need extrapolation, it is what it is.

Thanks for doing that- I agree with your first and last points (it isn't necessary for big sales, and niche games/genres have a bigger issue with it).

I don't agree that women have 'plenty to play'. 'Plenty to play' is of little comfort if you don't care about the top sellers. They make up a lot of sales but in terms of a percentage of the number of titles released, that list is by definition a drop in the Ocean. With hundreds of games being released each year, I think focusing on the biggest sellers and assigning 'sexualised design' to 'niche' lets some like Metal Gear off the hook, and others like Xenoblade, being made and published and promoted by Nintendo, hide behind being a niche product rather than a key part of the promotion cycle for a platform holder in the runup to Christmas.

If someone told me 'you've got loads to play', then looking at the list above I'd choose two of them, as fantasy RPGs and their various sub-genres make up 95% of what I play.

Sure, tastes matter. Genres matter. But again this goes back to whether this is a problem with the gaming industry, as it is often presented, or if the gaming industry is fine as a whole and this is a problem with specific genres of games. Because those are very different things, imo. You can't write off the entire mobile space, for example, and I see very little sexualisation in that space. There's a difference between 'There's nothing for women to play if they want to avoid sexualised designs' (the charts show this to be way off) and 'There's nothing in the genre I particularly like for women to play if they want to avoid sexualised designs'.

Your point that this is just 40 out of hundreds of games released that year is a fair one - I'm no analyst and can't go through them all. But it's better than nothing and it shows what the most popular games were and gives a rough idea of whether they were sexualised. That has to be better than nothing, and it does show that there are a ton of popular female friendly video games out there.

1.) The argument of, "don't know, I assume not", is a bad stance to take in any argument about anything.
2.) The suggestion of, "just stick to nintendo if you don't want oversexed stereotypes or ultraviolence" isn't a meaningful suggestion. It's just telling people to ignore what most of the game industry is doing.
3.) We are in a year where many of the games being offered as suggestions for game of the year are smaller independent titles, why you would choose to ignore those is baffling.

Because according to this list and your argument, the solution for women is "play competitive shooters, sports games or games that don't actually have characters in them." Do you understand how demeaning that is? And if even if you didn't mean to talk down to women with this post, other people are using this exact same argument to say, "there's no problem, there's still stuff for you to play, so shut up."

Try this. Imagine your girlfriend, who doesn't play games for some reason, decides she's going to take an interest in gaming. What games would you recommend for her to play? What games would you suggest she avoid? Start there, at the point where an outsider, regardless of gender, might feel invited by the concept of video games.

It's demeaning to suggest playing the most popular games in the world across all formats? What the fuck am I reading?

I chose one specific idea - the top charts - to show that there are a ton of games without sexualisation. That's all I did. It's a fair point. If we want to discuss narrative only games then let's make it clear that the discussion is about that and not video games as a whole.

If a female friend wanted to start gaming, I'd suggest she start with my favourite games, which are Nintendo games. Oh shit, have I demeaned her? Please help.
 

esserius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,373
I'm not an analyst, I'm not a researcher, I'm not working with 'data sets'. I'm just a guy trying to make a point on a discussion forum, using some basic charts to try and get a grip on the scale of this problem and asking for input. But it's better than nothing (better than some vague idea that almost all games are sexualised) and it does make a clear point even if you ignore the games I didn't play - the majority of the most popular game in 2016 were free from sexualisation. Use that point to make whatever argument you want, but I think the point is a fair one and it stands. That point doesn't need extrapolation, it is what it is.
Ban, I presented that information because your claims are coming from a place of extreme haze. You are arguing from a self-admitted point of ignorance, that you "don't know" critical information for many of the games you are claiming as representative, and you haven't given us any evidence that these are the best-selling games, or what your criteria are for best-selling, or what corroborating information you have regarding sales, much less that these are the majority of best-selling games for 2016.
 

Cranston

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,377
You must be really pleased with yourself huh. Oh well at least now I know you're just a troll, or just totally intellectually dishonest and devoid of an actual point of view.

Not a troll in the least. Having a perfectly good conversation with other people.

Your post was simply venemous and boring. And you need to be aware of the fact you sound like Zapp Brannigan 'curse their neutrality!'.
 

SumYung

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
76
Wasn't she a completely lost rookie in the first one? I mean the violence was for sure over the top but that doesn't mean the situation wasn't completely illogical either, the way better job is character progression
The producers literally said of the first game that they want the player to feel like "I want to protect her". It caused a little controversy at the time.

https://kotaku.com/5917400/youll-want-to-protect-the-new-less-curvy-lara-croft
 

Deleted member 203

user requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,899
Not cool, at all. I consider myself somewhat centrist on several social and fiscal issues. Back in the old site, centrists were insulted. This site is a chance for a fresh start for all of us. So... Don't do this. Please.
To be centrist is literally to not have an opinion. Do some research, take a stance. Centrism is an ideology based on explicitly not taking a stance. You should never aspire to be a centrist. You can be undecided on something, sure. But that's not what centrism is.
 

Cranston

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,377
To be centrist is literally to not have an opinion. Do some research, take a stance. Centrism is an ideology based on explicitly not taking a stance. You should never aspire to be a centrist. You can be undecided on something, sure. But that's not what centrism is.

I'm genuinely posting this in good faith.

You've got the wrong word. You're thinking of 'neutral'. To be neutral is when you abstain from giving a point of view. People dislike neutrals for the reasons you suggest. If you're centrist, it means you hold moderate political views which usually means trying to broker compromise and balance competing rights.
 

Yabab

Banned
Nov 24, 2017
97
São Paulo, Brazil
To be centrist is literally to not have an opinion. Do some research, take a stance. Centrism is an ideology based on explicitly not taking a stance. You should never aspire to be a centrist. You can be undecided on something, sure. But that's not what centrism is.

That is factually wrong. To be a centrist is to accept that a goal can be achieved in multiple ways and that each way has its specific features.
 

Deleted member 30569

User requested account closure
Banned
Nov 3, 2017
722
To be centrist is literally to not have an opinion. Do some research, take a stance. Centrism is an ideology based on explicitly not taking a stance. You should never aspire to be a centrist. You can be undecided on something, sure. But that's not what centrism is.

You've already been responded to, and I agree with both responders so far that you are, indeed, incorrect.

From the very first paragraph of Wikipedia on "centrism":

"In politics, centrism or the centre is a political outlook or specific position that involves acceptance or support of a balance of a degree of social equality and a degree of social hierarchy, while opposing political changes which would result in a significant shift of society either strongly to the left or the right.[1]"

Let's not make up definitions, please.
 

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
Ban, I presented that information because your claims are coming from a place of extreme haze. You are arguing from a self-admitted point of ignorance, that you "don't know" critical information for many of the games you are claiming as representative, and you haven't given us any evidence that these are the best-selling games, or what your criteria are for best-selling, or what corroborating information you have regarding sales, much less that these are the majority of best-selling games for 2016.

Here's the kicker... I don't think any of that matters. I think the point stands either way whether these were precisely the most popular games or just super popular games anecdotally. We can still see the basic point I'm trying to make illuminated - that the top games are largely free from sexualisation.

But here we go anyway:
PC/Steam: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-01-02-best-selling-steam-games-of-2016-revealed
Consoles: http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/16/50-best-selling-video-games-of-2016-revealed-6384231/
Handheld: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/2016s-best-selling-games-in-the-us-revealed/1100-6447090/ (I couldn't get a full-year list of these games so extrapolated from December - should be safe enough).
Mobile: https://www.nyfa.edu/student-resour...grossing-mobile-games-and-how-they-got-there/

Those are the lists I used. Precision is NOT important here, to the point I'm making. I said that in my orignal post. This is NOT research, it's just a bit of effort put behind my argument that this is a genre problem and not an 'industry-at-large' problem.

To be centrist is literally to not have an opinion. Do some research, take a stance. Centrism is an ideology based on explicitly not taking a stance. You should never aspire to be a centrist. You can be undecided on something, sure. But that's not what centrism is.

This is completely wrong and is an opinion I see a frustrating amount. What you're talking about is neutrality.
 

Mesoian

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 28, 2017
27,186
It's demeaning to suggest playing the most popular games in the world across all formats? What the fuck am I reading?

I chose one specific idea - the top charts - to show that there are a ton of games without sexualisation. That's all I did. It's a fair point. If we want to discuss narrative only games then let's make it clear that the discussion is about that and not video games as a whole.

If a female friend wanted to start gaming, I'd suggest she start with my favourite games, which are Nintendo games. Oh shit, have I demeaned her? Please help.

It's not though.

Your suggestion, for this list, is to stick with games that have so little to say or are so competitive focused that characters or narrative don't factor into them. "Stay in this nintendo box and you'll always be safe", "stay in this mobile box, the nature of the games are so milquetoast and basic that you'll never have to question anything","stick with these shooters, characters and design will never factor into it because of the playing field that needs to stay even".

Top Sales are a bad identifier when most of the games responsible for said sales are the result of simply being competitive first games. Would you actually tell someone who's vaguely interested in video games to start with FIFA or CSGo?

I mean, hell, if your suggestion really would be, "just stick with nintendo" I guess I can't fault you, those games are generally excellent. But it's a bad solution for someone looking for a more interesting, more diverse experience than annual shooter X, Bi-annual platformer Y. Going by sales is bad. So let's go by critical acclaim.

Code:
97
Super Mario Odyssey (Switch)
User: 8.9
Oct 27, 2017
3.
96
The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (WIIU)
User: 8.1
Mar 3, 2017
4.
93
Divinity: Original Sin II (PC)
User: 8.3
Sep 14, 2017
5.
93
Persona 5 (PS4)
User: 9.1
Apr 4, 2017
6.
92
What Remains of Edith Finch (XONE)
User: 7.0
Jul 19, 2017
7.
92
Undertale (PS4)
User: 6.3
Aug 15, 2017
8.
92
Mario Kart 8 Deluxe (Switch)
User: 8.5
Apr 28, 2017
9.
91
Shovel Knight: Treasure Trove (Switch)
User: 7.9
Mar 3, 2017
10.
90
Bayonetta (PC)
User: 8.4
Apr 11, 2017
11.
89
Lone Echo (PC)
User: 7.2
Jul 20, 2017
12.
89
F1 2017 (PC)
User: 7.5
Aug 24, 2017
13.
89
Final Fantasy XIV: Stormblood (PS4)
User: 7.6
Jun 20, 2017
14.
89
Rez Infinite (PC)
User: 7.0
Aug 9, 2017
15.
89
Horizon Zero Dawn (PS4)
User: 8.3
Feb 28, 2017
16.
89
Injustice 2 (XONE)
User: 7.9
May 16, 2017
17.
89
88
XCOM 2: War of the Chosen (PC)
User: 7.7
Aug 29, 2017
19.
88
88
Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus (XONE)
User: 6.1
Oct 27, 2017
21.
88
NieR: Automata (PS4)
User: 8.7
Mar 7, 2017
22.
88
SteamWorld Dig 2 (Switch)
23.
88
Cuphead (PC)

Here's the top 20 games of the year as according to metacritic (Edith Finch and zelda were on there twice so I eliminated number 1). Granted Metacritic is subjective at best, but it's a way to build a better list to review. This is a much more interesting list, there are a lot more surprises, nothing is left out for being niche or lower budgeted. I've played most of these, and can attest that these are generally excellent games in a year of excellent games.

Of this list of 20, 25% of games indulge in objectification of it's characters in way or another. 1/4th of games in a particularly upstanding year of games, including probably the strongest line up of female protagonists to date.

The solution to the problem of objectification shouldn't be, "just don't play those games, you have other things to play". There is nothing wrong with asking developer to be more mindful of how their characters are treated in game. It is not a bad thing to point the needlessness of 2B's exploding skirt and labeling it "just a bit of pandering", because that's what it is, a bit of pandering. There is a scene in Wolf 2 that I will not spoil because WOWWWIE IT IS SOMETHING, but it is there for little reason other than to revel in some good ole american "sensibilities" (It's sexual pandering). We need to stop vilifying people who complain when they are pushed away by the idea of objectification being a fun, harmless notion. It's fine if you don't care, but we're not here to discuss how you don't care. We're here to discuss why this thing is so pervasive, what purpose does it serve, and why, in a particularly good year for video games, ~1/4 of games still have dumb shit in the ways of sexualization, objectification and pandering that we have to step over in order to enjoy an otherwise excellent work.

Yes, Nintendo games are good. Mario and Zelda are probably my number 1 and 2 games of the year. But to suggest to ignore some of the best games of the year because, "you have other things to play" is a mean spirited thing to say. Chastising people for their opinions on others' creative visions is not how this industry grows, it's how it stays stagnant.
 

GUMDROP

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
375
That is factually wrong. To be a centrist is to accept that a goal can be achieved in multiple ways and that each way has its specific features.

"Centrism" is border-line anti-intellectualism in almost every case, claiming that the average of two people's thoughts must be the answer to the riddle. To be a centrist is to have no values; to have only an equation formed from the ideas of others that ultimately totals zero. In the vast majority of cases, "centrists" confuse having opinions on both sides of the spectrum as being in the middle. For all the pragmatism and rationality the clergy of the moderate likes to preach, they fail to see the reality in front of them - there is, in fact, a right and wrong in this world. And no amount of Quillette articles will change that.

Of course, that's just my opinion. The truth might be somewhere in the middle of us.
 

Deleted member 2809

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
25,478
And even then, you can be a centrist on certain issues. Economy, free speech, etc.
But being a centrist on civil rights ? Get out of here.
 

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
It's not though.

Your suggestion, for this list, is to stick with games that have so little to say or are so competitive focused that characters or narrative don't factor into them. "Stay in this nintendo box and you'll always be safe", "stay in this mobile box, the nature of the games are so milquetoast and basic that you'll never have to question anything","stick with these shooters, characters and design will never factor into it because of the playing field that needs to stay even".

Top Sales are a bad identifier when most of the games responsible for said sales are the result of simply being competitive first games. Would you actually tell someone who's vaguely interested in video games to start with FIFA or CSGo?

I mean, hell, if your suggestion really would be, "just stick with nintendo" I guess I can't fault you, those games are generally excellent. But it's a bad solution for someone looking for a more interesting, more diverse experience than annual shooter X, Bi-annual platformer Y. Going by sales is bad. So let's go by critical acclaim.


Here's the top 20 games of the year as according to metacritic (Edith Finch and zelda were on there twice so I eliminated number 1). Granted Metacritic is subjective at best, but it's a way to build a better list to review. This is a much more interesting list, there are a lot more surprises, nothing is left out for being niche or lower budgeted. I've played most of these, and can attest that these are generally excellent games in a year of excellent games.

Of this list of 20, 25% of games indulge in objectification of it's characters in way or another. 1/4th of games in a particularly upstanding year of games, including probably the strongest line up of female protagonists to date.

The solution to the problem of objectification shouldn't be, "just don't play those games, you have other things to play". There is nothing wrong with asking developer to be more mindful of how their characters are treated in game. It is not a bad thing to point the needlessness of 2B's exploding skirt and labeling it "just a bit of pandering", because that's what it is, a bit of pandering. There is a scene in Wolf 2 that I will not spoil because WOWWWIE IT IS SOMETHING, but it is there for little reason other than to revel in some good ole american "sensibilities" (It's sexual pandering). We need to stop vilifying people who complain when they are pushed away by the idea of objectification being a fun, harmless notion. It's fine if you don't care, but we're not here to discuss how you don't care. We're here to discuss why this thing is so pervasive, what purpose does it serve, and why, in a particularly good year for video games, ~1/4 of games still have dumb shit in the ways of sexualization, objectification and pandering that we have to step over in order to enjoy an otherwise excellent work.

Yes, Nintendo games are good. Mario and Zelda are probably my number 1 and 2 games of the year. But to suggest to ignore some of the best games of the year because, "you have other things to play" is a mean spirited thing to say. Chastising people for their opinions on others' creative visions is not how this industry grows, it's how it stays stagnant.

We're on entirely different pages here, because

a) You're looking at games subjectively in your opening paragraphs - what you personally think is interesting - and I'm looking at objective lists of what people actually buy - what they want. And
b) I think Fifa would be an outstanding place for many people to start playing video games, because it's an excellent video game which most of my friends play (so there's a social experience) and most people already know the rules of the game, therefore only need to learn the controls. I'd absolutely recommend someone to start with Fifa.

Honestly, the way you dismiss non-narrative games and commercial successful games is absurd, and that's my whole point - the video game industry is way, way bigger than that narrow slice of games you and others personally like.

And if 25% of your list of games have objectification, that's actually not too dissimilar from the rate in mine. And again, that's not a huge amount. Which means that both criticially AND commercially successful games are largely free from sexualisation. Far less than the majority, anyway. At which point the argument becomes against any games having sexualisation, rather than arguing that the overwhelming amount of games do - which is what I understood the argument to be. 'Female sexualisation as default' etc etc.
 

esserius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,373
Here's the kicker... I don't think any of that matters. I think the point stands either way whether these were precisely the most popular games or just super popular games anecdotally. We can still see the basic point I'm trying to make illuminated - that the top games are largely free from sexualisation.

But here we go anyway:
PC/Steam: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2017-01-02-best-selling-steam-games-of-2016-revealed
Consoles: http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/16/50-best-selling-video-games-of-2016-revealed-6384231/
Handheld: https://www.gamespot.com/articles/2016s-best-selling-games-in-the-us-revealed/1100-6447090/ (I couldn't get a full-year list of these games so extrapolated from December - should be safe enough).
Mobile: https://www.nyfa.edu/student-resour...grossing-mobile-games-and-how-they-got-there/

Those are the lists I used. Precision is NOT important here, to the point I'm making. I said that in my orignal post. This is NOT research, it's just a bit of effort put behind my argument that this is a genre problem and not an 'industry-at-large' problem.
When you are using a small set of data, precision becomes extremely important. You can't make broad claims about a small set of information without extremely precise points of focus. This data isn't even consistent, since some of these charts are using worldwide sales, the mobile games are using games that weren't published in 2016... this makes your argument about an already small set of information weaker, not stronger. What's more, there isn't any information that you've dug up that claims these games are free from sexualization, it's just your anecdotal assessment. What you can say is that a majority of games you picked based articles about their sales in 2016 didn't have sexualization according to your personal assessment of sexualization (which you also haven't defined).
 

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
When you are using a small set of data, precision becomes extremely important. You can't make broad claims about a small set of information without extremely precise points of focus. This data isn't even consistent, since some of these charts are using worldwide sales, the mobile games are using games that weren't published in 2016... this makes your argument about an already small set of information weaker, not stronger. What's more, there isn't any information that you've dug up that claims these games are free from sexualization, it's just your anecdotal assessment. What you can say is that a majority of games you picked based articles about their sales in 2016 didn't have sexualization according to your personal assessment of sexualization (which you also haven't defined).

I don't give a single shit about any of this nitpicking data analysis bollocks. I have said that before. I am not a researcher, and I don't care. Nor am I comparing games to other forms of media (where did you even get that from?) You seem to be taking my post for something it's not, again and again.

It's a broad argument supporting my opinion that most games don't feature sexualised designs. It doesn't need to be any more precise than I've made it to make the point that I want it to. As for the definition of sexualisation, why should I have to define it when others in this thread have been talking about it for pages without issue? If you want to know, I'd say that it's a character design that is clearly designed to appeal sexually to the viewer, either solely, primarily or to a major extent.

"Centrism" is border-line anti-intellectualism in almost every case, claiming that the average of two people's thoughts must be the answer to the riddle. To be a centrist is to have no values; to have only an equation formed from the ideas of others that ultimately totals zero. In the vast majority of cases, "centrists" confuse having opinions on both sides of the spectrum as being in the middle. For all the pragmatism and rationality the clergy of the moderate likes to preach, they fail to see the reality in front of them - there is, in fact, a right and wrong in this world. And no amount of Quillette articles will change that.

Of course, that's just my opinion. The truth might be somewhere in the middle of us.

This is nonsense. Utter nonsense.

Centrists are those who happen to believe that given the current arguments in a given area, that the correct answer DOES happen to lie in the middle, not that it always MUST.

There are many things I'm a centrist on, and many areas where I'm on the fringe.
 

Digital

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,166
"Centrism" is border-line anti-intellectualism in almost every case, claiming that the average of two people's thoughts must be the answer to the riddle. To be a centrist is to have no values; to have only an equation formed from the ideas of others that ultimately totals zero. In the vast majority of cases, "centrists" confuse having opinions on both sides of the spectrum as being in the middle. For all the pragmatism and rationality the clergy of the moderate likes to preach, they fail to see the reality in front of them - there is, in fact, a right and wrong in this world. And no amount of Quillette articles will change that.

Of course, that's just my opinion. The truth might be somewhere in the middle of us.
Ends a rant against centrism with centrism. Lol

And as we all know, there's nothing more intellectual than a false dichotomy.
 

GUMDROP

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
375
This is patently and objectively false.
If you are a so-called centrists, your goal is to find a balance between two pre-existing sides. You are relying on the thoughts of others. Their values, not yours. And in this, the centrist is hamstrung by an assumption of good faith. If the Left opinion is that marriage should be a right to all humanity, and the Right's counter is that marriage began as a Christian rite and homosexuality opposes Christian values - what is the centrist take? Because if you are to argue for some balance between these two ideals, you have to ignore the obvious logical failure of the Right; that is, that marriage is a wholly Christian affair in modern American. And if you acknowledge that the Right is wrong, well.. you aren't really keeping the two sides in balance based on their own ideals. Rather, you are now changing the arguments to find a new "center", or your own opinion.

Ends a rant against centrism with centrism. Lol

And as we all know, there's nothing more intellectual than a false dichotomy.

I also have trouble with irony. I forgive you.

And what is the false dichotomy here? Just so we are all clear.
 

Redcrayon

Patient hunter
On Break
Oct 27, 2017
12,713
UK
It's a broad argument supporting my opinion that most games don't feature sexualised designs. It doesn't need to be any more precise than I've made it to make the point that I want it to. As for the definition of sexualisation, why should I have to define it when others in this thread have been talking about it for pages without issue? If you want to know, I'd say that it's a character design that is clearly designed to appeal sexually to the viewer, either solely, primarily or to a major extent.
It doesn't, though? It supports the idea that a handful of the biggest franchises don't feature sexualised designs (and some of those barely feature women at all for various reasons).

You're using a narrow selection of the games with the biggest, perhaps the most broad, appeal to then claim that supports a premise that 'most games don't feature sexualised designs'. It's not a cross section, it's by definition a self-selecting group.
 

esserius

Member
Oct 26, 2017
7,373
I don't give a single shit about any of this nitpicking data analysis bollocks. I have said that before. I am not a researcher, and I don't care. Nor am I comparing games to other forms of media (where did you even get that from?) You seem to be taking my post for something it's not, again and again.

It's a broad argument supporting my opinion that most games don't feature sexualised designs. It doesn't need to be any more precise than I've made it to make the point that I want it to. As for the definition of sexualisation, why should I have to define it when others in this thread have been talking about it for pages without issue? If you want to know, I'd say that it's a character design that is clearly designed to appeal sexually to the viewer, either solely, primarily or to a major extent.
All I'm doing is analyzing the strength of your argument. And what you've presented doesn't appear to be a very strong argument, based on the analysis. I apologize if it comes across as nitpicking or that I'm targeting you, that's not my intent. I'm simply concerned that the argument doesn't have the strength or reliability you claim it does. I don't think it's reasonable to make the conclusion you have based on the information you've provided.
 

Redcrayon

Patient hunter
On Break
Oct 27, 2017
12,713
UK
And even then, you can be a centrist on certain issues. Economy, free speech, etc.
But being a centrist on civil rights ? Get out of here.
This. Big difference in taking a central position between 'big government vs small government' and 'equal representation' vs 'inequality'. A centrist position in a severely unbalanced status quo supports that status quo, rather than siding against an large slide either way. Perhaps it comes down to whether an individual recognises an imbalance or not before deciding whether the position they hold is then centrist? Anyway, this is kinda heading off topic.
 
Last edited:

Bán

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,307
It doesn't, though? It supports the idea that a handful of the biggest franchises don't feature sexualised designs (and some of those barely feature women at all for various reasons).

You're using a narrow selection of the games with the biggest, perhaps the most broad, appeal to then claim that supports a premise that 'most games don't feature sexualised designs'. It's not a cross section, it's by definition a self-selecting group.

Sorry, once again you are correct. It shows that most of the most popular games don't feature sexualised designs. Very correct, and you're right to pull that up.

Personally, though, I believe it holds true for the rest of the industry. I don't have anything to back that up other than my own anecdotal experience being a gamer. Perhaps I'll go look at a schedule of recent releases over the past month. Between that, the best-sellers list, and the metacritic list of critically acclaimed games that mesoian presented you'd have a pretty fair cross-section of games that you'd be looking at.
 

GUMDROP

Banned
Oct 29, 2017
375
This is nonsense. Utter nonsense.

Centrists are those who happen to believe that given the current arguments in a given area, that the correct answer DOES happen to lie in the middle, not that it always MUST.

There are many things I'm a centrist on, and many areas where I'm on the fringe.

And what about areas where you don't believe that the answer lies in the middle? If you side with Conservatives 25% of the time and are in the middle the other 75%, do you have centrist or Conservative values? You cannot always be in the middle while using any kind of informed thought. Centrism is a fallacy. People can have a centrist opinion on a given issue, but you cannot be a "Centrist" unless you refuse to see any issue.
 

Cranston

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
1,377
If the Left opinion is that marriage should be a right to all humanity, and the Right's counter is that marriage began as a Christian rite and homosexuality opposes Christian values - what is the centrist take?

In principle, easy.

Is marriage a state or private function? As it is the former, homosexual couples have the right to ask for an ordained minister to conduct their service.

The trickier question is location; churches themselves are private property, so you have to weight the competing right of a private institution to conduct its own affairs against the right of a national subject to pursue his or her wishes. On the whole, I do think private institutions have that right, but, to muddy the waters further, does the fact that churches benefit from enormous tax privileges make them duty bound to open their doors to all state subjects.

In short, the centrist would approach a question like this in the style of a judge. Consider the current legal framework and then try to apply objective principles. Where they conflict (as is inevitable), try to find a moderate position.