Shame, there are no games for women

[Key Board]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Consider why he thought that. Consider the reputation anime has built for itself... subservient moeblobs, tentacle rape and general all-around male domination of female objects.

Yes, it's not all like that. Yes, some of anime and manga's bad rep comes from cultural differences between the West and Japan. Yes, there is a mild stigma against liking "cartoons" when you aren't a kid anymore.

But enough of it exists to give the medium a bad reputation, especially among women. The same goes for video games, but gaming isn't nearly as bad as anime. I freely admit to people that I'm a gamer, but I do not volunteer that I enjoy anime and manga. I know damn well that most people will assume the worst.

Short version: Kotaku guy has a point.

My point is that the kotaku guy missed the point of why this game is taking this direction.

As said with my Gurren Lagann comparison earlier, some games are MEANT to be over-exaggerated and ridiculous. If it makes some people uncomfortable then sorry.. some games are MEANT to be like that

remember Mortal Kombat? exactly

The point is that some things are clearly alienating to some, but you should not try to change them to make it more accessible to others

Again, I am not talking about video games as a whole. I'm talking about specific cases like this game where it is clear what the tone of the game is.

That's the reason why people give DmC flac. If a a series that is best known for tricky and sometimes unforgiving combat, you do not streamline it and make it more accessible to a larger group of people.

[cronnoponno]

I'm not saying most titles don't apply to a male fantasy, but on the topic of the dwarf in the Dragon's Crown game(a game I probably won't be playing) I don't really see how a muscled up dwarf= male power Fantasy, I don't know much about the game, but I think the dwarfs buff build is a stereotype of dwarves in general.

Most dwarfs I hear about are either immensely fat, or totally muscled up beyond comparison.

[Key Board]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

I'm okay with sexual objectification in video games as long as it's equally applied and fair.

Right now, it's not. Your female characters are sexually objectified while your male characters are designed around a male power fantasy. Both methods of objectification are serving the male interest ONLY.

You wanna make a sexy game? Sure. Put some sexy, big-breasted girls in, but put some delicious mancandy in there for the ladies. Why should the guys care? It's not like they're going to be looking at the male characters, anyway... unless there's something they aren't admitting, after all.

If the intent is to make something that is meant to be sexy for both genders than yes, I'm sure they would do it.

But not all games intend to do that. And they shouldn't be forced to.

I'm going to repeat what I proposed earlier in this thread.

I think gaming should be more like comic books. Rather then trying to bunch everything into one genre that hits the largest target audience, it should embrace specialization and branch off.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Short version: Kotaku guy has a point.

Whatever point Kotaku guy tried to make, if he even had any besides drumming up traffic, which is all Kotaku do these days, it is lost in the childish ad hominem attack that apparently constitutes game journalism in his sorry pos book. I mean, ffs, the guy is resorting to calling the sorceress a loli-bait, yes, the same one which he just complained was too sexists because of the oversized boobs, apparently is also guilty of being a loli.

Originally Posted by cronnoponno

I highly agree with the Article... but I still don't think games that DO target a specific gender or culture should be completely eradicated, there's nothing wrong with a game like Senran Kagura, I guess the issue is that games that DO take themselves a bit more seriously and aren't advertised as being eye-candy do serve that eyecandy

I think this sums up how I feel about this whole fiasco:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/2013/04/...cter-selection

also this

[sa547]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Short version: Kotaku guy has a point.

Never liked their articles -- or most of Gawker -- as their credo and quality of their so-called "game journalism" opinions have become questionable at best.

[synaesthetic]

The Penny Arcade strip sums up my feelings about 50%. Being not straight and not attracted to freakish breast-mutants, I find both images, the actual one and the imagined one to be repulsive and disgusting.

If the artists of Dragon's Crown intended to squick everyone out with his artwork, he did a good job of it. I don't even think it's sexual objectification--I think it's grotesque sexual objectification. Fan Disservice rather than fanservice.

But maybe I'm just projecting my own feelings. I find most "objectified" female characters with gag boobs and impossible proportions in gaming to be grotesque and disgusting. It's not solely about breast size or the appearance of her face or anything like that--it's the whole package taken together. I have no problem with female characters that happen to have large breasts. That exists in reality.

What doesn't is freakishly huge gag boobs and freakishly narrow waists that no internal organs would fit inside, and then freakishly wide hips and a freakishly huge and rounded ass. Humans aren't built that way. If you're a woman with big boobs, chances are the rest of you is pretty large as well, but you never see that in gaming.

For me it's less about being ticked off over objectification and more something akin to uncanny valley. When the proportions of the female body get skewed so much it stops being attractive and starts being repulsive. This is probably why I never really cared much for Bayonetta.

[kyp275]

IMO it's finding an issue where there is none. The characters in question here was lifted from the game and attacked without context. like Tycho from PA said, the entire freaking game is a giant blob of hyper-styled... well, everything. FFS, the females looks more "normal" than the dudes in that game.

VW's game has always had that look, Odin's Sphere, Murasame etc. DC is even more stylized, but it's nothing they haven't done before.

Here's an excellent post from PAR's comment section before the author who called for discussion on the subject ironically shut it down because he apparently didn't like the direction it was going (ie. people pointing out all the double-standard and the douchebaggery of the original Kotaku article):

Spoiler:

Slaign / April 24
I rarely choose to say anything if I don't have a great deal of thought on the subject at hand. This subject is one that I personally have a lot to say about. I'm someone who's posts are typically long, and this post is going to be even longer than usual. So, I'm going to preface it with a TLDR, and it goes like this:

There is still sexism in the industry. It's a problem. We need to do our best to make sure games that don't sexualize women can get made. However, sexualization isn't a "problem." Women can be both sexual and strong, and well characterized. Being sexualized is not the same as being objectified. Much of the objectification exists in the minds of those demonizing the art. It's unfortunate that we can't have a rational discussion on this subject. People at both extremes need to understand the shortcomings of their views, and realize that the truth is likely, as with most things, somewhere in the middle.

So with that out of the way, here's the post proper:

You know, it's so disappointing. We really can't have an intelligent discussion about this, because so few of the people are willing to have an actual discussion.

Look at these comments. People aren't concerned with engaging in a discussion and being enlightened about each other's opinions and tastes. Most of these commenters have already judged each other and are content to shout each other down. They've already decided that there are two sides to the issue, and people have chosen sides and already decided that people on the other side are socially ignorant and idiotic.

It's like you're entitled to one of two opinions. Either "Women should never be sexualized, and this sort of art is sexist, misogynist, immature, and rude." or "Women need to STFU because sexism isn't a real thing."

There seems to be no middle ground. Everyone has already decided that their view on the situation is socially correct and that anyone who disagrees is sadly backwards. Both sides are coming into the discussion as crusaders against a social injustice, and are unwilling to see that every situation is different, and there is a lot of middle ground on this issue.

So, I'm not going to engage anyone I've seen in the comments directly. I've seen a couple intelligent points made, but they have been heavily overshadowed by opinions on both sides that are so ignorant, overblown, and distasteful that I prefer not to associate with them at all.

I love your writing, Ben. I find it intelligent and engaging. However, I found this article a bit tone deaf. First of all, by not commenting on the shortcomings of Kotaku's reporting on this issue, you make the article feel one sided. The original article was far from an intelligent jumping off point for a reasonable discussion of the issue at hand.

Secondly, you spend half the article defending homosexual people from being marginalized, and the other half painting along gender lines. You say these characters are so obviously designed for "male" eyes, to appeal to "male" fantasies, casually dismissing the possibility and reality that some women like this kind of thing too.

You, of course, recognize that there are women out there that think sexually about other women? I know you didn't do this intentionally, but you really ought to try and be on the lookout for stuff like that in the future.

But it goes further too. A woman doesn't have to be gay to find this kind of art style appealing. There are plenty of women out there who are straight as an arrow, yet still revel in female sexuality. If you go to a convention, you'd be hard pressed not to find women who like to dress up as these sexualized characters. I assume you wouldn't marginalize their tastes by presuming that they do so only for male attention, correct? How about the apparently sizable contingent of female Queen's Blade fans? I know at least one or two female artists who like to draw sexualized women bordering on hentai.

This is an art style. An aesthetic choice. Yes, it has a strong sexual component. No, that doesn't make it only able to appeal to a single gender. The demographic of men who like this sort of art may be more prevalent than that of women who enjoy it, but that's no reason to ignore them.

Finally, your own biases shine through in this article. Not only did you cover the issue lopsidedly, as if only the people who enjoy this kind of art are being immature about it, but the words you use give light to your own biases toward the subject even while trying to be fair.

First, there's the headline. "You don't like breasts? You must like men," could just as easily be "You enjoy breasts? You must be 14." If you were truly trying to give a balanced view on the subject, it should have had BOTH.

Then there's the second part of the headline. "The disappointing conversation AND art of Dragon Crown." "And?" The art of Dragon Crown is objectively disappointing? You're framing this story with the art being the problem right off the bat in the headline.

Sure "You don't like breasts? You must like men. You enjoy breasts? You must be 14. The disappointing conversation around the art of Dragon Crown," might be a bit long, but I'm sure you could have found a way to take all that bias out of the headline.

Then you frame the apology as "Something like an apology." Sure, his apology didn't cover every sensibility he offended, but it was an apology. It included the unqualified words "I'm sorry." On the other hand, I don't see any apology from Schreier over his remarks on the maturity of Mr. Kamitani, his team, and his fans. You don't report on that, though.

Then we get to this: "This tradition is its own problem, simply because it’s been done. It’s old, creaky, and a relic from another time. There is nothing wrong with taking a swim in these waters, but it’s also worth pointing out how obvious, boring, and overdone they’ve become since the '70s."

So, that's objective. First of all, you frame it as a "problem." Well, maybe it's a problem for you, but for other people it isn't. "It's old, creaky, and a relic from another time." Not only is this filled with subjective criticism, it's also falsifiable. It's obviously not a relic from another time, because it continues to be produced and consumed. You see it as a relic from another time, because you seem to wish it would go away, while at the same time paying what comes across as lip service to the idea that people are allowed to enjoy it.

"We have yet to grow out of them," comes across as damning an enjoyment of sexuality as something to be grown out of. It's painting it as something for the socially and physically immature. As if a grown up doesn't enjoy sexual content anymore, because it isn't nuanced enough for his sophisticated tastes.

"It completely rejects the idea of women as characters in these fictions, and instead casts them as eye candy." A sexual woman can be both sexual and have depth. Emma Frost is a deeply conflicted character, with her own goals and motivations, internal and external conflicts, agency and power. Just because she wears what amounts to a corset, panties, and thigh high boots doesn't mean she must be nothing but eye candy.

Do you see how this can shine a light on your own sexist bias? You have no trouble seeing what nuance there is to be had in a Conan the Barbarian or Superman, but once a female character shows some leg or cleavage, your brain just goes "Duh! Object!" and nothing else seems to matter. As if she can't both be sexual and have character depth.

"The only reason they would dress like this is to sexually arouse men, there is no practical reason for these clothes." This is so wrong and reductive. There's no practical reason women might enjoy an aesthetic for it's own sake? Are we contesting that women at conventions dress as these characters only to excite men, too? Because I've seen cosplayers fighting the battle against this viewpoint quite a bit lately. To them, an implication that dressing sexy is only done for men is a degrading and disrespectful reduction of female agency. I agree with them.

These women can choose to look sexy because they like it. Is that so unreasonable? They can choose a sexy look without even caring about the sex appeal, because they like how it looks. They can perhaps just enjoy the cut and the style.

Or what if they choose this look because looking sexy makes them feel powerful and confident? Is that invalid?

"What’s worth criticizing is how few people are doing anything else."

I agree! So can we do that? Can we please take the time out to write an article about how we wish there were more female characters of a less sexual nature for us to enjoy, without needing to put down a game for NOT being that? Can we want what we want without demonizing the things that AREN'T what we want?

I don't want people who don't enjoy this sort of thing to not have a place in gaming. I don't want women who want female characters who look like them to feel put out by that lack. I don't want people of either gender who would prefer not to have sexual imagery thrown in their face to feel they have no options. I want more Mirrors Edge and Remember Me style games to get onto the shelves.

However, if the only way you can think of to start off that discussion is by demonizing a game for not being that, then you need to take a step back and figure out a more intelligent way to go about it. Sexualized art isn't the problem, so stop attacking it. Instead of villainizing what other people are doing, make your voice heard so that people who would like to do what you want can hear it and be encouraged.

"When my daughter remarks on how stupid the clothing is in a game, it annoys me not because I worry about her becoming a strong woman - that shit’s going to happen regardless, at least if the first nine years are any indication - but because I’d love to play adventure games where I don’t feel weird inviting her to play."

I totally understand this, and I would never presume to tell you how to raise your daughter. I'm sure you're a much better parent than I would be, because I don't even want kids. But I hope that instead of feeling a gut reaction of shame towards the sexualized images in the game, you have at least had a conversation with your daughter about it.

I'd want to know why exactly she feels judgmental towards this art style. Is it just because it doesn't appeal to her? Is it because she's thinking analytically about how vulnerable the character looks? Or is it because she's picked up on a societal inclination towards sex being thought of as immoral, and she thinks these characters ought to feel degraded?

Have you considered asking her to compare her thoughts about physically exaggerated female characters to her thoughts about similarly exaggerated male characters? Because I certainly hope she isn't under the impression that being sexualized makes a woman less capable or strong, or robs her of depth of character.

I understand that 9 years old might not be an ideal time to discuss the sexual component of art, and again I'm not trying to suggest that I know how best to raise your kid off of some throw away comment. It's just that I see the commenters below who are so sure what they have to say is right just because they think it's right, and I wonder if it might not be a good idea to have the discussion during a more formative time.

As for the "joke" the artist made in response to the article, I think it was in poor taste. I think some people have a point about the fact that he didn't necessarily say being gay was bad, but I still think it's implied. When you reply to an insult in the tone of an insult with "You must be gay," it comes across as if it's meant as an insult. So yea, I don't think it's unfair to criticize such a joke. I also think an apology should be enough unless you have other reasons to think the man is homophobic.

[Kyero Fox]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

For me it's less about being ticked off over objectification and more something akin to uncanny valley. When the proportions of the female body get skewed so much it stops being attractive and starts being repulsive. This is probably why I never really cared much for Bayonetta.

It's her legs isn't it?

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

The Penny Arcade strip sums up my feelings about 50%. Being not straight and not attracted to freakish breast-mutants, I find both images, the actual one and the imagined one to be repulsive and disgusting.

If the artists of Dragon's Crown intended to squick everyone out with his artwork, he did a good job of it. I don't even think it's sexual objectification--I think it's grotesque sexual objectification. Fan Disservice rather than fanservice.

But maybe I'm just projecting my own feelings. I find most "objectified" female characters with gag boobs and impossible proportions in gaming to be grotesque and disgusting. It's not solely about breast size or the appearance of her face or anything like that--it's the whole package taken together. I have no problem with female characters that happen to have large breasts. That exists in reality.

What doesn't is freakishly huge gag boobs and freakishly narrow waists that no internal organs would fit inside, and then freakishly wide hips and a freakishly huge and rounded ass. Humans aren't built that way. If you're a woman with big boobs, chances are the rest of you is pretty large as well, but you never see that in gaming.

For me it's less about being ticked off over objectification and more something akin to uncanny valley. When the proportions of the female body get skewed so much it stops being attractive and starts being repulsive. This is probably why I never really cared much for Bayonetta.

This. In spades, sometimes I wonder if the art designer got their credentials carving graffitti on bathroom walls. There's "cartoon" and there's just "artist has never actually seen a female".

[cronnoponno]

I think her breasts are ugly as hell to, but I'm more into smaller than average types on their own, let alone giant fucking knockers a little bigger than an adult-human head.




I read the guys article where he called the sorceress ''Loli Bait'', and I need to say that is by far the funniest thing I have ever heard, so I guess having a cute and young-looking face means you're a loli now, is that why some mangas are mistagged as having a Loli in it when it's just a average-chested 20+ year old who isn't a giant? If I was trying to argue with that guy seriously, I think I would offend him because I would seriously break out laughing at that point.

[Xagzan]

Originally Posted by Vexx

This. In spades, sometimes I wonder if the art designer got their credentials carving graffitti on bathroom walls. There's "cartoon" and there's just "artist has never actually seen a female".

Let's be fair, this guy is also responsible for the utterly gorgeous art of past Vanillaware games.

[ArchmageXin]

Originally Posted by Vexx

This. In spades, sometimes I wonder if the art designer got their credentials carving graffitti on bathroom walls. There's "cartoon" and there's just "artist has never actually seen a female".

Oh please =)

Video Game Art designers have 1 objective, and that is $$$. Marketing knows sex = Sales, since they been selling sex since the days of Shakespeare and Leonardo de Vinchi.

So what if they made the boobs a tad bit larger or the legs longer? As long as people are will to buy, the sexy chick will be there. Especially as a first time small developer who sank their budget into a games, sexy gamer chick has always been the easiest way to attract eyeballs and dollars, thank you very much.

[synaesthetic]

A good game attracts my dollars and eyeballs.

[cronnoponno]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

A good game attracts my dollars and eyeballs.

A good game with good tits attracts twice the dollars and eyeballs that your crowd will ever attract.



....according to the mentality of many game designers, and to be honest I don't think they're far off; there are MANY other factors which can affect the success or failure of games that do this though...

[Xion Valkyrie]

There is some valid criticism regarding the depiction of the female sorcerer in Dragon's crown, but that article's author is trash. He barely does any research, his writing is juvenile, and is jumping on this issue just to get page hits, and it's working. The depiction of prostitutes in any GTA games is 100x more damaging to women than this game, yet it's not something that's ever been covered by Kotaku. He's just attacking Vanillaware because it's a easy target, they're a small overseas company that can't put any kind of financial pressure on Kotaku, and the typical Japanese response to such attacks it to apologize.

[synaesthetic]

I'm not even really counting Dragon's Crown in the equation here. It's clear the artists were going for a grotesque style. None of the characters are the least bit attractive.

Generally speaking, though, ya'll are sitting there scratching your heads wondering why more of your girlfriends/wives/daughters/etc don't play video games.

This is a small part as to why.

[Sky Knight]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

but put some delicious mancandy in there for the ladies. Why should the guys care? It's not like they're going to be looking at the male characters, anyway... unless there's something they aren't admitting, after all.

Oh That Made me Laugh so Hard

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

A good game attracts my dollars and eyeballs.

Yes I couldn't Agree More

As For me I'm a Hardcore Female Gamer... to be honest I couldn't careless if the game wasn't really targeted for women. To me its all the same I guess (as long as I get to choose my Gender, I do like playing as a female of COURSE), I play the game beat it and move on to the next or replay it if I liked it enough... What we really need is MORE great RPGs!

[ArchmageXin]

Originally Posted by cronnoponno

A good game with good tits attracts twice the dollars and eyeballs that your crowd will ever attract.



....according to the mentality of many game designers, and to be honest I don't think they're far off; there are MANY other factors which can affect the success or failure of games that do this though...

It is true though. male gamer between early teen-Mid 30s are like 75+% of your audience potiential. Most of them will either like the hot female lead or at least meh the fact she is a hot female lead.

A hot female lead may or may not sell the game, but a ugly girl will certainly sink it. I think the only over weight female character I can think of (barring some kind of animmorphic character) is the Earth Princess (who is this farting fat-ass monster) from World of Warcraft.

The company who made is Blizzard, I.E top dog of gaming industry, and made her a villain to be butchered, and only dared to do it once.

That is saying something.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

I'm not even really counting Dragon's Crown in the equation here. It's clear the artists were going for a grotesque style. None of the characters are the least bit attractive.

Generally speaking, though, ya'll are sitting there scratching your heads wondering why more of your girlfriends/wives/daughters/etc don't play video games.

This is a small part as to why.

Of course, but at this point I can't say I care (the rush of inane and asinine feminist posts across various sites and forums in the past few days have done nothing but turn me off to their cause).

The relatively low ratio of female games goes far beyond mere sexual bias in game design. games are no different than movies or books or any other medias when it comes to those bias, but those don't have any trouble finding female audience. From my own experience, most women I know either simply haven't even remotely thought about gaming at all (no, they didn't get offended, they never got that far), or is interested in nothing other than your typical browser games.

Is there bias in games? yes, but just like in other medias, there are plenty of titles that are either aimed at women or are gender neutral. Dismissing the entire medium because of the aesthetic design of some of the products would be akin to me dismissing all vampire-related stories because of Twilight, or shunning all fiction books because of 50 shades of gray or any other romance novels.

[Jan-Poo]

Personally I've never heard of vanillaware before nor I've ever seen their games (I guess I'm living under a rock), so after reading all these comments I became curious.

A simple search of "dragon's crown" on google images gave me several examples of the art used in this game and I must agree with those that say it's not just a single character, all of them are depicted with extreme attributes.

But I don't quite get what is the fuss anymore, is it because the characters are too appealing or because they aren't appealing enough? Because frankly as some of you have said they are simply too strange to be "fappable" material including the huge boobs woman and let's not go over the amazon with disproportionate hips. Perhaps this can attract some niche fetishist, but the vast majority? let's be serious.

But even if the characters aren't "beautiful" to me this art is very interesting it has a certain charm, just like Jojo's impossible anatomy or the acclaimed Picasso, you know. Humans are not made like that? And who cares? Isn't it long past the time when you needed to strictly adhere to real anatomy to make good art?

I think everyone is looking at it in the wrong way. This artist is awesome, and if his purpose was really to sell through fan service, he would draw something more mainstream.

In the end I feel that that author of Kotaku is really complaining that the sorceress's boobs are too big for his tastes and he covers his complaint with pseudo pro-feminist arguments.