Ever embarrassed by video game excesses?

Duggy747

FarCry 3 is a great game but, good grief, it had a woeful story and dialogue (Bar Vaas, he was a nuts character who fitted into the universe perfectly)

I play games on the HTPC which is in the sitting room so whenever the GF is around that's when all the awful dialogue and cheesy bits happen.

It's like when you're watching a standard movie, your parents enter the room and then, for no apparent reason, a sex scene shows up on the telly.

Retr0gamer

I wouldn't even say uncharted has good female characters considering they penchant for getting kidnapped. Very few games do female characters well.

We need Sega to take Rieko Kodama out of whatever basement they have her locked in to give us some more phantasy star style female characters.

Burning Eclipse

krudler wrote: »

Uncharted is one of the few series that gets female characters right, witty, intelligent women who aren't purely there for T&A. How many other franchises have a middle aged woman as the main villain. Gaming needs to grow up big time when it comes to portraying female characters.

Amy Hennig is the reason why

I played God of War 3 recently, and while I enjoyed it, I was genuinely embarrassed by some of the gratuitous nudity and violence in it. Couldn't play it in front of my wife.

hooradiation

The fact that #1ReasonWhy was even a thing.


Not sure if it's an "excess" though.

Potential-Monke

Just on the nudity point, especially in God of War, around that time in real life, public nude bathing was common and accecptable, and nudity was something that was not frowned upon and a lot of male sports were done in the nip (the Greek word Gymnasium literally means "a place to train naked"). So, although the nudity wasn't required, a mixture of attempt at era-portrayal and pandering to the youths looking for digitised boobies made them include it imo. Plus, it was an attempt (a bad one at that) to show just how manly Kratos really was.

who_me

I always find it weird that people have more of a problem with sex in games than violence. Even if it's a cringiness argument rather than moralising... Is storming a D-day beach single-handed while being shot dozens of times any less ridiculous or silly?

Still... I always find it disappointing that game creators create wonderfully detailed, intricate worlds, with amazingly realistic animation; then give that game silly obvious plotlines in order to make the game easy and understandable to everyone. Gaming could - and probably should - be an entertainment and artistic medium up there with TV, movies and music. Yet, who won the gaming equivalent of the Oscars/Grammys?

Potential-Monke

Thing is, making a game easy for the masses usually gets more sales than something harder (Dark Souls). Apparently a great game by this forums standards, but too punishing for the masses to enjoy.

Reekwind

who_me wrote: »

I always find it weird that people have more of a problem with sex in games than violence. Even if it's a cringiness argument rather than moralising... Is storming a D-day beach single-handed while being shot dozens of times any less ridiculous or silly?

Yes. There's a difference between a male power fantasy and a male power fantasy that reduces women to the role of simpering glamour models. If people want to play at being Rambo then that's 100% okay, once the presence of strong male characters doesn't preclude the existence of strong female equivalents

And to be clear: the problem is not sex per se. It's the puerile representation of sex and women that I find embarrassing. I'm not so much worried about people walking in on me and finding a sex scene as them asking 'why has that woman got beachballs sown to her chest?'

ahnowbrowncow

Reekwind wrote: »

Yes. There's a difference between a male power fantasy and a male power fantasy that reduces women to the role of simpering glamour models. If people want to play at being Rambo then that's 100% okay, once the presence of strong male characters doesn't preclude the existence of strong female equivalents

And to be clear: the problem is not sex per se. It's the puerile representation of sex and women that I find embarrassing. I'm not so much worried about people walking in on me and finding a sex scene as them asking 'why has that woman got beachballs sown to her chest?'

So you're alright with killing hundreds of people in a game as long as women appear strong, you're priorities are a bit messed up

Reekwind

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

So you're alright with killing hundreds of people in a game as long as women appear strong, you're priorities are a bit messed up

I've got absolutely no problem with most violence on screen, whether it be a computer monitor or in the cinema. Why should I?

Computer game violence typically says absolutely nothing of note, nor does it pretend to. It is, as I say above, harmless escapism. Me, big space marine, me shoot many bad aliens. I don't see how anyone can get worked up by that; unless they're some Mary Whitehouse figure who gets worked up when Commando is shown at Christmas

The portrayal of women in games is a different matter entirely. When you make the above violence gender-specific (ie men shoot things, women are sexy and get captured) then, yes, I have a problem. This ceases to be simple escapism and instead becomes nothing more than an adolescent power fantasy. I find that to be cringeworthy, as I've said above

ahnowbrowncow

Reekwind wrote: »

I've got absolutely no problem with most violence on screen, whether it be a computer monitor or in the cinema. Why should I?

Computer game violence typically says absolutely nothing of note, nor does it pretend to. It is, as I say above, harmless escapism. Me, big space marine, me shoot many bad aliens. I don't see how anyone can get worked up by that; unless they're some Mary Whitehouse figure who gets worked up when Commando is shown at Christmas

The portrayal of women in games is a different matter entirely. When you make the above violence gender-specific (ie men shoot things, women are sexy and get captured) then, yes, I have a problem. This ceases to be simple escapism and instead becomes nothing more than an adolescent power fantasy. I find that to be cringeworthy, as I've said above

What I can't understand is what is it that makes the women in the game something of note but violence is nothing of note? How is it a completely different matter? They are both fictional, virtual or whatever you want to call it. And is killing hundreds of people not a power fantasy then?

For some unknown reason you are making a distinction between the two where I fail to see one.

Reekwind

Um, because violence isn't people...?

As I said in my above post, if somebody wants to pretend to be Rambo then fine, let them. It's not necessarily how I like to escape everyday life but each to their own. Until, that is, that person's power fantasy starts to demean others. If you can't play as Rambo without reducing all the women in game to the role of sex dolls (if only because that's the reality that the game presents you with) then yes, we have a problem. It's called misogyny and I don't like seeing it in games or draped over marketing materials*

Now I don't believe that you can demean/infantilise/objectify/whatever violence in the same way. How could you? Again, violence isn't people. Conflating the two (ie gender sterotypes and violence) would only make sense if you have some moral aversion to both, witness the already name-checked Mary Whitehouse. I don't; I don't have an issue with most violence in games and you've not explained to me why I should

*Or, the thankfully less blatantly common, racism in games

Banjo

You can't have a Rambo power fantasy moment without reducing the role of whatever race you're attacking (and yes, I'm including the Strogg in that) to that of a bullet ridden rag doll. It's equally demeaning. The enemy are easy prey for your machine gun. The women are easy prey for your love gun. It's all the same but since the enemy are usually men and men are not allowed to feel marginalised somehow the non-sexual power fantasy is ok.

So, Women as sex dolls, I'm confused - why is it ok to have all of the men portrayed as generic idealised physical specimens but not the women? Nobody wants to watch ugly people on screen*unless the drama is character driven, and games are typically event driven. Therefore the people in them should be beautiful unless they're villains, and even then Villains are allowed to be good looking as long as they have an obvious villain trait such as a scar, cybernetic yoke stuck to their face, odd coloured hair or are over 35.

*this is a huge generalisation based on decades of watching films and TV and seeing what sh!te seems to sell well, what actors do well and what roles they're in. I'm not an expert, but neither is Barry Scott and people listen to him....

ahnowbrowncow

Reekwind wrote: »

Um, because violence isn't people...?

As I said in my above post, if somebody wants to pretend to be Rambo then fine, let them. It's not necessarily how I like to escape everyday life but each to their own. Until, that is, that person's power fantasy starts to demean others. If you can't play as Rambo without reducing all the women in game to the role of sex dolls (if only because that's the reality that the game presents you with) then yes, we have a problem. It's called misogyny and I don't like seeing it in games or draped over marketing materials*

Now I don't believe that you can demean/infantilise/objectify/whatever violence in the same way. How could you? Again, violence isn't people. Conflating the two (ie gender sterotypes and violence) would only make sense if you have some moral aversion to both, witness the already name-checked Mary Whitehouse. I don't; I don't have an issue with most violence in games and you've not explained to me why I should

*Or, the thankfully less blatantly common, racism in games

Yes I know "violence isn't people", racism or sexism isn't people either. They are all nouns.

I don't understand how you can think sexism and racism is worse than violence. They are all fictional so if you think one is bad then why don't you think they are all bad?

I think you're being hypersensitive to sexism.

Reekwind

Banjo wrote: »

You can't have a Rambo power fantasy moment without reducing the role of whatever race you're attacking (and yes, I'm including the Strogg in that) to that of a bullet ridden rag doll. It's equally demeaning

For some reason I don't really care about the portrayal of aliens, robots, Nazis or whoever the nameless mook of the week is. Nor do I see the need to compare female characters to Stroggs or nouns

And of course there are cases of violence where it is unacceptable. Mowing down innocent civilians requires a very strong artistic justification to pull off. Shooting children had traditionally been unacceptable in FPSs. More likely to appear, and genuinely morally questionable, is playing as a white guy mowing mowing legions of black mooks

The women are easy prey for your love gun

That's a statement that's going to linger in my head for for some time. And for all the wrong reasons. It pretty much sums up what I find so cringeworthy about some games

So, Women as sex dolls, I'm confused - why is it ok to have all of the men portrayed as generic idealised physical specimens but not the women?

Having a massively muscled space marine storm an enemy citadel and rescue a princess with beachballs where beasts should be is a male fantasy. Having a similarly proportioned witch who loses clothes as she fights is a male fantasy. Having your character sleep (or at least flit shamelessly with, it's been a while) with a buxom stripper/schoolgirl is a male fantasy. Repeatedly rescuing a feisty yet oddly passive female sidekick/love-interest from the jaws of terror is a male fantasy. You see the trend here?

ahnowbrowncow wrote:

I don't understand how you can think sexism and racism is worse than violence. They are all fictional so if you think one is bad then why don't you think they are all bad?

That makes no sense. I think dragons are fictional but I don't automatically assume that dragons are bad. I think Gordon Freeman is a fictional character but I really want to see him on my screen again. DNF was fictional but that didn't stop it being a misogynistic mess. In short: these characters/games/tropes have to be evaluated in their own right and can't be lumped into one just because they're "all fictional". Similarly, I have no idea why you continue to treat violence and sexism as the same thinf

Frankly I think you're just being deliberately obtuse here. You've not explained by fictional violence is bad (despite repeated requests to) and you've not established why having violence in games automatically excuses sexism and misogyny

ahnowbrowncow

Reekwind wrote: »

That makes no sense. I think dragons are fictional but I don't automatically assume that dragons are bad. I think Gordon Freeman is a fictional character but I really want to see him on my screen again.

Mother of god. I'll have to go slow here.

I have no idea why you continue to treat violence and sexism as the same thinf

I'm not treating them as the same thing, violence is worse than sexism, but in games neither are real so I couldn't give a rats ass about either of them, why do you???

You've not explained by fictional violence is bad (despite repeated requests to)

I'm guessing you mean why, where did I say fictional violence is bad??? Please show me.

What I did say was that if you think sexism (what you perceive to be sexism anyway and it's not real either) in games is bad why don't you care about violence in games. Once again, neither are real. But if you are going to get your panties in a twist about one of them I would have thought it'd be the more serious of the two, violence.

you've not established why having violence in games automatically excuses sexism and misogyny

I never said it excuses sexism, what I said was that if you think sexism is bad why don't you think violence is bad???

Sexism in games is no more real than the violence or the zombies/dragons/monsters so why do you give a crap about just sexism in games?????????????????????????????????????????????????

Syferus

Something being 'fictional' isn't a valid reason why someone shouldn't care about the message or image it sends out. That's a terrible, terrible argument to make.

ahnowbrowncow

Syferus wrote: »

Something being 'fictional' isn't a valid reason why someone shouldn't care about the message or image it sends out. That's a terrible, terrible argument to make.

But gamers make the argument that violence in games is fictional, doesn't have any impact on them and therefore doesn't have any significance in the real world so why should this supposed sexism in games be any different? Because violence is obviously worse than sexism so if violence is grand so should sexism. And characters having big boobs isn't even sexism.

It's just hypersensitivity to female sexism.

Banjo

Reekwind wrote: »

You see the trend here?

Yes, I do. The makers of games are doing an excellent job of pandering to their target market.

Should their target market be exclusively randy violent teenage boys? That's an argument for when I'm not typing on my phone!

Reekwind

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Mother of god. I'll have to go slow here

Don't give me that nonsense. You are the person who has explicitly linked sexism and violence on the basis of them both being fictional (?) and you're the one who's been dragging us down this hole of incomprehension. Look at what you're saying:

"I'm not treating them as the same thing... but in games neither are real so I couldn't give a rats ass about either of them"

So these are apparently two completely separate things but we can lump them together and talk about in the same breath because some games have fictional representations of both. Contradictory, no? Now I don't know why you've done this because no one else here is suggesting that the impact of violence and the impact of misogyny in computer games is the same

I'm not treating them as the same thing, violence is worse than sexism, but in games neither are real so I couldn't give a rats ass about either of them, why do you???

Please read my posts above. Violence is a concept, an action. Women are real. Ethnic minorities are real. I don't particularly care how one person kills another person on a screen because, nine times out of ten, it's of absolutely no relevance to the real world. This is not the same in the case of chronic portrayals of women as simpering damsels who exist merely to loom pretty. Man is strong, woman is weak. On the most basic possible level, without even getting into a broader discussion on gender roles, this sort of adolescent worldview in games gives the industry a bad name and makes me cringe. Why? Because it's the sort of thing that most men grow out of when they finish school and realise that there's more to the opposite sex than tits and ass

In short, I don't see the harm in shooting a fictional alien in the face; I do see the harm in games portraying women as mindless bimbos. How is that difficult to get?

I'm guessing you mean why, where did I say fictional violence is bad??? Please show me.

Then why on earth are you harping on about it? Why are you insisting that it's worse or "more serious" than sexism? I've made it pretty clear that I don't care about violence in games, that I don't see the point of discussing violence in games (in conjunction with sexism) but you keep dragging us back without explaining why anyone here should care. Last time: why should I get my "panties in a twist" over violence in games?

Sexism in games is no more real than the violence or the zombies/dragons/monsters so why do you give a crap about just sexism in games?????????????????????????????????????????????????

I don't know if you're trolling or simple. Misogyny doesn't exist in games? Why? Because they portray a fictional environment? Or because you're fine with having misogyny on screen?

I guess that no film can be racist either. Because none of it's real, right? It all happens in imagination land. Actually, I'm not going to have this discussion with you. Not someone who trots out this "female sexism" line. That'd be a waste of time

Banjo wrote:

Yes, I do. The makers of games are doing an excellent job of pandering to their target market.

And that's the problem. The industry is peddling fantasies to 'randy teenage boys' while ignoring those who a) aren't teenagers or b) aren't male. And that's embarrassing when you're playing a game as man in his late twenties

I don't even think it's a market thing though so much as it is a developer issue. But, as you say, that's another discussion for another time

ShiverinEskimo

Missus came home from work just as I scored Liara in Mass Effect 3.

ahnowbrowncow

Reekwind wrote: »

Don't give me that nonsense. You are the person who has explicitly linked sexism and violence on the basis of them both being fictional (?) and you're the one who's been dragging us down this hole of incomprehension. Look at what you're saying:

"I'm not treating them as the same thing... but in games neither are real so I couldn't give a rats ass about either of them"

So these are apparently two completely separate things but we can lump them together and talk about in the same breath because some games have fictional representations of both. Contradictory, no? Now I don't know why you've done this because no one else here is suggesting that the impact of violence and the impact of misogyny in computer games is the same

Please read my posts above. Violence is a concept, an action. Women are real. Ethnic minorities are real. I don't particularly care how one person kills another person on a screen because, nine times out of ten, it's of absolutely no relevance to the real world. This is not the same in the case of chronic portrayals of women as simpering damsels who exist merely to loom pretty. Man is strong, woman is weak. On the most basic possible level, without even getting into a broader discussion on gender roles, this sort of adolescent worldview in games gives the industry a bad name and makes me cringe. Why? Because it's the sort of thing that most men grow out of when they finish school and realise that there's more to the opposite sex than tits and ass

In short, I don't see the harm in shooting a fictional alien in the face; I do see the harm in games portraying women as mindless bimbos. How is that difficult to get?

Then why on earth are you harping on about it? Why are you insisting that it's worse or "more serious" than sexism? I've made it pretty clear that I don't care about violence in games, that I don't see the point of discussing violence in games (in conjunction with sexism) but you keep dragging us back without explaining why anyone here should care. Last time: why should I get my "panties in a twist" over violence in games?

I don't know if you're trolling or simple. Misogyny doesn't exist in games? Why? Because they portray a fictional environment? Or because you're fine with having misogyny on screen?

I guess that no film can be racist either. Because none of it's real, right? It all happens in imagination land. Actually, I'm not going to have this discussion with you. Not someone who trots out this "female sexism" line. That'd be a waste of time

And that's the problem. The industry is peddling fantasies to 'randy teenage boys' while ignoring those who a) aren't teenagers or b) aren't male. And that's embarrassing when you're playing a game as man in his late twenties

I don't even think it's a market thing though so much as it is a developer issue. But, as you say, that's another discussion for another time

Judging by your rant you don't even know what misogyny means. Misogyny = the hatred of women. So go on, show me all these examples of misogyny in games.

And going by your ridiculous reasoning nearly every game is misandristic, how many men were killed in bf3, far cry 3 or call of duty compared to women???

Sexism AND violence are both concepts you buffoon, they both happen to men and women in the real world. But one is acceptable to you in games and the other isn't, I have asked you countless times why and each time you skip the question.

By your logic, it's ok to shoot hundreds of men or women in the face but a woman with big boobs isn't acceptable. Something a bit wrong with that isn't there.

I'm giving up, I don't have time to argue with a dim wit. Either you're that or a troll.

Reekwind

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Judging by your rant you don't even know what misogyny means. Misogyny = the hatred of women. So go on, show me all these examples of misogyny in games

Ironically, I don't even agree fully with most modern definitions of 'misogyny', which tend to treat it as interchangeable with 'sexism'. As we saw earlier this year in Australia. But there is good reason for this: these days, when sexism is no longer sustained by pseudo-science, I'd suggest that most sexism is derived from a pathological hatred or fear of women. So misogyny doesn't always manifest itself as direct violence but it's hard to think of why people would otherwise insist that women should play a subordinate role in politics or the workplace. In short, misogyny is very much at the core of sexism

I can't think of a valid logical reason for Bayonetta's clothes to disappear during combat or for the developers of Dead or Alive devoting so much time to breast movement or for an archaeologist to be defined by her bra size or for a Duke Nukem game to feature childish twins as sexual objects or the vast majority of female characters to substitute 'sexy' for 'strong'. And so on. Basically, I can't think why so many computer games treat female characters as nothing more than eyecandy... unless the developers are misogynistic or deliberately pandering to an imagined misogynistic market

That is, there is a fear or hatred of women that prevents them from representing them as anything more than helpless damsels or sex dolls

And going by your ridiculous reasoning nearly every game is misandristic, how many men were killed in bf3, far cry 3 or call of duty compared to women???

Because muscle-cy men shooting other men as part of a male power fantasy is evidence of a deeprooted hatred of the male gender. Yes, that sounds about right

Just go away and take your insecurities somewhere else. Just watch out for those scary female sexists!

Fnz

saiint wrote: »

because its a GAME
you shouldnt feel embarrassed , unless its like gta and theirs nude girls going around everywere :L

GRMA wrote: »

By and large I think sex is unnecessary in games.

GTR63 wrote: »

Any time I picked up a playboy in Mafia II people seemed to be around to see the centrefold and my embarrassment.

Marsden wrote: »

Sleeping dogs seemed fairly good until I had to sing Kareoke to a girl on date level, pretty lame and hard to explain to the wife why I was doing it.

J. Marston wrote: »

Sex in games is just weird. It's just strange and cringey in videogame form.

Deano7788 wrote: »

The sex minigame in God of War.

mikom wrote: »

The dates in San Andreas.

It's not an original thought, but these are the embarrassing asides in a world where the norm is to shoot a million people in the face, forever.

deathrider

I can't say I've ever really been embarrassed by games. The night of Lollipop Chainsaw's release, I sat down to play it and my girlfriend sat there watching. We both laughed our asses off for the hour or two that I was playing. If Julliette Starling's adventures can't embarrass me, I don't reckon anything could, lol.

who_me

Syferus wrote: »

Something being 'fictional' isn't a valid reason why someone shouldn't care about the message or image it sends out. That's a terrible, terrible argument to make.

Nevertheless, it's odd that a female character wearing very skimpy clothing seems much more worthy of complaint than a male (or female) character shooting/killing/dismembering others.

It's not just women in games (look at how the male characters are often muscle-bound in tight T-shirts), and it's not even limited to games (it didn't take Craig long to have his top off showing off his figure in his first Bond movie; there aren't many ugly leading men these days either). Sex sells. As long as games featuring lightly-attired women sell well, games-makers will keep making them (and movie-makers will keep making those films etc..)

deathrider

Speaking of sexism in video games, did Anita Sarkeesian ever get around to making those videos?

Reekwind

who_me wrote: »

Nevertheless, it's odd that a female character wearing very skimpy clothing seems much more worthy of complaint than a male (or female) character shooting/killing/dismembering others

Why? That's a serious question

This has come up a few times in this thread and I don't quite understand why we're suddenly making computer game violence out as An Issue. I'd assumed that this was tabloid territory. Obviously I may well be wrong on this. Is anybody in this thread really concerned about violence in computer games?

Sex sells. As long as games featuring lightly-attired women sell well, games-makers will keep making them (and movie-makers will keep making those films etc..)

This is not a matter for this thread but I really dislike this argument, when applied to anything. People make pixelated breasts or military shooters or rom coms because people will pay for it. No. People will spend money on whatever is available; the decision as to what gets made is taken on the developer side and reflects what they think people want. Often they get it quite wrong and typically that sort of thinking is a race to the bottom

But, as I say, it's a broader issue

Deano7788

My main issues with some of the stuff that's been mentioned, in comparison to violence, is that (1) it's normally badly handled and (2) it's needless. They're only in it for the sake of having them in it. They serve no real purpose. You can easily make a game without overt sexism or cringe worthy sex scenes; it's kind of hard to make a shooter if you take out the shooting. I mentioned God of War earlier in the thread. If you took out the sex minigame you'd have the exact same game; if you took out the combat you wouldn't have a game.

Potential-Monke

Hang on there a sec, DNF had sexy scantily clad women because that's Duke. It's always been Duke. Duke without it would be a crime. It plays into the role of Duke and that's why they're there.

And these days strong female roles/leads are becoming more common, look at Ashley/Aria/Liara/Miranda/Tali (she didn't even have a face for years) from the Mass Effect Universe, Alyx from Half Life, Trip from Enslaved. There are many others, all strong female leads, all good looking yes, but that's what the masses want.

The same can be said for music, look at what sells: Cheryl Cole, Rihanna, J-Lo, all very good looking girls who probably wouldn't have got anywhere without their looks. The music world is changing, and the less good looking are getting their chances these days, but it's still "sexist" is a manner. Sex sells.

If you have a look at this picture, the first few stats show that 2 out of 5 gamers are girls, and 80% of them play the Wii where a lot of the major retail games might not be on (initially). Developers may be making games for their own fantasies, but until general consensus changes in every walk of life, women in games will continue to be portrayed as they are in most other medias.