Support NeoGAF

[OutrageousFacts]

But then you flip it and in Japan a lot of western games' violence gets censored. Just so you know, the grass isn't always greener on the other side.

Sure, but imo it's infinitely easier to make a compelling argument against murdering/torturing in games than against ... sexy anime girls (where no explicit porn ever happens. This is another hilariously dishonest point: the pro-censorship crowd always acts as if we want literam porn games. No, guys, porn scenes happen exclusively in western games. Underage sex scenes even, looking at you, Life is Strange 2).

Ofc, ideally nothing should be censored, because creative freedom is one of mankind's highest values.

 

[oagboghi2]

How about you read the thread again? The thread is about the lack of fan service in western games due to the choices of devs to not have overly sexulised characters. It's not about east games generally made to be specifically about fan service and how they're treated in their western versions. You have no idea what my position is on that.


Bringing up this thread is pretty ironic considering it's a pretty clear sign of pressure from gamers trying to browbeat game devs into doing what they want. Ever heard the term "go woke go broke"? It's just a veiled threat to say put certain ideas in your game and we'll boycott it. It's pressure to police creative content plain and simple. nothing but cancel culture, this whole thread, all of these threads complaining about "wokeness" is just cancel culture. We got pretty much every thread about The Last of Us Part 2 full of people saying Druckmann needs to be fired because they don't like what he's putting in the game HE is the lead designer & writer on.

You guys are really poorly placed to criticize anyone else on pressuring devs.

My God dude you are so full of shit. "Get woke, go broke" is not a threat. It's a meme reference to whatever project you are referring trying to appeal to a certain audience to obtain larger gains, and failing.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Which bits are you referring to? I don't remember any sexualisation of any characters in God of War or Thief's End .

"Huge macho shirtless dude isn't a male being sexualized because it is a power fantasy".

 

[Doom85]

Sure, but imo it's infinitely easier to make a compelling argument against murdering/torturing in games than against ... sexy anime girls

But it's all fictional. If one were to raise a fuss about violence against fictional characters in video games then one can just as easily point out that the fictional girls that are often sexualized in Japanese games are underage. And the minute someone goes, "but they're drawings, not real people!" then the exact same argument can be made about the violence.

Also, Japan censored the sex/nudity in GTA 5 and removed the nudity from Witcher 3, so it's not even just the violence.

Also, there are definitely porn games in Japan. Quite a few visual novels have them.

I would also point out that if one doesn't want a game censored, fair enough, however no company is under a legal obligation to put a game in their library. When people throw a fuss about Sony or Steam not allowing a game made by a third party or indie developer due to questionable content to be allowed into their library, they're being fucking ridiculous. It's THEIR company, it's THEIR rules about what's allowed in or not. I could write a novel filled with some controversial content and no publishing company is under obligation to make a deal with me. I'm not specifying this for you per say, but there are a lot of ignorant people online who seem to think being anti-censorship means they can take it to an extreme and make every video game company bend over backwards for them. Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Steam, etc., yes they should try to be pro-consumer but that's within reason. They're not your little bitch.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Steam, etc., yes they should try to be pro-consumer but that's within reason. They're not your little bitch.

All these companies have multiple times (decades) bend over backwards for the loudest group though.

 

[Doom85]

All these companies have multiple times (decades) bend over backwards for the loudest group though.

Gotcha, so they shouldn't be a little bitch for the other side, but your side. TOTALLY makes everything fair.

 

[OutrageousFacts]

But it's all fictional. If one were to raise a fuss about violence against fictional characters in video games then one can just as easily point out that the fictional girls that are often sexualized in Japanese games are underage. And the minute someone goes, "but they're drawings, not real people!" then the exact same argument can be made about the violence.

But it's still easier to argue for violence censorship. Even sexy 'underage' characters are *just* sexy. Murder is murder.

But I explained that I'm against any censorship, not sure why you ignored that part of my posting.

I would also point out that if one doesn't want a game censored, fair enough, however no company is under a legal obligation to put a game in their library. When people throw a fuss about Sony or Steam not allowing a game made by a third party or indie developer due to questionable content to be allowed into their library, they're being fucking ridiculous. It's THEIR company, it's THEIR rules about what's allowed in or not. I could write a novel filled with some controversial content and no publishing company is under obligation to make a deal with me. I'm not specifying this for you per say, but there are a lot of ignorant people online who seem to think being anti-censorship means they can take it to an extreme and make every video game company bend over backwards for them. Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, Steam, etc., yes they should try to be pro-consumer but that's within reason. They're not your little bitch.

This is the kind of, sorry, bs I can't stand. It's basically excusing censorship via means of capitalism. There's a lot to be said about it, but since it's past 2pm here, I just wanna add this: When it's not enough that Sony (and Steam) ban games from their store, but even websites like sankaku or fakku are prevented from distribution, because their payment partner (credit card companies, paypal, etc) would quit service with them if they sold certain games, THEN that's a severe problem. One that's not handwaved away with 'oh well, the market ...'.

If I write a controversial book, I can still self-publish. If a game can't be sold because payment options are being taken away, that's unacceptable.

 

[OutrageousFacts]

Gotcha, so they shouldn't be a little bitch for the other side, but your side. TOTALLY makes everything fair.

One side is against, the other side for censorship. It ought to be clear which side publishers should be on. Hint: the nazis *loved* censorship.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Gotcha, so they shouldn't be a little bitch for the other side, but your side. TOTALLY makes everything fair.

My side? Show me where either of these companies went back and said "no we shouldn't censor this random thing some mom group/ pronoun name on twitter and their screechers found offensive". The company either lets people make their games (ugly faces or not) or they enforce a censor based on the loudest group.

 

[Doom85]

My side? Show me where either of these companies went back and said "no we shouldn't censor this random thing some mom group/ pronoun name on twitter and their screechers found offensive". The company either lets people make their games (ugly faces or not) or they enforce a censor based on the loudest group.

Maybe actually read what I wrote before you decide to reply in the first place? I flat out said not censorship but rather letting a game be published by them in the first place. A book publisher who doesn't want to make a deal with me and a book I wrote is NOT censoring me. Censoring my work would mean we made a deal and then they altered the book to their liking. Simply not wanting my material in the first place is not censorship, and never will be no matter how one might try to spin it.

 

[lyan]

Also, Japan censored the sex/nudity in GTA 5 and removed the nudity from Witcher 3, so it's not even just the violence.

Aren't these due to legal requirements though, like how they need to put mosiac on porn? Not entirely comparable.

 

[Doom85]

This is the kind of, sorry, bs I can't stand. It's basically excusing censorship via means of capitalism. There's a lot to be said about it, but since it's past 2pm here, I just wanna add this: When it's not enough that Sony (and Steam) ban games from their store, but even websites like sankaku or fakku are prevented from distribution, because their payment partner (credit card companies, paypal, etc) would quit service with them if they sold certain games, THEN that's a severe problem. One that's not handwaved away with 'oh well, the market ...'.

If I write a controversial book, I can still self-publish. If a game can't be sold because payment options are being taken away, that's unacceptable.

Again, you're ignoring another problem here. If a credit card company does not want to be involved with certain content, that is their decision. They are not under obligation to keep working with a site as long as it doesn't breach a contract or something. It sucks that games might be harder to self-publish, but that's not on a credit card company. If people want to write edgy and controversial content, that's their right, but no one else has to be obligated to get involved with said content.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Maybe actually read what I wrote before you decide to reply in the first place? I flat out said not censorship but rather letting a game be published by them in the first place. A book publisher who doesn't want to make a deal with me and a book I wrote is NOT censoring me. Censoring my work would mean we made a deal and then they altered the book to their liking. Simply not wanting my material in the first place is not censorship, and never will be no matter how one might try to spin it.

I mean you are the only one trying to spin what defines censorship in the first place. No idea why though. A pubisher that makes changes based on moral outcry (or a localization) is censorship.

 

[Doom85]

Aren't these due to legal requirements though, like how they need to put mosiac on porn? Not entirely comparable.

If the US decided to make it illegal to have any sort of fanservice of characters that were stated to be underage, the eruption of anger from the Internet would be massive on a level rarely seen even for the Internet. So yes, I actually think it's totally comparable. The law didn't get passed out of nowhere, it clearly reflects the moral beliefs of a lot of Japanese citizens.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

If the US decided to make it illegal to have any sort of fanservice of characters that were stated to be underage, the eruption of anger from the Internet would be massive on a level rarely seen even for the Internet. So yes, I actually think it's totally comparable. The law didn't get passed out of nowhere, it clearly reflects the moral beliefs of a lot of Japanese citizens.

 

[Doom85]

I mean you are the only one trying to spin what defines censorship in the first place. No idea why though. A pubisher that makes changes based on moral outcry (or a localization) is censorship.

Not trying to spin it all, and again your last sentence isn't even what I'm talking about. I'm talking about companies who didn't change a fictional work but rather choose to not let the work be available in their software library (since, you know, they own that software library and don't have to just let any asshole's work on it if they don't want to). They didn't alter anything, they just simply chose to not make a deal with the developers and put the game in their library.

Either actually pay attention to what I'm saying because I'm not replying to you anymore if you don't as you're just wasting my time.

 

[OutrageousFacts]

Again, you're ignoring another problem here. If a credit card company does not want to be involved with certain content, that is their decision. They are not under obligation to keep working with a site as long as it doesn't breach a contract or something. It sucks that games might be harder to self-publish, but that's not on a credit card company. If people want to write edgy and controversial content, that's their right, but no one else has to be obligated to get involved with said content.

At what point will you realize your line of thinking is wrong?

No grocery is obligated to sell you food. No water supplier is obligated to sell you water. When you're lying on the ground, dying from dehydration, is that still ok? Because nobody was obligated to sell you water?

Edit: I'll leave this old article I wrote here for you to read. Might help you educate yourself:

The War on Anime – About Censorship, the Pedo-Boogieman and Morality

If you made it this far, you must have been looking really hard or were really lucky. That is because for one reason or another, seemingly the entire gaming press chooses to ignore one of the most …

outrageousfacts.wordpress.com

 

[Doom85]

At what point will you realize your line of thinking is wrong?

No grocery is obligated to sell you food. No water supplier is obligated to sell you water. When you're lying on the ground, dying from dehydration, is that still ok? Because nobody was obligated to sell you water?

What sort of strawman insanity is this?! Actually, yes, a store isn't obligated to carry any product they don't want to because, you know, THAT'S HOW THE LAW WORKS, but logically the market as a whole exists and other competitors would jump on that opportunity and offer food and water.

But also, are you actually comparing an individual fictional piece of work to FOOD AND WATER?!

That's it, both you and SLoWMoTIoN are going on ignore. I try not to resort to that, but this is just ridiculous. If you all can't even read what I'm posting and are jumping to the most dramatic extremes possible, I've got better things to do.

 

[lyan]

If the US decided to make it illegal to have any sort of fanservice of characters that were stated to be underage, the eruption of anger from the Internet would be massive on a level rarely seen even for the Internet. So yes, I actually think it's totally comparable. The law didn't get passed out of nowhere, it clearly reflects the moral beliefs of a lot of Japanese citizens.

Seems to me you are pointing out why this becomes a problem.

 

[OutrageousFacts]

That's it, both you and SLoWMoTIoN are going on ignore. I try not to resort to that, but this is just ridiculous. If you all can't even read what I'm posting and are jumping to the most dramatic extremes possible, I've got better things to do.

We're going on ignore, you're going on Resetera. Not that it wasn't obvious

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

If the US decided to make it illegal to have any sort of fanservice of characters that were stated to be underage, the eruption of anger from the Internet would be massive on a level rarely seen even for the Internet. So yes, I actually think it's totally comparable. The law didn't get passed out of nowhere, it clearly reflects the moral beliefs of a lot of Japanese citizens.

^^^^^^

are jumping to the most dramatic extremes possible

I've got better things to do.

TFW you sperg out so much you decide to ignore others on a separate post since you can't win an argument.

 

[MagnesG]

You know, there are differences between games being released even with their mature ratings versus games being absolutely prohibited from releasing by platform holders themselves - ratings be damned, because of those vocal psychopath whining. There's also the cases of devs (recently DMCV) being scared of their game not passing the screening so they censored it themselves from the start, or changed their approach by sticking those "core values" up their asses to please these fake current climate preaches. That's what happens in most cases where game release date are at stake by the platform holders, and they don't want any issues to pop out "just because".

The worst example are when we had some of the big titles (even first party) being absolved from scrutiny while other games got cherry picked left and right. Absolute double standards and hypocrisy.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

underage is a no no. that is illegal in the US. has been for a long time. also we keep kids away from this content already via ratings and laws. we keep them away from all kinds of content, including violent stuff, across many forms of media. this is why there is an R rating in movies. this is why we have ratings on games. we have had those for decades now, so none of this is even a concern. the gaming age is not averaging at kids any more, and hasn't for a while.

The average age of a U.S. gamer is 35, the average number of years a U.S. gamer has been playing games is 13, and only 29% of the gamer population is under 18 years old.

Video games in the United States - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

over 70% of gamers are over 18 years old. an overwhelming majority of gamers are adults. IMO sexual content in games for adults is a perfectly fine thing, and whenever anyone tries to divert the discussion into kids, i have to wonder what their intentions are. it is odd how often "Think of the children!" is the rallying cry for censorship.

video games aren't just for kids or teenage boys or whatever someone's strawman is. they aren't even mostly for kids. that is based on an outdated stereotype that is factually incorrect. it is mostly adults that play video games. i know people are ashamed of this, you see it in pop culture everywhere, the whole anti incel thing, etc. imo a lot of this pearl clutching is low key shaming of this fact.

yet it is a fact. most adults do enjoy games. so that is really quite normal. in reality it would be a much healthier past time if people just accepted it and dealt with it openly. instead of hiding behind kids.

 

[Jon Neu]

Nope, but then I'm for letting the devs do what they want and I'm not going to start crying because devs aren't interested in putting fan service in every game or throw a fit because every girl in games isn't pretty.

It's interesting that you're trying to spin this as the meany prudes trying to censor games when really it's more about canceling devs that don't appeal to you.

You are on the prudish side trying to demonize sexuality, no matter how hard you try to spin it.

And the cancel culture types are on your side, too. Arguing the same convoluted shit like “you are oppressing women if this character is too sexy”.

 

[Jon Neu]

Probably because it's a really strange thing to get upset about, especially in response to a brand new game.

Because we know is the result of a toxic ideology trying to censor videogames because in their misandry and ridiculous ego, they can't stand that male adults could enjoy sexy female characters.

Videogames have had all kinds of designs through history and nobody cared. What has changed? The arrival of SJW to the entertainment media at large and videogames in particular trying to dictate how videogames have to be designed. Now we have this convoluted theories about things like “the male gaze”, demonizing the enjoyment an heterosexual male has when seeing an attractive girl because that somehow oppresses women, therefore videogames have to stop having sexy women or else they risk being called sexists. And in 2020, there's nothing worse for business than being called sexist, racist and the likes. And this bullies know it and try to exploit it as much as they can.

Apparently, caring for women™ it's censoring sexy videogame characters. This is what this narcissistic virtue signallers amount to in their heroic fights for women rights.

 

[chriskun]

I'm afraid your comparison is off.

Character design in film/TV and in video games is different. Has to be. Always has been.

This part of your post:



assumes a lot, but isn't supported by much.

What do you mean, "when it makes sense"? Do you think a woman (or anyone) always knows when she'll get brutish, and dresses accordingly in advance? Women can get violent at a party, when they're wearing a dress and high heels. And do you think "brutish" women can't turn into smoking-hot femmes fatales when they want, or need, to?
And don't you realize what you're implying when you say that for a woman who "excels at being hot as fuck" (LOL) it "makes sense" being a politician? Really, pal? Don't you realize that those designs are created to pander to stereotypes and people's expectations? Don't you know that history has seen plenty of ugly women as queens? Don't you realize that film and TV showing attractive women in positions of power IS fanservice?

But let's get back to video games.

It's true that "fanservicey" designs had been free to go places for a long time. With different sensibilities, of course. Scantily-clad women have featured in video games for a long, long time. Arcade brawlers were full of them. Gauntlet, Dungeons and Dragons, Streets of Rage, and the plethora of 1-on-1 fighters that flooded arcades and consoles after Street Fighter II made the genre explode. Other genres were slower to follow, mainly because graphical fidelity didn't allow for detailed models and the best you could fap to were the illustrations in the game's manual.

When 3D became mainstream, both Japanese and western devs went to town with sexualized designs. On the eastern front you had stuff like Dead or Alive, which was incredibly in-your-face with sexualization, even if boob jiggle was intended to be more of a joke and a promotional feature. The in-game models were a bunch of crude polygons and making those tits jiggle in the most exaggerated fashion was relatively easy - also you could turn it off. On the western side, you had shit like this:

Blatant. Unoriginal. And completely, utterly pointless. This isn't design. There is literally nothing behind this character's appearance. It's what clueless western designers thought "gamers" liked because "gamers" seemed to like JRPGs very much, and "gamers" being stupid, of course it couldn't be the games they liked. It had to be the boobs.

Around the time of Sudeki and similar stuff, there was a period when this kind of shit was turned up to 11. I'll take the Soul Edge/Calibur series as an example.

This is Sophitia in Soul Edge:

This is a 1995 design. It's still quite modest, even if it is somewhat sexualized. But this is good design. The proportions aren't exaggerated, yet the overall design screams sexy even if the woman's torso is covered in armor. Sophitia is meant to be strong, but also sexy. You better believed I rubbed one out at Sophitia, LOL. More than one, to be honest. And of course Namco had a secret swimsuit costume for her, but this one was the main character design. And it's great. Sexy, but believable and balanced. This is a design that would make sense in the game's historical context.

But then this happened:

This is a striking one-image recapitulation of what happened with female character design in the 2000s. I used to love Sophitia's design. But when Soul Calibur went HD, this is what was shown in promo images:

And this, yeah, this turned me off. This isn't good character design. You can see that the character wasn't the primary concern here. no sir.

Cassandra is another perfect example of this. And I can understand why a reaction movement to this shit started. It's silly. It's juvenile. It's gratuitous. And from my point of view, it's actually a turn-off rather than a turn-on. I didn't ask for this. I don't know who asked for this.

But there's got to be a middle line between this and current designs. Because current "designs" aren't much of designs at all. Japanese designs may be a turn-off for many and some of them are absolutely ridiculous, yes. But broadly speaking, Japan still understands design better than the west. Chara design in visual arts (compared to live-action, where a different balance must be adopted because real people are perceived differently by the audience compared to fictional graphical representations) must have something distinctive, something that makes a character look different and interesting, something that makes you think "yeah, this is how I'd expect this character to look" when you get to know them beyond their appearance. But this?

What even... IS this? This isn't design. There's nothing behind these except "they must look like this lest someone be offended", or "I think a woman should look like this". But there's the problem. When you're designing a woman character, you're not designing a woman - you're designing this woman. A person, not a generic fleshdoll. Same goes for the Nat Drakes, the Booker DeWitts, the Commander Shepards of the video game world. Sadly, their looks don't really seem to matter to their designers. We can recognize these characters because we've spent a lot of time with them by consuming video games. But this:

This became mainstream for a reason. Yeah, she's sexy. Yeah, the tits and the outfit definitely played a part in her success. But this design is cool. This design screams "Look at me, I'm someone!". There's nothing generic in OG Lara. And OG Lara still reminds us that there's a difference between a character that's sexualized for the sake of showing digital flesh, and one that can be sexy but it's much more than that.

Damn, this is alot to get to, but I was specifically talking about Game of Thrones, which I think does sexualization really well. And just to be clear to everyone else, even though I'm obviously being sort of dick(I apologize), I'm really not trying to shame anyone, there def is a place in the world for this stuff, and I enjoy it to a degree still. Basically, I'm just saying to chill and not act like there is some sort of SJW agenda behind every single female character design that doesn't look like a Baywatch model, which is what the OP is saying.

 

[checkcola]

One game that's been on my blacklog forever has been Rise of the Tomb Raider and I played about an hour or so a week or so ago, Lara's ass looks great in it. That is all.

 

[Jon Neu]

Damn, this is alot to get to, but I was specifically talking about Game of Thrones, which I think does sexualization really well.

It did not according to the perpetually offended feminists.

You can never win, there's always something sexist if you put the necessary amount of thought to elaborate some convoluted argument around it.

 

[Geki-D]

You are on the prudish side trying to demonize sexuality

Prove it. Show me crying over a character's design being "too sexy" and not just defending a devs choice like you guys spill your salt over them not being sexy enough.

I'll wait for those receipts.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Prove it. Show me crying over a character's design being "too sexy" and not just defending a devs choice like you guys spill your salt over them not being sexy enough.

I'll wait for those receipts.

This is true. You are right 100% right, you have a thing for defending ghosts more than anything. Or defending those poor woke kids and how people here are no better.

Bringing up this thread is pretty ironic considering it's a pretty clear sign of pressure from gamers trying to browbeat game devs into doing what they want. Ever heard the term "go woke go broke"? It's just a veiled threat to say put certain ideas in your game and we'll boycott it. It's pressure to police creative content plain and simple. nothing but cancel culture, this whole thread, all of these threads complaining about "wokeness" is just cancel culture. We got pretty much every thread about The Last of Us Part 2 full of people saying Druckmann needs to be fired because they don't like what he's putting in the game HE is the lead designer & writer on.

People posting all of this doesn't get people fired or has anybody here rabidly demand things on twitter. Nor does NEOGAF have nerd crusades to get things changed thru being the loudest and most obnoxious.

You guys are really poorly placed to criticize anyone else on pressuring devs.

Show me where NEOGAF is pressuring devs outside members voicing their opinions here.

Please, if I missed something go ahead and share a link.

 

[chriskun]

It did not according to the perpetually offended feminists.

You can never win, there's always something sexist if you put the necessary amount of thought to elaborate some convoluted argument around it.

You can win, and in hindsight people usually separate the bullshit from whats practical. Anyone who lived most of there cognizant lives in the 90’s knows this.

 

[Screamer-RSA]

Hey guys, I'm too mAtUre to want to look at a sexy video game characters or even real life attractive people. I'm too mature to even want to fuck anything. And when my crazy hot friend I know eventually moves on with someone that actually wants to fuck her, I'll continue take solace in the fact and continue to post on internet forums how mature I am.

 

[Geki-D]

This is true. You are right 100% right, you have a thing for defending ghosts more than anything. Or defending those poor woke kids and how people here are no better.

Don't see the receipts I asked for but I'm glad you admit they don't exist. As always Jon Neu truly doe's neu nothing. Literally, he knows nothing about anything.

People posting all of this doesn't get people fired or has anybody here rabidly demand things on twitter. Nor does NEOGAF have nerd crusades to get things changed thru being the loudest and most obnoxious.
Show me where NEOGAF is pressuring devs outside members voicing their opinions here.

Please, if I missed something go ahead and share a link.

This thread, all of these "woke" threads are nerd crusades. But you're right. I said you guys are well into your cancel culture -and you are- but I never said you were actually successful. See, you come in these threads for your little circle jerks, wanting to get some of that sweet sweet echo chamber return about the latest game dev that commited a thought crime as you virtue signal to one another how much you hate the "SJWs" and "wokeness" but you're the fringe. No game dev is going to listen to you guys. A complaint about how a minority group with an actual, real history of persecution is shown in a game will always grab the ears of devs more than "D'ahhh WhY LaRa BoObZ No BiG?!" lol You think any devs are going to give you the time of day for dumb shit like that?

You guys would love nothing more than to fire devs, cancel games, makes games fail and shut down studios -that embarrassment of a thread about TLOU2 is a perfect example of that- but you have no power to do so. you guys would be laughed off Twitter or any mainstream social network, just like flat Earthers.

There are games with fanservice, there are games without. Learn to accept the vision devs have for their games and live with it without starting to cry about conspiracies because they aren't pandering to your sensibilities all the time. And if you think (and you're wrong) all games are pandering to some other group and no longer to you, then maybe it's time you leave gaming because game devs can pander to whoever they want, it's their choice.

Anyway, it's been real, guys. I'm done here, your arguments are repetitive, weak and I grow bored of the dogpile . I'mma leave this thread so you to can jack each other raw over who hates SJWs the most. See you in TLOU2 OT, when the wokest of the woke game by the SJW masterminds is out but you guys have so little self control and principles that you give those nasty SJWs your money anyway so they can make even more terrible lefty propaganda games (say what you want about those Twitter woke scolds, at least they stick to their guns).

I'll respond if Jon Neu can drop those receipts, but I know he can't because he's full of shit.

 

[Hecaton117]

Don't see the receipts I asked for but I'm glad you admit they don't exist. As always Jon Neu truly doe's neu nothing. Literally, he knows nothing about anything.

This thread, all of these "woke" threads are nerd crusades. But you're right. I said you guys are well into your cancel culture -and you are- but I never said you were actually successful. See, you come in these threads for your little circle jerks, wanting to get some of that sweet sweet echo chamber return about the latest game dev that commited a thought crime as you virtue signal to one another how much you hate the "SJWs" and "wokeness" but you're the fringe. No game dev is going to listen to you guys. A complaint about how a minority group with an actual, real history of persecution is shown in a game will always grab the ears of devs more than "D'ahhh WhY LaRa BoObZ No BiG?!" lol You think any devs are going to give you the time of day for dumb shit like that?

You guys would love nothing more than to fire devs, cancel games, makes games fail and shut down studios -that embarrassment of a thread about TLOU2 is a perfect example of that- but you have no power to do so. you guys would be laughed off Twitter or any mainstream social network, just like flat Earthers.

There are games with fanservice, there are games without. Learn to accept the vision devs have for their games and live with it without starting to cry about conspiracies because they aren't pandering to your sensibilities all the time. And if you think (and you're wrong) all games are pandering to some other group and no longer to you, then maybe it's time you leave gaming because game devs can pander to whoever they want, it's their choice.

Anyway, it's been real, guys. I'm done here, your arguments are repetitive, weak and I grow bored of the dogpile . I'mma leave this thread so you to can jack each other raw over who hates SJWs the most. See you in TLOU2 OT, when the wokest of the woke game by the SJW masterminds is out but you guys have so little self control and principles that you give those nasty SJWs your money anyway so they can make even more terrible lefty propaganda games (say what you want about those Twitter woke scolds, at least they stick to their guns).

I'll respond if Jon Neu can drop those receipts, but I know he can't because he's full of shit.

I'm not even sure what to say to most of this but it seems like you've realized that removing yourself from the conversation will lead to an improvement in the quality of discourse which is something I can 100% agree with you on based on what I've seen of your posts here.

 

[MagnesG]

A bonafide sjw troll lol, asking for receipts yet can't show one "they"self. Just ignore that mentally disabled person.

 

[MisterBrimstone]

I've just seen Jill face animations in RE3 at 400% so.. you tell me.

 

[Woopah]

"Huge macho shirtless dude isn't a male being sexualized because it is a power fantasy".

Yes that is completely correct. The quotes I've from the character's creators talk about him being a power fantasy

Jaffe: " He may not totally feel at home in Ancient Greece from a costume standpoint, I think he achieves the greater purpose which is to give players a character who they can play who really does just let them go nuts and unleash the nasty fantasies that they have in their head."

I hadn't seen any quotes from the developers saying Kratos was designed to be sexually appealing to players.

Kratos is the go to example of huge shirtless dude designed as a power fantasy.

 

[GymWolf]

I've just seen Jill face animations in RE3 at 400% so.. you tell me.

that shit is hilarious, i watched the one with carlos too.

 

[spandexmonkey]

Yes that is completely correct. The quotes I've from the character's creators talk about him being a power fantasy

Jaffe: " He may not totally feel at home in Ancient Greece from a costume standpoint, I think he achieves the greater purpose which is to give players a character who they can play who really does just let them go nuts and unleash the nasty fantasies that they have in their head."

I hadn't seen any quotes from the developers saying Kratos was designed to be sexually appealing to players.

Kratos is the go to example of huge shirtless dude designed as a power fantasy.

Please, Kratos being powerful could've been conveyed without dressing him in skimpy clothes (see Space Marines). The loincloth barbarian expresses not only strength but virility and sexuality. It's prime man meat, the height of male sexualization. Stop viewing everything from a heterosexual male lens. Exaggerated masculinity is attractive to those that look to it and it's easy to understand why for those that seek that attention.
The inverse is also true, but is highly demonized. Drench a woman in exaggerated femininity and those of us attracted to it will go nuts and those that want that attention will know how to achieve it.

 

[DryPancakes]

Prove it. Show me crying over a character's design being "too sexy" and not just defending a devs choice like you guys spill your salt over them not being sexy enough.

I'll wait for those receipts.

You really have been living under a rock for the past 6 years.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Prove it. Show me crying over a character's design being "too sexy" and not just defending a devs choice like you guys spill your salt over them not being sexy enough.

I'll wait for those receipts.

 

[Woopah]

Please, Kratos being powerful could've been conveyed without dressing him in skimpy clothes (see Space Marines). The loincloth barbarian expresses not only strength but virility and sexuality. It's prime man meat, the height of male sexualization. Stop viewing everything from a heterosexual male lens. Exaggerated masculinity is attractive to those that look to it and it's easy to understand why for those that seek that attention.
The inverse is also true, but is highly demonized. Drench a woman in exaggerated femininity and those of us attracted to it will go nuts and those that want that attention will know how to achieve it.

He certainly shows a lot of skin but I think developer intent matters and Kratos was designed as a power fantasy, and not as someone for the player to be attracted to.

For a game where the intent is to sexualise the male character designs, I'd say Boyfriend Dungeon is the prime example.

 

[Guilty_AI]

He certainly shows a lot of skin but I think developer intent matters and Kratos was designed as a power fantasy, and not as someone for the player to be attracted to.

For a game where the intent is to sexualise the male character designs, I'd say Boyfriend Dungeon is the prime example.

If we're talking about intent, the intent of sexy female characters in games is usually to mimic action movies of old. Any sexy female MGS character is just that.
And for games where the intent is to sexualise the male character for women, there's an entire genre for it called Otome games.

 

[Carna]

Does this expand into straight men being into shota characters?

 

[spandexmonkey]

He certainly shows a lot of skin but I think developer intent matters and Kratos was designed as a power fantasy, and not as someone for the player to be attracted to.

For a game where the intent is to sexualise the male character designs, I'd say Boyfriend Dungeon is the prime example.

Male power fantasy:

Sexualized male power fantasy:

You can emphasize strength and power without putting muscularity on display. He's showing off that physique for a reason.

 

[Saber]

He certainly shows a lot of skin but I think developer intent matters and Kratos was designed as a power fantasy, and not as someone for the player to be attracted to.

Dude, Kratos showing his abs is male fantasy. No one wants to see men abs and sweaty muscles other than the ones who are attract to them, regardless of gender or sex orientation. Neither those male characters from the new Mortal Kombat.

How long it will take to people forget this lame excuse? Do you people even know how is a teen girl magazine? Or all those men and young people showing their abs are male fantasy too?

 

[Knch]

Sexualized male power fantasy:

You can emphasize strength and power without putting muscularity on display. He's showing off that physique for a reason.

Seems overdressed for being a Spartan...

 

[Pejo]

Prove it. Show me crying over a character's design being "too sexy" and not just defending a devs choice like you guys spill your salt over them not being sexy enough.

I'll wait for those receipts.

 

[lock2k]

What a dweeb lol

 

[Woopah]

If we're talking about intent, the intent of sexy female characters in games is usually to mimic action movies of old. Any sexy female MGS character is just that.
And for games where the intent is to sexualise the male character for women, there's an entire genre for it called Otome games.

Sure, there are plenty of games with attractive women who aren't sexualised and there are games which do sexualise men.

I agree with all of that.

Male power fantasy:

Sexualized male power fantasy:

You can emphasize strength and power without putting muscularity on display. He's showing off that physique for a reason.

It's a fair point.

From everything I've read about the design and seen in the games I still don't think the intention of Kratos' looks was to sexualise him (in earlier versions he was armoured and wore a mask).

Having said that I'm sure there are some players out there who find Kratos attractive.

Dude, Kratos isn't showing his abs as male fantasy. No one wants to see men abs and sweaty muscles other than the ones who are attract to them, regardless of gender or sex orientation. Neither those male characters from the new Mortal Kombat.

How long it will take to people forget this lame excuse? Do you people even know how is a teen girl magazine? Or all those men and young people showing their abs are male fantasy too?

Kratos being a power fantasy (I never said male fantasy) was explicitly stated by Jaffe. I don't know why you think it's an excuse.

I would say teen girl magazines probably do sexualise guys because that is there intent,

My original point was that a lot of players wouldn't like it if Kratos was heavily sexualised in the next game. Would you agree with that or disagree with that?