Comment on sexist/racist/homophobic stuff in games you really really like. READ OP BEFORE COMMENTING

[Dalisclock]

Now I'll give you Black Ops II and Ghosts because they really do seem to portray ALL Hispanics as evil. I mean just look at BLOPS in particular: every single Hispanic on Earth is your enemy and the one guy who isn't, betrays you for no fucking reason whatsoever!

BLOPS, I can kind of see this but on the other hand, you can also read a class struggle thing in there too, with the West having decandent floating cities and death drones while everyone else is pretty much starving. Not to mention the fact that Menendez actually comes across as the most sympathetic villain in the entire series(not that the bar is very high for CoD) does a lot to balance out the "evil brown people" protrayl.

Ghosts, OTOH, comes across as more racist, less nuanced retread of the BLOPS II plot. I haven't played it, partially because of this reason.

 

[Dalisclock]

No, they do have a point. What was one of the arguments of racist white folks back in the day for suppression of blacks, for slavery? You can't let them loose, you can't give them their freedom, because they're savages and they'll turn on us and they'll take revenge. What happened in the real world? Nothing like that - the civil rights movement was extraordinarily peaceful. What happened in Bioshock? Guess the racists were right all along, and the suppression justified. Also, the Daisy Fitzroy (and perhaps the Vox Populi altogether) is just as racist as the white folks, just in reverse, again nothing like real civil rights leaders. And the violence of the oppressed against the oppressors is sort of painted in the same light as the violence of the oppressors against the oppressed in Bioshock, and that's a horrible false equivalency. All that makes the message a bit iffy.

I disagree. It felt it was very appropriate, since in real life it's fairly common for one group that's been brutalized and oppressed to eventually do the exact same things the moment they managed to gain power. The French and Russian revolutions are both excellent examples of this. Hell, the man who started the french "Reign of Terror"(and dubbed it that) started out as an idealistic believer in human rights. Didn't take very long to go to chopping off peoples heads en masse, starting with pretty much anyone who had any sort of power under the previous government.

Considering how badly the underclass in Columbia were treated prior to the revolution, I would be more surprising for them NOT to be committing war crimes.

 

[CloudAtlas]

They were objectifing FemShep by making her appearance the object of fan choice: pick whatever you think is prettiest. Not a big thing, but unfortunate nonetheless.

I didn't care much for it myself. There's only one FemShep I consider relevant, and that's my FemShep. I just picked whichever looked closest to that one. After all, my FemShep wasn't as much a separate character as she was basically "me", my self-insertion.

Ironically, of all the choices presented, fans choose the one that looked closest to the previous default appearance.

They were objectifing FemShep by making her appearance the object of fan choice: pick whatever you think is prettiest. Not a big thing, but unfortunate nonetheless.

It was more that they weren't really happy with the default appearance of the original Femshep (who you have to admit, looked kind more like a random generated face when compared the Maleshep's iconic look) so they pretty much just asked the fans "Hey, which Femshep would you like to play as the most?" It's hardly objectifying her.[/quote]

Yes, the previous default appearance of FemShep just looked like a random generated face, no unique model or textures, and probably was, so to give her a higher-quality, defined look at all, I definitely welcomed that (and I used that look myself). I just believe the way they got there was a bit unfortunate - but please not I called that decision just "questionable", not "clearly sexist" or something like that.

___

On all the comments on racism in Bioshock Infinite: I stand by my remarks, but I'm not that invested in Bioshock to argue about them further. The point of this thread was to admit to some content of a game you like to be problematic in your opinion, to acknowledge that you can enjoy games while being critical of its aspects, and that I did.

 

[Dandark]

I love most of the characters and their designs in league of legends but.....just....well....

Some of the splash art is so silly. I like the character designs but Riot constantly makes any females characters break their back in most of the poses they put them in.
They have plenty of really good female character designs that are fully armoured and not at all sexualized but most of them are and sometimes they just look silly. I still really like most of them though.

 

[Flames66]

Personally, I wasn't a huge fan of how women were used in Spec Ops: The Line. No spoilers, perse, but if you haven't played it yet, you probably shouldn't read it, as it spoils part of the tone of the game.

Anyways, the women in Spec Ops: The Line are used solely as part of the guilt trip, and there's not a single female character or combatant in the game. Thats not neccesarily fine, but at least understandable, in most games, but Spec Ops: The Line isn't most games. The game is supposed to be a deconstruction, but it stuck to this whole notion of "oh noe teh wimminz" quite unironically while demolishing any other positive myth surrounding war and the military, not to mention the metacommentary on the medium of gaming. Not only did it come off as a missed opportunity (which it most certainly was), but in retrospective it almost kind of felt insulting. Maybe they just didn't think of it, but if they did, that means this was probably the one "you can't do that" line that they didn't cross in regards to the game, and maybe they just couldn't conceive of a good way implement it if they did think of it, but I don't know that, so it just kind of feels weird against the backdrop against the rest of the game.

I think it makes sense in the context of the narrative. I don't think it was a case of sexism, I think it the writers were trying to keep a tight focus on the story.

OT: Not a game, but I enjoy Ace Venture: Pet Detective. I think it is a hilarious film with great jokes, good characters well cast and a well written story. Apart from one thing. There is a massive dose of transphobia, hatred and disgust permeating one of the main story elements. I have just about managed to separate that from my enjoyment of the film, but it still bothers me.

 

[Steve Waltz]

Racism in Pokemon. Kind of hard to over look the whole Jynx thing. I watched Game theory and I still think Jynx is racist. Also why does the2nd Gym leader in Black and white look like Aunt Jemima. Ask a Black person who likes pokemon, does she look like Aunt Jemima.

Because they probably designed that character on that southern slave caretaker persona. This game was made by a bunch of Japanese people, most of which have probably never seen a black person before. With that said, they probably have no idea that African-Americans are still sore about the slavery that happened back then. That's why it's likable; it's ignorance, not racism.

 

[BreakfastMan]

On all the comments on racism in Bioshock Infinite: I stand by my remarks, but I'm not that invested in Bioshock to argue about them further. The point of this thread was to admit to some content of a game you like to be problematic in your opinion, to acknowledge that you can enjoy games while being critical of its aspects, and that I did.

Well, that is all well and good, but that doesn't mean we can't have some good, intelligent discussion of one another's criticisms. I think it is healthy to be able to be critical of anything, including criticism of media.

 

[CloudAtlas]

On all the comments on racism in Bioshock Infinite: I stand by my remarks, but I'm not that invested in Bioshock to argue about them further. The point of this thread was to admit to some content of a game you like to be problematic in your opinion, to acknowledge that you can enjoy games while being critical of its aspects, and that I did.

Well, that is all well and good, but that doesn't mean we can't have some good, intelligent discussion of one another's criticisms. I think it is healthy to be able to be critical of anything, including criticism of media.

You are totally right about that. I just wanted to say that I don't want to discuss it further (because it's a really complicated issue), but the way I put it was admittedly not very fortunate.

 

[kilenem]

Racism in Pokemon. Kind of hard to over look the whole Jynx thing. I watched Game theory and I still think Jynx is racist. Also why does the2nd Gym leader in Black and white look like Aunt Jemima. Ask a Black person who likes pokemon, does she look like Aunt Jemima.

Because they probably designed that character on that southern slave caretaker persona. This game was made by a bunch of Japanese people, most of which have probably never seen a black person before. With that said, they probably have no idea that African-Americans are still sore about the slavery that happened back then. That's why it's likable; it's ignorance, not racism.

I kind of understand that like when Japanese do Black face to imitate rappers, ganguro, but pokemon still had to past a American localization. In some Nintendo games they take religious things or sexual innuendos. Why can't they make things less racist.

Also Christians are still pissed about Jews killing Jesus,even though it was really the Romans. I can be mad about something that happened a 150 years. Plus it wasn't like the next 100 years were gravy. According to Christopher Donar L.A.P.D still haven't changed since the Rodney King Beating.

 

[Loonyyy]

Or allowing the fans to pick which FemShep they liked best? They were just trying to include the fanbase.

They were objectifing FemShep by making her appearance the object of fan choice: pick whatever you think is prettiest. Not a big thing, but unfortunate nonetheless.

1. I really liked Bioshock Infinite in general, but I think the portrayal of Daisy Fitzroy and the Vox Populi was very iffy. To prevent spoilers, I don't want to into detail here, but a quick Google search for "Bioshock Infinite + Racism" will tell you why. None of the reasons why I find it iffy are my own anyway; to my own shame, I didn't noticed it myself while playing B:I, I only learned about it afterwards.

Well, that might be because that criticism is quite poorly thought out and ignores one of the most common readings of the themes/messages of the game, not to mention completely ignores the idea that stories can reflect the themes and struggles of its characters in the world itself...

No, they do have a point. What was one of the arguments of racist white folks back in the day for suppression of blacks, for slavery? You can't let them loose, you can't give them their freedom, because they're savages and they'll turn on us and they'll take revenge. What happened in the real world? Nothing like that - the civil rights movement was extraordinarily peaceful. What happened in Bioshock? Guess the racists were right all along, and the suppression justified. Also, the Daisy Fitzroy (and perhaps the Vox Populi altogether) is just as racist as the white folks, just in reverse, again nothing like real civil rights leaders. And the violence of the oppressed against the oppressors is sort of painted in the same light as the violence of the oppressors against the oppressed in Bioshock, and that's a horrible false equivalency. All that makes the message a bit iffy.

That part kind of annoyed me too. Booker and Elizabeth start clutching their pearls at the violent revolution they were aiming for, and equivocate the violence of the oppressed against their oppressors, and those complicit in their oppression, with the oppression in the first place.

Callous as it may be, but shit happens. The founders who supported the system that oppressed the Vox, whether or not they themselves did anything aggressive, had their chance to pick the right side. They had their chance to try to help people, and to end suffering, and they didn't. They sided with what made them more comfortable. And as the game is so insistent on pointing out, Booker and Elizabeth aren't above violence to achieve their ends, and the ends of the Vox are far more noble than what Booker thinks his are. And while the game condemns the violence of Booker, it does it in such a stupid way that I generally dismiss it as trying to have their cake and eat it too.

THE FOUNDERS WILL BLEED!

Spoiler

(Additionally, it was more than a little annoying and silly that the Vox then turn on you. blah blah blah "In this reality Booker was a hero of the Vox who died" blah blah blah. It still seems like a silly reaction to go straight to killing him. I'm pretty sure I know why it was done though. It's hard to make decent AI that don't look completely retarded when you're expecting them to help you (Well, not so much hard, as considered not worth the effort).)

 

[EternallyBored]

Lovecraft isn't thát racist. More like xenophobic. And it's usually pretty subtle.

Ehh, no, he was both, and it's only subtle because his more racist and xenophobic stories don't see a lot of publishing nowadays, to the point that some of his short stories are almost entirely lost, and his poetry is pretty much never sold because it was really, REALLY racist.

There are still some in circulation, like the story where he describes a deceased Black man as a gorilla like creature. Or his correspondence where he specifically calls out "niggers" as loathsome and ugly creatures. Or even his delightful poetry that describes the creation of black people in his fictional universe, let's read a passage.


" When, long ago, the gods created Earth;

In Jove's fair image Man was shaped at birth.
The beasts for lesser parts were designed;
Yet were too remote from humankind.
To fill the gap, and join the rest of Man,
Th'Olympian host conceiv'd a clever plan.
A beast they wrought, in semi-human figure,
Filled it with vice, and called the thing a ******. "

I don't know how you define subtle, but to me, that's about as subtle as a hurricane. He was indeed xenophobic, but he was also really, really racist as well.

EDIT: Actually, I should clarify, as even his xenophobia seems to be mostly rooted in racism as well, he actually really liked Western European culture and people, he is on the record in correspondence as talking about how the English were the height of society, refinement, and breeding. He was also a proponent of biological determinism and eugenics, and a staunch opponent to any sort of interracial marriage or breeding. Strangely enough, he wasn't much of a misogynist, as he believed that discrimination against women was a product of oriental belief (so basically Asians are why misogyny exists, so now you know who to blame ladies).

 

[Butterfly]

I'm an on-again, off-again player of League of Legends, and I usually enjoy the game a great deal. No, it's not as deep as DoTA, but it's got a unique style of play when it comes to emphasizing skill-shots, and it's loads of fun as long as you aren't told to kill yourself by a teammate.

With that said, the portrayal of the majority of the female characters is... not exactly something I'm comfortable with. Most of them are sporting ridiculously revealing outfits, and their splash art commonly breaks basic human anatomy to twist the character into bizarre positions so as to display both their chest and rear at once. Yes, there are female champions who wear more believable clothes, and there are male champions who run around shirtless, but if you look at the entire pool of characters, it's not hard to see the disparity.

I get that this is a common trope in fantasy games, but I just wish it wasn't so damn prevalent.

This. I was always slightly put off by the sketchy representation of a good majority of the female champions. Even the ones who are sensible by default tend to have skimpy alternative skins available for them. It's true that many of the male characters are also heavily underdressed, but most of them are still not so much "attractive" as "authoritative". And it's very clear that the ladies are wearing little in the name of sex appeal. There are some counterexamples - like Yasuo (soooo dreamy) and Varus (if only he wasn't half horrifying eldritch corruption) - but then those counterexamples get covered-up alternate skins. I'm not saying Rito has some inherent prejudice about female characters, but I'm implying it.

 

[Phasmal]

Or allowing the fans to pick which FemShep they liked best? They were just trying to include the fanbase.

They were objectifing FemShep by making her appearance the object of fan choice: pick whatever you think is prettiest. Not a big thing, but unfortunate nonetheless.

It was more that they weren't really happy with the default appearance of the original Femshep (who you have to admit, looked kind more like a random generated face when compared the Maleshep's iconic look) so they pretty much just asked the fans "Hey, which Femshep would you like to play as the most?" It's hardly objectifying her. It's like saying letting the fans choose the appearance of Call in Mighty No. 9 is objectifying her.

Iconic, though?
Really?
Really?

I thought Manshep just looked bland. I agree he looked like he had more design to him than the standard Femshep but I wouldn't say his look was iconic.

I wasn't that huge on the Femshep options that were presented, and find it a bit weird that we had a little beauty pageant for them, but hey, anything that doesn't completely fucking ignore those who like to play as the ladies is a positive in my book.

OT: The intro to the new DMC was so paint-by-numbers predictable it was downright boring. `Oh look all the ladies want to bone the player character! Look at asses and boobs!`
Wow. That is so new I nearly fell off my bed from amazement. This is surely not something I have seen before.

 

[EternallyBored]

That's... Pretty racist.

It's a lot less apparent in the stories I read, but yeah...

He was a weird dude, afraid of pretty much anything that he didn't know.

I guess that's why he managed to write such good horror.

Yeah, his most famous stories contain only a fragment of what he put into his other writings, especially his poetry, if you can get a hold of it, it can give you a glimpse into the mind of a deeply paranoid man.

He's pretty much the poster child for the concept of looking past a creator's personal views in order to enjoy their work.

 

[TekMoney]

Lovecraft isn't thát racist. More like xenophobic. And it's usually pretty subtle.

You should probably read "Facts Concerning the Late Arthur Jermyn and His Family" where a man realizes his family is descended from mixed breeding with an ape goddess and he kills himself because of it.

It's not at all hard to figure out the subtext of that one.

 

[chikusho]

That part kind of annoyed me too. Booker and Elizabeth start clutching their pearls at the violent revolution they were aiming for, and equivocate the violence of the oppressed against their oppressors, and those complicit in their oppression, with the oppression in the first place.

Callous as it may be, but shit happens. The founders who supported the system that oppressed the Vox, whether or not they themselves did anything aggressive, had their chance to pick the right side. They had their chance to try to help people, and to end suffering, and they didn't. They sided with what made them more comfortable. And as the game is so insistent on pointing out, Booker and Elizabeth aren't above violence to achieve their ends, and the ends of the Vox are far more noble than what Booker thinks his are. And while the game condemns the violence of Booker, it does it in such a stupid way that I generally dismiss it as trying to have their cake and eat it too.

THE FOUNDERS WILL BLEED!

But.. Booker and Elizabeth weren't aiming for the revolution. They were just trying to get out of Columbia.
Booker is only helping the vox because he needs the airship, right?

*EDIT*

Just curious, what did you find stupid about the way they condemn Bookers violence? I mean, basically the entire game from start to finish does nothing but condemn Bookers violence, and it bleeds through every aspect of the game. Hell, even the soundtrack does it.

 

[bossfight1]

I DID notice that, in the Mass Effect games, all female armor was designed to prominently display their cleavage, like it was saying "Hey, this hardened space marine is also a girl!" But, still, it offered more coverage than most female armor in games.

I can definitely see people's issues in how female characters are more or less legally required to be dressed/built in an attention-getting way, rather than actually making CHARACTERS, not wank material. I know it's been said before, but you shouldn't rely on cover-art or promotional images to sell a game; make a game that's bought for its gameplay, its story, make it stand out in ways other than visuals. Yeah, I sometimes have a bit of an "oink oink" moment with scantily-clad women in games, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't buy a game just because its cover art didn't have enormous bazongas on the cover.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

That part kind of annoyed me too. Booker and Elizabeth start clutching their pearls at the violent revolution they were aiming for, and equivocate the violence of the oppressed against their oppressors, and those complicit in their oppression, with the oppression in the first place.

Callous as it may be, but shit happens. The founders who supported the system that oppressed the Vox, whether or not they themselves did anything aggressive, had their chance to pick the right side. They had their chance to try to help people, and to end suffering, and they didn't. They sided with what made them more comfortable. And as the game is so insistent on pointing out, Booker and Elizabeth aren't above violence to achieve their ends, and the ends of the Vox are far more noble than what Booker thinks his are. And while the game condemns the violence of Booker, it does it in such a stupid way that I generally dismiss it as trying to have their cake and eat it too.

THE FOUNDERS WILL BLEED!

Spoiler

(Additionally, it was more than a little annoying and silly that the Vox then turn on you. blah blah blah "In this reality Booker was a hero of the Vox who died" blah blah blah. It still seems like a silly reaction to go straight to killing him. I'm pretty sure I know why it was done though. It's hard to make decent AI that don't look completely retarded when you're expecting them to help you (Well, not so much hard, as considered not worth the effort).)

I agree with that spoiler.

Spoiler

I loved the game, but the moment Fitzroy turns the revolution against you for fairly dubiously thought out purposes felt a little...gamey.

As for Booker, I'm going to echo chikusho's comment. The entire game was about Booker's violence and all the terrible consequences spilling out from it.

On the supposed "racism" in the game...I have absolutely no problem with Fitzroy and the Vox Populi lashing out against their oppressors. As others have said, it is very common for revolutions to take ugly turns (for some reason I'm reminded of Orwell's pigs), and having the Vox Populi continue the cycle of violence was very in keeping with the primary themes of the game. If there was a problematic element, it was Booker solemnly intoning that Fitzroy and Comstock were two sides of the same coin. They really weren't, Booker...you chode. One of them was a PRODUCT of the other.