Games you like that you can admit can be a bit cringe-worthy sometimes

[ManutheBloodedge]

Here's a question for you, do you believe it's generally worth making a fuss over, or has the criticism gone to far?

For God's Sakes I am not trying to make a fuss over anything.
I was trying to have a fun conversation about games using cheap techniques and silly things, but it seems the majourity of people just can't look objectively at their hobby anymore. Mention the S-word and they immediatly assume you are trying to take away their games and burn their house down.
I thought that maybe, MAYBE people might be mature enough to admit that sometimes their beloved games might not be perfect in every way, shape or form. But that seems to be asking for way too much here.
I don't care how many naked women, men or anything are in your games, you can enjoy yourself as much as you like.

Erm, dude, I thought my previous post was in line with what your thread was about. But okay, just generalize everyone on this thread and call me immature with all the others, see if I care.

Spoiler: I don't

 

[llsaidknockyouout]

I loved Zelda: Skyward Sword.

But the game made a litany of errors which put people off: excessive tutorials, constant alerts/reminders, linearity, backtracking, by-the-numbers fetchquest, repeat boss fights and so on.

 

[Amaror]

Erm, dude, I thought my previous post was in line with what your thread was about. But okay, just generalize everyone on this thread and call me immature with all the others, see if I care.

Spoiler: I don't

It was and it was good. But my comment wasn't directed towards you.
Your post was a perfectly fine post but if you look at the other posts you have people arguing about whether or not women were happy in medieval times, why I am apparently a puritanical a***ole demanding cencorship or definitions of "sexism" or "problematic".

 

[ManutheBloodedge]

Erm, dude, I thought my previous post was in line with what your thread was about. But okay, just generalize everyone on this thread and call me immature with all the others, see if I care.

Spoiler: I don't

It was and it was good. But my comment wasn't directed towards you.
Your post was a perfectly fine post but if you look at the other posts you have people arguing about whether or not women were happy in medieval times, why I am apparently a puritanical a***ole demanding cencorship or definitions of "sexism" or "problematic".

And here I thought adding a Jontron video would make it perfectly clear I was not exactly serious...

 

[the December King]

I love the Metroid franchise but as I grew older I noticed a stark difference between it and similar games, and that in it you're killing mostly animals. Usually when we go around committing videogame massacres they're against people who deserve it. In Wolfenstein we had Nazis, in Doom we had demons from hell, in Halo we got genocidal aliens and then we wrapped back around to Nazis. For the most part enemies kind of deserved it. Even in Zelda most of the enemies are either sentient or effected by evil magic. Metroid? In Metroid you're mostly just running through habitats killing the native non-sentient species. Yeah there are space pirates but they're mostly outliers and in stuff like Wolfenstein where they have dogs those are outlier enemies too. Most of Metroid is just killing native species because they're in your way even though you could probably get around them easily if you had any alternatives to shooting them. Its direct counterpart is Castlevania an in Castlevania you're fighting explicitly evil creatures. I know people look at Metroid from a mechanical perspective at the foremost and thats not wrong to do so because its a franchise that values mechanics above narrative to the degree that narrative is mostly conveyed through mechanics but it does always strike me as odd that this happens to a series that belongs to the same company that has The Legend of Zelda and Pokemon, which are both heavily about an appreciation of and love for nature. Overthinking it? Sure, but I always get wondering about it when I played a Metroid game.

What an interesting observation- this is something I have never considered about the Metroid games. Oddly enough this could also have applied to the earlier Tomb Raider games too- going to exotic places, and shooting all of the animals.

 

[Ubersupersloth1]

hmmmmmmmmmmmm...
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM....

I'm trying to think of one.

AHA! The Neptunia series. While not "sexist" per-se. It's VERY fanservicey but I enjoy it for its humour and general fun, lighthearted atmosphere. Although having a party and all 15 of them being women IS a little weird. Plus, like, half of them are lesbians. But, whatever. I cringe whenever there's a panty shot or CLEARLY intentially titillating scene. It's why I'm NOT getting that Spin-Off game that advertises clothing damage as a main selling point.

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

I love the Metroid franchise but as I grew older I noticed a stark difference between it and similar games, and that in it you're killing mostly animals. Usually when we go around committing videogame massacres they're against people who deserve it. In Wolfenstein we had Nazis, in Doom we had demons from hell, in Halo we got genocidal aliens and then we wrapped back around to Nazis. For the most part enemies kind of deserved it. Even in Zelda most of the enemies are either sentient or effected by evil magic. Metroid? In Metroid you're mostly just running through habitats killing the native non-sentient species. Yeah there are space pirates but they're mostly outliers and in stuff like Wolfenstein where they have dogs those are outlier enemies too. Most of Metroid is just killing native species because they're in your way even though you could probably get around them easily if you had any alternatives to shooting them. Its direct counterpart is Castlevania an in Castlevania you're fighting explicitly evil creatures. I know people look at Metroid from a mechanical perspective at the foremost and thats not wrong to do so because its a franchise that values mechanics above narrative to the degree that narrative is mostly conveyed through mechanics but it does always strike me as odd that this happens to a series that belongs to the same company that has The Legend of Zelda and Pokemon, which are both heavily about an appreciation of and love for nature. Overthinking it? Sure, but I always get wondering about it when I played a Metroid game.

What an interesting observation- this is something I have never considered about the Metroid games. Oddly enough this could also have applied to the earlier Tomb Raider games too- going to exotic places, and shooting all of the animals.

As a carry on, it shows up a lot in far cry now. It has this aura of the killing of swakll the lion.

Also a Metroid where you had more options then shooting the creatures sounds really cool.

Also also, pokemon come off really bad if you start digging into it too much. Pokemon abuse everywhere.

 

[BarryMcCociner]

How about none? Sexism is hatred of a gender, I can't name a single game that leaves me with the impression "Wow, the developers really fucking hate women!"

Beyond: Two Souls gives me the impression that David Cage hates women, or at least he hates Ellen Page. His other games also get really creepy as well, as far as terrible things almost happening to women is concerned.

The only David Cage game I played is that one where a man is forced to drive against traffic on a highway, crawl through a tunnel filled with broken glass, cut off a finger, kill a dude, and drink what he is told is poison that'll kill him in an hour or his child dies.

In this game I can also remember a woman being forced to strip at gunpoint (or not doing that and simply clubbing the dude over the head.)

To my memory, you have to go through some of these trials as the man to not have a small child die, however you don't have to strip at gunpoint as the woman. You can simply immediately knock the man out.

The best logical step to make from that is not "Wow, David Cage hates men more than he does women" it's "Wow, David Cage made a game with situations in which the characters have valid reasons to fear for their safety."

And furthermore, isn't it a recurring theme across David Cage's work to (attempt to) juxtapose violence with sexuality? Like, a character will kill someone then crawl right into bed with someone else, blood still on their hands?

 

[Silvanus]

The only David Cage game I played [...]

You're thinking of Heavy Rain.

 

[CyanCat47_v1legacy]

Just a question, how was medieval society demeaning to women? Men did the hard, difficult, dangerous work, because women simply weren't physically able to. Meanwhile, women often had their hands full with the household and raised the children with exactly the same ideas on how society should work. Were those women unhappy with their lot? Were the men? Compared to modern society, they all had a shitty life, but you can hardly say one group was demeaning to the other. Men and women had different and equally important things to do and did what they were good at, because that was the only way a family could function. It's only now, in the last century, with a social system and jobs being less physically demanding, that people can have a choice of what to do with their lives.

Wives were the property of their husbands.

Define 'property', because, in most historical societies, men had major legal obligations to their wives. Men who treated their wives badly or just plain failed to provide were usually ostracized by the family and society as a whole. I don't know about other parts of the world, but in most of medieval Europe (up to the early 19th century), men had to take almost all the legal liability for their wives' actions (usually excluding murdering their husbands).
this does not include accusations of witchcraft and adultry which a woman could not defend herself against simply because nobody would ever believe a womans testimony over a mans

They had little-to-no choice over whom their husband would be; that decision would rest with the man and their parents.

Neither had men, in most cases. Arranged marriages were usually a family matter, nothing to do with the people actually involved.

They had no ability to leave their relationships, while the men did. If the men did make that choice, the women would be socially ostracised, or even legally penalised, solely for having been left by a man.

Not really. Marriage in most societies was a big deal, often even sacred. Nobody trying to get out of it is going to get points for that. The reason 'staying faithful' was more important for women, is purely because of the biological reasons for marriage: men provide food/protection, women provide children. Unfaithful women don't uphold their part of the bargain, while layabout men don't hold up theirs and were usually punished severely for it.

While men had some degree of choice over profession (though much more restricted than we do today),

Not really.

the women had absolutely none at all. They were barred from almost all forms of work.

Women, especially those in more well-to-do families, didn't need to have a job at all. Managing a household and looking after the children was more than enough work. Plus, most work was physically demanding. Why would someone pay a woman for what a man would be better at?

They were denied almost all forms of education.

As were virtually all men.
In 1900 a woman with money to pay for it and prior education prior to qualify for it would could barely find a single university in her entire country that would accept her.
They were also legally required to have a signature from their father or husband to take out a loan even if they were the registered CEO of their own company. a woman could also be the first child, the most qualified and she would still come last in line in the matter of inheritance of power

They were denied all forms of political representation (even the meagre ones afforded to men in those times).

A women's life was in and around the house. The number of political decisions that even remotely touched upon female life was very small indeed. Same for most men, really. Money ruled politics, not gender. Poor people had no representation, be they man or woman.
In most modern european republics and democracies all poor men were given a vote 50 to 70 years prior to even partial sufferage being instituted

In many cases, they were denied even the ability to leave the home.

Individual cases maybe, but not as a societal system. Even if it were the case, there are plenty of cases where women themselves supported living rules that us modern Western people would find ridiculous.

When there was talk about allowing women to drive in Saudi Arabia, according to many polls a majority of women were against it. Same with abolishing male guardianship. Why? Because they liked to be driven everywhere. They liked to be taken care of. They liked not having responsibility. It's the very same as when in many western countries women's right to vote was instituted. Some of the most vocal opposition was women, because they didn't see any need for responsibility, nor did they have any benefits from it, as politics seldom concerned the household, so did not concern the female life. Only in recent times has that changed.
the prohibition act was passed largely due to a large ammount of female voters

It's not even disputable that medieval society was sexist in the extreme.

Yes, it is. It's very narrow-minded to assume that just because our modern liberated rules don't apply to another society, that people will automatically be unhappy with it. That it is a form of oppression by one group against another. Or do you really think it's just a case of 'they don't know what they're missing'?
A woman charged with adultry was stoned, a man charged with adultry got various comparatively mild punishments. in fact a european woman could not request divorce in the year 1900 unless she had proof that the man had seriouly beaten her and i doubt the court believed the ones who were very often. meanwhile a man needed only the flimsiest evidence of adultry to get a divorce and could have multiple well known extramartial affairs at once without giving the woman grounds for divorce. when charles the fifth heard of martin luther being charged with heresy he chose to give him a fair trial in wurms as a german citizen despite the insistance of the inquisition to put him on trial in rome where he would probably have been sentenced to death without the chance to speak for himself. if it had been a nun preaching the same things she would have been burnt almost immidiately for witchcraft

Where were the mass female protests throughout the ages? If it was all so bad, surely some would have risen up against the establishment? Why is it that this only started happening now in this modern age of easier jobs and social security? Because women had no need for it then. They do now. And even now you'll not find many women complaining that there are not enough female garbagemen, female mine workers, female builders (female convicts?). No, it's only about the safe, well-paying jobs, like managers or doctors.
that is like saying "where were all the revolutions in the medival ages?". many philosophers in the, classical, medival and renessance eras supported the statement that the king ruled by grace of god and as such revolts were sacrelige. one in particular named augustine was essential in the formation of the church after the fall of rome. augustine was a highly sexually frustrated man with a seriously warped idea of both women and female sexuality and as such he was obsessed with the passage that said eve convinced adam to eat the apple. many objected when he proposed all kinds of ridiculously sexist things for church doctrine but were overruled. as for female protests many women fought for better woring conditions during the 1800s and several male and female writers after the age of enlightenment wrote works that promoted womens rights like "A doll house" or "Amtmandens d?tre" (english title not available). the fact is that the common imaginatin is shaped by ideas that develop over centuries and decades. to say the medival ages did not discriminate against women is like saying the age of european imperialism did not discriminate people who were not white. being conditioned into accepting aa culture that views a large portion of the population as lesser can take a lot of time to overcome. bartolome de las casas, one of the first opponents of european imperialism and slavery in the 1500s was just as racist as everyone else when he first came ot america but by watching the atrocities of the conquistadors he slowly began to change his mind. even after this it took many years for him to finally oppose slavery. he wasn't born with the understanding that slavery is inhumane

In hindsight we can claim that it was all so unfair for women, not being the same as men back then, but I is there any proof that women disliked their place in society back then? Sure, there would have been some, but the same can be said for men.

North koreans love the kim family despite the fact that they are constantly starving and lacking water and electricity. does that make the dictators of north korea good leaders when they are simoultaneously utterly incompetent and incredibly cruel but people are too brainwashed to hate them

 

[ThatOtherGirl]

I have a hard time labeling individual games as "problematic", especially over something like fan service. Individual games are individual works, and there is nothing wrong with having a work dedicated to tits and ass (as low brow as that might be). Even the most egregious fan service games like DOAX do not bother me on their own. In fact, I welcome the existence of such games.

The problem that can arise are trends of fanservice across parts or the whole of the industry. Games like DOAX I think actually do not contribute to this problem nearly as much as games like, say, Fire Emblem Fates. DOAX is a game dedicated to staring at women. We all know what is going into that, and I don't think that is necessarily a problem. But a game like FE:F puts a real double standard in place, making certain female character designs all about bringing the sexy to the table in a game where that really doesn't have a strong place. Again, on it's own not a problem. Have all the asymmetrical sexy you want. But it contributes to the overall trend of putting women in stripper armor where men get real armor. It is a problem in aggregate if not on the individual level, especially because it can actually become difficult for women to find games in which women are not used as objects of titillation.

And it isn't just fan service/sexism, there are all sorts of problematic trends across most of art, not just video games. Like the tendency to cast crossdressers/trans women as one note villains. I think if I were to name every game that contributes to a problematic trend I would be naming most of the games I play. Even if I listed major contributors there would be many. The thing is I don't think most or any of these games are problematic individually. Everyone is entitled to their fantasy, whatever that may be, and to express it.

Now there are games I would consider individually sexist or racist or have additional context that makes them individually problematic. For example, Quiet in MGSV is a problem. Not because having a hot bikini chick sniper girl is a problem (it is kind of stupid maybe but not a problem necessarily) but the frankly ridiculous excuses that were made for including her like that, and how we were all going to be so sorry that we doubted him. It was pretty insulting when all he had up his sleeve was what we got. (so for the record, MGSV is one such game for me.)

There are games that get to the point of individually problematic on their content alone, but usually they are games that I am not going to be playing. For example, I would consider Metroid Other M to be in this category, but that is not a game that I am going to be playing and enjoying.

And finally I am sure there are small, individual scenes or very brief sections of a game that I don't like for these reasons but I am not one to think that a small thing is going to taint an entire game. For me if a game is problematic it has to have a really big problem or a constant systematic problem. I'm sure if I dug through my catalog I could find some games with jokes at the expense of trans people. I still probably like the game, and I don't think one problematic element makes the entire game problematic.

 

[BarryMcCociner]

The only David Cage game I played [...]

You're thinking of Heavy Rain.

Yeah, that checks out. That is the video game I was thinking of and it is made by Cage.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Everything here.

I'm a writer and if there's one thing that pisses me off, it's stuff like this. People who take a great big piss on the consistency and rules of their world just to get some T&A in particular piss me off. You've created a world, a unique world to call your own, for the love of fuck have that world follow some consistent rules. Is armor important? If so, why aren't women wearing real armor? Why are they wearing glorified fetishwear? If armor isn't important, why do guys bother? Stuff like this tell me that the people who put this stuff in care more about masturbation fodder than creating a consistent and fleshed out world. Curiously enough, so many of these games that do this expect me to take them SERIOUSLY. Fire Emblem Fates is a fairly serious game (It has lots of comedy but it also deals with war and families being torn apart), but it's kinda hard to take those more dark moments seriously at times when the female main character's armor shows off her ass (No booty for the male main character, of course....) It's a very simple concept.

Spoiler

http://www.themarysue.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/SexistGame.jpg

And if the person reading this is one of those people who for some reason thinks I'm attacking them for liking something that (I'm NOT) then replace "Sexist" with "consistent".

And if you're going to include a sexy female character that steps all over your established approach to combat, for the love of fuck be honest and say it's because you wanted a sexy character. If I see another "She breaths through her skin" or "She needs her skin bare to cast spells" my eyes are going to roll out of my head.

Spoiler

http://cdn.themis-media.com/media/global/images/library/deriv/998/998987.png
(Oh yeah Cortana's appearance was supposed to distract people. Man, I remember all ZERO TIMES THAT HAPPENED!)

You know maybe I'd be less annoyed by all of this, maybe I'd just shrug and say "meh, whatever," but there's really not much alternative to pick from. Where the hell am I supposed to go to find a hero like Chris Lightfellow? Someone who wears armor that doesn't show off her ass and doesn't have a fucking stupid breast plate?

Spoiler

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/suikoden/images/3/37/S3_Chris_Lightfellow.png/revision/latest?cb=20140709163528

Oh and crossdressers as villains, because that's still a thing because of lack of creativity. Christ, people still love depicting the mentally ill as people who are killers waiting to happen, when in reality not only are they less likely to attack others, they're more likely to be the victims of violent crimes.

 

[The Lunatic]

This entire thread is about art that we consider problematic, but still love, so presumably we don't want it to stop existing.

I think you're assuming an extremism that just isn't there.

Then what exactly does "Problematic" mean, if not... A problem?

I mean, perhaps there's a lesser known definition I'm unaware of, but, every time I've seen it used, it's by somebody who wants something removed or changed.

 

[Silvanus]

Then what exactly does "Problematic" mean, if not... A problem?

I mean, perhaps there's a lesser known definition I'm unaware of, but, every time I've seen it used, it's by somebody who wants something removed or changed.

Something being a problem does not necessarily mean one wants it not to exist. A plot hole is a problem; that doesn't mean I don't want Star Wars to exist, of course. People are rarely that extreme.

 

[WindKnight]

This entire thread is about art that we consider problematic, but still love, so presumably we don't want it to stop existing.

I think you're assuming an extremism that just isn't there.

Then what exactly does "Problematic" mean, if not... A problem?

I mean, perhaps there's a lesser known definition I'm unaware of, but, every time I've seen it used, it's by somebody who wants something removed or changed.

Its something that could be better. Its possible to love something, but be aware some of its elements are less than great in their depiction of women or other marginalized groups.

Nothing is perfect, and liking something that handles race, gender etc badly in one or two aspects doesn't make you a bad person. Nobody expecting you to hate the game/film whatever, or only watch/enjoy perfect things, just be willing to acknowledge when it did something wrong.

Heck, a quote from She Who Must Not Be Named on this very subject:

?It?s both possible, and even necessary, to simultaneously enjoy media while also being critical of its more problematic or pernicious aspects.?

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

Also also, pokemon come off really bad if you start digging into it too much. Pokemon abuse everywhere.

That actually one of the things the series got better with as time went on. A lot of non-violent mechanics were gradually introduced as the series went on. Breeding and daycare training in Gen II, contests in Gen III, the Underground in Gen IV, the movie studio and taking walks in the park in Gen V and so on. Then there were spinoffs that used alternative gameplay or just contextualized it differently entirely. Colosseum and XD are about taking animals from abusive owners and rehabilitating them. The Mystery Dungeon series recontextualizes the combat by making your team comprised of Pokemon who chose to be there and aren't beholden to any Pokeballs. There's older spinoffs like Pokemon Snap, in which you're basically a NatGeo photographer, or Hey You, Pikachu, in which you're just hanging around with Pokemon buds to more modern titles that... basically do the same thing more or less with stuff like the Pokemon Google Maps game and a bunch of rehashes of Hey, You Pikachu over time. There's the Pokemon Ranger series which is where you're explicitly a park ranger and naturalist trying to preserve environments and rescue Pokemon in need. Its interesting because the notion of Pokemon battling as abuse has been acknowledged more and more as the series has went on, even being a focal point of the narrative in Gen V. It doesn't undo any of the subtext of the core gameplay but it offers some less abusive alternatives and even occasionally recontextualizes the combat.

The breeding and collecting can be rather dark. Just think about all the unwanted Pokemon stuck in the bank or in wonder trade loops.

 

[Danbo Jambo]

Take off the apparel/armour of the vast majority of female or male characters in RPG's, and you'll see absurdly dissonant body models relative to age (or character, often). Isn't Wynne's figure (and complexion out of the clothing) incongruous?

Apropos Flemeth and Isabela: in lore it's entirely consistent for Flemeth to take many forms, and frankly her DA2/DA:I design is a far better fit.

And Bella's bust size was absurd, sure (almost as absurd as Bethany's in Varric's curtailed fantasy version of the prologue sequence), but her sexuality went hand-in-glove with her character. Not sure why you'd find it hard to believe Bella could keep a ship full of crewmen and women in line... You did play DA2, right? Aside from being disastrously selfish, she's badass and knows her sailing/piratey shit.

DA:2 just seemed to do the whole thing way too OTT overall. Old women, and Flemeth, AND Isabella etc. - every woman just had massive boobs and it just felt wrong.

It just distracted me from being absorbed into the experience, and whilst in isolation each may be able to be explained away to some degree, as a collective it was cringeworthy.