So the general gist of this is that I can be violent against women, so long as I don't want to fuck them? Because I've re-read this about a dozen times or so and that's the only reasonable conclusion I can gather.Moonlight Butterfly said:Sexualisation isn't the same as power fantasy.Treblaine said:As good as such a character design is, the current wave of conservative feminism that is in vogue (example being Anita Sarkeesian and $160'000 of agreement) will never accept such as design. Although this "Kratan" (my best attempt at Greek feminisation) wears more clothing than Kratos, she wears less than Lara Croft that conservatives under the guise of feminism have consistently poured bile on the idea of her wearing clothing even as conservative as that.Moonlight Butterfly said:I'd imagine she would wear something that made her look powerful like Kratos... who isn't sexualised at all.Ukomba said:
And then there is the size of this Rule-63-Kratos' breasts, therefore she is an "unattainable ideal" that is an unforgivable affront against women, according to feminist-conservatives of course. Oh before you ask, no, Kratos' or Duke Nukem's amazing musculature and Solid Snake's tight ass cheeks don't count as an "unattainable ideal" because... err... well, don't DARE challenge feminists or else you are a hateful troll. The thing is these conservatives claiming to be feminists is they act like women are disproportionately suggestible in a negative way when exposed to an idealised form.
This conveniently ignores all the obese males in the western world who no doubt have also been raised exposed to the Schwarzenegger or Duke Nukem physique and unable to achieve that impossible physical standard give up completely. But no one, I say NO ONE, is saying body builders should be banned from professional wrestling for setting an "unattainable ideal" body type.
Face it, the only character that conservatives complaining under the banner of "feminism" (like Anita Sarkeesian) will be happy with is a woman in a body covering orange jumpsuit who you never actually see and never hear anything from. Quite, invisible, without an opinion. As Anita Sarkeesian has made clear.
And then of course there is the Sarkeesian brand of so-called-feminism that abhors all direct violence, especially ANY involving women, this Kratan must not only cover up but never kill anyone or be at risk of being killed.
I am all for a female to take on a role like Kratos but have no illusions it will please the current wave of conservative feminism as long as Anita Sarkeesian's view on women are held in such high regard.
Like I said I would have no problem with a female topless Kratos a long as she wasn't posed in a boobs and butt pose 24/7 and she was as fearsome as her male counterpart. Physical appearance almost isn't the issue it's how that appearance comes across.
Feminists like Sarkeesian aren't complaining about clothes they are complaining about the way a character is presented. An oversexualised male fantasy or a simpering damsel in distress.
Look at my comic book example earlier on in this thread. Surely you can see the difference.
I really think you are misrepresenting Sarkeesians views there too. Violence against women isn't the issue. It's when the women who are being attacked are sexualised, like the sexy nuns, that is the problem.
The God of War devs have missed the point.
Furthermore...
Unattainable ideal isn't the issue at all
It seems you have this twisted view of what these feminists are saying ie: We can't ever look like that so we don't like it. That is NOT what anyone is saying.
God of War Team "Pulling Back" From Violence Against Women
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Great, overt political correctness wins again. Do these idiots even realize that this attitude flies directly in the face of equality?
Do the devs just have no women on their team? If I were sitting in that room when they tried to pull this(as a male or female), I would tell them how little sense it makes.
They are also directly perpetuating the stereotype that video games cause violence(against anyone), what the hell?? 99% of the people who play video games, play it, kill members of various races, genders and ages and then we don't go out and start beating the shit out of women, OR ANYONE.
Do the devs just have no women on their team? If I were sitting in that room when they tried to pull this(as a male or female), I would tell them how little sense it makes.
They are also directly perpetuating the stereotype that video games cause violence(against anyone), what the hell?? 99% of the people who play video games, play it, kill members of various races, genders and ages and then we don't go out and start beating the shit out of women, OR ANYONE.
As long as the intention of the violence isn't to titillate then I don't have a problem with it.DevilWithaHalo said:So the general gist of this is that I can be violent against women, so long as I don't want to fuck them? Because I've re-read this about a dozen times or so and that's the only reasonable conclusion I can gather.Moonlight Butterfly said:Sexualisation isn't the same as power fantasy.Treblaine said:As good as such a character design is, the current wave of conservative feminism that is in vogue (example being Anita Sarkeesian and $160'000 of agreement) will never accept such as design. Although this "Kratan" (my best attempt at Greek feminisation) wears more clothing than Kratos, she wears less than Lara Croft that conservatives under the guise of feminism have consistently poured bile on the idea of her wearing clothing even as conservative as that.Moonlight Butterfly said:I'd imagine she would wear something that made her look powerful like Kratos... who isn't sexualised at all.Ukomba said:
And then there is the size of this Rule-63-Kratos' breasts, therefore she is an "unattainable ideal" that is an unforgivable affront against women, according to feminist-conservatives of course. Oh before you ask, no, Kratos' or Duke Nukem's amazing musculature and Solid Snake's tight ass cheeks don't count as an "unattainable ideal" because... err... well, don't DARE challenge feminists or else you are a hateful troll. The thing is these conservatives claiming to be feminists is they act like women are disproportionately suggestible in a negative way when exposed to an idealised form.
This conveniently ignores all the obese males in the western world who no doubt have also been raised exposed to the Schwarzenegger or Duke Nukem physique and unable to achieve that impossible physical standard give up completely. But no one, I say NO ONE, is saying body builders should be banned from professional wrestling for setting an "unattainable ideal" body type.
Face it, the only character that conservatives complaining under the banner of "feminism" (like Anita Sarkeesian) will be happy with is a woman in a body covering orange jumpsuit who you never actually see and never hear anything from. Quite, invisible, without an opinion. As Anita Sarkeesian has made clear.
And then of course there is the Sarkeesian brand of so-called-feminism that abhors all direct violence, especially ANY involving women, this Kratan must not only cover up but never kill anyone or be at risk of being killed.
I am all for a female to take on a role like Kratos but have no illusions it will please the current wave of conservative feminism as long as Anita Sarkeesian's view on women are held in such high regard.
Like I said I would have no problem with a female topless Kratos a long as she wasn't posed in a boobs and butt pose 24/7 and she was as fearsome as her male counterpart. Physical appearance almost isn't the issue it's how that appearance comes across.
Feminists like Sarkeesian aren't complaining about clothes they are complaining about the way a character is presented. An oversexualised male fantasy or a simpering damsel in distress.
Look at my comic book example earlier on in this thread. Surely you can see the difference.
I really think you are misrepresenting Sarkeesians views there too. Violence against women isn't the issue. It's when the women who are being attacked are sexualised, like the sexy nuns, that is the problem.
The God of War devs have missed the point.
Furthermore...
Unattainable ideal isn't the issue at all
It seems you have this twisted view of what these feminists are saying ie: We can't ever look like that so we don't like it. That is NOT what anyone is saying.
Otherwise it's actually kind of disturbing.
Jesus Christ guys, did you even read the article? From what I read, they seem to be just saying "In the next game Kratos won't probably be using helpless women as doorstops again", not "We are extremely afraid that Kratos might offend women in any way possible so we're making him a jolly ol' gentleman".
I thought the major point of GoW: Ascension was supposed to show the more human side of Kratos, before he became the killing machine we see in GoW3. All these replies about political correctness... I day it's more a matter of taste. The doorstop thing in GoW3 IMO crossed a certain line and was just unpleasant instead of rewarding or entertaining.
Seriously, these replies seem more to me that you guys want to see Kratos disembowel, slash, crush and maim ESPECIALLY women. That seems kinda... disturbing.
Umm, yeah, except GoW: Ascension takes place BEFORE Kratos is a misogynistic monster. Even the voiceover in the teaser trailer says: "There was a time before Kratos became the monster known as the Ghost of Sparta. A time when something other than rage consumed him." I.e. before inadvertedly killing his family. And yeah, Kratos totally treated his wife as an object, because he actually stayed with her and their child and felt guilt for having killed her. That's totally misogynist.BeeGeenie said:
I thought the major point of GoW: Ascension was supposed to show the more human side of Kratos, before he became the killing machine we see in GoW3. All these replies about political correctness... I day it's more a matter of taste. The doorstop thing in GoW3 IMO crossed a certain line and was just unpleasant instead of rewarding or entertaining.
Seriously, these replies seem more to me that you guys want to see Kratos disembowel, slash, crush and maim ESPECIALLY women. That seems kinda... disturbing.
I think people have really jumped the gun here(myself included).
I don't think this is a politically correct motivation from the studio, it's merely their direction for the character.
Posted my thoughts here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.382696-In-defense-of-David-Hewitt-Ascension-controversy
I don't think this is a politically correct motivation from the studio, it's merely their direction for the character.
Posted my thoughts here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.382696-In-defense-of-David-Hewitt-Ascension-controversy
I think that is a bit of an over-the-top statement. I think most people just overreacted at the title, and didn't read either this article or the interview with Hewitt. Both sites make it known that it is the direction of the character and not the studio. If it had been the studio's new policy(for no reason), then the reaction would be appropriate.bartholen said:
Mind elaborating on this a little bit? And what point does someone who can merely be interpreted as "attractive" cross the line into "titillating"?Moonlight Butterfly said:
Taking the previously mentioned example of Kratos using a topless woman as a door stop, is the mere fact of her exposed breasts make the violence pseudo-sexual in nature?
It's just odd to think that the issue isn't the actual violence being committed against the women, but that fact that they entice men in the process?
I look at the recent Lara Croft debacle, and I'm not seeing her hyper sexualized during the "rape-but not rape" sequence. It appears to be just the sexual violence against her that's the problem?
It's beginning to look a lot like we can't make note of their femininity during any point of the process or we get accusations of sinister intentions. Or is it merely that they can't be attractive?
Actually, I never liked the franchise in the first place. I actually think this is the developers taking a step back and taking a good look at where they've arrived, saying "what have we done?" and trying desperately to figure out how to make Kratos likable as a character. Something I thought they failed at completely from day one.bartholen said:
I was just pointing out that if they wanted Kratos to be a relatable human being, they should have thought of that in the first place so such a retcon would be unnecessary. When even they don't like the main character of the game that THEY created, they're doing something wrong.
I apologize if I seem to be dragging this topic, but I fail to see the retcon here. It is established in the first game that Kratos was always brutal, but only after killing his family did he become the inhuman monstrosity we've seen him as. I'm going out on a limb here and say that before that the reason for his brutality was most likely desire for conquest and power, not revenge and destruction. Hence he probably won't be stomping the brains out of everyone who looks at him funny, only those who stand in the way of his ambitions.BeeGeenie said:
Except when women exist in those games as nothing but sex objects or doorstops. The men are at least formidable enemies. Anything femaleish that fights you is sort of not exactly a human woman or is dispatched rather easily example in case Hera, whose fight consists of a maze and snapping her neck.Father Time said:
I know you like the game and that's why you defend anyone who says anything bad about it. But guess what. Liking something that has flaws and bad sides doesn't matter.
I like the games to, doesn't stop me from seeing that it's treatment of women is less noble than that of men. Painting every single woman in the game as either a health container, an achievement, an object of lust or patheticly weak.
Well the Lara Croft thing was to do with the fact that they though of rape as a way to 'toughen women up' and that they thought gamers couldn't possibly identify with a female protagonist and would instead want to protect her. Surely you can see where the issue is with that.DevilWithaHalo said:
Female gamers do not have a problem with characters being attractive but its rare that you get a character that is 'just a person' like say Alyx Vance or the female characters in the Avatar cartoon and not someone who has obviously been put their as fanservice for the boys.
I don't like the feeling that my sex is just there for decoration. Even if a woman is kicking ass in a game if she has her boobs hanging out and the camera hovers around her butt it feels cringy and degrading.
Again look at my comic book example earlier in the thread. if the woman in the second picture was wearing the exact same er...grass strips? as in the first picture I wouldn't have a problem with it because at least she looks like she is acting and reacting suitably to the situation she is in rather than derpy boobs and butt pose for the guys.
I fail to see a difference. How is being an @sshole in the name of conquest and ambition somehow better than being an @sshole in the name of revenge? That's like saying the Nazis were really great guys once you get to know them. They all had wives and children, so they must be good people. They weren't killing out of anger, it was just their day job, so that makes it okay.bartholen said:
The problem is what is a sexual pose and is not is so subjective that I have heard people call a pose like this...Moonlight Butterfly said:
http://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/images/legacy_art_27/screen2.jpg
... as "a blatantly sexual pose" with complete seriousness. The sexist prejudice of people - men and women - is so great if a woman is recognisably female that they cannot see anything about them but sex.
Sarkeesian has objected to female characters JUST FOR BEING SEXUAL, when they are in no-way at all simpering or playing as a "damsel". To spite the huge backlash by fans of Metroid the Other M for how they presented Samus so out of character as a simpering damnsel in distress, her silence on this issue has been deafening. The worst example of sexism she has nothing to say on.
Her concern over and over and over and OVER again has been women being presented as sexual. Full stop.
I can see the difference in the comic you posed but I have come to realise that conservatives won't allow it. I WOULD LOVE to have a character like that in video games, I love how the artist wasn't afraid to give her some muscles. Yes, women have biceps, this is not a "masculine" feature any more than ripping abs are a masculine feature. But she is too brazen, too bold, too exposed and confident, you can see how this can be misrepresented? Like how they misrepresented Lara Croft.
BTW, I am not misrepresenting Sarkeesian's views, she has said MUCH on this and made herself very clear and had a chorus of approval of her blanket derision of women being possibly perceived as sexual in video games or anywhere in the media.
The problem is any female who is recognisably female can be made to be sexual. Kratos is not considered sexual wearing as little as a loin cloth but it is because of people's prejudices that they will always see a women who doesn't cover what is recognisably female as sexual exhibitionism.
The "sexy nun" thing, there is no male equivalent, because it is almost impossible to sexualise men but conservatives with see sex negative in any woman who is distinctly female.
Your ideal female Kratos like in the comic design you gave as an example, that WILL be attacked by the likes of Sarkeesian as being no different from Hitman's sexy nuns. They make no distinction. Consider the tragedy of Lara Croft.
PS: I don't know if these people who attack women for showing their bodies could honestly call themselves "feminist" but many are very clear in attacking the depiction of women being physically fit and beautiful as destructive because it sets an unreasonably high standard that causes dysfunctional attitude to health and beauty, and they they claim this is sexism. As if no men would be under the same pressure to be lean, ripped and well hung.
No one is attacking the female characters for being attractive. Like I said the unattainable body type is not an issue here.Treblaine said:
You seem to be distracted with the thought that feminists want female characters to be wrapped up head to toe. That isn't the case and is just false.
What they and I would like is for female characters to be more than eye candy in both appearance and the way they are presented. Female heroines could be similar in build to olympic athletes not underwear models. Unfortunately you get this opinion from devs that the first thing about a female character should be how attractive she is to a man. Like the space marine game dev who said 'We could put female characters in but how could we make them sexy?'
Miranda in Mass Effect 2 is a good example. She is capable and intelligent yet the camera constantly hovers around her bum, she wears tight clothing and heels in combat situations and one can not escape the fact that the devs are bascially putting this woman across as a sex object. Why even do that...why do male gamers need that dynamic. Why can't we just have a female character who isn't there for YOU and is just a character in her own right.
I can't really exert how annoying it is to have this constant reminder that you aren't the intended audience in the most skeevy way possible.
Well that's just what the producer THINKS you are not judging the games BY THE GAMES THEMSELVES!Moonlight Butterfly said:
I NEVER was protective with Lara in any kind of patriarchal way, I identified and was one with her, I was protective only in a self-preservation way as she was my avatar, and of course the immortality of the save system abused greatly. If I wanted to protect Lara, I'd just play around in the safe Croft Mansion, not elect for such lethal missions... nor would ANY of the people who played the games.
The Producer is just an idiot who is regurgitating pseudo-scientific studies into who "some guy reckons" people play Tomb Raider games. Well DUH, for the fun of adventuring searching for amazing treasures amongst fiendish traps and climbing puzzles.
Lara Croft most definitely has a character, as you can see with how Angelina Jolie's character in the films so completely clashed with the one in the games, and also the Lara of the reboot series. The reboot cast Lara as some fragrant lovely explorer that you'd like you parents to meet. 1990's Lara was way more punk, yet still very upper class, she'd a rich heiress that totally OUT OF STEREOTYPE doesn't flaunt her sexuality to get men to do things for her, she was extremely individualistic and with a deep personal ambition and assertiveness.
How. How is Lara fan service for the boys? Lara is no decoration, you think the type of person who almost always walks around with a pair of guns on her hips is someone for decoration? Who's passion is big game hunting and grand heists?
Please, play the Tomb Raider games, they may not be snappily written but they depict an extraordinary character, not just for a female, for any kind of character.
Dude I played the Tomb Raider games when they came out and I loved them. I was talking about the recent comments that were made about the reboot and why people had a bad reaction to it.Treblaine said:
You seem to repeatedly ignore the jist of what I'm saying and cherry pick comments.
No no no. I do not think these people are feminists, they do CLAIM to be feminists as they spout this conservative agenda of objecting to any an all depiction of the female body, I think they are conservatives.Moonlight Butterfly said:
Actual definitive feminists don't have a problem with Lara Croft. This is not a "no true scotsman" fallacy, this is definitively what feminism is.
Yes, I am definitely in favour of more muscular women in action games, yet these so-called-feminists even denigrate the likes of the Street Fighter cast to spite their considerable musculature on females, the common theme - as so very well established with the likes of Sarkeesian - is blanket objection to them showing as much skin as men. It's not how powerful they are, it's how if they don't hide their bodies they are sexual and that is a terrible thing.
I haven't played Mass Effect 2 yet. The impression I get from characters like Miranda are not exactly drawing me in. On the other hand you have Jack, who seems like the exact opposite of Miranda. If I was choosing who to go on what missions I'd always chose Jack over Miranda and I'd ask Miranda if she was really committed at all. But I have to be reasonable, I wouldn't be a ***** to a woman wearing heels, so why would I ***** to Miranda?
"Why can't we just have a female character who isn't there for YOU and is just a character in her own right."
I'm pretty sure Mass Effect does have female characters that are characters in their own right. Or are you really wanting to say:
"Why can't we just have a GAME where there is not ANY female character who is there for YOU, only characters in their own right."
And all the characters in one way or another that there FOR YOU. The game exists and these characters exist for you to view them, to be appreciated in any and many ways.
Also, hang on a second, I haven't finished Mass Effect but my understanding is that to spite being able to play as either a male or female Shephard, there is always the romance option with a female. That means you are always ROLE PLAYING (in a role playing game) as either a man with heterosexual desires or a female with homosexual desires. The camera is following where your ROLE'S attention is. It's my understanding in later games there are male romance options, where either male Shepard or female Shepard can shack up with a dude.
Stop trying to break the immersion by thinking "who is the director doing this for" or "the producer said this". No, get into the fiction. Say you are watching a movie you get one shot of a guy looking across the street, then the next shot is of a woman's arse, that is the film showing what the guy across the street is looking at. Stop thinking about target markets and intent, and just get into the role.
I'd be totally fine playing a male character who has a gay relationship (I'm a straight guy) why would you have a problem with role playing a guy having crush on a gal?