Well, I suppose I'm glad you fessed up to it, anyway. I hope it's becoming clearer why the gaming community tends to be so dismissive, at best, to this issue.
I'm a big fan of the Torchlight games. It has attractive female characters, but their outfits are quite reasonable. Well that is true. Not sure how good it is as a game, but it makes for excellent wank material. From what I've seen, most female volleyball players wear chest support.
I don't think that the problem is that women in computer games are attractive. The problem is that woman are portrayed as big breatsed amazon warrioresses with insanely skinny waists and legs long enough to reach the moon. Compare Lara Croft to Chell and you'll see a definite difference.
I don't see it necessarily as a problem. I would if Lara Croft were also depicted as weak, helpless or an accessory to male adventurers. But she is none of the above. I've no problem with bombshell Lara, as some women ARE built like that. I've more problem with her being depicted wearing Daisy Dukes then being expected to run through the jungle. I've run through jungles and forests. Not a great pick for a veteran adventurer's wardrobe. But that is really a nitpick, imo, not that serious an issue.
Sure...but this game is as much about the effect as anything. Complaining about their wardrobe while playing volleyball in this game would be like complaining about the cartoon physics in the regular Dead or Alive game. They are what they are.
Yeah, I guess you're right. that was probably a bad example. It really wasn't made to be an accurate volleyball sim. I guess not being a huge boob fan, I just don't see the point.
That's the thing, though. Nathan Drake (of the Uncharted games) wears long sleeves and pants. If he was running around the jungle in cutoff shorts and a tank top, it would be utterly laughable. But Lara Croft is a woman, therefore she should be showing as much skin as possible, even if it's completely impractical--because, by God, we've got to appeal to the horny male demographic. Tank tops and cutoffs it is! Who cares if it's implausible? Sex appeal is more important than logic and realism--at least when we're portraying a woman. Why does no one stop to ask why this is how you make games "appeal to men"? What, are men just unthinking, hormone-driven brutes that won't play a game just because it's good, they have to be lured in with big tits and lots of skin? I'd argue that's just as insulting and demeaning to men as it is to women. It is true that men and women, in the aggregate, gravitate toward different kinds of games. But the differences aren't as specific and confining as one might think. Men are attracted to games that are more competitive, with clear rules and specific conditions for winning. Women tend to be drawn more to games that allow cooperation and creativity and don't emphasize satisfying particular victory conditions. Of course, these are generalizations and there are plenty of men who like cooperative/creative/freeform games and women who like highly competitive games, but if you look at the demographics it's clear which way the genders slant based on those two broad categories. You'll notice I didn't mention anything about how gender is portrayed in either type of game--because that, in and of itself, is not that important to making a good game. You can have a game that's plenty competitive and satisfying without needing to bring the gratuitous T&A. I don't think this is the sort of thing that needs to be addressed by laws or anything like that, just a sense of social responsibility on the part of game developers, and a general maturing of the industry. The gaming market isn't made up primarily of 15-year-old boys anymore, and the games being produced should reflect today's more diverse market. Sex appeal is an easy gimmick the bean counters think will boost sales; it should be turned into an embarrassing stereotype that actually hurts sales, because the gaming public realizes how demeaning and immature it is.
Well, not so much as being implausible for the environment (granted), but there are differences between men and women. There are some looks men can pull off, and some they can't, and vice versa. If you are going to show off beefcake (and many videogames do), there are better, more effective, more MACULINE ways to do it than a particular cut of tank top and Daisy Dukes. Of course, gratuitous is in the eye of the beholder. I personally have no problem with some, as long as the game is good and the characters are well written. Gratuitous, IMO, is if it comes in doses that seem inappropriate for the kind of story they are trying to tell, if it is obviously pandering, or if it is simply to cover up bad writing or a crappy game. There are those who will say ANY TnA is too much. I of course differ. As long as you give me a good game with great writing, I'm all about TnA, within reason, and if it seems to fit the character and/or situation. The idea that ANY sex appeal is automatically demeaning and immature, on the other hand, is just a surrender to the PC crowd. Not interested in that extreme, either. Again, as I say, there is a happy medium and it should depend on the kind of game and kind of story. Big difference between, say, Leisure Suit Larry and Mass Effect.
I'm not of the mind that there should be no skin in games at all, just that the industry as a whole should rise above its seemingly juvenile attitude toward women. Things are better than they used to be, but let me put it another way. Take one of the Dead or Alive games, with their exaggerated "breast physics." Would something with that kind of sensibility ever get made into a mainstream movie or TV show today? It would be an utter embarrassment and people would be ashamed to admit they watched it, because they realize how exploitative and immature it is. Video games have yet to "grow up," although they are on their way. Things are better than they used to be, there is just still a lot of progress left to make.
I don't know if the situation requires "growing up", or just people being more selective shoppers. There will always be trash videogames, as there always will be trash movies. We just happen to live in an age where there is plenty of both. More of the trash than treasure, sure, but it was always thus. Just read your reviews, talk to your buddies and be a careful shopper.
This right here is the problem. Very few games, if any, "show off beefcake." Many games do not portray men nor women in a realistic fashion but it's the nature of this unrealistic depiction that is inherently sexist. Simply put, male characters have their strength emphasized: they exist to let male players act out power fantasies. Female characters, on the other hand, are typical sexuality and objectified. Men are shown as powerful, women are shown as sexy. As a systemic issue in the games industry (and to a large degree, our media as a whole) this is inherently sexist. There is nothing wrong with making games designed to play up to power fantasies in general but the fact that nearly every game that does this inherently excludes women is a very large problem. It's not about the appearance of characters in isolation. It's about context. Context always matters.
Yes, they do. But in a different way, to different audiences. It is NOT inherently sexist to depict physical specimens as such. It is what it is. Sex sells. This will not change. It is up to you as the consumer to judge a game on it's own merits. Harping over "sexism" because a woman is scantily clad...well, it makes me yawn. I'm more concerned whether the game is worth a damn. Those male characters are typically dressed in such a way that shows off their masculinity (not daisy dukes and tank tops cut a certain way, because that would look SILLY. Men and women wear different clothes). Women in such games wear clothes that show off their attributes. If you really don't think there are lots of games showing buff, muscular, athletic men in ways that make it clear they are...gotta wonder just how much about the gaming field you are famililalr with. I agree some of this can be silly, and a marketing tactic to sell crappy games. But I think some of this is also some using this, exaggerating it, and seeing what they wish in service of a political agenda. (big boob long legged girl BAD. Don't look, nasty man! You be OBJEKTYFIIN!!!) Yes, but those men are also almost always some variation of handsome, and most of those women are phyically skilled and capable. As is interpretation. Again, are there problems? Yes. Can cheesecake be used in lieu of good games? Yes, and IMO, a bigger problem. But do I believe that the presence of sexy women in games who are also capable and powerful a problem? Hell no, that's a big time step up. And do I think that removal of all sexiness is some kind of social progress? No, I most certainly do not, and those who do seem to see it as such, to me, seem to be people who aren't much fun. Sexiness has a place in all art, not just games (and no, male sexiness and female sexiness is not interchangeable. That way lies androgenous ads for perfume). And as long as humans are humans, it will remain, forever and ever, amen. It is up to us to be discerning consumers and not let cleavage hoodwink us into buying crap. Also, to recognize when such elements are being used in such a way that simply doesn't serve the game, the story as presented, and buy accordingly.
I guess you missed the bit where I said it wasn't really about how a character is dressed, it's about overal context? Your entire rebuttal completely misses the points that I made. Again, having male characters whose strength is emphasized does not make them sex objects. The way it is used contextually makes them proxies to enact power fantasies. There are plenty of games that emphasize the strength of male characters and at no point did I ever say they weren't, but the nature of that characterization is not about sex. If male characters in games were being dressed to emphasize their sexuality they'd be wearing thongs that showed off their packages. Not much of that going around in mainstream gaming. Female characters who are shown as capable but wearing silly revealing clothes are not there to be strong female characters, they are there to play up to a rather obvious male fantasy. In no way does that sort of thing represent a strong female character, it's just another type of objectification. See, for example, the recent trailer for the new Hitman. Agent 47 is shown "suiting up" while at the same time, sexy nun assassins are taking their clothes off. They fight and Agent 47's strength is emphasized while the sexy nun assassins have their sexuality emphasized. He kills them in a shower of blood and sexiness. The people in charge of making that trailer said that they did not intend to make a sexist piece of work... but that is exactly what they did. Not just because there are scantily clad women in it, but because those women are shown to be inferior to the powerful man who dominates them. The conflagration of all that objectified sex with some over the top violence makes it all the more skeevy. For another example, take the new Tomb Raider. For the new game they tried to reinvent Lara Croft with an origin story. The game will have Lara be physical brutalized by her enemies and surroundings, including attempted sexual assaults that she has to fight off. Crystal Dynamics has stated that their intent is to put the player in a position where they feel they need to protect Lara as well as show how she became a strong fighter in the first place. It was not their intent to imply that a woman needs to be brutalized and sexually assault to become strong, but that is exactly what they are doing. The game is not designed so that you identify with her as a player, it's designed so you see her as something you need to protect, ultimately objectifying her. In this case, the core issues really have nothing to do with her character design or mode of dress and the gender issues remain. Furthermore, at no point did I ever say that sex or sexiness is something that should not be in games, that's a complete straw man. It is entirely possibly to use these components in media without objectifying one gender. There are tons of examples of this all over... but sadly, very few in gaming. Once again: the important thing is context. And in the end, it's really easy to "yawn" at gender problems in media when the problems aren't directed at your gender. It's also worth saying, I think, that your attempts to dismiss me as not knowing much about games is sort of silly considering my current line of work.
This is actually a very common theme in literature, too. A powerful woman at the start of a story is always a villain. A female "hero" always starts out weak because male readers need to feel protective first before they can accept female empowerment. They need to see the female weakness first. There are exceptions of course. But how many times have you seen a wise female Gandalf-like character? How many times have you met a good powerful female character at the start of a story? A wise queen? Yeah, right.
I feel way out of my league on this topic but I'm going to try to contribute anyway. I nderstand the desire to see attractive people of the opposite sex in media, including games. Video games in general are mostly escapism, so I understand that sexy women are going to be involved, especially if there is a large male demographic. I don't think that attractive necessarily needs to mean barely-clad and unrealistic proportions, however. Big boobs are one thing, but when you combine them with a fifteen inch waist and hardly any clothing, it can be pretty ridiculous. I like playing cute or attractive characters in games but I don't think they need to be oozing that kind of over the top, specific sort of sexuality. Like someone already said, I think that's as demeaning to men as it is to women. A lot of times when topics like this come up, people will say "but the male characters are as bad" or actually call for some sort of hunk to make it fair to women. Which misses the point, I think. To begin with, most women probably differ in what they want when compared to men. A guy with unrealistic bulging muscles running around with barely any clothes on does nothing for me. And really, when I play a game I'm not looking for something sexy anyway. Even if I did, I don't think playing to the most superficial desires is necessarily the healthiest thing to do. Is it the best way to sell games? I don't know. Would you guys play games as much if they included a larger variety of characters, both male and female? If the women had more realistic proportions and were more than partially-clothed? Is it realistic at all to expect that? Saying that people should vote with what they buy isn't the easiest thing, as many games that contain these aspects are otherwise terrific.
You're kidding, right? Have you actually SEEN a woman in real life who looks like this? Granted, the latest versions of her are approaching something that looks like a believable woman, but the earlier versions of her are completely unrealistic. That's because they want to portray her as a sexualised image, despite the toughness her character shows. Gotta give the boys their eye candy. In both male and female characters, different traits are emphasized according to what male players generally desire. A male player wants to be a tough strong man, so when he plays as a male character, it is heavily muscled. But female characters aren't desired to be so muscled. so Lara Croft - who would in real life be very strong - is not portrayed as having any visible muscles. In short, characters are portrayed the way a horny boy would want them to be portrayed. A big tough guy he can pretend to be, and sexy chicks with big breasts he can wank over. Just out of interest, are you a guy or a girl, and how old? Not to belittle your point, but I can think of Captain Janeway, Guinan and Professor McGonagall off the top of my head. But anyway, getting back to what I was saying earlier, I think programmers need to learn that a woman can be sexy without being a sex object.
Programmers don't generally decide what the women in games look like--that's what the artists do (3D modelers, etc.)
is it sad to admit i actually find Telsia Murphy from Elite Force attractive? and more than Lara Croft? she's actually a realistically proportioned woman and not showing any skin except her face...