Really, posting an endless stream of images that show how males in entertainment are just as equally idealized as the females - taken to even greater extremes in video games - won't convince you that there exist equally powerful physical stereotypes for both males and females? Both stereotypes are dangerous, it's unhealthy to be as heavily muscled as most video game characters, and it's unhealthy to starve yourself down to being a hundred pound waif.
No. Because it's not just about body image.
Is there anyway I could be more plain when I say that? What is it about that which you aren't getting?
Body image is the root of everything. Attractive people are more confident, more commanding, more successful, better regarded, and happier then unattractive people.
When a gamer lives vicariously though a gorgeous avatar, interacting with sexual partners they'd never be able to attract in the real world (look at Shepard and Kaiden/Ashley in Mass Effect)... what does this do to them? Does it change their standards of what they'll settle for in terms of physical standards?
It's been shown that twisted physical ideals have profoundly damaging effects in print media, to deny these effects in electronic media is foolish.
Robman on
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Quite frankly, I think that the idea that sex doll male characters is totally fine and sex doll female characters is SEXIST is more sexist than having sex doll female characters, because it implies that for some reason girls aren't supposed to like sex, and anything remotely sexual obviously portrays sexism against women.
It's like you're not even reading other posts. Hyper-masculine characters are not "sex dolls". They're escapist fantasies for the men that play the games they're in. They are designed to embody the characteristic men value in themselves, not the characteristics women value in men.
I wouldn't like Prince of Persia nearly enough if he was a fat neckbeard with sweaty pits.
That's a wonderful false dichotomy.
That's a wonderful non-response to her opinion that was in no way meant to be interpreted as a binary choice.
Why are we blaming the manifold failings of adolescent boys on the videogame industry, again?
Because in large part the gaming industry seems to be run by them. Remember the developer's rationale for why Lara Croft was made an attractive female - "if I'm going to be watching an ass for 10+ hours, I want it to be an ass I want to look at."
See, I don't think that's particularly sexist. All other things being equal, why not make her an attractive woman? Making a female character sexy is not the same as saying she's not as good as a man.
it's not sexism as much as game studios not having a clue how to write non archetypes in general. It gets painfully obvious the more and more the novelty of 3D and HD wears off.
When it comes to women, it isn't even sexism as much as clueless writers. It's pretty well known that game characters are pretty much all written by committee, and the main (only) consideration is how they affect the user experience, and not whether they're actually compelling characters. In a sense they're like Clippy from Word, except with more polygons.
For example, a woman soldier in real life or even in a film is going to come across differently than in a video game where any female character's combat garb is skin tight spandex- if they're being conservative. They also go out of the way to grace female characters with "feminine grace" in situations where it's in appropriate. Like on a battlefield.
In a sense video games in the state they exist now pretty much can't render anything beyond comic book quality writing and characterization. Not because of anything inherent in the medium, but because the function of games as applications is highly specific, and the marketplace really isn't open to anything other than games based on physical interaction, or systems derived from older forms of gaming.
It's possible to create the video game equivalent of, say, a group of friends in their last year of high school, putting you in one of their shoes and living out an emotional story while interactively experiencing all the minutiae of a serious narrative. It's just that there isn't a name for that sort of thing- it's not a game, where there's a specific, appealing and enjoyable mode of interaction that makes it survive in the marketplace. That sort of application has no category, no market.
Which means you probably aren't going to see characters that exist on their own terms as people. They're just part of the interface.
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
Really, posting an endless stream of images that show how males in entertainment are just as equally idealized as the females - taken to even greater extremes in video games - won't convince you that there exist equally powerful physical stereotypes for both males and females? Both stereotypes are dangerous, it's unhealthy to be as heavily muscled as most video game characters, and it's unhealthy to starve yourself down to being a hundred pound waif.
No. Because it's not just about body image.
Is there anyway I could be more plain when I say that? What is it about that which you aren't getting?
Body image is the root of everything. Attractive people are more confident, more commanding, more successful, better regarded, and happier then unattractive people.
When a gamer lives vicariously though a gorgeous avatar, interacting with sexual partners they'd never be able to attract in the real world (look at Shepard and Kaiden/Ashley in Mass Effect)... what does this do to them? Does it change their standards of what they'll settle for in terms of physical standards?
It's been shown that twisted physical ideals have profoundly damaging effects in print media, to deny these effects in electronic media is foolish.
Okay, here's a little thought experiment for you.
List the things that are considered to make a male physically attractive. Then list the things that are considered to make a female physically attractive.
Then take a look at the lists and try to figure out the difference between the two. Here's a hint - only one of those lists reinforces a notion that the group linked to it is good for one thing only.
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
Seriously. Again, slamming back to the L4D pictures - Francis went from a fat, muscly biker to something closer to 'normalcy'. Louis lost his hair and beard and adopted non-threatening office clothing. These were not random changes, but reflect an effort to create broad appeal. Apparently, gamers aren't ready for either the original Francis or Louis characters.
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
You know what's funny? I think after having played it a bit, Bayonetta for all of it's... being it, is probably one of the best female-main games I've seen in terms of characterization, in it's own shallow manner. The main character is a person who makes you feel incredibly cool, is supremely confident and competent, and kills everything for some reason. Sure she's a 2D caricature, but she's the sort of 2D caricature that few people bother to make for women, the unabashed action hero badass. It's my favorite escapism, as well as my girlfriend's. She always tells me she wishes there were more shitty action roles for ladies.
Oddly though, "Wet", though similar and arguably less retardedly exploitative, doesn't give me the same sensation. Probably because it's kind of not great.
Edit: Oh, yeah, much as I like the conversation, I'd love to see a response or a ban. Not a perma-ban, just 2 weeks so they don't get to write a paper.
Edit Again: Oh, and interestingly, though the main character is ridiculously sexualized, I notice in the Bayonetta thread, there's far fewer people saying you know "oh man, pretty lady" than there are people going "oh ew! totally no!" for various reasons.
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Why are we blaming the manifold failings of adolescent boys on the videogame industry, again?
Because in large part the gaming industry seems to be run by them. Remember the developer's rationale for why Lara Croft was made an attractive female - "if I'm going to be watching an ass for 10+ hours, I want it to be an ass I want to look at."
See, I don't think that's particularly sexist. All other things being equal, why not make her an attractive woman? Making a female character sexy is not the same as saying she's not as good as a man.
Because it wasn't "well, we have a strong story that calls for a well thought out female character," it was "I'd rather look at a female ass." You can't see why that would be rather sexist?
Really, posting an endless stream of images that show how males in entertainment are just as equally idealized as the females - taken to even greater extremes in video games - won't convince you that there exist equally powerful physical stereotypes for both males and females? Both stereotypes are dangerous, it's unhealthy to be as heavily muscled as most video game characters, and it's unhealthy to starve yourself down to being a hundred pound waif.
No. Because it's not just about body image.
Is there anyway I could be more plain when I say that? What is it about that which you aren't getting?
Body image is the root of everything. Attractive people are more confident, more commanding, more successful, better regarded, and happier then unattractive people.
When a gamer lives vicariously though a gorgeous avatar, interacting with sexual partners they'd never be able to attract in the real world (look at Shepard and Kaiden/Ashley in Mass Effect)... what does this do to them? Does it change their standards of what they'll settle for in terms of physical standards?
It's been shown that twisted physical ideals have profoundly damaging effects in print media, to deny these effects in electronic media is foolish.
Okay, here's a little thought experiment for you.
List the things that are considered to make a male physically attractive. Then list the things that are considered to make a female physically attractive.
Then take a look at the lists and try to figure out the difference between the two. Here's a hint - only one of those lists reinforces a notion that the group linked to it is good for one thing only.
Does it? Slim people are only good for fucking? What kind of bizzaro-world do you live in? Are there no marathon runners in your world? No cross-country skiers? No long-distance cyclists? No pilates or yoga experts? No rock climbers? No (endless stream of endurance sports).
Your refusal to see skinny women as anything but a cock-acceptor, and your assignment of the muscleman as a god-king figure reveal some pretty sad core assumptions.
You know what's funny? I think after having played it a bit, Bayonetta for all of it's... being it, is probably one of the best female-main games I've seen in terms of characterization, in it's own shallow manner. The main character is a person who makes you feel incredibly cool, is supremely confident and competent, and kills everything for some reason. Sure she's a 2D caricature, but she's the sort of 2D caricature that few people bother to make for women, the unabashed action hero badass. It's my favorite escapism, as well as my girlfriend's. She always tells me she wishes there were more shitty action roles for ladies.
Oddly though, "Wet", though similar and arguably less retardedly exploitative, doesn't give me the same sensation. Probably because it's kind of not great.
Edit: Oh, yeah, much as I like the conversation, I'd love to see a response or a ban. Not a perma-ban, just 2 weeks so they don't get to write a paper.
Bayonetta is clearly a genre-savvy piece, where Wet was clearly an exploitative piece.
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Except you can do both - look at Mirror's Edge, for example. Faith is probably one of the most realistic female characters ever, and that comes from her design, which doesn't veer into stereotypes. And even then, you still had idiots that thought she needed to be "tarted up".
You know what's funny? I think after having played it a bit, Bayonetta for all of it's... being it, is probably one of the best female-main games I've seen in terms of characterization, in it's own shallow manner. The main character is a person who makes you feel incredibly cool, is supremely confident and competent, and kills everything for some reason. Sure she's a 2D caricature, but she's the sort of 2D caricature that few people bother to make for women, the unabashed action hero badass. It's my favorite escapism, as well as my girlfriend's. She always tells me she wishes there were more shitty action roles for ladies.
Oddly though, "Wet", though similar and arguably less retardedly exploitative, doesn't give me the same sensation. Probably because it's kind of not great.
Edit: Oh, yeah, much as I like the conversation, I'd love to see a response or a ban. Not a perma-ban, just 2 weeks so they don't get to write a paper.
Bayonetta is clearly a genre-savvy piece, where Wet was clearly an exploitative piece.
Isn't Wet more or less supposed to be the video game equivalent of a Matrix-esque exploitation film?
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Well, yes, games generally do require competition, or goal-setting, or design.
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
Since the conversation drifted from videogames to the media in general, I was referring primarily to non-videogame characters.
But videogames with unattractive male main characters?
Well, let's start with Planescape: Torment, where the male lead character is a walking, mutilated corpse.
I wouldn't call Niko Bellic from GTAIV that much of a stunner, either, but then again your mileage may vary.
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
The Sopranos was also a specific example and not a genre.
Do you really think that "The Sopranos" is the same as "Video Games"? Fucking really? Can you in any way come close to justifying that line of thought? I bet I can come up with specific films that are sexist too. But apparently the Sopranos is a genre, right?
Hey look, Half-life fucking 2 was mainstream. Guess that's the response to someone saying "Porn is mainstream and exploitative" too, right?
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Except you can do both - look at Mirror's Edge, for example. Faith is probably one of the most realistic female characters ever, and that comes from her design, which doesn't veer into stereotypes. And even then, you still had idiots that thought she needed to be "tarted up".
Faith is a size one.
Robman on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
But more seriously: Sam Fisher in Splinter Cell (craggy older guy), Raynor in Starcraft (balding and goateed), Guybrush Threepwood and Bernard Bernouilli from the Lucasarts adventures, the...cyborg-guy-thing from Bioforge, any game ever where you are a dogfaced soldier recruit in some historical or future war, or any game where you are a male main character with no discernible sex characteristics whatsoever (the Silencer in Crusader: No Remorse, for instance, or the bodiless kid hero in LOOM).
If you are a male gamer, you have a huge selection of fictional avatars that have characteristics you may find desirable (badass space pilot! SAS agent!) but are not sexualized in the least. If you are a female gamer, your options in this arena are a lot more circumscribed. This is close to the crux of it.
Jacobkosh on
0
Options
ElldrenIs a woman dammitceterum censeoRegistered Userregular
You know what's funny? I think after having played it a bit, Bayonetta for all of it's... being it, is probably one of the best female-main games I've seen in terms of characterization, in it's own shallow manner. The main character is a person who makes you feel incredibly cool, is supremely confident and competent, and kills everything for some reason. Sure she's a 2D caricature, but she's the sort of 2D caricature that few people bother to make for women, the unabashed action hero badass. It's my favorite escapism, as well as my girlfriend's. She always tells me she wishes there were more shitty action roles for ladies.
Oddly though, "Wet", though similar and arguably less retardedly exploitative, doesn't give me the same sensation. Probably because it's kind of not great.
Edit: Oh, yeah, much as I like the conversation, I'd love to see a response or a ban. Not a perma-ban, just 2 weeks so they don't get to write a paper.
Bayonetta is clearly a genre-savvy piece, where Wet was clearly an exploitative piece.
Isn't Wet more or less supposed to be the video game equivalent of a Matrix-esque exploitation film?
I think I've said this before, but Bayonetta is basically the logical extension of Barbarella.
You know what's funny? I think after having played it a bit, Bayonetta for all of it's... being it, is probably one of the best female-main games I've seen in terms of characterization, in it's own shallow manner. The main character is a person who makes you feel incredibly cool, is supremely confident and competent, and kills everything for some reason. Sure she's a 2D caricature, but she's the sort of 2D caricature that few people bother to make for women, the unabashed action hero badass. It's my favorite escapism, as well as my girlfriend's. She always tells me she wishes there were more shitty action roles for ladies.
Oddly though, "Wet", though similar and arguably less retardedly exploitative, doesn't give me the same sensation. Probably because it's kind of not great.
Edit: Oh, yeah, much as I like the conversation, I'd love to see a response or a ban. Not a perma-ban, just 2 weeks so they don't get to write a paper.
Bayonetta is clearly a genre-savvy piece, where Wet was clearly an exploitative piece.
Isn't Wet more or less supposed to be the video game equivalent of a Matrix-esque exploitation film?
That's what I found so funny. WET is "hey! let's do Kill Bill!"
It should be genre-savvy like hell. But for some reason it just seems... off. It may be because it's movie genre savvy, rather than game genre savvy. I mean, the guy who did Bayonetta has reinvented beat-em-ups like 4 times.
Because that's not true. Because you're ignoring how the media can and does repeatedly present unattractive male characters as being heroic, sexual people, and rarely if ever does the same for unattractive female characters. Presenting a sample of images designed only to reinforce the false equivalency you want to impose doesn't make it so.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
But more seriously: Sam Fisher in Splinter Cell (craggy older guy), Raynor in Starcraft (balding and goateed), Guybrush Threepwood and Bernard Bernouilli from the Lucasarts adventures, the...cyborg-guy-thing from Bioforge, any game ever where you are a dogfaced soldier recruit in some historical or future war, or any game where you are a male main character with no discernible sex characteristics whatsoever (the Silencer in Crusader: No Remorse, for instance, or the bodiless kid hero in LOOM).
If you are a male gamer, you have a huge selection of fictional avatars that have characteristics you may find desirable (badass space pilot! SAS agent!) but are not sexualized in the least. If you are a female gamer, your options in this arena are a lot more circumscribed. This is close to the crux of it.
While I in large part agree with you, Sam Fisher is sexy. Not a very good example.
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Except you can do both - look at Mirror's Edge, for example. Faith is probably one of the most realistic female characters ever, and that comes from her design, which doesn't veer into stereotypes. And even then, you still had idiots that thought she needed to be "tarted up".
Faith is a size one.
Faith spends all her time running and jumping from rooftop to rooftop. Find me someone who does that who isn't size one and we'll talk. She was ridiculously in shape because of course she'd be ridiculously in shape. She also had tiny boobs and wore enough clothing to cover them. The idea that she was thin and in shape in no way made her a sex symbol.
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Except you can do both - look at Mirror's Edge, for example. Faith is probably one of the most realistic female characters ever, and that comes from her design, which doesn't veer into stereotypes. And even then, you still had idiots that thought she needed to be "tarted up".
Faith is a size one.
Faith spends all her time running and jumping from rooftop to rooftop. Find me someone who does that who isn't size one and we'll talk. She was ridiculously in shape because of course she'd be ridiculously in shape. She also had tiny boobs and wore enough clothing to cover them. The idea that she was thin and in shape in no way made her a sex symbol.
But it does serve to counter the idea that skinny hot girls are good only for fucking, yes?
The only thing Faith has in common with say, the chick from Ninja Gaiden, is that she has a small waist line. There's nothing sexualized about her - her being a size one has absolutely no relevance.
override367 on
0
Options
JacobkoshGamble a stamp.I can show you how to be a real man!Moderatormod
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Well, yes, games generally do require competition, or goal-setting, or design.
Survival and brutality not as much.
except competition and goal setting in a narrative context lends itself primarily to conflict, which lends itself to survival/combat most of the time.
But it does serve to counter the idea that skinny hot girls are good only for fucking, yes?
The attentive reader may have noted that that was why Hedgie brought her up in the first place.
The attentive reader would have noticed this followed
Then take a look at the lists and try to figure out the difference between the two. Here's a hint - only one of those lists reinforces a notion that the group linked to it is good for one thing only.
Robman on
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
edited December 2009
Unless it's a comedy game (and those are as common as hens' teeth), there's no utility in having a "realistic" character. Games, no matter how much some might protest, aren't dramatic media where realism is dependent. Considering most games' occuring in space or fictional ancient histories, I don't see how realism is even a broad concern, and I would bet many of you would agree.
What's the functional utility of having an unattractive or overweight or unappealing player-character? No one wants to be that person, and most games have little context for such a character. But just wait until we have Call of Duty: Procurement and Motorpool. Or Street Fighter V, featuring the new character Randy Joe Tisdale, a paunchy ex-fratboy from South Carolina.
Why are we blaming the manifold failings of adolescent boys on the videogame industry, again?
Because in large part the gaming industry seems to be run by them. Remember the developer's rationale for why Lara Croft was made an attractive female - "if I'm going to be watching an ass for 10+ hours, I want it to be an ass I want to look at."
See, I don't think that's particularly sexist. All other things being equal, why not make her an attractive woman? Making a female character sexy is not the same as saying she's not as good as a man.
Because it wasn't "well, we have a strong story that calls for a well thought out female character," it was "I'd rather look at a female ass." You can't see why that would be rather sexist?
'I'd rather look at a female ass than a male one, and I think our target audience feels the same way' does not equal 'women are only good for fucking'.
It would be easier to just say that Video Games are mainstream.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Except you can do both - look at Mirror's Edge, for example. Faith is probably one of the most realistic female characters ever, and that comes from her design, which doesn't veer into stereotypes. And even then, you still had idiots that thought she needed to be "tarted up".
Faith is a size one.
Yes, but with an athletic build and a small bustline that fits into her character as a whole - having to run along the tops of buildings, she's not going to be both lithe and stacked. There's also the fact that's she's very clearly ethnically Asian while avoiding being stereotypically so, which is another thing rather avoided in a lot of games.
And going back to the lists, the typical things that make women physically attractive - a curvy body, large bust, etc. - tend to be things that focus only on the woman's ability to reproduce. In comparison, the things that make men physically attractive - muscles and a well developed body - are things that make them physically capable. Which is a pretty large gulf.
Think about it - if you were shown a picture of a female bodybuilder, what would your reaction be?
What is cooking mama going to do... be thrown out into the jungle where she must win a cooking competition or be eaten alive?
Face financial ruin after being driven out of business, lose her possessions to creditors, and live a brief and miserable life on the streets before dying of tuberculosis.
What's the functional utility of having an unattractive or overweight or unappealing player-character? No one wants to be that person, and most games have little context for such a character. But just wait until we have Call of Duty: Procurement and Motorpool. Or Street Fighter V, featuring the new character Randy Joe Tisdale, a paunchy ex-fratboy from South Carolina.
He loses a lot.
Street Fighter has always been chock to the brim with unattractive and unappealing player characters, unless you find Blanka, Dhalsim and E. Honda to be attractive.
Lawndart on
0
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Posts
Body image is the root of everything. Attractive people are more confident, more commanding, more successful, better regarded, and happier then unattractive people.
When a gamer lives vicariously though a gorgeous avatar, interacting with sexual partners they'd never be able to attract in the real world (look at Shepard and Kaiden/Ashley in Mass Effect)... what does this do to them? Does it change their standards of what they'll settle for in terms of physical standards?
It's been shown that twisted physical ideals have profoundly damaging effects in print media, to deny these effects in electronic media is foolish.
See, I don't think that's particularly sexist. All other things being equal, why not make her an attractive woman? Making a female character sexy is not the same as saying she's not as good as a man.
When it comes to women, it isn't even sexism as much as clueless writers. It's pretty well known that game characters are pretty much all written by committee, and the main (only) consideration is how they affect the user experience, and not whether they're actually compelling characters. In a sense they're like Clippy from Word, except with more polygons.
For example, a woman soldier in real life or even in a film is going to come across differently than in a video game where any female character's combat garb is skin tight spandex- if they're being conservative. They also go out of the way to grace female characters with "feminine grace" in situations where it's in appropriate. Like on a battlefield.
In a sense video games in the state they exist now pretty much can't render anything beyond comic book quality writing and characterization. Not because of anything inherent in the medium, but because the function of games as applications is highly specific, and the marketplace really isn't open to anything other than games based on physical interaction, or systems derived from older forms of gaming.
It's possible to create the video game equivalent of, say, a group of friends in their last year of high school, putting you in one of their shoes and living out an emotional story while interactively experiencing all the minutiae of a serious narrative. It's just that there isn't a name for that sort of thing- it's not a game, where there's a specific, appealing and enjoyable mode of interaction that makes it survive in the marketplace. That sort of application has no category, no market.
Which means you probably aren't going to see characters that exist on their own terms as people. They're just part of the interface.
Can I have an example of this in a video game that's not Duke Nukem, please?
Okay, here's a little thought experiment for you.
List the things that are considered to make a male physically attractive. Then list the things that are considered to make a female physically attractive.
Then take a look at the lists and try to figure out the difference between the two. Here's a hint - only one of those lists reinforces a notion that the group linked to it is good for one thing only.
Seriously. Again, slamming back to the L4D pictures - Francis went from a fat, muscly biker to something closer to 'normalcy'. Louis lost his hair and beard and adopted non-threatening office clothing. These were not random changes, but reflect an effort to create broad appeal. Apparently, gamers aren't ready for either the original Francis or Louis characters.
:?:
And the OP hasn't made a reply yet
This is almost definitely doing someone's homework
Oddly though, "Wet", though similar and arguably less retardedly exploitative, doesn't give me the same sensation. Probably because it's kind of not great.
Edit: Oh, yeah, much as I like the conversation, I'd love to see a response or a ban. Not a perma-ban, just 2 weeks so they don't get to write a paper.
Edit Again: Oh, and interestingly, though the main character is ridiculously sexualized, I notice in the Bayonetta thread, there's far fewer people saying you know "oh man, pretty lady" than there are people going "oh ew! totally no!" for various reasons.
The Sopranos was mainstream.
The problem is all this artsy farts stuff about characters and themes are things that without exception are considered secondary to gameplay, and there's no production or publishing model for projects that want to prioritize anything else. Therefore games are going to be primarily dealing in emotions of survival, brutality, or simply competition and not much else for the near future.
Because it wasn't "well, we have a strong story that calls for a well thought out female character," it was "I'd rather look at a female ass." You can't see why that would be rather sexist?
Does it? Slim people are only good for fucking? What kind of bizzaro-world do you live in? Are there no marathon runners in your world? No cross-country skiers? No long-distance cyclists? No pilates or yoga experts? No rock climbers? No (endless stream of endurance sports).
Your refusal to see skinny women as anything but a cock-acceptor, and your assignment of the muscleman as a god-king figure reveal some pretty sad core assumptions.
Bayonetta is clearly a genre-savvy piece, where Wet was clearly an exploitative piece.
Except you can do both - look at Mirror's Edge, for example. Faith is probably one of the most realistic female characters ever, and that comes from her design, which doesn't veer into stereotypes. And even then, you still had idiots that thought she needed to be "tarted up".
Well, yes, games generally do require competition, or goal-setting, or design.
Survival and brutality not as much.
Since the conversation drifted from videogames to the media in general, I was referring primarily to non-videogame characters.
But videogames with unattractive male main characters?
Well, let's start with Planescape: Torment, where the male lead character is a walking, mutilated corpse.
I wouldn't call Niko Bellic from GTAIV that much of a stunner, either, but then again your mileage may vary.
Edit: Oh, and here's what Max Payne will look like in the upcoming third game. Sexy!
The Sopranos was also a specific example and not a genre.
Do you really think that "The Sopranos" is the same as "Video Games"? Fucking really? Can you in any way come close to justifying that line of thought? I bet I can come up with specific films that are sexist too. But apparently the Sopranos is a genre, right?
Hey look, Half-life fucking 2 was mainstream. Guess that's the response to someone saying "Porn is mainstream and exploitative" too, right?
Faith is a size one.
But more seriously: Sam Fisher in Splinter Cell (craggy older guy), Raynor in Starcraft (balding and goateed), Guybrush Threepwood and Bernard Bernouilli from the Lucasarts adventures, the...cyborg-guy-thing from Bioforge, any game ever where you are a dogfaced soldier recruit in some historical or future war, or any game where you are a male main character with no discernible sex characteristics whatsoever (the Silencer in Crusader: No Remorse, for instance, or the bodiless kid hero in LOOM).
If you are a male gamer, you have a huge selection of fictional avatars that have characteristics you may find desirable (badass space pilot! SAS agent!) but are not sexualized in the least. If you are a female gamer, your options in this arena are a lot more circumscribed. This is close to the crux of it.
It should be genre-savvy like hell. But for some reason it just seems... off. It may be because it's movie genre savvy, rather than game genre savvy. I mean, the guy who did Bayonetta has reinvented beat-em-ups like 4 times.
While I in large part agree with you, Sam Fisher is sexy. Not a very good example.
Faith spends all her time running and jumping from rooftop to rooftop. Find me someone who does that who isn't size one and we'll talk. She was ridiculously in shape because of course she'd be ridiculously in shape. She also had tiny boobs and wore enough clothing to cover them. The idea that she was thin and in shape in no way made her a sex symbol.
But it does serve to counter the idea that skinny hot girls are good only for fucking, yes?
The attentive reader may have noted that that was why Hedgie brought her up in the first place.
except competition and goal setting in a narrative context lends itself primarily to conflict, which lends itself to survival/combat most of the time.
The attentive reader would have noticed this followed
What's the functional utility of having an unattractive or overweight or unappealing player-character? No one wants to be that person, and most games have little context for such a character. But just wait until we have Call of Duty: Procurement and Motorpool. Or Street Fighter V, featuring the new character Randy Joe Tisdale, a paunchy ex-fratboy from South Carolina.
He loses a lot.
'I'd rather look at a female ass than a male one, and I think our target audience feels the same way' does not equal 'women are only good for fucking'.
Are you serious?
What is cooking mama going to do... be thrown out into the jungle where she must win a cooking competition or be eaten alive?
Yes, but with an athletic build and a small bustline that fits into her character as a whole - having to run along the tops of buildings, she's not going to be both lithe and stacked. There's also the fact that's she's very clearly ethnically Asian while avoiding being stereotypically so, which is another thing rather avoided in a lot of games.
And going back to the lists, the typical things that make women physically attractive - a curvy body, large bust, etc. - tend to be things that focus only on the woman's ability to reproduce. In comparison, the things that make men physically attractive - muscles and a well developed body - are things that make them physically capable. Which is a pretty large gulf.
Think about it - if you were shown a picture of a female bodybuilder, what would your reaction be?
Face financial ruin after being driven out of business, lose her possessions to creditors, and live a brief and miserable life on the streets before dying of tuberculosis.
I would play this game.
Also this one.
Street Fighter has always been chock to the brim with unattractive and unappealing player characters, unless you find Blanka, Dhalsim and E. Honda to be attractive.