852 réponses à ce sujet

[Marionetten]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I'm saying that if one objectifies one gender, one should objectify all genders. Otherwise it's sexist.

So yeah, you're saying that only bisexuals should be allowed to make lewd comments meaning you're effectively discriminating against straights and gays by telling them that they can't or they're objectifying sexist trash. Way to go.

Modifié par Marionetten, 18 septembre 2011 - 01:52 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I'm saying that if one objectifies one gender, one should objectify all genders. Otherwise it's sexist.

And you could argue that Roche is sexist, sure.

That doesn't make the game sexist.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...

I would find it more acceptable if we weren't forced to play the character, a fact that ensures that I'll never play the thing.

That is sufficient reason. You don't need to say it's mysoginist, or "bestial" or whatever.

[Dragoonlordz]

jeweledleah wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

And where is the astounding misogynism in TW2 (other than it being set in an actual medieval setting with people not taking women seriously)?

My question to that: is it presented as a bad thing?

What I love about the game is that it doesn't moralize.

What it does show is several females being good leaders, excellent politicians and strong fighters.
It shows someone like Vernon Roche, having a woman as his right hand, which is rare. And we see women fighting with the Scoia'Tael rebels.

But it doesn't go out of its way to say "it's wrong!!"
And yea, Geralt sometimes does say "women" in a playfully dismissive manner once or twice. I prefer it that way.  

see, those are the parts that I likke.  there are a lot of good things about Witcher, and I honestly don't even mind it that hecould be a James Bond like, bangs everything that moves.  i just don't see the point of showing aforementioned boinking in excruciating detail at every chance.  it doesn't make the game mature.  Gray morality and intricate story make the game mature.

In giving the player the freedom to make that choice of watching or skipping is the mature aspect. You don't have to visit a brothel, you don't have to bang a succubus and you can skip the scenes if they offend you but it's mature enough to have the scenes but give the player the choice of watching if desired.

[hoorayforicecream]

Marionetten wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I'm saying that if one objectifies one gender, one should objectify all genders. Otherwise it's sexist.

So yeah, you're saying that only bisexuals should be allowed to make lewd comments meaing you're effectively discriminating against straights and gays by telling them that they can't. Way to go.

Are you saying that straight people can't objectify their own gender? How discriminating of you.

[Xilizhra]

Marionetten wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I'm saying that if one objectifies one gender, one should objectify all genders. Otherwise it's sexist.

So yeah, you're saying that only bisexuals should be allowed to make lewd comments meaing you're effectively discriminating against straights and gays by telling them that they can't. Way to go.

I think she was talking about the game itself allowing for objectifying comments to be made regarding both genders, from different characters.

[1136342t54_]

MerinTB wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
and the whole thing comes across like something Zack Snyder would imagine as "female empowerment" à la Sucker Punch.

Wow.

Sucker Punch is not female empowerment.  It's a statement on the exact kind of exploitation of women in "male dominated entertainment media" that you are attacking here.

Some people read some bad reviews of that film and it's become something of a generally accepted reality that the film was trying to be "female empowerment" when it's the farthest thing from.

sorry, I loved Sucker Punch and I, for one, got what Zack Snyder was trying to do - your mileage of course may vary

This. Also throughout the movie it did pretty much paint most of the males as the bad guy and there was only like 2 males who actually helped at all. Its not just about female empowerment (although it had aspects of it) 

[Xilizhra]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I would find it more acceptable if we weren't forced to play the character, a fact that ensures that I'll never play the thing.

That is sufficient reason. You don't need to say it's mysoginist, or "bestial" or whatever.

From what I've heard, I believe that it is misogynist. I don't believe it's as misogynist as it used to be, or that it being misogynist is unique or uncommon. Mass Effect has had issues with this as well, more prominently in 2, so one could say that Witcher is evolving whereas ME is devolving.

[Marionetten]

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Are you saying that straight people can't objectify their own gender? How discriminating of you.

I'm saying that straight people are unlikely to sexually objectify their own gender. Your complaint was Roche commenting on Triss' ass, remember? Why would he comment on Geralt's ass?

Personally, I don't think sexual objectification is fine in any form regardless of your sexual orientation but I also don't think that this was a case of it. Roche knows Triss is more than that. He was just trying to make a joke to lighten up a somewhat dire situation. That's how the man rolls.

Xilizhra wrote...

I think she was talking about the game itself allowing for objectifying comments to be made regarding both genders, from different characters.

There is plenty of that. A lot of women in The Witcher view men as little but toys. The Lodge of Sorceresses is notorious for this.

Modifié par Marionetten, 18 septembre 2011 - 01:58 .

[KnightofPhoenix]

Xilizhra wrote...
I think she was talking about the game itself allowing for objectifying comments to be made regarding both genders, from different characters.

Males are mocked by women in TW too. The Lady of the Lake even mocks Geralt and says he is not that good in bed, and that's in TW1.

Like I said, the biggest despicable character is a straight male.
The 2nd in command of the Blue Stripes in a woman who can kick her colleagues' asses anytime.

What more does one need, a random comment in the air by Roche asking if Geralt's lampost is scarred as the rest of him?

[Complistic]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

I'm saying that if one objectifies one gender, one should objectify all genders. Otherwise it's sexist.

And you could argue that Roche is sexist, sure.

That doesn't make the game sexist.

The witcher world is pretty sexist actually. They stayed pretty faithful to the source material. It's so refreshing.

[addiction21]

MerinTB wrote...

Letting a giant monster lose to smash buildings and eat people?

Rampage was great. Loved that game.

[Siansonea]

MerinTB wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
and the whole thing comes across like something Zack Snyder would imagine as "female empowerment" à la Sucker Punch.

Wow.

Sucker Punch is not female empowerment.  It's a statement on the exact kind of exploitation of women in "male dominated entertainment media" that you are attacking here.

Some people read some bad reviews of that film and it's become something of a generally accepted reality that the film was trying to be "female empowerment" when it's the farthest thing from.

sorry, I loved Sucker Punch and I, for one, got what Zack Snyder was trying to do - your mileage of course may vary

Yeah, duh, Sucker Punch ISN'T female empowerment. The main character is lobotomized for helping another girl escape from an asylum, and her "dream world" experiences degrade them even more. Whatever "statement" you think Zack Snyder was trying to make is, I believe, all in your head. I don't think he thought it through that far. It think he just thought it was "hot". The characters are pathetically one-dimensional, and EVERY female in it is a victim of a man in some way, and the only one who escapes is rescued by yet ANOTHER man. So is this some kind of deep-stealth skewering satire? I don't think so.

[slimgrin]

Future Guy wrote...

jlb524 wrote...
This TW2 vs. BW stuff argument is tiring.  They each do their own thing when it comes to sex and romance and if you don't like it, don't play it or don't do the romances.

Future Guy wrote...

I don't see pandering as a bad thing.  It is paid entertainment afterall.

Unless they're pandering to 'teh gays' amirite?

No.  It's entertainment.  Like a movie pandering to a demographic.  If I don't think I'll be interested in it, then I won't watch it.  If they pull a DA2 with ME3, then I won't buy it.  I'll move on to something else.

There is no lack of gay people in TW2.

Modifié par slimgrin, 18 septembre 2011 - 01:57 .

[Ryzaki]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Marionetten wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

Ugh. Witcher 2 love scenes? No thanks. Just go back to ME1 please. classy, sensual and mature.

I'm really not understanding what is so sensual, classy and mature about sideboobs. Maybe I'm missing something?

Visually speaking The Witcher 2 destroys everything BioWare has ever produced. That bath scene is gorgeous to look at not only because of the characters but also due to the fantastic environments. Shagging the captain in some drab room with dimmed lights just doesn't compare. In fact, I always found those scenes exceedingly sleazy.

Yes because ME1's build up and dialogue was destroyed by the Witcher's dull barbie doll flat faces.

If anything Biowares titles have more barbie doll faces than WItchers by a truly long way.

You must be joking. I'm not gonna lie and say BW's faces don't hit uncanny valley because by ra they do (hellooo Miranda!) but worse than the Witcher? No way in hell.

[Dragoonlordz]

Xilizhra wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Out of curiosity, hasn't your universal reaction been the destruction of the Scoia'Tael?
Also, why do you "prefer it that way?"

Hmmm? You mean me being against the Scoia'Tael? Yea, that has nothing to do with gender.

Because it adds more character to the universe and setting we are playing in. More realism, if you wish to call it that.
When it says it's a medieval fantasy, it makes sure it feels something remotely resembling medieval societies.

I would find it more acceptable if we weren't forced to play the character, a fact that ensures that I'll never play the thing.

As a game based on a series of books, with male lead role and him being straight in those books. If you only wish to play as a female lead or bisexual or homosexual then sure it may not be your game. But that doesn't make it a bad game or the sexual scenes involving male lead and females bad either. Just because Bioware allows you to play as female lead and bisexual or homosexual doesn't mean every game should to become worth playing.

[KnightofPhoenix]

Complistic wrote...


The witcher world is pretty sexist actually. They stayed pretty faithful to the source material. It's so refreshing.

Yes, it is definitely sexist.

That's not the game being misogynist. The game world and setting are, and I agree it's refreshing.

Modifié par KnightofPhoenix, 18 septembre 2011 - 01:59 .

[MerinTB]

1136342t54 wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...
and the whole thing comes across like something Zack Snyder would imagine as "female empowerment" à la Sucker Punch.

Wow.

Sucker Punch is not female empowerment.  It's a statement on the exact kind of exploitation of women in "male dominated entertainment media" that you are attacking here.

Some people read some bad reviews of that film and it's become something of a generally accepted reality that the film was trying to be "female empowerment" when it's the farthest thing from.

sorry, I loved Sucker Punch and I, for one, got what Zack Snyder was trying to do - your mileage of course may vary

This. Also throughout the movie it did pretty much paint most of the males as the bad guy and there was only like 2 males who actually helped at all. Its not just about female empowerment (although it had aspects of it) 

The men in the movie (except the doctor at the end and, maybe, the cops who come in at the very end) are SLIME.
There is neither any nudity, nor any sex scenes, and even though there's a brothel and the "fetish school girl uniform", the camera never goes for close-ups on breasts, cleavage, butt, panty-shots... they kept the camera back and wide almost the entire time Baby Doll is in that get-up.
Anytime Baby Doll would "dance her sexy dance" the movie didn't show it, cutting to the fantasy action scenes instead.

....

I really need to finish my Definitive Critique and post it.

[naledgeborn]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

As a game based on a series of books, with male lead role and him being straight in those books. If you only wish to play as a female lead or bisexual or homosexual then sure it may not be your game. But that doesn't make it a bad game or the sexual scenes involving male lead and females bad either. Just because Bioware allows you to play as female lead and bisexual or homosexual doesn't mean every game should to become worth playing.

Yep. Just ask Adam Jensen.

[Xilizhra]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Out of curiosity, hasn't your universal reaction been the destruction of the Scoia'Tael?
Also, why do you "prefer it that way?"

Hmmm? You mean me being against the Scoia'Tael? Yea, that has nothing to do with gender.

Because it adds more character to the universe and setting we are playing in. More realism, if you wish to call it that.
When it says it's a medieval fantasy, it makes sure it feels something remotely resembling medieval societies.

I would find it more acceptable if we weren't forced to play the character, a fact that ensures that I'll never play the thing.

As a game based on a series of books, with male lead role and him being straight in those books. If you only wish to play as a female lead or bisexual or homosexual then sure it may not be your game. But that doesn't make it a bad game or the sexual scenes involving male lead and females bad either. Just because Bioware allows you to play as female lead and bisexual or homosexual doesn't mean every game should to become worth playing.

Well, no. It'd be odd in something, like, say, Mario (though there's been steadily more female selection options in there, even), but in a game that involves sexuality, I believe it's an important component and that a lack of it is a weakness.

[hoorayforicecream]

Marionetten wrote...

hoorayforicecream wrote...

Are you saying that straight people can't objectify their own gender? How discriminating of you.

I'm saying that straight people are unlikely sexually objectify their own gender. Your complaint was Roche commenting on Triss' ass, remember? Why would he comment on Geralt's ass?

So yeah, you're saying that only bisexuals and gays are likely to make lewd comments about their own gender, meaning you're effectively discriminating against straights by telling them that they can't or they're objectifying sexist trash. Way to go.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 18 septembre 2011 - 02:00 .

[Complistic]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

Complistic wrote...


The witcher world is pretty sexist actually. They stayed pretty faithful to the source material. It's so refreshing.

Yes, it is definitely sexist.

That's not the game being misogynist. The game world and setting are, and I agree it's refreshing.

Ah, I see what you meant.