126 réponses à ce sujet

[hobbit of the shire]

I'd really like to see a game without objectification, or, at the very least, not one-sided objectification. I just watched a movie yesterday, Dredd3D (god-awful, don't watch it). They guy was in his crazy robocop armor and didn't even take his helmet off the whole movie. All you could see was his mouth. The female was also in robocop gear, but for some absurd reasoning they say, she cannot wear a helmet. Translation: sexy female gets to show off her pretty face and hair for the male audience to gawk at. Same issue we have with games. It's one thing to show sexuality in a game (and as an adult gamer, I am perfectly fine with that), but when there is an absurd amount of eye candy (especially one-sided), then I get ticked.

Morrigan's clothing is questionable. But her personality made up for it. And maybe living in the bush sort of means she has her own clothing style. She didn't dwell on it, although she did take advantage of using her "charms" when required. Isabela, on the other hand, is a total **** (who the heck wrote her dialogue?). Talks non-stop about sex and exudes sex. If that isn't a character made for objectification, I don't know what is. No way I can take her seriously.

Dressing practically... hmmm... I suppose just walking around outside you'd see females NOT dressing practically. So I suppose it is too much to ask for in a game. HOWEVER, you're in combat, so it would really make sense if the armor covers up, you know, your vital organs. Fitted for a female, but provide the same protection. Yeah, in the fantasy world you might have to have some leeway, if anything but to make sure your companions don't all look the same (is that Leliana or Alistair under all that armor? lol). After all, you do want your characters to look cool. However, there should be some sense in it. And if people do want to see a chainmail bikini, let that be a mod and not the standard in-game armor. Heck, I admit to playing around with skimpy armor for my characters. But the vanilla game shouldn't really do that.

[Orian Tabris]

Both of my player characters from my fourth import game (from DA:O to DAII) are very flirtatious and openly bisexual characters with no preference for either gender. They're also very immodest, and don't care what others think of them or the things/people that they have a fondness for.

To the point. These things that make up their personalities and who they are, are viable roleplaying concepts that the player may choose to add to their characters, to give them more dimension and depth. These concepts are within the contraints of the games, and don't require the player to make them up. You don't have to say "my character likes both men and women", because it's possible to have the player character sleep with characters of both genders in one playthrough. Either of my characters from my fourth import game would happily wear scantilly clad clothes in public (though I never have them run around completely naked), based on the choices I've made while playing them.

So why shouldn't the player character be allowed to express themselves in the clothes they wear? If BioWare continues these trends that make their games so popular, and frequently put them in the spot light, should they not try to take it that one step further?

[ScotGaymer]

As I said in the other thread...

Personally in DAO and DA2 I didn't think any of the characters were overly sexualised at all (or sexually objectified). Even Isabela, because the characters that did have strong sexualities worked because it fit their character.

I didn't object to Isabela.

I did however object strenously to Miranda, Samara, ME3 Ashley, and Sexbot Edi and her fricking ******. Why you might ask?

Isabela was just as "revealing" in her outfits as Miri, or any of the ME women; and yet I object to them and not her? Hypocracy! Heresy! Idiot!

It has to do with the presentation of the character. Yes Isabela was a sl*tty pirate wench who wore revealing clothing, but being a rogue and a duelist her outfit made sense both in context of her character and from a pragmatic, functional point of view. Also DA2 didn't have any points of the game where you pretty much had close up shots of her t*ts or bum.

Compare with Miranda, and Samara in ME2, Miranda, and Edi Sexbot in ME3. And with Ashley's ME3 look and her suddenly bigger b**bs.
In ME2 there is hardly a scene goes by with Miranda where the camera doesn't at least once do a close up shot of her backside or her chest; and it's the same in ME3. Not to mention her outfit is horribly impractical in combat situations (seriously she runs around in heels!); and would not protect her in a hostile environment.
Samara isn't subjected to the same type of egregious treatment as Miranda (both Miri and EDI are female like beings that are objectified for fanservice reasons) but her outfit is every bit as impractical and ridiculous as Miranda's (and Jack and Thane's too).
In ME3 because Miranda isn't a companion, and EDIsexBot is, it is EDI that is subjected to the gross objectification and fanservice (and it isn't even equal opportunity fanservice cos none of the Male ME characters are EVER treated like that - the closest is when ManShep checks out Kaidan's bum when hes romancing him in ME3) that Miranda was in ME2, and continues to get the very few times she appears. Also that horrific ****** in EDI's alternate outfits.
And Ashley; her new look doesn't even make sense. It doesn't fit her character, and it is strange that her b**bs are suddenly a LOT bigger than they were in ME1/2. And her outfit is also horribly impractical.

Personally I don't mind if Bioware "over sexualise" characters if they want to. As long as it is equal opportunity oversexualisation, and fanservice. You want to include a Miranda/Isabela like character and have camera shots of her backside and b**bs?
Absolutely fine by me; as long as you do the same for a fit male companion character; ie a Male NPC companion gets shots of him with his shirt off, or in just his undies. Close up shots of his bum, or crotch. And so on.

For me it's an all or nothing thing.

If you wanna serve your fans with a bit of titilation and harmless "sexy" camera shots; then go ahead. Brilliant.

Just don't cater to only the Str8 Male demographic. Service ALL your potential fans.

Like in Final Fantasy 13 when Snow has his top off for like two whole chapters. And Fang with her rather revealing clothes for pretty much the whole game.

Modifié par FitScotGaymer, 19 septembre 2012 - 09:30 .

[Bfler]

The main target audience of games are males below 25, and most of these players like saucy looking females. Best examples are the already mentioned mods, f.e. look at some of the most endorsed for Skyrim at Nexus:

Calientes Female Body Mod Big Bottom Edition -CBBE-
DIMONIZED UNP female body
or Killer Keos Skimpy CBBE V2 Armor Set (armors of females with many removed parts and large boobs)

And if most people like it, you can't really avoid sexualized chars, even if it degrades them to objects.

Modifié par Bfler, 19 septembre 2012 - 09:59 .

[syllogi]

Bfler wrote...

The main target audience of games are males below 25, and most of these players like saucy looking females. Best examples are the already mentioned mods, f.e. look at some of the most endorsed for Skyrim at Nexus:

Calientes Female Body Mod Big Bottom Edition -CBBE-
DIMONIZED UNP female body
or Killer Keos Skimpy CBBE V2 Armor Set (armors of females with many removed parts and large boobs)

And if most people like it, you can't really avoid sexualized chars, even if it degrades them to objects.

  While I have nothing against the nude body mods themselves, the skimpy armor mods look ridiculous, and make me wonder why the players who use them don't just make the armor invisible or run around naked in God Mode.

I really, really hope that the DA3 devs realize that the Nexus mod using crowd is a very select, very odd group of people.  I mean, half the mods for Skyrim over there appear to be My Little Pony related.  And I like that it's pretty much understood that if you want  some of the stuff you see in the Adult sections at Nexus, you need to buy the PC version and mod it in.

There are tons of players who would be completely turned off by adding the Heavy Metal type sexy armor you commonly see on the Nexus.  Both male and female.

[Sable Rhapsody]

FitScotGaymer wrote...
Personally I don't mind if Bioware "over sexualise" characters if they want to. As long as it is equal opportunity oversexualisation, and fanservice.

I present: exhibits A and B.



Us girls got eye candy too in Mass Effect.  I think part of the reason why it wasn't as equal opportunity as it could be is because the male alien LIs were *really* alien as opposed to palette swapped Liara or Tali (who is apparently just a photoshopped hot girl.)  Of course there was still one-sided pandering (the consort, Kelly Chambers, Diana Allers, etc.) but it's not as though there wasn't plenty of dude to look at.

[syllogi]

Haha, I suddenly have an image of Kreia from KOTOR2 being made over like Flemeth. I have a feeling she would not approve.

[ScotGaymer]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

FitScotGaymer wrote...
Personally I don't mind if Bioware "over sexualise" characters if they want to. As long as it is equal opportunity oversexualisation, and fanservice.

I present: exhibits A and B.

-SNIP-

Us girls got eye candy too in Mass Effect.  I think part of the reason why it wasn't as equal opportunity as it could be is because the male alien LIs were *really* alien as opposed to palette swapped Liara or Tali (who is apparently just a photoshopped hot girl.)  Of course there was still one-sided pandering (the consort, Kelly Chambers, Diana Allers, etc.) but it's not as though there wasn't plenty of dude to look at.

Thats the point.

It isn't equal opportunity is it?

Kaidan in ME3 has his top of for like 2 scenes - a very brief period of time - and Jacob is only topless for one singular scene in ME2.
Compare to Miranda and Samara having their b**bs out practically the whole game, and Jack being literally semi naked the entire game (in ME2). Compare to the gratuitous t*ts and bum shots every single time you talk to Miranda in both games.. Compare to EDI Sexbot.

One brief swatch of a male backside, and 2 brief scenes of topless Kaidan (and one of Jacob in ME2) doesn't really compare does it?

I get that most of the devs in BW are str8 male dudes, and default to "hey this is what a dude would like" but is it really that hard to attach the "and this is what a girl would like" to that thought? And hey who knows maybe even "and gay dudes maybe will like this." and "lesbians will so love this." to that?

Is it hard to say "well we have this character that is basically fanservice for titilating our str8 dude and lesbian audience; so we should have another character that is basically fanservice for titilating our gay male and str8 girl audience."? And have them automatically on an equal footing?

[SpunkyMonkey]

What gets me with the sexualization of characters bares little resemblance to class which, in medival ages, was a big factor.

I really don't expect to find many beautiful peasants compared to when mixing with nobility where I expect to find far more lookers - simply because of the wealth factor.

Not saying you can't have lovely commoners or ugly nobles, but from a bigger perspective I'd expect more toothless scrags amongst the commoners and more porcelain beauties amongst the nobles.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 19 septembre 2012 - 01:24 .

[Parmida]

ME3's male bodies were dreamy, I loved looking at dem muscles!
And why not? eyecandy for everyone!

[EricHVela]

(Another thread ended up locked due to irrelevant mud-slinging so I won't link it here.)

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Sopa de Gato wrote...

Give them personalities first, sexualities second.

Which is exactly what's done.

Gaider can put things more eloquently than I, but essentially it's a low cost way to help make our game more interesting to a group of people that typically find themselves marginalized.

In my opinion, if the relationship can only be deduced as being "bisexual" with metaknowledge, then I have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever and continue to support it.

I don't know what weight the opinion of the Technical QA Analyst of the Dragon Age franchise, but in my opinion, his opinion contradicts what he quoted.

It seems to me like he basically said that it's cheaper (low-cost) to make them all bisexual. In my opinion, that also cheapens the personalities that should take precedence when deciding what their sexuality will be.

I will iterate that I feel that writers, who insist that the fault is metagaming, expect players to experience total amnesia or expect player to play the game only once. By trying to do something different than before, the player is metagaming by considering what happened in a previous play-through. It's ridiculous to think that it's the players' fault for metagaming something that takes many attempts to experience all of it.

[Rawgrim]

ReggarBlane wrote...

(Another thread ended up locked due to irrelevant mud-slinging so I won't link it here.)

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Sopa de Gato wrote...

Give them personalities first, sexualities second.

Which is exactly what's done.

Gaider can put things more eloquently than I, but essentially it's a low cost way to help make our game more interesting to a group of people that typically find themselves marginalized.

In my opinion, if the relationship can only be deduced as being "bisexual" with metaknowledge, then I have absolutely no problem with it whatsoever and continue to support it.

I don't know what weight the opinion of the Technical QA Analyst of the Dragon Age franchise, but in my opinion, his opinion contradicts what he quoted.

It seems to me like he basically said that it's cheaper (low-cost) to make them all bisexual. In my opinion, that also cheapens the personalities that should take precedence when deciding what their sexuality will be.

I will iterate that I feel that writers, who insist that the fault is metagaming, expect players to experience total amnesia or expect player to play the game only once. By trying to do something different than before, the player is metagaming by considering what happened in a previous play-through. It's ridiculous to think that it's the players' fault for metagaming something that takes many attempts to experience all of it.

Quite right. The romance icon constantly reminded me that Hawke was a sexual Mary Sue, more or less.

[ScarMK]

I don't think anyone has a problem with them being bi, (at least majority of those I see arguing against it), but the fact that each LI was bi. It seems as though Bioware is just taking the easy route and trying to pretend that they are doing it for "equal choice for all, what happens in this playthrough does not mean it happens in another".

*Edit* I should mention that Sebastion was DLC and likely had more development time than the base game LIs.  Had he been in the base game, I'm sure he would have been as bi as everyone else.

Modifié par ScarMK, 19 septembre 2012 - 02:46 .

[snackrat]

I'm fine with dressing impractically! But I'd like it to remain an option.

I'm fine with my women wearing soft, decorative mage robes showing off curvaceous figures! But I'd like my no-nonsense characters to look badass if they want.
I'm fine with my men wearing the broad, spiked armour born of a power fantasy! But I'd like my more subtle characters to look reserved if he wants.

Basically I'm saying avoid that ol' 'big armour on the dude. chainmail bikini on the chicks' chestnut. But this is Bioware, so I have faith they'll handle that well. At least on the ladies side... it's harder finding armour for men that doesn't look like it was born out of a power fantasy.

[hoorayforicecream]

ReggarBlane wrote...

It seems to me like he basically said that it's cheaper (low-cost) to make them all bisexual. In my opinion, that also cheapens the personalities that should take precedence when deciding what their sexuality will be.

Since the allocated resources are finite, the tradeoff is "More love interests for everyone at the cost of some believability, or less love interests for everyone, period." The decision was made to make the most use of the content they create.

I never felt like that the personalities in DA2 were cheapened at all. Despite four out of five romantic interests in DA2 being bisexual, I never felt like they were anything but different people from each other. They each had their distinct personalities, and were deep, 3-dimensional characters if you spent the time to get to know them. Isabela was a free spirit, Merrill was an innocent optimist, Anders was a manipulative revolutionary, and Fenris was a tortured soul. Sebastian was a repentant and reluctant leader.

Making them strictly heterosexual or homosexual wouldn't have added anything significant to their characters, since the primary theme of the character isn't their sexuality (except in Isabela's case, where it feeds into her primary theme of personal freedom).

A lot of people point at DAO as "how to do it", but I look at it as "this doesn't make a lot of sense." If they're going to enforce sexuality, then they should enforce sexuality. Morrigan would only romance a man, so why does she spend so much time talking about her freedom and her past and her dislike of feelings, rather than how much she likes men, and why she dislikes women? If sexuality is as big a part of their characters like you say, then why don't they ever talk about it or make it a thematic point? If they don't, then it's simply being taken for granted and, in my eyes, doesn't add anything to the story. If there's no benefit to it save for making people feel less yucky about a dude possibly being into another dude, it shouldn't remain when the benefit is more inclusivity for everyone else.

It just seems like those who look at it as "the right way" take sexuality for granted. "Heterosexual until proven otherwise" doesn't and shouldn't apply to Thedas.

I'd venture to say that since they don't bother to work it into the narrative and enforce it solely via mechanics, that sexuality is not central to their character, but rather an arbitrary mechanics/gameplay decision, like why you can burn a hurlock, but not a building.

There was a game I played that actually did address sexuality as a central theme in a character's story, and it was excellent. The way that DAO handled it was decidedly not. If I have to decide between "More options and a little less believability" and "less options with no appreciable gain in believability", I'd rather have more.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 19 septembre 2012 - 03:04 .

[bleetman]

Bfler wrote...

The main target audience of games are males below 25, and most of these players like saucy looking females. Best examples are the already mentioned mods, f.e. look at some of the most endorsed for Skyrim at Nexus:

Calientes Female Body Mod Big Bottom Edition -CBBE-
DIMONIZED UNP female body
or Killer Keos Skimpy CBBE V2 Armor Set (armors of females with many removed parts and large boobs)

And if most people like it, you can't really avoid sexualized chars, even if it degrades them to objects.

I'm tired of this argument. The sooner they learn that the world does not revolve around giving them erections, the better.

[Sejborg]

There is nothing wrong with sexy characters.

[bleetman]

Sejborg wrote...

There is nothing wrong with sexy characters.

There isn't, no. What I personally have a problem with, however, is when said sexyness is a) entirely contrary to what they do for a living or who they are as a person (so, the usual female-warrior-in-bikini/exposed-in-all-the-wrong-places-armour nonsense, as if that wouldn't fatally undermine the whole point of armour), and waved in our faces constantly. There's more to it than that - both being far more commonplace amongst female characters than male, for starters - but those are my two biggest personal bugbears.

Let me put it this way.

http://cloud-2.steam...BB7CFBB381B06D/

This is a sexy character. Granted her outfit doesn't really look like anything resembling combat attire and don't even get me started about the high heels, but fine. I'll ignore those for now. Miranda is sexy, and from a design perspective she's sexy in a way that I wouldn't personally say is at a detriment to her as a character. Her look fits who she is. I mean, mostly. Apart from the 'why would that stop bullets' thing. But moving on.

But then the game does this.

http://cloud.steampo...7B3A2448D739ED/

And it does it over and over and over. This? This is kind of thing is my biggest problem. Because not content with Miranda being sexy, they saw fit to scribble it on a sign shaped like a bosom and beat me over the head with it repeatedly. Hey guys! Look at thiiiiis! Are looking? You better be looking! Phwoar! Check out those curves! Over, and over, and over. It's immature and degrading, and it treats her like a piece of meat for us to drool over rather than a legitimate character I should be appreciating and respecting.

And then there's characters like Samara...



...who, despite being a centuries old live-for-the-cause-die-for-the-cause warrior who spends her entire life hunting down criminals and has no interest in romance, still has a giant hole in her armour. On her boobs. To give us all a good look at them. Why? Why is this a thing? Why would anyone in her position leave a giant vulnerability like that, right over what I can only assume are three vital organs?

Mass Effect is full of this kind of nonsense. I'll be incredibly frustrated if DA3 slips to the point of including it too.

daaaav wrote...

But, it really irks me when people say things like "female characters should dress practically"... Why? What if they don't want to dress practically? If it makes sense for the character then they can dress as impractically as they like...
 

They needn't all dress practically all the time, I'd say. Again, it relates to their character and their occupation. That said, when your occupation involves slaying dragons, a degree of practicality wouldn't go amiss from time to time.

I mean, let's take Isabela. I'm fine with her look. I like her look, and for who she is and what she mostly spends her time doing? That's fine. Go for it. But when I'm taking her to cut down mythical creatures of superhuman strength and capability? Throw on some armour, woman. Not much! Maybe just a thick leather jerkin or the like. Y'know, something more resiliant than air. Living shouldn't come second to looking good.

Modifié par bleetman, 19 septembre 2012 - 04:16 .

[ReallyRue]

I do think it would be good to have a lots of range in armour/robes, including some that are more practical and some that are more 'stylish'/'revealing'/whatever you want to call it. On one condition - it's the same for men. That's something I thought was good in Skyrim. Practical armour that covers you is mostly the same on men and women, but skimpy fur stuff is revealling on both.

The only thing I really dislike is when the men are restricted to full plate and the women are restricted to fur bikinis.

I do think that revealing stuff should have much lower stats too.

Modifié par ReallyRue, 19 septembre 2012 - 04:28 .

[EssEeeEcks]

Bfler wrote...

The main target audience of games are males below 25, and most of these players like saucy looking females. Best examples are the already mentioned mods, f.e. look at some of the most endorsed for Skyrim at Nexus:

Calientes Female Body Mod Big Bottom Edition -CBBE-
DIMONIZED UNP female body
or Killer Keos Skimpy CBBE V2 Armor Set (armors of females with many removed parts and large boobs)

And if most people like it, you can't really avoid sexualized chars, even if it degrades them to objects.

I am a male below 25 years of age and I would prefer a little less sexualization please.

[EssEeeEcks]

Sex and sexuality is a unavoidable part of human culture and society. That said, don't make every single character in the game make googly eyes at me, thats just annoying.