680 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Equal representation is PC garbage, that's what it is.
An attempt to create "equality" by forcing numbers.
That doesn't make anyone equal. It's just window dressing.

Let the developers/publishers do their job.

If what's on the cover doesn't matter, then you lose nothing by equal represtation... unless you have a personal investment in unequal representation. If so, what is it? If not, why do you care either way?

Why do I care? I don't.
Not about the cover, but about poeple raising the fuss.

Just as you have the right to raise a fuss about it, I have the right to raise a fuss about you raising a fuss.

[Plaintiff]

Dhiro wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
...where did you get this picture of me?

I'm sorry Jimmy. I should've told you I keep mementos of all my sexual conquests.

You'll have to tell me why he's called Fast Jimmy, then.

Now now, don't laugh. It happens to the best of us.

Jimmy's performance issues are largely psychological. Once he gets over the jitters, he's a firm, yet gentle lover.

[Xilizhra]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
Equal representation is PC garbage, that's what it is.
An attempt to create "equality" by forcing numbers.
That doesn't make anyone equal. It's just window dressing.

Let the developers/publishers do their job.

If what's on the cover doesn't matter, then you lose nothing by equal represtation... unless you have a personal investment in unequal representation. If so, what is it? If not, why do you care either way?

Why do I care? I don't.
Not about the cover, but about poeple raising the fuss.

Just as you have the right to raise a fuss about it, I have the right to raise a fuss about you raising a fuss.

Well, it can be a reasonable assumption that the fuss won't end until greater diversity is achieved. Once it is, we'll stop making a fuss and you can be happy about the lack of fuss-making. Logically speaking, we have the same goals, because if you oppose us, all you do is prolong the fuss for the sake of an outcome you don't actually care about. That seems like a waste of time to me.

[Dhiro]

Plaintiff wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
...where did you get this picture of me?

I'm sorry Jimmy. I should've told you I keep mementos of all my sexual conquests.

You'll have to tell me why he's called Fast Jimmy, then.

Now now, don't laugh. It happens to the best of us.

Jimmy's performance issues are largely psychological. Once he gets over the jitters, he's a firm, yet gentle lover.

Strong, but not violent. Tender, but not soft. *sagenod*

[Plaintiff]

Dhiro wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Dhiro wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...
...where did you get this picture of me?

I'm sorry Jimmy. I should've told you I keep mementos of all my sexual conquests.

You'll have to tell me why he's called Fast Jimmy, then.

Now now, don't laugh. It happens to the best of us.

Jimmy's performance issues are largely psychological. Once he gets over the jitters, he's a firm, yet gentle lover.

Strong, but not violent. Tender, but not soft. *sagenod*

I'm still struggling to recall how it even happened. We were passionately debating the merits of race selection, and then the next thing I know, I'm straddling his hips and he's tearing my Chewbacca costume in half with his bare hands.

[Darth Death]

Plaintiff wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Frak cover.
I don't care who's on it. And neither should you.

People who are overly conderned about who's on the cover have their own agenda they are trying to push.

God forbid anyone care about equal gender representation in videogames.

So inequality stems from no box cover of a woman despite being able to play as a woman in-game? The problem isn't "equal gender representation", but control. I feel that statement is just an excuse for more control over the product (Dragon Age). "Equal gender representation" has already been achieved in DA. A woman on a cover of a game isn't necessary to prove "equal gender representation" exist. It existed for some time now. 

[esper]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

esper wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
HAHAHAHA...Seripously? Conditioned?

What's next? You're gonna tell me that poepel watching MLP are conditioned to  percieve magical, talking ponies as normal?
I dunno about you, but people know the difference between RL and fiction and things like superhero comics are more removed from reality than fairy tales.
Does anyone consider those poses normal at all? I can't think of a single person who would think that.

There is difference between one work or series showing something unrealistic because people expect it to be unrealistic, and different works (here covers) beginning to show such poses because it is the standard. With the latter reality will slowly becoming unrealistic in the mind of people.

err...no.
Not really.

Sexy femaly poses are in any case unrealistic and impossible for any human being to do (Or very daming if they tries). The very fact that those poses was countered with 'but female body and male body works differently' shows that, yes, some people are beginning to think that those poses are possible if not normal for the female body.

Congratulations. You found out there are stupid people in the world.
Now what does this have to do with poses? Nothing really.

Or are you arguing that we should bad anything unrealistic, before people start beliving in it?

No, but I am arguing that we point out that it is unrealistic so that people notice it. People know that flying flying unicorn are not real, we get that belief crushed around the time as the belief in Santa Claus (relatively speaking), but the posing off woman is never pointed enough and then we will get 'stupid' people who do think it is the standard.

It is the subtle things that are really dangerous and poisionous when dealing with subjects like misgony and homosexuality. Because it is those subtle things, that let stereo types which are flat out not true, gain root in the mind of the general population.

[esper]

Darth Death wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Frak cover.
I don't care who's on it. And neither should you.

People who are overly conderned about who's on the cover have their own agenda they are trying to push.

God forbid anyone care about equal gender representation in videogames.

So inequality stems from no box cover of a woman despite being able to play as a woman in-game? The problem isn't "equal gender representation", but control. I feel that statement is just an excuse for more control over the product (Dragon Age). "Equal gender representation" has already been achieved in DA. A woman on a cover of a game isn't necessary to prove "equal gender representation" exist. It existed for some time now. 

A man on the cover isn't necessary either.

[Fast Jimmy]

syllogi wrote...

What is this thread about, at this point? I mean, I would like to see more diversity in the representation of the player character in advertising (I think that's what this was originally about, right?). But now it's all over the place, and I'm not sure what some people are passionately defending and/or getting angry about.

When it comes to advertising video games towards women, I don't even know what that would look like, because it's something that doesn't happen right now. I really wouldn't want that if it looked like Lisa Frank threw up all over my favorite games, for instance. I think that it's very possible to create a marketing campaign that doesn't exclude female players and female player characters, while also appealing to male players.

I would like it, personally, if no 'set protagonist' is used in advertising at all. I would prefer that the option of getting choices in how your character looks and what class they can play be at the fore front of an advertising campaign. 

Think like the WoW campaign showing different characters (like the Mr. T blood elf, or the Chuck Norris ranger), but without B-list celebrities and gimmicky cheekiness. 

People who look at the cover of ME3 and just think 'Oh, A shooting game in space where I play as this dude/this chick.' That's not the beauty of Bioware games. It's the idea that you can make your own character, not play someone else's. that's what Bioware should be advertising, not showing some picture of a pre-rendered character, male OR female. 

[Fast Jimmy]

Plaintiff wrote...
I'm still struggling to recall how it even happened. We were passionately debating the merits of race selection, and then the next thing I know, I'm straddling his hips and he's tearing my Chewbacca costume in half with his bare hands.

What can I say?

I go wacky for a Wookie. 

[Darth Death]

esper wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Frak cover.
I don't care who's on it. And neither should you.

People who are overly conderned about who's on the cover have their own agenda they are trying to push.

God forbid anyone care about equal gender representation in videogames.

So inequality stems from no box cover of a woman despite being able to play as a woman in-game? The problem isn't "equal gender representation", but control. I feel that statement is just an excuse for more control over the product (Dragon Age). "Equal gender representation" has already been achieved in DA. A woman on a cover of a game isn't necessary to prove "equal gender representation" exist. It existed for some time now. 

A man on the cover isn't necessary either.

Indeed it's not, because I'm able to play as a man in-game. That's what counts. The issue can be solved if a nug was on the cover instead of men & women. 

[esper]

Darth Death wrote...

esper wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Frak cover.
I don't care who's on it. And neither should you.

People who are overly conderned about who's on the cover have their own agenda they are trying to push.

God forbid anyone care about equal gender representation in videogames.

So inequality stems from no box cover of a woman despite being able to play as a woman in-game? The problem isn't "equal gender representation", but control. I feel that statement is just an excuse for more control over the product (Dragon Age). "Equal gender representation" has already been achieved in DA. A woman on a cover of a game isn't necessary to prove "equal gender representation" exist. It existed for some time now. 

A man on the cover isn't necessary either.

Indeed it's not, because I'm able to play as a man in-game. That's what counts. The issue can be solved if a nug was on the cover instead of men & women. 

Actually, I have passed over games which later proved to be both gender playing supporting because there were no hint of option to play a woman on either the cover or the game description on the back.

But in all fairness, I think dragon age have a good thing with the Blood Dragon Logo.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

syllogi wrote...

What is this thread about, at this point? I mean, I would like to see more diversity in the representation of the player character in advertising (I think that's what this was originally about, right?). But now it's all over the place, and I'm not sure what some people are passionately defending and/or getting angry about.

When it comes to advertising video games towards women, I don't even know what that would look like, because it's something that doesn't happen right now. I really wouldn't want that if it looked like Lisa Frank threw up all over my favorite games, for instance. I think that it's very possible to create a marketing campaign that doesn't exclude female players and female player characters, while also appealing to male players.

I would like it, personally, if no 'set protagonist' is used in advertising at all. I would prefer that the option of getting choices in how your character looks and what class they can play be at the fore front of an advertising campaign. 

Think like the WoW campaign showing different characters (like the Mr. T blood elf, or the Chuck Norris ranger), but without B-list celebrities and gimmicky cheekiness. 

People who look at the cover of ME3 and just think 'Oh, A shooting game in space where I play as this dude/this chick.' That's not the beauty of Bioware games. It's the idea that you can make your own character, not play someone else's. that's what Bioware should be advertising, not showing some picture of a pre-rendered character, male OR female. 

The front cover of DA:O was cool with just the dragon.

Hawke actually put me off the game a bit.

[Dhiro]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

syllogi wrote...

What is this thread about, at this point? I mean, I would like to see more diversity in the representation of the player character in advertising (I think that's what this was originally about, right?). But now it's all over the place, and I'm not sure what some people are passionately defending and/or getting angry about.

When it comes to advertising video games towards women, I don't even know what that would look like, because it's something that doesn't happen right now. I really wouldn't want that if it looked like Lisa Frank threw up all over my favorite games, for instance. I think that it's very possible to create a marketing campaign that doesn't exclude female players and female player characters, while also appealing to male players.

I would like it, personally, if no 'set protagonist' is used in advertising at all. I would prefer that the option of getting choices in how your character looks and what class they can play be at the fore front of an advertising campaign. 

Think like the WoW campaign showing different characters (like the Mr. T blood elf, or the Chuck Norris ranger), but without B-list celebrities and gimmicky cheekiness. 

People who look at the cover of ME3 and just think 'Oh, A shooting game in space where I play as this dude/this chick.' That's not the beauty of Bioware games. It's the idea that you can make your own character, not play someone else's. that's what Bioware should be advertising, not showing some picture of a pre-rendered character, male OR female. 

The front cover of DA:O was cool with just the dragon.

Hawke actually put me off the game a bit.

There was a guy on the DA: O cover too.

It also had Morrigan though, so it balances things out.

[Bfler]

You could also place a whole group with men and women on the cover like here in case of the German game Drakensang:

Modifié par Bfler, 18 décembre 2012 - 04:12 .

[SpunkyMonkey]

Dhiro wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

syllogi wrote...

What is this thread about, at this point? I mean, I would like to see more diversity in the representation of the player character in advertising (I think that's what this was originally about, right?). But now it's all over the place, and I'm not sure what some people are passionately defending and/or getting angry about.

When it comes to advertising video games towards women, I don't even know what that would look like, because it's something that doesn't happen right now. I really wouldn't want that if it looked like Lisa Frank threw up all over my favorite games, for instance. I think that it's very possible to create a marketing campaign that doesn't exclude female players and female player characters, while also appealing to male players.

I would like it, personally, if no 'set protagonist' is used in advertising at all. I would prefer that the option of getting choices in how your character looks and what class they can play be at the fore front of an advertising campaign. 

Think like the WoW campaign showing different characters (like the Mr. T blood elf, or the Chuck Norris ranger), but without B-list celebrities and gimmicky cheekiness. 

People who look at the cover of ME3 and just think 'Oh, A shooting game in space where I play as this dude/this chick.' That's not the beauty of Bioware games. It's the idea that you can make your own character, not play someone else's. that's what Bioware should be advertising, not showing some picture of a pre-rendered character, male OR female. 

The front cover of DA:O was cool with just the dragon.

Hawke actually put me off the game a bit.

There was a guy on the DA: O cover too.

It also had Morrigan though, so it balances things out.

You mean those which "part" of the dragon? I never really thought of them as anything other than background filling tbh.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Bfler wrote...

You could also place a whole group with men and women on the cover like her in case of the German game Drakensang:

check out the Megadrive artwork for Golden Axe 1 & 2 - very similar

[Fast Jimmy]

^

Actually, that was just the collector's edition. The original, vanilla game just had the blood dragon splattered on the front. No characters at all.

[syllogi]

Dhiro wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

syllogi wrote...

What is this thread about, at this point? I mean, I would like to see more diversity in the representation of the player character in advertising (I think that's what this was originally about, right?). But now it's all over the place, and I'm not sure what some people are passionately defending and/or getting angry about.

When it comes to advertising video games towards women, I don't even know what that would look like, because it's something that doesn't happen right now. I really wouldn't want that if it looked like Lisa Frank threw up all over my favorite games, for instance. I think that it's very possible to create a marketing campaign that doesn't exclude female players and female player characters, while also appealing to male players.

I would like it, personally, if no 'set protagonist' is used in advertising at all. I would prefer that the option of getting choices in how your character looks and what class they can play be at the fore front of an advertising campaign. 

Think like the WoW campaign showing different characters (like the Mr. T blood elf, or the Chuck Norris ranger), but without B-list celebrities and gimmicky cheekiness. 

People who look at the cover of ME3 and just think 'Oh, A shooting game in space where I play as this dude/this chick.' That's not the beauty of Bioware games. It's the idea that you can make your own character, not play someone else's. that's what Bioware should be advertising, not showing some picture of a pre-rendered character, male OR female. 

The front cover of DA:O was cool with just the dragon.

Hawke actually put me off the game a bit.

There was a guy on the DA: O cover too.

It also had Morrigan though, so it balances things out.

It was a good use of montage, which, while it's been popular for movie posters forever, for some reason isn't very popular in video game covers.  

I mean, when it's shocking and different to see something (anything) other than "Grim White Dude Striding Manfully" on a video game cover, even a well composed montage is refreshing.

[Kidd]

Am I the only one who absolutely adore SWTOR's cover art?



Definitely one of the better ones I've seen, even though it's yet another "good-looking good girl and deformed-looking bad guy" kind of MMO cover in the back there.

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 18 décembre 2012 - 04:26 .

[hoorayforicecream]

Collector's Editions are targeted at the fans who already know about the game itself and are likely to buy it. The collector's box is intended to convince the person who is buying the game to upgrade to the extra goodies in the collector's edition. The regular edition box, however, is (supposed to be) designed to entice someone who doesn't know anything about the game itself. At a glance, it should give the potential customer an idea about what the game is about. It doesn't necessarily need to show the protagonist, but it does have to give the customer an idea about what the game is. This isn't just the story, either. The cover needs to show the basics of gameplay as well.

Here's an example:



This *isn't* the protagonist on the cover, but it still tells you everything you need to know about the game in one image. There are dudes with guns on a tropical island. That's the game.

Here's another great box art:



Everything you need to know about the game in one image. It is about a dude who kills people during the American Revolution.

Consider the difference between ME1 and ME2's box art:



The first shows a space opera, but doesn't tell you much about how the game is played, or what it is the player will be doing. It actually looks a lot like the Star Wars Episode 1 movie poster, and tells about the plot of the game, but it doesn't tell much about the gameplay itself, and that's the problem with it. The second? Everyone has a gun, front and center, and they are all cocked and ready to fire. You know at a glance that the game is about shooting, aliens, and space. It's not as pretty or as well-composed, but it does its job of conveying a snapshot of the game itself better.

It isn't necessary to show the protagonist on the cover, but it is necessary to show, in one snapshot, the essential gist of the game's core. The regular box art needs to convey the one-sentence description of the whole game, and not just the story, because it's targeted at people who simply don't know anything about it.

Modifié par hoorayforicecream, 18 décembre 2012 - 04:40 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

esper wrote...
No, but I am arguing that we point out that it is unrealistic so that people notice it. People know that flying flying unicorn are not real, we get that belief crushed around the time as the belief in Santa Claus (relatively speaking), but the posing off woman is never pointed enough and then we will get 'stupid' people who do think it is the standard.

Stupid people will be stupid stuff even if you tell them otherwise.
Smart poeple never believe in stupid things to believe with.

And please - using superhero comics as an example is just strange for one other reason:


Superhero comics throw the anatomy of BOTH sexes in the garbage bin and make science cry tears of blood.

It is the subtle things that are really dangerous and poisionous when dealing with subjects like misgony and homosexuality. Because it is those subtle things, that let stereo types which are flat out not true, gain root in the mind of the general population.

And unfortunately, plenty of people campaining or such noble goals are anything BUT subtle and do more harm than good. He who hunts monsters and all that jazz...
The lead a crusade agaisnt things you cannot get rid off (stereotyoes), because they are part of the most basic human thought proses and human nature - that is what pissses mny poeple off and that is why you often end up wiht the opposite reason.

I'd be  the first who'd strangle many of the so-called "moral crusaders" of today - not because I necessarily disagree with their goal, but because I utterly despise them and their methods and their ideas.

[The Hierophant]

Lotion of all the comic artists available i can't believe you used Rob Liefeld as the example for superhero anatomy. It's like using Uwe Boll as an example for directing over Kubrick, Spielberg, Scorcese, hitchcock, or heck even the average budding amateur director.

I get your meaning, but Liefeld c'mon? I am disappoint.

Modifié par The Hierophant, 18 décembre 2012 - 05:42 .

[AlanC9]

hoorayforicecream wrote...
The first shows a space opera, but doesn't tell you much about how the game is played, or what it is the player will be doing. It actually looks a lot like the Star Wars Episode 1 movie poster, and tells about the plot of the game, but it doesn't tell much about the gameplay itself, and that's the problem with it. 

I thought that they were trying to copy the KotOR box, actually -- though of course the KotOR box art was a derivative of that poster. And the KotOR box did get a lightsaber onto the cover, but of course KotOR didn't really need to communicate that on the box.

Not everything can be communicated via such art. How would you get across the difference between. Jedi Knight gameplay and KotOR gameplay?

[Xilizhra]

The Hierophant wrote...

Lotion of all the comic artists available i can't believe you used Rob Liefeld as the example for superhero anatomy. It's like using Uwe Boll as an example for directing over Kubrick, Spielberg, Scorcese, hitchcock, or heck even the average budding amateur director.

I get your meaning, but Liefeld c'mon? I am disappoint.

Well, to be fair, Liefeld was quite popular and one of the defining artists of a generation. Of course, that generation mostly sucked, but still. However, I believe both sides of the argument can safely say that anything drawn by Liefeld is not going to pass anatomic muster.