KainD wrote...
Destiny_1989 wrote...
- most men want women to be beautiful
- most women overlook men's physical aspect in favor of personality
- Most people are straight.
- Including more different faces is easier than including non-straight content, I think.
You're missing what I was saying. I wasn't talking about sexuality or what gender most people prefer but about physical aspect, regardless of someone's sexual preferences. I personally don't think that being gay or straight has an impact on the stereotypes I mentioned before. I will add the "straight" into my argument to make it more clear, regardless:
- most straight men want women to be beautiful first and foremost, personality can come later, if at all (there's no huge loss if there isn't any, because it's not what usually propels a female character into the attractive position; it's something that increases their attractiveness but the physical aspect is usually the defining feature)
- most straight women can overlook the physical aspect of a man if their character, personality, inner struggle etc. is appealing (because women usually prefer emotional stability first)
Being straight or not doesn't really have anything to do with these stereotypes. It's a difference in preference based on gender.
I also said in my first post that not every man and woman on the planet necessarily thinks like this, but enough do that you could say it's a trend.
FaWa wrote...
No point to make models, we barely have enough time as it is" But why would they do that if female dwarves were so prevelant in DAO? (You could play as one ffs) I truly believe the time constraints EA put on Bioware made them have to cut something, and obviously that thing would be the "ugly" girls. Again, god forbid you cut the badass drunk dwarf. (Seriously what a new character archetype that has never been explored ever). In the begininng of development, they chose to focus on male dwarf characters.
Someone already adressed this, dwarves were more important in DAO because you went to their home and dealt a whole lot with them so it would have been very weird if there were no women AT ALL in their society. They weren't as important in DA2 and that's how things were. I honestly prefer it like this than having token females just for the sake of having them. Had Varric been created as a woman that's exactly what he would have been so, in order to avoid that, they would have needed to spend more of the little time they already had to create female models so one single dwarf woman wouldn't have been weird (I don't want another Nyreen Kandros, really).
Anyway, the bolded part is what I want to address. If you're talking about Oghren there, please go back and play DAO once more because he might appear to be a walking stereotype but he is a very good character. He doesn't drink just for the sake of perpetuating a stereotype, his wife took their whole family save for him into the Deep Roads to search for a fairy tale, went insane, wanted to sarcifice dwarves to make more golems and HE HAD TO KILL HER. These things will drive anyone to drinking. You also get to see him heal if you have the patience to stick with it and get his life back on track with Felsi (they kinda ruined all that development in Awakening by bringing him back to point 0 and making you turn him into an upstanding citizen and responsible father again, though).
keightdee wrote...
The difference there is that the "Adonis" physiques in male characters that you're referencing are a male power fantasy, not your common straight woman's sexual fantasy, whereas "sexy" female characters are straight male sexual fantasies and not female power fantasies. (And anyway, should "we" be catering just to straight people? Duh, no. And Bioware doesn't, bless them.)
Why does sex vs power matter in character design, anyway? Because they serve different purposes. And subverting those purposes, those tropes? Makes for some awesome ****. "Sexy" characters are meant to be appreciated, gazed at. Their role is passive. They have no agency within this scenario. This is why Isabela is a brilliant, fantastic, precious gem of a character, because she snatches agency from the hands of people who would seek to wrest it from her and, ugh, Isabela, my pirate queen.
"Powerful" characters are meant to do, they're active. They're out there changing things (for good or ill) with their big muscly muscles and phallic guns and animu swords and sheer force of will. I've seen people in similarly-themed threads bring up Kratos. "Look at this guy!" they say. "He's so unrealistic! Nobody looks like that!" You know why? Take it from the mouth of David Jaffe, the guy who created him: "[Kratos] may not totally feel at home in Ancient Greece from a costume standpoint, I think he achieves the greater purpose which is to give players a character who they can play who really does just let them go nuts and unleash the nasty fantasies that they have in their head." (Source)
This perceived turnabout is not fair play. These cliches in character design uphold negative, destructive aspects of popular culture. By not actively opposing these forces, we only further entrench them.
(If that was a little too "Gender in Media 101" for you, well, someone should have hidden the wine.)
Well said, good sir or madam!
EDIT for formatting reasons.
Modifié par Destiny_1989, 20 juin 2013 - 08:35 .
Retour en haut
, one sided argument. 
) undress him in your inventory screen....which showed you a "generic human male" model. A little bit to muscular, may be, but, hey - healthy food, a lot of climbing, swimming cross Calanhad and plenty of running exercises can do magic! 8P
