why whats against it?
Well, a few things. To limit it to three:
1) The lack of options in the CC to make characters that I wanted to make.
2) The lack of feminine casual outfit and ball outfit or ability to make them such.
3) The lack of feminine armors or ability to make them such.
Also, as others have pointed out, a survivor of sexual assault may be traumatised by having to re-deal with that in a game. A survivor of murder? Oxymoron.
That's not really an argument for anything, though. It would be extremely silly for games to not do things just to spare the feelings of players who might have been the victim of a crime.
One can't survive murder, but one can survive a murder attempt. Or a mugging. Or a war. Or burglary. There might be players who have PTSD from having served as a soldier. Should games be designed around not triggering that?
That's not really an argument for anything, though. It would be extremely silly for games to not do things just to spare the feelings of players who might have been the victim of a crime.
One can't survive murder, but one can survive a murder attempt. Or a mugging. Or a war. Or burglary. There might be players who have PTSD from having served as a soldier. Should games be designed around not triggering that?
That's what we have rating warnings for (in Australia, they are very specific; DAI is MA15+ Strong fantasy violence and sexual references, Online interactivity). You can get very specific information about what led to a game getting the rating it got, precisely because some people want to avoid particular content. Of course, if you're a survivor of violent crime and you decide you're going to play Shooty McBlastemup 15; The Blaminating, you can't act surprised when there's violence.
Games can, of course, contain disturbing content; no one is suggesting they should be designed without adult content and stuff some people are going to find disturbing. But although sexual assault and murder are both trivialised in games, one affects women disproportionately. And it does so not for good, solid story reasons, but as a stupid, lazy trope.
That's what we have rating warnings for (in Australia, they are very specific; DAI is MA15+ Strong fantasy violence and sexual references, Online interactivity). You can get very specific information about what led to a game getting the rating it got, precisely because some people want to avoid particular content. Of course, if you're a survivor of violent crime and you decide you're going to play Shooty McBlastemup 15; The Blaminating, you can't act surprised when there's violence.
Games can, of course, contain disturbing content; no one is suggesting they should be designed without adult content and stuff some people are going to find disturbing. But although sexual assault and murder are both trivialised in games, one affects women disproportionately. And it does so not for good, solid story reasons, but as a stupid, lazy trope.
I have to say, I hate how whenever removing sexual assault in media brought up, it's always argued only for women's sake. It's sad how it is almost never argued for men's and women's sakes. It almost as if the men who get sexually assaulted are not as worthy of being watched out for as the women who get sexual assaulted.
That's not really an argument for anything, though. It would be extremely silly for games to not do things just to spare the feelings of players who might have been the victim of a crime.
One can't survive murder, but one can survive a murder attempt. Or a mugging. Or a war. Or burglary. There might be players who have PTSD from having served as a soldier. Should games be designed around not triggering that?
Except it's not. It's one thing to say that there is social value in portraying a particular grim social issue. But the idea that there isn't a balance between the social value and the impact on people who've been traumatized is absurd.
Also, as others have pointed out, a survivor of sexual assault may be traumatised by having to re-deal with that in a game. A survivor of murder? Oxymoron.
Murder can leave people traumatized as well. Obviously it's not the actual victim of the murder..they're no longer around to dwell on it. But there can be grieving loved ones who will always be haunted by what happened, or witnesses who are traumatized by what they saw. And then there is impact on communities, particularly where murder is not uncommon.
So with that being said I'm not quite sure I agree that the subject of rape must be handled more carefully than murder in games. Both are among the worst things one human can do to another, and can leave people traumatized.
I think the problem with rape is that our culture expects women to receive sexual violence.
If a woman is captured by nefarious villains, we the audience will assume that the villains will try to rape her, or consider raping her. On a good day the lead villain might give orders for her to be unharmed because she is needed for later. We expect a male character to be locked up, or beaten up, or horrendously tortured, but sexual violence would be surprising.
That's problematic because it feeds into the larger trend of women being sexualised by default. It also means that men being the victims of sexual violence continues to be treated as a novelty, not a serious issue.
----
I don't want developers to avoid these issues, quite the reverse I want them to engage with them. But I want people to think about the stories they are telling, and the stories they aren't telling.
I think Daniel Craig getting his balls flogged in Casino Royale is an amazing scene. But I wouldn't be comfortable watching a woman hero get similar treatment, which is stupid. I want to reach the point where sexual violence is treated with enough respect that it can be used well.
Murder can leave people traumatized as well. Obviously it's not the actual victim of the murder..they're no longer around to dwell on it. But there can be grieving loved ones who will always be haunted by what happened, or witnesses who are traumatized by what they saw. And then there is impact on communities, particularly where murder is not uncommon.
So with that being said I'm not quite sure I agree that the subject of rape must be handled more carefully than murder in games. Both are among the worst things one human can do to another, and can leave people traumatized.
I'm not nearly as averse to rape being featured in a story as much as others, but I don't think you can say it's equal to murder either. And not for any of the reasons everyone else has given. I can't even say why it is, but it somehow is just worse. Murder is one of the most common activites in gaming, but just ask yourself this, would you be comfortable playing a game where you routinely rape people?
Having said that I do think murder is treated way too lightly. Especially in the sense that characters who take part in mass murders (sometimes of innocents or people just doing their job) being celebrated as heroic good guys. Killing guards never sits well with me unless it's GTA or something.
So with that being said I'm not quite sure I agree that the subject of rape must be handled more carefully than murder in games. Both are among the worst things one human can do to another, and can leave people traumatized.
Well, the difference is that murder in games is never really anything like IRL murder. There are obviously triggers for people who lost loved ones - so that sort of portrayal might resonate - but insane demon abomination killing soldiers is unlikely to strike a chord.
Jimquisition did a pretty good analysis of the difference I think:
Except it's not. It's one thing to say that there is social value in portraying a particular grim social issue. But the idea that there isn't a balance between the social value and the impact on people who've been traumatized is absurd.
I am very strongly against the notion that every portrayal of a problematic issue needs to be respectful, thoughtful and geared towards having some sort of positive social effect. Video games don't have to be educational material. Neither do books, for that matter. Fiction isn't required to have 'social value' and it isn't made better fiction by having it.
Well, the difference is that murder in games is never really anything like IRL murder. There are obviously triggers for people who lost loved ones - so that sort of portrayal might resonate - but insane demon abomination killing soldiers is unlikely to strike a chord.
So having insane demon abominations that rape people would be okay, then?
Games can, of course, contain disturbing content; no one is suggesting they should be designed without adult content and stuff some people are going to find disturbing. But although sexual assault and murder are both trivialised in games, one affects women disproportionately. And it does so not for good, solid story reasons, but as a stupid, lazy trope.
Murder is regularly thrown in as something completely casual, often even as a joke. I don't see how sexual assault disproportionately affecting women is really relevant to the amount of tact it should be portrayed with. Also, technically, the other affects men disproportionately.
Mind you, I'm not complaining about the portrayal of murder. But the double standard in this matter is pretty damn glaring.
I am very strongly against the notion that every portrayal of a problematic issue needs to be respectful, thoughtful and geared towards having some sort of positive social effect. Video games don't have to be educational material. Neither do books, for that matter. Fiction isn't required to have 'social value' and it isn't made better fiction by having it.
It's not about it being educational or having a positive message. "Social value" isn't the value to society of a positive view - it's the value of people's right to expression vs. the effect of that expression. Regardless of where you draw the line, every modern democracy deals with the same issue in coming up with standards for permitted speech.
The respect comes from considering the POV of others. If some nutter wants to publish a rape fantasy, we as a society might permit it because we view expression in itself as a valuable, but that doesn't make the author less of a worthless nutter.
Jimquisition did a pretty good analysis of the difference I think:
Spoiler
I agree with him.
To be clear, I'm not advocating that the player have the option to commit it in a game. I would find that offensive, as there is no way for that to be presented except as some sick rape fantasy for sociopaths. Maybe that makes me hypocritical, since I'm okay with player characters having the option to kill other characters in games. But I'd feel uncomfortable with a player character having an option to commit rape. That is a line I'd rather developers not cross and I'd rather not purchase that game.
I was referring to scenes like one in the City Elf origin, where it is implied that other characters were raped or were about to be raped by the villain. IMO that scene didn't trivialize it, didn't portray it in a positive light, and certainly wasn't portrayed in a way that was meant to titillate
I can go check. Hopefully you can tell that I am not one of the people that hates her.
Few minutes of googling later...
This is from a college lecture that she did back in 2010:
@ 12:20 she admits to not being a fan of video games, and that she would "Love to play video games, but doesn't want to go around shooting people or ripping off their heads, that's just gross.":
Spoiler
So, she apparently doesn't play a lot of the games I've seen her review. While this doesn't invalidate any of her arguments, or stances, and I still feel this is something that should be explored further, Anita herself is not a gamer. I don't see her opinions about women in tropes as any less valid, but I did lose respect for her by a lot. If she wants to critique games, that's her right. I guess it would be easier for me to take her a bit more seriously if she actually played the games she was talking about.
Except TERA. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
So i watch the whole video to get context and nothing in that video states she doesn't research the games she reviews. The context of what she is saying is that its not a recreation she partakes in. I know of a friend who doesn't play FPS shooters, but reviewed them years ago. He played the games for the review long enough for him to be able to review the product aka a few days but if you ask him, "do you play FPS." he says No. Why? because he played them only for work and prefers other types of games. He doesn't hate them but his time to play games is limited so he plays games that give him the most enjoyment which are not shooters.
The context of what she was saying its clear to me she doesn't play video games for enjoyment but that doesn't mean she has not "played" the game for research. She said "she had to learn a lot about video games in the process of making this." This tells me she does research and isn't that all she is required to do to critique something?
Murder can leave people traumatized as well. Obviously it's not the actual victim of the murder..they're no longer around to dwell on it. But there can be grieving loved ones who will always be haunted by what happened, or witnesses who are traumatized by what they saw. And then there is impact on communities, particularly where murder is not uncommon.
So with that being said I'm not quite sure I agree that the subject of rape must be handled more carefully than murder in games. Both are among the worst things one human can do to another, and can leave people traumatized.
And rape can traumatize the same people who were not the actual victums of the rape that can be traumatized by a murder. So again rape has the ADDED factor of the victum not only has to deal with the crime committed against them but they have the added effect of being traumatized by it, a murder victim doesn't. Just because being traumatized by a murder can happen to someone other than the victum doesn't nullify the fact that a murder victum is dead and ergo isnt traumatized after the fact.
And rape can traumatize the same people who were not the actual victums of the rape that can be traumatized by a murder. So again rape has the ADDED factor of the victum not only has to deal with the crime committed against them but they have the added effect of being traumatized by it, a murder victim doesn't. Just because being traumatized by a murder can happen to someone other than the victum doesn't nullify the fact that a murder victum is dead and ergo isnt traumatized after the fact.
On the other hand, the friends and family of the murder victim can be traumatized more than the friends and family of the rape victim. After all, at least their boy/girl is still alive. Meanwhile the murder victim's friends and family will never see or enjoy the presence of their boy/girl again.
So i watch the whole video to get context and nothing in that video states she doesn't research the games she reviews. The context of what she is saying is that its not a recreation she partakes in. I know of a friend who doesn't play FPS shooters, but reviewed them years ago. He played the games for the review long enough for him to be able to review the product aka a few days but if you ask him, "do you play FPS." he says No. Why? because he played them only for work and prefers other types of games. He doesn't hate them but his time to play games is limited so he plays games that give him the most enjoyment which are not shooters.
The context of what she was saying its clear to me she doesn't play video games for enjoyment but that doesn't mean she has not "played" the game for research. She said "she had to learn a lot about video games in the process of making this." This tells me she does research and isn't that all she is required to do to critique something?
Chill. I dropped that "is she or isn't she a gamer" crap several pages ago, because I even said it doesn't matter. Just like you said, she has a right to be a critic against video games, and I'll stand by that.
Before you bring down both barrels on me, please take the time to read what else I said after that. Here's one of my follow up remarks:
Sorry for the double post, but I might as well get this out:
In the end, her style isn't the takeaway for me anymore. What she did was get everyone talking, from gamers to critics to those in the industry about this. That was something that was very needed and something that is going to help benefit games as a whole down the road. I don't necessarily have to agree with her approach, or even her as a person. I commend her ability to get people talking. Frankly, more people talk about the conversation she started over her these days.
The person that starts a conversation like this isn't always going to be perfect in their approach, nor are they going to be 100% correct. I will always have respect for her for what she was intending, and what she tried to do. I also think anyone that submits rape/death threats to her is an awful person that needs serious psychiatric help. Just like with any critic, I don't have to agree with her completely in order to respect what she believes in and what she's trying to do.
I can understand that you're passionate about this, but please read all of someone's posts before you go off. I actually don't give a crap how much she is or isn't a gamer. That's nitpicking for me, and besides the point.
What I do care about is that she has a right to be a critic, and the way she is treated is awful. She can and does have valid points, even if I don't always agree with her point of view. I'm one of those weird people on the internet that don't attack someone's personality if I don't agree with their words.
I've been largely staying out of the rape conversation topic, because frankly I've seen both you and other posters express their feelings about this subject better than I can.
On the other hand, the friends and family of the murder victim can be traumatized more than the friends and family of the rape victim. After all, at least their boy/girl is still alive. Meanwhile the murder victim's friends and family will never see or enjoy the presence of their boy/girl again.
Riiiiggghhht because seeing a family member suffer for years makes you warm and fuzzy inside that "at least their boy/girl is still alive."
Imagine the worse thing you every experience now add with that experience a sense of having your personal power stolen from you, and now imagine you feeling this way for years and years and years. Reliving this trauma, you really think it is contextually the same as murder?
There are very real difference between the two. The result of murder is death, death is an inevitable state of life and a great equalizer. There is no inevitable state of being raped in the human condition. Rape is not something the average person learns about as a child but death is something that is natural for children to learn about. Rape creates a state of being in the human condition that is alien to most peoples experience where death is not alien at all.
The logic of the following is flawed because it ignores how rape is different.
Its okay to have murder in games.
murder is bad in real life.
Rape is bad in real life.
ERGO its okay to have rape in games.
Its neither a double standard nor hypicritical to take a stance that rape shouldn't be in games because they are not the samething.
Riiiiggghhht because seeing a family member suffer for years makes you warm and fuzzy inside that "at least their boy/girl is still alive."
Imagine the worse thing you every experience now add with that experience a sense of having your personal power stolen from you, and now imagine you feeling this way for years and years and years. Reliving this trauma, you really think it is contextually the same as murder?
There are very real difference between the two. The result of murder is death, death is an inevitable state of life and a great equalizer. There is no inevitable state of being raped in the human condition. Rape is not something the average person learns about as a child but death is something that is natural for children to learn about. Rape creates a state of being in the human condition that is alien to most peoples experience where death is not alien at all.
The logic of the following is flawed because it ignore how rape is different.
Its okay to have murder in games.
murder is bad in real life.
Rape is bad in real life.
ERGO its okay to have rape in games.
Its neither a double standard or hypicritical because they are not the samething.
Do not dare to assume I do not know the differences between rape and murder! 
Also, just because I am arguing that the murder of a friend or family member CAN(not will) inflict as much if not more trauma of those close to the victim is not me arguing that since murder is in games rape should be too. Neither should be in games. So next time think before you try lecturing someone you don't know a darn thing about!
I do not need to imagine anything! Do not dare to assume I do not know the differences between rape and murder!
Stop the QQing and the fake outrage.
First I never made an assumption. I never said imagine being raped.
i said take your personally worse experience add a sense of losing personal power and then imagine experiencing that for years and years. I didn't even say this is what rape is like. What i said is take this imagined situation and imagine reliving and then i asked you if you thought this was contextually the same as murder. I then gave examples how murder is contextually different from rape.
So stop your phoney indigation.
Riiiiggghhht because seeing a family member suffer for years makes you warm and fuzzy inside that "at least their boy/girl is still alive."
Imagine the worse thing you every experience now add with that experience a sense of having your personal power stolen from you, and now imagine you feeling this way for years and years and years. Reliving this trauma, you really think it is contextually the same as murder?
There are very real difference between the two. The result of murder is death, death is an inevitable state of life and a great equalizer. There is no inevitable state of being raped in the human condition. Rape is not something the average person learns about as a child but death is something that is natural for children to learn about. Rape creates a state of being in the human condition that is alien to most peoples experience where death is not alien at all.
The logic of the following is flawed because it ignores how rape is different.
Its okay to have murder in games.
murder is bad in real life.
Rape is bad in real life.
ERGO its okay to have rape in games.
Its neither a double standard nor hypicritical to take a stance that rape shouldn't be in games because they are not the samething.
What about torture?
There are a lot of similarities between rape victims and survivors of torture, and both can experience lasting psychological trauma. Torture is commonly depicted or implied in video games. In Dragon Age for example we see characters being tortured in sneaking through Howe's dungeon or in the escape from Fort Drakon. There is also the dialogue at the Landsmeet where one of the Banns says that the the things done to his son while imprisoned by Howe/Loghain, is beyond any healer's skill.
I do think it is a bit of a double standard if we say that it must be never implied that a character was raped in a video game, while torture being portrayed or implied is rather common. I'm not sure I see a difference between the two.
Stop the QQing and the fake outrage.
First I never made an assumption. I never said imagine being raped.
i said take your personally worse experience add a sense of losing personal power and then imagine experiencing that for years and years. I didn't even say this is what rape is like. What i said is take this imagined situation and imagine reliving and then i asked you if you thought this was contextually the same as murder. I then gave examples how murder is contextually different from rape.
So stop your phoney indigation.
So I am QQing, throwing a fake outrage, and giving phoney indignation, huh? What else am I doing, since you clearly know better than I do?
And by the way, the worst thing you can experience, losing all personal power, and experiencing that for years and years happens for those who witness murder or death in front of them as well, so what is your point exactly? It's not a trait unique to only a certain crime. Are their differences? Of course there are. But that doesn't mean the result can't or isn't the same. 7 + 5 and 4 x 3 are different contextually functions, yet both net the same result.
Thank the Maker that BioWare will never allow players to rape NPC's. That's some nonsense best avoided.
I must point out that it's a pretty sad that this subject is coming up in the Lady Inquisitor thread.
Thank the Maker that BioWare will never allow players to rape NPC's. That's some nonsense best avoided.
I must point out that it's a pretty sad that this subject is coming up in the Lady Inquisitor thread.
I don't think anyone is asking for the ability for the player character to carry that out. Its a debate on whether scenes like the one from the City Elf origin are acceptable.
What about torture?
There are a lot of similarities between rape victims and survivors of torture, and both can experience lasting psychological trauma. Torture is commonly depicted or implied in video games. In Dragon Age for example we see characters being tortured in sneaking through Howe's dungeon or in the escape from Fort Drakon. There is also the dialogue at the Landsmeet where one of the Banns says that the the things done to his son while imprisoned by Howe/Loghain, is beyond any healer's skill.
I do think it is a bit of a double standard if we say that it must be never implied that a character was raped in a video game, while torture being portrayed or implied is rather common. I'm not sure I see a difference between the two.
You make an interesting point. Both involve a victim who has lost all personal power and is at the mercy, or lack thereof, of the perpetrator. Both inflict physical, mental, and emotional trauma to a victim. So you are right in that there isn't much of a difference. In fact, one could say rape is a type of torture that is performed through sexual means.
Retour en haut
