477 réponses à ce sujet

[Abyss108]

I get your point.  There's not really a good reason for it - I shouldn't think that she knows that guy is stood behind her, and she's literally bulletproof, so she probably has more reason to look defiant and dangerous than defeated.  I guess it's "just" the usual reflexive tendency to unavoidably pose female characters that way that we see everywhere. It doesn't necessarily make the devs (or whoever actually designed the look of the teaser) bad people, it just makes them a bit lazy and unaware that it's a problem.

 

Right. But the fact it's done by laziness or unawareness doesn't make it less of a problem. No one is trying to burn the devs at the stake, just pointing out things that are an issue. If you don't point it out, things never change.

[maia0407]

I think the point sought here is that it isn't a bad thing for women to be sexualized in portrayals, the problem is that there isn't a greater variety of portrayals (Incidently, I don't think TW3 had this particular problem with variety, but whatever)
However, Bayonet feels that what is being suggested is that women should never be portrayed in a sexual manner nor het-male sexuality catered to ever.

Yeah, Bayonet jumps to a lot of conclusions. No one has suggested that women can't ever be portrayed as sexual or that het-male sexuality is wrong. The problem with gaming, comics and the like is the prevalence of objectification and the lack of any perspective other than het-male.

You did bring up an interesting point on how we can criticize individual works. I'm not sure the works can be separated from the culture they are created in but I'm not married to that point. Needs some thought.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I think the point sought here is that it isn't a bad thing for women to be sexualized in portrayals, the problem is that there isn't a greater variety of portrayals (Incidently, I don't think TW3 had this particular problem with variety, but whatever)

However, Bayonet feels that what is being suggested is that women should never be portrayed in a sexual manner nor het-male sexuality catered to ever.

 

Precisely, TW3 does not have problem with diverse portrayal of women. You have the sorceresses, the female commoners, the female nobility, female alchemists, female warriors, female leaders, Ciri, etc. They all look differently, dress differently and behave differently but somehow this is not diverse enough. Smh.

 

I guess CDPR should spend their marketing campaign engaged in a diversity and representation circlejerk fetish which is what Bioware did instead of just trying to promote their game.

 

I feel that way because I know that Witcher provides a very diverse portrayal of women which these people willfully overlook in their crusade against objectification and sexism of imaginary characters.

 

 

Yeah, Bayonet jumps to a lot of conclusions. No one has suggested that women can't ever be portrayed as sexual or that het-male sexuality is wrong. The problem with gaming, comics and the like is the prevalence of objectification and the lack of any perspective other than het-male.

You did bring up an interesting point on how we can criticize individual works. I'm not sure the works can be separated from the culture they are created in but I'm not married to that point. Needs some thought.

 

What prevalence of what objectification ? People objectify each other all the time. Its why we have social hierarchies, labels and social roles in society. Teacher, student, employer, employee, mother, father, child, criminal, lover, husband, wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, vegan, atheist, religious, etc.

 

You are suggesting that objectification is inherently wrong somehow which it isn't. Its just part of life. Saying that there is prevalence of objectification is like saying water is wet. Congratulations, you grasped the obvious.

 

How do you know that these perspectives we see in gaming is strictly for the heterosexual males ? Because they are written by heterosexual males ? Reality check - People can write people of different sexuality and different gender.

[Abyss108]

1) You are not criticizing the sorceresses for how they are written, you are criticizing them for what they are wearing.

 

2) A few women on a single topic in a single sub-forum versus women elsewhere ? I will take my chances. Especially given that BSN is SJW haven.

 

3) You want to not have fictional women wear what they want to because in your mind, its sexism. That is censorship.

 

4) Sexism does not cause female characters to be written the way they are. By that logic, homophobia is responsible for the creation of Halward Pavus, total disregard for life is responsible for the creation of Solas, terrorist desires is responsible for the creation Dragon Age 2 Anders, evil manipulative female behavior is responsible for the creation of Morrigan in Dragon Age Origins and religious conservatism is responsible for the creation of Cassandra.

 

1 - You mean what they were written to wear.

 

2 - So, no, nothing to back your point up. Ok then.

 

3 - If this was the case, I would also take issue with Morrigan and Vivianne. I don't. And even if I did, posting my opinions on the matter on a public forum is not censorship. Devs are free to make whatever content they want. I am free to criticise it. No one is trying to make anything illegal.

 

4 - You seem to be mistaking writing a character with a sexist/homophobic/whatever opinion, with sexist/homophobic/whatever writing. 

[Rel Fexive]

Right. But the fact it's done by laziness or unawareness doesn't make it less of a problem. No one is trying to burn the devs at the stake, just pointing out things that are an issue. If you don't point it out, things never change.

 

Absolutely.

[Sylvianus]

@bayonet: I don't think anyone's anti-sex here, just anti-sexism.

 

The porn scenes I was talking about were offensive not because they featured sex, but because they were obviously designed exclusively for a male audience. In the scene with Keira, for example, the camera focuses only on Keira and her breasts. Why wouldn't they show Geralt as well? Isn't he part of the experience? But ok, I know what the developers had in mind when they designed that scene (which is used as a repeatable scene with the prostitutes). The thing is, it's just one more example of the sexism in the game.

 

 

There, i disagree. Be careful. Having something specifically designed for a male audience isn't sexist.  As much as it isnt sexist when something is specifically designed for a female audience, whether in books, novels, magazines, serie tv and other things. There are plenty of examples of objectification of men in media and I never thought,  " oh sexism." . Because I know that it was designed for a female audience  to please their power fantasy. Things that are unlikely to please to a lot of men.  i don't care if I see a lot of naked men in a magazine specifically designed if the goal is to please or to attract straight women and to sell them something, it's not my business. If I see something like that in a serie tv, a video game or a novel, i just move on and see eleswhere what could be more to my tastes. People can enjoy whatever the hell they want and products can try to attract whatever demographic they want. I don't see the issue there. 

 

Geralt is male, the story of a straight while male, you are playing the point of view of a straight white male, in a game designed mostly for a straight white male audience. Complaining about only seeing the asset of the romances is not worth it to me. 

 

If I watch a lesbian serie TV, I'm not going to complain that I rarely see straight people and straight couples. Because  I'm smart enough to understand who is targeted and the point of the serie tv. If it happens, okay, if it never happens, I just don't care. It doesn't need to.

[Bayonet Hipshot]

1 - You mean what they were written to wear.

 

2 - So, no, nothing to back your point up. Ok then.

 

3 - If this was the case, I would also take issue with Morrigan and Vivianne. I don't. And even if I did, posting my opinions on the matter on a public forum is not censorship. Devs are free to make whatever content they want. I am free to criticise it. No one is trying to make anything illegal.

 

4 - You seem to be mistaking writing a character with a sexist/homophobic/whatever opinion, with sexist/homophobic/whatever writing. 

 

1) So ? What they wear is part of their character. Would you say that Vivienne objectifies herself because she wears a ridiculous Orlesian outfit with a large cleavage cut ? Would you criticize Morrigan for practically being topless, that's just her iconic outfit.

[maia0407]

Precisely, TW3 does not have problem with diverse portrayal of women. You have the sorceresses, the female commoners, the female nobility, female alchemists, female warriors, female leaders, Ciri, etc. They all look differently, dress differently and behave differently but somehow this is not diverse enough. Smh.
 
I guess CDPR should spend their marketing campaign engaged in a diversity and representation circlejerk fetish which is what Bioware did instead of just trying to promote their game.
 
I feel that way because I know that Witcher provides a very diverse portrayal of women which these people willfully overlook in their crusade against objectification and sexism of imaginary characters.
 
 

 
What prevalence of what objectification ? People objectify each other all the time. Its why we have social hierarchies, labels and social roles in society. Teacher, student, employer, employee, mother, father, child, criminal, lover, husband, wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, vegan, atheist, religious, etc.
 
You are suggesting that objectification is inherently wrong somehow which it isn't. Its just part of life. Saying that there is prevalence of objectification is like saying water is wet. Congratulations, you grasped the obvious.
 
How do you know that these perspectives we see in gaming is strictly for the heterosexual males ? Because they are written by heterosexual males ? Reality check - People can write people of different sexuality and different gender.

Social hierarchies are not objectification. You really need to get a better understanding of the terminology so you'll stop conflating unrelated concepts. And, yes, treating people as objects is wrong.

[Abyss108]

1) So ? What they wear is part of their character. Would you say that Vivienne objectifies herself because she wears a ridiculous Orlesian outfit with a large cleavage cut ? Would you criticize Morrigan for practically being topless, that's just her iconic outfit.

 

 

... Did you really just quote a post I made saying I don't I don't have an issue with Morrigan or Vivienne, to ask me if I have an issue with Morrigan and Vivienne?

[Heimdall]

Thanks for the clarifcation, but like I said earlier, we should look at why the devs chose to advertise the game that way. Why is it a woman who is shown in sexualised, vunerable poses? If she's powerful and dangerous then let her look powerful and dangerous.

I'd argue that the incongruous image of the women being vulnerable (Yet having bloody blades emerging from her arms and surrounded by her victims) was precisely what the developers were aiming for. She is simultaneously a victim of a society that has pushed her to obsessive cybernetic modification to perfect herself, yet also the perpetrator of a heinous violent act. She is simultaneously vulnerable, yet powerful, victim, yet victimizer. The contrast of the image is what the developers were counting on to stir interest and thought. The final shot of the same woman (I think?) with a shaved head and body armor having joined the same group that stopped her rampage, would then indicate her shedding of these roles in favor of that of a protector.

Analysis is fun.

[Abyss108]

 

 

There, i disagree. Be careful. Having something specifically designed for a male audience isn't sexist.  As much as it isnt sexist when something is specifically designed for a female audience, whether in books, novels, magazines, serie tv and other things. There are plenty of examples of objectification of men in media and I never thought,  " oh sexism." . Because I know that it was designed for a female audience  to please their power fantasy. Things that are unlikely to please to a lot of men.  i don't care if I see a lot of naked men in a magazine specifically designed if the goal is to please or to attract straight women and to sell them something, it's not my business. If I see something like that in a serie tv, a video game or a novel, i just move on and see eleswhere what could be more to my tastes. People can enjoy whatever the hell they want and products can try to attract whatever demographic they want. I don't see the issue there. 

 

Geralt is male, the story of a straight while male, you are playing the point of view of a straight white male, in a game designed mostly for a straight white male audience. Complaining about only seeing the asset of the romances is not worth it to me. 

 

If I watch a lesbian serie TV, I'm not going to complain that I rarely see straight people and straight couples. Because  I'm smart enough to understand who is targeted and the point of the serie tv. If it happens, okay, if it never happens, I just don't care. It doesn't need to.

 

 

So where are these epic fantasy games designed to appeal to me with sexy naked men?

[maia0407]

So where are these epic fantasy games designed to appeal to me with sexy naked men?

Yeah! Where's my banana hammock clad warrior?

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Social hierarchies are not objectification. You really need to get a better understanding of the terminology so you'll stop conflating unrelated concepts. And, yes, treating people as objects is wrong.

 

Here's the definition of objectification :-

 

Objectification (Objectify): A person is Objectified if they are treated as an object without Agency (the capacity to independently act).

 

By that definition, there is no objectification taking place in the Witcher universe since the women in Witcher universe have character agency and their own personality as well as their own plots. Exceptions include those that are prosecuted and burned at the stake or left to die by Radovid & Co.

 

... Did you really just quote a post I made saying I don't I don't have an issue with Morrigan or Vivienne, to ask me if I have an issue with Morrigan and Vivienne?

 

Yeah, because you are not making any sense whatsoever. You are willing to criticize sorceresses because of what they wear even though that is part of their character.

 

 

So where are these epic fantasy games designed to appeal to me with sexy naked men?

 

Try Japanese games. Also, Zevran and Iron Bull. Oh and you can fantasize about Geralt as well - He has superhuman stamina, superhuman reflexes and will never get STDs.

 

People will fantasize whatever and whomever they want, regardless of author intention.

[Illyria]

 

So because the sorceresses do not fit your narrow world view of what is acceptable for a female character, they somehow promote objectification ? How do you know that the sorceresses clothings were justifications ? Any evidence ?

 

 

Because they were written that way.

 

I'm not too sure how many different ways there are to say 'these women are not real and therefore have no say in what they wear, and any justifcation for the outfits is made by the dudes writing them' but I'm probably going to find out.

 

I get your point.  There's not really a good reason for it - I shouldn't think that she knows that guy is stood behind her, and she's literally bulletproof, so she probably has more reason to look defiant and dangerous than defeated.  I guess it's "just" the usual reflexive tendency to unavoidably pose female characters that way that we see everywhere. It doesn't necessarily make the devs (or whoever actually designed the look of the teaser) bad people, it just makes them a bit lazy and unaware that it's a problem.

 

Exactly.  And as consumers of media it's our duty to make writers and desginers question why they make the choices they do.  Why they fall back on old stereotypes.  As Abyss108 said, just because it's laziness rather than malicious doesn't make it less of a problem.

 

1) So ? What they wear is part of their character. Would you say that Vivienne objectifies herself because she wears a ridiculous Orlesian outfit with a large cleavage cut ? Would you criticize Morrigan for practically being topless, that's just her iconic outfit.

 

Actually, a lot of people complain about their outfits.  Morrigan's Sacred Ashes trailer robe was much less revealing (and I use a mod to change her in-game outfit to that) and wearing it in the snow in Skyhold is impractical (so I have another mod which gives her sleeves and a covered top).  The Art of Dragon Age Inquisition showed some lovely desgins for Morrigan's new look, all of which were scrapped for her iconic outfit.

 

The characters don't objectify themselves.  The desgins are objectifying.  BW has, on the whole, got a lot better with their outfit desgins, though (look at the improvement in armour from DAO to DAI).

[Sylvianus]

So where are these epic fantasy games designed to appeal to me with sexy naked men?

 

What is the difference between serie tv, novels and video games ? There are a lot of novels that objectify men, specifically designed for women, the same for serie tv and magazines. It sells a lot. The fact that it doesn't happen in video games doesn't change the point of my argument.   It's about the media targeting an audience. It isn't sexist. Like at all. If you don't see much of that in the video games, that's maybe because for a long time, the devs simply didn't think there were a lot of female gamers compared to male gamers ? 

 

If it happened in a game speficically dsigned, you know what I would do ? I wouldn't buy it, because I am simply not interested. Exaclty the same behavior I have with some serie tv, novels and magazines. But no, I would never complain about it and scream sexism. 

 

It's unreasonable in a game specifcally designed for a specific audience to complain that you didn't have your candy. I am against sexism, but you aren't going to convince me that it's one on this. 

[Abyss108]

Yeah, because you are not making any sense whatsoever. You are willing to criticize sorceresses because of what they wear even though that is part of their character.

 

I make perfect sense. The reason you don't see that seems to be because you believe there are only 2 possible opinions -

 

"sexiness is good"

"sexiness is bad"

 

whilst nobody here other than you supports either of those two blanket statements. You simplify what other people post to the point of absurdity, you invent arguments for other people based off things they have never said, you don't seem to believe there is a difference between a sexist character and sexist writing and you believe the act of a person posting their opinion on an unrelated forum to be censorship.... Honestly, trying to hold a conversation with you is ridiculous. 

[Donquijote and 59 others]

 

 

Your flawed perspective that video games somehow cause sexism and violence ? You shouldn't be surprised why your perspectives are neither acknowledged nor represented.

 

 

For you, its inappropriately sexualized. Not for other women. Don't claim to speak for all women. Just go to CDPR forums or Witcher reddit site and see how many women there enjoy playing the game and like the female characters.

 

 

 

 

 

Fyi, Celene slept with and f*cked Briala while she did horrible things to her family and to the Elves. Leliana f*cked clients and sometimes killed them. Isable f*cked around so hard that she had to go to a Spirit Healer to cure her STDs.

 

Somehow no complaints there. Oh wait, those are women, Geralt is a white male. So its muh privilege

 

I mean, looking at some of the responses in this thread, its like people want female characters and homosexual characters with no flaws, female characters that will wear what these people dictate them to wear and how these people dictate them to present themselves because otherwise its muh soggy knees and bad representation.

 

Story be damned. Characters be damned. Consistency be damned. What we want is cultural authoritarianism and censorship.

Even if i agree to some degree with yours argumentations i dare to say that you're on the wrong part of the internet...it's like saying a prey hunted  by the DA hunters Lol

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Because they were written that way.

 

I'm not too sure how many different ways there are to say 'these women are not real and therefore have no say in what they wear, and any justifcation for the outfits is made by the dudes writing them' but I'm probably going to find out.

 

"These people are not real and therefore what they wear or do is irrelevant because they are not real"

 

That is how I think because as an ex-religious man, I know the negatives of taking fictional things too seriously. At best, you get pointless non-productive arguments like the one we are having right now and at worst, lots of people die and get oppressed.

 

That's why I don't care about what fictional people wear and how they behave and that's why I don't think others should care about it as well. Because they are fictional and ultimately do not matter and should not matter beyond entertainment and enjoyment.

[Abyss108]

What is the difference between serie tv, novels and video games ? There are a lot of novels that objectify men, specifically designed for women, the same for serie tv and magazines. It sells a lot. The fact that it doesn't happen in video games doesn't change the point of my argument.   It's about the media targeting an audience. It isn't sexist. Like at all. If you don't see much of that in the video games, that's maybe because for a long time, the devs simply didn't think there were a lot of female gamers compared to male gamers ? 

 

If it happened in a game speficically dsigned, you know what I would do ? I wouldn't buy it, because I am simply not interested. Exaclty the same behavior I have with serie tv, novels and magazines. But no, I would never complain about it and scream sexism. 

 

It's unreasonable in a game specifcally designed for a specific audience to complain that you didn't have your candy. I am against sexism, but you aren't going to convince me that it's one on this. 

 

So, I should just read novels instead of playing games? Women should just not have content in an entire medium?

 

If I had options between games that were objectifying women and games that were objectifying men, there wouldn't be an issue. The issue isn't that certain games have objectified women - objectification can be fine in certain cases. It's the fact that it's always the women who are objectified, and us women don't get the option of just "buy another game designed to appeal to you".

[Bayonet Hipshot]

Even if i agree to some degree with yours argumentations i dare to say that you're on the wrong part of the internet...it's like saying a prey hunted  by the DA hunters Lol

 

I have sparred with real women in real life who are actually strong and worth fearing so I am not afraid of some wenches, especially feminist SJW wenches if that's what you are worried about.

 

I am worried about wasting my time though. Could have fapped merrily to some glorious porn instead of pointlessly arguing. It would have been a better expenditure of my time.

 

I make perfect sense. The reason you don't see that seems to be because you believe there are only 2 possible opinions -

 

"sexiness is good"

"sexiness is bad"

 

whilst nobody here other than you supports either of those two blanket statements. You simplify what other people post to the point of absurdity, you invent arguments for other people based off things they have never said, you don't seem to believe there is a difference between a sexist character and sexist writing and you believe the act of a person posting their opinion on an unrelated forum to be censorship.... Honestly, trying to hold a conversation with you is ridiculous. 

 

Sexiness is sexiness. It is neither good nor bad. Being sexy simply means you are genetically fit and reproductively fit.

 

I don't care if Keira Metz dresses sexily in the same way I don't care if a female colleague decides to wear tight fitting clothes that accents her figure to work.

 

You are the one making it look like a bad thing because its somehow sexual objectification. It isn't. The sorceresses are not suddenly reduced to mere things. They have their personalities, their characters, their plots and their agendas.

[Illyria]

"These people are not real and therefore what they wear or do is irrelevant because they are not real"

 

That is how I think because as an ex-religious man, I know the negatives of taking fictional things too seriously. At best, you get pointless non-productive arguments like the one we are having right now and at worst, lots of people die and get oppressed.

 

That's why I don't care about what fictional people wear and how they behave and that's why I don't think others should care about it as well. Because they are fictional and ultimately do not matter and should not matter beyond entertainment and enjoyment.

 

So only your enjoyment matters?

 

What a lot of this thread has been pointing out is that women (and gay people.  And trans people) also want to enjoy games.  And that means having less content that feels like it's geared towards just the enjoyment of straight men.

 

And what I said was the women are not real and therefore have no say in what they wear.  And the lore of the world they live in isn't real and therefore any justifications for why they dress like that are created by the men who desgined their outfits.

 

And that means that your claims of 'well the women are dressing how they want' make no sense - because the women are not choosing to wear anything.

 

What many of us are trying to point out is that we should question why these tropes and desgins are the standard.

[Donquijote and 59 others]

 

 

 

  Morrigan's Sacred Ashes trailer robe was much less revealing (and I use a mod to change her in-game outfit to that) and wearing it in the snow in Skyhold is impractical

Please someone save me,i'm dying for the laughing.

The designers really were drunk when they made that choice..... she need to be  recognizable like superman with the iconic dress

(the same dress after 10 years)!

[Heimdall]

Yeah, Bayonet jumps to a lot of conclusions. No one has suggested that women can't ever be portrayed as sexual or that het-male sexuality is wrong. The problem with gaming, comics and the like is the prevalence of objectification and the lack of any perspective other than het-male.

You did bring up an interesting point on how we can criticize individual works. I'm not sure the works can be separated from the culture they are created in but I'm not married to that point. Needs some thought.

I think a lot of argument and backlash on this issue is generated by the perceived demonization of hetero-male sexuality, which generates a lot of the frustration and vitriol Bayonet is currently demonstrating for us.

I think some important questions to answer would be about how and if male sexuality (Or any sexuality for that matter) can be catered to without objectifying the object of attraction. We all internally objectify people everytime we admire another person's body or see them solely in terms of a role we expect them to perform. Second, if objectification is unavoidable while catering to sexuality, what if not all objectification is actually harmful?

[Illyria]

 

Please someone save me,i'm dying for the laughing.

The designers really were drunk when they made that choice

 

 

Her clothes in the artbook showed her with actual sleeves and also a fur hood.

 

I just want to give her a blanket and something hot to drink.

[maia0407]

"These people are not real and therefore what they wear or do is irrelevant because they are not real"
 
That is how I think because as an ex-religious man, I know the negatives of taking fictional things too seriously. At best, you get pointless non-productive arguments like the one we are having right now and at worst, lots of people die and get oppressed.
 
That's why I don't care about what fictional people wear and how they behave and that's why I don't think others should care about it as well. Because they are fictional and ultimately do not matter and should not matter beyond entertainment and enjoyment.

I do care about the fictional people in my entertainment as it effects my enjoyment of said entertainment.