Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ok ok I changed it. Happy?

Final warning for this thread and posters herein.

*facepalm*

I find it depressing that someone thinks I brought up the V-W dichotomy because I believed in it, rather than me using it as 1: an education tool, and 2: naming the idea in order to criticize it.

I brought it up because it effects how some (or even many) game developers view their characters. Common sense says that it should go without saying that I oppose the dichotomy.

And I do. I think that this is a horrible thing, which encourages violence and hate towards women who do not fit perfectly in to the Madonna/Virgin part of the dichotomy.

Frankly taking the stance that was taken is doing a disservice to his side of the debate.

Frankly after looking at it I hate that stuff, what is wrong with sleeping around so long as it's done safely and with some thought?

I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

 MrDwhitey wrote:
Frankly taking the stance that was taken is doing a disservice to his side of the debate.

Frankly after looking at it I hate that stuff, what is wrong with sleeping around so long as it's done safely and with some thought?

Nothing, but you need to be up front about that before entering a relationship. Especially if your romantic interest isn't a fan of casual sex.

Thus my caveat of "careful with consent".

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Yeah, my opinion too. To go back to the topic (I would hate to see this thread closed), it is also true that the frame of many game is just not appropriate to include sexual relationship anyway. Many game do not even really have stories to speak of (I am thinking about fighting games or MOBA, for instance). And really, in most title I play, I do not miss them.

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Casual sex without consent isn't casual sex, it's rape.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Casual sex without consent isn't casual sex, it's rape.

Perchance she meant consent with a minor? Or not give consent all willy-nilly?

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Casual sex without consent isn't casual sex, it's rape.

I read that as more being open with the person that it's just casual than about consent to sex at all.

Though I might have been misreading it.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Yeah, my opinion too. To go back to the topic (I would hate to see this thread closed), it is also true that the frame of many game is just not appropriate to include sexual relationship anyway. Many game do not even really have stories to speak of (I am thinking about fighting games or MOBA, for instance). And really, in most title I play, I do not miss them.

The topic of how do you fit sex in or if you should is kind of a wide reaching one I guess. Often I hear you just can't include it. Sex doesn't fit in this style of game or in this setting or in this story and a fair amount of the time they are right. You can't fit it in a MOBA for example. Kind of the ugly side to it is titillation always seems to fit. You have the mounds of skimpy outfits in MOBAs for example. You end up with lots of titlation, but not much behind it and that loops it back to what I said before.

The you can fit in sex touches on other things too. Like I have been told you can't include gay characters in games because you can't include sex, or you can't include transgender characters because you can't include sex(or nudity). I don't really buy these arguments myself, but I hear them a lot.

nomotog wrote:

The you can fit in sex touches on other things too. Like I have been told you can't include gay characters in games because you can't include sex, or you can't include transgender characters because you can't include sex(or nudity). I don't really buy these arguments myself, but I hear them a lot.

Those sound more like excuses for bad/lazy character writing than anything else.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

nomotog wrote:

The you can fit in sex touches on other things too. Like I have been told you can't include gay characters in games because you can't include sex, or you can't include transgender characters because you can't include sex(or nudity). I don't really buy these arguments myself, but I hear them a lot.

Those sound more like excuses for bad/lazy character writing than anything else.

Yep, but I am also a bad/lazy writer so I can't really think up any good counter arguments. There is that question of how do you inform your audience that a character is such and such. I don't really have good answers to that. I just have odd ideas.

I am playing valkyria chronicles and they have a neat thing were what gender a character is into is actually a gameplay mechanic. You can find a unit who fancies men or fancies women well also being a man or woman themselves. (There is even one unit that fancies both.) There is some ambiguity with this it's not 100% clear what this trait means exactly weather romantic or simply buddy buddy.

nomotog wrote:
Kind of the ugly side to it is titillation always seems to fit. You have the mounds of skimpy outfits in MOBAs for example.

For me this is more of a lazy/bad character design thing. That and/or the character designer have issue on how he/she view women in real life. There are plenty of possible awesome design that do not need, and would not work well, with skimpy outfits. For instance, I really like the “evil faerie queen” concept of Malady from Strife, and it does not work with skimpy outfits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nomotog wrote:
Like I have been told you can't include gay characters in games because you can't include sex

If (genereic) you cannot show or imply a romantic relationship without including sex, I am going to question your writing abilities . I mean, even for a MOBA: throw in some man in a refrigerator (and tons of bios from MOBA include refrigerating someone) and bang, you are done, without even giving the love interest any characterization whatsoever, and without having to deal with it ever again .

Too bad she's really lackluster power-wise in the game itself

If I cared about power level when choosing characters, I would not have this avatar or signature anyway .

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Casual sex without consent isn't casual sex, it's rape.

I read that as more being open with the person that it's just casual than about consent to sex at all.

Though I might have been misreading it.

The philosophy of consent includes a lot of transparency yes.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
I agree. If you're in to casual sex, that's cool as long as you do it safely and make sure you are careful with consent.

Casual sex without consent isn't casual sex, it's rape.

Perchance she meant consent with a minor? Or not give consent all willy-nilly?

I believe that is what is being displayed and talked about.

 Melissia wrote:
*facepalm*

I find it depressing that someone thinks I brought up the V-W dichotomy because I believed in it, rather than me using it as 1: an education tool, and 2: naming the idea in order to criticize it.

I brought it up because it effects how some (or even many) game developers view their characters. Common sense says that it should go without saying that I oppose the dichotomy.

And I do. I think that this is a horrible thing, which encourages violence and hate towards women who do not fit perfectly in to the Madonna/Virgin part of the dichotomy.

Yeah I'm always up for a robust debate, but there is some really needless pedantry going on here. I'm pretty sure everyone does actually understand what you mean.

Personally I think its less of an important issue than you do, and I honestly don't think it encourages much violence and hate towards women in real measurable terms, because I don't think almost anything illegal or morally repugnant laid at the door of "video gaming" actually does 90% of the harm that the fething wishy washy constantly offended politically correct self loathing arbiters of society (and the media) says it does, but I fully understand what you mean.

 mattyrm wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
*facepalm*

I find it depressing that someone thinks I brought up the V-W dichotomy because I believed in it, rather than me using it as 1: an education tool, and 2: naming the idea in order to criticize it.

I brought it up because it effects how some (or even many) game developers view their characters. Common sense says that it should go without saying that I oppose the dichotomy.

And I do. I think that this is a horrible thing, which encourages violence and hate towards women who do not fit perfectly in to the Madonna/Virgin part of the dichotomy.

Yeah I'm always up for a robust debate, but there is some really needless pedantry going on here. I'm pretty sure everyone does actually understand what you mean.

Personally I think its less of an important issue than you do, and I honestly don't think it encourages much violence and hate towards women in real measurable terms, because I don't think almost anything illegal or morally repugnant laid at the door of "video gaming" actually does 90% of the harm that the fething wishy washy constantly offended politically correct self loathing arbiters of society (and the media) says it does, but I fully understand what you mean.

I think the major issue though is that if woman complain about certain 'representation' of woman in games. Such as in Red Dead Redempetion. You know a game set in the old west. Where not many women were either cow girls, or you know.. Independent. If you see a whore in a game, its a whore. If a woman is beat up, that is showing domestic violence, which is a very serious issue. If you think that the game designers are purposefully putting it into their game to depict women as stupid or evil. I suggest you walk out the door, because you don't know how many artists are women.

It is stupid to think well there are many. No there aren't. Very few times has there been historical women who have raised a sword or a gun. Those that have are far in between.

There are some major Women, but lets face it there aren't that many examples of women through history with warrior abilities.

Another major thing. And this is mostly my reaction to Antia's second video on damsels of distress. Where Hitman Absolution was brought up.

Me being someone who played the game for its stealth elements, realized that she misrepresented the game.

Though one of the things she did bring up was actually quite correct. That damsels in distress are fairly common in games. That is an excellent point. But I think it happens on both sides, where both males and females are both put into a damsel situation or in peril.

 Asherian Command wrote:
It is stupid to think well there are many.

History is stupid, then.

Also? Fun > your bizarre fantasies about how things really were.

 Melissia wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
It is stupid to think well there are many.

History is stupid, then.

Also? Fun > your bizarre fantasies about how things really were.

Gaming is not always meant for fun.

They can tackle things like that and can stay in a historical period.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Gaming is not always meant for fun.

Good games are.

 Melissia wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
Gaming is not always meant for fun.

Good games are.

False

Horror games are not fun.

So you don't get any enjoyment out of horror games?

 Melissia wrote:
So you don't get any enjoyment out of horror games?

He said not fun. You get enjoyment out of many things other then fun.

nomotog wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So you don't get any enjoyment out of horror games?

He said not fun. You get enjoyment out of many things other then fun.

It is a strange world that I find myself hearing that enjoyment isn't having fun.

I dunno what point getting bogged down in semantic argument is trying to prove, but it's not working.

 daedalus wrote:

nomotog wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
So you don't get any enjoyment out of horror games?

He said not fun. You get enjoyment out of many things other then fun.

It is a strange world that I find myself hearing that enjoyment isn't having fun.

Ir's mostly a wording thing. When you say fun, it conjures up things like explosions and excitement. Enjoyment is more vague. Like you can get enjoyment form a mundane task like cleaning house, but that doesn't make cleaning house fun.

Basically games can invoke a lot of different feelings and can be used for a lot of things other then simple fun.