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.
2014/09/09 16:40:01
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Manchu wrote: It sounds like you are arguing against yourself. I wonder if you believe either line of reasoning or if you are just baiting the thread as you were about clothing in FF13.
I said its a tool, but it doesn't make the character. I should probably clarify that.
Clothing may say something about the character, and give us hints about them. But it doesn't create the character. It doesn't make them interesting. It is their actions and what they do that can be.
But that is a old tool.
The Captain Walker example is an example of taking that one step forward. But it is rarely executed. People usually have the same look throughout the game, and don't change. (But there are exceptions) That these injuries or wounds or new battle armor might say loads about the character.
But currently most designers do not execute it to its fullest.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 16:42:01
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/09/09 16:44:23
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
I'm having a real hard time following your point here. I think design can go a long way to help the at least the credibility of a character, often doing a great deal to provide context and set the right tone.
Since we've been going on abouts Final Fantasy and I've brought up the design before, consider Judge Drace a (sadly), minor character from FF12:
Spoiler:
Watch that scene and then consider how it would have felt if she'd had a design more in line with Fran's, or something like this:
Spoiler:
In addition to affecting the credibility of the character, it would change the tone of the scene immensely to me.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 16:44:56
2014/09/09 16:44:58
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Appearance (including clothing) is one aspect of a character design. How important it is depends on a couple of things: (a) how much other characterization there is and (b) whether other characterization focuses on appearance.
What Samus wears, for example, is extremely important to her characterization.
To answer the OP (Since I have no opinion about the FF series) I don't like how normal looking women seem to be the exception rather than the rule. Take a gander outside and you'll see that earth is not populated by buxom women wearing next to nothing. Yet Video Games doesn't reflect this reality. It indirectly states that women are eye candy first and foremost. Their abilities are secondary.
Thought for the day: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
30k Ultramarines: 2000 pts
Bolt Action Germans: ~1200 pts
AOS Stormcast: Just starting.
The Empire : ~60-70 models.
1500 pts
: My Salamanders painting blog 16 Infantry and 2 Vehicles done so far!
2014/09/09 16:54:23
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Manchu wrote: Appearance (including clothing) is one aspect of a character design. How important it is depends on a couple of things: (a) how much other characterization there is and (b) whether other characterization focuses on appearance.
What Samus wears, for example, is extremely important to her characterization.
True. But I said it rarely happens. In most games,
Since we've been going on abouts Final Fantasy and I've brought up the design before, consider Judge Drace a (sadly), minor character from FF12:
I withdraw my statement.
That is very much more in-line with the idea that it says alot about their position and the status among society. So I might need to make definition a little bit more broader than my teacher has taught me thus far.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/09/09 16:56:05
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
In addition to affecting the credibility of the character, it would change the tone of the scene immensely to me.
I can get what you're saying. Using a character I actually know and Hellsing again as examples, Integra would be nowhere near as believable if she were dressed in a sexy or ridiculous outfit. She spends half the series commanding an eldrich abomination, and lacking any sort of refinement or fine dress to visualize her confidence and strength, she'd just look too ridiculous.
In GW2, I rather like Eir as a character, but her outfit kind of kills her for me. She lives on a freezing mountain, and she's dressed like this.
Visually, I do like the design, but I just don't imagine that keeps her very warm. That exposed thigh just completely kills the look. Same with Queen Jenna. I always o check her feet every time she shows up because I want to know if she's still barefoot. You compare them to Jory and Kasmeer (a deconstructed fantasy airhead) and their designs just don't mesh with their characters.
Granted at this point I'm not talking about skimpy or sexy outfits so much as characters with visual designs that kind of ruin them for me, but the principle I imagine is applicable. Characters who don't mesh their visual appearance with their character can be a hindrance.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 16:57:23
Lightning's appearance is very important to her characterization.
She is confident, capable, tough, and terse. But she also has pretty pink hair and a cute outfit.
In other words, Lightning does not have to trade being a conventionally attractive woman to be fighter and a leader. Nor does she have to hypersexualized to be those things.
She is confident, capable, tough, and terse. But she also has pretty pink hair and a cute outfit.
Yeah see I can buy that. Her clothes are practical nothing outlandish about them. The bare shoulder says confident/strong, that her neck is covered says professional, and then she's still got a skirt, which still suggests a hint of femininity. If that's how she is in game, then her design is great as a representation of who she is (and looks cool on top).
Nor does she have to hypersexualized to be those things.
There's a reason I'm very found of the Lady of War trope, to me best personified by Saber
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 17:18:34
Slarg232 wrote: Aren't the Norn immune to the cold due to the Animal Spirits they worship? Because most of the guys go Barechested, at least in GW1.
Even if this was the case a lot of this can do with presentation. Skin isn't just about skin. Like the design he posted clearly shows that character has metal scales and heavy leather, some feathers or fur. It's evokes feeling of rough, wilderness fighter.. and then it's got like pieces missing. Not just any pieces but just specifically the ones that are going to show off cleavage or her thighs.
When you get some big muscly dude with his shirt off, it's usually just a muscly dude with his shirt of. It's matter of a fact, you can tell it wasn't specifically designed to enhance titillation.
Like, Consider Zangief of Street Fighter fame. Dudes barely wearing any clothing, but he is designed is like that to make him look like a Wrestleman. Whatever reason that lady's design is showing off her thighs and cleavage, it's not to show she's particularly resistant to the cold.
If you're not cold, you wear cool clothing. You don't take heavy clothing and then specifically cut out around your breast cups and run a slit up your thigh.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 17:19:19
2014/09/09 17:18:02
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Slarg232 wrote: @LordofHats: Aren't the Norn immune to the cold due to the Animal Spirits they worship? Because most of the guys go Barechested, at least in GW1.
If that's in the lore then I completely missed it XD I assumed it was just general style over practicality design.
@Chongara: (Disclaimer, GW2 didn't really interest me, but i played the GAK out of GW1).
Spoiler:
This is how most of the female Norn were in GW1, notice the armor around the legs and arms, but not the chest/head.
Spoiler:
This was the male counterpart, again notice the armored legs and arms, but not chest/head.
My point being, in GW1 at least, it was the basic pattern set up by the norn to have bared chests, and the females were treated no differently than the males.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 17:54:08
I've never feared Death or Dying. I've only feared never Trying.
2014/09/09 17:54:05
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
I'm joking obviously. I remember when that game was coming out and I saw Vaan, Ashe, and Fran and was just like "omg they look so ridiculous." I've liked the art work for the final fantasy series a lot (I had one of the old art books). X had some wonderfully amazing character designs, but XII was just wtf. Only character I really liked the look of in XII is Penelo.
Didn't even like Basch? Apparently he was meant to be the original protagonist. But then Square Enix thought Vaan would appeal more to their target audience
Warcraft 3. The only female enemy I remember is the sorceress who had a somewhat sexualised costume (high boots are totally impractical, as is a top which you will constantly pop out of on the battle field). Again, magic attacker, there's no female with physical prowess.
AS a WC3 Map maker, I find that completely false.
The entire Night elf race is made up of women. O.O
There are custom units that are female. The Ranger, The Villager, The dark ranger, Slyvanas Windrunner, Jaina Proudmoore, Lady Vashj, Naga Sirens, Naga Summoners, Succubus, Wraiths, Banshees, and then finally the high eleven villager.
There are tons of units that are female.
Please do proper research before you talk about it.
Plus the Sorceress Character. Is probably the most overpowered unit in the game with polymorph and slow. She floats around, she uses magic. She really doesn't give two craps about anything, because... Well. She kind of kicks a lot of ass if put in a proper position
All of WC3 is about positioning and micro. And intense almost OCD microing but still. A group of 15 sorceresses can change an entire army into bloody sheep and kill them with ease. Or they make the entire army invisible and sneak into someones base and kill everyone there.
The Assassin and Amazon want a word with you.
All those were succubus's. They are succubus. Lets repeat that. They are succubus's. ITs sort of their job to be sexy. Andariel is the Queen of all Succubus's. So no duh she would do that. She is known to be beautiful, but also scary as gak.
Hi. I'm glad you replied, although many of your examples support my argument rather than go against it.
As I said about WC3, I only mentioned what I remembered. I didn't research anything. Maybe I should have so I can post here, but I never said I did research on that.
The night elf race. I looked for character models. The female ones I could find were mostly scantily clad in a way that was unnecessary and didn't give them good armour. I couldn't find many that were direct combatants, or had non-sexy clothing.
I didn't mention the Assassin or Amazon, as we were talking about female enemies. If you want I can talk about how the Assassin who is supposed to sneak around has a huge amount of pale skin exposed along with black armour. She isn't Assassinating anything in that. She also has high heels on.
The Amazon would might need to cut off one of those boobs if she wanted to be a serious battlefield archer. Her costume isn't bad, but it isn't good.
The Fallen Rogues, the cats and the succubi were pretty much the only female enemies in D2 then. Yet one was wholly devited to sex(it doesn't matter if that is what a succbi does, why didn't they include Banshees, or some other fantasy female creatures that weren't about sex). The cats had ok armour, the Rogues did not. Same problem as the assassin.
As to your prostitute argument.
GTA-
Prostitutes are actually thought to be actually in control of situations. Do you pay them to do things? No, you are required to pay them. They control you.
Even willing prostitutes are not what I'd call in control of situations, considering they often have a pimp, they are often required to do fairly degrading things. You may be paying them, but to say they feel power in that situation is like saying that whenever you spend money on gambling, you win.
The fact that we are discussing the most sexualised job there is when talking about representation of women in games tells me that there is something wrong here. You didn't counter my point by naming a bunch of empowered non-sexualised women in GTA games. Instead you responded by saying that prostitutes are powerful. Keeping in mind that prostitutes in GTA are paid, and then can be killed and robbed, or beaten up by the player immediately afterwards. They do not have guns, they do not have personalities.
Also, as to clothes making the character. I have done work in animation too(usually do straight up video work). You're mistaking the juztaposition of childlike characteristics with an inanimate object to mean that character appearance does not matter. If this: http://ohiok.com/img/yourspacecooment/meredo/sexy/sexy-babe.gif
had been the character model used in that lamp sketch none of us would ever have watched it, because it would be terrible.
Proper characterisation requires well thought out character appearance, even if a juxtaposition is used to make a point about that character.
As you said yourself in a later post, what the character wears tells us a lot. Not just about them in general, but also about them in that moment. Female characters don't often get this treatment.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 19:24:38
Check out my youtube channel for Tutorials, Battle reports and other stuff in both 6mm and 28mm
www.youtube.com/user/ManticMoments
2014/09/09 19:24:18
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
bertnernie wrote: I couldn't find many that were direct combatants, or had non-sexy clothing.
As I said, there is the warden (hero unit) and the huntress (basic unit). The warden:
Spoiler:
The huntress is maybe in sexy clothing, maybe not, it is quite hard to tell:
Spoiler:
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 19:26:09
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/09/09 19:25:27
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Slarg232 wrote: @Chongara: (Disclaimer, GW2 didn't really interest me, but i played the GAK out of GW1).
Spoiler:
This is how most of the female Norn were in GW1, notice the armor around the legs and arms, but not the chest/head.
Spoiler:
This was the male counterpart, again notice the armored legs and arms, but not chest/head.
My point being, in GW1 at least, it was the basic pattern set up by the norn to have bared chests, and the females were treated no differently than the males.
This design is still, less than good in my view. See you're pointing them out and measuring by a metric that's roughly "Amount of skin exposed". They both aren't wearing a lot of clothes, so the designs are roughly comparable! This is an insufficient way to look at things if not the entirely wrong one.
While it's true they're both not wearing much on their upper bodies, the way they're not wearing much is very different. Everything about the dude gives this impression of weight. I'm not just talking about how he's big, I'm talking about how only his lower arms are covered, his beard and hair lie very flat and flow downwards. In addition he's got this bigass belt buckle thing that's super solid and has a boar's face on it. This is all really cohesive and meant to emphasis a sense of power. He's the same as his hammer. It speaks of a warrior or maybe a rugged craftsman and that's it. That vision isn't fighting anything with anything.
Then in contrast note how the womans leggings stop just short of covering her hips, and connect to a belt/chain that slides in a way that points at her pelvic area.Now we can't really have her bare-chested modesty and all that. However the way they choose to cover her breasts is key. They could have gave her the giant belt buckle thing and extending up above/around her breasts, or better yet more a simple band of made from the same natural materials as the other parts of their outfits. Instead it's this ornate boob-cup thing. There is this strip that runs up from her waist right up into the middle of her cleavage.The whole design draws attention and highlights her breasts, hips and crotch in a way the male design doesn't for him. Gone too is the cohesive sense of weight in the design, with the gloves reaching all the way up the forearm either stopping to or becoming more form-fitting to really bring out her soft shoulders.
Like if the dude was wearing a pair of sort of semi-armored chaps, with an ornate codpiece and his gaint belt-buckle had a cutout for his abs where the boar's head is these designs might be really comparable. However they're not. You can't just look at what they do and don't have covered, the way they're covered and what it draws attention to is equally if not more important.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 19:26:49
2014/09/09 19:40:50
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Completely and utterly scandalist. I mean look at the warden, The huntress! They show so much damn skin!)
Scandlist! Can't you see? No, no one can. They only show their belly buttons which is kind of a stupid design, but eh. Considering what was coming out at the time. I can deal with that.
Spoiler:
This message was edited 9 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 19:54:24
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/09/09 19:46:06
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Are we still trying to figure out an coherent point of view from what Asherian Command is typing? I know I gave up, I have no idea what he means.
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/09/09 19:51:26
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
LordofHats wrote: If that's in the lore then I completely missed it XD I assumed it was just general style over practicality design.
Norn produce more body heat than humans, so they are less impacted by (but not IMMUNE to) the cold.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/09 19:51:34
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
For instance, because I never tire of posting it, this show lots of skin (including naked breasts) but it is not sexualization:
(Beware, trailer for a children movie)
"Our fantasy settings are grim and dark, but that is not a reflection of who we are or how we feel the real world should be. [...] We will continue to diversify the cast of characters we portray [...] so everyone can find representation and heroes they can relate to. [...] If [you don't feel the same way], you will not be missed"
https://twitter.com/WarComTeam/status/1268665798467432449/photo/1
2014/09/09 19:58:18
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Manchu wrote: The "how much skin" argument is bad. But that doesn't mean that showing skin can never be a sign of sexist character design.
A lot of the problem appears to be that trends matter much more than specific examples on this particular topic, but a lot of people have no or little understanding of trends in specific or statistics in general.
The people in the past who convinced themselves to do unspeakable things were no less human than you or I. They made their decisions; the only thing that prevents history from repeating itself is making different ones.
-- Adam Serwer
My blog
2014/09/09 19:59:55
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Manchu wrote: The "how much skin" argument is bad. But that doesn't mean that showing skin can never be a sign of sexist character design.
WEll my argument is that the entire night elf race shows skin. Like both night elf male heroes are shirtless. And consider there are only two other male units, (The druid of the claw and the druid of the talon) they are the two only units that are the only ones covered that are male)
You really can't say those models are even sexualized. Infact its one of the few games that has more females in one specific playable race that don't look like complete sluts.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote: For instance, because I never tire of posting it, this show lots of skin (including naked breasts) but it is not sexualization: (Beware, trailer for a children movie) video
Correct as long as you don't drag attention to it and just have it there where it makes sense. Then yeah.
But in games like of god of war. With the Goddess of Love bit. Yeah I called absolute "Yeah right." on that.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/09 20:08:59
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
2014/09/09 20:05:17
Subject: What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?
Asherian Command wrote: You really can't say those models are even sexualized. Infact its one of the few games that has more females in one specific playable race that don't look like complete sluts.
Having more females than males doesn't have anything to do with sexualization. And what do you mean by "complete sluts"? Do you mean they are only somewhat slutty?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Melissia wrote: trends matter much more than specific examples
I'm not sure what you mean by trends. The impression I get is people who reject criticisms of sexist character design do so by making false equivalence arguments about surface area of exposed skin or zero sum arguments.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/09 20:07:40
Asherian Command wrote: You really can't say those models are even sexualized. Infact its one of the few games that has more females in one specific playable race that don't look like complete sluts.
Having more females than males doesn't have anything to do with sexualization. And what do you mean by "complete sluts"? Do you mean they are only somewhat slutty?
I think you are misinterpreting me here.
I am being sarcastic. I am saying they are not sexualized. AS in most games the make the women usually in a fantasy settings are scantly cladded, and well don't act like normal people.
I don't think they look slutty at all.
From whom are unforgiven we bring the mercy of war.
The Empire 
1500 pts
: 
