Jump to content

Recommended Posts

You're forgetting that, because women would lose physical fights because they're women, dressing like that allows them to DISTRACT THE ENEMY. Nevermind if the enemy is female, gay, asexual, uninterested in that particular body type, not particularly fond of brunettes, etc.

 

...The "distracting the enemy" excuse is REALLY demeaning to men, actually. The "can't help himself" logic isn't exactly a glowing appraisal of male self-control.

 

No, it allows the enemy to get an easier kill. I already mentioned in earlier posts that some British Celtic "barbarian" armies were reputed to have gone to battle against the Romans semi-nude or completely nude (usually for symbolic or health reasons, their clothes were filthy and they had some rudimentary understanding that filth in wounds led to things like gangrene,) and the Romans almost always won.

 

See, the thing about war is, war is scary. An army of guys with sharp objects charging at you with murderous intent is scary. Whether or not they are dressed provocatively is not an issue to the reptilian part of the brain that handles the fight-or-flight response.

 

You may have heard of people ****ing themselves out of fear, that happens because the digestive system shuts down in those F-or-F situations. So do sexual systems. Non-essential functions are sidelined to maximize energy into anything that has the potential of saving yourself from dying. When someone charges at you with a battleaxe raised high, naked, your focus is going to be on the battleaxe if you aren't suffering from some genetic deficiency or mental disorder.

Edited by AGX-17
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... without statistical evidence." Though in this case it wouldn't be necessary for all people of those groups to agree, since it being objectionable to a subset could be enough.

 

 

Precisely, Mufflon. Do you have an issue with the goals I pointed out? That the "people on this thread are simply asking for a change from over-sexualized stereotypes to more thoughtful, creative, and deep characters - that's for both male and female characters, as well as any variety on that"?

 

Because that's what this thread is here to discuss, not who is a hypocrite or the nature of ad hominems. You're not meting out justice for someone who responded to your friend, you're trying to derail the thread with unrelated semantics.

 

So let us return to the topic at hand.

 

The argument is more along the lines of, "We all know this is an unrealistic game in pretty much every way, so don't bring realism into it when really what you're trying to say is 'I don't want content I don't like.'"

 

That's not what's been said, and different people have explicated that many times. Such as:

 

 

 

 

This thread yet again has gone to great lenghts to rationalize why a slightly different formation of metal, that in most cases would protect the wearer just as well is bad, while entirely ignoring the dancing monkey in the room about the entirely naked monk that will presumably fight dragons and knights by punching them (or any other kind of "unrealism" that isn't based in feminist ideals for that matter).

 

You will excuse me if I don't believe there isn't any other agenda behind all these arguments, near-essays, mental gymnastics, feminist blogs and Kotaku (lol) links you throw around in rationalizing the lack of breasts and how any other way would be "unrealistic", yet completely ignore everything else.

 

Actually that subject has been dealt with. Comparing Cadegun to Furton is like comparing Iron Man to Dare Devil. It makes sense for Iron Man to wear the best armor because he depends on his armor to protect him and fight villains. It makes no sense for Dare Devil to wear a suit of armor because he uses acrobatics and martial arts to protect himself and fight villains.

 

The goal is to create logically consistent world.

 

People are not complaining about a female monk, they're complaining about a female knight. If there was a female monk who doesn't wear armor, then no one would complain because that makes sense.

 

If you set up a certain of rules for something like a character class, everyone in that class should follow those same rules. Knights protect themselves with armor. Monks protect themselves with martial arts and mystical abilities, which require far greater freedom of movement. It makes no more sense for knights to wear the armor that direct enemy blows towards their heart than for monks to wear armor that restrict their movement and make it harder for them to dodge blows.

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

You will excuse me if I don't believe there isn't any other agenda behind all these arguments, near-essays, feminist blogs and Kotaku (lol) links you throw around in rationalizing the lack of breasts and how any other way would be "unrealistic", yet completely ignoring everything else.

 

I think you are missing the point. The question isn't whether or not there will be "unrealistic" elements in PE but rather where which ones are "good" in a sense of "they enrich the game world" and which ones are not. Magic, for example, is good, while boobplates will only satisfy a percentage of the players without improving the game in any ingame-relevant way. And frankly, my idea was to ask around if other players are quite sick of these ridiculously sexualized, unrealistic women in games as well - as the answers show, many of them are.

 

It is not a matter of political correctness. I don't want an "ugly-women-quota" or anything. I want a believable word, with fantastic elements, yes, but not unrealistic without need.

 

 

 

and

 

 

 

Well, this thread has gone down the drain, at least you people dropped your pretenses about unrealistic armors and showed what you actually want, e.g. impose changes on the game based on your sociopolitical beliefs, like has been done several times before this year alone by developers that don't seem to get that it's a vocal minority and a small part of their consumer base *demanding* all this...

 

Once again: Comments like yours make this thread go "down the drain". Thankfully, they are not the only ones. I will adress your comment, though.

 

First of all, this is not about sociopolitical beliefs, it is about a virtual world we can believe in. I can speak only for myself (though others have said similar things here): I want a world were women are diverse. Not because of political correctness, but because that's life. Women are diverse. Of course the developers could build a world where all women are sexy clad bombshells. And if you stretch it, you can find reasons for it, like "chainmail bikinis could be magical". I myself would not buy that, though.

 

To be believable, the world I envision has beautiful women as well as ugly ones - and an average looking majority. There may be cultures in them were males and females alike run around in small pieces of leather and nothing more, because its a cultural thing. Fine by me :) But this cultures definition of beauty might vary from our own. They might like tattoos and body modification or regard being fat as a sign of wealth. What is important is, that they are believable. They would have to resort to guerilla tactics against heavy armored opponents, for example. They would have to live in warm regions. Their warriors would look trained, but not necessarily beautful. Their women might be equals or supressed - it might even be a highly sexist culture - as long as it is believable.

 

They should not be clad in leather and physically beautiful just because some men (or women) like half-naked characters, regardless the circumstances.

 

This has nothing to do with feminism, nothing to do with political correctness. Not that these are bad things, mind you. And I like that the women in this forum show their opinions - and make your latent sexism even more obvious. Strong female characters are a good thing (as are strong male ones). None of them should be reduced to their appearance.

 

@Raccoon and other sincere posters: Maybe we should lead the discussion away from feminism while ignoring the obvious trolling. I have a few ideas for cultures and the depiction of gender therein. Take, for example, the abovementioned "leatherclads". Jungle people, I guess. Fighting against nature every day might give them some equality in genders, or not. Your thoughts?

 

 

and

 

 

 

Wow, I really... wow... do you see a feminist political correctness conspiracy everywhere? :blink: This is utterly ridiculous.

 

This is not about pleasing feminists or adhering to political correctness. This is about cultural diversity in regards to beauty, this is about a realistic approach towards the female (and male, for that matter) population in what will become - as we all hope - a great game. This is not about boobplate because boobplate has, well, boobs. This is because (as experts have pointed out) boobplate would be impractical. And why should anyone enchant a female bikini (given that such a thing even exists in a fantasy setting)? Its impractical. Spellbreaker and you are not only helpless, but also half-naked. :) Why not enchant a full plate instead, giving double protection?

 

Many of the people in this thread who really want to discuss these things (and it seems many of them have given up because of the crazy) want an immersive, realistic world. That includes diversity in women, but also standartised equipment for battle. Others want to see their fantasy fulfilled, for a little escape from reality. Thats a valid point too, though I don't share it. And another group tries to combine these things, pledging for "teh sexy" (even if a bit unrealistic) where it can be put in, regarding the logic integrity of the world.

 

Yes, many of those who posted are men. Does it matter? No. Because these men will play the game. They have paid for it on Kickstarter. They believe in it. And now they think about what the game should be like. What they would like to see. Whether its armor, whether its violence or whether there should be a giant kick-backside monster in the game. And here they discuss the approach towards the population (primarily the female one, but also men) and the diversity of beauty ingame and how they would like to see interesting characters that are not only defined by body feature. (And yes, Obsidian has done it well a few times already, so one can get his hopes up, but still discuss it - Planescape Torment handled Violence well and still it is discussed).

 

Why shouldn't the players (even if they are male) not be allowed to do that?

 

 

 

 

and I had a bunch more but there's a limit on the number of block quotes per post. You could, you know, read the thread.

 

Conversely the idea that it's all about "content I like" can of course also be used against people supporting bikinimail for women but regular armour for men:

 

"My sexual fantasy involves a woman exposing herself in public, please put it in your game, I'm going to make up stories to justify it because I am too embarrassed to admit my sexual motives. See? I made a character like that in a TT RPG so it's valid!" Is not a legitimate argument in favor of your proposition.

 

If you want Obsidian to twist themselves into knots to justify skanky women in skanky outfits like every other Oblivion or Skyrim mod, that's your perogative, but it makes no sense and it doesn't fit Obsidian's ethos for the game as far as I can tell.

Edited by Joukehainen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh I thought you were talking about the guy I originally quoted.

 

Since that poster was anonymous, I can't say with complete certainty that it wasn't her. But is seems very unlikely.

 

I don't understand why you are attacking me over this if you agree with me? I respect that your friend has different views but I doubt she wants something as vapid as the guys earlier were suggesting.

 

I doubt that, too. But there are more than two sides to this issue. What I disagree with are specific claims about what all women want (and don't want) from gaming, and I take issue with generalisations about half the world's population in general.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this particular incarnation of the topic has derailed a bit too far and reached the end of it's usefulness. It's also reached the post count limit. If people want to continue discussion on the theme, feel free to start a new thread.

  • Like 2

“Things are as they are. Looking out into the universe at night, we make no comparisons between right and wrong stars, nor between well and badly arranged constellations.” – Alan Watts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...