Sexually explicit content

[PieSnatcher]

You can call anything a quick, cheap, easy stab at drama or plot lol.

 

 

Yes one can but that doesn't automatically dismiss his observation and opinion (and correct me if I'm wrong) that sexual violence is often used as a shortcut to convey strong emotions to an audience. I would be inclined to agree. I would not say, however, that it should be off limits. Just that it's inclusion ought to be thought out and measured in the context of the story that is being told.

 

Like most here, it seems, I am not into sexual content designed simply to titillate. If that is the goal then I think it will nearly always come across as awkward. Fortunately that won't be an issue here.

[Karkarov]

Nilfgaard isn't my Geralt's enemy, Emhyr proved his good intentions the last time they met and my Witcher has no interest in politics or loyalty to the north. In fact as Ciri's father i'd say that there's a degree of respect there, especially after his decision to abandon prophecy and power for the sake of morality.

 

Edit: Now the Aen Elle, those I would say are Geralt's enemy.

He still wanted to pork his own daughter, just saying....  That said Nilfgaard is the bad guy in the sense of the country itself, It isn't like the Northern Kings are all that nice either.  Heck in my Witcher 2 playthrough I will carry into Witcher 3 let's just say Geralt wasn't quite as innocent of Kingslaying as he could have been......  >_>

[Failion]

 

You can call anything a quick, cheap, easy stab at drama or plot lol.

 

Yes one can but that doesn't automatically dismiss his observation and opinion (and correct me if I'm wrong) that sexual violence is often used as a shortcut to convey strong emotions to an audience. I would be inclined to agree. I would not say, however, that it should be off limits. Just that it's inclusion ought to be thought out and measured in the context of the story that is being told.

 

Like most here, it seems, I am not into sexual content designed simply to titillate. If that is the goal then I think it will nearly always come across as awkward. Fortunately that won't be an issue here.

 

agreed luckily that won't be the case unless this actually a 3 million dollar backed pron game. Sexual content could be used to strike terror into the player. Having a female lead captured and violated by tentacle monstrosities only to return later to ambush the player as a zombie oozing with strange goo from every orifice of her body and controlled by parasites.

[Darji]

 

 

You can call anything a quick, cheap, easy stab at drama or plot lol.

 

Yes one can but that doesn't automatically dismiss his observation and opinion (and correct me if I'm wrong) that sexual violence is often used as a shortcut to convey strong emotions to an audience. I would be inclined to agree. I would not say, however, that it should be off limits. Just that it's inclusion ought to be thought out and measured in the context of the story that is being told.

 

Like most here, it seems, I am not into sexual content designed simply to titillate. If that is the goal then I think it will nearly always come across as awkward. Fortunately that won't be an issue here.

 

agreed luckily that won't be the case unless this actually a 3 million dollar backed pron game. Sexual content could be used to strike terror into the player. Having a female lead captured and violated by tentacle monstrosities only to return later to ambush the player as a zombie oozing with strange goo from every orifice of her body and controlled by parasites.

 

Why only female? That said I rather want to see not the actual crime so we can label someone as bad but rather how someone who has to deal with the consequences and the struggle that occur with such a crime.  Again make it meaningful make people understand  and make them feel uncomfortable. 

[CBuckey]

There's nothing wrong with sexually explicit content but most of the time in video games its handled in such an off-putting and juvenile way that the games would frankly be better off without it.

[W.MacKinnon]

 

 

You can call anything a quick, cheap, easy stab at drama or plot lol.

 

Yes one can but that doesn't automatically dismiss his observation and opinion (and correct me if I'm wrong) that sexual violence is often used as a shortcut to convey strong emotions to an audience. I would be inclined to agree. I would not say, however, that it should be off limits. Just that it's inclusion ought to be thought out and measured in the context of the story that is being told.

 

Like most here, it seems, I am not into sexual content designed simply to titillate. If that is the goal then I think it will nearly always come across as awkward. Fortunately that won't be an issue here.

 

agreed luckily that won't be the case unless this actually a 3 million dollar backed pron game. Sexual content could be used to strike terror into the player. Having a female lead captured and violated by tentacle monstrosities only to return later to ambush the player as a zombie oozing with strange goo from every orifice of her body and controlled by parasites.

 

 

LOL, frankly had to give you a like Fallion. I laughed pretty hard reading the romance thread on this board, but damn. Wiping away tears here, thanks! Cheers

[Zwiebelchen]

I think one of the best implicit uses of sexual content was a side character in the anime Full Metal Alchemist. Namely Roze, an innocent girl from a town ruled by a fanatic priest. She gets befriend with the lead character until he leaves the town after freeing the city.

Later, the city is struck by a war and you see a scene of soldiers forcing their way into civilian houses.

When the protagonist comes back to the city one year after, you will see Roze with a child.

 

It's never spoken out or shown and never does any character say anything about who the child is from. In fact, some people might not even realize what happened (especially younger audiences). It's subtle, but when you notice, it hits you like a train.

 

"But Zwiebelchen, how is that story special?", one might ask now.

The big difference here to other stories is: the series doesn't point a finger. It doesn't say "look at this evil rapist bastard! Yes, you can hate him!". It doesn't abuse rape as a cheap plot device to make you hate the villian - because you don't even know who the father is.

It leaves you within an emotional vacuum. There's no one to be blamed or hated, except for war itself. In fact, it kind of makes you detest the protagonist for indirectly causing the events that led to this war. Perfectly crafted from a writer's perspective.

 

 

The mentioned above only applies to the 2003 remake of the series. In the original series, she does not have a child. But there's still subtle hints of her being raped by soldiers. Just less obvious.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zwiebelchen

[BruceVC]

I think one of the best implicit uses of sexual content was a side character in the anime Full Metal Alchemist. Namely Roze, an innocent girl from a town ruled by a fanatic priest. She gets befriend with the lead character until he leaves the town after freeing the city.

Later, the city is struck by a war and you see a scene of soldiers forcing their way into civilian houses.

When the protagonist comes back to the city one year after, you will see Roze with a child.

 

It's never spoken out or shown and never does any character say anything about who the child is from. In fact, some people might not even realize what happened (especially younger audiences). It's subtle, but when you notice, it hits you like a train.

 

"But Zwiebelchen, how is that story special?", one might ask now.

The big difference here to other stories is: the series doesn't point a finger. It doesn't say "look at this evil rapist bastard! Yes, you can hate him!". It doesn't abuse rape as a cheap plot device to make you hate the villian - because you don't even know who the father is.

It leaves you within an emotional vacuum. There's no one to be blamed or hated, except for war itself. In fact, it kind of makes you detest the protagonist for indirectly causing the events that led to this war. Perfectly crafted from a writer's perspective.

 

 

The mentioned above only applies to the 2003 remake of the series. In the original series, she does not have a child. But there's still subtle hints of her being raped by soldiers. Just less obvious.

 

Well I have say that is one of the few really good examples I have heard of how you could incorporate the issue of rape into an RPG without it making most people feel uncomfortable but having an emotional impact. Good post

Edited June 18, 2014 by BruceVC

[Chilloutman]

I thought that most people (I hope) feel unconfortable with any rape subtle or explicit should not change it. If you have problem with rape in game because its 'unconfortable' but dont have issue with it if its subtle then its kinda strange. If its in it should aways makes you feel unconfortable.

[BruceVC]

I thought that most people (I hope) feel unconfortable with any rape subtle or explicit should not change it. If you have problem with rape in game because its 'unconfortable' but dont have issue with it if its subtle then its kinda strange. If its in it should aways makes you feel unconfortable.

 

In a game there is a huge difference between highlighting the horrors of rape during war and giving your character the ability to rape people because "rape is realistic". Both can be demonstrated differently and only the former  would make most people feel uncomfortable

[Endrosz]

Really?  I wouldn't say they even had interesting characterization or agency.  The only time Triss and Shani inform your choices is when you have to choose between them romantically, or when Triss has been kidnapped.  Ves is rarely in the narrative at all, and the most notable time is when she's a rape victim.

 

The scene at the start of Chapter 3, when Triss talks to another sorceress through the mirror while Geralt is still in bed though awake is one one of my favorite scenes of all time in an RPG. There, we have a FEMALE sorceress in the following situation:

 

-- She has SAVED the male protagonist from impending doom. Not the other way around! She's been WATCHING his progress, and stepped in when things started going south. You don't realize until later how much she's done for you.

-- She's offering critical KNOWLEDGE and HELP to Geralt about how to progress with the investigation.

-- She's offering her (very nice) HOUSE as a base of operations, with a convenient teleport station.

-- She has a KING eating from her palm (Foltest).

-- She's LYING to Geralt on request. Lying gives you power over people, in this case Geralt, the protagonist. Contrast this with 'I'm a plot slave, here's the info dump you need KTHX BB' NPCs that abound in RPGs.

 

She's fully in control of the situation. She's got the knowledge, she's got the power, she's got the important contacts, she's got the material assets, she's got the PLAN. All that is not enough characterization for you? The sex that's implied between the two at that point is a mere wink in the sequence of events, a quick exercise.

 

You can say less for Shani, but she's still far from being a simple **** toy. She's the one who's taking care of Alvin initially, she's the one that plans a get-together with Dandelion, and so on.

[Darji]

 

I thought that most people (I hope) feel unconfortable with any rape subtle or explicit should not change it. If you have problem with rape in game because its 'unconfortable' but dont have issue with it if its subtle then its kinda strange. If its in it should aways makes you feel unconfortable.

 

In a game there is a huge difference between highlighting the horrors of rape during war and giving your character the ability to rape people because "rape is realistic". Both can be demonstrated differently and only the former  would make most people feel uncomfortable

 

This is out of the question. The former will never happen. However I can not believe that the later done right will people not uncomfortable. Of course not everyone but the ones who actually identify with characters and their stories during a game.  When these situations occur even in movies it is not about the victim but rather a symbol how bad or terrible the antagonist is.  But what if you go the different route and focus on the victim and his struggle and not about the crime itself. Done right could this be very powerful.

[BruceVC]

 

 

I thought that most people (I hope) feel unconfortable with any rape subtle or explicit should not change it. If you have problem with rape in game because its 'unconfortable' but dont have issue with it if its subtle then its kinda strange. If its in it should aways makes you feel unconfortable.

 

In a game there is a huge difference between highlighting the horrors of rape during war and giving your character the ability to rape people because "rape is realistic". Both can be demonstrated differently and only the former  would make most people feel uncomfortable

 

This is out of the question. The former will never happen. However I can not believe that the later done right will people not uncomfortable. Of course not everyone but the ones who actually identify with characters and their stories during a game.  When these situations occur even in movies it is not about the victim but rather a symbol how bad or terrible the antagonist is.  But what if you go the different route and focus on the victim and his struggle and not about the crime itself. Done right could this be very powerful.

 

 

My bad, I meant to say "only the latter would make people feel uncomfortable"

[Endrosz]

Also, while I'm at it, I'm with Nonek on the subject of sex and such in games. It should be handled in an "it happens sometimes, and it's fun" way. No big pretentiousness.
 
Really, the Middle Ages, especially the renaissance were far less prudish than today's society. That trend started later, and had a lot to do with the spread of protestantism. In addition to Chaucer, you should read a bit of Giovanni Boccaccio (Decameron) and Tales of Arabian Nights (not the children's version! the original, containing some very explicit sexual tales!) and the poems of Francios Villon if you want to get a good idea about how the common people treated naked bodies and sexuality. The famous Italian film director, Pier Paolo Pasolini created a trilogy of movies depicting these works: Decameron -- Canterbury Tales -- Arabian Nights. In these movies, Pasolini captures the joyfulness and playfulness of sexuality -- not simply the act of sex, but the whole longing-flirting-dreaming-chasing erotic aspect -- very well.
 
Here's a poem from Villon, who's kind of the wandering French bard of the XV. century:

 

The Ballad of Villon and Fat Madge

‘'Tis no sin for a man to labour in his vocation.' -Falstaff
‘The night cometh, when no man can work.'

What though the beauty I love and serve be cheap,
Ought you to take me for a beast or fool?
All things a man could wish are in her keep;
For her I turn swashbuckler in love's school.
When folk dropp in, I take my pot and stool
And fall to drinking with no more ado.
I fetch them bread, fruit, cheese, and water, too;
I say all's right so long as I'm well paid;
‘Look in again when your flesh troubles you,
Inside this brothel where we drive our trade.'

But soon the devil's among us flesh and fell,
When penniless to bed comes Madge my whore;
I loathe the very sight of her like hell.
I snatch gown, girdle, surcoat, all she wore,
And tell her, these shall stand against her score.
She grips her hips with both hands, cursing God,
Swearing by Jesus' body, bones, and blood,
That they shall not. Then I, no whit dismayed,
Cross her cracked nose with some stray shiver of wood
Inside this brothel where we drive our trade.

When all's made up she drops me a windy word,
Bloat like a beetle puffed and poisonous:
Grins, thumps my pate, and calls me dickey-bird,
And cuffs me with a fist that's ponderous.
We sleep like logs, being drunken both of us;
Then when we wake her womb begins to stir;
To save her seed she gets me under her
Wheezing and whining, flat as planks are laid:
And thus she spoils me for a whoremonger
Inside this brothel where we drive our trade.

Blow, hail or freeze, I've bread here baked rent free!
Whoring's my trade, and my whore pleases me;
Bad cat, bad rat; we're just the same if weighed.
We that love filth, filth follows us, you see;
Honour flies from us, as from her we flee
Inside this brothel where we drive our trade.

I bequeath likewise to fat Madge
This little song to learn and study;
By god's head she's a sweet fat fadge,
Devout and soft of flesh and ruddy;
I love her with my soul and body,
So doth she me, sweet dainty thing.
If you fall in with such a lady,
Read it, and give it her to sing.

[Nonek]

 

Nilfgaard isn't my Geralt's enemy, Emhyr proved his good intentions the last time they met and my Witcher has no interest in politics or loyalty to the north. In fact as Ciri's father i'd say that there's a degree of respect there, especially after his decision to abandon prophecy and power for the sake of morality.

 

Edit: Now the Aen Elle, those I would say are Geralt's enemy.

He still wanted to pork his own daughter, just saying....  That said Nilfgaard is the bad guy in the sense of the country itself, It isn't like the Northern Kings are all that nice either.  Heck in my Witcher 2 playthrough I will carry into Witcher 3 let's just say Geralt wasn't quite as innocent of Kingslaying as he could have been......  >_>

 

 

He never wanted to, as a wise man he simply saw the benefit in accruing the power inherent in the prophecy, especially considering the stability of the throne that Duny knows all too well, however he turned aside from this for Moral reasons. In the crucial moment he made the right choice, I trust him more because of this, not less as I stated. Besides totalitarian empire or feudal monarchy, Geralt will still be a reviled mutated freak.

[Zwiebelchen]

This is out of the question. The former will never happen. However I can not believe that the later done right will people not uncomfortable. Of course not everyone but the ones who actually identify with characters and their stories during a game.  When these situations occur even in movies it is not about the victim but rather a symbol how bad or terrible the antagonist is.  But what if you go the different route and focus on the victim and his struggle and not about the crime itself. Done right could this be very powerful.

 

It's always uncomfortable (subtle or not) and it should be. As should killing people. For some weird reason though, rape is almost the last instance of uncomfort (next to child murder) that still causes a reaction in people nowadays. You can slaughter people left and right in games and no one will blink an eye anymore. That's why rape and sex are so powerful in storytelling. If and only IF used right.

If it's used as a tool just to make you hate a villian, then you failed. If it's used just for the thrills, you did it wrong either. It's about the victim.

Hence the example I posted above about the Roze plot in FMA (that isn't actually a plot, just a tangent), where I feel it was perfectly executed.

Hatred and Anger are easy to invoke. However, creating caring feelings on the audience is much harder to pull off, but also so much stronger and rewarding at the end.

I've seen a lot of series and movies or played games where I couldn't care less about the characters. Because they didn't invoke any feelings in me (other than frustration for bad writing).

On the contrary, some of the most memorable stories always had characters where I was like "I wish I could just give them a hug now through the screen".

 

About the "murder doesn't blink an eye" thing:

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/fps_mod.png

 

 

tl:dr:

There should be feelings of discomfort in any good story (except maybe for pure comedy). That's what makes a story memorable and touching on a subconscious level. That's when a story will make you involved. That's also why you shouldn't neglect complicated topics just because it's complicated. Sure, if done wrong, it can cause a lot of people to raise an eyebrow. But if done right, it will be totally worth it. Have trust in your writers and don't block them on plots just because you are scared about the media backlash, that's what I'm saying.

Edited June 18, 2014 by Zwiebelchen

[Didier2]

I like the way Fallout 2 handled it. Letting you pimp out your freshly shotgun-weddinged wife/husband to a group of gecko hunters.

And there were more instances where the game really allowed you to be a total bastard in ways other than killing people.

[Darji]

I like the way Fallout 2 handled it. Letting you pimp out your freshly shotgun-weddinged wife/husband to a group of gecko hunters.

And there were more instances where the game really allowed you to be a total bastard in ways other than killing people.

But this had no impact at all. Yeah it was fine back then when it was all about fun. But things have changed and you can not simply go out and kill children with a gatling gun without any way of consequences. Same with the other thing it was a fun thing to do but that is not enough anymore. Games have grown up. 

[Chilloutman]

 

I like the way Fallout 2 handled it. Letting you pimp out your freshly shotgun-weddinged wife/husband to a group of gecko hunters.

And there were more instances where the game really allowed you to be a total bastard in ways other than killing people.

But this had no impact at all. Yeah it was fine back then when it was all about fun. But things have changed and you can not simply go out and kill children with a gatling gun without any way of consequences. Same with the other thing it was a fun thing to do but that is not enough anymore. Games have grown up.

 

Oh you are very wrong here sir, It was not for 'fun'. It was deeply connected to world after nuclear winter and how human nature degradate really fast and how morality is the first thing humans loose in struggle for life. Kind of dog eat dog. And there were consenquenses for killing childrens, becoming slaver or drug addict. And I think word reacted correctly. You simply have to deatach your own morality based on world you live in now, with all luxury of supermarkets, laws, police, schools, feminist movements, political correctnes. These things doesnt exist in Fallout (at least not everywhere), and didnt existed in 16th century (some).

[Karkarov]

Oh you are very wrong here sir, It was not for 'fun'. It was deeply connected to world after nuclear winter and how human nature degradate really fast and how morality is the first thing humans loose in struggle for life. Kind of dog eat dog. And there were consenquenses for killing childrens, becoming slaver or drug addict. And I think word reacted correctly. You simply have to deatach your own morality based on world you live in now, with all luxury of supermarkets, laws, police, schools, feminist movements, political correctnes. These things doesnt exist in Fallout (at least not everywhere), and didnt existed in 16th century (some).

Yeah this is the part where you guys went to far and now Darji actually is right.

 

If Obsidian wants to release a game with child killing in it and give the ability to pimp your spouse to a bunch of mercenaries that's great.  Neither of those things make any kind of narrative or logical sense in the Eternity world and quite frankly will generate serious backlash in the real world if non games media get a hold of it, but hey whatever floats their boat I guess.  That being said I didn't see any of that featured in Fallout New Vegas either.  I would have thought if Obsidian really wanted to do those things today and didn't just include them in the original game because "what the hell lets do it?!!?" then that's the game they would have been in.

[Chilloutman]

 

Oh you are very wrong here sir, It was not for 'fun'. It was deeply connected to world after nuclear winter and how human nature degradate really fast and how morality is the first thing humans loose in struggle for life. Kind of dog eat dog. And there were consenquenses for killing childrens, becoming slaver or drug addict. And I think word reacted correctly. You simply have to deatach your own morality based on world you live in now, with all luxury of supermarkets, laws, police, schools, feminist movements, political correctnes. These things doesnt exist in Fallout (at least not everywhere), and didnt existed in 16th century (some).

Yeah this is the part where you guys went to far and now Darji actually is right.

 

If Obsidian wants to release a game with child killing in it and give the ability to pimp your spouse to a bunch of mercenaries that's great.  Neither of those things make any kind of narrative or logical sense in the Eternity world and quite frankly will generate serious backlash in the real world if non games media get a hold of it, but hey whatever floats their boat I guess.  That being said I didn't see any of that featured in Fallout New Vegas either.  I would have thought if Obsidian really wanted to do those things today and didn't just include them in the original game because "what the hell lets do it?!!?" then that's the game they would have been in.

 

Well its part of why I dont like new Fallouts, if I put a side stupid world limited by engine, greates issue is with atmosphere the game got. Superficial humor. Wanna be funny characters. They just doesnt understand in what original fallouts were funny and where it was 'dark' humor. Its like red meats - not for mainstream

[Blarghagh]

As this topic has now covered everything from rape in literature to the humor inherent in killing children, I think it's safe to say the thread has moved off-topic from sexual content in PoE. As such, I've decided to close it. I'd like to request we let topic rest for a while, because it isn't really appropriate for the board in the first place.