The Official Romance Thread

[Lephys]

This. I'm not sure why some pro-mancers think making the romance mandatory is an even remotely good idea for a wrpg.

I don't think it should be mandatory. But, I don't think it should be toggleable or something. I mean, it should simply be facets of the characters that you either explore or don't. It shouldn't just be "everyone's a robot, unless you click the 'Romance' button" or something.

 

Kinda like the stronghold. It's "mandatory" in that it doesn't simply cease to exist or be a part of the narrative and world if you don't decide to lay claim to it. But, the game doesn't force you to become its lord and manager.

 

But, yeah, I agree that you shouldn't find that your only option is to develop romantic emotional attachment to someone in the game.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

You're quoting me on a handful of isolated words. I'm not asking why you're saying the same words I said. I'm asking why you're selectively quoting them, as opposed to simply quoting me on whole statements. You've selectively quoted these words, but provided no reason for their specific emphasis. Except for "incorporated." It is evident that you feel negatively about that word.

 

Here we go again. Round and round Lephys goes, where he'll stop no one knows. I am quoting your whole post as well as the words you use. Specifically one word in particular in the context of your post. And I did provide a reason. Go read my post again.

 

 

That I did. What I didn't describe was the completely re-worded/tweaked example you presented above as if it were the exact same thing I presented.

 

And we are also talking about 'realism' as well. Realism as well as a game mechanic you've come up with to be used as an emotional attachment against a resolve check. As if emotional attachment can be quantified into a game mechanic based on realism.

 

 

So... you did it purely because I did? Or are you saying you did it for the same reason I did? Because, when I did it, it was to emphasize the fact that the game doesn't forcibly objectify a character by simply having a sexually expressive character in its world and allowing the player the option to interact with that character. The real world contains people who are both physically attractive and sexually expressive, and yet no one coded them that way. If they're sexualized, it's of their own volition. Thus, I can't really see the fault in virtually representing such a person in a game.

 

It's a bit redundant for you to emphasize the same word for the same reason, right after I did. Maybe there was a different reason? 

 

No, I did it purely to keep it in context of what I was saying. And the game does objectify sexually expressive sexualised female NPCs. The game also allows you to treat them as objects because that's what the game is designed to do as per my previous post on this.

 

And now you're justifying sexualised female NPCs because there might be 'some women' in real life who are sexually expressive? So is that now the standard we should look at and put them in video games? LMAO. You couldn't write about this stuff. You're digging yourself a hole with every post you make on this subject and it keeps getting deeper for you.

 

It's a bit redundant for you to guess at my reasons and then make arguments against those reasons.

 

 

I'm okay with exactly what I said I was okay with, which is not that. You keep adding words to things, and I know not why. What I'm okay with is the sexualization of NPCs in a video game. Obviously within reason, as with anything. I like cake, but I don't like infinite cake. That leads to an upset stomach, and/or death.

 

There we have it folks. Lephys is okay with the sexualisation of NPCs in video games. And with sexualisation comes objectification as I already pointed out many times.

 

 

Also, I asked if sex was supposed to be the only way one can interact with an object, as if an object were just an object. It is you, just then, who just decided "object" means something else.

 

Objectification is essentially the treating of an non-object (namely, a person), as if it were merely an object. There are many ways in which one may treat an object, and, thus, many ways in which a person may be objectified. Sexually is merely one of them.

 

Do you disagree with that? I can't tell if you do or not, because you keep rewording things we've already said in interrogative form. I don't know if you're accidentally doing that, or if it is your intention to present me with a reason to clarify every single question you ask me.

 

No, it's been you who's been objectifying sexualised female NPCs in video games as objects to do what you will including having sex with them. And you see nothing wrong with objectifying sexualised female NPCs in video games. And you keep justifying this objectification of sexualised female NPCs in video games with reasons that are just mind blowing. Reasons why a lot of women would like to see the objectification of sexualised female NPCs taken out of video games.

 

Plain and simple, objectifying female sexualised NPCS in video games treats them as objects meaning they are denied agency, instead of what they should be like in reality. Some people start to favour the lie instead of relish in the truth. And last time I checked, nothing substantial is built on lies.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I wonder if Lephys or Hiro will ever crack and strangle the other?

[Lephys]

No, it's been you who's been objectifying sexualised female NPCs in video games as objects to do what you will including having sex with them.

Apologies, but I feel the rest of your post has taken a back seat to this.

 

How exactly do you know what I have and have not been doing in both my playthroughs of video games, and in my mind as I'm playing them? If you have the ability to know that, you must have a fascinating telepathic ability. Although, a flawed one, since the information you've somehow acquired is incorrect.

 

I wonder if Lephys or Hiro will ever crack and strangle the other?

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure one of us hasn't cracked.

 

I can attest to not yet having been strangled, so I suppose that hasn't occurred yet. He strangles my mind, a bit, I suppose.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Lephys

[Namutree]

I wonder if Lephys or Hiro will ever crack and strangle the other?

They can't because this is a forum, but if they could; I think Hiro or Lephys would have by now.

[tajerio]

I wish I cared as much about anything as these guys care about everything. I would have accomplished so much more in life by now.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Apologies, but I feel the rest of your post has taken a back seat to this.

 

How exactly do you know what I have and have not been doing in both my playthroughs of video games, and in my mind as I'm playing them? If you have the ability to know that, you must have a fascinating telepathic ability. Although, a flawed one, since the information you've somehow acquired is incorrect.

 

The old dodge and weave tactic. I'm not talking about what you do with a particular playthrough with a particular game. I have been addressing your posts on why you're okay with sexualised female NPCs in video games as well as objectifying them.

[Lephys]

The old dodge and weave tactic. I'm not talking about what you do with a particular playthrough with a particular game. I have been addressing your posts on why you're okay with sexualised female NPCs in video games as well as objectifying them.

I have no idea what you're talking about. You just literally told me what I do in my games. I'd like to know how you can know that. If you're telepathically stalking me, I need to know about it. Or maybe you have malware in my computer? *rolls a Search check*

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

I have no idea what you're talking about. You just literally told me what I do in my games. I'd like to know how you can know that. If you're telepathically stalking me, I need to know about it. Or maybe you have malware in my computer? *rolls a Search check*

 

No, I didn't literally tell you what you do in games. But nice try. And the fact remains with your posts. You are okay with sexualised female NPCs in video games as well as those NPCs being objectified.

[Namutree]

Lephys and Hiro make me think some people will never understand each other. Why you guys even respond to each other at this point is beyond me. If I were either of you I would just have started to ignore the other.

[Darji]

 

 

I have no idea what you're talking about. You just literally told me what I do in my games. I'd like to know how you can know that. If you're telepathically stalking me, I need to know about it. Or maybe you have malware in my computer? *rolls a Search check*

 

No, I didn't literally tell you what you do in games. But nice try. And the fact remains with your posts. You are okay with sexualised female NPCs in video games as well as those NPCs being objectified.

 

Wait. There is nothing wrong with sexualizing characters or objectification in general. It becomes only bad if it used in a dumb way. For example.  In a highly sexualized World like Metal Gear Solid, a Quiet in a skimpy outfit is totally fine and there is nothing wrong with it since she fits perfectly into the world Kojima created.  Using skimpy Bikini models in a game like COD for MP or SP would make absolutely no sense and is a bad example how you should not do it.

 

You really can not generalizing sexualizing and objectification. Another example would be Anime.   Let us take Fairy tail for example which has tons of fan service for male and female characters.  But the women and men have so much diversity in their personality that it actually feels really great. And Fairy tail despite a lot of sexualisation and objectification of their characters is one of the most favorable series for men and women in Japan. It is always in their Top5 list of Animes. 

 

Stop making the error Anita Sakeesian does because she things sexualisation and any form of objectification = bad and misogynistic. She even called Witcher 2 out for that a few days ago which by the way is just ridiculous. 

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Lephys and Hiro make me think some people will never understand each other. Why you guys even respond to each other at this point is beyond me. If I were either of you I would just have started to ignore the other.

 

Lephys' default setting is to disagree with nearly everything I post on this forum. And it's been pretty much stock standard since he's come to the forums. Pretty much when I post something, Lephys will jump in and disagree. Just have a look at anything I've posted in this thread and Lephys has jumped in to disagree. And then when I have a discussion with Bruce, you also have Lephys jumping in and disagreeing with me. And then a self confessed feminist like Bruce is 'liking' and agreeing to quite a few of Lephys' posts with his stance on sexualisation of female NPCs in video games. First time I've come across a feminist who is all for the sexualisation of female NPCs in video games when there's a plethora of young girls, women on the internet, feminists, blogs, etc who are also against this. That's why I asked Bruce why as a feminist, he's now for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Lephys]

Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list, and he still finds time to criticize every post I make.

 

I really don't mind. Without criticism, understanding cannot be tempered. Sometimes, Hiro actually has really good stuff to say. So, if I were to ignore him completely, I would miss out on those good things, when they appear.

 

It's kind of like hunting rare Pokemon. Patience is a virtue.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Wait. There is nothing wrong with sexualizing characters or objectification in general. It becomes only bad if it used in a dumb way. For example.  In a highly sexualized World like Metal Gear Solid, a Quiet in a skimpy outfit is totally fine and there is nothing wrong with it since she fits perfectly into the world Kojima created.  Using skimpy Bikini models in a game like COD for MP or SP would make absolutely no sense and is a bad example how you should not do it.

 

You really can not generalizing sexualizing and objectification. Another example would be Anime.   Let us take Fairy tail for example which has tons of fan service for male and female characters.  But the women and men have so much diversity in their personality that it actually feels really great. And Fairy tail despite a lot of sexualisation and objectification of their characters is one of the most favorable series for men and women in Japan. It is always in their Top5 list of Animes. 

 

Stop making the error Anita Sakeesian does because she things sexualisation and any form of objectification = bad and misogynistic. She even called Witcher 2 out for that a few days ago which by the way is just ridiculous. 

 

 

I'm not taking a feminist stance on this. I'm asking a feminist being Bruce why he is okay with the sexualisation of female NPCs in video games. Bruce usually waits for others to come to his rescue such as people like Lephys and then he agrees with those posts. So these last few pages haven't been Hiro vs Lephys. It's been Hiro vs Lephys and Bruce with Bruce in the background.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Lephys]

@Darji:

 

Fairy Tail is an excellent example! They're sort of parodying fanservice with the way they do theirs. 'Tis amusing, ^_^

[Namutree]

Wait. There is nothing wrong with sexualizing characters or objectification in general. It becomes only bad if it used in a dumb way. For example.  In a highly sexualized World like Metal Gear Solid, a Quiet in a skimpy outfit is totally fine and there is nothing wrong with it since she fits perfectly into the world Kojima created.  Using skimpy Bikini models in a game like COD for MP or SP would make absolutely no sense and is a bad example how you should not do it.

 

 

You really can not generalizing sexualizing and objectification. Another example would be Anime.   Let us take Fairy tail for example which has tons of fan service for male and female characters.  But the women and men have so much diversity in their personality that it actually feels really great. And Fairy tail despite a lot of sexualisation and objectification of their characters is one of the most favorable series for men and women in Japan. It is always in their Top5 list of Animes. 

 

Stop making the error Anita Sakeesian does because she things sexualisation and any form of objectification = bad and misogynistic. She even called Witcher 2 out for that a few days ago which by the way is just ridiculous. 

 

When you say objectification Darji; what form of it are you referring to? I've just checked the definition of objectification, and it seems to mean treating a person as a thing; without regard for their dignity. How is disregard for people's dignity not bad?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Oh, I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list, and he still finds time to criticize every post I make.

 

I really don't mind. Without criticism, understanding cannot be tempered. Sometimes, Hiro actually has really good stuff to say. So, if I were to ignore him completely, I would miss out on those good things, when they appear.

 

It's kind of like hunting rare Pokemon. Patience is a virtue.

 

Nope, not on my ignore list. It's good to show everyone you're okay with sexualisation and objectification of female NPCs in video games.

[Darji]

 

Wait. There is nothing wrong with sexualizing characters or objectification in general. It becomes only bad if it used in a dumb way. For example.  In a highly sexualized World like Metal Gear Solid, a Quiet in a skimpy outfit is totally fine and there is nothing wrong with it since she fits perfectly into the world Kojima created.  Using skimpy Bikini models in a game like COD for MP or SP would make absolutely no sense and is a bad example how you should not do it.

 

 

You really can not generalizing sexualizing and objectification. Another example would be Anime.   Let us take Fairy tail for example which has tons of fan service for male and female characters.  But the women and men have so much diversity in their personality that it actually feels really great. And Fairy tail despite a lot of sexualisation and objectification of their characters is one of the most favorable series for men and women in Japan. It is always in their Top5 list of Animes. 

 

Stop making the error Anita Sakeesian does because she things sexualisation and any form of objectification = bad and misogynistic. She even called Witcher 2 out for that a few days ago which by the way is just ridiculous. 

 

When you say objectification Darji; what form of it are you referring to? I've just checked the definition of objectification, and it seems to mean treating a person as a thing; without regard for their dignity. How is disregard for people's dignity not bad?

 

Sexual objectification of course.  Stripper for example do this but this is nothing bad in general. Sex sells and is something very natural. It only becomes a bad thing if it does not fit. Like for example Bikini models in Call of Duty or if its against their will of course.  Again in Japan almost everything is sexualized and objectified but they do not really differentiate between male and female and this is a good way of doing it.  If its only on one side it becomes rather pandering. If this is the right word for it. 

[Lephys]

Nope, not on my ignore list.

Oh. Odd. I tried to send you a PM recently, and it basically said I was not allowed to. Plus there was that time you told me I was going on your ignore list. I just figured I was on it, after all that. Clearly I was mistaken. Sorry about that.

 

It's good to show everyone you're okay with sexualisation and objectification of female NPCs in video games.

When it's false, it's no longer good. I think there's a word for it. Slander? Libel is printed, but I think forum text would still count as slander. I'm not sure on the technical aspects of that.

 

I don't understand why you take pleasure in this act. It's not very nice.

[Darji]

@Darji:

 

Fairy Tail is an excellent example! They're sort of parodying fanservice with the way they do theirs. 'Tis amusing, ^_^

I do not think they are parodying fanservice in Fairytail. The later stuff has really hentai moments combined with torture in the Manga. And I am pretty curious how they will handle this in the Anime.   Sexualisation of these characters just fits perfectly into the world Mashima has created. Also it is a show for teens and sex always sells with teens no matter the gender^^

 

But I personally like most of the fanservice in Fairytail. Most of it is of course amusing ^^

Edited July 24, 2014 by Darji

[Hiro Protagonist II]

When it's false, it's no longer good. I think there's a word for it. Slander? Libel is printed, but I think forum text would still count as slander. I'm not sure on the technical aspects of that.

 

I don't understand why you take pleasure in this act. It's not very nice.

 

It's not false and it's not slander. You admitted you are okay for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games. You can't get around that.

 

And what act is this? Quoting you saying you are okay for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games? I'm just quoting what you have written.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Namutree]

Sexual objectification of course.  Stripper for example do this but this is nothing bad in general. Sex sells and is something very natural. It only becomes a bad thing if it does not fit. Like for example Bikini models in Call of Duty or if its against their will of course.  Again in Japan almost everything is sexualized and objectified but they do not really differentiate between male and female and this is a good way of doing it.  If its only on one side it becomes rather pandering. If this is the right word for it. 

 

 

Objectification is NOT only bad when it doesn't fit the setting! Objectification involves the disregard of a human being's dignity. That is always bad. Probably why I hate so many Animes.

[Darji]

 

Sexual objectification of course.  Stripper for example do this but this is nothing bad in general. Sex sells and is something very natural. It only becomes a bad thing if it does not fit. Like for example Bikini models in Call of Duty or if its against their will of course.  Again in Japan almost everything is sexualized and objectified but they do not really differentiate between male and female and this is a good way of doing it.  If its only on one side it becomes rather pandering. If this is the right word for it. 

 

 

Objectification is NOT only bad when it doesn't fit the setting! Objectification involves the disregard of a human being's dignity. That is always bad. Probably why I hate so many Animes.

 

You should take a look at this

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9Ju-1I1DTU&list=UUmb8hO2ilV9vRa8cilis88A#t=676

 

Everything is objectification. It is just a matter of interpretation.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Darji

[BruceVC]

 

When it's false, it's no longer good. I think there's a word for it. Slander? Libel is printed, but I think forum text would still count as slander. I'm not sure on the technical aspects of that.

 

I don't understand why you take pleasure in this act. It's not very nice.

 

It's not false and it's not slander. You admitted you are all for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games. You can't get around that.

 

And what act is this? Quoting you saying you are all for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games? I'm just quoting what you have written.

 

 

Hiro I wanted to respond to this because you asked a good question earlier

 

Firstly you are 100 % correct that I am a feminist and  as you know I take issues of SJ very seriously, in fact I take them more seriously than Romance. But there is no contradiction here.

 

The sexualisation of a person in game is not necessarily a bad thing. My definition of that means that there is sexual dimension to there character. This could be there appearance or how they conduct themselves. Isabella is a good example of this type of personality and she also happened to be my Romance choice, ahhhh....those Pirate boots

But a person who is sexualised also needs to have other attributes that make them relevant or important. They need to be defined around something else apart from there sexuality. And that's important, so Isabella wasn't just a hottie. She was a important contributor in combat and had an interesting personality

 

But the objectification of a person is where that person has no other purpose but to be an object and this is normally around there looks, so for example if Isabella only looked like she did and had no other valuable combat skills or had no interesting dialogue choices. This is a negative

 

So you can see the difference, the sexualisation of something is not always a bad thing but the objectification of something is

Edited July 24, 2014 by BruceVC

[Lephys]

I do not think they are parodying fanservice in Fairytail. The later stuff has really hentai moments combined with torture in the Manga. And I am pretty curious how they will handle this in the Anime.   Sexualisation of these characters just fits perfectly into the world Mashima has created. Also it is a show for teens and sex always sells with teens no matter the gender^^

 

But I personally like most of the fanservice in Fairytail. Most of it is of course amusing ^^

Oh. I was only commenting on the first 48 episodes (season 1, I guess?) of the anime. That is the extent of my Fairy Tail experience.

 

It's not false and it's not slander. You admitted you are all for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games. You can't get around that.

 

And what act is this? Quoting you saying you are all for sexualisation of female NPCs in video games? I'm just quoting what you have written.

Sorry, but no.

 

Objectification is NOT only bad when it doesn't fit the setting! Objectification involves the disregard of a human being's dignity. That is always bad. Probably why I hate so many Animes.

Disregarding people's dignity is bad. However, animes (for example) don't disregard "people's" dignity. Same with games. They're not people... they're just constructs. It's no different from a first-person shooter. They just simulate a conflict. Sure, they probably desensitize a 5-year-old, because he doesn't know any better. But, once we're able to separate fiction from reality, we see enemies in shooters as a challenge, and kills as points. Just like in martial arts competitions and such. You don't get a point for how much pain you've inflicted on someone. You get a point for your form, etc.

 

Now, that isn't to say there isn't needless sex and violence, oftentimes, in video games (and animes, etc.). But, providing characters in an RPG who are actually sexualized isn't forcing the player to decide that real people are just objects.

 

If a game provides a bunch of characters who are functionally sex dolls, that's not horrible objectification of females, it's just bad character writing. That's a semblence of a real female that isn't very realistic. It's basically just the shell of an actual female person, because it doesn't have even simulated dignity.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Lephys