Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Oh boy guys, a burden of proof argument, hold on, let me get my popcorn and slushies.
"Because it's demeaning, objectifying, and generally misogynistic as all hell? You have no problem with that?"
I don't see how its that, its "lets look at sexy ladies" with a fighting game built around it. Really, extreme volleyball was better since it dropped all pretense about being it about anything else and focused on it.
But if you're saying a game can't be about sexy ladies, then I disagree with you.
But if a game is only about looking at sexy ladies, then wouldn't it be easier to just go on the internet and look at porn than to pay $60 for a lesser version of the experience?
Clockworkuniverse: Except I provided valid counter-points to why the game was viewed as good. Malk only took some things out of context, some very minor things mind you, and made that the crux of his argument.
He was looking to say the game was bad so he can say "well people who say the game is sexist but good are wrong." Not because he has anything worthwhile to say about the game otherwise.
And you just jumped on the bandwagon without any real useful things to disprove what I said, so yeah.
Besides, having good gameplay doesn't even remotely excuse the rampant sexism in their games. If that was the case, Sengoku Rance wouldn't be a pile of shit.
"A game about sexy ladies" is voyeuristic and exploitative. End of story.
"But if a game is only about looking at sexy ladies, then wouldn't it be easier to just go on the internet and look at porn than to pay $60 for a lesser version of the experience?"
I go on the internet to get my porn, but I don't see what you are saying has to do with anything. People pay for time with webcam girls, so I can't really come up with a good reason why people prefer to pay for what they can get for free.
Related, do you buy games or pirate them?
>Except I provided valid counter-points to why the game was viewed as good.
"People like hard games" is not a counterpoint.
Also ad hominem attacking one of the mods isn't a good idea.
Objectivity and subjectivity are difficult to apply to many forms of entertainment media, but it's generally well-accepted that there's a form of "objectivity" (or at least something close to it) that comes from having consistent standards for something to be applied to.
Two examples of something pretty objectively wrong were provided by Malk; "bugs up the wazoo" and a "murderous camera". These are two factors that should count against any game. But then there's something like "uneven weapons", which leaves some room for discussion. Plenty of games feature uneven weapons as a feature of progression, but those games are designed with that factor in mind. Even then, though, a big part of a game's depth (and often, therefore, its engagement potential) is in its balance; if there's a dominant strategy (such as the use of a particularly powerful weapon), then that means a lot of game content is rendered systematically obsolete. RPGs with linear weapon upgrades get around this by limiting the powerful weapons to the late game, but in a more action-oriented experience, and overpowered weapon renders many of the obstacles in the game non-issues. Or the opposite, when a weapon is so weak as to not be worth using, which robs the player of a potential tool that could have been used to enrich the gameplay experience.
"Besides, having good gameplay doesn't even remotely excuse the rampant sexism in their games. If that was the case, Sengoku Rance wouldn't be a pile of shit."
Except that isn't what was being argued. And besides that, something can be "good" or " bad" regardless of how sexist or whatever something is. Besides, I think we just have different standards for what qualifies something as good or bad, I just care if the game is enjoyable or has a good story, if a game is enjoyable and has an awful story (Sengoku Rance) or has bad gameplay but a good story (Monster Girl Quest), then I'm going to like it.
But really, its hentai, abandon all hope for an enlightened view of women.
For the record, I for one am not against porn in my vidya. I just object to Team Ninja's vacuous sex doll portrayals of women as a receptacle for that porn.
^See, this is a fellatious argument. The idea that just because most hentai is misogynist then all of it has to be. The point of porn isn't to degrade women it's to get you off and those things need not go hand in hand.
Malkavian: No, my counter-point was that the core gameplay was extremely solid for the reasons I mentioned. It was fluid, the controls were good, and there were diverse enviroments, enemies, and weapons. If you want to ignore what I'm saying, go ahead, just don't pretend that you refuted them.
And it wasn't ad-hominem attack, at least it wasn't meant to be, its what I felt about his involvement in the argument.
No it can't. Sexism is morally reprehensible, and anything that features it is equally so. And gives up any notion of being "good" whatsoever.
After several posts of saying that his opinion was invalid because it was an opinion, you did eventually say that the game was good because of its difficulty, fluid combat and variety in enemies.
To me, these things don't seem to make up for a malicious camera, a poorly-planned difficulty curve and heavy bugs.
Again, I don't know who's right. I'm just going on the arguments made in this thread.
Are you sure he was saying that the game was bad just because he arbitrarily wanted to rather than, say, because he played it and didn't like it?
If a game can be purchased legally, I buy it. If for whatever reason it can't be obtained legally, I would pirate it, though I don't think I've ever actually encountered that situation.
This I can't agree with. Like, switching over to the thread about romance in media, I still like the Marvel movies even though they have exactly one decent female character between them.
A work that has no other reason for existing, though, is inherently bad.
I don't believe porn or sexualised depictions of women are inherently sexist or exploitative, either. One of the real issues with how this works in many industries at the moment is, as Malk noted, female characters existing solely as objects of sexual lust. It's that kind of (often subtle) dehumanisation coupled with the sexualisation that produces a problem rather than sexualisation as a thing on its own. After all, lots of women like to get nasty with the person/people of their choosing. Most human beings do in fact enjoy sex and being sexually appreciated. The issue is when this comes at the cost of their identity, in the eyes of others, being wiped away in favour of a perception of them as a sexual tool.
accusing someone of jumping on a band wagon is an ad hominem attack, buddy. It puts an attack on the person.
Also,
>It was fluid
Granted
>the controls were good
except not, there's a delay in some areas if you go and occasionally a choppy framerate and poor camera controls make it impossible to know what you're doing.
>and there were diverse enviroments, enemies, and weapons
These are true, but being pretty doesn't translate in a properly functioning game, not to mention having so many weapons leads to the imbalance problem I was talking about before.
Clockworkuniverse: Its just that the things that were brought up seemed really petty rather than actual faults, and there was a strong sense that there is an agenda behind what he is saying rather than any value in what he is actually saying, if that makes sense. But still, I'm willing to buy what you say over what he says because of it.
Also the Avengers movie did a better job of making Black Widow not so useless, even though I thought Loki was a horrible main antagonist.
Let's stop arguing about that; it's off topic and I, the alleged victim, don't really care.
>there is an agenda behind what he is saying rather than any value in what he is actually saying
I'd love to know what you mean by an agenda because all I can think of as an 'agenda' is 'tell people Team Ninja is bad at making video games'
^Okay, fair enough.
Yes, real human beings can enjoy sex and find confidence and empowerment in their sexuality. Fictional characters on the other hand, are created expressly to appeal to an audience's lust, is by definition a sexual tool.
I think he got the impression from your OP that you wanted to call them bad because of all the sexism rather than because of their actual game making skills. I didn't get that impression, but I can kind of see how he could.
I think it's kind of unfair to say that any depiction of sex in media is inherently exploitative, which is basically what you're claiming.
Malkavian: The frame-rate, on the whole, was extremely stable, though. I did forget about the whole "enemies re-spawning once you leave a room" bullshit and how X was used, so I will grant that.
But I'm not talking about diverse as in "graphics" since that doesn't really go against an argument that the game is shit, I just mean it put you in a lot of different situations and gave you different ways to carry things out, compared to "press x to kill" type games. But to say that the game isn't "Properly functioning" is way too extreme to me.
Also don't call me buddy, I'm not your buddy, guy.
And yeah, I guess its an ad hominem attack, and it was out of place so I apologize for that.
By the same token, though, you could use that as an argument against making attractive characters at all. Besides, characters are meant to simulate people closely enough that we believe this person could actually exist, or at least stands in for a more developed person. Removing sexuality from that equation removes a fundamental element of human existence. And obviously that sexuality isn't always appropriate, depending on the game, but arguing against sexuality wholesale is like arguing against anger or relief. It's just a part of being human, and in some contexts, a character devoid of any sexuality may fail to provide an effective illusion.
Dogs aren't lazy.
Hey, I didn't come up with the name, but that's the reasoning the guy provided.
clockworkuniverse: That was I was talking about in terms of agenda, yeah.
>I just mean it put you in a lot of different situations and gave you different ways to carry things out, compared to "press x to kill" type games.
Giving you too much variety is an inherent flaw, because it leads to the problem of having so much stuff that is absolutely worthless and just ends up in the back of your inventory from disuse. The problem with NG's variety is that it isn't variety so much of chafe. It's a distraction rather than an enhancement. This could have been solved by making more balanced weapons with more advantages and disadvantages, making magic more useful, and the like by the slapdash effect leaves us with a mess.
And it really doesn't offer much more than DMC3 or God Hand or a lot of the other highly regarded hack-slashers. Heck it doesn't even have that much more than God of War (which in and of itself isn't as great as made out to be) and that doesn't have the balance issues.
Also, the incomprehensible story bears noting. Yes, I know people are going to say 'If you want story play a JRPG' or some shit, but if the critics came out talking about how great the story was, not a fucking person would be saying the plot didn't matter. They'd use that as a point of how great the game is.
Just because it's part of being human doesn't make it right. Besides I have never seen a piece of media where the latter is true.
Yeah Other M was a pretty crap game on all counts except graphics. It was basically everything irritating about Ninja Gaiden, plus reducing combat to 1-2 abusable mechanics for pretty much the whole game.
>Just because it's part of being human doesn't make it right.
So wait, you think sex is immoral?
>Besides I have never seen a piece of media where the latter is true.
I can name a whole bunch. Gears of War is a notable one where Fenix's (or however you spell his name) desire for his wife rings false because of how impossible it is to see him as a creature of any romantic or sexual desire.
In fact a lot of hyper-masculine stuff falls into this category with the lack of any feminine or sexual aspect which is also what leads to all the jokes about repressed homoeroticism in people who like that kind of stuff.