Dammit!
This was making me a happy gamer woman right up until the last twenty seconds or so. Gah! The Covenant fly beings were kinda cool, but…
Sigh. No, they can’t just kick ass, they gotta be cheesecake. Fucking men.
This was making me a happy gamer woman right up until the last twenty seconds or so. Gah! The Covenant fly beings were kinda cool, but…
Sigh. No, they can’t just kick ass, they gotta be cheesecake. Fucking men.
April 19th, 2007 at 8:18 am
Oh, I saw that yesterday and clicked it off the second she mounted him.
I was going to post the Japanese Commercial for Final Fantasy Revenant Wings on Tuesday, but it exhasperated me.
So I guess I’ll post it here so we can all be exhasperated together.
April 19th, 2007 at 8:35 am
You might want to watch again, and stick it out until the ending credits. The cheesecake shit doesn’t come until after that. Mr. Oum has a surprise for us.
What did they do to my Penelo!? Aaaaaaaaa!
April 19th, 2007 at 9:12 am
Excuse me, but why should they *just* kick ass? When female computer game fans do fanart of their favorite male characters, they do more than kick ass. From what I’ve seen of the Sepiroth-fangirl crowd, for example, they’re not shy about putting him in all kinds of gratifying situations and states of undress. Sure, he’s active, badass, in control, etc, but there’s no conflict with those things and being sexy in the eyes of fangirls. I’m sure you’re aware of slash fiction as well. Of course, male characters aren’t sex objects first and heroes second, but it would seem to me that pairing up two strong female heroes for some girl on girl action wouldn’t be at all bad if they only were more equal with male characters in that respect.
I’m not trolling, btw. I honestly wonder about these things and this blog seems like a good place for a sensible point of view.
April 19th, 2007 at 9:22 am
Great. Now we have to explain Male Gaze, power disparity, and internalization to Hertza.
Or, I could just send him to Feminism 101. Yeah, I think I’ll do that.
April 19th, 2007 at 9:26 am
Because women characters in games never just kick ass. They have to be sex objects first. It’s been done already. Yes, I’m aware of the Sephiroth fangirls (though I prefer Kuja from Final Fantasy IX, personally, or Sydney from Vagrant Story) and the slash fanfiction. But male characters get to just kick ass all the time. Women don’t. It’s not just this movie, it’s a pattern of behaviour running all through the history of gaming.
April 19th, 2007 at 10:05 am
Moira:
That was what I tried to express. If female characters could be heroes first, like male are, things could be different. It’s tricky as a guy to find a female character attractive and still stay away from blatant sexism. Sicne it’s possible to sexualize a character in a positive way, like it’s done when fangirls do it with male characters, I’d like to do that myself and maybe make my male friends think twice about their choices too.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:49 am
While I agree it is disproportionate; to say that women are *always* a sexual object is to ignore some work done by a few publishers who, IMHO have at least tried to give their female chars depth and merit without is being sheerly by cleavage size. Example Heroes of Might and Magic V’s female lead. Granted, you do have to break her out of where she’s being held near the beginning; classic DiD scenario and all; but after that,she’s her own char, not defined by her gender but by her leadership and force of personality in shaping the war you fight.
April 19th, 2007 at 11:59 am
Ah, Fun, I see you’re going to make me push up my review of HoMM:V. Damn your eyes!
But, I do have to disagree — While Lady Isabel is a much better female heroine than we’ve had in a long time, it’s not like HoMM:V is ignoring the needs of the menfolk — the Damsel in Distress scenario you described is pretty important, as is the general army unit designs:
Ah, I see she’s wearing her sensible battle heels!
Not to mention the Succubii.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Well, it *is* still a fantasy RPG/RTS hybrid (with some truely spectacular and gorgeous artwork, btw). I did not say they were perfect; merely a step in the right direction. And when you play further through you’ll see more and more she plays the role of hero and leader and that little DiD scenario in the beginning is less important. I won’t spoil plot, but suffice it to say there’s some role reversal coming up on the classic plot.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
The damsel in distress scenario is just lazy thinking from the game designers. They could’ve easily have made her active in the story and still fulfill the same function. Maybe if she was holding back the hordes of evil herself and the player character came with reinforcements instead of rescuing her from twiddling her thumbs, locked in a tower.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:23 pm
She kind of was when she gets captured; at that point you’re the reinforcements sent to help her army; which has all perished except her (she’s a mite tougher than your average foot solder). But then you get her to use in your army as well and she can throw down. Muahahahaha!
April 19th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
Maybe if she didn’t waste so much energy and magical power brandishing her sword when she’s talking to her lieutenant, she would have had the MP to finish off the army that captured her. :p
I’m still getting my ass kicked by the druids; I need to finish up so I can do the needful and review this game properly. But let me just say that when the cutscene where she’s captured and the big bad demon lord is waxing on about how he doesn’t want to hurt her and he will protect her as long as he can when he locks her up in the tower, my eyes actually rolled right out of my head and across the floor where the cats decided to chase them, and I had to spend a little time washing them off before I could put them back in.
April 19th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Typical “Misunderstood villain with a soul” bit…not to worry, he gets what’s coming to him eventually. Such scenes just make taking him down that much more satisfying.
(Though you will likely not jump up and down yelling “Yeah Mutha-$#@%er! What NOW?!” as I did…)
April 19th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
“Well it’s fantasy” doesn’t wash with me. Why should that give it a pass when it comes to having characters that look appropriate for the role they’re in?
If a woman is supposed to be a warrior in a game, why can’t she look like one? At the very least, why can’t she wear armor that actually covers up her body in a way that would offer some protection? I know it can be done, I’ve seen illustrations of women wearing armor before.
Meh.
April 19th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
It’s not that it can’t be done; believe there are (Pony will have to fact check me on this) 2 female monsters/creatures that have some sort of scant outfit. There’s a number more that are more…sensibly…dressed.
At the same time, the Titans are wearing shorts and some really ripped abs for their shirtless torsos; amongst other such things.
Not trying to excuse anyone or anything; just saying this was not the usual one way street we see in most games. Part of it is *intended* as humor (I realize of course humor is subject to taste) (Pony: Angels? LOL).
When I say that it’s a fantasy game of this type, I do expect some tongue in cheek humor. (Not necessarily a scantily clad succubus, mind you).
It is a good game and one worth consideration if you enjoy the RPG and TBS fields.
April 19th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
It would seem to me that armor or clothes isn’t the main issue. A male character can be as decked out or nekkid as he wants without being objectified. Take Conan for example.
April 20th, 2007 at 8:36 am
I don’t think it’s the main issue, HertzaHaeon, but I think it’s an issue.
The problem isn’t just that women are presented mostly naked, but it’s about the choices that are there. Consider a game like the Soul Calibur series.
I’m a guy, so let’s say that I want to play a male character.
I can pick Rock, the sort of Conan-esque character, in his all his shirtless glory.
Or, I can pick Siegfried, who is wearing a full suit of armor.
Or I can pick the pirate, in full pirate get-up.
Or the samurai in either robes or armor.
Or the monk, the martial artist, the swashbuckler, etc… all of whom wear roughly appropriate clothing for their given professions. Some of them have bear chests, and most of them are depicted as attractive, but there is a lot of variety in what they’re wearing, and they don’t look completely out of place for what the game claims that they are.
Let’s say I decide to play as one of the women… do they get the same respect?
Hardly.
I can be one of the warriors- let’s see, wearing ridiculously reveiling skirts, and almost no armor. Or maybe the one wearing what appears to be a corset, thigh-high boots, and not much else, or maybe the one wearing a mid-riff…
Or I can be the ninja wearing fishnets or a unitard with armor under her breasts, pushing them up…
Or I can be the pirate… wearing a maid outfit?
All of the women are hyper-sexualized, and wearing as little clothing as posible, for the most part. The new character they added in III is wearing the most normal outfit of all (and carries an umbrella sword. Sweet!), but they’re pretty clearly meant to titilate… they’re designed, imo, with a strong emphasis on being sexually appealing towards the male audience.
I find that annoying and frustrating. I was glad that the newest one included a character creation mode so that I could actually create some female fighters who were, you know, wearing clothes.
April 20th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
I found the entire video to be quite cheesy honestly. Still, the later stages made it the tip of the cheesecake. Its a shame its seemingly always female characters have to be sexualised in some manner (as it has already been pointed out). I do agree somewhat with funiculus though, in that there is a chance there are people out there who do have a grip on reality, and I wouldnt want to dismiss their works as the same tripe. I do really hate this kind of garbage though, as I find it insults me as well. I mean I don’t take kindly to being treated like a sucker.
Its kind of like I often think some creators occasionally put an emphasis on female characters hitting men in the genitals. I mean why? I dont find that entertaining, I find it just as cheesy as a basis for a female character being nothing more than a sexual object.
Its kind of odd really though, since I have nothing against female characters actually being realistic in actions AND appearance, but I also wouldnt mind seeing female characters developed less in this way (this is more in reference to protagonists actually.) The ones who have practically zero character and always remained masked or in some kind of suit, or never to speak at all. I mean, Im not a fan of Metroid or Samus, but I hear it pissed a lot of people off when she is put into this sort of sexual object shown in the film above.
Why couldnt it have been like many of the male protagonists like the Master Chief or Gordon Freeman, who you cant ever see or cant ever hear speak. Sometimes I think its great to leave those things out, if only for the sense of mystique about the character. I mean, Id be crushed if the Master Chief revealed his face to the players, or Gordon finally spoke. I cant even begin to identify with what it would be like for them to then only exist for the viewing pleasure of others. It just craps on everything you used to like about that particular character.
April 20th, 2007 at 5:36 pm
I think this is the developers thinking they’re being clever and putting a bit of “girl power” into their characters so they have something to fall back on if the mean ol’ feminists call them on the way women are portrayed in the game.
“But she knees him! In the balls! She’s telling him he can’t treat her that way in the only way a man will listen! That’s what feminists like, right? Men getting their balls crushed?”
My eyes, they do roll.
April 20th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
Roy:
Soul Calibur is a good example of when things go wrong with female characters. It feels silly because it would be so easy to fix without impacting the game or the character design.
TheBends:
I can see why it annoys people. I personally thought the Spartan and Samus fan video wasn’t too bad, since neither character is created as a sex doll, and both in fact are strong characters on equal terms with any male character in a similar game. Women can take any kind of strong, male character, make him have hot butt sex with another hot male character, and it’s all positive and sexy. They’re not shy about ideals for their male characters either. So obviously it can be done, although I don’t quite see how a male equivalent would work yet.
April 20th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
If the last part of the Haloid video itself wasn’t enough to make my eyes roll and my teeth grind, the “FAQ” underneath sure as hell was.
“Internet: WHYYYYYY did you make Master chief a girl!?!?!? Master chief’s not a girl?!?!?! WHAT TEH HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU YOU FAG?!?!?!
Me: In the Halo story according to the books there were actually 32 Spartan soldiers, including women. If you look closely you can actually see the number 458 on the “Master Chick’s” suit. 458 being the number of the Spartan that made a Cameo in the Dead or Alive series. Not much thinking went into it further than that though. Plus hot lesbians are awesome.”
…I got nothin’.
April 21st, 2007 at 8:14 am
Hertza, I think you do have something of a point, since I have seen all that “slash” stuff, or a fan drawing a pic of her favourite character in some sexed up situation, etc. Still, I doubt its as commonplace as this whole male heterosexual view of women (all that gaze stuff that was mentioned earlier I reckon). Sure, if things were pretty equal, this could just be equated to exactly what you have mentioned. All that stuff about women and what situations they like to put their favourite male characters into. Whatever it is they make fan-fics/drawings/videos etc.
Even if things were equal in that regard though, I doubt I could still ever enjoy that video, as the action simply doesnt suit my tastes. Though I admit, clearly lots of effort and skill have gone into its creation. Still, I think instead of being like the female equivalent you bring forward, tucked away out of most people’s (heterosexual males?) view, this just lands on top of a huge visible pile of similar things done by male fans, or creators.
Basically what Im trying to say is, sure women may do similar things to what the video does, possibly even more graphic on occasion, but I think its far less likely their fantasies will come blaring before your eyes (not accusing the video of this, just most types of media).
And MP, I think youre right, perhaps I hate it so much because Im realising some of these developers (guys?) think they are making strong, cool women characters. Though clearly they have gone way off the map when they feel the need to make her crush some guys testicles under her boot heel. Its extremely cheap and tacky to say the least.
April 21st, 2007 at 9:29 am
TheBends:
Making things equal that way is what it’s all about, isn’t it? I’m not really defending the fan video, even though it’s nothing compared to some slash I’ve seen. I just want characters that can catch everyone’s imagination in all kinds of ways, even sexually, and do it in a positive way free of objectification or guilt. With all the teen and adult players out there I’m sure it’s an important issue in moving games forward as art and entertainment.
April 21st, 2007 at 6:17 pm
That whole video is crazy-cheesy.
But I admit it: when it said, “I thought I was the only girl in armor with the weight of the world on her shoulders,” I was like, “aww…” Also, “so cliche.”
And then it went south rather rapidly. And again with the video game cheesecake that looks like crappy Poser art. What’s up with that?
April 27th, 2007 at 2:39 am
hmmmmmmmmmm shld ppl cr …………… n ts gm f dnt lk t dn ply t
(Disemvoweled for lack of relevance. And sanitized for your protection.)
April 27th, 2007 at 10:12 am
Hee.
I never get tired of seeing disemvoweled posts.
May 1st, 2007 at 3:49 pm
When it coems to games, I see women characters for more than just a sexual object. I see women characters as having an IQ above 110.
May 1st, 2007 at 3:49 pm
…and my IQ is 109.
May 1st, 2007 at 5:08 pm
I guess thats cool Jovan, but surely you cant deny that sometimes you just cannot apply that idea to some women characters? Some characters who’s IQ never even came into their design, yes? I mean sure, sometimes I have seen more in women characters than just a sex object, but on occasion I have had to look PAST the sex object to find it.
Though Im not sure what you meant entirely by that post, because it struck me as very……… specific. I guess what I want to say is that you must be disappointed quite often. Since sometimes what you see will never change what something is. Either that or youre incredibly imaginative, able to construct areas of women characters that were left out in their design.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:07 pm
Forgive me if I’m wrong, but… isn’t 110 the low end of avg? I’m only going by online IQ tests, etc - so my perspective is a bit skewed, I admit.
So The “110 IQ” comment doesn’t really have the impact on me that I think Jovan intended it to have.
May 2nd, 2007 at 12:12 pm
http://iq-test.learninginfo.org/iq04.htm
nvm. I did my own research.
And I’m fairly certain that whatever IQ test I took is blowing smoke… no way is my IQ (133 scored) is “Very Superior”, pfft.
May 3rd, 2007 at 1:58 pm
If the people I normally see online represent “average” then that scale needs to be adjusted down significantly. If such people have an IQ over 80 I’m going to shoot whoever invented or believes IQ tests for being too stupid to function.
May 3rd, 2007 at 2:43 pm
The IQ test as devised by Alfred Binet was never intended to measure high or even normal levels of intelligence. It was strictly intended to help teachers identify those students who had learning difficulties and needed extra attention to do well in the classroom. It wasn’t until the idea came to the US, and specifically to the US Army in the person of Robert Yerkes, that it was used to rank ‘intelligence’ in a large number of people, and it has been very badly misused ever since. The tests used today claim to measure intelligence as something real and one-dimensional (i.e., you can use a line to describe position), but often are shown to have strong cultural and socioeconomic class biases, and anyway fail to define whatever the hell they’re measuring in the first place, beyond an ability to do well or poorly on standardized IQ tests.
For example, in the Army IQ testing back when, it was found that ringworm (a kind of fungus and not a worm at all) infestation was predictive of about a twenty-point deficit on the IQ test. The tester’s conclusion? That being stupid put you at higher risk of getting a ringworm infection. Not that ringworm infection was strongly associated with poor education and an inability to afford shoes, but that smart people didn’t get ringworm.
Now, I’m considered fair smart (also by people who are not me), but I have nothing but contempt for IQ tests, especially the online sorts that are featured in flashing banner ads. We don’t know enough about how our minds work to even define what we’re testing for, much less to be able to rank people by their relative intelligence. And the keen observer of the Moira condition will note that high IQ test scores (I tend to do spectacularly well on standardized tests) fail miserably to correlate with income. To use the jargon of my school days, the vectors Moira(Smarts) and Moira(Income) are orthogonal, decoupled, unrelated.
May 3rd, 2007 at 2:44 pm
“It has a six in it, but its not six thousand”
“What is it?”
“……..six”
“Do me a favour. Thats a poor IQ for a glass of water!”
Sorry, Im a Red Dwarf fan, and all this talk about IQ’s……
Ill shut up now.