Support NeoGAF

[Earthpainting]

I'm pretty weirded out by the volume of sex workers in open world, and wonder why this has become a thing. I guess the pattern is crime-ridden and impoverished settings. Regarding the larger subject as a whole, I'm not sure how I'd tackle this subject myself. Some of her points become a bit tricky.

The active participant in voyeurism angle was pretty interesting. It's true that when you give control of your camera, the camera direction becomes the player's responsibility. The only other time I've heard it brought up was when Ueda was defending his decision to not have a female character in The Last Guardian. He did not want to give people the opportunity to let people look under the characters' skirt (because obviously a female character would have one), so that was an argument against making it a girl. It's one of those things where developers do not consciously make and give you the tools to oggle, since they exist to facilitate other elements, but they are available nonetheless. It's a silly thing to maybe bring up, but it's one of those things that is unique to the medium.

On the matter of the objectification and especially violence against NPCs, things get difficult for me. Violence is pretty much the primary method of interaction in video games. When the violence is framed specifically around sex workers, things clearly get a strong misogynistic slant, but this is a side-effect of the abstraction of NPC-based mechanics. NPCs in large games literally are generic game objects, categorised in types, with slight modifiers to make them look less cloned. That is how they often still are in games with a smaller, more intimate scope. Most of their behaviour and interactions are inherited from a generic base "NPC" character, regardless of gender, race or anything. If it is humanoid, chances are their available methods of deaths, and their posthumous spoils will be the same.

I understand that violence against women has a history, and should be treated with a bit more respect. However unless she's specifically talking about violence against sexualised game characters, I'm not sure how we can sidestep this. I'm not a supporter of excluding female characters from combat or certain mechanics. One of the bigger UK developers was and still is struggling with this subject. They opted to not include any female low-level enemies because of this, which quite a few developers were disappointed by. As gross as it may sound, I think it may be good on a grander scale to accept generic low-level enemies.

 

[ExFalsoQuodlibet]

Your second point reads like that you shouldnt be able to sleep with prostitutes in a game at all.

You can do whatever you want, I'm not say that you shouldn't: I'm saying that the "job" of prostitution is not everywhere a conscious, voluntary job: even in GTA games those "hos" are those kind of "hos" that have a pimp that molests and threatens them if they don't prostitute themselves. I'm just saying that it shouldn't be "casual", like it shouldn't be casual to commit murder just for fun, even in a game.

I dont really think thats possible to code a Game like that. I dont really see why NPCs should act different because you shoot a prostitute or an old grandma or some 20years old someone.

I don't get this: you really think that a game cannot be developed to consider the various NPCs in a different way? They are different entities with different properties, they can act on the global state of the game in a different way.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

He did not want to give people the opportunity to let people look under the characters' skirt (because obviously a female character would have one),

Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but that's sarcasm, right?

 

[Cyrano]

I dont really think thats possible to code a Game like that. I dont really see why NPCs should act different because you shoot a prostitute or an old grandma or some 20years old someone.

Why would you actively discourage more dynamic characters in videogames?

 

[Chairmanchuck]

I don't get this: you really think that a game cannot be developed to consider the various NPCs in a different way? They are different entities with different properties, they can act on the global state of the game in a different way.

I can see how a story singleplayer driven Game could be like that (like in Mass Effect or Binary Domain), but not some kind of open-world Game.
At least not if it would make a difference between prostitutes, old grandmas and whoever.

I know what you mean. I just dont think in an open-world game such thing is possible. At least not on a level that would be sufficient not to be called shallow.

Why would you actively discourage more dynamic characters in videogames?

I was thinking of an open world Game like GTA. I dont really think other story-relevant NPCs would act about some number like "0 Prostitues killed=nice to you", "10 Prostitutes killed=he questions your behaviour" etc.
I mean you need to write a dialogue for all of these options.
If its just general murder, sure. Such thing would be possible, but I think it would look more like "We had to cram that feature in it".

In a story-driven Game like Mass Effect on the other hand that would be possible, but you dont usually murder people just for fun in such Games.

The only other time I've heard it brought up was when Ueda was defending his decision to not have a female character in The Last Guardian. He did not want to give people the opportunity to let people look under the characters' skirt (because obviously a female character would have one), so that was an argument against including making it a girl.

Besides that his other argument like "A girl isnt strong enough to grab something" was not really convincing.

 

[Earthpainting]

Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but that's sarcasm, right?

It was sarcasm on my part, but that's pretty much how it went down. His reasons for not having a female character were fear of up-skirts, and that a lot of climbing wouldn't be very believable (in his game about ratbird beasts keep in mind) for women due to their upper-body strength.

 

[Cyrano]

I guess it depends on the game. In the context of GTA (shitty, rundown city) and New Vegas (Las Vegas, obviously) they make sense. Their presence is less justifiable in games like Hitman that have significantly less world-building.

Please note, I'm just going to talk a bit about the ways in which these NPCs are presented in a ridiculous manner, though as Anita says, I'm not actually sure sexuality is presented in any way at all in these games. Just regressive power fantasies.

It seems really awkward in a game like Assassin's Creed that there are female-constructed NPCs around, seemingly everywhere, that can be used to accomplish objectives like distracting guards. I know there were a lot of sex workers in the times these games were presented, but not nearly as many as they're presenting and certainly not constantly and consistently a few feet away from law enforcement officials (and dumber still, law enforcement officials who are clearly on duty and can be seen by multiple people, including other officers)! Also, as just a general note, how/why is it that every female-constructed NPC seems sexually attracted to a character they've just met? And why are they attracted to them not knowing who they are or what their intent is? Seriously, why would anyone solicit a person for sex without having any idea about these really important things!? (We all know the answer, it just seems weird to have to point it out.) Why is it that these NPCs seem to be all over any given city, from random street corners to movie theaters? Do sandbox games just get a pass for having really poorly coded (and placed) NPCs because they're big? What's more, who would agree to having sex with a person in broad daylight, or a person who they know is part of law enforcement (such as the characters in the military games), without any foreknowledge of their intent? Is it difficult to add some code that the NPC checks to see if it's daylight? If it's a law-enforcement official? If they're spawning in a place that makes some amount of sense? If the player-character is hostile (or has been hostile in the past)?

This is just some of the mechanical stupidity these NPCs and games suffer. It doesn't even touch on how bad their treatment is because they're reduced to objects rather than characters.

The fact that they're treated as objects is troubling enough, but the logic is just as nonsensical. It feels a lot like Cinema Sins watching how many silly faux pas there are in movies, but instead we're looking at videogames, particularly the faux pas relating to female characters.

 

[Zero315]

1) first of all, prostitutes exist, but they are real human beings, while in games they are mostly based on the way prostitutes are depicted in other media, like movies and comics: there's no depth in their characters, there's no line of text that is not about using her as a sexual object, there's nothing that suggests that they don't like their condition, that maybe they are forced to do it with the threat of violence, that they are unhappy or that they still have a life beyond the "job": game writers simply use token characters to depict something that should be treated with more respect;

There's no depth to their characters because they are mostly random NPCs. I don't expect to hear the backstory of the guy running the shop, or the woman waiting on the bus. So why should these random NPCs get special treatment?

2) don't reward players with actual perks for having sex with a prostitute: there should be a loss on the main character's side for taking advantage of a prostitute, if possible not only a economic loss, but also in "reputation" or something: make other characters treat you differently if you frequently engage in sex with prostitutes;

Taking advantage? This is becoming dangerously close to sex worker shaming so I'm just gonna... yeah....

3) if you commit violent acts against prostitutes in the game (I mean you the player, not the character, because the character does what the player wants it to do) there should be actual real deep consequences: if the character is caught by police, it's game over, you go back to before the murder or violence and think about what you're doing; even if there's no police involved, the main character should gradually be treated differently by other characters, to the point that if the character constantly practices violence on prostitutes just for fun, then other female (or male) characters actually become hostile to the main character in a sort of Dark Souls fashion, and that's for the entirety of the game: you had fun by acting like a monster? Well, you're going to suffer consequences.

Why should there be more severe consequences for this over any of the other random NPCs? You can't have harsher consequences for doing something that outside of a mission that you do inside of one. If I happen to randomly kill an NPC during a gunfight in a mission it should be an automatic game over or it should put me back at the beginning of the mission? No, because that would suck and would be extremely frustrating.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

It was sarcasm on my part, but that's pretty much how it went down. His reasons for not having a female character were fear of up-skirts, and that a lot of climbing wouldn't be very believable (in his game about ratbird beasts keep in mind) for women due to their upper-body strength.

Yeah, I know Ueda is a sexist moron, I was just making sure you weren't agreeing with him.

 

[Cyrano]

I was thinking of an open world Game like GTA. I dont really think other story-relevant NPCs would act about some number like "0 Prostitues killed=nice to you", "10 Prostitutes killed=he questions your behaviour" etc.
I mean you need to write a dialogue for all of these options.
If its just general murder, sure. Such thing would be possible, but I think it would look more like "We had to cram that feature in it".

In a story-driven Game like Mass Effect on the other hand that would be possible, but you dont usually murder people just for fun in such Games.

While just anecdotal, I've worked with kits in the past and it's pretty easy to change NPC behavior based on a few simple checks the NPC runs when a PC is near. Skyrim even allows you to zone out places so that a certain area "knows" the PC is actively hostile. It's a bit mind-ready in the case of Skyrim, and could progress a bit more slowly, but generally word gets around if some psychopath starts murdering random NPCs in a certain city-area (this could easily be extended to weirder stuff that I won't get into). Which is a pretty logical progression and would be especially true of more modern environments.

 

[Rich]

GTA cities are supposed to be seedy. How would one achieve that without sex work in the game? Sex work is something which often goes hand in hand with drugs and organised crime. You simply can't remove it from a game like GTA. That said, they had 3 protagonists, I'm not sure why one of them couldn't have been a female. It would have been interesting to see how a female deals with things in the GTA universe.

I'm not sure why people bother debating Sarkeesian videos though. She mixes genuine problems in games (and the industry) in with faux outrage at things which aren't problems which trivialises the big issues. Half (or more) of what she say is trolling to get people talking and debating about her videos.

 

[ExFalsoQuodlibet]

I was thinking of an open world Game like GTA. I dont really think other story-relevant NPCs would act about some number like "0 Prostitues killed=nice to you", "10 Prostitutes killed=he questions your behaviour" etc.
I mean you need to write a dialogue for all of these options.
If its just general murder, sure. Such thing would be possible, but I think it would look more like "We had to cram that feature in it".

I honestly don't understand why this couldn't be an actual feature of a sandbox game: there's still story in them, there's still mainline characters and dialogue. I don't see how this possible feature would automatically result in a shallow addition. Are you implying that there cannot intrinsically be any consequence of your behavior in a sandbox game without forcing developers to make the mechanic shallow?

 

[Chairmanchuck]

This is just some of the mechanical stupidity these NPCs and games suffer. It doesn't even touch on how bad their treatment is because they're reduced to objects rather than characters.

I would argue, that is, because the devs think of them as objects. I mean to the dev the prostitues in Assassins Creed are just the object "distraction". The devs think "We have to place this object close to mission objectives the player will encounter in some missions in the past."
They are not just put there randomly, since they are always close to some fort or some sidequest.

I just wonder why they went with prostitues instead of something else.

I honestly don't understand why this couldn't be an actual feature of a sandbox game: there's still story in them, there's still mainline characters and dialogue. I don't see how this possible feature would automatically result in a shallow addition. Are you implying that there cannot intrinsically be any consequence of your behavior in a sandbox game without forcing developers to make the mechanic shallow?

Of course I think it is possible if a dev would really want that. The question is, is it worth it for the dev?
How deep should it be? How much new dialogue should be written for that?

I mean the NPCs in most sandbox Games are already really shallow itself, so I wonder how such a system would make such an issue make believable.

Skyrim even allows you to zone out places so that a certain area "knows" the PC is actively hostile.

In the case of Skyrim I would also argue it feels totally shallow. I mean you can even guess how the checks work, even if you arent a programmer.

If such a system should be added into a Game, I think it should be a main part of the game, so it will feel believable.

 

[SixMachine]

The old Fallout games gave you a title if you killed any children, Basically everyone hated you if you gunned one down. People will react negatively to you and hunt you down in random encounters. They could do something like that.

But honestly if they went that route it wouldn't feel like GTA, since the point of the game is to endorse whatever playstyle you want. They are extremely aware of the types of people who play this game, since Trevor is basically the chaos incarnate that embodies the type of player who likes to blow shit up and kill at a drop of a hat. This type of thing would fit a role playing game, but I wouldn't see this working for a GTA. Especially since players who want to play it straight like a good guy Niko or something want the option to cut loose every once in a while.

Just a few years ago, in some european countries, there was nothing bad in murdering jews either. The fact that something is, to a certain level, "accepted" doesn't make it right. You didn't understand my point, let me clarify: abuse of female sexual objects in a game shouldn't be treated as a regular, casual activity; even if the job is legal in some countries, it's a diminishing activity for most women and carries actual cultural weight.

Yes it should, this is just a particular example that can have particular sets of consequences.

I forgot the name of the documentary but there are actually perfectly legal, high paid escorts in Europe who do this thing consensually. They are actually paid really well and they actually check clients for diseases. So not all sex workers are bad. But if the sex worker was forced into it or had to do it for a means of survival, that is extremely bad. Though in the GTA series you don't know the context in why these prostitutes do what they do.

 

[thesolidshark]

Haven't seen the video, but I'm glad most are happier with it's turnout as signs of improvement, but sad to hear some context is lost in the explanations. If her Watch_Dogs inclusion of a scene of sex trafficing made no mention of how the player had the opportunity to stop it, I might call that a small misstep. That would've been nice to know.

There is nothing bad about having sex with a prostitute. At least not here in most european countries.

Just a few years ago, in some european countries, there was nothing bad in murdering jews either. The fact that something is, to a certain level, "accepted" doesn't make it right.

I understand where this is going, but still, making the comparison of prostitution versus murder based on acceptable standards leaves me confused. Is prostitution really as bad as murder for some people/countries? And which countries were that bad a few years ago?

 

[ExFalsoQuodlibet]

There's no depth to their characters because they are mostly random NPCs. I don't expect to hear the backstory of the guy running the shop, or the woman waiting on the bus. So why should these random NPCs get special treatment?

Woman waiting on the bus and guy running to the shop are not degrading to women or disrespectful and dehumanizing, so yes, those "random" (they're not random, they are specifically written to be there, and they're not mandatory or something) NPCs should get special treatment: is that so hard to understand?

 

[Lime]

Sorry if I'm being obtuse, but that's sarcasm, right?

No, it's true. Reasoning was that girls aren't as tough as boys and that players would look up the skirt (because female characters obviously have to wear skirts only)

Makes you think about ico and sotc and their gender politics.

 

[B-Genius]

This is ridiculous. Have you seen the mod edit to the OP? These threads get ugly. This one is probably being heavily moderated and a bunch of dingoes have already landed bans from previous threads. I saw posts get deleted off the first page. There are no signs that her harassment was from a very a small group of people.

Seems to me that neurosisxeno's point was that these dingoes are the (vocal) minority. If it was the majority, this thread would be shut down completely and we wouldn't be able to have this discussion. If we could tally the overall views of her videos against the amount of hate mail she got/gets, I'm sure we'd see a relatively small percentage.

 

[Kattbuss]

I completely missed that this was out. I really enjoy Sarkeesian's videos and I feel that they are quite important to the medium. I have to check this out when I get home from work.

 

[SixMachine]

Woman waiting on the bus and guy running to the shop are not degrading to women or disrespectful and dehumanizing, so yes, those "random" (they're not random, they are specifically written to be there, and they're not mandatory or something) NPCs should get special treatment: is that so hard to understand?

Actually a lot of NPCs are placed there for flavor. Not everyone is going to have plot relevance, and a lot of the npcs in open world games are literally random. They are randomly generated and they don't even have a unique look. You can go around the block and see 4 of the same hooker in these games.

 

[Fliesen]

I understand where this is going, but still, making the comparison of prostitution versus murder based on acceptable standards leaves me confused. Is prostitution really as bad as murder for some people/countries? And which countries were that bad a few years ago?

Prostitution is often connected to human trafficking and thereby sometimes considered modern day slavery.

Austria is a wealthy country, but i'd dare to assume that many of Vienna's street prostitutes are from eastern Europe and many of them are not in posession of their own passport anymore.

At least with murder you are aware that you're ruining (ending) someone's life. I think there's far too many people who think that prostitution is just "paying for sex" and forget about what goes on behind the scenes and what they're supporting that way.

 

[Cyrano]

Makes you think about ico and sotc and their gender politics.

These games' stories are based on female-structured NPC McGuffins. Not that it's new, but much like a lot of games, they're deeply compromised as a result of this. One of those, "I really want to like this game, but come on! Seriously!?" It makes it really hard to recommend games to people when you have to present them with weird caveats. =/

 

[ArjanN]

I don't think the prostitutes in Binary Domain are a great example, you can't have sex with them and if you try your reputation with your teammates goes down, they're just a setup for the whole teammate trust system that game has.

The violence argument in Deus Ex/Hitman/Dishonored and such also doesn't make much sense as they're sandboxy games where you can just kill everyone, whereas her video makes it seem like it's specifically targeting women.

 

[thesolidshark]

Prostitution is often connected to human trafficking and thereby sometimes considered modern day slavery.

Austria is a wealthy country, but i'd dare to assume that many of Vienna's street prostitutes are from eastern Europe and many of them are not in posession of their own passport anymore.

At least with murder you are aware that you're ruining (ending) someone's life. I think there's far too many people who think that prostitution is just "paying for sex" and forget about what goes on behind the scenes and what they're supporting that way.

Ok, very good point. I wasn't thinking that hard about it when I read his statement, but this has better perspective. Murder is still worse to me, but good point none-the-less.

 

[ExFalsoQuodlibet]

Prostitution is often connected to human trafficking and thereby sometimes considered modern day slavery.

Austria is a wealthy country, but i'd dare to assume that many of Vienna's street prostitutes are from eastern Europe and many of them are not in posession of their own passport anymore.

At least with murder you are aware that you're ruining (ending) someone's life. I think there's far too many people who think that prostitution is just "paying for sex" and forget about what goes on behind the scenes and what they're supporting that way.

Completely agree, thanks for explaining that in a better way than I did

 

[Cyrano]

In the case of Skyrim I would also argue it feels totally shallow. I mean you can even guess how the checks work, even if you arent a programmer.

If such a system should be added into a Game, I think it should be a main part of the game, so it will feel believable.

I would take shallow over non-existent. What's more, again this goes back to my dynamic character argument. In games like GTA, nothing except moving the main plot forward makes the player feel like anything they do has any impact on the game world at all. The game world is just this sterile, immutable object (and thus the NPCs, by extension, are also objects). In a way it's like a creepy museum except all the "stuff" can be touched. Actually it's probably exactly like a creepy museum if Second Life and its recreations of museums are any indication. At least in games like Dishonored there is some indication that actions have consequences, even if it's an exceptionally shallow concept of consequence.

I know they call them sandbox games, but at least in a sandbox you can actually move the sand around.

Prostitution is often connected to human trafficking and thereby sometimes considered modern day slavery.

Austria is a wealthy country, but i'd dare to assume that many of Vienna's street prostitutes are from eastern Europe and many of them are not in posession of their own passport anymore.

At least with murder you are aware that you're ruining (ending) someone's life. I think there's far too many people who think that prostitution is just "paying for sex" and forget about what goes on behind the scenes and what they're supporting that way.

Also this.

Worthwhile to also note that this problem seems to be getting worse, not better: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-25048307

 

[Dehnus]

Although I mostly agree with her point of view, I do not agree with the solution of removing it. I think it moves us back in time to a time before the sexual revolution, limits us to a great extend and actually will cause more harm because people let things fester.

For this same reason I am against people acting so shocked to some nudity while they let their children see the most horrible violence on the news.

I do however agree that the amount of "female eyecandy" is just annoying and sometimes even irritating. In World of Warcraft every female hero is either wearing bikini armour or is as flat as a pancake in character development. For instance they way they changed Sylvanas I find downright insulting and catering to a certain male demographic.

Realistic armour should be almost the same for males and females to begin with, so why women only have their breast and private parts covered (Bikini armour) while males have a complete suit... is something that always strikes me as odd.


However that said, the solution of just removing every form of sexual "objectification" is just wrong as well. Sadly it exists in our world and thus can be shown. Also we should not deny our attraction to the human form. In my case that would be male, in other cases that would be female. There is nothing wrong with that and we shouldn't act pedantic about it as where we a bunch of giggling Nuns, in my opinion at least.

It is however understandable that women are offended by the lack of MALE representation. If you go into any poverty strucken country you'll notice that male prostitution is just as common as female. It is just odd that in games you hardly see any of this, for the reason that it frightens the major demographic. This adds more to the shame culture that exists and why males who are a victim of this don't dare to go to the police about it. Same thing with male victims of spousal abuse, something feminists used to be very ardent about trying to pull out of shame culture. The latter is very sad that a nice man who is physically or mentally abused by his spouse (male or female) doesn't dare to open his mouth or seek help. Shame culture prevents him from doing so, as... well "You are man and you let another man/woman do that to you!?" shaming.

So.... yes. I do agree with her that it is over represented, I do not agree with her solutions. A better one, in my opinion, would be to look at it from a more realistic stand point. If you are going to add prostitution, make sure you also show the pain and horror of human trafficking and not just the "sex symbols". This doesn't always apply, as in the Netherlands prostitutes can control their own business.. but that is a different matter . It also would be nice to see the male aspect of it.

And to use it as a "sexual candy to attract adolescents", that she is completely correct about. It is very wrong and needs to stop.

Sorry for my rant, and I hope I haven't offended anybody with this.

 

[TheRedSnifit]

Woman waiting on the bus and guy running to the shop are not degrading to women or disrespectful and dehumanizing, so yes, those "random" (they're not random, they are specifically written to be there, and they're not mandatory or something) NPCs should get special treatment: is that so hard to understand?

If GTA was designed based on not being "disrespectful", it would end up being some shitty Assassin's Creed-style game where you can only kill rich white men and law enforcement. GTA's gameplay style and world simply would not function if they tried to give every persecuted minority "special treatment".

 

[antennaehead]

Interesting video, as usual. I'm a bit disappointed that most of the video was about specific games (GTA-style open world) and specific NPSs (prostitutes). It'll be interesting to know more about other types of Background Decoration problem (like racing games that were shown in the beginning).

 

[B-Genius]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bWmF09hknY

http://gta.wikia.com/Hercules

the main character is not gay but Rockstar has included them in their games (from the popular and well received Dlc for gta 4 Ballad of Gay Tony)

There many gay clubs in Gta 5 but non of the clubs or enterable gay or straight (one for a brief single mission only).

Of course, how could I forget!? I even worked on the GTAIV DLC, haha.
BoGT was great. It's a pity these things weren't included in V, at least in some form.

B: That's not a photo shoot, it's a auction of women from the Human Trafficking mission. Your mission is to stop it, free the prisoners and have those involved arrested.
But I like that you didn't know that, it show hows her slick editing with no context or explanation slyly backs her objective.

Lol, "artsy photo shoot", my bad...
I agree that Sarkeesian is using clever editing and cherry picking to an extent to maximise the impact of her claims. I guess her point is that the game doesn't make any interesting commentary on human trafficking, and that these poor naked female NPCs are just wallpaper? Again, I don't know as I haven't played it.

Maybe she takes issue with the fact that these women can be gawked at by the player, because they have an active role in the game world. I wonder how you could depict human trafficking in order to get a real message out to players who might otherwise gawk at the "goods"...

Already has been. The protagonist in The Ballad of Gay Tony worked for a gay night club owner in Liberty City. And he was actually one of the best characters in that entire game.

Spoiler

they also had male nudity, but I can't remember if that was in Ballad of Gay Tony or Lost & Damned

Yes, you're right it was one of the mission givers in TL&D. He's a somewhat powerful/interesting character, though, certainly not in a position to be bullied by the player. He's also not particularly attractive/well-endowed (I suppose?), but I don't think that excludes him from the discussion. His presence - the fact that the developers made him that way is pure world building/flavour, which I would argue is the way R* approaches the majority of their games. They provide the content, the player creates context.

Inclusivity and equality is irrelevant in this case, and Anita actually explained that: women start from a disadvantageous position in this matters, and if even if some games with mirrored roles existed, their depiction of men would be seen as nothing more than distraction to make fun of other tropes. Two wrongs don't make a right.

I don't believe they're irrelevant. I think making more people (namely men) feel uncomfortable about these situations and circumstances in games might be a good way to drive the message home. If the bolded is true, then try putting men at a disadvantage. I'm not saying it would make things "right", but it could be effective because we're not used to seeing it. GTA already makes fun of a lot of things, so why not the "receptiveness/awareness of the target audience", too?

The tricky thing is that in society, we're conditioned to expect and worship the female form. Having male human trafficking in a smart game like Watch_Dogs (and I mean "smart" as in not simply satire or tongue-in-cheek all the time) would encourage the majority audience (male gamers) to think more carefully about their objectives and placement within that world. They're not just saving a bunch of stereotypical "damsels" or "window dressing"; they're thinking more about why both males and females are on display, and why this is a bad thing.

The FFXIV costumes are not completely on-topic, but still a good example. They're not making fun of anything or serving any particular purpose. They're just there as a choice, if you're that way inclined, which by default includes more people with different ideals/tastes. The gay bars in TBoT were part of the story and world building, not necessarily a distraction. It depends how you layer in your depiction of men/women in your game, but as long as it makes contextual sense and is consistent, I don't see a fundamental issue.

 

[B3il]

Holy fucking shit at those video clips. Hilarious! I've been out of the AAA/sandbox game space since San Andreas, and I can't believe, 10 years later we're still doing ME LOVE YOU LONG TIME, glitchy dance loops and HEE HEE, having THE SEX restores your health!

It was the drinks cans bit that really struck with me. Imagine your gender's whole presence in a fictional world being on the same level as a power-up mushroom. With tits.

If R* are smart, GTA6 could ditch the hookers and the lol sex shit, have a strong, capable female protagonist, and they'd be praised to high heaven and sell a billion.

 

[The Technomancer]

I wouldn't say it's in the Stone Age (Bronze Age maybe), but it could definitely make improvements (Ubisoft be damned). The problem is that nobody is really suggesting improvements, just pointing out that there is a problem. Anita is really no different in that regard. Yes, she is pointing out a lot of examples, but she is rarely (I haven't seen a single time) giving alternatives. To top it off whenever she got chances to speak with game developers following her successful Kickstarter, she made every appearance about her Internet harassment, and made almost no mention of the cause she was championing.

Whenever someone actually suggests "improvements" half the internet erupts in cries of censorship and artistic vision. I've basically given up trying to concretely say "it would be nice if developers did more things like this and less like that" because of how much it just completely stops any conversation.

 

[Mr_Antimatter]

Holy fucking shit at those video clips. Hilarious! I've been out of the AAA/sandbox game space since San Andreas, and I can't believe, 10 years later we're still doing ME LOVE YOU LONG TIME, glitchy dance loops and HEE HEE, having THE SEX restores your health!

It was the drinks cans bit that really struck with me. Imagine your gender's whole presence in a fictional world being on the same level as a power-up mushroom. With tits.

If R* are smart, GTA6 could ditch the hookers and the lol sex shit, have a strong, capable female protagonist, and they'd be praised to high heaven and sell a billion.

Could work, and would definitely give them a lot of potential story angles. I mean, there are female crimelords in fiction, and female gangsters are not unheard of ether. Make it one half kill bill, one half my wife is a gangster, and just run with it.

 

[Noray]

Holy fucking shit at those video clips. Hilarious! I've been out of the AAA/sandbox game space since San Andreas, and I can't believe, 10 years later we're still doing ME LOVE YOU LONG TIME, glitchy dance loops and HEE HEE, having THE SEX restores your health!

It was the drinks cans bit that really struck with me. Imagine your gender's whole presence in a fictional world being on the same level as a power-up mushroom. With tits.

It's embarrassing. What I find the most reprehensible though is the fucking fondling minigame in GTA5. I mean, seriously, who the fuck thought that was a good idea in the first place. And then to make matters worse, if you do it "right" the stripper will actually come home with your character? For real? Let's reinforce the myth that strippers/sex workers are just waiting for the "right guy" to come along to "save" them from their shitty lives, yay!

 

[B3il]

Yep, that was when the last fragment of the "we have hookers in the game to make it gritty and realistic!!!" defence crumbled into dust.

 

[DrDrizzay101]

Videos like this remind me what a young medium gaming is, and that we haven't progressed as far from Beat Em and Eat Em or Custer's Revenge as we might want to think. A lot of the issues in the video are definitely problems and indicative of gender bias, but it also says a lot about the limitations of creating humanizing mechanics and systems in a fundamentally artificial game space. We've got a long way to go, and its time developers start holding themselves to a higher standard. No more "it's just a game" defense for this stuff.

 

[Regulus Tera]

This is the first time I've found one of Anita's videos difficult to watch. The footage chosen is just gross, which I guess was the intended purpose.

 

[Barrylad]

One thing the discussions ITT have made me think about is whether or not GTA can still be considered satire or just juvenile titillation, especially after V. I feel like GTA V was a turning point to me, where the humour was starting to feel played out, uninspired and lazy. While Los Santos' presentation of women in advertising etc. was surely just a satire of the real world, the way women are written and treated in the game's main plot did feel troubling to me. I've heard some say that V's plot is akin to one big, meta commentary on the state of GTA style games but I dunno if I buy that.

Maybe worth a thread in itself.

 

[ronito]

One thing the discussions ITT have made me think about is whether or not GTA can still be considered satire or just juvenile titillation, especially after V. I feel like GTA V was a turning point to me, where the humour was starting to feel played out, uninspired and lazy. While Los Santos' presentation of women in advertising etc. was surely just a satire of the real world, the way women are written and treated in the game's main plot did feel troubling to me. I've heard some say that V's plot is akin to one big, meta commentary on the state of GTA style games but I dunno if I buy that.

Maybe worth a thread in itself.

I was just about to post something similar that saying pointing to the GTA series as a sign of misogyny is sorta like judging men as misogynistic by surveying 12 year olds.

 

[Subtle]

I like what Sarkeesian does, but I can't help but feel it's a little disingenuous to single out violence against prostitute NPCs without pointing out how the outcome is the same for all NPC regardless of who they are.

 

[Infinite]

I like what Sarkeesian does, but I can't help but feel it's a little disingenuous to single out violence against prostitute NPCs without pointing out how the outcome is the same for all NPC regardless of who they are.

I wonder if people actually watched the video. She addressed this argument in the video and did point out that out

 

[Morrigan Stark]

No, it's true. Reasoning was that girls aren't as tough as boys and that players would look up the skirt (because female characters obviously have to wear skirts only)

Makes you think about ico and sotc and their gender politics.

Yeah, makes one hope TLG gets cancelled for real. What a piece of shit.

I wonder if people actually watched the video. She addressed this argument in the video and did point out that out

She addressed it... but rather poorly, IMO. It wasn't very convincing. I wish she had elaborated more on that.

 

[HappehLemons]

Video had some good points and some bad points. I feel like it's a little contradictory that she's part of a group called "Bitch Media".

 

[Phades]

I was thinking of an open world Game like GTA. I dont really think other story-relevant NPCs would act about some number like "0 Prostitues killed=nice to you", "10 Prostitutes killed=he questions your behaviour" etc.
I mean you need to write a dialogue for all of these options.

I'm not sure if you realize it or not, but basically that already existed in a non-sexualized format with bioshock and the little sisters. The sexualization aspect isn't relevant though considering it is just a choice->reward scenario.

 

[Infinite]

Yeah, makes one hope TLG gets cancelled for real. What a piece of shit.


She addressed it... but rather poorly, IMO. It wasn't very convincing. I wish she had elaborated more on that.

Elaborated more on what? What do you think shes trying to convince you of? The video is about female characters as background decorations.

 

[Gestault]

I feel like it's a little contradictory that she's part of a group called "Bitch Media".

Just so you know, most people would understand that to be a subversion of a common slur against women. Their work is a reaction to that kind of attitude and attack. It's not contradictory.

 

[Gestault]

Elaborated more on what? What do you think shes trying to convince you of? The video is about female characters as background decorations.

Sarkeesian is making a claim that sexist norms are being injected into games because of how the player can treat women, in terms of violence against them. In that segment, she argues that she believes that by nature of there being female characters with the ability to be harmed, it tacitly asks to the player to do so. Someone pointing out that the treatment of women in those gameplay systems is no different from any other NPC is a logical counterpoint to the underlying claim of sexism. The game system reactions of becoming hostile toward or fearful of players that carry out those acts is glossed over when she describes that reaction as exhilarating, and further encouraging the violent acts. Again, she claims sexism as a reasonable conclusion for the (as she sees it) inadequate response, but she ignore or hides that the game gives the same reactions independent of gender.

I think it's a little funny that Sarkeesian argues that the female characters are "asking for it" in terms of gameplay violence, when I can't identify (and she doesn't convey) any semiotics to that effect.

 

[DragonGirl]

The people screaming context are missing the point..for pretty much all of her videos. At no point ever is she critiquing individual games. She's showing how ubiquitous these portrayals are. This isn't a problem because it exists in some individual game somewhere, This is a problem because how across the board and common these portrayals are. Her videos are, every one of them, focused on consciousness raising of how far reaching these issues are. The point of consciousness raising is to try and make people aware that a problem exists, to get people to think about it, to be more critical of the media they consume. She doesn't suggest solutions because there aren't any solutions if people don't acknowledge that a problem even exists. The very act of realizing something is problematic is, in and of itself, the solution because, one would hope, it would change the patterns of what consumers buy or consider acceptable.

 

[Gestault]

The people screaming context are missing the point..for pretty much all of her videos. At no point ever is she critiquing individual games. She's showing how ubiquitous these portrayals are. This isn't a problem because it exists in some individual game somewhere, This is a problem because how across the board and common these portrayals are. Her videos are, every one of them, focused on consciousness raising of how far reaching these issues are. The point of consciousness raising is to try and make people aware that a problem exists, to get people to think about it, to be more critical of the media they consume. She doesn't suggest solutions because there aren't any solutions if people don't acknowledge that a problem even exists. The very act of realizing something is problematic is, in and of itself, the solution because, one would hope, it would change the patterns of what consumers buy or consider acceptable.

The purpose of including these games is that they're examples of the problem she's identifying. They are how her points are substantiated. I haven't seen many comments saying simply "well this one game wasn't like that, so I dismiss her whole point." The problem arises when the bulk of, or at least key examples to make her point fundamentally confuse inclusion with endorsement. Novels by the Bronte Sisters include scenes of sexism and abuse. That doesn't mean those works are encouraging either. On the first page of this thread, I responded with concern that Sarkeesian used a scene as an example for her criticism, which within the storyline was actually highlighting a monstrous human trafficking ring, in parallel to (and criticism of) real-world events. She merely showed the camera pan over the female characters in the context of games showing women as something to be used.

As I re-watched the video, my reactions came into better focus, and I responded as such. If we're to accept her ideas with no attention to how she evidences them, then we're approaching a foregone conclusion, and no one who doesn't already agree will respond to the criticism. I posted in greater detail later on, which I suppose is worth quoting here:

The implications of Sarkeesian's examples are troubling for me, as they suggest she either isn't able to identify the semiotics of criticism within the games themselves (example: The clip from Red Dead Redemption wasn't one of encouraging female objectification, but she noted it as one), or she's frequently (and I fear, knowingly) falling into a fallacy of incomplete evidence.

For a point of reference: If I read a paper by a student where even one-fifth of their evidence fell into that category (incomplete evidence), it would undermine the merit of that argument. It would be wisest to remove it all-together. If their thesis relied on any of those examples, I would consider that a failing paper. Sarkeesian seems to fall short of that standard, from a quick overview. When any critic cites works as indicative of a pattern, when that work is actually critical of that pattern, that should be a black mark on their understanding of the subject. Since the alternative would reflect even more poorly on the author (deliberate academic dishonesty), I'll simply assume it's unfamiliarity with the work. This isn't me objecting to the premise: I already agree with the premise; I'd like to see more social commentary along these lines, but this is a troubling use of "evidence" to that end.

My concern about your reaction is that you're either focussing on the lowest hanging fruit, in terms of criticism of the ideas in the video, or you're falling victim to the fallacy of constructing a strawman to attack. You opened in reaction to people "screaming" about loss of context for her examples. I see very little of that here.

 

[Nymphae]

I'm sure many people here can give you more examples and research on why repeated images of women as objects can socialise society into thinking that in certain ways.

I remain skeptical that those types of advertisements have much of a noticeable effect on society at large.

If women are repeated portrayed to objects without their agency, don't you think that the general population might just form false impressions of what women actually are and what they can and should be?

No, I don't think that is the impression the majority of the general population would form, do you, honestly? I am quite able to see ads like that without it effecting the overall view I have of women, which has been predominantly informed by the real people in my life, the friends I have, the people who have taught me as I grew up, the artists I look up to, etc. I'm sorry but I just don't think that ads like that are as harmful as some people make them out to be. Are they evidence of a certain degree of sexism? Absolutely. Do I think they have any lasting impact on people's lives? Not really.