-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bikini Armor Battle Damage: Sexy Armor Hypocrisy (?) featuring (some of) NeoGAF
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
The comic is about what women find sexy. The original comic says it's a cutey Batman, the other one says, no it's actually abs and chest muscles.
While Senran Kagura is extremely over the top, you can still gather from it that men apparently like breasts and butts. The comic would also work with pictures of Twilight, Thor and Arrow instead of the romance novels.
blankempathy
Member
Kuja's personality matches his outfit though so to me it didn't stand out too much.Was Itahana (Mevius' character designer) responsible for Kuja's design in FFIX?
I know he's listed with two others as the character designers for that game.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
It just occurred to me, that when I saw the trailer for Brianna Wus game a while ago, one of the characters stuck out to me.
Now, her game takes place on a space station. In space. Now, she made this blog post to point out the hypocrisy of people getting upset over the male armor that looks horribly designed but....her game has a one piece suit outfit for one of the characters? That seems to have a pivotal role in the game? In space?
Not saying she's a hypocrite but...yeah. Double standards.
Now, her game takes place on a space station. In space. Now, she made this blog post to point out the hypocrisy of people getting upset over the male armor that looks horribly designed but....her game has a one piece suit outfit for one of the characters? That seems to have a pivotal role in the game? In space?
Not saying she's a hypocrite but...yeah. Double standards.
Somethings can be degrading and offensive when they originate outside a group and empowering when they originate inside a group.
For example, the 'n-word'.
Not saying that is definitely the case here, but it probably could be argued.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
True. But I remember in one of the recent Bayonetta threads, some of the discussions ignored the fact that she was created by a female designer and went straight to the throat.
i know but isn't there still "male oversight"(right word?) at the end? Same can be said about Soul Calibur.
I could be mistaken, but I believe that character designers are contracted to design characters to a certain specification, and obviously require approval for the final design. How much input a character designer actually has on the sexualization/objectification of a character probably varies considerably from case to case.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
Reading up on some interviews, the lead designer of Bayonetta states that Kamiya had 3 points he wanted filled out, but she decided for her to have long legs for one thing,(For the first game) and looking at the concept art taht she did,(For the 2nd game) the final design is very close to it.
So while Kamiya might've written off on it and said 'ok', alot of it seems to be her design.
Edit-This is getting a bit off topic as Bayonetta doesn't fit the mold, but having to jump hurdles to somehow figure out that in the end Bayonetta is 100% sexualized by a male is...a bit much, no? A man can make a female character that is deemed respectful whilst being sexy just as much as a woman can. I simply brought up Bayonetta because you were giving a double standard to a one piece swimsuit like outfit being 'empowering' when done by a woman, but when a woman designed Bayonetta, you try to write it off as 'Well a man had to sign off on it'.
SolidSnakex
Member
What about Code of Princess? The concept and art came from Kinu Nishimura.
Don't take it so seriously. I just don't like the design.
Deified Data
Banned
I can't think of any intelligent way it can be argued.
Most people's problem with Bayonetta isn't actually her outfit so much.
Pretty much most of the gripes I have seen have been with the constantly absurd camera angles.
Basically the common sentiment I've seen is "Cool a smart sexy competent female character who owns and uses her sexuality oh wait now I am 3 inches from her crotch/buttcrack this isn't great."
From page one of this thread you see people talking about the "Ban this Sexy filth" strawman of an argument which in reality pretty much nobody is making.
It is entirely possible to be sexy without being exploitative. I imagine Brianna would argue that what she's going for with her characters, and most people feel Bayonetta skirts that line, usually with the camera-work pushing it over.
Basically, yeah Bayonetta's character designer was a lady and she made, in a vacuum, a cool sexy character who owns it and is cool.
But Bayonetta's cinematics directors, from what I can find, are not ladies, and it shows.
All this is not to say you have to be a lady to not be sexist about a female character in a game, but the chances are certainly far better.
Zuhzuhzombie!!
Member
BreezyLimbo
Banned
That argument was actually made in the thread I linked, but the counter argument was that Bayonetta as a character knew fully well where those cameras were and would actively pose for it-It was simply being in character for her to pose at these cameras. You can see the way she treats other characters in the game that her personality is a dominating one that knows she has an amazing body, and she plays it up for the camera as well for the way she acts in game. She's not being belittled by these camera angles, she's actively owning them and alot of her poses in the game, whether or not the camera zooms in on it, are her showing off her sexy body.
We can argue whether she has agency or not, but the way she's presented in game is that she's very much in control within game. She's an extremely strong female character. I could see a problem if she was a submissive character who wasn't actively in control in game, and the camera zoomed in while she was being weak, but she's not.
I think that's the greatest thing anyone can be taught, man or woman-That YOU are in control of your body, and to own it. Bayonetta definitely gives off that vibe.
Tye The Czar
Member
I think we need to hammer home the fact that most people aren't actually saying this and brutally mock anyone who actually thinks Criticism = Censorship.
stump sock
Member
I think the person who figures out how to explain this to the world will win the nobel peace prize
John Kowalski
Banned
That does look kinda sexy, but man winter is gonna be rough for the poor fellow.
silvermember
Banned
You give humans too much credit. Expect the worst and you will never be disappointed in life.
I hear that outfit is the latest in anti cold tech.
John Kowalski
Banned
If you read between the lines, she's actually saying that men have little to complain about in relation to overtly sexualized poor designs yet the negative response to this one character is vast, almost unanimously negative, and generally unchallenged. Whereas females do have much more serious complaints to commit to, but whose voiced opinions are generally handled as a secondary concern and often ostensibly and unnecessarily challenged.
For all we know that thing has full Blizzard immunity!
ShadowSoldier89
Member
Criticism is fine, but calling everything criticism is also wrong. A large portion of people have been calling things like bikini armor sexist and offensive. These terms refer to something harmful, and the moment you are calling something harmful you are calling for its existence to be snuffed out.
If someone really believes that then thats their prerogative, however calling that criticism is wrong.
On the other hand, those just saying they dont like the design, they would prefer to see X, then yes that is criticism.
That's the thing though. All those things you mentioned are great and are the parts of her character that are good and are widely celebrated.
But assigning agency to a video game character is already a wonky subject that is much deeper than this discussion here and I think somehow layering control and agency over the game camera into that discussion gets even more iffy.
I can definitely see where you're coming from. Hell there's a move where she dances shooting everywhere and then explicitly poses for the camera (complete with camera flash and shutter click) but I feel like that's the exception rather than the rule.
In a game as self-aware as that I can certainly see the argument that Bayonetta as a character is meant to be aware of the camera and is explicitly acting for it. But even given that assumption, the camerawork often goes beyond the pale and ceases to be something that can be argued is an element of her agency. Times where she's very clearly not posing but the camera takes the opportunity anyway.
Like I said it's a far deeper discussion than it first appears, but I hope this has at least given you some insight, from someone who finds this subject interesting and has read a lot of takes on it, that it's a far more complex situation than just "Sexy Character #1 Good. Sexy Character #2 Bad?! Checkmate Feminism!"
These are pretty fucking huge leaps of logic you're doing.
You are talking about an argument no one is making, and on top of that you are tone policing it.
BreezyLimbo
Banned
It's definitely a difficult discussion. It's like...if we come to the consensus that any female character without any agency is considered to be slightly sexist or offensive or whatnot when portrayed in a sexual way, does that mean any female character written or created by a male fits this spectrum? Are there ranges on whether we'd find it offensive if they act too liberally, or not offensive if conservative?
It's...it's definitely a tangent from the present discussion, and it's definitely a discussion to be had another day. I feel we can both agree though that Bayonetta as a character, is a very strong character in terms of personality and dominant instead of submissive.
Pretty much totally agree.
I think it's definitely possible for a dude to create a female character who has agency within the work and isn't treated exploitatively, but it is far less common.
I also that it is an example of the problem you have with any kind of black and white assessment. Bayonetta is definitely a strong character, but many would argue she is still objectified by the camerawork. That doesn't mean that she as a character is any less well done or powerful, necessarily, but you do also have to take into account how even good characters can be treated poorly.
Also unrelated to this conversation but thanks to this thread I learned that any time I said "Yeah that's kinda sexist" what I was actually saying was "This shouldn't exist burn it all Please." This is a strange moment.
Freshmaker
I am Korean.
Odd part you highlighted as I was talking about the design, which is not in any way a person. (Which is why I used the "it" rather than a gendered pronoun.)
I will give the design credit though. It's certainly creative. I've never seen a man ever dress like that for any reason. Closest I can come up with is Borat at the beach.
SkeptiMism
Member
That seems like slightly misguided logic.
I'll start out with an example.
There's a lot of marketing for various clothing that's pretty fucked up and twists our thoughts about how a woman should look in a nasty way (I hope we don't have to argue about that by the way, as things we see and hear affecting us is one of the basic pillars sociology leans on - we are the product of our genes, upbringing and culture). We can pretty safely say it's harmful and we can criticize single manifestations of that harmful marketing or single aspects of those manifestations,
Let's take for example a magazine advertisement that has a very thin, photoshopped model in it. We can criticize this marketing by criticizing that advertisement or maybe taking a single aspect of that advertisement, such as an overly sexual pose. Now, this doesn't mean that we are calling for this specific advertisement not to exist, and it doesn't even mean that there should be no such advertisements at all. It's only a manifestation of the harmful marketing, and as such we are really criticizing the larger whole. In other words, we are calling for the people responsible to be more thoughtful when they do it, and at the same time we are also calling for the general public to be more aware of what's happening.
There wouldn't really be a problem if there was more equal representation of various female body forms. There would still be plenty of room for thin models and photoshopped pictures.
The same way, people criticizing these things in games and saying that the sexist portrayal of women in such a large scale is harmful, aren't really calling for any single games not to exist but they're criticizing them as manifestations of that harmful portrayal of women. The purpose is to make the people responsible more aware of it and hopefully more thoughtful, and at the same time to make the general public more aware of it. There would still be plenty of room for games like Senran Kagura to exist and there would still be plenty of room for even games that are otherwise normal but in some aspects would have obvious sexism, such as bikini armor.
hooijdonk17
Member
is to
what
is to
Most of the reactions are because the art is FUGLY and stupid. The same argument can and has been made for female characters.
I think i even made a similar point to her's in the thread.
However i will never be cool with the idea of "non-practical design = bad design".
If i were, i couldn't enjoy and even love the extravagant look Tarsem movies have, for that very reason.
Impractical designs work within a certain context. Tarsem's movies never try to portray realism, they're always surreal.
The problem is when you have a world that tries to present itself as fantastical, but still grounded, and then the characters wear outfits that don't fit into the universe. This happens in games all the time.
CosmicGroinPull
Member
You need to see the armour from behind to see what got people going
They have to work harder on their textures, make the muscles more prominent. That pic almost got me going....
ConanTheKing
Member
This argument (And the one from that cat girl Tekken character) serves to demonstrate one more reason why Japanese games don't hold the acclaim they once did. Even if you disagree and find it fine/appealing, clearly a lot do not and it just reinforces stereotypes.
SolidSnakex
Member
I know, what I was referring to is that you seem to be suggesting that the industry should get rid of any character designs that may make some uncomfortable. Unless i'm just misreading what you're saying. No form of entertainment does that. That's why I said that it's opening up a dangerous can of worms. Because where are you going to stop when it comes to getting rid of things that may make someone uncomfortable?
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Can we stop pretending like only Japan is guilty of this? It's completely preposterous. All one needs to do is open Steam and check out almost anything with the word "RPG" in it to find examples of these shitty armours. And Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are among the rare games that don't do this (Dark Souls II does have some skimpier outfits, but at least they're unisex and usually actual clothing and not metal) and they're Japanese games. The whole trend started with western fantasy artists such as Vallejo and Frazetta anyway.
Just ignore the designs in Vagrant Story and Final Fantasy 9 when Square was at the top of the game and the genre stronger than ever.
Fantastapotamus
Wrong about commas, wrong about everything
Am I really the last person on earth who thinks of this when people talk about witches?
Cause that quote really weirded me out way more than it should have.
Video games have tons of strange tropes that people take for granted, and one fairly large one is a complete lack of a sense of propriety. Go into people's homes and rummage through all their things! Wear a mankini to battle and grapple with other beefy men with children watching! Destroy all barrels! After a while you get used to that stuff.
Video games only ask you to suspend your disbelief, though, not completely annihilate it as a concept permanently from your psyche. I can't speak for anyone else, but that's my problem with that armor. You could imagine someone realistically stealing things, because that's a thing that happens, and you could imagine someone wearing a mankini because you can see stuff like that at the beach, and you can see the appeal of unrealistic exploding barrels because it's cathartic, and highly volatile explosives do exist. That armor, though, is where I draw the line. It's not that I can't imagine a person wearing it to battle, it's that I can't imagine a person wearing it anywhere. Even if I pictured someone wearing that in the bedroom with their lover, I can only picture it as some kind of humiliating punishment.
Video games only ask you to suspend your disbelief, though, not completely annihilate it as a concept permanently from your psyche. I can't speak for anyone else, but that's my problem with that armor. You could imagine someone realistically stealing things, because that's a thing that happens, and you could imagine someone wearing a mankini because you can see stuff like that at the beach, and you can see the appeal of unrealistic exploding barrels because it's cathartic, and highly volatile explosives do exist. That armor, though, is where I draw the line. It's not that I can't imagine a person wearing it to battle, it's that I can't imagine a person wearing it anywhere. Even if I pictured someone wearing that in the bedroom with their lover, I can only picture it as some kind of humiliating punishment.
There are worse things shown at real fashion shows. Just admit you are uncomfortable.
HolyBaikal
Banned
Well, NeoGAF isn't perfect in gender views. And I don't see anything wrong with her quoting us. Even though not everyone meant it that way.
There were some people saying things like "it's emasculating" like it was a bad thing.
So I do think there are some gender things to worry about with this...
There were some people saying things like "it's emasculating" like it was a bad thing.
So I do think there are some gender things to worry about with this...
It grounds itself, but it's still a fantasy world so far out from reality that anything could happen. All fiction is. You can say it's based on the real world, but in a world with magic, monsters, dungeons and loot crazy armour and many other other worldly things fit in just fine. It's the creators choice what they fill their worlds with, not everything has to be an accurate representation of real things, fiction would be terribly boring if the only fiction available was based entirely on non-fictional circumstances and settings.
The biggest problem is a lot of people especially on the internet on places like here and tumblr, which while popular are still niche in comparison to how much the games sell are the people that complain and discuss about things like this. That's fine and discussion is good, but the vast majority of people who buy this sort of game don't look at a video game or a piece of fiction and feel offended themselves or for other people. They just see it as fiction and either buy it if they like it, or leave it on the shelf. The amount of discussion that comes out of tumblr makes it appear it's a huge, massive issue when the real problem in the gaming industry is how companies, western especially treat women in the work place. That is what keeps women out of the games industry, not what characters are made and so on.
People need to also remember that video games started off as something aimed mostly at a male audience, that audience is still the largest target market for the mainstream gaming market and there is still many niche genres that are aimed at families, women, young girls, young males and even older men and women. Maybe if they got advertised a lot more then there wouldn't be such a big issue all the time. There's something in gaming for everyone, it's just many people don't know where to find it.
Lowlander2
Banned
Glass houses.
To me all Final Fantasy games are a rollercoaster of visual emotions. Sometimes I adore a certain design and sometimes I scratch my head wondering if I am simply getting old and I do not understand what I see. It has been always like that.
For example, in FFX I find too excentric Tidus clothing. It has identity but to me it just tries to make him look cool and nothing more. I do not understand that design.
Then in Auron I find not only an excellent design that represents very well the character, it even adds how he uses the top part to rest the arm. That is an amazing detail that works perfect.
For example, in FFX I find too excentric Tidus clothing. It has identity but to me it just tries to make him look cool and nothing more. I do not understand that design.
Then in Auron I find not only an excellent design that represents very well the character, it even adds how he uses the top part to rest the arm. That is an amazing detail that works perfect.
Am I really the last person on earth who thinks of this when people talk about witches?
Cause that quote really weirded me out way more than it should have.
yep, the 1950s are over, and we now think of witches as sexy, empowered, and strangely inflammable.
So basically things straying from the general art direction look bad and out of place.
That has nothing to do with practicality.
if in one of the aforementioned Tarsem movies, one character was just wearing jeans and a tshirt, it would look like shit.
So again, it's not about practicality, but about adhering to the art direction, which this Final Fantasy character could be doing (i haven't seen the rest of the game).
People complaining that Cidney or Gladiolus design aren't practical, are not making any sense, because (like them or not) they fit the general art direction; art direction that does not have "practicality" as one of its major staples, not above stylish designer costumes anyway.
And google searching how a real mechanic dresses has fuck all to do with it (i'm saying this as someone who doesn't even like her design, btw).
FF Seraphim
Member
The design is horrible. Whoever this blog person is, its obvious they just care about making a stupid statement than actually caring about people's dislike of the design. Seriously its super bad.