I haven’t played Lollipop Chainsaw but, watching some of the cut scenes, it strikes me as more of a Planet Terror/Cherry Darling tongue-in-cheek “Yes, this is intentionally ridiculous; that’s the point” thing than a Buffy the Vampire thing.
Within the context of its intentional absurdity, Juliet’s uniform makes more “sense” to me than, say, Jill Valentine killing zombies in a miniskirt for days on end (which we’re supposed to be taking straight-faced).
Notice how there’s her face, there ? Above the boobies ?
I mean, yes, that’s a pretty bad shot (marketing :rolleyes:), but it’s still a photo of a person. Not just a body. Right ?
Reference/homage to another work (Ghost in the Shell IIRC). Doesn’t count ! My literary commentary, my rules ! 
Joke aside, “River in the box” is more about evoking notions of “fetal, newborn => innocent, pure but vulnerable” than catering to prurient interest IMO.
Isn’t that like saying that everything about Anders Breivik beyond his mass murder and repugnant screeds is super innocent ? 
[QUOTE=Jophiel]
Within the context of its intentional absurdity, Juliet’s uniform makes more “sense” to me than, say, Jill Valentine killing zombies in a miniskirt for days on end (which we’re supposed to be taking straight-faced).
[/QUOTE]
It does, I agree - but that intentional absurdity does not *have *to include upskirt booty shots or drawn out pans over The Goods, does it ?
Like, there are times where it’s quite clear they’re going for the surreal parallel of Juliet preoccupation about her looks and still looking totally hot in the middle of a zombie apocalypse… with her boyfriend’s severed head stuck to her belt…; and there are times where it’s pure “you should probably be fapping right about now”.
Second-hand information from a private conversation, which I wasn’t privy to? Or should I dig through Quinn’s entire twitter feed looking for it? I’ve seen it confirmed by so many different sources that I find it entirely believable.
This is a byproduct of me being jaded. I also don’t “blame” the industry for not taking risks. Because I’m stupid, and I totally should blame them for both. :smack:
Don’t expect me to understand how the marketing department thinks.
I don’t know, honestly. It comes back to the issue of “when is a character merely a sex symbol”. And that’s a fairly uncomfortable and very subjective discussion. Obviously, characters like Juliet, Lara Croft, and Bayonetta are meant to be attractive, at times almost ridiculously so. Does this make them bad characters? Does this make them exist solely for the sake of titillating the male audience? I mean, in the case of, say, the new Starfire it’s pretty easy to tell - you have a character with a fairly classic, universally-beloved interpretation being turned into a flirty, sexy, rather dull “adult” version. As much as The Amazing Atheist tries badly to defend that (the video where he complained about feminists not liking the New 52 incarnation of that character was the one that finally convinced me to unsubscribe - god, what a tool), the point is that these changes were not for the sake of the character - they were for the sake of sex appeal. But what about these characters? What about Ivy, or Mai Sharanui, or any number of other badass action girls clearly in charge of their own destiny who happen to be built like a lamppost with melons taped to the side? And it gets even more complicated when you look at, say, Bayonetta, and realize that for all intents and purposes this appears to be a character designed with “exhibition as empowerment” as a major design element- that is, her character intentionally and joyfully derives power from her sexuality and showing it off, like the women who do porn because they genuinely enjoy doing porn. I dunno.
No, but that doesn’t make them objectively “bad” or harmful either. I’m not going to work too hard to defend a game I haven’t played but the over-the-top sexuality was part of what made me compare it to Planet Terror. We didn’t need to see Cherry Darling dance either but I understand that it played a greater role in the director’s vision than just “fap fap fap”. Neither are the apex of their particular media or anything but I can see where both at least attempting to use the sex appeal of the protagonist as part of the entire package as opposed to just tacking it on because “boobs”.
I’m just speaking personally but, on the “stupid fanservice” scale, it bothers me less (such as it bothers me at all which is pretty little) than my previous example of Jill Valentine killing zombies in a miniskirt or Lara Croft jungle spelunking in a pair of khaki hotpants. Those games we’re supposed to be taking seriously and a serious protagonist would put some damn pants on in their situation. Lollipop Chainsaw isn’t working under the premise and the sexuality is part of the absurdity.
Yay, *Bayonetta *is something apart - it’s very odd really, that playing a game about a deliberately, over the top sex bomb with impossible legs, who poledances in cutscenes, paddles her enemies’ buttocks, seemingly cannot utter a sentence that doesn’t include innuendo and featuring constant ass shots… doesn’t *feel *even a little bit skeevy to me.
I’m not sure I get it, or why. Maybe she’s so sexualized, she does a full revolution and goes back to positive representation :), I’unno either.
On the other hand, you can clearly see the “TITTAYS !” evolution of Ivy. Every game she gains a cup size while her bra sheds square inches. I mean, she was always a sultry character (whip it, whip it goood) but it’s visibly getting worse. Same goes for Sophitia - who’s supposed to be a gorram Vestal of Athena ! Chastity incarnate ! The job title where, if you have the temerity of even getting raped, Athena turns you into a snake person ! AGH !
Oh do not even get me started on Sophitia. Just no. Ivy and Tira at least have the personality excuse; Soph is just gratuitious boobage for boobage’s sake in way that doesn’t even make sense with the character. Especially given that her more brash sister is considerably more modest. Come the fuck on. Speaking of which: a ninja with J cups? Really? If it weren’t for that I’d not complain about Taki, but ninjas don’t have tits like that. Especially in bright red jumpsuits with no support. At least they haven’t sexualized fucking Talim yet. I hope.
(That said, Lizardman x Astaroth and Nightmare x Astaroth are shockingly erotic. Torture porn ftw.)
For those of who, like me, are unfamiliar with this online boogieman 4chan, here’s a guide.
Given the orchestrated campaign of lies here, I’m pretty skeptical of any claim about this situation unless I’m seeing primary sources. Are all the different sources you’re seeing for claims about her criticisms sourced back to TFYC and/or 4chan? If so, I think your trust in them is unwarranted.
That’s got to be the most disgustingly fair assessment of 4chan I’ve ever seen.
Sure you do, there’s no reason to lie.
Again, be sure to quote my posts where I said any of the above was okay. Put it right here. --------------->
But whatever you do, don’t address the substance of my arguments, or gamergate’s, because you, and Quinn, cannot, since it completely demolishes her credibility
That “misogynist” dump that proved Quinn engaged in private and public conduct that directly contradicted her claims to being a feminist. So, after spending months lying to and attacking gamers, it turns out she’s of the classic “do as I say, not as I do” moral crusaders. People don’t like being called names and derided by hypocrites, funnily enough.
Who is this “everyone” you’re referring to? Can you go ahead and list their names here? -------------->
They “got in bed” with charitable donors who spent over $20,000 to help a female-generated video game get made. Despite Sarkeesian’s and Quinn’s attempts to shut it down, because these particular feminists were doing something unheard of to third-wavers, expending effort and creating something worthwhile, instead of whining.
There’s every way to get around it since the narrative doesn’t conform to your lies.
Just a question, do you get a dollar every time you say “misogyny?”
Bayonetta is a really, really tricky thing. On one hand, it’s obviously pandering to a sorta male-gazey audience. That’s not necessarily okay. But the thing that makes her better in my eyes is that in-universe, that is, ignoring the fact that the camera is there and us players are watching it, she’s not doing it for anyone. She’s a woman that likes sex, and likes to look sexy and dress up. But she’s doing it for herself.
She’s not doing it for anyone and shows absolutely no sexual interest in any of the men in the cast of the game itself. In fact, she regularly goes out of her way to demean them. Now, yes, from a meta perspective this is basically just playing to Kamiya’s obvious sub fetish, but if you separate the art from knowledge about other things Kamiya has made it’s a unique take on female sexuality and not one I think we should wholly discount because of meta reasons.
That said, part of the problem is that she’s not a very good character, she barely has any motivation. But it’s a Platinum game, every Platinum game has paper-thin plot and characterization, so accepting the game for what it is I think Bayonetta has some very good points, even if there are also obvious issues with the game (especially the marketing of the first game in Japan).
That’s strange. I wasn’t aware there was some kind of electric prod sold with every video game that detects whether the user has a uterus or not, then proceeds to shock them so they’re not able to play those games.
Yeah, how dare she state facts that reflect reality and extant market conditions. What an idiot
And who was it that was forcing you to watch it?
Not when it’s done as a diversionary tactic, and explicitly leaves out games journalists and games developers. Sorry
No it’s a nonexistent one. Sorry.
That’s nice. Too bad you’re numerically insignificant in the game-buying arena.
Christ aren’t you just a wonderful little clueless misogynist. Fun fact: when you make a game entirely around the sensibilities of one gender, it has less of a pull to the other gender. When you, in addition to this, provide elements that are explicitly alienating to women, you get what we have right now.
:smack:
You do realize that saying “well it’s accurate” to a strawman completely undermines your argument, right? That’s not her position!
Really? Because I think the majority of game buyers are people like **Kobal2 **and me - grownups with careers and lives and interests outside of gaming. It is you, in fact, who is an insignificant minority, an as soon as the game manufacturers realize this, you’re history.
Are you really being this argumentative? Do you not know what the ESA says about gaming’s demographics. It’s a total split down the middle. Men and women are equal players. Men likely spend more, but pretending that women don’t play games at all would be A) foolish for publishers and B) absolutely moronic for anyone else to claim.
I can’t believe this has gone unaddressed for a page, beucause I think it speaks to blindy’s ability to separate truth from fiction. Anders Behring Breivik is a sick fuck of a racist mass murderer. Anders Lystad Brevik (note the different middle name and spelling of the last name) is a game designer and (as far as I’m aware) hasn’t killed anybody. But the narrative that a mass murderer would sign a letter to Zoe Quinn supporting her is too good to fact check. (Nevermind that it is neither to ZQ, nor does it support her specifically, as LHOD pointed out.) C’mon, blindy. Are you so divorced from reality that that didn’t tickle your spider sense even a little? I read the accusation, thought “that doesn’t seem right,” and within 2 minutes of Googleing could say with confidence that they were not the same person. Maybe there are some legitimate complaints about the relationship between the gaming industry and the media that cover it, but the GG story is so full of either negligent reports (like calling a board game designer a mass murderer) or lies that if blindy told me the sky were blue, I’d have to go outside and look for myself before I believed him.
