5 ms·

What I find weird in our current status quo is how "sex work" and having an OnlyFans account is considered empowering, but a game about fictional characters lik

by ttt0 5y ago

What I find weird in our current status quo is how "sex work" and having an OnlyFans account is considered empowering, but a game about fictional characters like DOA is considered sexist and misogynist. I never played it, so I might be wrong, but isn't that why people play DOA in the first place? To see sexy women? So how's that trolling?

dragontamer 5y ago
> I never played it, so I might be wrong, but isn't that why people play DOA in the first place? To see sexy women? So how's that trolling? There's a fair number of players who were hoping that DOA would become an esport: akin to Marvel vs Capcom 3, Street Fighter 4, or Smash Ultimate. There's a discussion that must be had about DOA's excessive "sexiness" and whether or not that is hurting it from becoming a mainstream esports game. DOA 6 focused on the "cinematography", which caused an outrage because their fans wanted more emphasis on the sex-appeal (which was absolutely the focus of DOA2 through DOA5: "boob physics" was front and center in a lot of marketing) Now don't get me wrong, the discussion should be had. But... this isn't about censorship at all. This discussion ultimately comes down to the skirt length and bust size of Kasumi / Marie Rose (and other characters). To derail the discussion by yelling "censorship" is unnecessary, and unhelpful hyperbole.
slg 5y ago
>What I find weird in our current status quo is how "sex work" and having an OnlyFans account is considered empowering, but a game about fictional characters like DOA is considered sexist and misogynist. The difference is consent. A person is free to objectify themselves and doing so can be empowering. A person should be extremely cautious about creating fiction to objectify a group of people to which the author does not belong as this can be exploitative and have societal repercussions. I know next to nothing about the developers for the DOA franchise, but I am guessing there would be less controversy if the studio had a larger female presence.
- ttt0 5y ago
  What consent? We're talking about fictional characters here. Is Dwarf Fortress an immoral game, because the authors are not a part of groups like dwarfs, elves and goblins? And some in-game events may occur without the consent of those characters? edit: Got rate limited for some reason and can no longer respond, so I'm just going to edit this post: What does the "consent from the group" even mean? Do you have to make a poll, write to the CEO of Women™ or something? Seriously. Can I even include women if I'm making an amateur video game as a one-man effort (no pun intended), and I myself am not a woman? And for dragontamer, I guess you got your answer. I don't personally care about video games at all, but some people believe this is immoral and rape-like (no consent), so it's not surprising to me that someone calls it censorship and points out the parallels to back when people tried to censor violence in video games and whatnot. edit2: > You are free to make whatever game you want. The public is free to respond to your game however they want. You aren't going to get many complaints if you "even include women". If you objectify those women, you might get met with those complaints. If you were a women objectify women, you can at least claim that your are taking control of the objectification. That is viewed as a valid excuse by a lot of people much like how I mentioned people in a minority group are generally allowed to make jokes at that groups expense. So I should take it as roughly "the consent from the group means that the group isn't going to cancel you"? But if that's the case then why is it called "consent"? Isn't the entire point of consent to ask before you take action? It's like saying "I'm going to force you to have sex with me, if you don't go to the police then it means you consented to it". And from my understanding that's literally what rape culture is.
  - slg 5y ago
    Consent from the group being objectified. It is the same reason that a person who belongs to a specific minority group is usually given free reign to tell jokes about that group while a person outside that minority isn't. It doesn't matter that the character in the joke isn't a real person.
    - dragontamer 5y ago
      Its pretty clear that all the women whose breasts were measured for DOA's breast physics consented to these effecs. Consent certainly isn't the issue here. This is 100% a "Sexiness" issue. DOA is a "sexy" game, including breast physics and precise measurements of "bounciness" in skimpy costumes. The discussion the DOA community needs is about how such "sex appeal" is relatively niche, and is a "turnoff" to some gamers. DOA6, which was striving for esports / mainstream acceptance is finding itself between a rock and a hard place. DOA has a history of being "that sexy game", which people don't want to associate with in public. On the other hand, to make a change in the marketing is somewhat of a betrayal to the fans who have supported DOA over the past few decades. --------- The underlying issue gets ignored because of 'censorship' worries. A game that markets itself with this kind of sexiness front-and-center cannot really become mainstream. Its too perverted for people to want to associate with in public.

by ttt0 5y ago

dragontamer 5y ago

> I never played it, so I might be wrong, but isn't that why people play DOA in the first place? To see sexy women? So how's that trolling? There's a fair number of players who were hoping that DOA would become an esport: akin to Marvel vs Capcom 3, Street Fighter 4, or Smash Ultimate. There's a discussion that must be had about DOA's excessive "sexiness" and whether or not that is hurting it from becoming a mainstream esports game. DOA 6 focused on the "cinematography", which caused an outrage because their fans wanted more emphasis on the sex-appeal (which was absolutely the focus of DOA2 through DOA5: "boob physics" was front and center in a lot of marketing) Now don't get me wrong, the discussion should be had. But... this isn't about censorship at all. This discussion ultimately comes down to the skirt length and bust size of Kasumi / Marie Rose (and other characters). To derail the discussion by yelling "censorship" is unnecessary, and unhelpful hyperbole.

slg 5y ago

>What I find weird in our current status quo is how "sex work" and having an OnlyFans account is considered empowering, but a game about fictional characters like DOA is considered sexist and misogynist. The difference is consent. A person is free to objectify themselves and doing so can be empowering. A person should be extremely cautious about creating fiction to objectify a group of people to which the author does not belong as this can be exploitative and have societal repercussions. I know next to nothing about the developers for the DOA franchise, but I am guessing there would be less controversy if the studio had a larger female presence.

ttt0 5y ago
What consent? We're talking about fictional characters here. Is Dwarf Fortress an immoral game, because the authors are not a part of groups like dwarfs, elves and goblins? And some in-game events may occur without the consent of those characters? edit: Got rate limited for some reason and can no longer respond, so I'm just going to edit this post: What does the "consent from the group" even mean? Do you have to make a poll, write to the CEO of Women™ or something? Seriously. Can I even include women if I'm making an amateur video game as a one-man effort (no pun intended), and I myself am not a woman? And for dragontamer, I guess you got your answer. I don't personally care about video games at all, but some people believe this is immoral and rape-like (no consent), so it's not surprising to me that someone calls it censorship and points out the parallels to back when people tried to censor violence in video games and whatnot. edit2: > You are free to make whatever game you want. The public is free to respond to your game however they want. You aren't going to get many complaints if you "even include women". If you objectify those women, you might get met with those complaints. If you were a women objectify women, you can at least claim that your are taking control of the objectification. That is viewed as a valid excuse by a lot of people much like how I mentioned people in a minority group are generally allowed to make jokes at that groups expense. So I should take it as roughly "the consent from the group means that the group isn't going to cancel you"? But if that's the case then why is it called "consent"? Isn't the entire point of consent to ask before you take action? It's like saying "I'm going to force you to have sex with me, if you don't go to the police then it means you consented to it". And from my understanding that's literally what rape culture is.
- slg 5y ago
  Consent from the group being objectified. It is the same reason that a person who belongs to a specific minority group is usually given free reign to tell jokes about that group while a person outside that minority isn't. It doesn't matter that the character in the joke isn't a real person.
  - dragontamer 5y ago
    Its pretty clear that all the women whose breasts were measured for DOA's breast physics consented to these effecs. Consent certainly isn't the issue here. This is 100% a "Sexiness" issue. DOA is a "sexy" game, including breast physics and precise measurements of "bounciness" in skimpy costumes. The discussion the DOA community needs is about how such "sex appeal" is relatively niche, and is a "turnoff" to some gamers. DOA6, which was striving for esports / mainstream acceptance is finding itself between a rock and a hard place. DOA has a history of being "that sexy game", which people don't want to associate with in public. On the other hand, to make a change in the marketing is somewhat of a betrayal to the fans who have supported DOA over the past few decades. --------- The underlying issue gets ignored because of 'censorship' worries. A game that markets itself with this kind of sexiness front-and-center cannot really become mainstream. Its too perverted for people to want to associate with in public.