Sure, but the SoM kissing thing isn't a review, it's a disavowed opinion piece:
http://www.polygon.com/2014/10/1/6880061/shadow-mordor-kissing-design
Unless there is a review which does the same thing and I just haven't seen it.
Right, I have to put up my hands to that one. Altough I could've sword I read it somewhere else, but until (if) I find it, you're right. That was a bad example.
I'm interested in seeing examples of this. I'm not exactly doubting you, I don't visit game review sites much so I don't really know. Is it really so extreme? I assume you're speaking specifically of reviews of games which ARE sexualizing women, because I'm pretty sure most CoD reviews can go three sentences without talking about the portrayal of women.
My thinking is that Dragons Crown was asking to be made into a sexism controversy, and got exactly what it wanted. Though I suspect most reviews actually did cover the gameplay mechanics also... They just addressed the watermelons in the room.
I will try to get a few decent examples and post them here. And no, it's not "that" extreme. But noticeable enough to roll my eyes and get quite a few people annoyed enough to complain about it. It's usually the moment where I have to double check if half the stuff mentioned comes even close to being that bad. A lot of Dragon's Crown stuff I read shortly after release were up in arms about the scoreress and amazon. So I assumed that those were two models oddly out of place in a otherwise decent represantation. But I had to drift to Video footage and the like until I saw that the other models are also acted up with every fantasy stereotype ever, and that the two chicks didnt seem out of place most of the time (I mean, I generally didnt like the models, maybe except for the Elf. The Warrior looks like a pea on top of a dude that filled his armor with baloon animals.). I could've hopped on to the thing too if the other characters were reasonably presented. But they werent.
Okay, I think you're exaggerating. Maybe projecting.
No, I do mean it that way. It isnt everyone, mind you. I still regularly visit quite a few Sites, but other sites like Kotaku and the bunch? That isnt journalism, at least half the time it isnt. And when I reach the point where I have to cherry pick articles not containing some nutjob's "Dis' be sexist, Mon!" out of the others, the site isnt exactly climbing on my list. The whole "Gamers are dead"-thing gave me a good pointer on which site can be safely ignored without loosing anything valuable.
Altough, I have to admit that I was pretty upset with this whole thing. People that I used to watch regularly, or who I read regularly, shifted from stuff that really interested me (Game design, bad DRM, backwards compatability, deeper analysis of story and gameplay) to the whole "women in gaming" thing. I mean, it's HUGE. And there ARE issues I recognize. But I have a hard time with not being able to walk ten paces without being BOMBARDED with this crap. Maybe you're right, and maybe I just project too much into actually harmless pieces, because there's a ton to go around at the moment. But from a subejctive point, there's too much, it's to acted up, and contains way too much drama.
People asked for a female protagonist. They didn't magically deduct a point from every game without one, or demand that every game have one. You're knocking down strawmen.
The guy's response was the problem, that he dismissed public opinion *in general* over this. That he suggested it would be "pandering" to listen to what people want, period. He could have just said "No" or "No, it'd be too much work" or "No, the majority of the gaming community doesn't care about having female heroes".
So hopefully people take his snarky advice and take their dollars elsewhere, to developers who listen to their fans. Or at least don't dismiss their fans.
Strawmen? I dont think so, honestly. First of all, we've seen the excuse of "It takes too much time." and "Not enough people want that" before, and people went apeshit then too! Look at AC: Unity for the "Not enough time" excuse. It's a battle you cant win, people will yell at you either way. So his version is as good as any. Also, he did not dismiss all people voicing discontent, only those that specifically asked for a female protagonist. At least in the articles i've read. If you have one where he also goes that route for other concerns, I would concede this point.
I just dont see how this would be a valid critique anway. Why wasnt the Character gay? Why wasnt he black? He wrote a certain story with a certain character in mind, and "If you didnt like the color/gender/sexuality of the main protagonist, the game probably isnt for you." is probably the most valid response you can give. Sure, his tone was a bit...meh. So I can understand if you wouldnt want to have anything to do with him.
I didn't say anything about hate crimes or... African druglords?? Yes, that does sound crazy!
I was thinking about the Chik-Fil-A situation, but also things like Metal Gear. If I was in favor of nuclear proliferation, I'd probably avoid buying games involving Kojima! Nothing weird about that.
That was blow out of proportion on purpose, because I wanted to illustrate the "How bad can it be?"-point. Maybe it makes me a bad person, but I do not check if anyone involved in a certain production does bad stuff on the side. I think that's just a matter of personal preference. And I wanted to show my point of view, it would have to be pretty bad stuff for me to go "You know what? Maybe this isnt a good idea.". But I never got the impression that my money supports some outrageous atrocities somewhere else in the world. But again, to each his own. I stopped buying inventory from certain places for much dumber reasons than anything like that.
Author
Topic: Re: Only two posts on 'Tropes vs Women in Video Games' (Read 311158 times)