It's been reported that Dead or alive Extreme 3 will get a VR update the day PSVR is released. Some people have a problem with this, going so far as to say the game is a "sexual assault" simulator:

https://www.engadget.com/2016/08/29/dead-or-alive-vr-is-basically-sexual-assault-the-game/

www.polygon.com/2016/8/30/12710076/dead-or-alive-vr-mode-harassment

I think this reaction, while not surprising, is pretty ridiculous. It's the same train of thought that lead people like Jack Thompson to claim GTA is a "murder simulator". In my opinion they need to learn to better differentiate between fantasy, and reality; and while you might personally find it distasteful, it doesn't harm anyone in the real world so what's the big deal?

These are just my thoughts though, what do you think?

Is this a step too far? I am interested to hear your take on this.

Oh come the fuck on. I can't wait for the ports of Senran Kagura, Gal Gun and Otomedius Excellent. So we can have this conversation over and over again like it's 1999.

If you wan't to argue that these kinds of groping modes are freaking stupid and distasteful, then yes. Great job, you spotted the creepy. But is this really gonna be recontexualized around VR as if that changes anything? Is this really gonna be a debate just because the screen is closer to our faces? Sexual Assault simulator REALLY? Fuck this man, I'm ooooooooout.

This is approaching the Uncanny Valley of gaming behavior where it technically isn't real, but the fidelity of it is making us extremely uncomfortable.

If someone made an actual murder simulator in VR, where you're stabbing a realistic virtual person with the Move controller as he screams for help and slowly dies of blood loss, then people would be rightfully concerned about what type of audience it's aiming for.

I suspect if the girls acted like they enjoyed the touching instead of asking the player to stop, people wouldn't be so squicked out about it. As-is, this is one of those times where my in-game ogling crosses the line from "entertaining diversion" to "uncomfortable commentary on my behavior".

do i think this will make more people more likely to commit sexual harassment and/or assault? my guess is probably no.

would i be creeped the fuck out if i knew anyone who regularly engaged in this sort of stuff? you bet.

Man, I gotta say I really feel bad for Koei Tecmo and the Team Ninja guys. The poor guys already stated categorically that they aren't gonna release it outside of the cultural context that it was intended for (read: not the west) but Western media still feels the need to comment and condemn the game. There's really no winning for them and it bums me out.

Is the game creepy as heck? Of course it is! But why can't people just acknowledge there is a market for games like this and it doesn't make someone a bad person if he develops a game targeting that market. Neither are the people in the market bad people! Different from me to be sure, but who am I to judge with my masochistic love of roguelikes and permadeath strategy? It's hilarious when you consider how some of these journalists champion the ability of developers to produce the kind of games they want to make, even if they're art games or whatever, yet are so quick to bash stuff like this as a game that shouldn't exist. The devs AND the publisher already decided that this game ain't for the west but somehow people still find the need to complain that it offends them. It's mind boggling.

I don't really get why you'd have a problem with it being called a harassment simulator or whatever.

Isn't your point that because it is simulated it is therefore fine? Why then does it matter if it's murder, cannibalism or sexual assault?

I mean, yeah it's a video game obviously, but wow that is some creepy ass shit. I can't believe I'm saying this but even the one the Tekken folks are making is a more tasteful than this

Its a creepy ass game and i can see how people take issue with it but the VR bit really doesnt change anything but drawing some more attention to the game for a while.

@imhungry: Absolutely, the whole thing is a convenient cover for cultural imperialism. Hey Japan, some western people think your culture sucks, and shouldnt be allowed the freedom to express itself in art like ours, we're so morally superior!

... I can totally see that game coming out within the next year or two. It's the same logic behind how Hatred got released.

All of this could have been avoided if the developers would just put in male players with crazy dong physics.

@clush: They can call it what they want, I don't mind how they refer to it. My problem stems from the insinuation that this causes real life behaviours that mimic the game. It's the same argument that people had against comic books, heavy metal music, rap music, violent movies etc.

It's a fundamentally flawed premise that strips us of any intellectual capacity for reason and says we just blindly mimic what we see. Depiction is not endorsement.

@sysyphus: You do realize that most people in Japan do not like these kinds of games right? The DOA series isn't some emblem of sexual norms in Japan. They are niche and taboo in Japan too. It'd be like a Japanese art critic panning HBO's Real Sex as being too graphic. Both of them are going for a niche audience of people who are into sexually explicit stuff. They aren't grand cultural products by any stretch of the imagination.

@thatpinguino: I never said it's a shining example of Japanese sexuality. I am aware it's a niche product but just because some people don't like it doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.

Are either of the articles you posted actually saying that though? Seems to me like they're just pointing out that they find the mode creepy (as some in this thread have said) and that it resembles harassment.

I'm guessing these are people who will claim that because it's art, it should be allowed to be analyzed and criticized, which I don't necessarily disagree with. However, my question is, in what perfect circumstances would this be ok? Because, it sure seems like they would love for this to not exist.

@blzzzrrttt: They are arguing that it is wrong to depict certain behaviour. We should ask, why is depiction of anything we could find repugnant an inherently bad thing?

It stems from a belief that the depiction "normalises" this kind of behaviour, and leads to people enacting the behaviour shown in the game in real life.

I have a higher view of people than that. I believe people have the capacity to distinguish right from wrong. Reality from fantasy. And if they don't, quite frankly they are not emotionally mature enough to be playing games yet.

@sysyphus: Who's saying it shouldn't exists? I see two articles arguing that it's a shitty thing, but they aren't arguing for it to be destroyed.

I don't think "this thing is really terrible" and "this thing should be allowed to exist" are incompatible statements. I don't think there is a context where I would be okay with a game having a "fondle a protesting human" mode, but I can voice my critique by critiquing the quality of the game and it's message rather than the legality of it's existence.

Those are some click-hungry headlines, holy crap. :D

Reminds me of when Black Metal made all Norwegians murderers and church burners and rude to the elderly.

Blaming videogames for anything seems incredibly short-sighted. Let people touch fake butts if they want to, I say!

I find the collusion or bandwagoning by western media to be worse than anything Dead or Alive has done. One by one websites jumped on the "Looking at women in VR is literally rape" train.

Does this mean any game in which you kill people in VR is literally murder? I'm literally about to play golf, you guys.

I'm not sure why people would play this kind of stuff instead of watching actual porn, VR or otherwise, but all the more power to them. I have no interest in DoA's lewd shtick but it's not kicking my dog or anything.

My favorite part of this is that much like base DOAX3, once this actually comes out, no one on either side will be talking about it anymore. My second favorite part is that DOAX3 and this VR mode is probably on the tamer side of shit to come out of Japan recently.

@mikelemmer said:

This is my line in the sand kind of thing. I have no issue with sex games or games with sexy content, whether that’s costumes, fanservice, or whatever. I mean, I don’t go out of my way to buy those games, but I have played them and even enjoyed some of them from time to time. Also, what people decide to spend their money on or their time with is their business.

As a teenager, I tried out Commodore 64 strip poker games just to see what was up, making sure to do it when no one was around to catch me. Really, I was just curious about what a game like that was and how it could be achieved with such limited graphics, that and I really liked playing poker. Recently, I’ve tried out Huniepop, which is a pretty enjoyable match 3 game with anime relationship and sex stuff being the wrapping. But, in all of those cases, I feel like the other characters in the game were willing participants. I didn’t experience people recoiling in horror and saying no as I tried to do what the game wanted me to do.

I just don’t like the idea of a game that wants you to grope someone (man, woman, anthropomorphic potted plant, etc) that doesn’t want to be groped and is emphatically telling you to stop.

Now, pair that with VR, which is pretty much in its infancy and you could have some issues arise from this. VR has games/experiences where people can congregate with others, and there have already been stories written about real people in VR not respecting the boundaries of other real people, or how harmful that kind of harassment can be to the other party. It may be in a VR space, but those people deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. With a developer created character, that is something that isn't as important. As a player, you know your limitations and how willing you are to push boundaries. At the end of the session, you know that the character that you were with in VR was just polygons and programming. However, I think that we can lose sight of what it a real person versus a fake person, in a VR environment, and perhaps do something to someone that goes much too far.

I'm not implying that this game will lead to someone in a multiplayer or social VR environment groping another user, but I think that it is something to consider. We already have people acting like online threats and harassment are somehow less real than saying it to a person's face in real life. Is that going to be the argument for VR going forward? Well, it's not real, it's just virtual reality? I didn't grope or hurt you, I groped your avatar? The thing with VR is that it feels real, or is supposed to, so the person at the other end of that possible harassment will feel like they were groped or hurt or threatened, whether it's in virtual reality or not. That scares me as a woman who would like to try VR someday, wallet permitting, and would also like to remain feeling safe and secure as I experiment in that virtual space.

And, as someone who feels empathy for people expressing human emotions in a game, I feel like I couldn't get any type of enjoyment out of groping someone who doesn't want me to touch them and is verbally pushing me away, if not physically trying to push me away. Maybe some people want that experience in their games, but I find it to be highly offputting. I guess it doesn't matter much, because I wouldn't buy a game like that. It also doesn't matter much because it's not technically coming out in our region. Still, I look at this and feel like it would be nice if all of the women involved, even though they aren't real, were enthusiastically consenting and having fun, because I couldn't see myself having fun at their expense. :/

I don't see it as any different to rape themed porn, these people should probably go after that instead of DoA which in comparison is very tame indeed.

It's just another form of fantasy, if you find it creepy, that's fine (I do too) , but why people get so bent out of shape about it I simply don't understand. What world are people living in where they can't easily ignore DoA?

I've been in Japan over a year and it has been easy to avoid the 'Wow Japan...' kind of stuff. Although I did accidentally wonder into a hentai section of a store once. Yes accidentally. No really...

@deepcovergecko: What makes you think that the people critiquing this game on the grounds of it being sexual assault-y wouldn't also critique that kind of pornography? There isn't some finite amount of critique that every person is allotted.

@jadegl: What about open world games where you can car jack, and the driver starts fighting back, or screams and runs off? What about gears of war and other such games where enemies are cowering on the ground for their life to be spared and you can run up and execute them?

Is "consent" important in these instances? What's the difference between these and DoA's actions? Non of the characters in these situations want what is happening to them, how is this any worse?

It seems like every couple of months this discussion comes up, and whenever it does, it just makes me realize how far video games have to go to be perceived by both the public and even its own media as anything more than interactive toys, let alone an art form.

None of the articles mention that stuff which is by far a bigger offender than DoA if that's something they are so concerned about. It seems like video games get a big target painted on them just because.

@sysyphus: One of those games is about a war between active combatants. The other game does not force you to carjack and beat people even though it allows it. Some people would even argue that GTA is going for a saterical, over the top depiction of crime so the carjackings and mayhem fit into that depiction. This mode literally has no other form of interaction. You can't even argue that you're playing the game the wrong way when the women protest. It is just a mode where semi-realistic looking women recoil from your unwanted touch. That's pretty different context and it conveys a very different message.

Hey at least the girls aren't crying and getting raped by tentacle monsters. As far as creepy Japanese shit goes it's incredibly tame.

Yeah, no. You do mind how they refer to it and it seems to be the only reason for you to create this thread. If your point was something else you should've posted something else.

Right now you're basically saying 'anything goes as long as it's fake' but when people break down what these fake actions amount to (fictively) you get annoyed. Again, why? Shouldn't it not matter because it's fake?

GTA is a murder simulator. The video in these articles is simulated harassment.

Anyway, my response to the polygon article (which is an opinionated piece) is that everything after the first 3 paragraphs is pathetic drivel and if it strikes so close to home then what the hell are you doing checking out these videos in the first place? Are you really that hellbent on pointing fingers at males, society and culture that you're willing to traumatize yourself for that purpose? Your personal demons are yours to deal with, there is no male conspiracy. Although this is definitely a creepy-ass game for creepy-ass people, I shouldn't have to apologize for being a male and society shouldn't have to apologize for the way you were brought up.

When I watch a man play through the demo, those voices who pound into my head that I should be afraid of my body chime back in, just as they do every time in real life my body fails to protect me or is put at risk.

Come the fuck on. With all due respect: don't watch it then. The words 'dead or alive' should be enough warning that there will be some (inappropriate by any measure) sexually themed content. Did you say to yourself 'well, time to get offended and triggered once more!' before clicking play? ('but the views on my sobbing op-ed will be so worth it!')

'Deal with it' may sound harsh, but it's really the only way. And for the record, as a straight white male I think the DOA series is stupid, this new mode is stupid and all the VR does is make its stupidity more in-your-face... literally. The fact that I'm male doesn't make me love harassment and I'm sure the same goes for the vast majority of us. That might not resonate with your view of the big bad world, but again, those are issues only you yourself can deal with on a personal level.

@deepcovergecko: Those are video game sites! Of course they cover a video game's social context. Are game writers only allowed to write about sociological messages in games if they spend 4-5 paragraphs of each article discussing the litany of "more important" issues they care about first?

That's really the only problem I have with this, I'm not sure when this was (maybe one of the e3 panels) where one of the 8-4 guys was calling out japanese tv for being a bit pervy going as far to say 'dont worry they'll get there just give them a few years' really? I mean this isnt the middle east or anything noones rights are being taken away by any of this.

OT: It's a dumb thing, let the media grope themselves on their moral high horse, it doesnt actually matter.

Yawn... call me when they start putting out snuff films.

I never understood the Jack Thompson defense when someone dares complain or critique the industry.

Someone can critique the industry or a game, and have no desire to sue or "destroy" what they're critiquing.

After watching the video...It is kinda extra odd that they seem to be constantly asking you to stop...I imagined it was going to be more like an intimacy simulator of sorts. What a weirdly specific fantasy.

Yeah.

This is a game that virtually simulates violating the physical boundaries of a woman by touching her body against her will. The characters are programmed to object to your advances. It happens in virtual reality. That is as literal of a definition for "sexual assault simulator" as you can get.

Allegra Frank wrote a very thoughtful piece on why this thing's existence upsets her. It's up there in the OP. Did you read it? If not, here's a summary: men already violate a woman's physical boundaries in real life. A game that simulates it and gamifies it, glamorizes this behavior and further invalidates the notion that a woman's body is her own, that it is instead there to be inspected, by sight and by touch. You can say, "I don't care," or "Okay," or "I hear you," but when you say "that's ridiculous," you are indicating you aren't processing what is being said. If you don't give a fuck how this kind of shit makes a woman feel, own that.

Like @jadegl said, all it takes is for them to consent to the touching. To say "Yes" instead of "No." If this part of the game was just a Japanese Temptation Island, no one would care. But it's not.

@sysyphus said:

I never mentioned violence, so your comment is a bit off base, but I will answer your question.

When going into a Gears of War game or GTA, I expect violence, theft and other bad things to happen to me and to other people. And, as a player of some of these games, I find myself attempting to avoid hurting civilians as much as possible. I've written about this on the site before, you could probably find it if you go back through my post history, but I will reiterate it here - I tend to play games that have over the top violence and less emotional weight, like Gears of War, Halo, Doom, and that kind of stuff. This is so I don't have to feel "bad" when I kill something in an awesome way with a heavy metal soundtrack pumping in the background. And, in those games, the only things you tend to be killing are not just enemies, but full blown monsters. When I play games with more realistic characters and emotional heft, I tend to play them as a goody two shoes. I don't like hurting people. In GTA I don't get joy from running down people or shooting people who haven't done anything to me. I avoid it as much as possible.

Lots of people have talked about trying to get away from violence as the main gameplay element in games. I know we've herd the term ludonarrative dissonance thrown around a lot when talking about games like Uncharted, Last of Us and BioShock Infinite. I don't know if I fully subscribe to all of those complaints, but they certainly have been discussed at length.

Do I feel like there is a big difference between shooting an enemy that is trying to shoot me in game versus trying to grab the boob of someone who is not at all interested in me in a game? Yes, I do. I think one is totally impersonal and one if completely personal. One is over the top and absurd, the other is something that happens to people everyday on public transportation, in class, in bars and at work. That's how I approach it and how I feel about it. You may find that to be hypocritical, but I just find that one is possible and scary and something I don't want to participate in, or have perpetrated against me, and the other is not.

I do think it's alarming that they programmed them to be unwilling participants in this groping. Why is that necessary?

If nothing else this comes off as gross and tone-deaf in our current climate.

EDIT: After reading other comments I guess the idea of the woman being an unwilling participant is not new. Still gross.

When are we going to get to grope some unwilling men?

I'm not really sure what the issue is. A couple people writing about how a game that has a sexual assault simulator mode has a sexual assault simulator mode in it is ridiculous?

No one has a problem differentiating between reality and fantasy. That's why it's a sexual assault simulator.

If you're going to make a weird creepy game that's lets you pretend to grope women and have them complain about it, don't be surprised when someone calls you out on it.

And people bringing up that it's a Japanese thing don't understand Japanese culture at all. Groping is an actual problem there and it definitely isn't culturally accepted.

This is one of the most straightforward and valuable responses in this thread.

Seems no different than those other Japanese touchy modes in various games, except instead of using your finger or an analog stick, you're using the Move controller in VR.

brb gotta throw up.

I was with you up to a point but are you really saying sexually assaulting an avatar is just as bad as doing the same to someone in real life? Yes VR feels real, but it's not like it feels literally like real life... You can just throw your headset off at any time. Honestly this kind of argument only serves to diminish the severity of actual real life harassment.

If a psychopath gets his/her psycho quota filled by groping people in a virtual world, isn't that better than having him/her going around filling that quota on real people?

I'm pretty sure DOAX had modes very similar to this already, what's the problem now that it's in vr?

@elixirbronze: It's the same mindset that leads people to say they were raped....in GTA V. Way to belittle actual rape victims.

i don't know much about Japanese culture but they must be creating this for somebody? Surely? I mean, just look at the Japanese porn industry. I certainly won't sit here and bash them for it, not something I'd ever want to play but, you know, cultural differences and all that.

Not if they are doing it in a multiplayer/social game where a real person is behind the avatar. I stated that there is a difference between an NPC and the avatar of a real human being. If people want to grope a fake person that is programmed in the game, I guess more power to them. If it sates some type of desire to do that in real life to their coworker or a fellow student, I guess that would be a good solution to a problem. Do I think that that is what is going on here and how it's going to be used? Ehhhhh. That's a logic stretch I can't make.

I'm a real person, I deserve to have my space respected even in a virtual space. I deserve to have my body respected, even if it is a virtual body. If I say "No" to someone in VR, it's just the same as saying "No" in the real world, it's not less because it's polygons and data verus flesh and blood. Harassment online shouldn't be tolerated and harassment in VR should be even more closely watched for and punished.

If they grope the avatars of real people in VR and can't see that that is a bad thing, than I would be flabbergasted.

@jadegl:

I guess we'll just disagree then. I just want to make it clear that while I don't think sexually assaulting someone in VR is as bad as doing it to someone in real life, I still of course think it's bad and should be a punishable offence (however difficult that may be to actually do in practice). While the psychological tear might be just as bad in VR as it is in real life (I even strongly question this argument), the assailant won't be able to do anything to you physically, and I think that counts for something and it is essentially what I mean when I say it isn't "as bad".

If you don't think real experiences with sexual violence inform a person's reactions to digital experiences with sexual violence, then you have an empathy problem.