Kierkegaard

Like others have said, when reviewing games as art rather than consumer products, it is possible and even necessary to respond to their social and political implications and arguments. If a reviewer personally feels that the Male Gaze in camera work is objectifying, and that a game rife with that is a worse artistic product, he can express that.

There is no danger here. Even a review that is factually inaccurate or rude does not endanger the game or the readers--it will be dismissed by the majority who write with care and caution.

Fact is, whether you personally care about the examples from past games or not, a reviewer caring about them is never a problem. It's just more information for you to take in and consider.

There is no danger in criticism, only in being afraid to know and experience more thought.

Personally, I try to give money to games that I respect. Respect, for me, comes from a game that respects its subjects. So, I listen to Arthur's point and consider it.

Leah Alexander and others argued that Bayonetta 1 was sex positive feminism, that Bayonetta was confident in her body and self and not being exploited. Arthur is distinguishing the camera as a demeaning tool, focusing on her sexual parts to titillate the presumed hetero male viewer. It'll be interesting to hear what others think about this.

I know you were trying to end the argument, but I have to respond to the points here. No one, not Anita, not anyone, is saying video games cannot have sexy women and men. No one. That's a false enemy to fight here.

You are ignoring each time I say this, but one more time: Quiet's outfit is not sexy. It does not demonstrate her strength or her allure. It is a stupid combination of ripped pants and bikini that communicates nothing but exploitation and objectification. This is not new for Kojima.

Meryl is defined by her ass in MGS1 in finding her; there are easter eggs to systematically strip her.

The Boss happens to have a scar along her cleavage.

Naomi's breasts can be jiggled via the six axis in MGS4

Sniper Wold for no reason has her navel and cleavage exposed at all times

All the beauty and the beast characters are reduced to skin tight outfits and photo posing in MGS4

It is better that these women do have complex stories and strong characters--they do make their own choices and do important things. But goddamit. All of the above demonstrates that Kojima has a real problem letting any woman exist as a person rather than a sex object.

And yes, he does this with Raiden, too. But gay and male sexiness is generally played for laughs, not for titillation.

There's a problem here. Admit it.

Phantom Pain does look interesting, but I may vote with my wallet here and not buy it, just as I didn't buy Ground Zeroes after the horrible vagina bomb info came out. Giving my money to that is wrong.

Why does this sniper WHO RUNS A LOT AND IS SHOT AT need to dressed in a non-supportive bikini top and ripped up pants? Admit that it's because the character designer made her boobs a focus of the design. If you admit that, the only valid conclusion is that the artists are choosing to define her in this way.

You are acting as if I owe the artist the benefit of the doubt. I don't. Historically, Kojima has sexually exploited women in his games. There will be a backstory. It doesn't matter. Nothing can defend the dislogic and laziness of that outfit. It's objectively a sexually exploitive artistic choice. Why is that so hard to admit? What do you lose if you see this for what it is?

The fact is, the style overrides and derides the character. No matter what backstory she has, it will always conflict with her non-sensical, exploitative outfit.

I find this nonsensical. An artist is free to create what they will, but art necessitates criticism and judgement. So, if you create a character who runs around a battlefield at super speed but has no physical support for her breasts and no armor against bullets, then it is completely in my right to question that character.

If you create a character within the context of the world of 2014, where we recognize that defining a character as a sexual viewing thing via their outfit should either fit the context of that character or will be justifiably criticized, then expect justifiable criticism.

If, as an artist, you feel like what you've made will be criticized and feel guilty about that, it's up to you to decide if you want that.

Quiet has awesome powers. But she's another female character defined by her boobs and her silence, she is inherently disempowered. Even if she does cool stuff and has a cool backstory, she falls into sexists tropes.

It is completely fine to both praise her mechanical design and gameplay (she looks like a great and interesting supporting character!) while criticizing her ridiculous outfit and mutism. See, you don't have to like 100% of a thing. You can be critical without hating something and you can like something without loving all of it.

Quiet is not sexy. She is trashy and ridiculous. Any backstory to justify that misses the point--it's justifying a look that does not fit the context or purpose of her character. It's lazy design.

Hang in there, Jeff. You are a great person and have built a great place here. So sorry your dad died. We love you, despite having never met you.

@bigsocrates: Okay, that gives me some structural understanding. I'm in Act 2 now and it is clearly based around the big war stuff and the particular players are less developed. I like that Leah's mom was not actually fridged as motivation for Cain and Leah. The Enchantress looks ripe for a midriff-based disemboweling, though. Also, shiny things and I love the sentry and raining arrows and gattling gun R2 attack for the demon hunter.

@mbradley1992: Thank you! Essays will always be harder than anything in math ever.

@bigsocrates: You know, I hear this. But it's weird that there are, like, lots of conversation options with the characters and tons of audio diaries to pick up. I mean, I can ignore it, but there was effort there. It seems like it's a bit disingenuous to say that there is just as much story as Gauntlet. Blizzard clearly tried, pretty hard at points even. Maybe it's crap, but you can't say it meant to be crap.

High school English. It's my second year so I'm still figuring it out. It's definitely easier this year. Feel free to PM if you wanna talk more about it!

I do have some time, but something like Diablo is perfect for my current level of stress.

@geraltitude: Heh, nah, I'm too perfectionistic to half ass stuff. Will turn off story motors best I can.

Very well written and true. It's like humans being around each other and having a common interest and goal makes them nicer to each to other. Maybe we should put trolls and online jerks into a room with people they disagree with and have everyone play four-square or something. That's basically what PAX is.

Don't hit me! Right now, Fez. Never played it until it went free on PS Plus last month. I haven't looked up how to decode the language and can see all the intrigue. I have around 26 cubes and am working on the 32 cube door. Just having trouble going back into it--especially because getting to places I need to go requires lots of backtracking and rote navigation. I love the idea of what I'm playing, and I know there's so much more to it, and that's cool. But it feels like quick sand right now rather than a neat castle to explore. Possible that's because the elevators only take me to four random floors rather than allowing me to zip to previous locations. I don't want to feel this way, but it's dragging for me.