deathofrats360's forum posts

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#1 Edited by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

I'm thinking about making a game rating site similar to flickchart, and one of the issues I'd end up having is building out the database.

Now, while I could manually compile a lot of info, it'd be nice if users of the site could search for games in the site's db, and if it's not found, have it search on here and pull up the closest matches. From that point users could pick the match, and the few fields we'd need would be copied to our db, as well as the id from GB, with a link to the games page on the site.

This way the site wouldn't constantly be pulling from GB or outright taking the whole db, and also it'd be promoting GB through the links back.

Would this be allowed? If so, would that change if the site was ad supported? Or supported by patreon or donations?

Avatar image for deathofrats360
Avatar image for deathofrats360
#3 Edited by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

@roundlay: companies decide to try and drum up some free advertising for a poor selling product based on a non-controversy that never existed?

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#4 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -


I don't think people in this thread are condemning Kojima or the rest of Kojima Productions, they're criticizing the game. Being a pervert or liking perverted things doesn't make you a bad person. Nor does making things with objectification in it.

Not only should gamers who take offense at these types of critiques should separate themselves from the games and not take it personally, but they should realize that people aren't talking about the designers being bad people, just the games having some problems.

I'm sure most designers can take the criticism of their work. Most artists can. Most artists welcome that criticism, even if it's not pretty.

Criticism of a game is just that, criticism of a game. It's not criticism of its audience or its designers. And to take it as such... Well, those are the people jumping to be offended at everything.

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#5 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

@alexw00d: they're right though. More often than not the target demographic for most entertainment mediums is young straight cis white males. There have been several incidences where developers or writers have talked about having to justify why a character is gay or not white or a woman or trans to their publishers. And that's fucked up.

So when a game that has every excuse to have the player character be exclusively the standard, it's a nice nod to not only the devs trying, but also to the fact that the industry as a whole is starting to listen to the people who'd like to play as someone closer visually to themselves.

This is pretty much all MGSV could do though, I don't think it would have been OK if they would have made BB customizable in the same way Saints Row is.

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#6 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

revealing outfit,stupid poses, lingering camera shots, all from the perspective of the person looking at her

that person is not necessarily you (insert MGS2 here). which is why you can call it bullshit, and it's not the character. since they sacrifice no characterization or agency in being portrayed that way.

ascribe it to the designers, or Snake, if you're feeling postmodern, but it is the perspective itself that is problematic and should be criticized, not whose perspective it is.

Actually they do sacrifice characterization and agency by doing so. Is Quiet portrayed as a character who would pose for BB in the back of a helicopter? As early as mission 15? No? Because she does. And that's part of her characterization now. But it conflicts with how she's portrayed elsewhere.

And the only real argument that it doesn't damage her characterization is that it's just an easter egg. Which... Well, would mean the character is doing out of character things to please the player, treating her like an object. The character lose their agency by making it not a choice of the character or a choice that character would make.

So it either hurts her characterization or her agency.

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#7 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

so you are aware that what she is as a subject, and how the players' viewpoint (camera, etc.) portrays her as an object, are separate ideas, from separate perspectives.

and in a game all about how the way we view, judge, and think about things is not representative of what they actually are, it seems disingenuous to conflate the two ideas.

getting pissed at the way the game portrays her is fine ( and I agree with you), and that might have even been Kojima's intention; to create a character that is portrayed in a way that people find problematic. but that has nothing to do with what the character actually is as a subject, or how you should view or judge them.

I judge the character by what the game designers has them do. Obviously people oogling her are bringing that to the game.

However I'm not able to escape the game encouraging oogling her. sit too long on the acc on the idroid and she starts posing for you, you don't have to do anything, to bring anything to it. It's just there. The objectification is just there whether you engage or not.

And what am I suppose to ascribe that to? The character, the designers, me?

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#8 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

Do you think Quiet is a well-written character with a strong narrative presence and an active role in the game?

Do you think Quiet's design is oversexualized and pandering, and the way the camera focuses on her is creepy and demeaning?

These are two completely separate and unrelated questions. don't reduce the subject-object dynamic to a single context.

I think both. However I think the latter does hurt the former, from the stand point of "she's a strong and fairly well written character. Try to remember that when we objectify her every time the camera comes near her".

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#9 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

@borklund said:
@ddi_kazal_st_drebin said:

Pale faced anorexic women with D sized breasts are a staple of our western society and shows itself over and over again in our entertainment.

What is so special about this pale faced anorexic women with D sized breasts? Does this pale faced anorexic women with D sized breasts do anything that I haven't seen in a video game, movie, television show, or side walk?

I dare say you've watched entirely too much pornography.

That dismissive comment does little to push back against the statement I made. You basically called me crazy.

The description I just gave we see on commercials during the super bowl-we see it in our movies-we see it in other video games. I am trying to figure out the source of the selective outrage. Since it seems that the noise that is produced for this character and those like her has never been enough to make the changes necessary to eliminate stereotypes such as what we see here. If you think I watch too much porn then so have you, because I am seeing every day people dressed like Quiet.

I think it is tacky then as it is tacky now, but this fake indignation at another pale faced woman showing her breasts is played out. Act upset but continue to throw money at the problem.


Sorry, what? There isn't a pale faced woman showing her breasts.

There's a model of a woman showing her breasts. There's animations for that model of the woman happily displaying her breasts. There's a story that explains why the model exists. There's lines of dialogue recorded in that story. There's a boob physics engine for the model's breasts. There's carefully choreographed scenes with the camera carefully focused on the model's breasts. There's animations that are only triggered if the player's camera is focused on the model's breast.

There is no woman here. There's a bunch of artists and programmers coming together to make the illusion of a woman showing her breasts. And the only reason is to reward players who want to see a woman in a too small bikini, a thong, and leggings shake her breasts at them. To turn the character into a peep show for the player.

This isn't Metal Gear weird story. It's just plain old objectification of a female character. Again. And it's stupid. And it's gross.

It takes away from the game for me every time the camera lingers on her butt or breasts. It takes me out of it. Because a game as amazing as this is pandering to 14 year old boys when it doesn't have to.

But anyway, it's not selective outrage. It's for the most part not even outrage. It's just disappointing. Games of this caliber shouldn't be doing this shit anymore. The industry needs to grow past using female characters as eye candy or motivation. It's lazy.

And, quite frankly in this particular instance it's even more disappointing because if it wasn't for the character design, the really fucking insulting "look at my ass and breasts" animations, and the camera deciding that Quiet's breasts are the most important thing in frame, Quiet would have been an awesome example of a strong woman in an action game. Instead all the really strong character work for her is undercut by her bending over and shoving her breasts in my face every time I'm taking to long organizing my platforms on the ACC or her upgrade icons being a close up of her breasts.

Avatar image for deathofrats360
#10 Posted by deathofrats360 (69 posts) -

The same things as always, harassing people in the industry they deemed to be "SJWs".