![latest[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/BJhDrHu.jpg "latest[1].jpg")
Explain something to me, v:
Why is it *wrong* to have a sexual video game character?
>>322615846
Its not
>>322615846
It's not.
It's nice if they can also be cute, though. Cute/sexy girls make games more fun.
I think the idea is that if a female character doesn't have that much plot relevance or character and yet her tits and ass are shoved in your face all the time, she's just there for wank material.
Some women and numales take offense to that.
Pandering games focus too much on titties and not enough on gameplay.
All of them end up being generic slogs that people only play to unlock bikinis and other gay shit.
If the most interesting part of a character is their sex appeal, then it's a pretty shallow character.
>>322615846
Where does the whip sword come from?
I tried googling it but i only found some super dangerous metal rat tail-like weapon that doesnt look the same at all.
>>322615846
Whoever designed that outfit is trying way too hard.
This one is better by leaps and bounds.
>>322616036
What if every girl has tits and ass?
Big boobs are racist.
Its not.
Ivy is a bit of a butterface, though.
I could see the argument for why it is wrong.
But if people want to pull the moral card then they sure as fuck don't get ANY right to think glorified violence is fine either,, because that is MORE wrong.
Nobody has said sexy is wrong. Even shits like brianna wu fucking loves dead or alive volleyball shit. People usually have an issue where you have this normal story that makes sense but then only twist it to objectify the women in an unfair and unbalanced way. But because a lot of you have brains the size of shotacon penises you fail to comprehend the extreme subtle difference between "sexy is bad" and "sexist pandering is affecting those who don't align with the pandering in a significant way so it might not be worth it if you want to appeal to both sexes" and we'll forever be stuck with you dumbfucks failing the reading comprehension roll and going all frothy over shit you don't understand and then go and get a verbal brojob from another cuckfuck who will support your idiocy.
TL;DR fuck you
>>322616531
I don't get it. Wouldn't a virtual representation of ANYONE be wrong, then? I know a girl with about the same measurements as Yagyuu from SK (she's just 1" taller in height) so it's not like big boobs are impossible or disrespectful.
>>322616728
Why, then?
>>322615846
There's nothing wrong with having one or two hyper sexual used characters.
What's wrong is when your character designs become more of a checklist to see if you got the latest cliche down.
What's wrong is when the games male to female ratio is 1 guy to every 6 women. It's annoying, and it doesn't make for good story telling or story setting.
There should be annoying healthy balance of both sexes, and character types should become fluid and developed again instead of TSUNDERE BITCH LOLI BITCH ARA ARA TIT BITCH SHITTY J POP IDOL BITCH CHILDHOOD FRIEND BITCH SELF INSERT BITCH
>>322617125
L O N D O N
O
N
D
O
N
>>322616531
I agree. We need more flat chested bimbos. DFC>Cowtits
In "serious" games I don't like characters that are there just to be sexy or feel like they don't belong (Quiet was shit for example), but I really can't understand why people get irked by revealing outfits in fighting games etc. Those games are usually so ridiculously designed in all regards that purposely sexed up characters aren't really any sort of stylebreaker.
Not to even mention something like Senran Kagura or DOAX, people should just treat them as very softcore porn. And how ridiculous it would be to conplain about sexism in porn of all places?
>>322615846
Womyn think males exist to serve them. They have a different psychological constitution.
Example:
>"Hey dude, you suck."
>"Okay, I'd better get better or commit suicide."
>"Hey lady, you suck."
>"omg you shitlord fat is beautiful. i am beautiful no matter what they say! words can't let me down oh nooo noooo so dont you let me down today!!! nuh uh! bigoted shitlord!!"
>this thread
Progressives are now the new puritans.
>>322617217
Not me, but she has a bf.My gf has decent sized ones, though.
But really, boobs (and the women who have them) should be celebrated. Why are women such prudes?
I fucking love when I get looked at.
>>322617349
>Metal Gear
>A "serious" game
>>322616531
are people that stupid to believe they can stop sexuality and sex from selling?
>>322615846
A.) it's problematic
B.) it's triggering
C.) it's oppressive
take your pick. it's ok if it's a sexy dude though obviously.
>>322615846
Its not.
>>322618396
SExy dudes are just male power fantasy, besides they're not designed towards female gaze so it doesn't count.
>>322618396
Even if the man is wholly separated from women?
>>322618165
Man, wish I could have a gf with nice rack, not small and not too big, just the perfect size
>>322616531
So large breasted women don't exist?
I should tell all the women in my family they're just racist stereotypes and not actually a normal body type.
>>322618476
I want to hear someone who argues this talk about Final Fantasy XV. I certainly don't fantasize about being those guys.
>>322618348
Yes, yes they are.
>>322618348
You do not really comprehend just how stupid the SocJus crowd is.
>>322618524A nice rack is good but what's better is she loves breastplay, but we're pretty deep in love so everything intimate turns me on, after 3 years still.
>>322619034
Aw, good for you Anon.
>>322617092
r u tumblor bcus u sound like a spy to me
>>322615846
There is a difference between doing it, and doing it WELL.
You can have a sexualized character while maintaining a strong sense of eroticism. Ivy in 4 was not erotic, it's the line between gonzo porn and porn with high production values.
Neither is wrong, but one clearly has more care put in to the total package.
>>322617092
given the choice, why be mad tho
>>322617092
It's a topic for people to get attention.
All the "outcries" and "controversy" are just people looking for something to be mad about and get other people to agree with them.
>>322615846
It's not "wrong", but I think people are upset with the idea that the masses can be controlled into buying something based on sexuality alone. It's like the concept behind click bait.
>>322615846
It can get annoying when the character is just their for T and A and sexual innuendos.
>>322617092
>Even shits like brianna wu
But Briana Wu is a capitalism supporting shitlord.
>>322618618
I fantasize about being withMale Cid
>>322620559
>Male Cid
So literally every other Cid?
>>322616531
>being a large breasted woman is offensive
isn't this misogyny?
>>322618618
sorry guys, it's me. i'm the one faggot that fantasizes about being all those teenage longhaired twinks from JRPGs, singlehandedly justifying all of them as "male power fantasies." i know it's wrong but I can't help myself. sorry.
>>322616531
Oh my fuck. This guy is a class act.
>>322620559
Which one?
>>322620849
Literally the only defense for that is if you want to be Cloud and fuck Tifa. That's it.
>>322617152
>What's wrong is when the games male to female ratio is 1 guy to every 6 women.
I don't know of any games that have that ratio.
Besides, what makes a 6/1 dicks-to-chicks ratio any better?
>>322615846
It's not actually wrong.
It just means the person employing this tactic has opted for the zero effort solution.
They won't use most of the visual design of the character to push characterization and any residual awfulness of the character design (such as looking like dogshit due to minimal effort) is buffed out with sex appeal.
If it's wrong then it's wrong because it is half assed.
>>322618476
>SExy dudes
Is this a sly reference to Square-enix making pretty boys for every final fantasy or is it just a typo?
>>322615846
To be honest, you can't really ask /v/. When it comes to things like whatever OP's asking, all they get is a bunch of people who don't truly get how the world works. In the same regard, you can't really ask someone on Tumblr or Reddit the same question because, let's face it, everyone there are fucking dumbasses as well.
If you honestly wanna have this conversation, ask someone that you know. Don't ask the internet.
>>322621418
>If you honestly wanna have this conversation, ask someone that you know. Don't ask the internet.
The winning answer.
>>322615846
If they exist purely for fanservice, then It irritates me.
If they are both fanservice material, but have actual personality and interesting backstory, then I don't have any problems with that.
>>322616404
More wank material duh
>>322621728
I want off this ride
>>322615846
It's not inherently wrong but developers have leaned on sexual game characters for so long it became wrong through sheer amount over time. Not a strong excuse but that's the one being trotted around.
Don't worry though devs won't abandon sexy characters. There's just too much demand.
>>322621536
Nah, asking someone you know means you're already affiliated with them. OP is less likely to affiliate with people who share the same belief which would just validate him. Unless OP wanted to get ask "random" people who know about video games which is probably the best way to go.No, people on /v/ aren't random.
>>322622372
Who don't share the same belief. My b
>>322616036
>numales
>>>/r/eddit
it's not tho
>>322616404
>all those attempts to hide the nips
>that one on the middle left is straight up barbie mode
>>322617662
>no man can defeat her, but I can wank to her
What if I find a character sexy just because she's well written?
>>322617092
have you even read any articles about the "objectification" topic?
it's exactly about that you can't show women with emphasis on their sexual appeal because if you do so you are using women as "sexual objects"
>>322623292
The worst part was the slave Leia debacle, as that ignores that Carrie Fisher requested a costume like that, and that Han Solo was used as an actual decoration at roughly the same time
>>322617092
Devs of these sorts of games don't want to appeal to both sexes. That's the point. 50 Shades of Grey doesn't appeal to me. Sexy Game X doesn't appeal to women. That's fine.
I could bitch and whine about how Christian Grey is too rich and handsome and it's objectifying males for their wallet, but instead I don't give a shit because I don't want the book.
Do you see the problem?
These censorship advocating outrage-mongers are self-contradictory and can never be appeased. One day they complain about one thing, the next day another. They're an extortionist protection racket. Disgusting people who produce nothing, demonize males, and stifle creativity.
TL;DR fuck you and your brainrape cult. make your own shit and shut the fuck up about mine. oh wait you can't because you got worthless degrees.
>>322615968
No they don't. I will have an urge to masturbate and that's not fucking fun when I just wanna play vidya
>>322623575
The best part of it is when Carrie Fisher did a recent interview complaining about her lack of movie roles as she got older. She says it's a "man's world" and that's why she doesn't get cast anymore.
Later on in the interview she says she doesn't get into character in roles and instead brings the character to her. So she's a shitty actor with a shitty attitude wondering where her career went.lol
>>322622541
>A word effectively describes someone.
>Q-Quiet R-Redditor!!
Shut up, numale.
>>322624584
Well better than Rey's actress, she just sounded like a Kiera Knightley wannabe
>>322616280
But women wouldn't buy it anyway, say like a porn magazine for instance women don't buy those, yet they buy fashion/ gossip magazines. But they dont complain that the porn magazines exist
>>322617569
I want to fuck her in missionary position and look her cute eyes through whole mission.
objectification has always existed in media, and for sure exists in video games. sexy isnt wrong, its just when a character exists exclusively as a sex object where the problem lies. unfortunately it is blown out of proportion recently and has been seen as a personal attack on video games. I just wish we could be productive about instead of flinging shit at eachother
>>322625436
I don't see sexy for the point of being sexy as a problem. It might be for people that literally can't distinguish between media and reality.
>>322624028
>if grey was a poor guy living in a basement the book would be about a psychotic seria killer
or something like that
Ivy isn't sexual. There's nothing sexual about her character apart from her outfit.
>>322615846
Because it hurts fragile feminist hambeast's feelings. That's it.
