Unpopular Video Game Opinions

[Gorse]

Sexualization of women idols and celebrities contributes to the overall sexualization of all women. These things do not just happen in a vacuum, they affect the views and ideas of those who consume said media.

1) Gonna need some hard evidence on that one!
2) So? Are women as a whole against sexualization of the female form in entertainment? Are even most women against the sexualization of the female form in entertainment? Because if they all are then I've got some very bad news for them!

And did these women go into wrestling because they loved having booty shots taken of them? No, they joined because they LIKED WRESTLING.

Well gosh, I find it very hard to believe they'd enter a sport that's known for sexualization and not expect to be sexualized!

 

[Metal]

When I think about Namco's 2D section I mostly just end up thinking of Splatterhouse. A shame the Splatterhouse remake or reboot in 2010 was a pile of garbage but I mean it was to be expected from a game series that hadn't had anything for over the last two decades.

 

[Magma]

 

[Glowsquid]

My post above was mostly because the overwhelming of Namco's game compilation and representation in crossover games is overwhelmingly focused on their early super-simple arcade games, with little attention to their 3D catalogue or even their comparatively more "modern" 2D games like Burning Force and Nebulas Ray. Like, I guess Pac-Man is a Very important and iconic game, but

Nto to say I dislike all of said early games. I love Xevious.

 

[Gorse]

My post above was mostly because the overwhelming of Namco's game compilation and representation in crossover games is overwhelmingly focused on their early super-simple arcade games, with little attention to their 3D catalogue or even their comparatively more "modern" 2D games like Burning Force and Nebulas Ray. Like, I guess Pac-Man is a Very important and iconic game, but

Well, y'know, gotta respect your elders! Namco had a huge influence on the early game industry (I hate using that term) and I think they've earned the right to endlessly rerelease their back catalogue for new generations to enjoy (and by "new generations" I mean "retro game enthusiasts" and by "enjoy" I mean "rebuy and rebuy and rebuy and rebuy").

And hey, even Namco's earliest games are a lot of fun and super interesting - would you believe that Pac-Man, Dig Dug and Galaga all run on the same engine? WITCHCRAFT IS WHAT I CALL IT

 

[WhimsicalFujoshi~]

I don't understand how this isn't basic logic, but here's a report I had to vaguely skim. It should answer a lot, and it's probably better for you to read than to argue on the internet without having read anything. http://www.apa.org/pi/women/programs/girls/report-full.pdf

and at 2.) "Too Bad, So Sad," Is not a valid argument when it comes to social progress.

 

[Gorse]

I don't understand how this isn't basic logic, but here's a report I had to vaguely skim.

Uh, you're asking me to read through a report you only "vaguely skimmed"? How do you know it even proves your point?

But I'll humour you and say the report 100% proves your claim. It's not like it changes anything - sexualization of the female form has existed since the dawn of man, and will likely continue until the... uh... dusk of man. I mean, maybe in a hypothetical future where we aren't dependant on women for the procreation of our species, but that's not really a thing that is happening at the moment!

and at 2.) "Too Bad, So Sad," Is not a valid argument when it comes to social progress.

I mean, it sure seems to be, considering... women are still sexualized!

ALSO: I don't consider changing entertainment around to be less appealing to it's target audience progress. I consider it the opposite! I consider it not progress!

 

[WhimsicalFujoshi~]

It's called critical reading, friend. You look at the work in order to see if it leans towards what you need.

Considering that sexualization, and the overall support for less sexualization has increased, your argument in the second part is flawed. Secondly, considering america's population is actually leaning towards women, as our friend, John Cena provides to you in video form, I say it's fair to not want so much overt sexualization in media.

Your argument essentially boils down to, "Well people like it, so there's no issue!"

 

[Glowsquid]

I think they've earned the right to endlessly rerelease their back catalogue for new generations to enjoy (and by "new generations" I mean "retro game enthusiasts" and by "enjoy" I mean "rebuy and rebuy and rebuy and rebuy").

And that's great. But it would be even better if Namco also gave some love to its 90's back catalogue

 

[Gorse]

Your argument essentially boils down to, "Well people like it, so there's no issue!"

You're right! That is my entire argument. It's how industry works!

 

[Gorse]

And that's great. But it would be even better if Namco also gave some love to its 90's back catalogue

When games like Solvalou start becoming financially viable I'll let you know!

 

[WhimsicalFujoshi~]

And industry changes with society. This is basic. As we progress as a society, the industry should naturally strive to progress forward as well. It helps with changing the overall viewpoints people have. Respect towards women is more commonplace now, so the industry should naturally treat them as fairly as women want to be treated. If they couldn't sell the wrestling without sexualization, then they might as well have just opened a porn studio.

 

[Gorse]

Well then I guess we as a society haven't """progressed""" to the point where the people who make sexualization profitable stop, then! I can promise you - the entertainment industry will immediately cease production of anything that doesn't yield a profit. And that's their goal - profit! You can talk politics all you like until you're blue in the face, but at the end of the day people are still going to give money for the things they like.

 

[WhimsicalFujoshi~]

So, where's your study on how de-sexualizing something means a total stop in sales?

 

[Gorse]

So, where's your study on how de-sexualizing something means a total stop in sales?

No study, sadly - you'll just have to take the entirety of the female wrestling industry (or the model industry, the music industry, etc etc.) as proof. I mean, if sexualizing the wrestlers (models, artists, etc.) doesn't bring in the moolah, why else would they be doing it?

 

[Dangerous Duck]

No study, sadly - you'll just have to take the entirety of the female wrestling industry (or the model industry, the music industry, etc etc.) as proof. I mean, if sexualizing the wrestlers doesn't bring in the moolah, why else would they be doing it?

Speaking of moolah and female wrestlers, the Fabulous Moolah was one of history's greatest female wrestlers and she was never sexualised in the manner of today's women grapplers. She was a diva, but not a shameless sex object.

 

[Gorse]

Speaking of moolah and female wrestlers, the Fabulous Moolah was one of history's greatest female wrestlers and she was never sexualised in the manner of today's women grapplers.

Not an argument, unfortunately! Being "a great wrestler" and being "worthy of precious TV time" are two very different things!

 

[WhimsicalFujoshi~]

Then I can't take your argument seriously if you're not going to back this up. You're assuming a worst possible outcome for desexualization of female wrestlers.

People find grappling sexy, whether or not camera angles contribute or not. This is not even a sexualization issue that the industry can deal with, because both men and women are attracted to that stuff. Getting rid of the extra fluff will not just randomly tank the viewership. While women aren't the majority of viewers, they make up a fair chunk, over 30%. Considering that the vast majority of male viewers that won't just drop it instantly because one small bit was removed, appealing to their growing female audience is not bad. Less alienation.

And Angler brings up a point, if a female wrestler can succeed without sexualization, chances are it won't just tank.

 

[Gorse]

Then I can't take your argument seriously if you're not going to back this up.

Again - they wouldn't do it if there wasn't a reason for them to! I think the fact that we're having this argument at all proves my point well enough.

Considering that the vast majority of male viewers that won't just drop it instantly because one small bit was removed, appealing to their growing female audience is not bad.

That's a quite a large statement! Any proof on that? I doubt the channels that air female wrestling would agree with you!

 

[Magma]

I think that it is logical to go with what'll make money but I also think women really haven't had many chances to be establish themselves to the same caliber as men.