But so what if a woman designed the sexy outfit? Isn't she still an artist that's aware that she caters to a largely male demographic?
I would DIE if I was told not to make a female character sexy. DIE.
Why do lots of guys think girls are all crazy feminists opposed to drawing a woman sexy or showing off any skin?
Also, there's a big difference betweens tasteless sexy and tastefull sexy.
I would DIE if I was told not to make a female character sexy. DIE.
Why do lots of guys think girls are all crazy feminists opposed to drawing a woman sexy or showing off any skin?
Also, there's a big difference betweens tasteless sexy and tastefull sexy.
But uh, why does it have to be sexy in the first place?
These abstract conversations seem pretty useless. In a vacuum it's really easy to make sweeping statements, but they'd apply poorly to individual games.
I like 'sexy' designs a lot, and i gravitate torwad them, but there are plenty of games/settings/stories where they become disgustingly offensive.
And realistic can look degrading and frumpy under the right circumstances -- I'd be hard pressed to find a plain jane business woman anything but sexist next to a character like Dante from devil may cry.
The poster who said it was all in the attitude nailed it. My female friends like Frazetta a lot more than Boris Vallejo, and i think the difference between powerful, engaging women (sexualized and objectified or not) and a degrading sex doll really comes down to characterization more than it does design.
But uh, why does it have to be sexy in the first place?
Because... it's fun? And games are meant to be fun. (As many have already said, if it suits the art direction/mood/theme/etc...) I don't think something like Tetris is lacking fun because there's no sexy people, but I do think that, say, an RPG is more fun when it has a sexy lady to play as.
Hey guys let's argue in ridiculous absolutes to try and prove our point, that will sure make useful posters like mezz who offer developed opinions feel really stupid for wasting their time.
that makes zero sense... because your game characters aren't beautiful they game auto sux?
It makes perfect sense, actually. And it wasn't stated that the game "auto sux" without beautiful characters, but rather that it's just more fun with them. If the character design doesn't specifically prohibit sex appeal for story or gameplay reasons, then what reason would you ever have to not make a character attractive? It's not like it's hurting anything.
The same could be said of the art style itself--I'd argue that I find a personally appealing art style 'sexy', which also increases the fun of the game. It's why I don't play games that have a chunky, heavy aesthetic normally--because imo it's not as 'sexy'.
(And before more generaliztions are made, no, I'm not saying that those games are 'auto sux', but that since I don't find the game appealing, I'd rather spend the hours in something I really love.)
While I appreciate your compliment, I don't agree with you. I think that's rather shallow thinking, and we've literally regressed from the point of the entire topic in stating that.
I'd like to think that the general demographic of gamers are intelligent enough and capable of enjoying the game without having boobs jiggling in every shot.
oh so if all my characters were monsters in said title and all the people were average non heroic..run off the mill people. That would make it boring. idk....I could hunt a example to prove this one wrong but I'm going to bed.
It's a matter of taste.
I would tend to agree that average characters are boring. I couldn't stand Heavy Rain, or any of the Call of Duty/Battlefield games because of that. I can play those games for maybe an hour tops before I get absolutely sick of them. On the other hand, games like Gears of War, Darksiders, Space Marine are awesome to me. If I wanted to play war, I'd join the military.
But again, it's a matter of taste, and that's just MY taste (and lots of other people). I know people who think that Gears is f'n stupid, and would much rather play Battlefield or Madden.
I'm glad we've taken this thread from protecting women from themselves to attacking them for not having viewpoints that meet your standard of pretentious douche-baggery.
No one ever seems to complain about this one. NO ARMOR AT ALL, she's not even a FIGHTER, more like a BROADWAY VAUDEVILLE BURLESQUE yet she has a role in a violent video game regardless. she doesn't even get anal bum cover.
There's a better tasteful and sexy example from the same game series........ i think. mrskuillface would probably know
Makkon, I'm sorry if I offended you, I was just trying to make the point that we female artists DO often enjoy creating sexy female characters. And as I was trying to say, sexy doesn't mean lots of tits and ass showing necassarily, but a feel, a stylel, an attitude. I think a lot of your artwork is sexy, and not trashy or tasteless at all, and I really mean this as a compliment. And I know you're trying to bring up good examples of great characters that aren't oversexed, but I would definitely argue that some of your examples are sexy--The Portal character is lookin' pretty good, and I'm sure the Gears character was also designed to be sexy.
I'm trying to say that 'fun' is partly in the aesthetic appeal of a game. I never said 'super' sexy was more fun. I really don't need a game to be 'beautiful' or 'sexy' to enjoy it a lot--but if I DO consider a game these things, than that's just another fun/enjoyable level to it.
Mezz: Naw, you didn't offend me, it was a pretentious over-reaction. Thank you, and I agree! Many of my female character designs are sexy, or attractive (I feel semantically there is a difference) and I love them! The female form is a work of art, and it should be appreciated as such. What I try to do with my female characters is to portray so much more than just physical attractiveness. I feel that poor design decisions such as massive boobs and wedgie thongs on female characters undermine the potential depth of a character and distract from what they should be: a stylistic representation of a person. Instead they become just eyecandy. That, and it's bad cliches. Sure it's taste, but I'm just tired of it. I think you made this point earlier in saying there is a difference between tasteful sexy and tasteless sexy.
All characters are designed to be visually appealing, and having a beautiful woman as a character design has never been a bad thing. I ALWAYS PREFER IT. But perhaps the direction that the conversation was going pushed my buttons a little when people argued that it was a matter of embracing female sexuality when it's nothing more than bad design. Having a male character ripped and shirtless in a speedo isn't embracing male sexuality at all. I don't get why people think that's what this is all about.
I will say that as a male artist, I enjoy making awesome male characters too. Many of my male character designs could be defined as sexy in every right. I'd be hard pressed to design a male hero character that wasn't handsome! But there's so much more acceptable design possibility with male characters because for them anything goes, sexy or not, they can be just pure awesome, and they can simply be themselves.
I just wish that was acceptable for female characters too.
I also think there's a semantic misunderstanding among many people in this thread with the words 'sexy' and 'attractive.'
As far as I see it this argument is missing a perspective, those attracted to males. As eld's post pointed out even the female character's who aren't showing too much skin still are sexy, trying to use a portal gun whilst having your jumpsuit only half on would get irritating after a while :poly121:
I mean male characters in games are rarely unattractive unless it's the whole point of the character (EG the nerdy one or the old scientist). Take Barney from half life for instance, he's meant to be a slightly goofy character (or at least I assume so) yet out in the street he would be medium-high in terms of looks.
The simple fact is when people are playing a piece of entertainment they don't want ugliness shoved in their faces without a purpose so things will sway toward a sexy/attractive angle. As well as ugly, unattractive people in games can distract from what is going on, take the example of one of the BBC's politics correspondents gary odonoghue (pic) whilst I don't mean too belittle him or mock him in any way he does distract focus away from the stories he presents in the way a regular pretty newscaster wouldn't. I'm all for having a more representative selection of people in games or on TV but you need to understand titillation isn't the only reason they are there, sexyness is soothing on the eyes
I don't think the problem in games is women being too sexy or wearing thong armor...
I don't really care about someone's choice in the aesthetics (that's their choice wether i like it or not )
But,
It's the god damn writers! That i have a problem with these days. can we complain and argue about that?! I mean why is it that video game writers are so lazy! hashing out the same Doomsday plot and stories it's sad....
oh so if all my characters were monsters in said title and all the people were average non heroic..run off the mill people. That would make it boring. idk....I could hunt a example to prove this one wrong but I'm going to bed.
I think normal people vs monsters definitely stands to be visually boring, if 'normal people' aren't engagingly designed.
Some of the silent hill games manage to have visually exciting protagonists despite the 'plain' character designs. Fatal frame fails. Clocktower fails. Siren's stylish and gorgeous... but the characters are damn boring.
What about games where characters are sexualized but still presented with fleshed out personalities and identities?
What about games where characters are sexualized but still presented with fleshed out personalities and identities?
You mean like this?
Who loves pandas and has a sistOH NEVER MIND I SEE CLEAVAGE THIS IS OVERLY SLUTTY AND DEGRADING TO FEMALESTHINK OF THE WOMEN OUT THERE WHO ARE SLAPPED WITH THIS INSULTING SEXUALIZATION OF THEIR GENDER DAY TO DAY
All this toing and froing can be simmered down into a simple test -
Look at the character design. Does it make you roll your eyes? If it does then you've got an excessively pandering design. If you don't then you don't.
He seems to have failed to understand the point behind all of this, it's not like the women wearing that armor are going out to battle in a real world. One could sit down and argue about all of the unrealistic matters in games/movies/comics/whatever but you'll just be wasting your breath. People should understand that it's all about visual design, not practicality.
He seems to have failed to understand the point behind all of this, it's not like the women wearing that armor are going out to battle in a real world. One could sit down and argue about all of the unrealistic matters in games/movies/comics/whatever but you'll just be wasting your breath. People should understand that it's all about visual design, not practicality.
I think most people would agree developing a character is more important that visual design in a lot of instances. If putting a character in skimpy clothes does nothing for the characters personality, back story, and traits, it shouldn't be done. You can have a beautiful visually appealing feminine clothing without exposing skin. If the character was an amazon or part of a culture with minimal clothing, that would make sense. If the culture is medieval Europe, fearsome female knight, it doesn't work well to push the story telling of the game.
I think most people would agree developing a character is more important that visual design in a lot of instances. If putting a character in skimpy clothes does nothing for the characters personality, back story, and traits, it shouldn't be done. You can have a beautiful visually appealing feminine clothing without exposing skin. If the character was an amazon or part of a culture with minimal clothing, that would make sense. If the culture is medieval Europe, fearsome female knight, it doesn't work well to push the story telling of the game.
I agree with you but what you're talking about is separated from the visual design of the character. The visual design simply can't stand on it's own, but what if the characters don't speak a lot and no backstory is given? The artist simply tried to make the design of the characters visually appealing(and let's face it, most players like this stuff despite telling you otherwise). If these kind of designs weren't successful then studios wouldn't still be doing it.
However games like Warcraft or Tera aren't set in a real existing place in our world so your argument doesn't quite work there. They're free to make up whatever logic there is, as long as we as players "get it".
Yes, we might enjoy making sexy women and women enjoy making sexy women, and that's fine. Sex is a good thing as long as we all consent to it. But the problem is that men aren't objectified nearly enough in kind. That uneven treatment (combined with the commercial context of these games) suggests an exploitative culture at work here, not a "sex positive" culture.
Why can't I see the outline of Nathan Drake's package as he emerges from the water? Why don't I get to see more bare dude ass in its furry glory? Why don't more male characters flirt with my character and offer their crotches, thrust into the air? Why aren't there any crotch-physics applied to male characters?
I think currently only Bioware gives any real thought to making men genuinely sexy -- e.g. talking to Jacob in Mass Effect 2 is like talking to a table, but dude, whoever baked his torso normal maps totally knew what they were doing. Woof.
If you say straight women love making sexy women, you straight dudes should start making more sexy men. Model their erect penises. Make those crotch bulges insanely, unrealistically huge. Men and women of all persuasions shall salute you for your artistry.
haha, yeah. I'm not sure if making the crotch bigger would be a good idea as I'm not sure if that's what women/gay men look at when checking them out. All I've heard is that it's mostly about the male forms of different muscles and more. What about the guy from final fantasy xii or the hero from Vagrant story?
I'm not sure why Square has been more daring when it comes to these kinds of male designs. I guess it's because their games have more female players? It's all about creating something that appeals to your audience, you don't see a lot of normal looking skinny guys in Gears of war for example.
... They're free to make up whatever logic there is, as long as we as players "get it".
That statement is slightly contradictory, one simply can't fabricate a logic and expect the player to "get it" because their doing that is based either on a preconceived 'library' of visual representations and exceptions they've built up in their life-time's, or when the ground rules have been established by the game world. If neither is done and one steps too far outside the box, it increases the risk of loosing the players engagement, not only in character but also in story. So, Warcraft and Tera 'work' not because they make up their own logic, but rather because they establish the rules for, and in, which that logic takes place, and that's something that's still "grounded in reality".
That statement is slightly contradictory, one simply can't fabricate a logic and expect the player to "get it" because their doing that is based either on a preconceived 'library' of visual representations and exceptions they've built up in their life-time's, or when the ground rules have been established by the game world. If neither is done and one steps too far outside the box, it increases the risk of loosing the players engagement, not only in character but also in story. So, Warcraft and Tera 'work' not because they make up their own logic, but rather because they establish the rules for, and in, which that logic takes place, and that's something that's still "grounded in reality".
So what you're saying is that Blizzard didn't make that logic up but they did use logic that others made up? Isn't that just nitpicking the point of my statement? It is still the same; As long as the players can understand the logic, the studios can afford to use it(rephrased after your critique).
With that being said many studios make up logic of their own too, even if they usually use whatever's already out there. You just have to take very small steps and make sure it doesn't stretch too far from reality. Take FPS games for instance, if you were to hold a shotgun like in Wolfenstein 3d it would be pretty awkward if not harmful to your body because of the recoil. It's not entirely logical but we still "get it".
The article made quite some weird point about conan though, "he's not meant to be armored" ?
And then in the destroyer:
(and this speaking outside of the books and comics)
And yes, I guess his appearance is mainly to appease the men who want to be conan, but still, they didn't have to skin him down in such a silly way when he actually did armour up when having to, and in the destroyer he goes around using his loincloth as armour-replacement through the whole movie.
We also have cases in the first conan movie where we have a female that is extremely scantly clad yet represented in a perfectly good and equal way, where the female lead will actually be strong and leading.
For me it's not about the amount of skin, sex sells and the female body is nice to look at,
What is most important is how these characters are represented, not physically, but mentally.
And then how we men treat women, in real life.
And I've probably use this example before but, without a doubt a favorite amongst females playing world of warcraft?:
Don't let things like this become caught in the holy war against skin on females in games, because it sure as hell will.
It's interesting someone brings up Conan the Barbarian in this thread. Yes I know the thread is old but it's still relevant to me. Conan was one of the first movies I ever saw as a kid. And EVERYONE was naked in that movie. And the women had swords and they were fighting just like the dudes were. So my first experience seeing scantily clad girls was were they were fighting as equals with the men. Men who also had their theighs and buldging chests bursting through their clothes. It just seemed like I was looking at the human body.
So to me, it's really ironic when some people try to stand up for women by saying that showing the female body is somehow disrespectful or diminutive. What is wrong with the woman's body?
Also, batman, superman, skin tight clothes. You can see everything. I think some people are just trying to seem 'evolved' but I just don't buy it one bit. Most of the human genome is aligned with femininity. That means that masculinity is only a small portion of any human.
For that reason all sexes, I believe, are naturally more fascinated with the female form than they are of males. Because the female form is closer to the averaged baseline of all our genetic variation.
Conan isn't a good example, if you want to see men portrayed just like women are in popular media, take a stroll down DeviantArt.
You can post a women with a cyber postage stamp covering her vagina and Polycounters will report the people who complain about it. Post a man with a cyber banana hammock and there will be a flood of reports about how it's disgusting and NSFW.
Conan isn't a good example, if you want to see men portrayed just like women are in popular media, take a stroll down DeviantArt.
You can post a women with a cyber postage stamp covering her vagina and Polycounters will report the people who complain about it. Post a man with a cyber banana hammock and there will be a flood of reports about how it's disgusting and NSFW.
Well that's because there is a difference between the masculine genitalia and the feminine. The masculine is capable of violence, while the feminine is not. To try to equate a penis to a vagina is to be in denial about the true state of sexuality across the world. There is a big difference between a young girl seeing a penis which is quite capable of doing physical harm to her, and a young boy seeing a vagina, which in and of itself, is not capable of doing him harm.
Replies
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
I would DIE if I was told not to make a female character sexy. DIE.
Why do lots of guys think girls are all crazy feminists opposed to drawing a woman sexy or showing off any skin?
Also, there's a big difference betweens tasteless sexy and tastefull sexy.
These abstract conversations seem pretty useless. In a vacuum it's really easy to make sweeping statements, but they'd apply poorly to individual games.
I like 'sexy' designs a lot, and i gravitate torwad them, but there are plenty of games/settings/stories where they become disgustingly offensive.
And realistic can look degrading and frumpy under the right circumstances -- I'd be hard pressed to find a plain jane business woman anything but sexist next to a character like Dante from devil may cry.
The poster who said it was all in the attitude nailed it. My female friends like Frazetta a lot more than Boris Vallejo, and i think the difference between powerful, engaging women (sexualized and objectified or not) and a degrading sex doll really comes down to characterization more than it does design.
Because... it's fun? And games are meant to be fun. (As many have already said, if it suits the art direction/mood/theme/etc...) I don't think something like Tetris is lacking fun because there's no sexy people, but I do think that, say, an RPG is more fun when it has a sexy lady to play as.
It makes perfect sense, actually. And it wasn't stated that the game "auto sux" without beautiful characters, but rather that it's just more fun with them. If the character design doesn't specifically prohibit sex appeal for story or gameplay reasons, then what reason would you ever have to not make a character attractive? It's not like it's hurting anything.
The same could be said of the art style itself--I'd argue that I find a personally appealing art style 'sexy', which also increases the fun of the game. It's why I don't play games that have a chunky, heavy aesthetic normally--because imo it's not as 'sexy'.
(And before more generaliztions are made, no, I'm not saying that those games are 'auto sux', but that since I don't find the game appealing, I'd rather spend the hours in something I really love.)
for example
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/mission%20art/missionart_092.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/mission%20art/missionart_094.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/mission%20art/missionart_111.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/mission%20art/missionart_152.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/mission%20art/missionart_157.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/2010/07-16-2010_cybabe.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/2010/sketchbook/sketch0021.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/24796637/2010/sketchbook/sketch0023.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/5301613/sketchbook/2011/sketch2011_054.jpg
As an artist, you must be capable of pulling off whatever the design calls for.
OIDAGBADFBAFHJAFADGBLADGKBAG RAGE
Love those designs Makkon.
To bad people will shun them because they don't show enough.
I'd like to think that the general demographic of gamers are intelligent enough and capable of enjoying the game without having boobs jiggling in every shot.
It's a matter of taste.
I would tend to agree that average characters are boring. I couldn't stand Heavy Rain, or any of the Call of Duty/Battlefield games because of that. I can play those games for maybe an hour tops before I get absolutely sick of them. On the other hand, games like Gears of War, Darksiders, Space Marine are awesome to me. If I wanted to play war, I'd join the military.
But again, it's a matter of taste, and that's just MY taste (and lots of other people). I know people who think that Gears is f'n stupid, and would much rather play Battlefield or Madden.
To each their own.
Please continue the list.
There's a better tasteful and sexy example from the same game series........ i think. mrskuillface would probably know
I'm trying to say that 'fun' is partly in the aesthetic appeal of a game. I never said 'super' sexy was more fun. I really don't need a game to be 'beautiful' or 'sexy' to enjoy it a lot--but if I DO consider a game these things, than that's just another fun/enjoyable level to it.
Mezz: Naw, you didn't offend me, it was a pretentious over-reaction. Thank you, and I agree! Many of my female character designs are sexy, or attractive (I feel semantically there is a difference) and I love them! The female form is a work of art, and it should be appreciated as such. What I try to do with my female characters is to portray so much more than just physical attractiveness. I feel that poor design decisions such as massive boobs and wedgie thongs on female characters undermine the potential depth of a character and distract from what they should be: a stylistic representation of a person. Instead they become just eyecandy. That, and it's bad cliches. Sure it's taste, but I'm just tired of it. I think you made this point earlier in saying there is a difference between tasteful sexy and tasteless sexy.
All characters are designed to be visually appealing, and having a beautiful woman as a character design has never been a bad thing. I ALWAYS PREFER IT. But perhaps the direction that the conversation was going pushed my buttons a little when people argued that it was a matter of embracing female sexuality when it's nothing more than bad design. Having a male character ripped and shirtless in a speedo isn't embracing male sexuality at all. I don't get why people think that's what this is all about.
I will say that as a male artist, I enjoy making awesome male characters too. Many of my male character designs could be defined as sexy in every right. I'd be hard pressed to design a male hero character that wasn't handsome! But there's so much more acceptable design possibility with male characters because for them anything goes, sexy or not, they can be just pure awesome, and they can simply be themselves.
I just wish that was acceptable for female characters too.
I also think there's a semantic misunderstanding among many people in this thread with the words 'sexy' and 'attractive.'
I'm not sure I want to touch the pony though, that stuff is perfect!
Which goes back to an ancient post of mine in another thread that even the "non-sexy" characters always pointed out are designed to be sexy.
And to be on topic: your art director will decide what's too sexy.
I mean male characters in games are rarely unattractive unless it's the whole point of the character (EG the nerdy one or the old scientist). Take Barney from half life for instance, he's meant to be a slightly goofy character (or at least I assume so) yet out in the street he would be medium-high in terms of looks.
The simple fact is when people are playing a piece of entertainment they don't want ugliness shoved in their faces without a purpose so things will sway toward a sexy/attractive angle. As well as ugly, unattractive people in games can distract from what is going on, take the example of one of the BBC's politics correspondents gary odonoghue (pic) whilst I don't mean too belittle him or mock him in any way he does distract focus away from the stories he presents in the way a regular pretty newscaster wouldn't. I'm all for having a more representative selection of people in games or on TV but you need to understand titillation isn't the only reason they are there, sexyness is soothing on the eyes
I don't really care about someone's choice in the aesthetics (that's their choice wether i like it or not
But,
It's the god damn writers! That i have a problem with these days. can we complain and argue about that?! I mean why is it that video game writers are so lazy! hashing out the same Doomsday plot and stories it's sad....
NO ONE SAID IT WOULD BE BORING.
Some of the silent hill games manage to have visually exciting protagonists despite the 'plain' character designs. Fatal frame fails. Clocktower fails. Siren's stylish and gorgeous... but the characters are damn boring.
What about games where characters are sexualized but still presented with fleshed out personalities and identities?
JUST MAKE GOOD ART, YOU GAIS.
You mean like this?
Who loves pandas and has a sistOH NEVER MIND I SEE CLEAVAGE THIS IS OVERLY SLUTTY AND DEGRADING TO FEMALES THINK OF THE WOMEN OUT THERE WHO ARE SLAPPED WITH THIS INSULTING SEXUALIZATION OF THEIR GENDER DAY TO DAY
Look at the character design. Does it make you roll your eyes? If it does then you've got an excessively pandering design. If you don't then you don't.
Simple, see?
Ran across this little write-up about Fantasy Armor, and thought you guys may find it interesting.
He seems to have failed to understand the point behind all of this, it's not like the women wearing that armor are going out to battle in a real world. One could sit down and argue about all of the unrealistic matters in games/movies/comics/whatever but you'll just be wasting your breath. People should understand that it's all about visual design, not practicality.
I think most people would agree developing a character is more important that visual design in a lot of instances. If putting a character in skimpy clothes does nothing for the characters personality, back story, and traits, it shouldn't be done. You can have a beautiful visually appealing feminine clothing without exposing skin. If the character was an amazon or part of a culture with minimal clothing, that would make sense. If the culture is medieval Europe, fearsome female knight, it doesn't work well to push the story telling of the game.
I agree with you but what you're talking about is separated from the visual design of the character. The visual design simply can't stand on it's own, but what if the characters don't speak a lot and no backstory is given? The artist simply tried to make the design of the characters visually appealing(and let's face it, most players like this stuff despite telling you otherwise). If these kind of designs weren't successful then studios wouldn't still be doing it.
However games like Warcraft or Tera aren't set in a real existing place in our world so your argument doesn't quite work there. They're free to make up whatever logic there is, as long as we as players "get it".
Yes, we might enjoy making sexy women and women enjoy making sexy women, and that's fine. Sex is a good thing as long as we all consent to it. But the problem is that men aren't objectified nearly enough in kind. That uneven treatment (combined with the commercial context of these games) suggests an exploitative culture at work here, not a "sex positive" culture.
Why can't I see the outline of Nathan Drake's package as he emerges from the water? Why don't I get to see more bare dude ass in its furry glory? Why don't more male characters flirt with my character and offer their crotches, thrust into the air? Why aren't there any crotch-physics applied to male characters?
I think currently only Bioware gives any real thought to making men genuinely sexy -- e.g. talking to Jacob in Mass Effect 2 is like talking to a table, but dude, whoever baked his torso normal maps totally knew what they were doing. Woof.
If you say straight women love making sexy women, you straight dudes should start making more sexy men. Model their erect penises. Make those crotch bulges insanely, unrealistically huge. Men and women of all persuasions shall salute you for your artistry.
I'm not sure why Square has been more daring when it comes to these kinds of male designs. I guess it's because their games have more female players? It's all about creating something that appeals to your audience, you don't see a lot of normal looking skinny guys in Gears of war for example.
So what you're saying is that Blizzard didn't make that logic up but they did use logic that others made up? Isn't that just nitpicking the point of my statement? It is still the same; As long as the players can understand the logic, the studios can afford to use it(rephrased after your critique).
With that being said many studios make up logic of their own too, even if they usually use whatever's already out there. You just have to take very small steps and make sure it doesn't stretch too far from reality. Take FPS games for instance, if you were to hold a shotgun like in Wolfenstein 3d it would be pretty awkward if not harmful to your body because of the recoil. It's not entirely logical but we still "get it".
And then in the destroyer:
(and this speaking outside of the books and comics)
And yes, I guess his appearance is mainly to appease the men who want to be conan, but still, they didn't have to skin him down in such a silly way when he actually did armour up when having to, and in the destroyer he goes around using his loincloth as armour-replacement through the whole movie.
We also have cases in the first conan movie where we have a female that is extremely scantly clad yet represented in a perfectly good and equal way, where the female lead will actually be strong and leading.
For me it's not about the amount of skin, sex sells and the female body is nice to look at,
What is most important is how these characters are represented, not physically, but mentally.
And then how we men treat women, in real life.
And I've probably use this example before but, without a doubt a favorite amongst females playing world of warcraft?:
Don't let things like this become caught in the holy war against skin on females in games, because it sure as hell will.
That PDF was seriously interesting though, no idea the game looked like that in early production, think I'll replay it when I get a new PC
awesome pdf tho
So to me, it's really ironic when some people try to stand up for women by saying that showing the female body is somehow disrespectful or diminutive. What is wrong with the woman's body?
Also, batman, superman, skin tight clothes. You can see everything. I think some people are just trying to seem 'evolved' but I just don't buy it one bit. Most of the human genome is aligned with femininity. That means that masculinity is only a small portion of any human.
For that reason all sexes, I believe, are naturally more fascinated with the female form than they are of males. Because the female form is closer to the averaged baseline of all our genetic variation.
You can post a women with a cyber postage stamp covering her vagina and Polycounters will report the people who complain about it. Post a man with a cyber banana hammock and there will be a flood of reports about how it's disgusting and NSFW.
Well that's because there is a difference between the masculine genitalia and the feminine. The masculine is capable of violence, while the feminine is not. To try to equate a penis to a vagina is to be in denial about the true state of sexuality across the world. There is a big difference between a young girl seeing a penis which is quite capable of doing physical harm to her, and a young boy seeing a vagina, which in and of itself, is not capable of doing him harm.