How many blog posts have I begun by divorcing myself from my status as a "female gamer", instead expressing a preference to be seen as a "human being who may have an alternate perspective in some cases due in part to her gender?"
Those of you who have followed SVGL for ages and ages (and there are a good many of you I know of -- thanks for hangin' around!) know I'm pretty much the biggest diehard Metal Gear Solid fan ever, and that Solid Snake is one of my favorite heroes. I feel like him sometimes; I step up often to handle things that maybe aren't "who I am," because people ask me to do it and because I'm the only one who can, and because it's my job.
You've probably seen my Bayonetta piece by now. My god, do I love Bayonetta. When its release was met with a big round of guilty handwringing and/or judgmental tsk-tsking over how sexy is the titular heroine, I couldn't quite stomach it, and wrote for GamePro about how Bayonetta doesn't need to be sexless to be a positive female portrayal.
I felt pretty good about my stance, too, and then my good friend Kieron Gillen, to whom I've always looked up, took me to task (or my working environment to task, really) gently thus:
That the biggest name in female videogame criticism finds her natural instincts to write apologia for almost anything sexual in games – as brilliant as she is at that – seems an odd warping of the deck. Or, now I think about it some more, perhaps entirely natural. What could be more popular with a generally male readership than a female journalist saying it’s all okay?
That the biggest name in female videogame criticism finds her natural instincts to write apologia for almost anything sexual in games – as brilliant as she is at that – seems an odd warping of the deck. Or, now I think about it some more, perhaps entirely natural. What could be more popular with a generally male readership than a female journalist saying it’s all okay?
I hope he meant "biggest female name in video game criticism", rather than to isolate "female videogame criticism" as a separate field (let's assume he did). Anyway, it's a fair perspective, as is that of the RPS commenter who accuses me of "moving the goalposts when it suits [me]."
Yeah, I do. Sometimes I find something okay, and sometimes I don't. Sometimes what I find okay will not be okay with others. I write subjectively, as should any critic (objectivity is an illusion that plagues our work). I recognize that there is sexism in Grand Theft Auto IV, for example -- but as that game presents a cynical world where both men and women are morally ambiguous if not disgusting humans, I found the game not sexist but the fiction depressingly faithful. I got a lot of mail from people who really hated that I took that position, as if I ought to instead have elected to make of the game an occasion for feminist championship.
Maybe I could have. I know a lot of people hate my writing because I am often defending sexuality; I am accused of pandering to my male readership. Maybe I am. We've all gotta work, right? But I still maintain I don't especially care about gender issues more than any other facet of media criticism. These are simply the articles of mine that get the most traction; this is the use others most commonly have for me. It's not my natural instinct.
My instinct, if any, is simply to react strongly against the tendency many people (or groups) have to distract from creative endeavors by using them as an occasion to highlight or invent victimization for themselves. I find those grievances to be ungrounded more often than not.
Anyway. Read the Bayonetta article. I won reviewer Tae Kim over to my point of view a little bit too: Here's his response. And here's something I'd like to know -- if the article had from it the "I" removed, if it were written by a man asserting that the stylistic content made Bayonetta's looks "acceptable," would you have bought the argument, or did it need to be billed as a "female perspective?"
[Bayonetta and Jeanne picture is from here, although I dunno who drew it. I like it because it is sexy, although messing around at the link will yield you some stuff that is less sexy and more certainly NSFW.]
135 comments:
Either I'm desensitized or just plain insensitive, but I no longer think anything unusual of such portrayal of females in mainstream media. Perhaps it's just that I've lived in Japan for 7 years where this topic is rarely broached. But sometimes, I wish there would be greater focus on other aspects of the game -- artistry, concept, playability -- than whether the lead character is appropriately male or female.
> My instinct, if any, is simply to react strongly against the tendency many people (or groups) have to distract from creative endeavors by using them as an occasion to highlight or invent victimization for themselves. I find those grievances to be ungrounded more often than not.
Awesome awesome awesome.
Noah
I would probably agree with them on it, since Bayonetta does ooze sexualism and senuality to a degree that almost takes it over the top, but the demons she summons with her hair and the wildness of the angels only goes to show how the game just reaches for the edges.
But I digress. I think that I would have agreed with the article if it was written by a man, but it wouldn't have had the same impact. It's often (and most of the time rightly so) pointed out by women that female game characters are just there for the jiggle physics. It's nice to see the story crafted around her, not something just shoehorning her into a guy's game or just making her an alternate playable character.
I only kind of partially agree with your original article on Bayonetta. There are a lot of times in the game when she is completely cool and her sexuality is a part of that. But there are other times, like the poledancing over the credit scene, where you definitely can see the developers exploiting that sexuality as opposed to celebrating it. What makes me not worry about it so much is that the whole game feels like it plays up the exploitation level entirely intentionally. It's ironic camp on the level of genius of something like the Rocky Horror Picture Show. I don't want to say this excuses their objectification (if it even needs excusing), but it puts it in a context where it feels like taking any kind of serious offense to it would be ridiculous.
Yes - sorry. Biggest female name, etc. My typos are eggreggerioushitihavenoideahowtofinishthisoneorstartitforthatmatter.
KG
To be honest, I'm finding more issues with Tae Kim's article than yours. That Lara Croft has somehow become a "footnote" seems hyperbolic, even if it may very well be a footstep to highlighting his conviction in Bayonetta, whether it's one of convenience or not.
Admitedly, haven't played the game yet. I'll do so before January ends of course, thanks to writing obligations, but I have been watching numerous previews, reviews, trailers and assorted media. If we are to believe the avatars and nicknames found on the internet, nearly all of this media was followed by men salivating at her impossible proportions, while others had objections from men and women alike.
At best, I think there's certainly a case that can be made both ways and as always all interpretations are likely to form out of what we're looking for than from the creators' intent. That's par for the course and it works two ways. I can't for the life of me find the titular character sexy - that is, the form itself is of disconcerting proportions, the personality seems modelled after a schoolgirl - which would be an interesting way to circumvent using the strange fixation of younger women on japanese culture; a woman with childlike traits, from lollipop sucking to gratuituous shots of her anatomy, seems to make it more "acceptable" - and there's always some angle, some movement, some focus on detail that screams out sexploitation. There's almost no other way around it: the majority of the experience revels in her curves and is designed so as to leave little to the imagination or second guesses ("first climax"? a stripper pole? really?). The result is plain to see: Lara Croft went from fake nude codes to the Eidos marketing teams scouring the land for new models to represent a virtual character to cosplay and whatnot. Bayo is going the same way. And it's not because they're necessarily a positive female portrayal - at least, not a positive portrayal in the way one usually thinks.
On the other hand, if you're looking for any measure of simbolism, interpretation and whatnot, there are curious detailes. Gunplay in videogames is often seen as a man's focus, and when the paradigm was being shaken with Lara Croft, it ultimately failed for a number of reasons. Chief among them most developers can't write characters to save their lives. Croft was, for all intents and purposes, a shapely figure that still operated as a man. Looking at characters like Jade and Alyx Vance, the proposition is that their feminism works the other way around - through a measure of circumstance and appearance, they operated as women in a man's world. They could have been modeled after the same objectives that went behind modeling, say, Alexis from SiN but if they retained all else, more than likely the status would be the same. Strength, determination and wits can go hand in hand with what one would call "killer body". But it's a question of attitude - it was a contained, rather than exhuberant, feminism. They're women who don't feel the need to take out a megaphone and say "watch out, I have a vagina!" Now I could point out to other examples of feminism in videogames, but the likes of Chell, Shodan, Jade and Ravel are either too obscure or likely to cause dissent, and would bring all other sorts of discussions that would drag this away from the topic (such as: Shodan being an artificial intelligence and Ravel being an old and deformed magical hag, even if both were written in much more sensible ways than their most appetizing "competition").
(OMG 2nd part)
Some of the things I've seen in Bayonetta's footage is interesting, to say the least. The most blatant one is the ornate "O" on the logo - it's just not the symbol, it's that particular shape inside it. It's also a different conception of the female body - if Ninja Gaiden establishes an uncanny valley of breasts, Bayonetta does that to the legs. Apparently Itagaki loves mammaries; Kamiya worsphis long legs. Curious that both designers have sparred in public over combat games, and theirs in particular, and Kamiya chose that particular direction - maybe unwillingly but this is one of those cases that I think was conscious. Another slightly less travelled interpretation is in the possibility that her being cast as a witch - in the past, a term applied to women seen as wanting to escape the rules imposed by men - to be a choice rather than coincidence.
Then, there are shots where she uses her pistols in curious ways, somewhere between tools for survival and fashion statement. Noticed the scene where she blows a head off with her gun heel? It's almost pornographic the way the head is rendered passive and large amounts of liquid come out as a result. If you look to headshots as a singularly male choice of expression (the "in your face" way of describing first-person shooters, the headshot as cumshot that defeats and humiliates adversaries), what's to say of a female character doing almost the exact same?
Also notice how in other scenes, she moves the pistols very close to her groin. For all those years of direct, bare bones gunplay of point and shoot, here we have a female character seemingly engaging a different perspective. It's not only that the pistols are used as fashion accessories (which could be taken as a debasing of a predominantly male mentality), but how she has no problems in the interplay of sexual powers. When it comes close to suggesting sexual intent (by having the phallic pistols veering dangerously close to her, let's say, place of power (I'm trying hard not to use the same words again and again so this is not filtered as spam or smut :P ), it actually doesn't happen - the pistols pass right by it. As if claiming the right to be a woman entitled to use tools often consignated to men, but also of suggesting that during this entire act of subversion she may surrender and assume a traditional women's role - only to come off of it as if she was saying "close but no cigar".
I wouldn't say this is necessarily empowering, but certainly depicts her as smarter, as more aware of her sexuality - and, in a meta way, aware of women's roles in videogames, possibly also in opposition to Itagaki's own vision - than most others of her type (by "her type", I mean the likes of Croft, Bloodrayne, etc).
So, smart or tart? Probably both. I think it would be interesting to determine to what lenghts such interpretations are correct - as in, was there a clear effort in using the status quo to challenge itself, by subverting the female role with situations like these - and not. But it may just be a case of it not being important. Healthy discussion on this will provide a good number of perspectives. Outside of that it seems to be a very good game on purely mechanical terms, but as a game experience - the sum of all its parts - it's likely to both win and break hearts.
I agree with the article entirely, though I do think that she is very similar to other strong female leads that came before her. Nariko from Heavenly Sword is almost identical, if lacking a sense of unrealism, such as kicking a lot of ass and remain throughout the game as a strong, independent character.
I'd have to agree with Sonikku, I think that while the point of your article would have been just as valid if written by a man, most of the detractors would argue something to the effect of, "Well of course you think the sexuality in Bayonetta is okay, you're a man."
I blame our nation's Puritan heritage - it seems everything is offensive to at least one person in the USA, and we're all socially obligated to feel shame whenever they speak up. Perhaps I'm too cynical about this particular subject to provide a proper opinion, though.
Personally, I was relieved to see someone speaking in favor of a woman's right to her own sexuality; most of the women in my life (which, as a CS engineer and gamer, are unfortunately few) come from fairly oppressive backgrounds and think life would be better if breasts were bound, skirts were mid-calf, and girls never became women.
I enjoyed reading the articles but dear goodness, I'll never read the comments section on there again. What a waste.
I've always liked Chell from Portal. She did for females in FPSs what Gordon Freeman did way back when. Silent but intriguing and entirely capable. Bayonetta just seems to me like the inevitable response to characters from Devil May Cry (Dante and Vergil) and No More Heroes (Travis Touchdown).
As for the perspective from which the article is written, it's only at the end that you really reinforce that you ARE a girl and you have a girl's perspective. Maybe it's because I am a reasonable person, but I read articles and judge them on their merit, not their author.
I think that defending Bayonetta's sexuality is an argument that shouldn't have to be made. Since it sadly does, I'm glad it's been made eloquently.
It's funny how all the debates from the 1960's and 70's are coming back, hunting the growing generation of video game fans to react to the 'basic' themes alongside the now well established industry called 'gender studies'.
"Avoid", I hear you say. True. I guess Leigh already must feel sick to 'explain' and to 'justify' her views (allthough it pays for some concert tickets? ;)
There will always be this wall between male and female views and arguments. Some would even argue that men are not qualified to talk about certain subjects. Possible. Many who do, really should not talk at all.
In my opinion video games - even to this day and age of visual complexity - drag their 8-bit umbilical cord with them; a time, where everything had to be explicit and easy to understand. Visuals were poor. There was no time for subtlety. Today, the limit is not the resolution but the target group to which the publishers like their game to appeal to.
If you talk about male/female video games and gamers, you have to talk about the cultural differences too. Japan and the States are still very different countries. Everyone who has travelled the world knows that. We get to play games we enjoy, yet elements of them annoy us, seem strange, offensive or ... awesome - depending on your age, education, views, experiences - no matter on which side of the pond you live. The feeling is mutual?
I write this from Europe. In Italy, for example, are still villages, only a couple miles away from each other, where people speak completely different dialects, have different customs and festivals. Something similar, you would know about, if you grew up in New York, in the 1950's, 60's or even early 70's - between Brooklyn, Bronx, Harlem...
Some aspect of US culture - especially the puritan part and therefore the obsession with sex and sexes is pretty funny, watching it from Europe. Mind you, we here are not better. We killed each other for 2000 years because of different views on the Virgin Mary. But I hope many of us - either side of the Atlantik or Pacific - started to share the same basic values: treating others with respect and dignity. I see no sex like Stephen Colbert sees no color. What sounds silly is actually based on the ethics of a certain philosopher named Immanuel Kant.
... coming eventually to the very point I want to make. What I would hope for is more 'diversity' in game characters! Let's have more complex straight, gay male and female, transexual characters, not just caricatures. Have more serious characters, more intelligible gameplay, more subtle character development and more real-world stories. And guess what? We have a lot of these things already. If you search you can find these games or make your 'custom' character and play through your own version. Not only indie-games. And Heavy Rain is coming too.
Who needs to catch up with 'us' is the mainstream media and the generation of old farts (even older than me) who don't understand how video games are growing to become a valid entertainment form, just like dad's TV and moms Jane Austen collection (another cliché characterization, some might have recognized? ;).
It's their 19th century male/female view that many are still dragging with them and need to leave behind. I leave you with a quote from another old dude like me, Dr. Frank-N-Furter: "Don't dream it, be it" (Rocky Horror Picture Show).
I don't buy tickets to concerts, or hardly ever! I pay for hand-stamps ^_^
I thought it was one of the sharpest and boldest things you've ever written about a game people were dying to criticize right from the start. Cheers.
Thanks to your article, I may actually be able to enjoy Bayonetta. Playing the demo just made me uncomfortable, in the "Please put on a jacket before you embarrass yourself" sense.
I loved your Bayonetta article Leigh, and greatly appreciated it. To answer your question, I did need that article to be written by a woman; 25 years of white male guilt have nudged my sensibilities in a more cautious direction.
Your opinion on this is a good one. It's not a sexist or a feminist game, it just has a lot of sexuality in it. That's fine. I'm more impressed with how great the game controls - the setting, amount of sexuality, or the amount of intended camp is completely secondary to the more technical awesomeness Platinum achieved with this game.
Now if they could only port their games to other systems in-house...
I really enjoyed your article on Bayonetta. I'd been worried about it for quite some time, given that the poor woman's legs were five times the length of the rest of her body, so at a glance I thought of it as straight up exploitation and the usual "sex sells" thing that so many people just eat up. Then you changed my opinion on it.
I suppose it wasn't necessarily the fact that you're female and gave the opinion you did (though you do have a perspective that men tend to, you know, not have, being men and all) but that you went into why it was so over-the-top and sexualized instead of just disregarding it right away. As someone who believes my country can be way too uptight about sex and who also believes sexuality can be a beautiful and empowering thing, your thoughts on the subject are really what got to me, not your thoughts on the subject. If that makes any sense.
Though you do have a bit more authority on the matter of female sexuality in games than men do, just as I'd probably have more authority on male sexuality in games. Of course, it's all very subjective (which I still don't think people understand about your writing, or mine, or anyone's really, which hopefully changes at some point because objectivity is really damn annoying), so it depends greatly on what game, character, etc. we're talking about. Bayonetta may not be exploitive to you, but you might think plenty of other female characters are. No wide brushes here.
And here's something I'd like to know -- if the article had from it the "I" removed, if it were written by a man asserting that the stylistic content made Bayonetta's looks "acceptable," would you have bought the argument, or did it need to be billed as a "female perspective?"
I think the answer to this sadly might have less to do with whether your argument stands on its own, and more to do with whether a man could make that argument without himself being accused of simply trying to prop up juvenile titillation as "okay". He'd be ripped to shreds, wouldn't he? Hopefully not by you, but still.
That is to say, I think that argument could only be made, and taken seriously, from a female's perspective. There's entirely too much bias directed at (and assumed on the part of) a male author trying to talk about female sexuality in gaming for the conversation to even go anywhere in that case.
I totally agree with your feature. And I kinda of resume it with the question:
Do women have to be/act like men in order to be a respectful portrayal??
One comment here struck me oddly: "It's not a sexist or a feminist game, it just has a lot of sexuality in it."
phylomathsonic, were you intending to set up sexism and feminism as opposites? Feminism is the opposite of Masculinism or Chauvinism, not sexism. It's a FORM of sexism, if we're being honest. A form that has been absolutely necessary to reach equilibrium, much as pro-black racism has been necessary. Is it really any less incorrect to say that there is nothing a man can do that a woman can't (as Ms. Alexander claimed in the article), than it is to say that there is nothing a woman can do that a man can't (she claimed the opposite)?
Also, the claim that Bayonetta is doing something men can't isn't entirely true. There exist games where hypersexualized men gallivant around in their skivvies. It showcases different characteristics, of course, but is a game like Cho Aniki really that different from Bayonetta? I, for one, am perfectly comfortable laughing my ass off at both.
@Julain: Actually, that's a common misconception. Feminism is the opposite of sexism.
"feminism - the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men."
Feminism isn't about rights for women that men don't have, it's about equality. The status quo is that women are currently at a disadvantage, and thus they are the ones that the movement currently seeks to empower.
Just read the Bayonetta article, very interesting, and I agree with you.
My gripes with Bayonetta comes not from the game itself; when viewing the game only, I completely agree with what you wrote.
My problem comes when viewing the broader spectrum of video games. How many big games released in the last five years with women in prominent roles did not represent their sexuality as one of their major character traits, either through their behaviour or their outfits?
Julian,
Second wave feminism is a movement with a number of sexist traits, but feminism, both as a movement and a school of literary thought, represents more of a concern with gender than an attempt to postulate the superiority of or qualities of genders and/or sexes. Third wave feminism, for example, concerned itself largely with disabusing the conceit that inherent differences between genders exist. Third wave feminism is also, appropriately enough, deeply concerned with female sexuality and the power inherent therein. In fact I found myself relating a lot of what Leigh had to say to the third wave feminist response to second wave feminism's relatively conservative philosophies.
That said, the point I interepretted the point that "Bayonetta is doing something that men cannot" to mean that Bayonetta's world is one where female sexuality is the ultimate font of power, not simply that male "action heroes" can equal her feats of violence. While there are certainly plenty of idealized male figures who dole out hurt to less-than-perfect opponents, there aren't too many who explicitly rely on their sexuality as a means of empowerment. The only one that comes to my mind is Custer from the classic (shameful) Custer's Revenge of Atari fame. Regardless, the point that our critical apparatus has trouble interpetting sexuality in an adult fashion and that Bayonetta is step in that direction remains, to me, valid. To me it's the Liz Phair effect all over again. Let's hope Bayonetta does one better, though, and decides to quit before they hit four sequels.
You speak of Dante in Devil May Cry. Dante, like Bayonetta, goes around slaying bad guys and shooting things.
The difference is, Dante isn't giving sexually submissive gestures and posturing to offer panty shots. He doesn't have a penis so large that it would cause back troubles. The things emphasized unrealistically on his body are the things that play into what's actually occurring in the game. Is Bayonetta trying to sleep with everything in the game? Is she breastfeeding children? Is she trying to draw attention? Because from what I read, the game is about killing bad guys.
@David Hill: But you're missing the point; yes, the game -is- about killing bad guys. But why, in the case, is Dante using such ridiculously stylish and elegant movements when he does it? Why does he surf on enemies and eat pizza while shooting pool balls to defeat foes, instead of just beheading them with his sword?
Dante isn't cool because he kills bad guys; he's cool because of -how- he kills the bad guys. His over-the-top style is far too ridiculous to be practical. Bayonetta does this too, only with a more sexy skew.
Also, I think there's a double-standard in play. In DMC3, a young, handsome Dante was running around without a shirt...which, if I understand women correctly, is the female version of a woman in a bikini.
@Branden:
I haven't played DMC3. I was referencing the first game mostly, which shares designers with Bayonetta.
He might be running around without a shirt, that's all well and good. But is he proportioned in such a way that his sex organs are inviable?
Could Bayonetta sell with a character model that could support things like, say, a kidney?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bayonetta is particularly terrible. I get it. I really do. When viewed in a vacuum, it's absolutely acceptable. However, it's just a symptom of a larger problem. Every video game with oversexualized females gets the same, "you have to look at it alone, you can't compare it to everything else!" treatment.
I can count on one hand the number of times I've played a female character that wasn't hyper-sexualized. I couldn't count on all my limbs how many males that weren't hyper-sexualized. That's a larger problem. Much larger than a Devil May Cry clone. I'm less disgusted, more rolling my eyes at it. I'm a guy. I like sex. I like women. I like nudity. Bayonetta isn't any of those things, in my opinion.
I don't agree with Leigh's stance that Bayonetta is a good female role model. She's basically Dante with tits. I don't find it offensive as it's clearly a parody of over-sexualized female stereotypes, but she's hardly an innovative or three-dimensional character and really brings nothing new to the table in that regard.
I guess I'd say she's empowering the way Duke Nuk'em was empowering i.e. she's not because no one, male or female, is going to relate to her on any level as she's not even remotely realistic as a character. That's fine given the kind of game that it is, but lets not kid ourselves that she's leading any kind of revolution.
Now since I don't currently have a 360 and am unwilling to support terrible ports to the PS3 I haven't played Bayonetta yet. That said it doesn't offend me like other things can mostly because its having fun with its sexiness and being over the top. Take the demo for Dante's Inferno for example. Here we have a topless Beatrice floating around for no apparent reason except as contrived titillation (given that Dante's Inferno seems to be one of the most contrived games ever made I guess it fits). Or the downloadable nude patch for The Saboteur. Now I'll likely play it at some point and may change my mind but from everything I've seen it doesn't bother me.
So if men were currently at a disadvantage, the Feminist movement would seek to empower them? Would they change the name, or just run with the complete misnomer? I can respect the Feminist movement's right to self-define, but I think the perspective is problematic, and highlighting the mismatch in the terminology highlights the problem. By defining one gender against another, you're assuming some sort of intrinsic antagonism, and perhaps more importantly it raises uncomfortable questions about transgender and intersex people. Inherent to the idea that women should be treated the same as men is the idea them men are the default, the ruler to be measured against. Is it insufficient to simply be gender egalitarian?
Also, while I understand that the stated goals of the movement are egalitarian in aim, I've seen plenty sexist garbage passed off as feminism. It's okay to say girls can do everything buys can do and more, but if you dare to say that there are some things boys are on average better at than girls based on mere physiology people jump down your throat. I was raised in a progressive family in a progressive area. I understand that these are statistically atypical circumstances, but it means that I've had to put up with a lot of "boys are dumb, lazy, and only concerned with sex" BS without much recourse. I saw ripples of that in Ms. Alexander's closing paragraph, and it struck a chord. And hey, I'm glad she said it, because I can be here debating it.
I feel like the previous paragraph was a much stronger ending: "Thanks to its innovative approach to the idea of female power, Bayonetta is the first action game heroine that's made me directly conscious of how cool it is to be a girl." I can really get behind that. Girls should be proud of who they are and proud of their sexuality. This is veering off into the land of speculation, but I'm skeptical that the closing lines were meant as referring solely to the female-dominated game world. The reference is distant in the article, all the way back before the screenshot - I can't even get them on the same screen and there's no direct call-back. Additionally, the tone of the piece gets increasingly general, culminating with "I already know that women can do all the same things men can."
Also, I was specifically referring to using their sexuality as a means of power, and not just beating up dudes. I brought up Cho Aniki in part because it's so far from the American mainstream. The only thing more uncomfortable for American men than women embracing sexuality on their own terms is homosexuality. Games about men utilizing their sexuality are rare, but let's think about this for a second. There's a reason there's debate about Bayonetta. If this sort of thing was commonplace we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Leigh -- Fierce is good, you go! :)
To the folks who think a well muscled guy with no shirt isn't displaying secondary sexual characteristics equal to big tits, I gotta say that must not be your type. For a lot of women, *and* men, a well muscled greased up guy (and don't the toons generally look shaved and greased up glossy?) is considered to be sexy in a lot of quarters.
That women rarely talk about tight buns or six pack abs as sexy, vs. men talking about tits (especially in gaming circles) doesn't change the preferences of a majority of the male-attracted population.
Those male avatars are set to be hyper-sexualized. It goes all the way back to primate ethology -- if you are attracted to a dominant male, they're it.
They don't have to be in lingerie.
On the other hand, what you identify as submissive (licking a lollypop, for example) seem to me to be *aggressively* sexual cues, not timid. Arch, maybe. Teasing maybe. But submissive? Do they really make you imagine Bayo as a doormat?
Shava
gamer grrl since the 1970's
@shava24
@David
Sexuality is different for males and females. Men are stimulated visually, while with women attraction tends to be more emotional. There are anthropological reasons for this.
Thus, you can't directly compare male sexuality to female sexuality. Men are attracted to women who can bare children, indicated by breasts and hips. Women are attracted to men who are fertile and capable of providing for their family, represented by a muscular torso.
In short, while males might be attracted to a woman in a thong, that in no way means that the female equivalent, in terms of attraction, is a man in a thong. It has been my experience that women are not attracted by the sight of male genitals, or a bulge. I'm sure there are exceptions, but I think you're comparing apples to oranges.
I personally bought Bayonetta for the gameplay; I don't find her attractive. Her proportions are strange, her hairstyle is strange, and she wears a skin-tight bodysuit made of hair. I like things that are stylish, and while Bayonetta has the moves, I find Jeanne's physical aesthetic more appealing...and once again we find ourselves having a conversation that we would never have were the protagonist male.
That said, the game would still sell if her proportions weren't as extreme. In general, it doesn't really matter just how big the boobs are...just so long as it has them, there are guys who will be more likely to buy it. :(
@Julian
I hear where you're coming from, and agree that the name "feminism" is confusing. However, the word is well-established and in dictionaries, so I doubt it will be changed anytime soon.
And I am more than aware of so-called feminists who, upon inspection, are actually not feminists as much as just people who hate men. The key is that you can't let a few bad eggs spoil a good thing; there are members of any group or belief system that are not good representatives for their claimed causes. Despite what they label themselves as, if they are not actually acting as such, they are not it.
In short, it's unfair to let these "extreme" feminists sour your opinion of what is actually a very positive movement.
Leigh, I don't think there's anything wrong with having your cake and eating it too in this case. Your writing is interesting and valuable regardless of your gender, and you're not wrong to ask that it be treated just like that of any other writer. At the same time, the fact that you are female is undeniably a part of your unique identity, and it's nothing to apologize for when it informs your opinions in cases such as this.
I found your Gamepro article to be perceptive and accurate, and I do appreciate that it came from you instead of a male writer. It would have been just as accurate whether or not it had come from a female perspective, but to be honest, perhaps the fact that it did helped to legitimize it, and that's not a bad thing.
" I'd like to know -- if the article had from it the "I" removed, if it were written by a man asserting that the stylistic content made Bayonetta's looks "acceptable," would you have bought the argument, or did it need to be billed as a "female perspective?" "
I'd be surprised if a man wrote an entire article about that, when he could easily write about how well Bayonetta plays, about how much fun it is, and how other similar games compare to it (i.e. criticism). It's more interesting to write, read and discuss about that when we're talking about Bayonetta than whether or not the main character's portrayal is "acceptable," or whatever. I can't understand how a man would even want to talk about Bayonetta in that regard after playing it.
I apologize if this has been said already. I have not read any other comments.
C'mon, Leigh. You're so close: your article is a triumph of your own subjectivity. But then you backpedal.
"...I am accused of pandering to my male readership. Maybe I am. We've all gotta work, right?"
How could a self-professed critic say such a thing?
Furthermore, your GamePro article hinted at a much deeper issue, picked up by Tycho at Penny Arcade: why do we give beefed up male protagonists a pass? Don't you think Marcus Fenix's bicepts were designed just as carefully as Bayonetta's legs? I know you probably don't feel the need to address sexuality at every turn (as is your right), but your opinion on playing as sexualized male protagonists would be an interesting one to hear.
Unless you've already done this. But, then again, maybe you need to repeat yourself for the Kieron Gillens out there.
@Sal Paradise
I think it's hard to approach that subject matter because an important issue comes into play: intent.
I don't think anyone would argue with the fact that Marcus Fenix was not created so that Gears of War would sell well due to sex appeal. The game was largely created by men, for men.
I don't think it's quite as easy to make such a bold statement about Bayonetta, especially when, regardless of intent, we all know that putting a sexy girl in a game yields more sales. The designers of the game were largely male. Even if they say one thing, not everyone will buy it...
I'd be inclined to think more favourably of the game (and of your article) if it weren't for (a) the "torture attacks" on the Joy angels and (b) the fact that "sexual" somehow has to equal pole dancing and ludicrous camera angles.
Lots of people have been raising Marcus Fenix by way of comparison. But does the camera in Gears of War take every opportunity to zoom in on his buttocks or his crotch? Does he kill enemies by dancing like a stripper?
"Not sexless" is one thing, but Bayonetta goes way beyond that.
Except he was created to be hypermasculine. He isn't necessarily meant to be an object of overt sexual desire but his entire character is meant to be an extreme personification of male secondary sexual characteristics. You have the obviously huge chest and shoulders but beyond that you have the huge hands,the bulging arms, the facial hair, the predominant chin, the thick neck and you can make a case for the scars.
@Branden
I still think defining the movement in binary terms with a male default is problematic, but you've been more than fair. Thank you.
Robert: and so Bayonetta has exaggerated female characteristics, which you may note I wasn't objecting to and which I have no problem with. But last time I checked, "kills enemies by dancing like a stripper" wasn't a "female characteristic", and I don't see it's a positive or empowering portrayal of anything.
I sort of object to the idea that I as a guy gamer need anyone-- male or female-- to justify my fetishes to me. I fully recognize exactly how unrealistic the proportions are, how ridiculous the hyper-sexualization is, how pandering the librarian glasses and lollipop-fondling are. That doesn't mean that I find it any less attractive, though, and I don't feel any need to apologize for it. We don't choose what we find sexy, and I don't enjoy sex with my realistically-proportioned real-life girlfriend any less for it.
I think a female perspective on it is very interesting simply because it's such a different perspective from my own, bringing a whole different set of societal assumptions and agendas and responses to the table. So in that sense, yes, your point of view is more valuable to me than if you were a man. But the sooner we can quit framing the discussion in terms of "justifying" this or "apologizing" for that, the better.
When figuring out how to portray a female character positively in a game and still sell her as the "star," I think it's nearly impossible to win on all accounts. If you portray her as obviously feminist and play down sexuality, she will most likely come across as unappealing or preachy. If you make her overtly sexual then she may be perceived as just a pretty body to control, and some gamers will objectify her while others will dismiss her. If she is portrayed as vulnerable and thoughtful, that limits the types of games she will be suitable for--she would not usually be in an action game or shooter or anything where a powerful personality would be expected.
I think Bayonetta works as a character because it is impossible for someone like her to exist in the real world. She is so flamboyantly sexual, cruel, facetious and theatrical that, combined with her impossible physical proportions and the ease with which she exhibits immense power, she transcends any possible expectations a person can have for a female, and thus is beyond believability. If she were just a stripper with guns, I think gamers would take more offense.
That said, if that's the best way we have to portray a female character as both powerful and appealing, it's problematic because it seems much easier to have a strong male lead in a game, of both the ridiculous and the believable varieties.
As such, I don't see a problem with Bayonetta bearing a torch for strong women in games. I just hope that she paves the way for a wider variety of female character types to be successful, rather than starting (or continuing) a trend of sexy acrobatic caricatures.
@lastgunslinger:
I don't know. Silent Hill 3 has a rather plain-looking female protagonist. I don't know that anyone called it preachy. She was a terribly deep character, and there was plenty of (albeit fucked up) sexuality there.
This isn't a derogatory question, just something to maybe spark some talk: What about other unrealistic depictions? What do you think of those? For example, in Australia recently, there was a commercial that had a black character with legs longer than his body, dribbling a basketball. He couldn't exist in reality thanks to his hyper-exaggerated proportions. But could some still find that offensive?
@Branden Re: Attraction
While you're correct about different body parts being considered attractive, I don't see video game designers making their male characters with over-exaggerated, erect nipples.
Working in gaming has confirmed this for me at least. Designers aren't trying to appeal to women. It's very much a double-standard. They'll make a woman overly sexual, but if they make a male character muscular, it's to fulfill male power fantasies, not to appease female players. We're not looking at an even playing field, we're looking at male fantasies on both sides of the fence.
Excellent read, both the original article and your blog post. I never knew Gamepro had such evolved discussions on it. I thought it was all previews, reviews, and screenshots. You never fail to earn my respect and impress me, keep it up!
I began to write a comment in response to this post. The reply grew and grew, until it became a post of its own, on my almost-never-updated site: http://www.zang.org/2010/01/sexy-videogameland-if-you-run-out-of.html
The question is: who is Bayonetta's sexuality for? Why doe female characters in games not have lovers, husbands, etc? Why is it than you will almost never find any male character that could possibly get in the way of the presumably-male player's fantasy-possession of the female avatar, when male avatar-characters have lovers and wives and girlfriends galore?
@William
I love your blog entry. Absolutely insightful. I'll be linking to it.
@David Hill
I had this clarified more in an original version of my post before editing, but I was originally going to say that most of the strong female leads I could think of were in horror games, and as such had more depth of character than physical attractiveness, but that those character types would not really work in a game that was more about action. Also, I wouldn't necessarily call SH3 a blockbuster.
As for other exaggerated body types, it depends on what you exaggerate. In your example, the long legs is an exaggeration of the stereotype that black basketball players are unusually tall, which may be offensive to some, although I personally don't find it so. In Bayonetta's case, her breasts and legs are certainly exaggerated, but no more than anything else about her shape or character--her movements, her skeletal structure, her hairdo, her mannerisms are all over the top. That's not to say that some won't find the overall picture offensive, but it doesn't strike me the same way as the typical skinny female with large breasts does.
I've loved a lot of Gillen's writing, and I can't find the full comment you're quoting, but based on very little context, I say: To hell with him! It's frustrating that he's taking you to task for not saying the things he expects/wants you to say, and it's infuriating that he accuses you of selling out because of it.
woops, i added link to the RPS page mentioning me.
I disagree with your GP article whether it was written by a man or woman.
I think you are the most well-known female name in games journalism because of exactly the type of capitulations you make in this article and in others.
On the other hand, I agree with your assessment of women in the GTA series - there are no angels in that world, and that's appropriately handled for both genders.
Frankly, it seems like you were really phoning it in with the Bayonetta article and all the negative feedback is reaping what you sow.
If you bothered explaining or defending your points, you would actually make people think. Instead, you are getting knee-jerk agreement (thanks for validating my opinion!) or censure (you're setting feminism back 3 decades!) with no content in the article itself worth defending.
I mean, look at your 'apology'/'explanation' here full of half-assed 'Maybe I do write about this stuff because it drives traffic'. 'Maybe I am philosophically inconsistent', et c.
Please, please, please try harder when you write in the future. I don't know what your draft/revision/pre-publication feedback/editor situation is, but it needs fixing. Serious fixing.
Hey! Kind of a first time reader of your blog, but I go to Kotaku a lot and have read some of your articles there. Great stuff!
I just wanted to bring up something you talked about in your Bayonetta article; when you were bringing up examples of more realistic heroines, you put Heather from Silent Hill 3 amidst the likes of Jade and Alyx Vance, and I'm not really sure if that's a very fair comparison!
Where as the others you mentioned could easily be argued as "women living in a men's world" (as the other article put it), Heather doesn't really fit that. She's not oversexualized, true, but she's not a tomboy either. She's just your average teenage girl. I mean, you can just tell from her outfit that she likes to be fashionable, and heck, you start the game in a mall! She's a very girly girl who just got wrapped up into a nightmare.
What makes her really interesting, though, is how even though she's your typical American teenage girl, she still has the capability to beat off split-head dogs with a crowbar. And in that sense, I think she's one of the better examples of a female protagonist in a video game: maintaining a sense of femininity, but being courageous enough to fight back instead of running away.
But I digress. Your article was great regardless!
I don't object to your arguement, nor would I if it was written by a man. In fact if a man had written an article I would have considered it a poorly made defense of an embarassing purchase.
What does bother me is when a developer thinks that their consumers are honry morons who will buy their game if an attractive woman licks a lollipop suggestively in the trailer. I, as a male gamer, deserve more respect than that from a developer.
The problem I find with your article is not that you're pandering to the male audience, but that you're suggesting bayonetta does anything else. The game is based on the motto sex sells and to analyze it further is to suggest that thought and consideration went into its design when it clearly didn't.
Honestly Marxist Feminism is Racist To tell the truth . White Marxist Academic feminism has a deep dogmatic habit of projecting this Western Political Socially ideological ethnocentric Construct of a Universal sisterhood on a diverse range of culture to force a very white Marxist feminist liberal narrative on the world and any depiction of woman .On top of this it operate while Simultaneously ignoring cultural differences in experience of different woman from different ethnic groups and culture while on the other hand proclaiming to represent “The Globe and All woman “ like any bigoted prophet who hide behind a morality systems to protect themselves and maintain the status quo of there Own Narrative and projection of there own Experiences on anyone else who happen to have a vagina " .
There a reason it known as White woman Middle class feminism outside of political corrected talks or been coined as White Woman form of Imperialism by woman working on male and female social problems other society .
These native woman will acknowledge there are problem between man and woman in there society they want to solve these problem within there own cultural rules , From Islamic woman to Africa to Asia
.There a huge tendency in White Marxist feminism to project a random category of “Powerless victim “ On anything that a woman or has a vagina. Anywhere regardless of place time ,historical or social forces at work .” And a nauseating simplistic Reduction of any a problem and it related to generic (X) woman from (Y) Culture , well it must be because there oppressed by some evil created by the man in (Z) Society (Let just forget about the hundreds of years of Neo Colonial slavery and will forget about the everyday Corporate , European Religious exploitation , Genocides they may have happened . )No it boils down to man oppressing woman simply that all there must be to it . For a movement that quickly reducing itself to an academic western cult it it so called concerned with Equality seems have a very good habit of completely ignoring other people culture and social relationships to push it own social doctrines and agendas in the Name of Western sisterhood.
Anyway back to Bayonetta
A Culture have a Value system and there Two side to the mating system . The question is how does male and female interact within that value systems how is there roles balanced . How are they measured within there own value system
The issue with any conflict of man and woman in Western context tend to deal with incredibly ethnocentric cultural interpretation of it own values projected on to an image ‘Liberty Individuality Competition “etc
It seems retarded to have a discussion about bayonetta which is a japanese game with a Japanese character and Random European things tossed in . In the context of woman conflict in Western American culture I see no relationships between the two .
Even when talking about female empowerment it inheritably ethnocentric concept (Since where talking about a Japanese game let talk about Japan , )
To begin with as someone who has talked to Native Japanese doing anthropology in there own societies . The Japanese have a very different definition of freedom , then the concept of American Liberty the two are not relatable and have the origins in very different philosophical systems (Buddhism/Shinto/ Confucianism vs Protestant Christian /Secular Greek ) . And a very different concept of the individual and the self than the One in the West . The individual is apart of the whole and Freedom/empowerment is measured by less responsibility and duty which in turn create greater freedom for an individual in Japanese society .G Getting Career in the Japanese context doesn’t carry the a many stereotypical attribute we associate in the West with Liberty Career Competition ;in the Japanese context Job and Working leads to a Reduction of Freedom and power for someone living in Japan. The More work you do and more responsibility the Greater your burden is as you have to carry the society on your back that your duty . Let me be clear it consider your duty to do these things “Not an individual right” It is Completely opposite to how someone in the West Might view it . And if You fail at doing this you've failed society this is part of why the sucide rate has been a problem. The Greater Stresses of Japanese Capitalism and Outsourcing placing strain on these values
Men in Japan actually have far less freedom in Japan than Japanese woman under japanese code and social ethics in the male role. . Your money goes to your wife and your wife has full control over house expenses and money since it her job to control the home .(She Controls the Home it not Consider she has No Power in Japan ) . Since it your job to support your family
.In the Domestic Sphere in Japan woman actually have more Freedom given the Japanese Social definition of Freedom. They can practice there hobbies more opportunities to travel the world they have control overall income from there husband, the Woman give there husband there salary . Many cases outright rejecting Feminist emphasis on a career in the West
Anyway back to the Topic of Bayonetta . It just seems like this whole controversy very stereotypically(Almost daily repetition) of a Western having an issue with What is made in Japanese media a completely Radically different culture than your own and complaining about a entertainment from a society they know nothing about . With the Sole motivation Overacting to Female sexuality/or protection of Female sexuality with a very American Puritanatical slant and criticizing leigh for “Traitor to the feminist/Christian sisterhood cause”
criticizing leigh for “Traitor to the feminist/Christian sisterhood cause”
I've got to say that I bought your argument solely because you're a woman. The videogame industry tends to champion "desexualized" female characters as the best ones but this isn't always true. I find Jade (Beyond Good and Evil) and Alyx (Half Life 2) to be just as boring as Lara Croft. The reason I can get behind your views is that you are more qualified than a man. If a white man says "Princess and the Frog" is racist and a black man disagrees, the former is obviously wrong.
@Anonymous: All those big words mean things individually. However, when strung together they only communicate that it's hard to type with a tinfoil hat on.
@ Anonymous
I don't have much to say except that the creator of the game is very into American stuff. I don't think any DMC game ever even had Japanese dialogue...it's designed to be American.
Which doesn't make it American, of course, (perhaps more of an outsider's view of American values?) but it's not necessarily chock full of Japanese values as opposed to American ones.
Either way, the game was sold in America, and making that happen, advertising, etc...these acts were done by Americans. They decided, whatever there reasons, that this game would be a financial success. Americans may not have created it, but they sure supported it...so I think it's valid to discuss American society alongside it.
@Reed Brown
"If a white man says "Princess and the Frog" is racist and a black man disagrees, the former is obviously wrong."
I find that argument to be incredibly shaky. There are intelligent people and stupid people in the world; I would be more inclined to follow that kind of qualification than simply looking at the color of someone's skin and using that as a basis for how valid their opinion is.
THANK YOU Leigh -- From what I've seen of the kickback against Bayonetta's "puerility", much of it comes from male gamers who are made uncomfortable by Bayonetta. They take recourse in decrying her hyper-sexuality as anti-feminist. But Bayonetta _owns_ her own sexuality (this being, of course, what makes people uncomfortable. Her sultry glances aren't invitations; they're challenges). The idea that women can't be overtly sexual is just as antithetical to feminism as the idea that women have to be sex objects.
@Peter
I'm genuinely curious. Who has said that women can't be overtly sexual?
@David
I guess I'm responding directly to reviews such as this: http://origin.avclub.com/articles/bayonetta,36870/.
More generally, I'm responding to the central conceit in Leigh's article -- that the internet is "tsk tsking" Bayonetta's sexuality as somehow regressive or sexist. I suppose w/out more citation you could dismiss this as a straw man, but it certainly fits the impression I've got from various message boards (and a number of reviews such as the above).
More distally still, I'm referencing the tiresome old (and, I think, genuinely repressive -- thus my comments) virgin/whore dichotomy, where a woman has binary and unappealing options: be a boring prude or a an impure harlot. This is hardly a new formulation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madonna-whore_complex
And that's the reason Bayonetta is, I think, a feminist hero. Although she, in some sense, courts the male gaze, she does it as subject, not object (as Leigh so nicely put it). In short, she wasn't made to make guys feel good about themselves by either catering to their need for sexual mastery (e.g., Lara Croft) or to their need to congratulate themselves for resisting objectifying women (e.g., Jade).
Please note I'm not claiming the _only_ reason a man might not enjoy Bayonetta is because he's a closet sexist. Just that I think it explains the moralistic fervor from the same gamers who champion truly execrable protagonists like Kratos.
@Peter
Fair enough. I know my own personal problem has nothing to do with the overt sexuality. I find that she's yet another example of the same, objectified caricature representing women in games. She's nothing new, she's just the same thing, squared.
I like overt sexuality. I just like it in women, I'm tired of seeing it on Jack Skellington with boobs.
David,
How do you think a game might successfully depict an overtly sexual woman w/out falling into the sort of trap I feel Bayonetta avoids (and you feel she does not)?
Do you think you would feel differently about her success as a character if you actually found her viscerally sexy (as opposed to Burton-esque)?
I actually _did_ find her sexy, but what I find most interesting is that she often made me feel uncomfortable w/ her vamping -- and yet her character was, stylistically and in terms of gameplay, completely consistent. I don't think this discomfort came as a surprise to Kamiya and team.
@Peter
I feel she doesn't. She doesn't feel real. She doesn't look like a woman. Her sexuality seems like a bad porn, not a woman. Does that make sense?
If I found her viscerally sexy, I actually think I'd like it more. If only because it's a change of pace. That pushes boundaries. That challenges notions.
I can see why some people would be made uncomfortable.
@ David
I can see where you're coming from. But women in porn are there to be subjected to our gaze. Bayonetta (the game and the character) was such a perfect storm of spectacle, however, that I felt I was, in some sense, there to be subjected to my need to gaze at it. The locus of control was on the other side of the screen, if you will. I guess that's a bit abstruse.
I can totally see that it wouldn't ring cherries if it didn't go over stylistically. But I felt Bayonetta was a stylistic tour de force in the same league as Okami (interestingly, the biggest complaint I heard about that criminally under-played game was "I don't want to play as some animal," which has some parallels to some of the responses to Bayonetta viz "I'm not going to play as some weird-looking overly sexual witch).
Of course, the game was made, predominately, by men. And Bayonetta is, in some way, a doll to be played with (although less so than any other female protagonist I can think of), so my position is certainly vulnerable.
We may have to log this off to aesthetic differences, since I think we probably share a similar desire for interesting, non-derivative game protagonists.
@Peter
I do think we're in agreement there.
I'm just bored with most games anymore. As far as females go, I want more Silent Hill 3. I guess in my old age, I'm more concerned about depth. To me, depth is sexy.
I really don't think Bayonetta is a problem. However, I would say it's a symptom of a larger problem in our culture. But that's true of 99% of the market.
I'll take more Bayonettas _and_ more Silent Hill Threes :-)
Peter, I wrote the AV Club review that you cited in response to the question, "Who has said that women can't be overtly sexual?" Of course, nowhere in the review do I say anything like that, and to imply such is a gross mischaracterization. I haven't seen any serious critic say anything like that. It's a strawman.
My criticism is aimed at the way that the game portrays the character -- particularly the way it puts the viewer, through its cinematography and storytelling, in the position of a leering observer. I wasn't frightened by Bayonetta or discomfited by her, I was bored with her. Whatever power the Bayonetta character might have is neutered by the way its camera repeatedly objectifies her and presents her as a piece of HD-rendered meat to be gaped at. (My sentiments somewhat mirror those of David Hill, in fact -- I would have said "hentai figure come to life," but "Jack Skellington with breasts" is much funnier.)
The "she's subject, not object" thing -- I'm with Tiffany Chow; I get it, but I'm not buying it. I think the game predominantly conducts itself from a male heterosexual perspective, and not an especially layered or mature one. I find this to be a particular shame given that the character of Bayonetta itself was designed by a woman. I mean, there was a lot of potential here for something groundbreaking. Leigh thinks it realized that potential; I don't.
The notion that the people criticizing this game's treatment of female sexuality are probably "uncomfortable" with Bayonetta and "closet sexists" is intellectually dishonest bullshit. It would be like insinuating that Leigh only enjoyed the hypersexuality of the game because she's a closet nymphomaniac. You're not arguing the merits anymore; you're delving into worthless pseudo-psychoanalysis that has a chilling effect on the real conversation.
I respect differing readings, including Leigh's, which is well-reasoned and defensible. Disagree with my analysis all you want -- variety is the spice of life and all that -- but if you want to cast personal aspersions instead of engaging in a respectful discussion, color me unimpressed.
Well, all the talk inspired me write my own essay on the topic, which I will provide a link to for those interested, as opposed to eating another half of your comments section as I have already done.
http://gamepray.blogspot.com/2010/01/on-exploitation-of-heroines_13.html
"...if it were written by a man asserting that the stylistic content made Bayonetta's looks "acceptable," would you have bought the argument[?]"
Yes. Because the article makes an excellent argument, which I find I agree with.
@ John Teti
Well, this is a hazard of message boards I suppose -- as I wasn't arguing w/ you at the time, I wasn't very careful about how I referenced you.
Note in referencing you directly I was responding directly to David Hill's question: who's suggesting women can't be overtly sexual? Not the question "who's afraid of overtly sexual women." My more diffuse answer to _that_ question was: lots of male gamers on the internet who don't like feeling out of control. Do you want to argue that one? I can certainly see that this wasn't stated very clearly, so my apologies to the extent that you felt I was making a direct personal attack against _you_.
I was, however, making a direct attack against your _review_ (which I stand by), and despite your vitriolic response here (the ad hominem nature of which I can understand, as I suppose it looked very much like I was making an ad hominem attack against you), your review still reads very much to me to be making the claim that women (at least in games) oughtn't own their own sexuality in an overt manner.
Your argument against Bayonetta, as written, is question-begging. Bayonetta is pointlessly lewd and "puerile" because... you say it's pointlessly lewd and puerile for a woman to suggestively lick lollipops, have clothing made of hair, etc., etc. But what about those things is so necessarily offensive?
You suggest Bayonetta was served up as a piece of meat for male delectation. But, aside from her unabashed sexuality, why do you feel this is the case? Because if it's just unabashed sexuality, then it's impossible for a woman to be unabashedly sexual w/out being offensive.
cont...
I find such a claim offensive, and, in an attempt to deconstruct from whence it might come, I discussed male discomfort with sexually forward women.
You claim to have no such discomfort, and I'm certainly not going to claim greater insight into your psyche than you yourself have. Not that I think such a feeling is shameful. Lord knows I feel it (as I noted, Bayonetta often made me feel uncomfortable in a way that, say, the Dead or Alive girls don't (they just bore _me_)), though I certainly try to remain critical about why. Regardless, I feel your review needs further explanation.
Of course, now I've taken you to task for not explaining your objection to Bayonetta's sexuality. Why do I defend the same?
Specifically, because I felt Bayonetta's presentation was critical of just the sort of mindless male-ego-stroking characterization of which you accuse it. Her presentation is so over the top, so campy in every way, and so stylistically seamless w/ the incredibly campy and over-the-top game play (which is all about placing her in a position of power -- the climaxes here are hers' at least as much as ours). Her sexuality is the subject of every cut scene just as her grace and power are the subject of every gameplay chunk. It's been so inflated how could the creators not have been aware that it would offend? If they just wanted to make a doll for creepy gamers to leer at, why spend the huge amount of time polishing the gameplay and aesthetic? Why make it such a creepy and weirdly caricatured aesthetic (e.g., as you noted, the Skellington vibe)
And why the hew and cry about Bayonetta (of which your review is part) when every third game released has a ridiculously sexualized female character (or four)? Because, I'd suggest, Bayonetta does something different. It upsets the status quo. It pokes and prods and causes a unique reaction. Gamers are comfortable w/ pixelated desire-objects who just roll over and take it.
You shrug off the suggestion that she's more subject than object. How come? Bayonetta is all about power, never about submission. The males in the story are after-thoughts.
"But too often, the game devolves to its button-mashing, raunchy norm, adopting the puerile sensibility that is making Japan a less relevant voice in a slowly maturing medium."
Finally, on the subject of strawmen: really? The entirety of Japan's gaming industry is "puerile" in comparison to the West's? Throw in a Bayonetta and I'll raise you a Kratos. See that w/ a Ninja Gaiden and I'll toss in Gears of War.
Lots of kids play video games, so there's lots of puerile content. It sells well. It's not the province of West or East.
We can, of course, disagree about whether Bayonetta is part of that world-wide (and I'll agree, unpleasant) truth. But I just can't see that she wasn't created w/ a critical eye.
Oh, ps:
I get your point about the camera (the "male eye" or whatever).
But I just think it supports the critical reading -- Bayonetta wants to be seen, and ogled, on her terms. Those terms may be reminiscent, at times, of pornography. Maybe the camera wasn't handled as cleverly at all times as it could have been.
But she's obviously presented as aware that there's a camera, and someone on the other side.
A more modest camera would have undermined her status as in control of her own sexual presentation, I feel.
And, finally, pps (and sorry to all for the extra long posts):
The idea that men have deep seated (and likely unconscious) discomfort with female power is far from "intellectually dishonest BS." Psych experiment after psych experiment shows just these sorts of tacit biases in pretty much every group of people about pretty much every other group (can provide you plenty of citations if you like).
This tacit bias can go a very long way to explaining a great deal of extremely unpleasant things people have done, and continue to do, to each other.
It may be, in this case, that objection to Bayonetta is not stemming from this sort of bias (although people, according to self report in the literature on this stuff, don't have much conscious access to it). But it behooves us all to at least be conscious of the possibility that our behavior is driven -- and sometimes in potentially harmful directions -- by deep and often hidden mental persuasions.
Again, just the fact that people are often biased in just these ways doesn't mean you are in this case, or that if you are it's driving your reaction. But I don't think it can be stricken from general argument of this nature a priori.
Peter, let's be more honest about sexual politics. Men feel anxious about assertive female sexuality when they are reminded that they may not benefit from it. Does Bayonetta have another lover that isn't, implicitly, the player? (A childhood friend sequestered in another dimension doesn't quite count.) I discuss this issue more deeply in my post mentioned above.
The fact that a woman might enjoy identifying with Bayonetta doesn't, in my view, undo the "libidinal economy" - I think it is a bit of a red herring to think it does. I don't think there's anything wrong with heterosexual male desire, either. The problem is that not only is this desire disproportionately served in a way that marginalizes those who don't fit that description, but that anything which would trouble the centrality of it, that would, for example, show a female avatar-character deeply and passionately committed to a man not-the-player, or sexually available to others but not-the-player, is left out completely. As in my post, I refer to John Berger to explain it better.
Maybe I need to do another post, two paragraphs is already too much for a comment page.
William: I enjoyed your essay on the subject.
You definitely have some good points -- I'd argue, however, that (some) men feel threatened by sexually forward women when that sexual forwardness is not in their (i.e., men's) _control_. The stereotype, anyway, is that guys want their girlfriends and wifes to be more forward in the bedroom. But that forwardness is under the aegis of romantic commitment or ownership.
The sort of sexual forwardness that Bayonetta exudes (I'm arguing) is the sort that no, indeed, you won't benefit from, because it's not _for_ you. If it _were_ for you it wouldn't be the sort of forwardness I'm trying to pinpoint. Maybe forwardness isn't the right word. Self-possession?
Bayonetta isn't saying "hey, let's do it." She's saying "Hey, you're attracted to me, but too bad for you."
I think a female protagonist available to other game characters but not the player could be very interesting -- but that wouldn't fit Bayonetta's style either. She's not _for_ anyone. Her sexuality is for herself.
And yeah, I'm really spamming this message board right now :-P But I don't have (and nor am I in the market for) a blog.
And I'm not trying to claim that Bayonetta is a champion of post-post feminist thought. Just that she's stylistically coherent and _not_ offensive in the way so many other T&A "heroines" are.
I think I am starting to realize the difference between the fantasy of the passively available nude in Western oil painting and the fantasies in contemporary pop - especially "otaku" - culture.
As Berger points out, the owners of paintings of nudes were wealthy, powerful men, whose ownership of the painting flattered and reflected their privileged position. The classic erotic figure for them was a woman who recognized their power and authority, while making herself available to fulfill his needs and desires.
But the consumers of pop culture are mostly those who are not particularly wealthy and powerful, and the otaku, in particular, is characterized by sexual passivity, inhibition and perhaps repression. The fantasy of a very active female figure who will initiate sexual relations - who desires the male viewer with enough energy that he is spared the anxiety-producing task of initiating seduction, a task fraught with memories of disappointment - is a more powerful fantasy figure for many men than the classical nude type; the other otaku-fantasy object is on the extreme at the other end, the range of moe character-types who are incapable of rejecting the desiring male, yet are themselves drained of libidinal power.
I'd say that's very insightful. But I still think Bayonetta flouts that characterization. Because, again, she's not _going_ to reach out and take the sad little otaku in hand.
And also, I think the really insidious thing about the subservient nude is that she recognizes the power of her owner, _and_ her subservience is _because_ of that power. Sets up a nasty little feedback loop where the more subservient she is the more powerful the owner, and the more powerful the owner the more subservient....
@ Peter
Won't she? She does just what I want her to. If I want her to spread her legs(literally), all I need to do is press LB...
It's a fair point, Branden.
There's definitely a tension. The taunt command is aimed at the angels, though, not the player. When she spreads her legs for the player, it's during cuts cenes when _she's_ in control
Thematically, her overt sexuality might make more sense considering her opponents, a bunch of baby-faced religious prudes. It's almost like she's lending it to you briefly to use against the enemies (who are _your_ enemies too), just like she lends you her fighting prowess to clear them out.
But she is, in a sense, cavorting at the gamer's behest, there's no denying that.
A funny anecdote if you haven't played Chinatown Wars.
You can find a prostitute in the game who will start yelling at you because she thinks you will kill her and steal her money, then stages an ambush against you by a gang of prostitutes.
wow
Herbal Penis Enlargement Pills
How to last longer in bed
One of the reason's I read your work Leigh is because, like me, you seem to be cursed with the tendency to consider both points of view.
Your dissection of the Kotaku porn star article that you link to here is prime example, you may disapprove, but you also spend time considering their motivations rather than simply hurling polemic.
Personally I'd come down on the other side with Bayonetta, not simply because I think it's sexist, but because her sexuality seems to be little more than a cover up for the whole sloppily put together character. I'm not surprised game sites just stick pictures of her up when the only other alternative appears to be confronting the fact that the developer appears to have flung a bunch of random crap at some paper and called it a concept.
Great article, Leigh. A few thoughts (or responses to comments on this blog post, rather):
1. I've seen the word "leering" used a lot in criticism of the more sexually-charged camera angles. I think that word is far to strong for what's going on in this game. Bayonetta is a sexy game, and Platinum wants you to know it. Bayonetta herself certainly knows it. There's the blowing kisses to break barriers, the hair thing, the fact that she's dropping innuendo in her dialog left and right, and the fact that almost all of these sexually suggestive poses the game puts her through end with a coy wink at the camera. She's aware of her sexuality, and she certainly seems aware that we're watching. To put it bluntly, she wants it. She's in control. She's not being victimized. To me, that's not leering.
Imagine if in, say, Half Life 2, Alyx Vance was sexualized in a similar way, but was still the same person. Put her in skimpy outfits (even skimpier outfits to be unlocked upon completion of the game), upgrade her breasts to TITS (as Penny Arcade put it), put her in sexually suggestive poses, have her get tentacle-raped, what have you. No winking at the camera, just same old Alyx Vance with some tarting up. I think this would be what I would call leering. Sexuality isn't part of her character. Other than Eli joking about her and Gordon makin' grandkids, it's almost never brought up. The game would be effectively forcing this "strong female character" into becoming a sex object. Bayonetta isn't being forced into anything. Bayonetta is titillating, but I really feel like it's an entirely different thing.
2. I've seen the sexuality of male characters in games brought up as a counterpoint (i.e. "why are w e cool with Dante and Marcus Fenix, but not Bayonetta?") I both agree and disagree. Realistically, the sexuality in Bayonetta, and in most sexualized female characters, is far more present than they are in macho males. After all, they're playing to a bigger audience. But I also think that completely dismissing how sex plays into how male characters in games are portrayed is going overboard. No, Dante doesn't have a cock so big that you're left wondering "how the hell does he walk with that thing?" (though as someone else brought up, that's not a 1:1 comparison to big tits.) But his sexual traits are still there. He's strong, masculine (at least for Devil May Cry 4), cocky musclebound, and doesn't wear a shirt so we can all check out his TOTALLY RIPPED ABS. He's exaggerated, and characters like Kratos and Marcus Fenix are even more so. No, it's not a strong as Bayonetta, but it's still there. And hey, if you don't think so, come by Gaygamer or 4chan sometime.
3. I'm not sure if people were being factious when they brought this up, but claiming that Bayonetta stripping based on the player's actions is some kind of metaphor for female subservience seems a bit warped to me. It's a video game. The protagonist being on some level subservient to the player is a given. It just seems weird to even bring that up.
I love your thoughtful criticism of (mostly) sexuality in video games, and have been reading your blog for a while, but I think this is the first time I've felt compelled to comment.
I liked your Gamepro article - as usual you tackle your argument with insight and gusto. However, I think the weakness in your article was based on trying to decide if Bayonetta was either "empowering or exploitive," and not having much concession for the possibility that it could be both.
I love your arguments for how the game is empowering, and especially love your assertion that "context is the most important consideration in judging whether an element is appropriate or not." But I don't know if you're really considering the context of Bayonetta as a product - as a video game - in the context of video game culture at large. Within the context of the actual game, Bayonetta's hyper sexuality might be appropriate, but is it appropriate in the context of hyper sexuality prevalent video game culture on a whole? You see, I don't have an answer for that, but I wish the question would have been raised or considered more closely in your article.
With MW2's F.A.G.S. viral video, they tried to create something that was satirical in and of itself, but the outcry about it seemed to stem from the context of current video game culture which MW2 is part and parcel to. They didn't consider the fact that online internet culture is ripe with hate language, and their video sort of condoned that. Without the context of the larger culture, well, would the video have been as offensive? Maybe. I don't know.
As far as Bayonetta goes... I'd sure love to hear your opinion on how the game can be played with one hand. Is that empowering for women? Maybe Bayonetta is a source of empowerment - but does that dissolve it from also being a source of exploitation?
Nice points, Dave P.
On the subject of male sexuality in games, just thought I'd add that secondary sex characteristics go beyond anatomy. Dante's extreme swagger and devil-may-care attitude are over exagerated secondary sexual characteristics as surely as Bayonetta's posterior.
Oh, and Klip, in one sense at least the one-hand playing is _disempowering_ to the player who gets _less_ direct control over Bayonetta. It highlights the "she's in control, not you" aspect of things.
Peter
Well that's a smart perspective, and sort of in keeping with the mythology informing Bayonetta.
But - just like my argument to the author of SVG - your point should be weighed against the other side of the coin: the fact that the game is inviting you to masturbate while playing it. Within the context of our culture, that's what the game is doing when it makes a bullet-point out of being able to play it one-handed, right?
But, on the flip-side, maybe the condoning gist of your comment is actually more appropriate than the demeaning gist of my comment, if the conversation here IS actually a conversation about masturbation - and what masturbation means to us? Maybe there's a comment in this game mechanic indicating masturbation is a healthy activity - and not something that should create guilt or shame? If that's the case, I would be willing to consider it, and might even applaud it.
The topic of masturbation is an ugly topic, as far as mainstream public conversation goes. Not dinner table conversation. Which doesn't mean it shouldn't be talked about - on the contrary, I'm actually curious why it hasn't been brought up somewhere so progressive as SVG!
And that's kind of the crux of what I'm saying: I think to preposition that this game can either be beautiful or ugly, empowering or exploitive, denies the possibility that it might be both, and sort of limits the conversation we can have about it. I think the 'ugly' aspects of this game should be given as much attention as the 'beautiful' or empowering aspects - maybe in the light of day those ugly things wouldn't actually be so ugly. I don't know. Nobody could know until it actually got pulled out into the light of day and both 'beautiful & ugly,' or 'empowering & exploitive,' were discussed together. Not discussed with a pretense of doing so objectively, because that's impossible, but at least discussed in the same breath, with the same weight for each, without assumption that everyone is already on the same page about what is potentially 'ugly' in this game or a game like this.
It's actually a very minor complaint. I love the points that Alexander argues, and she does briefly mention the ugly aspects of hyper-sexualized games in general. But when she says flat-out that the style of this game is not inherently unfair to women, it seems like she's either missing something, or I'm missing something, because within the context of the game the sexuality might be apropos, but I'm not convinced it is within the context of video game culture at large. As Alexander says, game characters don't need to be robbed of their sexuality to be a positive portrayal of women, but isn't there more to the conversation when the game is more than just sexual, but hyper-sexual? Isn't there more to the conversation when the game invites the player to masturbate while playing it?
I don't know, just seems like there's a missing conversation here, and kind of glossed over in the (otherwise insightful) Gamepro article.
Klip, I'm with you. Bayonetta's sexuality can definitely be construed in multiple ways. I've been arguing more for Bayonetta as critically aware and feministic just because my impression has been that the dominant discourse has been counter to that.
But not only could the designers have intended it to serve multiple functions, one oughtn't totally discount interpretations that don't match authorial intent.
So it could be constructive for some and destructive for others. Or constructive and destructive at the same time for some as well.
As for onanism, I guess one could extend the metaphor I've been trying to put together and suggest that if during one-handed play one performs such an act, one is even _more_ in Bayonetta's control/thrall. And your climax, as it were, will most likely not dictate _her_ biggest climaxes.
"My instinct, if any, is simply to react strongly against the tendency many people (or groups) have to distract from creative endeavors by using them as an occasion to highlight or invent victimization for themselves. I find those grievances to be ungrounded more often than not. "
THIS is why I keep reading your work. Whether I agree or not to any particular article, I know you're always tackling things with a lens of critical analysis and intent on the issue itself.
I'm curious where this "play the game with one hand" came from. Was this an official marketing line for Bayonetta somewhere? Because it sounds more like something a review would say, as I would think it goes against the "stylish hard action" that Kamiya stands for.
Also, in my own experience (and I may be getting old) the game is significantly difficult, and I am certainly not breezing through it on normal difficulty.
"Whether I agree or not to any particular article, I know you're always tackling things with a lens of critical analysis and intent on the issue itself."
Hehe, there is no issue being analyzed here. :)
"Also, in my own experience (and I may be getting old) the game is significantly difficult, and I am certainly not breezing through it on normal difficulty."
About the game! Yay! Thanks!
Yes, the game in normal is more difficult than most action games on normal difficulty these days, though I'd say Ninja Gaiden and Devil May Cry 3 were harder games in the same difficulty setting. Though, from what I've played, Bayonetta has very forgivable checkpoints (only died twice so far). I'm not a fan of restarting right before where I died, especially in an action game, so I'd say that's the biggest issue so far with this game.
Branden Bean,
Really good point. I checked out PlatinumGames blog, and found the post where Kamiya details Easy Automatic mode (one hand mode) - and he does not imply there's a link between this and masturbation. (Although apparently the mode is also called Mommy Mode?). Here's the link: http://platinumgames.com/2009/08/25/very-easy-automatic/
Also, at the end of this Joystiq interview he talks about Easy Automatic mode, and there's nothing kinky about it: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/10/19/interview-bayonettas-hideki-kamiya-and-yusuke-hashimoto/
So this does look like the kind of thing where the community took a feature and made implications about it that were not intended by the designer. Especially considering there was also an Easy Automatic mode in the first Devil May Cry.
Sorry I made so much brouhaha over a non-issue, didn't do proper research, let myself be swayed by hearsay, and assumed this was a facet of the official marketing.
I'm going to go into a corner now, open my mouth, and insert a foot.
@Brenden
The "mommy mode" thing just disintegrated most of my misgivings. My wife currently breastfeeding a two-month-old, that reference shows me that they took honest consideration. While I hadn't heard of the masturbation corollary, this one-handed thing is an amazingly cool idea, and I applaud them.
Very interesting essay over at Gamasutra: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/26820/Opinion_The_Cultural_Clash_Of_Bayonetta.php
Christian Nutt suggests Bayonetta is high camp, and the offense so many in the gaming community seem to be taking at it comes largely from the apparent threat of camp to a medium struggling for cultural acceptance.
I find this pretty compelling -- many of the panegyrics against Bayonetta I've read claim, in extremely incensed manner, that it _bored_ them. I.e., their words said it was beneath notice, but their tone suggested that it had got beneath their skin.
To be perfectly frank, Leigh, as a dedicated reader and a woman... I'm incredibly disappointed in you.
Bayonetta is not a representation of female power. She is a representation of what a man thinks female power is: sex displayed and then denied. I'll freely admit to having not played the game--I don't have money to waste on games I don't want to play, and considering that I hated Devil May Cry, I'm thinking taking a pass on Bayonetta is warranted--but everything I've seen in the comments thus far seems to be pointing to the idea that Bayonetta denying explicit sexual gratification to the (male) player is somehow empowering to women. Well, no. I'm sorry, but it's not. You seem to have lost sight of the fact that Bayonetta is a female character created by men for a primarily male audience--empowering women, even via irony, is not exactly a priority here. (And @David Hill above, I guarantee you they weren't thinking about breastfeeding mothers when they put in Mommy Mode. They may not have been thinking masturbation, either, but the thought that a game would make any concessions whatsoever to as small of an audience as breastfeeding mothers... I'll just leave it at "yeah, right.") Yes, sex sells. But please don't pretend that pandering to the lowest common denominator is somehow empowering to women.
But Leigh, I'm especially distressed by your excitement at female sexuality being used as a weapon. Weaponizing female sexuality (and the denial of it) only reinforces the perception that women with power over their own sexuality are dangerous. Female sexuality is not some mysterious, forbidden thing that people should fear. It's not a weapon; it's not a tool. It's also not the be-all, end-all of femininity. So when female sexuality and its use are the be-all, end-all of a female character, one of still regrettably few female characters in the medium, you can understand why women like me get a little worked up.
A lot of the issue here is, of course, balance. When's the last time you saw a prominent female character whose list of descriptors did not start with "sexy"? What about one where "sexy" isn't even on the list? (Corollary: When's the last time you saw a male character whose list of descriptors DID include "sexy"? And don't say Dante--it has been established multiple times in the comments that Dante is "cool," not "sexy." Or at least, he's marketed thus, in the way that Bayonetta is most definitely not.) When the ratio of Bayonettas to Chells is better than 1,000:1, I'll start letting people off the hook for creating another super-sexy femme fatale. I still won't be handing out prizes and asspats for it the way you are, though.
@Anonymous:
I don't think it was just breastfeeding mothers. A "mommy" is someone that might want to play a game, but not have enough time and ability to devote 100% attention. I showed my wife the video without context, she immediately said, "Oh wow, I could play that while tending to the baby."
Also, I do agree on the "sexy" signifier. Do I think we can't have a cool game heroine that is sexy? No. However, I think it's sort of telling that every single time we get a 'strong heroine,' one of her primary traits is her sexiness.
@David
You raise a good point re: Mommy Mode, though I'm not convinced that it was put into the game for that reason. Realistically, I think it's just a way that they made Easy Mode even easier, and the fact that it only takes one hand is an amusing side effect. The question of casual gamers and gender is old meme at this point, but do we have to refer to Super Easy Mode with such a female-coded (not to mention age-coded) name?
Anonymous:
Good to get more female perspective in here. I certainly agree that we could use more female game characters whose primary characteristic isn't "sexy." I'd argue, however, that the vast majority of male characters are in fact designed, in part, to be "sexy." You don't think that "cool" and "sexy" overlap?
That said, if a female character is going to be defined w/ sexiness in mind, I vastly prefer Bayonetta to 99.9% of the other sexy heroines, whose "sexiness" is just painted on after the fact.
The reason being that her sexiness seems built in from the ground up, self-contained and stylistically coherent. She devotes as much or more vamping at the basically asexual angels as at the player (which latter could, of course, be a woman).
Also, I don't think the font of her power is _denying_ her sexuality to males. Rather, her power is partly sexual, and males are, in many ways, beside the point. To suggest that it's about denying or giving it up is inherently phallocratic: Part of what's interesting about Bayonetta is that her sexiness is largely portrayed as _for_ her, not for anyone else. As such, she'll use it for whatever means she pleases, be that titillating men or pissing off angels.
The created by males thing is very much a fair point. It would also be nice to get more women into game development. But Bayonetta's having been created by males does not, automatically, mean that her only function is as a piece of meat. Although I agree it means we should be more cautious in interpretation.
Again, she's not a hero of feminism. But she is, I think, a hero who can fit under the aegis of feminism.
PS: I think part of the idea behind "mommy mode" is that the player is like a helpless little kid, and Bayonetta's going to take care of those bad angels for them (like a protective mother). Remember, her final demon is some kind of Ur-goddess, and she spends a good deal of the game caring for Cerissa.
"Hehe, there is no issue being analyzed here. :)"
Yeah yeah...but you get what I mean, right?
Even if I may have different opinions, values, or conclusions from Leigh I know her's are determined using the same approach of critical analysis. To me that's much more interesting to read than someone who has the same view as I, but with a weak, shallow reasoning behind it.
"Sometimes what I find okay will not be okay with others. I write subjectively, as should any critic (objectivity is an illusion that plagues our work)."
I've only just discovered your blog and don't know if you reply to comments, but I'm dead curious about what you meant by the above quote and would love if you could expand on it. Cheers.
I look forward to a world where men and women, white and black, religious and non-religious can all work side by side to blow shit up!
@Ali
I understand that quote to simply be a bite of truth; people can talk about being objective all they want, but in reality it is impossible. We are all unique individuals and no matter how hard we try, we cannot view things from an entirely neutral viewpoint. As long as you possess your own frame of reference, anything you think will be subjective.
In fact, and this part is merely my own opinion, I would say that someone who can understand this and admit they are subjective will end up being more objective than someone working under the delusion that they actually are objective.
@Branden: Thanks, that's good advice to know. More recently I've been stressed to figure out how I can write something 100% objective, so that was good to read before I became entirely delusional about it.
I am not offended by highly sexualized female gaming characters. What does annoy me is for a female game character to be "a positive role model" in games or any medium for that matter, she has to be stripped of her femininity and sexuality altogether. Give her some guns, give her smaller boobs, give her a cold bitch demeanor and wallah! Apparently you have a non objectified representation of a woman. I don't believe that for a female to be stronger or for her to be taken seriously she must suddenly man the fuck up. To me it should be about balance in gender roles and their representations. However, when I look at Bayonetta I honestly see a made to order fetish doll. I think this time they have still gone a bit overboard. Characters in games are always going to be stylized to some extent, but what I do crave is for there to be a sexy but realistically proportioned female gaming character who triumphs in ways that are based on awesome actions or heaven forbid a personality, not some lame sexual innuendo or Big Fucking Gun that compensates for a penis.
Let's all take heart in the presence of the conversation, be it thoughtful, accusatory, or steeped in so much practived, one-sided dogma.
Video games have often failed to stimulate thought and conversation. Breathe deep, and realize we will not solve this argument. It's been around for quite a while and it will continue to be around.
I'm glad to see a game throw a heavy rock into the fucking pond and kick up a bunch of silt, regardless if some of that silt is the sediment of rotten bullshit. It's still better than a meaningless rock with hardly any weight to it, just skipping across the water's surface.
Most of those pictures on gelbooru were gross but something about bayonetta with a penis is totally subversive
What does annoy me is for a female game character to be "a positive role model" in games or any medium for that matter...
Isnt it the (female) gamers responibility as to how she interprits--for better or for worse--or really does the responsibility really lie on the games or the creators shoulders?
@Mark: It's the responsibility of both gamer and developers, but the developers comes first as it's their creation that is interpreted. The hypersexualised run-of-the-mill women who star in most action, fighting and jRPGs can't be interpreted by the gamer as a strong female character as none of these women have been designed as strong female characters (in the context of personality and representation, not how much ass they can kick or how much magic they can use).
Compare Lara Croft with Samus Aran. Lara goes off treasure hunting, Samus goes off bounty hunting. Lara has always been advertised as a sexy, female Indiana Jones and since her introduction she's become Gaming's biggest sex symbol, but is that really the role model a female gamer wants to follow? Sure she's got guns and she can shoot shit up, but her most recognised trait is her figure.
Samus, on the other hand, was not even revealed to be a woman until the end of the game, and even then only to the best of players, subverting the almost universally followed unwritten rule that protagonists will be men. The games do not treat her special because she's a woman, and aside from bonus pics at the end she is not sexualised (though it worries me that Team Ninja is developing the next game after pioneering boob physics in Ninja Gaiden). Her status as a woman is not the focus of the series, nor is it touched upon. In most ways, her skill equals if not exceeds her male counterparts. In a game genre dominated primarily by space marines, Samus does a lot to equalise the field and does so without flaunting her sexuality. If you want to interpret it so, you could say that she shows that gender does not (or should not) make a difference, either in games or reality.
That's not to say that sexuality is bad (an example of cleverly used sexuality would be EVA in Metal Gear Solid 3), because it's not, but the abuse of it is (such as in Lara's case where it's used to attracts swaths of horny teenagers).
Leigh, I agree completely that a female character being sexy isn't and shouldn't automatically be considered a negative. But if there's no measurement of "cool vs. demeaning" beyond the context of a game, then any discussion of Bayonetta or any gender representation in games would seem to crumble under subjectivity. Anonymous 4:07 more or less personifies the counter-argument I was curious about -- games journalist Leigh Alexander says Bayonetta's cool, and someone else says she's not! To be fair, Leigh, you provide tons of context for your argument and are presenting more than just a gut instinct. But how "uncool" does a sexy female character have to be to qualify as demeaning? There's a middle ground between Bayonetta and a Native American woman tied to a cactus, right? Is Lara Croft demeaning because she's not as self-aware, or because her games' directors weren't as stylish?
Your article made me think about what struck me initially as a rigid issue, Leigh. Keep up the good work!
As a woman who plays games and draws pornographic illustrations, both for myself and for money, I celebrate my personal sexuality through the images I draw of women's bodies, but I'm still a feminist, and I see no contradiction between what I enjoy looking at and my personal philosophy. Feminism = I get to like what I like.
What bothered me about your article was the assumption that this hyper sexualisation was intuitive because a woman was the protagonist, the implication being that sex is the primary power of women. I found that idea dangerously absurd. Movies and games are rife with depictions of women using sex as a form of power, but what this does is render the women non-threatening to the male viewer/player necessarily by her sexual availability. Sex isn't power, it's currency. Unfortunately, there isn't something like a federal trade commission making sure that an opponent with a gun can't cut and run, and so it doesn't even work very well.
We get to like what we like, and we don't have to compromise our values to justify it. Strong female protagonists are not defined by their ability to knock over (heterosexual male) opponents (either with guns or sex), but by how well drawn their personalities are and how believable their motives. This is what most male protagonists get that female protagonists mostly don't.
As a postscript, what bothers me about your writing in general, and not just your article, is that you purport to be a "woman's voice." You don't speak for women gamers, Ms. Alexander. You speak for you. There's nothing wrong with that, but I'm tired of seeing you quoted as the token female voice on gaming.
Cola said:
"As a postscript, what bothers me about your writing in general, and not just your article, is that you purport to be a "woman's voice." You don't speak for women gamers, Ms. Alexander. You speak for you."
Heh, she is a woman, a member of the female gender, and thus "a woman's voice" like any other's. It just so happens that more people listen to her than to other women when it comes to videogames in the West (or, things other than gaming about videogames... or something). At any rate, there's nothing wrong with stating her opinion as, "a woman's voice," unless she was a man (I don't think she is a man, BTW).
"There's nothing wrong with that, but I'm tired of seeing you quoted as the token female voice on gaming."
Then blame the sites that quote her as such! Frankly, after reading shit like this from Heather Anne Campbell:
"The other thing that Street Fighter did successfully was gestures -- what I mean by this is that the moves were a psychological metaphor for what was happening onscreen."
http://www.playmagazine.com/?fuseaction=SiteMain.Content&contentid=1630
Uh... what? It's a fighting game. And what does your following statement have to do with psychol... nevermind.
And, from Heather Chaplin (What is it with Heathers!?:)
"It is you guys as game designers who are mired deeply in ‘guy culture'. You aren’t men. You are stunted adolescents."
http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/694389/gdc-2009-smartbomb-author-heather-chaplin-tells-game-designers-to-grow-up.html
Men = guys. We're men, we are naturally meant to act like men. And we make videogames for a living. What part of...
*sigh*
I just don't have much hope. It's like everything I read about videogames from women these days has nothing to do with the actual fucking games!
Most of the women that know about games come from game development, from my experience. At least the ones I've met and worked with, and back in the day there used to be great criticism about games found in gaming mags around the early-to-mid 90's. They compared similar games to each other, broke down the qualities and drawbacks of mechanics and level design, and thusly provided insight on the quality of the games they criticized. These great women were few, but I guess that's because videogames appeal to men more.
BUT BACK TO THE TOPIC AT HAND (or at least the more interesting one).
I'm playing around Chapter 5 or so of Bayonetta, and if people playing the game aren't talking about the combat system, they should definitely be talking about what Platinum Games has done with environments. Having the environment tear apart as a result of a battle, in-game, is exhilarating and adds a lot to the magnitude of each attack, even if it's all scripted. Uncharted 2 had far fewer moments where they applied similar chaos to the environments as the player remained in control of Drake, though they also added custom animations for all characters in those encounters. I've found each approach works for the respective game, as a fast-paced game like Bayonetta should not be hindered by combat-interrupting animations if the ground is falling from under her feet.
At any rate, the more I play this Kamiya gem the more I wonder how God of War III will stack up against it. After all, they've been doing the "epic" beat-em-up better than other games in the past generation, if that means anything.
@ Carlos
Yes, because what's interesting to you is the most important thing in the world. All other discussion must stop in order to talk about what you find interesting, because you are clearly the most important person in this post, possibly even the most important on the entire Internet.
I'm terribly sorry that we womenfolk just can't compete with you and yours in scintillating online discussion. Please, derail the conversation more with your nuggets of infinite wisdom.
@Anon
What? Carlos was responding Cola and talking about Bayonetta. How can you be more on topic? He wasn't forcing anything down anyone's throats, he was talking about legitimate points.
Thanks for speaking out, defending your position, and not bowing to pressure from busy bodies. I play games based on their quality, not whether or not the main character is overtly sexual.my two cents
@ anon, and quoting your post so we can tell which one. Things are getting confusing. ;)
What? Carlos was responding Cola and talking about Bayonetta. How can you be more on topic? He wasn't forcing anything down anyone's throats, he was talking about legitimate points.
Carlos could have been more on-topic if he was actually addressing the issue at hand, which is the role sexuality and sexualization plays in Bayonetta, as opposed to the level design. Instead of contributing to the discussion that Leigh and the other posters are having, he has attempted to derail it onto a topic that interests him. Yes, Bayonetta's level design is a worthwhile topic of discussion. No, it is not the one being dealt with here. Walking into someone's blog post and attempting to change the topic of discussion because you find it uninteresting is self-centered and rude.
I would be willing to cut him some slack if he hadn't prefaced his lame subject change with several paragraphs of screed completely dismissing the writing of female game journalists and then pinning his dissatisfaction with their commentary on their gender. I quote: "I just don't have much hope. It's like everything I read about videogames from women these days has nothing to do with the actual fucking games!" Because Carlos is obviously supreme auditor of what is worthwhile commentary and what is not. And a vagina automatically disqualifies you from providing worthwhile commentary.
We all know you're a bi-sexual feminist.
> Walking into someone's blog post and attempting to change the topic of discussion because you find it uninteresting is self-centered and rude.
Right. I have never read a comment/forum thread that has not in some way evolved from its origin. It's not self-centered or rude, he never just shrugged the whole conversation off to talk about what he likes, he was responding to a comment. And then he returned to Bayonetta, and so what if it wasn't the exact same line of thought as the original post?
> pinning his dissatisfaction with their commentary on their gender.
The commentary he quoted was related to gender. The second, at the very least, was a female journalist directly attacking male game designers. And maybe he got his facts wrong, I don't know, did he? You haven't corrected him if he is, because you've been too busy hissing your spite.
> Because Carlos is obviously supreme auditor of what is worthwhile commentary and what is not. And a vagina automatically disqualifies you from providing worthwhile commentary.
He was talking of his own experiences, obviously very subjective. He hasn't said that women journalists are crap, he's said that most of the women journalists he's read the works of have been crap. Rather than attacking him for being a man, why not add to the discussion by refuting his evidence-supported points with your own evidence-supported points?
@ Ali
Sure, fine, it's not as bad as if someone had barged in and started talking about football. But please note that the previous 110 comments, including the one to which he was ostensibly replying were all concerning the implications of Bayonetta's portrayal as a woman and a sexual being and Leigh's article about that topic. Not the game's level design. It's the equivalent of piping up in a discussion about the psychological intricacies and narrative themes of Fight Club with, "I like Fight Club because Brad Pitt is hot! :D :D :D" Tangentially related to the topic at hand? Yes. Actual meaningful contribution to this conversation? No. There's a time and place for everything, but this moment here and now is not necessarily it.
I'm not attacking Carlos because he's a man. I'm attacking him because he's saying some really stupid stuff. And what exactly is Carlos' point, here? Because I'm not really seeing one beyond "There are some female video game critics other than Leigh, but they aren't any good." And I'm not seeing much in the way of evidence, either. But if you wish me to explicitly address his points, I will do so:
I actually agree with Carlos that Leigh should not be blamed for the lack of women in video game criticism. It's a problem with the mentality of the industry that there are so few female voices. No, Leigh should not be the only one, but it's not her fault that she's quoted so frequently.
But Carlos then goes on to quote the writing of two other female game journalists as examples of "shit" and suggests that this (in his opinion) sub-par writing is why there are so few female voices on games. He wraps up with the quote I mentioned earlier, I'll repeat it because it makes me laugh bitterly:
I just don't have much hope. It's like everything I read about videogames from women these days has nothing to do with the actual fucking games!
I don't know how you're reading that, but all I see is, "Women writers don't talk about video games the way I want them to be talked about, therefore I don't like women writers." That's a pretty bullshit attitude, imho.
I read both the links he quoted, btw. He's missing the point in both. I think Heather Anne Campbell has a really interesting point regarding the benefits of a psychological connection between the motions the player uses on the controls and the motions the character goes through on the screen (which has nothing to do with gender, by the way). Of course, Carlos doesn't think so (His comment indicates that he either doesn't understand the words she's using or doesn't think fighting games should ever be analyzed, even in terms of interface design). As for Heather Chaplin, I would refer to Leigh's own write-up here:
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/04/opinion_kicking_the_dog_at_the.php
Chaplin's point is sound, though the way she delivered it may have been questionable (depending on your interpretation of what is acceptable in a rant session setting). Carlos again misses the point, falling back on the old crap that men are men, can't be anything else but what society dictates men are, and the video game industry is run by men and is therefore exempt from any criticism regarding possibly growing beyond male interests. I'm not fully convinced that he actually read any more from either source than the sentences he quoted.
As for Carlos' comments on Bayonetta's level design, I will fully admit that I have not yet played the game and am therefore not qualified to offer any opinion on its finer points. I do enjoy a good level design discussion, and would content myself to listen (or read, or lurk, whichever is most relevant) to one on Bayonetta. In the proper forum for it, of course.
Great article, as usual.
Personally, I didn't need a woman (or man) to point out that Bayonetta isn't somehow misogynistic, but I'm very glad you did, because like it or not, your argument does carry more weight on this matter on account of your gender. I'd grown mighty tired of all the 'guilty handwringing' as you so eloquently put it, myself.
The simple, unfortunate fact is, if *I* were to speak out against this sort of faux victimization, I'm likely as not to be simply written off as a sexist. While if a woman says the exact same thing, people seem to actually stop and listen.
Which is why I'm so very grateful to you for providing your proverbial 'voice of reason' in the gaming industry.
I apologize if I lose track of some of you. When addressing multiple anonymous people at the same time, it can prove difficult to distinguish one from the other. Adding the timestamps should help, though I'm unsure if the date of a comment varies depending on the reader's timezone. Also, it seems I need to split my response in a few comments, so sorry for that.
-------------------------
Anonymous said... January 25, 2010 11:24 AM
"@ Carlos
Yes, because what's interesting to you is the most important thing in the world."
It's interesting to me, but that's not why it's important. Talking about the game is more important (and interesting) because it's a game, except for people that don't like games. This becomes even more prevalent when compared to the discussion of a "sex role" in a beat 'em up.
"All other discussion must stop in order to talk about what you find interesting, because you are clearly the most important person in this post, possibly even the most important on the entire Internet."
Nonsense. Please read my response above. :)
"I'm terribly sorry that we womenfolk just can't compete with you and yours in scintillating online discussion. Please, derail the conversation more with your nuggets of infinite wisdom."
If by "we women," you mean the women that I've read "game" articles or discussions from that rarely delve into the actual games, but instead waste time on "sex roles" and other useless topics that have no business in videogame discussion, then yes, likely everything I say about a game will be a nugget of wisdom to you, or go right over your head. However, as far as the rest of the women journalists that write about games because they like games, because of how they play, and address such issues, they're fine in my book (i.e. videogame criticism - what a journalist, male or female, should be doing!)
I was also careful in my statement that I've met women who know games well, either in the past or presently in game development, so I ask the same level of care from you before replying to my comments:
"Most of the women that know about games come from game development, from my experience. At least the ones I've met and worked with, and back in the day there used to be great criticism about games found in gaming mags around the early-to-mid 90's. They compared similar games to each other, broke down the qualities and drawbacks of mechanics and level design, and thusly provided insight on the quality of the games they criticized. These great women were few, but I guess that's because videogames appeal to men more."
Anonymous said... January 25, 2010 5:38 PM
"Carlos could have been more on-topic if he was actually addressing the issue at hand, which is the role sexuality and sexualization plays in Bayonetta, as opposed to the level design. Instead of contributing to the discussion that Leigh and the other posters are having, he has attempted to derail it onto a topic that interests him. Yes, Bayonetta's level design is a worthwhile topic of discussion. No, it is not the one being dealt with here. Walking into someone's blog post and attempting to change the topic of discussion because you find it uninteresting is self-centered and rude."
You're perfectly correct. However, I don't intend to be rude. It's just a natural occurence from my need to share the comments I've made in this blog, which go further than the main topic of this entry.
Furthermore, I'll make a good guess and say you could really care less if I posted off topic, but rather are exclusively upset at your misinterpretation of my statements regarding women.
"I would be willing to cut him some slack if he hadn't prefaced his lame subject change with several paragraphs of screed completely dismissing the writing of female game journalists and then pinning his dissatisfaction with their commentary on their gender. I quote: "I just don't have much hope. It's like everything I read about videogames from women these days has nothing to do with the actual fucking games!" Because Carlos is obviously supreme auditor of what is worthwhile commentary and what is not."
Instead of getting angry at me because you feel I've insulted all women (I have not, just the poor work of some of them), why not state the importance of this "sex role" issue you're discussing? After all, I'm saying a very simple thing: It is more interesting, worthwhile, and thusly more important to discuss the game when talking about a game. This statement doesn't really need any explanation (if it does to you, I'm sorry, I can't help you), but I guarantee you "sex roles" in a beat 'em up certainly demands one to question the discussion's usefulness.
"And a vagina automatically disqualifies you from providing worthwhile commentary."
*sigh* From above, and my earlier post (please pay attention):
"I was careful in my statement that I've met women who know games well, either in the past or presently in game development, so I ask the same level of care when reading my comments."
"Most of the women that know about games come from game development, from my experience. At least the ones I've met and worked with, and back in the day there used to be great criticism about games found in gaming mags around the early-to-mid 90's. They compared similar games to each other, broke down the qualities and drawbacks of mechanics and level design, and thusly provided insight on the quality of the games they criticized. These great women were few, but I guess that's because videogames appeal to men more."
Ali said... January 25, 2010 7:40 PM
"Right. I have never read a comment/forum thread that has not in some way evolved from its origin. It's not self-centered or rude, he never just shrugged the whole conversation off to talk about what he likes, he was responding to a comment. And then he returned to Bayonetta, and so what if it wasn't the exact same line of thought as the original post?"
I understand what they (her? how many are there?) are upset. It's not that I've been trying to change the topic, as from what few comments I've read in previous entries subjects change after several comments, and that is all well and good for people. This thread actually has over 100 responses dedicated to the subject, so you'd figure they wouldn't care about my few neglected, "off-topic" posts. No, they're really upset because they feel I've offended women, or possibly because I've offended their writing (who knows? Maybe one of them wrote that nonsense about a fighting game's moves having psychological meptaphors). It's a knee-jerk reaction, and nothing more.
"The commentary he quoted was related to gender. The second, at the very least, was a female journalist directly attacking male game designers. And maybe he got his facts wrong, I don't know, did he? You haven't corrected him if he is, because you've been too busy hissing your spite."
The facts aren't wrong. I was in the front row of the GDC talk where Heather Chaplin vomited that statement, and other garbage, on game designers. My thoughts on it are already somewhere in this blog. The link I added is where that quote is found, though if those weren't her exact words, she certainly made those feelings clear.
As for the Heather Campbell quote, that was to point out the nonsense of her statement regarding the Street Fighter series. It was just dumb, like her Action Button review on SFIII (which wasn't a review, just fan commentary).
Both quotes were examples I've found where women drift off into subjects other than games when discussing games, and just barely glance at the surface of the playable part of the game (the game, for anyone wondering).
"He was talking of his own experiences, obviously very subjective. He hasn't said that women journalists are crap, he's said that most of the women journalists he's read the works of have been crap."
Subjective indeed, for I cannot talk about things I haven't experienced.
"Rather than attacking him for being a man, why not add to the discussion by refuting his evidence-supported points with your own evidence-supported points?"
i.e. Better time spent in this blog, and in any discussion. Though I can assume some female journalists are capably talking about games out there, I can't say "that is true" if I haven't seen it in a while, or have with extreme rarity (and I'm assuming I just forgot those).
Anonymous said... January 26, 2010 12:40 PM
"Sure, fine, it's not as bad as if someone had barged in and started talking about football. But please note that the previous 110 comments, including the one to which he was ostensibly replying were all concerning the implications of Bayonetta's portrayal as a woman and a sexual being and Leigh's article about that topic. Not the game's level design. It's the equivalent of piping up in a discussion about the psychological intricacies and narrative themes of Fight Club with, "I like Fight Club because Brad Pitt is hot! :D :D :D" Tangentially related to the topic at hand? Yes. Actual meaningful contribution to this conversation? No. There's a time and place for everything, but this moment here and now is not necessarily it. "
Any time is a good time to talk about something more worthwhile than what is being discussed, especially if both topics can be linked together. For example, Leigh talking about Bayonetta's role as an oversexualized woman leads me to bring up the question of why talk about the character's sexual role, which leads me to suggest that talking about the game is time better spent, and so on. Maybe people will catch on and improve the discussion, or step away if they haven't played the game and have no business talking here, or in your case, preventing me and the more interesting discussion from taking place. You've suceeded, I guess.
Also, your Fight Club example is a poor one because, unlike your scenario, I'm interrupting the discussion with a better topic than the one being dicussed. In reality, it would be like my interrupting the "Brad Pitt is hot" discussion with the topic of the story of the film, and then you coming in yelling and screaming at me that Brad Pitt is so hot and I should shut the fuck up about the film.
"I'm not attacking Carlos because he's a man. I'm attacking him because he's saying some really stupid stuff. And what exactly is Carlos' point, here? Because I'm not really seeing one beyond "There are some female video game critics other than Leigh, but they aren't any good."
The point is simple. If you wonder why I even bother with all of this, it's because from what I've read Leigh happens to enjoy many of the games I do (e.g. MGS is the reason I joined the industry, learned English well and moved to America while everyone I knew and loved lived in a third-world country -- I love that series to death. She has also talked about Persona and Demon's Souls, to name a few). She also has enough of an audience in her blog where a discussion with several people could be had on these games, but while she claims to be a game journalist, a videogame critic, she ends up analyzing everything but the game most of the time. Wouldn't it be cool if Leigh could analyze a game for what it is? I may be naive in this statement, but I believe everyone who has played games that long should be able to do so, unlike someone like N'Gai Croal (a man, FYI) who didn't play games until 1999 and thus I can't give weight to much of what he says about videogames, his content, even if it's all very well written. But that's another subject entirely...
"And I'm not seeing much in the way of evidence, either."
Two quotes of women critizicing games as anything but games (Campbell critizicing Blazblue, if you didn't catch that), and doing it poorly. One blames men for being men and making games for men and calling that wrong (where the only thing wrong about a game is being a bad game), the other makes shit up about a fighting game series, and neither one is really talking about how games work. Sure, men sometimes do the same, but (ignoring quality), you can find men breaking down videogames all over the internet.
They're an example of where their heads are at when it comes to videogames, which is far away from them.
"But Carlos then goes on to quote the writing of two other female game journalists as examples of "shit" and suggests that this (in his opinion) sub-par writing is why there are so few female voices on games. He wraps up with the quote I mentioned earlier, I'll repeat it because it makes me laugh bitterly:
'I just don't have much hope. It's like everything I read about videogames from women these days has nothing to do with the actual fucking games!'
"I don't know how you're reading that, but all I see is, "Women writers don't talk about video games the way I want them to be talked about, therefore I don't like women writers." That's a pretty bullshit attitude, imho."
I already addressed this to the first anonymous poster, but I'll reiterate in more detail: Whether or not I find an issue interesting or uninteresting is irrelevant. Either way, if a woman, or anyone, wants to call themselves game journalists, they need to address the actual game. Period. It is self-explanatory. It is so stupidly self-explanatory, I would cry instead of laugh bitterly if people can't understand this. If you're not critizing the game, then you're not being a game critic, nor a game journalist (well, you'd be a shitty game journalist, but you get my point).
Of course, this is when discussing a videogame. For example, there was a great article from Leigh about how developers weren't getting paid by a publisher (it may have been the Brash Entertainment debacle, though I can't recall). She's not talking about a game and then going on a pointless topic about it, but talked about an issue that is relevant, and adressing it well. I remember really liking that article, especially as a developer. My issue here is about the writing of videogames, however.
"I read both the links he quoted, btw. He's missing the point in both. I think Heather Anne Campbell has a really interesting point regarding the benefits of a psychological connection between the motions the player uses on the controls and the motions the character goes through on the screen (which has nothing to do with gender, by the way). Of course, Carlos doesn't think so (His comment indicates that he either doesn't understand the words she's using or doesn't think fighting games should ever be analyzed, even in terms of interface design)."
Fighting games should definitely be analyzed, though not stupidly. Heather Campbell says there's a "psychological metaphor" between the input on the stick and buttons, and the action/animation that occurs on screen (Charge left, then right and player releases a horizontal attack, etc.). First of all, there's nothing psychological AND metaphorical about that (if there is, please expalin this nonsense to me). It's the same as saying there's a "psychological metaphor" when the player presses RIGHT on the d-pad in ANY game, and the player moves to the right. That makes every fucking game have a "psychological metaphor," since inputs generally correspond with an action on screen that simulates such input, meaning there is nothing about Street Fighter that separates it from other fighters (or most other games!) in the psychological metaphor category (LOL!).
And for God's sakes, please don't couple "psychological metaphors" with "interface design." Please.
As for Heather Chaplin, I would refer to Leigh's own write-up here:
http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/04/opinion_kicking_the_dog_at_the.php
Chaplin's point is sound, though the way she delivered it may have been questionable (depending on your interpretation of what is acceptable in a rant session setting). Carlos again misses the point, falling back on the old crap that men are men, can't be anything else but what society dictates men are, and the video game industry is run by men and is therefore exempt from any criticism regarding possibly growing beyond male interests."
"Old crap than men are men?" LOL, what? Since when did things stop being what they are? Men are men. This has nothing to do with what society views as men.
As for Heather's retarded rant, one would begin to think, "Well, I guess a great father, wonderful husband, hero of the community must be a fucking child in her view if, when he plays or makes a videogame, it's usually about a power fantasy, or has boobs." Then one may realize, "Oh, she makes no fucking sense. A videogame really does not define the measure of a man." Then when you delve into what a game is, what complexity, depth, skill and competition are, you may just realize games don't need serious "themes" to grow, but instead an improvement of complexity, of depth, of skill. She made her already stupid point worse.
Also, and this is the last thing I'll say about this, keep in mind she started that rant with a comment about how she couldn't talk about games with her non-gamer peers because she was embarrassed by most games out there. If that doesn't sound like a completely selfish, horrendous excuse to demand developers to make certain types of games just so she can be proud in her little world about playing them, then I don't know what is. Pathetic.
I talked more about this in Leigh's older entry on the subject, so the rest of my opinion is there if you care and have the time. I'm not going to go further into this than I already have.
"I'm not fully convinced that he actually read any more from either source than the sentences he quoted."
I read Heather Campbell's quote, and her Action Button review of Street Fighter III: Third Strike (though the site is worth reading mostly for Tim Rogers, even if rarely their "reviews" are actual reviews, so I should know better). Reading more of the article where she was interviewed just makes me sad, as apparently she's played fighting games for a long time and should be insightful on them.
Also, I was sitting front-center at the GDC rant session where Heather Chaplin spit her venom on game designers. I listened intently, as I did to Leigh (who seemed nervous as hell), Clint Hocking, That Hilarious Dude From Maxis (Chris something...?), etc.
As for Carlos' comments on Bayonetta's level design, I will fully admit that I have not yet played the game and am therefore not qualified to offer any opinion on its finer points. I do enjoy a good level design discussion, and would content myself to listen (or read, or lurk, whichever is most relevant) to one on Bayonetta. In the proper forum for it, of course.
My advice to you, if you ever care to take it, is to spend less time arguing with someone about the validity of the discussion of the sexualization of a character of a videogame you haven't even played, and instead just play the damn thing. Believe me, it is time better spent. :)
Good stuff. Just watched my second roommate go through a playthrough of Bayonetta, and recognize it as a great game. I was originally taken aback by its style, but I realized that it was SO over the top that it was more a style choice than an overt ploy to get 13 year olds to play the game (though I doubt it hurt....). You just gained a podcast listener :)
This is truly a debatable topic.And I see there are already too many of us trying to make a point here.
I loved your article about Bayonetta. Finding this game really restored my excitement in video games in general. I was a little surprised at how i felt about the main character as she was so powerful and sexy and not afraid to use either her power or sexuality. In terms of something being negative toward women i always look to how the relationship between sex and power is handled. In Bayonetta they got it just right. If you give a women a lot of power but strip her of her sexuality (as often happens) than its just another instance of the masculine dominated media showing that a female can't retain her sexual power at the same time as having physical power (or any other kind). This gives men the ability to still dominate her in a sexual way. conversely if you give her tons of sexuality and no other power, well obviously that's bad for women. Bayonetta, however has both not only sexual and physical power, but dominance in her world and that is fantastic!
I was so happy to find your article about her though, to see that other women out there hadn't missed the point with Bayonetta. I loved what you said about how she made it cool to be a girl!
Your post was quite good than other blogger, i also like anime, this is very artistic!
anyway I'm william
mind if I put a link back to you?
(clickable) ------> Men Suit
Whoa.. impressive post! keep it up, you will be soon get famous about this.
i am a freelance writer..
see my works here ------> big suits
Post a Comment