Review Jerusalem Post: The Witcher reeks of perversion

[sheek]

GDC '08: Game devs terrified of sex
Brenda Brathwaite implores game designers to put a bit more nookie in its titles, and for stores to stock naughty games.

• SAN FRANCISCO--Game developers are frightened of sex, claims the founder of the International Game Developers Association's Sex special interest group.
  
  She told the audience at her "Hentai, Hardcore, and Hotties" talk at the Game Developer's Conference that "Developers are terrified of putting sex in games in case they get an AO rating, which is the kiss of death."

Lollerz

 

[denizsi]

but I want to talk about why sex shouldn't be gameplay

Wtf is your problem, nobody is talking about making sexual intercourse a part of gameplay? Cut the case on that.

 

[TheLostOne]

Isn't it the same with everything else? Conversations, combat, etc.

Nope. On a conceptual level, sex is simply different. It's like eating - would you ever be able to enjoy a three-course meal in-game? The experience simply does not translate.

There are aspects of combat (ie tactics, strategy, viscerality) that translate to play via monitor, keyboard, and mouse. The same is true of conversation, exploration, and loot collection. With sex, what can be translated is the narrative context (ie the culmination of a romance, the shock of rape, etc.) and the visual/aural appeal. The former can be done in a tasteful manner, I suppose. The latter, for the most part, is just going to be porn, and whenever you're using sex as a mini-game, it's the part that dominates.

So yeah, I can see sexual situations being done in a sensible manner, but not the activity of sex.

You're right, you stupid piece of shit. There should be no scenes of characters eating in games either because you can't enjoy a three course meal.

Are you thinking about the shit that your typing out or are you just bored and fucking spouting nonsense for the hell of it?

 

[Jasede]

Go back to your dating sims.

 

[TheLostOne]

What dating sims? Jasede you freak me the fuck out. One second you're posting furry Portal porn and the next you're preaching against bare tits in The Witcher.

You're as fucking fickle as my wife.

 

[Azarkon]

Wtf is your problem, nobody is talking about making sexual intercourse a part of gameplay? Cut the case on that.

So I can't talk about something unless other people started talking about it first? GTFO, this isn't your blog. I was responding to Section8's post stating that modern developers can't be trusted to do something sensible with sex in games. He's right, but the reason is not that sexual situations can't be depicted in a mature manner, but that combining "sex" with "games" is inherently silly and any developer doing it is tempted to do it in a tongue-in-cheek manner. So long as sex is a part of the gameplay (and if it's an end goal of interacting with NPCs, it's a part of the gameplay) you're never going to get away from the accusation that it's all just for titillation.

You're right, you stupid piece of shit. There should be no scenes of characters eating in games either because you can't enjoy a three course meal.

Because that's what I argued, right? How nice of you to call me a "stupid piece of shit" when your ass can't even read what I wrote correctly. What does that make you, stupider than shit?

Are you thinking about the shit that your typing out or are you just bored and fucking spouting nonsense for the hell of it?

I think anybody with half a brain cell would notice that I put plenty of "thought" into my posts. Your posts, on the other hand, could be generated by stringing random insults together, like:

You shit-fucking dick with anal-intercourse for brains whose posts are RETARD should be sodomized with ten-foot donkey space marine wtf kingcomrade?

 

[TheLostOne]

Nope. On a conceptual level, sex is simply different. It's like eating - would you ever be able to enjoy a three-course meal in-game? The experience simply does not translate.

Uhh... hmm... So you're saying that sex is similar to a 3 course meal in that its a sensory experience that is impossible to convey in video games.

The problem with this "point" is that no one is talking about having sex in games as some sort of interactive virtual intercourse. You're statement is worthless because it has no pertinance to the question of sex existing in video games in it's current form. It's not meant to be interactive, it's meant to be part of the story.

If you're PC goes and gets a hooker it's because that's the type of fucker you're playing. I didn't watch the screen fade to black in Fallout in hopes of having some out of body orgasmic experience by taking the place of my character (would have been cool though).

So no, you didn't put any thought into your statement, or if you did then you need to be a bit more analytical and patient when running things through your head. The food analogy was just fucking stupid. Just like no one's trying to virtually enjoy a 3 course meal in a game, no one's trying to simulate the sensation of having sex either unless they're trying some wierdass freaky porn game.

 

[DraQ]

kingcomrade?

A grave insult, no doubt.

 

[denizsi]

So I can't talk about something unless other people started talking about it first? GTFO, this isn't your blog.

Here:

I don't see how sex could ever be sensible when it's on a monitor and you play with your mouse... At best, we might approach the spectatorial thematics of sex in films, but there's an element of physicality in sex that will simply never translate into games in a mature fashion.

In other words, the sheer absurdity of trying to engage in an intimate physical activity with computer programs by clicking your mouse (how can you ever take it seriously, if you sit back and think about what you're doing?) means sex in games is always just going to be used for porn and titillation. I can see games depict sexual situations in a meaningful way, but not "sex" where you, the player, is an active participant.

Nobody ever made a point of "sex as gameplay" and by the time you joined the discussion, people have already been discussing how sex could or could not contribute to a game in indirect ways. Then you jumped with a big "NO to everything sex" and you give "sex as gameplay is bad" as a defence. I don't think anyone of us would want a "Sexy Beach 3D meets Mass Effect", so either keep your big "NO to everything sex" with a reasonable and related argument, or STFU.

 

[Jasede]

What dating sims? Jasede you freak me the fuck out. One second you're posting furry Portal porn and the next you're preaching against bare tits in The Witcher.

You're as fucking fickle as my wife.

I -am- your wife. Now take out the trash and don't forget to buy 12 bottles of water next time you come back from work.

Fully aware of my hypocrisy; I only post this because I hope it makes you guys laugh. I am really a bit messed up. See, bare tits bother me - they're unnatural, after all! That is, to me. When you have some perversion, that perversion seems natural from your perspective, and everything that you don't like seems unnatural and loathsome. At least to me. I should study theology.

 

[Azarkon]

You're statement is worthless because it has no pertinance to the question of sex existing in video games in it's current form. It's not meant to be interactive, it's meant to be part of the story.

Sex used as a goal of NPC interaction is bound to be accused of being pornographic. Why wouldn't it be? You're jumping through hoops to get laid. Depicting it simply validates the titillation factor. If that wasn't the point, who cares if it's fade-to-black?

So no, you didn't put any thought into your statement, or if you did then you need to be a bit more analytical and patient when running things through your head. The food analogy was just fucking stupid. Just like no one's trying to virtually enjoy a 3 course meal in a game, no one's trying to simulate the sensation of having sex either unless they're trying some wierdass freaky porn game.

Read the post in context. Ausir was asking why the argument can't be made for conversations and combat. That doesn't make any sense unless sex is an actual gameplay element, and not just a situation that arises in the plot.

 

[Mayday]

Jasede... to the casual observer, your typical post looks more like attention whoring rather than being funny :/
No offence meant of course.

 

[Azarkon]

Nobody ever made a point of "sex as gameplay" and by the time you joined the discussion, people have already been discussing how sex could or could not contribute to a game in indirect ways. Then you jumped with a big "NO to everything sex" and you give "sex as gameplay is bad" as a defence. I don't think anyone of us would want a "Sexy Beach 3D meets Mass Effect", so either keep your big "NO to everything sex" with a reasonable and related argument, or STFU.

Again, this isn't your blog. I can post in tangent to the discussion and pose a new line of thought, if I chose; that's how this whole discussion started, unless you still think we're bashing the Jerusalem Post.

And where did I say "NO to everything sex?" I made the observation that sex-as-activity can never be made sensible in a game, as a slight tangent to what Section8 was saying. I was not responding to the discussion over whether it's possible to depict sexual situations maturely.

 

[TheLostOne]

I missed your post right above Ausir's and assumed you were talking about the showing of sex in games (a la Jasede) instead of pointing out the infeasibility of an interactive sex game.

Even so, I'm not sure this is accurate as there already is interactive porn out there (albeit pretty crude). If it exists, it must do it for some people. Besides, sex in games is not the same as porn in games. The little mini-game at the start of God of War was amusing, but certainly not pornographic despite the interaction.

So what's your point exactly? If it's not a 100% true to life simulation it shouldn't exist?

Edit: and what deniszi said +1. Sure you can pull a tangent, but you phrased it as an argument and were pretty unclear about what you were driving at except that in some form sex should not be in video games.

 

[Azarkon]

I missed your post right above Ausir's and assumed you were talking about the showing of sex in games (a la Jasede) instead of pointing out the infeasibility of an interactive sex game.

Even so, I'm not sure this is accurate as there already is interactive porn out there (albeit pretty crude). If it exists, it must do it for some people. Besides, sex in games is not the same as porn in games. The little mini-game at the start of God of War was amusing, but certainly not pornographic despite the interaction.

So what's your point exactly? If it's not a 100% true to life simulation it shouldn't exist?

Edit: and what deniszi said +1. Sure you can pull a tangent, but you phrased it as an argument and were pretty unclear about what you were driving at except that in some form sex should not be in video games.

Here's my original argument:

"I don't see how sex could ever be sensible when it's on a monitor and you play with your mouse... At best, we might approach the spectatorial thematics of sex in films, but there's an element of physicality in sex that will simply never translate into games in a mature fashion.

In other words, the sheer absurdity of trying to engage in an intimate physical activity with computer programs by clicking your mouse (how can you ever take it seriously, if you sit back and think about what you're doing?) means sex in games is always just going to be used for porn and titillation. I can see games depict sexual situations in a meaningful way, but not "sex" where you, the player, is an active participant."

Generalization, elaboration, point. Can't get clearer than that. I even made sure to make the caveat for depicting sexual situations (which, as I said, might be doable in a mature fashion if it was done in a spectatorial manner ala films)... And you guys still missed it.

And no, I'm not denying the existence of interactive porn games. I'm saying that games of that sort will never depict sex as anything more than titillation and pornography. That's the whole point.

 

[TheLostOne]

In other words, the sheer absurdity of trying to engage in an intimate physical activity with computer programs by clicking your mouse (how can you ever take it seriously, if you sit back and think about what you're doing?) means sex in games is always just going to be used for porn and titillation.

??? WTF are you talking about? Interactive graphic sex would be porn. How could it be otherwise? Tasteful intimate sex scenes exist already, are not porn, and no one thinks they should be interactive.

So what third option are you saying will never be attained? The true experience of intercourse? Who the fuck is even asking for that? Even so I'd give the porn industry more credit. In time who knows.

But you're not talking about porn... And you're not talking about sex scenes in games... You're talking about a hypothetical sex interactive game that's not porn that can't exist because it can't give you the true sensation of sex.

You're posts are fucking M C Escher paintings.

 

[Azarkon]

Oh and, just fyi, saying that sex where the player is an active participant cannot be done maturely, meaningfully, or sensibly does not mean it should not exist. Porno games serve a very specific purpose and they accomplish that purpose just fine - it's when you try to justify porno games, or interactive sex in general, with some bullshit about deeper meaning that we run into trouble.

I'm saying that interactive sex, in games, are not meaningful - and can never be made meaningful so long as our hardware capabilities are limited to monitor + mouse. The point of sex, as an activity in real life, can go beyond pleasure, but that's because sex in real life has an element of physical intimacy that does not exist and cannot exist in games. Sexual interaction in games is therefore limited to the arousal factor of watching porn on screen. That's why in depicting sexual situations in the story, developers usually opt for something more tasteful - unless they want to be called out for their titillation ala Witcher's "collect them all" porn cards.

 

[RK47]

Yeah. He's talking about this probably.

 

[Azarkon]

??? WTF are you talking about? Interactive graphic sex would be porn. How could it be otherwise?

You tell me.

Tasteful intimate sex scenes exist already, are not porn, and no one thinks they should be interactive.

Right, and they're called "sexual situations" in my posts, which I specifically mentioned as a caveat. Do you always skim posts to pick out the one line that doesn't make sense out of context so that you can flame it?

I'm not talking about some "third option." I'm saying that if you go down the road of thinking that sex can be meaningful beyond physical pleasure (which is the basis of any "sex can be done in a tasteful manner in games"), you'll eventually come to the conclusion that for sex to be meaningful in games, it must not be part of the gameplay. That's an insight some game developers do not seem to have, as they insist on making sex a mini-game (ie collectible cards).

 

[TheLostOne]

Oh and, just fyi, saying that sex where the player is an active participant cannot be done maturely, meaningfully, or sensibly does not mean it should not exist. Porno games serve a very specific purpose and they accomplish that purpose just fine - it's when you try to justify porno games, or interactive sex in general, with some bullshit about deeper meaning that we run into trouble.

I'm saying that interactive sex, in games, are not meaningful - and can never be made meaningful so long as our hardware capabilities are limited to monitor + mouse. The point of sex, as an activity in real life, can go beyond pleasure, but that's because sex in real life has an element of physical intimacy that does not exist and cannot exist in games. Sexual interaction in games is therefore limited to the arousal factor of watching porn on screen. That's why in depicting sexual situations in the story, developers usually opt for something more tasteful - unless they want to be called out for their titillation ala Witcher's "collect them all" porn cards.

Ok, this post actually makes sense. Unfortunately, no one is suggesting that interactive sex should or would be done tastefully or for artistic purposes. Who said it should have some deeper meaning?

The problem in, you jump in feet first with your posts arguing against the feasibility of this when no one was suggesting otherwise. Plus what you're saying is pretty fucking obvious.

Sex sells, even when you're talking about books. That's why most of the shit you read is going to have some sort of love interest. It's all about titillation. Sometimes it will delve into more emotional shit, but so do games. Mass Effect tries to anyway.

Titillation and pornography are not the same thing. They don't have the same goal. Sure sexual arousal is present in both, but there is a line that you have to cross. It's the same reason why not all books with a romance or sex subplot get filed under romance novels. It's not central to the theme.

 

[Azarkon]

Plus what you're saying is pretty fucking obvious.

It seems obvious until you realize what people actually do to implement "mature" sex in games.

Most of the times, it's either a mini-game (the Witcher, GTA) or an explicit goal of NPC relationships (Mass Effect, NWN 2, etc.). It's seldom a situation that simply arises and conveys meaning. The setup is almost always retarded, precisely because developers think that "sex in games" = "sex as game" - ie sex as the end goal of some series of interactions on the part of the player. You can't blame reviews, then, for making fun of sex in games or for saying that it's all about attracting horny teenagers. Because that's what it is.

 

[TheLostOne]

First of all, none of those examples were interactive which was what your whole first post was all about: How you couldn't see clicking on the monitor as giving you the real sensation of physical intercourse.

It also means your 3 course meal example was completely invalid (as I originally pointed out). That whole argument has absolutely no bearing on what you're talking about now.

Now what you're attacking is the validity of mature sexual encounters in video games as anything other than pure titillation.

I disagree. I think it's a valid part of the story. If you're having a relationship, at some point it will be consummated (assuming the relationship goes anywhere). Why include the first part in the story and not the second? If you're talking about Geralt, his character is supposed to be a man-whore. I'm assuming he is in the books as well. It's part of the story.

As far as GTA goes, well that whole game is about satisfying base urges and the story is pretty irrelevant. I don't see anyone trying to claim that anything about GTA is mature. (unless you mean "rated M for Mature")

So please, tell me again what you were initially going on about.

 

[Mefi]

If most games can't manage to capture dialogue and utterly fail even with the most innocuous sexual flirtation, how the hell do you expect them to manage convincing sex scenes?

 

[Azarkon]

First of all, none of those examples were interactive which was what your whole first post was all about: How you couldn't see clicking on the monitor as giving you the real sensation of physical intercourse.

It also means your 3 course meal example was completely invalid (as I originally pointed out). That whole argument has absolutely no bearing on what you're talking about now.

It has every bearing. Sex can exist for its own sake if the physical intimacy aspect of sex can be conveyed in an effective manner. Then it would be a meaningful experience regardless of the context. But because the physical intimacy of sex can't be conveyed, much as the taste of food cannot, its range of "sensible" use is very narrow. Any time you use sex in a modern game, therefore, you must justify why you're using it, because the act itself is nothing more than titillation when translated into game terms. This virtually eliminates all scenarios involving interactive sex, but it goes beyond that. My point with regards to the three-course meal comparison is to explain why interactive sex cannot be made sensible; now, I extend that reasoning to cover a much broader range of uses.

I disagree. I think it's a valid part of the story. If you're having a relationship, at some point it will be consummated (assuming the relationship goes anywhere). Why include the first part in the story and not the second? If you're talking about Geralt, his character is supposed to be a man-whore. I'm assuming he is in the books as well. It's part of the story.

Collecting erotic cards as "rewards" for sex are not part of the story. Just try to argue that what the Witcher did is not titillation to anyone outside of its fanbase. You will fail.

Consummation of a relationship can also happen off screen. It is inherently pornographic to depict the process unless you actually had a point to make, which Mass Effect did not (yes, I realize that ME did not show tits and ass; that's not the point - the point is that it had a whole segment devoted to sex that didn't actually add anything to the story - does it really matter, for the purposes of the PC-NPC lesbian relationship, if Shepard wanted to "do it again" or if she was "great in bed"?)

So please, tell me again what you were initially going on about.

Sex cannot be done in a "mature" manner when it's done:

1. Interactively
2. As a mini-game
3. As a player goal
4. Explicitly, without any point to make

 

[Ausir]

I don't really see The Witcher "cards" as a minigame, even if it's seen us such by many players. No more than e.g. collecting all journal entries found in the game or anything like that. And all sex in the game is entirely optional. But the point is - the option is there, just like it often is in The Witcher books. The cards available in the journal simply symbolize Geralt's memory of that event.

If you're talking about Geralt, his character is supposed to be a man-whore. I'm assuming he is in the books as well. It's part of the story.

Not necessarily. As I said, the sex is entirely optional - you don't have to engage in any sexual intercourse in the game.