Game News Video Games And Male Gaze

[Sukeban Cho]

It come down to if you don't like it, don't play it. If you think it's a bad influence, don't let your kids play it. It's as simple as that. People are going to do what they want, and if it's in their nature to peek at hinies they will and nothing in the world is going to stop them.

I envy people with such a power for turning walls of text into straight to the point one liners.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

It would probably be much better than the japanese film.

shia labeouf as ichi and jim carrey as kakihara

 

[Radisshu]

Yeaaaaaaaaaaah. Imagine that ending scene. I mean, the one in the manga.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Jim Carrey in full rope reveal will surely the crowd pleaser for the season

I have to ask though, is your avatar a personal creation or is there an internet resource that does this to baby photographs?

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

I.E: Dante being shirtless more often than not is completely unnecesary, but man, putting a shirt on him is a waste.

It is a waste...either you have an annoying coat that makes it harder to see if you can dodge attacks or you miss out on weapon-specific devil triggers. Shirtless Dante is the most credited costume; no coat plus differentiated devil triggers.

 

[Stinger]

The next trailer had better feature 47 in a G string getting beaten up by a professional women in a business suit. It's the only way to make up for this.

(Or it could just feature 47 calmly observing a situation and planning an elaborate trap to kill the target without anyone knowing he was there or even considering the possibility of murder...you know the actual core focus of the fucking gameplay of the Hitman games)

 

[Azrael the cat]

But then you get metro-sexual Orlando Bloom types if you go that route. Today's leading man; sensitive and non-threatening. No wonder Kwa's going down the shitter.

(a) How many successful films has Bloom been the male lead, without the film-makers having to through in some other ultra-manly-man to balance him off? Remember, whilst everyone wanted to shag him after LotR/PotC, in LotR he was hardly the male lead (nor even the main male sex symbol - Aragorn gets the girls, and he's played pretty much manly-man). PotC needs no explanation (thought the first was ok, others were shit - but still, they were a market indication of no-one really giving a shit about films with Bloom in it).

(b) Bloom was a sex symbol for a while because - like guys - a lot of women like them young, thin and pretty. But once you're above the age of, say, 25, that kind of sex appeal doesn't hold out in either gender - look at the sex symbols in their 30s/40s and they aren't Bloom-types (I remember when di Caprio was a sex symbol for the same reason - nearly derailed his career even though pre-Romeo+Juliet/Titanic he had a pretty good critical run as a teen actor (the Basketball diaries, What's eating Gilbert Grape) - the guy basically had to go out of his way to try to macho up his pretty face, do period piece after period piece, gangster films etc until he was taken seriously again.

(c) I've recommended this a few times (as a fun romp, not an artistic great or anything), but if you don't mind Stephen Moffat's writing, and you're pissed off with youthful pretty-boy (or youthful pretty-girl, for that matter), watch the mini-series Jekyll (it's a nod to Jekyll and Hyde, but set in modern times and more of a sci-fi/comic-book feel to it). It came out around that Skins was topping the British tv, and Moffat basically wrote a 6-hour 'fuck you' to British TV's obsession with youth: middle-aged Jekyll/Hyde going around (as Hyde) preying on young pretty leading-man types, while Jekyll is trying to get together with his also-middle-aged-hot-alpha-female wife (and mother of his kids) who pretty much walks all over the young pretty leading-girl-type Michelle Ryan (playing Jekyll's psychiatrist - is basically reduced to a schoolgirl crush on him, that he completely ignores because he's after his wife) - basically 6 hours of pure midlife-crisis-fantasy material. I can't imagine how many bad backs it caused after middle-aged guys watched it and were fooled into thinking that they/we weren't sad old balding gits.

 

[Stinger]

Ban Drocon

I felt significantly stupider after reading that shit.

 

[Sukeban Cho]

I felt significantly stupider after reading that shit.

I'm shocked that's possible.

By your own comment such is the magnitude of your fail it even breaks the limits of the natural world.

 

[RK47]

tldr. after reading too many mangas and hentais i am conditioned to expect some kind of T&A for every female character, no matter how conservative they look.

 

[Oriebam]

oh no, you didn't

now a certain someone is going to chimp the fuck out and shit everything up ITT, this simply is probably not going to end well

there is a subtle hint in this post mr.someone, you should take it

whew, now there won't be any guilt on my end if the shitstorm kicks off

 

[RK47]

*rubs moonstone*

 

[Sukeban Cho]

Typical woman/troll logic, shitpoo.

He's already pretty stupid (and so are you). But then of course stupid people never feel stupid but by any sane measure I'm exceptionally bright, if you feel dumb after reading my teaching it's because you actually are dumb.

That's the best trolling you can do?

I have had love letters thougher than you.

It is a waste...either you have an annoying coat that makes it harder to see if you can dodge attacks or you miss out on weapon-specific devil triggers. Shirtless Dante is the most credited costume; no coat plus differentiated devil triggers.

That's exactly what I was talking about!

Really...

 

[Shiki]

Masturbation and sex in media is almost as bad. Why, it means men can do away with them completely! Notice how crazy feminnutzies are about EXPLOITATION OMG. This is the core reason why. Power. That's the only real power women have compared to men. Notice how masturbation for women is so good, it's emPOWERING. For men, it's disgusting, and male fantasizing is a kind of rape or else made to look as pathetic as possible. Real men should work all day and night for their women (or better yet for society, let them be little drones without families supporting all the single mothers who had babies by guys they had one night stands with or which they adopted into their same sex couple).

So it's all about power, and NOTHING to do with right and wrong. Because obviously what some guy does in the privacy of his home is completely his own business, by any measure of two right and wrong.

Your rant reminds me of an old gem from a feminist blog (now a dead link but you can find bits quoted on the web) :

DNA tests are an anti-feminist appliance of science, a change in the balance of power between the sexes that we’ve hardly come to terms with. And that holds true even though many women have the economic potential to provide for their children themselves…Uncertainty allows mothers to select for their children the father who would be best for them. The point is that paternity was ambiguous and it was effectively up to the mother to name her child’s father, or not… Many men have, of course, ended up raising children who were not genetically their own, but really, does it matter…in making paternity conditional on a test rather than the say-so of the mother, it has removed from women a powerful instrument of choice.

Yup, feminism is all about the domination women want to have over men, not really an equality movement.
They also love to hate the "T" in LGBT.

 

[hiver]

What?...

Oh its oribeam ... well, i hope the rest of you learned he is not any kind of spokeperson for me, but rather, simply... a stupid dumbass who just dont understand some simple basics.
If you didnt, well... you will now!

First of, Drocon isnt really saying anything wrong. At least in the basic assumptions. How he interpolates those further is, well... less than perfect.
But i have no interest to go into any of it, especially because there are some special individuals that prove those "conclusions" right,... in their own ways.
Which kinda proves him sort of right in a limited manner, too. Relating to some individual issues rather then global, general rules and laws of THE TRUTH.

Secondly, he or anyone else is free to disagree with anyone else.
I fucking dont see what does that have to do with me, except in a dumb brain farts of some internet retard. Like oribeam.


Anyway,
Females are not any kind of angles. Men objectify women, and women sure as hell objectify men.
You just have to go out on any given saturday to feel it on your own skin.
Which all of you already did.

Majority of men are stupid assholes - majority of women are stupid assholes.
Verily... majority of humankind are stupid assholes.

The thing is that, despite that kind of non-thinking and resulting behavior fueled by it, is somewhat common, it does not mean it is the right thing to do, the smartest philosophy to adhere to or something that should be accepted as optimal thinking and behavior.
Things are not relative, relativistic excuses are just excuse, laziness, conformism, going with the flow or taking the easier path, - which brings you back to laziness and excuses, etc. - nothing else.

Of course there is always the old "i dont give a fuck!" answer too, which is only applicable until the issue starts happening and affecting you personally.



Now, before i spin-blow your minds completely - lets get back to the crux of the thing.
This is not a male problem, and it is not a female problem.

It is a human problem.
Both sexes succumb to it in their own, slightly different and slightly similar ways that differentiate and vary across individual people and their individual cultural, educational, personal and other differences.
The important fact is - that there are individuals who do not succumb to this shit.


It is also not a problem of showing something sexy or not. It is a problem of when and how you show it.
As in most things - the implementation is the problem.

This is usually too complicated for the dumb masses who just want some entertainment to think about so the discussion usually plummets into simplified accusations of someone objecting to bad implementation being a prude or... hah... asexual. And similar nonsensical bullshit.
That of course is just an excuse those implementing it so badly, because they are incapable of anything better, often use in their defense.
Nothing more than a strawman argument.

Bioware used it, HBO uses it extensively to cover their ineptitude and incompetence in actually adapting Songs of Ice and Fire, the stupid assholes that are making the newest Lara Croft game where she is continually beaten, hurt, and "broken down" with addition of some kind of "attempted rape mini game" are using it... and so on and so on...


As i said in my previous post, its just a simplest, crudest, most basic emotional engagement.
Sex riles people up, violence riles people up.

Well then, hey... lets just mix those two EH?
maximum emotional engagement FTW!!!!!!!!

That covers every media you ever saw mixing the two together, from Tarantino (though he actually has a talent, knowledge and expertize to create something without this crutch) to whatever dumb slasher horror flick to games using it to whatever else is there.

-edited spelling whatchamacallit..-

 

[RK47]

Well then, hey... lets just mix those two EH?

BDSM

 

[SCO]

Everytime someone makes a unfounded generalization god kills a smart person

 

[hiver]

Well then, hey... lets just mix those two EH?

BDSM

Not exactly... although some forms of bdsm contain actual violence and acts of actually hurting one of the participants, the bdsm in general doesnt rely on mixing violence and sex.
Its more about willfully and consensually allowing oneself to be tied or bound and dominated sexually for express purpose of experiencing pleasure one is not able to resist.
i.e. - giving oneself to pleasure consensually.

You meant sadomasochism, im sure.
Do read a bit... it will elucidate you.

Everytime someone makes a unfounded generalization god kills a smart person

Thats a gross unfounded generalization.

 

[SCO]

It's not a generalization, it's a fact (god is killing* smart people all the time )


*hurrr a train is speeding towards a tied person on a track...

 

[grotsnik]

Yes, RK47, any idiot knows that BDSM doesn't include or incorporate the notion of Sado-Masochism. You're talking about SM, not BDSM, you obvious ninny. If you knew anything about BDSM, you'd understand that it's actually about Bondage and Discipline, or Dominance and Submission; SM is something tangential and unrelated and is not a core part of the umbrella term BDSM or anything like that. Try reading a book or something, seriously. Like, Jesus. God.

 

[lefthandblack]

You meant sadomasochism, im sure.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the SM in BDSM stand for sadomasochism?

As to the topic:
It's the same reason that many people are fascinated with vampires. Sex and death are strongly related in the human subconscious and generate similar strong emotional responses.

orgasm = the little death

Plus, when you throw in the taboo of blasphemy you have a winning combination for getting people's attention and getting your game in the news.

There is no such thing as bad publicity.

 

[Oriebam]

BDSM is serious business.

 

[Sukeban Cho]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the SM in BDSM stand for sadomasochism?

Indeed, and it is only tangential and secondary for the PR drones and the weaklings who want to feel countercultural but are too much of a coward to go the entire way.

The amusing part is the way it is implied his knowledge on the topic comes from a book.

I'll be back when I finish laughing my ass off.



Edit: But I love him all the same.

Huggies for Grotsnik!

 

[Black]

Women are too dumb to understand video games anyway

 

[Gragt]

(a) How many successful films has Bloom been the male lead, without the film-makers having to through in some other ultra-manly-man to balance him off? Remember, whilst everyone wanted to shag him after LotR/PotC, in LotR he was hardly the male lead (nor even the main male sex symbol - Aragorn gets the girls, and he's played pretty much manly-man). PotC needs no explanation (thought the first was ok, others were shit - but still, they were a market indication of no-one really giving a shit about films with Bloom in it).

(b) Bloom was a sex symbol for a while because - like guys - a lot of women like them young, thin and pretty. But once you're above the age of, say, 25, that kind of sex appeal doesn't hold out in either gender - look at the sex symbols in their 30s/40s and they aren't Bloom-types (I remember when di Caprio was a sex symbol for the same reason - nearly derailed his career even though pre-Romeo+Juliet/Titanic he had a pretty good critical run as a teen actor (the Basketball diaries, What's eating Gilbert Grape) - the guy basically had to go out of his way to try to macho up his pretty face, do period piece after period piece, gangster films etc until he was taken seriously again.

Fun fact: I had to sit here for 10 seconds trying to remember who the hell that Bloom guy was and then remembered. Talk about being disposable! As for DiCaprio, I can understand him trying to break his image of pretty boy, but the fact is that his baby face still gets in the way. Each of his attempts to play a tough character have been laughable as it is impossible to take him seriously for he simply doesn't have the shoulders for that kind of thing. Weirdly enough, he's not the only one to think he can act tough, as evidenced by Scorcese's infatuation for him and the critical response. If anything I found him more at ease in roles where he plays some naive and/or charming character, like Catch Me If You Can where he really shines even if the movie itself is at best decent entertainment. It also kinda helped him fit in J. Edgar, Eastwood's latest rubbish movie, but then again the movie took the oh-so-daring decision to show Hoover as a delicate and fragile repressed homosexual who didn't dare to come out of the closet. Hardly a performance for the ages, or movie for that matter — and as far as Hoover goes, his brief portrayal by Bob Hoskin in Stone's Nixon is far more memorable. Compare DiCaprio to someone like Charlton Heston and it's clear they aren't in the same league: Heston may not have been a great actor but he was certainly one of the most charismatic as it is impossible to not look at him whenever he's on screen. Heston could naturally portray macho characters, and not the dumb kind, but DiCaprio has to force himself and do funny faces to appear vaguely tough. I kinda wonder if his renewed popularity will last, but then again Hollywood likes that kind of stuff.

(c) I've recommended this a few times (as a fun romp, not an artistic great or anything), but if you don't mind Stephen Moffat's writing, and you're pissed off with youthful pretty-boy (or youthful pretty-girl, for that matter), watch the mini-series Jekyll (it's a nod to Jekyll and Hyde, but set in modern times and more of a sci-fi/comic-book feel to it). It came out around that Skins was topping the British tv, and Moffat basically wrote a 6-hour 'fuck you' to British TV's obsession with youth: middle-aged Jekyll/Hyde going around (as Hyde) preying on young pretty leading-man types, while Jekyll is trying to get together with his also-middle-aged-hot-alpha-female wife (and mother of his kids) who pretty much walks all over the young pretty leading-girl-type Michelle Ryan (playing Jekyll's psychiatrist - is basically reduced to a schoolgirl crush on him, that he completely ignores because he's after his wife) - basically 6 hours of pure midlife-crisis-fantasy material. I can't imagine how many bad backs it caused after middle-aged guys watched it and were fooled into thinking that they/we weren't sad old balding gits.

I enjoy Moffat's work on the new Doctor Who so that sounds fun. On the subject, I found David Tennant and Matt Smith to be more charismatic and natural than either Bloom or DiCaprio despite being around the same age.