4 ms·

What consent? We're talking about fictional characters here. Is Dwarf Fortress an immoral game, because the authors are not a part of groups like dwarfs, elves

by ttt0 5y ago

What consent? We're talking about fictional characters here. Is Dwarf Fortress an immoral game, because the authors are not a part of groups like dwarfs, elves and goblins? And some in-game events may occur without the consent of those characters? edit: Got rate limited for some reason and can no longer respond, so I'm just going to edit this post: What does the "consent from the group" even mean? Do you have to make a poll, write to the CEO of Women™ or something? Seriously. Can I even include women if I'm making an amateur video game as a one-man effort (no pun intended), and I myself am not a woman? And for dragontamer, I guess you got your answer. I don't personally care about video games at all, but some people believe this is immoral and rape-like (no consent), so it's not surprising to me that someone calls it censorship and points out the parallels to back when people tried to censor violence in video games and whatnot. edit2: > You are free to make whatever game you want. The public is free to respond to your game however they want. You aren't going to get many complaints if you "even include women". If you objectify those women, you might get met with those complaints. If you were a women objectify women, you can at least claim that your are taking control of the objectification. That is viewed as a valid excuse by a lot of people much like how I mentioned people in a minority group are generally allowed to make jokes at that groups expense. So I should take it as roughly "the consent from the group means that the group isn't going to cancel you"? But if that's the case then why is it called "consent"? Isn't the entire point of consent to ask before you take action? It's like saying "I'm going to force you to have sex with me, if you don't go to the police then it means you consented to it". And from my understanding that's literally what rape culture is.

slg 5y ago
Consent from the group being objectified. It is the same reason that a person who belongs to a specific minority group is usually given free reign to tell jokes about that group while a person outside that minority isn't. It doesn't matter that the character in the joke isn't a real person.
- dragontamer 5y ago
  Its pretty clear that all the women whose breasts were measured for DOA's breast physics consented to these effecs. Consent certainly isn't the issue here. This is 100% a "Sexiness" issue. DOA is a "sexy" game, including breast physics and precise measurements of "bounciness" in skimpy costumes. The discussion the DOA community needs is about how such "sex appeal" is relatively niche, and is a "turnoff" to some gamers. DOA6, which was striving for esports / mainstream acceptance is finding itself between a rock and a hard place. DOA has a history of being "that sexy game", which people don't want to associate with in public. On the other hand, to make a change in the marketing is somewhat of a betrayal to the fans who have supported DOA over the past few decades. --------- The underlying issue gets ignored because of 'censorship' worries. A game that markets itself with this kind of sexiness front-and-center cannot really become mainstream. Its too perverted for people to want to associate with in public.
  - slg 5y ago
    Not all consent is created equal. Consent from people who are at a power disparity is not the same as consent from people leading the project. The women having their breasts measured aren't exactly in a position to impact meaningful change on this video game franchise. It reminds me how Harvey Weinstein used to demand that women shoot nude scenes in his movies. Many women agreed to shoot those scenes in an attempt to help their career. That might technically be consent, but the power imbalance in the situation makes it at least partially coerced consent. I'm not saying the people developing DOA are monsters on the order of Weinstein, but the women who have their breast measured are in a similar compromised position.
    - readflaggedcomm 5y ago
      That sounds less coerced than bought. If so, the promised reward involved doesn't change what "consent" means, it only changes where breach of contract might occur.
      - slg 5y ago
        A large economic or power disparity between the two may mean that there is not much difference between "coerced" and "bought". It is just like someone running a sweatshop might be able to hire people for a couple dollars per day. The workers would be consenting to work at that price, but they are being coerced into it due to their own financial situation.
slg 5y ago
>What does the "consent from the group" even mean? Do you have to make a poll, write to the CEO of Women™ or something? Seriously. Can I even include women if I'm making an amateur video game as a one-man effort (no pun intended), and I myself am not a woman? You are free to make whatever game you want. The public is free to respond to your game however they want. You aren't going to get many complaints if you "even include women". If you objectify those women, you might get met with those complaints. If you were a women objectify women, you can at least claim that your are taking control of the objectification. That is viewed as a valid excuse by a lot of people much like how I mentioned people in a minority group are generally allowed to make jokes at that groups expense.
- dragontamer 5y ago
  I realize you're a stranger to this discussion. But you're coming in from the completely wrong angle here. The "controversy" of note is the group who are threatening boycotts unless more sexy costumes are added to Dead or Alive 6. They do this because they think that Sony is censoring the Dead or Alive 6 series (and other games). I'm grossly simplifying things here but... that's the gist. This discussion of objectification and/or consent is... simply not a thing in the Dead or Alive discussions I'm aware of. I mean, that discussion is going on, but that's more "Hot Tub Meta" and "ASMR / Ear Licking" streams, and kinda different. Is a grown woman allowed to dress up in a skimpy two piece bathing suit and then stream herself playing video games on Twitch? Even when consent is 100% clear (no one is forcing this streamer to do this. They want to partake in the hot tub meta), a large group of people decry the "objectification". So to answer your general question: > I know next to nothing about the developers for the DOA franchise, but I am guessing there would be less controversy if the studio had a larger female presence. You're 100% wrong about this. There are plenty of examples inside of the video game community where adult women with 100% consent and 100% control over their creative abilities choose to be sexy, but this sexiness invites controversy. Its definitely not about consent. Its not about worker treatment. The discussion is clearly about how much sexiness should be in video games (and surrounding media: such as "streamers" on Twitch).
  - slg 5y ago

by ttt0 5y ago

slg 5y ago

Consent from the group being objectified. It is the same reason that a person who belongs to a specific minority group is usually given free reign to tell jokes about that group while a person outside that minority isn't. It doesn't matter that the character in the joke isn't a real person.

dragontamer 5y ago
Its pretty clear that all the women whose breasts were measured for DOA's breast physics consented to these effecs. Consent certainly isn't the issue here. This is 100% a "Sexiness" issue. DOA is a "sexy" game, including breast physics and precise measurements of "bounciness" in skimpy costumes. The discussion the DOA community needs is about how such "sex appeal" is relatively niche, and is a "turnoff" to some gamers. DOA6, which was striving for esports / mainstream acceptance is finding itself between a rock and a hard place. DOA has a history of being "that sexy game", which people don't want to associate with in public. On the other hand, to make a change in the marketing is somewhat of a betrayal to the fans who have supported DOA over the past few decades. --------- The underlying issue gets ignored because of 'censorship' worries. A game that markets itself with this kind of sexiness front-and-center cannot really become mainstream. Its too perverted for people to want to associate with in public.
- slg 5y ago
  Not all consent is created equal. Consent from people who are at a power disparity is not the same as consent from people leading the project. The women having their breasts measured aren't exactly in a position to impact meaningful change on this video game franchise. It reminds me how Harvey Weinstein used to demand that women shoot nude scenes in his movies. Many women agreed to shoot those scenes in an attempt to help their career. That might technically be consent, but the power imbalance in the situation makes it at least partially coerced consent. I'm not saying the people developing DOA are monsters on the order of Weinstein, but the women who have their breast measured are in a similar compromised position.
  - readflaggedcomm 5y ago
    That sounds less coerced than bought. If so, the promised reward involved doesn't change what "consent" means, it only changes where breach of contract might occur.
    - slg 5y ago
      A large economic or power disparity between the two may mean that there is not much difference between "coerced" and "bought". It is just like someone running a sweatshop might be able to hire people for a couple dollars per day. The workers would be consenting to work at that price, but they are being coerced into it due to their own financial situation.

slg 5y ago

>What does the "consent from the group" even mean? Do you have to make a poll, write to the CEO of Women™ or something? Seriously. Can I even include women if I'm making an amateur video game as a one-man effort (no pun intended), and I myself am not a woman? You are free to make whatever game you want. The public is free to respond to your game however they want. You aren't going to get many complaints if you "even include women". If you objectify those women, you might get met with those complaints. If you were a women objectify women, you can at least claim that your are taking control of the objectification. That is viewed as a valid excuse by a lot of people much like how I mentioned people in a minority group are generally allowed to make jokes at that groups expense.

dragontamer 5y ago
I realize you're a stranger to this discussion. But you're coming in from the completely wrong angle here. The "controversy" of note is the group who are threatening boycotts unless more sexy costumes are added to Dead or Alive 6. They do this because they think that Sony is censoring the Dead or Alive 6 series (and other games). I'm grossly simplifying things here but... that's the gist. This discussion of objectification and/or consent is... simply not a thing in the Dead or Alive discussions I'm aware of. I mean, that discussion is going on, but that's more "Hot Tub Meta" and "ASMR / Ear Licking" streams, and kinda different. Is a grown woman allowed to dress up in a skimpy two piece bathing suit and then stream herself playing video games on Twitch? Even when consent is 100% clear (no one is forcing this streamer to do this. They want to partake in the hot tub meta), a large group of people decry the "objectification". So to answer your general question: > I know next to nothing about the developers for the DOA franchise, but I am guessing there would be less controversy if the studio had a larger female presence. You're 100% wrong about this. There are plenty of examples inside of the video game community where adult women with 100% consent and 100% control over their creative abilities choose to be sexy, but this sexiness invites controversy. Its definitely not about consent. Its not about worker treatment. The discussion is clearly about how much sexiness should be in video games (and surrounding media: such as "streamers" on Twitch).
- slg 5y ago