New Games Suck... Or Is It Just Me?

So a Reddit thread that links to WSJ?

Are you looking for some gotcha comment? I literally just said "a variety of places".

Stop derailing, were talking about shitty modern day games.

You didn't read my last post isn't it?

Those models's jobs are MODELS.

Kay is a scoundrel living in a dangerous world. She is NOT a model.

Reduce feminity for a scoundrel character is realism. If scoundrel looks like a rl super model it would break immersion.

So yes, Kay's face should look more ugly than her face model because Kay and that model are 2 different person.

Also what made Kay "ugly" (I don't even think she is ugly, but whatever) is just a broken nose. Is that even a big deal?

I don't think someone being ugly is required for immersion in this case. Kay canonically has high charisma and has leveraged that many ways, having naturally attractive genetics fits this. She doesn't need to be butt-ugly for immersion, she just can't be wearing makeup and perfectly curated outfit.

I honestly don't think she is THAT ugly, either. Just kinda manly, like a Scoundrel should be, that's it.

If Kay is ugly then so is Peter and Miles. But we all know female beauty standard in video games are higher than male.

If I am going to apply same level of beauty standard as Nynja to male characters then only characters with BTS face is acceptable anymore.

Why should a scoundrel be manly? Attractive looks are very useful for pickpockets, it's common to stereotype a handsome man or a woman with good genetics as a pickpocket. Ugly people are naturally less trusted, it undermines her character more than it helps IMO. I think you are more dedicated to the argument than objective assessment here.

A scoundrel in a shitty environment will be reflected in cleanliness, available clothing, lack of makeup(so skin shouldn't be *perfect*). Requiring they also be ugly just isn't reasonable IMO.

No gotcha, but maybe think critically about your own sources as well.

Did they ever say if Kay Vess was modeled after her actress or just used for mocap/voice?

If I am going to enter a dangerous place to negotiate with gangsters and criminals, the first thing Id do is cut my hair short and wear man's cloth. So I wouldn't get unwanted attention from those people, who may just want to *** someone.

It's just the most logical decision, naturally.

You people watched way too many femme fatale movies if you thought the reverse applies to rl lol.



Not to me. If someone dress up like a femme fatale and approach me, I would wonder what are they planning. My mental alarm would sound.

Nevermind the fact that Kay doesn't even enter the territory of being really ugly, lol.

You're conflating presentation(clothes, makeup, cleanliness) with attractiveness(facial symmetry, skin quality, body proportion, etc). Men inherently know if someone is attractive unless the level of presentation is over the top. Nobody has suggested she be dressed provocatively(or even present differently), just that she shouldn't be hideous.

And what matters to you is irrelevant. I can link a half dozen studies showing that in the absence of preexisting relationship, ugly people are seen to be less trustworthy, would you like me to?

1-Why would a female scoundrel need to look "manly"?

2-Need to borrow an older post, hang on

It took you a whole 2 hours and 30 minutes to go from from "western devs making women look manly is a conspiracy theory" to "well she does look kinda manly"

Umm what's the difference between those claims?

I do think she is manly right from the beginning, I have never deny it. I only said "manly design=woke" is conspiracy theory.

Kay's look is how I always imagine a scoundrel character in a story. So I feel the design choice is made for realism reason, not woke reason. Hence I think accusing artists for designing character manly= woke is conspiracy theory.


Why can't people design a manly female character because that character is manly in the story?

And why can't female Scoundrel look manly?

Also manly =/= ugly. You people seem to think lacking feminine characteristic = woke, it can't be story reasons AT ALL.

That's the part that I don't agree with.

Okay, sure. let's say if that's true.

Kay still isn't "ugly" though. So the "not trust worthy" argument wouldn't work here.

/yawm

Ugly is a subjective term, relating to a scale of human attractiveness. She is certainly not on the high end of that scale, and obviously a good many people do consider her "ugly" or this conversation wouldn't be happening.

I do not think her character's story or setting require her to be ugly. I think the ideology of the designer or those above the designer played a part in her end appearance. These are opinions, you do not have to agree with them. But, you've made no headway in convincing me to abandon them, either. I think I'll leave it at that.

Nynja, how about let's just all be perfectly honest with current situation.

You think Kay is not hot, so you don't like the design.

I like "kinda manly" female characters, if they are the figher type. Because fighting and conflict is fundamentally a masculine activity. So I think a masculine female makes more sense than feminine one.

You like your stuff and I like mine, which is fine and I respect that.

But you are trying to destroy what I like by asking artists to never make what I like again, and accuse it for being "woke". That's not okay to me.

Go buy Stellar blade if you like k-pop girls, I won't stop you.

Why do you feel the need to fight what I like?

I think this comment in particular is a good opportunity for introspection.

Ultimately, people like Nynja and myself feel that extremely wealthy and powerful groups like Blackrock are destroying what we like by imposing these same designs across such a wide variety of media.

You are upset that some streamers with an audience are causing game studios to consider whether changes in this direction are a good idea. You can argue that streamers have power, but it's nothing next to the leverage a company like Blackrock has over studios.

You do not have to believe Blackrock is responsible. You can believe it is solely design direction. But, it doesn't change that we are perceiving a fight against what we like. We are on the opposite side of the same issue, it is a conflict between woke ideology(regardless of source) and anti-woke ideology, and you're too invested in your own side of that conflict to consider the opposite side.

They aren't "destroying" what you like, they are making what they like with their money. Blackrocks aren't destroying k-pop girl's game like Stellar Blade.

Plenty of games with k-pop girls are still being made. They aren't going away. Blackrocks etc aren't destroying them, they are just making what they like and add more different choices to the market. And that's even if what you said about Blackrock is true.

It goes beyond "not hot". A woman can be ugly but still look like a woman. They could make Kay look like a scoundrel by adding scars, bruising, dirt, etc. Its the addition of male features to the female face that is problematic.

People keep confusing ugly with uncanny valley.

Vote with your wallet.

I see this conflict being more of an art design preference than politics, to be honest.

I am not a westerner, I give zero ***about DEI. Nor I feel it is that important. However, I do think creativity freedom is important.

If another mega corp like black rock decided that every game must have K-pop girls, like actual Korean entertainment industry, I wouldn't go out and fight them endlessly. I would just accept k-pop has a market, move on and buy/make what I like. That's our difference.

It is pretty tiring to see you posting so much on this topic. Your stance is that people are freely making these creative decisions, I would argue that Nynja and Throny are arguing that the decision is being forced.

You both disagree on that specific point, I assume if you could be convinced that the decisions were not made by the creatives behind the games that you too would feel that it was bad.

So why not just move on from the topic, no one is going to be changing anyone's mind here.

Why make new games when you can reboot old ones like they do for movies?

Burgertime remake wru?

No, because a game IP as a property belongs to investors. So they still have freedom to make what they want as well.

If those influencers go fund their own anti-woke k-pop game instead of attacking people, it would have been fine to me. I would support them, even. More variety in the market is always better than less.

I only respond if people make a questionable point, and feel like there is a point to respond.

I feel your argument is deeply hypocritical. You are alright with investors, who have a financial stake in the game, using their power to influence the eventual product. But, streamers, who have an emotional stake in the game, should not be using their power to influence the eventual product?

You are dedicated to your ideology and stanning one side, with what seems to be a complete inability to step back and evaluate in an unbiased manner.

If there wasn't a meaningful audience that felt displeased with this trend, the streamers would not gain any traction. There are certainly streamers arguing in the other direction as well, so it's not like streamers only serve to advance right wing ideology.

I think the problem is that neither investors or streamers ultimately care about the end product. Both are doing whatever makes them more money, individual or multi-billion dollar investment firm.

It's not really hypocritical if you recognize my stance is always pro-industry growth and pro-artistic freedom, which is consistent.

That's assume your Blackrock theory is true, even if that's true they are still putting money in the market, resulting more jobs being created and wider variety of products being made.

Even if Blackrock decided to make an ideology that I don't agree with, the act of "making a game" is still a positive in the society. It creates more voices on different sides and more jobs for game dev. That's positive regardless of their ideology.

On the other hand, influencers are creating more variety of voice, sure. But they aren't creating more jobs because they don't generate projects. They want to cancel projects. So the value of political war via influencer are less productive than investors in my eyes.

If you don't believe what I said, check RT for my Wukong reaction. Despite I am not a fan of Chinese propaganda I was still excited for their success, because it is still significant industry growth in a segment that I like. I put industry growth on a higher priority, this isn't going to change soon.




I think I've made it VERY clear, that I don't support left wing influencers doing the same thing as right wing.

When left wing influencers attacked resident evil 5 I didn't agree with them. Want me to post 5 pages of rant against those sjw to balance things?

So my stance is pretty fair on both sides, imo.

The game before the "input":


The game after the "input":