Have we talked about Riot Games yet? We're not *nearly* there yet when it comes to the games industry treating women as human beings.What does this statement even mean?
Please, point me to the 5 female champions that oh so offend your sensibilities.
So far your entire line of thinking basically seems to boil down to "female character is attractive and/or shows a bit of skin = this is bad"
And I just don't follow it.
Actually you know, I think I can make a decent argument here, to hopefully clarify the mess that I've made.
Let's do take a look at the league of legends champions! I haven't actually done that. Never even played the game!
... Okay I can't link them all! Let me take some random samplesLuxSivirKarmaSoraka
... Lemme stop before I get to Z.
No wait let me look at Z just for th... Right.
Okay yeah I can see why I personally have a problem with how these character designs are playing out. I didn't cherry pick these characters, I just went down the list until I got bored.
They're all... kinda the same? Same body shapes - the same stereotypical "sexy" body shape to boot. They all seem to like those rather impractical yet oh-so-sexy poses too, and they all seem to enjoy wearing the same sexy clothes too! If I didn't know any better, I'd say these were designed by the same dude catering to one particular fetish. I do know a bit better: It's probably three dudes doing that.
My problem here is not "All things that are sexy or show skin are bad"! It's that they're all the same in a rather stereotypical sexy way, in a way that, say, Overwatch's roster isn't. They aren't designed to be cool, strong, cute, wilful, aloof, or the team mom. They are all designed to be conventionally sexy as their first consideration.
It's why Overwatch's character designs get mentioned so much, even if they aren't actually all that revolutionary: It's a mainstream game stepping away from character design that is entirely by men for men*. And I personally think that the games industry is better of by not being by men for men.
* By which I mean cis, straight men who favour a certain kind of conventional attractiveness that is popular in the west but that's too long for a short quippy political statement.
Btw, the game industry doesn't need to treat women like human beings.
I just would really prefer it if they did.
Or men. Because they're not human beings, they're bundles of pixels. Exceptions would be if those bundles of pixels are representing real people. Otherwise, they can be whatever you want them to be.
When a game comes into my possession, it's mine. That whole game World and everything in it. It exists solely for my amusement. That's the difference between video games and everything else. It doesn't matter what you do, there is no crime, there is no victim, there is no harm.
I disagree. Games are art. Art is both a product of a culture and it in turn goes on to influence all sorts of cultures. Why shouldn't we give games the same treatment we do books or films?