02-19-2012, 09:46 AM
Anzekay Wrote:The thing that usually bugs me about sexualization in video games (or most media forms really) is when all that is important or recognizable about the character is their overtly sexual rendering. If a character is so shallow that the only thing they represent is female/male sexuality then I honestly find it to be a pathetic and boring character to have anything to do with. It just doesn't strike me as interesting.
100% agree. Sexuality should be part of a character, not their sole defining characteristic (assuming, of course, the character is designed to have any actual substance and not just be thrown away).
What Jarka said about lazy design is absolutely correct. As people have said: sex sells. Any easy design is to throw a big-titted blonde into a chainmail bikini, give her a sword, and call it a day. Maybe make her a redhead if you're feeling particularly inspired.
I guess that's really what bothers me about these past couple pages of threads. When people say stuff like "they're trying to make money, of course they'll make nonstop sexiness" they're telling the designers and artists that lazy design is ok and will be overlooked. (That sounds more pointed than it's intended to be. I just want to point out how one thought process leads to another, even subconsciously.)
Of course this extends to any medium where artistic direction plays a big role, but video games are still in their formative years as one of those mediums and they're being set up to get some very easy passes. They shouldn't.
![[Image: Kaden2.jpg]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v403/Nezumi16/Sigs/Kaden2.jpg)
"It's on my brain, driving me insane. It's on my mind, all of
the time, and if it left... I would be fine."

