Dead Or Alive Xtreme Venus Vacation

[robdood]

So er.. yeah.  Am sure @Kirby already has a preorder placed. 

 

You only need to watch the first 20 seconds of this trailer to get the gist / dry heave / give up on humanity. 

 

 

Seriously, what the fuck. 

[Smitty]

2 hours ago, robdood said:

@Kirby

give up on humanity.  

 

 

I think we'll make it, somehow.

 

Also copying Kirby in is childish.

[Mr Tiddles]

It's their "compromise", clean up DOA, make this extra-pervy.

[partious]

Why does the logic that people use in their defensive, sarcastic responses to media articles about gaming violence/gta games and (just one of many potential examples) the lighthearted running down/attacking of pedestrians etc etc in open world games go out the window when the game involves perving and not killing.

 

"Hoho, just a game guys. Just as I don't feel the need to go run people over in real life after playing gta or shoot people in the face after doing that in 90 percent of popular modern games, I'm not going to feel the need to perv on real women just because I perved on the not real women in this game."

[Smitty]

It's all very yawn, this constant public posturing. It's Dead or Alive: Babe Sim, and it isn't going to end the world.

 

Sexual content is just as valid as any other content. Hetrosexual men are 50% of the population. It's getting extremely tiresome to see people pretending that all expressions of heterosexual male sexuality is this disgusting thing that must be hidden away.

 

People can buy and view porn. They can buy and view this. In a few years you'll see this as laughably quaint when people are all watching POV porn on their VR headsets, having sex in VR with sims, fucking sex bots and all the rest.

 

Most of us here enjoy various films and games where people are brutally murdered or what have you.That's ok, but sex isn't? Most of the men here, including the OP, are statistically likely to watch porn. Whatever.

[partious]

I guess it's easier to attach some sort of morally grey cutscenes to an ultraviolent kill em up that makes people believe they are playing something smart and progressive while playing a game that basically exists to tickle some violent instincts for 10-15 hours.

Getting a thrill from simulated killing is ok once you're killing the right people.

That said, even if you are randomly attacking or running over pedestrians in GTA 5 we all seem capable of realising that it's "just a game".

 

There's another topic on the first page where people are disgusted to see a woman with large breasts in a game 

 

It's the contrast to the reaction when fox news or whatever posture against violence in videogames that I find amusing.

[fat flatulent git]

Which other topic?

[partious]

Code Vein.

[Alex W.]

4 hours ago, Smitty said:

Most of us here enjoy various films and games where people are brutally murdered or what have you.That's ok, but sex isn't?

 

Games with violence in them are fine. Games with sex appeal in them are fine (they aren't really any, but that's besides the point). Those properties exist in something that has other merits. When you make an experience that's just wall-to-wall indulgence then you're existing in a creative space that's both unimpressive in terms of expression and insulting to the audience's ability to do anything but maximise one big primary colour response to one big primary colour stimulus. DoA had more credibility when it was a sexualised fighting game than when it became a faux-serious fighting game with an optional bonus disk for leering at the characters. That was at least recognisably a creative vision of one madman. This is corporate pandering.

 

This sort of indulgence always deserves a certain amount of eye-rolling or genuine alarm, like when people do edits of nothing but "the good bits" of movies or nothing but gore. To seek it out suggests a slightly worrying inability to have a deep connection with violence or sex or whatever, but to create it, and to have it as part of a multi-million dollar commercial franchise, suggests a willingness to exploit those prurient instincts that's deeply cynical.

[CovisGod]

Can you please stop shitting this thread up, GOTY contender right here. Pre-ordered. 

[Alex W.]

If your immediate reaction to the TLoU 2 trailer was to get horny I have some serious worries about you.

 

DoAX is the loot crate of sex in games. A bald, cynical cash grab. What’s sad is that, as with loot crates, people will line up to defend the practice with the justification that you know what you’re getting in to. You know what you’re getting in to with the Transformers franchise, that doesn’t make them any less worthy of criticism.

[squirtle]

Have they completely removed the volleyball out of these, then? Ah, well... Still... Day one!

[robdood]

4 hours ago, Smitty said:

It's all very yawn, this constant public posturing. It's Dead or Alive: Babe Sim, and it isn't going to end the world.

 

Sexual content is just as valid as any other content. Hetrosexual men are 50% of the population. It's getting extremely tiresome to see people pretending that all expressions of heterosexual male sexuality is this disgusting thing that must be hidden away.

 

People can buy and view porn. They can buy and view this. In a few years you'll see this as laughably quaint when people are all watching POV porn on their VR headsets, having sex in VR with sims, fucking sex bots and all the rest.

 

Most of us here enjoy various films and games where people are brutally murdered or what have you.That's ok, but sex isn't? Most of the men here, including the OP, are statistically likely to watch porn. Whatever.

Ugh dude, I'm not posturing. 

 

I don't see this as an expression of male sexuality. Well I suppose it is, but it's not one I agree with. I don't think it's 'disgusting', I just think it perpetuates sexism against women, its just another part of culture that cements the idea that it's OK to harass women, and that women exist purely for men's pleasure. 

 

So actually, I guess I do think it's disgusting. I don't want it hidden away, but I do want to be able to call out something I think is not good.  Not to white Knight, or posture, but because I genuinely believe things like this, in combination with other things that share a similar motive (conscious or not) are harmful to society. 

 

Just like Code Vein's dress up options, where the women's outfits are all about titillation, whereas the men's are not. 

 

Its just gross and crass and juvenile. 

[Uncle Nasty]

Is this in VR?

[Retroid]

The problem is when titilation gets into games with serious narratives or shows up unwarrented in what would otherwise be an all-inclusive game (say Peach wearing a micro-bikini). This knows what it is, who it's domographic is and unlike a lot of porn; atleast it's not subjecting real women to abuse (physical or mental).

 

From the looks of it, it's a softcore sexual fantasy pretty much devoid of realworld ties and I can't see the harm.

[Don Wiskerando]

10 hours ago, Smitty said:

 

 

Also copying Kirby in is childish.

It's polite not to talk behind someones back, so either a quote or mention is sometimes the right thing to do.

[rafaqat]

On 22/06/2018 at 11:39, Don Wiskerando said:

It's polite not to talk behind someones back, so either a quote or mention is sometimes the right thing to do.

 

Yup.  It was totally done out of politeness. 

 

 

 

[Fletch]

Dead or Alive: Extreme Uranus Vacation more like.

[Majora]

10 hours ago, partious said:

Why does the logic that people use in their defensive, sarcastic responses to media articles about gaming violence/gta games and (just one of many potential examples) the lighthearted running down/attacking of pedestrians etc etc in open world games go out the window when the game involves perving and not killing.

 

"Hoho, just a game guys. Just as I don't feel the need to go run people over in real life after playing gta or shoot people in the face after doing that in 90 percent of popular modern games, I'm not going to feel the need to perv on real women just because I perved on the not real women in this game."

 

This misses the point because the vast majority of us do face any significant risk of being murdered when we get out of bed each day, whereas 50% of the population get out of bed each day with a significant chance that they will be the victim of sexism, whether overt or implicit, whether by an individual or by 'society'. Games featuring killing do not reinforce any long standing and persisting stereotypes that murder is an acceptable course of action in a civilised society whereas games like this reinforce the pervasive stereotype of women being placid, unthinking objects who exist solely for male titillation and pleasure.

 

It is not really about a singular product or the depiction of women as sexual creatures, as Anita Sarkeesian was always at great pains to point out in her Feminist Frequency videos, it is about the volume, the history, the context and the way that the constant perpetuation of women in this manner creates and reinforces stereotypes in a way that would not be true if it were the exact same game but featuring male sex objects instead.

[Smitty]

6 hours ago, Alex W. said:

 

 When you make an experience that's just wall-to-wall indulgence then you're existing in a creative space that's both unimpressive in terms of expression and insulting to the audience's ability to do anything but maximise one big primary colour response to one big primary colour stimulus

 

Sounds like Doom 2016 to me. One big primary colour response to one big primary colour stimulus.

 

Again: ultraviolence is fine, but sex is not. Cutting peoples heads off is fine, but looking at sexy women is not.

 

The crass, juvenile things that I like are good and valid and proper. The crass, juvenile things that other people like are not. In-group, out-group. Peer group signalling. On and on it goes.

[SeanR]

it's getting made, because it will sell.

 

it's not the game that's the problem here, is it?

[Radish]

17 minutes ago, Smitty said:

 

Sounds like Doom 2016 to me. One big primary colour response to one big primary colour stimulus.

 

Again: ultraviolence is fine, but sex is not. Cutting peoples heads off is fine, but looking at sexy women is not.

 

Remember that in Doom, they’re not people. They’re literally demons from hell.

 

DOA is seeking to simulate the act of sexually harassing women. 

 

Surely you can see the difference there. 

[TheShend]

Will @jcafarley be covering this for a TCGS review?

[Smitty]

1 hour ago, Majora said:

 

It is not really about a singular product or the depiction of women as sexual creatures, as Anita Sarkeesian was always at great pains to point out in her Feminist Frequency videos, it is about the volume, the history, the context and the way that the constant perpetuation of women in this manner creates and reinforces stereotypes in a way that would not be true if it were the exact same game but featuring male sex objects instead.

 

That's just the transparently false excuse that is given. In a bid to avoid looking like you'd like to drastically limit the range of human creative expression you preemptively state that you're not saying nothing like X can ever justifiably exist, just that there's too much of it. The problem isn't with any given game, but the genre as a whole. I'm not extreme, we're not extreme you protest.

 

That's the theory you present. The reality is that every single example that is criticised will be criticised as if it contains within it the accumulated problem of the whole - the 'problematic trope' or whatever you don't like. So whilst the argument is presented as 'it would be better to have less of such things' its rhetorical and logical approach indicates the real desire - 'there should be none of such things'.

 

This reality is elided so that people can try and appear more reasonable. They imply that it's a problem of numbers, but when you listen to how theyactually look at each example its clear that they don't think this stuff should be in any game, ever. I mean, do you think that they would EVER give something like this a free pass? Do you think they'd say 'there aren't 100 games like this so its not unacceptable on its own terms'?

 

No, of course they wouldn't. They talk about tropes, but actually they want it stamped out as a form of expression. They want liking it as a form of expression to be totally socially unacceptable. You want to shame people who would partake. The theory they present says one thing, the attitude they express says another. It's not hard to read between the lines.

 

I'm an adult who accepts that there are all kinds of media and art that I don't like or actively hate. I am not interested in torture movies, or super OTT gore like Brain Dead, or watersports porn or whatever. But I believe in the freedom to create and partake in all sorts of things I dislike. I hate Roy Chubby Brown, I HATE his material, but I accept that it has a moral right to exist and his audience have a moral right to consume it. I have no desire to control what other people choose to consume.

 

Of course, I am now incredibly old-fashioned in that and believing in freedom of expression generally. The popular thing now is to argue only for the freedom to express 'correct' things. Is your entertainment idealogically pure? Are you pure? What are your crimes? Time for some self-crit.

 

Tom Cruise is a lunatic but I still love his work and suppot his movies. Because: who fucking cares. It's a free society, or it bloody well ought to be.

 

Growing up, looking back on Mary Whitehouse or say the Christian reaction to the Jerry Springer Opera I thought 'that's the past'. This completely inability to accept the artistic, creative validity of things you don't like, aggressive controlling moralising about other people's tastes - this is all a relic of conservatism, I told myself.

 

But, no; it's the future.

[snowbind]

6 hours ago, CovisGod said:

Can you please stop shitting this thread up, GOTY contender right here. Pre-ordered. 

 

Ikr! Fuck these dweebs, this looks great!

[Girth Certificate]

I wonder if Edge will do another big crotch cover

[Kayin Amoh]

Sexual content doesn't bother me a great deal. Chun Li's arse occasionally flashing up during a high kick is never going to give me a brain hemorrhage.

 

I do find it questionable that only the youngest, childish and most idiotic characters (Nyotengu/Helena aside) made it into Doa X3 and all the other western characters with anything resembling a hint of independence / being slightly over 20 years old were excised though. And there's a character in there, prominently featured in advertising, who looks and acts like she's an actual child.

 

Everyone has different triggers, and that, admittedly, was my absolute breaking point. I despise her so much I can't even say her name without wanting to spew my eyeballs out in disgust.

 

I'd have no problem with a game like this featuring most of the cast (I didn't complain about the concept with Doa X one or two, even though they weren't exactly great games - heck, I was all for them as far as gaming as a medium is concerned) , but recently it's been focusing on certain archetypes in a way that pretty much puts me completely off the series.

 

I

[Qazimod]

I assume this is just an early trailer and we'll get the full reveal of Bayman, Zack, Jann-Lee, Rig, Bass and friends in a follow-up video.  

[partious]

1 hour ago, Majora said:

 

This misses the point because the vast majority of us do face any significant risk of being murdered when we get out of bed each day, whereas 50% of the population get out of bed each day with a significant chance that they will be the victim of sexism, whether overt or implicit, whether by an individual or by 'society'. Games featuring killing do not reinforce any long standing and persisting stereotypes that murder is an acceptable course of action in a civilised society whereas games like this reinforce the pervasive stereotype of women being placid, unthinking objects who exist solely for male titillation and pleasure.

 

 

Various levels of violence and criminality are a big problem in society and if this DOA game or something like it can lead to people becoming more sexist outside of the game then surely sitting around playing violent games all day from a relatively early age will influence a persons instincts regarding the use of violence as an effective means of conflict resolution or getting what you want from people.

 

Murders may be relatively uncommon but if you're going to include the type of implicit sexism that a woman in the UK in 2018 might face in her daily life as something that a game like DOA Extreme might contribute to then using that same logic, I just can't quite accept the popular opinion on this forum that GTA and its ilk have no negative influence at all on society, or all the other violence and killing centric games have no influence on violence or agression in society because "they're just games". 

 

The vast majority of big budget games in 2018 are filled with violence. If you don't want violence there isn't much beyond Nintendo and indies. How many games like DOA extreme are there that are even remotely mainstream? 

 

I won't be buying or playing this DOA game, I mainly play arcade racers and Nintendo games but I just want someone to explain to me why one game with fake perving has a negative effect on the player/society when we have already concluded on this forum many times that the graphic violence in 90 percent of big modern games doesn't because games aren't real and people can differentiate between actions taken in a fake game world and actions taken in the real world.

 

[marsh]

4 hours ago, hellcock junior said:

From the looks of it, it's a softcore sexual fantasy pretty much devoid of realworld ties tities and I can't see the harm.

 

My brain, it's just how it works.

 

Sorry.