Dead or Alive Xtreme 3

[Dream]

Something mildly analogous happened during the Stroessner dictatorship in Paraguay. Specifically during elections for anything from mayor to president (wchih he won for 8 times in a row) it was customary for all polling stations to be crowded by colorado henchmen/partymembers rather loudly celebrating the assumed victory of their party and not so subtle pressure you vote for their party and (not that) subtle threats of shame or bad things coming your way if you did not. The voting was also customarily done publicly on the table (so that everyone can see your allegiance to the party) rather than the urn, and if you did use the latter that in itself lend to suspicion. As well, people who publicly boasted their allegiance got public offices, political favors (faster queues in hospitals, etc.), and other handouts for it.

So on technical terms it was a free choice between political parties, however it was done under massive and tactical duress ensuring that the majority of voters (which is what matters in a democracy) would vote for the "right" (here progressive) choice regardless of their own feelings or beliefs. Something other interesting to note is that gaslighting was a common thing used at the time and today. Many Stronists call it a presidency to this day and debates on whether or not the dictatorship was really all that bad ("we used to sleep with our door open" and similar holocaust-denial tier) is still highly debated to this day.

Of course people might take issue with the comparison but i genuinely believe that these rethorical tactics part from the same essence, and that doesn't lead anywhere good and i don't think people should delude themselves or others in that this leads to any sort of healthy progress neither for a society or it's particular members. And i say all this as someone who hasn't really cared all that much about DoA before.

[Bagheera]

I do in fact take issue with the comparison. The situation at hand would be analogous to showing up at the polling place and then casting your vote with the rationale that the opposition party will attack you if you voted any other way, when in fact the opposition party is nowhere to be found and doesn't even care about the election. IOW you and others are trying to stir shit up about this, when the fact is that nobody even cared about the game before the company decided to make its ridiculous announcement. This is all manufactured outrage, and has been from day one.

[TehDonutKing]

the fact is that nobody even cared about the game before the company decided to make its ridiculous announcement.

Uh, did you look at Dream's post? The image? That proves what you said wrong?

[Bagheera]

Uh, did you look at Dream's post? The image? That proves what you said wrong?

Yes. And I also watched this video, which utterly demolishes any "proof" that image provided (and a month past, at that).

[TehDonutKing]

I lack the time right now, but there's so much wrong with this video that i'm going to have to sit down and dissect it.

[Gob Hobblin]

By God, Dream, you're right: this furor over stupid titty games and political pressure and fear in the middle of a ruthless dictatorship are analogous! They're practically cousins!

...


Look, the fact of the matter is, the DoA games are going to get it in the ear for being sexist because they are. That's just a fact. You want to buy the games, buy the games. No one is stopping you from buying sexist games. That is your right as a consumer. No one is going to 'disappear' you for buying a DoA game, and no one is going to shame you about it unless you run down the street with it over your head screaming 'The tits bounce so much!' If you feel ashamed in the privacy of your own home because of what everyone else is saying about this game, however, than you should really consider why what these random people who do not know you say matters so much to you as to make you feel afraid (for some reason) to buy these games.

Your comparison, however, is flawed: the colorados were an organized effort to force votes to swing one way or another. This? It's disorganized. People see DoA, they comment on it, and a lot happen to comment that it's sexist. The only concerted, organization I've seen around this game is the effort to bring DoA: Xtreme Volleyball 3 to the United States, and that was in response to something that wasn't there to begin with. There have always been accusations of sexism around these games (your graphic shows that), so it's not what prevented the game from coming to the States, despite what the publisher announced.

It's because their sales suck.

The beach-volleyball series only sells well in the West, but those sales have been dropping with the past iterations to the point that it's not feasible to take the cost of porting the game. The original sales were already much lower than what was wanted. They threw up a smoke-screen about why they weren't porting it, because they didn't want to just out-and-out say that it was the sales, and saw a big hump of controversy provide them with free ad revenue.

It's that simple.

[Chuckman]

and no one is going to shame you about it unless you run down the street with it over your head screaming 'The tits bounce so much!'

There goes my Thursday.

[Gob Hobblin]

Chuckman, everyone knows that you do the aforementioned activity on Tits-Tuesdays. Then it's socially acceptable.

[Chuckman]

For Chuckman every day is Titty Tuesday.

[IronEvangelion]

New Soft Engine 2.0 tech demo: Nyotengu plays with a ball!

http://gematsu.com/2015/12/dead-alive-x ... engine-2-0

The body's shape-changing capabilities in response to external pressure/gravity are pretty impressive. I really hope Nyotengu still does the tongue thing when she wins like in DOA5U.

[Ray]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4EJasKQf50

This will be my last post about the censorship controversy. I think it a decent counter argument to Gobs.

[Gob Hobblin]

....no, it's not, it...it really isn't.

That is a helluva lot of whining, and beating his dick about how awful Jim Sterling is, but it doesn't actual counter anything I've said. He's complaining about how 'SJWs' are changing the social consciousness to make certain things unacceptable?

Well, so fucking what? If they think they have a more moral or better counter to the argument, then they wouldn't be 'losing' the culture war. I mean, people bitched about women voting, and how awful that would be, and the world is still here. People said blacks would be too stupid or ignorant to know what to do with the right to vote, and that was proven a stupid thought, too. Every generation is a new thing that we inch forward on, a little closer to a state of respect and equity among people of all races, religions, and genders, a point where we can truly say we judge a person by the content of their character and not their physical features, and every time we get a little closer to that point, people come out of the woodwork and scream and haw about how unfair it is, how unright it is, how it violates all the rights those people have to be in a position of superiority just a little bit longer.

Now, if you think that all of that is so unfair that you'll stake your flag on the hill of a shitty volleyball game, then...you know what, hats off to you. If that's the best thing you can pump all of your energy into fighting for, then...you know, you should probably consider if your position is really that important a cause.

[IronEvangelion]

If they think they have a more moral or better counter to the argument, then they wouldn't be 'losing' the culture war.

In any conflict, a side winning does not mean that side is "right." To me personally the current feminist movement in gaming represents sexual regression, not progression. Back in the sixties people fought for the freedom to express sexuality and depict it in the media. It was a massive progressive victory that threw off the shackles of right-wing religious dogma. Current feminism seems dead-set on undoing 40+ years of progress in the area of sexual expression.

Also, this is now the most depressing thread in this subforum. Nobody seems interested in discussing the actual game, just the media shitstorm that currently surrounds it.

[Monk Ed]

Also, this is now the most depressing thread in this subforum. Nobody seems interested in discussing the actual game, just the media shitstorm that currently surrounds it.

Only because the latter seems that much more interesting for all the parties involved.

...What? It's true.

[Gob Hobblin]

And women were treated like shit in the Sixties. What's your point?

And who said that the sexual depiction of women in the Sixties was right? The Sixties served its purpose of giving people the agency to pursue sex in the manner that they chose, but that didn't mean women were held as equals in that pursuit. We are at a point now where women can (primarily) engage with men on their own terms in deciding how, when, and where they choose to have sex, but we still aren't there. Men aren't slut-shamed, women are. Men aren't presented in media in sexual terms to the same degree and scope that women are (when was there a volleyball game out with men in banana hammocks? Why aren't we focusing on jiggle physics in the Down Under region?).

Sexual dynamics are still unequal, and until they reach something closer to parity, stuff like this game is still going to come under scrutiny. Think about the terms in which men and women date: men are afraid of being humiliated and rejected. Women are afraid of being raped and killed.

Think about that.

And you might not like the media shitstorm, but that's why we know about it. That shitstorm was pretty much deliberately stirred up to get attention to the game for sales. As for discussing the actual game, what about it warrants any conversation outside of the shitstorm? Is it really that groundbreaking? I mean, Monk kind of raises a good point: the controversy is more interesting than the game itself.

[Monk Ed]

(when was there a volleyball game out with men in banana hammocks? Why aren't we focusing on jiggle physics in the Down Under region?)

Why, indeed -- what's your answer?

[IronEvangelion]

True, Gob, but achieving progress for one gender doesn't mean we need to achieve regression for the other. For instance we need to eliminate the slut-shaming of women, not start slut-shaming men. And I'd support a male-only equivalent of DOAX as well. I wouldn't buy it, but I'd certainly be happy it exists and people have an option to buy it. What these feminists are doing is the opposite: they want to slut-shame both genders and prevent either from being sexualized in a video game. They're not trying to get a male character DOAX game made alongside the female character version, which would be actual progress, instead they're complaining about the female character version existing at all. Equality via regression.

And is the game groundbreaking? No, but neither are the majority of games that are released nowadays, yet fans still discuss them.

[Gob Hobblin]

Monk, the question was rhetorical, but if you have to know, it's because game developers are largely male, and assume that the majority of their audience is male, as well. They think in terms of what they want to see (not male bodies) and of themselves as people (who would feel awkward in said situations) than it is for them to apply the same rubric to women.

And dude, DoA is regression: you think this is something new and groundbreaking? Using sex to sell products is as old as tits themselves. Scantily clad women being used to push subpar products is an old tradition. You think people go to Hooters or Twin Peaks because the food is so damned good? Spare me. Don't act like this is some sort of big blow for the rights of women.

It's softcore, lazy porn without the payoff. And, as I have said many times before, if that's what you like, fine. It's your money, what titillates you is fine, and if for some reason they think a market for this exists, then there you have it. That's all it is, though.

[IronEvangelion]

Don't act like this is some sort of big blow for the rights of women.

I never said it was, not even once. It's a win for the expression of sexual content in the media, which was forbidden under the right-wing religious dogma of the past, not for women's rights.

It's softcore, lazy porn

Pretty much what I said earlier in the topic.

[Monk Ed]

Monk, the question was rhetorical,

I know -- but a lot of rhetorical questions provide surprises when they actually have to be answered.

but if you have to know, it's because game developers are largely male, and assume that the majority of their audience is male, as well. They think in terms of what they want to see (not male bodies) and of themselves as people (who would feel awkward in said situations) than it is for them to apply the same rubric to women.

This seems far more an answer to the question "Why does DOAX exist and why is it as it is" than "Why doesn't an all-male equivalent exist". I can see how the first sentence applies, at least -- that the mostly-male game developers don't think enough women would be interested in such a product. On that front, though, they're probably right -- I'd think it would appeal more to gay men than straight women.