Soulcalibur VI DLC Discussion Thread

Nyte said:
Soulcalibur can't just make all the women ugly and put them in sweaters like Mortal Kombat did.
Click to expand...
I don't want to keep harping on you, but you know nobody is suggesting anything like this. It's not as though the only options are skimpy or matronly. Overt sexualization can be toned down without making the characters "ugly" unless you're specifically equating attractiveness with how much their tits look ready to pop out.
And you're acting as though every woman in MKX is wearing a burlap sack. Most of them were still wearing outfits that are tight-fitting, revealing, or both. The only one that wasn't wearing either was Sonya, who was dressed.....like a soldider....kinda like she should be.
 
Nyte said:
What are you even talking about? "Left behind"? You realize how many franchises went downward after they tried to show how "mature" they were, alienating their fans?
Click to expand...

Really? Which ones?

Nyte said:
Also, Japan doesn't care about western censorship culture.
Click to expand...

You do know what censorship means, right? That it's not just people expressing an opinion that something is undesirable or unnecessary? Companies do not self-censor when they tailor their products to changing norms, such as when their consumers grow up and realize there is something off about bikini armor.

Nyte said:
The SC fanbase in general likes the sexiness, and if they took it away, they would leave in droves.
Click to expand...

Well, I just don't have as low an opinion of my fellow player, nor as laissze-faire an attitude towards the series reaching for a more mature tone, with time. I don't deny that sex sells, but so do other things. Such as good design that doesn't try to bootstrap itself with infantile pandering.

Nyte said:
The DOA guys even said as much about their series, which is why it's not "toned down", as much as it is tucked away but still present.
Click to expand...

Are you really suggesting that the developers of DoA have struck upon the ideal balance of maturity and tastefulness in the representation of female characters that a company needs to shoot for in order to stay economically viable? DoA, the series packed so full of juvenile fan service that they had to create a sub series of games just to accommodate all of the breast shots they felt they absolutely had to create? I'm not even going to touch the implications there (or the suggestion that anything is "tucked away" about how that team approaches such things)...I'll just let Tina say it for me:

58834
 
Last edited:
Rusted Blade said:
Really? Which ones?



You do know what censorship means, right? That it's not just people expressing an opinion that something is undesirable or unnecessary? Companies do not self-censor when they tailor their products to changing norms, such as when their consumers grow up and realize there is something off about bikini armor.



Well, I just don't have as low an opinion of my fellow player, nor as laissze-faire an attitude towards the series reaching for a more mature tone, with time. I don't deny that sex sells, but so do other things. Such as good design that doesn't try to bootstrap itself with infantile pandering.



Are you really suggesting that the developers of DoA have struck upon the ideal balance of maturity and tastefulness in the representation of female characters that a company needs to shoot for in order to stay economically viable? DoA, the series packed so full of juvenile fan service that they had to create a sub series of games just to accommodate all of the breast shots they felt they absolutely had to create? I'm not even going to touch the implications there (or the suggestion that anything is "tucked away" about how that team approaches such things)...I'll just let Tina say it for me:

View attachment 58834
Click to expand...
"Changing norms"?

If that was the case, CD Projekt RED wouldn't be as big as they are, and they don't give two shits about what you're referring to as "changing norms". Case in point: Witcher and Cyberpunk. Or for that matter, Nier: Automata, where Yoko Taro said "I like girls" as his reasoning for the sexuality in that game. Hint: Nier: Automata is universally beloved and a massive success.

Also, here's the list of franchises that went downhill after "trying to get with the times":

www.oneangrygamer.net

Homepage

Laters news from renewed One Angry Gamer team. Indie games, Mid-budget games, Development news, Dame engine news, Early Access entries and way more
www.oneangrygamer.net www.oneangrygamer.net

Games
Movies/TV
Comics
Other
Click to expand...
It's not just something I made up. Check the links and you'll see. I've had enough of this "changing of the times" BS that gets spewed. No, it's just a vocal minority of people on the internet that won't buy the product, and can't be pleased.

I'm done here.
 
Nyte said:
Hint: Nier: Automata is universally beloved and a massive success.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but not because it has female characters with their breasts pilling out of their tops. Because it told a thoughtful story that connected with people. Because it had great and diverse gameplay. Because it had polish and style. I'd say this runs counter to your argument more than anything.

Nyte said:
www.oneangrygamer.net

Homepage

Laters news from renewed One Angry Gamer team. Indie games, Mid-budget games, Development news, Dame engine news, Early Access entries and way more
www.oneangrygamer.net www.oneangrygamer.net
Click to expand...

Oh what a steaming pile of cherry-picking and confirmation bias garbage by some reactionary nitwit I can tell you that article is, just on the basis of the examples it chooses and the obsession with the word "woke". Ghostbusters didn't flop because it had an all female cast--it flopped because it was an atrociously unfunny film. Mass Effect: Andromeda didn't flop because it's cast was diverse (and FYI, not one whit more diverse the cast of the run-away success that was the original trilogy)--it flopped because it was a poorly written, glitchy mess. The Last Jedi didn't flop for being "woke"--it flopped because it was scripted and directed with all the skill and subtlty of one of the prequels. And Black Panther is a financial failure because on six-volume run of comics undersold? Well jesus, the IP right holders will just have to dry their tears with some of the $2 BILLION in revenue the movie made largely by riding the hype train of diversity.

Dude, come on, this is some seriously weak logic, through and through. Even if we accepted that each and every item on that list failed because it tried to be "progressive" (and as far as I can tell, not a single one failed primarily or even substantially for that reason), that would still be empirical evidence of exactly nothing, given the size of the industries they occupy, with many franchises adapting to the times and doing quite well as a consequence of not leaning on immature themes to the extent they did in their infancy as IPs. Now sometimes, I find it obnoxious when a series that was super immature in its inception gets away with rebuilding itself as a "serious" narrative (God of War comes to mind here), but that doesn't change the fact that the evidence runs directly contrary to your assertion that a series can't grow up and embrace a more mature tact without per se consigning itself to economic decline and cultural oblivion.

Additionally, and perhaps most salient, you keep asserting (and then ignoring the reponses to said assertion) that this about "poltical correctness gone awry", which is absolute nonsense. There are plenty of legitimate reasons that a person can find immature themes to be obnoxious and non-endearing in a story that have absolutely nothing to do with trying to be "woke". Some of us just find these themes childish, and would do so regardless of how much we think it is contributing to representation in media. And as Mokamoka has pointed out several times, there's space between bikini bound heroines and nuns covered head to toe to be explored even for those who absolutely have to have "babes" in their video games.

Nyte said:
No, it's just a vocal minority of people on the internet that won't buy the product, and can't be pleased.
Click to expand...

I bought the product, and will buy every single peripheral, and I'm quite pleased. I just disagree with your rationalizations of why titty shots are an absolute necessity that can't be questioned or re-evaluated by fans or the whole product/endeavour comes down like a house of cards....
 
Last edited:
I'm done. You're trying to spin a false narrative, especially regarding Nier: Automata when one of its core appeals is having a sexy female protagonist and not having self-censorship. This argument never should've happened to begin with.
 
Nyte said:
I'm done. You're trying to spin a false narrative, especially regarding Nier: Automata when one of its core appeals is having a sexy female protagonist and not having self-censorship. This argument never should've happened to begin with.
Click to expand...

That game has been recommended to me by no less than five people, and I've read/watched several reviews. No one mentioned 2B kind of flashing her stockings as a primary selling point. But if you're done, you're done. I agree it's unlikely a meeting of the minds is likely to emerge between yourself and the others who have commented here as to the absolute necessity for female characters to be scantily clad. But for the record, I have no clue what you mean about "trying to spin a false narrative"....
 
Last edited:
Rusted Blade said:
But one doesn't even remotely need to frame the issue in such terms to find that the Soul Calibur interpretation of "sex appeal" frequently dips into the immature.
Click to expand...
It's a video game, a toy if you will, it's not supposed to be mature.
People playing games and pretending it's a serious mature business are the most immature and laughable people themselves.
Rusted Blade said:
Oh don't go crying "PC oppression" on me. There's plenty to be said about objectification and how non-subtly these things are handled in the industry, especially in anime/otoku-influenced products coming out of Japan, if you're really determined to take the conversation in that direction.
Click to expand...
Look, reasonable objectification is good, healthy and beneficial. The whole SJW push to demonize objectification is completely crazy. We think of people in terms of benefits we can get from them as opposed to their humanity 20 times before lunch each day, that's just how our brains work. When I get on a bus, I don't care for the driver's humanity, I don't know this person, most of the times I don't even see their face, I pay for my fare and I expect to get from point A to point B, the driver could have been a robot and I wouldn't care. I don't have time to care, there is only so much care in me and I would rather spend it on my family and friends instead. The driver in return doesn't care who I am as long as I pay for my ride, I'm perfectly replaceable by any other passenger and am perfectly disposable the moment I don't have money to buy a ticket. Our whole society works because of reasonable objectification, without it we would have still live in caves.
That's my thoughts on demonization of reasonable objectification of actual humans. It gets doubly stupid when someone tries to demonize objectification of fictional characters that are literally objects by definition to begin with. It's absolutely crazy. Fictional fighting game characters are getting beaten, cut, impaled, thrown down from cliffs and burned all day long on repeat for our amusement like a modern version of Roman gladiators and somehow this kind of objectification if alright, yet the moment boobs are involved, we are supposed to care about honor and agency of a fictional idea somebody else thought of. Give me a break.
 
Klimat said:
It's a video game, a toy if you will, it's not supposed to be mature.
People playing games and pretending it's a serious mature business are the most immature and laughable people themselves.

Look, reasonable objectification is good, healthy and beneficial. The whole SJW push to demonize objectification is completely crazy. We think of people in terms of benefits we can get from them as opposed to their humanity 20 times before lunch each day, that's just how our brains work. When I get on a bus, I don't care for the driver's humanity, I don't know this person, most of the times I don't even see their face, I pay for my fare and I expect to get from point A to point B, the driver could have been a robot and I wouldn't care. I don't have time to care, there is only so much care in me and I would rather spend it on my family and friends instead. The driver in return doesn't care who I am as long as I pay for my ride, I'm perfectly replaceable by any other passenger and am perfectly disposable the moment I don't have money to buy a ticket. Our whole society works because of reasonable objectification, without it we would have still live in caves.
That's my thoughts on demonization of reasonable objectification of actual humans. It gets doubly stupid when someone tries to demonize objectification of fictional characters that are literally objects by definition to begin with. It's absolutely crazy. Fictional fighting game characters are getting beaten, cut, impaled, thrown down from cliffs and burned all day long on repeat for our amusement like a modern version of Roman gladiators and somehow this kind of objectification if alright, yet the moment boobs are involved, we are supposed to care about honor and agency of a fictional idea somebody else thought of. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

I'm quite certain you are entirely missing the point I and others have been trying to make here. Nobody is bemoaning the plight of digital avatars. We're just saying that certain franchises, this one most assuredly included, can be very juvenile in it idea of what "sexy" is. And you must know that you're quoting me out of context to an extent where you are just outright inverting the meaning of my comments. You took part where I said "It's not that I am coming at this from a perspective of political correctness, I'm saying I just find it silly." and cut out 99% of my post to pair it down to "I am coming at this from a perspective of political correctness--I want to make a victim out of everyone". It's a disingenuous and nonconstructive approach to discussion. Someone is not an 'SJW' just because they find something you enjoy to be banal or immature. And personally I find the people who lean on that term as an ad hominem to try to dismiss any criticism of something to which they have an attachment as being infinitely more problematic than even most of those to whom the term itself might reasonably be applied. This doesn't make your eyes roll? Well fair enough. It does me, and does for a lot adults, even those of us who are otherwise longtime and devoted fans of the franchise. And we're not oppressing anyone by saying that this is our reaction to it. We're not the "PC Police" because it makes us groan at the abject childishness of an an attempt to advertise to us like we are all pubescent boys, rather than making us feel titillated. And yes, of course video games are toys and not to be taken too seriously--which is exactly why I can look beyond small flaws like the dumb-ass plot of a Soulcalibur game, or ridiculous weapons, or impractical bikini armour to embrace the parts of the toy I do enjoy. But, uhhh, it doesn't mean I have to think those things augment the total package either, does it?

All of that said, since you did advance a moral argument argument which I feel is peculiar (even if you were responding to an argument neither I, nor anyone else here made), I'll respond to something that strikes me odd about it. Let's say for the moment those of us here who find this advertising immature were predicating that dislike in the objectification of women, rather than just saying that we find it obnoxious (which is the actual argument that has been advanced). Just because we can acknowledge that something is a common feature of human social interaction does not in itself transform that behaviour into something desirable or even defensible. The human mind is subject to all manner of undesireable biases and illogical and self-defeating propensities. For example, we are inclined by nature towards all forms of tribalism (including at its extremes racism and xenophobia), but that doesn't mean we just throw up our hands and accept it as inevitable and that anyone who attempts to choose a more rational approach is expecting too much and betraying all good pragmatic sense. So it's a good thing we are not having an argument along the lines of such topics of deeper importance, because were we so engaged, I would have to point out to you that your rationale is fundamentally, irretrievably flawed, as a moral and practical matter. :) And I for one have no problem treating each of the people I encounter in service industries in the average day as people, not robots; it doesn't take so much out of me that I cannot treat my loved ones with affection when I get home! And just because you accept objectification as the name of game of trivial social interactions doesn't mean the bus driver necesarily feels the same way. But since we're only talking about a matter of taste, we can agree to disagree about whether or not titty shots make for good game design or sensible advertising for adult consumers.
 
Last edited:
Rusted Blade said:
I'm quite certain you are entirely missing the point I and others have been trying to make here. Nobody is bemoaning the plight of digital avatars. We're just saying that certain franchises, this one most assuredly included, can be very juvenile in it idea of what "sexy" is. And you must know that you're quoting me out of context to an extent where you are just outright inverting their meaning. You took part where I said "It's not that I am coming at this from a perspective of political correctness, I'm saying I just find it silly."
Click to expand...
"Objectification" is a loaded political SJW term, if you don't want to be mistaken for one of those guys, don't ever use the word. Simple as that. Otherwise you are asking for a certain reaction.
Rusted Blade said:
This doesn't make your eyes roll?
Click to expand...
Not really.
Rusted Blade said:
This doesn't make your eyes roll? Well fair enough. It does me, and does for a lot adults, even those of us who are otherwise longtime and devoted fans of the franchise. And we're not oppressing anyone by saying that this is our reaction to it.
Click to expand...
1). Please stop trying to falsely associate your stance with words like "mature" and "adult", that's a pure manipulation. There are a lots of adults who enjoy sexy art, you don't get to privatise adultness for your personal gain and then talk down to others from your assumed height since those opposing "an adult" are automatically assumed to be "immature" children whose opinions are inherently less valuable. It's a bad manipulation that would not stand.
2). If you don't like the sexiness for non-political reasons, fine, that's your right. But don't expect not to get any backfire. I like the sexiness and in the face of sexiness getting erased from games left and right (mostly for political reasons above all), my only way to ensure I actually get what I want is to join the opposition and make sure our voice is heard loud and clear. Certainly we will not go quietly into the night and allow others to walk over us, even more so when we believe the other side is actually a minority, that's way to loud for its actual size.
Rusted Blade said:
All of that said, since you did advance a moral argument argument which I feel is peculiar (even if you were responding to an argument neither I, nor anyone else here made), I'll respond to something that strikes me odd about it. Let's say for the moment those of us here who find this advertising immature were predicating that dislike in the objectification of women, rather than just saying that we find it obnoxious (which is the actual argument that has been advanced). Just because we can acknowledge that something is a common feature of human social interaction does not in itself transform that behaviour into something desirable or even defensible. The human mind is also inclined towards all manner of undesireable biases and illogical and self-defeating propensities.
Click to expand...
I never claimed something being a common feature of human social interaction makes it a virtue by itself. I claimed something being a common feature of human social interaction that allows society to actually work and progress forward towards common good for everyone is in fact great.
 
Klimat said:
"Objectification" is a loaded political SJW term, if you don't want to be mistaken for one of those guys, don't ever use the word. Simple as that. Otherwise you are asking for a certain reaction.
Click to expand...

Kilmat, I...just don't know how many times I can say this and in how many different ways before it's clear to parties who want to label any contrary opinions of their beloved fanservice as SJW-based. But you've typically struck me as a rational enough person, so I will try saying it just one more time: I used that term expressly to distinguish what I was not talking about. I trust you understand that just by invoking a concept as a matter of comparison, someone is not themselves advocating that same argument? Conciously or not, I feel you are availing yourself of an argument that allows you to feel you are fighting political correctness run amok, but for the last time, such considerations were not the predicate for my argument. There are arguments in that area to be made, I am sure, but I left them cleanly to the side to fixate on something else entirely: that the I feel the "sex appeal" being discussed here is over-baked and silly. Speaking of which...

Klimat said:
1). Please stop trying to falsely associate your stance with words like "mature" and "adult", that's a pure manipulation. There are a lots of adults who enjoy sexy art, you don't get to privatise adultness for your personal gain and then talk down to others from your assumed height since those opposing "an adult" are automatically assumed to be "immature" children whose opinions are inherently less valuable. It's a bad manipulation that would not stand.
Click to expand...

Except, I'm not advancing the argument that my personal sense of taste is objective reality and have not done so at any point in this thread. I (and others) have simply said that it feels immature to us--if you choose to interpret that as an 'SJW' infringement/attack on your own taste, that's on you, and nobody else. Nobody is judging you here. If you get a little tingle out of the experience rather than an urge to laugh and shake your head, that's fine. Nobody said boo about that. But the argument that only someone obsessed with political correctness would not Soul Calibur breast-oriented fanservice sexy is asinine, brother.

Klimat said:
2). If you don't like the sexiness for non-political reasons, fine, that's your right. But don't expect not to get any backfire. I like the sexiness and in the face of sexiness getting erased from games left and right (mostly for political reasons above all), my only way to ensure I actually get what I want is to join the opposition and make sure our voice is heard loud and clear. Certainly we will not go quietly into the night and allow others to walk over us, even more so when we believe the other side is actually a minority, that's way to loud for its actual size.
Click to expand...

Kilmat, my friend, did you really just quote "Don't go quietly into that night" in defense of your support for an ad featuring Ivy's ginormous cleavage? I'm not sure that's exactly what Thomas was thinking about when sitting the death vigil, homie.

Anyway, getting to the substance of your point, it's not so much that I don't like the sexiness (for political or non-political reasons); it's that I don't find it to be sexy in the first place. Fan service fixating on inflated animated breasts straining against digital latex just doesn't do it for me. I'm sorry, but that is about as sexy as a waffle iron to me. And I don't think I'm alone in that.

Klimat said:
I never claimed something being a common feature of human social interaction makes it a virtue by itself. I claimed something being a common feature of human social interaction that allows society to actually work and progress forward towards common good for everyone is in fact great.
Click to expand...

Ok, but just so you know, I manage think about the various service industry employees I make use of in the average day as human beings, not "robots", and miraculously, when I get home, I still have enough "care" in me to be affectionate to my loved ones. So you might want to give it a try--you could end up surprised at what you are capable of...and I suspect you'll end up with less bodily fluids in your to-go meals as a consequence. :D All joking aside though dude, I don't find your argument on the virtue of objectification very compelling, but I think we can probably both agree this isn't the forum to resolve such lofty issues and we shouldn't press tolerance of our having gotten off into the weeds any further. You can always message me if you want to have that philosophical debate, but for the purposes of the thread, i think we can just agree to disagree.
 
Last edited:
Project Bokuho said:
So....yeah....how about that EVO Japan discussion.
Click to expand...

Ugh, Okubo's statements on that subject are a bit depressing. It hadn't occurred to me until someone else mentioned it a few weeks ago that EVO would be a great platform for DLC announcements. But once the notion was raised, it seemed like a very reasonable conclusion. Knowing that at most we are going to be hearing about balance patches feels very anticlimactic now. But as HacknSlash was saying earlier in the main SCVI thread, we can and should use the increased dialogue surrounding the event to try to make it clear to the devs that the hardcore community has some gripes on the subject of balancing. I think that's a very salient point.
 
Rusted Blade said:
Kilmat, my friend, did you really just quote "Don't go quietly into that night" in defense of your support for an ad featuring Ivy's ginormous cleavage? I'm not sure that's exactly what Thomas was thinking about when sitting the death vigil, homie.
Click to expand...
I only know the quote from the silly movie "Independence Day" Kappa.
Rusted Blade said:
Anyway, getting to the substance of your point, it's not so much that I don't like the sexiness (for political or non-political reasons); it's that I don't find it to be sexy in the first place. Fan service fixating on inflated animated breasts straining against digital latex just doesn't do it for me. I'm sorry, but that is about as sexy as a waffle iron to me. And I don't think I'm alone in that.
Click to expand...
It surely does the work for me. So I will stand by it.
Rusted Blade said:
Ok, but just so you know, I manage think about the various service industry employees I make use of in the average day as human beings, not "robots"...
Click to expand...
I bet you don't even know their names at least 90% of the time, so spare me.
 
Rusted Blade said:
I bet I don't know their names 98% of the time, but that doesn't stop me from seeing their humanity and reacting to them accordingly even in our trivial interactions.
Click to expand...
I think our standards of seing someone's humanity in a meaningful way must be quite different. Trivial politeness is but a decorum expected from any civilised human being. You are being polite, you get courtesy in return, everyone is happy during your interaction, 10 minutes later you completely forget you've even met the person in the first place. Next day someone else will sit at the same ticket window and you won't question the reason for the replacement even for a second.
 
Oh my God, we're still arguing this? Damn. Why don't we go back to DLC discussions already?

I still stand by what I say that the SC team is good for appealing to aesthetic and not just "trends", and I doubt any minds are getting changed here. So why not just stop with it?
 
Klimat said:
I think our standards of seing someone's humanity in a meaningful way must be quite different. Trivial politeness is but a decorum expected from any civilised human being. You are being polite, you get courtesy in return, everyone is happy during your interaction, 10 minutes later you completely forget you've even met the person in the first place. Next day someone else will sit at the same ticket window and you won't question the reason for the replacement even for a second.
Click to expand...

But you presume that everyone else shares your strict utilitarian view of people who are not within their family. I must tell you that this is not the case for most of us, even if, as a realistic matter, we don't have an immediately earth-shattering impact on each-other's day. However insignificant or transient the interaction I have with a bus driver, I do not in fact view them as a "perfectly disposable robot, good only for getting from point A to point B", nor do I agree that a propensity of objectifying one-another and refusing to see our shared humanity is the force which extracted us from our abjectly primitive beginnings. Quite the contrary, I think the scientific and historical record is clear that this inclination was the primary obstacle we had to overcome in establishing a more complex and mutualistic order of affairs. And even in our hurried and often disconnected lifestyles today, there certainly are people who care enough to try to make every interaction meaningful. I don't know that I can claim to be one of them (though I do try to show small kindnesses), but I can tell you that you shouldn't believe that just because you view the bus driver as another non-face that he absolutely feels the same about you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back