Fun Stuff > CLIKC
Violence is apparently better for children than two gay men.
onewheelwizzard:
Good points, benji. I've never personally played The Sims, I have to admit ... and from what I understand it's probably the closest we have right now to a computerized model of human interaction that could feasibly include sexuality without twisting it into something I personally don't think it should be. I can appreciate that. I haven't had any personal experience with it, but I acknowledge that it is (or at least may be) an exception to the rule.
Also, on the note of Harvest Moon, that's significantly less objectionable BECAUSE it's not sexual. It's such a basic series of FedEx quests (bring her stuff, the end) that I'd actually be pretty upset if sex came into it because it's simply not cut out to present sex for what it is, just as an arbitrary preset goal that you accomplish by completing material tasks. If sex was a part of Harvest Moon, a great injustice would've been done to sexuality.
You did, however, explain precisely the counterpoint I was going to raise, which was that video games by nature allow for "power-gaming" and manipulating the system for the most objectively optimal outcome. They're competitive by nature. There aren't many video games out there that a person boots up without the intention of winning or at least progressing towards a goal set by the game. Zooming out from the issue of violence, I feel like this is the broader issue at hand. Sexuality, and sexual relationship between people, is an area in which the goals and the definition of "winning" have to be self-determined. My immediate concern was that violence was the means by which goals are usually reached in video games, but the mere fact that a video game is almost invariably about reaching a preset goal is enough to turn me off a bit and I think that it's the deeper problem that the violence issue only exacerbates.
Creating a video game that accurately depicts romantic relationships between real people is probably impossible. There's no way to model a real person with real emotions. There has to actually BE a real person with real emotions on the other hand of a romantic relationship in order for it to be meaningfully said that the relationship exists. The relationship between a person and their video game avatar, or rather between a person and their video game avatar's ingame significant other, is simply never going to be an appropriate model for the relationship between any two real people. I guess I can understand the appeal of toying with Sims like dolls, as long as the person doing it doesn't start thinking that the dolls they're playing with are comparable to real people and that the way one of their dolls treats the other is a good basis for understanding how real people treat each other and how to treat a real person themselves. But I can't really see any redeeming qualities in explicit sexual content in video games. It just seems to me like the most blatant form of objectifying the sex act and turning it into something you "keep score" over.
I'm sure that at some point someone will release something that has sex in it and manages to treat it appropriately. But the way video games work right now I'm really not holding my breath.
ThePQ4:
I'm sorry I just kind of scanned through the last post, but I've got to ask:
What is "treating sex appropriately" exactly? Sex is is sex, no matter which way you turn it. You can scale it down or not show anything at all, but then that isn't a problem, and I'm sure there are a myriad of games out there that imply sexual activity without actually showing it. ...I'm confused. I think I got lost somewhere about five posts ago.
benji:
I certainly agree that we shouldn't use games as a way of teaching children about appropriate sexual conduct, and I agree that it can never substitute for being in a real romantic relationship. A game's goal is to present an engaging and entertaining simulation of something. With human relationships, games have to be kind of abstract.
For example, the Sims (I use it as an example because I am familiar with it, more so then with Dating Sims) represents human interaction using points. Different activities earn you or loose you points with different people. Having a friendly conversation earns you points. Pushing someone looses you points. If you get enough points, new forms of interaction become possible and you can move from talking talking, to hugging, to kissing, to sex. Now, this isn't an accurate portrayal of human feelings. I don't think "that girl is up to 75 points with me right now, I think I wouldn't object if she tried to kiss me." However, it's not terrible as a game representing something that is actually quite complex. The same thing is done with all other aspects of games. For example, a lot of stuff can happen on a battle field, but a game which tries to portray a battle has to narrow it down to variables: hit points, attack, defense, speed, bonuses, etc. No matter how many variables you add, it won't be completely accurate but it can get close.
The other option is, of course, that sex can be part of the narrative instead of part of the game. For example, many RPGs have romantic subplots, and sometimes even sexual ones. The player doesn't have to do anything to initiate these subplots, they just happen, and how accurately they portray human sexual relationships is entirely contingent on the writers of the game.
onewheelwizzard:
PQ4, I would consider "treating sex appropriately" (and this is an entirely personal definition here, I'm not going to make any claim to be an objective expert on how humans should best treat their sexual relationships) to be treating a sexual relationship as a cooperative effort that is made for the fulfillment and satisfaction of both people. But there's no way for a game to reward you based on how happy your partner is because your partner doesn't really exist. Actually, let me rephrase that. There's no way for you to feel rewarded by your partner's happiness because they don't really exist.
Basically, the means by which rewards are obtained in virtual relationships are precisely the opposite of the means by which rewards are obtained in real relationships. In the absence of a real human being to consider and have feelings towards, the very motivation that drives healthy relationships is precisely that which is precluded by virtual relationships.
I'm kinda reading into this a little far, I think ... most people don't think of their character in a game as actually being themselves, so I'm sure anyone who had a modicum of real empathy would be able to approach simulated relationships and real relationships as completely different things ... a real relationship is real, and a simulated relationship is just a game that is there to be won. But there are enough people out there who would take the rules of the simulated game and apply them to real life, thinking that if they just buy that one present, or call that many times, or just kiss her at that romantic moment, that'll be the winning stroke right there and their goal of getting laid will be achieved, and that this makes perfect sense and is the way things work, otherwise why would it work like that in the game?
I don't actually believe that games shape our beliefs and understandings about our personal lives to that extent, or at least not usually. But there are so many messages throughout all sorts of media nowadays (and for the past God knows how long) promoting precisely the selfish goal-oriented sexuality that there really doesn't need to be. Putting sex in video games just can't help. I'm certainly not going to be the one to tell anyone they can't do it, but keep it away from me and mine, especially if it's violent and sexual at the same time.
ThePQ4:
--- Quote from: onewheelwizzard on 15 Apr 2008, 12:46 ---I'm kinda reading into this a little far, I think
--- End quote ---
I concur...however:
Your expectation for "treating sex appropriately" is a little high. Lets face it: Who wants to buy a game where , as you say "sexual relationships are a cooperative effort made for the fulfillment and satisfaction of both people"...no one except for sorry saps who can't get real girlfriends. If they want something like that, maybe some silly japanese boy in the same situation will make a sim-game (Welcome to the N.H.K. anyone?) but otherwise: it doesn't sell.
If we wanted "real life" situations, we would go out and live our lives, not hole ourselves up in basements and play video games all day, amiright?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version