Television Blue Eye Samurai - Netflix's best original in years, update: renewed for a second season

[Phaseknox]

12 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

It's actually a dirty Disney (complete with annoying sidekick) version of Kill Bill about a native born Japanese person of mixed race that through sheer observation becomes the greatest warrior, impervious to pain and injury fueled only by rage to get revenge on their father for being born. A show that tries to be so cool by showing you they can have ultraviolence and tons of nudity and how Japanese the show is even though it's completely in English (but voiced by Asians) but they love to name drop Japanese phrases all over the place including a very cringe needle drop later in the show (of which there are many). Predictable writing every step of the way and a hideous art style.

While the revenge plot is typical for the genre, it still works to drive the characters and action which are both good IMO. I also like that it doesn’t shy away from sex and violence like a lot of shows, movies and video games do these days to the point of feeling censored. And it’s not woke in any way which is refreshing as well. These aspects combined with its art style and animation make it almost feel like a throwback to adult animated entertainment from the past which I’m a fan of. It does have some predictability and genre tropes, but I wasn’t really bothered by them and it did go in unexpected directions at times at least for me. I disagree that the art style is hideous, I personally like its somewhat stylized look but I can also understand how others such as yourself might not. Of course the show won’t appeal to everyone, but I myself think that it’s really good and I’m looking forward to the second season.

[Keyser_Soze]

46 minutes ago, Phaseknox said:

And it’s not woke in any way which is refreshing as well.

 

Well if we go by the classic definition it is very "woke"

 

In any case. I didn't find it compelling it was just someone raging for hours on end. I saw someone write, "Just because you're traumatized doesn't make you interesting" and that kind of summed up how I felt about it.

[Massdriver]

Finished it. I’m ready for season 2!

[skillzdadirecta]

On 11/28/2023 at 1:24 PM, Phaseknox said:

And it’s not woke in any way which is refreshing as well.

It's pretty damned "woke" if you go by what woke really means and not what right wing media has defined it as.

Spoiler

I mean the main character is a bi-racial woman posing as a man

and the whole show is a critique on male dominated societal norms. You don't get much more "woke" than that.

[Phaseknox]

1 hour ago, skillzdadirecta said:

It's pretty damned "woke" if you go by what woke really means and not what right wing media has defined it as.

  Reveal hidden contents

I mean the main character is a bi-racial woman posing as a man

 

 

Spoiler

The main character disguises herself as a man, but still identifies as a woman and is straight.

[skillzdadirecta]

11 minutes ago, Phaseknox said:

  Hide contents

The main character disguises herself as a man, but still identifies as a woman and is straight.

 

That's besides the point. 

Spoiler

Being "woke" doesn't simply mean acknowledging Transgendered people exist. Besides that would make her a Transvestite by definition and if you get WHY she does this, it still is a very "woke" message. Not to mention that one of the main characters is handicapped and the whole show is a critique of how women were treated in Japanese society specifically and in patriarchal societies in general... sounds pretty "woke" to me. This is what I meant by the deliberately narrow way right wing media has co-opted the term and tried to turn it into a pejorative. This show is VERY woke.... or more specifically Progressive.

 

Hope that doesn't ruin it for you 

[Phaseknox]

On 11/30/2023 at 12:20 PM, skillzdadirecta said:

That's besides the point. 

  Reveal hidden contents

Being "woke" doesn't simply mean acknowledging Transgendered people exist. Besides that would make her a Transvestite by definition and if you get WHY she does this, it still is a very "woke" message. Not to mention that one of the main characters is handicapped and the whole show is a critique of how women were treated in Japanese society specifically and in patriarchal societies in general... sounds pretty "woke" to me. This is what I meant by the deliberately narrow way right wing media has co-opted the term and tried to turn it into a pejorative. This show is VERY woke.... or more specifically Progressive.

 

Hope that doesn't ruin it for you 

Of course not.  I actually don’t have a problem with any of it, I just don’t like when stuff is shoehorned into things to check off certain boxes.

[Keyser_Soze]

The wokeness doesn't stop there, it's even more woke than you're giving it credit:

 

Spoiler

1. The main character is female (already stated)

2. The majority of the show is about females having power over men. Not just Mizu but Akemi as well.

3. The big theme of the show is minority characters taking down wealthy and white dudes

4. One of the big main characters is disabled

5. The main bad guy, Abijah, takes a tengu nose up  the ass.

 

 

I'm sure you could go on and on. The biggest disappointment here is I was sad to see Phase use something like woke, didn't think he was one of them.

[Phaseknox]

4 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

The biggest disappointment here is I was sad to see Phase use something like woke, didn't think he was one of them.

I’m not one of them which should be obvious from knowing me all of these years. I used woke as a term for pushing an agenda in arts and entertainment, but perhaps I don’t fully know its meaning and used it inaccurately. If so, then I apologize.

[Greatoneshere]

2 hours ago, Phaseknox said:

I’m not one of them which should be obvious from knowing me all of these years. I used woke as a term for pushing an agenda in arts and entertainment, but perhaps I don’t fully know its meaning and used it inaccurately. If so, then I apologize.

 

Putting more representation and diversity into arts and entertainment isn't pushing an agenda, it's leveling the playing field. Being "woke" is a good thing, broadly speaking. 

[Phaseknox]

On 11/30/2023 at 6:00 PM, Greatoneshere said:

Putting more representation and diversity into arts and entertainment isn't pushing an agenda, it's leveling the playing field. Being "woke" is a good thing, broadly speaking. 

I’m all for more representation and diversity in arts and entertainment, but sometimes it comes across forced in a way that feels disingenuous and only included to earn brownie points. That’s when it feels like it’s being pushed as an agenda IMO. But when it’s done authentically it’s a good thing like you said.

[Greatoneshere]

6 minutes ago, Phaseknox said:

I’m all for more representation and diversity in arts and entertainment, but sometimes it comes across forced in a way that feels disingenuous and only included to win brownie points. That’s when it feels like it’s being pushed as an agenda IMO. But when it’s done authentically it’s great.

 

If something feels "forced" into something, that's bad writing, not an agenda. An agenda implies a conspiracy or something. The only "agenda" might be that clearly marketing to all types of people increases profits so producers/studios might demand more diversity and representation broadly, but its still on the writers and directors, etc. to execute it well or not. I'm not sure that's an agenda any more so than anything else ever has been in art when it comes to companies wanting to make money.

[Phaseknox]

2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

If something feels "forced" into something, that's bad writing, not an agenda. An agenda implies a conspiracy or something. The only "agenda" might be that clearly marketing to all types of people increases profits so producers/studios might demand more diversity and representation broadly, but its still on the writers and directors, etc. to execute it well or not. I'm not sure that's an agenda any more so than anything else ever has been in art when it comes to companies wanting to make money.

I guess the agenda (if that’s the right word) that I was thinking of is “hey look at us, we’re progressive” done with blatant intent to gain favor with certain groups. It sometimes comes across as attention seeking instead of authentic and genuine IMO. But yeah, it’s not really any different than anything else done by companies wanting to make money.

[Keyser_Soze]

Do you have an example of when diversity was forced into something? Maybe if we start from there we can figure out what you really mean.

[skillzdadirecta]

When I hear people say "forced Diversity" it makes me think that there are projects that shouldn't include ANY diverse casting and when there are, that's somehow wrong. Tom Cruise starred in a film called "The Last Samurai". Was that "forced Diversity"? Or what about when A movie called "Gods of Egypt" was made and not one of those so called gods was Egyptian. or how for YEARS Hollywood had a "will it play in Peoria strategy" that called for them to cast white characters in roles CLEARLY better suited for people of color... Bruce Lee had a whole show taken out from underhim and given to David Carradine because studios didn't think an Asian man could be the lead in a tv show. Or when the original Godzilla shoe horned Raymond Burr in the American cut and made him the focus of a movie that wasn't about white people and didn't need them. People who decry "wokeness" seem to want to go back to the days when minorities were marginalized in film and TV and knew their place and THAT'S why Right Wing media is so up in arms about it. Anyway back on topic, Blue Eyed Samurai is about as woke as you can get but it isn't heavy handed or preachy about it and that's due to the writing as @Greatoneshere was talking about although @Keyser_Soze seems to disagree with that... the writing being good that is 

[Phaseknox]

On 11/30/2023 at 9:49 PM, Keyser_Soze said:

Do you have an example of when diversity was forced into something? Maybe if we start from there we can figure out what you really mean.

I guess kind of the way that Disney/Pixar, shows like Velma, some video games and a lot of commercials do it.

 

Perhaps not the same thing, but I don’t like the somewhat recent trend of purposely making female video game characters unattractive as a way to show that they’re not being sexualized. Looking attractive is not the same as being sexualized which some devs don’t seem to grasp. However, male video game characters continue to be chiseled and handsome. Talk about double standards.

 

On 11/30/2023 at 10:12 PM, skillzdadirecta said:

When I hear people say "forced Diversity" it makes me think that there are projects that shouldn't include ANY diverse casting and when there are, that's somehow wrong. Tom Cruise starred in a film called "The Last Samurai". Was that "forced Diversity"? Or what about when A movie called "Gods of Egypt" was made and not one of those so called gods was Egyptian. or how for YEARS Hollywood had a "will it play in Peoria strategy" that called for them to cast white characters in roles CLEARLY better suited for people of color... Bruce Lee had a whole show taken out from underhim and given to David Carradine because studios didn't think an Asian man could be the lead in a tv show. Or when the original Godzilla shoe horned Raymond Burr in the American cut and made him the focus of a movie that wasn't about white people and didn't need them.

That’s known as whitewashing, and I’ve always disliked it. The biggest offender from your examples IMO is the show Kung Fu casting David Carradine as the lead instead of Bruce Lee. I watched the show in my youth and never understood why a white actor was playing the role when the character was Chinese. It was awkward, and confusing.

 

On 11/30/2023 at 10:12 PM, skillzdadirecta said:

People who decry "wokeness" seem to want to go back to the days when minorities were marginalized in film and TV and knew their place and THAT'S why Right Wing media is so up in arms about it.

That’s definitely not me, I’m the complete opposite.

 

On 11/30/2023 at 10:12 PM, skillzdadirecta said:

Blue Eyed Samurai is about as woke as you can get but it isn't heavy handed or preachy about it and that's due to the writing as @Greatoneshere was talking about although @Keyser_Soze seems to disagree with that... the writing being good that is 

Part of what I like about the show is that it basically gives zero fucks, it’s not watered down in fear of offending anyone which is kind of rare these days.

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, Phaseknox said:

I guess kind of the way that Disney/Pixar, shows like Velma, some video games and a lot of commercials do it. Perhaps not the same thing, but I don’t like the somewhat recent trend of purposely making female video game characters unattractive as a way to show that they’re not being sexualized. Looking attractive is not the same as being sexualized which some devs don’t seem to grasp. However, male video game characters continue to be chiseled and handsome. Talk about double standards.

 

Yikes - a lot to unpack here. They aren't "purposefully" making female video game characters unattractive to avoid sexualization, they're just making them more diverse and realistic to account for the many more various bodily forms women (and people in general) have than the frequently unattainable looks put out in media. And double standard? Male video game characters have looked all kinds of ways since the beginning unless Mario, Alan Wake, Nico Bellic, etc. suddenly became studs. Of course there are plenty of male video game characters who are the muscle bound ripped hero (exhibit a: many first person shooter main characters) but even then, that's for men, not for women, made primarily by male video game designers for teenage boys interested in a power fantasy. Women aren't dialing up Gears of War for the muscle bound men for the most part. Women barely enter the equation so the double standard doesn't apply. Now that more women play and consume games, representation for their looks are changing (men's looks are changing as well, not sure where you're getting that all male video game characters are all chiseled in 2023 compared to women where it's changing). 

 

Looking attractive is of course not the same as sexualizing the person. But creating characters that aren't attractive to you is not the same as making characters unattractive for all people because developers are conflating attractiveness with sexualizing them and want to avoid that. Many devs just want more realism and diversity cause (a) it's a good thing for humanity and (b) it sells more. Can you name a game where what you're saying happened where they could have had an attractive character (not sexualized) but instead forced the character to be unattractive? Do you have enough examples to show this trend that you're saying exists? Also, what mandate is there that all characters have to look attractive, regardless of whether they are then sexualized or not? I don't remember that being some rule. Plenty of attractive characters still out there, what are you worried about? It's not like some take over is happening, it's just leveling the playing field some (and still more work to be done there).

 

Like, you say: "Disney/Pixar, Velma, some video games and a lot of commercials do it". Do what, exactly? I don't recall any forced non-attractiveness to avoid sexualization in any of that. Certainly not enough for you to be bothered by this non-existent trend you feel is happening. You also didn't provide a specific example of where diversity was forced into something, because I can't think of one, and certainly not some worrying trend. You do see the same logic applies to both representation of women and representation of minorities here. Varied, realistic looks for women is the same logic as applied to putting minorities in things at all.

[Keyser_Soze]

Is this a Cheerios commercial had a mixed race couple outrage type of thing? How could a white woman marry a black man and have mixed race children? That would never happen in the real world!

 

(Hmm interesting theme for this particular thread 🤔 )

[Phaseknox]

On 12/1/2023 at 11:02 AM, Greatoneshere said:

They aren't "purposefully" making female video game characters unattractive to avoid sexualization, they're just making them more diverse and realistic to account for the many more various bodily forms women (and people in general) have than the frequently unattainable looks put out in media. And double standard? Male video game characters have looked all kinds of ways since the beginning unless Mario, Alan Wake, Nico Bellic, etc. suddenly became studs.

There’s a lot more male video game characters than female ones, so of course there’s going to be a few more diverse looking male ones. But I still feel that some female video game characters are intentionally made somewhat unattractive looking to avoid being seen as sexualized. 

 

On 12/1/2023 at 11:02 AM, Greatoneshere said:

Can you name a game where what you're saying happened where they could have had an attractive character (not sexualized) but instead forced the character to be unattractive? Do you have enough examples to show this trend that you're saying exists?

A few somewhat recent examples off the top of my head would be games like Control, Deliver Us Mars, Horizon Zero Dawn, Rage 2, Returnal, Scars Above and Wolfenstein: Youngblood. In Control and Horizon Zero Dawn the main characters are modeled from real women which are both pretty IMO, but the devs made them look less attractive in the games. How is making them less attractive than the real women that they’re modeled from more realistic? It’s not which is why making women in video games less attractive so that they’re more realistic looking doesn’t really hold water IMO.
 

On 12/1/2023 at 11:02 AM, Greatoneshere said:

Also, what mandate is there that all characters have to look attractive, regardless of whether they are then sexualized or not? I don't remember that being some rule.

It’s my personal mandate and rule.  I like playing as attractive female characters in games. 

 

On 12/1/2023 at 11:02 AM, Greatoneshere said:

Like, you say: "Disney/Pixar, Velma, some video games and a lot of commercials do it". Do what, exactly? I don't recall any forced non-attractiveness to avoid sexualization in any of that.

I was using Disney/Pixar, shows like Velma, some video games and commercials as examples of things that the diversity in them can feel kind of forced instead of authentic IMO, that was separate from what I said about female video game characters being less attractive looking to avoid being sexualized. 

 

On 12/1/2023 at 11:28 AM, Keyser_Soze said:

Is this a Cheerios commercial had a mixed race couple outrage type of thing? How could a white woman marry a black man and have mixed race children? That would never happen in the real world!

Was that an outrage, I wasn’t aware of it. A lot of commercials include mixed race and gay couples in them these days which is perfectly fine of course, but sometimes it can come across as a bit forced IMO.
 

With that said, I myself didn’t mean to cause an outrage here with my comments. And I definitely didn’t mean to come across as if I wasn’t for diversity in things, because I most certainly am.

[stepee]

I think phase is just trying to get across that he wants diversity because the creators actually want diversity, so it’s genuine. Not that creators are doing it for money. It’s a level of nuance that unfortunately is near impossible to discuss because the right uses the same with nefarious intent. But he’s obviously not like that. 

[Phaseknox]

34 minutes ago, stepee said:

I think phase is just trying to get across that he wants diversity because the creators actually want diversity, so it’s genuine. Not that creators are doing it for money. It’s a level of nuance that unfortunately is near impossible to discuss because the right uses the same with nefarious intent. But he’s obviously not like that. 

Exactly. Thanks for clarifying it that way, because I admit that I sometimes struggle with how to explain things especially in written form.

[Greatoneshere]

1 hour ago, Phaseknox said:

There’s a lot more male video game characters than female ones, so of course there’s going to be a few more diverse looking male ones. But I still feel that some female video game characters are intentionally made somewhat unattractive looking to avoid being seen as sexualized. 

 

A few somewhat recent examples off the top of my head would be games like Control, Deliver Us Mars, Horizon Zero Dawn, Returnal and Scars Above. In Control and Horizon Zero Dawn the character models are the actual voice actresses for them which are both pretty IMO, but the devs made them look less attractive in the games. How is making them less attractive than the real women that they’re modeled after more realistic? It’s not which is why making women in video games less attractive so that they’re more realistic looking doesn’t really hold water IMO.

 

Actually making them "less pretty" is just your opinion - some might say the character model is prettier. That's my entire point. You're speaking with authority on attractiveness when you're making minor distinctions. There are a million reasons they could have changed the character model, why would you assume the intent is to make them less attractive to avoid sexualization? Either way my point is there isn't a double standard. Why did they make Alan Wake less attractive than the mo-cap actor who plays him? Because they wanted a college professor looking writer, doesn't have to do with making him "slightly less attractive" compared to the real person. You say words like: "I still feel" which isn't really evidence of anything.

 

1 hour ago, Phaseknox said:

It’s my personal mandate and rule.  I like playing as attractive female characters in games. 

 

That's entirely the problem though with this mentality! It's partly why it's such an uphill battle to get these things changed to be more inclusive. This is a very male cis-het viewpoint that has created these problems in the first place - the demand the female protagonists you play as be traditionally attractive or no one will buy or play your game. Thankfully that demand is changing - it's not like attractive female characters are going to go away if that's what you're worried about.

 

1 hour ago, Phaseknox said:

I was using Disney/Pixar, shows like Velma, some video games and commercials as examples of things that the diversity in them can feel kind of forced instead of authentic IMO, that was separate from what I said about female video game characters being less attractive looking to avoid being sexualized. 

 

Ah, okay, I follow you. Where in Disney/Pixar is diversity "forced"? Which games? And commercials are meant to pander, that's their entire point. And Velma specifically exists to mock everything, so that doesn't work as a straightforward example. You can't just go "Disney/Pixar". Which scenes/characters in which movies was diversity forced? Please specify.

 

1 hour ago, stepee said:

I think phase is just trying to get across that he wants diversity because the creators actually want diversity, so it’s genuine. Not that creators are doing it for money. It’s a level of nuance that unfortunately is near impossible to discuss because the right uses the same with nefarious intent. But he’s obviously not like that. 

 

You're completely ignoring the demand that all his characters in video games be attractive and when they're not its forced by devs only to avoid sexualization of the character. Don't you know you can make them attractive and not sexualize them? And that somehow a world run by men is allowing a double standard that works against them? Not great views to me.

[best3444]

Idk, Aloy is pretty in Zero Dawn. I honestly am not understanding phase here at all. 

[stepee]

20 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

Actually making them "less pretty" is just your opinion - some might say the character model is prettier. That's my entire point. You're speaking with authority on attractiveness when you're making minor distinctions. There are a million reasons they could have changed the character model, why would you assume the intent is to make them less attractive to avoid sexualization? Either way my point is there isn't a double standard. Why did they make Alan Wake less attractive than the mo-cap actor who plays him? Because they wanted a college professor looking writer, doesn't have to do with making him "slightly less attractive" compared to the real person. You say words like: "I still feel" which isn't really evidence of anything.

 

 

That's entirely the problem though with this mentality! It's partly why it's such an uphill battle to get these things changed to be more inclusive. This is a very male cis-het viewpoint that has created these problems in the first place - the demand the female protagonists you play as be traditionally attractive or no one will buy or play your game. Thankfully that demand is changing - it's not like attractive female characters are going to go away if that's what you're worried about.

 

 

Ah, okay, I follow you. Where in Disney/Pixar is diversity "forced"? Which games? And commercials are meant to pander, that's their entire point. And Velma specifically exists to mock everything, so that doesn't work as a straightforward example. You can't just go "Disney/Pixar". Which scenes/characters in which movies was diversity forced? Please specify.

 

 

You're completely ignoring the demand that all his characters in video games be attractive and when they're not its forced by devs only to avoid sexualization of the character. Don't you know you can make them attractive and not sexualize them? And that somehow a world run by men is allowing a double standard that works against them? Not great views to me.

 

Phase is a decent bit older than us, not to give a pass, but keep in mind that it might make modern sensibilities a bit more difficult and his views don’t really match mine with that but I don’t think he wants them overly sexualized, or he’d be playing waifu stuff - idk I’ll let you guys have at it if you want to continue - def not in the mood for a big argument

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

3 hours ago, Phaseknox said:

A few somewhat recent examples off the top of my head would be games like Control, Deliver Us Mars, Horizon Zero Dawn, Returnal and Scars Above. In Control and Horizon Zero Dawn the character models are the actual voice actresses for them which are both pretty IMO, but the devs made them look less attractive in the games. How is making them less attractive than the real women that they’re modeled after more realistic? It’s not which is why making women in video games less attractive so that they’re more realistic looking doesn’t really hold water IMO.

 

This is a very simple question to answer:  the developers had an artistic vision of the type of woman character they wanted to portray in the game without regard to either how their actual voice or motion capture actress looks in real life.  The physical appearance of that character depicts the stage that person is in their life, their experiences to that point, etc. without the need to entirely reflect the actual physical characteristics of the "real" woman (or women) who portray that character.  This is the sort of freedom of artistic interpretation that the video game medium provides that is unique among all other visual mediums (save for animation) and for which it should be duly celebrated!

 

In fact, the more "unattractive" (i.e., "normal") looking characters in gaming and other forms of visual media, the better!

[Ghost_MH]

1 hour ago, best3444 said:

Idk, Aloy is pretty in Zero Dawn. I honestly am not understanding phase here at all. 

 

I don't see it either. I'm not seeing some big difference in attractiveness between Aloy and Ashly Burch or even Control's Jesse Faden and Courtney Hope.

 

I mean, I'm not even sure what difference there even is between Jesse and Courtney. Maybe Jesse looks a little more...tired...maybe? But she's also stuck in some dimension breaking, haunt your dreams, hellscape.

 

Also, like, fuck Ellise Chappell, I guess? She's attractive and also looks just like her character in Delivery Us Mars. Or imagine being Anne Beyer. Is she a woke actress for being the face model for Returnal's Selene since she's not attractive enough for some people? Was a literal runway model and I guess now she's too old to use her face on anything.

 

[Phaseknox]

On 12/1/2023 at 3:24 PM, Greatoneshere said:

Actually making them "less pretty" is just your opinion - some might say the character model is prettier. That's my entire point. You're speaking with authority on attractiveness when you're making minor distinctions.

I agree that it’s just my opinion, I never claimed to speak with authority on attractiveness.
 

On 12/1/2023 at 3:24 PM, Greatoneshere said:

There are a million reasons they could have changed the character model, why would you assume the intent is to make them less attractive to avoid sexualization?

There was some outrage a while back over female characters in video games being overly sexualized, and ever since then they’ve been getting less sexy which is fine but even just being pretty seemed to be a problem and they started getting more average looking and even what I consider unattractive. That’s why it’s my assumption that they’re purposely made less attractive now compared to in the past.
 

On 12/1/2023 at 3:24 PM, Greatoneshere said:

Either way my point is there isn't a double standard. Why did they make Alan Wake less attractive than the mo-cap actor who plays him? Because they wanted a college professor looking writer, doesn't have to do with making him "slightly less attractive" compared to the real person.

Alan Wake is good looking in the first game, and he seems to be in the sequel as well and looks like the actor that he’s modeled from based on what I’ve seen of it. I really can’t think of too many male protagonists in video games that are unattractive TBH, but I admittedly don’t play as many games with male leads these days as I prefer playing as female characters in games.
 

On 12/1/2023 at 3:24 PM, Greatoneshere said:

That's entirely the problem though with this mentality! It's partly why it's such an uphill battle to get these things changed to be more inclusive. This is a very male cis-het viewpoint that has created these problems in the first place - the demand the female protagonists you play as be traditionally attractive or no one will buy or play your game.

I don’t really agree with this because it’s a known fact that most guys don’t like playing as female characters in games regardless if they’re attractive or not, that’s why there are so few female characters in games because it’s still a male dominated thing. I’m actually in the minority of being a guy who prefers playing as female characters, I’ve just always found attractive, athletic, ass-kicking females to be badass for some reason. I’ve never really liked playing as big, bulky, tank type characters which male characters often tend to be. And I just find female characters more appealing to look at while playing, I don’t like looking at a dude’s butt for hours at a time. 

 

On 12/1/2023 at 3:24 PM, Greatoneshere said:

You're completely ignoring the demand that all his characters in video games be attractive and when they're not its forced by devs only to avoid sexualization of the character.

I don’t demand it, I just prefer it. There’s a difference. And I don’t really get why it even matters since it’s just my personal preference.
 

On 12/1/2023 at 3:26 PM, best3444 said:

Idk, Aloy is pretty in Zero Dawn. I honestly am not understanding phase here at all. 

I admit that she’s cute, and I do like her. I was simply making the point that she was made a little less pretty IMO than her real life counterpart that she’s modeled from.
 

On 12/1/2023 at 4:08 PM, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

OK, hear me out here:  maybe -- just maybe -- the developers had an artistic vision of the type of woman character they wanted to portray in the game without regard to either how their actual voice or motion capture actress looks in real life.  The physical appearance of that character represents the stage that person is in their life, their experiences, etc.

Maybe. 

 

On 12/1/2023 at 4:55 PM, Ghost_MH said:

I'm not seeing some big difference in attractiveness between Aloy and Ashly Burch or even Control's Jesse Faden and Courtney Hope.

 

I mean, I'm not even sure what difference there even is between Jesse and Courtney. Maybe Jesse looks a little more...tired...maybe? But she's also stuck in some dimension breaking, haunt your dreams, hellscape.

Aloy is modeled from Hannah Hoekstra, not Ashly Burch. And Jesse is more manly looking than Courtney, look at that jaw.  And yeah, she definitely looks more tired as well. But she looks like that at the beginning of the game, so it can’t be blamed on her experiences in the dimension breaking, haunt your dreams, hellscape. 
 

On 12/1/2023 at 4:55 PM, Ghost_MH said:

Also, like, fuck Ellise Chappell, I guess? She's attractive and also looks just like her character in Delivery Us Mars.

I didn’t realize that the character model was based on a real person, those bangs and eyebrows were kind of bothering me in the game but I still thought that she was somewhat cute. The problem in this case isn’t so much that she’s unattractive because she’s really not, but whoever did the character models for the game did a somewhat poor job IMO especially for the supporting cast. But I still really like the game, it’s one of my favorites this year.

 

On 12/1/2023 at 4:55 PM, Ghost_MH said:

imagine being Anne Beyer. Is she a woke actress for being the face model for Returnal's Selene since she's not attractive enough for some people? Was a literal runway model and I guess now she's too old to use her face on anything.

Young or old, runway model or not, I just don’t personally find her attractive. 

 

With all of that said, I didn’t mean to take this thread off-topic with my personal opinion on the attractiveness of female video game characters. Looking back I admit that I exaggerated a bit. And I also don’t deny that I could be completely wrong about my assumption of them being purposely made less attractive now to prevent them from appearing sexualized.

[best3444]

Lol you're something else. You and your female protagonist obsession! 

[CastlevaniaNut18]

Anyone using the term “woke” just makes me not want to take them seriously. 
 

 

Anyway, I wasn’t even aware of this show and now I think we’re gonna watch it this weekend. 

[Phaseknox]

1 hour ago, CastlevaniaNut18 said:

Anyone using the term “woke” just makes me not want to take them seriously.

Yeah, I admit that using it was a poor choice on my part.

 

1 hour ago, CastlevaniaNut18 said:

I wasn’t even aware of this show and now I think we’re gonna watch it this weekend. 

It’s really good IMO, one of the better animated shows that I’ve seen in a while.

[Keyser_Soze]

If chiseled handsome men are a problem for you then may I suggest Onimusha?

 

The main character is an over the hill samurai (an actual samurai unlike this show) and is traveling with an overweight man that can command falcons to decapitate people (how awesome is that?!) a nerdy guy, an ugly medicine man, and the most badass monk you've ever seen.

 

It's better directed and looks better than this show and the actions aren't as telegraphed as much as BES. In fact it shares some similar elements which are done better and more surprising in Onimusha. The battles and enemies are a lot cooler as well, which in BES are just groups of dudes for the most part.

[Phaseknox]

10 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

If chiseled handsome men are a problem for you then may I suggest Onimusha?

 

The main character is an over the hill samurai (an actual samurai unlike this show) and is traveling with an overweight man that can command falcons to decapitate people (how awesome is that?!) a nerdy guy, an ugly medicine man, and the most badass monk you've ever seen.

 

It's better directed and looks better than this show and the actions aren't as telegraphed as much as BES. In fact it shares some similar elements which are done better and more surprising in Onimusha. The battles and enemies are a lot cooler as well, which in BES are just groups of dudes for the most part.

That sounds good and all, but are there peaches? 
 

Based on your impressions and since I’m a fan of the games, I’m going to start watching it today.

[Keyser_Soze]

3 minutes ago, Phaseknox said:

That sounds good and all, but are there peaches? 

 

I have the sad news of saying, like the girl at chic-fil-a said to me once, unfortunately there are no peaches and to quote her, "it was really good wasn't it?"

[skillzdadirecta]

On 12/1/2023 at 3:42 PM, Phaseknox said:

How is making them less attractive than the real women that they’re modeled after more realistic? It’s not which is why making women in video games less attractive so that they’re more realistic looking doesn’t really hold water IMO.

Dude, they are playing CHARACTERS. Have you ever seen Monster with Charlize Theron? She's an incredibly beautiful woman but she was mad unattractive because that's what the part called for. The devs in the two games you named didn't want either of these characters' appearances to be the main focus of playing them and that's a perfectly legitimate creative decision. Not all female characters need to look like old school Lara Croft or Bayonetta.

 

  

On 12/1/2023 at 4:19 PM, stepee said:

Not that creators are doing it for money. It’s a level of nuance that unfortunately is near impossible to discuss because the right uses the same with nefarious intent.

News flash, the creators are making EVERY DECISION regarding game development to make money... Shocking, I know!

[stepee]

30 minutes ago, skillzdadirecta said:

Dude, they are playing CHARACTERS. Have you ever seen Monster with Charlize Theron? She's an incredibly beautiful woman but she was mad unattractive because that's what the part called for. The devs in the two games you named didn't want either of these characters' appearances to be the main focus of playing them and that's a perfectly legitimate creative decision. Not all female characters need to look like old school Lara Croft or Bayonetta.

 

  

News flash, the creators are making EVERY DECISION regarding game development to make money... Shocking, I know!

 

To be clear - I was expounding on what I believe they were saying not my personal opinion!