Xanatos
-
Posts
2017 -
Joined
-
Just to be clear:
I'm not championing "men's rights" or anything like that. Men have it much easier than women in most things. To enter the feminist debate and try to say "BUT WHAT ABOUT MENS RIGHTS?" would be ridiculous. It would be the equivalent of going to a Black History Month event and shouting "WHAT ABOUT WHITE HISTORY MONTH?"
Men's rights / Men being hard done to is not the issue of contention here. To suggest that is what I'm "championing" is to completely miss the point. If you're going to ignore what I write, and pigeon-hole me as "anti-feminist" just because I disagree with you, then you are being completely ignorant.
The issue of contention is that you are not accepting that the feminist debate goes BEYOND rights for women. It looks at the fundamental problem with gender roles within society as a whole. To take a truly feminist approach to something, such as fixing the costume options in this game, both genders must be looked at objectively. (I.e. Without calling certain male or female physical attributes as "normal/neutral"...because what is "normal/neutral" is fully determined by the patriarchal society within which we live!)
For those interested. Check out "Raep: A Philosophical Investigation" by Keith Burgess-Jackson. It goes over all of this in much more depth then I can on a video game forum.
-
That...didn't respond to anything myself or Blue_Mourning wrote.
-
Looks more like steampunk.
-
Hey Sam, my last post pretty much covers your questions.
-
Quote:Serious?Originally Posted by Golden Girl
The zone cap has been lowered to reduce lag. -
...to artificially make the game seem busier than it is?
-
Quote:You're being naive. You cannot preach equality on the one hand, while only championing the rights of ONE HALF of the population with the other. Allow me to explain why.Originally Posted by Smersh
No.
When you want two things to be equal, you absolutely have to get them to equal first before you start talking about adjusting both.
Both genders are social constructs of the patriarchal society within which we live. They are both equal parts of the problem and need to treated as such. If we focused just on women's right, and not at the meta-societal concerns, we would simply be granting women the right to become pseudo-men. This is because the power structure of the patriarchal society within which we live would STILL EXIST. Rather than be granted equal rights, women would be granted MALE rights. Do you see the problem here? If the patriarchal society is still in place, and dictates what power is, and that power is then "given" to women, it is not true gender equality. It is just giving women the right to be men.
This is what I was saying earlier. This notion of male power/sexuality being "neutral" or "normal" to so many people is in fact A MASSIVE PART OF THE PROBLEM. True equality would be the complete and utter breakdown of the patriarchal society within which we live, especially as a source of gender empowerment. To just focus on women, and ignore men, would in fact HURT women's right in the long run.
This is obviously all just my opinion. And I'm well aware this is just a forum for a video game. But a lot of people here seem to be very keen on equality for women, but aren't really looking at the wider picture. -
Quote:Let's get back to talking about BOTH genders.Originally Posted by Eva Destruction
It's not surprising that men try to sidetrack any discussion about women's issues with an argument that basically translates to "But what about the men? We have problems too! Now shut up and let's go back to talking about us!"
As long as you have an "us vs them" mentality, you're not striving for equality. -
If farms did not exist, people would still use the forums to find decent peer-reviewed storyarcs. The situation would not be different at all. (Mainly because instead of tonnes of crap farms to sift through, we would instead have tonnes of crap storyarcs.) In fact I am sure there are some farmers who, having grown bored of farming, decided to check out some storyarcs in the AE. I remember a thread recently where a couple members said that were it not for farming drawing them to the AE...that they wouldn't have bothered with the storyarcs there.
Farming is driving traffic to the place your stories are located. It's a good thing.
If you want people to play your arcs then promote them heavily. Just like in the real world, you can't expect the system to do the work for you. -
Quote:Not really. Given that your only source for them is yourself.Originally Posted by Seldom
Is my opinion valid, then?
All I care about is whether we're allowed to talk about farming. You haven't answered my question. -
Quote:In your opinion.Originally Posted by Seldom
The devs are perfectly fine with players repetitiously going through content to attain the standard rewards for doing so.
Where things get tricky in the architect are threefold:
First, the above is sometimes done to the exclusion of narrative or even creativity. (Creativity is not well used when copying from someone else's template) Templated/story-less creations published in the AE compete with creations that are in line with the design intentions for the AE, (making stories more or less in line with dev stories) so anything that could be interpreted as approval for their usage is avoided.
Secondly, the devs made the architect to be a place to supply supplemental content, that is stories for players to play along to when they did not feel like doing a dev arc again. A similar/alternate path of progression. The straight up streamlined reward systems present in many cases faster progressions, whether it's to leveling or to become wealthy. The devs have often mentioned their discomfort with accelerated progressions, particularly ones that bypass their desired progression speed and bypass content.
Third, the above mentality to find the most streamlined rewards has often found means to create heightened rewards through bugs/loopholes or just in ways the devs did not intend, which gave far more rewards for far less danger. These were termed 'exploits,' and are seen as a threat to the devs.
The trick is that all of the above (Repitition of accepted means, use of templated/shallow AE missions, accelerated progression in the AE, and AE exploitation) are often included by different users when discussing AE "farming." As some of the activities fall into the grey (or worse) areas of mission architect usage, I don't think you'll get a flat "Farming is fine!" from the devs. -
Played this one again years later. Absolutely fantastic. The friend I ran it with was creeped out.
Sorry if this counts as a necro-post (*rimshot*), but this is the best place to comment on it. -
...given that it's what most people use the AE for? Zwillinger even said in the latest Ustream that Paragon Studios understands that a lot of people like to farm. So I just wanted to check if it was safe to discuss it here.
I mean there's this thread over in the brute forum about which character makes the very best farmer:
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?t=250051
...so it SEEMS like Paragon Studios doesn't have a problem with this. I just wanted to be sure.
Sorry for making a thread about this as a conversational topic. I couldn't find any official word on the matter. Was hoping someone in the AE community would know.
Please note I'm not talking about exploits. (Those are things that MARTy handles.) I'm talking about running AE missions that are reward-centric. (That you can often repeat in the same manner as Incarnate Trials.)
Cheers! -
Game's best RPVPer. @Vince.
-
It is not surprising that people within an MMORPG do not understand male sexuality.
Why did I even bother. -
Quote:The male avatars appearing strong, and the list of sexualised aesthetics they also posses, are not entirely prerequisites of one another.Originally Posted by Kjell_NA
The men aren't as sexualised as the women because the male models is strong. It's imposing, impressive and highly practical for a fighter. It's a tough guy. The female model isn't strong. It's got large breasts as default and no way of not having a tremendous butt.
It is also worrying that you think it's "normal" for men to appear strong. -
Quote:I suggest that you have a patriarchal perspective of what is "normal" for men to look like. This is perhaps why you consider the existing aesthetic of male avatars "gender" neutral when in fact they are very sexualised towards the notion of the masculine male:Originally Posted by SpittingTrashcan
They're not.
I have seen many sexualized portrayals of men created by various people, male and female, who have many different ideas about what makes a man attractive, some mainstream, some quite unique. The aspects of this game that are male-only - poses, animations, exclusive costume pieces - are not sexualizing masculinity in any of the ways that I have seen masculinity sexualized. What they remind me of more is neutral motions, that are neither particularly male nor female. What they remind me of is characters who have the same body language whether male or female because developing alternate male and female stances was too much work.
Default male models: broad shoulders, strong jawline, developed brows, muscular definition regardless of weight, arched back, good posture standing/walking/running, symmetrical features, waist-chest ratio, taller than female equivalent.
...how can you look at all that and say it's NEUTRAL?
Don't get me wrong. I think the sexual objectification of women is wrong. I'm not pointing out that male avatars are sexualised so that I can say "well suck it up, both genders are treated the same so it's fair." That would be a terribly crass thing to say. My point is, and it is a point that will no doubt get ignored, is that the sexual objectification of men is wrong as well. I'm just pointing out that this game, much like the comics that inspire it, sexualise BOTH genders in accordance with the overarching patriarchal values of the society within which it is made. This is wrong.
Ways to solve this:
-The walk/run animation. All three genders should be given the option to use both.
-Costume options being limited by gender. Assuming the art time is available, all options should be available to both genders. (Including mustaches.) -
To everyone criticising the women in this game as being overly sexualised towards women, let me just point out one thing.
You're forgetting the men.
The default male avatars in this game are as much an objectification of masculine notions of male sexuality as the default female avatars are an objectification of feminine notions of female sexuality.
Thus the issue is not one of the art team oversexualising women, but rather oversexualising men & women in accordance with patriarchal values of what men and women should look like.
But tbh...it's completely fine. Especially in a game where people can opt out of this by deviating from the norm. Butch women and feminine men are possible to be made in the costume creator. Plus if you look at the game narrative; the genders are portrayed to be very much equal.
The only time this would ever be an issue is if certain costume options were restricted due to them not being feminine/masculine enough. Limited art time I can understand, but you cannot claim the "opt out" feature is all that valid when the options presented are limited by the very social ideal you are trying to opt out of! -
GGs tonight guys.
-
Your name is accurate.
-
See what I mean? He just plays the forums.
-
Quote:Do you pvp?Originally Posted by Aneko
There are at least three things wrong with your post, but that's not surprising.
-
Quote:He doesn't. He's one of those ppl that just post on the forums.Originally Posted by DaveMebs
Do you have any idea what I'm even talking about?
-
While the entire CoT redesign has been a complete waste of time...
...I gotta agree with not including the pope hats. They would look SO STUPID poking out of force field bubbles. -
Quote:We already have a roleplaying forum. I know it's hard to find due to the cryptic title it has. ("Roleplaying".)Originally Posted by Tokyo
Xanatos lets stay on topic please. We are discussing the forums; not conducting online profiling. Back on topic; I happen to feel this change would be greatly appreciated by the role-playing community. role-playing shouldn't be relegated to one server, even Freedom has its role-players. A forum dedicated to Role-playing discussion would benefit the Role-playing community, a community I might add that is well over 2% of the gross population and only grows stronger with each issue. d;D
Roleplaying and PVP aren't mutually exclusive. I am living proof of this.
You are obsessed with the PVP community even though you hate it.
Keep cuttin.