SilverAgeFan

I wish Georgia O'Keeffe were still alive.

Considering the uproar over the last round of sociology experiments that was performed upon the CoH population, probably a not a good idea...

Excellent movie. Wish I could have seen some of the short theatre they workshopped before they knew it would become a film. Growing fan of small house contemporary theatre.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guessing that you don't really think much about men sexually. Or have ever worked in a job where are required to think about men in this way. Because that comment lacks a lot of insight regarding how the male form and gender (two different things--body vs. social role) are viewed sexually.

Not sure how to help you sort out "What women want." Maybe get a gay friend and indulge in an hour or two of girl talk about what they like in a guy? Nothing dirty, just an insightful abs vs. eyes sort of conversation. Or work as a photo editor in the fashion industry? Anyways, trust me, men are sexualized quite a bit. Not as much as women still are. But more so now than they were even 15 years ago.

And that catty peer pressure described up-thread that occurs between many women? Can't tell you how clearly some corners of marketing understand that and have been trying to foster that culture amongst any segment of modern male populations. From fragrances to balding treatments to exercise machines to fad diets to garments to music, men are definitely sexualized. Sometimes it is to entice those that are sexually attracted to male bodies. Other times its to spark exploitable insecurities in males themselves. But make no mistake, it does happen in our society at large.

Okay, tangent over. Back to the thread about gender roles within a superhero game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XwLxNT8svk

McLuhan would be proud.

Interesting summary of the topic at hand. In my life, often when I encounter a question like this, the answer is in the doing. There is no verbal answer.

But as you hint at and hedge around in your post, artistic doing is a bit more compromised when your medium is a digital gamespace. It's one thing if you are limited to say ink on paper and any type of marks your imagination, pride and shame will let you get away with. But here in this gamespace, if this is your primary creative outlet, I can see the frustration some highly creative and exploratory people might begin to feel.

Compromises abound with imitative yet potentially inspired gestures. Things as simple as "I want to make a character that is all about whips" can tumble into frustration once a player realizes they are stuck to a petless MM. Or a desire for a character that is 50' tall will likely never be fully realized. Depending upon how one's imagination works, these corners that within the game represent terra incognita may be the most tempting. And though my examples are back squarely in the genre of neutral impulses for various superpowers, the same artistic curiosities do exist for the more subtle and naturalistic questions of gender and sexuality and what role they play in the formation of various characters.

Not all of us are roleplayers. Nor are all of us necessarily artists and writers. But for each of us, our character stables, especially for those who stay with the game for a number of years, represent a not-so-insignificant manifestation of each of our individual creativity. Creative expression tends to move through territories. And in a weird round about way, I think each of our stables of heroes from names to power sets to costumes represents on possible answer to the question you articulate.

Fixed that for you.

No no. It's me not getting the appeal of Ghost Widow, visually or as a literary character. I understood Eva's point number 2 to be equally relevant to Desdemona's appeal as it was to Ghost Widow's. I think that is why she made the aside about D.

Hehe. Too many subthreads flying about here.

By the way, this is one of the most civil (and actually interesting) conversations about gender, visual representation, sexuality and how it all bundles up into character I've witnessed on a gaming forum... perhaps ever. Usually these things feel like the thread title implies, yet another boring retread on campus political correctness vs. sexual libertarians that then quickly decays into a mass flame war and thread lock.

Not to sound all group therapy, but thanks for sharing everyone. I've found many of the posts interesting to read.

I get these points. I do. When I said I didn't get the mystique, I guess I meant to say that viscerally, the character or her appearance has never really had an effect on me. It all makes sense to me intellectually. And I'm no stranger to lusty, romantic attractions to a variety of subcultures, emo and goth included, but GW has just never floated any boat I've rowed. Nor has her backstory piqued my imagination.

Noble Savage spoke to this maybe a year or so ago when he posted about giving us some of what we've been long clamoring for as well as some things we never knew we wanted. From direct experience, I think one of the most gratifying things as an artist is delivering the unexpected to an audience and getting a strong positive response. For the sort of work I do, it often comes in the form of a "Damn, you proved me wrong. I would've said this would have never worked. But here it is. And I love it." And I imagine for the art team it's coming up with an unsuggested, or rarely suggested costume piece concept, keeping it under wraps, releasing it and then getting wild praise and extensive usage from the player base.

For me, I think the railroad crossing sign as an improvised titanic weapon falls into this category. I never realized I wanted to make a character that bashes things with railroad crossing signs till I saw the artwork.

In a subtler fashion, those metallic upper arm rings for female models from the barbarian pack have similarly changed one of my main characters signature look. I've repurposed them as more generic armbands of cosmic power and colored them gold or purple depending upon the outfit. But it works. Makes the character feel more complete. And I never knew she'd be better of with them before seeing them and playing around with them. (This character coincidentally is the same one I rerolled in that OTHER hero MMO with the muscle definition slider set to 11.)

Go ahead and try to explain that to someone who doesn't play the game who sees the character from a more distant fresher perspective. (YMMV on this experiment depending upon the age, maturity and orientation of your test subject.) They may not get that she has one-of-a-kind hair. But I can tell you from my experience she's been described to me by outsiders as, "Is that the character with the huge white boobs?" Sure, there's accentuating what you've got. And then there is silly.

To me, Ghost Widow's costume has always felt as silly as the nipples on Batman & Robin's chest plates in Joel Schumacher's Batman and Robin simply because it overshadows everything else about her with a big flashing neon sign that essentially says "BOOBIES -->". Even with years of familiarity with the content of the game, I've found it hard to get over that costume. And I've found those outside the game simply can't take any deeper expositions of her character seriously as it sort of seems like just weak coverup to justify folks liking her simply because of how she looks. And in that case, I think her overt sexualization actually serves for some (myself at least and those I've already described) as an obstacle to accessing the character or taking her seriously.

In my experiences, for a character like her to work, there needs to be a synthesis between the overt sexualization, her motivations as a character, and the role her sexuality plays in her interactions with other characters.With a character like Ghost Widow, it seems when someone brings up the costume the response is "Yeah, but she's cool for different reasons..." rather than "Yeah, she's all that and then some..." It may sound like a subtle difference. But it's a difference that matters in my book.

And before this conversation goes there: Yes I get the whole dead, disinterested and therefore unobtainable schtick ascribed to GW. I get it. But I also find it a rather boring manifestation of unobtainability. She is no Rogue or Doctor Manhattan in this respect. Part of it is because she is already so disinterested that it just doesn't matter that she is a non-corporeal being. The other part again is the sillyness of the white plastic boob-guard costume. Instead she comes off like the cartoonish sit-com woman who THINKS she catches someone eying her in public and then proceeds to bob and weave her head while loudly asserting "NUH uh honey, you ain't gettin' into this". (Or Jill Talley's beautiful moment in a Mr. Show sketch from about 15 years ago when she comes out of a truck stop bathroom, wipes her nose and then randomly asserts to some person waiting on-line at the register "Take a pi'ture, it'll last longer. Jag-off!") The only valid response for most characters targeted by this is a mixture of confusion and reciprocal disinterest by the pre-emptive rejection. And for some, add a touch of privately held embarrassment at GW's lack of self awareness.

Anyways, I realize this is an argument of opinions which I'll never win here with most forum members. Ghost Widow has a strong fan base amongst CoX players. Or at least she seems to. I've never understood the mystique though.

I like this summary. It matches where my mind is at when I make a new character. Each of my characters is quite different from the last and each is usually my own riff on some of the many tried and true tropes of comic book fiction.

Yet where you assert that overplaying is bad, I think it's like picking fruit. The longer you can let it ripen on the plant, the more intense the flavor. But you also risk going too far and your harvest going off. But it's worth the risk IMO.

So back to what I understand as Sam's original overall topic and question that has resurfaced several times in the past year: why are there so few options to then overplay the muscle bound Red Sonja type of female in game?

I have a hard time agreeing with this statement when you look at her costume chest piece. The first thing a couple people I know who don't play the game have commented upon seeing her in game or loading graphics are her breasts. That costume isolated and exaggerates the existence of her breasts. It's all there in black and white. And personally, I've always thought that she was a bit of a cheesey character for it.

Next to Sister Psyche, I'd argue she's one of the most sexualized female canon characters in game (pre-Desdemona of course).

It's all good. Just wanted to be clear that on this particular topic, I'm on your side.

Bringing it back to requests for character parts and the source material (comic books, superhero comics in particular and that which is T for Teen down to G rated) while skirting that elephant in the room, gender bending in a media loaded with gender stereotyping and highly characterized body types and gender roles is a common means strategy for creating a "unique" character.

We may not be able to discuss the specifics of WHY various roles and looks are gender stereotyped, but like many taboo subjects I think many of us know it when we see it. Some of classic comic gender benders are quite memorable and charming. Peppermint Patty, anyone? Anyways, I think what Sam (and a few others) have requested over the years are a few more tools in the costume creator to play with this pretty standard strategy for defining a character in visual fiction. Regrettably, I think a few firey places would need to freeze over though before we see tutus in the Huge->Belts category.

That was me who suggested that. It was not meant as a joke. The manner that it came out was as a witty quip and clever turn of phrase if I vaguely recall the momentum of the exchanges in the thread correctly. Anyways, I said it there and I'll reiterate here: I've always been a fan of Wretch's unique arms.

Sam, I generally like the ideas you bring to the boards. And you tend to tackle them with the utmost passion. But you need to chill a little. Sometimes you risk alienating people that agree with you.

A wry writing tone doesn't always mean someone is against you.

One of my favorite things about the character creator in a competing MMO title that shall go unnamed was the musculature slider. It was basically a slider for the alpha channel of a shader on every character regardless of body type: male, female or huge. I remade one of my original 5 characters in that particular game world, a classic female heroine who can easily be triangulated in terms of personality and aesthetic between Superman, Wonder Woman and She-Hulk. Being able to crank her musculature--the definition and not just the geometry--to 11 really helped make her visual presence in that other title rather stunning. She was ripped and I loved it.

I also wouldn't mind more "butch" costume options, whether it be Baron coats, new short hairstyles, or tough-grrrl tat sleeves. But even the butch can become sexualized. Witness Vasquez in Aliens. Or ask any visually oriented queer friends you might have. Butch can definitely be sexualized...

Edit: Oh and men are not allowed a full range of options either. It's been how many decades since Rocky Horror and the whole glam fashion? No fishnets for men? Very limited long hair options? It's not just about cross dressing. Context is everything. In the Ocean's films, Bernie Mac's penchant for manicures would have come off as pretentiously metrosexual if given to Brad Pitt's character. But for Bernie's character, this and other cues blurring gender lines, just made him seem tougher and in certain scenes more intimidating.

From willowy gothic male androgyny to linebackers in tutus, shades of male cross dressing can also be put to good use when defining a character's schtick. Yes it all needs to remain T for Teen. But cripes, how many rock stars for the past 40 years have gotten us used to some blurred gender lines when it comes to men? The closest thing we have in this direction is the legacy S&M style male top with skin that has leather straps and nipple rings. And this could arguably be the only male costume item that is as sexually overt as dozens of female options, including a majority of the original tops with skins options.

Hmmm.. not sure whether to reply as a reasonable but indifferent adult and thank you for the response. Or as an impassioned but disappointed customer. Part of me is ready just to say "meh" and figure that we're going to get what we get under Freedom. But the part of me that is still very enthusiastic about this game is kinda tired of the tired explanations for weird marketing and release decisions. That part of me is also in agreement with other posters that are asserting that the no clipping explanation just doesn't wash and what *has* been included in this pack is marginally worth the price of Paragon Points.

Hmmm... will go test this now. Within reason. If we can get up to 2 in a week, I'll see if I can get 3 or more on the character I've already done it once with. Like EG's post implies, I thought that it was 1 per week per character no matter what. I didn't realize you get 1 for the first time doing any signature story and then it is gated starting the run AFTER that.

Any clear word on how this is intended to work once we have multiple signature arcs? Will it be one big rewards table reward per arc per week per character? Or one rewards table bonus per character per week, regardless of the diversity of arcs?

****

Edit:

So just ran this arc another two times on a character who had already gotten 1 hero merit. I was able to get one more. Third time I ran it, there was red text below the hero merit option on the rewards table saying I can only choose that reward once every 7 days. Since this character can fairly effectively speed this arc, going to run it a few more times to see how it currently *is* working, regardless of whether that is WAI. I'm just systematically picking each successive reward until it won't let me anymore, sort of like doing holiday mishes for badges and powers.

To be clear, on this character, running it thrice I was only able to get 2 hero merits total.

****
Edit 2: Rewards Log

Run 1

Rewards Blocked From Selection: None
Reward Selected: Hero Merit
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 1 Hero Merit

Run 2

Rewards Blocked From Selection: None
Reward Selected: Hero Merit
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 1 Hero Merit

Run 3

Rewards Blocked From Selection: Hero Merit
Reward Selected: 4x Reward Merits
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 20 Reward Merits

Run 4

Rewards Blocked From Selection: Hero Merit, 4x Reward Merits
Reward Selected: Reward Merits
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 5 Reward Merits

Run 5

Rewards Blocked From Selection: Hero Merit, 4x Reward Merits
(Basic Reward Merits was still available, but I chose the next one in interest of testing)
Reward Selected: Astral Merit
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 1 Astral Merit

Run 6

Rewards Blocked From Selection: Hero Merit, 4x Reward Merits, Astral Merit
(Basic Reward Merits was still available, but I chose the next one in interest of testing)
Reward Selected: 10 Incarnate Threads
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 10 Incarnate Threads

Run 7

Rewards Blocked From Selection: Hero Merit, 4x Reward Merits, Astral Merit, Incarnate Threads
Reward Selected: Reward Merits
Rewards Received:

• 2 Reward Merits
• 5 Reward Merits

****

Final Edit:

So, it appears that the system is WAI. But just not how I expected it to from the initial announcement. ALL rewards are available for the first time you do the mission. No selection counts towards your weekly limit. Then thereafter, you can claim each and every reward on the table once every 7 days with the 5 merits being the one repeatable reward.

The other thing that threw me, I expected the 4x Reward Merits to simply award 4x the base reward merits you receive for the arc itself: 2. When I got 20 for that selection, I thought I might have found a bug. But nope. It's 4x the 5 merits which is the repeatable reward.