Quantcast
I'm tired of this overemphasis on diversity spilling into our entertainment.

Forums - General Discussion - I'm tired of this overemphasis on diversity spilling into our entertainment.

OP, imma be honest with you. You're the one that sounds self entitled.

Creators can appeal to whoever they goddamn please, and you can just NOT buy the games you don't like. It's exactly the same for you as it is the for the people that used to complain about not being represented.



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
Azuren said:
We need more roles filled like how they filled Ripley's role in Alien:

Write a unisex role. If a love interest is necessary, make that love interest unisex as well. Fill the role with the best actor for the part (best pairing if a love interest is necessary), and that's it. Don't write a strong female for the purpose of having a strong female, because that character will likely suck.

Supergirl doesn't suck.

I think she sucks, you just need to search for the right movie...



RolStoppable said:
Azuren said:
We need more roles filled like how they filled Ripley's role in Alien:

Write a unisex role. If a love interest is necessary, make that love interest unisex as well. Fill the role with the best actor for the part (best pairing if a love interest is necessary), and that's it. Don't write a strong female for the purpose of having a strong female, because that character will likely suck.

Supergirl doesn't suck.

She did in her conception. It looks years of clever writing to make her acceptable.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

EnricoPallazzo said:
RolStoppable said:

Supergirl doesn't suck.

I think she sucks, you just need to search for the right movie...

I see a hint of porn.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azuren said:
We need more roles filled like how they filled Ripley's role in Alien:

Write a unisex role. If a love interest is necessary, make that love interest unisex as well. Fill the role with the best actor for the part (best pairing if a love interest is necessary), and that's it. Don't write a strong female for the purpose of having a strong female, because that character will likely suck.

That's like saying don't write a sci-fi story for the purpose of having a sci-fi story.

If somebody wants to write a strong female (or whatever else) character, why shouldn't they? The only thing that matters is how well you execute that



Around the Network
Podings said:
OP, imma be honest with you. You're the one that sounds self entitled.

Creators can appeal to whoever they goddamn please, and you can just NOT buy the games you don't like. It's exactly the same for you as it is the for the people that used to complain about not being represented.

Creators are increasingly being told who to appeal to, isn't that the point of the original comment? So it's not exactly sincere ranting that creators 'can appeal to whoever the goddam please'.



Angelus said:
Azuren said:
We need more roles filled like how they filled Ripley's role in Alien:

Write a unisex role. If a love interest is necessary, make that love interest unisex as well. Fill the role with the best actor for the part (best pairing if a love interest is necessary), and that's it. Don't write a strong female for the purpose of having a strong female, because that character will likely suck.

That's like saying don't write a sci-fi story for the purpose of having a sci-fi story.

If somebody wants to write a strong female (or whatever else) character, why shouldn't they? The only thing that matters is how well you execute that

Perhaps you miss interpreted his phrase.

And it really goes to the same point, you don't write a sci-fi for the sake of being sci-fi, you want to write a great story and being sci-fi is just the theme, canvas, boundary, etc. Same you create a great char and if so happen you put as a female great.

But when you decide to make a sci-fi or strong female for the sake of it you'll fall in the pitfal of not great execution. That is one of the points discussed a lot in this thread that when for diversity sakes some movies or games define a woman they make her flaweless to not get complains from SJW and that ends up being shallow and boring.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Angelus said:
Azuren said:
We need more roles filled like how they filled Ripley's role in Alien:

Write a unisex role. If a love interest is necessary, make that love interest unisex as well. Fill the role with the best actor for the part (best pairing if a love interest is necessary), and that's it. Don't write a strong female for the purpose of having a strong female, because that character will likely suck.

That's like saying don't write a sci-fi story for the purpose of having a sci-fi story.

If somebody wants to write a strong female (or whatever else) character, why shouldn't they? The only thing that matters is how well you execute that

You're conflating genre and character, so not exactly the best argument from the get-go.

 

If someone wants to write a strong female character, then they should focus on the character arc, not the genitalia and ideology. Write a good character before you decide the gender, don't try to write a good character around a gender.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Azuren said:
Angelus said:

That's like saying don't write a sci-fi story for the purpose of having a sci-fi story.

If somebody wants to write a strong female (or whatever else) character, why shouldn't they? The only thing that matters is how well you execute that

You're conflating genre and character, so not exactly the best argument from the get-go.

 

If someone wants to write a strong female character, then they should focus on the character arc, not the genitalia and ideology. Write a good character before you decide the gender, don't try to write a good character around a gender.

That was basically my point, it's about proper execution, not making arbitrary decisions. I don't entirely agree with your point about writing the character first and then deciding the gender. That works in some cases, if you go in with the idea of it truly being an interchangeable character, but in many other cases a character will have traits, and story arcs that lean decidedly in one direction or another. 



Angelus said:
Azuren said:

You're conflating genre and character, so not exactly the best argument from the get-go.

 

If someone wants to write a strong female character, then they should focus on the character arc, not the genitalia and ideology. Write a good character before you decide the gender, don't try to write a good character around a gender.

That was basically my point, it's about proper execution, not making arbitrary decisions. I don't entirely agree with your point about writing the character first and then deciding the gender. That works in some cases, if you go in with the idea of it truly being an interchangeable character, but in many other cases a character will have traits, and story arcs that lean decidedly in one direction or another. 

Well he put the write the charcter not the story totally... and he also put that when you decide the gender if you want to have romatic impact you also put the details of that later but the romantical impact was already written neutrally.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994