#oneaday Day 757: SEX!

20120214-231602.jpg

Let’s talk about sex. Sex in video games, to be exact.

I read this article over on Eurogamer today. It makes its point in a rather crude manner, noting that video games “can’t do sex”, going on to cite numerous examples including popular media’s backlash against Mass Effect‘s sex scene and BioWare’s subsequent retreat into their characters’ underwear; sex-focused games such as 3D Sex Villa 2; Second Life‘s notorious sex industry (which likely accounts for a considerable proportion of that virtual world’s economy) and numerous others.

But I sort of think that the argument in that article is a bit flawed. There seems to be something of a confusion in the distinction between “sexual content” and “porn”. I don’t think anyone is advocating the inclusion of outright pornography in our games, though this is often the assumption that mainstream media makes when news emerges of sexual content in a high-profile game. But the Eurogamer piece jumps from discussing Mass Effect’s soft-focus sideboob to games that are just plain porn. There’s no middle ground, it seems.

Or is there? Well, yes, but you have to look outside of the mainstream and outside of the pornographic games industry to find it.

Probably the most common example you’ll find of this “middle ground” is in the dating sim/visual novel/eroge genre. I’ve played a few of these over the years for curiosity’s sake and while some are just interactive porn stories (Paradise Heights springs to mind — there are no choices to make and a lot of fucking) others like True Love, Kana Little Sister, Three Sisters’ Story and, yes, Katawa Shoujo use their sexuality as something more than just a titillating scene for players to jack off over or something deliberately provocative to attract the ire (and thus inadvertent publicity) of the mainstream media. (This latter interpretation is a cynical view, I know, but I’ve seen too much video game marketing over the last couple of years to believe it doesn’t happen.)

Rather, these games use sexual scenes in context. Katawa Shoujo is perhaps the best example, with sex scenes proving to be a way for us to get to know more about the characters. We learn that Emi is adventurous and willing to try anything once; that Lilly, despite her prim and proper appearance, enjoys her sexuality; that Shizune is dominant in all aspects of her personality; that Misha is confused; that Hanako believes no-one will see her as anything more than a “princess” to be saved; that Rin craves intimacy, to find some way to connect to another person. All of these scenes feature explicit erotic imagery and text, but none descend into being porn — sex for the sake of sex. During the sex scenes with Rin, for example, there’s a lot of philosophising about what might be going on inside Rin’s confused, creative head. Lilly uses one of her sex scenes to show Hisao what it’s like to be blind. Emi’s “Anal.” scene is endearingly awkward as only teenage sex can be. And Hanako’s encounter with Hisao is faintly horrifying after the fact.

“I can’t fap to this!” was the war cry thrown up by members of 4chan upon playing Katawa Shoujo, but that’s not a bad thing — do you jack off every time there’s a sex scene in a movie? No, because that’s ridiculous. Sex doesn’t equal porn.

The same is true to a lesser extent in True Love, another dating sim based in a high school, though in this instance it’s a regular education institute rather than a special school. In True Love, gameplay revolves around managing the protagonist’s schedule so he builds up a series of different statistics ranging from creativity to sportsmanship. Different statistics will attract different members of the game’s cast, and this then sends you down their various narrative routes where, again, along the way you get to know them a whole lot better and, again, you get to shag them at least once in a scene that, while erotic, is more focused on characterisation than providing something for the player to get their rocks off to.

Three Sisters’ Story actively punishes players for being promiscuous, though not until it’s far too late to do anything about it. Throughout the course of the game’s story, the player gets the opportunity to have sex with the three sisters in question, but also has the opportunity to turn them down, too. If the player elects to have sex with all of them over the course of the game, the story doesn’t end well for our protagonist, even after he saves them from abduction. A degree of self-control on the player’s part is required in order to get the best ending. Do they want the sexy scene now, or do they want the story to end well?

Moving out of the visual novel genre, Silent Hill is another series which has always used sexual imagery to striking effect. Rather than being outright explicit about it, however, it tends to make use of more abstract imagery, leaving the player to interpret things for themselves. At no point in the game do we see exactly what made Angela so wrong in the head, but we can interpret that it was sexual abuse from her father. At no point in the game does James speak about his resentment over his wife’s illness depriving him of sexual gratification, but we can determine that from the appearance and behaviour of Maria, the various times Pyramid Head shows up and the grotesque mannequins who form the bulk of the game’s enemies.

You can’t fap to Silent Hill, in short.

Look at Catherine, too. The game’s just come out in the UK so a whole new wave of reviews has been hitting. I was rather surprised to see at least a couple calling it out for not being daring enough with its visuals — i.e. not showing any tits, muff, cock and/or balls. Despite the game’s focus on adultery, sexuality and adult relationships, there are no explicit sex scenes in the game, and nothing more than sideboob in the nudity department. But the thing is, there doesn’t need to be. Catherine didn’t need explicitly pornographic scenes to get across its point. Sex is a key theme in that game, but that doesn’t mean we need to stop for a fuck break every so often. Sometimes implying something can be just as powerful as showing it and — God forbid — making it interactive: Heavy Rain‘s painfully awkward interactive sex scene says “HHNNNGGG” at this juncture.

So can games “do sex”? Why yes, yes they can. Unfortunately, those games which do do sex and do it well tend to be confined to the specialist interest, cult classic or underpromoted independent title department. So why don’t we see large publishers taking more risks, producing more adult games with sexual themes and/or content?

Part of it is a marketing issue. Getting too explicit with the sexytime in a game will net a release an “Adults Only” rating from the ESRB, and that’s a big no-no for a lot of game retailers, thus hurting physical sales for the publisher. Given the growth of digital downloads, however, at least part of this problem goes away — there’s no shame in purchasing an Adults Only title online, and publishers can simply sell it themselves, which is generally a better deal for everyone involved anyway.

Part of it, too, is fear of backlash from the mainstream media and, subsequently, politicians who don’t understand the first thing about the industry, assuming it to be toys for children. California had a narrow escape just last year, and it’s doubtful that publishers want to take the risk of making the people in charge think that censorship of a creative industry still finding its feet is a good idea.

Do we “need” sex in games? If we want to explore the full gamut of human emotions in the interactive stories that we tell, then yes, we do. We need to get over the assumptions that everyone playing games is too young to be able to handle sexual content. We need to get over childish tittering at every sight of sideboob. We need to have realistic characters who have realistic relationships.

What this doesn’t mean, however, is that we need sex in all games. And those games that we do have sex in should justify its inclusion somehow, otherwise we’re right back to accusations of peddling porn again. Katawa Shoujo and its ilk are doing it right. Mainstream publishers could learn a lot from the risks that independent studios and those who tackle the development of a game as a creative rather than a technical or marketing project.

Who knows what the future holds? I certainly don’t. But it’s clear that the industry as a whole still has a lot of growing up to do as yet.

#oneaday Day 71: Want Not

I haven’t bought anything “new” for some time now, be it a book, CD, DVD, Blu-Ray or game. (Actually, that’s a lie, I picked up Deathsmiles recently but only because if I didn’t grab a copy now I doubt I’d ever see it on store shelves ever again, but that’s beside the point. I probably shouldn’t have started on this aside as it is taking away from my original point somewhat. Forget I said anything and let’s start again.)

I haven’t bought anything “new” for some time now, be it a book, CD, DVD, Blu-Ray or game. (Actually… (No! Stop it!) What? (You know what.) Oh all right.) And you know what? I don’t miss it. (I’m going to focus on games here.) I don’t feel like I’ve missed out on Assassin’s Creed Brotherhood and I don’t feel like I’m missing out on Dragon Age II. There are many other things I could list but I won’t because it would be terribly boring.

There are many reasons I haven’t missed buying these things. Firstly and most obviously, it’s saving money, something I’m woefully short of at the minute. Secondly, though, there’s really no need to constantly have the latest and greatest the second it comes out. What does it achieve, really? You pay full price, have to enter six bajillion redemption codes to download all the DLC that should be on the game disc (don’t get me started!) and know that there’s going to be more of it in the future. Wait a few months and you could likely have a better edition for less money and more Stuff. You also get to avoid all the “pre-order bonus” bullshit that big publishers are starting to pull these days, because the content in question is often then included in that newer edition.

The third and probably most important reason, though, is that not rushing out to buy something awesome the second it comes out is the fact that you can then just enjoy what you’ve already got. I’m currently playing through Final Fantasy XIII, a game which I picked up months ago, played approximately 20 hours of, stopped due to something else coming out, and never went back to until recently. Now, those who dislike FFXIII will undoubtedly say that I shouldn’t have bothered, but I’m having a blast, and the fact I’m not feeling “pressured” to beat it as quickly as possible means that I can savour the beautiful world that makes up that game, take my time to explore and enjoy the extra content it has on offer, and move on to beat it when I’m good and ready. When I’ve beaten that, I have Demon’s Souls, Disgaea 3, Darksiders, Resident Evil 4, killer7 and a whole host of other things to play through—a backlog of games that literally covers years. Eventually I’ll get through them all—hopefully in time for a Dragon Age II game of the year edition or even Mass Effect 3.

Of course, this will all go out the window once Catherine comes out in the States and I immediately import it but hey. That’s another one that might end up being hard to find, so it’s an investment, hey?

#oneaday, Day 258: More Eurogamer Thoughts

Apologies to those of you who don’t give a damn about teh gaemz. But, well, I’m spending the weekend in the company of lots of new and shiny ones so I thought it was probably worth sharing a few brief thoughts on the noteworthy ones. Of course, there are also some “official writeups” around the place for you to enjoy – today I wrote about Dragon Age II, for example.

Dragon Age II, incidentally, is simply marvellous. I loved the first one (and am, in fact, currently replaying it) but only felt mild interest towards the sequel for some reason. I felt exactly the same about Mass Effect 2, in fact, and ended up absolutely loving that. Having played the demo of Dragon Age II… yeah. That’s now a day-one purchase. They’ve fixed the niggly graphical issues of the first game, added a protagonist that actually talks (and is player-designable, like Mass Effect‘s Shepard) and made the combat make a bit more sense with a controller.

Some PC gamers have been a bit sniffy about this, thinking that it’s evidence of the series “dumbing down”, especially after the first game was a proposed return to BioWare’s roots. But the cinematic nature of Dragon Age makes it ideal for playing one the couch via the big screen. So why shouldn’t it be designed with console play in mind?

Regardless of your opinions on these decisions… it’s looking solid, and I’m very much looking forward to it. It is to Dragon Age: Origins as Mass Effect 2 was to Mass Effect. That is to say, a massive improvement in almost every way.

Besides Dragon Age (which I had to wait for ages to play, and then had to play standing up, which made my shoulders ache) I also had a go at Motorstorm Apocalypse (which let me sit down, but made me wear 3D glasses). This was good fun. There were elements of Split/Second to the “driving amidst chaos” gameplay, though, there was less of the unpredictability of Disney’s title. It was very clear that Apocalypse‘s environmental hazards are scripted rather than triggered by players or AI. It’ll be interesting to see how this works in multiplayer, as many of the effects seemed to be timed conveniently to happen just as the player passed.

Apocalypse was notable for having probably the best 3D effect that I’ve seen so far; that said, the technology is still clearly flawed at the moment. Graphics are low-resolution, jaggedy and run at a poor frame rate. They also seem to flicker quite a bit, and it’s easy to feel yourself going cross-eyed.

Dominating the show floor near the entrance was Def Jam: RapStar. The Eurogamer Expo, which was mostly filled with white nerds, was probably not the best place to show off this game. You couldn’t fault the booth’s staff for their enthusiasm, though, as they kept up a constantly energetic and noisy display all day. Of course, being not the world’s biggest fan of that type of music (to say the least) I found it incredibly irritating. And I wasn’t alone. Still, at least a few people seemed to be enjoying it.

But seriously. That game has fucking N-Dubz in it, which is enough reason to curse its name for all eternity. Not only that, but an N-Dubz song about Facebook. Seriously. Watch this. It’s an embarrassment.

Do you really want to stand in front of your TV and sing that? Yes? Then I don’t think we can be friends any more.

Settling down to a quiet night this evening before stepping back into the breach for the last time tomorrow. To anyone else attending, apparently there’s a Tube strike tomorrow evening, too, so you may want to consider leaving the show early.

Normal business (well, as normal as it ever gets) will resume tomorrow evening. Possibly!

#oneaday, Day 191: Pay To Play

I wrote a news post relating to this subject earlier tonight, but I thought I’d expand on the thoughts I alluded to in there in a proper blog post. It’s a matter of some debate, and the post itself provoked some discussion. This is good, as it’s an issue in the games industry that needs talking about.

I’m referring to DLC. But not just any DLC. DLC that you get a little voucher for in a sparkly new copy of a game, like it’s some “free bonus” and not at all something that’s there to squeeze a bit of extra cash out of purchasers of a pre-owned copy of the game.

It’s happened a few times recently. The most recognisable examples are probably Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect 2, both of which provided “free bonus” content for those who purchased the game new. Dragon Age included a new character who integrated into the storyline and had a bunch of quests associated. Mass Effect included the “Cerberus Network”, a ticket to a whole bunch of free DLC. They’ve since started charging for new packs, but the first bunch of additional content available for Mass Effect 2 players was gratis. So long as you had access to the “Cerberus Network”.

Most recently, we’ve had Alan Wake. Now, I will hold my hands up here and say I haven’t yet played Alan Wake. I understand it’s rather good. However, one recurring comment that I’ve heard from a number of friends is that the story comes to a somewhat unsatisfying conclusion. Perhaps “unsatisfying” is the wrong word; the game sets itself up for a sequel, apparently. Fair enough; plenty of games have done that. Did anyone play Baldur’s Gate: Dark Alliance? Worst. Cliffhanger. Ever.

But for purchasers of the game to be teased with the fact that there is some DLC coming “soon” that will continue the story beyond the cliffhanger ending and bridge the gap between this and the semi-inevitable sequel? That sounds awfully like leaving a game unfinished and withholding the true ending to me. Now, granted, Remedy haven’t said they’ve deliberately withheld content. But something stinks about this. Think back to the days of the PS2; if you purchased a narrative-based game, you’d expect it to come to some sort of conclusion, whether that’s a cliffhanger ending designed to set up a sequel, or a definite finale. Very occasionally expansion packs made an appearance, but these were, for the most part, confined to home computers with the ability to install data.

What we have now is effectively a game which says “Here’s the game. Here’s a cliffhanger. BUT WAIT! THERE’S MORE!”—but only for people who either bought the game new or who are willing to pony up 560 Microsoft Points for the privilege of continuing a story which should have been finished in the main game.

I find this sort of thing more objectionable than EA’s approach with Dragon Age and Mass Effect‘s DLC. At least in those games, all the DLC takes the form of optional sidequests. Sure, some of them impact the main plot. But they don’t strip out what appears to be an important part of the core narrative of the game.

Alan Wake, being a more linear game by nature, doesn’t have the luxury of sidequests to insert into its structure. As such, I know I personally would much rather they had either left this content out altogether and put it into the sequel, or included it in the game in the first place. To do it in this manner seems rather unnecessary, not to mention a sharp poke in the eye to those who typically purchase pre-owned games because they’re cheaper. (cf. me)

Still, this looks like becoming something of a standard business practice for large developers at the moment, so we should probably get used to it. At least the independent and smaller developers haven’t jumped on the bandwagon yet.

DLC is all very well and good—it hearkens back to the old days of going to the shops to buy an “expansion pack” for a favourite game—but when the “extra” content feels like it probably should have been in there in the first place? Hmm. I start to think it’s not such a good idea for people with money and power to get their claws into.

What do you think?