Thread 723909805

>gamers want escapism and hate realism
>gamers get angry at female warriors in any context or cant take them seriously despite the concept being a vehicle for escapism

Who are the gamers you speak of?

>>723909805 (OP)
No they get angry when devs come out and say shit like "we're reversing gender roles for fantasy classes"

>>723909805 (OP)
If a game insists on putting in female warriors it should at least give them skimpy armor and feature rape.
That's the bare minimum.

>>723909805 (OP)
It's not so much like, female warriors existing. It's that they function the same as male warriors. You have this inbuilt aspect of biology with genders, and so an inherent excuse to handle men and women differently, more diversely/creatively. And being a fictional setting you don't have to be realistic.

But rather than say, some female bandits that are armed with crossbows and use traps, and avoid direct physical combat they would lose, instead they stat and behavior wise just act exactly like male bandits.

Women have 3 classes
Tomboy knight
Boob witch
Loli rogue

>>723909805 (OP)
Nah female warriors in bikini armour are cool it's the girlbosses who want to be taken seriously that ruin the escapism.

>>723909805 (OP)
Are the gamers in the room with us right now?

>>723909805 (OP)
Axe too small and no shield
I am not taking this seriously

>>723909805 (OP)
You're going to put women who are evil, robbing, potentially murdering, criminals in the game, but say I'm the bad guy for intending to not even kill, but simply rape them? Fuck you

>Killing an evil criminal woman is LE GOOD
>Raping an evil criminal woman is LE BAD

And not even a woman-thing, you could be a woman yourself or play a female char, and are still in the wrong if you intend to rape a male bandit.

>>723909805 (OP)
>gamers get angry at female warriors in any context
uh, no?

>>723910553
one allows your game to still be sold at major retailers, the other precludes it entirely
get a brain, moran!!

female warriors have always been in fantasy. new writers just don't know how to write females because the gender roles are fucked. it was that a female warrior was seen sometimes as mystical (a woman servant from a god/higher power), something to be desired but not really achievable, but still beautiful. While not as capable as, say, the main warrior protagonist, they were supporting characters related to the main protagonist. See: amazons, valkyries, that lady in Conan, etc...

You cant really just put a female warrior in any setting, without a little compromise. Make her some archer, a bandit, a thief, a mage, or sorceress of sort. You cant make her a brute because women are physically weaker than men, and its hard to believe a woman would win in a fight against a men unless she plays dirty, like kicking the balls, biting, scratching, or using a taser, or some hidden weapon or something. You can also cancel all of this out by giving her superpowers but thats a different story

>>723911083
>>723911894
>You cant make her a brute because women are physically weaker than men
why not?
im just not concerned with the limits of sexually dimorphic biology in a world where people can be empowered with magic and be preternaturally skilled in arts of war, if a woman warrior can best a thousand men in combat, its because she's just can, because its whats written -- i accept it at face value.

>>723910931
We live in a society where this is the case, sad!

>>723912368
>im just not concerned with the limits of sexually dimorphic biology in a world where people can be empowered with magic and be preternaturally skilled in arts of war,

Because it's narrative cowardice. Men and women are naturally different, and you have the chance to explore that, doubly so for a fictional setting, but you're just making them the same.

>>723911894
You just have to make them freakishly large. and cute

>>723912628
>on this planet, humans breathe carbon monoxide instead of oxygen
sounds good to me
>and they can fly
ok
>and they have an extra appendage that allows them to swing like monkeys
got it
>and the women are just as competent as the men
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5d42w4ZcY4

>>723909805 (OP)
escapism for men*

>>723909805 (OP)
i don't care about females in fantasy being here or there as long as they aren't tainted by modern feminist writing tropes

>>723909805 (OP)
>Female warrior
>Either a yaassss queen slay HR-mandated ogre or some girly cutesy moe shit
I miss when women were allowed to be half-naked valkyries

>>723912894
A game like that doesn't exist tho

>>723914640
im working on it
working title is called 'planet of the humans who breathe carbon monoxide while using their tails to swing like monkeys and launch themselves into flight and the women are as competent as the men'
release date TBD

>>723914928
Kino game idea but the Women breathe Carbon Dioxide and expel Oxygen. The Men breathe Oxygen and expel Carbon Dioxide. If you don't have a partner you die.
>Title: "I can't Breed"

>>723909805 (OP)
Inserting women into what, by the devs on words are, historically accurate scenarios where women would not be by most if not all historical accounts is retarded. Only reason to complain about women in videogames that have no bases on historical accuracy is if they are ugly or annoying which, surprise surprise, keeps happening.

your attempt to speak for such a large number of people is foolish

>>723910151
G.I.G.A.B.A.S.E.D

>>723915517
or historically accurate scenarios like medieval Europe, or high fantasy, where black people are in prominent positions of power and the societies are extremely heterogenous

>>723909805 (OP)
If they’re believable characters and aren’t trying to upstage or belittle everyone around them, people love females who take charge or fight.

>>723915204
didnt ask jaktard

>>723909805 (OP)
>faggot devs force real life politics in game
>this somehow promotes escapism

Fuck off, double nigger.

>>723909805 (OP)
Activism ≠ Escapism
Media that aims to reshape the worldview of people that use it to conform to a political ideology is didactic and patronizing

It's the whole "heroic fantasy for me, but not for thee" mindset that irritates me. I'm not saying you have to enjoy media aimed at women, I usually don't either, but you also don't have to be a prick about it merely existing. Also this goes both ways, women that are obnoxious online about how action heroes are unrealistic and objectify the wimminz are equally annoying. It's power fantasy it isn't that deep and it probably isn't going to magically set women's rights back 100 years.

>>723917357
Wanna know what really fucking piss me off? Women complaining about a female character who is not the protagonist not showing up enough or doing enough because she's totally important.
Because when the fuck have they ever complained about a male character not being in the same position when there's a female lead?

Disgusting worthless pieces of shit.

>>723909805 (OP)
Female Warriors are great! I just want to be able to romance them and have lovey-dovey sex while holding hands.

>>723909805 (OP)
If women get killed in fights it means the population declines from lack of mothers. It's not sustainable anyway.

>>723917541
Yeah, that's definitely true. On the other and I get it if the complaint is about a woman presented by the game as the heroine alongside the hero but still does nothing.

>female warriors is unrealistic!!
Is the opticsfaggot way of saying that women should be submissive in media without saying that women should be submissive in media.
The actual argument that people are too afraid to make is that passive, submissive women are just inherently more aesthetically pleasing than muscled up bulldykes

>>723919131
I will say that explicitly and say female warriors are unrealistic.

It's selective realism. Every player character is meant to be a power fantasy of some kind. You really don't need to explain more than that. If you really want to get that anal about realism in the context of fantasy, your heavily armored human fighter isn't fucking standing toe to toe with an ogre, let alone a dragon, they are getting splattered in one single hit no matter the armor, or whateverthefuck is between their legs.

>>723909805 (OP)
I don't want realism. I only reference realism because cunts use realism as an excuse to introduce shit that's not even realistic.

>>723919131
I don't mind a muscled up woman as long as they are capable of being gentle and showing love too. The stronk wymen feminists don't get it.

>>723909805 (OP)
I like make-believe concepts of women and (cute) boys

they don't exist in real life and that's okay

>>723912628
Primitive take.

>>723909805 (OP)
It's funny how much leftist discourse consists of pretending not to understand things, therefore making discussion impossible.

>>723911894
Archers need to be strong. Women can be crossbowmen at best.

>>723912894
>>723919864
The gender division of labor is the oldest division of labor in the world.

Every single human society we've ever heard of has had it, and it almost certainly predates the existence of the Homo sapiens.

ONLY modernity has actively attempted to eliminate this, with mixed results. It did not "just happen", there was an effort towards this goal.

So you see when you give me a fantasy world based on a pre-modern and somehow human men and women do the exact same things and nobody thinks there's anything remarkable about it, it just stinks of modernity and ruins it.

>But that's because modernity is the best! The past is awful, the past sucks, i would hate living in the past and so would you!!!
You are fundamentally incapable of understanding fantasy as a genre.

>>723920226
Well duh. They don't want honest debate. Everything they do concerning vidya and "chud" adjacent hobbies is inherently in bad faith. They don't want to appeal to anyone else. They don't want to convince you they're right. They want you to accept what they say is true even if you don't believe it. They want you to eat their shit with a forced smile on your face. It's an unironic humiliation ritual.

>>723909805 (OP)
My fantasy is a world where I am the strongest, smartest, best, most important person ever. Female warriors don't fit into it because anyone who isn't me is just a mindless slave that exists only to serve me in my perfect world.

>>723911083
This. There has to be a sort of magical property to them
>>723911894
>archer
Nigga bowmen were massive dudes. Trust me, a woman is better off with a sword than a longbow
But yeah, i kinda agree with the rest but there CAN be a woman warrior i think, just need to give context: perhaps she's a a demigod, or some sort of half demon or takes some sort of alchemical potion that makes her strong as a man

>>723920970
they should be exotic sex slaves obviously

>>723920970
>Trust me, a woman is better off with a sword than a longbow
I don't buy this argument.
A woman with a bow might have less effective range than a dude with a longbow, but if you get shot within that range, you'll still die.
Meanwhile a woman fighting in melee against a man will have a permanent disadvantage in strength and mass. She'll have a hard time parrying attacks and even if she does she'll get pushed around.

>>723921472
women simply don't have enough muscle mass and bone density to operate longbows properly, light crossbows maybe

>>723920404
>You are fundamentally incapable of understanding fantasy as a genre.
the apple is purple
>no it isnt??
it is here
>but apples are green and red, that doesnt make sense
let it make sense in this scenario
>but apples arent purple?

>>723921784
The color of apples have nothing to do with modernity.

We need more single mothers in video games (her husband died)

>>723909805 (OP)
You're making a lot of wild and fucking retarded assumptions and false correlations just to annoy complete strangers for a minute or so.

>>723909805 (OP)
>gamers don't want shitty games
>developers make shitty games on purpose to punish gamers
>this is the gamers fault somehow

>>723922517
Why do they make Nazi America look so nice?

>>723910151
With mods you can now turn them into limbless dolls like in fallout.

>>723921472
>A woman with a bow might have less effective range than a dude with a longbow, but if you get shot within that range, you'll still die.
An arrow from a man will pierce armour or shields or go through bone where a woman's arrow wouldn't. A woman can't fire as many shots before getting tired. A woman can't hold the bowstring drawn to aim for as long as a man. A woman archer can't retreat as fast as a man when necessary. A woman can't even carry as much ammunition as a man.

>>723921472
>>723923941
I see now that the point you were making is that a woman would still be better off at range despite her shortcomings. Ignore my post.