>male character is physically stronger than female character
What are some games that aren't afraid to do this? Seems everything got pretty normalized in a hurry.

DS game, not retro
Plus the thread is just a thinly veiled excuse for /pol/ shit

>>>/v/

>>11857669
It's absolutely retro. Read the sticky.

>>11857669
>thinly veiled excuse for /pol/ shit
That's your insecure projection. This is very much a "thing" with older RPGs.

>>11857671
Your entrenched white male fragility is absolutely retro. DS games aren't.

>>11857671
>This is very much a "thing" with older RPGs.
You know what is also very much a "thing" in both older RPGs and even still modern ones? Melee classes being physically stronger than magic classes. Jonathan used physical weapons, Charlotte used magic.

>>11857696
Alright. What are some games where you can create your own characters but the sex difference affects overall stength regardless of role?

Morrowind

>>11857671
Re-read it. The sticky says nothing about the DS. While I personally think it's high time DS and PSP discussion are allowed here, for now, they're not.

>>11857708
>While I personally think it's high time DS and PSP discussion are allowed here

This doesn't work. The last time that happened it lasted 2 months before they started allowing home consoles of the same gen. Which made sense because frankly most GBA games have the same design mentality as console games, which is also why it doesn't make sense to allow DS and PSP which have the same design mentalities as 7th gen consoles.

>>11857695
You're not in a healthy place and you should stoptrying to force everything through the lens of your own identity politics and insecurity.

Men being stronger than women isn't a "hotbutton political issue". But it is odd that this universally-accepted fact that's baked into our perceptions of reality often isn't accurately reproduced in video games.

As for DS not being retro, then disregard and discuss pre-DS games.

>>11857712
Cool, let's let it happen then.

>>11857716
And then people like OP and you will be like "wtf I can talk about this 7th gen console game that came out in 2015 but not 3DS games ???!!! 3DS should totally be allowed they're retro now!!"

>>11857725
Meh. I'd love it if all the people who bitched about 6th gen in the before times and currently bitch about 7th gen got driven off this board. I've used /vr/ on and off since 2013, and back then, I was annoyed that PS2 and GBA discussions weren't allowed. It made me happier than a pig in shit when they finally allowed them, but alas, /vr/ is always one generation behind where I think it should be.

>>11857725
You are creating imaginary opponents in your head that don't exist.

>>11857713
Yeah son, resorting to a slow board like /vr/ so you won't get ignored and bringing up a non-/vr/ game for the topic to even get any traction conveys the very picture of a mentally and emotionally "healthy place".

Nah I'm kidding you're golden, let's discuss the bravery of all those arcade games that were unafraid of making the female characters invariably the weak-but-fast characters.

>>11857729
But using /vr/ since literal day one and I've always said the 6th gen made sense. 7th gen doesn't. "Retro" isn't just a matter of age, it's a matter of style, and that's how it's established in fashion and other areas. If the style and design principles haven't changed then there is nothing to go "retro" about, and the design principles started in the 7th gen are the same as today.

Including this stuff is also opening the door to threads like OP's which have nothing to do with the time period in question and instead apply modern politics to the subject mattter, which is a very modern thing to do.

>>11857739
"Cope" is not a mentally healthy statement and not anything that belongs on this board. Talk about video games, not your off-topic idpol nonsense.

>>11857739
It's going to be a long summer, isn't it

>>11857725
The 3DS WILL be retro in 2035. The 20 year rule makes the most sense.

>>11857748
Anon, the "topic" IS idpol nonsense lmao. Even your used wet wipe equivalent of personal self awareness should be able to recognize that

(1/2)
This thread is some /pol/ shit, but I'll humor it with a cool Pokemon fact.

In Pokemon Gen II, the gender of your Pokemon is determined by its attack IV. Female Pokemon are assigned to the lower half of the IV range. For example, if the gender ratio of a species if 7/8 male and 1/8 female, then a Pokemon of that species will be male if it has an attack IV of 15-2 and female if it has an attack IV of 0 or 1. This means that male Pokemon tend to have a higher attack stat than female Pokemon, and that a Pokemon with the highest possible attack stat for its species must be male. (Genderless and all female species notwithstanding, obviously).

This may make it seem like male Pokemon are always better than female Pokemon, but that is not the case. If a Pokemon has physical damage moves, it is obviously optimal for that Pokemon to be male. If a Pokemon only has special damage moves, the only thing your attack stat effects if how much damage you take by hurting yourself with confusion, so its actually optimal for that Pokemon to be female. Also, there's an attack called Attract that only works on Pokemon of the opposite gender. Since male Pokemon are stronger and more common, most Pokemon your opponents will be using are going to be male. Naturally, this means a Pokemon that runs an Attract should be female.

>>11857859
(2/2)
Interestingly, there's actually a good chance the correlation between attack and gender is inadvertent and not an intentional piece of game design. You are able to trade Pokemon between Gens I and II. This created a problem for the programmers, since Gen II adds new Pokemon attributes such as gender and shininess. It may seem intuitive to assign these new attributes randomly to a Pokemon when it is transferred from Gen I to Gen II, but this creates a problem in that the attributes wouldn't be persistent if a Pokemon is traded back and forth across gens multiple times. The way the programmers solved this is by making the new attributes be derived from a Pokemon's IV, since IV are random numbers assigned to every Pokemon the same way in both gens.

The data type for IVs is just 2 bytes. The first 4 bits of these two bytes are for the attack IV, the next 4 are for defense, the next 4 are for speed, and the last 4 are for special. When checking for a Pokemon's gender, the game uses the 3 most significant bits of the IV bytes for no other reason than that's the check that can be programmed with the fewest assembly instructions. Those bits just happen to correspond to the attack IV, so its likely that male Pokemon being stronger than female Pokemon is not intentional.

The data type shenanigans have some other implications with regards to Pokemon gender distribution. In Pokemon species with a 7/8:1/8 male to female ratio (this is most Pokemon species), it is impossible for shiny Pokemon to be female. This is because only 8 different IV combinations correspond to a shiny Pokemon, and none of those combinations have an attack IV of 1 or 0.

>>11857859
>>11857861
>>>/vp/

>>11857747
I just want a place to discuss older games that have fallen out of the limelight. I'm not overly hung up on design philosophies. One could argue that there isn't much of a difference between late 6th gen games and early 7th gen games design-wise.
>Including this stuff is also opening the door to threads like OP's which have nothing to do with the time period in question and instead apply modern politics to the subject mattter, which is a very modern thing to do.
So you want to pretend the world around us hasn't changed and that old things don't look different now than they did when they were new? I can understand not wanting to get into modern day politics, but I think it's inevitable for people to say "X thing did/didn't age well" when they discuss older works. People do it with film, people do it with music, and people do it with video games as well. And if you're one of those annoying "games don't age" people, I'm gonna blow a fuse.

>>11857859
>This thread is some /pol/ shit
Nature is some /pol/ shit.

>>11857716
This board will become even more trash with 7th gen.

>>11857958
I predict it'll be about the same; i.e. you can't get much worse than how things already are. The biggest difference is we'll have a wider range of topics we're allowed to discuss.

>>11857859
Females of a certain species are way more valuable to have than males because a female is how you get to reproduce that certain species of pokemon, while a male simply gets thrm pregnant. Example: if I want Pikachus, then it's best to find a female Pikachu so I can breed my own (as long as a male shares the same egg group he can get my Pikachu preggers). There are inherent strengths to male and female. I really like how pokemon showcases these strengths.

>>11857982
We don't need a wider range of topics, mate. This is a specialized board. The focus is retro. To open it up to non-retro would be retarded. That's literally what /v/ is for.

>>11857982
If I wanted a wider range of topics I'd go to /v/, which I do use.

>>11858049
>>11858058
/v/ is where I go if I want to discuss current-day shit, which I almost never do, which is why I come here instead. 7th gen isn't current. Also, discussing the same shit over and over gets boring. /vr/ could use some new topics.

>>11858109
I doubt you've played all the retro games and then bring them up as an individual /vr/ thread to say that. Maybe you should expand what you play within /vr/ constraints rather than bitching about how "narrow" the topic of the board is.

>>11858119
Fuck that. Like I've mentioned before, I'd love it if people like you got driven off of here.
Alternatively, we could have a /vr2k/ board that would not only satisfy people who want to discuss 6th and 7th gen, but also all the crotchety old-timers who want /vr/ to stick to 5th gen and under.

>>11858135
Yeah I know. You'd like people that fave any resistance for bullshit to be driven off, and shows how you currently view the board as.

>>11858148
What you call "bullshit" I call "things I want to discuss".

>>11858152
Those things you want to discuss can be done on /v/. Hell, I was able to get a Shadowman thread on /v/ yesterday and that's a 5th gen game. Maybe you should try harder.

>>11858153
>Those things you want to discuss can be done on /v/.
And get drowned out by whatever current-day shit people are discussing, sure.
> Hell, I was able to get a Shadowman thread on /v/ yesterday and that's a 5th gen game. Maybe you should try harder.
You got lucky.

In Fighting Force, the female characters are faster but don't hit as hard.

Surprised this hasn't been posted yet.
Peach has the lowest strength stat of the cast, with Luigi being second because the original DDP character was female.

>>11857667 (OP)
The slightly lower physical stats hardly matter considering how broken her spells are.

>>11857671
>Retro gaming means platforms launched in 2001 and earlier
>ds released 2004
Not retro

I feel like we've had threads where everyone thought PSP was retro and no one tried to backseat mod it

>>11857892
That's fine and all, but OP's question isn't interesting at all because the answer is "almost all of them" and the ones that made male and female characters the same often did that because the programming was easier that way. There's barely anything to talk about here EXCEPT /pol/-style ideological garbage.

>>11858936
Why would any particular game have been posted yet, when it was totally normal for games to do this back then? "Man is warrior or old sage, girl is healing mage or generic mage" is utterly standard in JRPGs and a fair number of action games. "Guy is stronger girl is faster" is very very common in action games. OP is asking for a list of thousands of games, for some reason.

>>11857859
>This thread is some /pol/ shit

Well yes but he's right. I opened so many jars during my lifetime etc. I would expect this reflected in RPG games for example. Which is not a thing anymore!

>>11857713
men not being about to generate a hadouken in real life isn't a "hotbutton political issue". But it is odd that this universally-accepted fact that's baked into our perceptions of reality often isn't accurately reproduced in street fighter.

>>11859236
And yet people are only complaining about /pol/ for some reason.

>>11859167
>I feel
Making shit up in their head, seeking their feelings as fact.
>where everyone thought
Never was the case, that was your "feelings" talking. PSP was accepted on /vr/ because it was the old and easy handheld to hack to emulate old games. People are probably gravitating to a chinkheld these days or a steam deck. Just because it was accepted in a way to play /vr/ games doesn't mean it is acceptable to bring it up outside of that context.

>>11857696
Jonathan uses melee weapons because he is a strong biological man and Charlotte had to learn magic because being a woman she was too weak to wield weapons effectively. Also, you will never be a woman and Trump is your president.

>>11857892
>black guy can jump higher than the white guy
kek

>>11857667 (OP)
Final Fantasy Tactics.

Men excel at physical attacks, Women excel at magical.

>>11859767
Both of those things are determined by almost everything else, even fucking birthsigns, but not gender. In fact men can't be dancers (the physical class) but instead can only be bards (the magic one) and vice versa for female units. technically its the opposite, especially since dance could be paired with other physical classes and singing with other magic ones.

>>11857667 (OP)
Charlotte has less muscle mass from years of being on puberty blockers.

>>11857667 (OP)
Not retro.

>"and this is the strongest swordsman in our kingdom"
>it's a 7 year old girl
I hate anime

>>11859224
>it's not interesting!!
>stays in the thread bitching up an infantile storm
>i'm not the idpol maniac!! it's you!! it's all of you!!
good god get over yourself

>>11859236
>OP is asking for a list of thousands of games, for some reason.
What is this victim-playing hyperbole nonsense? OP asked for "some", not "thousands".