I don't agree with Sarkesian's thoughts on Bayonetta.

Over in the review comments for Bayonetta 2, @Thanatos2k posted a link to Anita's twitter where you can see her tweets about Bayonetta 2 getting such high praise.

Most of Anita's videos about Tropes vs. Women I am in ~80% agreement. This is one of those times that I am not. Bayonetta, to me, is a fleshed out character who wishes to be sexually provocative. I mean this as opposed to someone like Samus Aran who has had it pushed onto her in that one game. Samus is strong and doesn't wish to be sexual, while Bayonetta is an ageless witch thousands of years old who wants, can, and does strut what she's got. I feel like shaming her characterization is akin to slut shaming. "Women can't be sexual, even if that's what they want to be."

I ask that you please keep the thread respectful.

Wow... Thats very insightful..... I should thought about that 1st.

i wonder if she knows that Bayonetta was designed by a female

@elheber: Yeah I agree with your views on Bayonetta as a character as well. In this case I think her use of sexism is off-base.

I think she's just reacting instead of analyzing...yet again.

@mastermetal777

And Most times she is right to do so.

@Lulu_Lulu: Reaction doesn't bring about a rational, level-headed conversation about a controversial topic. Only by analyzing it do things get discussed properly. Reacting to outdated stereotypes about video games is something trolls and the conservative media do, and what has that brought? Nothing productive, I can tell you that much.

Eh who cares honestly? It's just like the poor reviews from games that you disagree with, who cares.. In the end of the day, money talks, and devs aren't going to change their ways if the cash keeps coming in.. I think a bunch of manchildren take this shit way too seriously to what Anita says..

As I said in a tweet last night, anyone spending too much time looking at Bayonetta's ass will probably be dying a lot.

I never agree with Sarkesian's thoughts.

I don't care about what she thinks

@sSubZerOo: I feel it's civil duty to call out things you believe are wrong. If nobody did, nobody would be corrected and wrong messages would run rampant. If everyone did, the discussion would lead to enlightenment quicker.

I like what she says most of the time. I did not like this.

What they said.

There's a difference between a sexualized (and empowered) persona and the voyeuristic camera work; is the voyeurism a desired and productive outcome of the sexual empowerment of the character is probably a better argument to be had.

A complete moron of a woman she is. I guess feminists are having trouble figuring out any actual hardship that women in first world countries go through.

what is a sarkesian ?

sounds like something from star trek tng

seriously i never heard of such a lifeform

When it comes to how male sexual-consumption-oriented in design a character is a straight women is a poor judge. It's something you either have a sense for directly (which usually comes with a penis) or don't. Bayonetta goes well beyond being sexualised and fetishistic to being a whole different animal. In fact there aren't the words to describe Bayonetta's sexualisation-to-the-point-of-conversely-not-being-sexualised character trait (but we should probably invent one). She's a truly unique character in a sea of interchangeable action men and women.

The funny thing about Bayonetta is that she's an entirely empowered woman with complete control and domination of the male sex. She uses her sexuality as a weapon and quite effectively.

Anita needs to shut the **** up already and go spend all that money she took from so many gullible people. She is Jack Thompson in a woman's body (where is he these days, did he get a sex change and a new identity perhaps?).

To many here she has no creditably. Many topics that follow her way there as large amount of those that just scream her way of thinking as proof.

I stop caring what she said because to be she was too sexist against Princess Peach and possible females like the princess.

Anyone with common sense know not listen to Anita and that she already admit that she doesn't play video games

I agree with some of the stuff she says, but this sounds like a knee-jerk comment to me...

I just checked out her Twitter feed and it seems she's canceled her talk at USU due to threat of a school shooting. Personally, I don't care what this woman says. Threatening her life and innocent lives of those attending is despicable. Let her speak her piece and be ignored, but doing crap like this is only making her a martyr.

Who fvck is this lady and why should I care?

@cdragon_88

If you don't care go away.

I think she is right, good to see someone mentioning the obvious in some of our video games: some characters and games are designed to give pimply basement dwelling man-children their pixelated fantasy. I have a daughter so maybe I am more aware than others.

http://www.dualshockers.com/2014/10/14/bayonetta-2s-over-sexualization-complaint-a-perfect-example-of-whats-wrong-with-modern-reviews/

^ This is why it's so dangerous.

And let it be known, the developers are tired of this nonsense too:

http://www.nichegamer.net/2014/10/gamergate-interview-reviewing-the-reviewers-double-time-edition/

@elheber: Nice try Troll

And Dumbo makes as much sense with that bayonetta critic as a happy sad clown would do on a submarine.

And there's a reason so many people dislike her.

Yes, but is this to be applauded? When I think of empowerment of women, I think Ripley from Aliens. And does empowering women necessarily entail the domination of men through sex? Defining empowerment through sexuality seems....I don't know.....just wrong, and at the risk of being a white knight saying this, an insult and belittlement to women.

Why is it that women, especially ********'s, feel the need to crash the party when it comes to male culture? It's like anywhere there are hobbies or what not that are the domain of men they have to come in and ruin it with their delusional political views. Seriously, f*ck off and die already. If it weren't for all these spineless nerds drooling over any girl gamer (usually a poser) giving them the time of day things might not be such a joke. Feminists are not for equality, they are nutty hypocrites who want power and money and feminism is their con job. Dumb women like this Sarkesian, who are incapable of rational thought, buy into their insanity hook, line and sinker.

Guys started paying less attention to women when gaming became a huge part of their lives, so women have to invade the gaming world to get guys to start paying attention to them again. It's amazing how women have to be a part of whatever culture guys are into yet guys want nothing to do with their female culture. And then it eventually gets poisoned so princess buzzkill's feelings don't get hurt.

Women were barely anywhere to be found when so called nerd culture wasn't mainstream. Women weren't in the arcades, few if any were playing table top RPG's, they weren't reading comics, they thought it was lame and had no interest in it, and now it becomes hip and they all of a sudden think it's so wonderful. You are fakes that don't want to be left out of whatever cultural trend will get more people to pay attention to you. It's not about gaming it's about female vanity. If mobile apps and online gaming didn't exist, there would be very few women interested in video games. You think they want to go hang out and play video games at the house of the guys they are gaming online with? Hell no. It would cramp their style being around nerds.

I feel that article is part of the many overreactions and overvaluations of reviews and scores. The fact that the article starts out with "something needs to be said" suggests the writer is really only in it for himself. He's echoing what so many people have already said over and over again. He brings nothing new to the table. Yet he feels something needs to be said? Give me a break.

"Authors are departing from the idea of giving their readers a fair assessment of a game’s quality, and are increasingly using reviews as their personal soapbox, or as a high horse on which to sit to educate the allegedly unschooled gaming masses on whatever personal agenda they happen to support, and to “punish” those game developer that happen to produce games that don’t fit said agendas."

This is an overreaction, in my opinion. Noone is explicitly trying to educate people or push a personal agenda. That is all implied and interpreted. People simply can't stand it that for some people morals and politics have become an important part of videogames (and really, criticising a game because of it doesn't happen that often). The 'soapbox' and the 'high horse' are exaggerated labels applied to value judgements based on morals. Reviewers make similar value judgements based on technical or gameplay aspects, yet these are not seen as educating or forcing an agenda. They are just as much based on experience, on personal standards, but because they do not pertain to what is morally right and wrong people don't mind as much. People should stop assuming that reviewers are directly addressing their readers. They're not. They're giving their opinion on a game. And one aspect might be more relevant to you than others. You can easily filter out what is valuable and anything that is missing can be found in countless other reviews. There's nothing dangerous about it. It's broadening the possible criteria for judgement.

"What should be reflected, first and foremost, in a review’s content and in its score is the game’s quality, and while several aspects of “quality” are subjective, there are also many that aren’t. Production values are an example: graphics, animation, audio, textures, effects; Those are objective aspects of a game’s value that should not be overlooked."

A lot of these aspects only deserve mention if they are horribly bad. Most games have become pretty standardized in the quality of these technical components. Plus, the quality of graphics, animation and effects can often be determined based on watching gameplay footage. Audio is more difficult, but most of it is pretty standardized. That is why these aspects are ignored. It's easy to find that information outside of reviews. Also, these aspects are not the most important parts of a satisfying gaming experience. Gameplay, narrative, characters, art design, etc. Those are very difficult to objectively value, yet they are the most vital part of a gaming experience. The writer seems to be overvaluing the objective aspects for the sake of his argument.

"When you see games with extremely high production values like Destiny being slapped with a 4 or a 5, it’s obvious that the reviewer is completely ignoring the objectively positive aspects of the title, and is replacing them with spite and misinformation in order to punish the developer for having released something that didn’t match his personal expectations."

This is incorrect, if you ask me. These objectively positive aspects are often not ignored in reviews. They are mentioned and their quality is often acknowledged. However, in some cases they are simply not valued as much in the overall experience, which suggests that this writer focuses a little bit too much on scores and overall appreciation, which are highly irrelevant when making a personal choice about a possible purchase. The fact that so many people apparently rely on a review score alone is not the reviewer's responsibility. There is no misinformation when arguments are backed up with sufficient examples. The worst that could happen is misinterpretation or information that does not appeal the reader's preferences (in which case there are many other reviews). Or, you know, people simply can't be bothered to read beyond the score and the pros and cons list. I can only speak for myself, but I have never been misinformed by reviews, nor have I made a wrong purchasing choice based on them, yet I often use them to inform myself about the quality of a given game.

I can go on and on. I'll stop for the sake of length (my reply is already too long). This guy isn't even trying to look at this issue from different perspectives. But I guess that's ok, because it's an editorial.

Why is it these idiots lose their mind when there's a half naked woman and nobody says squat when it's a man?

Oh, and I seriously hope this Brandon doesn't consider himself a journalist. He's openly expressing his opinion, siding with the people he interviews and promoting the policies of the website he works for. This is the kind of tabloid journalism he refers to.

neanderthal feminists like her amuse me

I have half a mind to buy a wiiu and b2 just to spite them.

Ask a dominatrix if this is a bad thing (especially considering, at least in the first game, Bayonetta very much acted like one, with the whip and the BDSM finishers). Some women find power through their sexuality, denying them this would be sexist.

@ShepardCommandr

Do it ! Do it for me !

Eh... the real question is...
Will you buy a WiiU just to play Bayonetta 2?

That's a fair question. It goes back to what I said about Samus Aran, who is the videogame equivalent of Ellen Ripley. Bayonetta doesn't have to be Ellen Ripley. Not every female hero has to be Ellen Ripley. There's room in the games medium for different types of female heroes, sexual or not.

I'm not saying women will look to Bayonetta as a role model, though there must surely be at least a few women out there who see her as a power fantasy the way we did with He-Man or Duke Nukem. I find it strange to think some people believe women don't wish to be sexy.

Worst, IMHO, is the portion of people who believe women shouldn't be sexual even if they want to be because it sends a bad message: "Women are sex objects for men, so women can't be sexual or else they become objects." Though to me, shaming women for being sexual sends an even worse message: "Don't be who you want to be. Who you want to be is bad." So shaming Bayonetta is essentially slut-shaming. And slut-shaming is something that feminism is trying to eliminate.

The problem with anita is she seems to arrogantly think her brand of "sexually conservative good girls dress modestly type of Feminism" is the ONLY acceptable why to be a feminist someone needs to tell her feminism is very wide and diverse encompassing very different but equally valid postions

Can people just ignore her, she is a attention seeker who hates women who are not like her.

I'm sure there are others, gamers, who disliked Bayonetta 2 also and disagree with it's score for whatever reason they had.

Doesn't mean I think they're correct.

@IJONOI: Nailed it.

Its japan home of the hentai and lolicon porn.....

What do you expect every animated girl over there gunna get sexualized culture clash much.....

There is a reason and it has to do with the inconsistency with there reviews. The most glaring hypocrisy is the story. Many reviewers say the story is bonkers, crazy, nonsensical, either you like it or don't. That would indicate a con, but at the end of the day does not impact the overall score. At the same time, Evil Within has a "convoluted" story and is listed as a con. With regards to both games, its clear as day that reviewers have a problem with the story.

Past couple on months, any game with a subpar story would get points deducted as which is what happened to BF3 and Destiny. This game comes along and all is forgiven bull fucking shit. I like the game and glad it got a 10, but this preference and reviews based on what I feel now needs to stop. Same genre, identical set ups. One game gets praise for a game mechanic while the other game gets shit on for the same gaming design. See it all the time in MMO and FPS reviews especially.

"bonkers, crazy, nonsensical" is not a con for Bayonetta. It's an outlandish game that needs an outlandish story, otherwise they wouldn't fit together. It's a pro.

Dead to Rights: Retribution is an example of a game that ditched a serious story in favor of an over-the-top story to reflect the gameplay more, and it got positive marks for it.

Having a crazy story is not the same as having a convoluted story nor are either of these the same as lacking a story. These things also vary in relation to the game they are in. I'm not sure why this seems to be such a difficult concept for some to grasp.

Ok