https://www.psypost.org/2022/06/sexualized-video-games-are-not-causing-harm-to-male-or-female-players-according-to-new-research-63388
>“Overall, the ‘moral panic’ over video games and sexualization is pretty much following the ‘paint-by-numbers’ pattern of the video game debate. Lots of hyperbole and moral outrage, but very little evidence that video games are causing any ‘harm’ to either male or female players.”
Spread the word.
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
Fake study.
Proof? Regardless, it's more real than your vegana ever will be.
Men dont have veganas moron.
Could've fooled me with the way you're acting.
Jannies please ban this transphobe. There's no place for it here.
>Men dont have [HEADCANON]
You certainly never had one.
Based
Cute
why do weebshitters want to jerk off to vidya so much, and also how the frick do you even get hard to chink cartoons that shit looks like dragon ball
>how the frick do you even get hard to chink cartoons
Literally different strokes for different folks.
>why do weebshitters want to jerk off to vidya so much
We're big fans of artistic freedom.
I don't understand how people get off to family guy porn or princess peach either.
Or summer time saga
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO THIS IS NOT HOW IT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO troonySISTERS
bot thread
advertising is against the rules
I'm not a robot, anon.
Based on your inability to counter the study and relentless need to silence opposition, I can guarantee you're a liberal, though.
then why do you keep spamming all your troony garbage all over the board?
Why do you keep spamming the SAME TRASH about kojima killing abe 10 times over in a row each hour?
Lets set rape legal next.
harmless is the wrong word
its one of the best ways of selling your games
>rightwingers think based and praised rhyme.
lol
rhyming is gay
and so are you
Woke shit isn't trying to sell dude, it's trying to impress Larry Fink so that the company ESG score goes up for the quarter. Even if a game completely flops as long as the company gets another 3 bil a year invested for pushing the message then they still win...our wallets don't matter to corporations anymore
how is MU3 anyway, really wanna get that just for the girls
Your biased image fails to mention that MUA3 was a traditional game while Avengers was GaaS shit.
>MUA3 was a traditional game
Because it was developed by Team Ninja; same reason the women aren't ugly.
By traditional I mean: "a complete single player game that you play and finish, a complete package you pay $60 for". Meanwhile Avengers was one of those games that on top of charging $60 for the base game expect you to keep throwing money at them forever.
Of course the completed "pay once and you're done" $60 product will do better than the exploitative $60 GaaS trash.
Babylon's Fall has non-ugly character designs, and still was a massive failure because like Avengers it was GaaS garbage.
Sexualization is a good thing
Cumming is obligatory
Yet no mainstream gaming journalists will copy and paste this report like they do to other outrageous shit
True. Speaks volumes about where their collective loyalties lie.
Outrage is their product. Why elevate something that proves it meaningless?
And still the Senran Kagura games will never be good videogames.
Try one. You might be surprised.
How so? I'm breaking no rules and it's been nearly two days since my last one. It's not like I can control whether or not other anons make similar threads. You, however, are free to hide these threads anytime one triggers you.
>Try one. You might be surprised.
I played Shinovi Versus and Valkyrie Drive. That's why I know they aren't good videogames.
My condolences. At least you tried one, which is more than most are ever willing to do.
>hard to really judge a meta-analysis' accuracy without reading the thing itself
This is all I could find that's not behind a paywall:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563222001637
>Sexy shit can still stick out or distract in a game by being overdone
Purely a matter of preference and something that's irrelevant in both the scope of this study and debates about this topic in general. The goal here was to provide evidence that artistic freedom isn't harmful in any way, shape, or form.
>My condolences.
Yeah, it's a shame I wasted several precious hours with such horrible games. "Do the opposite of what Ganker says" is indeed the golden rule.
It's not like you had anything better to do.
>joke 'science'
How so? I've yet to see a study proving sexualization is harmful...
>It's not like you had anything better to do.
I could have give the chance to a good game, or replay a good game. Or watched anime.
Honestly I'm the one to blame for not following the golden rule like I always do, but I always try to have an open mind when it comes to vidya. Same with Neptunia, another shit experience.
Of course I already saw the abstract, it's literally linked in the OP article.
Again though, you can't really find much from that. The OP article actually gives more info about the meta-analysis, but again it's just a summary. NOt knowing what studies they actually looked at (cause paywall) means we can't really form an opinion beyond that summary which seems fairly loaded and requiring that fuller meta-analysis.
>The goal here was to provide evidence that artistic freedom isn't harmful in any way, shape, or form.
No it's not?
It's just about whether or not high degrees of sexualized content in games contributed to body image issues or misogyny. And it was done via a meta-analysis of less than 18 studies. It's not going to say anything that huge with such a limited pool.
Even the article itself says they aren't against people complaining about sexy shit, just not to overexaggerate harmful effects:
>“As a purely ‘public health’ issue, this doesn’t appear to be much of a concern at all. That doesn’t mean people can’t advocate for better representations of females in games. They just need to be cautious not to make claims of ‘harm’ that can be easily debunked, thereby calling into question what might otherwise be reasonable advocacy goals.”
And even there, again, they found mixed results but said that the ones that found harm were poorly done studies, which, again, is hard to judge without reading the article itself.
>No it's not? It's just about whether or not high degrees of sexualized content in games contributed to body image issues or misogyny.
It always comes down to whether or not artists/developers should be free to create what they want in the end.
>It's not going to say anything that huge with such a limited pool.
I understand your skepticism, but the info this study found is always going to be far greater than anything gleaned from doomed attempts at proving sexualization in fiction is somehow harmful in reality. Basically, it's a start. Will it ultimately change anything? Probably not, but as you can see from this small thread alone, the mere possibility of change is enough to send certain "folks" here into a seething fury.
You making this same fricking thread every day isn't harmless.
the biggest thing causing harm to females in the modern world is diversity.
>Ferguson and his research team conducted a meta-analysis of 18 relevant studies. All of the studies included a measure of exposure to general or sexualized video games. Fifteen of the studies measured aggression toward women or sexist attitudes, while 10 studies measured outcomes related to depression, body image, or anxiety.
>“The major caveat is simply that many of the studies just aren’t very good,” Ferguson said. “The good news is that the higher quality studies were less likely to find evidence for negative effects than lower quality studies. In some cases, scholars probably interjected their personal moral opinions into the studies, if unintentionally. Granted it’s still a fairly small research area, but this initial data has been so underwhelming that I’m not sure there’s much to be mined here.”
Without reading the article itself (not available and I'm not digging around for a free copy), it sounds like this could easily just be the researchers reading a few studies and writing about how it's all exaggerated or poorly done when it finds something against their hypothesis and praising the ones that follow it.
Or just as easily vice-versa. Again, hard to really judge a meta-analysis' accuracy without reading the thing itself to see what it's judging.
The idea of it causing body issues for women is probably mostly bullshit.
The misogyny side is more of a chicken & egg thing the same way the violence discussion came about, which could be what the article is getting at. Gamers are certainly on average way more misogynistic, but the question there is if the games made them that way or if they were more drawn to the games because they were already.
That said, danger and tastefulness are two different things. Sexy shit can be harmless and still stick out or distract in a game by being overdone.
Also the common knowledge that gamers for the most part would slam any willing pussy even if the woman attached to it wasn't a 10/10. Actually that's probably true for men in general.
>Gamers are certainly on average way more misogynistic, but the question there is if the games made them that way or if they were more drawn to the games because they were already.
I really think it's just the result of the hobby still allowing for male-oriented thinking. You become soured to gynocentrism and feminized points of view because you're surrounded in them in most other aspects of life.
Lol no. It's just incels angry at women because they won't frick them and coping by playing video games. Simple as.
Do you not see the irony in saying "they're just mad because women don't like them" when the post is about being disillusioned to gynocentrism? "They're coping with <male hobby> because women won't frick them" is a very feminized point of view.
Call it feminized if you want, it doesn't make it any less true.
>You become soured to gynocentrism and feminized points of view because you're surrounded in them in most other aspects of life
Case in point
Sure thing. How old do you think people are when they start getting into video games? Do you think 7 year olds become interested in them because of muh masculinity?
Cute orc bride
Everyone already knew that except Liberals and conservatives.
not going to start trusting psychology papers just because they align with my biases, sorry
joke 'science'
stop bumping this shit bait thread
Do simple facts really bother "y'all folks" that much? Can't say I'm surprised, all things considered.
While that may be true, people on this website don't care whether it's harmless or not, so they are just arguing in bad faith. Hell, they don't think there is anything wrong with rape, why should their opinion on sexualization be taken seriously?
Why are they flipping their position now?
>they
Anon, it's one meta-analysis. It's the most cherry you could pick. Even the article seems to imply they want more "well done" studies on the topic cause they claim the ones that DO find harm are all flawed in some way.
>lmao soientists don't know anything they're just making all this shit up
>WHOA GUYS LOOK AT THIS POP SCI HEADLINE THAT AGREES WITH MY POSITION! WHY AREN'T YOU TRUSTING THE HECKIN SCIENCE!
Go frick yourself with a rusty fence post
There has literally never been any scientific foundation for the idea that looking at a doodle of breasts will turn a man into a sex offender.
>Moving the goalposts
The point is, Ganker has always despised science and scientific studios, calling them "fake" or "israeli cons"; suddenly doing a 180º because one of those happens to align with your personal biases makes you a hypocrite.
>Ganker is one person
Ganker is unironically a hivemind. A very hypocrite hivemind but still a hivemind.
Literally everyone does that. Why do you think companies and organizations refuse to publish data about stuff like crime and race or data on family courts?
>companies and organizations refuse to publish data about stuff like crime and race or data on family courts
If they refuse to publish them, then how does /misc/ makes its infographics? How those infographics cite their sources (usually government and police departments)? How are we aware of the 41% suicide attempt percentage between transgender people if they refuse to publish them?
Again, you're moving your goalposts. Ganker can't claim to be anti-science only to suddenly embrace a scientific studio due to confirmation bias.
They mostly come from FBI/judicial databases, where the data isn't really presented externally or reported on. Which is what it's all about - the data is there but very few report on it outside of fringe groups because it's problematic.
Meanwhile pay gap statistics get plastered everywhere despite them rarely every controlling for work sector, title, experience, etc.
>Ganker can't claim to be anti-science only to suddenly embrace a scientific studio due to confirmation bias
Isn't this strawmanning? Are you that afraid of one study that you choose to attack its supporters instead of its findings?
>Isn't this strawmanning?
No, that's literally how it is. Ganker fricking believes that the Earth is flat.
>Are you that afraid of one study that you choose to attack its supporters instead of its findings?
I attack its supporters because they're hypocrite and double-faced, not the content of the study itself.
We all aren't one entity, anon. Assuming that is a strawman in and of itself.
The earth is not flat but watching NPC's like you have a meltdown when I assert that it is never gets old. Dance, jester, dance.
>suddenly
That isn't sudden at all. /misc/ (Ganker is a subreddit of /misc/) has always selectively believed in science or "science" that supposedly supports their beliefs. Or crime statistics of course. Funny how israelites are so powerful but somehow have no power to fake those.
Take a deep breath and relax, "anon".
Facts are simply facts, nothing more.
If only someone would tell this to Cucksoft so they'd stop censoring their own shit. Having them set up a department in the US was a huge mistake.
>trust the science, chuds
>NOOO NOT THAT SCIENCE
lole
>DA JOOS are corrupting society with da degeneracy!
>NOOOOOL DA JOOS are trying to take away my porn!
You can't have it both ways chuds.
jerking off to 2D is no different to jerking off to 3D; you're still commuting the sin of "spilling your seed on the earth rather than using it to start a family and continue your bloodline" (which is both literal and metaphoric) and still you see them defending 2D pornography.
I never understood this to begin with, if you think depictions of things make people do things then why would you start at sex and not murder or other far more extreme crimes?
Sexualization is harmless but coomers are fricking insufferable and so everything that helps get rid of them is good. So, remove sexualization from video games.
>remove sexualization from video games
Wouldn't that just make coomers even more "insufferable"?
Sexualize women and men even more in vidya!
I stopped caring
The problem with sexuality in videogames isn't the sexuality itself; it's the fact that it is used to sell a mediocre / outright bad game, or a game that on top of being trash uses a predatory monetization system.
People like Resetera miss the forest for the trees and oppose those games due to "sexualization of women reee", when they should oppose them because they're shit games that make the hobby worse as a whole.
Now coomers will reply with this post with a "nooooooo, they're fun!!!!". Millions of people consider AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA third person camera-over-the-shoulder moviegames "fun"; that doesn't make them genuinely fun, let alone good games.
>choice between a mediocre game that has breasts and fanservice or a mediocre game that doesn't have breasts or fanservice
Hmm... what a decision....
The implication that not having sexy stuff means your game is good is pure moronation.
Or you can just ignore both and play something good.
It's not a forced choice like you imply.
The qualities aren't mutually exclusive like you're implying either.
They are.
The people who want erotic or sexual content on a game belongs to a completely different audience from the one that just likes videogames and want to play a good one.
There are games that actually are first and foremost videogames and still have fanservicey content (like fighting games or Nier Automata), but said fanservice is more of a complement for the whole package than the focus on it, unlike something like Senran Kagura.
I like NieR and Senran Kagura.
Because you like 2B's ass and nothing else.
You wouldn't have played it if 9S were the sole playable character.
>What are you basing that observation in?
Interacting with the people who makes and participates on these threads.
They don't play games without female characters and wouldn't play a game if it removed its female character but played exactly the same.
Videogame fans want good videogames; sex-obsessed people are the ones who need sexy characters to consume something, and will consume anything regardless of quality because it has sexy characters.
>Interacting with the people who makes and participates on these threads.
So in other words, dumb Ganker threads, maybe a handful of anons shitposting, because everyone knows that's the best way to get opinions.
Ganker is the place on the internet where Senran Kagura and fanservicey games as a whole are defended the hardest; anons' opinions are the best indicator of how the average coomer thinks.
It's like Resetera is the best place to go if you want to know how a So y lent-chugging glasses and beard idiot thinks.
The internet is a big place, and Ganker is as much of an echo chamber as resetera even if they are opposite. Thinking you can form objectives views just be observing or "interacting" here is just dumb.
>Ganker is as much of an echo chamber as resetera even if they are opposite
moronic take. Resetera gays can say whatever they want here and we can't even post on era.
What I mean is if you go to a "coomer" thread ask the opinion of people who are only there to post lewd pics of course you're gonna get a biased view, but the fact that you have people here with a different opinion yet refuse to even change your view just means you're a shitposter.
>You wouldn't have played it if 9S were the sole playable character.
I played the first NieR long before the sequel.
>Videogame fans want good videogames
Having good character design is a condition for good video games, it's as important as music, story, gameplay etc.
Games are a medium that combine many elements. There's literally no reason to accept lesser quality in any domain.
I hope you're trolling because if you actually think they way you do you're a hopeless human being.
Do you actually think if Nier Automata replaced 2B with a second 9S for the entire game, it would improve the quality of the game in any way?
Your reasoning is absurd.
>Having good character design is a condition for good video games, it's as important as music, story, gameplay etc.
It isn't. It's window dressing that may or not attract players, but it's not even as remotely important as the gameplay, level design, enemy design, overall mechanics, etcetera.
Deep Rock Galactic has no female characters and the player characters are ugly science fiction dwarf. Does that means that DRG is a bad game?
Starcraft has ugly western designs and almost no female characters. Does that means that Starcraft is a bad game?
Age of Empires 2 has no female characters outside Joan d'Arc and the generic randomly-generated female villagers, who are no different from the male ones. Does that means that Age of Empires 2 is a bad game?
Killing Floor has no female characters besides a few skins and the screamer, and both use an ugly realistic design. Does that means that Killing Floor is a bad game?
Metal Slug only has two female characters (and only on the second game onwards), which are represented on the character selection screen as grotesque humorous caricatures. Does that means that Metal Slug is a bad game?
It means all of those games could have been better.
I said it at the start and I'll repeat it one last time, these things are not mutually exclusive no matter how much you want them to be.
Getting your dick hard isn't something that can make a game "better". For a masturbation-addict man like you does, but for people who actually plays videogames like me it would be a waste of resources that could be used making new maps, new weapons, new enemies, new gameplay mechanics, anything.
>these things are not mutually exclusive no matter how much you want them to be.
They are. A good game doesn't need sex to sell, and a game that uses sex to sell is always a mediocre game at best.
Many good games have sexual content but it's just eye candy for the players, not the game's reason for existing.
>a waste of resources
So character designers, programmers, writers, composers, directors, etc. are all just the same guy? Wow! I have a newfound respect for video game development.
Games shouldn't have good sound effects or story, that doesn't enhance the gameplay.
Sound effects do serve the gameplay and enhance it (see: Dead Space)
Story indeed doesn't; it's just window dressing.
So you have no real counter-argument? As expected from someone who considers Doom to be a shit game because it has no female characters and uses ugly western designs.
>Sound effects do serve the gameplay and enhance it (see: Dead Space)
Elaborate
Many of the enemies travel through the rooms' duct systems, which have several places where the enemies emerge. Depending on the sound you can anticipate where the enemy is and where it may appear to attack you.
>So you have no real counter-argument?
Devs should be free to make whatever they want, even if you personally despise it. How's that?
>As expected from someone who considers Doom to be a shit game because it has no female characters and uses ugly western designs.
DOOM Eternal was the last western game I actually enjoyed.
>Devs should be free to make whatever they want, even if you personally despise it. How's that?
I never said that I despise it. I never said that developers aren't allowed to create the characters they want to create.
I'm just saying that when a game focuses on sexy characters and fanservice, it's because the game is bad, and that a game not having sexy characters and fanservice isn't automatically bad like you people claim.
A game having sexy characters and fanservice isn't automatically bad like you claim, though.
It is, when the sexy characters are the selling point. Without a shred of doubt you already know you're dealing with shovelware.
Now, playing it or not it's your decision but you know what to expect.
>Without a shred of doubt you already know you're dealing with shovelware.
I have to wonder how many games "folks" who make this claim have actually played. Whether it's AAA or indie, there is some truly terrible shit out there; all far worse than what they collectively convinced themselves to believe something like Senran Kagura is.
Well, I've actually played some of the very worst videogames have to offer from the NES to the PS4, shit that barely qualifies as a videogame.
I'm willing to concede that "shovelware" may be too harsh of a word to describe Senran Kagura given how they're technically functional games, but still doesn't change the fact that Senran is bottom of the barrel and not something worth playing.
And we go back to Ganker's double faced attitude. If something like Dark Souls 2, another technically functional and technically complete videogame, is called shovelware, why can't Senran be called as such?
I like Dark Souls and Senran Kagura, though.
Yes, you like mediocre games and are willing to eat shit; we know as much.
Yeah, there's hundreds of actually shitty games out there either in old and current consoles, and let's not even mention PC. It's just a matter to go to steam, eshop, ps network, etc. and take a quick look to realize what kind of shit gets released every single day.
>but still doesn't change the fact that Senran is bottom of the barrel
Case in point, if you've actually played some of the shit that's on NES, SNES, 64, PS1, etc. You'd conclude that Senran Kagura is at worst just mediocre, but that would be discussing in good faith.
>You'd conclude that Senran Kagura is at worst just mediocre
There's actually nothing mechanically wrong with it, he probably just doesn't like it which means it's shit I guess?
Elden Ring is mediocre at worst, and people here consider it not worth playing due to not being good or excellent (even when there is nothing mechanically wrong with it).
Why Senran, which is mediocre at best, should be considered worth playing?
Elden Ring is good game, not mediocre by any means.
Calling Ninja Gaiden and Sekiro mediocre at worst is discussing at bad faith too. Lots of people consider those games great.
Calling SK "mediocre at worst" is discussing in bad faith.
"Mediocre at worst" means it's on the same league as something like Ninja Gaiden Black or Sekiro, which can't be any farther from the truth.
So you don't like playing video games in general?
That would explain a lot.
weird you'd post a series who's latest mainline game is a lot less braindead than a lot of other fighting games I could mention because of how holds work. landing your big meter move isn't always a sure thing either because of them and even when you do it doesn't ensure you'll win. Also people don't have projectiles (unless you count Zack's laser beam).
NTA but Doom has fantastic character design. There's no women, no, but it doesn't need them - it's focused on inhuman monster enemies and beefy space soldiers and they're iconic as frick and cool as hell looking.
Doom is actually a great example of how good character design improves a game.
But it has no sexy characters. You can't condemn games for having "ugly characters" and then defend Doom.
NTA but he uglyness needs to have a purpose and no, muh realism is not a justification.
>Deep Rock Galactic has no female characters and the player characters are ugly science fiction dwarf. Does that means that DRG is a bad game?
It means that the game has one obvious flaw and I don't understand why there's a large cosmetics side to this game if it's all on some fat ugly dwarf. Legit doesn't make sense to me.
The game plays well but the characters are unappealing. Yes, this is a large negative for the game.
>Killing Floor has no female characters besides a few skins and the screamer, and both use an ugly realistic design. Does that means that Killing Floor is a bad game?
KF2 actually has a couple fairly attractive female characters to play as and one of the monsters is a big titty monster lady.
>Metal Slug only has two female characters (and only on the second game onwards), which are represented on the character selection screen as grotesque humorous caricatures. Does that means that Metal Slug is a bad game?
Are we really going to pretend that Eri and Fio are anything but absolutely adorable
Their portraits aren't representative of their sprites at all
>Yes, this is a large negative for the game.
Only for porn addicts, not for people who actually play and enjoy videogames. Note how you actively disregard the game even when you accept "it plays well"
>KF2 actually has a couple fairly attractive female characters to play as and one of the monsters is a big titty monster lady.
And Killing Floor 2 is a very disliked game. Isn't it interesting how the game with fanservice content is a straight downgrade gameplay-wise from its predecessor?
I'm just saying that it doesn't make sense to me that DRG has a large cosmetics component when the characters aren't appealing. It feels like wasted resources, which is exactly the thing you're complaining about.
Also KF2 plays better than KF1 imo.
>Also KF2 plays better than KF1 imo.
Well, you consider Senran Kagura to be a good game; you having terrible standards when it comes to videogames' gameplay is a given.
You're arguing with multiple people.
Like any good schizo.
Killing Floor is a bad game because it's the kind of thing you'd find at Dave and Busters.
>There are games that actually are first and foremost videogames and still have fanservicey content (like ... Nier Automata)
boy am I sick of people praising this game and its shallow repetitive gameplay
the writing and presentation is good but let's not pretend it is actually a good game
No, normal people like sexy designs and good video games.
You're the strange one for wanting ugly designs in your games and writing them off as automatically bad if they have attractive characters.
Your brain is likely broken.
>The people who want erotic or sexual content on a game belongs to a completely different audience from the one that just likes videogames and want to play a good one.
What are you basing that observation in? Dumb threads in Ganker? Wanting to play something like Senran Kagura or Oneechanbara every once in a while doesn't mean someone doesn't enjoy something else, thinking you can only stick to one thing is child mentality.
please don't act like most shovelware doesn't come in the form of repackaging some kind of card game, majong or earthbound though.
>these two found my thread
Excellent. I thank you both in advance for any and all potential bumps.
two who
You're not wrong in that these games are usually shit, and there's also nothing wrong with jerking off to the material they produce. Which makes them still offer more than your average shovelware, like it or not.
Blue Reflection is a low budget title but calling it shovelware is just unfair. The second one especially is very decent.
anyway it's time i draw some senran kagura
"harm reduction" was always an excuse, not the point of the exercise, which was to ruin things that normal people like for the sake of a toxic political agenda. that's why this study won't change anything or gain any traction.
If sexualization is harmless then why does half this board fap to naked animated 10 year olds?
I ain't heard of anyone harming themselves with JPEGs and PNGs
dunno bro some of those jaggies are sharp
watch out for them aliased girls
Shit that's why in Ganker X I have rounded corners on thumbnails, just in case
You're late!
I know damn it, I just woke up
Ok cool, but not every game has to be porn.
Fanservice isn't porn. Hell, CERO forbids full nudity and explicit depictions of sex from all retail Japanese releases, which only makes the demonization of these games even more senseless.
>no evidence means it's not potentially true
Misogyny is caused by women.
>Antisemitism is caused by israelites
this
and fan service wouldn't be as big as it is (both in vidya and anime) without feminism ruining Japan and creating so many Neets who enjoy it. so if you dislike coomer stuff you can literally blame women.
Okay but new Senran Kagura game when?
If men view women a certain way it's because of women's behaviour. Take responsibility instead of blaming everything and everyone else.
Based YT comment I found under a lollipop chainsaw video I was watching.
Good shit, anon.
It's always funny when roasties conflate a flopping wiener to bouncing breasts. Contrary to popular belief, men's cloths accommodate the dick rather well unless it's some betacuck skinny jeans where a buldge would be pronounced and only when errect or packing a real suasage of a flaccid dick. A better comparison would be Bara jiggle with tight muscle shirts actually. This isn't even mentioning that the location of both parts is vastly different between dicks and breasts.
reminds me when they literally wanted BALLS HANGING OUT in dragon's crown like that was going to get past censors
It's always ridiculous when people say breast jiggle is unrealistic.
If anything, jiggle in games is typically toned down from reality. Big breasts bounce every-fricking-where in real life.
Telling me something I've known for years now.
Whether this study exists or not, or even goes against that narrative, I doubt you'd stop being a pornography addict OP, sad
stop spamming this garbage. I don't care. Just make more games with hot women in them, I don't give a shit about your moronic study.
Frick off OP, make a real videogame thread next time.
Don’t talk to my boyfriend like that homosexual
>I don't care.
Then hide the thread.
>"unrealistic" women in media
large breasted woman who looks like she practices good skincare. often looks to be overweight and visibly lacking any muscle definition
>unrealistic men in media
ridiculously buff monsters with full, flowing manes of hair
Proofs don't exist
Every study is a lie pished by a lobby (read: the israelite)
Science is worthless
Everything we know is a lie
Makes sens, I never understood these arguments, they all rely on the fundamental assumption that everyone is a literal moron who cannot differentiate reality from fiction, whether it's about sexy characters, sexy outfits, violence or whatever else.
I don't know who's trolling who anymore.
>Implying it ever had anything to do with body image.
>Implying it wasn't always about white women seeing imaginary people as competition for attention.
Just like the "All games should have an easy mode" Discussion is about accessibility and totally not about journalists being filtered by any game with a fail state, right?