Are Game Magazines Turning Into Men's Magazines? 147
KaiEl writes "I was skimming through the latest issue of Electronic Gaming Monthly (April 2004) the other day when I began to notice a recurring theme: pictures of scantily clad women, both virtual and real, kept popping up. Usually it's not surprising to find one or two skimpy outfits in an issue, but this one seemed crawling with them. I decided to chronicle a list of the semi-nudity in a post on my weblog. What does this surplus of sexy pictures say about the direction of the videogame industry? Is it a reaction to the success of 'male' magazines like Maxim and FHM? Is it a reflection of the video game industry's seeming fascination with the barely clothed female form (see: Dead Or Alive Xtreme Beach Volleyball)? Or am I just a prude who's getting worked up over nothing?"
Re:Let me see... (Score:4, Interesting)
There are pictures of semi-naked women which will both catch eyes and excite men looking through magazines and deciding on which to buy.
The exact same mechanism is at work.
It's Just EGM (Score:4, Interesting)
However, DOA:X is a good illustration of how the gaming market <i>is</i> becoming more sexually oriented. Mmmm....decline of society...
Re:prude - nope (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, I don't know the mag in question, or many mags at all, for that matter, but your logic is faulty. The above quote is fine, but you make an assumption -- that they need to put in the hotties to sell issues. Maybe they were doing fine as it was, and decided to add some nudity to boost sales even more.
I just hate it when people say things like that.
I Noticed the Same Thing... (Score:3, Interesting)
pictures of scantily clad women, both virtual and real, kept popping up.
I noticed exactly the same thing.
I used to be a subscriber to EGM, but I eventually dropped the subscription because I felt it was taking unfair advantage of the ease with which my hormones are manipulated by random people. It seemed they were beginning to shove out the real gaming-related stuff in favor of more "lowest common denominator" stuff - such as images of the female form in various stages of undress, and I just decided I wasn't getting what I was paying for anymore, so I quit paying. ;)
Forget objectification, this is just silly (Score:4, Interesting)
Besides, it's not as if anyone who wants porn can't get it. Frankly, given the Internet, it's probably quite possible to obtain porn faster than you can conceivably look at it. Why bother with some random half-assed sexual innuendo in a gaming magazine?
Re:Rule #1 (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Prude? It depends... (Score:5, Interesting)
What surprised me, more than anything, were the reactions on Slashdot. Some were comparing the situation to a televisual 'Goatse' -- though in my opinion there is a bit of difference between being taking by surprised by a gaping anus and by a breast (with a sun around the nipple, goddamit!). I don't know if the same numbers apply to the USA, but over here most boys have seen a pornographic film by the age of around 8. I just do not see how seeing a breast on television could be so shocking. Anyway, isn't the Superbowl broadcast in the evening in America? Shouldn't kids who aren't old enough to have seen a pornographic flm yet have been in bed already?
So, to say it frankly, it is true that most French people think of you Americans not only as warmongers but also as prude maniacs. Though you say this could be the general opinion throughout Europe, I beleive that the United Kingdom does have a lower tolerance of what appears on television than in France or in Germany. In the United Kingdom, the "F word" is censored even at 10 PM, whereas in France we are allowed to hear it as soon as 5 - 6 PM. That is one of the aspects of our liberal censorship policy that I like less of, as I do feel there should be certain regulations to protect what our children car hear on daytime television. I'm 13 and I swear constantly, but perhaps my language would be more elegant had the television not repeated some language so much.
Missing the point (Score:2, Interesting)
The other misconception here is that games are a male dominated industry, if you take a look at the sales numbers you will see that the top selling game is the Sims. The Sims, sells predominately to a female audience at roughly 70 to 30 split. While Killathon 3 , may get more hype, make no mistake, as games move towards the mainstream, there are and more women gamers. Make no mistake, there isn't a major publisher out there who isn't working on a strategy for women. Industry wise games have to go down that road otherwise they risk imploding and having what happened to the comic industry happening to them.
In the end the Maxim-ization of EGM not only does a disservice to the industry but to the gamers who got them where they are today as well as the women audience who are expanding the market. EGM should focus on what it does best, cover games, rather than chase a subscriber base that belongs to someone else.
Today I cancel my subscription (Score:3, Interesting)
Its a clean UK magazine tarnished only slightly by the odd graphics card advert but this month it comes with a flyer for a "Mens Magazine" complete with samples of the kinds of pictures I can get.
Well d*rn, I dont buy mens magazines cos I don't want my mind tarnished by the decietful images, and I don't buy deceitful magazines that try to tarnish my mind on the sly like PC Pro.
I doubt PC Pro will miss my single subscription fee, but I won't miss PC Pro. I own my mind and I try to control what goes into it.
Sam
Re:Prude? It depends... (Score:3, Interesting)
Perhaps this is the crux of the issue. Most boys in the US grow to be 13 or 14 before seeing a pornographic film... although it depends on what you mean by pornographic. Some people define it as simply seeing the full frontal nudity of a member of the opposite sex. Others define it as seeing 2 people engaging in sexually explicit activity (to be blunt, when you see the penis penetrate the vagina, for instance). For the former, I'd say 8-10, but 13-15 for the latter.
Americans, in general, are more prudish than Europeans. I personally see this as both a positive and a negative. It's a positive because it seems to be working. More married couples now are staying together rather than getting divorced, teenage pregnancy is decreasing, drug use is down, average income is up, unemployment is low (compared to most European countries), etc. It's a negative because I feel it's one of the primary issues that segregates America from the rest of the world. Perhaps if we didn't censor the F word on TV, or allowed topless beaches, we wouldn't have quite as many differences between living here and living in Europe.
Regardless, parents in the US are more overprotective of their children than any other country that I can think of. They've passed laws to stop all lanes of traffic when a school bus turns on its flashing lights, for instance. One of the aspects of this overprotectiveness is wanting to protect the children from the "evils" of sexuality... thus, the Super Bowl incident.
If it helps to understand, Americans aren't only overprotective of children. In fact, they're overprotective of everyone, and everything. The main theme seems to be "I know what's best for you better than you do." Ironically, while America is supposed to be the bastion of freedom in the world, this idea of protecting everyone else from themselves is the complete polar opposite of freedom. To protect someone, you do so by placing restrictions on them... thereby destroying the concept of freedom.
Sadly, I don't think there's a good example of a country that has it right yet. America is too prudish, while other countries place restrictions in other ways... like increasing tax rates for different salaries, or prefering one group of people to another. Hopefully, in the future, we can create a world where each of us has true freedom... I doubt it though.