Tomb Raider Forums  

Go Back   Tomb Raider Forums > Tomb Raider Franchise > Future of Tomb Raider

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-04-24, 11:48   #131
charmedangelin
Member
 
charmedangelin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 23,099
Default

Rachet has human appearance though, no other animal besides humans walk on two legs. Women are born with breasts, that's a biological fact. Do they define women? Not entirely, but I wouldn't say that a female Ratchet having them is uncharacteristic given the fact that they actually do share many human qualities. That's really a poor excuse imo.
charmedangelin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-24, 13:20   #132
Dennis's Mom
Moderator
 
Dennis's Mom's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 17,075
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charmedangelin View Post
Say what you will about the sexy women in the 90's and 2000's, but at least none of them was brutalized, tortured, or SA to prove themselves. They were bad ass on their own merit, sexy or not. They didn't have anything to prove like female characters these days.
I have theory that these characters were only powerful because of their obvious design pandering to the male gaze.

In other words, the ratio of power women can have in a video game is relative to their state of undress.

I call it the "sure I can kill you, but I'm dressed for sex so you can have the fantasy I might decide to **** you instead because that's really really a thing that might happen" theory of female video game attire.

In other words, the ability to be bad ass is relative to acknowledging wanting a man's attention.

The less women acknowledge their need for male attention, the more they will be punished, i.e., brutalized. Reminded, as it were, of their precarious place in the ecosystem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AndrewGilkison View Post
What exactly is wrong with looking "stereotypically female"? I don't get it.
I'm sorry, are you seriously asking why people don't want to be a stereotype?

I linked to a video earlier, but I guess no one watched it." Ah well. "Maya Shiranui looking like she does is awesome. EVERYONE looking like she does is stupid."

I'd just like to clarify my own position. I don't care whether female characters are beautiful per se, but it annoys me that the only way a female character can be considered "sexy" is if she's threatening wardrobe malfunction. I'm definitely team "reasonably appropriate attire."

And because I'm a woman, I definitely on the team that things like intelligence, wit and resourcefulness are also considered sexy with or without the visual shorthand of cleavage.

Last edited by Dennis's Mom; 01-04-24 at 13:22.
Dennis's Mom is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-24, 23:32   #133
janissary
Member
 
janissary's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 149
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by [Xmas] View Post
The difference between diverse characters now and then is that they used to be (usually) well-written characters whose skin color or sexuality weren't the only trick up their sleeves so to speak, whereas today a lot of characters feel like their, um, character almost takes a backseat while a lot of emphasis is put on their skin color, gender identity, or sexuality.
I don't want to get inside the whole argument with LGBT and POC. But this quote here is what I'm having problems with. People who say thing like this don't think gender identities or sexualities were highlighted because they actually are... they think gender indentities and sexualities are highlighted because most characters they want to take a shot at aren't heterosexual. Same thing can be said about skin color too - because inclusivity of specific genders, sexualities or sexes can come off as fabricated. Most of the time it's true... especially if it's Hollywood. But none of this criticism will be uttered about the likes of James Bond, who's in each movie has to have an love interest. Titanic sinks in the Atlantic but it's still used as set piece (took the back seat as you said) inside a buttery love story. This wasn't a problem because of said reasons and none of them (by I mean Rose and Jack) were interesting characters at all. I want to stress this example particularly because to understand my statement you can actually observe the difference between ''A Night to Remember'' and ''Titanic'' back to back. Therefore, to me comments like this aren't genuine and flat out delusional. People who say things like this deep down wants these ''diverse'' characters to hide their sexual and racial identities behind masks.. and oh how ironic this must be to people who read this person's whole comment.
janissary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-24, 01:43   #134
[Xmas]
Member
 
[Xmas]'s Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 12,568
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janissary View Post
I don't want to get inside the whole argument with LGBT and POC. But this quote here is what I'm having problems with. People who say thing like this don't think gender identities or sexualities were highlighted because they actually are... they think gender indentities and sexualities are highlighted because most characters they want to take a shot at aren't heterosexual. Same thing can be said about skin color too - because inclusivity of specific genders, sexualities or sexes can come off as fabricated. Most of the time it's true... especially if it's Hollywood. But none of this criticism will be uttered about the likes of James Bond, who's in each movie has to have an love interest. Titanic sinks in the Atlantic but it's still used as set piece (took the back seat as you said) inside a buttery love story. This wasn't a problem because of said reasons and none of them (by I mean Rose and Jack) were interesting characters at all. I want to stress this example particularly because to understand my statement you can actually observe the difference between ''A Night to Remember'' and ''Titanic'' back to back. Therefore, to me comments like this aren't genuine and flat out delusional. People who say things like this deep down wants these ''diverse'' characters to hide their sexual and racial identities behind masks.. and oh how ironic this must be to people who read this person's whole comment.
For the record, this person is gay so I don't see why I'd want gay fictional characters to hide their gayness or not express it when appropriate or necessary for plot purposes. However, my being gay doesn't constitute 100% of my personality, and it's not something that I let define me every day, or that I need to insert into every single conversation. Of course I agree that not all cis straight white characters are top tier/flawlessly written, and I'd have no mercy calling them out just as I'll call out any other sloppy character. Personally, I've always found James Bond (both the movies and the character) dull, and it's not an experience I've ever found myself deliberately seeking out more than once.

However, I will not stand for the Rose DeWitt Bukater slander as she's a very special character to me ever since I first saw Titanic as a child. Something about Rose's journey from a sheltered upper class (seemingly) young woman essentially being sold to another man by her own mother so the family can keep their lifestyle and good name -- to a bad ass axe-wielding-survivor who not only takes back control of the course her life is heading in, but also her own body (and who she shares it with) has resonated with me. At the start of the movie, she appears glamorous and quite comfortable in her own little bubble, but we soon find out she's actually suicidal and depressed, even attempting to jump off the ship. Meeting Jack (but also another upper class lady who lives life on her own terms, Molly Brown) inspires her to do things she wouldn't have dared doing for the first time in her life -- standing up to her mother's controlling nature, talking back to her snob fiancť, and dropping zingers as her inner rebel starts coming out. It's a tale about the stifling and highly controlling nature of the upper class lifestyle and how it impacted women (Rose's mother was just as much a victim as Rose was, but she chose to go along with the programme rather than defy the expectations and live with the consequences). It is also a tale about a woman reclaiming her free will. The ship's sinking is merely a backdrop because it's not its main theme, and to call Titanic just a "buttery love story" is oversimplification at its best. Rose grows as a character and she's a different person by the end than she was at the beginning. This is good writing. If all you took from Titanic was the romance aspect then you've missed out on a lot.

My hope for the future of LGBTQ+ characters is that we can get journeys like Rose's because we deserve them, and it's indeed long overdue. I would like to see multi-layered complex characters whose sexuality isn't the only focus (unless that's all there is to the story) and who receive the kind of love and attention to detail afforded to other iconic characters. A gay character I've particularly enjoyed in recent years is Emily from The Handmaid's Tale. Too bad Alexis Bledel left the show, but it kind of makes sense as the writers started focusing so much on June and Serena that all the other characters got the short end of the stick.
[Xmas] is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-24, 11:18   #135
janissary
Member
 
janissary's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2021
Posts: 149
Default

Look, I think the same way with you. But let's call straight romance out too. Heterosexuality is also a sexual orientation and man... people are always full of that. Ottoman Empire literaly went into decline because of a man who couldn't contain himself over a woman.

I think I must change that sentence to ''Jack and Rose's romance aren't interesting.'' Because the problem isn't their characters but rather a romance plot slapped into one of the most interesting tragedy of history and the fact that none of us really thought ''we are projecting our sexual fantasies in this movie'' Rose would have made a kick ass survivor character in that movie just like a nurse Violet Jessop - a woman who survived not just Titanic disaster but when it's sister ships Britannic was torpedoed or when the Olympic got hit by another vessel. Now that's a strong character that didn't needed a romance to drive her. I think she was suffered a head trauma beacuse she was on the lifeboat that Britannic sucked in while sinking. Nonetheless she did survive, there wasn't a Jack who yetted her out of that boat. She saw the propeller and jumped out. That's it.

You can't bring your sexuality into this saying you are homosexual so you can't want LGBT characters to hide their identity. We are living in a society severely corrupted by Abrahamic religions, where human sexuality is an obsessive running theme in each three books. These books draws a ''normal'' life style for people, therefore anyone who isn't either mentioned or villainized in these mainstream products are considered sick. This type of hatred can only orchestrated by these religions. Humans are social creatures and not being accepted or out right banished is a pschologicaly fearsome experience for us. That's why most people hiding their true identities and deep down ''don't want to get into way'' to avoid difficult conversations in heteronormative society. Most of the time doing it without realizing themselves. Not saying it's you here. But comments like these usually very calling on people like those. That's why I find them very sus.

Seriously, it must be hardest thing to write LGBT character because how marginalized they are throughout the history. If a gay character had two hours of screen time and only it's two seconds shows you a sex scene people would think ''this character is full of itself.'' I know I think that way sometimes.

I also want to add that I think this game is in development crisis. Tomb Raider's history is filled with these type of episodes and I will not be surprised if we got a half finished game. Some leaks said they were thinking for Aniversary remake, which was one of the smartest thing they would've done since it was planned for 25th Anniversary and they were trying to go for unified Lara Croft. But then that was scrapped... probably last minute decision and probably beacuse of 2020 ordeal get in way. Either way I don't think anyone who responsible for post-2013 games know what they doing now.

Last edited by janissary; 06-04-24 at 13:34.
janissary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-24, 12:10   #136
Dennis's Mom
Moderator
 
Dennis's Mom's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 17,075
Default

They scrapped the "unified" Lara Croft? Good. What a dumb idea. They've kinda already diluted the character into meaningless garbage, and the idea of further diluting the character because they think people are too stupid to understand timelines was only going to make it more ridiculous.

Starting with the character is the reason the Survivor trilogy is so horrible. They're so busy trying to make Lara into something they forgot to tell the story.
Dennis's Mom is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-24, 12:15   #137
omerocoti
Member
 
omerocoti's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 913
Default

I don't think the game is in a development crisis.

A TRA remake/remaster was considered, but scrapped because the engine wasn't "transferable" to the Survive trilogy engine, so it would have taken a lot of work/time for them to make a new remake from scratch back then. But, I think we will still have a new TR1 Remake (again) in UE5, being the next main game.

My biggest disappointment with CD is that they don't have the same kind of communication with fans as Capcom. They don't open polls to find out what we want, they simply launch minigames, boards, cosmetics bla bla bla
omerocoti is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-24, 15:50   #138
amiro1989
Member
 
amiro1989's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,729
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis's Mom View Post
They scrapped the "unified" Lara Croft? Good. What a dumb idea. They've kinda already diluted the character into meaningless garbage, and the idea of further diluting the character because they think people are too stupid to understand timelines was only going to make it more ridiculous.

Starting with the character is the reason the Survivor trilogy is so horrible. They're so busy trying to make Lara into something they forgot to tell the story.
They haven’t scrapped anything people are just reading between the lines, when there’s nothing to read. They said that the Lara in the concept art is not exactly how Lara looks in the next game and that will always be true because it’s not the 3D model they are using in-game. People then applied the narrative that satisfied their opinion. What was shown is what a unified Lara could look like. That statement is still true.

Last edited by amiro1989; 02-04-24 at 15:55.
amiro1989 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-24, 16:37   #139
Jamise_Croft
Member
 
Jamise_Croft's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 2,226
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amiro1989 View Post
They havenít scrapped anything people are just reading between the lines, when thereís nothing to read. They said that the Lara in the concept art is not exactly how Lara looks in the next game and that will always be true because itís not the 3D model they are using in-game. People then applied the narrative that satisfied their opinion. What was shown is what a unified Lara could look like. That statement is still true.
Drag them
Jamise_Croft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-24, 16:29   #140
suli
Member
 
suli's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,017
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amiro1989 View Post
They havenít scrapped anything people are just reading between the lines, when thereís nothing to read. They said that the Lara in the concept art is not exactly how Lara looks in the next game and that will always be true because itís not the 3D model they are using in-game. People then applied the narrative that satisfied their opinion. What was shown is what a unified Lara could look like. That statement is still true.
Yup. Unified Lara is set in stone at this point. It's just for the first time in franchise history the devs are given the time needed to make their game. We're so used to all the games being rushed that we couldn't handle this
suli is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 18:39.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Tomb Raider Forums is not owned or operated by CDE Entertainment Ltd.
Lara Croft and Tomb Raider are trademarks of CDE Entertainment Ltd.