What a Strange Character Representation - Critique on the Game

[Gaius Flamma]

Young audiences have a high level of impressionability which makes such representations potentially harmful to their understanding of gender roles and self worth .

The growing societal awareness about healthy representation makes it essential to focus on suitable content for youth in media to create a supportive environment for their development .

at 13 years old children are still developing their understanding of body image
exposure to hyper and over sexualized characters can distort their perceptions of beauty

and appropriate behavior , leading to unrealistic expectations and unhealthy standards

constant exposure to sexualized imagery can desensitize young children to objectification of individuals

over sexualization can contribute to issues such as anxiety , depression , and body
dysmorphia

in conclusion :

protecting kids from over sexualized content is crucial for their development, fostering a healthier understanding of themselves and their relationships with others.

This Video Game needs a Higher Age Rating

Update :

it is absolute scary so far that not a single person here couldn come up with a reasonable and logical answer .

also we had someone literally commenting " i dont care about kids " or " nobody cares what stinky teens are doing "

[Toybox]

Also, FYI this outfit is pretty much pulled from the one she wears in the comic, and it makes sense for the character she is. She's incredibly narcissistic and her body is meant to be literally tough as diamonds, so there is precedent for her to dress this way, because she doesn't need armor or padding.

It's lore accurate for the character, and regardless of the gooner comments, they shouldn't have to compromise character design to cater to puritan ideals.

[Gaius Flamma]

Originally posted by Toybox:

Also, FYI this outfit is pretty much pulled from the one she wears in the comic, and it makes sense for the character she is. She's incredibly narcissistic and her body is meant to be literally tough as diamonds, so there is precedent for her to dress this way, because she doesn't need armor or padding.

It's lore accurate for the character, and regardless of the gooner comments, they shouldn't have to compromise character design to cater to puritan ideals.

There are numerous ways to express a character's strength and identity without resorting to sexualized designs specially for a game which is rated for 13 year olds .

So you whole Argument falls flat like a house of cards and totally missing the point of what kids should be exposed to these days or not , what is appropriate or not .

Let me ask you a simple logical question so i can understand your viewpoint .

Would you have a problem when a teacher is dressing like this in the school infront of the kids or your kid specificly the emma frost x revolution skin ?

[Toybox]

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

Originally posted by Toybox:

Also, FYI this outfit is pretty much pulled from the one she wears in the comic, and it makes sense for the character she is. She's incredibly narcissistic and her body is meant to be literally tough as diamonds, so there is precedent for her to dress this way, because she doesn't need armor or padding.

It's lore accurate for the character, and regardless of the gooner comments, they shouldn't have to compromise character design to cater to puritan ideals.

There are numerous ways to express a character's strength and identity without resorting to sexualized designs specially for a game which is rated for 13 year olds .

So you whole Argument falls flat like a house of cards and totally missing the point of what kids should be exposed to these days or not , what is appropriate or not .

Let me ask you a simple logical question so i can understand your viewpoint .

Would you have a problem when a teacher is dressing like this in the school infront of the kids or your kid specificly the emma frost x revolution skin ?

That is a different context and a different scenario. These are video game characters, not real people. If you failed to teach your kid the difference between fantasy and reality, that's on you.

It wouldn't be appropriate for a teacher to wear a bikini to work. That doesn't mean we need to restrict every beach to 18+. Your argument is ridiculous.

[Gaius Flamma]

Originally posted by Toybox:

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

There are numerous ways to express a character's strength and identity without resorting to sexualized designs specially for a game which is rated for 13 year olds .

So you whole Argument falls flat like a house of cards and totally missing the point of what kids should be exposed to these days or not , what is appropriate or not .

Let me ask you a simple logical question so i can understand your viewpoint .

Would you have a problem when a teacher is dressing like this in the school infront of the kids or your kid specificly the emma frost x revolution skin ?

That is a different context and a different scenario. These are video game characters, not real people. If you failed to teach your kid the difference between fantasy and reality, that's on you.

It wouldn't be appropriate for a teacher to wear a bikini to work. That doesn't mean we need to restrict every beach to 18+. Your argument is ridiculous.

Semantics does matter in a discussion to understand the opposite site of viewpoint
i gave you a hypothetical question to test your logic on what kids should be exposed to or not ,

I give you that they are made up characters , but it absolutely does not change the fact of the matter what those kids being exposed too and can shape their impression .

Exposure to sexualized characters can shape their understanding of what is considered normal or desirable behavior ,

Conclusion

it does not matter if it is a made up character or not , the fact of the matter is what they get exposed to and if it is appropriate or not .

lets just entertain another hypothetical because you like " reality " .

what if the teacher in school is giving out books to children and in there is a made up character and over sexualizied visualy , is that appropriate in your viewpoint or not ?

[OMEGA]

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

Originally posted by Mermaider666:

Ever read a comic book before?

Softer than baby sh1t

stick to the topic and quit trolling

The Psylocke vengeance skin which was literally nicknamed the gooner skin first appeared in 1981 your a little bit late to the party.

[Toybox]

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

Originally posted by Toybox:

That is a different context and a different scenario. These are video game characters, not real people. If you failed to teach your kid the difference between fantasy and reality, that's on you.

It wouldn't be appropriate for a teacher to wear a bikini to work. That doesn't mean we need to restrict every beach to 18+. Your argument is ridiculous.

Semantics does matter in a discussion to understand the opposite site of viewpoint
i gave you a hypothetical question to test your logic on what kids should be exposed to or not ,

I give you that they are made up characters , but it absolutely does not change the fact of the matter what those kids being exposed too and can shape their impression .

Exposure to sexualized characters can shape their understanding of what is considered normal or desirable behavior ,

Conclusion

it does not matter if it is a made up character or not , the fact of the matter is what they get exposed to and if it is appropriate or not .

lets just entertain another hypothetical because you like " reality " .

what if the teacher in school is giving out books to children and in there is a made up character and over sexualizied visualy , is that appropriate in your viewpoint or not ?

Again, under what context would this be needed? Schools are for learning. There is no reason for this to exist in this context. In the context of a video game based on a comic book that accurately depicts how the character looked on the comic, there is precedent.

You're making up an arbitrary scenario with no context and comparing it to one that has context and is purposeful in design.

School is for learning. Video games are for entertainment. You need to learn the difference.

[Gaius Flamma]

Originally posted by Toybox:

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

Semantics does matter in a discussion to understand the opposite site of viewpoint
i gave you a hypothetical question to test your logic on what kids should be exposed to or not ,

I give you that they are made up characters , but it absolutely does not change the fact of the matter what those kids being exposed too and can shape their impression .

Exposure to sexualized characters can shape their understanding of what is considered normal or desirable behavior ,

Conclusion

it does not matter if it is a made up character or not , the fact of the matter is what they get exposed to and if it is appropriate or not .

lets just entertain another hypothetical because you like " reality " .

what if the teacher in school is giving out books to children and in there is a made up character and over sexualizied visualy , is that appropriate in your viewpoint or not ?

Again, under what context would this be needed? Schools are for learning. There is no reason for this to exist in this context. In the context of a video game based on a comic book that accurately depicts how the character looked on the comic, there is precedent.

You're making up an arbitrary scenario with no context and comparing it to one that has context and is purposeful in design.

School is for learning. Video games are for entertainment. You need to learn the difference.

since you wont engage into hypotheticals to test your logic which would totally show your position onto the topic , i will ignore you

bye

[Toybox]

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

Originally posted by Toybox:

Again, under what context would this be needed? Schools are for learning. There is no reason for this to exist in this context. In the context of a video game based on a comic book that accurately depicts how the character looked on the comic, there is precedent.

You're making up an arbitrary scenario with no context and comparing it to one that has context and is purposeful in design.

School is for learning. Video games are for entertainment. You need to learn the difference.

since you wont engage into hypotheticals to test your logic which would totally show your position onto the topic , i will ignore you

bye

Your hypotheticals need to make a modicum of sense before they can he engaged with. Why do you keep bringing up school as a comparison? Comic books and school are two different things. What is appropriate changes based on context. There is no one singular definition that covers everything.

[Gaius Flamma]

Originally posted by OMEGA:

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

stick to the topic and quit trolling

The Psylocke vengeance skin which was literally nicknamed the gooner skin first appeared in 1981 your a little bit late to the party.

In 1981, comics did not have a formal ratings system like today's "Comics Code Authority" or age ratings

Psylocke's character and storylines developed over the years to include more mature themes for adults and not being appropriate for children

nice try , next time do some research

[Toybox]

Originally posted by Gaius Flamma:

Originally posted by OMEGA:

The Psylocke vengeance skin which was literally nicknamed the gooner skin first appeared in 1981 your a little bit late to the party.

In 1981, comics did not have a formal ratings system like today's "Comics Code Authority" or age ratings

Psylocke's character and storylines developed over the years to include more mature themes

nice try , next time do some research

The Comic Code Authority was established in 1951.

[FireForce]

honestly valid concern. society and social media as a whole is pushing sexual content on the youth too much now

[Toybox]

Originally posted by FireForce:

honestly valid concern. society and social media as a whole is pushing sexual content on the youth too much now

You were clearly not a child in the 80's and 90's.

[fenrif]

Originally posted by FireForce:

honestly valid concern. society and social media as a whole is pushing sexual content on the youth too much now

A woman with her legs out is only sexual if you are a coomer.

[Nitro Toxico]

Originally posted by Toybox:

Originally posted by FireForce:

honestly valid concern. society and social media as a whole is pushing sexual content on the youth too much now

You were clearly not a child in the 80's and 90's.

Im from the 90's, and this argument post is just an overprotective mother/farter/person that is just trying to sound like that a 5 year old is playing Marvel Rivals.

The game is rated T for Teen, so the fact they are going overprotective is because parents dont know how to handle kids these days. Its up to the parent to control what they are allowed to play if they are younger then the age requirements.

If you cant do that, then you have no reason to go overprotective when parents wont.

[Gaius Flamma]

Originally posted by FireForce:

honestly valid concern. society and social media as a whole is pushing sexual content on the youth too much now

totally agree on that and its very concerning .

80 percent of the comments so far are " well the parents need to take care and are responsible of the child and watch out what they get exposed to "

which i do agree totally specially these days , but that does not change the fact that the companys and all those institutes agreeing publishing such things in the first place so kids

get exposed to it . in this example marvel rivals being rated for 13 years old upwards yet having over sexualizied characters in it which begs the question ...