Jump to content


Member Since 10 Oct 2003
Offline Last Active Feb 17 2016 09:47 PM

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Anita Sarkeesian | More Feminist or More Fraud?

17 February 2016 - 09:49 PM





Apologies for the shoddy research on my part.



'sokay, I just got this thread linked in my site referrers and had a need to vent a little :)

The term sexually objectified is a thin one, and can be edged either way to support any kind of debate.

If you are losing a debate, you can bend the definition favorably, if you are winning the debate you can bend it unfavorably as well.

What sexually objectified is, is hard to say. For this reason, hpapillion seems to have defined it as "sexually objectified decoration" because the root word, sexually objectified, is a bit ambiguous.


You might find it useful to read the posts you are referring to before talking about them. Or to use a thing called google which can help you in your research. Sometimes when people put quotation marks around sentences, it is because they are directly quoting things which have been said elsewhere on the internet. Searching for that quoted text will help you discover the source of the quote. It may also help you discover if someone is completely making a quote up. This is a useful skill for you to learn when trying to understand the world.


I didn't define sexual objectification as anything at all. I simply pointed out that there is no Tropes Vs Women episode entitled "Sexual Objectification". It's not a trope.


Therefore, I:

- picked an episode which appeared to reference sexual objectification in its description

- stated which episode I was referring to

- quoted the definition of the trope as it was being used in that particular episode


Also, that's not what "root word" means. Here is a link to a dictionary entry with an explanation of the term "root word". 

In Topic: Anita Sarkeesian | More Feminist or More Fraud?

17 February 2016 - 07:03 PM

By the standards that Anita Sarkeesian describes female roles in video games, then virtually everyone of Hanako Games' titles are misogynistic.  I would would argue that Hanako games would be one the worst offenders out there, as virtually every game released is full of female characters that Sarkeesian takes issue with:

  • Damsels in Distress
  • Smurfettes
  • Ms. Males
  • Seductresses
  • Sexually objectified

So who exactly is this misogynist?


Our own hpapillon, AKA Georgina B.









May I just say that it's terribly disappointing that, in a thread which was started by people complaining that someone who (supposedly) doesn't know anything about games shouldn't be criticising them, not one of you bothered to point out that

- pretty much everything in this accusation is untrue

- the screenshots being quoted aren't even from games I developed??


Let me break it down for you. First off, the "damsel in distress" trope, particularly as it appears in video games, refers to a helpless female character being put into distress, which she does nothing about herself other than maybe calling to the heroes for help, in order to serve as a motivating factor for the heroes. It does not mean any female character who ever needs help with anything, or is ever in any sort of danger.


The princess in Dragon's Lair sits in a bubble waiting for you to save her. Princess Peach is repeatedly kidnapped. Pauline is dragged up to the top of the level by Donkey Kong. Your goal is to save them. That's what they're for.


The objection to the trope is when this is the only thing a female character is for in video games - to be an object to be rescued.


Now yes, by a technicality, I do have a game in which a princess is kidnapped and you're supposed to rescue her! So you could almost score on this point. Of course, there are many, many other female characters in the game, including the protagonist, and the princess is rescued before the halfway point and becomes an active participant in the story.


What's next? Smurfettes. That refers to having a large male cast with only a single female character. Have you LOOKED at any of my games? Okay, if you're completely unfamiliar with my games you might briefly think that Date Warp contains only one female character, but you would still be wrong, and in everything else it should be immediately obvious.


Ms Male Character - How could anyone think this possibly applied? Please tell me where any of my games feature a female version of an established male character. Did you just pick this trope name out of a hat?


Seductresses - Again, let's look at the explanation of the trope she was calling out. "The Evil Demon Seductress is a supernatural creature usually a demon, alien, robot, vampire etc. who is most often disguised as a sexy human female.  She uses her sexuality and sexual wiles to manipulate, seduce, kill and often eat poor, hapless men by luring them into her evil web."  Now look at my games again. That accusation doesn't make sense.


Sexually Objectified - That isn't even a Tropes Vs Women trope name. Were you referring to the Women as Background Decoration episode? Okay, let's go with that. "the subset of largely insignificant non-playable female characters whose sexuality or victimhood is exploited as a way to infuse edgy, gritty or racy flavoring into game worlds. These sexually objectified female bodies are designed to function as environmental texture while titillating presumed straight male players. Sometimes they’re created to be glorified furniture but they are frequently programmed as minimally interactive sex objects to be used and abused."   Okay, tell me again how that has the slightest relation to any of my games.


As for those screenshots:

One was from Lucky Rabbit Reflex. Look at the game page. It's an affiliate title. I did not make it.

One was from Spirited Heart. Look at the game page. It's an affiliate title. I did not make it.

One was from Summer Session. Look at the game page. It's an affiliate title. Are you seeing a pattern here?


And they still don't demonstrate the tropes you're calling out!




In a thread complaining about someone else supposedly not doing her research and just spitting out random views for political reason, this is the epitome of hypocrisy, and you should all be extremely ashamed of yourselves.


Am I above criticism? Absolutely not. But making up random nonsense for the sole purpose of trying to "prove" that feminism is bad should make you feel like a terrible person.

In Topic: Making money with your apps/games

28 August 2015 - 10:54 PM


I'm confused how you're managing to miss the option of "Just sell your game."

You don't need an appstore.

You don't need a publisher.

You can just sell games.


hpapillon? Aren't you that person who sold a game in a store, but then stressed how difficult and unprofitable it was?


Now you are saying "just sell games" as if its the easy secret we all forgot? If only it were that simple. :P



I'm probably about to get an award and a mod-smacking for the world's worst thread necromancy, but - you may have been thinking of someone else?


It's not impossible that I complained about retail here once, sometime in the distant past - after all, I've been in the business for many years and I forget many things. But stressing about how difficult and unprofitable it was doesn't sound like me. I've only ever done retail deals twice, neither was hugely difficult, and I got some money out of it.


The most stressful business dealings I've ever had I can't really talk about here but they had nothing to do with selling games in stores.


And even if they had, that would still be massively missing the point. Selling a game in a retail store, through a publisher, is the exact opposite of "just sell your game".


You don't need a publisher. You don't need a retail deal. You can just sell games. You can sell them on your website as downloads. You can print them in your garage and sell them in person as boxes (I wouldn't recommend it, it's a lot of work, but you can. We've done this for anime conventions.)


Considering how old this thread is though I expect most people have moved past the obsession with app stores and are fixating about dumping their games onto Steam with all the other games? (There's another market that has changed a LOT in the past two years.)

In Topic: If You Made A Good Game, How Would You Sell It?

19 December 2013 - 02:48 AM

Humble may prefer to invite people manually who are already coolkids - At least that has been the case previously. However, there is some information about joining on this page (when it works - right now I'm having to read that out of google cache because their site is overloaded?)

In Topic: Is There Market For Sprite-Based "Oldschool" Rts?

06 December 2013 - 11:49 PM

There's a market for quite a lot of things, but it can require some effort to get your game out there and seen by the right people.


If you want to know how much market there is for a product, try digging around in forums where people who like that sort of game are. Are they excited by the idea of a new one? If they hear about YOUR project, do they think it's cool? Do they have dream features they'd love to see?


If no one's interested, it won't get any more attention as freeware than it would as commercial.


Features alone generally will not make your game a success, unless they're truly amazing ground-breaking features (and map/building/campaign editors aren't, really). Those are great features and would help a good game grow, but they take time to discover and learn. Excitement is often built by things people can see very quickly - that's where graphics and themes are most useful.