'Gooner 9/11' averted as Zenless Zone Zero's butt-obfuscation technology is rolled back in the face of horny outrage : games

[–] harcesz@szmer.info 91 points 3 days ago

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 23 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I decided to so a quick search on what the advertisements for this game looked like.

Devs fucked up. One must learn to harness and control the goon. You can't bait and switch the gooners and come out unscathed.

[–] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 6 points 3 days ago

Spoon out the Goon and you will soon lose your boon. As they say.

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 30 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

That is some weird shit to get upset about, but I suppose I can understand it for a game that seems to have put a lot of effort into the proper related jiggle physics. If I bought a game specifically because it has super realistic anime ass I'd probably be very upset if they took those away.

[–] shakcked@lemm.ee 45 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Imagine showing this article title to someone from the great depression or even more recently a fire fighter who lived through 9-11....this time is wild

[–] misk@sopuli.xyz 27 points 4 days ago

Humour is a sum of tragedy and time.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Ive met enough old bastards who lived through the great depression and while most of them are dead they wouldve all laughed. One of them got porn banned on a base dedicated to R&D because of the sheer quantity of privates caught jacking their privates in the toilets. That man was my great grandfather who was one leg on the porn smuggling market.

[–] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 2 points 3 days ago

🫡

[–] Tikiporch@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

Simple metaphor assists their understanding.

Imagine if you walk around to the back of Michelangelo's David and his ass disappeared.

Is this game fine art? Of course not. But as every gamer fervently attests, games are art.

[–] Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago

I mean programming in methods of anti-perving the camera view have been common in games for decades now.

[–] fibojoly@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

For the goons, it's fine arse though.

[–] Jimmycakes@lemmy.world 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Anyone else old enough to remember pc gamer as a legitimate news company lol. What a headline

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 3 days ago

at least they're using 9/11 correctly

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 20 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Love the comment in the article about godamn China wanting to take away my anime butts.

Making your character disappear when the camera is close isn't even an uncommon thing in games. I think in the past Capcom learned the same lesson Hoyo just learned, cause in Monster Hunter this is an option you can select, but not the default.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We've had character fade for decades. Otherwise it can be hard to see upwards for targeting or looking around in third person titles :p

[–] Zoomboingding@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago

In ZZZ there's not much you need to do in the overworld by looking up, it's 100% to see more angles of the character

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Stay classy, young men.

[–] Rozz@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 days ago

That's a tough ask

[–] codexarcanum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I especially like how the only example photo (from a fucking tweet of course) shows the completely flat non-ass of some anime goth girl that looks like she's 14. We need to go back to making gamers ashamed of their hobby.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Not gamers. Closet pedos.

It's like how not all anime is for closet pedos. But there's certainly a whole fucking lot that needs to be named and shamed.

[–] ayaya@lemdro.id 25 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Of course. Just like how GTA players are actually closet mass murderers.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Sorry didn't realize that sexualizing children is fine as long as they're virtual and could never possibly lead to increased numbers of child sexual assaults.

[–] theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Hey so two things:

not all women have giant breasts and huge asses. Other body types exist. Most healthy women have smaller breasts than any you see on tv or in games or anime.
The availability of violent video games and media correlates with lower violent crime.

The availability of pornography correlates with lower rates of sexual crimes.

Therefore it stands to reason, though it is unpleasant if not impossible to objectively test your conjecture is likely the opposite of reality.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -15 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Oh great, somebody that doesn't understand stats.

You know what else having access to violent video games correlates with that might be a bit more important than the video games themselves? Material wealth and higher standard of living. What happens to correlate with material wealth and higher standard of living? Less crimes of every single type.

Also I don't agree with the way the body is being sexualized in the comment above mine, but there is a serious problem, still, with sexualization of characters that explicitly look like children but are "totally a 200 year old vampire bro". This is especially true of anime and video games with anime-inspired artwork. I'm not saying that all video games or animes are like this. Nor am I saying that all gamers and anime fans are closet pedos. What I am saying is that there's serious problems in these communities that must be addressed. The pushback in spite of my non-condemnation of the whole is kinda hilarious. I do understand how my first comment could be misinterpreted.

Never thought I'd get into an argument where somebody thought sexualization of minors was a good thing though, so I guess that's a new experience at least.

[–] theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

We had you people try this shit in the 1990s.

Violent media does not cause violence.

Pornographic media does not cause sex crimes.

Get the fuck back to your southern Baptist Church and leave the nonreligious alone. Stop pretending you give a shit about kids, you just want to push your weird little religion on everyone.

[–] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Just so you know what the scientists studying this have to say:

Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010).

Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research.

While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://research.usc.edu.au/view/pdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&sa=X&ei=z9BkZ676Lb6_y9YP1YLqoQw&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr

[–] MellowYellow13@lemmy.world 0 points 19 hours ago

Your paeudoscience isnt fucking science

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Never thought I'd get into an argument where somebody thought sexualization of minors was a good thing though

Nobody was making this argument, that's a straw man you made up.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -9 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault...

Just because the argument was implicit and not explicit does not mean it wasn't made. That was not a straw man.

The other commenter was actually strawmanning my position incredibly heavily in another comment, but I noticed you didn't call that one out.

Lemmy is rife with this pedophile apologia, especially concerning threads about child pornography material made with AI and about comic style child pornography material, and I have no problem with saying that that is absolutely disgusting.

Are pedophiles mentally ill humans that need help? Yes. Should they be pushed towards active pedophilia in any way, shape, or form? No. They should not. As psychologists studying sexual abuse prevention agree, even in the case of VCSAM.

A direct excerpt from the paper:

Should we be worried about escalation? The consumption of VCSAM does not prevent pedophilic individuals from future offending and can instead act as a progressive addiction (Maras & Shapiro 2017). Some CSAM offenders who engage in contact offending have suggested the contact offending was an extension of their online offending (Quayle & Taylor 2003). For example, in a recent study that applied Ward and Siegert’s (2002) pathways model to sexual offending of penetrative child sexual offenders, several offenders engaged in CSAM before resorting to contact offending. 12 One female offender, “commenced to use the internet…(time) to chat with other people… who gained sexual gratification from child pornography which led to the commission of the subject offences” (Osbourne & Christensen 2020, p. 13). The material has been argued to potentially serve as a gateway to contact offending (Maras & Shapiro 2017), as the offender may become desensitized to passive viewing, finding it to be insufficient over time (Schell et al. 2007). In line with the material being considered as a gateway, an offender might commence with masturbating to VCSAM material, then escalate to CSAM material (after becoming desensitized to VCSAM), before progressing on to act out impulses on children – in an attempt to experience the original level of gratification when first viewing VCSAM. Sullivan and Sheehan (2002) refer to the desensitization of images as the ‘fantasy escalation effect’ with the trajectory to engage in increasingly explicit videos and images (Sheehan & Sullivan 2010). Given that much of VCSAM material is computer generated, it allows for unlimited creativity in how child characters are abused compared with CSAM (e.g., movements and depictions that are not humanly possible in real life). In turn, offenders who escalate through the types of VCSAM, viewing unimaginable forms of bestiality and penetrative activity, might find themselves skipping the nudist, erotic, or posing forms of CSAM during their escalation, instead being drawn to the gross assault and sadistic CSAM. It is not, therefore, illogical to suggest that those who commence CSAM offending from VCSAM offending may be more desensitized and follow different offending trajectories compared with those who commence with CSAM offending, which could be explored in future research. While engaging with abusive material does not inevitably result in contact offending (Henshaw, Ogloff & Clough 2015), there are effects to the exposure of such. In their laboratory study, Paul and Linz (2008) found that participants exposed to ‘barely legal’ pornography (females depicted as under the age of consent), were quicker to recognize words with sexual connotations (after being primed with neutral images of female children) compared with participants who had been exposed to adult pornography (after being primed with neutral images of older-looking models). The authors concluded that the relationship between cognitions and the likelihood of acting on such, is complex (Paul & Linz 2008). While they argued the mere endorsement of sex-youth cognitive schema does not guarantee deviant action, the potential effects of deviant behavior from being exposed to such material cannot be outright rejected (Paul & Linz 2008). Paul and Linz (2008) suggest that extensive exposure can desensitize individuals to related behaviors and content. Given VCSAM is related in content to CSAM, the ongoing effects of exposure to VCSAM is an important avenue for future research

https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://research.usc.edu.au/view/pdfCoverPage%3FinstCode%3D61USC_INST%26filePid%3D13161500130002621%26download%3Dtrue&hl=en&sa=X&ei=z9BkZ676Lb6_y9YP1YLqoQw&scisig=AFWwaeZERt0h_qC0HOcMzLh1ghdF&oi=scholarr

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 12 points 3 days ago (1 children)

He did actually make this argument when he said pornographic material depicting minors being available would lower cases of sexual assault...

YOU added the "minors" part. The person you replied to isn't talking about minors. They used the word "women" specifically. Ironic that you said this earlier:

You, on the other hand, are very good at making up arguments to put in my mouth.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Ahh yes I forgot to disregard all context of the argument. That's my favorite tool in discourse, personally! Have anything to say to the rest of my comment? The actual important part?

Of course not...

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

What context? This isn't about children at all and never was.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh... I guess you don't know the game.

https://dguljqwnrjejm.cloudfront.net/images/Genshin_Impact_thumbn.width-1000.bgcolor-000.format-jpeg.jpg

https://assets.xboxservices.com/assets/cd/d0/cdd0d11b-dd3f-40f3-8720-41463983fd45.jpg?n=222910044_GLP-Page-Hero-1084_1920x1080.jpg

Those are the characters.

Another commenter pointed out that a selling feature of this game is the jiggle physics.

This is getting old though.

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh no, I know the game very well. In fact, I know the game well enough to know that the images you posted are not from this game. Genshin Impact is a completely separate franchise from Zenless Zone Zero. This is the character from the article, who is most assuredly not a child.

I'm not sure if you're being an idiot on purpose, or if it's an accident.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Oh that's totally my b. I got confused. I think the article may have mentioned genshin impact somewhere.

Anyway, I took a look and you're right only half the cast is child-coded! Great! Now let's get the other half too!

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 8 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think the article may have mentioned genshin impact somewhere.

It didn't. Just like nobody ever argued for sexualizing minors.

This isn't the first thing you've just made up in this thread. I'm beginning to think that you're acting in bad faith here.

[+] GiveMemes@jlai.lu -6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You're correct that nobody has quite said the quiet part out loud yet except for myself and the initial comment I was replying to.

And again, nobody is interested in arguing about the points to do with sexualization of minors in video games and anime, despite that being the comment thread they replied to.

Yes I've made mistakes and committed fallacies in this argument. No, I am not arguing in bad faith. Nor do I intend to.

Nobody has replied to the salient points, nor the research I've raised, and that saddens me, as it means people are more interested in keeping their lolicon games than reducing issues affecting real people, and as a survivor of childhood sexual assault myself, I find that pretty fucked up. I would hope that even somebody who hasn't gone through what I have would have the same proclivity to protect living, breathing children over having unfettered access to lolicon games that sexualize minors but this thread has shown me that this is not the case.

Goodbye

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Again, you're the only person talking about minors in this thread, my guy. Nobody's replying to your straw men because we all see them for what they are.

You're just upset that the game you know nothing about doesn't line up with the talking points you had prepared, so you're trying to force them into the conversation and twist it into something it isn't. Nobody's going to humor that obvious attempt at derailing the conversation, because you're arguing against points that nobody is making in the first place.

You already made it apparent that you don't know what the game is about, let alone which game the article is even referring to since you clearly didn't read it. Why are you even here? Just to say "Look at me, I care about children"? Congrats, you're such an amazing person.

[–] theonlytruescotsman@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago

What in the porn brained nonsense is this comment?

[–] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 0 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Well that just made me facepalm and mutter, "Fucking gamers" out loud this early in the morning.

Fucking seriously, how god damn immature can gamers be.

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 26 points 3 days ago

Ehh, I'm with the gAmErS on this one. ZZZ is very straightforward about what sort of game it aims to be; a game that shows you big ole jiggly tiddies. Whether or not you think that's a game you'd want to invest your own time and resources into, a lot of people have paid pretty heavily into this game to get specific jiggly bits on their teams. To take that away from them, as if that wasn't a core selling point to the game, is kind of a dick move.

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world -1 points 3 days ago

The great buttocalypse of 2024 😱

Because it's oh so hard to find some butt on the Internet... 🙄

Games