Diminutive Diatribes: Balance in a Developer’s Teams

            Let's talk about my favorite video game developer ever.  Vanillaware.  Vanillaware...is not necessarily the best off developer in the gaming world.  They have an incredibly unique art style and all of their games use beautiful hand drawn sprites.  Their gameplay also tends to be very solid.  However, not only are they a small developer, they are also...very unbalanced.  George Kamitani himself mentioned that the company consists largely of artists working together and that it was a great experience for him, as an artist and the director of most Vanillaware games, to work with them.  However, do you know what Vanillaware doesn't have a lot of?  Composers.  Sound designers.  Programmers.  Marketers.  The company is a repository of artistic talent...but of little else.  And this is a major problem, no matter how competent the developer.

A company of artists.  Great for visual flair, lacking in many other areas.

            Balance in a development team is remarkably important, both for indie developers and for professional developers.  When I say balance, I refer to two things.  The first is that you have a team with enough materials to finish a game on their own.  Even if the music is sub par or the art suffers, you have enough skill amongst your team that you can finish the game.  This is a balanced development staff, where they can do everything that is necessary for a game.  There are those who can program, compose, do sound design, do art, story boards, etc.  The second way of looking at balance in a developer's teams is recognizing their own weakness.  While I have given Vanillaware crap for their lack of sound design, that is the reason they outsource.  And outsourcing is not necessarily bad.  If you have a balanced team, but your balance leans more towards art rather than music or game design, then outsourcing can help bring your game itself back into balance.  The team plays to its strengths and the outsourced party helps to complement those strengths.  The important thing to recognize, however, is that these two ideas of balance do not exist in a vacuum.  Balance as I have laid it out means basically having the ability to finish a game and making the best game possible with the given materials.

Despite the fantastic art, Vanillaware frequently needs to outsource or receive assistance to finish their games.  This...is not a good thing.

            However, why is this idea of balance so important?  Well, Darwin stated that overspecialization leads to extinction.  Conversely, in game design, it's a good idea to know your strengths and play to it.  I love Vanillaware's art style, story, and often their gameplay.  Know what else I love?  The music of every Vanillaware game.  The music is done by an independent company, Basiscape.  This...isn't necessarily a big deal, due to the fact that many companies will outsource what they cannot do themselves.  However, let me ask a question.  What happens if Basiscape is bought out, goes out of business, or simply refuses to work with Vanillaware anymore?  Can they compose music on their own to match their games?  In the release of Dragon's Crown, they needed Atlus's help to finish the programming aspect of it and help with translation.  Could they have done it without Atlus there to back them up?  For the translation of their game Muramasa: The Demon Blade, Vanillaware needed the help of Ignition entertainment.  Do you see what I'm getting at?  In game design, overspecialization is desired to a large degree because it allows a company to be different from the crowd...the sad tragedy, however, is that the company may not be able to deliver a finished product specifically because it is different from the crowd.

This company goes out of business or refuses to work with them and Vanillaware has no options for music.  Basiscape has done the music for almost 100% of Vanillaware's games.

            Vanillaware creates amazing games, however the stars have to be in perfect alignment for them to see the light of day.  They rely heavily on other companies for their sound design, assistance with programming, and for translation so that their games can reach any region outside of Japan.  If any of these elements are missing, it is unlikely a game will be finished, or at least that it will manage a world wide release.  Vanillaware is probably the most prominent example, but this is also pretty true of indie games as well as other major developers.  Mistwalker leans heavily on Smile Please for support with music.  Tri-Scape worked with Square-Enix for a while with games like Star Ocean and the Valkyrie Profile Series.  Gearbox outsourced Aliens: Colonial Marines to several studios, before having to do revisions on their own.  These studios would, and in some cases did, suffer greatly from their over reliance on outsourcing.  It is a tool, but not the only one.  I say that the bare minimum you need in a company is at least one person with the skills to do what you are outsourcing, just in case.

Outsourcing is not necessarily a bad thing.  I'll take music from Nobuo Uematsu's independent composition company over a homegrown developer any day.  However...you can't always count on that, so you need a fallback plan.

            If a company's support or outsourcing goes belly up, without any way to finish the game, the project may be abandoned and the studio closed.  However, indie developers tend to show that where there's a will, there's a way, some sitting on games for years until they can actually get the skills they personally need to finish them or finding those who can help.  If a development team has balance, namely that if they don't lean too heavily in one direction towards art, design, story, or music, but have at least one or two people in every area, they may eventually be able to finish a game.  If support does fall through, then the developer can work on their own to finish their game.  Perhaps the most balanced teams are those that rely on only one or two developers.  Aquaria only had two developers.  Derek Yu focused on art design and story while Alec Holowkwa focused on programming language and musical composition/sound design.  If either left, the game would have probably fallen through, however because of the closeness of their work and the size of their team, it would be feasible for one programmer to finish the work of the other.  Dean Dodrill is another good example, who built Dust: An Elysian Tail on his own for several years.  He was the only programmer, so he had to do all the work.  There was no way a departing team member or outsourcing would ruin his game since it hinged solely on him.  For bigger development teams, it's best to have at least one or two specialists who can do one thing really well, like music or programming, that have overlapping skills so if outsourcing is needed, they can still do work.  And if the outsourcing falls through, the company has a fall back plan.

Ironically, the developers with the most balance in their teams are the one man development companies.  Dean Dodrill built Dust: An Elysian Tail from scratch, all by himself.  No risk of failure if outsourcing or support fell through.

            The important thing to keep in mind, however, is that just because you have a balanced development team does not mean you should absolutely not outsource.  Remember, the other half of balance in game development is recognizing fallacies in your own team and working to correct them.  This often means that if you have a weak sound design team or no time to build cinematics, then you should outsource them so that the product looks good all around.  Outsourcing is a tool that game developers recognize has its uses.  Legend of Iya, for example, is built entirely by Darkfalz, a pixel artist who also works with game design and very amateur music.  He recognized his weakness in sound design and decided to outsource to someone who could give his game a more fitting soundtrack.  That's alright.  That's clever/important to recognize.  If this outsourcing falls through, he can still finish his game with the skills he possesses, however balance dictates that if music is not his strong suit, then perhaps it is wiser to outsource.  I say, it is important to use it when appropriate, but not be completely reliant on it.  Have a fallback plan, by having balance within your development team.

Legend of Iya is not at its strongest musically, so the creator is outsourcing for music.  But he himself CAN make some music for the game, just in case.  Balance is about making the game as good as possible...but also having a fallback plan

            So, to reiterate, balance in a developer's team can mean two things.  It means having enough team members with the skills necessary to finish a game all on their own.  However, since people often specialize rather than having general knowledge in all aspects of game design, they will more often than not play to their strengths, leaving one area of a game weaker than the others.  In this case, you want to bring balance to the game itself through outsourcing to people who specialize in what you lack.

            Whatever you do, don't go into game development completely reliant on the promises or the work of someone else, because things happen.  Contracts are breached, disasters happen, word comes down from corporate HQ, and sometimes outsourcing just falls through.  If you don't have a balanced team, your game may never see the light of day unless you shop around for another skilled group of people to help you.  This can lead to delays, wasted time and money, and eventual cancellation.  Balance goes both ways.  While you want to deliver the best product you can, you should not be so overspecialized that you cannot finish said project on your own, at least in my opinion.  It's fine to have specialized team members or even for a development company itself to specialize in certain things, but always try and remember to have a fallback.  Have balance in your team so that if you are backed into a corner and left without outside support, you can still deliver a game to us.

I just want to encourage developers to have balance.  More games means more options which means gamers have more choices for enjoyment.

            No matter how bad a game, I believe that it is better for something to be released rather than just outright cancelled.  Even terrible games have some merit in that they can be enjoyably flawed or they highlight the strength of other games.  So, even if you can't deliver a master piece, have the tools necessary to release a game at all.

Kid you not, this glitchy monstrosity of a game got released.  And yet Mega Man Legends 3 was cancelled...depressing.  At least be able to give us a game, developers.  No matter how terrible, I think it's better to have them then to not...even if it's just so we can point and laugh.

            I'd also like to take a moment and ponder the irony of my previous statements.  Many of us hate games like Big Rigs Over the Road Racing or Ride to Hell because they are egregious examples of a failure of fundamental game design.  However, they were at least released.  And even if they are terrible to play, they can be used as examples to help other developers learn.  So I stand by my statements.  I doubt these teams had proper balance, but they still managed to finish these products.  The gaming world, even if it is just due to the lack of something to mock, laugh at, or learn from, would be poorer if these had just been cancelled and quietly swept under the rug.

Oversexualized Vs Objectified

 With the release of Dragon's Crown just a few short weeks away, I'd like to talk a little bit about something that happened in May.  You see, Jason Schrier of Kotaku fame recently did a smear job of Dragon's Crown and itscreator, George Kamitani. Kamitani and his company, Vanillaware, make some of the only games I will buy no questions asked anymore in this boring, over saturated, overblown game industry, because they are fun, often feature strong female characters, have interesting art styles, and prove that hand drawn sprites are still relevant in this day and age. So, why the smear job? Because some of his characters are sexually exaggerated...and this naturally descended into the typical flame war between journalist, developer, and fans of both.  We're so mature in this field of entertainment, aren't we?  However, while looking on with a mix of disgust and disappointment at the state of games media and even developers themselves, I read a few arguments from fans who were more than just well thought out.  They were somewhat transcendent. 

Kamitani's rebuttal to Schrier's criticism.  We're so mature here...from the moment I saw this picture, I began the count down to the Kamitani x Schrier flame war.

            "Oversexualized does not mean objectified," was the thesis I took away from the most eloquent of these arguments. There are tons of oversexualized women in gaming and while some of it may pander to the male demographic, these women only become less as characters if you fail to see them as characters to begin with. True, there are the token eye candy cheesecake shots, but most of these women have a personality, a past, and a drive, beyond the outlandish designs...if you're willing to look for it. And really, many people who cry foul about oversexualization should perhaps examine for themselves why they jumped onto that bandwagon to begin with. I don't deny being a man and being biased towards the outlandish designs of some women in gaming, but if a woman is an object, I tend to get frustrated...I would rather they be a well rounded character who contributes to the story, because that is kind of why I play games.

 

Outlandish, perhaps, but objectified?  Not if you know who this character is.  Especially not if you know who this character is.

           Following that same line of thought, I examined why certain women are dressed the way they are.  I found that those who are blatantly pandering, like the Oneechanbara girls who fight zombies in bikinis, are...well, rather stupid.  Their outfits make no sense and come off more as idiotic, rather than sexy.  Some of the pandering games at least gave their characters good reason to dress the way they did, thus sucking me more into the world.  Juliet Sterling, for example, in Lollipop Chainsaw was a high school cheerleader, so her short skirt and tank top, while very much showing off her body, made sense in the context of the world.  On top of that, Juliet is a strong female lead who is capable, unreliant on men for protection, has an emotional support system through her family, wit and intellect that is buried behind a valley girl personality, and some self loathing which makes her more relatable, as she has self-image issues.  These personality traits mesh well with her role in the game as a cheerleader/zombie slayer, creating a nice balance between cheesy, over the top, and somewhat relatable.  Her occasional lapses of understanding are still played for yucks and the camera loves to zoom in on her short skirt or her tight top, but she, on her own, has both a personality and context.  Even if the character herself is oversexualized, to an extreme degree might I add, her strong, distinct personality and the proper context for her behavior and clothes go a long way to combat the idea of objectification.  In the current video gaming environment, this seems like the status quo for strong female leads.  They're allowed to have some character, but there must always be sexual appeal and their clothes often need to show off their bodies.  While this is understandable to an extent...it is also very unfortunate, given how in the past video games have created strong female characters who didn't need to rely on sexuality to sell their games.

 

Juliet Sterling:  Oversexualized?  Most definitely.  Pandering?  Without a doubt.  But look at her clothes.  She's a cheerleader caught in a zombie outbreak on her way to school.  At least her outfit makes some kind of sense.  We aren't always so lucky.

            I shared some of these ideas with a non-gamer friend of mine who was markedly more critical of my approach, stating that oversexualization, even with a strong character, is still objectification to a degree, since game designers have control over how a character looks and acts.  While we did get a bit heated, we managed to stay civil and she broached the idea to me that one of the few times oversexualization is okay is when it is done not for the sake of pandering but for the beauty of the form.  When sexuality is just created for beauty's sake, for its own sake, then it is alright.  No cheesecake shots, no snide remarks or drooling idiots hounding a beautiful woman, just someone who is beautiful on their own and it does not have to become an issue with the story or the audience.  To her credit, I found this idea intriguing and after re-examining some of my own favorite female protagonists, I found that the ones I liked the most did in fact adhere to this kind of mentality, where they were beautiful, but not objectified or even used for male pandering.

 

Meet Ellen, from the game Folklore.  Ellen is very attractive.  Without showing a bit of skin.  She is beautiful for the sake of being beautiful, not for titillation or pandering.  Well done, Folklore.  Well done indeed.

            So, I decided I wanted to have a little chat with the gaming community on oversexualization.  When it is actually well done, when it is tolerable, and when it is deplorable.  For these three examples, ironically, I can use the three female leads of Dragon's Crown to tie it all together, because of their varied designs.  The elf fits the criteria for beautiful, well rounded, and contextual character, making her the strongest female lead and the one requiring the least pandering, while still being able to be attractive.  The amazon fits the well rounded and contextual character and while her design does pander a little to the male audience, it largely stands on its own since she has a unique and independent persona.  The sorceress sadly falls into a trap that was started in the Playstation 2 era where "jiggle physics" became a thing.  Her clothing makes a kind of contextual sense, but largely it seems out of place and only meant to show off her cleavage and legs.  Speaking of her cleavage, her breasts jiggle around willy nilly with no rhyme or reason and her personality seems ditzy, flirtatious, and reliant on men, even if it is for the sake of manipulating said men for personal gain.  She is the kind of character that needs to be avoided.  I hate bashing on her because Kamitani probably didn't create her with that in mind, but it speaks to an archetype that really needs to be laid to rest in gaming at large. 

            I want to add for the sake of completeness that this is a preliminary analysis from before the game launches to broach the idea of oversexualization vs objectification.  The characters are being examined based on gameplay footage, since the story has not been officially released, so their personalities, as seen through their in-game animations and dialogue, may change.  This is just based on what we know right now. 

 

Get ready kids, we're about to jump into examination and wild speculation on character design and personality.  Fun times.

            Anyway, with the background out of the way, let's start with the best first.  The elf fits the bill of being beautiful byhaving a slender, attractive body that is fitted into a ranger's uniform.  A green tunic and brown cloak for disappearing into the woods, a hood to keep the rain out of her eyes, thigh high boots for traversing through muck unimpeded, and all of this together without needing to show much skin for titillation.  Her pale face and well proportioned body speak of a kind of beautiful woman who is agile and capable, even if she cannot wield a gigantic sword like some of the male characters.  She has strong bow skills and the ability to use martial arts to defend herself.  The elf's in-game animations give her an air of seriousness, with a tender side as she appears to be friendlier to animals than the other characters.  The elf hits the perfect balance, in my opinion, of strong, attractive female characters that are beautiful for their own sakes, not for the audience's sake.  She is like Gwendolyn from Odin Sphere, Elly from Xenogears, or Lenneth Valkyrie from Valkyrie Profile.  Her clothes make sense in context with both the setting and her personality and her body type is pretty average.  Truth be told, she could have been given larger breasts as an attempt to titillate the audience, but if her overall design was the same, I.E. no cleavage, then she'd still be able to hold onto this beauty for the sake of beauty ideal.  This is what we want if we're going to have an oversexualized character.  One who is beautiful for their own sake, not for the sake of a male audience, who has a strong, independent personality, and one who dresses and acts with proper context based around their persona and the setting.

 

The elf has a slender, beautiful body, but her clothing makes sense and doesn't needlessly show off skin.  She is cute and attractive without having to flash breasts or butts to the male audience.  This is what we need more of.

            Next up is the amazon.  The amazon, in my opinion, fits into a precarious position between overtly pandering and beautiful in her own way.  From her animations, the amazon appears to be very much like a barbarian heroine from a Borris Vallejo painting.  She is muscular, comfortable with her body, and favors brute force over subtlety or protection.  The amazon has a fairly decent sized chest, complete with cleavage showing, and massive muscular thighs, which have earned her some criticism because she dresses in what amounts to a chainmail thong bikini.  This may sound like me, as a male, making excuses, but hear me out.  I honestly think this aesthetic works for the barbarian woman personality the amazon seems to have.  Barbarians are traditionally known for wearing little clothing, as they prefer freedom of movement over heavy armor, and only cover their weakest spots, like genitalia, feet, or their head on occasions.  In this context, the amazon is a mass of muscle, but still has weak points in her feet, for example, if she had to cross jagged ground, in the area of her genitalia due to the nerves and sensitivity, and the head, which controls the rest of the body.  Thus, it makes sense for her to cover these parts, while not covering her muscle.  And the clothing she wears, while very revealing, allow her to make full use of her legs, as she favors kicking enemies as well as using an axe.  She is confident enough in her own strength that she doesn't need the covering and would prefer the freedom of movement.  To me, this costume makes sense with her personality and the context of the game.  Is it pandering?  Well...yeah, unfortunately.  The amazon doesn't have a body thought of as traditionally beautiful but she does have some parts which could be singled out as sexy by others which overlook her as a whole

 

The thong will be a sticking point for a lot of people, but considering her aesthetic, I think the amazon works.  Is she pandering?  Yes, but at least there is more under the surface and her outfit makes sense in context.

            In this case, like with many women in games who have a strong personality and clothing that matches context but is still revealing, I want to say this.  A character is only objectified if you THINK of them as an object.  The amazon has a personality, a reason for dressing like she does, and even if she is somewhat pandering, it is easy enough to ignore it because she can be seen as beautiful in her own right.  The beauty of the human body at its peak physical perfection.  However, if all you see are the giant thighs and the cleavage, or the lack of clothes, you are turning her into an object.  She wasn't made as one, you are TURNING her into one.  This is true for a fair number of female protagonists in modern gaming.  Bayonetta, for example.  Her personality shows that she feels dismissive towards men and enjoys using their sexual thoughts against them, while using an outfit that is made of her hair which is equal parts weapon and armor.  Is she pandering?  Absolutely, there are plenty of cheesecake shots or moments where she herself is overtly sexual.  But for her personality and the world she exists in, her costume makes sense and her actions seem more like a middle finger towards the largely male audience oggling her.  So, she's only objectified for her looks if you refuse to see how she is subverting the norms of the jiggling bimbo heroine and choose to only see her AS a jiggling bimbo heroine.

 

Bayonetta and the amazon are where we are right now in the games industry in terms of regular female protagonists.  They can be strong, but they do have to pander the audience, with sexy poses, cheese cake shots, or a general lack of clothing.  They're still characters and are only objects if we reduce them to objects...but we can do better.  I know we can.

            Sadly,the worst example of female character design in Dragon's Crown comes from theSorceress.  Her clothes feature a dress that has a slit in the side to show off her long legs and her top is low cut, allowing her breasts to jiggle about like crazy.  She has a ridiculously thin waist and seems content to shove her legs and chest wherever she pleases.  Her attacks seem to focus on a mix of magic and titillation.  She has some impressive magic feats, such as ice and fire spells, true, but she also has spells like charming enemies, turning them to frogs, or turning them to stone, which reflect back on female ideas of titillation and temptation.  Her design seems to dip heavily from traditional witches and mythical temptresses.  This could be me looking too far into it, but this kind of design seems reliant on men for her success, as she counts on her sex appeal to a degree, and with clothing that really doesn't fit the context of the game world.  In Dragon's Crown, players enter all kinds of dungeons, from dank sewers to dragon's caves.  I'd think you'd want clothes that either protects your entire body, like the knight who is covered in armor, that allow freedom of mobility while protecting the essentials, like the amazon, or which makes sense based on your skillset, like the elf, whose costume seems built around keeping her mobile and able to snipe enemies with her arrows.  The sorceress's clothing seems more reminiscent of a bar waitress's clothes, with a witch's hat added in for good measure.  I'm not saying bar maiden's or bards or any other unorthodox type of person can't be an adventurer, but it seems oddly out of place amongst the other adventurers.  She seems like fan service for the sake of fan service.  And really, that is, in my opinion, the worst kind of female character in video games.  These are the characters who are objectified because they have no strong persona, their clothing and design in and of itself are meant to not fit into the world, but rather to catch the male eye, and they cannot stand on their own without a male audience.  I'd find it hard to believe with her jiggling breasts and overly sexual design that women would be able to enjoy the sorceress as much as men.  Which is a shame, because some of the ideas they had for her seemed interesting, like turning male monsters into toads, thus subverting some fairy tale and female tropes of storytelling.  However, the whole package with the sorceress seems to be a bit much.

 

Look at that shot.  The skull between the breasts.  That should say it all.  The sorceress might turn out to be fun and not nearly as sexist as she seems, but...just this image of a woman in gaming is discouraging.  Guys, we really need to stop doing this...

            This is what I hate.  I hate it when a character isn't given enough personality to work with, like Paula in Shadows of the Damned, and where what little they have either panders to the male audience or makes little sense.  I hate it when characters are dressed up like barbie dolls for no reason at all and without context, like in the DOA volleyball games.  Think about those games for a second.  Not only are these female characters regular enemies in fighting tournaments, so they wouldn't be hanging out together at a resort, but they also have jobs or personas which make them lounging on a beach in a bikini, posing as hard as they can to look sexy, really unlikely.  Christie is an assassin.  Sex appeal can be used in her work, but in her downtime too?  Lisa is a wrestler.  Maybe she wants to relax, but...with people she's smacked down with?  Ayane is a bloody ninja who is frequently in contact with and assisting the Hayabusa clan!  Why is she traipsing around in a bikini on an island that seems to be inhabited only by eye candy for the male audience?!  Perhaps worst of all though, I hate characters that have potential, but have that potential is squelched for the sake of fan service.  The character Tala in Darkwatch was a bit oversexualized, with her gothic look, black clothes, open cleavage, and cold, but flirtatious persona.  But she provided some nice character development for the main character, Jericho.  Jericho is a vampire and still coming to terms with his powers, so Tala acts as the devil on his right shoulder vs. an angel he had on his left in the form of a ghost.  Then the game thought, let's show them having sex, with Tala naked and straddling Jericho, who is still fully clothed.  ...Really?  Why was that necessary?  Yeah, she uses the moment to tempt Jericho to bite her and uses her new vampire powers to become the main boss later, but...there were dozens of ways to do that which didn't just degrade the character into bouncing breasts.  Talya had potential as a female villain because she was subtle and clever...I'd think she could've figured out a quicker, easier way than screwing Jericho to get bitten.

 

Darkwatch, DOA Volleyball, Oneechanbara...this is just pathetic.  Fan service women with no character whose only goal is to titillate.  THESE are the objectified women.  These are the ones I feel sorry for and the ones I am unable to play, because they're so vapid, pandering, and empty.

            So, there you have it.  Three examples of oversexualization in gaming through the lens of Dragon's Crown.  What I want you to take away from this though is that oversexualization does not automatically mean objectification.  In the first case, objectification is damn near impossible because the character is so well designed that she is beautiful, but in perfect balance between body, clothing, persona, and likability.  In the second case, objectification is possible because certain parts of the character's body and clothing put aspects of her on display, creating an imbalance, but her personality and the context of her design make it your choice.  You can choose to see her as an object or as the character she was meant to be.  The third case is the most depressing, as it blatantly panders to the male audience without really providing context in costume, character, or setting as to why she needs to be this way.  The character herself is not strong enough to carry the design and while the abilities she possesses are nice, they don't excuse or hide the fact that the design is too catered towards the male audience, rather than a gender neutral party, which most games should be.  A good game can create male leads that both men and women find either admirable or attractive or female leads which women feel empowered playing and which men can find beautiful, but without feeling the need to ogle.

            Let me close with this. Oversexualization of both men and women is a common thing in all kinds of media, from books, to movies, to games. And not all of it as unwanted as some might believe, as many people, men and women, enjoy the form, the outlandishness of the design, or the costuming without even getting sexuality involved.  They enjoy the beauty of the character for what it is.  Oversexualization is not a bad thing in and of itself...it's when you reduce the characters being oversexualized to objects that we have a problem.  Oversexualized doesn't have to mean anti-feminist, misogynistic, or even unhealthy.  It's when you reduce that character to an object that you give them this negative connotation.  So next time anyone wants to do that, think about the game, the context, or the character you're talking about.  Think about who they are, what they mean, why they're depicted that way and if there really is a reason to get upset.  Don't just point and go "SEXIST" as a knee jerk reaction. And likewise, don't pick up a game or get enamored with it because of sex appeal...games are there to be played. You want sex, you've got the internet.
 

Vallejo paintings are full of oversexualized women and men.  Does this make them objects?  Well...I say that's up to you.  I'm more interested in the wings and the alien world that the fact the woman's in a bikini.  To me, she isn't an object...I don't know if the same can be said about others.

             All in all, game developers should strive to make characters like the elf, but we shouldn't be as critical of the amazons or the Bayonettas out there.  They are pandering to increase sales, but their character, design, costume, and their overall likability coupled with the game's enjoyment factor often make this a matter of choice.  You can reduce them to objects if you only focus on certain aspects, but that is YOUR decision to make.  The character still has character.  Game developers should avoid making characters like the sorceress, or at the very least try and make her BETTER.  The sorceress had potential and with a little re-tooling, I think she could be just as strong as the amazon or even the elf.  Don't make a character only for eye candy's sake, though.  We all lose when that happens.

            Finally, let me say once again, this is just one person's opinion.  Take it or leave it, argue with it if you want, but at least think about what I've said and why I've said it.  The fact that we live in a world where A) Men think it's okay to make a pandering piece of eye candy as a main character in a game and B) Where the world is such that women are so jaded about the portrayal of all characters that they may call sexist as a knee jerk reaction makes me very, very sad.  Also, this is based on the impressions of Dragon's Crown from its promotional material.  I wanted to use this to kind of defend Kamitani to a degree, because I don't think he tried to make his characters eye candy.  I want you to see how he probably thought about their design and creation, through these three examples.  I think the sorceress design is flawed, but it at least had potential.  That's more than I can say for the DOA Volleyball series, which took established characters and turned them into dress up dolls.