Dead Island Riptide Collector's Edition [NSFW]

ShaneU

This is disgusting

humanji

I saw that on RPS and after reading many of the comments, am I the only one to think "So what?"

Asmodean

ShaneU wrote: »

This is disgusting

Damn right, where's the tricolour bikini!:D

F1ngers

Huh?
How is this NSFW?

spankmaster2000

Meh. If the publisher thinks it'll sell for them, let them at it.

I don't know if I'd say "disgusting", but rather a bit pointless, in so far as, who do you think looks at that and says; "that'll look great on my mantelpiece!"

Each to their own I suppose...

Headshot

That will start the youngsters into serial killers early lol

ShaneU

F1ngers wrote: »

Huh?
How is this NSFW?

Would you like your boss seeing you looking at decapitated torsos?

super_furry

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/kngs7f

They've already been forced into a pretty grovelling apology.

"A statement on the Zombie Bait Edition:

We deeply apologize for any offense caused by the Dead Island Riptide “Zombie Bait Edition”, the collector’s edition announced for Europe and Australia. Like many gaming companies, Deep Silver has many offices in different countries, which is why sometimes different versions of Collector’s Editions come into being for North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia.

For the limited run of the Zombie Bait Edition for Europe and Australia, a decision was made to include a gruesome statue of a zombie torso, which was cut up like many of our fans had done to the undead enemies in the original Dead Island.

We sincerely regret this choice. We are collecting feedback continuously from the Dead Island community, as well as the international gaming community at large, for ongoing internal meetings with Deep Silver's entire international team today. For now, we want to reiterate to the community, fans and industry how deeply sorry we are, and that we are committed to making sure this will never happen again."

DjFlin

After the announcement trailer for this game. I have to say, this looks a little more tame than I would have guessed.

Link for those that dont remember.

TerrorFirmer

I don't see an issue at all. People will happily play a game in which you dismember, bludgeon, maim, shoot, run over, decapitate; and god knows what else; zombies, but get their knickers in a twist over this? I don't get it.

Would you like your boss seeing you looking at decapitated torsos?

Your boss would probably be more concerned with you browsing gaming websites at work. Labeling the thread as 'NSFW' is a bit Daily Mail sensationalist. You'd swear the game came with an actual torso, not some gaudy, tacky, painted piece of crap statue that features in your original post.

Jesus, some people just love to be offended.

Reekwind

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

I don't see an issue at all. People will happily play a game in which you dismember, bludgeon, maim, shoot, run over, decapitate; and god knows what else; zombies, but get their knickers in a twist over this?

Because it's not about violence; it's about the convergence of sex and violence to sell computer games to puerile teenagers, and those that think like them

No one would ever consider throwing in a model of a bloodied yet bulging male crotch to sell games but some people don't give a damn about a cut up female torso with (something that looks like) breasts attached? That's a problem

super_furry

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Jesus, some people just love to be offended.

Really? They're literally trying to sell a pair of breasts.

humanji

super_furry wrote: »

Really? They're literally trying to sell a pair of breasts.

No, they're not. They're selling a statue that represents the game. It's the torso of a young person, dressed in beach attire. This is to give the impression that they were somewhere hot, on a beach, having fun, living life to it's fullest. But they've turned it on it's head. The person is dead, literally torn apart. It's an ironic twist.

Just because there's a pair of tits on it, doesn't mean it should be banned in case it upsets some overly sensitive people or excites some overly puerile people. Google "Zombie Memorabilia" and you'll find loads of this sort of stuff and it's really popular.

I don't remember too much of a hubbub about being able to recreate that torso in-game.

TerrorFirmer

Exactly. It's at least relevant to the game; 80% of female characters in the first game were dressed in Bikini's, not too surprisingly considering the context of it being set in a tropical paradise; and while I think it's stupid, I don't understand the criticism.

I don't see it too differently than the very fact that 12 year girls can walk into a calender shop and buy calenders of their favorite boybands half naked and covered in oil, but no one seems too up in arms over that. Surely that falls into a worse bracket of using sex as a medium to sell unrelated merchandise?

The breasts maybe was a decision pandering to the fact that the demograph is largely male; a bulging crotch and aforementioned use of scantily clad men is certainly used however to shift a huge amount of material to women of all ages in other mediums aside gaming, including teenage girls.

super_furry

You can shoot middle-Eastern terrorists in the face in Call of Duty. Doesn't mean it'd be OK for Activision to suddenly bundle Taliban corpse models with their game.

In this case it's not even a zombie, it's a dismembered torso with a pair of pneumatic breasts front and centre. The head's ripped off, the arms have been torn away, there are ribs jutting out but the breasts are perfectly perky. It's reducing a women to 'just a pair of tits'.

Reekwind

humanji wrote: »

No, they're not. They're selling a statue that represents the game. It's the torso of a young person, dressed in beach attire

Of course - it's just a complete coincidence that it's a female torso with breast-like objects to the forefront. I'm sure that it could just as easily have been a male torso or crotch, right?

TerrorFirmer wrote:

The breasts maybe was a decision pandering to the fact that the demograph is largely male; a bulging crotch and aforementioned use of scantily clad men is certainly used however to shift a huge amount of material to women of all ages in other mediums aside gaming, including teenage girls

Out of curiosity, what goods are advertised to teenage girls using a massively bulging and barely restrained cock?

But it's the first part of the statement that's really relevant: the assumption that the male demographic somehow requires or excuses a top-heavy dismembered female torso. That's no doubt the exact mindset of the people who created this embarrassment and it's entirely false. Stick a pair of breasts on something and men will buy it? Right

This is exactly why people believe that computer games are for spotty teenagers whose closest contact to a woman comes from FHM - because the industry itself so regularly treats its customers as puerile adolescents. And, it has to be said, some vocal gamers live up to the worst stereotypes

humanji

super_furry wrote: »

You can shoot middle-Eastern terrorists in the face in Call of Duty. Doesn't mean it'd be OK for Activision to suddenly bundle Taliban corpse models with their game.

There's a difference between what is bad taste and what is sexist. A Taliban corpse would be relevant and about as tasteless as the torso.

In this case it's not even a zombie, it's a dismembered torso with a pair of pneumatic breasts front and centre. The head's ripped off, the arms have been torn away, there are ribs jutting out but the breasts are perfectly perky. It's reducing a women to 'just a pair of tits'.

Pneumatic breasts? Anyway, it's not reducing a woman to anything that you don't do in-game. Where's the indignation in that? You can do the exact same to a male zombie. Is that also sexist, reducing a man down to a pair of pecs?

Reekwind wrote: »

Of course - it's just a complete coincidence that it's a female torso with breast-like objects to the forefront. I'm sure that it could just as easily have been a male torso or crotch, right?

Out of curiosity, what goods are advertised to teenage girls using a massively bulging and barely restrained cock?

Penis =/= Breasts. But there are plenty of products advertised with topless men.

Reekwind wrote: »

But it's the first part of the statement that's really relevant: the assumption that the male demographic somehow requires or excuses a top-heavy dismembered female torso. That's no doubt the exact mindset of the people who created this embarrassment and it's entirely false. Stick a pair of breasts on something and men will buy it? Right

This is exactly why people believe that computer games are for spotty teenagers whose closest contact to a woman comes from FHM - because the industry itself so regularly treats its customers as puerile adolescents. And, it has to be said, some vocal gamers live up to the worst stereotypes

If people get the wrong impression about you because of a bit of memorabilia that few will buy, then they're hardly worth your time worrying about, are they?

pixelburp

Am I offended? Not really no, I see worse on TV - just finished watching an episode of Dexter for example - and given zombie games are all about cathartic interaction & violence, it's hard to get too incensed.

Am I slightly embarrassed though that one of my favourite hobbies once more shows itself as a crass, tasteless, juvenile industry, always trying to find new depths to sink, while insulting the emotional intelligence of many of its consumers? Oh hell yeah.

It reminds me of a similar marketing campaign ... somebody did (which says a lot really about its success) ... where they left replica body parts in bins around London city, as part of a grotesque treasure-hunt & runup to a game. You can imagine how well it went & how quickly it got shut down.

But to use that classic of parents everywhere - I'm not angry, I'm just disappointed. This kind of adolescent nonsense is just the sort of thing I expect of gaming these days. Or their marketing departments I should really say.

CastorTroy

So why exactly are people complaining? It's not like people are being forced to buy this. Pretty good chance people who do buy this would look at similar or worse stuff online.
And who is complaining? Is it the Daily Mail brigade who are only aware of this because 1 of them noticed it while looking for something to complain about then got the rest of them on the bandwagon?

Potential-Monke

Not this argument again. :rolleyes:

Someone shows a pair of tits in a game: sexist. Someone shows women as weak in a game: sexist. A company decide to do something different with a collectors item: sexist. Who gives a flying fcuk what they do, as long as the game is good?

I'd personally buy it. It's different. It's not your usual crap that "collector" editions come with. It's relevant to the game. It's going for shock value, and tits sell goddamit! Wouldn't go on my mantelpiece though.

I'll start taking these "they're using tits and sex to sell" arguments seriously when porn doesn't exist. Would it make all the overly sensitive happier if there were two editions and the 2nd one had a dismembered male torso?

Anyway, they look fake to me (if the model was real, that is). So maybe that's another example of the company/marketing thinking a bit more about this. A lot of women who go around wearing string bikinis on beaches have fake boobies, and they would be perfect because no zombie wants a mouth full off rubber!

Zillah

Women already endure a really horrific amount of prejudice, abuse and objectification. Trying to compare how women are objectified as sexual objects in society to something as banal as a poster of a boy band shows incredible naivety or serious dishonesty. Go on, ask yourself if men suffer sexual objectification or its consequences to the same extent that women do. You don't need to post your answer, if you're honest then you know the answer is no - so quit the disingenuous comparisons.

No, this statue isn't going to kill anyone, but it is incredibly crass and lacking in taste. Yes, stuff like this happens in the game, but they're picking out this one example of a woman reduced to a pair of bulging and bloodied breasts and literally putting it on a pedestal. It's pathetic, and part of a very pathetic, lowest-common-denominator mindset. I can't believe there are people coming out to white-knight this stupid shit. Yeah I'm sure they just chose an image that they felt represented the game, that just happened to be a dismembered, busty woman wearing almost nothing. Total coincidence. Gaming culture isn't getting a bad reputation for this crap at all.

I wouldn't demand that they apologise, retract it or anything like that. They have a right to do whatever they want. But I'm going to call it out for the juvenile, misogynistic crap that it is.

Polar101

TerrorFirmer wrote: »

Labeling the thread as 'NSFW' is a bit Daily Mail sensationalist.

Not at all, I'd have been annoyed if I had opened this thread on my work PC and it didn't mention 'NSFW'.

...why would anyone buy a Collector's Edition like this? Good thing the publishers woke up.

Potential-Monke

Zillah wrote: »

Go on, ask yourself if men suffer sexual objectification or its consequences to the same extent that women do. You don't need to post your answer, if you're honest then you know the answer is no - so quit the disingenuous comparisons.

Certain men do. Ginger men.

Zillah wrote: »

I wouldn't demand that they apologise, retract it or anything like that. They have a right to do whatever they want. But I'm going to call it out for the juvenile, misogynistic crap that it is.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/misogyny

I fail to see how this is "hatred, distrust or dislike of women".

pixelburp

CastorTroy wrote: »

So why exactly are people complaining? It's not like people are being forced to buy this. Pretty good chance people who do buy this would look at similar or worse stuff online.
And who is complaining? Is it the Daily Mail brigade who are only aware of this because 1 of them noticed it while looking for something to complain about then got the rest of them on the bandwagon?

What has Daily Mail got to do with anything? It's crass and infantile, just because some people are calling it for what it is doesn't make them complainers, or stuffy begrudgers of the medium. I wish gaming would grow up sometime, and realise this is the kind of dumb-ass nonsense that plays into the hands of those who'd really try to censor gaming if they had the chance.

As ever, the usual caveat applies that this publicity was probably semi-planned, and shock-value got the game front & centre for sure, but really. God. Sometimes I think the industry deserves everything it gets really, it does itself no favours.

Reekwind

humanji wrote:

Penis =/= Breasts. But there are plenty of products advertised with topless men.

And a few examples of computer games advertised using naked male torsos in sexually suggestive ways would include...?

If people get the wrong impression about you because of a bit of memorabilia that few will buy, then they're hardly worth your time worrying about, are they?

I would have said that once. Not now. There have been too many examples of the crass sexism within the games industry. This stupid, stupid Dead Island example isn't an isolated slip-up in an industry otherwise noted for its balanced and nuanced portrayal of women. Not by a long shot. The industry seems to want to live down to its stereotype, along with some sections of its customers

How on earth can we pretend that we're fans of a mature industry that treats people like adults when - and this is the real twist - such crass and puerile marketing is met by shrugs? You either accept that our hobby is run by and for juvenile men-boys, and don't complain when it's painted as such by tabloids or the mainstream media, or you at least try to see what's wrong with something like this

(And it goes without saying that anyone who buys this edition of the game especially for that figurine fully deserves any scorn heaped on, invariably, him)

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Who gives a flying fcuk what they do, as long as the game is good?

What a horrible, horrible argument. Who cares if a game is marketed in ways that are sexist/racist/bigoted/insulting/cringeworthy/whatever so long as the game is good? I don't think that sort of inane apologism needs rebutting

pixelburp

Reekwind wrote: »

[...] You either accept that our hobby is run by and for juvenile men-boys, and don't complain when it's painted as such by tabloids or the mainstream media, or you at least try to see what's wrong with something like this[...]

This is an important bit; gaming as an industry & community whine with cries of "why us?" when it gets it in the neck from the conservative media outlets, feigning innocence - oh poor us, those pesky old codgers not getting the medium - but fails to learn any lessons and acts out with ill-judged incidents like this one. It can't play the victim all the time, there has to be some gave and take in all this & the industry show it has the maturity to ... well, not act like an obnoxious arse all the time.

Plus you'd think with Sandy Hook and gaming once again getting picked on by everyone, someone would have had the sense to say "you know what? The timing on this collectors edition isn't great, let's go with something else, we're doing ourselves no favours here".

CastorTroy

pixelburp wrote: »

What has Daily Mail got to do with anything? It's crass and infantile, just because some people are calling it for what it is doesn't make them complainers, or stuffy begrudgers of the medium. I wish gaming would grow up sometime, and realise this is the kind of dumb-ass nonsense that plays into the hands of those who'd really try to censor gaming if they had the chance.

As ever, the usual caveat applies that this publicity was probably semi-planned, and shock-value got the game front & centre for sure, but really. God. Sometimes I think the industry deserves everything it gets really, it does itself no favours.

By Daily Mail, I just meant was it the usual crowd that was complaining. But seemingly not.

But as you pointed out, they may have preplanned this for the publicity. Just like things like The DaVinci Code or The Exorcist, the controversy makes people want it more or at least makes them more aware. So them apologising after the fact won't change anything. It's out there now, got them exposure and has done its job.

saiint

i want boobie statue !

Potential-Monke

Reekwind wrote: »

What a horrible, horrible argument. Who cares if a game is marketed in ways that are sexist/racist/bigoted/insulting/cringeworthy/whatever so long as the game is good? I don't think that sort of inane apologism needs rebutting

I was referring to DeepSilver, not gaming in general. It's not the most outrageous or sexist thing to happen in gaming (DNF was way more sexist and there wasn't such a furore over that). Nor is it particularly sexist. People are picking out what they want to see, not what (imo) is being portrayed. Think of a sun drenched beach. What's the most common thing there? Women in bikinis. Yes, there are loads of other groups, but the one that stands out is women in bikinis.

Would people have been happier if it was a full body lying on the ground with it's insides falling out? Or even a skinless, half decomposed body of unknown sexual orientation? Gore is ok. Just don't sexualise women. :rolleyes:

Reelwind wrote:

And a few examples of computer games advertised using naked male torsos in sexually suggestive ways would include...?

God of War has Kratos more or less naked on their covers. And have a look at the Cho Aniki series. There are more, but in a medium which was dominated by mostly a male demographic for a long time you are bound to have countless more half naked female characters than male.

Gaming, as a medium, is still pretty young. Films have (and still are) using females as sex objects and how long is that going? Gaming will follow the trend and because it is still young it will use females as sexual objects. Music has it's fair share, as literature has/does.

I seriously think people are way over-reacting to this. It was meant as a bit of fun. But the PC brigade made sure that the fun was short lived. The game is an 18's, and as adults are we not capable of deciding if you want it or not without getting our panties in a twist? You might say that it is aimed at a younger audience, but what marketing company in their right minds would think that parents would buy that for their sensitive little children?

Skerries

anyway if you actually want to buy the non controversial version it's here for €22.39

http://www.ie.wowhd.com/games/dead-island-riptide-pc/dp/32061929?affid=11195&affid=11195

danthefan

Not going to buy it but I really couldn't care less about it.


As for why male crotches aren't used to sell video games, I would imagine because the target market wouldn't really respond well to that. Seems obvious enough.