fellas, I got a question about the contradiction ya girl Andrea made,
She is in favor of a videogame world where there is less "tits and ass", but feels that we don't need to steer away from the violent, unbelievable body count shooter games.
I am confused on her vision.
These fps action games are all about being super silly / over the top. We know the characters will have double d's and 14inch dicks on our characters (hopefully not on the SAME character....) because it is meant to be the 80's action shoot em ups. To have a compelling heroine that is believable and strong in one of these titles would be just like having you control Elena Fisher or Chloe in the Uncharted games. Yes, you have an empowering woman (or at least a different approach), but the message of 'female empowerment' would be muddled amongst the piles of bodies.
To make a strong female lead (or male) that goes against the grain of a normal protagonist, you should try to put them in a game where violence is not emphasized. If SukerPunch had a Clarice Starling (silence of lambs) esq character, it would not matter because she was still is a contradiction (like we said about Drake and Bond).
Throw them in a game heavy rain esq game where decisions and character development is crucial, and when killing is necessary, it is emotional and awe-inspiring.
PS Batman does not count. Yes, he doesn't kill them, but they are still motionless on the ground, and has the same effect as a enemy being dead in any other game (same could be said for Bully) . The only difference between the two is the game saying they are not dead, but they virtually are.