DOA5LR Game Theory on... Competitive DOA?

The genius game theorist, whom is aware of his catching good looks... pastes his face onto Christie and says that the skimpy outfits are distracting and that the community leaders were wrong for the soft ban. My question is, if this is a strategy; shouldn't it be banned? Wouldn't that mean the community did the right thing? Because it's not a fair strategy if it was ever considered one to begin with.

I didn't support the soft ban on outfits, but at this point I'm not sure I really care. Do you agree with this game theorist, or do you think his claims are ridiculous?

YouTube

9 2 2,013

12:53

Game Theory: The Strategy of Sex Appeal in Dead or Alive

 

This guy is right.

 

As I said in the original thread on the site that mentioned this:

I disagree with his theory that the sexy outfits provide an inherent competitive advantage. He even disproves it by pointing out that players get numb to it. Changing costumes won't matter in the end as his counter-counter-point suggests. That's because a competitive player is already numb to all the costumes and doesn't get "sexually aroused" at a tournament by the sexy outfits.

He's looking at the wrong side of the coin here. He's arguing against the ban from a perspective of the player. The ban was from the perspective of the spectator who isn't numb to the outfits. Which makes them think the game has nothing to offer since it must be using what is considered the lowest common denominator to advertising. So all they remember of the game is "it's the pervert/sexy/pedo game", and is all the new player is gaining from this first view of the game.

As for the costume ban itself, it was in effect for the two events it was tried at. It just wasn't posted online until after those two test runs. The players in the event were the ones who wanted to push for the change, and you can hear them in commentary of the tournaments saying things like, "Man, had to pick the V swimsuit...".

 

As someone that reasonably knows how DOA works as a competitive fighter, this shit was basically just a bad joke and a borderline troll. No competitive player would get distracted by a costume to the point that it would contribute to them losing a tournament match. It's shit like this that just reiterates how the public views the DOA franchise and how it'll never get taken seriously. The comments on the YT video illustrate how ignorant people are of DOA as a competitive fighting game.

 

I find his theory very creative and original, but I disagree with him on the point that playing DOA automatically slows everyone's reaction time, no matter the skill level. I can safely say that I don't feel that my reaction time worsens if I'm playing against a female character in a sexy outfit (yes, even Momiji ). I'm so used to it by now after about ten years of DOA experience.

I also think MatPat is exaggerating the fact that being sexually aroused slows your reaction time by a factor of 8. That's ridiculous! To illustrate this, a reaction time of 2000ms would mean you could barely respond to twice the duration of a fully charged Power Blow (120 frames). That's absurd. I don't think there is a single person in this community with that slow of a reaction time. Sure the study he mentioned clearly stated empircal evidence regarding this phenomenon, but one could wonder if the study is valid? Moreover, that study was conducted in 1999 and the stimuli used in that time were usually pictures of real life sexy women. It's hard to imagine that this could be generalized to a fighting game and even to the DOA population.

 

I mean, honestly, the same people who bash DOA for its sexuality are the same people who will post hentai pictures and sexy cosplay photos of women. DOA has always been unapologetic about its sex appeal and that's one thing I like about the franchise. Hate it or love it, Itagaki set out to make a fighting game that stood out from the crowd, and he did that with the fast paced system, the cinematic stage interactions, and the sexy females with assets. Plus, if you ask a lot of people, many of them don't even consider the sexy costumes that sexually appealing to begin with.

The theory was interesting, because it was funny. For some reason, the FGC has some aversion to sex appeal, but then again, so does the gaming industry in general. Japan isn't afraid of it, but the West seems so prudish at times that it baffles me. Yet recently, I was kicked out of a group where a guy was posting pics of vagina and a video of himself getting head from a woman just because one of the members joked that gamers who frequently post memes don't get any. So it's a very confusing space to be in. I don't see what the problem is with sex or fan service in video games. These women are selling a fantasy, and they're not real. However a gamer chooses to enjoy DOA and its women is their business, but to most of us, we've played DOA for so long as we don't even notice the breast jiggle in fights anymore because we're used to it and its lost its shock factor.

 

Does this really need to be on the front page?

 

Does this really need to be on the front page?

Sure! It's actually an interesting discussion and a pretty funny and entertaining video. I think many have already established that hate it or love it, DOA has a certain image and it's not going away. The "soft ban" that was put in place was hardly enforced, because a lot of TOs didn't care and a lot of them didn't even have consoles that had the DLC costumes, which had majority of the fetish wear and swimsuits. Plus, a lot of the Top 8 players and players on stream didn't even use majority of the costumes banned, so the idea was good in theory, but honestly not needed in the first place.

 

Lowleveldrama

 

I don't find it to be a very interesting discussion at all.

You know what a soft ban is? It's someone asking you politely not to do something, while fully allowing you to do it should you insist.

In other words, its nothing. It never was anything. But the misconception of it sure got a large number of stupid people up in arms.

 

I don't find it to be a very interesting discussion at all.

You know what a soft ban is? It's someone asking you politely not to do something, while fully allowing you to do it should you insist.

In other words, its nothing. It never was anything. But the misconception of it sure got a large number of stupid people up in arms.

People didn't see it as a soft ban at first... they saw it is as ban. The commentary during tournaments didn't ever help with calling it a soft ban last time I checked. If it was nothing, it was stupid to even waste time on the idea... or.

This story is posted on the front page, and not that original thread because this is the first DOA video to ever exceed a million views pertaining to any sort of competitive play. Rejoice in your efforts.

 

I honestly didn't take this guy seriously. His content wasn't compelling and his logic wasn't sound. I considered it a fluff piece to be honest. Plus the soft ban is not that big a deal. If someone really REALLY wants to "violate" the soft ban and try their luck with using a skimpy swimsuit as one of their strategies (ignoring the fact that the opponent may be an androphilic male or female) be my guest. Let that person represent themselves as immature or frivolous within a tournament setting.

 

That's the problem. People did not understand what the term "soft ban" meant, even though it was explained thoroughly.

This is because most people were not actually interested in what was being said. They were more interested in the dramatic, fictional "hard ban" that never happened.

Stupidity.


The only message that the TO's were trying to convey was "Hey, if you guys would refrain from picking the skimpy shit on stream that would probably help with the public image a bit." And for that, the community erupted with bogus interpretations, accusations and a really bizarre series of protests from people who don't even go to tournaments in the first place. We even got a fucking Kotaku article.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

 

So basically, the "soft ban" wasn't even needed in the first place? Because not many people used those kind if costumes unless they did random select. And it wasn't a soft ban at first, it just said ban. It only turned into a soft ban after the exposure of the story on Kotaku, EventHubs, and other sites.

 

I honestly didn't take this guy seriously. His content wasn't compelling and his logic wasn't sound. I considered it a fluff piece to be honest. Plus the soft ban is not that big a deal. If someone really REALLY wants to "violate" the soft ban and try their luck with using a skimpy swimsuit as one of their strategies (ignoring the fact that the opponent may be an androphilic male or female) be my guest. Let that person represent themselves as immature or frivolous within a tournament setting.

Still wouldn't matter since any player worth their salt would be numb to any and all fanservice from any character in general...and that isn't just exclusive to Dead or Alive either...

 

When they implied that no females play DOA, I was done.

I love the Game Theorists' videos and all, but this time they done fu-- you know what? I'm gonna keep using Christie's C2.

 

Playing 100 games with a buddy, both of you in Borat outfits, and you won't give a shit. Oh yeah your character can also be in Borat oufits.

words about soft ban

What we don't want is commentators and players being dweebs about boobies. The let's look at both outcomes you mentioned.... 1- the soft ban happens 2- no one cares/thinks about it because they don't care consciously or subconsciously. Both equate to not giving the ZOMG boobies boobies boobies any attention = good.

Has anyone actually been to a competitive meeting and the competitors where acting like idiots over boobies?

 

So basically, the "soft ban" wasn't even needed in the first place? Because not many people used those kind if costumes unless they did random select. And it wasn't a soft ban at first, it just said ban. It only turned into a soft ban after the exposure of the story on Kotaku, EventHubs, and other sites.

No, it was always a soft ban. Anyone who told you otherwise was lying or simply clueless.

There may have been loose talk about hard banning it, but that was never a mandate at any point.

You guys, along with our wonderful sensationalist friends at Kotaku, managed to create an epic controversy over literally nothing.

Playing 100 games with a buddy, both of you in Borat outfits, and you won't give a shit. Oh yeah your character can also be in Borat oufits.


What we don't want is commentators and players being dweebs about boobies. The let's look at both outcomes you mentioned.... 1- the soft ban happens 2- no one cares/thinks about it because they don't care consciously or subconsciously. Both equate to not giving the ZOMG boobies boobies boobies any attention = good.

Has anyone actually been to a competitive meeting and the competitors where acting like idiots over boobies?

Of course we don't. But we have a wide range of commentators, so you never know. Eventually, someone is going to be that guy. Eventually, some player is going to be that player. And the stream monsters are always going to be acting stupid. You can't control it.

The best you can do is help create a better environment, which is what we attempted. Unfortunately, people decided it would be more fun to act like drama queens. Our mistake.

 

The soft ban is a joke.

And if you get sexually aroused by those costumes, while you're competitively playing fighting games, you're apparently also a joke.

 

I watched it earlier and i was like "yeah, makes sense, but is he seriously saying that women don't get desensitized and thus the softban was unfair?" This is actually the central point of his argument.