For a mature title The Witcher displays an all too believably juvenile attitude towards sexual relationships. At the mechanical level women are objects to be acquired the more the better. That on it’s own is offensive enough without even considering the soft porn cards you are “rewarded” with for having sex with particular women (Particular women in this instance being any with more than one line of dialogue it seems). If this wasn’t troubling enough there’s a situation in the early stages of the game where a woman “rewards” you for rescuing her from being raped by having sex with you…
The casually offensive attitude with which women are treated in The Witcher would be comical if it wasn’t so distasteful, still it does raise an interesting question: Is it ever justifiable for a game to feature an explicitly prejudiced and offensive character? Furthermore if that character is the protagonist is it justifiable for the game to present the world in a prejudicial manner, to include game mechanics that are clearly sexist or racist in nature?
At the risk of trying to justify the sexism on display I feel it needs pointing out that Geralt, the player character in The Witcher, is a predefined character based on a series of books by Polish author Andrzej Sapkowski. The usual room for player expression and interpretation of their character provided by most role playing games is limited. It doesn’t take long to realise that Geralt is a misogynist, he sees women as disposable pleasure and doesn’t think twice about having sex with somebody and never even talking to them again. Given such a character the conceit of a collection mini-game for sexual relationships seems apt. It is an accurate representation of the way in which Geralt views the world, and women in particular; it’s not pleasant but then Geralt is not pleasant.
Sexism, racism and heteronormative behaviour exists in the world this is an unavoidable fact, to ignore than in our fiction and in our art would be extremely naive. Everybody has had experience with somebody who is sexist or racist and though those people might not be ones we’d choose to call friends, they are not evil people. Unpleasant to be around? Probably. Misguided? Almost certainly. But evil? No.
If we want mature games in the truest sense of the word then at some point they will need to engage with themes of prejudice and intolerance. It stands to reason that such games will need to feature characters who are sexist, racist or otherwise prejudiced and offensive. Demonising such individuals is the easy option and does little to tackle the issues themselves. If we are to include sexist and racist characters in our games, might we even consider making our protagonists sexist and racist? After all in a game we have the closest connection to the character we are playing. With such a protagonist we will need to make use of game mechanics that portray that character’s inherent intolerance and communicate it to the player.
Is it possible to implement such mechanics in a meaningful manner as a narrative tool without causing offense?
I believe, and hope, that it is. Of course it will not be easy. If we are to engage with the themes of sexism, racism and prejudice it will be necessary to ensure that games use such mechanics in an appropriate and intelligently designed manner. This will only be possible once we can ensure that games are not being casually sexist and racist through ignorance or apathy. It will be very difficult to make intentionally provocative and meaningful games dealing with prejudice and privilege when so many have shown they are capable of causing offense unintentionally.
Tags: Andrzej Sapkowski, Game Criticism, Game Design, Narrative Design, Racism, Sexism, The Witcher
May 15, 2009 at 8:18 pm
I know one of the writers for the game adaption of The Witcher. While I haven’t talked to her about this explicitly, I’m nearly positive that part of the reason the “sex cards” are in the Witcher is to help portray Geralt as a sexist douche, as you noted. Geralt can also be pretty racist (against non-humans rather than other types of humans).
I don’t find this at all offensive or inappropriate. If we want better characters is games, we have to be okay with the possibility of some of them being {whatever}-ist, just like people in the real world are {whatever}-ist.
Of course, figuring out whether something similar to the “sex cards” is intended for deliberate characterization or if it’s just lowbrow pandering can be difficult and some folks are apt to overreact.
May 15, 2009 at 8:40 pm
I’ve not played The Witcher yet (it’s on The Pile!) but I can accept the idea of a protagonist with whom the player is not expected to identify fully, but who has their own character, which can be objectionable. The Gabriel Knight games ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_Knight ) are another example of games with a protagonist like this. Although Gabriel is undoubtedly a charismatic and sympathetic character, it’s constantly made clear that he has an extremely sexist attitude, and treats women in much the same way as Geralt, by the sound of it – as sexual conquests and little more.
What’s also made clear, however, is that he’s full of shit, and is constantly called out and upbraided by his assistant Grace (a wonderful female character, who is also playable in the 2nd and 3rd games). Their conflicted relationship, and the way that both their characters develop, and Gabriel in particular starts to see things differently as the story progresses, that has made the games such a cult favourite – they’re in my all-time top 10. So yes, it can be done.
I think what worries me most about the Witcher’s approach is that by making it a card-collecting game, it’s implicitly endorsing it as part of the game, that if you don’t “catch ‘em all”, you’ve not achieved everything. It’s part of the culture of achievement that people like Michael Samyn of Tale of Tales have criticised (and outright mocked, in “The Path”), and it seems really inappropriate here. Isn’t sexist behaviour being rewarded? Shouldn’t a player be able to ignore this part of the game without feeling like a “lesser” gamer than someone who collected all the cards? Or is the player being rewarded for acting out Geralt’s unpleasant character the most? – but I’m not sure I buy this argument.
I’d be interested to know in what ways, if at all, the game itself criticises Geralt’s attitude, if, as the developer claims, we’re not supposed to admire him. How is this communicated, and is it clear enough? If it’s not admirable, why is it apparently rewarded?
May 17, 2009 at 9:57 am
One aspect of the Witcher story which I don’t think is mentioned in the game is that magic users are all required to be sterilised. I’d be really testing my memory to give you the reason but it’s something about keeping a control of magic use so that they don’t get children being born with powers that go untrained creating a danger to themselves and everything around them.
This coupled with the fact that Geralt’s Witcher mutation has left him with an extreme resistance to disease allows him to have intercourse with whoever he feels like without consequence. One would imagine that this could result in a fairly apathetic attitude towards women, particularly in someone as cold and cynical as Geralt. In the books it’s used to highlight the contrasts between Geralt and the female chaarcters as well as with the romantic Dandylion. In the game with Triss and Dandylion relegated to very minor roles, Geralt just comes off as kind of a chauvinistic jerk.
All of that said, I never liked the inclusion of the collectable sex cards. They work against what is otherwise an unusually mature and well written RPG.
May 17, 2009 at 10:15 pm
You can just play the game without the sex cards, it’s not like they are real “rewards” they do nothing to effect the game, and if you want to see certain characters without clothing well then you have go along with Gerralt’s misogynistic attitudes. Also no one ever seems to mention the love triangle quests that develop later in the game, Gerralt apparently does have somewhat of a heart and if you choose you can make him express his wish to settle down and have a family (with an adopted son of course). I have no problem with the playing cards, many games include casual sexual encounters at least this one doesn’t rewards you with lasting titillation and recognizes these parts of the game for what they are for. Also if Gerralt has all these images of past “girlfriends” doesn’t that mean that he remembers them somewhat, better than the faceless prostitutes in games like SR2 or GTA, also I think it is appropriate in the suedo-mediaeval setting that this sexist attitude exists and women can be easily cast aside without repercussions (except for Shawni getting really angry at you).