While I would agree that yes my male nature tells me that some of these CG and game girls are pretty attractive polygons (Lara Croft=hotness not matter what) I can still recognize that its a bit creepy to be swooning over something a 350 lb bearded sloppy virgin artist drew or put together for his own twisted pleasure.
I must say though that the only thing I've come across of this type thats even creepier is (i dont know if they still do it) when PSM magazine has artists draw up "swimsuit" versions of CG girls so that the mag can have a "swimsuit edition".
Edit by Nemmerle: I'm moving this debate out into a new thread, minus the light flaming that I've deleted, and eventually into the pub since it seems a shame to just delete it.
I didn't make it!
I don't get why everyone says it's creepy or weird to think a game babe looks good. It's just like looking at a picture of any other hot chick, except the only difference is they aren't real. But then again how do you know that the pictures of real chicks are of real chicks and aren't extremely good CG? Or for that matter you have to acknowledge that most pictures of chicks online are edited beyond recognition to teh point where you practically can consider them CG.
It only becomes creepy or weird when you become so engulfed by a game babe that you neglect your own real relationships or if it distorts you view of what a real women would look like.
90% of images you see in magazine have been artificialy altered, to start with the obvious, a good deal of playboy playmates have implants, then there is the airbrushing of the skin to cover blemishes, then the lighting filters on the camera, then post work to make it more and more appealing. In the end, so what? It's fantasy, and it's good fantasy, a warm fantasy.... getting back on track, the end point is whether or not it's polygons, pixels, paint, pencil, pen, or person, if it's "hot" it's "hot".
Reguarding the steretype of the artists, a good deal of artists base their work on live models, and those off commission, off the people around them (friends, girlfriends, wives, etc. et.c). Atleast outside of the hentai industry, you don't need women to draw hentai, just a basic use of pen and ink, and a knowledge of tits and ass.
Best thing about art is, it doesn't take $10,000 to make someone look jaw droppingly perfect, just a nice pen, pencil, and alot of ink.
Yeah agreed with the above two posts, there's nothing wrong with it. It's artwork in the design of a human being. If you didn't interpret them as human beings in a sense, then you wouldn't really get the story or anything. It's only weird when, as Afterburner said, you take it to extremes and that isn't most people.
While I agree with you Chemix and Afterburner and I see your point about the human eye and brain plainly recognizing beauty in all it's forms I still cant agree that taking a picture of a person who actually exists and tweaking it to the extreme is the same thing as fully creating an completely nonexistant being.
You're forgetting what this thread is essentially talking about...the "hotness" of pixels shaped in the form of a woman with big breasts and a perfect body. While it's human nature to recognize aestetic (sp, sorry it's late) beauty it's unhealthy for someone to sit there in World of Warcraft and pleasure themselves watching a partly nude Night Elf give their character a horrible motion captured version of a lap dance.
It's an argument that no one will ever be able to win. They've both got their flaws, but I typically see those set extremely against it as needing to get of their "high horse", I mean, it's just their taste, leave them alone. It might make you feel better to yell at them while on at internet forum but you're not doing much.
Obviously a lot of people take this "fetish", if you will, to a scarey level...otherwise there would be no money to be made in the Hentai business for example. I'm not stating that it's sick and unhealthy to recognize art as beauty in the form of something like these CG and animated women - what is unhealthy is like what I have stated before...becoming sexually aroused and losing contact with whats real and what isnt (which leads to threads such as this where people post in game pictures of Lara Croft and respond with a "I'd hit that...").
Essentially what I'm saying is that it's not normal nor is it healthy to become infacuated with something that is NOT REAL to begin with. Losing touch with reality is not a good thing my friends and calling a living breathing beautiful woman the same thing as something a computer generated is exactly that...
My 2 cents. Cg is an advanced computer art and science. It is worth many hours of hard work and pain and frustration and it is owed and worth every bit of appreciation that any one gives it. It is like a painting or a sculpture...it is art . It deserves to be respected as art . I see nothing wrong with relating to or respecting a cg woman. Finding her attractive or sexy after all human traits and talents make her up, the artist makes her who is human and with in her all those organic traits from with in the artist's perception and liviing experience and human observation are seen and mimmiced and done so with a fine job.
It's no more real than a character an actor plays only these characters are virtually made and are labored in creation from a cg artist who spends many many hours working on the fine details that make the character look human and life like. It has gotten to the point where cg characters can be on screen and we wont even realize they are fake. I see no reason why a man or woman cant find a cg character hansome or sexy when in fact it was human talents and characteristics that made the character look more human to begin with.
Voice of joy and sunshine
26th May 2003
A great many people these days look at pictures of hot women, and sometimes men, on the internet - and by and large we accept this. However for some reason when these images are entirely artificial such as CG babes or Anime pictures the level of social acceptability is less. What is really wrong about fancying something that doesn't exist in the strictest sense of reality? There are women in magazines who look nothing like their real selves thanks to the CG skills of the graphics editors, that isn't so different from a CG woman made that way from scratch. It's not like the average person is going to be able to lay their hands on the object of their affection in any case.
In my opinion it's not about CG it's about any picture whatsoever. If your jerkin off to a cartoon off a game or jerkin off to a centerfold in playboy your still jerking off to an image of a woman. It's not a real woman. Saying there is a difference just because one image was based on an actual woman while the other was based on the concept of a woman is a hair thin distinction.