I was recently de-flowered of my Sims virginity after playing The Sims 2 for an A.V. Club review. I admit, I’m new to the world of simulated living, but somethings struck me as pretty realistic - like the fact that my sim had to take a nap every other goddamn minute, or that cooking healthy food was a pain in the butt.
Other things were a bit less true-to-life. For example, the possibility for instant romance. I definitely appreciated that the game let me mack it with both men and women, but the idea that, after only two conversations, we would be wearing our hideous wedding dresses and hopping under the covers seemed like a bit much. Not that it wasn’t fun.
What makes it so strange to me though isn’t the free-flowing slutiness (My sim was set for lovin’.), it’s the statement the game is making about the potential for romance. Sometimes you and another sim just don’t click, but for the most part your conversations are the same with everyone: talk, joke, flirt, kiss, sex. That is, if you want to take it that far.
Every person you “socialize” with first becomes your friend, then levels up to be your lover. Is this just a way oversimplified version of complicated human relationships, dumbed down for the sake of simple gameplay? Sure. But it also raises an interesting point about the nature of friendships and sexual attraction.
In real life, is every friend a potential lover? Is friendship really just a masked form of flirting, or at least a way to reach out for affection? Is there ever such a thing as a platonic friendship?
It’s a topic that probably steps on the toes of some of the more homophobic among us, but it’s still worth talking about. Think, for example, of 19th century “romantic friendships” - relationships that, today, would look like romances, but then were considered close, friendly ties. Girls clasped to each other’s bossoms; men caught up in warm embraces. Now we’d call it gay. Yet there was rarely sex involved. But, then again, sometimes there was.
How do we define (and, in effect, compartmentalize) friendship, affection, romance, love, sexual attraction? Isn’t there a little of that sim promiscuity in us all?
November 14th, 2005 at 10:56 am
The problem with the Sims and relationships is that you’ve only got a handful of verbs to illustrate the dynamics of the relationship, hence all the relationships are pretty much the same. A social game with more verbs, say hundreds instead of maybe fifty, would be able to play to the idiosyncrasies of two individuals finding things in common, playing as sarcasm, mock-cruelty, affection ect. If you really wanted a meaningful virtual relationship between PCs and NPCs you’d have to craft the game around that specific context.
I’ve come to recognize that even feelings of respect are really a subliminated form of attraction, and that everyone is bi-sexual to some porportion or another, with the people we typically call “bisexual” having a near even distribution. I think in that sense Will got it Wright, er, right. If you’re homophobic that can be a very unsettling thought, but apply it the other way, to heterosexuality, and you realize that without some degree of respect, then friendliness, then affection, you can’t really have a meaningful sexual relationship. Being aware of these things brings a degree of wisdom, I think.
November 14th, 2005 at 11:02 am
It’s nice to hear someone else besides me pimping the Kinsey scale :-).
You raise an interesting question when you say that people should think more about the friendships theoretically underlying their romantic relationships: can people be together without being friends? Can people be attracted to one another without liking each other?
November 14th, 2005 at 11:56 am
I had a friend once who insisted that you couldn’t be friends with members of the opposite sex (assuming you’re hetero) that you don’t wanna boink. I’ve found this to be patently untrue. The breadth and depth of friends that I’ve had over the years span the spectrum of ugly to beautiful, according to modern society’s commericalist designation of the terms, and while many of them I have indeed wanted to boink, others I have not. I think it is true that people tend to respond more favorably to those they are attracted to sexually, but I hold no stock in the idea that platonic relationships can’t or shouldn’t contain sexual attraction. For one thing, flirting is fun. For another, to pretend we don’t have bodies intricately tied to our minds is to deny that we are human.
I would agree with you, Patrick, that “… feelings of respect are really a sublimated form of attraction” if only through anecdotal evidence of my own existence that I’m never attracted to people I don’t respect and that the more I respect someone, the more I am attracted to that person.
I love The Sims’ lighthearted approach to sexuality. It makes it out to be something fun, even humorous, that can be engaged in with frivolity and which the primary outcome is one of deeper connection with the other. Where I find it a little bit constricting is that I wanted my Sim to share a multi-adult, polyamorous household with members of both sexes, but they all get jealous of one another if the see one of their lovers even hugging another of the roommies. The moral being: have as many lovers as you want, just keep them secret from eachother. This shows the designer’s view that monogamy is the only happy possibility in terms of human relationships–or, perhaps, they felt they’d made enough of a controversy by allowing you to choose your Sim’s sexuality and didn’t want to push the envelope further.
November 14th, 2005 at 1:35 pm
Hey, Matt. You mention the link between attraction and respect. I think, in a “normal”, “healthy” relationship that’s true. But (As the sub I feel like I always have to stand up for the rights of masochism) I think it often doesn’t work that way. Many men, I would argue, feel the need to dominate men they don’t respect, and would perhaps be intimidated by ones they did. And women may not want to be respected (Sorry, I’m a woman and a sub, so this is the gender dynamic that often comes to mind. It could, of course, go the other way.). There’s something very sexy in a Mary Gaitskill way about shame. Call it unhealthy; call it what you will. It’s a legitimate choice.
Also, as far as polyamory in the Sims, I think most people would look it as an orgy, not a constructive, polyamorous relationship. Of course, the idea that monogamy is the only way to go is close-minded, but, like you said, they could only push it so far before they got stoned. Plus, having known a number of people who’ve tried to form polyamorous relationships, I’ve never known it to work. There’s so, so, so much commuication involved. Personally, I’m really fascinated with the idea of monogamy vs. promiscuity, and what’s innate in our nature and what’s learned. I’d like to think, in some ways, we’re fooling ourselves, that we’re bonobos, and that’s that. Then again, I’m in a five + year monogamous relationship. And, it’s hard to deny, no matter how Utopian the conditions get, that old die-hard keeps coming back: jealousy.
November 14th, 2005 at 7:50 pm
You all raise a good point about The Sims not representing masochism, and other “dysfunctional” relationships, there is definetly a platonic tint to the game’s design, probably because Will Wright is not much of a swinger or a postmodernist or whatever you want to chalk it up to. Come to think of it, Erasmatron is much in the same line of thinking, very platonic. For instance, you couldn’t possibly to an adaptation of say, a Kathy Acker novel in Erasmatron, even if you could figure out a design the designation of gender as black and white would make it aesthetically inert. As soon as I get some serious capital I’m going to produce a drama engine capable of all these gradients and ambiguities. In the meantime, Bonnie, I think it might make a good post to do a Kinsey scale quiz regarding how one plays videogames, and give people their “videogame gender” score as a result.
November 14th, 2005 at 7:57 pm
Will Wright as a swinger. That’s the funniest thought I’ve had all day…
Patrick, tell me more about how you think a video game Kinsey test would work? Would it determine whether your tastes in games are more “masculine” or “feminine”? Your gaming identity? Your ability?
November 15th, 2005 at 1:52 am
Hey, Bonnie! I stumbled onto your site via womengamers.com! I think that it is awesome. I enjoy your articles and posts a lot. Womengamers just never satisfied my desires for discussion of video games and gender/sex. No offense to anyone, but people over at womengamers actually ended up surprisingly conservative. So, awesome site, and awesome post right here.
I think that everyone is certainly bisexual to some degree. Respecting someone is pretty close to “liking” them and being attracted to them, and there’s nothing wrong with affection in platonic relationships. But what about when you know someone so well, like, say, a best friend, that intimacy or sex just seems wrong, like incestuous? Can you reach the point where you respect them so much that it’s not sexual? What’s up with that?! Overall, I think everyone should hug, cuddle, and flirt more, and quit acting like that’s reserved for sex partners.
I’ve always loved that they let your sim knock up both sexes, but in the Gamecube version of the Sims that I played, only hetero lovin’ is allowed. They made everyone bi for the Urbz, though, luckily.
November 15th, 2005 at 4:38 am
People can be together without being friends, that’s a no brainer for me, and I can’t really think of a situation of friendship that wouldn’t be based on subsumed sexual desire.
But then, as my previous post in “Bad Words: the Language of Sex” hinted at, I generally think most human activities are subsumed sexual desire.
Jealousy is one of those things I’ll never get [well, I get it as a survival adaptation, that’s the working of it I do not get], probably because I’m such an ultra-individualist at the core, and also because I make a clear separation between sexual relationship and social relationship. My take is that if the person you live with grows the desire to have some experience you cannot provide (it can be as “simple” as “what would sex be like with another kind of partner(s) ?” to more complex games) s/he should have the right to do so without endangering the relationship. What matters in a social bonding relationship (Can I talk with my partner ? What I am I willing to compromise for him/her ? What does s/he is willing to compromise for me ? Is the sharing of daily intendancies worthwhile ?) isn’t what matters in a sexual relationship, so why link both ? You never own your partner (however reassuring the thought of it might be to some, I guess). Unless of course your partner wants to be owned…
I find it interesting that in conversations, a total lack of jealousy generaly seems to be considered more of a put off by female friends than male [I guess it all too often falls down to power play: jealousy is a clear proof of desire, and being desired is holding power.].
Marvin Gaye put it better than me:”"I contend that sex is sex and love is love. When combined, they work well together, if two people are of the same mind. But they are really two discrete needs and should be treated as such … ”
Never could get into The Sims. Once the gist of it acquired, it never surprised me. I don’t see the point of the whole process if its creations cannot surprise me, unless it’s supposed to mold my way of seeing social life.
Though I never tried iteration 2. Maybe I missed something ?
PS: sorry about the rant, I should never post before my first cafeinated drink of the day.
November 15th, 2005 at 11:13 am
Hi Zack, thanks for stopping by. Interesting point: can you ever be so close with someone it’s no longer sexual. You ask about it in context of friendships, but it would seem to happen with romances too. You’re with someone so long the sex goes out of it. You also say that sexual attraction in a relationship of that kind would be “incestuous” - which, I suppose, means we have to more closely define incest, and what exactly is taboo there. I don’t mean to condone incest, but it is a favorite topic of mine. Supposedly, there’s a part of our brain that is supposed to stop us from being attracted to people who have been around us constantly for the first 2 years of our lives (i.e. our family members). But that, we know, doesn’t always happen…
MD^2, I don’t think you’re missing much in Sims 2. It was more or less an uninteresting experience.
As for jealousy, I don’t understand it either. All the things you’re saying about being able to be with someone but also let them experiment I think is wonderful, in theory (though it would require hella communication). All I know, as someone in a long-term, monogamous relationship, is that no matter how much theory goes into it, I still love my fiance, and it would kill me if he experimented with someone else. Then again, it would probably kill me if I did too. Jealousy has a certain evolutionary logic to it, but not one that should logically - it seems to me - be so strong if it really was just a relic of our ancient past.
November 15th, 2005 at 4:55 pm
I guess a ludic Kinsey test would gauge someone’s style in various genres, what class they tend to prefer in RPGs (or if they multi-class), how they deal with griefers in MMO’s (or if they play the griefer themselves), if they prefer aggressive strategies in RTS or like to line up defenses for a long term built up, I don’t know, theres a lot of specific questions you could glean from particular play styles. Just an idea.
November 15th, 2005 at 10:07 pm
Heh, the lack of polyamory in the life of the Sims was one of the first things that I noticed in The Sims 2 as well. Compared to other lines they could’ve crossed, I’d say that subject’s pretty damn tame.
Or maybe I’m just too weird for The Sims. I mean, I’m a shy guy, socialization has never been a big factor in my life. I don’t go out of my way to avoid it like anti-social people do, I just don’t go out of my way to seek it out. Because of this it’s always seemed really unrealistic to me how obsessively dependant Sims are upon constant chatter and affection. They can’t go half a day on their own without starting to get really depressed no matter how anti-social I try to make them.
At any rate, Bonnie, you were complaining about how quickly Sims could become the closest of friends in this game. To fill you in on a tiny bit of what you missed by not playing the original Sims, the game originally only had one bar measuring what the Sims thought of one another and it was slightly easier to build them up to lovers than it currently is in Sims 2.
But when the Hot Date expansion (I think) added in that second bar it suddenly became near impossible to build up the relationship meter with anywhere near that kind of speed. I think you might have liked that setup better. The idea was that all your actions would have a large effect on the temporary meter and very little effect on the long-term meter. Only by maintaining a high temporary meter over a period of time could you get a significant change in the long-term meter. This made it very difficult just to reach friend status in a single day. They dumbed that feature down so much for the second game that it’s only the tiniest bit harder than the original version to become friends. It’s so easy that I second guessed myself while writing this over whether or not Sims 2 still had the second bar. (It does, believe it or not.)
Hey, who knows, maybe there could be room in future expansions for furthur revisions to the way the game’s relationships work. You know, like maybe when the conditions are right the automatic jealous reaction will be overruled and it’ll be possible to have those polyamorous households. I just had a funny thought, how about a gender preference sliding scale for each Sim? This adds straight and gay behavior to the Sims and it offers up the possibility that that orientation can change over time. (What does that say about me that I’d suggest that?) Along with that would come some sort of system of relationship labels that rely on both the long-term meter and the gender preference meter to decide whether a Sim thinks of another as a crush (or lover) or just a good friend.
Actually, depending on how extreme they make the behavior at the far ends of the gender preference scale, that might add more than straight and gay to Sims behavior. It could also add homophobe and heterophobe. (It looks like I made that word up but you know what I mean, hopefully.) Man, if my idea were to ever go through that’d add a lot of awkward moments to the game as the characters severely misjudge each other’s level of interest… Heh, people who love torturing their Sims ought to love it.
November 16th, 2005 at 8:55 am
Patrick, I see what you’re saying. Although, with some of those things, I wonder what you would classify as masculine and what as feminine. For example, I assume you’re saying being a griefer is a male trait. Certainly, I think the majority of griefers are male (then again, so are the majority of gamers). But why do you think that is?
Muljo, thanks for updating me on the earlier Sims methods. I didn’t mean so much to “complain” about the way things are now, only to point it out. The changes your suggesting could be fascinating, but then I feel a lot more time and energy in the game would be dedicated to sexuality and attraction; it might even end up being a whole different experience. So why not make it a different game :-)?
November 16th, 2005 at 11:54 pm
That could work. A large part of the Sims experience is the actual construction/ decoration of your house and all the various mundane tasks of everyday life. If we want relationships to be the entire point of the game instead of just one aspect of it they could probably afford to dumb down all those other things. Let them continue trying to simulate everything perfectly in The Sims, and create something else where certain parts of the simulation are automated somehow (or just considered irrelevant) to make more room for the character to just play around. I guess that’s sort of the same idea as The Urbz. (I haven’t played it but it seems to basically just be ignoring the mundane details so the Sim has more time to… “go clubbing” or something, I guess.)
October 30th, 2007 at 3:10 am
sports betting legalities…
sauce cunningly:Etruscan kiloword:crayon?newlywed …