Blizzard Dev Offers Apology for Response to Sexualization Question

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
Dragonbums said:
For me, I don't want all sexy women to go away. I just want an equal balance. There are times where I just want to be a badass. Badass for women doesn't have to be synonymous with sex appeal.

A lot of people thought the default FemShep was pretty hot and she was shown in full armor. They didn't need to do unnecessary titillation to make a female character conventionally attractive.
You wont get an equal balance when the demographic spread is not equal. For all the reasons I said in my other posts, what you are asking here is not likely and not fair. Titillation sells among certain genre, so it will be used within those genre because they show a profit as a result. In an industry that has stagnated like the gaming, that has gotten so conservative out of fear and necessity, expecting a change that can only be classified as risky (such as changing the formula of what sells well) is nothing short of entitled. Sucks but no, you will not get equal amounts in games (though even in spite of this, there has been shifts towards less titillation so it is not like that is all you have to choose from either)

Dragonbums said:
But like I said earlier, variety would not kill the gaming industry. "Sex sells" is the mantra, but you aren't selling a porn magazine. You don't NEED to make them get in my bed sexy. It would not affect the sales of the game at all.
People are playing videogames to play videogames. Not to be aroused. "Sex sells" mantra did not stop a game from having successful sales, nor abysmal sales, and it certainly didn't save it from either being a good game or a bad game.
It is not the entire industry, it is the triple A market and the genres that use titillation most often. Beyond that though, yes, there is real fear that not appealing enough to the demographic WILL kill companies at least, especially when games have become so bloated that failure of a large title (by, say, not appealing enough compared to a competitor) will kill a company. Look what happened when Darksiders 2 failed. Companies are afraid to fail so they make conservative business choices, up to and including outright pandering to audiences.

Furthermore, obviously not everyone shares your sentiment regarding games, as the titillation does seem to be responded to well enough that it continues. Not surprising given how all other media out there use the same tactics, hard to fault a strategy that is reliable even if not progressive. but more on that in a moment.

Dragonbums said:
Just because other mediums do it doesn't mean videogames have to follow the herd. Nor does it make it the right thing to do.
No, it means it is a larger cultural issue you have a problem with, not something gaming can fix or address as a subculture. And it means that games, as a demand oriented medium and a luxury product rather then necessity will respond to overall culture trends by simple logic of supply and demand. One could no more stop sexy characters in games then explosions until culture itself changes the appeal to them. And because of the way the larger industry works in targeting its demographic, that means you couldn't stop the amount of titillation for the same reason. Furthermore, I feel you are moralizing when using the term "right thing to do". If you meant that as a business and industry sort of thing (as in the current habits are bad for the industry) then I can agree there even if I understand the business motivation. If, however, this is a moral aspect like using sexy characters alot is somehow unethical, then I would have to protest.

Dragonbums said:
Except for the part where the female designs DO NOT fit with the atmosphere of the games. I explained this with what Bioware did with Ashely in Mass Effect 3 and not only did it not make sense in the perspective of her personality and background, but it didn't even make sense in the realm of her occupation, and current situation. Especially considering where her opposite Kaidan, was much more realistic to the atmosphere of the game.
Most fan-service in movies has little rational reason to be there. Hell, the horror movie staple of the topless scene are often shoehorned in just for the sake of having the skin seen. I wouldn't expect gaming to be any different in that regard by having little excuse behind trying to appeal to lowest common denominator.

Dragonbums said:
While I'm glad you can brush off the issue, that does not make it true for everyone else. I can as well can ignore that aspect and play the game and enjoy it. But at the end of the day I still wish there was more variety for me to choose from outside of customizable character games.
We all wish it was so. In fact, I don't think a single person would say they didn't like the idea of variety. Problem is, there is a finite amount of time and energy developers will put into games, and as sch they paint in broader swaths to attract the largest amounts of the demographics they know will buy the product. Unfortunately, it means it is less likely to find characters suited to your taste it seems. My sympathies, but everyone compromises in gaming. That the demographic that kept the industry alive and profitable is more likely to not have to compromise as much on ascetics isn't surprising, nor wrong (going back to games being products and thus made to appeal in the broadest way to the people buying them)

Dragonbums said:
But the thing is there are much more mainstream and popular games that do indeed show those kinds of guys in videogames. A lot more than women. Not every guy looks like Kratos from God of War.
So if a guy doesn't like to play as meat fridges, he has a nice big library to choose from that doesn't feature male protagonists like that. The same cannot exactly be said for women.
Well, lets start with the obvious that the male characters are still attractive and the only difference here is that instead of 2 body types, you have 3. Hell, this shows that reflection of culture itself aspect I was talking about earlier. Look at the main character designs. You have the "average" looking white male with brown hair pretty boy/rogue type, or the massive bulking monster. Both represent the ideal "masculinity", though the two show the change in culture as a whole about what is "manly" now. The classic idea of muscles and strength versus the the more modern handsome and roguish badboy. Your Kratos versus Nathan Drakes.
But lets assume that the "variety" male characters are given compared to females tells us something. What?
Well, what does that tell us then? To me, it is indicative of how the triple A industry is conservative and scared, using tried and true methods instead of trying new ideas regardless how much that hurts the industry in the long run. It also tells me that demand for variety in gaming is not high enough to warrant the massive cost involved in making the games with the less demanded characters. Furthermore, it tells me there should be a smaller market for them already in place, perhaps some sort of "independent" gaming not as restricted by business ideology and budget constraints, and where smaller games can flourish based on demand, even if not the blockbusters. Some sort of "indie game" scene.






Dragonbums said:
Just because it's less of an issue compared to other things, doesn't mean it should be disregarded. It certainly doesn't mean that it's a non issue. A problem is still a problem no matter how small.
First, it sounds like you are moralizing here. You should really word things better, it gives the impression that you are projecting your own ideals of right and wrong in an ethical sense onto the rest of the world and that would lead to a lot of conflict. And you'd be dismissed and compared to the religious jackasses who tried to stop Rock music. And D&D, videogames in general, Rap, Punk, Violence, Violence in video games and so on. Would be a good idea to avoid moralizing is what I am saying.
Secondly, assuming you are treating this as a discussion and not sermonizing and that the problem you refer to is in relation to the industry and how the current issue harms it (thus making it a problem to gamers), as said before, if the gaming industry is merely a reflection of culture at large (and it is), and the big games made are made to meet demand that is determined by our collective culture wants as demographics (and they are), then blaming gaming for there being a lot of sexy characters is as much a waste of time as blaming a cough for someone having cancer. It is the symptom of a larger issue, trying to guilt the game industry to take cough suppressants doesn't fix things, it makes the matter worse. Those that try to be risky in the current industry culture are as likely to fail as succeed with how big a budget they throw at those big name games. Change too much, greater chance to fail, and you know well that the first things they blame for failure are the changes. And as history has shown, those that try to break the mold in a way that addresses the "problem" tend to be regarded as failures for their efforts. I loved the hell out of Beyond Good and Evil, but in spite of the cult following and progressive character and writing, the parent company regards it as a failure for financially missing the mark.

Dragonbums said:
How many of them are really in the spotlight or aren't indie games though. That's the problem. It's often an overwhelming majority that's like that.
There would be zero harm to the game's industry if the playing field was evened out.

The game industry needs diversification and different perspectives on a widespread level. Unless of course they want to end up like the comic books industry.
Care to tell me the number of Hollywood blockbusters coming out with unattractive characters of either gender? Because you are complaining about that right now when complaining about diversification in the big name titles.
As explained before, demand is not as high for what you want as what others want. Expecting them to both be given the same treatment is naive and entitled. They wont. There is a reason that the summer blockbusters all tend to be huge spectacle events with explosions and sexy characters. That is the same reason that the largest titles in the gaming industry use the same ideas. They sell, they work, and regardless your personal tastes on the matter, because they sell, and sell very well, they get used over and over til they stop selling well.
Furthermore, for someone who understands the parallels to the comic industry enough to mention them, you forget that they are notorious for titillation pandering too. And in times of doubt, that is where they go back to as well, if DC is any indication. Hell, the comic industry that should be serving as a warning seems instead an inspiration to many game designers, with the same issues showing up so well. From high product price in order to cover talent/production costs, to juvenile obsession with violence and titillation, to greedy practices like special editions and additional story/content spread out to nickle and dime customers, to obsession over just the target demographic...
Yeah, I readily agree they are similar and should get off that track before it goes over the cliff, but at the same time, there is are reasons why the comic industry before, and games now did that. If you want to ever change it, you have to understand those reasons well enough to know what ones you can actually affect or not. Big game companies don't care if you like the titillation or not, then cant hear you over the sound of the money coming in from those that do.
 

Dragonbums

Indulge in it's whiffy sensation
May 9, 2013
3,307
0
0
runic knight said:
You wont get an equal balance when the demographic spread is not equal. For all the reasons I said in my other posts, what you are asking here is not likely and not fair. Titillation sells among certain genre, so it will be used within those genre because they show a profit as a result. In an industry that has stagnated like the gaming, that has gotten so conservative out of fear and necessity, expecting a change that can only be classified as risky (such as changing the formula of what sells well) is nothing short of entitled. Sucks but no, you will not get equal amounts in games (though even in spite of this, there has been shifts towards less titillation so it is not like that is all you have to choose from either)
Competitive sports is hardly has an equal demographic or exposure in sports players, despite the fact that just as many women are fans of football and other various sports teams as men. Yet I don't see women's sports being equally popular or as exposed.
Titillation only sells on very specific genres. Which is to say, not most of the industry. Fans don't need titillation to sell fighting games.
Shooters don't need titillation to sell their games, etc. etc.

Titillation is more or less an added extra. There is nothing to gain from it, and there is nothing to lose by removing it from characters that have nothing to do with it.

It is not the entire industry, it is the triple A market and the genres that use titillation most often. Beyond that though, yes, there is real fear that not appealing enough to the demographic WILL kill companies at least, especially when games have become so bloated that failure of a large title (by, say, not appealing enough compared to a competitor) will kill a company. Look what happened when Darksiders 2 failed. Companies are afraid to fail so they make conservative business choices, up to and including outright pandering to audiences.
It's not about one game appealing to all demographics. It's about an entire medium that almost universally appeals to one specific majority, and everyone else can gtfo so to speak.

There is no reason for the game industry as a whole to stamp their feet and refuse to diversify their audience to other potential demographics.
Now which studio caters to what is a whole nother story. I'm not talking about that. I'm not asking GTA to feature a gay lead.
I am hoping however that when a "new and exciting" IP comes around. It's actually that, and not just a continuation of the same blasted thing.

Furthermore, obviously not everyone shares your sentiment regarding games, as the titillation does seem to be responded to well enough that it continues. Not surprising given how all other media out there use the same tactics, hard to fault a strategy that is reliable even if not progressive. but more on that in a moment.
Everyone responds well to things that sexually attract them. However the argument here is that titillation is needed to sell the game. And more often than not, no it's not needed. At all. Nobody is going to not buy the game because this woman didn't have a boob window.

Unless your making games like Dead or Alive- you are doing it because you want to. Don't try to hide behind sales. If your game is good, you sell it based on the content of your game. Not by something superfluous like a boob shot.

No, it means it is a larger cultural issue you have a problem with, not something gaming can fix or address as a subculture. And it means that games, as a demand oriented medium and a luxury product rather then necessity will respond to overall culture trends by simple logic of supply and demand. One could no more stop sexy characters in games then explosions until culture itself changes the appeal to them.
But the thing still stands is that sexual characters were never needed for videogames to sell. They were never needed for them to be appealing. I'm paying for this luxury product too. Why should I be told to sit down and shut up and let the majority get to fully enjoy their $60.00 experience while I get some of the scraps in some aspects?

And because of the way the larger industry works in targeting its demographic, that means you couldn't stop the amount of titillation for the same reason. Furthermore, I feel you are moralizing when using the term "right thing to do".
There are more gamers that are above the age of 20, than there are prepubescent boy gamers going into their big boy pants. We are already seeing the negative affects of the gaming industry at large appealing to this demographic as opposed to opening up and diversifying their target audience to suit people with different tastes.

Most fan-service in movies has little rational reason to be there.
It would be fanservice if Ashely were a character they just slapped in there in ME3.

However she is not fan service. She was an established and well rounded character that prior to ME3 had a design and attire that reflected and respected the type of person they made her to be.
It's a disrespect to the writing and the character to take all of that away to make her look like a Miranda clone space babe for the same adolescents who couldn't give two shits about what Mass Effect was all about anyway.
Why didn't they do fanservice for Kaidan or Garrus? While all the Mass Effect ladies except Jack, got a boob job, all the men followed the flow of the story and looked more rugged and tired to reflect the current environment.

Don't go waving your dick around claiming to be the next sci fi master piece since Star Wars, if you are going to pull bullshit like this to appeal to horny losers.


We all wish it was so. In fact, I don't think a single person would say they didn't like the idea of variety. Problem is, there is a finite amount of time and energy developers will put into games, and as sch they paint in broader swaths to attract the largest amounts of the demographics they know will buy the product. Unfortunately, it means it is less likely to find characters suited to your taste it seems. My sympathies, but everyone compromises in gaming. That the demographic that kept the industry alive and profitable is more likely to not have to compromise as much on ascetics isn't surprising, nor wrong (going back to games being products and thus made to appeal in the broadest way to the people buying them)
And this is why if gaming continues as is, it's going to find itself in a downward spiral fast. They want to appeal to what they perceive as the largest common denominator. Yet all the games that do that well already exist.
Dark Souls wants to make their next game more like Skyrim. Why?
Nobody played Dark Souls for Skyrim. They played it for Dark Souls. If I wanted to play a Skyrim game, then I will go to Bethesda to get my Skyrim fix. I was looking for something different in Dark Souls and that is what I got.

Well, lets start with the obvious that the male characters are still attractive and the only difference here is that instead of 2 body types, you have 3.
You are mixing up attractiveness with sexual appeal. Attractiveness is someone or something that appealing to the eyes. That does not have to be sexual in the slightest



It also tells me that demand for variety in gaming is not high enough to warrant the massive cost involved in making the games with the less demanded characters. Furthermore, it tells me there should be a smaller market for them already in place, perhaps some sort of "independent" gaming not as restricted by business ideology and budget constraints, and where smaller games can flourish based on demand, even if not the blockbusters. Some sort of "indie game" scene.
But there is a high demand for it. That's why more of these topics keep cropping up. That's why more of these questions keep getting brought up.
Because there is a growing demand to stop these things and actually do something more creative with their money.

Nothing is stopping a big name studio from making a smaller, niche title, and appealing to that market. Nothing. They just don't WANT to.

The fact that all of these Kicstarters with independent games and a ton of variety are getting successfully funded proves that the AAA business is wasting away an opportunity that is right in their face to gain a lot of money. Having more choice makes everything better in the long run.

However if the game's industry wants to go on it's suicide run to ruination, then they can be my guest.






Care to tell me the number of Hollywood blockbusters coming out with unattractive characters of either gender? Because you are complaining about that right now when complaining about diversification in the big name titles.
Once again, you are mixing up attractiveness and sexiness. They are not synonymous with each other.

A lot of people found FemShep attractive. This is despite the fact that she wears a full set of armor like her male counterpart.

I didn't say ugly people should rule the industry.

Yeah, I readily agree they are similar and should get off that track before it goes over the cliff, but at the same time, there is are reasons why the comic industry before, and games now did that. If you want to ever change it, you have to understand those reasons well enough to know what ones you can actually affect or not. Big game companies don't care if you like the titillation or not, then cant hear you over the sound of the money coming in from those that do.
And that money will either be staying the same or ever decreasing. There is only so much money you can make pandering to the same bottom of the barrels. Eventually they are going to have to do something fresh, and titillation is a well run dry for them.
Idiots following idiots doesn't always mean something works for them. It just means they are both taking the same path off the cliff.
 

runic knight

New member
Mar 26, 2011
1,118
0
0
Dragonbums said:
Competitive sports is hardly has an equal demographic or exposure in sports players, despite the fact that just as many women are fans of football and other various sports teams as men. Yet I don't see women's sports being equally popular or as exposed.
Titillation only sells on very specific genres. Which is to say, not most of the industry. Fans don't need titillation to sell fighting games.
Shooters don't need titillation to sell their games, etc. etc.

Titillation is more or less an added extra. There is nothing to gain from it, and there is nothing to lose by removing it from characters that have nothing to do with it.
Sports take place in reality. Thus the people who participate would, quite likely, protest to being treated like a fantasy. Fictional characters don't really have the necessary free will to do that. And, given how often female athletes do end up making news for photo shoots that glorify them in the same vein as video game characters are used for titillation anyways, well, you point is a little lost.

You are right fans don't need titillation at all, and for many games it doesn't fit the theme well. FPS is a great example. Though, since you mention it, I can't think of many FPS where titillation was a key part of the design. In fact, the biggest complaints in games I see are from the fantasy mmo and fighter genre, as well as some grumblings about in MOBA. Games where mechanics are key and everything else is window dressing. Since everything else is not very important, you end up with pandering to the target demographic in order to outsell the competition. Not needed, no, but no real excuse not to try to attract more of the same demographic either. And no, changes in hopes of attracting a demographic that doesn't support the product as it is is not likely in an industry as conservatively run as Gaming's mainstream is.

Dragonbums said:
It's not about one game appealing to all demographics. It's about an entire medium that almost universally appeals to one specific majority, and everyone else can gtfo so to speak.

There is no reason for the game industry as a whole to stamp their feet and refuse to diversify their audience to other potential demographics.
Now which studio caters to what is a whole nother story. I'm not talking about that. I'm not asking GTA to feature a gay lead.
I am hoping however that when a "new and exciting" IP comes around. It's actually that, and not just a continuation of the same blasted thing.
Except, they don't appeal to only one majority, and you are being disingenuous claiming they do.
As said before Genres appeal to a specific majority in such a fashion, and do so because there is huge slants in the gender split on sales. Go play any simulation or puzzle games, and you don't see what you claim is "universal". Go look at the facebook and mobile market. No, the issue is only as predominant as you complain about in the big budget triple A market, which is built around FPS, Fighters, Fantasy action/rpg and MMO.

Now, when you have 70%+ splits in gender in those genre, which all evidence I have seen in that regard shows there is, then yeah, you will be more likely to get sexualized characters and titillation. Not all mind you, as there are always examples that don't even in those genre, but you see it more often.

So it isn't universally, but Genre based, and not universally in the genre but rather increased odds.

I do agree, some fresh blood in the IP market would be nice, but that is why I call up the indie scene so often, as games made popular there can be picked up and lead to more and better ones.


Dragonbums said:
Everyone responds well to things that sexually attract them. However the argument here is that titillation is needed to sell the game. And more often than not, no it's not needed. At all. Nobody is going to not buy the game because this woman didn't have a boob window.

Unless your making games like Dead or Alive- you are doing it because you want to. Don't try to hide behind sales. If your game is good, you sell it based on the content of your game. Not by something superfluous like a boob shot.
My argument was not that it was needed, please don't misunderstand. My argument was that it was justified for them to use titillation, and that the current direction of the industry would make it hard for them to break that habit.

It is not an all or nothing thing here. No game needs it, that is very true. But the industry likes to hedge its bets as much as possible. It is why they copy what sells well in the first place. Titillation is just one more aspect that will likely appeal to the demographic in general and increase the odds of sales by .0x% according to some study done. Beyond that though, it seems very dismissive of you to presume there needs o be a reason for it in the first place. Could just be the creators wanted to have that as acetic because they liked it (not likely a strong enough reason on its own, publishers tend to be squeezing creative control a lot, but certainly could add to why)

Dragonbums said:
But the thing still stands is that sexual characters were never needed for videogames to sell. They were never needed for them to be appealing. I'm paying for this luxury product too. Why should I be told to sit down and shut up and let the majority get to fully enjoy their $60.00 experience while I get some of the scraps in some aspects?
I never said to sit down and shut up, please stop being disingenuous here. I'm telling you to stop attack the damn mirror and turn around to see the real issue.
As for why you shouldn't get your experience? Well, because no one does. Everyone compromises, you are not special. Now, because you don't share the same tastes as the idealized general demographic, you have a great chance of having to compromise on more, but that is your lot as not having enough financial pull as them.
I'm sorry you don't like it, but unless you can pull out an equal stake of money as the demographic they target, then no, you can't reasonable expect the product to suit your taste more then theirs, regardless how little you like the current version. I can't expect to change the likes of Twilight because I dislike it, not it is so damn popular among other people, what makes you think you are entitled to changing how this industry works?

Dragonbums said:
There are more gamers that are above the age of 20, than there are prepubescent boy gamers going into their big boy pants. We are already seeing the negative affects of the gaming industry at large appealing to this demographic as opposed to opening up and diversifying their target audience to suit people with different tastes.
I agree, this is shallow, short sighted and negatively impacts the industry and the hobby of gaming.
That is why I don't support the games and companies I don't like and instead support the ones I do. As a consumer in a democratic society, it is all anyone can rightfully do. trying to make it a social injustice that you don't get the games you want when games themselves are not a right but a luxury made to meet demand is absurd. No one gets what they want, deal with it and support what is closest to it where you can. Pray others share your sentiment.

Dragonbums said:
It would be fanservice if Ashely were a character they just slapped in there in ME3.

However she is not fan service. She was an established and well rounded character that prior to ME3 had a design and attire that reflected and respected the type of person they made her to be.
It's a disrespect to the writing and the character to take all of that away to make her look like a Miranda clone space babe for the same adolescents who couldn't give two shits about what Mass Effect was all about anyway.
Why didn't they do fanservice for Kaidan or Garrus? While all the Mass Effect ladies except Jack, got a boob job, all the men followed the flow of the story and looked more rugged and tired to reflect the current environment.

Don't go waving your dick around claiming to be the next sci fi master piece since Star Wars, if you are going to pull bullshit like this to appeal to horny losers.
Yeah... and I am sure Leia in the bikini in the third movie was totally justified and necessary, yes?

my point stands, all the more for your attempts to complain about it. Even in star wars there was fan service for the sake of it. Also, your distaste for the fan service and sexy characters is leaking through here and poisoning your argument. Calling people who may have reacted well to it "adolescent" does little to make your argument sound like anything but you whining about how games don't cater to your personal tastes and instead cater to a generalized idea of the paying collective beforehand.

Dragonbums said:
And this is why if gaming continues as is, it's going to find itself in a downward spiral fast. They want to appeal to what they perceive as the largest common denominator. Yet all the games that do that well already exist.
Dark Souls wants to make their next game more like Skyrim. Why?
Nobody played Dark Souls for Skyrim. They played it for Dark Souls. If I wanted to play a Skyrim game, then I will go to Bethesda to get my Skyrim fix. I was looking for something different in Dark Souls and that is what I got.
Because, and I feel I am repeating myself here, It. Made. Money.
No.. .that isn't quite fair, NAMCO BANDAI made a great game and the team seems to know what made it great judging from all I saw of the sequel.
Still, Dark Souls was a huge success, but it didn't make Skyrim bank. Skyrim was terrible in combat, and buggy and clunky, but it made boats of money. Dark souls developers obviously want a piece of that. Add to it that a larger world and gameplay like Skyrim seems the natural progression for a game like dark souls in terms of growing as a game. So long as they do not forget what made them successful in the first place, I welcome it. Hell, if I could get skyrim with dark souls combat, I'd be a happy guy, and I know many others feel similar.

There are millions of better examples the Dark Souls, a series that seems to still have its soul. I can understand the frustration, both characters and designs, as well as business decisions in the industry. But this, here, does nothing. If every triple A company out there went belly up tomorrow, we would still have more games then hours in our lifetimes. The triple A industry is not needed, and the indie scene and other markets have been eating away at it for a while. There will always be demand for the blockbuster titles though, and because of that, all the pandering that goes along with them. Best we can do is vote with our wallets and let that speak of what we want as gamers.

Dragonbums said:
You are mixing up attractiveness with sexual appeal. Attractiveness is someone or something that appealing to the eyes. That does not have to be sexual in the slightest
A huh. I suppose that mentioning that not all female characters are sexualized will be a waste of type? Because for all you complain about it as a universal problem, not many actively sexualize female characters any more then males. Oh, you have fan service, to be sure, but I can point to DMC or countless bishounen inspired characters who get the same treatment. No, not as many, because as we already established, that demographic is smaller and not targeted as much. But in terms of quality, well, we do have the likes of this after all.
http://kotaku.com/5533232/romance-games-chesty-men-for-the-ladies

Also worth noting that titillation as pandering to males is done to appeal to a general stereotype about them. It is called lowest common denominator after all. But for women, the pandering is to a different stereotype. While you do have the over the top sexual fanservice with the pretty boy or the brutal badass, you also have, if you will excuse the term, "female" fan service that use character types and tropes equally as shallow, though on a mental level instead of a physical one. These same traits and tropes are what makes fiction like Twilight so popular.
So, lets tally up here.
In the quantity category, while we do have much more pandering to males, we have funding and demand determining what shows up more often.
In the quality category, we have equal levels of open pandering.

and the final result is that we have the expected amounts of pandering to both genders based on the amount of demand for such games in the first place.

Dragonbums said:
But there is a high demand for it. That's why more of these topics keep cropping up. That's why more of these questions keep getting brought up.
Because there is a growing demand to stop these things and actually do something more creative with their money.

Nothing is stopping a big name studio from making a smaller, niche title, and appealing to that market. Nothing. They just don't WANT to.

The fact that all of these Kicstarters with independent games and a ton of variety are getting successfully funded proves that the AAA business is wasting away an opportunity that is right in their face to gain a lot of money. Having more choice makes everything better in the long run.

However if the game's industry wants to go on it's suicide run to ruination, then they can be my guest.
What is stopping them, as I tried explaining before, is the conservative business practices and a lack of demand. Demand, mind you, is figured out by what sells now, not what people say they might support. And, so you know, they DO try to make smaller, nitch titles and they bomb. Hard. Remember Me is a great example. Hell, one of my favorite games of all time, Beyond Good and Evil, is regarded as a failure because of poor sales. That is the problem here, for all the people saying they want such projects, they are never supported and to a business, all the good intention in the world does not mean shit if the end result is lost money.

Now, kickstarters are great ideas and are a way to break the hold the industry has on gaming, as well as a means to show demand with actual money backing. Kickstarters are a great thing I think, and will probably be what we use should the industry wither away and die. Though, as said before, I doubt it. There will always be demand for the blockbuster, and developers have gotten into the habit of making nothing but them. I can't blame them for that, it makes money and it is decent enough. But it isn't progressive by any means, though who goes to a popcorn flick and expects that in the first place? You want depth and character, you go smaller, either company branches designed to do that specifically or indie stuff that loves it.

Dragonbums said:
Once again, you are mixing up attractiveness and sexiness. They are not synonymous with each other.

A lot of people found FemShep attractive. This is despite the fact that she wears a full set of armor like her male counterpart.

I didn't say ugly people should rule the industry.
No, in this regard, I mean what I said. Or was Megan Fox's role in the transformer movies suppose to be more then eyecandy? Or the bond girls? Or the usual romantic interest in action films?
I keep comparing the games you complain about with Hollywood blockbusters for a reason. The same sort of sexualization you complain about in games is far worse there. A close up of Miranda's ass in clothing in a game would have been a back shot of her naked ass under some feeble excuse to see skin in a movie. This ties back into what I was saying before about it being a cultural thing, not gaming, and that gaming merely meets the demand, not forces it and how it is popular even if not your taste.

Dragonbums said:
And that money will either be staying the same or ever decreasing. There is only so much money you can make pandering to the same bottom of the barrels. Eventually they are going to have to do something fresh, and titillation is a well run dry for them.
Idiots following idiots doesn't always mean something works for them. It just means they are both taking the same path off the cliff.
I agree. But then, I was never disagreeing that the current policy or direction was the best course, merely that complaining about it in gaming specifically was not. And making it sound more like a moral crusade like many around here do only makes it even worse when it comes to trying to address it.

At no point should the discussion been how it is bad or wrong for companies to be using titillation, because that is so engrained into our culture and media that complaining about it in gaming comes off as hypocritically attacking the hobby rather then the source of the issue. Instead, the conversation should have started with and firmly remained about how people wanted more variety. Don't make it about gender, don't make it about politics, don't make it about venting complaints about the ones not doing it right, make it about what you want to see in regards to your next purchase and why they are getting your money because they did something right.
When you complain about the ones doing it wrong, you are dismissed as part of the sea of general internet hate. Worse, you are often ignored because of the assumption that "well, they weren't going to buy it anyways, if all out past history hasn't shown wrong". I keep repeating myself here, but honestly, it is the only way to make people listen. Support things that you like. You will never get the perfect game, but you can support ones that get closer. Gaming is the way it is now, with the biggest titles like movie blockbusters, because of the decades of financial support and response. It was the support that allowed the games to get bigger and more expensive. And while they may often be blowing that expense, the industry is still trying to chase that final dollar as best they can. Titles like Beyond Good and Evil died because people did not support it. And like an animal removed from the herd, it can't affect the next generation of gaming and help it evolve when since it was removed.

It is annoying and frustrating. It may even feel unfair. But it is what it is and the only way it will change is if people invest into it enough to make it profitable to do what you want.
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
BigTuk said:
Rebel_Raven said:
Like Desert Punk says people will complain about the lack of female protagonists. You can't make a problem worse to fix it.

The real answer is to stop putting every last woman in scantily clad outfits... just some of them. Create as much variety/clothing options as possible, and give people something to be happy about so they're less likely to point at what makes them unhappy.

Expanding on it, it'd help if they weren't restructed to supermodel figures. Some? sure. All? no.
It depends on what the problem is. The way I see it, the problem is people jumping on their soap boxes to argue a point that they believe no one can disagree with them on. It's the same trick anti-abortionists use. If you disagree with me you're a baby-hating baby-murderer' In this case 'If you disagree with me you're a misogynistic pig man'. Which I am really tired of.

And heaven forbid a female protagonist that's expected to jump, fight, swim run and climb should have a pleasantly well toned athletic figure. These women don't have supermodel builds (you can't see their ribs).

And maybe just maybe the women with pleasantly toned athletic builds with pert breasts who like flashy and sexy attire actually like seeing themselves represented in games hmmm and kicking ass no less.

The actual quirk was mentioned in an Extra Credits strip. Is it really fair to complain about the portrayal of women in a game that is primarily marketed towards young men? After all the games that are actually marketed towards women are just fine and there are quite a few of those... heck most of the games put out by popcap and other casual game devs are marketed towards women, not to mention the hidden object games which in the less casual circles are not unlike the point and click adventure games just with less obtuse puzzles. These games feature many well written female protagonists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV8AM1ciS4I

The argument may be more 'why you can't get a good salad at a steak and ribs joint'. Is it wrong for men to like female protagonists that are pleasant to look at? I mean if you're going to be staring at someone and following their movements for hours on end... they might as well be easy on the eyes eh?
I can see people having a problem with the soap boxing, but there's the thing where some people disagree with the soapboxing, but don't bother to agree there's a problem at all. Throwing the baby out with the bath water, so to speak.

I'd like to think I'm not one of those people that don't believe I can be argued with because I kinda relish people arguing with me. Sooner or later they might offer a believeable point that changes my point of view. :p
Honestly, I'm not pushing for cencorship. I'm not trying to take the sexy away. I just wanna see more female characters out there to play as, in diverse portrayals. It's really that simple. That said, the people disagreeing with me kinda come off as "No, the industry shouldn't cater to women like that!" I have to scratch my head, and wonder why that's bad.
People say it's to stop the moral crusade, but you can't really stop it, IMO. I'm not saying give in completely, but we gotta compromise somewhere, I think.

I'd say, yeah, it's fair to complain about games marketed towards young men because there's a severe lack of games that aren't in the same areas.
The real problem as I see it is that mainstream gaming, especially on consoles, just don't have enough women, especially as playable characters, to have a healthy variety of figures, personalities, and so forth. Even if we did have enough women, would the industry stop, and think to create the diversity of appearances?
I'd like to think they would if the meddeling from others would loosen it's grip on the industry.

You basically nailed a problem I have. Pretty much every non-browser based/casual game is marketed towards young men. A lot of women play browser based games which a lot of "real gamers" look down upon because the browser based games are "casual." And then the word "casual" gets used against the quest for better female representation because all they do is play "casual games."
With a lack of "real games" as deemed so by "real gamers" welcoming women, it's no surprise that the more casual games that market more to everyone are played more by women. People go where they feel wanted.
While the game types you mention do offer something to women, what if those games aren't a person's cup of tea? I mean, I don't really dig simple temple runs, or puzzle games with "buy tips!" or "pay to lower time sinks!" tactics involved. I certainly don't want to play games that encourage you to recruit other people as it cheapens meeting people, and you just end up with a long list of names that you have no conversations with. Kinda irritated at all the incompatibiliyt issues with IOS games, too.
In the end, are we going to condemn people who want decently written female characters that dress in a less than sexualized manner to only playing light, casual games?
Should that really be the salvo that ends the pursuit of better representation for women?
I mean could you really only play one, or two genres of games for decades? If you're anything like me the answer is a resounding "hell no" as many experiences are craved out of gaming.

It's not wrong for men or women to want protagonists that are pleasant to look at at all. I know I don't mind it every now and then. Heck, I'm unashamedly playing Senran Kagura (Available in Nintendo E-ship for 30 dollars!) which is a DS game that rivals Dead or Alive as it has an all female cast of school girls with large bouncy boobs of the sort that warped my concept of "big" in terms of bra sizes. Mind you, the appearances of the girls wasn't the prime drive to pick up the game, rather having a large cast of women with many points of views was. Surprsingly, and supifyingly, the game seems to be made with a surprising amount of heart compared to most games, too. The characters have stories, the music gallery has small notes of what the song is supposed to mean. They know it's shameless sexualization, yet it's not blindly that. Heck, 2 girls in the game wear eye-patches hinting at more physical imperfections than I've seen in a long time in women's character designs.

I'm not trying to stop sexualization entirely, however there's a lot more ways to achieve attractiveness than giant wobbley boobs, a wobbley ass, and clothing that barely meets the criteria of bikini, or even basing a character off a model, or super model. The real problem arises when that's about all there is to pick from.
It's frustrating at times to see Links, Marios, Warios, Dantes, Kratos types, and basically men running the gamut of appearances in mainstream games, yet women are hard pressed to escape model, supermodel, or really aimed at guys.
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
BigTuk said:
Rebel_Raven said:
It's frustrating at times to see Links, Marios, Warios, Dantes, Kratos types, and basically men running the gamut of appearances in mainstream games, yet women are hard pressed to escape model, supermodel, or really aimed at guys.
Simple solution... let those that have a problem with the lack of games that suit their tastes, make a game that suit their tastes and bring it to the market. Since there is obviously an underserved niche market. That's how new markets and genre's are created. rather than complain, learn some coding, learn some game design and make a change. If you do well people will take notice, and if you're profitable then you can bet the other publishers will jump that band wagon at speeds that'd make marty mcfly dizzy.

That's how you make a change, not buy pointing at what someone else has done and saying 'You're doing it wrong! shame on you! and Shame on you for liking what he did!" which is pretty much the direction these discussions always take. If you're gonna complain about something the industry is doing wrong you should post a link to your kickstarter or sourceforge game project that rectifies the problem.
For a person like me, and no doubt for many, that's the most useless suggestion ever. No offense intended, of course.
Here's why.

1: I don't have the time for it.
2: I don't have the vision for it.
3: I don't have the money. Kickstarte won't help as I have no vision.
4: It's not simple to learn coding, and create yor own game. Not by a long shot.
5: Playing the game you created is messed up. You already know it inside, and out, and by the time you finish making it, you'll probably be sick of it as creating it becomes work.
6: It takes years to create a game.
7: It sure as hell won't compete with non indie games.
I'll stop there, and I hope I made my point.

Honestly, though. Making that suggestion without knowign anything about who you're suggesting it to is pretty messed up. It's practically insulting.

No single indie game will change the face of non-indie gaming. If it does it deserves all the awards. Not even Minecraft made the main game industry give enough of a damn to try and make an AAA minecraft. All it did was spawn indie imitators. And that's considering all the money it makes.

Payday 2 was massively successful for an indie game. Think the rest of the industry really gave a damn? Nope.

A series of games will take forever to make to hope to make a dent in anything. Especially vs the notion that women hurt game sales somehow.

I'm really hard pressed to imagine an indie game ever making enough money to grab the attention of the game industry that chases GTA, CoD, and MW, one of which made over a BILLION dollars, and no doubt the rest are gunna come close.
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
BigTuk said:
If you don't have the time, or vision to fix a problem yourself, well you have little right to complain when know one else does. Sorry that's just my way of thinking. If know one opens a door for you, open it yourself, if there is no door to open, grab a hammer and make one.

ANd you're right, making a game is hard but it is very rewarding and the point of going for a niche market is not to out sell the big boys it's to tap a market that they aren't I mean look at games like Paper's Please, Minecraft; these are games that have done fairly well and have managed to touch an interesting niche market. Remember at one point video games on a whole were considered a small niche market... now look at it. MMO's were considered a new niche market.


The point is, what have you done to help those that are actively trying to fix the problem with meaningful action, have you checked the indie dev forums or kickstarter to find anyone that's trying to get a project like that off the ground? You know so maybe when threads like this pop up you post a link to them so other people can check it out and maybe give them a hand or at least let other people know they exist?

Or is that too much hard work?

COmplaining's the easiest thing in the world, a close second is finding fault in the works of others. Getting off our ass and actually doing something...that's the difference between a fellow with a million dollar idea andf a fellow with a million dollars.
Well, I'll take what "little right" you deem I have to complain that the professionals with better resources are being held back from their vision with meddeling.
You don't have to like it. We're just not gunna agree on this matter it seems.

If I was going to make a game it wouldn't be frikking niche if I could help it, it'd be there to prove women don't kill a game's sales.

I offer my support when I can to help.

Lemme ask you the same question. What have -you- done?

Complaining is about all some people can do, not for being lazy, or anything, but because they have limits of ability and/or resources and/or knowledge.
A great idea in a crap game, nevermind a game that isn't created to potential is a wasted idea. And that's if they even have a good idea to begin with. You can't just pop out a game and fix everything.
And pretending ONE game will satisfy a person is ludicrious. So what ever you think it takes to make a game, multiply it.
 

zehydra

New member
Oct 25, 2009
5,033
0
0
Maybe I'm not playing the right games but I don't typically see that many scantily clad females in the games I play. I see a couple posts on here claiming that "scantily clad" is the norm for female characters in video games (why it is a problem), and I just don't think that's the case.

It definitely seems to be more prevalent in fantasy (and sci-fi to some extent) for some reason.
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
zehydra said:
Maybe I'm not playing the right games but I don't typically see that many scantily clad females in the games I play. I see a couple posts on here claiming that "scantily clad" is the norm for female characters in video games (why it is a problem), and I just don't think that's the case.

It definitely seems to be more prevalent in fantasy (and sci-fi to some extent) for some reason.
Well, lemme ask, what games do you play? I mean I have no idea if it's the games you play or not.

It's a problem because it's seen as the norm, and people don't want it to stay that way. I don't think anyone wants scantily clad completely gone, rather just not so common.
 

zehydra

New member
Oct 25, 2009
5,033
0
0
Rebel_Raven said:
zehydra said:
Maybe I'm not playing the right games but I don't typically see that many scantily clad females in the games I play. I see a couple posts on here claiming that "scantily clad" is the norm for female characters in video games (why it is a problem), and I just don't think that's the case.

It definitely seems to be more prevalent in fantasy (and sci-fi to some extent) for some reason.
Well, lemme ask, what games do you play? I mean I have no idea if it's just you or not.

It's a problem because it's seen as the norm, and people don't want it to stay that way. I don't think anyone wants scantily clad completely gone, rather just not so common.
Don't Starve
Terraria
Minecraft (doesn't really count)
Civilization V
Left 4 Dead
TF2 (has no female characters)
Skyrim (it has one or two scantily clad barbarian-ish armors)
Golden Sun
FFTA
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
zehydra said:
Rebel_Raven said:
zehydra said:
Maybe I'm not playing the right games but I don't typically see that many scantily clad females in the games I play. I see a couple posts on here claiming that "scantily clad" is the norm for female characters in video games (why it is a problem), and I just don't think that's the case.

It definitely seems to be more prevalent in fantasy (and sci-fi to some extent) for some reason.
Well, lemme ask, what games do you play? I mean I have no idea if it's just you or not.

It's a problem because it's seen as the norm, and people don't want it to stay that way. I don't think anyone wants scantily clad completely gone, rather just not so common.
Don't Starve
Terraria
Minecraft (doesn't really count)
Civilization V
Left 4 Dead
TF2 (has no female characters)
Skyrim (it has one or two scantily clad barbarian-ish armors)
Golden Sun
FFTA
Basically, yeah, not the right games. :p Fair enough.

I thought "Don't Starve" was a game revolving exclusively around a guy with no other characters short of those trying to kill you? Am I mistaken, which is why it counts? I mean it didn't look graphically stunning either.
 

zehydra

New member
Oct 25, 2009
5,033
0
0
Rebel_Raven said:
zehydra said:
Rebel_Raven said:
zehydra said:
Maybe I'm not playing the right games but I don't typically see that many scantily clad females in the games I play. I see a couple posts on here claiming that "scantily clad" is the norm for female characters in video games (why it is a problem), and I just don't think that's the case.

It definitely seems to be more prevalent in fantasy (and sci-fi to some extent) for some reason.
Well, lemme ask, what games do you play? I mean I have no idea if it's just you or not.

It's a problem because it's seen as the norm, and people don't want it to stay that way. I don't think anyone wants scantily clad completely gone, rather just not so common.
Don't Starve
Terraria
Minecraft (doesn't really count)
Civilization V
Left 4 Dead
TF2 (has no female characters)
Skyrim (it has one or two scantily clad barbarian-ish armors)
Golden Sun
FFTA
Basically, yeah, not the right games. :p Fair enough.

I thought "Don't Starve" was a game revolving exclusively around a guy with no other characters short of those trying to kill you? Am I mistaken, which is why it counts? I mean it didn't look graphically stunning either.
Don't Starve is a fantastic little game. There are three female playable characters.
 

Bocaj2000

New member
Sep 10, 2008
1,082
0
0
Desert Punk said:
What the person makes as a professional is up to their bosses. Doing what they are told is the mark of a professional, I have been in jobs before were I was given a vague set of instructions and told to use my own initiative.

In this case yes "looks cool" is very important in game development, things that look cool and interesting are important in a visual medium. Are you really thinking that you cant be given the atmosphere, theme and tone of a game and told to make something cool within those perimeters? Do you think they have to have their hand held through every step of the process? If so you must be dealing with some pretty shitty professionals if they cant be trusted to work within some guidelines but complete an objective.

That link you gave is interesting, but all of those things do not negate designing something that looks cool. The setting, tone, and mood all give background that can inform as to what would "look cool" within context. Why do you seem to think that something "looking cool" has to be devoid of meaning?

Edit; Sorry if that comes across as a bit confrontational, I just still dont understand the thought process.
You're absolutely correct, and I never stated otherwise. But I think you misunderstand me. This might help:

Aesthetic is a means to an end, not the end itself.

In this case, creating a cool looking character is used to support a specific atmosphere, but creating it for its own sake is inane.

Does that help you understand my point?
 

Rebel_Raven

New member
Jul 24, 2011
1,606
0
0
BigTuk said:
Rebel_Raven said:
BigTuk said:
If you don't have the time, or vision to fix a problem yourself, well you have little right to complain when know one else does. Sorry that's just my way of thinking. If know one opens a door for you, open it yourself, if there is no door to open, grab a hammer and make one.

ANd you're right, making a game is hard but it is very rewarding and the point of going for a niche market is not to out sell the big boys it's to tap a market that they aren't I mean look at games like Paper's Please, Minecraft; these are games that have done fairly well and have managed to touch an interesting niche market. Remember at one point video games on a whole were considered a small niche market... now look at it. MMO's were considered a new niche market.


The point is, what have you done to help those that are actively trying to fix the problem with meaningful action, have you checked the indie dev forums or kickstarter to find anyone that's trying to get a project like that off the ground? You know so maybe when threads like this pop up you post a link to them so other people can check it out and maybe give them a hand or at least let other people know they exist?

Or is that too much hard work?

COmplaining's the easiest thing in the world, a close second is finding fault in the works of others. Getting off our ass and actually doing something...that's the difference between a fellow with a million dollar idea andf a fellow with a million dollars.
Well, I'll take what "little right" you deem I have to complain that the professionals with better resources are being held back from their vision with meddeling.
You don't have to like it. We're just not gunna agree on this matter it seems.

If I was going to make a game it wouldn't be frikking niche if I could help it, it'd be there to prove women don't kill a game's sales.
And thusly you show yourself to have know real knowledge about how markets work. I'd correct that if I were you. Otherwise people might call you ignorant.

All new things start out niche, or at the very least 90%. You can't make a product that will appeal to everyone uniformly, that is iompossible, people are all different, they come from different cultures, different backgrounds and different predjudices. Even the standard of beauty isn't universal.

Sure there are professionals with better resources and training, but being professionals they make what people pay them to make. You know, because it's like their job. Maybe if you could gather up I dunno 200,000 other people and each of you chip in a dollar a piece you could maybe pay a professional to make the game you all want.And heck if y'all gave five dollars a piece that'd go a long way. Granted you'd all have to have five less meals from the dollar menu at mcdonald's for a month but hey, it's for a good cause right?

I offer my support when I can to help.

Lemme ask you the same question. What have -you- done?

Complaining is about all some people can do, not for being lazy, or anything, but because they have limits of ability and/or resources and/or knowledge.
A great idea in a crap game, nevermind a game that isn't created to potential is a wasted idea. And that's if they even have a good idea to begin with. You can't just pop out a game and fix everything.
And pretending ONE game will satisfy a person is ludicrious. So what ever you think it takes to make a game, multiply it.
What have I done? I've actually been learning 3D Modelling and coding. i've been sketching and resketching level design ideas. Sure it's meant a few stressed weekends and nights of 2 hours sleep but hey, sacrifices must be made.

Limits in ability and knowledge are easy to fix if one actually bothers to make a few sacrifices. and no One game won't fill the market, but it's a start... and it's something. Heaven knows empty words with no actions behind them aren't going to do squat. You pop out a game, see how it does, take the feedback then go back and make a better game. And the cycle iterates each iteration yielding a better product.

In case you haven't figured. My point is this. Rather than complain, contribute. Nothing is easy and if you want something done well you will have to actually make some sacrifice, give something of yourself. Or you can wait around, flapping your gums until someone decides to do the work for you. That's what we call 'being entitled'.
New things? What new things? Female protagnists aren't "new" here, nor are most game genres these days for that matter.
Niche can kill a game easier than it makes one these days.

200,000 dollars to make a game? I mean a -real- game to compete with the rest of the industry to show that women won't sink a game? That's highly optimistic. maybe if you add three more zeroes maybe? Oh sure, games can be made on less, but I'll be surprised that such a game actually makes an impact in the gaming industry as a whole.
5x that won't likely make a game that'll shake the industry.
And getting 200,000 people to agree on the same game? Wow, that's ... absurdly optimistic. You must think I'm some kinda cult leader to have that kind of intelligence, and charisma.
I think you overestimate Kickstarter a lot, frankly.

So you've been learning, but haven't applied any of it to a game? You don't have a game out, or an actual job in the industry? Well, good luck making a game, and get some more sleep. Good luck in the industry, too. I don't think you understand it as well as you think if you think it's just that simple.
You really need more sleep based on the surly vibe you're giving off.

... Wait a tick! Take feedback? Unless that feedback is from people making their own games, why would you care? You just told me I have little right to give feedback (complaining is feedback, after all) for not building my own game. Who'd give feedback to someone just as likely to tell'em to sod off?

zehydra said:
Don't Starve is a fantastic little game. There are three female playable characters.
Huh, that's news to me. Thank you for the info!
 

Frankster

Space Ace
May 11, 2020
2,507
0
0
I really don't like how RPS turns on the drama here and find their manner toxic to the causes they are apparently supporting.

But that's online social activism for ya I guess...
 

Strazdas

Robots will replace your job
May 28, 2011
8,407
0
0
Wait, let me get this straight. Did escpaist jut dramatize it as always or did the PR actually stepped in and cut the guy off mid-sentence? I mean wow thats one way to overreact to soemthing like this. its not like he was actually saying anything sexist to begin with. In fact it looks like he was about to explain why he did what he did and they dont even let him do that.
 

Karnesdorff

New member
Nov 19, 2009
33
0
0
Tenmar said:
Sorry but when I played WOW during vanilla and TBC our main tanks were women in both avatar and in real life. Both of their armor sets when it came to raiding even in the start of end game content completely covered the characters head to toe.

Hell I went through most of the game before joining any guild looking like a hobo orc and human. Wasn't any sort of political speech in that, it was just the artistic choice of throwing random pieces of gear together.
So around the time you were playing this was the sort of stuff that people could use...

http://wowroleplaygear.com/2010/01/10/the-bloodfist-set/
http://wowroleplaygear.com/2012/01/28/tyrants-set/
http://wowroleplaygear.com/2010/01/13/the-lofty-set/

Note that this is supposed to be plate armour and the male versions of these are all enclosing(or at the very least cover 80% of the body) and yet on the females it's combat underwear. Apparently there are people at Blizzard that think that the US Army could save millions because in their mind a kevlar laced bikini top, underwear and chaps protect a woman just as much as full armour does a man!

Now I can already hear people saying but that's X level gear, now it's more enclosing! To which I say that's a bit better, but c'mon telling players 'Oh, in the mid levels you'll look like an extra from World of Whorecraft, but don't worry! Once you max out you'll get real person clothes again!' isn't exactly an inclusive message y'know.

I have to say I'm rather amused at the accusations of having never having played WoW from some too, apparently on the basis that 'No-one who has played WoW could criticise it!!!'. I have, I played it for a year or two a while back, but it simply didn't grab me much, once my friends who played it moved on, I had no issue cancelling the subscription.

K.