Couldn't agree with you more, see my above post for more detailsIhateregistering1 said:
.again, couldn't agree with you more.FogHornG36 said:
Getting More Women to Work in Games Is Easy
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
.From my own experiences, I have found more prejudice and discrimination from WOMEN about being a gamer then from men in the world around me. Yes the internet has a higher percentage of loud mouth jerks towards women but offline, it's women putting on the hate.
Men have never seemed to care that I am not expertly made up, other women did and in fact deliberately cause trouble at work for me about it. In fact it got so bad that even when the guys came in hung over and hadn't showered (and smelled it), I was still the one getting in troubled because I sweated a little but hadn't doused myself in some floral perfume. I even get flack over wearing non-floral perfumes (mostly because I hate floral scents).
Men don't care that my hobbies are things like D&D, video games, computer games MtG and the like, Women sneered at me about it and mocked me for it.
Men were fine with me talking with however about geeky things, women acted like I was trying to steal their men, or flirting or was going to sleep my way to the top.
Women were the ones spending (apparently) hours stewing over some tiny thing I said that they took offense to while men shrugged it off.
I'm sorry but while some women may not act like this, many many more do. Those women suck the life out of jobs and make it harder on any other women who don't want to fit the stereotypes of being pretty and not into technology.
Maybe women should spend less time yelling at men who really as a whole don't care if women are into gaming or not and want someone who can do the job without hand holding all the time, and more time yelling at women who want the special treatment and to shove geeky women back into female stereotypes.
Men have never seemed to care that I am not expertly made up, other women did and in fact deliberately cause trouble at work for me about it. In fact it got so bad that even when the guys came in hung over and hadn't showered (and smelled it), I was still the one getting in troubled because I sweated a little but hadn't doused myself in some floral perfume. I even get flack over wearing non-floral perfumes (mostly because I hate floral scents).
Men don't care that my hobbies are things like D&D, video games, computer games MtG and the like, Women sneered at me about it and mocked me for it.
Men were fine with me talking with however about geeky things, women acted like I was trying to steal their men, or flirting or was going to sleep my way to the top.
Women were the ones spending (apparently) hours stewing over some tiny thing I said that they took offense to while men shrugged it off.
I'm sorry but while some women may not act like this, many many more do. Those women suck the life out of jobs and make it harder on any other women who don't want to fit the stereotypes of being pretty and not into technology.
Maybe women should spend less time yelling at men who really as a whole don't care if women are into gaming or not and want someone who can do the job without hand holding all the time, and more time yelling at women who want the special treatment and to shove geeky women back into female stereotypes.
Credit where it's due: the implication you attribute isn't necessarily the case here. The only thing we can truly glean from it is that 55% of women in the industry at the very least believe that they didn't always want to. I would assume that at least some of them went through the same process as Sampat went through: Not knowing, then knowing, then vaguely wanting to, then really wanting to, then getting in, etc.ForumSafari said:
So, it's not really THAT bad. Although the fact we can glean so little about it kinda goes to show how useless the statistic is at proving anything other then itself.
That's a little simplistic.Ihateregistering1 said:
As a shareholder, there are degrees of "profit" that are better - if I have $100mil, I'd probably prefer $150mil back on a company I control 100% over $280mil back on a company I control 50%, as the first has a higher return on investment. On the other hand, I'd prefer $150mil back on a $100mil investment over $100mil back on a $60mil investment, as at the end of the day I'm $10million up on the first investment.
However, as an employee the profitability of the company takes a massive backseat to my happiness of working at the company - with the caveat that the company is some form of profitable, to ensure its medium-term survivability. I'd much rather be happy at a company that delivers 120% ROI than miserable at a company that delivers 150% ROI. I see this all the time at corporate recruitment sessions - companies pitch for new graduates as if they were potential clients instead of potential employees. I don't care how many business lines you offer, or the returns you deliver - I care about how much you pay me, and whether I will find the work rewarding.
There's a reason why "Best Companies To Work For" and "Best Companies For Diversity" lists exist.
Why not?Madmonk12345 said:
Home computing had only just come about, and introduced the general public to an amazing new set of possibilities./
Before the 80s programming was almost an unknown. A relatively new field with usually very low levels of exposure at lower levels of education.
As it has become more and more prevalent and its subject matter more and more exposed women have generally taken it up less and less.
As we all are aware programming and computer science degrees rely heavily on mathematics, another subject which has infamously low take-up rates with women. Why couldn't this be a natural progression?
Im a woman and I do stuff like 3d designs, textures and even a bit programming in my free time for fun. As I am member at the escapist its not hard to figure out that I am interessted in games and can also get quite passionate about what goes wrong with certain games, like new mmorpgs.
But I did never consider going into games industry seriously.
why would I bind myself financially to such a culture that gives even men so much hate at times, where sexism is still such a problem, where you would eventually have to deal with a vocal minority that is extremly disgusting. Why would I want to work at a place where I couldnt even point it out if I was treated unfairly based on being a woman and any complaints would be disregarded as me just wanting a special treatment because I am a woman?
I am not saying that it has to be like that, but there is a chance for all of those things and I want none of them, so I rather get a job where I know noone cares about my gender.
But I did never consider going into games industry seriously.
why would I bind myself financially to such a culture that gives even men so much hate at times, where sexism is still such a problem, where you would eventually have to deal with a vocal minority that is extremly disgusting. Why would I want to work at a place where I couldnt even point it out if I was treated unfairly based on being a woman and any complaints would be disregarded as me just wanting a special treatment because I am a woman?
I am not saying that it has to be like that, but there is a chance for all of those things and I want none of them, so I rather get a job where I know noone cares about my gender.
What about racial equality? Why aren't we getting more pakistanis in gaming or Cambodians? Are game devs afriad of hiring West Asians?
What about sexuality equality? Why aren't there an equal number of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trans people as there are straight people? Why does the games industry HATE gay people?
Why are there so few men taking the interior design majors? Why are women in these businesses actively keeping straight men out of interior design?
Isn't it clear that if there's anything less than 50/50, it's automatically about hate and bigotry?
What about sexuality equality? Why aren't there an equal number of gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trans people as there are straight people? Why does the games industry HATE gay people?
Why are there so few men taking the interior design majors? Why are women in these businesses actively keeping straight men out of interior design?
Isn't it clear that if there's anything less than 50/50, it's automatically about hate and bigotry?
No. Only if its a majority men and a minority women. Oh and the job has to be desirable and not something like construction. Men can keep those dirty jobs. Oh and the men who do work in that field need to be retrained and remodeled lest they offend some poor vulnerable woman while on the job. Things need to change so that women feel more comfortable in a space that people were already comfortable in. Job also needs to pay lots of money. Its probably not sexism if your only making minimum wage.Nurb said:
By profit growth, I meant growth as a percentage, not necessarily raw numbers.Korskarn said:
And you are correct, of course you want to be a good place to work for and pay your employees a competitive wage, as you want to avoid turnover and not be known as an awful place to work for, but for whatever reason, a great deal of the social justice warriors out there seem to equate that having a 50/50 male female ratio, or having lots and lots of "diversity" (I hate that word) automatically makes a place better to work for and means they crank out a better product, when there's scant evidence of this being true.
Thanks for pointing this out. I've always found it funny that people complain about how there aren't enough female game developers, female engineers, female congress members, etc. but I've yet to hear anyone complain that men make up 90+ percent of all sanitation workers, construction workers, coal miners, oil field workers, and other 'dirty jobs'.Robert Marrs said:
I didn't know that! Thanks for the information.Madmonk12345 said:
I don't think it changes my question, though.
As far as I can see, it's still a question of whether women (in general) today are welcome in the industry, or that they are not interested in pursuing a career in it. Knocking down barriers to women is important, unless we're ramming a bulldozer through a wall that is not there.
1. The low intakes of women into mathematics careers isn't based on their gender. Statistics found few if any gender differences in mathematical skill back in 1990. It's a self perpetrating myth.MaximumTheHormone said:
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/bul/107/2/139/
2. Even if women being worse at math was relevant, social skills, where women supposedly thrive, are infinitely more important than the mathematics in the real world beyond how these classes work. Programmers in the real world must be able to work on teams effectively, and social skills are a must.
Just because women as a whole have equal skill in math to men doesn't mean that women have equal desire to study mathematics. Not only is mathematics considered to be a pretty dry subject by the majority of women, as LadyTL stated above women are much more likely to be looked down upon by their female piers in the cases where they do have an interest. That may not seem like a very important point from a male perspective, but women in general are far more sensitive to social pressures.Madmonk12345 said:
And while being able to socialize well is a useful tertiary skill in a programming/game-development environment, the core skills for the job are mathematics, computing and programming languages; there is no getting around that.
1. There isn't much difference in performance in primary school as this study points out (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11542-eng.htm):Madmonk12345 said:
"The study showed that 9-year-old girls and boys were no different in terms of success in mathematics in Grades 3 or 4."
but once they enter secondary school noticable discrepancies emerge.
By 15 this study found that women's scores would always topple men's scores in reading, but men's scores would topple women's in maths (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11542/tbl/tbl003-eng.htm)
In the 2007s SATs
"the girls? average score on the math portion of the SAT was 499 points, compared with 533 for boys, out of a possible 800 (College Board 2007)."
(http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/women_and_math_the_gender_gap_bridged/)
The Gap between men and women's performance in the maths has never come within 20 points since recording began in 1971
(http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/09/2012-sat-test-results-a-huge-gender-math-gap-persists-with-a-33-point-advantage-for-high-school-boys/sat1-4/)
Women have proven stronger (on the whole) in reading than in maths, and this shows true even in countries where women's scores have beaten mens.
http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/images/uploads/sapienza2008_fig1.gif
eg. IN iceland where womens scores in Maths have (on average) exceeded men's by 10, their performance in English has beaten mens by an average of 60. Not suggesting equality in ability, but rather a slanted education system.
Women's dominance in Reading and Men's Dominance in mathematics is reflected in the uptake of bachelors degrees by each gender. (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/89-503-x/2010001/article/11542/tbl/tbl009-eng.htm)
2. While games design and programming relies on teamwork to some degree, the essential skills of these fields are maths and programming languages.
Games can be made without other people, but they can't be made without a knowledge of programming languages and a decent handle of maths.
Thank you for this. While I have always been more interested in writing, I've also come across this sort of sexist attitude just in general. No, it's not terribly rampant or horrible, but sometimes there's this sense when you go into an all-male group that you're there for something other than what you're supposed to be working on. In video games or even text based games -- I've had it happen several times where after getting to know people you share pictures (with men and women both). A little over half the time guys will be surprised to find that I'm not conventionally ugly -- what a shocker to be a societal norm! -- with the sort of implication that only ugly or undesirable women would be interested in those sorts of genres/fields or show some form of skill in that area (which then usually translates into negative behavior towards women who are considered undesirable).IndomitableSam said:
Then there's this transformation that can occur when guys find out you're not a guy. I mean, it's like I just want to be taken at face value, so I tend to act gender neutral online or even masculine (it's always assumed the person behind the keyboard is male, which you know, whatever, I do that too) -- and sometimes it feels like I get taken less seriously or start to get harassed if the topic comes up (normally I sort of non answer, but I'm not going to lie if directly asked or whatever). Like, my skills were not in question before, but now they are? Same thing with interests. I play as much if not more videogames than my boyfriend and male friends, I know as much if not more about computers than they do, yet always always when the male friends have girlfriends somehow I'm expected to fall back into the bland hostess role and keep their non-nerd girlfriends entertained while they go off and do things I've expressed considerable interest in and that they know I'm interested in. It's one thing if I agree to do non-nerd stuff ahead of time, but when it's just assumed . . . I hate that. And yet it's always just assumed that I'd prefer to go do "girly" things (sewing, baking, talking about stupid boring shit) -- despite the fact that when I have the option I usually go for the nerdy stuff. (which has resulted in a few heated discussions, the sad thing is that they don't even think they're doing it, despite such happy phrases as "oh, well, Kat can go keep randomgirlfriend company while we watch this" -- it's not meant in a negative way, but it doesn't feel good at all)
It's that sort of default attitude that is the problem.
Not every situation is like that, and you can say that those things are different in the professional environment, but people are people. The little prejudices and biases that people show in their fun time will still carry through to when they hit the work place. I know a terrifyingly capable woman who is about to get her degree in engineering who is blunt and honest without descending into rudeness (and that is an important distinction, because being rude is being rude and should not be tolerated in anyone) who constantly faces off with men (her peers in the field) who claim to want a straight-talking and capable woman -- but when confronted with her they become offended or dismissive. Put them in the same situation with a man who has a similar sort of personality and the reaction is totally different. It's not a good feeling to face up against that. What's worse is that women sometimes do the same thing to each other (I am twenty-six years old and sometimes my decades older female coworker still calls me 'little girl').
So while yeah, maybe women are not now as interested as their male counterparts, there's still that feeling of 'do I want to be in that environment?' 'Do I want to go through with that struggle?' My guy friends make fun of feminism and that sort of attitude of 'all feminism is unreasonable' -- and it makes me so sad. I don't want special treatment. I just want to be treated the same way that I am when people think I'm a guy online. I don't want to be flirted with, condescended towards, or thought of as less capable just because I'm a woman. I don't like feeling like it's easier just to let people assume I'm a guy.
**Yes, I know not all men act that way. I have met plenty awesome men who act professionally/reasonably. There's still too many who don't, though, and those are the ones that make me feel icky.**
So yeah, the article itself did seem a little aggrandizing and I think some parts could have been communicated better, but there is still sexism, and unless it's acknowledged it's not going to go away. Too though, I think when it is communicated it needs to be done in a way that doesn't make it seem like it's all men who act that way towards all women. There's a double standard that needs to be avoided here -- because no one wants to be made to feel like they're the bad guy if they're not.
(and yes, sometimes the reverse happens where women will be sexist towards men, and I find that just as repulsive)
This is wrong on so many levels... "As a black woman, I think we're starting to see the full extent of where fried chicken can go, and we're not going to see it develop to it's full extent while it's dominated by a largely homogenous group of people who all have similar ideas about how chicken should "cook"."TheMadDoctorsCat said:
Just because you change the color of their skin or gender swap them doesn't make your statement not sexist and racist.
Even if it wasn't it'd still be wrong, you don't even need to peruse more than a handful of game reviews to see "white male" gamers disliking "white male" games by "white male" game designers, or these same "white male" people disagreeing on whether these "white male" games are good or not.
And no, an ending disclaimer about how white males aren't ALL unoriginal hacks serving the hive mind doesn't make it better. See: "I'm not racist, but..."
Black women intervening to tell you that that sentence in and of itself not only is a really bad and racist analogy but completely misses the point of what the poster was saying in the first place.UberPubert said:
Fried Chicken is not on the same level as a cultural food, yet alone an artistic medium like video games where many views can be expressed depending on who or what team is making the game. Videogames is no different than movies, illustration, music, etc. It is a communicative medium that expresses the idea of the devs making it in visual form.
Therefore for a genre that relies on viewpoints and visualization in order to keep itself fresh having people other than white guys making videogames will benefit the whole medium as a whole. We have already seen the stagnation last gen. It has mainly been the same shit, and it will continue to be the same shit, and it will always be the same shit until more women, people of color, sexualities, and countries not only enter the videogames sphere but are also in charge of making games.
Yes, almost as if that was the point. By swapping just a few words - none of them adding or removing the subject race or gender from the statement - I was able to point out how ignorant and bigoted it was. Because it is, any statement that judges people based on those factors is.Dragonbums said:
Food is food, and food IS culture, what's this nonsense about writing fried chicken off?Dragonbums said:
You're basically just repeating what TMDC said so I'll more or less repeat what I said: Stop bein racist, sexist, and heterophobic(?). Implying that white guys all make the same kind of games or bring the same ideas to the table because of the color of their skin and their gender is not any less offensive when applied to any other combination of gender, race or sexuality. Stop doing it, because it's still wrong.Dragonbums said:
And I want to set time aside for this particular bit because there's something even worse than your blatant discrimination:
Sheer ignorance. It hasn't been the same shit anywhere except in the mainstream. The digitization of videogames and the low barrier for entry on the market has opened up an unfathomable plethora of options the likes of which no generation of gamers has ever seen before, and no generation after will experience such growth. We're on the cusp of a virtual renaissance as more becomes available for less and the word of mouth marketing through the likes of youtube lends otherwise small developers incredible success in spite of their lack of funding. Anyone can submit the next big thing to Steam or raise money for it on just an idea on kickstarter, anyone can make a fortune. Wringing your hands because no one of your preferred race or gender has does not make it "the same shit", and it doesn't mean the problem is with "white guys".Dragonbums said:
It wasn't bigoted or ignorant. For one by making that analogy you are implying that making videogames is a cultural thing that only white people do when it in fact is not.UberPubert said:
Someone saying we need more than just white people making videogames to expand the medium is not bigoted in the slightest.
Responding to said statement stating that including more people into the process of making videogames is the equivelant of telling 'X race how to make X food that is culturally relevant to them' is bigoted.
Once again, shitty analogy that didn't even really confront what the OP was saying.
I really don't feel like explaining this again after Escapist just had a thread in the off topic section where me and multiple black people have explained why we don't consider fried chicken a culture staple within our race. I guess I'll link that to you http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.845468-Why-are-African-Americans-ashamed-of-their-food-culture?page=1
Then honestly, I would like them to legitimately prove me wrong. Because they will retread the same ideas over and over and over because for the most part because they do not have the diverse range of people from different backgrounds, sexualities, emotional states, nationalities, etc.
David Cage for instance is universally hated here for his fucking games. Why? Because people think they are just novels with controls. Yet apparently places like Italy love the shit out of these games. And apparently the dude got knighted in France for it. Yet we still have Jim and thousands of other gamers pissing and booing.
Then we had Hepler. All the women fucking suggested was that the same way we can skip cutscenes, we should be allowed to skip irrelevant filler battles and allow those who are more interested in the story of the game get to the story. Especially for those with hand cognition disabilities or those who just suck at playing games. Got so bad that she got death threats about the beheading of her kids.
And let's even extend that to Bioware they implemented three modes story mode, regular mode, and action mode. You wanna know the one that got the most complaining? Story mode. Why? Because just like Cage's games it allowed people who cared more about the story (which was basically Mass Effect anyway) get through the story and none of the bullshit head shot battles. That's not even going into the near phobia backlash at the mere thought that you an choose to be gay in the fucking game- oh yeah, it was called "shoehorning"
And when studios do try to attempt those things? For every comment saying how awesome it would be you got 10 more pro capitalists defedning fat cats in making more stale games because they make money.
Only a few notable studios have actually done something to change the drinks a little bit.
And mainstream is just that. Mainstream. It is the public face of gaming for everyone outside or not that deep in the gaming community. Just like how the movie industry in the 1930's can claim that people of color CAN make movies pertaining to them. They will just be in either total obscurity or those who are looking for it will find it.
And yet people like Zoe, who made depression quest still get untold amounts of discrimination for the simple fact that she's a woman.
The dev of Flappy bird got so much hate for making a simple ass game and slapping it on the i store that he took the fucking game down to leave him alone.
Just because things are easier doesn't mean that the community around it is comfortable for people of different ethnicities and sexualities to work in.
But white guys are the ones predominately making games (and Japanese people.
And I already stated that opportunities mean fuck all if the environment is hostile against said group of people. Black people were granted the right to vote, and most of them didn't do it for the longest time anyway because doing so would get them lynched. Of course that's not nearly as extreme in the slightest in videogames, but the meaning is still there.
Not many people of different groups are going to be inclined to "get" those opportunities when the mental and social negativity far outweights any possible chance of success.
Of course these are the comments that are easy to say when 90% of all videogames cater to you in some way, shape, or form.
It's not better than "If you don't like X than do it yourself" it's a crappy excuse that does nothing but shutdown the argument because the poster refuses to legitimately look, address, and talk about the issue at hand.
But that's not what he said, I'm not sure how you can confuse "a largely homogenous group of people who all have similar ideas about how games should "work"" with "more than just white people". The statement that white people are a homogenous "group" who all think alike is racist.Dragonbums said:
I didn't actually say fried chicken is part of black culture, I said a black woman claiming that that the bounds of fried chicken could no longer be pushed by black women alone due to being a homogenous group of similar thinkers was racist. Black women can cook differently from one another, white guys can have different opinions on what constitutes a game. Easy.Dragonbums said:
I don't even see your point in that thread, I read it top to bottom before I even posted here and I still don't buy food is not part of a "culture", even if it's racist to presume fried chicken is a part of black culture, it's not barred from being so anymore than hot dogs and hamburgers are from being considered American.
This line of thinking is also incredibly discriminatory. The assumptions that people of different backgrounds, sexualities, emotional states (what does this even mean?!) or nationalities somehow have a more "diverse range" (again, what does this mean?) is making blanket statements about what you think this homogenous "white guy" experience is. There are more differences between people than the color of their skin and their gender, I don't see where you get off labeling and judging them on that premise alone.Dragonbums said:
Erm, "universally hated", "places like Italy love", "knighted in France". You realize Italy and France are predominantly Caucasian countries, right? As in, your "white guys"? I'm not sure what your point is, and I don't even agree. I'm not a fan of David Cage, I think Telltale does his job better as far as that sort of game goes but universal hate is ridiculous.Dragonbums said:
I really don't like what you're implying by this. Are you trying to tell me "white guys" are responsible Hepler's harassment? Even if you had demographic proof of the harassers saying that they were in fact white men it'd be extremely racist of you to claim they did it because they were white males.Dragonbums said:
What? Story mode is just easy mode. I can understand how the wording might set off incredibly knee-jerk people but the mode itself was nothing new, it was jut rebranded to appeal to broader audiences. There's been easy difficulty since Mass Effect one, and that game was super easy. The action mode was actually the greatest deviant, which made conversation replies automatic rather than manual as they'd been before.Dragonbums said:
And I can actually see the case for the inclusion of Cortes's (the shuttle pilot) romance being shoehorned in. He didn't feel like a very well fleshed out character - he didn't even exist until the third entry in the series, unlike all the other romance options... except for Traynor (the brand new lesbian option). So... Yeah, I can totally see why it seems like those two characters were tacked on at the last minute for broader appeal or publicity. I don't think it's wrong to have LGBQT characters in the game as romance options but I'd rather their characters be meaningful additions rather than new sex scenes.
Again I'm not sure what this had to do with white males, do you seriously think "pro-capitalism" is a shared trait among them? Are we just going to ignore all the critics here on this website and elsewhere in favor of sweeping labels and generalizations?Dragonbums said:
Better define "change", or at least the describe the norm. Are we talking about a certain type of genre or narrative or characters or what? If you want to argue against what we call genres today that's fine - there are still a few indy titles that come to mind - but I feel it's fair to let you know more than a few of them originated from Japan and it's not really fair to lay it at the feet of white guys.Dragonbums said:
So you'll have to actually look for quality rather than hope that the best of it will float to the surface? You've basically described every medium of art ever and defined how I experience my gaming hobby. Unless you're specifically referring to quality as being non-white-male-produced content. Again, racist.Dragonbums said:
It was not just because she was a woman, it was because she made a game dealing with real life issues and that set some people off, some people who very probably have their own issues to deal with and don't like the idea of anyone commodifying it. "Next up, Concentration Camp Tycoon: Auswitchz DLC"Dragonbums said:
I have no idea what the flappy bird controversy was, it still just looks like any other mobile app flash game, what does it have to do with white males? I don't even experience the mobile app market, no one I know does.
I don't understand, internet communities such as forums and message boards are relatively insulated from internet bile, if not at least policed, the only time anyone is vulnerable to an uncomfortable community is when it's no longer a community and instead public opinion. No one is comfortable with public opinion, most of it is garbage.
So? How does being in the majority make them a problem, and how does being in the majority mean they're all the same?Dragonbums said:
This is really silly. Lynching someone definitely stops them from doing that thing you don't want them to do, and probably serves as a warning to others like them to not try it themselves. Nasty internet comments - sorry, "mental and social negativity" - stops you from doing nothing. No one will physically stop people from making videogames based on gender, ethnicity, etc. in the first world, that's not a thing. Extremely negative public opinion can stop people from buying your game, but it can't stop you from making it, otherwise school shooting simulators wouldn't exist. If you're actually making a good game, and not a school shooting simulator, you might enjoy success.Dragonbums said:
Well I'd say at least 90% of all videogames try to cater to everyone in some way, either by being fun or interesting or having a nice aesthetic visual quality.Dragonbums said:
Unless you meant the racist thing. I think you meant the racist thing. I'll try to address that.
No. I do not fit into yours or any corporate definition of "white male demographic", most people I know don't, and I could not care less for what passes for it anymore than the presumption that black people fit into the "urban market".
I think that argument works but it's usually misworded, normally by people who don't understand it or opponents of proactivity, wanting things to be handed to them instead. So I'll re-clarify: I think if people of whatever race, religion creed or gender want to make videogames, they should do it, they should do it to their heart's content and never stop doing it, because I truly believe anyone can make a good game and in this day and age there's not much stopping them, and when the digital landscape is so covered in these great games there won't be any argument or issue to be had. We'll be playing video games.Dragonbums said: