Jimquisition: Creative Freedom, Strings Attached

[white_wolf]

Edit: What I'm saying is that if Half-Life 2 is played by someone identifying as female, Gordon Freeman is female in that case. If played by someone idenifying as male, Gordon is male.

As a female, I've got to say...not really. This isn't how it works at all. I don't know what it feels like to "be" a man, but I still felt like Gordon Freeman playing HL2 and I was perfectly fine with everyone else calling me a male, and with Alyx hitting on me every now and then. And when I was playing the Walking Dead I didn't feel like a female Lee, I felt like Lee. I made my decisions based on my perceptions of his character. I wanted him to fall in love with Carly, and I encouraged him to be fatherly to Clementine. As I saw his relationship with Clementine develop, it felt like a father-daughter relationship, not a mother-daughter. And I loved that--I just loved the honesty and tenderness there. It reminded me of my dad in many ways.

To say it's impossible for a player to play as the opposite gender without "imagining" they're the same gender is like saying a person can't watch a movie or read a book about a character of the opposite gender without mentally changing them to be the same. That just isn't how it works at all. Perhaps if the character is nameless and there's no narrative like Minecraft or something, but if the character has a name and if they're an active participant in the narrative then that defines them. All throughout Bioshock I was aware I was playing a man, and I felt no need to change that. I was too busy exploring the narrative and seeing where the characters and story were going to go. It's just the same as the way I got through Harry Potter just fine without turning him into Harriet Potter in my mind. It's the same principle, really.

Pretty much this, but as a fem gamer when I play a male lead if I'm asked like in ME to be him I assume the mantle of him. My father treated me more like a boy anyway so I'm pretty good at playing the, " If I was a guy" game. So I just do that. My male lead doesn't become a she because I'm playing as him I step into his shoes, his mind, and try to navigate the world as him when questioned by the npcs. If I'm however alone and just killing things, scavenging, or exploring I'm free to do as I please I don't however think I'm not him its just I'm fallowing him about while doing these things or a better way of putting it is during his free roam nonquestion sections if its a 3Dp he has a camera fallowing him either like a flying bug or its in his helmet (for fp types) and I see what he sees at no time does he become she. Other times when I'm about scavenging, exploring, killing I'm him completely I'll find myself going, " What's this?", " Can I make that leap?" there is no difference between he and I when I'm playing we sync up rather well because of who he is and his personality these heros are the type I prefer to play as.

There are however points of disassociation when Geralt is sleeping with Triss it's a check out moment and then its a movie but for the most part I'm usually engaged in what my male lead is doing even if he's fp. If my male hero is getting hit on by a woman I don't like personality wise I'll ignore her or look for the option to turn her down. But if she likes my male lead and I think she's a nice girl I'll be happy for my male lead and as the woman above said encourage him to be with her. I loved when Tali wanted Mshep and was super happy when he was able to return her advances for instance. When they would meet up or share a moment together I was happy for them and thought he was a lucky guy not me being a lucky girl it was his moment with her and he would be lucky because of it for himself.

When I'm a fem lead I find my thoughts are less constricted when I think of things it's like she's thinking these things I no longer have to play the " if I was a guy" mental game I can now just be in the world and experience it without an added layer.

However a male can play a fem lead in much the same way by playing the, " If I was a girl," game or just mentally accompanying her, rooting for her, wanting to help her succeed in her quest, or if he can actually place himself in her shoes. At no point would the fem lead become he, he would be aware of the fact its a she and he would either choose to fallow her or choose to mentally become her.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Honestly why does it matter to you? It's pretty obvious that these aren't blank slate characters so why be hung up about it?

Because I want to see more stories about women.

Note, in my post, I said "I'm sure someone there would have liked to write something like that" (paraphrased from memory) - the point of that was that I'd like to see what sort of story they'd have written about a female protagonist. It would have been interesting.

There aren't many actual "blank slate" characters these days anyway - if you have full voice-acting, even if you can select a voice, it isn't a blank slate anymore.

 

[Sheo_Dagana]

Yeah... the very instant you start questioning people about the things they do or say, they pull the 'right to free speech' card, and if you press any further than that, then it is YOU who is suddenly the person against free speech. It's an irritating argument and one I'm tired of seeing, specifically from certain web-comic artists who bully people into thinking their jokes are funny.

I especially liked this video because it was nicely balanced - you tackled this issue rather effectively despite your illness being at it's peak. Hopefully you'll be feeling better soon, as next week is likely to get crazy.

 

[MaximumTheHormone]

The reason why publishers/ developers are afraid/ aren't bothered to put female protags in their games:
They don't sell.
We can bandy around the bush about artistic integrity and freedom of speech all we like, but the real reason why there is such a slim selection is that when games have been offered with Female (non-overtly-sexualized, ie. not Lara Croft) protags they have seen pretty poor to mediocre sales.
Eg. Beyond good and Evil
Aliane Corre (From Ubisoft):
"The game play was there, the technical excellence was there but perhaps the target audience was not there,"
inb4 bad marketing
Ubisoft is a fairly large publisher, this wasn't just an indie sleeper title, this was a commercial retail product that was reviewed by all the major review sites. This was a worldwide released commercial title + it received critical acclaim and won the developers choice 'best game of 2004' (Therefore in its debut period it received PLENTY of exposure)
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_Good_%26_Evil_(video_game)
Eg. Mirrors edge
A highly exposed, multi-platform game in a market surrounded by sequels of old titles and the Nintendo Wii
Quote From the marketing director for DICE "I would look for world-wide sales of over 3 million, on three platforms," Frain tells Edge, adding, "as a conservative number. I think it has the potential to do a lot more than that."
http://www.edge-online.com/news/mirrors-edge-projects-3m-sales/
Despite a decently solid metacritic score (81%)and its release of 5 platforms (With mobile expansions)in June 2013 an EA executive revealed that the game had sold 'About 2.5 million units'
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror's_Edge
The problem isn't that gamers encourage the sale of gender exclusive games, its that games that reflect the egalitarian idealism that they desire are not selling to the degree that would encourage publishers to make more.

 

[Strazdas]

Why should a game be criticised or scrutinised simply because it doesn't have a female protagonist?

Why shouldn't it?

Because all else equal, gender of protagonist does not matter. So a game should not be criticized for a sole reason of protagonist genre. Criticizing however is not equal to asking why, which is what you were doing in the video. You werent criticizing, you were inquiring, and theres nothing wrong with that.

 

[Entitled]

Most games are about male protagonists because most developers are male.

So why doesn't that play out as significantly in Hollywood or print?

In Hollywood, it totally does.

Remember that time when Warner's president decreed that they don't intend to make any movies with female leads any more? [http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/warner-brothers-president-says-no-more-female-lead-characters/] Like, at all.

Or ever heard about the Bechdel test? Part of the reason why it works, is because a staggering amount of movies lack ANY female characters, or at least two named female characters who talk to each other, and the ones that do, often only have male characters around them to talk about.

With novels, there is a larger percentage of female writers, as the whole medium is more cost-effective, and also has a larger market of female readers (chicken or the egg about which caused which. One could say that women stay in the writing business because there is a better market for it, or that the lower barrier to publish novels first made female writers available, which caused women to read about their identifiable female characters). The YA genre in particular is full of female lead characters due to this, not to mention the existence of erotica, which exists as a female-centric genre practically only in print.

 

[Entitled]

Why should a game be criticised or scrutinised simply because it doesn't have a female protagonist?

Why shouldn't it?

because there's nothing inherently wrong with telling a story about a guy. The problem with there not being enough good female playable characters in games is an issue because it's a trend, not because having a male protagonist is bad. I mean if I end up staying with someone who cooks spaghetti for dinner every night for 2 weeks, i'd almost certainly get sick of it, but that doesn't mean that choosing to make spaghetti for your evening meal is a bad choice. Criticizing a game for simply choosing to have a male protagonist is basically like criticizing a different friend's cooking skills simply because he chose to make spaghetti in the previous scenario.

If your friend cooks spaghetti for 2 weeks straight, it is not quite their cooking skills that should be criticised, but there is still definitely something criticism-worthy about their consistent failure to diversify their meals. Because the food exists in a context. A cook in a restaurant is only expected to skillfully prepare whatever your order, but someone who cooks for you over a long term and picks the menu, is also expected to take your diet's context into account.

If a game decides to invent a new fantasy world, and it JUST HAPPENS TO BE one with elves, dwarves, humans, orcs, and dragons, and the first level involves slaying giant rats, and you later meet your teammates with an inn, and at the end there is an evil overlord in a spiky helmet, that's definitely a point of criticism. Not because there is something "inherently wrong" with either of these tropes. Not "inherently". But there is something wrong with observing the plethora of uninspired generic fantasy stories before, all of them using these, and still going ahead with no particular justification (e.g: not for parody, homage, or deconstruction). Even if you are a skillful writer, not acknowledging the outside context that what you are writing will feel cliched for most readers, is a valid point of criticism.

Likewise, if so much of our literature, movies, and games are about one particular half of humankind, failing to acknowledge that and choosing the lazy option just because you can't bother to question your assumptions, is definitely a point of criticism on it's own, even if it's otherwise a skillfully done work.

LACK OF interesting original thought, deserves to be criticised, even if "inherently" nothing would stop it from being interesting, it's the writer's job to recognize the context in whic it isn't.

 

[DoubleChops]

Ok Jim, I can do that for you. Fantasy Football Gods, Jim says thanks.

 

[Coreless]

Ok so what was the point of this video? I have watched it twice and I still don't see much of a point being made. Its self evident that freedom of speech means the freedom to criticize people and their work. I just don't understand how anyone could think otherwise considering its written into the freaking thing with the word "freedom".

And like others have said, you are free to criticize all you like but people also have the freedom not to listen to you and just because you have a criticism doesn't automatically make it a good one.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

People are fully in their right to ask the question, but as has been summarised in other videos, they shouldn't be attacked for said beliefs.

Hell it's in part why GTA5 is the definition of 'meh' to me. It'll no doubt be very good for what it does, but the lacking of female protagonist doesn't get my hype machine running. Probably why I like Saints Row as much as I did, no matter how much the series deviated from the GTA formula, if there wasn't a female customisation option I probably wouldn't have played it as long.

This attitude pervades into other similar ventures, like Mass Effect, I could play as femshep until the cows came home, but every time I played a dude I seemed to just get bored. Not even Miranda's butt could lure me back.
For added affect to this, two shows coming that I'm most excited for also star female protagonists (Kill la Kill and Legend or Korra respectively).

It's a weird quirk.

 

[bug_of_war]

HA! Science is funny. Anyway.

:0 WHA!?

Of course you, Jim, and whoever else can ask someone/some people to make a game[sub](if you do it in a polite way)[/sub].

And then those people can say no, sure, maybe later, why do you want us to make that game, and pineapple.

What can't be done is demanding them to make a game, and expecting them to make it.

Spoiler: Because...

pineapple.

http://cheezburger.com/7782390016

You can ask, but everyone asks, and ^ is pretty much happens. The quote has yet to be confirmed, but it does seem very likely as something a game designer would say.

 

[Sutter Cane]

Why should a game be criticised or scrutinised simply because it doesn't have a female protagonist?

Why shouldn't it?

because there's nothing inherently wrong with telling a story about a guy. The problem with there not being enough good female playable characters in games is an issue because it's a trend, not because having a male protagonist is bad. I mean if I end up staying with someone who cooks spaghetti for dinner every night for 2 weeks, i'd almost certainly get sick of it, but that doesn't mean that choosing to make spaghetti for your evening meal is a bad choice. Criticizing a game for simply choosing to have a male protagonist is basically like criticizing a different friend's cooking skills simply because he chose to make spaghetti in the previous scenario.

The problem is more like every restaurant in the neighborhood cooks nothing but spaghetti, and while it's very good spaghetti, you're going to get tired of it. But the moment you ask the cook to make something other than spaghetti, all of his fans blast you for trying to dictate what he makes, and say that if you don't like it, then go to another restaurant (ignoring the fact that they only cook spaghetti too, natch).

you're right, that is actually a better way to put it. I still stand by however that it'd be far to single out any one restaurant for choosing to serve spaghetti though, since spaghetti is by no means a bad thing. each individual instance is ok, it's the trend that's the problem. Going "X game doesn't have a female protagonist so i'm boycotting it" just makes you sound like you're trying to say that all games need to have playable female characters, which is pretty clearly not what anyone is actually arguing for.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Creative Freedom, Strings Attached

Freedom of expression is not freedom to express without challenge. A game is within its rights to include any content it does, but that content is not sacred.

Watch Video

This episode! I couldnt agree more. I dont think ive ever agreed as much as Im agreeing with jim right now! New favorite episode right here.

 

[Lightknight]

Why should a game be criticised or scrutinised simply because it doesn't have a female protagonist?

Why shouldn't it?

because there's nothing inherently wrong with telling a story about a guy. The problem with there not being enough good female playable characters in games is an issue because it's a trend, not because having a male protagonist is bad. I mean if I end up staying with someone who cooks spaghetti for dinner every night for 2 weeks, i'd almost certainly get sick of it, but that doesn't mean that choosing to make spaghetti for your evening meal is a bad choice. Criticizing a game for simply choosing to have a male protagonist is basically like criticizing a different friend's cooking skills simply because he chose to make spaghetti in the previous scenario.

The problem is more like every restaurant in the neighborhood cooks nothing but spaghetti, and while it's very good spaghetti, you're going to get tired of it. But the moment you ask the cook to make something other than spaghetti, all of his fans blast you for trying to dictate what he makes, and say that if you don't like it, then go to another restaurant (ignoring the fact that they only cook spaghetti too, natch).

you're right, that is actually a better way to put it. I still stand by however that it'd be far to single out any one restaurant for choosing to serve spaghetti though, since spaghetti is by no means a bad thing. each individual instance is ok, it's the trend that's the problem. Going "X game doesn't have a female protagonist so i'm boycotting it" just makes you sound like you're trying to say that all games need to have playable female characters, which is pretty clearly not what anyone is actually arguing for.

This fails in that the analogy would have to account for a world in which there is only spaghetti and ziti and the restaurants in question only make one or the other. In such a world, only getting one or the other would be normal and so getting the same one every night from a restaurant or person would be significantly more common. It's not like we have a million different genders like we do food types.

You then have to explain why the restaurant should make ziti when the overwhelming majority of clients prefer spaghetti. While it's a lofty and noble goal to support female leads, the demand isn't that present as far as we can tell. As I said in an earlier post, the 47% female to 53% male ratio in the recent ESA study is terribly off base when considering certain markets like the AAA game market. This study includes iOS gamers and over half the respondants did not plan to buy a single game in the year of the study (2012). So the definition of "gamer" was made significantly broader than the group high budget game companies are selling to. Even then, in the previous big study that was 40% to 60% female/male before iOS was included, 80% of those females had a Wii as their primary gaming console. This meant that the AAA market only saw 9% of that 40% owning a ps3 and 11% owning a 360. Because the ratio is smaller, that means that more than 80% of their actual target market was male. Not only that, but the ratio can skew further if the types of games one gender prefers differs from the other. We already see a significant difference in console preference so why not game type? We don't know and people don't appear to be doing that research (please, someone give me the resources to do this, it'd be extremely interesting to learn what the actual demographics are for AAA tarket markets).

So if 80% of your market is male, why does it make sense to try to reach some kind of equilibrium between protagonist genders? Why does it makes sense to try and have 50% of games having a female lead when your market isn't that way? That is every bit as sexist as any other sexist action that lifts one group up for no other reason than because of their gender. Should it be at least 20% female? Perhaps, that brings me to my next point.

This is a business. Every company that is making a game to sell is going to look at the market and see 80% males in the target range. It is not their job to make the protagonist a female to right some arbitrary statistic. You don't change waist high stockings to have more room for men just because there really are some men who wear them. Your basic stocking is going to take into account your target market and if you want to also cater to the few males who use them then you have to figure something else instead that doesn't make it less comfortable for the women. This is why we have a ton of games now that have completely customiseable protagonists. Each one of those games should be touted as having a female protagonist. Mass Effect, Skyrim, Saints Row, and so many others. Taking all of these into account as well as games that have multiple gender options like Resident Evil did may end up having a higher percentage of the AAA market than we may think where the player can be female.

When there is such a high disparity between target demographics, you don't cater to the needs of the fewer at the cost of the many. You either only cater to the majority or you do something else to make them happy. As such, a female character should only be the main protagonist if it is part of the story. The artistic vision, if you will. But if the gender of the main character isn't stable but they can only have one (for financial or time reasons), then business-wise and customer-wise it makes sense to make it male due to current market conditions. The game in question would require different character modeling and more voice acting resources in addition to rescripting who knows how much. The demand isn't high enough to warrant those resources so just leave it as it should be. I would expect no less if women made up a disproportionately larger market segment of something else I enjoy. If you can't play a game because the main character doesn't have two lady lumps under their shirt then you shouldn't buy the game and should get used to disappointment in life if you're going to be that rigid about it. I don't have a problem playing Lara, I don't have a problem with Chell or any of the other female characters I've played over the years. I do prefer an avatar that resembles me, but I don't particularly care even what species it is. Hell, a humanoid dog character would be out of place in the last of us but I'd have eventually gotten past it.

If a little boy draws a picture of a boy weilding a sword, you don't ask him why like he should have made it a female. It's what he wanted to draw and he wasn't wrong for doing so. The same has been traditionally true of art in every other form of media. This question, while valid, is implying that an artist is doing something wrong by choosing one gender instead of another. That makes the question pointedly sexist itself while accusing the creator of sexism.

 

[nuttshell]

There's two arguments being made in this episode and they're both right.

One, that creators don't need to answer to or be cowed into making what people want them to make due to political correctness and other such demands.

Second, that everyone has the right to criticize others over their words and decisions.

HOW-EVER

There is an undercurrent flowing through this discussion that these questions are somehow important issues and MUST be answered by every game maker who ever makes a game with a male character, that every game must have a choice of genders of their main characters - and it's getting out of control. They could remake a movie about Pinocchio and someone would ridiculously ask "Why not a girl puppet?" And GTA, GTA is a game about criminals. Have you seen the ratios of how many people in jail are men vs women? It's about a 10 to 1 ratio. Stands to believe most people in a story about criminals would be the same. It's not like there's no women in the entire game! Why do we have to bend so far out of reality to accommodate political correctness just because? Sometimes these questions DO deserve flippant responses.

Because after all, as this episode has taught us, just because you asked a question doesn't make your question above reproach and beyond criticism itself. That's what these game makers are doing with their responses - criticizing your questions as not worth answering.

Wow, a reasonable critical comment allready on page 2. I'm impressed, kudos.

A very nice bookworm said to me once: "Only those completely devoid of fantasy don't want to read books that aren't about themselves."
I'd like to expand on that. Only whiny, narcistic people make a big deal about fantasies that don't tailor their specific interests.

 

[DoomyMcDoom]

When it comes down to it, when asking the question "Why can't he be a girl instead" one should really be asking "Do we want a poorly written female lead created by a man, who can never truly understand what it is to be female, and as such never do justice to the concept? Or a male lead, who acts male, is male, and at least is fully believable(if well written, some writers suck either way)."

Sure, some could say that women deserve more of a spotlight as protagonists in gaming, but one of the biggest issues I see, is that women aren't making games... They just aren't, look at the ratio of writers, and developers in the gaming industry, what we need isn't just more female protagonists, but more women in the industry.

Honestly, as a man, I have no idea what it's like to be a woman, I only know what I've observed, which means I couldn't write a deep female protagonist, because I don't fully grasp the inner workings of a woman's mind, I could write a male protagonist with any of a thousand different drives ambitions, reasons for everything, no fuckin' problem.

I don't mean to attempt to speak for all of the other men out there, but I don't think any of us really know how women feel or think the way a woman herself does, it just makes a lot more sense for female writers, to write female characters.

So yeah, to all of you women out there incessantly bitching about inequality, get your asses out there and start producing some good stuff instead of trying to make men do it for you, if you think about it, that's exactly what feminism is about, now make yourselves equal, and act(write for game companies, or make your own games, the indie scene counts too y'know, it doesn't have to be a multimillion dollar "AAA" title.).

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

You don't know that. Either of those things. Maybe nobody on the writing team wanted to write a female playable character, maybe the ones that did didn't have a good character or a good story in mind.

**facepalm**

While it is technically true that I don't know for certain that no one at Rockstar had any ideas for a female lead, I find that idea extremely unlikely. And, if that is the case, then Rockstar has a lot fewer creative minds than I imagined.

As to the other - you're going to tell me what is or is not "interesting"? Personally, I'd just like to see what Rockstar came up with - just them stepping out of their comfort zone would have been interesting all on its own, even if the result wasn't great.

I mean hey nothing's stopping you from getting the game and still asking them to make a game with a woman in it. Not every suggestion needs a threat of a loss $60 (or whatever cut of that Rockstar makes) to be valid. Just seems weird that that's a dealbreaker unless it's a "I wasn't terribly interested in the game to begin with but a female hero would've been just enough to make me want it" kind of thing.

First off, since it is my money, I can use it in any way I want. Plenty of people withhold their money from companies that use DRM no principle. Why is this less valid of a reason? I want to see more female protagonists in games - so when two similar games come out, and one gives me the option of a female protagonist while the other does not, then why shouldn't I give my money to the company that provides me with what I want and withhold it from the company that does not?

Secondly, I never said it was a dealbreaker. Catherine has a male protagonist, but it also has a unique subject matter and gameplay style that isn't available anywhere else. Furthermore, it has a good story and the male-ness of the main character is intrinsic to that story.

However, most games - wait, no, you're Mr. Exact Terminology and if I'm even slightly Hyperbolic, you will ask for proof that my numbers are accurate - MANY games don't have stories that rely on gender in any way. People ***** about "women who act like men" in games, but honestly I don't see many men acting like "men" either. I see "generic blank slate" acting like "generic blank slate" in many games.

One of the reason that the Saints Row series works is because nothing in you average crime game is actually particularly male-centric. Likewise, your typical sci-fi action-rpg title (ie Mass Effect, but I can name several other sci-fi shooters where you could change the gender of the lead and no one would notice). "Being badass" is not a male trait - and it is often the only trait that video game protagonists are given.

I'm asiding. My point is, no, a male protagonist is not a deal breaker. However, if the protagonist's male-ness is simply a default setting, then that is a point against a game. And I make an active effort to support games with female protagonists.

 

[nuttshell]

...then Rockstar has a lot fewer creative minds than I imagined.

Your imagination clearly has no boundaries.

 

[Mahoshonen]

Ok so what was the point of this video? I have watched it twice and I still don't see much of a point being made. Its self evident that freedom of speech means the freedom to criticize people and their work. I just don't understand how anyone could think otherwise considering its written into the freaking thing with the word "freedom".

And like others have said, you are free to criticize all you like but people also have the freedom not to listen to you and just because you have a criticism doesn't automatically make it a good one.

I guess the point is that, as amazing as it may seem, there are people that don't understand this connection.

And deciding not to listen doesn't close the conversation. The critics are looking for a response, and silence does nothing except validate the criticism. And yet, it not's necessary to bow to criticism to satisfy the critics. Just the previous GTA, changing the gender of Niko Belic would require major changes in the game's story to keep it at the same level of quality. The same applies to Red Dead Redemption-you'd have to do massive changes to make a compelling story with a female lead. I haven't paid attention to the hype, but I'm willing to give Rockstar the benefit of the doubt here. But the question ought to be addressed. Ignoring the question is simply disrespectful.

...then Rockstar has a lot fewer creative minds than I imagined.

Your imagination clearly has no boundaries.

Nice edit. You should work for the National Enquierer.