Jimquisition: Diversity? LIEversity!

[Bara_no_Hime]

Alternate title could have easily been, "The continued owning of Ubisoft by the righteous James Sterling and anybody with a bloody working brain in their head."

**slow clap**

Well said and well done. I, once again, am thanking the gods for you, Jim Sterling.

OT: I actually skimmed the first page of this thread and I was pleasantly surprised. Good for your Escapist. I'm not going to keep going, however, as I'm now happy and don't want to run into the inevitable disappointment.

 

[Weaver]

Please take the time to read this. I'm really tired of non-developers telling everyone how they're so lazy and sexist and don't know how to do their job from people who have never written a line of code in their life.

http://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/27ut97/distinct_lack_of_female_characters_due_to/ci5z8i7

Long story short "I could animate a character in a few days" does not mean "I can ship the game with that character in it in a few days". We're talking like 25 - 30 days to add a character like this.

And by "interesting design" I mean artistically interesting, I avoided writing all together.

Yes, and Desmond isn't artistically interesting. The fact that I said "in any way" was supposed to indicate that.

And the rest doesn't change anything I've said. At best, you've put words in my mouth. And maybe in the mouths of others. I'm not sure anyone's saying that three days is all it would take to actually make the game work. At the same time, you're seeing all sorts of people pointing out that the overall effect is trivial (edit-with relationship to the whole).

I do find it interesting that they've been able to animate, voice, and even make playable women before, but I'm not sure that's particularly here nor there (with respect to this).

Okay, you didn't like Desmond's design. Then what if I changed "The art team needs to design an interesting character" to "The art team needs to design a character" because that work still needs to be done. Even if you think they're shit at making characters, that doesn't change the fact they simply aren't going to just make a rough sketch of one character in an hour without presenting it to the team and lead designers for input and revision. That's how character concept art works in games.

In terms of time for character creation, you said

But more to the point, the cost in time has already been addressed. In fact, the video kind of addresses it. At the very least, Jim references other people who have addressed it.

And Jim referenced an artist tweeting "The character would take a few days to animate" then construed that to mean it would be a few days to just make a character. In my opinion, Jim did not tackle the fact that it will simply take far too long for a game that will be in RTM state (IE, completely finished) in about 4 weeks. You can't have QA doing huge testing cycles with like 5 days left until RTM unless you want to all get fired and lose your sweet 20% metacritic bonus.

And yes, they've been able to create female characters before because they had time. This is simply an unfortunate case where they're too close to the deadline and had too many resources working on getting the new co-op system to work properly in time that they ran out of time to implement an feature in the icebox.

And yes I know I'm going to get "Women as characters should not be considered a FEATURE" from someone. This is, again, the problem with non-developers trying to understand the insane world of SDLCs. Features are everything in code. Everything that doesn't already exist is a feature. Features are then broken down into a set of actionable tasks, or "stories" if you're doing traditional agile development.

Moving the character is a feature. Having a character is a feature. Jumping is a feature. Shadows are a feature. Lighting is a feature. A story is a feature. Sound is a feature. You get the idea.

 

[BrainBlow]

Imagine if this sort of logic was applied to any other type of fixed narrative:

J.K. Rowling is so sexist. Why didn't she consider inclusivity from the start? Clearly she should have written a second version of the Harry Potter series, "Harrina Potter", so her female readers could read about a witch instead of a wizard. What? That would be too much work? What a lazy writer. #womenaretoohardtowrite

Or what about movies? Why couldn't they have made a female version of Django in Django Unchained? Too much work? So lazy! #womenaretoohardtofilm

Or what animation? Why couldn't they have created a female version of Hiccup for little girls in How to Train Your Dragon? #womenaretoohardtoanimate

I just don't get it. Is there something I am missing? How is demanding genderswapable protagonists in a fixed narrative in any way reasonable? I mean, demand that they be female in the first place if you have to, but how can you justify demanding both genders?

You think an INTERACTIVE medium has a fixed, completely linear narrative? 0_o I would say you have no grasp of the issue people take of excluding women from gaming but it actually just looks like you have no grasp of gaming.

But it does have a fixed linear narrative. The game has a main character, the main character has a name and a personality, specific events happen, specific words are said by the player character. They player does not change these things in any way. Just because the exact method of how you get from cutscene A to cutscene B isn't set in stone does not mean the narrative is not set in stone. It is a fixed narrative.

That is absolutely not true.
Almost NO VIDEO GAMES have a FIXED narrative from the beginning! Story takes the backseat entirely in the game creation process, and even then, the stories tend to undergo significant changes all the time.
Extra Credits: How To Start Your Game Narrative [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22HoViH4vOU]

 

[Something Amyss]

snake

Like, now I'm not sure if you're joking or not. The cardboard box was more interesting.

but i dont want male, female, white, black, hispanic, asian, gay and straight to exist simply to not offend anybody, is freakin' stupid in my opiniona dn it can end up affecting the quality of the characters in a game

Well, of course it's "not to offend," rather than to include, or appeal to. But I somehow bet that would be a problem, too.

Meanwhile, we get saddled with more shallow white dudes and the concern level just isn't equal. Can't help but wonder why.

More specifically, I'm not sure anyone's demanding a fully fleshed character. Just a MP avatar like they've had in the past. Makes me wonder why you protest so vocally.

I already conceded my ignorance. You people don't have to keep reminding me how stupid I am.

No offense. Just pointing out why I think I prefer the resource argument.

Do I even want to know what that is?

Assassins creed is an incredibly diverse game series, it's disingenuous to try and paint that picture otherwise.

Yeah, about Liberation: Remember that black female zombiejoe said was playable? Well, he was completely correct. Which means they do have assets for fully playable female characters, and not very long ago it was perfectly within their power to do such a thing. So why is it a problem now? Did those assets suddenly stop existing? Did they fire the only female voice actor in the entire world?[/quote]

Maybe they're the only developers in the world that recycle zero of their assets. Although, the voice acting thing is probably going to be tough. After all, they will almost certainly have women as NPcs in the game, women who have voices no less. And since you probably don't need more than some grunts and stuff to meet the standards most people have set, it's hard to argue this would ad much significant strain to the process.

Then again, maybe they get paid by the word.

 

[sweetylnumb]

Cue the bunch of dudebros going "ITS NOT 40% LIES HERASY FARMVILLE NHEEEH"

Guys it actually doesn't actually matter if females only make up 20% of "real" gamers, that's still a big audience that ubisoft considers unworthy of appealing too. Economically, it just makes sense, nevermind the social issues. Assuming farmville players arn't gamers and can't be appealed to as well (which they tottaly can)

Also you really only need a voice actor and a female face no'one bloody cares if they dont have swaying hips and massive boobage and move like actual human beings as opposed to porn stars

k Thanks

 

[Ickorus]

Hold on a second, not acknowledging that anyone other than white males exist? Only appealing to that demographic? Did liberation, 1, freedom cry, and 3 stop existing?

Assassins creed is an incredibly diverse game series, it's disingenuous to try and paint that picture otherwise.

Yeah, about Liberation: Remember that black female zombiejoe said was playable? Well, he was completely correct. Which means they do have assets for fully playable female characters, and not very long ago it was perfectly within their power to do such a thing. So why is it a problem now? Did those assets suddenly stop existing? Did they fire the only female voice actor in the entire world?

As Aaron said, I don't think there is a real problem, just some pr guy coming out with a lame excuse when they should have just said they'd rather focus their efforts on more important parts of the game than a mute puppet for multiplayer use.

My issue with your comment (and the entirety of this latest outrage) is that people are acting like all Ubisoft have done is make white male characters and cater to that single audience when it is patently not true.

To clarify: Different avatars would be cool in my books, pr dude is dumb, honesty is best policy and overreaction and omission of facts for the sake of self righteous fury is bad.

 

[Something Amyss]

Oh, wow. In that case they are even bigger idiots than I thought. Sounds like hammering nails into their own coffins lol.

Well, even the Escapist gave AC: Unisex an award, so I doubt that's a coffin you hear being nailed.

 

[JimB]

Give me a strong female protagonist, character or sidekick that'll interest me, but don't throw in token women for the hell of it.

Why not?

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Why bother with excuses? You know what would have been a perfect response to this? "We didn't realize that there was so much demand for female characters, we made the wrong decision not to include them and we're looking into adding them in a future update". No, it's not as good as having them right off the bat, but you at least give your consumers the feeling that you care about what they want, and that you're recognizing their interests.

 

[Sticky]

Jim, I feel that you've failed to see the forest for the trees.

Representation isn't why you should be mad at Ubisoft over this. So who cares if they don't put in characters that are not 'representative' in their games? I don't want the burger king kids club in all of my games because companies are too petrified of not representing someone, somewhere. I think every story should be allowed to include the characterization they desire, regardless of gender or skin color.

That said, why you SHOULD be mad at Ubisoft extends far deeper than mere under-representation. You touched on it briefly and I was hoping you would talk about it a bit more. It's that in the year 2014 with the next-gen AC on the horizon, we're still reusing Ezio and Altair's movement patterns and models because Ubisoft thinks no one noticed. That no one noticed that there were 4 assassins that all moved the same way and somehow moved and stabbed the same way Ezio used to. Like somehow no one would notice that they were just flat-out lifting animations from him.

I know the counterpoint already, E3 demo, years away from release, etc. I guess, much like with Watch_Dogs, they'll eventually muster up the effort to cut a bunch of content and features from the E3 demo and call that the release version [http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=838538].

 

[BlumiereBleck]

It's France in 1790. Well of course you're not going to get a 'diverse group of people that are apparently super necessary for a game's story.'

Revolutionary France had alot of women take an active role in history. Besides there was an actual women who assassinated Marat, so that excuse doesn't really hold.

And we all remember how they all ended up.

Five bucks says you end up helping Robespierre only for him to betray you.

 

[Frission]

It's France in 1790. Well of course you're not going to get a 'diverse group of people that are apparently super necessary for a game's story.'

Revolutionary France had alot of women take an active role in history. Besides there was an actual women who assassinated Marat, so that excuse doesn't really hold.

And we all remember how they all ended up.

Five bucks says you end up helping Robespierre only for him to betray you.

It would be historically apropro. I would actually like that idea. It would show that the Assassin's ideals are not always for the best!

 

[BlumiereBleck]

It's France in 1790. Well of course you're not going to get a 'diverse group of people that are apparently super necessary for a game's story.'

Welcome to the thread, person who did not read the rest of the thread.

There have already been other posters who also know nothing about the French Revolution and also tried to pull out the "but women spent the entirety of the French Revolution underground or in the kitchen or something probably" excuse. They were corrected. For fun, try typing "French Revolution assassin" into Google.

Where you up in arms about the last 6 or so Assassin's Creed games too because there are female assassins throughout the time periods where those games took place in?

 

[BlumiereBleck]

It's France in 1790. Well of course you're not going to get a 'diverse group of people that are apparently super necessary for a game's story.'

Revolutionary France had alot of women take an active role in history. Besides there was an actual women who assassinated Marat, so that excuse doesn't really hold.

And we all remember how they all ended up.

Five bucks says you end up helping Robespierre only for him to betray you.

It would be historically apropro. I would actually like that idea. It would show that the Assassin's ideals are not always for the best!

I can see the dlc being "Help Napoleon" and stuff like that.

 

[Frission]

/snip

Napoleon is for wimps. Going full on terreur with Marat and Saint-Juste is where it's at!

 

[Aaron Sylvester]

Why bother with excuses? You know what would have been a perfect response to this? "We didn't realize that there was so much demand for female characters, we made the wrong decision not to include them and we're looking into adding them in a future update". No, it's not as good as having them right off the bat, but you at least give your consumers the feeling that you care about what they want, and that you're recognizing their interests.

A company can't exactly "we made the wrong decision" so easily. Just "we may add them in a future update" would've been more than enough.