Jimquisition: The Creepy Cull of Female Protagonists

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Pretty sure I've seen plenty of people in this thread say we only play casual games and by guys I meant the enemies, not just men. sigh.

Sounds like you need to reread those comments again and work on your comprehension skills.

No I think I understood them pretty well

'Girls can't say anything because the majority of the don't play REAL games'

It's so old and tired.

There are probably tons of reasons for those stats like their boyfriend/husband is the one registered on the console or whatever. Doesn't mean they don't play the games.

That's even if you don't count The Sims 3 and Angry Birds as real games (which considering Space Invaders is counted as a 'real game' is a little stingy)

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Saying that girls play casual games is not the same as saying girls aren't allowed to play games like Bioshock, or any other non casual game.

It is when they are using it as an excuse as to why we can't have decent female protagonists. We are basically being told our opinion doesn't count because we apparently aren't as invested.

 

[Baresark]

snip

I'm gonna step back for a moment, I went to a dark place on that one and I apologize. I clearly inferred concepts that didn't exist and I owe both you and the conversation more than that. I'll reduce what I was saying to something that is... more focused. I mentioned the that there are instances where sexism or racism are cited that it's simply not the case. You insisted that the theory of Implicit Egotism is dressed up bigotry. It's not. That's all. I don't owe you an explanation for that. It's simply not that. Many great psychologists have studied it and found it to exist. They have shown that it affects, statistically, the choices people make. I don't, personally, feel that marketing based on focus groups equals sexism. I'm not going to get into an argument about making points out of minor statistics being important or why we should concentrate on them. I'm not a CEO of videogame publishing company.

Many fine people have commented on how they do not have a preference but that is impossible. I do not have a strong preference, but I do have a preference. More often than not I play games as myself, given the choice. I make choices in games like Mass Effect that are choices I personally would make in that situation. Going back, I couldn't stand to let Myrle die in Metal Gear Solid because I personally would not let someone die when I had the chance to save them.

I always, at some point, play a game as if I was the person in the game. If a game allows me to really customize the appearance of my character (like Dragon Age Origins did) I will spend a pain staking amount of time creating myself in that game. It's not because I'm selfish, or I don't like women, or black people, but because I'm a white guy who has high self esteem and self respect. Making that character look like me makes it all the easier to be engrossed in a great game. That is what implicit egotism is, it's finding comfort in things that are familiar. That does not equal hating things that are different, it means preferring that which is familiar, which all people do. Not just in reference to people though. If you grow up with dogs as pets, you are more likely always to favor having a dog over a cat. If you spent your formative years in a hot tropical environment, you are not likely going to move to Alaska as that is a much more alien environment than you are used to. It's a preference, that people are more than entitled to. And preferring the play a game as a male, if someone actually cares about that, shouldn't be treated as if it's some great catastrophe or that the person is some evil human being.

Edit: I forgot to put this. At no point am I saying that racism or sexism doesn't exist. I'm simply saying that it may not always be the case, as some people such as yourself seem to purport is the definitive case here. Jim as well.

 

[Treblaine]

I think it's overly simplifying to call it ONLY racist or sexist. It can lead to that, but it's a more universal phenomenon. People that are alike have more in common, and so they're more comfortable spending time together. I'm all for experiences that push the boundaries, but those can and are often supposed to be uncomfortable as they challenge preconceived notions, and the vast majority of people aren't going to seek those out all the time. And this would doubtfully show up amongst all people all the time. If most of us, for instance, saw Elizabeth on front cover we would be perfectly fine with it, but it might not stick out as cool to the guy who is just casually browsing whereas that soldier game might. He's not really saying in his mind "Ew, a girl game" he's just saying "Ooh look, a soldier game!" Kind of like the way I react to dinosaurs or spaceships.

Is that sexist? Eh, kinda, but it's also not really conscious and not something that can be easily changed. And as long as games have such huge budgets that they need to pull in a more casual/mainstream crowd then that's the kind of thing we're going to have to deal with.

(That's why I've been buying so many indie games lately)

Well I'm simplifying for brevity, but I believe the principal still stands, that you can't excuse this trend by a psychologist's study proving that it's real and to do with ego.

I don't have a particular problem with Elizabeth not being on the front cover. The game - after all - it is a shooter and Booker is the protagonist.

I can't fault any single game because no single game does this but it is the absence of games with a female lead.

The point is not that they chose the protagonist with a gun over a girl in a dress. The point is would they have still chosen the man over the woman if it the hero had been a woman with a gun, saving a vulnerable male? That's the interesting question. Do a Rule 63 Booker DeWitt, same rough style of clothing, same gun, same stance, yet clearly a woman. Would the focus group have been equally have been turned off the game?

Because the gun is important, to spite Bioshock Infinite's unique aspect of Flying City of Columbia and Elizabeth's role, the pivotal aspect is that this game is a shooter. If you can't play shooters you cannot play this game.

But where are the shooters with female leads?

 

[CommieCatGirl]

Male gamers want cool male protagonists in their escapist fantasies, who knew? I guess the only solution is to call dude bros insecure closeted homosexuals in order to feel like a big man!

Don't blame culture, blame biology and economics. You have to accept that most males, especially males that play shooty games, are going to want to play as strong males and want their games to have an air of machismo to them. Most males are just programmed to be that way, if you make them a single struggling single mother in their action game looking for love while simultaneously filling the role of the strong male action hero, then you're just going to be ruining their entertainment for the sake of your own agenda.

If you want to make a change, try starting a movement actively boycotting "dudebro" shooters and game publishers who hinder developers from making games with strong female characters with genuine feminine traits. They'll start caring more about the damage to sales more than they ever will the condemnations of some overweight gamma male on the internet.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Ok let me get this straight, Publishers don't want to do female protagonists out of a fear of HETEOsexual intimacy? ...what?

Yeah, you'd think they'd at least be cool with it... but maybe that's also partly because gamers (or rather, the dudebros) may assume she's the dominant one in the relationship by virtue of being the player character (which kinda makes sense)... and they probably won't like the idea.

And while we're speculating, perhaps said dudebros don't like the idea of women being portrayed as anything other than a living sex doll. Say you have a female protagonist in a healthy, long-term relationship with a member of the opposite sex. Do you know what keeps these kinds of relationships alive? Sacrifice,love, commitment, time. In this type of relationship, you now have to consider the other person's feelings and desires. You may have to sacrifice things for their benefit. Things like these don't fit very well with a dudebro's idea of a relationship.

The only way to be in that kind of relationship is to understand that the other person is not your puppet or toy, available to use at your convenience, but a living human being with dignity, free will, and desires and goals of their own. In this relationship, she is your cherished equal. Again, things that do not fit within a dudebro's idea of a woman.

But again, this is merely speculation.

And we wonder why figures such as Anita Sarcesian keep popping up.

 

[Baresark]

Saying that girls play casual games is not the same as saying girls aren't allowed to play games like Bioshock, or any other non casual game.

It is when they are using it as an excuse as to why we can't have decent female protagonists. We are basically being told our opinion doesn't count because we apparently aren't as invested.

You can't have decent female protagonist because people who make games, for the most part, right shit female characters. I don't think anyone said it's because girls only play casual games. If you see insult, you will find it, even when it is not offered. That is not to say there aren't plenty of idiotic pigheaded people in gaming "culture" (used very loosely, of course). Couple that with the fact that no one seems to be able to decide what exactly a good female protagonist is. If they are remotely brave enough to put some female only traits, they usually get torn a new asshole for it. Do you know what the average male character is? They are a meat train. They are something you point in a direction and tell them kill everything in their path. That is a terrible thing and an incredibly shallow character that does not mimic real life in any way. I don't know any guys who are exclusively machines of destruction and quite frankly, it's not flattering at all. But we don't care so much about it either. That is one of the ways men and women are different.

 

[RafaelNegrus]

I think it's overly simplifying to call it ONLY racist or sexist. It can lead to that, but it's a more universal phenomenon. People that are alike have more in common, and so they're more comfortable spending time together. I'm all for experiences that push the boundaries, but those can and are often supposed to be uncomfortable as they challenge preconceived notions, and the vast majority of people aren't going to seek those out all the time. And this would doubtfully show up amongst all people all the time. If most of us, for instance, saw Elizabeth on front cover we would be perfectly fine with it, but it might not stick out as cool to the guy who is just casually browsing whereas that soldier game might. He's not really saying in his mind "Ew, a girl game" he's just saying "Ooh look, a soldier game!" Kind of like the way I react to dinosaurs or spaceships.

Is that sexist? Eh, kinda, but it's also not really conscious and not something that can be easily changed. And as long as games have such huge budgets that they need to pull in a more casual/mainstream crowd then that's the kind of thing we're going to have to deal with.

(That's why I've been buying so many indie games lately)

Well I'm simplifying for brevity, but I believe the principal still stands, that you can't excuse this trend by a psychologist's study proving that it's real and to do with ego.

I don't have a particular problem with Elizabeth not being on the front cover. The game - after all - it is a shooter and Booker is the protagonist.

I can't fault any single game because no single game does this but it is the absence of games with a female lead.

The point is not that they chose the protagonist with a gun over a girl in a dress. The point is would they have still chosen the man over the woman if it the hero had been a woman with a gun, saving a vulnerable male? That's the interesting question. Do a Rule 63 Booker DeWitt, same rough style of clothing, same gun, same stance, yet clearly a woman. Would the focus group have been equally have been turned off the game?

Because the gun is important, to spite Bioshock Infinite's unique aspect of Flying City of Columbia and Elizabeth's role, the pivotal aspect is that this game is a shooter. If you can't play shooters you cannot play this game.

But where are the shooters with female leads?

That's why I think it'd be important to know the numbers of players. Because assuming men want a male lead and women want a female lead then what determines the lead would be the numbers of each gender in the intended audience.

And then even if the numbers break down to something like 85-15, we would then ideally like the leads to be representative, so 85-15 there again. But each of those games are trying to sell to the entire audience, so they all go for the 85% men, and so the leads look like what we have.

All of this totally hypothetical of course, because we don't know the numbers.

That's why I liked this video so much, because it really captures how messy the situation is. It's not really anyone's fault but it's kinda everyone's fault but there's nothing any one person or company can really change, and no one's super likely to do so, but it's obviously bad right now.

Once again, smaller scale indie games, get one with a female lead that goes big and maybe when that hapens they'll get more adopted as leads. Maybe.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Saying that girls play casual games is not the same as saying girls aren't allowed to play games like Bioshock, or any other non casual game.

It is when they are using it as an excuse as to why we can't have decent female protagonists. We are basically being told our opinion doesn't count because we apparently aren't as invested.

You can't have decent female protagonist because people who make games, for the most part, right shit female characters. I don't think anyone said it's because girls only play casual games. If you see insult, you will find it, even when it is not offered. That is not to say there aren't plenty of idiotic pigheaded people in gaming "culture" (used very loosely, of course). Couple that with the fact that no one seems to be able to decide what exactly a good female protagonist is. If they are remotely brave enough to put some female only traits, they usually get torn a new asshole for it. Do you know what the average male character is? They are a meat train. They are something you point in a direction and tell them kill everything in their path. That is a terrible thing and an incredibly shallow character that does not mimic real life in any way. I don't know any guys who are exclusively machines of destruction and quite frankly, it's not flattering at all. But we don't care so much about it either. That is one of the ways men and women are different.

A crap female protagonist would even be welcome at this point I'll take what I can get -,-

Also again, people HAVE said in this thread the reason why there are male protagonists is because girls only play casual games.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Funny, I just got a game with a female on the cover today. Granted, Hyperdimension Neptunia isn't exactly a feminist ideal...

The solution to the chicken and egg problem you see is simple: use this internet thing in front of you to market the hell out of it. Facebook, twitter, youtube, forums, there's no reason why under the radar games have to be under the radar, and we shouldn't just be buying and playing only the big AAA games the gaming websites tell us to (most of us would take that idea as an insult). If some sleeper / indy game with a female lead became a big hit from the female demographic, it would do more to shatter these dopey stereotypes far faster than all the Sarkesian videos and internet whining we could muster. I understand reluctance. Failure spells out the stereotypes are legit and that companies really are smart by pandering to the "boys club" so it's easier to ***** on the net about all the ways the system is rigged, but the market won't change unless there's proof there will be something to meet it. Remember Me is going to send a strong signal to the industry now that it's getting press, so pimp it, and get the sales up because if this one flops, it'll only tell the industry they were right about female gamers, female characters, and mens' attitudes toward them.

 

[Treblaine]

Saying that girls play casual games is not the same as saying girls aren't allowed to play games like Bioshock, or any other non casual game.

It is when they are using it as an excuse as to why we can't have decent female protagonists. We are basically being told our opinion doesn't count because we apparently aren't as invested.

Yeah, that's the terrible logic of "majority rules" when a minority is still a significant proportion.

But I don't see this as "the many must suffer for the few" as if is not a suffering to have a female lead and it's not even for a "the few".

53% of men (on wow) choose a female character. CHOOSE being the key there, what larger percentage would that be coming to acceptance. Suddenly the proportions of gamers who are both "men" and "will only play as the same gender" is pretty insignificant.

Female leads are good for male gamers, female gamers, straight, gay and bi. It's good for the industry, it's good for the arts. This is not a special interests case to have women in gaming.

The "special interest" is keeping women OUT of gaming, and it is the twin threat of dude-bro jocks and professional character assassins. The latter will have individuals of many different non-overlapping belief but the combined result is clear: to consistently attack women in any and all forms they appear in video games with such an endless tirade of fallacies, disingenuous critique, and down right malicious lies that no one can get a fair trial.

They'll of course say they are going after the male writers (even when it's women like Rihanna Pratchett) but they can't be so blind to the result that such heavy double-standards just conditions developers to avoid women altogether. It's less controversial to have a part of your game be about massacring Russian civilians in an airport with belt-fed machine guns than to have a woman in your game...

Back in the supposed "bad old days" there was very high depiction of women in gaming, Resident Evil had a 50-50 mix for the first few games. But now, no female role can escape character assassination.

 

[Baresark]

Well I'm simplifying for brevity, but I believe the principal still stands, that you can't excuse this trend by a psychologist's study proving that it's real and to do with ego.

LoL, it's not a psychological study. It's years of psychological studies showing how peoples preferences are determined. It's part of a much larger arena of psychological study that shows how people are not rational (as in a normative concept of reasoning in the sense that rational people should derive conclusions in a consistent way given the information at disposal). This is an offshoot of work that has literally changed the way of how science understands the motivation of people and why people make the choices they make. You can't reduce years of a two mens life and a Noble Prize to racism and sexism. It just doesn't make sense to view something that is essential to who people are and their driving motivations in a given situation to that.

 

[Treblaine]

That's why I think it'd be important to know the numbers of players. Because assuming men want a male lead and women want a female lead then what determines the lead would be the numbers of each gender in the intended audience.

Well that's a false assumption and even if that were true that utterly denigrates video games as an art form and opens it up to censorship on the grounds that it's not an art form about expression, it's about pandering to the lowest common denominator of the mere majority.

And then even if the numbers break down to something like 85-15, we would then ideally like the leads to be representative, so 85-15 there again. But each of those games are trying to sell to the entire audience, so they all go for the 85% men, and so the leads look like what we have.

All of this totally hypothetical of course, because we don't know the numbers.

That's why I liked this video so much, because it really captures how messy the situation is. It's not really anyone's fault but it's kinda everyone's fault but there's nothing any one person or company can really change, and no one's super likely to do so, but it's obviously bad right now.

Once again, smaller scale indie games, get one with a female lead that goes big and maybe when that hapens they'll get more adopted as leads. Maybe.

I don't give a damn if gaming is 100% +/-0.0000% males that's no reason to exclude depiction of women from video games, even from lead roles.

It's utterly crazy that men are expected as being unable to imagine they are playing as a woman when they are able to imagine so many other completely unreal things, like rocket jumping, flying around overhead rails in a flying city, even dying. But cannot work if they have to play the role of a woman? Or a black person?

This doesn't need an indie game, this can be changed right away.

 

[The Lugz]

The game industry doesn't want female characters

sad, jim.. but probably true.

I, and many others have downloaded mods for skyrim, and other games that allow kissing, 'intimacy' and other forms of 'interaction' that games devs don't allow, i think this shows some lateral ability to understand that a character is not equal to the player, by at-least some gamers, and that it's quite likely publishers simply don't want to deal with the backlash from the vocal minority groups 'yet again' over a topic they don't feel compelled to tackle to actually make a game

personally i have no problem playing a male or female role, straight, gay, robot on dog or martian on marmot whatever the dev feels is appropriate, and honestly there can be no backlash if they bury these options in obvious romancing dialogue, because.. well you asked for it?

it really is just chicken / egg. so maby we should send a publisher a crate of chicks to show them that hatching eggs works, now and then.
i mean, honestly how can a developer / publisher be in the wrong to show a healthy relationship where consent in dialogue and or actions matter? are they afraid gamer guys will be getting laid too often with their social skillz +1 to play the latest game? .. i wouldn't put it past them, actually.

 

[Baresark]

snip

A crap female protagonist would even be welcome at this point I'll take what I can get -,-

Also again, people HAVE said in this thread the reason why there are male protagonists is because girls only play casual games.

That is fair, there aren't a lot of female protagonists. There are almost all really crappy male characters out there. Also, I have not personally seen a post that said "Girls only play casual games, so they can't have a female protagonist". I think you must be responding to a troll or two out of hundreds of comments.

 

[Treblaine]

Well I'm simplifying for brevity, but I believe the principal still stands, that you can't excuse this trend by a psychologist's study proving that it's real and to do with ego.

LoL, it's not a psychological study. It's years of psychological studies showing how peoples preferences are determined. It's part of a much larger arena of psychological study that shows how people are not rational (as in a normative concept of reasoning in the sense that rational people should derive conclusions in a consistent way given the information at disposal). This is an offshoot of work that has literally changed the way of how science understands the motivation of people and why people make the choices they make. You can't reduce years of a two mens life and a Noble Prize to racism and sexism. It just doesn't make sense to view something that is essential to who people are and their driving motivations in a given situation to that.

A study of studies is still a study.

Just because people have a tendency to act irrationally doesn't mean such irrationality should be indulged. This is kind of a "ministry of the bleeding obvious" as "people are prejudiced" and "prejudice is irrational" DUUUUUUUUUUDUUUUUUUUUHH! The significance is finding a measurable basis for this, but downvotes for you for acting like this is any sort of defence for such tendencies.

You'll have to do better to excuse such favouritism than "oh no, science proves they really do have this prejudice".

Bigotry isn't acceptable just because the majority do it!

And I think YOU are the one guilty of reducing their work by bringing up their work in such trite terms, so don't you start making any accusations.

 

[Baresark]

It's utterly crazy that men are expected as being unable to imagine they are playing as a woman when they are able to imagine so many other completely unreal things, like rocket jumping, flying around overhead rails in a flying city, even dying. But cannot work if they have to play the role of a woman? Or a black person?

Did anyone actually say that?