Jimquisition: The Creepy Cull of Female Protagonists

[Lightknight]

Im a 27 straight male thats been playing video games since I was 2 and I switch between male and female characters all the time and could care less what sex they are. When they say males only play males they must be talking for themselves cause even with my other male friends who game this has never been a topic because we never felt it needed to be. I think people these days are too sensitive and need to calm down for real.

Yeah, I've seen a number of males play as females all the time. If given a choice I like to pick an avatar that resembles me but if not I don't really care.

I think the main opposition to this one was that she was a girl as much as that she has a relationship in the game. So the question takes it a step further. If you role play as a girl are you ok with your character getting some action from a guy? As I said earlier, I'd posit that guys spent all of the early Tomb Raider franchize mentally undressing Lara and a sex scene would have just been an opportunity to see her undress moreso than insult them in some way where their avatar is doing something that they wouldn't.

 

[Treblaine]

Snippy Snip

Just because the main character is female doesn't automatically make her somehow unproblematic.

Could do without the double negatives.

And a person that finds parts of her character/the game troubling can still enjoy the game. You're playing the the argument that if it's female it's inherently a good thing, and should be exempt from criticism.

No I'm not.

And that's just a no good, very bad way, to approach it. The people that had issues with Bayonetta were thrilled to see a game with a female lead, they just had issue with how much it catered to the male gaze in an industry that already does enough of that.

The last part doesn't make sense, such an absence of women in gaming as all precludes

And what's the problem with something that appeals to straight men and lesbians? Actually what is the damn problem. It doesn't exclude anyone else any more than Vamp excludes non-gay-men from Metal Gear Solid 2 + 4

Violent shooters are's specifically for men, there is no basis to that, it's a spurious myth that violent entertainment is only or overwhelmingly appealing to males.

It reinforced the idea that a woman is only empowered if she's sexual.

No it doesn't, a single game doesn't do that.

It's still limiting in offering a robust number of different character types outside of fap-bait.

No one would be crazy enough to fap/schlick to Bayonetta gameplay footage.

When the only way a woman can be seen as awesome is when she's DTF, how is that any different than a game like Duke Nukem where women are there simply to be groped?

Bayonetta isn't only way women can be depicted as awesome in video games and you know that. It's just one depiction. And she if she was "DTF" as Jersey Shore puts it, it's because it's what she wants, it's her agency.

it still plays on that mentality. And is a valid criticism of the game. Bayonetta was a good attempt, but it still catered towards what men think is how a woman behaves when she's powerful

That's you making assumptions about men and ignoring lesbians (and of course gay men), not a criticism of the game from your own perspective. I want YOUR opinion, not your assumptions on what other people's opinion might be. (straight) Men can say for themselves what they conclude from playing such games.

(and that's ignoring the storyline which left a big question of whether the Bayonetta we played through as was how she truly was since, y'know, amnesia). And there was no contrast with the other female character sin the game. Even with goofball Dante you had the counterpoint of Virgil being painfully serious.

So what. The developer didn't do a carbon copy of their previous games. What does that observation add? I don't think the writing can be summarised so simply.

BUT! Because the game was so over the top, there were those that felt that it was part of the charm. Bright colours, a crazy soundtrack, ridiculous moveset, wtf boss battles. It was a crazy ride from start to finish.

So if a person doesn't find offense to the game because of that, they aren't wrong either. because, on it's own, bayonetta is relatively harmless. However, in an industry that already promotes women as sexual things, how was it really gorundbreaking? When we've got Laura Crofts and DoA girls, and Zero Suit Samus, and the ladies of MK...how was she really doing anything different for women being leads in games?

Are YOU offended by the game?

It's quite clear the problem with the industry is it doesn't promote women at all, and why is it that developers are avoiding them like the plague?

(Let me be clear: I have the game and love it. I think it's good phone, and I get great joy out of the crazy finishers done to the stylings of Fly Me to the Moon. But I'm not going to kid myself and think that I should be grateful for this crumb of an offering when it come to female protagonists)

No one is expecting you to be grateful for this depiction... we just don't want one of the few female depictions in recent years getting shot down again because it isn't ground-breaking because the message that developers are getting is they get so much flak for having a female doing anything that they just shouldn't bother, and should just make another cover based harrowing war shooter with a cast entirely of exploitative male clichés.

Because when it's trash with males they can at least have fun with that.

Rihanna Pratchett (writer of Tomb Raider 2013) noted this, no one wants to discuss what a negative influence characters like Nathan Drake are on males, if these is anything wrong with him then it's a problem with that character, not the entire industry. Even if the possibly negative thing is being done by almost every other male lead.

 

[Technicka]

snip for length

The industry is inundated with different type of male leads. There's something for everyone. Women aren't given the same opportunities. Our heroes are always sexy and ready to have sex. We don't get unattractive fighters (GoW), or goofballs (classic!Dante), or bitter assholes (new!Dante)or douchebags (Nate Drake) or average joes (Alan Wake)in droves. So when the few leading ladies we do get keep sticking to the same mold, at what point do women start calling out the creators to try something different?

And, yes, you are arguing that because Bayonetta is one of the very few female leads out there, that women shouldn't call out the problems with her/the game. You back it by saying because the industry won't chance another game with a female lead. And yet, we're seeing that already. Even with the critical love that Tomb Raider is getting, with the ferver that BG&E can still command of fans, we still see instances like developers having to fight to have the main female lead on the cover of her own game, or where another is pushed to the back as to not scare of the menfolk. It's self-fulfilling: "Let's not not support this game with a female lead because the audience won't like it because we refuse to showcase it's best features, or fight for it like we do our dozen of other male-led titles!" But then the industry is surprised when obscure-but-entertaining title with a lady under-performs compared to Grizzled White Guy Saves The Day With Guns And Lasers VI: Payback Platinum Edition

If we aren't calling out the mistakes to provide constructive criticism, then how do we expect to reach a point where we'll see a healthy roster of varied female heroes? Are we to just wait until the industry has an epiphany?


And like I said. Bayonetta was fun. I wasn't bothered by it. But that's me personally. My friend, however was bothered by a few aspects. That didn't make her feelings any less valid because they didn't phase me. Because she still enjoyed the game on it's own merits. She just didn't like it when held as part of the industry mindset as a whole.

 

[Baralak]

You know, I wonder what it says about me when I have to play a guy in Elder Scrolls to take the game seriously, but on the flipside, I have to play a girl in all the Saints Row games to take the game seriously.


Also, I fully admit that I love playing dress up with characters. Especially in Saints Row, since all clothing is irrelevant to character stats, unlike Elder Scrolls and other such RPGs. Also, MaleShep in all 3 Mass Effects.


Captcha: chocolate milk. I'd love to have some, thank you.

 

[Technicka]

some things

I agree, it does toe a rather faint line of self-mockery. And with a lot of works that do that...it can sometimes backfire (like the Uncle Ruckus movie that's apparently in the works...).

I enjoyed that Bayonetta was a woman that was comfortable with her body and sexuality. It was a breath of fresh air. But that doesn't mean another player might not feel the same way, or might be weary of an outsider (in this case a man) being able to accurately showcase this without pandering to the very people it's poking fun at. Like I said. Not gonna knock a person for having issues with the game.

I will say that the idea of "Any representation is good representation," is a troubling one. Should an NDN be happy that there's a show with a person of their race on a show when that person is a send up of the broken English-speaking noble savage type?

Yes it sucks that any criticism can be used to fuel the naysayers. But let's be real, the nay sayers are doing it anyway. Doesn't matter if it's a good game, a bad one, or average. They'll stick to their guns because they refuse to do otherwise. So why should people let those folk dictate when they can approach something critically?

 

[wolfwood_is_here]

This will hurt the industry when it finds itself subject to the censors.

If making such a tiny amount more money in the short term from a minority of egotistical sexists... if that is all that matters above artistic integrity then that so devalues video games as expressive form of art that they are liable to lose the protection they have end up restricted like hardcore pornography. Don't think it could happen? Look at Germany's censorship laws on video games.

And don't exaggerate that they will become starving artists, we are talking about the smallest effect on maximum sales by pandering to a small proportion of a majority who egotistically refuse to have anything other than a straight white male in the lead role. And you don't see the result of such staleness can have in the long term.

Trying to make games just for the money and you end up where EA is!

You seem to assert that there needs to be an egotistical sexist, but I don't think it's that complicated. If the Return On Investment isn't there, the game doesn't get made. It doesn't even matter if the "tiny amount" means they end up in the black, if the publisher is trying to gain market share and maximize profits, they don't want niche projects that break even, they want blockbusters that earn big bucks. Whether that's right or not isn't what we're discussing here, but greed is the root of the problem, not sexism.

Video games are not viewed as an expressive form of art by the majority of people who write laws, report the news, and go out and vote. One cannot blame them when the industry is doing its best to exploit base desires and pander to the lowest common denominators. The solution to both issues? Education.

The problem is you seem to ignorantly assume that a female lead - alone - will, regardless of all else, so cripple a game's possibility of success that it will bankrupt everyone involved.

You seriously think that Bioshock Infinite would have tanked like Duke Nukem if it had a "Becky DeWitt" as the lead role rather than a dude?!?

The statement "only Sith deal in absolutes" is itself an absolute, so it can't be true if it was spoken by a Jedi that never deals with absolutes. If it's true, it invalidates the very point it was trying to make. It's a nice sentiment, but it falls apart under any real scrutiny.

I guess the other side of the coin is that you assume that a female lead - alone - will, regardless of all else, so benefit a game's possibility of success that it will profit everyone involved?

There's certainly a difference between a "good" and a "bad" character. Is gender parity alone the goal? Would it be sufficient to say that so long as we had equal numbers of "good" and "bad" male and female characters, at least they're equally represented?

No. At best they are failed hedge-fund fiddlers, who mostly know nothing about creating games and are only in it to make money. They don't know the risks as they have no idea what they are dealing with.

Everyone is in it to make money. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying, or dangerously naive.

How about people stop claiming to speak for everyone else.

So far as I can tell, I am the only person who appealed to changing the sexual appetites of male gamers, back in my post on page 10. I am also probably the only person who has been attempting to parallel the failed evangelism of faiths and the failing evangelism of sexism in gaming in hopes that they don't make the same mistakes. On all accounts, I am standing by myself in a unique position that doesn't appear to be supported by anyone else in the thread. Pray tell who is the "everyone else" that I would be speaking for?

There are no grounds to say that a female lead alone will destroy a game's chance at success.

See if a game with a macho male protagonist fails, it's for any reason other than his gender.

But if a series with a female protagonist after years of success fails, then suddenly it's the fault of the lead role being a women. This does not make sense.

As has already been stated, is this a straw man? I do not understand where I made the argument that the situation you've described is supposed to make sense.

Games don't need female roles for a minority of female gamers, they deserve female roles for all gamers.

Please explain how someone deserves something they don't want.

This isn't about ideologies, this is because female characters could and would make good leads for games, including action games.

Is the call for more female protagonists, good female protagonists, or more good female protagonists?

Depiction of women has not gone the way of the buggywhip, how incredibly out of touch are you!?!?!

You don't seem to have understood the analogy, so I'll put it differently. Companies like EA are the horse whip manufacturers. They've been in business for a (realtive to the industry) long time, and they see new technologies coming along to replace them as a threat, not something to adapt to. In almost every instance where you have an established manufacturing entity, they are extremely resistant to change. Even their new ideas seem like barely more than a new coat of paint on the old ideas. If they don't adapt and change, however, they will eventually die out, because the market to support them has fallen through. This is often because, whether a product really is superior or not, if the tastes of the consumers change, then so does the market.

Indie developers are in a place to meet the needs of female gamers, but in order for them to get support the consumers (male and female gamers) have to be willing to change their tastes and what they are expecting. This doesn't mean they need to expect a worse game, but that they are going to get a different experience than they may be used to. If they don't want that experience, it's not beneficial to call them names and browbeat them, you have to instead educate as to why that point-of-view is relevant. That is why I believe that it's the consumers changing that will lead to a lasting improvement of the industry, because if the consumers are better educated they are better able to then respond to support their hobby when questioned by "outsiders".

This means that some folks are going to have to boycott big publishers, even if they're making games they like, and educate both their neighbors and congresscritters that the consumers of video games are mature enough to keep self-regulating.

That's the biggest insult to injury of all, you see? They aren't just trying to regulate video games because of their content, but because the market has shown that gamer will cave to and revel in the exploitation. They see the problem as not being able to be solved internal to the game industry because none of us are championing maturity in what we're supporting. They see us being unable to help ourselves, so they want to introduce laws and censorship because they don't think we have the maturity to make those decisions. They see us dithering about, contemplating chicken-egg, instead of taking the mature route and just owning our role and making the change in ourselves.

So that is why I would push for education. That is why I blame the consumer. That is why I see banging the gongs of sexism missing the point, because the industry as a whole has bigger problems than gender parity. We're on the brink of losing control of the very medium we love so dearly, and while sexism is certainly a part of it, I believe the solution requires more personal involvement than folks seem willing to commit to.

 

[Legion]

*snip*

I think you should specify female playable characters.

I think it is an unfair generalisation to suggest that most female characters in all video game roles are sexual. Non-playable characters have as much variety as men do really.

 

[Partezan]

snip for length

The industry is inundated with different type of male leads. There's something for everyone. Women aren't given the same opportunities. Our heroes are always sexy and ready to have sex. We don't get unattractive fighters (GoW), or goofballs (classic!Dante), or bitter assholes (new!Dante)or douchebags (Nate Drake) or average joes (Alan Wake)in droves. So when the few leading ladies we do get keep sticking to the same mold, at what point do women start calling out the creators to try something different?

And, yes, you are arguing that because Bayonetta is one of the very few female leads out there, that women shouldn't call out the problems with her/the game. You back it by saying because the industry won't chance another game with a female lead. And yet, we're seeing that already. Even with the critical love that Tomb Raider is getting, with the ferver that BG&E can still command of fans, we still see instances like developers having to fight to have the main female lead on the cover of her own game, or where another is pushed to the back as to not scare of the menfolk. It's self-fulfilling: "Let's not not support this game with a female lead because the audience won't like it because we refuse to showcase it's best features, or fight for it like we do our dozen of other male-led titles!" But then the industry is surprised when obscure-but-entertaining title with a lady under-performs compared to Grizzled White Guy Saves The Day With Guns And Lasers VI: Payback Platinum Edition

If we aren't calling out the mistakes to provide constructive criticism, then how do we expect to reach a point where we'll see a healthy roster of varied female heroes? Are we to just wait until the industry has an epiphany?


And like I said. Bayonetta was fun. I wasn't bothered by it. But that's me personally. My friend, however was bothered by a few aspects. That didn't make her feelings any less valid because they didn't phase me. Because she still enjoyed the game on it's own merits. She just didn't like it when held as part of the industry mindset as a whole.

You can call out the market and demand from them what you desire as much as you want!

The issue is that people like Jim shame men into thinking there is something wrong with them wanting to play as a male character, even though here you are demanding to play as a female one. The issue is that people don't seem to see the hypocrisy of women wanting to play female leads but then being critical of men when they speak up and tell the market they want to play as male ones.

If gender in video games really didn't matter, and men shouldn't care if they play as a man or a woman then the same thing should be said for women, stop caring who you play as! But that is not the case, and you have every right to demand female characters but just stop shaming men when they don't do the same.

 

[itsthesheppy]

Yet another gender-problems video.

Yet another 16-page thread.

I wonder if the video game industry and community have a problem with gender.

It's the hot topic of recent times, ripe for the media spotlight due to all the "controversy", juicy for massive forum rave-fests because it's such a touchy topic for so many people...really, what else was expected?

Just like all those other completely phony made-up flash in the pan controversies. Like... uhm... hang on, no, I'll come up with it...

Violence in games leading to violence in real life? No, that's not it; that's just people outside the community saying that. What other major-and-phony controversies are there from inside the community? Hmmm.

I'll get back to you on that. I'm sure there's lots.

 

[Technicka]

Hey you know all those books, comics, and even movies written by women. Did you ever wonder why they don't include any of the female characters you mentioned? Could it be because even women don't like these types of women? If so then their lack of appeal is probably why they're not in games.

You must not do much reading of things with female leads. Because there's plenty of books written by women with varying female personality types in their leads. Comics are tougher because you have to stick to indie titles, as the Big Two aren't very accepting of female talent (but the few that do, have written for characters that range from Wonder Woman to Mystique to X-23. And movies? Well you've got works like Bridesmaids, Brave, and Zero Dark Thirty as written ones that show women with different attributes.

So, yes, there are plenty of women that like reading about women that are more than just strength through sexiness.

It was explained in the video that the people who rated the box art felt that the cover with the male character the player plays as was better than the cover with the non-playable female character. I guess people just like the character they play as to be on the box art, rather than unplayable characters.

No, it was explained that the box art was plotted the way it was because of fear that having the female on the cover ALONGSIDE the male would scare male gamers off. The argument wasn't to erase the hero, but to use the cover to convey that the woman was also important to the game's plot. the back cover is where you regulate the, "Oh by the way..." bits, as most people don't actually read the back (because if they did, parents would stop bitching about game content...)

Comparing imaginary games to your strawmen just shows you lack a real argument. Certain type of genre are always going to be more popular than other genre, just like certain type of characters are always going to be more popular than other types. So a game made to appeal to as many people as possible will always sell better than a game designed to appeal to a niche market.

Except the video already proved my argument. Publishers don't want to put their money behind a new IP if it focuses on a woman, because they're sure it'll fail. But they'll gladly release it and watch it fail. Meanwhile a new IP with a male lead, get's all the press events, and a slew of trailers and screenshots. And if it fails, no one says, "Well I guess we shouldn't make a game with white dudes anymore." No. They try again. And again. And again. Even using bayonetta as an example, unless you were a big fan of the creator, you didn't see much outside of dedicated game sites. No TV ads, either. But when the original DMC came out, there were plenty of ads.

Look at the Assassin's Creed series. AC3 had theatrical trailers before some movies, plenty of airtime on TV. And Liberation got squat, and was stuck on the Vita, a system with a decidedly small userbase. The game was set up to fail long before launch.

Mass Effect is brought up alot (well let's just go with all of the Bioware titles of late). I remember the ME2 commercials. For all the glory of having a female playable option, the ads were quick to not make mention of that. Dragon Age focused on the male version of the hero as well. Sure ME3 got a fem!Shep trailer. And if you were a denizen of the webs, you saw it. But it never hit the airwaves during primetime. It was never shown in theaters.

You can call out the market and demand from them what you desire as much as you want!

The issue is that people like Jim shame men into thinking there is something wrong with them wanting to play as a male character, even though here you are demanding to play as a female one. The issue is that people don't seem to see the hypocrisy of women wanting to play female leads but then being critical of men when they speak up and tell the market they want to play as male ones.

If gender in video games really didn't matter, and men shouldn't care if they play as a man or a woman then the same thing should be said for women, stop caring who you play as! But that is not the case, and you have every right to demand female characters but just stop shaming men when they don't do the same.

Except pretty much every self-ID'd female that's commented in this thread has pointed out that we have been playing as male leads (even when there's romance) since the get-go. And we aren't crying out about how ickle it is to do so.

Jim isn't shaming men for not preferring to play female leads. He's calling out guys who's argument hinges on their fear of seeing the character kiss a dude (and subsequently, themselves kiss a dude). If that's the only reason a person refuses to play a woman, that's a pretty weaksauce one as, like I said, women and minorities have been doing it for a long time.

 

[Hellkiller15]

I will admit that I would feel awkward about a female protagonist getting it on with a male love interest. But to be honest if it meant we got more female protagonists I would happy deal with that awkward moment/s. I would love to see some interesting games with strong female leads and I have felt for quite a long time that it's a great shame that we haven't had many female leads in the games industry because they can often be far more interesting then typical strong males like every single male character from Gear of War.

 

[Technicka]

While you have provided examples of female leads in comics and movies you failed to explain which female characters are the type you said you wanted more of. Which of these female characters are unattractive, goofballs, bitter assholes, douchebags, or average Joes? If none of them are then try to figure out why these type of characters are so unpopular.

It's cute that you're so hung up on the fact that I didn't give you a wikipedia calibre listing of every female ever writeen ever. Because Twilight 9regardless of your thoughts about it) was wirtten by a woman with an average female lead. The Anita Blake series features a lead that's a pretty raging ***** more often than not. Wolf at The Door is about a soccer mom-type. My Mad Fat Diary has an unattractiveness, overweight lead. Hunger Games - depsite what the movie shows you, Katniss is painfully underfed and as such isn't exactly going to win any beauty pageants.

It was clearly stated that people preferred Bioshock box art that only featured the playable character on the front, so that's why this version was chosen. In the world of marketing what the customer prefers is what's chosen, not what's the most accurate.

I'm not entirely sure you've actually taken part of a focus group. So maybe that's why I'm not impressed with that argument. Because those questionnaires tend to be worded in a way that lead participants to the results that the client already want. It's far too often used as a validation. After all, focus groups told Hollywood that movies where the female is the hero aren't worth doing. And the whoops Ellen Ripley happend. And whoops again, Angelina Jolie becomes an action star. And whoops Twilight proves even a female led romance can be a force to recon with. And ho, there's Hunger Games again proving them wrong.

Bayonetta and DMC were made by different developers and had different publishers so it's no surprised that they were advertised differently. Especially since the original DMC was released in 2001, while Bayonetta was released in 2010. Back in 2001 fewer people used the internet so you had to use more television adverts to make people aware of your games.

You also shouldn't consider how Bayonetta was advertised in the USA as a reflection of how it was advertised throughout the world. In Japan was advertised Bayonetta using large posters at railway stations in Tokyo.

http://kotaku.com/5389856/bayonetta-stickers-removed-posters-uncovered

That would hold weight if I didn't just watch a Bioshock advert on TV. Traditional media is still something business uses. You're implying that Bayonetta got less TV time because the internet is the way publishers look to spread hype. When plenty of other titles see both avenues being employed. Bayonetta had the beenefit of using the DMC brand (as a good portion of the original DMC team was behind it) and that angle could've been used in the US as a promotional item. But nope.

And I'm not entirely sure why you're bringing up the Japan ad campaign since they don't have the same issues we do with women on covers, or having games focused on them.

Liberation is a spin off while AC3 is a continuation of the main story. AC3 is being released on a multiple platforms while Liberation is only being released on one (which AC3 isn't being released on). Liberation was never going to be as popular because it's not about Desmond's predecessors.

The CoD franchise has been spin offs for quite some time. And no one questioned that aspect when Activision stuck with it. Halo ODST and Reach were too, and they still got as much hype as the main story. Hell, even Ballad of Gay Tony (a friggin DLC) got more media love than Liberation. So like I said, Liberation was set up to not succeed, but now when someone complains about sexism in gaming, people can point out that Liberation happened. But such a shame it didn't do well, and that's why female leads are so scarce.

 

[Partezan]

Jim isn't shaming men for not preferring to play female leads. He's calling out guys who's argument hinges on their fear of seeing the character kiss a dude (and subsequently, themselves kiss a dude). If that's the only reason a person refuses to play a woman, that's a pretty weaksauce one as, like I said, women and minorities have been doing it for a long time.

it has nothing to do with fear, I doubt any gamer out there expresses a physical sensation of terror at playing a romance from a female point of view or that of a homosexual, it's just a preference.

Do you not have a preference in clothing? Do you think it would be retarded if for example you didn't like wearing a dress and then I made a video calling you sexist, and creepy and telling you that you have a problem because you don't want to put on a dress?

If you buy the game for me or even better yet pay me money for playing a game I'll play whatever gay kissing sex thing you can come up with, no one has a physical fear they simply have a preference and these days if your preference isn't a feminine or gay one then you have issues...

And Jim is absolutely shaming that preference, go back and watch his video again and listen to to all the shaming language he uses and all in regards to a PREFERENCE of males to play as strong male characters.

 

[Technicka]

Jim isn't shaming men for not preferring to play female leads. He's calling out guys who's argument hinges on their fear of seeing the character kiss a dude (and subsequently, themselves kiss a dude). If that's the only reason a person refuses to play a woman, that's a pretty weaksauce one as, like I said, women and minorities have been doing it for a long time.

it has nothing to do with fear, I doubt any gamer out there expresses a physical sensation of terror at playing a romance from a female point of view or that of a homosexual, it's just a preference.

Do you not have a preference in clothing? Do you think it would be retarded if for example you didn't like wearing a dress and then I made a video calling you sexist, and creepy and telling you that you have a problem because you don't want to put on a dress?

If you buy the game for me or even better yet pay me money for playing a game I'll play whatever gay kissing sex thing you can come up with, no one has a physical fear they simply have a preference and these days if your preference isn't a feminine or gay one then you have issues...

And Jim is absolutely shaming that preference, go back and watch his video again and listen to to all the shaming language he uses and all in regards to a PREFERENCE of males to play as strong male characters.

Yea, nooope. He's calling out the guys that are saying they can't play as a female because they don't want to maybe have to play a scenario where the lead has adult times with a male. The majority of the video is him raging against an industry that seems determined to ignore that women are customers and that they deserve more than to be depicted as objects in so many games. He also makes mention that games can't even be arsed to offer the chance for players to create a character that they want. If games went about it like BioWare does, then this wouldn't be such an issue (the marketing part would, though). But the games don't even offer that much. So, in a game like Bioshock, preferences is a non-issue because there's only one option, regardless of the players' desire.