Jimquisition: The Creepy Cull of Female Protagonists
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Oddly TOR did it well, the screen simply fades to black and nothing no sound not odd screen wobble nothing, and its well acted post and pre.Tombsite said:
Bioware is good at this (not the scenes themselves) usually sadly they've got worse over the years.
i would be happy, really happy if during a games story they told a compelling love story with no sex scene, like super happy.
1. The problem is that there was legitmate criticism, and praise for Bayonetta (was there ridiculous hate from some areas? Sure, but even CoD has it's dedicated hater base in critics). But those get overlooked. Because it's easier for a developer/artist/publisher to point out the full stop negative articles and use it as an excuse to not try again.Treblaine said:
They don't want to here the constructive criticism. Especially publishers. They want unfettered praise, or they'll take their toys and go home. And only on issues that they could care less about. Because ME3 got such shit for it's ending - and quite a bit of that wasn't constructively expressed. But players were rewarded for their harsh words. The Dark Souls community is in a bit of a civil war as fans tear into each other in regards to the game's difficulty. Hardly were kind words used when addressing the dev team. but they got results. Critics, and players alike, tore into Duke Nukem Forever...and no one's insisting that they reword their feelings to not desparage future attempts at shooters. Plenty of FPSes get shat on, but no one blinks twice at it. There are plenty of occaissions when people have gone whole hog, gleefully, into tearing a game apart. And that never stopped the industry from pumping out more. And yet, it's when women as leads is up for debate that it becomes an issue. We already know that guys will play a game with a woman taking top billing: Kate Archer, Lara Croft, Lightning, Jill Valentine, Bloodrayne, Claire Redfield, Rebecca Chambers, Heather Mason (which is impressive since the entire tone of SH3 was birth and motherhood), Valkyrie.
And still the industry needs to be coddled and told how awesome and amazing they are for taking the bold steps to have a female lead in a game. There's already proof that this dudebro demographic that they're catering too isn't as vast as often portrayed. They already have proof that gamers can play as a female with no problems in multiple genres. So why is the argument always made that they need more proof? Why is it always up to women (and those that agree with them) to use placating words/gestures and guide them on how not to make a piss poor female lead? They just have to jump back a few years and look at their own history.
2. Marcus attractive? That's...debatable. Personal standards, and all. But none of the men were designed to draw in women/gay men. They're male power fantasies. Whereas Bayonetta, old school Lara Croft (and even new!Lara, to a much smaller degree) are designed to appeal to straight men (if a bi/lesbian woman likes it, that's a bonus, but not their intent).
When women/gays say they fancy Marcus, or any of the COG team, it's in spite of the design's intent. it's no different in how it works in comics. Very few male leads are created with the intention of appealing to non-straight men, or women. Especially in a game aiming for wide appeal. Raiden is one of the first ones that come to mind - and even that backfired to a degree. As Kojima once confessed that MGS2 was an attempt to appeal to women, and Raiden's look was based off of popular BL manga tropes. And while the focus groups loved it, when the game came out, most women were unimpressed and demanded Snake back. But it surprised him, and many in the industry as well. Raiden was everything they were told women wanted: nice hair, lean physique, just enough hip to toe the line of androgyny...and yet, women responded better to Snake's scruff and scratchy throat, and more pronounced muscles.
The comic industry is in the same boat. Though a lot of new blood in the artist side has jumped on that and is starting to use it to their benefit.
How in the world is declaring that there is an industrywide problem targetting a small group?Windknight said:
Are you talking exclusively about "oh, if you make gay jokes you must be gay" stuff? What is there to defend? It's pop-psychology BS nonsense and doesn't actually help anything. Which is fine. Someone is a jerk be a jerk back. However i can be destructive when people begin to believe that there is a general truth to the assertion. Because that's what TV taught them.
As far as starting a war... Yes. He is starting one. And/or contributing to one. A lot of people love to dial it back and say "hey, we just want to talk about these things." But talking is just that. Talking. We can try to act as if this is all just talking and no discernible words are being said and no messages sent. Two guys yelling racial slurs at some guy across the street are "just talking." I find it very odd that when people call the message out many like to dial it back to "just talking." As if they want to posit opposition as a general opposition for their right to say things.
Why is it starting a war? Because it's putting people at odds with each other. Read through the first few posts in this topic. A general distaste for and lamentations over the preferences of "manchildren" and "dudebros" and the CoD/FPS crowd and whatnot. What elicited those reactions? Why are people concluding that their sensibilities are at odds with these guys?
The reality, of course, is that they are. But always in the way people think. If you are not a/an FPS fan then the sensibilities of those that are are at odds with you because the perception that they should be catered to the most means you are likely not seeing the types of games you enjoy. And I agree this is cause for concern. It concerns me as well.
Sticking to the far less volatile "FPS vs non FPS" example, there are many ways to address the issue.
1: Attack the dudebros who love the game.
2: Attack the people who make the game.
3: Tell people to stop making THOSE games and instead make THESE games.
4: Portray the fact that the games are popular as a coordinated conspiracy to keep you from getting the games YOU like.
or...
5: Proposition those who like your kind of games.
6: Proposition those who want to make your kinds of games.
7: Tell the people making THOSE games that there are people who would like to see THESE games AS WELL.
8: Push to EXPAND the market to include more of what you like and support it showing that the interest is there rather than constantly tell others to LIMIT how they appeal to other groups and instead focus on creating things that appeal more to you and your sensibilities 2 minutes after carrying on about how stupid and clueless they were about how to appeal to you.
The last 4 are different than the first 4 because the responsibility is placed on those who want to see change. Rather than tell others they need to figure out how to appeal to you you do exactly what they did before they put the market where it was at... You create an industry that reflects your areas of expertise built on the backs of those who have a taste for it.
That's the non-war version. What really is the point of all these attacks regarding sexism and whatnot? We saw a girl raise over 100K to TALK about video games. Where are the kickstarters to actually MAKE these progressive games with the values and progressive ideas? And I'm not trying to say "go out and make your own games" although that's what a lot of people, young, old, rich and poor, did. More that it's weird how much we talk about how the industry is growing as far as patrons but it shouldn't grow as far as who is contributing to the works within.
I guess it bothers me a lot to see the origins of the industry completely repatriated and replaced with a sinister story about hate, intolerance and coordinated moves by Japan, USA and children all before the internet existed in order to attack certain groups and hold them down when what really happened is that some people wanted to make games and they made them based on ideas and principles they were familiar with. The White Male issue is even more perplexing due to Japan's dominance of the industry for all those years.
So yeah... To me it's declaring war. Because we don't have to be fighting. I don't feel like I have to go to battle with XBox live idiots and their "organized" campaign of intolerance of certain groups in order for me to have a good time with people who I know or who have been proven to not suck.
Okay, so I'm confused here.
Some people are saying that female characters shouldn't be prevented from having the same traits as male characters and that traits aren't necessarily gender-specific. Okay, yeah, I get that, makes sense. One guy put it very well, I won't bother paraphrasing him to the word, but basically he said that there isn't any significant difference in how you write a male or a female character.
But then I see someone saying that there are ways of writing women that are 'incorrect', and basically serve only to make a man with tits. Now hang on a second, what?
What the hell kind of sense does that make? And how did we get this split and self-contradictory? Why do these kinds of threads always spiral off into batshit insanity?
Please, answers are appreciated.
Some people are saying that female characters shouldn't be prevented from having the same traits as male characters and that traits aren't necessarily gender-specific. Okay, yeah, I get that, makes sense. One guy put it very well, I won't bother paraphrasing him to the word, but basically he said that there isn't any significant difference in how you write a male or a female character.
But then I see someone saying that there are ways of writing women that are 'incorrect', and basically serve only to make a man with tits. Now hang on a second, what?
What the hell kind of sense does that make? And how did we get this split and self-contradictory? Why do these kinds of threads always spiral off into batshit insanity?
Please, answers are appreciated.
Why should it be on us to make the games? Why should the industry ignore every element of its potential market, and focus instead on pleasing male teenagers alone? And why is pointing this out 'declaring war'? Why is saying 'this is not ok mr game maker, could we get some representation too please?'' being aggressive?Gladys Knight said:
I'm really not seeing your reasoning here. Honestly, it looks more like you want to see it as an attack, you want to see it as aggression when it just is not. and to put it simply, if you see raising awareness of a problem as someone declaring war, then you have to ask yourself why you are seeing it as such.
We want to make our voices heard. we want the publishers to listen and understand that we want female heroines, that telling a creator they cant have a female heroine, or if they do have a female heroine they can't have her on the front cover and be a major part of the marketing, is wrong, and it sends an uncomfortable, unpleasant and sexist message. I am 35 years old. I started gaming when my age was in single digits, and I want to see games grow. When publishers want to send the message 'we don't want cooties on us' it rubs me up the wrong way.
The big thing I did not see mentioned was if the gang behind Mass Effect ever bothered to track the trend of people choosing to play the female Shephard?
I think that's data the industry could use.
I think that's data the industry could use.
Agreed. However, neither AI programming issues nor model development issues are inexhaustible excuses. As programming becomes more sophisticated more will be possible. Over time criticisms or this kind will become fairer.Treblaine said:
A review of Tomb Raider from Good Game at the beginning of this month stands out:Treblaine said:
With this brilliant re-imagining of Lara, she really is one of the most powerful, relatable, and truly human heroes, irrespective of gender, that I've encountered in a game. This experience manages to be exciting, mature, gritty and well paced. All while showcasing a host of fluid mechanics and animations that bring this gripping story to life almost flawlessly. It's 10 out of 10 from me.
- Stephanie "Hex" Bendixsen. http://www.abc.net.au/tv/goodgame/stories/s3703900.htm
Many shooters do have rather generic protagonists, but it is not quite as straight forward in other genres.Treblaine said:
The following are lists of Role Playing and Action/Adventure games that have sold well over the last three years, derived from http://www.vgchartz.com/
Role-playing games:
Dark Souls
Diablo III
Dragon Quest Monsters: Terry's Wonderland 3D (released only in Japan)
Dragon Warrior VII
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, The
Fable III
Fantasy Life
Final Fantasy XIII-2
Guild Wars 2
Kingdom Hearts 3D: Dream Drop Distance
Mass Effect 3
Monster Hunter Tri
Ni no Kuni: Wrath of the White Witch
Pokemon Black / White
Sly Cooper: Thieves in Time
Star Wars: The Old Republic
Sword Art Online: Infinity Moment
World of Warcraft: Musts of Pandaria
Action and Adventure games:
Animal Crossing: New Leaf
Assassin's Creed III
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood
Assassin's Creed: Revelations
Batman: Arkham City
Dead Island
DMC
Dragon's Dogma
Dynasty Warriors 8
God of War: Ascension
Grand Theft Auto IV
Hitman: Absolution
inFAMOUS 2
Kinect Star Wars
L.A. Noire
Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D, The
Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, The
LEGO Batman 2: DC Super Heroes
Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance
New Super Mario Bros. U
New Super Mario Bros. Wii
One Piece Pirate Musou
Paper Mario: Sticker Star
Professor Layton and the Last Specter
Red Dead Redemption
Resident Evil 6
Saints Row: The Third
Senran Kagura Shinovi Verses: Shoujotachi no Shoumei
Skylanders Giants
Skylanders: Spyro's Adventure
Soul Sacrifice
Tomb Raider (2013)
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves
Uncharted 3: Drake's Deception
Uncharted: Golden Abyss
Walking Dead: A Telltale Game Series, The
A trend toward "blank slates" need not prevent us from assessing the extent of female characterisation in games compared to the extent of male characterisation in games. Judging from these lists, my overall impression (for what it is worth) is what I said before. Males in games frequently have more intricate and complex personalities than their female counterparts. This includes supporting characters.
I've been bitching about this crap for years, though not nearly as eloquently as Jim of course. But then again this isn't bitching, he's pointing out a real legitimate problem.
Gotta love how the big guys are all "We can't do THIS to male gamers, that would be weird and wrong!!" all the while completely missing the follow up reply of "But you've been doing it to female gamers for years"
I feel like this is such an untapped market too, I mean... I love games that are all about experiencing new horizons and viewpoints, male oriented stories would be so much more potent if they weren't, for the most part, the only option.
Gotta love how the big guys are all "We can't do THIS to male gamers, that would be weird and wrong!!" all the while completely missing the follow up reply of "But you've been doing it to female gamers for years"
I feel like this is such an untapped market too, I mean... I love games that are all about experiencing new horizons and viewpoints, male oriented stories would be so much more potent if they weren't, for the most part, the only option.
I think it may have something to do with the need some people (and even societies themselves) have to put things in clearly defined boxes. They see men and women as two separate groups with established personality types limited to their respective gender and sexuality.Mr.Squishy said:
Hilariously enough, one of my best friends is a living breathing example which proves this whole stupid thing completely wrong.
I saw someone earlier with the quote that 20% of players chose female Shepard.Disgruntledgrrl said:
At least in the third game, I believe.
Because all the good data suggests there's no market for it.
These are businesses. They're not going to take a risk unless they feel their backs are to the wall.
Even if women make up ~45% of the demographic for gamers, most won't go for the "core" gaming scene. They play world of warcraft. They play farmville. They play angry birds.
There's no problem here that can't be addresses to the industry as a whole; why are they so afraid of their own shadows? Because they're businesses, that's why.
These are businesses. They're not going to take a risk unless they feel their backs are to the wall.
Even if women make up ~45% of the demographic for gamers, most won't go for the "core" gaming scene. They play world of warcraft. They play farmville. They play angry birds.
There's no problem here that can't be addresses to the industry as a whole; why are they so afraid of their own shadows? Because they're businesses, that's why.
Brevity would be appreciated though.wolfwood_is_here said:
No I've assigned stupidity. Paranoia is stupidity, it's reacting of something that isn't there, and I don't have to follow Hanlon's Razor.Treblaine said:
I certainly don't have to follow Occam's Razor as it's illogical that the simplest explanation is always true as things can so easily get complicated. There is some truth to Hanlon's Razor as people are far more likely to be stupid than deliberately malicious.
The burden of proof is on you to show that they are actually greedy and not just idiots.
I have proof they are clueless on game design (stupid) as they are not game designers, they background is in hedge fund managers and they are telling GAME DESIGNERS how to design games.
I think they are being sexist, but not maliciously sexist, but sexist out of stupidity.
You never heard of the phrase ?painting by numbers? it's not science. Science it's numbers any more than card reading has predictive powers.
What's new is justifying it as an imperative, before it was nothing but personal greed of those who collected the profits, now those who take home bonuses after reaching milestones still feel they must push further at all costs.
Hey, I didn't say they were exceptionally idiots, I'm just saying they are idiots.
You aren't being scientific though, not on arbitrary dichotomies like you have made.
No straw man, I was pointing out that preference in a loaded choice (like chose Mass Effect shepard gender) isn't the basis of exclusion.
Everyone is. Gears of War is a work of art, very low brow, but still art. Art and entertainment can be one and the same.
I never heard nor accepted that greed for money even was the solution. Games have to be made for money, but ultimately they have to be made also for the sake of making them. Steven Spielberg didn't just want money, he wanted to make Jurassic Park and he wanted to make Schindler's List.
It can't work if greed (greed for more and more money) is the only or even the overriding motivation.
Money matters... but money it's everything.
If you tell me again what I am and am not doing again I'll put your on my ignore list as a waste of my time. No replies. No nothing.
I'm not going to reply to any more double-talk. This is either from being too clueless on how you are using words or are using a convenient double standard. I have no more time for either.
It's impossible to discuss this any further with you, you put PAGES into responses but not adequate consideration of what I have said and what you said before.
The problem is how even gaming critics like Jim didn't take into account the inherent limitations of the medium in his rant.Fiairflair said:
The problem is this doesn't break down aspects of the character, it's just a relatively small piece of approval. Not like how it is in attack where aspects of the character are picked apart in the negative.
The largest volume and passion is in the negative towards female characters but importantly disproportionately against female characters than against male characters. Characters like Nathan Drake are not broken down for pillory as negative force in the industry, in fact I saw a gametrailers bit where they broke down all the little things like liked about Nathan Drake, the half tuck, how he reacts to things... and they gloss over all the negative (and there is a lot to gloss over).
Hang on a minute, a lot of those are games where you have the option of playing as a woman and/or have very "blank slate" protagonists.
This includes ones where your lead role may have a detailed back story, but it's just the character by their self doesn't characterise. Almost all the characterisation of Shepard is user controlled... but how much of that is false choice to give the mere illusion of player agency and increase immersion.
See it's where both I want and feel there is the greatest need for female lead is in violent-action shooters, not for women but for both male and female gamers its something that must be explored more widely.
And I think it's most important from the attitude to violent-action games that it doesn't become the sole preserve of male machismo.
Tomb Raider is one but I'm torn as I love that you have a woman in an action-violent role but on the other hand Tomb Raider was more of a pure platformer with a low emphasis of violence. Plus it's a god awful cover based shooter.