Yeah, they talk about it, but they certainly don't seem as dedicated to it as Anita. As much as they talk about it, I'm not at all sure people know about it all that much, and this is the largest problem. Anita's a big name. She gets out there, she talks about it, she makes herself known, apparently.runic knight said:-snip-
No, I don't think it is lack of people wanting to talk about the issue at all. Hell, Jim and Moviebob around here talk about the issues and do them more justice. The guys over at Extra Credits do too, and did long before Anita. Hell, even many letsplayers end up having discussion on the topic in a way that at least addresses and acknowledges the industry failings and encourages actual discussion on the topic far more then Anita. It is sad when the GameGrumps offers better insight and topic of civilized discussion then a woman who's sole aspect of fame is that very topic.
As great as Jim Sterling (who I'm more familiar with) and Movie Bob (Who I don't watch as often) are in talking about it, they need greater exposure.
Gamegrumps talks about women's representation? And I think I'm subscribed to them, and I hadn't noticed. No slight to them, it's just kinda my point. They aren't even on my radar.
I've been to Anita's site. While she talks about representation almost exclusively, she also discusses other things like the evoluton of Legos from a gender neutral product to what we see recently. 2 worlds.And keep in mind, that this is the only topic Anita talks about, where as all the otherso n the list address or at least try to, the complex web of issues and topics relating to gaming. Anita specialized in feminist ideology and presses that onto everything else. And doing so makes her a one note ideologue and creates controversy instead of discussion. No, much like when someone tries to claim the same about her political themed alternatives of O'Riley or Jones or 'insert fox news pundit here', her popularity has nothing to do with a lack of alternative and everything to do with the controversy around her. People talk about her because she is controversial (no, this is no because of the topic itself, otherwise every example I mentioned would have been just as big and just as prominent, but of method and shit stirring).
One largely aimed at boys with violence, weapons, and jobs like cops, pilots, and firefighters.
Another? extremely pink, with the rest pastel. The figures are minifigs, largely incompatible with Lego City proper.
But that's off topic. Point is she does do more than just talk about videogames.
As towards audience, I was thinking that it's needed to go after more than the gamers themselves, but the developers, and producers as well. And thus you have to talk to people that'd likely call themselves professional adults, in denial over enjoying anything other than live, straightfaced news with the occassional shouting. There's a reason that when people talk seriously on tv, they talk seriously for the most part.You dismiss the others unfairly as well and it highlights another issue as to why anita is presumed the face of the issue when she actually does nothing to help. Jim is volatile and satirical. Extra Credits use cartoons. Moviebob is short and to the point. All of them are designed, intentionally, for the gaming audience itself. Say what you will about their opinions, all of them make the product that is suppose to reach, and therefore influence, the gaming community.
Part of the audience is a lot of people who'll never admit to watching cartoons, and probably not even youtube. Real hard ass types.
Honestly, I love Jim Sterling. I watch every vid, and went back, and watched everything on Escapist. He's practically my hero as far as people that talk about videogames.They also touch on many issues, showing an understanding of how there is more then one issue and even touch on how various issues relate and can feed each other, as well as often offering both sides to an argument. And even if done sometimes superficially, they still acknowledge that the other side has actual arguments and address them. It is easy to see that they care, and even when people disagree with them, the amount of reaction they get, even when making completely controversial topics, is still worlds less then the flack Anita brags about getting on the only video she had
openoh sorry, I remember trying to post on that video, it wasn't open, it was authorized only comments.
I've watched more than a few Movie Bobs, but mostly when he talked comics, and that vid about the old nerd generation being unable to let go of how they were treated, and should be better.
I, by far, do not hate them, or their opinions. All I'm saying is how well known are they outside of the Escapist?
And I am subscribed to Gamegrumps, though I don't watch them as heavily.
My point is, Anita's known all over the place, in many places, ven if it is partly, or even mostly through the controvercy.
See, I was very very very late to the party as far as Anita's concerned. I didn't know who she was for, I'd say a few years after she started? How long was she talking about games? I honestly don't know. And when her name did come up, I didn't really care until fairly recently. That said, she's made a bigger apparent impact than Jim, Bob, and Gamegrumps combined to me.
She just doesn't have competition, IMO, for being the name mentioned first when these topics start. Being the first name mentioned is the most important thing. It can set the tone for everything, IMO. People can talk a great game, but if people aren't around to listen, tehy aren't going to have the impact.
It's really really really optimistic to think youtube+Anita=civilized discussion. Especially with the really limited amount of space for typing comments... at least for long winded folk like me.
Further, keep in mind there's no real moderation in youtube, comments go a mile a second, so it'll likely be flooded by people saying a lot of uncivil things, and ad hominem stuff, drowning out the people that are trying to have a civil discussion, and unlucky sap (likely more than 1.) would have to filter through all of that dung to get the "civil" stuff out. The comments would likely be never ending. Then Anita needs to make a reply video.
The Escapist would be a really really bad expectation to have for Youtube comments.
Separate individuals from a group? Not that I'm a fan of Anita, or trying to defend her as I'd like to think 'm pretty neutral towards her, but care to expand on that?Anita on the other hand, has shown no interest in any of that. From the combative personality to the inability to separate the individuals from the group, to the perpetual push of her ideology onto everything, she is a political demagogue. She is a false face that is suppose to pretend to be a representative of the community or issue in the same way that O'riley doesn't represent all conservatives, nor cares about conservative issues so much as his personal ideological drive and painting the world as black and white.
The rest I can't comment on. I don't talk government type politics.
I'm not trying to dismiss as opposed to be honest here.You dismiss the rest when they are the ones gamers would actually give a shit about and listen to. They are entertaining, they understand how gamers (or I suppose larger geek culture) think and they want to address the problem in a way that gamers can influence things. Anita wants to blame people and ***** about the issue, and while you'd think that would raise awareness, the issues are not unknown to gamers. She is the fox media pundit. Her fame is from controversy, her audience is not gamers per-say but ideologists or those ignorant of the topic or gaming itself. As others have made note of before, she is very comparable to the religious preacher type condemning games for causing violence. She is another Jack Thomson and no one would ever have accused him as representing the discussion so much as representing everything wrong in it.
I appreciate their points of view. I'm just saying they don't seem to be as well known.
Believe me, I'd be thrilled if Movie Bob, or Jim, or Extra Credits got Anita's level of recognition. I agree they make the points better. But like I said, would the hardass professionals listen to them, and take them seriously?
Through Jim's crass nature?
Through Extra credit's cartoon nature?
Mobie bob might have a shot at being taken seriously by them.
I mean, I hear EA's gotten Anita in on Mirror's Edge 2, for better or worse. She's being taken seriously if true, I'd imagine.
I can't say it often enough, I live Jim.You dismiss the others and I can't see why except as arbitrarily. I can understand you may dislike them or they may not jump on the issue the way you like, that is fine, but lets be honest here, they are more highly respected by a larger segment of the community then Anita will ever be, and they never overshadow the topics they discuss. When talked about in relation to the issue, the discussion is still about the issue. How much of the back and forth in these threads since Anita have been more about her then the topic itself? People were having the right discussions on the topic before Anita, now there is just a hell of a lot more noise to deal with about her.
Bob's pretty cool.
Extra Credits is all right with me. I have absolutely nothing against them, personally.
In fact I prefer them over Anita.
I do admit they don't jump on the issue as often as I'd like, but heck, Anita seems to take forever to make a video, so it kinda balances it out some, but Anita has that whole dedication thing going for her, and she seems to go out into the world and have talks on the matter as Bob attended one.
I gotta wonder, outside of the Escapist, does Jim, or Bob get mentioned in talks like these? Extra Credits I could see, maybe.
Word of mouth is definitely going to be important if they are going to become the go to name for videos on the matter.
That's a hell fo a catch 22.Your solution is, sadly, a risk. And when you remember that the industry is made of individual companies not very willing to make risks, you realize how hard it is to get change. Hell, they half-ass those attempts in order to mitigate the huge risks as it is. Hell, they do that to their largest games, sacrificing story or gameplay for "broader appeal" as it is, expecting them to do a female character based game any real justice is like finding a diamond in the rough.
If they don't take the chance, women won't be the playable stars of games, they'll never see them as viable, wash, rinse, repeat.
What other solutions are there?
I mean I'd love to say "indie games!" but I think it'll be a miracle for an indie game with a female protagonist, nevermind most games, to make the kind of bank that the larger industry would take notice. I mean, lets look at the indie darlings. Then lets look at all the rest that haven't made it there. The percentage of indie games that gfot noticed seems intensely small.
Sounds like you're suggesting I give up on wanting female protagonists, honestly considering what I quoted before this, and this part.Your ideas are, quite simply, awesome. I know I would enjoy playing a game like those, and they already have a lot of the potential art assets and issues made they could recycle for the batman one. It is unfortunatet though that the cost of making the game by a triple A company would mean that it would be the bean counters in charge of if it goes through, and the first question they will ask will be "why do it with second stringers, when Batman is the big name?" And that will be the end of that dream. Hell, look what happened to Arkham Origins alone. A batman game that lost a lot of appeal and polish because the company wanted to save a buck but still wanted to market off the popular name. And that is before we get going into backlash territory, where any game with a female protagonist will instantly be controversial, and not just because of the disgruntled fan, but because you can not make a game with a female protagonist without a shit ton of scrutiny about the character. Does she represent women well? Is she too sexualize? Why is she being hurt, that is misogynist and promotes violence against women. Why isn't she being hurt, that is treating her different then a male protagonist so it is misogynist. What about the villains, what are their gender. Why is the villain also female, that is misogynist and says women can't fight men. Why is it a male, that is misogynist because they aren't representing women enough.
I mean, it's a huge risk, and people are gunna hate playing as women, and so forth. Lots of excuses as to why what I want will never happen, which can't be a good thing, can it? I mean I can't accept that I should stop talking about the issue.
One thing about using pre-made assets, though, it it cuts through a lot of development costs. It's why stand alone games like Undead nightmare, Libery City Stories, and Blood Dragon aren't sold at 59.99 like the parent game.
Like I said, we're going to need a lot of women out there. No one person is a good representative of anything but themselves, I think. I mean, meeting one person out of a group is just one impression. Meeting a lot of people will make many impressions. You may not like one, or two of them, but there's bound to be some you'll like.
So, what is the solution? I mean I've given mine, but I'm not really seeing one from you.Do I have to go on? I can understand the frustration, but a female protagonist especially in story based games being rare has as much to do with avoiding a negative backlash from media ideologues as it does with worry about male gamers being turned away, hell, given how most gamers don't care too much about the gender they play as(as seen by portal, L4D, metroid, Borderlands, and sections of games with female characters for shorter portions (batman for instance), I would wager that avoiding the extra undo bullshit that comes with a female protagonist would be even more so. And that is it's own self-feeding cycle, as female protagonists are rare so those that use them get extra bullshit to put up with, making them less likely to be used which feeds back to them being rare. This is one of the reasons I end up calling Anita cancerous as well, as she breeds that sort of mentality, the same that ultimately makes developers choose to not use female protagonists much, and instead go under the radar by doing the same as others. Hell, look at what happened with Lara Croft, how many shitstorms were raised on that alone, for what was ultimately a mediocre but harmless game. First the worry about it being more of the dumb boobs with guns chick, then a fit about the remodel still being to sexualized for reminiscing the iconic clothing, then the "protect" complaint, then the "rape scene" complaint, then the complaint that the game didn't do well because it wasn't advertised well enough, then the excuse that the female protagonist was what made people avoid the game (when by that point it was the media hype that made me, and I am sure a number of others, just pass on the game). And that is not even getting into the complaints by the other side of the crowd upset that the iconic character was changed in design and game style. And the same happens all the time now when a female character is used. Female character's proportions are exaggerated in a game that does it to every character? Female character is the companion and main character of the story (while the player character is the "action" and plot on tracks aspect)? Female child is main point of redemption of the protagonist? Every one of this ended up in drama and shitstorms because they were female characters by people who keep complaining there is not enough good female characters. Of course not when every attempt by wary publishers and developers are shot down for not being the perfect example and failures are not tolerated without calls of misogyny and a week or two of bad publicity to contend with. What is saddest about this all is that the characters are scrutinized like that solely because they are female.
Unfortuantely that extra scrutiny, especially when so often molehills, just decreases the odds of a game like you wants. Now I am not saying people shouldn't examine and argue about female characters, and I am not saying people need to shut up about the lack of them or the patterns they often fall into, but what happens now, the rapid, controversial seeking drama-fests about them that pop up over stupid shit, that is not healthy for the cause. It is just another roadblock, this one made by the very people who actively claim to want more female protagonists, in a long list of excuses companies have to not use them as it is. Hell, comics are known for sexy character designs, especially in female characters. Assuming the company making the game decided to choose the Bird of Prey instead of the Dark Knight for a title character and game, can you honestly tell me that how the characters look and how that relates to feminism and sexism would not be brought out, and that knowing that they would still wouldn't influence company decisions? When it is solely an argument of demand and market demographics, a female protagonist has a bit of an uphill battle to be used in games of certain genre. When you have these other aspects compounding on top of it, it is exponentially less likely.
It sounds simple, just add more female protagonists. Make half decent games. Done. And when you put it like that, yeah, it leaves you scratching your head why they can't just do it, but that question should have been the first point of warning that you were missing something. If the answer is so simple, why haven't they just done it? No reason not to if it will earn them a larger audience and more money. Well, because it isn't so simple. The corporations are run by the conservative and greedy, renown for dogmatic business policies and excess. Game design is more and more products of committee and demographic targeting decisions. Things that increase the odds of the target demographic choosing the game are chosen over alternatives, and things that cause excess controversy are avoided as much as possible or spun to deflect it. Look at some of the latest controversies with female characters. The Puppeteer guy and the Dragon's Dogma drama both were from game makers being passionate about what they wanted their games to be like. You think that next time they will be so lenient to pet projects after those mishaps? Or the recent Heavy Rain guy stuff? Every time there is such drama, the developers close ranks a little more and creative freedom is replaced with corporate pandering.
Whenever someone tries to make what you ask, everyone flocks to it, criticizing and smothering the thing and projecting their own ideals or grievances onto it. Such games are no longer their own projects, but considered cogs in a greater debate, and for all the discussion they may cause, dismissed and forgotten afterwords. And if they make no money in the end, they failed to the company and are less likely to be risked again. People love Beyond Good and Evil. Critics loved it. Feminists loved it even. But it didn't make coin, so it is regarded as a failure to the creators.
I mean I can guess "Stop criticising" but I really don't see that happening. That seems to go against human nature. Hate is like a litteral drug.
It sounds repeditive, but the only way I see to combat the criticism is to give people more to love than they hate.
Also I think you typoed Dragon's Crown by typing Dragon's Dogma.
I paid less than 400 for my laptop, a compaq persario cq56 a few years ago. It dun hold up.As for computers, I have found my $400 dollar desktop still holds strong enough to play whatever games I wish after 6 years, albeit on lower settings sometimes. The amount of value I have gotten out of it though compared to a PS3 or Xbone though is massive. Steam sales alone has gotten me a library of games for a combined price still probably less then a 360 and a game woulda got me at launch, to say nothing of live cost for the free online play I enjoy. Not had any real issues with maintenance or upgrade yet, with the worst being a 50 dollar virus purge. When I do upgrade it, it will still probably cost less then a next gen system and I wont lose my library of games to boot.
But like I said, 'll prolly get a new PC over anything, and keep my laptop open for the social stuff I do while gaming.
I don't think Minecraft did much for open world destruction short for helping the push. I think the push predates minecraft a bit with games like Red Faction, and some military shooter I can't remember the name of. Bad Company, or something? Military shooters kinda bleed together a lot.Minecraft did inspire the industry though. Yeah, we have dozens of games from indie publishers from terraria to cubeworld, to the space-themed ones and so on. In the triple A world, we have the push for "open world" and "destructible environments". Hell, don't we have an MMO coming out in a while that has that ability to shape the environment as a big gimmick? And do note that because they are indie, they can be bought and used in a way a little different then a first party title by a major competitor can. If God of War was an indie title, the companies would have hosted it as well instead of making copy cats, at least right away.
You have a point in indie games resembling the old exploratory time in videogames where budgets weren't as huge.As for investment into the indie stuff, yeah, they are just giving them space, but that is sort of the point I was making. They are acknowledging them and even selling their consoles based on them. It is great for them because there is no overhead cost for the games to be made, and any one could be the next castle crashers or minecraft. It is actually funny in a way, because this set up was what made the consoles of the late 80's and early 90's so flush with great games and ideas, that you didn't need a monster budget to make them and you had the freedom to be creative instead of following corporate strategy. It is a reason I love the indie scene and growth, as I see it as a return to what made gaming great in the first place. And because of that freedom, and the lack of publicity many games get until after they are made, it cuts a lot of the issues lowering the odds of using a female protagonist down. No corporate suit saying to use a male because it has a 5.4% chance of improved reaction in play-testing, no controversy every step of the way, no compromising gameplay or story to chase a fickle audience, and much much more creators making what they want to make. Yeah the CoD and Skyrim out there are nice and pretty, but I prefer the fun of TF2 and the gameplay of Dark Souls so much more. Neither are "indie" by any means, but rather a result of a different culture of game making then the creators of the first two. Hell, maybe I am just bias for the indie scene lack of reliance of grey-brown fps bullshit.
Still, even if there was the next castle crashers, or minecraft, how could it hope to stack up to what the industry's after? The CoDs, the MWs, the GTAs, and big names that people go after to try and squeeze money out of the people that already likely bought the games they're trying to emulate?
Money talks, unfortunately, and until indies generate enough of it, I don't think the main industry'll care.
I don't blame you for any bias for the indies.
Heck, lets go a step further and add a "siege mode" where you craft a castle and let Peach to try and repel Bowser for once instead of getting kidnapped and lending credence that Peach likes being kidnapped, and boinks Bowser. <.<The mario idea though, that sounds really cool. I mean, the world is made of bricks and mushroom as it is, and being they are plat-formers, you could just make the game to be reliant on user generated content similar to the sackboys. Hmm...
Maybe make a village of defenses.
Sounds like a plan to me.While I do appreciate this thread that will never die, I think the majority of our topic is moving more and more away from Anita itself and onto actual issue and understanding of the topic of women in gaming. Maybe we should start a sister thread based solely on the issue (and leave the most polarizing aspect of the thread, Anita herself, here).
I'm gunna have to get sleep now, though. rar.
If you don't mind some constructive criticism, I suggest a bit more use of paragraphs to break up the large amounts of text bundles.