The Needles: Lose the Dude

[Susan Arendt]

I just don't see why it matters, to tell the truth... I find it remarkably easy to play as either a guy or a girl. For instance, I have as much fun playing as Jill Valentine in Resident Evil as I do as Kratos in God of War. Both characters (and games) have different assets that set them apart, but they're both fun.

That's just my opinion.

Your opinion sucks. Jill Valentine could never properly make a sammich. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyuz4IB6Pbc] And no female has ever made anything as awesome as that video. Or Resident Evil. Or God of War.

Because when you're creating awesome shit, you don't have time to post unfunny versions of DURRR I DONT UNDERSTAND YOUR OBVIOUS SATIRE DURRR or YOU OFFENDED MY PRECIOUS SNOWFLAKE SEEEeeeeEEELF!

How about this, oh various entitled she-and-occasionally-he-bitches: Cave Story was made by ONE MAN. With a family and a second job to support that family. Now, if ONE WOMAN can make a game as awesome as that, or better yet, if ONE WOMAN has made this game and has in fact been ignored due to sexism, then I'll consider your pettifogging concerns valid, rather
than the desperate attention-seeking of girls who no doubt failed in the both the job and the sexual market and are desperately trying to blame their problems on the nearest hapless male who'll listen to their whining.

And if you can't find this game, then take a cue from Eva Mendez and make sex tape. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEsNFOOXChI]

Huh? How does this, in any way, address the post you quoted? It's like you're having a completely different conversation.

 

[Andy Chalk]

The women I know who game, yeah, a lack of female protagonists isn't what we consider a major downfall of the industry, but it's one of those grumbling complaints I hear and sometimes reflect. I compare it to load screens; mostly it's something that isn't bothersome, but it can be improved on - and on some occasions, it creates a jarring game-breaking dissonance with game narrative.

I'm not a big fan of line-by-line quoting but I want to mention before I forget that I asked a female core gamer about this and she said something very similar: She'd love to see more female protagonists but their shortage isn't something that she's losing sleep over. So it's not an urgent concern but obviously there's a very real and shared desire for more prominent roles for women.

It's partly following money, true, but that tends to come across in business meetings as a mumble that consumers aren't turned off by a strong female lead, so it's ok to plunk down investment capital on a major production when the concept has been proven safe.

I'd disagree with you there and say it's entirely following the money. At least for companies like Activision. You can look to smaller, independent developers and maybe expect a more diverse range of gender roles, but corporate heavyweights are extremely unlikely to roll the dice on something like that. It's creatively bankrupt, sure, but that's the nature of the vast majority of the game industry - and the movie industry, too. It's profits and shareholders, and if that means churning out Modern Warfare clones and annual Madden iterations, so be it. A billion dollars - a billion dollars! - in quarterly revenue can't be all wrong.

Quite frankly, I'm sort of aghast that you seem to be throwing your hands up in the air at the concept of holding games up to certain artistic standards, or that it's silly to think they can be a factor in social progress (a major definition of art is reflecting and having the potential to influence our society).

I've done no such thing. The original article was a reaction to a number of things triggered by the "lose the chick" story, in particular the mask of surprise that some people assumed at the shocking revelation that Activision would mandate protagonist genders in major game releases, and the apparent belief that the company is somehow responsible for leading the drive toward gender equality. You may not like the prevalence of "gender normative roles" in videogames but it's hard to argue that it hasn't been a hugely profitable strategy. That's where Acti's responsibility begins and ends. I'm absolutely in favour of greater diversity in games, and I don't think your complaint is invalid. I just don't think that Activision or anyone else is under any kind of mandate to make them simply because it's the enlightened thing to do.

It's great that you start classes in two weeks. Go make a great game, break the mould and set new benchmarks. I'll buy a copy when you do. Prove to the industry once and for all that chicks can carry games and maybe you'll see a shift toward a more inclusive world. But I think it'll be a tough slog: You say you can change the world by changing games; I think you have to change the world in order to change games.

I'm also disappointed that you referenced Big Bang Theory. Why does everyone think that show is so funny? It's rancidly idiotic.

 

[manythings]

Well if we're going to play this game there are a very specific set of reasons why militaries are predominately male and the higher up you go into the likes of commandoes and spec ops the more the percentile tips away from women.

Ah, but if we are to continue this I will point out that this is a military in the future.
There is very little reason to not have more women in tougher combat roles.
It is Sci Fi after all, if we can travel through space and colonize it why can there not be gender equality in the military?
In fact, it seems like the second will come before the first.

Since women can typically and consistently out perform men in physical professions? Women can withstand twice the pain a man can before it starts reducing performance? Women can do a lot of things but physical professions will be male dominant. It's a function of how we are made and have evolved. I'm not saying women can't achieve but it is usually with more time, training and resources expended for the same results. When the military looks at training cost will determine what happens.

 

[MomoHime64]

I'm not a big fan of line-by-line quoting but I want to mention before I forget that I asked a female core gamer about this and she said something very similar: She'd love to see more female protagonists but their shortage isn't something that she's losing sleep over. So it's not an urgent concern but obviously there's a very real and shared desire for more prominent roles for women.

It's partly following money, true, but that tends to come across in business meetings as a mumble that consumers aren't turned off by a strong female lead, so it's ok to plunk down investment capital on a major production when the concept has been proven safe.

I'd disagree with you there and say it's entirely following the money.

Quite frankly, I'm sort of aghast that you seem to be throwing your hands up in the air at the concept of holding games up to certain artistic standards, or that it's silly to think they can be a factor in social progress (a major definition of art is reflecting and having the potential to influence our society).

I've done no such thing.

You say you can change the world by changing games; I think you have to change the world in order to change games.

I'm also disappointed that you referenced Big Bang Theory. Why does everyone think that show is so funny? It's rancidly idiotic.

I'll be brief - thanks for reading and responding to what was, for me, a quick write, but probably a long read. I do appreciate it, and I'm glad you asked a female core gamer and got some more input on this issue, and your responses are well thought out and make me think more about my stance on the issue.

I agree, as far as Activision goes, money is entirely the issue. I'm not going to challenge your stance, or their methods - they have the financial leeway to piss off their customer base, so, it's not like I *can* argue with a proven system. However, I don't think this industry would support only Activision's business model. And fortunately, it doesn't have to. The more technologically savvy gamers become, and as more game-making technology advances, the more I see games being made that are about more than the bottom line, where a game can be made that can take risks that might cost them a percentage of market share, but ultimately (hopefully) make a better game. That being said, I don't think it's wise to ever ignore the purpose of a game company is to make money - but sometimes, it's not mutually exclusive to make a profitable game AND one that defies conventional game design.

Of course, just like the movie industry, the majority of media produced are going to be committee-selected focus-group-tested mass-market games hoping to get as much return on the investment as possible. This isn't a bad thing - but the industry as a whole shouldn't be tuned to specifically change an avatar's gender if it would damage the gaming narrative. (Or nationality, or race, or age, etc.) Sometimes, the unusual choice is the right choice - and right now, the unusual choice is having a female avatar. It shouldn't be in every game, but it ought to be in more.

And sorry if I read your tone wrong (damn emotionless internet), but when you wrote "The predominance of "uber-macho narratives" in modern games and the harassment of female gamers that results isn't game culture, that's just culture, period. You want to change games? Change the world" -- it seemed rather defeatist, like "Well the world sucks, so don't bother fixing what you can." And if you think games can't change the world - we'll just have to agree to disagree on this point. As far as Big Bang Theory - it is literally what was just being discussed over the cube wall. I could have just as easily said "The Office" or "UFC". My idea of funny is begins and ends with parrots pining for the fjords and the Ministry of Silly Walks, with an exception made for Simon Pegg.

Thank you very, very much for the congratulations on school - it's been difficult finding a way to pay for it, but if I wind up in a career instead of a place that pays me bad money to shuffle paper, I'll consider it worth the cost. And thanks again for taking the time to respond - I've enjoyed the discussion.

 

[Outright Villainy]

Giant snip

Just thought I'd pop in to say I quite enjoyed the discussion going on here. I'd add more, but I don't feel like I've much more to contribute; I'd probably just repeat what you said in a shallower way. It's always nice to see a new user tackle things so thoroughly anyway, I'm sure you'll be a fine poster.

 

[MomoHime64]

Giant snip

Just thought I'd pop in to say I quite enjoyed the discussion going on here. I'd add more, but I don't feel like I've much more to contribute; I'd probably just repeat what you said in a shallower way. It's always nice to see a new user tackle things so thoroughly anyway, I'm sure you'll be a fine poster.

Thanks! I was sort of surprised to get so many responses from Andy Chalk - not used to that kind of feedback, especially when, well, I can be so verbose. But that's part of why I prefer the Escapist to the forums I visit - just glad that when I joined in on a topic, the original poster took the time to read through and respond to so many comments (not just mine, but many others' as well). Pretty darn awesome.

 

[Horben]

This article is more trolling than it is Jonathan Swift.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Honest truth, the day after this went up I started playing a new HOG in which the lead character is a big, burly, mean-looking dude. Interesting bit of timing there.

 

[Andy Chalk]

whoa dude

Wow, that's some serious bitterness there. Did you lose a job to a woman or something?

I don't see anything inherently wrong with the industry (or games themselves) being dominated by men, but suggesting that women simply cannot perform at the level of men strikes me as patently ludicrous. It's hardly surprising that there's been no "auteur games" from women, given their tiny presence in the industry, but it's crazy to see that as proof that it just can't happen.

(Feel free to reply when you can, if you like.)

 

[maxben]

Well if we're going to play this game there are a very specific set of reasons why militaries are predominately male and the higher up you go into the likes of commandoes and spec ops the more the percentile tips away from women.

Ah, but if we are to continue this I will point out that this is a military in the future.
There is very little reason to not have more women in tougher combat roles.
It is Sci Fi after all, if we can travel through space and colonize it why can there not be gender equality in the military?
In fact, it seems like the second will come before the first.

Since women can typically and consistently out perform men in physical professions? Women can withstand twice the pain a man can before it starts reducing performance? Women can do a lot of things but physical professions will be male dominant. It's a function of how we are made and have evolved. I'm not saying women can't achieve but it is usually with more time, training and resources expended for the same results. When the military looks at training cost will determine what happens.

Again, the problem is that you are equating the realistic with the Sci Fi.
And make no mistake, Mass Effect isn't traditional Sci Fi with the emphasis on the Science but the Star Wars Sci Fi with emphasis on the Fiction.
So in a genre that is meant to be limitless in its capabilities, much like fantasy and indeed the two are only separated with one being in space and one having dragons (though dragons in space would rock), the old generic societal expectations and pedestrian reality are supposed to matter?
Realistic limitations are supposed to matter?
Hell, if that was the case half the game wouldn't work.
Why does gender have to be realistic but not physics?

I'm not talking about gender parity in reality now, as you said that would make little sense in certain aspects such as evolutionary differences.
However, the limitation in games only exist because the developers decided they should.
I remember the Activision Rumor that they shied away from female main characters because they figured that their male demographic will be uncomfortable playing female characters.
It had nothing to do with the fact that a girl can't take as much pain because they create the rules not reality, but do to societal expectations they decided against having women lead.
And if you read that thread here on the Escapist, you will see that such unrealistic things like a woman being a mercenary will not break immersion because its "unrealistic" because no one really cares and many people think it would be kind of awesome.
Trinity was always cooler than Neo, Xena kicked Hercules' ass, and Buffy was more interesting than Angel.

If fiction, which represents our imagination, can't get over basic gender roles what's the point of having fiction at all?

 

[manythings]

Since women can typically and consistently out perform men in physical professions? Women can withstand twice the pain a man can before it starts reducing performance? Women can do a lot of things but physical professions will be male dominant. It's a function of how we are made and have evolved. I'm not saying women can't achieve but it is usually with more time, training and resources expended for the same results. When the military looks at training cost will determine what happens.

Again, the problem is that you are equating the realistic with the Sci Fi.
And make no mistake, Mass Effect isn't traditional Sci Fi with the emphasis on the Science but the Star Wars Sci Fi with emphasis on the Fiction.
So in a genre that is meant to be limitless in its capabilities, much like fantasy and indeed the two are only separated with one being in space and one having dragons (though dragons in space would rock), the old generic societal expectations and pedestrian reality are supposed to matter?
Realistic limitations are supposed to matter?
Hell, if that was the case half the game wouldn't work.
Why does gender have to be realistic but not physics?

I'm not talking about gender parity in reality now, as you said that would make little sense in certain aspects such as evolutionary differences.
However, the limitation in games only exist because the developers decided they should.
I remember the Activision Rumor that they shied away from female main characters because they figured that their male demographic will be uncomfortable playing female characters.
It had nothing to do with the fact that a girl can't take as much pain because they create the rules not reality, but do to societal expectations they decided against having women lead.
And if you read that thread here on the Escapist, you will see that such unrealistic things like a woman being a mercenary will not break immersion because its "unrealistic" because no one really cares and many people think it would be kind of awesome.
Trinity was always cooler than Neo, Xena kicked Hercules' ass, and Buffy was more interesting than Angel.

If fiction, which represents our imagination, can't get over basic gender roles what's the point of having fiction at all?

Oh. See I thought we were talking about the gender divide of reality and it's affect on fiction and the perception of "What can happen" not how we shouldn't allow fiction to be influenced by the gender divide. In that case I'm on your side of the fence, we do need to ditch the blandity of the grizzled action guy (not entirely retire it since that guy does exist) in favour of characters that can fit just as well. That being said no super hot, 18 year old, big-titted blondes should be in there since... well just no.

Trinity was cooler than Neo after the first one since they made him the Lord Jesus Christ and once you've done that how does a character grow? Also I'll have to argue since I think Angel went to a lot more interesting places than buffy did.

Space dragons would also be kick ass.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Why are lead characters in videogames almost always women?

I see what you did there, and I approve.

 

[Chipperz]

Wow, that's some serious bitterness there. Did you lose a job to a woman or something?

Wow, that's a pretty standard SHAME ON YOU EVIL MALE FOR TELLING THE TRUTH YOU MUST HAVE SOME ULTERIOR MOTIVATION line, there. Are you so utterly subservient to women because they haven't given you any lately that you'll tell any lie and ignore any truth for them?

I don't have to lie, creatively stretch the truth, or try to imply nonexistent motivations because women already want to have sex with me. It's their job to justify themselves to me, not the other way around.

Protip - excessive capslock and formatting gives you away as a liar. Noone in their right mind wants to have sex with a twelve year old.

OT - I find that, with the increase in character creation and the ability for the player to make a more personalised avatar, this argument is becoming less and less valid in general. BioWare and Bethesda continuously prove that it's possible to have excellent stories (or, in BioWare's case, an excellent story, repackaged with aliens/dragons as appropriate) that is utterly gender neutral, and I can't see it being too long before the vast majority of games have some kind of 'character select', even if they all have the same/similar name/designation to cut down on voice acting...

 

[ZetaAnime]

I don't know why more and more women are the main character of popular games my guess would be that the companies think by having a sexy lady it will attract more of a guy population to play just because your playing as a hot main character. But i rather play as a bad ass dude then a sexy chick for one women are limited in games to a certain amount of ideas to do while a dude character can pretty much tear off a dude's head eat his brain while he kills the mafia. There are no games or ideas like that for women. By having women main characters it limits the badassness to a game.
TIMBAP_AJR

 

[Andy Chalk]

It's their job to justify themselves to me, not the other way around.

This is the kind of nonsense that ends conversations. I'm not sure if you're playing up some kind of "Angry Forum Man" persona or if you really are that thick but either way, it's clear we're done here.

 

[XMark]

Hahaha, I was baffled for the first couple of paragraphs, then realized it's a parody of articles about the female perspective on games and gamers. Does make you think, though. If women had a larger representation in the gaming community, how would that effect game design, storylines, and character designs?

 

[Eponet]

Where shooters are almost always guys, puzzles tend to be female characters (think Portal).

I'm probably just sheltered, but most of the puzzle games I've played have had a male lead, but most of the puzzle games I've played were made by Yahtzee.

 

[Eponet]

Buffy was more interesting than Angel.

While I agree with almost everything else you said, in this case, it's heavily subjective. Personally, I thought Angel was easily the more interesting of the two, or maybe it's just that the directing was superior. Being the better looking of the two helped as well, maybe.