So Ubisoft had another controversy recently, this time about how their video game protagonists being all men and their lame-ass excuse shortly after. This prompted the usual backlash, followed by the usual counter-backlash about how there didn't need to be any female protagonists in that game in the first place. You can almost set your watch to these tides of opinions.
But I feel an important detail was missing from the debates, an absent point that needed to be made; this particular game did not actively need a woman as a protagonist, but the games industry, as a whole, would be better off for it.
You see, as with any industry in its infancy, video games have an image problem. Even beyond the Fox News featherbrains, many see video games as an industry for teenage males, a concept that physically manifests itself with developers making games only for that same demographic. As a result, the main characters of many games are white men, with companies having to fight uphill to put out the odd exception, such as Remember Me.
Now, when four player co-op is present, the game would probably function fine with any assortment of male and female characters, but most developers usually put in at least one girl, being free to do so because the main character rule no longer applies and suggesting that the developer is savvy to the fact that women do, in fact, exist. Ubisoft, however, has just suggested the opposite: that the number of women who play games is so low, it isn't worth shelling out to make a new character model. While the inclusion of a female character would not automatically improve the game, exclusion of any female characters whatsoever clearly makes a statement, the same kind of statement the Tea Party periodically puts out when they feel they haven't alienated enough people yet. And since Ubisoft, one of the new biggest software companies out there, is making this statement, it puts the whole industry in a bad light. To put it another way, you certainly COULD wear a tie-die tshirt to a company meeting, but don't be surprised if they deny you that raise you wanted.
So put on a tie, Ubisoft! Do you really want to let Nintendo outshine you in the PR field?
But I feel an important detail was missing from the debates, an absent point that needed to be made; this particular game did not actively need a woman as a protagonist, but the games industry, as a whole, would be better off for it.
You see, as with any industry in its infancy, video games have an image problem. Even beyond the Fox News featherbrains, many see video games as an industry for teenage males, a concept that physically manifests itself with developers making games only for that same demographic. As a result, the main characters of many games are white men, with companies having to fight uphill to put out the odd exception, such as Remember Me.
Now, when four player co-op is present, the game would probably function fine with any assortment of male and female characters, but most developers usually put in at least one girl, being free to do so because the main character rule no longer applies and suggesting that the developer is savvy to the fact that women do, in fact, exist. Ubisoft, however, has just suggested the opposite: that the number of women who play games is so low, it isn't worth shelling out to make a new character model. While the inclusion of a female character would not automatically improve the game, exclusion of any female characters whatsoever clearly makes a statement, the same kind of statement the Tea Party periodically puts out when they feel they haven't alienated enough people yet. And since Ubisoft, one of the new biggest software companies out there, is making this statement, it puts the whole industry in a bad light. To put it another way, you certainly COULD wear a tie-die tshirt to a company meeting, but don't be surprised if they deny you that raise you wanted.
So put on a tie, Ubisoft! Do you really want to let Nintendo outshine you in the PR field?