Women gaming problems, solution discussion 1

[Yuuki]

A bunch of low-budget no-innovation knockoff games don't appeal to anyone but fledgling game designers and crass capitalists, and to state that this is an acceptable situation for women is ridiculous at best, insulting at worst.

Low-budget, yes. No-innovation, are you serious? Most of the innovation is happening in the low-budget gaming department. Yes you will most likely find 10 games that have similar mechanics, but that's purely due to the sheer number of those games out there. Nothing comes close to the sheer VARIETY found in iPhone, Android, Flash and Java games. Nothing.

I agree with you that right now, the casual games market is much more appealing to women than the mainstream market. The high and even medium-budget games industry is seemingly unaware of the existence of half the world's population.

They're perfectly aware. The "myth" of multi-million-dollar industries being unaware of the existence of women was debunked a while ago. Actually I don't know how even such a notion developed, it's so absurd.

Because casual games are better designed for women

That doesn't really make any sense. None of these games were designed specifically for women in mind, there is nothing feminine about them unless you count being colorful/cartoonish being a feminine thing (and they are only like that due to low budgets, to make games look "nice" without having to invest in top-tier graphics engines).

and women disproportionately play them

I haven't seen any evidence to women disproportionately playing them. Even the slightest number of women doing anything is considered a huge deal. I would be willing to bet roughly 50% of the people playing casual games are male, because even amongst males there are tons of people who just aren't interested in mainstream gaming and want to stick to light games that are free, easy to learn, don't have any steep hardware requirements, etc.

The Sims series are great games and shows the results of what happens when a game is designed which appeals to women.

But this was really just an accident. The Sims is part of Will Wright's obsession with simulating basic reality.

First you state that Sims was designed to appeal to women, and then you state that it was just an accident?

What would happen if game developers specifically designed games for women? Not in the insulting sense, like another Bejeweled clone, but seriously wanted to benefit women through the medium of video games?

The fact that you think that it's "insulting" that women are mostly casual gamers is in-itself insulting to both women and the industry as a whole. The industry is very good at providing people for what they ask for, market demand can spur the creation of literally anything.
Tell me, exactly WHAT would a game "specifically aimed at women" resemble? What would it even have? Please do tell.

Also I have no clue what you mean by "benefit women through the medium of video games". Please clarify? Benefit women how, and why?

 

[A Weakgeek]

Really I can't see this whole situation going more than one way and one way only.

Group A bitches about issue X, Group B bitches about issue Y and so on.

Game dev will look into these issues, and judge wether or not pandering to the people complaining will cause profit.

If profit is assumed, game dev will handle chosen issue according to their own judgement.

Thus, I dont really see the point in trying to come up with solutions on so polarizing issues, since 99% of people (Including the people in the industry) are so damn opinionated theres literally no chance of anyone listening except for the people who already agree with you.

 

[CloudAtlas]

While i give you that suggestions were made, they were mostly general but not practical ones. For example making the community more welcoming would be a solution, but that's no real helpful as it doesn't solves the problem of how to achieve this solution.

Well, you can't change the community as a whole, but you can start with yourself, influence your friends, and speak out when people abuse others in a game. I know doing the latter means feeding the trolls, but it can mean a lot to the person on the receiving end to know that someone's with her/him.
I'm trying to work on all three things, but I don't always live up to my own standards.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Thus, I dont really see the point in trying to come up with solutions on so polarizing issues, since 99% of people (Including the people in the industry) are so damn opinionated theres literally no chance of anyone listening except for the people who already agree with you.

It's only a minority who is "so damn opinionated", one way or the other. And the people in the industry are certainly listening. They might not heed the wishes and demands, but they do listen. And since they're not nearly as immature as their audience, they are able to handle critique as well.
This I strongly believe.

 

[blazearmoru]

I think that in a few generations, white knights will start making games for girls which will also appeal to bronies. Also there are already some girl gamers and maybe a few will start developing games.

 

[A Weakgeek]

Thus, I dont really see the point in trying to come up with solutions on so polarizing issues, since 99% of people (Including the people in the industry) are so damn opinionated theres literally no chance of anyone listening except for the people who already agree with you.

It's only a minority who is "so damn opinionated", one way or the other.

If you take the general populous into account, maybe. But the people who actually have power over these affairs, writers, people who study demographics/psychologists etc. are opinionated. They picked a side a long time ago, unless ofcourse, they are complete newcomers to the industry. Which for AAA games is ofcourse almost never.

 

[oreso]

There's been some great arguments here, and I do thank runic knight for focusing on solutions.

To outline my stance for those interested:

Spoiler

I would say that "getting more women into gaming" or any kind of quota is just social engineering, and not a legitimate goal. People are free to choose, and should remain able to do so.

Diversity in games is good in itself, and appears to be happening anyway. There are certainly some traditionalists in the industry, but they appear to be widely mocked and lambasted.

A certain -lack- of diversity in characters is also to be expected however. We live in a gendered society, and any game that reflects society may well reflect that genderness. There are plenty of good reasons for not being genderblind (not least of which is if you want to explore gender issues themselves, or you wish to appeal to people's sexual preferences).

I will say that the extreme scrutiny female characters are placed under can be toxic and self-defeating. Being hyper-critical is not a way to encourage developers to experiment.

I'm skeptical of any link between the portrayal of women or men in the media and any big effect on behaviour in real life. Mario may be symptomatic of sexist attitudes, but Mario didn't cause or perpetuate those attitudes in any significant way.

I think that in a few generations, white knights will start making games for girls which will also appeal to bronies. Also there are already some girl gamers and maybe a few will start developing games.

This got me thinking.

MLP is unabashedly targeted to girls, and guys loved it. They didn't want to change it or make it more inclusive with male characters, or promoting male values or whatever. They were certainly mocked and abused en masse. But they didn't need any help; they just formed communities and got on with loving the show and making things. If folks had thought that bronies required special protection, consideration or support or they wouldn't have enjoyed the show, then I think that would've just been condescending and counter-productive.

I understand that "gaming" is a whole medium, far broader than a single show, but if women are feeling underserved and attacked, a similar positive attitude might help. Play the games you want and ask for more of them, or make them. Form communities if you feel safer there (I know many exist already of course). But if folks think women need special consideration, protection or support then that does seem a bit condescending and counter-productive too.

Cheers!

 

[shadowuser10141]

Also, with the community... I'd think I'd be more likely to be shot if I picked a female character. Not less.
Like... my boyfriend plays Trouble In Terrorist-Town a lot and uses voice. If I were to do that, I can almost guarantee I'd get shot more than him.
Maybe I should do that as an experiment?

I play on a TF2 server (which is another source game like Gmod TTT) and we have about 3 women who regularly play and talk on the mic. Nobody bats an eyelid.

So either:

A. You're playing on the wrong servers.
or
B. You have a chip on your shoulder. "Woe is me. I get hazed in game because of my voice. Feel sorry for me!"

I have been called tons of names by anonymous 13 year olds. Does that mean I'm going to moan about it on a forum or ask for kickstarter money for a documentary?
No, it's called having a thick skin. I don't care what anyone on the internet thinks of me, neither should you.

 

[runic knight]

Really I can't see this whole situation going more than one way and one way only.

Group A bitches about issue X, Group B bitches about issue Y and so on.

Game dev will look into these issues, and judge wether or not pandering to the people complaining will cause profit.

If profit is assumed, game dev will handle chosen issue according to their own judgement.

Thus, I dont really see the point in trying to come up with solutions on so polarizing issues, since 99% of people (Including the people in the industry) are so damn opinionated theres literally no chance of anyone listening except for the people who already agree with you.

Keep in mind it is the blind drive for profit that leads to DRM and other such practices that the customers oppose. Yes, supply and demand has a strong factor on things, but it is foolish to presume that is the sole force for why the market is the way it is now, or that the community itself has little chance of changing it.

Go back and reread a few pages, it goes over the why of the issue in a way that appeals to the selfish perspective. As I said before, I know well not everyone agrees that there is a problem, let alone how to address it, but everyone does at least acknowledge there is a definable difference in gender representation, participation and portrayal. I therefore looked at it in a way that would be good for all of gaming to address. And I already touched on why Group A bitches about Group B, the motivations behind that, why it is bad and how we can address it.

 

[A Weakgeek]

Really I can't see this whole situation going more than one way and one way only.

Group A bitches about issue X, Group B bitches about issue Y and so on.

Game dev will look into these issues, and judge wether or not pandering to the people complaining will cause profit.

If profit is assumed, game dev will handle chosen issue according to their own judgement.

Thus, I dont really see the point in trying to come up with solutions on so polarizing issues, since 99% of people (Including the people in the industry) are so damn opinionated theres literally no chance of anyone listening except for the people who already agree with you.

Keep in mind it is the blind drive for profit that leads to DRM and other such practices that the customers oppose. Yes, supply and demand has a strong factor on things, but it is foolish to presume that is the sole force for why the market is the way it is now, or that the community itself has little chance of changing it.

Well, as foolish as you claim it to be, thats how I, and many other people see it.

Invidual people act selfless, or even outright heroic at times. However, when there are entities, such as in the game industry, which consists of hundreads or even thousands of people per project, who are tied together almost solely by the goal of making money ie. making a living for the people involved, theres no place for higher morality. If theres no profit to be made with handling societal issues, its simply irrelevant for such large companies as in the AAA industry.

 

[TehCookie]

I hadn't thought about the cost aspect, but that is a really good point. Games are pretty expensive, be it the games themselves, the consoles or even just a pc that can handle the high end ones.

Maybe we can address this and give the indie scene a bit of a boost in the same go? Maybe make a list of good, cheap and fun games that the average pc could handle without issue and sort of make it a gamer-intro pack or something? Even just through something like steam to help with the social aspects (and because good sales), have a list of good, inexpensive games.
I go pc, as that seems more likely then someone going to buy a console itself. Then again with the rise of smart phones and the blurring of that tech, we might start having more overlap between them then before. Would probably help to take advantage of that sort of thing.

I think because of the nature of gaming in general, there will always be a community. Movies and music have communities as well, even if only though their sub-genre (since the overall community is indistinguishable from the entirety of society itself). So I think the sports community root would be the best way to follow for example, if only in terms of acceptance.

Multiplayer community is a mixed bag. on one side, it is some of the best fun you can get in games just playign with other people. On the other, any sort of lack of moderation leads to the worst sort taking over. Maybe take that steam list idea from above and make a group for people to find other newbies to play with as well as players who want to welcome new gamers?

That's one of the reason women love facebook games they're cheap and run on any machine, and that gets them branded casuals with spite. Don't expect everyone to start off hardcore and don't get mad if they don't want to pursue games further. I got my mom to play 999 and Phoenix Wright by starting with sudoku.

But I guess that goes back to a more accepting community.

These statements truly confound me - cost? Cost is the reason females don't play games? Do females not work where you live?

OP: People play games they like, whether it's because the game is fun, or scary, or pretty or challenging or it's what they're in the mood for at the time. An industry or a community doesn't have to change because I don't like one of the products. As long as there's variety in games made I'll find (and buy) the ones I like and play them (on the computer I bought).

Do you pay 90+ dollars for a haircut, why don't you own all consoles and a PC? Why not, do you not work? Not everyone is as privliaged as you, they have different priorities whether it be school, fashion or other hobbies. I wouldn't pay $460 to watch a movie.

 

[Phasmal]

I play on a TF2 server (which is another source game like Gmod TTT) and we have about 3 women who regularly play and talk on the mic. Nobody bats an eyelid.

So either:

A. You're playing on the wrong servers.
or
B. You have a chip on your shoulder. "Woe is me. I get hazed in game because of my voice. Feel sorry for me!"

I have been called tons of names by anonymous 13 year olds. Does that mean I'm going to moan about it on a forum or ask for kickstarter money for a documentary?
No, it's called having a thick skin. I don't care what anyone on the internet thinks of me, neither should you.

Wow, your experience isn't the same as mine so I must be doing something wrong or exaggerating?
Please.

I don't particularly want anybody to feel sorry for me, and I've not said anything about kickstarter so you're projecting pretty hard there.

My skin is hard. I just can't be arsed most times to use things like voice if someone is just going to take offence to me being a woman.
Getting shit cause you fucked something up or someone just took a disliking to you is standard, and I get that too. Dickheads who randomly decide to single you out cause you're female is another thing. I just wanna play normally, and usually remaining unknown is the best way to do that.

And yeah, there are a lot of accepting spaces, but it's certainly not rare to run into the kind of douchebag who has mommy issues.

EDIT: Also, I wasn't even talking strictly about harassment, just constantly being treated like an oddity gets really old. Imagine a majority of people being surprised because you can do something you consider an everyday activity. Imagine how quickly that gets old.

 

[runic knight]

These statements truly confound me - cost? Cost is the reason females don't play games? Do females not work where you live?

OP: People play games they like, whether it's because the game is fun, or scary, or pretty or challenging or it's what they're in the mood for at the time. An industry or a community doesn't have to change because I don't like one of the products. As long as there's variety in games made I'll find (and buy) the ones I like and play them (on the computer I bought).

Yes, cost. Keep in mind that if the average system is around $300 and games run $45-60, that is a pretty steep price if you want to start getting into gaming at the same level as people who have been in it for a while. And as I said, cost may be a reason people of either gender, not just women, don't play games. It is just that as a reason stacks onto of other reasons, that I went over already, and seems to discourage women disproportionately then men. Thus if we can find a way to bypass some of the discouraging hurdles people have to put up with, it could help increase variety in the player base, which in turn helps increase variety in the products supplied to that base.

As you even say, variety in games is a good thing. But you get less and less of that the more the industry tries to consolidate to appeal to a niche market. In fact you can probably see the parallels in how the market of the last few years has tried to appeal more and more directly to the big sellers (seen in all the WoW or CoD clones out there) and how the consumer demographic for the Triple A industry seems to be more uniform. Thus, if we want more game variety, it would help to increase player variety in order to get more demand for things besides brown cover based shooters.

 

[runic knight]

Really I can't see this whole situation going more than one way and one way only.

Group A bitches about issue X, Group B bitches about issue Y and so on.

Game dev will look into these issues, and judge wether or not pandering to the people complaining will cause profit.

If profit is assumed, game dev will handle chosen issue according to their own judgement.

Thus, I dont really see the point in trying to come up with solutions on so polarizing issues, since 99% of people (Including the people in the industry) are so damn opinionated theres literally no chance of anyone listening except for the people who already agree with you.

Keep in mind it is the blind drive for profit that leads to DRM and other such practices that the customers oppose. Yes, supply and demand has a strong factor on things, but it is foolish to presume that is the sole force for why the market is the way it is now, or that the community itself has little chance of changing it.

Well, as foolish as you claim it to be, thats how I, and many other people see it.

Invidual people act selfless, or even outright heroic at times. However, when there are entities, such as in the game industry, which consists of hundreads or even thousands of people per project, who are tied together almost solely by the goal of making money ie. making a living for the people involved, theres no place for higher morality. If theres no profit to be made with handling societal issues, its simply irrelevant for such large companies as in the AAA industry.

I am aware that many people see it as solely a market driven conclusion. That is part of the reason I spent over an hour typing out the huge first post explaining how it is not, in fact, solely market driven. And why I spent that time explaining the practical benefits of increasing the participation. And why I have replied to a variety of posts reitterating these points and the simple one that so many just can't seem to grasp is that This is not a morality argument.

I am aware that the industry is a business. I am also aware that as a business, the current practices and models will not last forever and is actively hurting the industry in the long run, as well as screwing over the fan currently. For a direct comparison, look back at the comic book crash of the 90's and you can see parallels all over. An industry with little respect for the consumers using practices designed to milk money from them as much as possible, chasing after stupid ideas of being hard or edgy solely for the sake of being hard or edgy because they think that appeals to a demographic with money and yet in doing so ignoring that you need to get new customers to replace ones who are lost over time, and that can not be done with the mentality they use. An over saturation of companies targeting the same demographic at the expense of all other tied in with an open contempt towards what made them successful in the first place and a mentality of excessive waste because they can not fathom the profits running out or that when everyone is after the same demographic, there will be a limit to how much that demographic can provide financially. Hell, we have already seen the fallout of this staring with companies going under because even though their products sold millions, it was no where near enough to make up the bloated budget spent on it in the first place.

Furthermore, as I said several damn times now, I have presented this case in a way DEVOID of moral grandstanding and instead concentrated on presenting it in a way that appeals to self interest of gamers and how it can appeal to self interest of the industry as a whole. Additionally, I have done all I can to spell out to everyone here that I do not want any sort of moral dick-measuring contest to go on and that I do not want to hear any dumb ass ideas about what should be disallowed or be forced to stop.
Go and actually take the time to read it, please. You reveal you haven't yet when you make such posts as this suggesting this is a moral stand here. While it can, and even at times has been, this thread is not and unless you haven't taken the time to actually read it, it should not be mistaken for it.

 

[generals3]

These statements truly confound me - cost? Cost is the reason females don't play games? Do females not work where you live?

OP: People play games they like, whether it's because the game is fun, or scary, or pretty or challenging or it's what they're in the mood for at the time. An industry or a community doesn't have to change because I don't like one of the products. As long as there's variety in games made I'll find (and buy) the ones I like and play them (on the computer I bought).

Actually cost does play a role but more because women tend not to be as much into gaming as men and consequently probably don't want to invest as much money as men. (which is also why the industry focuses more on men)

 

[deadish]

Now, in order to try and keep this thread somewhat civil, keep in mind this thread is NOT for
1. Discussing politics or political ideaology.
2. Certain controversial youtube video series creators
3. Opinions on what is or is not acceptable and thus should be enforced on the rest of the world.
So don't do any of that. We good now? ok.

The most notable of these of late tend to be participation, portrayal, and employment.

You broke your own rule already.

Participation and employment are highly correlated IMHO. Fix the former, you solve the latter.

The problem now is figuring how to create games that will be popular among the fairer sex.

 

[runic knight]

These statements truly confound me - cost? Cost is the reason females don't play games? Do females not work where you live?

OP: People play games they like, whether it's because the game is fun, or scary, or pretty or challenging or it's what they're in the mood for at the time. An industry or a community doesn't have to change because I don't like one of the products. As long as there's variety in games made I'll find (and buy) the ones I like and play them (on the computer I bought).

Actually cost does play a role but more because women tend not to be as much into gaming as men and consequently probably don't want to invest as much money as men. (which is also why the industry focuses more on men)

I would add that it isn't limited to women, but to all newcomers in general (with women generally more often the newcomers because other reasons). So it does seem to affect women more then men, but it isn't because of their gender and certainly not limited to it. Cost when getting into a new hobby can be intimidating and might be the point between someone trying it or just shaking their head and moving on.

 

[runic knight]

Now, in order to try and keep this thread somewhat civil, keep in mind this thread is NOT for
1. Discussing politics or political ideaology.
2. Certain controversial youtube video series creators
3. Opinions on what is or is not acceptable and thus should be enforced on the rest of the world.
So don't do any of that. We good now? ok.

The most notable of these of late tend to be participation, portrayal, and employment.

You broke your own rule already.

Participation and employment are highly correlated IMHO. Fix the former, you solve the latter.

The problem now is figuring how to create games that will be popular among the fairer sex.

Not quite. As I haven't gotten to portrayal, I haven't gotten into any sort of argument about what is right yet, and if you must know, I have no desire to get into a moral discussion on that. That said, one can still look at portrayal in aspects such as lack there of without making claims about if it is acceptable. It is pretty easy to state how something is without making it a moral claim, and even when going into a discussion on changing things, one can still leave out morality and instead concentrate on cause and effect in a more general way. Thus at no point would it be "this or that is acceptable or not", rather, "if we want this conclusion, this option may work more towards that." Also, I used the term "acceptable" to avoid any sort of moral grandstanding about how women can or can not be portrayed, not because I had no intention of mentioning portrayal at all.

Surely you can see the difference between the two now, yes?

 

[deadish]

Not quite. As I haven't gotten to portrayal, I haven't gotten into any sort of argument about what is right yet, and if you must know, I have no desire to get into a moral discussion on that. That said, one can still look at portrayal in aspects such as lack there of without making claims about if it is acceptable. It is pretty easy to state how something is without making it a moral claim, and even when going into a discussion on changing things, one can still leave out morality and instead concentrate on cause and effect in a more general way. Thus at no point would it be "this or that is acceptable or not", rather, "if we want this conclusion, this option may work more towards that." Also, I used the term "acceptable" to avoid any sort of moral grandstanding about how women can or can not be portrayed, not because I had no intention of mentioning portrayal at all.

Surely you can see the difference between the two now, yes?

The way women are portrayed in games should be up to the designers. That's all I really have to say.

That said, personally from what I have seen, scantily clad women - which is what most people here ***** about - aren't really "offensive" to women per se. Having skimmed a good number of shoujo manga and animation, there is almost always a hot women or two in them (and I mean "really hot", full bust, shapely hips and all), commonly in the role of best friend of the protagonist - I believe women appreciate a good specimen of the female form too.

PS: LOL, the captcha is "don't waste time".

 

[runic knight]

Not quite. As I haven't gotten to portrayal, I haven't gotten into any sort of argument about what is right yet, and if you must know, I have no desire to get into a moral discussion on that. That said, one can still look at portrayal in aspects such as lack there of without making claims about if it is acceptable. It is pretty easy to state how something is without making it a moral claim, and even when going into a discussion on changing things, one can still leave out morality and instead concentrate on cause and effect in a more general way. Thus at no point would it be "this or that is acceptable or not", rather, "if we want this conclusion, this option may work more towards that." Also, I used the term "acceptable" to avoid any sort of moral grandstanding about how women can or can not be portrayed, not because I had no intention of mentioning portrayal at all.

Surely you can see the difference between the two now, yes?

The way women are portrayed in games should be up to the designers. That's all I really have to say.

That said, personally from what I have seen, scantily clad women - which is what most people here ***** about - aren't really "offensive" to women per se. Having skimmed a good number of shoujo manga and animation, there is almost always a hot women or two in them (and I mean "really hot", full bust, shapely hips and all), commonly in the role of best friend of the protagonist - I believe women appreciate a good specimen of the female form too.

PS: LOL, the captcha is "don't waste time".

I have no qualms at all with scantily clad female characters. Hell, I regularly defend the practice and the creator's choice in using them, just look up the Dragon's Crown discussions. But one can look at portrayal and see a disparity in things, and one can try to understand both the effects that has and the why of it in the first place, which is what the core of this thread tries to do in all topics before delving into solutions, or even if a solution is nessesary.

Now myself, I would rather just see more games in general and more variety. Keep the ones with the stylized sexuality or the skimpy outfits or the over the top sexiness, but encourage more games to be made overall and have some new ones increase the variety in character types, protagonist portrayal and other aspects.

As said in the first post, I don't want to hear people claiming companies should not do something, especially in a moral argument. Rather, I want more variety and options in general because that is good for the industry and the fans. And one of the ways I was suggesting to help that is to increase variety of demand by helping increase the participation of other demographics, particularly of the female ones. Variety in demand can lead to variety of product, which is more choice for all gamers.
Let the designers make the characters they want to, but increase demand for more types. It is pretty obvious that the designers can listen to the money (and even if some don't, the publishers sure do). and beyond even that, it could help fight when developer decisions are actually impeded by publishers because of the perceptions of the market due to lack of variety in the player base. See the posted examples Raven mentioned about how developers were pressured into design choices by publishers.