Support NeoGAF

[A Link to the Past]

Why male leads far outnumber female leads? Isn't that the very subject of this thread?

...Yeah? See, this is why people have no idea what you're saying. We are working on fixing that problem, and the suggestion that we may not be focusing on the actual problem has been to talk about trigger warnings, which, unless I missed it, no one in this thread has actually been discussing. Such a lack of discussion might suggest to me that you are obfuscating the discussion and erecting strawmen to counter.

 

[ViolentP]

...Yeah? See, this is why people have no idea what you're saying. We are working on fixing that problem, and the suggestion that we may not be focusing on the actual problem has been to talk about trigger warnings, which, unless I missed it, no one in this thread has actually been discussing. Such a lack of discussion might suggest to me that you are obfuscating the discussion and erecting strawmen to counter.

Not even sure why I'm still trying to talk to you. You seem to have it all figured out. Good luck on your journey.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Not even sure why I'm still trying to talk to you. You seem to have it all figured out. Good luck on your journey.

...Uh

Okay

Sorry, I just figured that since you were the only one talking about trigger warnings in this thread, suggesting that trigger warnings have any relevance to this topic might be kind of disingenuous and in bad faith

I mean seriously, at this point you're getting defensive that I pointed out a flaw in your argument >_>

 

[Listonosh]

I'm of the opinion that female and minority protagonists shouldn't be shoehorned into a game. I prefer something natural as opposed to some contrivance meant to appeal to a vocal community. Just my opinion. If your game was made in mind with having a minority/female/transexual lead great, if it wasn't, don't alter your vision for the sake winning press or the respect of gamers.

Exactly this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm part of the minority that actually plays female characters in games I get to choose, but I certainly hope that developers aren't changing their artistic vision to please the masses. If your narrative calls for a specific gender, stick to your guns.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

You don't think that focusing on a result of an issue could be detrimental to addressing the actual problem? If women are truly underutilized, I think the focus should be on understanding why that is case and focus on changing that? Not that I have a horse in this race, but I certainly wouldn't want to see an influx of female lead roles only because people are complaining about it. It should happen because whatever held them back to begin with has been resolved.

This may seem a grandiose solution, I'm just wary due to the times change has been made solely to satiate consumer for the sake of profit.

What is bad about that kind of change if people are still discussing and working to fix the "source" of the problem? You're advocating for doing nothing until the perfect solution arises, which is a terrible way of addressing any issue. It's like being out of shape and avoiding all exercise until you change your poor diet — you can do both and exercising doesn't distract from the core issue. It still helps.

Not even sure why I'm still trying to talk to you. You seem to have it all figured out. Good luck on your journey.

Lmfao. you certainly don't get it, and probably never will.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Exactly this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm part of the minority that actually plays female characters in games I get to choose, but I certainly hope that developers aren't changing their artistic vision to please the masses. If your narrative calls for a specific gender, stick to your guns.

I mean, you say exactly this, but concerns of shoehorning are based not on things that actually happen, but baseless fears that it may result in that happening. The only pandering I seem to see is towards men.

 

[ViolentP]

...Uh

Okay

Sorry, I just figured that since you were the only one talking about trigger warnings in this thread, suggesting that trigger warnings have any relevance to this topic might be kind of disingenuous and in bad faith

I mean seriously, at this point you're getting defensive that I pointed out a flaw in your argument >_>

Once again, incorrect. I pointed out the trigger warnings as an incorrect solution to yelling about a problem. If a developer feels the need to warn the consumer that there are no women in the game, it only serves to satiate those upset about the fact, and does nothing to rectify the actual problem that women are absent. This was never about trigger warnings, they were only used to illustrate the wrong way of resolving a problem.

And don't be mistaken. I'm not at all defensive. There are people we can have these discussions with and others we can't. You and I just so happen to run into each other in such a case. I don't blame you nor do I think your opinions are wrong. But our manners of communication, or lack thereof, will always supersede our points, and on a subject like this, we would both ultimately lose.

I'm trying to walk away from this conversation as cordially as I can. I would recommend the same from you.

What is bad about that kind of change if people are still discussing and working to fix the "source" of the problem? You're advocating for doing nothing until the perfect solution arises, which is a terrible way of addressing any issue. It's like being out of shape and avoiding all exercise until you change your poor diet — you can do both and exercising doesn't distract from the core issue. It still helps.

I'm not advocating doing nothing nor did I imply such a thing. I advocate the idea that any action taken should be taken to the source.

 

[brettski2024]

Sounds like a silly thing to be concerned about, honestly. Everyone seems to have an axe to grind these days.

Seems like everyday we hear some new group that is offended by something. Life is a lot better looking from a positive lens vs. hyper critical, equality in unnecessary things, and "safe places" demanded everywhere (see college campuses where students are offended by anything, everything)

 

[A Link to the Past]

As Spring-Loaded noted, concerning yourself with trigger warnings (which I might add are a huge non-issue and do not affect the quality of games, and in fact offer a means by which to include content in games while also addressing the concerns of some) does not take away from your ability to concern yourself with other things. You can absolutely concern yourself with trigger warnings while also concerning yourself with other issues.

Everything that is being done and discussed in this thread is being done for the sake of fixing the issue, so I now don't really understand in this context what you think is the issue with how people are addressing this topic.

Sounds like a silly thing to be concerned about, honestly. Everyone seems to have an axe to grind these days.

Seems like everyday we hear some new group that is offended by something. Life is a lot better looking from a positive lens vs. hyper critical, equality in unnecessary things, and "safe places" demanded everywhere (see college campuses where students are offended by anything, everything)

There are studies that show that lack of positive representation (specifically race in the case of these studies) in media creates a negative impression for people of under-represented races, so claiming that representation in media is unnecessary is ignoring the deeper context behind the issue.

It has nothing to do with grinding axes and has everything to do with trying to get more equal representation in media, which consumers, being consumers, are entirely within their right to attempt. Consumers in this industry are not only rather constantly making that attempt for a wide variety of reasons, but are encouraged to do so. The only time I see people saying otherwise is when the person finds their goals to be undesirable.

 

[lightskintwin]

Exactly this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm part of the minority that actually plays female characters in games I get to choose, but I certainly hope that developers aren't changing their artistic vision to please the masses. If your narrative calls for a specific gender, stick to your guns.

Can you please pick a specific example where this has happened? And if you can't, are you being worried or concerned over a boogeyman (something that doesn't exist), but is brought up in conversation merely as a faux devil's advocate to inclusion and diversity.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Once again, incorrect. I pointed out the trigger warnings as an incorrect solution to yelling about a problem. If a developer feels the need to warn the consumer that there are no women in the game, it only serves to satiate those upset about the fact, and does nothing to rectify the actual problem that women are absent. This was never about trigger warnings, they were only used to illustrate the wrong way of resolving a problem.

I cannot see how you come to conclusions like these.

for example: no one who opposes rape is satiated by the existence of trigger warnings for the subject. Why do you perceive these and other indirect solutions as being actively harmful?

 

[ViolentP]

As Spring-Loaded noted, concerning yourself with trigger warnings (which I might add are a huge non-issue and do not affect the quality of games, and in fact offer a means by which to include content in games while also addressing the concerns of some) does not take away from your ability to concern yourself with other things. You can absolutely concern yourself with trigger warnings while also concerning yourself with other issues.

Everything that is being done and discussed in this thread is being done for the sake of fixing the issue, so I now don't really understand in this context what you think is the issue with how people are addressing this topic.

Still with the trigger warnings. That's how I know you're typing before you consider. Good luck fixing this. I wish you the best.

I cannot see how you come to conclusions like these.

for example: no one who opposes rape is satiated by the existence of trigger warnings for the subject. Why do you perceive these and other indirect solutions as being actively harmful?

Wow. You jumped a trigger warning about women being absent to rape? I wish you the best as well.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Still with the trigger warnings. That's how I know you're typing before you consider. Good luck fixing this. I wish you the best.



Wow. You jumped a trigger warning about women being absent to rape? I wish you the best as well.

You keep talking about how hung-up we are about trigger warnings, but you've been constantly choosing to ignore entire posts because a portion of it referred to trigger warnings. All we want to know is that since you brought up trigger warnings as an example of something, what is the comparable quality in this thread? What are people doing in this thread that is not the appropriate way to address the issue? What can people in this thread do to better address the issue? If you came into this discussion in good faith, the answer should be immediately available.

 

[Spring-Loaded]

Still with the trigger warnings. That's how I know you're typing before you consider. Good luck fixing this. I wish you the best.



Wow. You jumped a trigger warning about women being absent to rape? I wish you the best as well.

You brought up how harmful the existence of trigger warnings are since they "distract" from the core issue. Trigger warnings exist for discussions/videos/other media. Just to further illustrate how ridiculous the notion of trigger warnings satiating anyone, I mentioned those types of trigger warnings.

And advocating for more female characters in video games similarly doesn't "address the core problem," the way that trigger warnings don't. It does help though, and I'm hoping to figure out what your thought process is if you think the subject of this thread is a waste of time.

Your reasoning doesn't seem logical at all.

 

[LightofRohan]

What a fucking stupid statement, all this stuff is to draw up controversy.

"Being a hero is male by default!"

On the fucking study that says 49% can be either gender. And this doesnt even account for the increase minority lead presence at this E3. One day will be at 98% female leads and then maybe people will find something else to complain about.

 

[A Link to the Past]

What a fucking stupid statement, all this stuff is to draw up controversy.

"Being a hero is male by default!"

On the fucking study that says 49% can be either gender. And this doesnt even account for the increase minority lead presence at this E3. One day will be at 98% female leads and then maybe people will find something else to complain about.

No, it is a statement meant to point out the disparity. People are simply asking for more equality in terms of roles made exclusively for men vs. roles made exclusively for women.

Also, what does it matter that minority leads are more prevalent than they were last E3? I mean that's great, and you are well within your right to make a thread talking about the great progress we've made on that front, but you can't simply use it as a bludgeon to act as though this problem is actually not a big deal.

 

[Aquillion]

Again, the trigger warning itself isn't the issue, it's the fact that it's becoming a requirement in order to satiate those who feel wrong is being done.

Can you explain what you mean by "satiate?" It's a really odd turn of phrase to use here.

People request content warnings because they want to know what something contains before they consume it. That seems to me like a broadly-reasonable request (and it's important in a free market in particular in that it helps people "vote with their pocketbooks", so to speak, although that isn't the core reason people ask for it.)

Obviously the people who are asking for those warnings, well... want them. So saying that the warnings are being added to "satiate" them seems really odd to me. Like... people request warnings, they get warnings in response to that request, how is this a bad thing?

Same with female protagonists, right? Or minorities or whatever? People request female protagonists, or black protagonists, or whatever, and they (hopefully) get some games answering that need. Some of those games will be good attempts to meet that demand, and some will be badly hacked-together things that don't understand what was really being requested, but overall, the idea of the market being responsive to customer demands is a good thing, right? At least when it leads to more variety in terms of what's available.

The weirdest thing of this whole debate is how some people treat "the market is responding to customer demands" as some kind of sinister thing. Like, what? Do you only consume games made by isolated monks on mountaintops who never read reviews or communicate with the outside world so their artistic vision can remain forever untainted?

It's not like everyone is going to listen and suddenly drop their successful existing formulas to make whatever people are demanding; but if there's enough voices indicating that a market for more eg. female-led games or whatever exists, hopefully a few more developers will be willing to try delving into that market. That's how the industry works. No game just happens in a sterile void of Pure Art; it's always part of a complicated interplay between the competing visions of the people on the team and whatever the market demands (or can support) at the moment.

(I got a bit off-track there; the latter few paragraphs aren't addressed to you specifically.)

 

[Gunmonkey36]

This is a rather insular perspective. I mean, you really don't think you'd have some kind of issue if games features women as the protagonist 95% of the time when there is no choice? You really think you wouldn't think "man, it would be nice if we could have more men represented in games."

With the way most games are made absolutely not. I rarely relate to any of the characters in any game. I find most protagonist representations lacking depth and/or being just generally irrelevant to the enjoyment of the game. I wouldn't bat an eye if the games were 95% female protagonists or even 100%. I just don't see the big deal. If the story/gameplay are good I could be a creature made of blocks or something.

 

[ViolentP]

Can you explain what you mean by "satiate?" It's a really odd turn of phrase to use here.

People request content warnings because they want to know what something contains before they consume it. That seems to me like a broadly-reasonable request (and it's important in a free market in particular in that it helps people "vote with their pocketbooks", so to speak, although that isn't the core reason people ask for it.)

Obviously the people who are asking for those warnings, well... want them. So saying that the warnings are being added to "satiate" them seems really odd to me. Like... people request warnings, they get warnings in response to that request, how is this a bad thing?

Same with female protagonists, right? Or minorities or whatever? People request female protagonists, or black protagonists, or whatever, and they (hopefully) get some games answering that need. Some of those games will be good attempts to meet that demand, and some will be badly hacked-together things that don't understand what was really being requested, but overall, the idea of the market being responsive to customer demands is a good thing, right? At least when it leads to more variety in terms of what's available.

The weirdest thing of this whole debate is how some people treat "the market is responding to customer demands" as some kind of sinister thing. Like, what? Do you only consume games made by isolated monks on mountaintops who never read reviews or communicate with the outside world so their artistic vision can remain forever untainted?

It's not like everyone is going to listen and suddenly drop their successful existing formulas to make whatever people are demanding; but if there's enough voices indicating that a market for more eg. female-led games or whatever exists, hopefully a few more developers will be willing to try delving into that market. That's how the industry works. No game just happens in a sterile void of Pure Art; it's always part of a complicated interplay between the competing visions of the people on the team and whatever the market demands (or can support) at the moment.

(I got a bit off-track there; the latter few paragraphs aren't addressed to you specifically.)

Busy at the moment but I'll gladly answer the question when I get back in front of a PC.

 

[Listonosh]

Can you please pick a specific example where this has happened? And if you can't, are you being worried or concerned over a boogeyman (something that doesn't exist), but is brought up in conversation merely as a faux devil's advocate to inclusion and diversity.

I stated I hope that it doesn't happen, not that I hate to see when it happens. Granted, it's something we as consumers might never know, since that's the kind of stuff that happens behind closed doors.

 

[Seductivpancakes]

Sounds like a silly thing to be concerned about, honestly. Everyone seems to have an axe to grind these days.

Seems like everyday we hear some new group that is offended by something. Life is a lot better looking from a positive lens vs. hyper critical, equality in unnecessary things, and "safe places" demanded everywhere (see college campuses where students are offended by anything, everything)

I hate to break it to you, but a lot of groups are treated unfairly and like shit. People are just more vocal about it these days and they should be.

And yes, lack of representation can be damaging to children.

 

[LightofRohan]

With the way most games are made absolutely not. I rarely relate to any of the characters in any game. I find most protagonist representations lacking depth and/or being just generally irrelevant to the enjoyment of the game. I wouldn't bat an eye if the games were 95% female protagonists or even 100%. I just don't see the big deal. If the story/gameplay are good I could be a creature made of blocks or something.

Yea, I honestly never understood it. People think just because the main character has a dick, I instantly relate to him? I don't get it. I don't value my gender that much. I really don't care what balls or holes are there when they are fighting. I get people thinking, "Oh that'd be neat!" but this weird fucking savage intense war that is going on for, "THERE ARE THIS MANY FEMALES LEADS TO THIS MANY MALES" is just insane to me.

Growing up I was looking up to Beatric Kiddo and Ellen Ripley. My wife was really inspired by Jackie Chan for some reason. It doesn't matter.

With that said it's nice for people that it really matters to are getting more options nowadays... And I'm sorry Link is not a female.

No, it is a statement meant to point out the disparity. People are simply asking for more equality in terms of roles made exclusively for men vs. roles made exclusively for women.

Also, what does it matter that minority leads are more prevalent than they were last E3? I mean that's great, and you are well within your right to make a thread talking about the great progress we've made on that front, but you can't simply use it as a bludgeon to act as though this problem is actually not a big deal.

Thanks for the response.

It's absolutely not a big deal, in any way. And the race point was that there are "strides" being made to be more "inclusive" in a large variety of ways, but I guess people are just overly focused on the gender thing.

I understand you feel strongly about wanting women to be a large exclusive factor in games. But it's simply not as horrible as a lot of you like to act. And out of those 49% gender choice games, I'm pretty sure most featured the female character and default to them to.

If you are in this war, consider a 49% to be a huge advancement... and there will be a huge swath of female exclusive games coming soon if that is your biggest worry.

 

[lightskintwin]

I stated I hope that it doesn't happen, not that I hate to see when it happens. Granted, it's something we as consumers might never know, since that's the kind of stuff that happens behind closed doors.

So why even concern yourself over something that's not happening. If anything the opposite happens due to focus groups and perceived risks. I can list you examples of developers who've been asked by publishers to change their female protagonists to male, you will not find the opposite happening.

 

[Galactic Fork]

I'm of the opinion that female and minority protagonists shouldn't be shoehorned into a game. I prefer something natural as opposed to some contrivance meant to appeal to a vocal community. Just my opinion. If your game was made in mind with having a minority/female/transexual lead great, if it wasn't, don't alter your vision for the sake winning press or the respect of gamers.

Well, this kind of assumes the majority of protagonists being white men is some kind of natural artistic state devoid of any base in biases of anybody in the creative process. You are basically stating that white guy is the default, and everybody else needs a reason to exist or else they're shoehorned in.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Yea, I honestly never understood it. People think just because the main character has a dick, I instantly relate to him? I don't get it. I don't value my gender that much. I really don't care what balls or holes are there when they are fighting. I get people thinking, "Oh that'd be neat!" but this weird fucking savage intense war that is going on for, "THERE ARE THIS MANY FEMALES LEADS TO THIS MANY MALES" is just insane to me.

Growing up I was looking up to Beatric Kiddo and Ellen Ripley. My wife was really inspired by Jackie Chan for some reason. It doesn't matter.

With that said it's nice for people that it really matters to are getting more options nowadays... And I'm sorry Link is not a female.



Thanks for the response.

It's absolutely not a big deal, in any way. And the race point was that there are "strides" being made to be more "inclusive" in a large variety of ways, but I guess people are just overly focused on the gender thing.

I understand you feel strongly about wanting women to be a large exclusive factor in games. But it's simply not as horrible as a lot of you like to act. And out of those 49% gender choice games, I'm pretty sure most featured the female character and default to them to.

If you are in this war, consider a 49% to be a huge advancement... and there will be a huge swath of female exclusive games coming soon if that is your biggest worry.

The reason why 49% of games feature women in a leading role is because people have complained about issues that were also called "not a big deal." Same with minority leads - we don't have as many as we do because people were patient and quiet.

 

[LegendofDragoonLives]

Honestly for me, it's just boring to play the same dude over and over. Some variety is always nice. If you look at the male character design a lot of them are just blending in and becoming almost the same mid age grizzly character.

I've yet to encounter this as a problem this gen. I don't what secluded set of games you're playing when they're almost the same design/age though. Sounds like BS whenever I read this.

Aren't 50% of the games at E3 where you can pick male or female?

 

[Listonosh]

So why even concern yourself over something that's not happening. If anything the opposite happens due to focus groups and perceived risks. I can list you examples of developers who've been asked by publishers to change their female protagonists to male, you will not find the opposite happening.

True, I guess I was playing devil's advocate in that situation. It's certainly shitty to hear that kind of crap is happening =(

 

[AllIsOneIsNone]

These topics always have pages and pages of discussion, and that's fine. But it seems pretty damn simple to me...developers cater to their and more importantly our, the consumers, preference. It's pretty clear to me that even if female gamers are on the rise, the core consumer base is still overwhelmingly male. Males more often than not want to project themselves into the in-game character, I know I do.

Tons of games have options for male and female characters, which is a good way to go.

 

[Galactic Fork]

I've yet to encounter this as a problem this gen. I don't what secluded set of games you're playing when they're almost the same design/age though. Sounds like BS whenever I read this.

Aren't 50% of the games at E3 where you can pick male or female?

It's a different issue. Basically 3 percent are female exclusive, where 41 percent are male exclusive. Stories with a set protagonist are more likely to be written specifically for that protagonist instead of more non-character driven stories.

Also 52% let you play as a woman, but 90% let you play as a man.

 

[tearsintherain]

Are there any stats on what gender, race, etc people pick in some of the popular newer online games like Destiny, GTA 5 online, Division, MMOs, Uncharted multiplayer, etc? While it wouldn't tell us anything about who the people behind the characters are, it would be interesting to see when given a wide choice what players tend to pick.

I remember being blown away that only 18% of Mass Effect players choose FemShep, not sure if it was ME1-3 or just ME3? Has that number changed a lot in the more recent games?

 

[brettski2024]

I hate to break it to you, but a lot of groups are treated unfairly and like shit. People are just more vocal about it these days and they should be.

And yes, lack of representation can be damaging to children.

I fail to see how this is treating people poorly or hurting children. I would argue that the content in most of these games can be more harmful to children than the lack of gender diversity.

oh well. I've invested too much thought already in this thread.

 

[LegendofDragoonLives]

It's a different issue. Basically 3 percent are female exclusive, where 41 percent are male exclusive. Stories with a set protagonist are more likely to be written specifically for that protagonist instead of more non-character driven stories.

Also 52% let you play as a woman, but 90% let you play as a man.

How many directors are men and how many are women? If there is a huge disparity %, it makes sense why there is such a huge difference in terms of main protags. I know it's not always the case, but men/women are more likely to create character of their sex then the other way around I'd imagine.

 

[Weltall Zero]

Once again, incorrect. I pointed out the trigger warnings as an incorrect solution to yelling about a problem. If a developer feels the need to warn the consumer that there are no women in the game, it only serves to satiate those upset about the fact, and does nothing to rectify the actual problem that women are absent. This was never about trigger warnings, they were only used to illustrate the wrong way of resolving a problem.

You illustrated all of fucking nothing. If you really wanted to illustrate, you would have picked a non-controversial example, not one that most people aren't going to agree with you either but conveniently is more controversial so it allows you to derail the conversation into another you think you can more easily win or at least distract from the original one. Basically, if we confront you on the issue of trigger warnings, you've successfuly derailed the conversation; but if we don't, we implicitly concede that trigger warnings are, in fact, a bad idea. A Link to the Past is spot on in calling this disingenuous.

So to counter this, I say to you: there is nothing inherently wrong with trigger warnings, they're a tool and as such can be used and they can be abused; and if you have an issue with them and want to discuss them further, create a new thread about them.

 

[psychodino]

Personally, I prefer to play as a male character if given the choice. Might play as Emily in Dishonored 2 first to see her abilities, but I plan to stick to Corvo on other playthroughs

 

[Weltall Zero]

Exactly this.

Don't get me wrong, I'm part of the minority that actually plays female characters in games I get to choose, but I certainly hope that developers aren't changing their artistic vision to please the masses. If your narrative calls for a specific gender, stick to your guns.

Then I have bad news for you.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/...s-didnt-want-a-female-lead-in-our-video-game/
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/188775/You_cant_have_a_female_character_in_games.php

Well, the good news is that you were right in fearing a gender is shoehorned; you just guessed wrong which one.

oh well. I've invested too much thought already in this thread.

I'd say you've proved the opposite beyond all doubt. But from your replies, it must be the most you've tried to think about people of different genders and races beyond "will you shut up about your problems", so it must feel like a lot.

These topics always have pages and pages of discussion, and that's fine. But it seems pretty damn simple to me...developers cater to their and more importantly our, the consumers, preference. It's pretty clear to me that even if female gamers are on the rise, the core consumer base is still overwhelmingly male. Males more often than not want to project themselves into the in-game character, I know I do.

Tons of games have options for male and female characters, which is a good way to go.

It's ironic that the very first thing most new posters acknowledge is how many pages long these topics are, yet in the same reply evidence they didn't read a single one by bringing up the same points discussed (and thoroughly debunked) over and over in every damn page as if they were a breath of fresh air. For yours, it can be shot down with the fact that a 40% of console (not mobile) gamers are female, so there goes ye olde "overwhelmingly male" rationalization. Again, you're not the first, or the second, or the 50th to make that argument:

That's pretty misleading. Most games offer a choice. Also, what would be an acceptable number here? You can just blurt out headlines for the shock/troll value, but they can be dismissed just as readily. We would need values. What do you want and what are you willing to give for it? Don't expect 50% of games to star women when 80% of the people who purchase games are male. I made both of those numbers up just to illustrate a point. In order to cater to a market it has to be there.

Clearly. Your 'contribution' to this thread and your comments on things that have already been discussed, as well as the fact that nothing here is 'misleading' if you were to read the actual article ... is pretty redundant

To be fair, these topics do devolve in little more than a few devoted posters having actual discussion, punctuated by new people arriving, spouting the same old wrong assumptions like you just did, being educated, then either leaving in a huff or acknowledging and learning. One can only hope the latter ones make a difference in the end, exhausting as the whole, endless process is.

 

[eso76]

I believe Horizon would look a lot duller and boring with a male lead, for example.
Mirrors Edge owes a lot of its charm to Faith and thinking of it, most games with a female lead would lose a huge part of their appeal if you changed main character's gender.

I believe things are changing. Articles like this are going to make a difference. But these sentiments are only reaching devs now, allow some time for them to sink in (and well, developing games takes a while) and a lot of them will feel compelled to stray from the easiest choice, from the default option. It's probably going to become a matter of pride for some of them, if nothing else.
I can't see, say, Neil Druckman's next main character being a white guy (assuming it's not a returning character)

 

[zeldablue]

I fail to see how this is treating people poorly or hurting children. I would argue that the content in most of these games can be more harmful to children than the lack of gender diversity.

oh well. I've invested too much thought already in this thread.

A lack of representation can have some pretty huge effects on children. Just watch some studies. Read about the "baby doll race study" or something. It's pretty obvious that our earliest observations in life can shape our expectations later on in life.

All children are egotistical maniacs. Adults are too but we like to pretend we aren't. We want to convince ourselves and others that we're important. It's a stupid desire but one that has aided us in survival since...like, forever. We're constantly looking for society to validate us. That might involve our parents' validation, the opposite sex's validation or something much broader. We're social animals, so we want to have strong indications that our existence is both acknowledged and seen as good/useful. "Representation" is that thing that indicates that it's okay for us to exist and that it's okay for us to have a meaningful life.

Does that make sense?

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

Sounds like a silly thing to be concerned about, honestly. Everyone seems to have an axe to grind these days.

Seems like everyday we hear some new group that is offended by something. Life is a lot better looking from a positive lens vs. hyper critical, equality in unnecessary things, and "safe places" demanded everywhere (see college campuses where students are offended by anything, everything)

As more and more minority groups get exposure in society, of course this kind of stuff is going to come up.

And seriously, the "positive lens" you describe is being able to be offensive to anyone you want?

 

[Aquillion]

Then I have bad news for you.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/...s-didnt-want-a-female-lead-in-our-video-game/
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/188775/You_cant_have_a_female_character_in_games.php

This is an important point, yeah. People are all like "I hope they don't shoehorn in female leads", ignoring the fact that the reason female-only leads are at 3% here is because they're shoehorning in male leads.

 

[Spyware]

Are there any stats on what gender, race, etc people pick in some of the popular newer online games like Destiny, GTA 5 online, Division, MMOs, Uncharted multiplayer, etc? While it wouldn't tell us anything about who the people behind the characters are, it would be interesting to see when given a wide choice what players tend to pick.

It's maybe a bit OT but I wanna tell you something.
In the Gears 3 MP beta I chose to play with female avatars... at first. When I was downed the enemies always picked me up and walked into a wall while holding my character in front of them, which look like they were humping the character from behind. From a spectator's angle this just looks extremely silly, but from behind which is usually how you see it if it happens to you it looks a lot like a rape situation.
I started choosing male characters after having this done to me about ten times in just a couple of games. When I played as a male it happened only every third game or so and one or two times in those games. A huge difference from having it done every time it was relatively safe for a person to do it. It's Gears of War's teabagging and is evidently done to everyone by pretty much everyone since apparently a huge bunch of multiplayer gamers are immature buttholes, but the difference in times it happened made the choice of avatar gender very easy for me.

This is also on top of getting 3-4 messages of the Fat, Ugly or Slutty kind per game when using female avatars versus maybe some random rage message now and then if I used male ones. Eventually I just stopped playing online games. Can't use the avatars I want or use my mic without being harassed, so what's the point?

 

[brettski2024]

As more and more minority groups get exposure in society, of course this kind of stuff is going to come up.

And seriously, the "positive lens" you describe is being able to be offensive to anyone you want?

Woah. Yes, thats EXACTLY what I mean by being positive. :/

You got me thinking.. I believe we all have a right to be 'offensive'. I fear the day when nobody is offended. In fact, being offended by someone is probably healthy to a degree.

 

[brettski2024]

A lack of representation can have some pretty huge effects on children. Just watch some studies. Read about the "baby doll race study" or something. It's pretty obvious that our earliest observations in life can shape our expectations later on in life.

All children are egotistical maniacs. Adults are too but we like to pretend we aren't. We want to convince ourselves and others that we're important. It's a stupid desire but one that has aided us in survival since...like, forever. We're constantly looking for society to validate us. That might involve our parents' validation, the opposite sex's validation or something much broader. We're social animals, so we want to have strong indications that our existence is both acknowledged and seen as good/useful. "Representation" is that thing that indicates that it's okay for us to exist and that it's okay for us to have a meaningful life.

Does that make sense?

I appreciate your response. Very thoughtful. I am still in the camp that this specific complaint about e3 and women as exclusive protagonists is not a big deal don't hate me

 

[WarioFan63]

[/U]

Woah. Yes, thats EXACTLY what I mean by being positive. :/

You got me thinking.. I believe we all have a right to be 'offensive'. I fear the day when nobody is offended. In fact, being offended by someone is probably healthy to a degree.

I would imagine that marginalized groups getting offended isnt healthy at all.

 

[ClayKavalier]

To me the bigger story is that nearly half of games allow you to choose. Compare that to even a few years ago. That's progress. Seems almost petty to focus on the small number of games that don't require you to play as a woman.

Feminist Frequency loses me a bit at times like this. IIRC Anita said last E3 that Dishonored 2 would have been better if they dropped the male option and only had a playable female character, or something along those lines. Choice is good, and I don't see what good it does to get caught up on the idea of having a female-lead-only game to cancel out each male-lead-only game.

I understand it's still crappy that if you do look at games to feature a single, specific character there's a huge discrepancy, but come on. Celebrate the victories.

lots of girl gamers who may want to relate to the main character. It shouldn't be hard to have a main male or female character. this shouldn't be as hard as some makes it sound. Sunset Overdrive, or Saints Row did it very well.

This always strikes me as really weird. I'm a white male and play a lot of games and I can't think of a single one off the top of my head where i've personally related to the main character.

Who could?

"Oh wow, this dudes triple my size, spent years in prison, and chainsaws people in half while fighting in a war. Awesome, I'm totally in this guy's head."

"Oh nice, this guy is going to save the universe with a ragtag gang of highly trained specialists before sacrificing himself for the greater good, me and him would have a lot to talk about."

"I'm glad this Mario guy is the same gender and ethnicity as me, otherwise I wouldn't be able to relate to what he's going through here."

Granted I think representation is important, but mainly to normalize the idea that different people can do the things you do in games, not only white guys can be heroes, etc. Being able to personally relate to 90% of game characters seems ridiculous no matter who you are.

 

[shangolin]

For yours, it can be shot down with the fact that a 40% of console (not mobile) gamers are female, so there goes ye olde "overwhelmingly male" rationalization. Again, you're not the first, or the second, or the 50th to make that argument

This may also come down to males showing an anti-female bias in their purchases, while female players are used to male gender roles so gender plays a smaller part in their purchase preference. In other words, making the protagonist female might still lose them dollars even if the console ratios were 50/50.

 

[Gold_Loot]

This is an important point, yeah. People are all like "I hope they don't shoehorn in female leads", ignoring the fact that the reason female-only leads are at 3% here is because they're shoehorning in male leads.

Shouldn't we keep in mind that these percentages are strictly concerning the press conferences ,and not actual software?

Female protagonists are fairly healthy all things considered.

I think the problem is more variety in content. Now, correct me if I'm wrong here but, I have a feeling most women don't care to storm a Korean base camp with an AR in hand. Most women don't want to beef up to 250 pounds and chase pigskin balls. Most women don't care to cut heads off with a sword and storm a castle. And so on and so on..these kinds of games are the AAA bread and butter.

I think having more variety in software will bring more variety in protagonists and gender roles. And in turn, bringing more variety in gamers.

 

[Galactic Fork]

[/U]

Woah. Yes, thats EXACTLY what I mean by being positive. :/

You got me thinking.. I believe we all have a right to be 'offensive'. I fear the day when nobody is offended. In fact, being offended by someone is probably healthy to a degree.

Being "offended" or "offensive" is not monolith. You should examine what people say they are offended by and why. Examine it and then decide your opinion on the subject. You will find "offended" is not as cut and dried as you seem to think it is.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

I understand wanting more fem reps, but what i don't understand is why this seems to portray the option to play as female as a negative.

It doesn't. Read the article.

This seems like a hugely clickbait title when the sampling bias is so fucking bad and it ignores the over 50% of games letting you play as a female.

It doesn't. Read the article.

It really bothers me that SJWs are trying to downplay Emily being playable because Corvo is also playable in Dishonored 2.

Uh-huh...

Personally, I prefer to play as a male character if given the choice. Might play as Emily in Dishonored 2 first to see her abilities, but I plan to stick to Corvo on other playthroughs

Thanks for sharing, bro

Sounds like a silly thing to be concerned about, honestly. Everyone seems to have an axe to grind these days.

Seems like everyday we hear some new group that is offended by something. Life is a lot better looking from a positive lens vs. hyper critical, equality in unnecessary things, and "safe places" demanded everywhere (see college campuses where students are offended by anything, everything)

Oh dear...

What a fucking stupid statement, all this stuff is to draw up controversy.

"Being a hero is male by default!"

On the fucking study that says 49% can be either gender. And this doesnt even account for the increase minority lead presence at this E3. One day will be at 98% female leads and then maybe people will find something else to complain about.

I do see a "fucking stupid statement" here, but it's not in the article, that's for sure!

stuff

Oh hey... welcome back? Haven't see you in forever ^^

 

[Spyware]

To me the bigger story is that nearly half of games allow you to choose. Compare that to even a few years ago. That's progress. Seems almost petty to focus on the small number of games that don't require you to play as a woman.

Feminist Frequency loses me a bit at times like this. IIRC Anita said last E3 that Dishonored 2 would have been better if they dropped the male option and only had a playable female character. Choice is good, and I don't see what good it does to get caught up on the idea of having a female-lead-only game to cancel out each male-lead-only game.

I understand it's still crappy that if you do look at games to feature a single, specific character there's a huge discrepancy, but come on. Celebrate the victories.

There are three types of games in the "both" category. Great examples are Dishonored 2, Detroit and Skyrim.
In Dishonored 2 you can play as either a woman or the man from the first game, but the story is clearly centered around the woman. They are completely different characters with their own powers and personalities. This is great, especially when marketing it so heavily with the female lead.
Detroit apparently forces you to play with multiple characters? (Correct me if I'm wrong here please) These characters are different individuals and so on. This is also great. Especially the forcing part (sadly). To force people to play a character they usually wouldn't choose and see that it doesn't negatively affect the game.
Then there is the Skyrim version. Genderless avatar with no personality and different skins. Most often defaults to male, marketed with male looks and so on. These actually do nothing to help push for real inclusion. The majority choose to go with the default appearance and not step out of that white manly man "comfort zone" even tho they claim race or gender doesn't matter.

Most games fall into the Skyrim category and I can't see that as a victory, sorry.

We want people (gamers, devs and publishers) to understand that the white male needs to stop being the comfort pick. We need diversity in everything, games included. Imagine if Default MaleShep had been based on a black man instead of Vanderloo but nothing else was changed. A huge amount of people would then have played with a minority lead because he happened to be the default. Many didn't want to bother with the CC and (rightly) thought ShepLoo looked the most detailed and stuff.

But I do agree that pointing at Dishonored 2 and saying they should change it is stupid. I'm extremely happy to get two distinct characters with their own point of view and playstyle in a game. Gonna love to play as Corvo again and Emily looks great too. That game is a definite win.

 

[ClayKavalier]

There are three types of games in the "both" category. Great examples are Dishonored 2, Detroit and Skyrim.
In Dishonored 2 you can play as either a woman or the man from the first game, but the story is clearly centered around the woman. They are completely different characters with their own powers and personalities. This is great, especially when marketing it so heavily with the female lead.
Detroit apparently forces you to play with multiple characters? (Correct me if I'm wrong here please) These characters are different individuals and so on. This is also great. Especially the forcing part (sadly). To force people to play a character they usually wouldn't choose and see that it doesn't negatively affect the game.
Then there is the Skyrim version. Genderless avatar with no personality and different skins. Most often defaults to male, marketed with male looks and so on. These actually do nothing to help push for real inclusion. The majority choose to go with the default appearance and not step out of that white manly man "comfort zone" even tho they claim race or gender doesn't matter.

Most games fall into the Skyrim category and I can't see that as a victory, sorry.

We want people (gamers, devs and publishers) to understand that the white male needs to stop being the comfort pick. We need diversity in everything, games included. Imagine if Default MaleShep had been based on a black man instead of Vanderloo but nothing else was changed. A huge amount of people would then have played with a minority lead because he happened to be the default. Many didn't want to bother with the CC and (rightly) thought ShepLoo looked the most detailed and stuff.

But I do agree that pointing at Dishonored 2 and saying they should change it is stupid. I'm extremely happy to get two distinct characters with their own point of view and playstyle in a game. Gonna love to play as Corvo again and Emily looks great too. That game is a definite win.

It seems like your problem with Skyrim is mostly marketing though. The game is built around your character not having a specific personality or appearance, they can't change that without fundamentally changing what you do in that game. Same with games like Mass Effect, the choices you make are a huge part of it so your character has to be a blank slate to an extent. I agree it's not good that a white male character is the status quo as far as what goes on the box, but the intentions of the developer are a lot more important to me that decisions made by a marketing team.

Completely agree with the section I bolded. I was just saying that I'm never going to personally relate to a character like Shepard regardless of their skin color or gender.

I don't really understand what skin color has to do with relating to someone anyway. Silly example, but if a black person plays Gears of War 3 are they going to think "My wife died tragically, but I can't relate at all to what Dom's going through because he's Hispanic"?

Similarly I've bonded with a lot of people talking about growing up poor regardless of our ethnicities.

Again, I think representation is really important, just think personally that citing people being able to relate to a video game character is a bizarre reason for it.