Support NeoGAF

[Shiggy]

"Does race matter? To be honest, i'm so enlightened, i don't really see color.", says the white dude.

And yes, it does matter.

Instead of being thankful that not everybody judges and sees people based on their skin colour, you just shit on that guy. Great attitude.

 

[TimeEffect]

would it? I think, especially among antagonists, AC:Syndicate was, once again, a great example. Plenty of female mobsters, gang leaders and even top-dogs.



"Does race matter? To be honest, i'm so enlightened, i don't really see color.", says the white dude.

And yes, it does matter.

When I look at Last of us though, the violence is particularly different. Choking people, intense melee, people begging for their lives.

I think making a male lead with male enemies is the eaiser option in that game. I feel like devs choose male lead in certain violent games because of this. I feel like AC would do good to star a female lead because I think the narrative would remain the same. Id say the AC universe is too different to compare.


Same goes for Recore and Horizon. It seems having a female lead pushes good representation without compromising anything. Dishonored could have gotten away with exclusively female lead

I don't feel it's the same with very violent games, and I think it's a matter of expecting aggression and brutality in male leads compared to female leads. I dont think recore, horizon, and dishonored are particularly violent games for that matter.

Anyways, Im just focusing on violent games, I know there are diverse genres that can star women exclusively without problem. I wonder if a game like days gone could star a woman, ever.

 

[Admiral Woofington]

I'm always bothered when they refuse to count games with men and women Co starring. Options isn't a bad thing.

 

[Hamster Plugin]

So, if LoU starred Jolein, would people notice if all your human enemies were male? No one would expect all humans to be female though. Yet people also dont seem to expect a mix of both, since brutalizing women in last of us with a male lead would be controversial. Would a female lead be the same way, or would enemies continue to be just male? Im curious if devs try to avoid gender mixing and just use male leads and male enemies for particularly violent games

The last two Tomb Raiders are literally what you are describing: a woman mauling and killing men in extremely brutal ways throughout the game. It's why TR2013 is the only game I have ever used the "remove game permanently from Steam library" feature on.

Tomb Raider 2013's success shows that a woman killing men in extremely brutal ways is acceptable in society. The reverse wouldn't.

 

[Fliesen]

I'm always bothered when they refuse to count games with men and women Co starring. Options isn't a bad thing.

but they do count them. very explicitely so.
please read more than the Thread title.

 

[……forgetit]

but they do count them. very explicitely so.
please read more than the Thread title.

Well, not really they go in the choice category, but they aren't the same. You have to play as the girl in dishonored to finish game, but not female Ryder, they're very different, but in the same category.

 

[Darkwater]

The fact that you think that a game that doesn't star a female-exclusive character is relevant to an article about games that do is... well, I'd say shocking, but given the mental gymnastics I see when people try to discredit these kinds of articles, I have come to expect it all.

Mass Effect: Andromeda is not relevant. And this is fact. This article is entirely black-and-white - the game either exclusively stars a woman, or it does not. Games that exclusively star a woman are mentioned, and games that do not are not. There are tons of great female roles, some that were even at E3, but they are not mentioned because the subject is not relevant to the quality of the roles or the quality/relevance of the female character options in their respective games. If you cannot understand why an article shouldn't go on a tangent, then I have no idea what to tell you. I mean, should all articles about poor representation of women in the industry mention Mass Effect: Andromeda? Should there just be a type-up from EA for every article to include that makes sure that everyone knows how great the industry is doing outside of the topic being discussed? Honestly, I don't know about you, but I would sooner not have game journalism move away from the whole journalism thing and creep into PR mouthpieces. It is not normal for critical articles to be expected to be positive if they do not choose to be, let alone when the article is not related to what people are pointing out as a positive.

Let me quote the last paragraph of the article that you view as the gold standard here.

"This massive discrepancy means that for now, games continue to reinforce the deeply entrenched cultural notion that heroes are male by default. We live in a culture that regularly encourages girls and women to project themselves onto and fully empathize with male characters, but rarely encourages boys and men to fully project themselves onto female characters," Feminist Frequency's post reads. "When players are encouraged to see a game universe exclusively through the eyes of a humanized female character, it helps challenge the idea that men can’t or shouldn’t identify with women as full human beings."

Sarkeesian says it herself. 'The notion that all heroes are male by default'. She does not say 'the notion that all heroes are male'. Do you still think ME:A, which goes very much against the notion of 'male heroes by default', is irrelevant to the greater debate of feminism in gaming? I'm sure you do. Show me more of your mental gymnastics. And before you say 'well, the article The Verge wrote is exclusively about exclusively female protagonists and that is also what I'm exclusively speaking of', then I say enjoy focusing on a specific facet instead of the bigger picture. It's futile. You're not getting anyone anywhere arguing over what are details of the debate. You and The Verge would do well to heed the same advice game developers and publishers should heed: make your scope a little broader.

 

[The Lamp]

I think a better thing to analyze is new IPs. Sequels will almost always use the same protagonist as before, but new IPs show new choices people are making with protagonists. Like Horizon and Detroit.

 

[Admiral Woofington]

but they do count them. very explicitely so.
please read more than the Thread title.

I did read more than the thread title, I read the direct excerpt the OP took from the article which usually is meant to represent the article and the exact number he posted in the title is being used as the numbers for games with "exclusive females".

Now if they went on to show other stats and percentages that's fine and I didn't read those, but I'm going based off what's the argument in the thread. Not to mention Anita's distaste of games that share the limelight.

 

[Caronte]

Maybe there are fewer female gamers because there are fewer games with female leads.

Do games with female leads have a much higher number of female players than the others? From what I understand the difference in players' gender for each game is mostly related to the game's genre, not the main characters gender.

I agree that we need more female characters in gaming. But disqualifying games like Detroit just because you play as multiple people and not as a single female character doesn't make any sense to me.

You also have to consider the economic aspect of it. It is much easier and safe for a triple A game to allow you to choose your gender, or to make stories in which you play with multiple characters. You can't expect multi-million franchises to change to an only female playable character when you don't know if the market is there to support it. This is a business after all.

I don't think expecting these type of changes to happen overnight is realistic. We should celebrate female characters in lead roles, and criticize those who are sexualized. For now, I think that's already good progress.

 

[Lime]

Darkwater, you're only referring to the marketing of ME:A as being 'progressive' by having a female protagonist being the default. The game itself is still optional in who you choose to play as. Trying to use it as a counter-argument against the claim that games vastly underrepresent female characters exclusively does not work when ME:A is a game that isn't having FemRyder as the only option.

 

[Spyware]

I did read more than the thread title, I read the direct excerpt the OP took from the article which usually is meant to represent the article and the exact number he posted in the title is being used as the numbers for games with "exclusive females".

Now if they went on to show other stats and percentages that's fine and I didn't read those, but I'm going based off what's the argument in the thread. Not to mention Anita's distaste of games that share the limelight.

The Verge thing is pretty bad. The actual post at FF says (among much else) this:

We were encouraged to see, however, that the showcase of Dishonored 2 once again focused on the playable female character, Emily, and that in the trailer for Mass Effect: Andromeda, the female version of protagonist Ryder was featured, whereas with the original Mass Effect trilogy, almost all promotional materials used the male version of Shepard. Dishonored 2 and Mass Effect: Andromeda were two of 29 games in which you either choose to play as male or female characters, or in which the gender of your character or characters appears to be unspecified, such as Fe. Of course, the option to choose is welcome. However, a purely binary understanding of gender was once again on display, with no games indicating the ability to choose from a wider range of gender identities and expressions. Furthermore, the fact that a whopping 12 times as many featured games center exclusively male protagonists than exclusively female ones indicates that the video game industry still has an extremely long way to go before approaching anything resembling gender parity.

 

[Darkwater]

Darkwater, you're only referring to the marketing of ME:A as being 'progressive' by having a female protagonist being the default. The game itself is still optional in who you choose to play as. Trying to use it as a counter-argument against the claim that games vastly underrepresent female characters exclusively does not work when ME:A is a game that isn't having FemRyder as the only option.

What have I been saying this whole time? Yes, there is a gross imbalance when you place gender-exclusive games side by side. That is a bad thing. But doing that is painting a bleaker total picture than when you include games like ME:A, which, despite not exclusively featuring female protagonists, are plenty helpful to the feminist cause. Is the total picture of how feminism in gaming is doing not relevant here? Are we just zooming in on these exclusives so we have extra fodder to complain about? Are we here to complain, or are we here to see reality for what it truly is and adjust accordingly?

EDIT:

We were encouraged to see, however, that the showcase of Dishonored 2 once again focused on the playable female character, Emily, and that in the trailer for Mass Effect: Andromeda, the female version of protagonist Ryder was featured, whereas with the original Mass Effect trilogy, almost all promotional materials used the male version of Shepard.

Even Sarkeesian agrees with me. Thanks, Spyware.

 

[TriniTrin]

Sorry gaming industry! If you have a vision and it doesn't involve a lead female character you are a being sexist and you should be ashamed of yourselves. I'm sorry if you wanted to tell this story with a male lead character but it should be a woman because equality over your vision and creativity.

For the record I am totally interested in the games that feature a female lead but if a company doesn't wanna make a game with a woman lead then I don't see why they get shit for it. The whole idea they said about it being because of a cultural thing with women can't be heroes..... I mean maybe they have a vision of their game that doesn't involve a female as a lead character? Shocking and horrible I'm sure.

 

[Admiral Woofington]

The Verge thing is pretty bad. The actual post at FF says (among much else) this:

Much better thanks, seems like she has changed her tune over games that have both male and female.

I see it as extremely positive that more than 1 out of two games allow you to play as a woman.

Out of those games featuring males exclusively though, I believe two of them feature minorities which are having a harder time getting the limelight.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Let me quote the last paragraph of the article that you view as the gold standard here.



Sarkeesian says it herself. 'The notion that all heroes are male by default'. She does not say 'the notion that all heroes are male'. Do you still think ME:A, which goes very much against the notion of 'male heroes by default', is irrelevant to the greater debate of feminism in gaming? I'm sure you do. Show me more of your mental gymnastics. And before you say 'well, the article The Verge wrote is exclusively about exclusively female protagonists and that is also what I'm exclusively speaking of', then I say enjoy focusing on a specific facet instead of the bigger picture. It's futile. You're not getting anyone anywhere arguing over what are details of the debate. You and The Verge would do well to heed the same advice game developers and publishers should heed: make your scope a little broader.

N... no one claimed that all heroes are male? Sarkeesian refers to the fact that men are not challenged to be female in games, while women are not given the same consideration. If a woman wants to be a woman in a game, she is going to have a harder time finding a game that lets her than a man would to find a game where he can be a man.

Mass Effect: Andromeda factually does not challenge men to be a woman because it offers no incentive to be a woman, aside from that she's female by default. It is not difficult to push your stick right and choose the gender you wanted to be in the first place. And THAT is why the article is not about games like Mass Effect: Andromeda - it is about a specific issue in the industry. An issue that you, apparently, think needs to be broadened, while people like me and others are happy to be able to discuss how poorly the industry does with this specific issues, talk about how we can improve it, and not have people complain that this specific issue is under discussion.

What have I been saying this whole time? Yes, there is a gross imbalance when you place gender-exclusive games side by side. That is a bad thing. But doing that is painting a bleaker total picture than when you include games like ME:A, which, despite not exclusively featuring female protagonists, are plenty helpful to the feminist cause. Is the total picture of how feminism in gaming is doing not relevant here? Are we just zooming in on these exclusives so we have extra fodder to complain about? Are we here to complain, or are we here to see reality for what it truly is and adjust accordingly?

EDIT:



Even Sarkeesian agrees with me. Thanks, Spyware.

...*sigh*

Sarkeesian does not agree with you, because the only arguments that are claiming ME:A shouldn't be acknowledged for its progressiveness at all are straw arguments you've made up. People have been telling you up and down the article does not need to mention ME:A or any other game that is not relevant to the main subject. Sarkeesian was just nice enough to throw a bone as an aside (AKA, a side note of acknowledgment that the industry does okay in other areas).

 

[Mohonky]

Off topic, but the "too soon junior" and Bale gif contexts are amazing lol.

 

[MrCookiepants]

Meh. At the end of the day, this is business. Horizon will probably suffer for having a female protagonist (doubly so because she is not conventionally attractive). Sony is not bothered by this and allows their developers a certain degree of creative freedom. Other publishers are more risk-averse. Just the way it is.

 

[Kin5290]

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.

Versus white brown haired male protagonists, who need no excuses to be present in a game? Somehow they are never considered "contrived".

 

[FirmBizBws]

I don't get threads like these. Is the female demographic even buying the games that don't have female protagonists? Are they even buying the ones that do?

 

[Fury451]

They missed a few games like Gravity Rush and Andromeda.

That said, it's some great progress; female characters are headlining games. Not co-starring only (but I believe your partner in CoD was a woman?) but headlining. And the games looked outstanding.

Change won't happen overnight, but I think this kind of change needs to be applauded and not derided for not being enough yet. It's happening, and that's awesome. Next year and the year after will bring even more, mark it.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I don't get threads like these. Is the female demographic even buying the games that don't have female protagonists? Are they even buying the ones that do?

...Yeah?

They missed a few games like Gravity Rush and Andromeda.

That said, it's some great progress; female characters are headlining games. Not co-starring only (but I believe your partner in CoD was a woman?) but headlining. And the games looked outstanding.

Change won't happen overnight, but I think this kind of change needs to be applauded and not derided for not being enough yet. It's happening, and that's awesome. Next year and the year after will bring even more, mark it.

The article only discusses games where women are exclusively the protagonist, so ME:A doesn't qualify.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Instead of being thankful that not everybody judges and sees people based on their skin colour, you just shit on that guy. Great attitude.

The whole "I don't see color" style response is very commonly used as a way to dismiss people's misgivings over issues regarding minorities.

 

[Lime]

Meh. At the end of the day, this is business. Horizon will probably suffer for having a female protagonist (doubly so because she is not conventionally attractive). Sony is not bothered by this and allows their developers a certain degree of creative freedom. Other publishers are more risk-averse. Just the way it is.

On what grounds do you think Horizon will suffer from having a female protagonist?

Also, in regards to the whole "it's a business" argument:

1. You're assuming that white dudes only want to play games featuring themselves and cannot relate.
2. You're assuming that the current overwhelming dominance of white dudes is the most profitable one
3. You're assuming that profits justify immoral behavior. If the majority of consumers wanted racist and sexist content, does that mean that companies are justified in producing racist and sexist content

 

[Henkka]

When a man wants a game that is written exclusively for a man (as Henkka pointed out, God of War is a story written with a male character in mind), they wouldn't be able to play every entry in that list in their lifetime.

A woman has to actively seek out stories written for women.

If you think that's nitpicking, then I don't know what to tell you. It's probably because you don't understand the idea of wanting something and having to look everywhere before you find it.

True. I feel like there are at least three aspects to this.

1) Most triple-A developers are male. They want to create art that reflects on themselves. They're also greatly influenced creatively by the media they consumed when they were young, which was aimed at boys.

2) Most avid gamers who purchase triple-A console games are male, as well. As far as I know, this is true. The "50% of gamers are women" statistic is true when you also consider mobile games. And trust me, mobile game studios are aware of this and develop games specifically aimed at women all the time. But the kind of triple-A action games that get shown off during press conferences at E3? Mostly male fanbase. So God of War, Call of Duty, Metal Gear, Battlefield, and so on. So there's a financial benefit to developing the kinds of games these devs would like to develop anyway.

3) As a result of 1) and 2), publishers are wary about female characters in big action games. Even Yoshida said they were nervous about Horizon's protagonist. This is mostly unfounded imo, as I doubt Horizon will suffer sales-wise from having a female protagonist.

So with this being the current climate, how likely is it that we'll see a big budget, triple-A game that deals with motherhood like TLOU and GoW deal with fatherhood? Pretty unlikely.

There's no quick solution to this. At next year's E3, the number of exclusively female-led games won't dramatically increase. It will happen, but slowly, as gaming becomes more mainstream and more and more women join the industry and become veterans at big studios.

 

[The Artisan]

what is the agenda behind that verge article?

if there were more female main characters, would that be broken down into them saying only a x small percentage were black females/brown females/latina female/another minority females?

as it is, there isn't really that many black/brown/latina protagonists, regardless of gender, is there?

 

[Darkwater]

N... no one claimed that all heroes are male? Sarkeesian refers to the fact that men are not challenged to be female in games, while women are not given the same consideration. If a woman wants to be a woman in a game, she is going to have a harder time finding a game that lets her than a man would to find a game where he can be a man.

Mass Effect: Andromeda factually does not challenge men to be a woman because it offers no incentive to be a woman, aside from that she's female by default. It is not difficult to push your stick right and choose the gender you wanted to be in the first place. And THAT is why the article is not about games like Mass Effect: Andromeda - it is about a specific issue in the industry. An issue that you, apparently, think needs to be broadened, while people like me and others are happy to be able to discuss how poorly the industry does with this specific issues, talk about how we can improve it, and not have people complain that this specific issue is under discussion.

...*sigh*

Sarkeesian does not agree with you, because the only arguments that are claiming ME:A shouldn't be acknowledged for its progressiveness at all are straw arguments you've made up. People have been telling you up and down the article does not need to mention ME:A or any other game that is not relevant to the main subject. Sarkeesian was just nice enough to throw a bone as an aside (AKA, a side note of acknowledgment that the industry does okay in other areas).

...*sigh*

Complaining about a lack of female-exclusive protagonists in games while simultaneously completely and willfully ignoring a game that went from male-featured, male-default, female-optional to female-featured, female-default, male-optional is the exact same thing as complaining to a builder about a lack of a wall when he has just laid the first layer of bricks. You can say the division of gender-exclusive games is bad all you want, but by purposely being so narrow in your view and zooming in on only those games, you can say hardly a single thing about feminism in gaming as a whole at all.

Edit: basically what you're constantly saying is that we're not talking about feminism, we're talking about the imbalance between female-exclusive protagonists and male-exclusive ones. Which is somehow not the same thing as feminism.

 

[Admiral Woofington]

what is the agenda behind that verge article?

if there were more female main characters, would that be broken down into them saying only a x small percentage were black females/brown females/latina female/another minority females?

as it is, there isn't really that many black/brown/latina protagonists, regardless of gender, is there?

There was about the same amount of specifically minority characters as females I believe. Depends on how many of those games that allow you to choose between male and female allow you to choose skin color.

 

[mreddie]

Feels like we are getting somewhere but yet, still a long way to go.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

None of that really goes against the point I was trying to make. I never said that women don't play games, but that last study was disingenuous. The one you posted makes more sense. Also it also supports the point I was making, different genres do better with different demographics, and finally we need more female protagonists in games, I really agree on that, but given the context of E3 the lack isn't as shocking as a lot seem to think.

It never was shocking it's just a bad outlook

 

[Hendrick's]

Thread title is a little misleading. 3% had exclusively female protagonists, so games like Mass Effect and Dishonored don't count towards that.

Altogether, 52% of games had playable female characters, apparently.

If this is true, this article has misrepresented info imo.

 

[John Harker]

The main villain and the main Knight that were shown of For Honor at e3 were Female.

Not nearly enough, but something for a game that has to be far predominenrly male.

Still disappointed about no female link option tho

 

[Zereta]

Thread title is a little misleading. 3% had exclusively female protagonists, so games like Mass Effect and Dishonored don't count towards that.

Altogether, 52% of games had playable female characters, apparently.

Precisely. The fact that the 3% is what's highlighted and not the 52% just makes all of this seem like trying to intensify a problem, that yes is a problem, but to say that there is a negative representation of female characters (and I guess, more specifically, playable female characters) when there is an active decision made to sensationalise the statistics... I don't know, man.

I respect Anita and what she's trying to do but I don't necessarily agree with the way she sometimes presents that.

femshep forever.

 

[Familienoberhauptvogel]

Precisely. The fact that the 3% is what's highlighted and not the 52% just makes all of this seem like trying to intensify a problem, that yes is a problem, but to say that there is a negative representation of female characters (and I guess, more specifically, playable female characters) when there is an active decision made to sensationalise the statistics... I don't know, man.

I respect Anita and what she's trying to do but I don't necessarily agree with the way she sometimes presents that.

femshep forever.

So 52% for females is good compared to 90% for males?

 

[Darkwater]

So 52% for females is good compared to 90% for males?

No, but the 3% used in the headline is a much smaller percentage than 52%. It's zooming in on a particularly glaring point to make the state of feminism in gaming look worse than it is

Spoiler

and for The Verge to rake in dat ad money

. I'm not saying that state is good, I'm saying it's a bit better than the article makes it seem.

 

[A Link to the Past]

...*sigh*

Complaining about a lack of female-exclusive protagonists in games while simultaneously completely and willfully ignoring a game that went from male-featured, male-default, female-optional to female-featured, female-default, male-optional is the exact same thing as complaining to a builder about a lack of a wall when he has just laid the first layer of bricks. You can say the division of gender-exclusive games is bad all you want, but by purposely being so narrow in your view and zooming in on only those games, you can say hardly a single thing about feminism in gaming as a whole at all.

Edit: basically what you're constantly saying is that we're not talking about feminism, we're talking about the imbalance between female-exclusive protagonists and male-exclusive ones. Which is somehow not the same thing as feminism.

1. No it isn't. That's a garbage analogy. It is akin to complaining that a chef made a great steak, but the potatoes were not properly prepared and as a result, do not taste very good. That is an appropriate analogy. This article has a purpose for a lot of people, just so happens that the article is not intended for you. Not all are, but people generally don't get upset about it and complain about how the article wasn't aimed at them.

2. Never claimed it wasn't about feminism...? Seriously, respond to me, not this straw person you've propped up.

3. It is patently absurd, the very notion that a statistical analysis of something should inherently be broader. Without articles that look specifically at certain problems in the industry, the problems cannot be fixed. And a lot of people are trying to get that fixed. While others are complaining about them trying to fix the problem. There are tons of articles that talk about Mass Effect: Andromeda and other things that you want this article to be about. Read those, and let people who want articles like these have them.

No, but the 3% used in the headline is a much smaller percentage than 52%. It's zooming in on a particularly glaring point to make the state of feminism in gaming look worse than it is

Spoiler

and for The Verge to rake in dat ad money

. I'm not saying that state is good, I'm saying it's not that bad.

I do love how you slowly revealed that you are actually bothered that the article exists in the first place. No, the article is not for clicks (though the title is poorly worded). The article is focusing on a specific issue facing the industry. An issue that you find so trivial that you actively are essentially telling anyone who disagrees "it's not actually a big deal, focus on the big picture" (or more accurately, ignore negative stuff and extol positive stuff).

 

[Fliesen]

No, but the 3% used in the headline is a much smaller percentage than 52%. It's zooming in on a particularly glaring point to make the state of feminism in gaming look worse than it is

Spoiler

and for The Verge to rake in dat ad money

. I'm not saying that state is good, I'm saying it's a bit better than the article makes it seem.

but it's worse than last year. with a downwards trajectory, if you focus exclusively on new reveals.

The whole "I don't see color" style response is very commonly used as a way to dismiss people's misgivings over issues regarding minorities.

it's the same as "who cares, everyone's free to do whatever in their bedroom, why make a big deal out of it, this shouldn't be an issue anyways" whenever an influental celebrity reveals to be homosexual.

 

[Aters]

Really?

50% of the world are women, 3% of games at E3 had female leads and you can't see whats wrong with it?

As others have pointed out, you can play 52% of the games as female. Also you can't expect something like Krato suddenly turns into a girl.

I think the fact that E3 is more western focused plays a role in this result. People love those sport games and shooters, and the vast majority of the audience for those games are male so they have to show them what they want first.

 

[Spyware]

If this is true, this article has misrepresented info imo.

The title is outright false as has been stated many times. They mean exclusively female protags which they specify in the post itself. There is then the 49 % with choosable female protags making the total percentage of games with any sort of female protag 51 %. The same criteria for male ones gives the result of 90 %.

So 3 % only female, 41 % only male, 49 % either.
Stills looks bad whichever way you look at it.

 

[Jonneh3003]

I'm not sure that's accurate but a lot of big titles are starring women which is awesome

 

[Darkwater]

1. No it isn't. That's a garbage analogy. It is akin to complaining that a chef made a great steak, but the potatoes were not properly prepared and as a result, do not taste very good. That is an appropriate analogy. This article has a purpose for a lot of people, just so happens that the article is not intended for you. Not all are, but people generally don't get upset about it and complain about how the article wasn't aimed at them.

2. Never claimed it wasn't about feminism...? Seriously, respond to me, not this straw person you've propped up.

3. It is patently absurd, the very notion that a statistical analysis of something should inherently be broader. Without articles that look specifically at certain problems in the industry, the problems cannot be fixed. And a lot of people are trying to get that fixed. While others are complaining about them trying to fix the problem. There are tons of articles that talk about Mass Effect: Andromeda and other things that you want this article to be about. Read those, and let people who want articles like these have them.

You said ME:A was 'as relevant to this topic as dental floss'. ME:A is relevant to feminism in gaming, so you must be of the opinion that that's not the topic we're discussing.

EDIT:

I do love how you slowly revealed that you are actually bothered that the article exists in the first place. No, the article is not for clicks (though the title is poorly worded). The article is focusing on a specific issue facing the industry. An issue that you find so trivial that you actively are essentially telling anyone who disagrees "it's not actually a big deal, focus on the big picture" (or more accurately, ignore negative stuff and extol positive stuff).

I am not 'bothered the article exists'. The title clearly presents the information in an enticing way and is thus absolutely meant for clicks. I do not find the issue trivial, nor did I ever say that. I'm saying that only focusing on this specific aspect of the feminism-in-gaming-cause results in a picture that is bleaker than what you would otherwise get if you look at the entire pie chart. Lastly: ignore negative stuff and extol positive stuff? You are the one who is ignoring the positive and shining a spotlight on the negative.

3% versus 41% is a very bad set of numbers. I have never denied that and I take insult in you accusing me that I have.

 

[CyberPunked]

What does it matter? Why is this a problem? Would you prefer devs to just make the protagonists female for the sake of forced diversity?

 

[kunonabi]

Looking at my list of upcoming purchases:
11 - exclusive female protagonists
5 - choice of male/female avatar
13 - female lead or even/majority of other playable characters are female
2 - fighting/sports where female-to-male split is about even.

compared to:

exclusive male leads - 4

Maybe looking at a super small sample size that excludes large amounts of more varied content isn't the best idea.

 

[Lime]

True. I feel like there are at least three aspects to this.

1) Most triple-A developers are male. They want to create art that reflects on themselves. They're also greatly influenced creatively by the media they consumed when they were young, which was aimed at boys.

2) Most avid gamers who purchase triple-A console games are male, as well. As far as I know, this is true. The "50% of gamers are women" statistic is true when you also consider mobile games. And trust me, mobile game studios are aware of this and develop games specifically aimed at women all the time. But the kind of triple-A action games that get shown off during press conferences at E3? Mostly male fanbase. So God of War, Call of Duty, Metal Gear, Battlefield, and so on. So there's a financial benefit to developing the kinds of games these devs would like to develop anyway.

3) As a result of 1) and 2), publishers are wary about female characters in big action games. Even Yoshida said they were nervous about Horizon's protagonist. This is mostly unfounded imo, as I doubt Horizon will suffer sales-wise from having a female protagonist.

So with this being the current climate, how likely is it that we'll see a big budget, triple-A game that deals with motherhood like TLOU and GoW deal with fatherhood? Pretty unlikely.

There's no quick solution to this. At next year's E3, the number of exclusively female-led games won't dramatically increase. It will happen, but slowly, as gaming becomes more mainstream and more and more women join the industry and become veterans at big studios.

.

On what grounds do you think Horizon will suffer from having a female protagonist?

Also, in regards to the whole "it's a business" argument:

On what grounds do you think Horizon will suffer from having a female protagonist?

Also, in regards to the whole "it's a business" argument:

1. You're assuming that white dudes only want to play games featuring themselves and cannot relate.
2. You're assuming that the current overwhelming dominance of white dudes is the most profitable one
3. You're assuming that profits justify immoral behavior. If the majority of consumers wanted racist and sexist content, does that mean that companies are justified in producing racist and sexist content

Since people are once again trying to doubt reality in the composition of gaming audiences in North America and Europe, there's this:

Active console gamers at 60/40 gender split, usage data & genre preferences revealed

And their findings are... that they're not really that different for people on the same platform type.

Source: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2014-10-30-platform-not-gender-drives-gamer-differences-eedar

Women compose 57.8% of mobile market, 53.6% of the RPG market, 34% of the FPS market, 50% of PC market including social.

Approximately 1/3rd of console and PC gamers are also women (Second Source: Gamasutra)

 

[martino]

omg this article

*

*

* click

 

[John Harker]

What does it matter? Why is this a problem? Would you prefer secs to just make the protagonists female for the sake of forced diversity?

That would be nice. Different perspective might make the experience more unique, too many games strive for the same emotional output, we need diversity to grow. I push for it often on projects I work on.

 

[The Artisan]

There was about the same amount of specifically minority characters as females I believe. Depends on how many of those games that allow you to choose between male and female allow you to choose skin color.

those would mostly be rpgs, right? what about games outside of that?

 

[Skeeter49]

Kat and Kara could have made a difference

 

[Fliesen]

What does it matter? Why is this a problem? Would you prefer secs to just make the protagonists female for the sake of forced diversity?

sure. yeah. why not.

Can you name a specific example where that's been detrimental to a game?

You're possibly unaware of this, but there's plenty of devs who make those generic white dude protagonists for the sake of "forced appeal to the presumed young white male audience".
It's fallacious to assume that all those brooding white dudes are simply the result of the devs "original, untempered creative vision" and not also because of a desire of mass market appeal.

 

[A Link to the Past]

You said ME:A was 'as relevant to this topic as dental floss'. ME:A is relevant to feminism in gaming, so you must be of the opinion that that's not the topic we're discussing.

Yes, a game that does not feature a female-exclusive character is not relevant to an article about games that feature a female-exclusive characters. Relevance is not established through a tangential connection. The article is about a specific element of feminism and representation in the industry that does not cover ME:A. Which is why it is not mentioned.