Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

My definition of strange is that you think it shouldn't be like this, that the setting is somehow wrong for switching gender roles like that. Otherwise the default is sexism against women in the game, which simply isn't necessary. But that wasn't my point anyway. I'm saying that if you try this for any given game, and then the game feels unplayable or the plot no longer makes sense etc., there's something wrong. Because in most cases, gender identity isn't all that important to the plot, unless pregnancy or sexism are also integral to the plot.

But in any case, seriously, why not? Why would it be bad if there was Larry Croft too? Or Solid Snake was a girl? Why couldn't Maria and Luigey go to save Prince Plum from Bowseria? You can say it makes them into a different character if you want, but it really doesn't. The only thing it changes is the gender. And yes, I know that's a large part of identity, I have personal experience with it, but when it comes to fighting? When it comes to saving people? When it comes to getting fat lewt? Gender doesn't matter, and it shouldn't matter in games. Because when there are so many more games with must-be-male protagonists than games with must-be-female protagonists? There's something wrong with those demographics.

Ok that's a really non-standard definition (I'd recommend saying something like "wrong" or "incorrect" if that's what you mean in future), but I'll try and roll with it.  As far as I can tell you're failing to grasp the point I'm making.  Yes, it doesn't matter who the main character is for very basic storylines.  But when you have a main character who has meaningful interactions with other people it does matter, because their reactions to that character will be informed by their society's view of all aspects of their identity, including their gender (and indeed, that character's personality will be influenced by how their society sees them).  Your second paragraph is therefore really baffling to me - any game with a decent storyline involves way more than "fighting, saving people and loot".  Indeed, I'd say that MGS qualifies as such a series, and you'd confuse parts of it if you inverted the genders (particularly MGS3).  This wouldn't be bad in and of itself, but it would require you to change the writing and the storyline - something that you seem to be denying.

As for why sexism against women should be the "default" in games... that's because it's the default in real life (ie virtually all societies have historically been sexist against women), and all stories should on some level speak to our own experiences.  Denying that sexism exists won't make it go away.

Of course that isn't to say you can't have female characters who go against societal expectations, far from it, but you should expect the way they interact with other characters to be different in a story-driven game.

[Rolepgeek]

*Sigh*

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't think sexism against women should be the default in games. Apparently you do. Which ties into the thing you're talking about where people's reactions to you shift based on your gender, because I simply don't think that that aspect of gameplay or storyline is necessary or wanted.

Making a game in which there isn't sexism isn't 'denying that sexism exists'. Because it exists, and because games often exist as escape mechanisms and power fantasies, 'allowing'(as if it was something we had the right to take away from them) women to associate with the character in a world where they aren't constantly being shoved down by society is just basic decency and good game design. Some people want stories to speak to their experiences and reflect what they've had to go through. Others want the opposite of that, they want to be able to do things they can't do in real life for one reason or another.

For that matter, you seem to be misinterpreting me on another level; I was saying that anything implicitly associated with gender would have to be rewritten, but there's plenty of things that aren't. In a world with gender roles flipped, people really wouldn't react much differently to you, because you're still/still not the oppressed gender. Even with extremely complex storylines, it's really easy to flip the genders of everyone involved; if sexism is involved, flip gender roles.

My point about fighting, saving people, and loot, is that a character's core competency doesn't matter based on gender. Their interactions with people by no means need to be affected by it. There is zero reason beyond 'reflecting reality', which games are rarely meant to do beyond what's necessary for willing suspension of disbelief(and if the mercenary captain really doesn't comment on your bust size or make fun of you for being a girl, or the visiting police officer comment on your staying at home to be a father to your child, does that really break your suspension of disbelief? Really?), for games to have sexist societies, unless that very sexism is part of the plot, which typically means, in turn, the main character or a very important NPC or party member, is different from the expected and trying to overcome society's expectations.

I don't expect the way they interact to be different from male characters unless the society in the game is sexist, and the characters they interact with are also sexist. Because other than that, there's no reason for them to be treated differently.

But leaving all that aside, my point is that it makes very little, if any, difference to most story's plots to switch the genders. So why, then, are so many stories' protagonists male rather than female? Because the industry is sexist.

[Leafsnail]

There's a difference between "let's agree to disagree" and "I'm going to ignore what you just said and repeat my position".

Whatever though I guess.  The only additional point I feel inclined to make is that no, this is not some stupid argument from ~immersion~.  It's the basic idea that art (that is, anything that attempts to tell a story rather than just give the player a power trip) has to reflect life on some level for us to relate to it.  If a female character experiences none of the challenges that real women face will they really be a relatable character, or will they be susceptible to the "basically a man" criticism?

[Neonivek]

Vaarsuvius from Order of the Stick is a definite character without us ever knowing hir gender

Actually that was by sheer coincidence. The creator thought her gender was obvious but was surprised when no one realized.

As well that is a bad example further so because Vaarsuvius is androgynous without it being revealed what her gender is. Her gender isn't "Male or female" her gender is "unknown" without it being a different character altogether.

it's about the individual player's experiences that define it as a story, right?

Not everyone follows this post modern view point that "everyone is right" and that it is only your experience with it that matters. That is why we try to analyze fiction further to dry to draw out more then what a cursory glance could have.

A character is not vague simply because they could have either set of genitalia

They really are. A character no longer is the entity you see in the videogame but rather some sort of nebulous character who exists in their own universe. They cannot have a set identity because we don't know their identity because they can have either identity because we aren't playing with one hero but two heroes both of which go through the game.

As well we aren't talking about Androgynous characters either. It would certainly be an interesting way to handle it (make the character model so androgynous so that your gender choice means nothing essentially).

That's not important enough to the character, in almost every game that isn't, say, a dating game

It isn't the fact that they can have either gender. Get gender out of your head. It is the fact that they are multiple characters.

As for Washington: Yes. So why aren't games rife with female protagonists? Why do they not reflect this equality? That is the problem here. And I'm saying that it could be easily fixed simply by companies, once they finish with the game(if it's not part of a series yet), go through and flip a coin for each character's gender. If they need to, tweak here and there to accommodate things to the story if absolutely necessary(or to the player's immersion; if 3/4 couples were gay, even I would start having doubts).

The reason why as I explained is that as SOON as you have a "multiple choice" main character you INSTANTLY weaken them as a character... because you are not nailing down their character. "Yeah the hero of our game might be a man, a woman, a dog, a cat, or an alien from outer space... You don't know and we don't care"

Mass Effect did the most to characterize their "blank slate" character and even then Sheppard was still essentially a nebulous character who lacked any sort of real face even within the game.

A single inspired viewpoint of a character is far superior when you are trying to strongly characterize them.

I don't expect the way they interact to be different from male characters unless the society in the game is sexist

You are aware there are differences between men and women right? As well there are differences between how they can interact even if we were to assume they are exactly alike right?

Then again I guess this is where we must agree to disagree since the belief that there are no differences between men and women is one that exists. It isn't one I prescribe to... but still.

why, then, are so many stories' protagonists male rather than female? Because the industry is sexist

Preference can explain so much of that.

Remember Spike TV's main audience is female... and Spike TV caters almost exclusively to men (I don't know how this works... >_<)

[Rolepgeek]

...so you're saying a female character has to undergo sexism in order to be considered female. That, therefore, sexism is part of a woman's identity, and she is not truly female is she does not undergo it.
If I'm wrong as to your position, please correct me. I want to believe you think something else.

I just don't think stories have to involve sexism, as I don't think that sexism is an aspect of life that must be reflected in art, stories, games, etc. in order for people to relate to them. If you do, that's your opinion, but you shouldn't defend sexism in games based on the idea that women wouldn't be able to relate to female characters, otherwise. Let's assume that is true, for a moment, though. Would it really be easier for a woman to associate with a male character, then, rather than a female character who doesn't face the obstructions of culturally-reinforced sexism?

Neonivek, you don't seem to understand my point, and instead choose to quote very specific parts of my post in what appears like an attempt to take things out of context so they'll be easier to refute using your logic. I am not talking about a character that can switch genders at will. Their identity is constant through the story. The only difference is gender, and you can have one identity with two genders. Just because the hero can be either gender doesn't make them separate heroes. They really aren't; your claiming such is based on apparently circular logic with no real basis beyond 'gender is so integral to identity that someone isn't the same person if they have a different gender'. Which seems transphobic, for one thing, but that's besides the point. Choosing which gender does not split them somehow into multiple characters.

Ah, but now you misunderstand me again. I said nothing about multiple choice characters, besides my disagreement with your view that multiple choice characters are weaker. Almost every game has an element of choice in it, and the differences in the choices you make affect what character you have, by your logic, because their personality and decision-making basis is different in order to explain each one. Games that don't have choice in them to some degree are less games and more visual novels with puzzle sequences, like Professor Layton. Perhaps there are multiple ways to solve the puzzle, or it's reaction-based, but once the player has no impact on the story and plot, it becomes much more difficult to relate to the character, and you are simply a bystander, and observer, not a player. But leaving that aside, I did not say 'why aren't all games multiple choice character games?'. I said 'why aren't there more female protagonists and characters?". Once the company finishes a game, they flip a coin to decide the gender, and the character is 'nailed down' as that. You know what the hero will be and it will not change. The difference is simply that they aren't yet another male hero, they're a female heroine. You can't choose the gender, they're just female, period. Why is that so rare?

[Neonivek]

Lack of sexism isn't ignoring the differences between men and women... that is just ignorance. It is just not making it more important then it should nor making someone beholden of those.

I just don't think stories have to involve sexism

They never do... not intentionally anyhow. The ONLY time you get sexism is when a "strawman feminist" berates your male character.

I could count the number of games that have sexism as an actual plot element (Intentional not "Ohhh I see no female guards") on one hand. You cannot claim sexism even in that situation when no female character is barred from being whatever the heck she wants to be. Since in the end the answer to "why are all the kings male?" becomes "Because there isn't a female one".

I am not talking about a character that can switch genders at will.

Then your response to my post is completely unrelated to everything I am talking about.

but now you misunderstand me again. I said nothing about multiple choice characters, besides my disagreement with your view that multiple choice characters are weaker

No misunderstanding I am expanded what I was talking about because you didn't understand what I said.

You can't choose the gender, they're just female, period. Why is that so rare?

There are 2 reasons for this.
1) Most creators are male, The demographics for most games are male, and many settings require male characters.
but more importantly.
2) GOOD LUCK.

We aren't outside the period where someone can use a female character without it being "The point". If you play to female stereotypes then your character is "regressive" and will be reviled, and if you play against them you are making a weak character.

I'll put it to you this way... If you gender swapped the characters in Heavy Rain... it would be considered a sexist game in all likeliness. This is why you cannot "Just use a female character in place of a male one".

[Leafsnail]

...so you're saying a female character has to undergo sexism in order to be considered female. That, therefore, sexism is part of a woman's identity, and she is not truly female is she does not undergo it.
If I'm wrong as to your position, please correct me. I want to believe you think something else.

This is kindof my position, but you appear to be making every effort to try and twist it into something evil.

Virtually all women in our society in real life experience sexism on a day-to-day basis.  It is easier to relate to characters who have similar problems and desires to you.  Therefore characters who experience sexism (or some analogue thereof) are more likely to be relatable to a female audience than characters who just magically don't have to deal with the problem at all.  It is fine if those characters gloriously overcome these challenges and shatter their society's expectations, but that doesn't mean the challenges should not be there.  Do you understand what I am saying?

I just don't think stories have to involve sexism, as I don't think that sexism is an aspect of life that must be reflected in art, stories, games, etc. in order for people to relate to them. If you do, that's your opinion, but you shouldn't defend sexism in games based on the idea that women wouldn't be able to relate to female characters, otherwise. Let's assume that is true, for a moment, though. Would it really be easier for a woman to associate with a male character, then, rather than a female character who doesn't face the obstructions of culturally-reinforced sexism?

I don't understand the question you're putting to me.  Are you talking about a character in one of your genderbent games where men are the ones who experience sexism?  Maybe, I'd be interested to find out.

If you're not talking about one of those characters then I'm confused as to what you're trying to prove with this question.  Is your position that physical resemblence to yourself is the only thing a character needs in order to be relatable?

I think you may also be misunderstanding me on a deeper level.  I'm not saying "the real world is sexist, therefore the game's industry can do whatever sexist things they like and go hog wild".  Rather I'm specifically challenging your idea that having 100% interchangable male and female characters is something we should aim for in all cases.

[Neonivek]

I think you may also be misunderstanding me on a deeper level.  I'm not saying "the real world is sexist, therefore the game's industry can do whatever sexist things they like and go hog wild".  Rather I'm specifically challenging your idea that having 100% interchangable male and female characters is something we should aim for in all cases

I don't think that is what Rolepgeek is saying, but I honestly cannot tell what (s)he is saying.

[Rolepgeek]

Lack of sexism isn't ignoring the differences between men and women... that is just ignorance. It is just not making it more important then it should nor making someone beholden of those.

I just don't think stories have to involve sexism

They never do... not intentionally anyhow. The ONLY time you get sexism is when a "strawman feminist" berates your male character.

I could count the number of games that have sexism as an actual plot element (Intentional not "Ohhh I see no female guards") on one hand. You cannot claim sexism even in that situation when no female character is barred from being whatever the heck she wants to be. Since in the end the answer to "why are all the kings male?" becomes "Because there isn't a female one".

Oh my god. How many times have I said this? I don't care if it's intentional; that doesn't matter. It's still sexism. Your logic is purposefully, and by the content matter, maliciously, choosing to ignore the actual issue and not look any deeper. If it's one game, it might be coincidence, but's it's not. Here, allow me to demonstrate some examples. Any time a female character is told to stay away from a fight, with no good reason beyond "I care about you" or something like that. I am not talking about when a female character is asked/told to stay away from a fight because they would not help or would be severely outmatched. I am talking about instances where a male character who is likewise outmatched, or less skilled than the female character, is allowed to come anyway. I am talking about any story in which sexual assault is a plot element, as almost every instance of that will involve sexism. Look up Double Standards: Rape if you don't believe me. I can, in fact, claim sexism when no female characters are shown to be trying for a specific position; that is the designers being sexist. In the end, the answer to "Why are all the monarchs male?" is, in almost every case, "Because the writers didn't want to make them female."

I am not talking about a character that can switch genders at will.

Then your response to my post is completely unrelated to everything I am talking about.

I was NEVER talking about a character than can switch genders at will.

but now you misunderstand me again. I said nothing about multiple choice characters, besides my disagreement with your view that multiple choice characters are weaker

No misunderstanding I am expanded what I was talking about because you didn't understand what I said.

Then enlighten me; why did you respond to the part of my post asking about females?

You can't choose the gender, they're just female, period. Why is that so rare?

There are 2 reasons for this.
1) Most creators are male, The demographics for most games are male, and many settings require male characters.
but more importantly.
2) GOOD LUCK.

1) Why is that, exactly?; That's only true sometimes, and only because many games alienate women due to the sexism; And yet they don't require female characters? I can't see how this is valid in any way as an argument. There is rarely, if ever, reason that the main character can't be female.
2) Because putting forth your answer in such a way as to suggest the notion is ridiculous and incredibly implausible, and arguing that 'it's not what most games do!' is a valid argument. [/sarcasm]

We aren't outside the period where someone can use a female character without it being "The point". If you play to female stereotypes then your character is "regressive" and will be reviled, and if you play against them you are making a weak character.

THIS IS THE WHOLE GODDAMN PROBLEM DAMNIT HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THAT?

I'll put it to you this way... If you gender swapped the characters in Heavy Rain... it would be considered a sexist game in all likeliness. This is why you cannot "Just use a female character in place of a male one".

If it would be considered a sexist game with the genders swapped, it's entirely possible that it is a sexist game as it is. Which, after a brief overview, I can't say it's not. All of the 'active' characters appear to be male, while the female controllable characters are a prostitute with a murdered child who helps the main character and someone whose purposes appears to be helping the main character recover and acting as a love interest; she supposedly conducts her own investigations, but from what I can tell, these don't actually achieve anything. They help the main character, without seeming to do much of anything on their own, from the looks of it.

...so you're saying a female character has to undergo sexism in order to be considered female. That, therefore, sexism is part of a woman's identity, and she is not truly female is she does not undergo it.
If I'm wrong as to your position, please correct me. I want to believe you think something else.

This is kindof my position, but you appear to be making every effort to try and twist it into something evil.

Virtually all women in our society in real life experience sexism on a day-to-day basis.  It is easier to relate to characters who have similar problems and desires to you.  Therefore characters who experience sexism (or some analogue thereof) are more likely to be relatable to a female audience than characters who just magically don't have to deal with the problem at all.  It is fine if those characters gloriously overcome these challenges and shatter their society's expectations, but that doesn't mean the challenges should not be there.  Do you understand what I am saying?

I understand what you're saying, however, I don't believe that a setting in which sexism is moot or nonexistent is 'magical', nor do I believe that female characters need to be defined by this sexism. IF part of their character that is related to by the player is their struggle to overcome the hurdles sexism places against them, then that sexism becomes part of their character. Which is neither necessary nor particularly desirable, in my view. I read plenty of stories with female protagonists, in cultures that are sometimes sexist, and sometimes not. Often there's an amalgam of various cultures that assign gender roles in different ways. In very few of those stories does the sexism in their society ever affect them in a manner integral to the story. There are certainly ones that do, some which are built around the concept, or a related one. But it isn't such an important part that putting sexism into the game setting can be claimed to improve the attraction the game has to female players.

I just don't think stories have to involve sexism, as I don't think that sexism is an aspect of life that must be reflected in art, stories, games, etc. in order for people to relate to them. If you do, that's your opinion, but you shouldn't defend sexism in games based on the idea that women wouldn't be able to relate to female characters, otherwise. Let's assume that is true, for a moment, though. Would it really be easier for a woman to associate with a male character, then, rather than a female character who doesn't face the obstructions of culturally-reinforced sexism?

I don't understand the question you're putting to me.  Are you talking about a character in one of your genderbent games where men are the ones who experience sexism?  Maybe, I'd be interested to find out.

If you're not talking about one of those characters then I'm confused as to what you're trying to prove with this question.  Is your position that physical resemblence to yourself is the only thing a character needs in order to be relatable?

I think you may also be misunderstanding me on a deeper level.  I'm not saying "the real world is sexist, therefore the game's industry can do whatever sexist things they like and go hog wild".  Rather I'm specifically challenging your idea that having 100% interchangable male and female characters is something we should aim for in all cases.

No, I'm asking if you're saying that a male character who doesn't face sexism is more relatable(I don't think that's technically a word but I don't know what else to use) to women than a female character who doesn't face sexism. Maybe they're exactly the same. But if so, why is there not then an even split between male and female protagonists? All other aspects of the character being the same, wouldn't you relate more easily to a character that had the same gender you identify as?

Additionally, I'm not trying to claim that 100% gender interchangeable characters is always the thing to try for. I'm saying that in many cases, their gender is not so important to the plot as to mean that 4/5 protagonists(being generous here anyway, btw) without gender choice given need to be male. It is a simple matter to change it so there is a 50/50 split in the number of male/female characters, starting with games being produced from now on. It is a matter of slightly different character models, slightly different dialogue options, perhaps slightly curved plots compared to their original track. But there is zero reason for the main character of every story to be male, and every reason for the characters in half of them to be female.

Unless, of course, they come out with a new Call of Duty/[Insert game of your choice] game, and because the campaign's protagonist is female, you really think you would choose not to buy it with that aspect being the deciding factor in your choice..

[Neonivek]

while the female controllable characters are a prostitute with a murdered child

She isn't selectable and also stop being such a puritan, if Madison (I think that was her name) was the typical prostitute character in all videogames... no one would be complaining about prostitutes in videogames.

She isn't even a "victim because she is a prostitute" or a "prostitute because it gives her power over men" sort of deal either. As well the game doesn't sexualize her or her job. As well she takes an active interest in her son's disappearance, can handle herself, and doesn't play the victim.

She is by far the most progressive prostitute in all videogames.

Oh my god. How many times have I said this? I don't care if it's intentional; that doesn't matter. It's still sexism.

It makes all the difference.

Skipping stuff because it will just be an argument sink, and I don't feel like having lengthy conversations on some topics.

Then enlighten me; why did you respond to the part of my post asking about females?

Because the current topic was "Why don't ALL games have a chose the gender of the main character" so I assumed that was what your post was about. I didn't know you were talking about something completely different.

THIS IS THE WHOLE GODDAMN PROBLEM DAMNIT HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THAT?

Here is kind of the difference. Your not helping. You are putting standards onto female characters in order to fit a criteria of non-sexism.

To do it you need to absolutely not care about sexism.

If it would be considered a sexist game with the genders swapped, it's entirely possible that it is a sexist game as it is.

No... because if the female characters were male, usually it would make the game not sexist.

For get the depiction of the female characters in the game for one second it is COMPLETELY unimportant and just look at the male characters.

Ethan is a divorced father completely destroyed by the loss of his son and goes on a journey maiming himself several times in order to get him back and has sex with a random stranger because she asks him to.

Lets Gender swap this shall we?

Ethel is a divorced mother completely destroyed by the loss of her daughter and goes on a journey where she gets maimed several times in order to get him back and has sex with a random stranger because he asks her to.

Hmm so Ethel is both the "Mother" character who is only doing something for her kids... and she is painfully maimed for shock value who needs to be saved and nurtured by another man who in some endings solves her issue, and who is redeemed through a male character (Even if I personally thought Ethan solo was a better ending... the game depicts it as the sad ending). That sounds like a VERY sexist character.

If Ethan was a woman I guarantee that people would be talking about how sexist her depiction was... by you even. The only thing that would seem progressive, other then her being the main character, is the fact that she isn't given magic mother psychic powers that allows her to know how her children are feeling to the point where she actually needs to learn to be a better mother rather then it being handed to her, thus making her seem like a real person as opposed to a videogame character.

Unless you are going to argue that the depiction of Ethan is somehow sexist towards men... and honestly? It really isn't. Ethan isn't macho and never learns martial arts, he genuinely cares for his children and tries to make a connection, and he shows genuine emotions other then anger. By all means he is a progressive male character.

[penguinofhonor]

Virtually all women in our society in real life experience sexism on a day-to-day basis.  It is easier to relate to characters who have similar problems and desires to you.  Therefore characters who experience sexism (or some analogue thereof) are more likely to be relatable to a female audience than characters who just magically don't have to deal with the problem at all.  It is fine if those characters gloriously overcome these challenges and shatter their society's expectations, but that doesn't mean the challenges should not be there.  Do you understand what I am saying?

I think that addressing sexism well can make your character much more relatable to women, but that doesn't mean sexism is the only level they can relate to them on. Most people have quite a variety of problems in their lives.

Would you say that you must include racism in some capacity to include characters of color?

[Rolepgeek]

while the female controllable characters are a prostitute with a murdered child

She isn't selectable and also stop being such a puritan, if Madison (I think that was her name) was the typical prostitute character in all videogames... no one would be complaining about prostitutes in videogames.

She isn't even a "victim because she is a prostitute" or a "prostitute because it gives her power over men" sort of deal either. As well the game doesn't sexualize her or her job. As well she takes an active interest in her son's disappearance, can handle herself, and doesn't play the victim.

She is by far the most progressive prostitute in all videogames.

...you're calling me a puritan?

Pfffftahhhahahahahahahahahhaha. No. I mention her being a prostitute because she is one, and as far as I can tell it's involved in the game. My concern was the part where she's barely a significant character for the first part of the game, and when she becomes a more major character, she serves to aid the main character, and that seems to be all; I don't notice any mention of her taking initiative on her own or working to do something before meeting the main character.

Oh my god. How many times have I said this? I don't care if it's intentional; that doesn't matter. It's still sexism.

It makes all the difference.

Skipping stuff because it will just be an argument sink, and I don't feel like having lengthy conversations on some topics.

I disagree. Unintentional sexism is so much worse, actually, because then it's part of the game, rather than just part of the setting.

Then enlighten me; why did you respond to the part of my post asking about females?

Because the current topic was "Why don't ALL games have a chose the gender of the main character" so I assumed that was what your post was about. I didn't know you were talking about something completely different.

Wait, since when? My point this entire time, for the last page and a half or so, was about games being able to but unwilling to have more female characters, and about games whose characters would still function as a story(it might not be the same story, but it's still a story, still viable, and still something they aren't doing).

THIS IS THE WHOLE GODDAMN PROBLEM DAMNIT HOW DO YOU NOT SEE THAT?

Here is kind of the difference. Your not helping. You are putting standards onto female characters in order to fit a criteria of non-sexism.

To do it you need to absolutely not care about sexism.

What? I don't even...you are making zero sense whatsoever. Seriously, I can barely even respond because your response is so confusing. Where did I start putting standards onto female characters? How does not caring about sexism help anything?!?

If it would be considered a sexist game with the genders swapped, it's entirely possible that it is a sexist game as it is.

No... because if the female characters were male, usually it would make the game not sexist.

For get the depiction of the female characters in the game for one second it is COMPLETELY unimportant and just look at the male characters.

Wow. I wanna stop for a second and take a look at this statement.

The female characters in the game are completely unimportant, only the male characters matter.

Would you like to rephrase that? That's such a disastrously awful thing to say I'm willing to believe it was an honest blunder, a digital foot in mouth, so to speak. But as it is...jeezus.

Ethan is a divorced father completely destroyed by the loss of his son and goes on a journey maiming himself several times in order to get him back and has sex with a random stranger because she asks him to.

Lets Gender swap this shall we?

Ethel is a divorced mother completely destroyed by the loss of her daughter and goes on a journey where she gets maimed several times in order to get her back and has sex with a random stranger because he asks her to.

Oh, cute, you phrased it in such a way as to make your point. Because going out with the person who helped you save your child is completely unreasonable -or is it just because a woman isn't allowed to want to have sex without looking like a slut? This leaves out, of course, the part where they're in a coma for several months, Ethan trying to save Jason and being injured in the process(and failing, which is kindof important), and of course the serious brain damage that seems to have continued, based on the whole 'blackouts' thing that happen. Nice nameflip though, props for that, at least.
Now, I'd like you to look at that a second time. Real quick. 'maiming himself several times' vs. 'where she gets maimed several times'. You probably didn't even mean to, but you still made it so the male version is active, while the female version is more passive; things happen to her, while he does things. An honest mistake, but a valuable piece of insight into your thought processes.

Hmm so Ethel is both the "Mother" character who is only doing something for her kids... and she is painfully maimed for shock value who needs to be saved and nurtured by another man who in some endings solves her issue, and who is redeemed through a male character (Even if I personally thought Ethan solo was a better ending... the game depicts it as the sad ending). That sounds like a VERY sexist character.

Male characters are only uncommonly shown to be nurturing or healing figures. Being maimed for shock value isn't really relevant, since it would apply to both genders(unless there's a different reason Ethan was maimed? In which case it would apply to Ethel as well.). 'In some endings' somehow means the character is sexist, apparently, while in other endings she solves the problem herself, or, as far as I can tell, the Male Madison simply warns Ethel so she isn't shot to death by police. Being 'redeemed' by a male character? I don't even know what this refers to, though I would be fairly sure she wouldn't need redeemed, considering the lengths she was going to for her daughter(although she did murder someone, so...).

Now, I'm going to take a moment, and thank you. I'm going to thank you for proving my point, considering my point was that if it's sexist whilst gender-flipped, it's probably sexist when not gender-flipped, and vice versa. Reread that sentence to make sure you understand what I'm trying to say, since we are misinterpreting each other so often here, apparently.

If Ethan was a woman I guarantee that people would be talking about how sexist her depiction was... by you even. The only thing that would seem progressive, other then her being the main character, is the fact that she isn't given magic mother psychic powers that allows her to know how her children are feeling to the point where she actually needs to learn to be a better mother rather then it being handed to her, thus making her seem like a real person as opposed to a videogame character.

Unless you are going to argue that the depiction of Ethan is somehow sexist towards men... and honestly? It really isn't. Ethan isn't macho and never learns martial arts, he genuinely cares for his children and tries to make a connection, and he shows genuine emotions other then anger. By all means he is a progressive male character.

?
This part just confuses me. What's your point here?

[Neonivek]

Being maimed for shock value isn't really relevant

Now your flip flopping. Even you brought up the "Male characters are harmed through other characters, female characters are harmed directly" as a form of sexism.

Except it isn't now because that would actually be a fair argument.

Oh, cute, you phrased it in such a way as to make your point. Because going out with the person who helped you save your child is completely unreasonable -or is it just because a woman isn't allowed to want to have sex without looking like a slut? This leaves out, of course, the part where they're in a coma for several months, Ethan trying to save Jason and being injured in the process(and failing, which is kindof important), and of course the serious brain damage that seems to have continued, based on the whole 'blackouts' thing that happen. Nice nameflip though, props for that, at least.
Now, I'd like you to look at that a second time. Real quick. 'maiming himself several times' vs. 'where she gets maimed several times'. You probably didn't even mean to, but you still made it so the male version is active, while the female version is more passive; things happen to her, while he does things. An honest mistake, but a valuable piece of insight into your thought processes.

Doesn't matter EVERTHING you bring up is sexist.

She is injured and has her autonomy taken away for months, she is walking around maimed and injured (as female characters tend to have happen to them), She has sex to get her shirt off, she is mentally unstable.

It doesn't matter how much of Ethan's story you bring up because gender swapped, it still makes a sexist female character if you are going purely by your standards.

[Rolepgeek]

Being maimed for shock value isn't really relevant

Now your flip flopping. Even you brought up the "Male characters are harmed through other characters, female characters are harmed directly" as a form of sexism.

Except it isn't now because that would actually be a fair argument.

Wait when did I ever bring that up? I don't recall saying anything of the sort. I brought up the way you talked about how the main character ending up in a maimed state, but I don't remember saying that male characters are harmed through other characters(which, based on context, presumably means emotional harm by hurting their friends?) while female characters are harmed directly(which, again, presumably means abuse directed specifically at them, based on the context you're talking in?)

Besides which, again, like I said, being maimed isn't relevant because the same thing is done to the male character for the same reasons. There are other reasons it might be sexist(and the storyline actually makes me wonder if they made the story, realized how sexist it might come across, and flipped the genders, making them a hilarious example for everyone), but that one just...doesn't really seem to apply.

Oh, cute, you phrased it in such a way as to make your point. Because going out with the person who helped you save your child is completely unreasonable -or is it just because a woman isn't allowed to want to have sex without looking like a slut? This leaves out, of course, the part where they're in a coma for several months, Ethan trying to save Jason and being injured in the process(and failing, which is kindof important), and of course the serious brain damage that seems to have continued, based on the whole 'blackouts' thing that happen. Nice nameflip though, props for that, at least.
Now, I'd like you to look at that a second time. Real quick. 'maiming himself several times' vs. 'where she gets maimed several times'. You probably didn't even mean to, but you still made it so the male version is active, while the female version is more passive; things happen to her, while he does things. An honest mistake, but a valuable piece of insight into your thought processes.

Doesn't matter EVERTHING you bring up is sexist.

She is injured and has her autonomy taken away for months, she is walking around maimed and injured (as female characters tend to have happen to them), She has sex to get her shirt off, she is mentally unstable.

It doesn't matter how much of Ethan's story you bring up because gender swapped, it still makes a sexist female character if you are going purely by your standards.

Wait, so a woman being injured, something that actually happens, and is a problem because of domestic abuse, though this wasn't caused by that, is sexist now? Are you trying to strawman? Is your implication that my standards, which I really don't know where you got them from, are that women have to be perfect, chaste, and invincible in order to be not be sexist? Or are you simply trying to provoke an emotional response by not making sense?

[Neonivek]

Besides which, again, like I said, being maimed isn't relevant because the same thing is done to the male character for the same reasons.

Temporal issue. "Ethan" the male doesn't exist. Only Ethan the female exists.

and the storyline actually makes me wonder if they made the story, realized how sexist it might come across, and flipped the genders, making them a hilarious example for everyone

They really didn't. To admit Ms. Noreasontobeinthegame could have had a larger plot in the original story they were planning (where there were Supernatural elements), but her current involvement is basically entirely blank. I actually have no idea if her story was meant to be vague (that you piece together) or if they really did have to cut quite a bit here and there. Then again Quantic Dream are the masters of the TERRIBLE new romance as well as devolving their game near the end.

While Madison (who could be the wrong name) was a character who was so popular from the trailer that they included her in the actual game and managed to make her, by sheer coincidence, a great character... One they make a love interest, to everyone's groaning because NO ONE wanted it, and then shipped away on a bus. She is also coincidentally the character EVERYONE wishes they were playing instead of Ms. OnlytheretobeEthan'sGirlfriend.

The "Father who will do anything for their child" is rare, especially with non-rowdy characters, but it has been done before. Silent Hill 1 was that for example as was Silent Hill Shattered Memories.

Also I can't stay in this conversation much longer, the glitches is annoying me a bit... So if I stop responding >_> yeah sorry.