Print

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

[Levi]

I'd be happy enough with better writing for female characters in games.  I do think Borderlands really did a great job for this, and for showing a world that is psychotic and horrible in every way, yet treats same-sex relationships as completely normal.   

Anyway, just wanted to say that and get out, as reading what drivel comes out of peoples mouths in these threads tends to destroy my faith in humanity. 

[pisskop]

You're leaving out the whole "NO QUEERS" thing, and bigoted trolling, maybe because most of it got removed and you didn't see it.  While that's a different discussion from this one, it did start the dialogue of representation in games being culturally important.  It's the same problem, just a different classification of people.

oh . . . I wonder if this subject isn't easier to discuss then.  Is there a consensus of negative homosexual stereotypes in games?  Most games I play don't even bother with a love interest so I never get to verify their sexuality.

[Kingbodz]

I'd be happy enough with better writing for female characters in games.  I do think Borderlands really did a great job for this, and for showing a world that is psychotic and horrible in every way, yet treats same-sex relationships as completely normal.   

Anyway, just wanted to say that and get out, as reading what drivel comes out of peoples mouths in these threads tends to destroy my faith in humanity.

It destroys mine too. But I love drama too much to leave.

[Neonivek]

"It was made by men" and "It was made for men" really shouldn't come into play.

Actually that's literally the problem as the vast, vast majority of AAA games are made by men and for men and do absolutely zilch to cater for women.

I will admit, they are getting a little better at remembering that women play games too. But "better" is not a reason we should stop hounding them. The reason Nintendo is so, so successful is because they cater to everyone. Moms, dads, kids, teens, and college kids. There's no one you don't know that wouldn't like playing one nintendo game or other. Can you say that for major AAA game releases?

Nope. They're catered to a very narrow demographic. Males, age 12-25. There are always purchasers outside the demographic, as there always is.

But they're catering to that group specifically and always. Never women.

There is no problem with female abuse. One of the aspects of not being sexist is not to give anyone special treatment. I think though the difference is the type of abuse women tend to suffer in videogames as well as how it relates to them.

E: Excuse you? There is absolutely problems with abuse.

You can make a good and dark game without abusing anyone, especially women who are often the target of this abuse for for !!edgefactor!!

Ok to the first part:

I am not talking about the issue that TOO much is catering towards men and not enough of the industry is homogenous, which is an issue. I am talking about the people who will instantly interpret a character as sexist or not sexist entirely by whether or not a man made it or if it is a female character made to be appealing to men.

As for the second part...

Of course, but why are you making female abuse special? Could it be because you have the exact same sexism that pervades this whole thing... that women are "things" that need to be "protected" and thus games that show them in any sort of negative situation are wrong because women are small little flowers who are constantly and forever abused in real life?

Cause we aren't talking about very specific forms of abuse here. We are specifically talking about ANYTIME a woman is hurt by a man.

Edited because I cannot complain even here.

[LordBucket]

You are more likely to relate to a protagonist because they will almost always be male

It amazes me that anybody would make this claim in an era where character customization is ubiquitous. If you want to play as female, the vast majority of the time you can.

Nevertheless: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Video_games_featuring_female_protagonists

And doing a quick search off the top of my head of a couple games I've played with female-only protagonists, they didn't even show up in the list. So it's far from complete.

Trivializing women's issues doesn't help the discussion. Erasure is just that. Perhaps you should spend some time listening instead of explaining to all us women folk how you know all about whether or not we are represented.

Ok. fine. What's the problem? Explain it to me. You didn't answer when I asked you to explain to me what it was you wanted that didn't exist. You evaded the question. So I'm calling you out. What is it you want that you think doesn't exist?

Because very obviously you didn't answer because you know that anyone with google will probably easily be able to give you examples of whatever it is you want, and then you won't be able to complain about it not existing anymore.

Is there really a problem? If so, then explain it. Show us what you so desperately long for that you believe doesn't exist.

As well as actually arguing that female characters in WoW aren't sexist as fuck.

How, exactly? Anyone who wants to play female can. There are no significant gameplay differences between the genders. In fact, none at all that I can think of. Women are consistently portrayed as in equal roles with men. There are female rulers of entire civilizations like Tyrande and Alexstrasza. And again look at the armor, it's not like they're any more sexualized than the men are.

What's exactly the problem?

[itisnotlogical]

You are more likely to relate to a protagonist because they will almost always be male, for example.

I feel like that's more of a coincidence than part of the problem. If it's like Cod of Dooty where EVERY SINGLE CHARACTER is male, then that's something to criticize, but I don't think it's fair to say that male main characters being more common is intentional. It's probably more of a male writer thinking of "male" as the default to a lot of things, so they make the main character a man without thinking.

I'm not saying that more female protagonists isn't a thing that we should strive for, but I don't think that something as broad as "male characters are more common" is a good point of criticism.

[itisnotlogical]

How, exactly? Anyone who wants to play female can. There are no significant gameplay differences between the genders. In fact, none at all that I can think of. Women are consistently portrayed as in equal roles with men. There are female rulers of entire civilizations like Tyrande and Alexstrasza. And again look at the armor, it's not like they're any more sexualized than the men are.

What's exactly the problem?

Even on the sexualization front there's plenty of that across both genders. Illidan has NEVER worn a shirt in his official art.

Dammit, meant to edit, sorry.

[Meph]

smeeprocket: You really need to learn to become more objective and present your ideas and responses in a well mannered and composed way.

Thats all.

[Bohandas]

Theoretically shouldn't oversexualized female characters also appeal to lesbians as well as men?

[TD1]

No, CoD is a battle field situation. People expect men to make war. There is a historical and a current-day precedent for this. There are many more men soldiers than women soldiers. Of course, I assume (never having played it) that there are no women in CoD, this is a stereotype. But every game imaginable milks stereotype, even seen a French person in a game not conform? What about an Irish person? A British person? Games are the realms of generalisation.

[Reelya]

I don't think a lot of gamer males, especially developers realize why the violence against women by men is so serious. The general excuse is "men are violent in the game against men too and women against men." But this violence, to many people, especially women, underscores the casual violence our gender experiences on a day to day basis that is trivialized and suppressed by society at large.

How do you think that should be handled in a sandbox game environment which allows the player to conduct violence in general? I ask this because a lot of the criticism I've seen recently is related to violence against women you can conduct in sandbox games, rather than pre-scripted incidents. The criticism is phrased as in "you 'can' do x to a woman" when "x" is something that you can also do to other characters, like driving over them.

[Neonivek]

How, exactly? Anyone who wants to play female can. There are no significant gameplay differences between the genders. In fact, none at all that I can think of. Women are consistently portrayed as in equal roles with men. There are female rulers of entire civilizations like Tyrande and Alexstrasza. And again look at the armor, it's not like they're any more sexualized than the men are.

What's exactly the problem?

Even on the sexualization front there's plenty of that across both genders. Illidan has NEVER worn a shirt in his official art.

Yeah but even then there is a rather sizable disproportionate sexualization in World of Warcraft.

Though they started cleaning up their act.

So you don't get the
Male Armor: Platemail
Female Armor: Bikini

as often and usually it is just a boob slot or a belly slot.

Theoretically shouldn't oversexualized female characters also appeal to lesbians as well as men?

Sometimes oversexualized female characters appeal to straight women. It is why Britney Spears appealed to women... in fact I think that was her biggest fanbase.

But if you look at females meant to sexually appeal to lesbians there are some differences.

In the same way that the Gay Male Fantasy is different then the Straight Female fantasy.

The biggest difference is that gay males TEND TO want a less restrained partner while females TEND TO want a restrained partner. Though I might be mixing up female teens with adult women.

[smeeprocket]

smeeprocket: You really need to learn to become more objective and present your ideas and responses in a well mannered and composed way.

Thats all.

I think I've been very objective, but I'm not going to hold your hand. That's not my job.

[TD1]

Smee, are you going to address the questions? LordBucket's in particular interest me.

[smeeprocket]

You are more likely to relate to a protagonist because they will almost always be male

It amazes me that anybody would make this claim in an era where character customization is ubiquitous. If you want to play as female, the vast majority of the time you can.

Nevertheless: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Video_games_featuring_female_protagonists

And doing a quick search off the top of my head of a couple games I've played with female-only protagonists, they didn't even show up in the list. So it's far from complete.

Trivializing women's issues doesn't help the discussion. Erasure is just that. Perhaps you should spend some time listening instead of explaining to all us women folk how you know all about whether or not we are represented.

Ok. fine. What's the problem? Explain it to me. You didn't answer when I asked you to explain to me what it was you wanted that didn't exist. You evaded the question. So I'm calling you out. What is it you want that you think doesn't exist?

Because very obviously you didn't answer because you know that anyone with google will probably easily be able to give you examples of whatever it is you want, and then you won't be able to complain about it not existing anymore.

Is there really a problem? If so, then explain it. Show us what you so desperately long for that you believe doesn't exist.

As well as actually arguing that female characters in WoW aren't sexist as fuck.

How, exactly? Anyone who wants to play female can. There are no significant gameplay differences between the genders. In fact, none at all that I can think of. Women are consistently portrayed as in equal roles with men. There are female rulers of entire civilizations like Tyrande and Alexstrasza. And again look at the armor, it's not like they're any more sexualized than the men are.

What's exactly the problem?

People currently are explaining the problem, and you are welcome to read there words. I feel like you are expending an excessive amount of energy trying to just shut the conversation down, however.

It's interesting to me that I do not come off as objective, but when someone is actively trying to trivialize the matter and silence the opposition, none of you say anything.

Do you feel I'm obligated to be eloquent and measured, with witty come backs and patience to spare while the other side can be as hostile as they wish?

That's kind of an unrealistic expectation.