[Illuyankas]

Assail, on 11 March 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

I'm saying that a man who cannot see that women need no empowerment but from within themselves is on the verge of mental illness. Why is it that you think that women need to be made into the protagonist that does the rescuing, or at least in a role where she is not this DiD, in a video game in order to be empowered? That's like being a homeless man and blaming your being homeless because you spent a lot of time living in the inner city as a child, seeing homeless men every day. People need to quit blaming bullshit for the reasons they don't feel empowered, or capable, or successful. Video games and their damsels aren't disempowering women, women are disempowering themselves, if that's how they feel. If they spent half the time going out and focusing on themselves and their own ambitions and goals instead of making videos blaming Donkey Kong for their lack of empowerment drive as a woman, they'd probably outweigh the amount of male CEOs in the Fortune 500.

Say what you will, but it's not advertising that has groomed me to want to be the breadwinner for my family, or protect the women of my family, it's the fact that that is how I was brought up. It also has to do with the fact that physically, I could probably protect a woman better than the average woman could protect herself. I'm faster, I'm more muscular, I am inherently built towards fighting, protecting, killing, working. It's not insulting, it's a fact. Now I say the "average" woman. There are always exceptions, and I won't deny that. So on that note regarding this response, I would say it's not advertisement that has subliminally programmed me to feel this way, it's my upbringing. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but you decided to personally talk about me, someone you know next to nothing about, so you get a response geared towards just that: me.

Women legally have every opportunity to succeed in the First World as much as men do. Will I say that that makes it a reality? No, but find me a perfect country where sexism, racism, bigotry, anything, does not exist. You won't. It's not possible, but would I say it's a giant issue that needs immediately redress? Fuck no. Women aren't getting shafted because of their gender at an alarming rate. It's not ruining lives. I'm not trivializing something that definitely needs improvement, but I am saying that the First World has a hell of a lot better things to consider and put their minds upon than video games apparently disempowering women.

Did you guys hear? SEXISM IS OVER!

Your homeless person metaphor is painfully wrong even beyond pretending external influences don't exist, you're ignoring the realities of how women are treated by our culture with bootstrap bullshit that is provably wrong and dishonest, you're saying it wasn't an external cultural influence you were exposed to as a child but instead an external cultural influence, you think women need your protection and your big manly muscles because they can't take care of themselves which is REALLY patronisingly shitty of you, if someone's body has a bigger influence on how you regard them - from needing your 'protection' to 'exceptions' - than their mind, then you are, unfortunatly, a dickhead. Oh, built towards 'working'? 'Not insulting, it's a fact'? Advertising is a part of culture as is the entertainment industry which includes video games, culture influences society, video games are a part of that culture and deserve a closer look.

Oh, and realistically you should be ignored by everyone for being utterly and completely wrong if you genuinely think women aren't getting shafted because of their gender at an alarming rate, or that's it's not ruining lives. It's not even debatable, they completely are.

Quote

Morgoth, on 11 March 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

Wrong headed though he may seem, Assail is actively arguing for his opinions and is participating in a discussion that directly relates to those opinions. I don't think he deserves the sort of vitriol he's receiving.

It's fine really... everyone is guilty of jumping to person attacks when they disagree. I would say it's human nature lol. With that being said, don't feel as though you must edit these posts on my behalf (Admins ), I'm always up for a good laugh.

Personally I don't mind being called a fucktard or something as long as the person doing it is honestly challenging my posts with facts and content. One day Assail will get there. One day. That said, calling me a girly man or whatever was a bit pathetic. *goes back to kitchen barefoot and pregnant, just the way Assail likes it*

[cerveza_fiesta]

To start, I agree in principle that women in video games could be portrayed in a less objectified, less sexualized, more equal light.

Dolmen+, on 11 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

I don't think it makes sense to try "balance" the market with an influx of female characters that try right the wrongs of their male counterparts by being just as strong, fast and stoic. There should be differences. The tough girl shouldn't come across as a tough guy that got born female. she should come across as a woman with all the best of the gender adding to who she is as a hero.

This sums up my feelings on the issue neatly. Giving a choice between a male and female lead is a good start (as with ME series) and it's cool that they've taken the time to put such a choice into a popular video game, but Dolmen is right that it isn't enough. The FemShep and SirShep stories are essentially identical save the romantic options and choice of gender is largely irrelevant in the arc of the storyline. To be truly equal, ME should have had 2 very different storylines, one in which each gender approaches situations from a unique perspective, even if the eventual conclusion was similar.

That said, I tend to agree to an extent with Assail, in that we might read too much into video game companies' intentions. When it comes down to it, their goal is to make money, and there are 2 factors I see related to moneymaking that compete directly with truly gender-balanced video game production:

• There is an existing largely-male market, and it only makes good business sense to pander to one's biggest market first and foremost before trying to appeal to newer/smaller markets.
• Studios are always on a deadline, and struggle to fit meaningful storyline content into a compelling game without cost overruns in development. Under such pressures it is very convenient to avoid extensive backstory through the use of widely-known clichés - especially ones that lend themselves to the action-oriented gaming environment.

The first factor unfortunately comes with the baggage of DIDs and heavily sexualized female video game characters. Companies know sex sells to a young male audience and will continue to use that as a marketing device until it doesn't work anymore. The second factor justifies the choice of DID since it fits nicely with a goal/action-oriented video game mechanic. If you look at the second factor a level deeper, the studio is also spared the expense of explaining a male character's motivations for saving the DID, and the reason why the female was the one captured instead of the male, AND the reason why the villain is capturing the female to motivate the protagonist. It's just a storyline that makes sense to anyone that ever read a book or watched a movie, and it can be exploited to save effort. What's worse, swapping gender roles within the DID cliché just *feels* wrong in many contexts (eg. medieval fantasy) and requires a lot of effort to convince the consumer that it isn't just a token effort to appease a feminist audience.

Not to say this is what the studios *should* all be doing, or that there are no other options for developers, but the two factors I describe are strong motivators for a production studio and therefore are very difficult to overcome by anyone hoping for change. As with so many other contentious "status-quo vs. progressive approach" issues, those wishing for a new deal in video game gender equality need to identify economic factors that make their views viable, otherwise the industry will continue to ignore their point of view. The industry clearly has the formula figured out for the current audience (as evidenced by the billions in existing sales), and I'm sure would be happy to shift their stance if it opened up new markets without sacrificing the current one.

Anyways, I'm interested to follow Sarkeesian's commentary and I hope she comes up with some tangible solutions in the end. Even if she doesn't it's a useful exercise to explore and generate awareness on the issue of video game gender equality so that other more solution-oriented individuals might take up the cause. That's the nature of research...each installment building on the last until a greater problem is solved. So to Assail's comment on it being a waste of time, I wholeheartedly disagree.

This post has been edited by cerveza_fiesta: 11 March 2013 - 02:52 PM

[Illuyankas]

Oh, and in case you were wondering why comments were disabled, this is why:

(long image full of bile and bigotry)

Spoiler

[D'rek]

cerveza_fiesta, on 11 March 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

Dolmen+, on 11 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

I don't think it makes sense to try balance the market with an influx of female characters that try right the wrongs of their male counterparts by being just as strong, fast and stoic. There should be differences. The tough girl shouldn't come across as a tough guy that got born female. she should come across as a woman with all the best of the gender adding to who she is as a hero.

This sums up my feelings on the issue neatly. Giving a choice between a male and female lead is a good start (as with ME series) and it's cool that they've taken the time to put such a choice into a popular video game, but Dolmen is right that it isn't enough. The FemShep and SirShep stories are essentially identical save the romantic options and choice of gender is largely irrelevant in the arc of the storyline. To be truly equal, ME should have had 2 very different storylines, one in which each gender approaches situations from a unique perspective, even if the eventual conclusion was similar.

(disclaimer: I have not played mass effect, but I think I'm not making any wrong assumptions - ignore me if I am)

I both agree and disagree with this. I don't think I would have a problem with it if it was done well, but at the same time in the places where the story diverges you are going to start getting into dangerous "female shepherd does it differently because she can't do what male shepherd does" (and vice versa) territory. And with the video game fan culture being what it is, that is probably going to make for some bad headlines for the game. The problem, I think, is that Shepherd is supposed to be one character, but you can pick whether they are female or male, right? So if they are a certain character, regardless of sex/gender, they should more or less act and think pretty similarly.
I think your described situation would work better in a game where you can decide between two different playable characters that have their own distinct personalities.

cerveza_fiesta, on 11 March 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

That said, I tend to agree to an extent with Assail, in that we might read too much into video game companies' intentions. When it comes down to it, their goal is to make money, and there are 2 factors I see related to moneymaking that compete directly with truly gender-balanced video game production.
>There is an existing largely-male market, and it only makes good business sense to pander to one's biggest market first and foremost before trying to appeal to newer/smaller markets.
>Studios are always on a deadline, and struggle to fit meaningful storyline content into a compelling game without cost overruns in development. Under such pressures it is <u>very</u> convenient to avoid extensive backstory through the use of widely-known clichés - especially ones that lend themselves to the action-oriented gaming environment.

The first factor unfortunately comes with the baggage of DIDs and heavily sexualized female video game characters. Companies know sex sells to a young male audience and will continue to use that as a marketing device until it doesn't work anymore. The second factor justifies the choice of DID since it fits nicely with a goal/action-oriented video game mechanic. If you look at the second factor a level deeper, the studio is also spared the expense of explaining a male character's motivations for saving the DID, and the reason why the female was the one captured instead of the male, AND the reason why the villain is capturing the female to motivate the protagonist. It's just a storyline that makes sense to anyone that ever read a book or watched a movie, and it can be exploited to save effort. What's worse, swapping gender roles within the DID cliché just *feels* wrong in many contexts (eg. medieval fantasy) and requires a lot of effort to convince the consumer that it isn't just a token effort to appease a feminist audience.

Not to say this is what the studios *should* all be doing, or that there are no other options for developers, but the two factors I describe are strong motivators for a production studio and therefore are very difficult to overcome by anyone hoping for change. As with so many other contentious &quot;status-quo vs. progressive approach&quot; issues, those wishing for a new deal in video game gender equality need to identify economic factors that make their views viable, otherwise the industry will continue to ignore their point of view. The industry clearly has the formula figured out for the current audience (as evidenced by the billions in existing sales), and I'm sure would be happy to shift their stance if it opened up new markets without sacrificing the current one.

I think that argument definitely applies well to games from the 80s that were made by smaller teams, on tiny budgets, with limited technical capabilities. Today though, games have millions in budget and huge teams, right? So in many ways they no longer need to depend on old cliches/tropes because they have the money, people and hard drive space to personify their characters more. Making a game that appeals to both the existing larger male market AND to the smaller female market should be easier than ever nowadays with either the storytelling or customization capabilities that we now have. A company can appeal to the female market without removing their appeal to the male market by giving players the choice between protaganists as mass effect did (certainly there could be improvements to this practice/example, but it's a big first step).

The challenge, I think, is that the game needs to not only appeal to both, it needs to not turn away either market, either, and obscene pandering to one market will probably turn off the other market. You can't make every secondary and tertiary character customizable, too, so that is where the company needs to take a hard look at itself and try to eliminate exploitive discrimination or obscene pandering in those characters and circumstances. Some companies are great at that, others don't seem willing to make the effort.

[Macros]

Illy, that picture massively depressed me.
i have no hope for humanity.

[Assail]

Illuyankas, on 11 March 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

Assail, on 11 March 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

I'm saying that a man who cannot see that women need no empowerment but from within themselves is on the verge of mental illness. Why is it that you think that women need to be made into the protagonist that does the rescuing, or at least in a role where she is not this DiD, in a video game in order to be empowered? That's like being a homeless man and blaming your being homeless because you spent a lot of time living in the inner city as a child, seeing homeless men every day. People need to quit blaming bullshit for the reasons they don't feel empowered, or capable, or successful. Video games and their damsels aren't disempowering women, women are disempowering themselves, if that's how they feel. If they spent half the time going out and focusing on themselves and their own ambitions and goals instead of making videos blaming Donkey Kong for their lack of empowerment drive as a woman, they'd probably outweigh the amount of male CEOs in the Fortune 500.

Say what you will, but it's not advertising that has groomed me to want to be the breadwinner for my family, or protect the women of my family, it's the fact that that is how I was brought up. It also has to do with the fact that physically, I could probably protect a woman better than the average woman could protect herself. I'm faster, I'm more muscular, I am inherently built towards fighting, protecting, killing, working. It's not insulting, it's a fact. Now I say the "average" woman. There are always exceptions, and I won't deny that. So on that note regarding this response, I would say it's not advertisement that has subliminally programmed me to feel this way, it's my upbringing. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but you decided to personally talk about me, someone you know next to nothing about, so you get a response geared towards just that: me.

Women legally have every opportunity to succeed in the First World as much as men do. Will I say that that makes it a reality? No, but find me a perfect country where sexism, racism, bigotry, anything, does not exist. You won't. It's not possible, but would I say it's a giant issue that needs immediately redress? Fuck no. Women aren't getting shafted because of their gender at an alarming rate. It's not ruining lives. I'm not trivializing something that definitely needs improvement, but I am saying that the First World has a hell of a lot better things to consider and put their minds upon than video games apparently disempowering women.

Did you guys hear? SEXISM IS OVER!

Your homeless person metaphor is painfully wrong even beyond pretending external influences don't exist, you're ignoring the realities of how women are treated by our culture with bootstrap bullshit that is provably wrong and dishonest, you're saying it wasn't an external cultural influence you were exposed to as a child but instead an external cultural influence, you think women need your protection and your big manly muscles because they can't take care of themselves which is REALLY patronisingly shitty of you, if someone's body has a bigger influence on how you regard them - from needing your 'protection' to 'exceptions' - than their mind, then you are, unfortunatly, a dickhead. Oh, built towards 'working'? 'Not insulting, it's a fact'? Advertising is a part of culture as is the entertainment industry which includes video games, culture influences society, video games are a part of that culture and deserve a closer look.

Oh, and realistically you should be ignored by everyone for being utterly and completely wrong if you genuinely think women aren't getting shafted because of their gender at an alarming rate, or that's it's not ruining lives. It's not even debatable, they completely are.

Quote

Morgoth, on 11 March 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

Wrong headed though he may seem, Assail is actively arguing for his opinions and is participating in a discussion that directly relates to those opinions. I don't think he deserves the sort of vitriol he's receiving.

It's fine really... everyone is guilty of jumping to person attacks when they disagree. I would say it's human nature lol. With that being said, don't feel as though you must edit these posts on my behalf (Admins ), I'm always up for a good laugh.

Personally I don't mind being called a fucktard or something as long as the person doing it is honestly challenging my posts with facts and content. One day Assail will get there. One day. That said, calling me a girly man or whatever was a bit pathetic. *goes back to kitchen barefoot and pregnant, just the way Assail likes it*

Where did I say sexism is over? Capitalizing it won't make the statement coming from me be any truer, so what is your exact point is saying it? None? Thought so.

Not at all. My homeless person metaphor is exactly what is happening. Instead of sorting ones own shit out, they're looking for a bullshit reason as to why the world is fucked and why they're being served up injustices. I'll say it again: a bullshit reason. Video games aren't disempowering women, nor are tropes, nor are men thinking they're better suited to certain avenues of life and vice versa. Lol, just because it's patronizing it doesn't make it any less true. But please, TRY to argue that women are more capable of physically taking care of themselves than a man is. When I say man, I'm talking an in shape, healthy man. Find me an "average" woman (And I realize average is extremely hard to agree on when talking about humans at all), and show me one that can do a better job of physically taking care of herself in a violent situation. Because that's what we're talking about. Genetics have got you beat on this, sorry to tell you. I couldn't care less if I look like a dickhead because I acknowledge the reality that men are genetically geared towards the physical things in life, thus making them inherently better than women are certain aspects of life, on a general level. It's reversed as well, as women can kick the shit out of me in plenty of different avenues in life. Do I feel disempowered as a man because that is so, and it's commented on and put in the spotlight in real life? No. Because I'm not going to let some bullshit that is external to myself dictate who I am as a person.

Listen, I don't know you, but I can promise you that if it comes down to it, I'm going to be able to go swing an axe out in the field for much longer periods with much more productivity than most women. That's what my body has evolved into over the years. When I say "built towards working", that's what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about a desk job, and in that situation, women can excel just as much as any man.

Like I said mate, if you're letting things like that dictate to you who you are, who you need to be, and how you feel, then take stock of shit and harden the fuck up. Props to you, I've never seen so eloquently defended the idea that it is acceptable to let video games or entertainment rule your life in the ways you're talking about.

I don't know you or your personal experiences, but I know women who are having zero issues going and getting out there and doing it successfully. One of them just got their BA and is now attending Stanford law before I even managed to end my 4 year stint in the Marine Corps. That's impressive, and I doubt she'll have any issue going out there and getting her shit together and making a living. My cousin at 29 years old just because a high school principle, and my other cousin just finished her first college text book on human sexuality... both women, neither with disempowerment issues nor being shafted due to sexism. Go out and get it, and quit making excuses. No, I don't think it's an alarming matter, and I don't think this is a huge issue that bears massive consideration in our day and age.

Lol, yes, I love my women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. I hope you can realize that I'm attempting to relay to you how sarcastic I am regarding that. By all means, tell me how manly you are You're like.... well I won't go there, no personal attacks

Illuyankas, on 11 March 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

Oh, and in case you were wondering why comments were disabled, this is why:

(long image full of bile and bigotry)

Spoiler

Nobody was I don't think... of course when you post a video on a public forum as large as youtube you're going to attract retards. Obviousness etc etc

[Morgoth]

Why is ability to survive violence suddenly what we're talking about? Unless you're living in somewhere in the depths of the Amazon I hardly see how that's a relevant metric.

[Illuyankas]

Ooh, this is getting better, though you're still too much of a coward to flat out call me a pussy. You know you want to, just do it. (then maybe after you can think about why you think calling my behaviour feminine is meant to be an insult, just a suggestion)

Your homeless person analogy would be more accurate if it was a homeless person complaining about being denied work by a person with a home because they don't own a house, which in fact also actually happens. Just as an example, the suffragette movement existed because women were disempowered by men thinking they're better suited to certain avenues of life - like having the right to vote, or the right to work, or equal pay etc - and producing media WHICH VIDEOGAMES ARE A FORM OF BY THE WAY to reinforce this viewpoint, which is the whole damn problem. I'm not going to argue that because it both isn't relevant and IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER IF YOU CAN LIFT MORE THAN, SAY, YOUR MOTHER, YOU'RE NOT INTRINSICALLY BETTER THAN HER BECAUSE OF YOUR PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES WHICH IS THE ATTITUDE YOU'VE EXHIBITED THIS ENTIRE THREAD. It should not even register that she isn't a weightlifter or whatever, you should be viewing her as an equal because she's another human being, just dump the biotruths in the bin, dude!

You really don't understand the fucking point here, do you. The concept of a subconscious exists! There are studies that prove media changes your opinions on things subconsciously! Videogames are media! You've subconsciously taken in the idea that women are doing fine nowadays, while they're doing better but not nearly good! The existance of a few women you know doing ok does not mean there is no longer a problem, it doesn't eradicate all the papers and studies and findings that show you will get paid more and not be fired as easily as someone who has your exact skillset for the job but is female! The external forces at work here can not dismissed on your say-so because they exist even if you don't believe me!

I don't give a fuck if you think I'm less manly than you, I'm happy that I can look at a woman and think 'hey, a person' instead of 'VAGINA DETECTED PROTECTION SUBROUTINES INITATED, DO NOT WORRY FEMALE YOU ARE INCAPABLE OF POSSESSING AGENCY SO I WILL DEFEND YOU'. Jesus Christ, dude. Video games are a facet of the media we enjoy. If there's a problematic element in it or the culture surrounding it (like all the fucking rape threats) we should take a look at it. Or you at least should take at least enough of a look to see that all these people may have a point, instead of disregarding it offhand because it doesn't fit your world view.

Oh, and SEXISM IS OVER is a reference to this:

This post has been edited by Illuyankas: 11 March 2013 - 05:28 PM

[Assail]

Morgoth, on 11 March 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

Why is ability to survive violence suddenly what we're talking about? Unless you're living in somewhere in the depths of the Amazon I hardly see how that's a relevant metric.

You're right. I was digressing

[King Lear]

cerveza_fiesta, on 11 March 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

To start, I agree in principle that women in video games could be portrayed in a less objectified, less sexualized, more equal light.

Dolmen+, on 11 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

I don't think it makes sense to try "balance" the market with an influx of female characters that try right the wrongs of their male counterparts by being just as strong, fast and stoic. There should be differences. The tough girl shouldn't come across as a tough guy that got born female. she should come across as a woman with all the best of the gender adding to who she is as a hero.

This sums up my feelings on the issue neatly. Giving a choice between a male and female lead is a good start (as with ME series) and it's cool that they've taken the time to put such a choice into a popular video game, but Dolmen is right that it isn't enough. The FemShep and SirShep stories are essentially identical save the romantic options and choice of gender is largely irrelevant in the arc of the storyline. To be truly equal, ME should have had 2 very different storylines, one in which each gender approaches situations from a unique perspective, even if the eventual conclusion was similar.

That said, I tend to agree to an extent with Assail, in that we might read too much into video game companies' intentions. When it comes down to it, their goal is to make money, and there are 2 factors I see related to moneymaking that compete directly with truly gender-balanced video game production:

• There is an existing largely-male market, and it only makes good business sense to pander to one's biggest market first and foremost before trying to appeal to newer/smaller markets.
• Studios are always on a deadline, and struggle to fit meaningful storyline content into a compelling game without cost overruns in development. Under such pressures it is very convenient to avoid extensive backstory through the use of widely-known clichés - especially ones that lend themselves to the action-oriented gaming environment.

The first factor unfortunately comes with the baggage of DIDs and heavily sexualized female video game characters. Companies know sex sells to a young male audience and will continue to use that as a marketing device until it doesn't work anymore. The second factor justifies the choice of DID since it fits nicely with a goal/action-oriented video game mechanic. If you look at the second factor a level deeper, the studio is also spared the expense of explaining a male character's motivations for saving the DID, and the reason why the female was the one captured instead of the male, AND the reason why the villain is capturing the female to motivate the protagonist. It's just a storyline that makes sense to anyone that ever read a book or watched a movie, and it can be exploited to save effort. What's worse, swapping gender roles within the DID cliché just *feels* wrong in many contexts (eg. medieval fantasy) and requires a lot of effort to convince the consumer that it isn't just a token effort to appease a feminist audience.

Not to say this is what the studios *should* all be doing, or that there are no other options for developers, but the two factors I describe are strong motivators for a production studio and therefore are very difficult to overcome by anyone hoping for change. As with so many other contentious "status-quo vs. progressive approach" issues, those wishing for a new deal in video game gender equality need to identify economic factors that make their views viable, otherwise the industry will continue to ignore their point of view. The industry clearly has the formula figured out for the current audience (as evidenced by the billions in existing sales), and I'm sure would be happy to shift their stance if it opened up new markets without sacrificing the current one.

Anyways, I'm interested to follow Sarkeesian's commentary and I hope she comes up with some tangible solutions in the end. Even if she doesn't it's a useful exercise to explore and generate awareness on the issue of video game gender equality so that other more solution-oriented individuals might take up the cause. That's the nature of research...each installment building on the last until a greater problem is solved. So to Assail's comment on it being a waste of time, I wholeheartedly disagree.

The market is already in existence though.

2012 Sales, Demographic and Usage Data: Essential Facts about the Computer and Video Game Industry

Women make up 47% of gamers. 25% of console players. 39% of PC players.48% of game purchasers.
That's a pretty significant "new market".

I'll give that it's a relatively recent development (maybe) but this didn't happen overnight.

[worry]

I don't mean to cherry-pick, but there was tons of writing overnight (or what is overnight for me, at least). So in terms of "balance": I think once you stop thinking of gender in binary terms, then the idea of "balance" becomes a lot less unpalatable, because you're not just dealing with the most simple level of tit-for-tat. You're just talking about taking an analytical and self-checking eye to what you're creating. That might actually be what Dolmen was getting at, but I also think it is what Sarkeesian (as preliminary a stage as it is) will be getting at. Even if Dolmen's language was a little wobbly, I do agree that simply occasionally switching the sexes in the trope isn't the answer to it (though I must say, that father switching up the characters in Donkey Kong is a cute story, and I'm not against the notion). The problematic gender language stuff seems to have been addressed already, but if you (still referring to Dolmen) are at heart arguing that characters, male or female, and particularly protagonists/playables or major NPCs, should be built from the ground up rather than being the same old thing with a female paint job over it, then I can agree with that.

This post has been edited by worrywort: 11 March 2013 - 09:42 PM

[amphibian]

I wonder what would happen if Assail asked the high school principal, the Stanford graduate and the thesis-writer about their views on sexism in media and personal experiences with sexism.

[Assail]

amphibian, on 11 March 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

I wonder what would happen if Assail asked the high school principal, the Stanford graduate and the thesis-writer about their views on sexism in media and personal experiences with sexism.

As they're either my family or close friends, Id be interested too, and will most likely ask them. Ill reply to you when I get out of this transition seminar illy, to much of an ass pain on my phone...

Edit: before I get back to this seminar about how I probably have PTSD and whatnot... I'm curious as to why people must refer to me as if I'm not around amphibian

This post has been edited by Assail: 11 March 2013 - 10:50 PM

[Silencer]

Illuyankas, on 11 March 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

Personally I don't mind being called a fucktard or something as long as the person doing it is honestly challenging my posts with facts and content. One day Assail will get there. One day. That said, calling me a girly man or whatever was a bit pathetic. *goes back to kitchen barefoot and pregnant, just the way Assail likes it*

Assail, on 11 March 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

It's fine really... everyone is guilty of jumping to person attacks when they disagree. I would say it's human nature lol. With that being said, don't feel as though you must edit these posts on my behalf (Admins ), I'm always up for a good laugh.

Good for you, you've both got thick skins. Funnily enough I don't give a flying fuck. The Discussion board guidelines are very clear and do not make exceptions for "If the other guy doesn't mind" or "If the other guy deserves it" - do you know why? Because making those kinds of exceptions makes everyone think the behaviour is acceptable, when it is not.
You will NOT personally attack each other. Each other's posts/ideas/opinions, fine. But not the other person. We put this shit in place because some people turned the religion forum into a slagging match about each other, and moreover some people take it, I dunno, personally, when they get called some very nasty things online. Go figure.



Illy, you especially are on shaky ground given your track record in this area. Next time, it will be a permanent ban, fyi. You've been warned.

[Khellendros]

Has anyone else seen that the new God of War: Ascencion caused some stir because at one point Kratos, the protagonist, has to graphically beat the living snot out of a female antagonist, after which you get the trophy, 'Bros before Hos'?

They've just done a ninja update, and changed the trophy name to 'Bros before Foes'.

[worry]

Ugh, that just made me shudder.

[worry]

Just looked it up, the text of their passive aggressive faux-apology was pathetic (though not uniquely so, I'm sure we've collectively seen dozens of variations of the same thing):
"We have created and will soon push out a patch for God of War: Ascension that alters the title of one of the game Trophies. The text was offensive to some members of our community and impacted their enjoyment of the game."

Read: "We're sorry you were offended."

[Shinrei]

This has been a fun thread to read.

I originally thought I agreed with Assail based on his very first post, but that's because I interpreted it differently before he explained. I thought it was ridiculous to make a video like this from the standpoint of it's like making a video that says "diets high in sugar make you fat". Like it's news to anyone. But that's not what he meant, so never mind. Cerveza made a good post I feel. The industry makes the shit because the shit sells. As we all know, ideals of social responsibility generally take a backseat to giving the customer what they want. Lots of companies out there do good and deliberately produce socially responsible products, but they still take a back seat to the Nestles and the Walmarts of the world.

But ultimately, I don't have much to say about this exact issue because I generally don't give a rats-ass about video games. As I said in another thread on video games

Attached File(s)

•  play_outside.jpg (132.87K)
  Number of downloads: 0

[worry]

Shinrei, on 12 March 2013 - 02:19 AM, said:

That's why I bought a DS.

[Dolmen 2.0]

Ornery Owl, on 11 March 2013 - 09:00 PM, said:

cerveza_fiesta, on 11 March 2013 - 02:50 PM, said:

To start, I agree in principle that women in video games could be portrayed in a less objectified, less sexualized, more equal light.

Dolmen+, on 11 March 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

I don't think it makes sense to try "balance" the market with an influx of female characters that try right the wrongs of their male counterparts by being just as strong, fast and stoic. There should be differences. The tough girl shouldn't come across as a tough guy that got born female. she should come across as a woman with all the best of the gender adding to who she is as a hero.

This sums up my feelings on the issue neatly. Giving a choice between a male and female lead is a good start (as with ME series) and it's cool that they've taken the time to put such a choice into a popular video game, but Dolmen is right that it isn't enough. The FemShep and SirShep stories are essentially identical save the romantic options and choice of gender is largely irrelevant in the arc of the storyline. To be truly equal, ME should have had 2 very different storylines, one in which each gender approaches situations from a unique perspective, even if the eventual conclusion was similar.

That said, I tend to agree to an extent with Assail, in that we might read too much into video game companies' intentions. When it comes down to it, their goal is to make money, and there are 2 factors I see related to moneymaking that compete directly with truly gender-balanced video game production:

• There is an existing largely-male market, and it only makes good business sense to pander to one's biggest market first and foremost before trying to appeal to newer/smaller markets.
• Studios are always on a deadline, and struggle to fit meaningful storyline content into a compelling game without cost overruns in development. Under such pressures it is very convenient to avoid extensive backstory through the use of widely-known clichés - especially ones that lend themselves to the action-oriented gaming environment.

The first factor unfortunately comes with the baggage of DIDs and heavily sexualized female video game characters. Companies know sex sells to a young male audience and will continue to use that as a marketing device until it doesn't work anymore. The second factor justifies the choice of DID since it fits nicely with a goal/action-oriented video game mechanic. If you look at the second factor a level deeper, the studio is also spared the expense of explaining a male character's motivations for saving the DID, and the reason why the female was the one captured instead of the male, AND the reason why the villain is capturing the female to motivate the protagonist. It's just a storyline that makes sense to anyone that ever read a book or watched a movie, and it can be exploited to save effort. What's worse, swapping gender roles within the DID cliché just *feels* wrong in many contexts (eg. medieval fantasy) and requires a lot of effort to convince the consumer that it isn't just a token effort to appease a feminist audience.

Not to say this is what the studios *should* all be doing, or that there are no other options for developers, but the two factors I describe are strong motivators for a production studio and therefore are very difficult to overcome by anyone hoping for change. As with so many other contentious "status-quo vs. progressive approach" issues, those wishing for a new deal in video game gender equality need to identify economic factors that make their views viable, otherwise the industry will continue to ignore their point of view. The industry clearly has the formula figured out for the current audience (as evidenced by the billions in existing sales), and I'm sure would be happy to shift their stance if it opened up new markets without sacrificing the current one.

Anyways, I'm interested to follow Sarkeesian's commentary and I hope she comes up with some tangible solutions in the end. Even if she doesn't it's a useful exercise to explore and generate awareness on the issue of video game gender equality so that other more solution-oriented individuals might take up the cause. That's the nature of research...each installment building on the last until a greater problem is solved. So to Assail's comment on it being a waste of time, I wholeheartedly disagree.

The market is already in existence though.

2012 Sales, Demographic and Usage Data: Essential Facts about the Computer and Video Game Industry

Women make up 47% of gamers. 25% of console players. 39% of PC players.48% of game purchasers.
That's a pretty significant "new market".

I'll give that it's a relatively recent development (maybe) but this didn't happen overnight.

These Stats are a shock to me tbh. My cousin is the most "hardcore" girl gamer I know of, off thread. She plays the Sims and Farmville. I have never thought that things had progressed this far with almost half the gaming community being female (at least in the more developed parts of the world). In my social circle games are things you play with the guys on a chill night at home, never with the wife or the female friend community. I find that really unfortunate as I think its one more type of fun available to a family or group of friends. Its not a substitute for a great night out at the movies or even a great day playing soccer on the fields but I think its a great option to have.

I have only managed to get the wife to play fashion games and tetris. Not as bad as it sounds tbh but I wish there were games that catered to both our tastes. Like the survey says most gamers are in the thirty bracket. Meaning some are married and/or with kids. I think Sarkeesians documentaries push the Gaming industry to recognize the fact that they need to appeal to both sexes aaand the varied arrangements both parties may find themselves in.

And @ Worrywort: yes, despite my wording that is exactly what I was trying to say.