Demand for more women in games is selfish

@comicstooge: 'People who criticise the system will be shot'- Our Communist overlords.

...Communism was inherently flawed, though.

@comicstooge: That's what we want you to think...

@sc:

Females spend over proportionately more money on virtual or digital currency than males and depending on how you define and distinguish games, actually make up a bigger majority

I assume one of those would be online gambling, adds aimed at women are becoming increasingly common.

an argument about having more female characters in a game is also different than an argument for having more female protagonists

It's mainly about the protagonist, the character they want to project on to, Link is probably the least fleshed out character in his universe but gets the most love. If we don't include bad guys the men to women ratio probably isn't that small.

@dextersinister: Do you think that if a POV game excels in other areas that people would be willing to buy it, or that its still too risky a move for game creators?

@sc: By point of view I assume you mean games where the protag has actual character?

The idea I see mentioned sometimes, that a certain number of women have to be playing to warrant the inclusion of positive female portrayals confuses me. That just sounds like "It's fine to be unpleasant, as long as we don't get caught".

@dextersinister: Sorry for not being more clear - I meant where the game is from the perspective of a sole character primarily, so like Castlevania, or Tomb Raider as opposed to games with multiple protagonists (like fighting games)

It's cool to play game with strong female characters because hey add even more uncertainty that they will beat life threatening situations. Ellie in Last of Us for example, I had fun playing her.

@dragonborn_ct: Dude GamerGate are a bunch of scumbags

@jonny_anonymous: Except they aren't.

@sc: Not sure how they would be a problem in the slightest when they are what most people think of when you mention video games.

@beaconofstrength: Tell that to the Transgender person that committed suicide over the harassment or number of people who have had to quit or move away because of it.

@jonny_anonymous: What does her death have to do with Gamer Gate? They didn't really cause her to kill herself.

@beaconofstrength: The harassed her until she did, it's there fault.

@jonny_anonymous: Vile abuse is common on the internet, people get threatened all the time, the idea that gamers do it anymore than sports fans, movie fans comic fans is just not true.

Gamergate could end tomorrow and the people that abuse others for fun will continue to do just that. Your assuming that an entire group did this when that's crap, I support GG and I've never even heard of it.

@dextersinister: Nobody said gamers do it more, but GamerGate exist solely to harass and bully others.

@jonny_anonymous: So a few people puts the entire movement into one person? So everyone in that movement must me monsters! Not to mention she was literally scamming hundreds of people by saying she needed a "lifesaving surgery", then going around to get a sex change. Most of the harassment came from people who were pissed that she blatantly lied to others, so she could get a sex change. She wasn't really an saint here. If anything, she was also a massive scumbag. Also, online harassment is nothing new. Stuff like this happens all the time, it's not isolated to just that instance. Even if GamerGate was gone, stuff like that would still happen.

@jonny_anonymous: No they don't and the only people that think that are those that are ignorant of the goings on online.

Comic Vines pretty mild but I could easily have a few horrible insults/threats thrown my way if I where to insult a fictional character on youtube but that doesn't mean everyone with a youtube account will do that and even then the people that do throw abuse are venting in a terrible way, they don't actually mean it.

@jonny_anonymous: Also, if GamerGate is just a harasment movement that just likes to bully others, why are they raising money to feed the hungry? Scummy pieces of trash they are.

@jonny_anonymous: Son, I swear that GG isn't about harassing and bullying. If you can check out the NotYourShield moviment...

@dextersinister: @dragonborn_ct@beaconofstrength: "It's ok that we done this bad thing because she also done bad things" What about the bets on whether they could get Zoe Quinn to commit suicide after they leaked nude pictures of her? Or how Anita Sarkeesian had to cancel a speech because they threatened to shoot her? Or how about Jenn Frank quit her job at The Guardian after rape threats? All this from GammerGate.

@dextersinister: Problem?!? Oh okay, I was just asking your opinion, like in comics indy books tend to be more gender neutral/gender colorblind but they are also allowed to take a few more risks in other ways as well, and less formulaic than Marvel or DC. Then again the idea is that such books have individuals who buy them that are more concerned with a great story, writing and art than wish fulfillment or finding a character that reminds them of themselves. As far as games, personally I love the two examples I gave you, but I wonder if in games the direction is going to be more slanted towards how games like Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Dark Souls etc operate allowing people even more choices as far as certain characteristics of the protagonist. Where as in comics I think generally, its characters that will remain draw, although there was a conscious effort on the part of the industry to make stars of writers/artists a bit more as well.

@jonny_anonymous: Again, you're generalizing the entire movement into one person. Of course there are a few sociopaths in Gamer Gate, but that could be said for any movement or group. Also, I'm not justifying the actions they made, I'm just saying she really isn't the sole victim in that situation. Lot's of people who use #GamerGate also get death threats, does that mean everyone anti-Gamer Gate are sociopaths? I guess you're also just as bad as the people who are sending out death threats to people who support GG. You should probably stop trying to generalize GG into one person, from actions of a very select few. A very large majority of GG don't like or support the people who've sent these threats. Generalizing just doesn't work.

@jonny_anonymous:

"It's ok that we done this bad thing because she also done bad things"

Do you actually read what we write because no one here said anything like that.

@sc: Are you sure you didn't confuse pov with poc?

Then again the idea is that such books have individuals who buy them that are more concerned with a great story, writing and art than wish fulfillment or finding a character that reminds them of themselves.

You word this like you don't get the latter from Marvel or DC and you don't get the former from indie, most indie comic buyers are purchasers of Marvel and DC.

The main problem with Marvel and DC is that most want the old which just happens to be primarily white males, the few prominent new character like Miles or Hope will be heavily tied to the history of an old. DC released a whole line of new ideas with the new 52 because that's what people asked for and every one of them faded away even when it was a critical success because people weren't willing to buy them.

In an alternative universe Whedon was allowed to direct Wonder Woman instead of going on to the Avengers and Catwoman and Elektra where good films changing the landscape on female superhero films.

Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Dark Souls etc operate allowing people even more choices as far as certain characteristics of the protagonist.

This will only really exist for RPG's. With the exception of Bioware who flesh out both genders I prefer to have one specific character so that they are fleshed out.

Games with women in mind will become more common as they play more video games much like games that appeal to the Chinese as they become more prominent in the market.

@dextersinister said:

POV fits the definition as I applied it. A game where the story is from a characters point of view. Not in the literal sense if that was your interpretation. Assuming POC means from the perspective of character or something similar that could work too.

Also are you sure thats not just your interpretation of my wording? Why would you assume that the wording implies you don't get what I wrote with Marvel and DC as well? Your not a person just looking for disagreement are you? Heh heh. A difference with Marvel and DC and indy books for example is that writers and the companies know, that a large appeal of their audience has certain expectations that they are happy to meet approximately. Expectations can vary book to book, but a Batman book has the advantage of having Batman in it but also the creative limitations of requiring that Batman have some sort of role in the story. Depending on the editor or writer it can also limit the writer by not ever allowing Batman to sit as well. There is some deviation from that book to book, but Marvel and DC try to go where the safe money is, which usually means smaller companies have to try and look for gaps and be a bit more risky.

I tend to think games that have woman in mind are already common, but that thinking about games in terms of gender exclusivity is already been slowly disappearing in favor of games with people in mind considering that divides between people are much more nuanced now because of reasons I gave in my first paragraph. Looking at peoples differences and similarities and the interaction between them is a far more effective way to cater to, design to, market to people than just thinking about differences and assuming you can't design to, cater to, market to more than just a gender unless its really actually a product that requires a certain type of marketing, male/female fragrances/perfumes etc and then their are profit reasons for that designed to exploit both genders. Then again you say more common and thats not inaccurate to say.

Check your privilege.

Pretty much this.

@sc:

Also are you sure thats not just your interpretation of my wording? Why would you assume that the wording implies you don't get what I wrote with Marvel and DC as well?

well this

and less formulaic than Marvel or DC. Then again the idea is that such books have individuals who buy them that are more concerned with a great story, writing and art than wish fulfillment or finding a character that reminds them of themselves.

That may have not been your intent but I couldn't help take that away from what you wrote.

On the last paragraph your right from a storytelling perspective, men and women are cut from the same cloth after all and although men and women are viewed differently for better or worse those views are far more often than not the same from both sexes. The main point is when a hard defined decision needs to be made with the prime example again being the sex of the protag it will favour men over women as they currently are the main purchasers/developers of these games, if I here about a game starring a female protag I won't bat an eyelash but if I here about changes being made called for because of some social issue then I would have an issue with what shouldn't be an issue.

I would prefer that the new DA not have had not included other races such as Dwarf and Elf for the protag so that they could focus on the character, nothing wrong with wanting that but it's selfish of me much like any change people want made to a game, games aren't Sesame street, positive life lessons aren't mandatory.

@dextersinister: Oh someone can always help take away more than what they think, just from consideration ^_^.

Marvel and DC are pretty formulaic, thats not a bad thing, they just have to conform to tighter and stricter rules than other companies do not have to. Thats not to say they aren't interested in a great story writing or art, its not an either or situation, just in situations where their might be a conflict of interest, well let me use my Batman sitting example again, some DC editors (hopefully only one) have the opinion that Batman can't sit, so regardless of how good a story is, Batman can't be written to be seated. The writer who thought that was stupid doesn't have that constraint in a lot of other books, especially non DC Marvel books. So its a relative thing rather than a binary thing. My apologies if I suggested it was more of a binary thing.

Great second paragraph too, but I wonder about how common game creators/developers think in such limiting terms versus organic developments they tweak with such things being considered in order to maximize how accessible their game will be as far as maximum success. Like I think GTA is a good example, since it has three protagonists, who are all male. Did they think that having one of those characters being a female would add or detract to sales? Or did they think maybe it could but maybe also the three characters already brought variety and that female gamers would want to play the game anyway because of its other features and that hypothetically one of those three characters could be female but that wouldn't also matter since people will buy it anyway. Basically I agree with you here, but I wonder what games would ever end up being changed because of social issues as opposed to social issues being big discussion points on sites and so the fear that some games will change. (Apart from organic changes that game developers themselves might want)

Oh not a fan of that in DA? I think I can understand. Even though I liked Dragon Age Origins more than Dragon Age 2 (not an unpopular stance) I liked my character in Dragon Age 2 a lot more, just because they had more character, presumably because they limited some of the design options. Though I am excited to play as Qunari in DA 3 heh heh.

@johnfrank120: No I mean literally. It was based around the idea that the wage of the worker wouldn't increase, when it already has.

@sc: Your comments show you're clearly a racist, sexist, animal hating nazi. :P Bet you steal candy from babies too, huh?

@sc: I can think of another reason.

When it comes white males can be safer to work with if you are going to make your characters have obvious flaws, I've held the opinion that unlike Cyclops Storm has been held back from developing in any interesting ways because what Cyclops went through was risky, if done wrong he could have become completely unlikable and woe any writer that does that to a prominent black female character that gets as much love as Storm so she gets safe storylines.

A lot of people would have loved the idea but can you imagine the sh*tstorm if they had given Trevors personality to a woman?

@comicstooge: It was based around many ideas that would or would not work. I could dig up my 45 page essay explaining it, but that will clog up the thread.

The DEVs ought to do what they want, not what some other people say they should.

I get the same sense as well. Having both genders represented in equally respectable roles in games detracts from what exactly, you know? It comes off like a kid who doesn't want to share, which is ridiculous because why would any hobbyist want to hinder what they love by excluding others from enjoying what they do already? Illogical, really.

To contribute to this thread, why is the idea of having women and other historically under represented groups in video games perceived as a bad thing? It doesn't change the premise of the game. Having female warriors or ethnically visible characters is enhancement in a visual sense, not a deterioration or interruptive of game play. It doesn't need to be more complicated than that. Half the world is female, so, why not show that in games? This goes for movies and all mediums, entertainment wise.

Also, criticism =/= censorship. Catchy hashtags and diminutive name calling does nothing but prove how tiresome internet warriors can be when trying to "win" the latest issue du jour. The strawmen being swung about by both sides of the debate is annoying, cluttering up real dialogue being pursued by game enthusiasts who want accountability while continuing to enjoy gaming.

No. It's her fault she committed suicide. Bullying is bullsh** don't get me wrong. But suicide is something a person does to oneself. Real life isn't all candy canes and happy joy. It's really crappy that people feel so bad that they kill themselves, but the fact is that if they do so rather then getting help, they can't point fingers.

No but the ones that are left can and I point my finger at the reprobates of GamerGate.

I won't argue that they are not D-bags. But people make their own choices. That was my only point. They didn't put a gun in that gals hand, they didn't give her an bunch of pills. They said things. Words don't kill.

When you know that someone has mental health problems and you bully and harass them knowing fine well how much damage you're doing then yeah that death is your fault no matter how you cut it. And now they are doing it again and taking bets to see how long it takes before Zoe Quinn kills herself.

@jonny_anonymous: Hopefully they fail. But I will have to agree to disagree with you. People have made it through some of the worst atrocities imaginable. People commit suicide when they give up, not when others cause them grief.

@feral_nova: As I said before I wasn't stating an opinion. I was commenting on the examination of that poll by gaming sites that showed its unreliability.

This begs the question of how gamer is defined in some of these polls.

@knightsofdarkness2: Yeah, I know, I just didn't want it to stir a mini controversy. When I get to a PC, I'll post an amusing gif to prove how fun loving I actually am :P

@ms-lola:

I get the same sense as well. Having both genders represented in equally respectable roles in games detracts from what exactly, you know? It comes off like a kid who doesn't want to share, which is ridiculous because why would any hobbyist want to hinder what they love by excluding others from enjoying what they do already? Illogical, really.

This wasn't about people not getting what they want because others don't want them to have it, it was a knock on points like yours that they are made that way to be unfair, devs just happen to be primarily male as well as the people who buy the games. If lot's of women bought games then more games will be made with female protags or if devs just all happen to have ideas for female characters.

It's not illogical, your idea is unreasonable, your asking for a quota, someone would need to look at the games released and design a character based on that rather than what they had in mind.

@jonny_anonymous: The person was unknown that sent the message to Anita Sarkeesian and her reasoning for not attending the speech was the Utah gun laws, apparently.

Products are formulated in a way it appeals to it's target demographic, talking to their imagination and such. This is being practiced since the beginning of human civilization. Complaining against such simple affair only complicates the situation. Current notion of fair share is being hackneyed in all six ways from Sunday. It's not about how adding new properties do your pursuit "justice", it's about measuring their efficacy so the investment doesn't go south. Concoctions can be altered as long as real demands are present, otherwise the effort is ill-spent and quite absurdly so.

It's appreciated when you add traits to elevate the product, unwarranted when a notion is forced just for the sake of it.

Why don't we just lest game devs do their job and try to create the best games they possibly can instead of trying to criticize everything little choice they make because it doesn't meet it politically correct quota.

Semi relevant image:

I was agreeing with the point the other poster made of how it appears, the exclusivity some factions of the gaming community seem to foster. The rest of my post goes on to explain my point of view and addresses some of the comments in your response. For the sake of clarity, I never proposed a quota but suggested a reflection of what is out there in the consumer world. Representing as many groups as possible in games does nothing to detract from the game itself. Like I said, there is no loss in the experience if the user prefers to use and create characters which they've enjoyed before.

The use of the word illogical was to describe the business impact on gaming by not hitting as many demographics as possible. While I am sure there are devs who are in it for the love of creation, this is still a business and the goal of business is to be profitable. The more profitable, the better. The adage, "build it and they will come" could arguably be applied here, and this was my point.

If tweaking characters to be physically identifiable as female or ethnic (visibly) is so difficult, my first question would be, why? This is a fantasy medium where anyone can do anything, so the argument of "realism" isn't a strong one. A preference of wanting male only characters, or sexually objectified female characters being questioned is fair and if the answer comes back with a "because I like it/my consumers like it", then any ensuing criticism raised is fair, just like in any other medium or product offered to the public. The idea gaming should be free of scrutiny in its depiction of gender (one example of historical misrepresentation of a group in visual mediums) is to me, a problem. Like I mentioned in my initial post, criticism =/= censorship. It's simple, really

I totally get the genuine reaction of some devs and gaming enthusiasts who like the status quo and feel their artistic freedom (and the enjoyment of it) is being threatened. I think it's extremely important to keep that in mind and it shouldn't be swept under the rug for "the greater good". Road paved and all that. But when taking into consideration all the pros and cons, I sincerely see no detrimental effect on gaming if representation free of stereotypes of certain groups is encouraged (not regulated) and along those same lines, the more welcoming the industry is to artists/creators who identify with those groups, the better it would be for the gaming world in its entirety. Games are a powerful entertainment force which translates into billions of dollars annually, providing jobs and opportunity for many people. Wanting it to be inclusive and relateable to as many people as possible isn't restrictive.

Just my opinion, and it's an evolving one. This is how I see things now, is all.