261 réponses à ce sujet

[HolyAvenger]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Like I've said numerous times, something like this is virtually impossible to prove one way or the other. It's like arguing about religion, which is why I wasn't interested in arguing it in the first place. 

Lets agree to disagree

[Antagony]

Fumiko Hayft, and colleagues conducted a study to look into gender
differences in brain activations while playing a simple video game. Participants: 22 students (age: 19-23 years old), equal distribution of
sex. Participants were screened for any clinical or psychological
problems that may have influenced the results. So, they’re mentally and
physical healthy and average.

Results: Male participants gained more space than females and males were also faster learners than females. These brain activations differences were shown to be correlated with
men’s higher rate of goal achievement and learning than women. No higher activations among women were found

Source:  vgresearcher.wordpress.com/2008/02/05/brain-scan-study-for-addiction-in-video-games-hoeft-et-al-in-press/

===================================================================================
Consequently, girls and women are at a systematic disadvantage in terms of their ability to control the gaming environment and meet their interpersonal need for control. This certainly is not to say that women and girls simply lack the skill necessary to master video games. In fact, research has shown that preexisting sex differences, including cognitive skills such as mental rotation and maze navigation, are attenuated through practice. However, the male bias in game design is problematic in that it systematically places femaleplayers at an early disadvantage in terms of their ability to control the gaming environment, which creates a vicious cycle in terms of reinforcing an inclusion-affection-control pattern that discourages female players fromplaying video games.
Because they initially may have less control over their performance in the game (as their scores may indicate), female players’ need for control is not being met by video games as well as male players’ need for control is being met. Therefore, as would be predicted by the uses and gratifications paradigm, women and girls are likely to turn elsewhere for meeting their need for control. The combined evidence of boys performing better than girls and girls turning away from video games further perpetuates the stereotyping of video games as so-called boy toys. As such, girls are even more strongly steered away from video games by way of social sanction by peers; that is, girls’ interpersonal needs of inclusion and affection are denied if they continue to seek out the cross-sex stereotyped activity of video game playing.

Source: www.google.com/url

===================================================================================
The better throwing accuracy shown by males was an expected result, since it has been
corroborated several times in different laboratories. The results obtained during
the prism adaptation phase show that there were no gender differences on the error
reduction of this visuomotor learning task. However, there was a significant difference
in the aftereffects shown by males and females. Contrary to the better performance
shown by males in the baseline, women showed larger aftereffects once the prisms were
removed.


Source: www.behavioralandbrainfunctions.com/content/6/1/74



See? I can take away the big picture from an article and make men seem important just like the opposite of what Shia was doing.

[megabeast37215]

Annomander wrote...
Too bad I played unreal tournament '99 since I was 7 years old then huh?

Guess if you played that game you'd realise that a pin-point attack like the shock rifle isn't so hard to aim. Then there's the secondary fire, then after that there's detonating the shock combos by hitting the secondary fire with the primary fire at the precise time to gib your opponent in a shock nova...

LOL me too... first it was Doom2, then Quake, Heretic, Descent, the Unreal games and the countless sequels for each of them.

I was a master spawn sniper in Unreal Tournament... from one side of Face Off to the other... all day long. Capture the Flag was my passion back then...

[HolyAvenger]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

I also find it hilarious that nobody (except me) went out of their way to contradict the laughable assertion that girl gamers (in ME3 MP) are likely to be awesome players who will carry the boys whenever they get on the same team.

Double standards are rather amusing at times.

I've never played with a female player in PUG (or at least, they've never identified themselves as such).

I have a couple on my Origin friendslist from here on BSN who are much better than me. But then, I'm just your average gold player, so that's not that special.

[Jay_Hoxtatron]

megabeast37215 wrote...



I was a master spawn sniper in Unreal Tournament... from one side of Face Off to the other... all day long. Capture the Flag was my passion back then...

I used to be hated for doing that . Ah good times.

[gynoid]

Annomander wrote...

The conclusion of the paper is of no interest to me, the statistics showed that males react much faster on average. For instance, in the 0-300 MS reaction range, there were far more males than females who reacted.

Conclusions are subjective, statistics are not.

I would seriously call into question any test that doesn't take into account many extraneous factors, the most obvious one being the ages of the various participants. There's no mention of that in the study, or of any other factors. The guy invited 269 facebook friends to take the test; we're given no other information. I would never use this test as anything other than an interesting footnote. You can't even say that the sample is truly random, because his friends list probably consists of people from certain groups/ages.

Taking small studies to try and prove men are better than women at gaming is really unhelpful - and I'm talking to both sides of the argument here. I think we can all agree that there are some societal influences that mean there tend to be more competent male gamers around, but I've seen no solid evidence to definitively say anything more.

(I believe Lord Sirian when he says that he personally hasn't encountered good female gamers, but it is just anecdotal evidence.)

Until there's a comprehensive study that actually examines female gamers vs male gamers, any speculations on the subject are going to be spurious. Citing a study that fails - in my opinion - to meet proper scientific standards is just clouding the issue.

[Happy Shepard]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

HolyAvenger wrote...

There are a number of issues with that report annomander, including the fact that you simply can't know if people truthfully picked their gender.

Lord_Sirian...yes, I agree with you that female gamers are less prevalent, and in gross numbers, not as good. But I don't think that's down to biological differences. I think that's social conditioning and the fact that gaming is still seen as a largely male activity. So fewer girls play it when young, as they are not encouraged to by their parents or expected to by their peer group and so forth. I think those kinds of factors and determinants have a much wider impact of the female player base than any inherent biological differences in the requisite motor co-ordination or other skills needed to be good at gaming.

 

Well I did state that there are a number of factors that influence why female gamers are less prevalent/good. Most of them not physical.

But I guess that got lost behind Shia's walls of text. 

Some people really do seem to be stuck in this whole thing of man = woman. Sorry folks, but they're not one and the same. There are real identifiable physical and emotional differences between the sexes.

When someone says that men are more likely to commit violent crime than women, do I get up in arms and call them a sexist pig? Nope.

I won't comment any further on this ridiculous discussion, but there is a difference between prejudice/discrimination and scientific studies that show trends/tendencies or superior precondition (not sure if this is the correct word btw).

Maybe you should word your posts a bit more catiously or stop acting defensive when your aggressive style gets attacked. Either way, i'm done here.

You guys have fun doing whatever this is.  

Modifié par Happy Shepard, 09 novembre 2012 - 01:47 .

[megabeast37215]

Jay_Hoxtatron wrote...
I used to be hated for doing that . Ah good times.

Hated... yet feared.

After you gun down about 20 of them... they start peaking around the corners/start looking for alternate routes.

[Daxamite]

unless you're actually experienced in the field, there is NO point in checking papers up on pubmed/google scholar etc and trying to use the abstracts to defend whatever point you're arguing. You just won't know enough about the field, the pitfalls, common errors, or bad citations or basic principles they are using. Unless its something stupidly basic. On the one hand its nice to see people attempting to use science to answer questions, but on the other its depressing that people think they can just read something quickly and then know what they're talking about.

[-Tentei-]

lol

[steverw1975]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

Samerandomscreennameidontcareabout wrote...

Women who find gaming "hard" due to brain involvement stuff/gender difference mostly do not pick up gaming anyway, so those that game are usually pretty fit. Seen my share of female counter strikers kicking my but around. ( Ok, I accept that I may be a bad gamer at counterstrike, but there is more anecdotical evidence that female gamers can and are good at their chosen games ). So maybe there are fewer female gamers, but those who game do so well.

 

Never said women couldn't be good at gaming, just that they were less likely to be and men better on average. A variety of reasons for this

physiological differences
differences in leisure activities when growing up & societal pressures to fit in (girls need to play with dolls, boys need to play games/play with toy guns etc.)
men more likely to devote time to improving their skills in these areas

etc. etc.

There are no physiological differences between men and women that would give either any real edge in typical gameplay. You have, however, finally changed your argument enough to bring up a reasonably valid point. Gaming is learned behavior. The more you do it, the more likely you are to be good at it. On average, men play video games more than women. As such, there are more men who are better at gaming. That doesn't mean that the women who do play video games regularly are at any disadvantage, however. It's also worth noting that more and more females are getting into video games, and that they're starting at an early age. So, that effect will diminish over time as well.

To the poster who mentioned spear throwing: That too is a learned behavior. The only way it could be found to have a permanent affect would be to say that the ability to throw a spear became so essential to survival that those who could not died out, and only those who could throw a spear lived long enough to procreate. We are, of course, discussing natural selection in this case. One problem with that notion...the human mind is an interesting thing and the impulse to survive is quite powerful. If someone can't throw a spear, their mind will work to find another way to accomplish the essential tasks. So, these technological advancements took place well before natural selection could take over, thereby denying spear throwers any real evolutionary advantage.

The only real instance where one could argue that a group has a physical advantage due to genetics (and both the reality and/or degree of any such effect is debatable) is the part of the African-American community that is directly descended from slaves that were born in America. Why? Because, America was never a prime port in the slave trade. The sugar plantations in what is now Latin America created a tremendous profit, but used up slaves at an alarming rate. As such, there was always a great demand, and the plantation owners were willing to pay whatever the slave traders wanted. Not so in the colonies (later America), so they basically got the leftovers. Due to that, and the eventual ban on importing new slaves, slave owners resorted to pretty much breeding  their slaves to ensure that they had a plentiful supply. Since they  were already breeding them, it was no big deal for them to be even more invasive in their policies and breed them for specific traits related to physical labor. It was selection, but not even remotely natural. Then again, just like the spear throwing example, it has absolutely nothing to do with gaming, or any individual's potential to become an effective gamer.

[-JP-]

Haven't bothered reading the entire thread, but if the woman told you to get in the hack circle, why didn't you just tell her you would, but you forgot to bring lubricant?

[aimimia]

My god what have I created

[HolyAvenger]

aimimia wrote...

My god what have I created

Welcome to BSN. Where even the most innocuous of threads can turn into a flamewar.

[-JP-]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

^
^you're a bit late to the party, we've discussed all of what you said and more...

and everyone else had moved on. Sorry bud.

Nice to see people going to the root of the problem.

[BridgeBurner]

aimimia wrote...

My god what have I created

Lesson one of posting on the BSN.

If something can escalate, it WILL escalate.

Faster than you could ever think possible.

[aimimia]

Annomander wrote...

aimimia wrote...

My god what have I created

Lesson one of posting on the BSN.

If something can escalate, it WILL escalate.

Faster than you could ever think possible.

Sadface... very sadface. People should escalate humor and fun rather then try to argue T_T 

[GordianKnot42]

Me, I always try to stay in the hack circle.

Wait... am I in the right forum?...

[Wynne]

Lord_Sirian wrote...

I've never been outscored by a female and have never actually met a female who was anything more than competent at gaming.

True story.

To flesh out what you (and steve) were saying in a later post, even aside from the physical differences you mentioned, that's as unsurprising as the discrepancy in salaries between women and men. Boys these days start playing shooters when they're young because it's accepted, and are pushed to be competitive, never mind any innate drives they may have which are only compounded by the gender schematics applied by adults who have already formed their own unconscious prejudices about what boys do and are like vs. what girls do and are like. So female gamers on the whole are still catching up. I was raised on adventure games and RPGs, myself. Shooters have been few and far between for me, and they started with Thief: the Dark Project, not exactly a typical shooter in the first place. (In addition, I had a six-month break from the game due to Lyme disease, and I still have joint pain from it, so I'm even farther behind than some. Individual life experiences also play a role. Thanks for that tip you gave me about the Harrier, by the way. I hadn't had mine for very long.)

So that's one thing, but don't forget the unconscious social pressures involved. I've had discussions with other women about this. When we play with guys, most of us feel a pressure to perform, to overcome some perceived common assumption that having breasts makes us automatically inferior at playing the game. This comes from experiences of being mocked by male players, for the most part, but even women perpetuate it--"What? You play games? Aren't those for boys?" It's harsh on the psyche no matter how mature you try to be about it. There's also the fact that some of us have had male friends and lost them because they couldn't take being outscored at other games, so scoring too well becomes as bad as scoring poorly. Also a potential subconscious hindrance/handicap.

Studies have shown that merely wearing a lab coat in fact makes people smarter (they score better on tests than when they are not wearing the lab coat.) In the same way, it's certain that doubting your own ability to do something makes you worse at it. (The yips, if you will.) Whenever a girl is playing with you, Sirian, even if it weren't for your name being masculine, you talk on the mic so she knows that you're male, which is already a psychological obstacle as opposed to playing with randoms with gender-neutral names. I'm not saying you should go out there and get a new account and call yourself Lady_Sirian and mute your mic and play with a million randoms and quiz them on their gender after the matches, but if you did, you might at some point in time have a different experience with female players. 
 
The physical differences are there, but they might in fact be trivial if not for other factors. In a perfect world which never suffered any form of inequality, it might be that half the people who could outscore you would in fact be female. (A small group, admittedly.) 

So yeah. SuperJet's not the only one who's taken psych classes.  There are physical differences, but I think that society and psychology play far more compelling roles in players' skill (both male and female, and the effects are both positive and negative.) The environment a person grew up in plays a tremendous role that science is indeed still working to understand.

No disrespect to Shia and Holy Avenger, though. Many of us get overzealous in defending the female gender, just because there are so many ignorant people in the world who "blame" women for things we have no control over. The side I see, however, is that you understand that you have a physical advantage which could at least partially explain the discrepancy you perceived, not that you were being offensive. 

It's actually sort of humble.  Well, maybe we shouldn't go that far... 

Nissun wrote...

People say that it's good leaving a player out of the circle to drive enemies away and keep pressure off the hack circle.

I've never seen it work. Sure, that lonely player may be distracting a banshee and some marauders. But we're still getting overrun by a kajillion brutes, a second banshee, and ravager fire. I say their firepower is more useful in the circle than outside.

Damn straight. And if it gets too hot, at least we've lured everything into a small, rocketable/grenadeable area. On Silver, that Vanguard can field the aggro and everyone else can go make a cup of coffee... but unless you're the type that can pull 140k on Gold even with decent teammates (generally scoring around half that), get back in the damned hack circle. 

But even if you are that person, you're a score wh*re and everyone knows it. As long as you can live with that, go to town, son. Go to town. Headbutt that praetorian just to show us you can!  

It's more impressive when a person can score that much while staying in the hack circle, though. Kill everything right in front of me--I'll be miffed that my shots are hitting 0.2 seconds after the thing dies because we always seem to target the same stuff, but I have to hand it to you, you're good. Especially if our teammates are outside it luring everything away and you are still kicking their asses.

If you were the lowest scoring person, on the other hand... are you just trying to act as a decoy to be in some way useful? Because otherwise, nobody's fooled, man. And you're not going to recover those points. That's just sad.

UWxMaserati wrote...

Last time I was in a hack on London and all 4 players are in the zone but I am an Asari Vanguard so every time my shields would go offline I would Biotic Charge someone and if I ever hit someone outside the circle a girl would come on the mic and angrily yell at me to get back in the circle.

Oh, that's just not cool. If you're a vanguard, and you're jumping in and out of the circle whenever you need to in order to stay up, there's not a damned thing wrong with that. Staying alive is more important than staying in the hack circle. Getting the mission credits takes priority, the bonus is just nice to have. That goes for Ms. Speedrun that you were talking about as well. Moving intelligently to the next objective is more important than just running like your ass is on fire, except maybe on Bronze.

Women score higher on average on the personality trait of conscientiousness, which probably affects our attitude towards missions, and that's certainly not a bad thing, but there's no reason to be unpleasant and aggressive about it. Most people respond better to polite requests anyway, as Jay pointed out.

rubynorman wrote...

[smilie]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mczyncghZV1qbs02do1_500.png[/smilie]

You have made something so beautiful, I... I don't even...

I LOVE YOU.  *saves image*

DJCS wrote...

mpfl wrote...

But... but... I AM KROGAN!

Best response to anything.

Indeed. That one's a classic. 

[aimimia]

GordianKnot42 wrote...

Me, I always try to stay in the hack circle.

Wait... am I in the right forum?...

Well... at least in doing so, you won't have any one screaming at you for not being in the GOD DAMN CIRCLE