491 réponses à ce sujet

[NorwegianPirate]

AllThatJazz wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

*snip*

Absolutely. Really spot on.

Yup, that pretty much sums it up!

Modifié par NorwegianPirate, 23 février 2013 - 05:26 .

[AllThatJazz]

DinoSteve wrote...

You know I wouldn't hold DA2 as a shinning example of how women are portrayed in gaming, all the women in DA2 are helpless, morons, promiscuous or insane, the only decent character is Aveline really, and even at that there are times when she comes across as boyish.

Disagree. Bethany is none of these things. Merrill, while single-minded and misguided, is none of these things. Leandra is none of these things. Female Hawke isn't, Tallis isn't. Who are you basing your list on? Meredith? Admittedly insane. Isabela? Promiscuous, but that's not al there is to her character. I also never got a sense of Aveline as 'boyish'. In what way does she come across as such to you?

Also, it's comparative, I guess. I can only think of one developer (Obsidian) who do as good a job as Bioware of a balanced representation of female character. At least Bioware tries for balance and diversity.  I'd be interested (genuinely so, not in a snarky way ) in what games/devs you consider to be shining examples in the portrayal of women, if any.

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 23 février 2013 - 05:31 .

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

I suppose Bethany or Leandra isn't any of things but they not portrayed as being powerful women, and Merrill is the biggest moron in the game. Isabela also fits the role of damsel in distress perfectly, and lol Talis, she was just a awful character full stop.

You know its shows that the majority of writers where female for DA2, its almost a dating sim.

Also since you asked I think Alex from Half Life 2 was a good female character and Faith from Mirror's Edge was another, man I love that game I think I'm going to play it now.

Modifié par DinoSteve, 23 février 2013 - 05:41 .

[billy the squid]

Xilizhra wrote...

And I call bull crap on most of the "oh it's sexist" rubbish I read around here. Potato, potato. It matters because it does? Yep an argument, which is as compelling as it comes. And no, games will not be good games if you just stick a woman in it so everyone can feel progressive. It's good if it makes sense, a well witten charcater, fits with the world it's set in etc. other than that you shouldn't give a damn.

The point is that, since you're already used to having your demographic be dominant in video games, it's literally unthinkable to you to imagine a situation where it wasn't. Even if there was one wholly-female game, it would matter less to you because of the overwhelming majority of wholly-male games elsewhere. In any case, it's true that it takes more than just having strong female characters for a game to be good, but it's a component of them being good in many cases, and will please almost everyone.

Now, Tomb Raider? One of the most succesful franchises in the gaming world... you know the one which is male dominated and yet we still pick up that game and play it in our millions. yeah, I'm not seeing you point on that front. That game will suceed or fail on it's merits as a game, not because it has a woman in it.

Which means that there should be no reason at all...

It's a fact of life, that yes there are a lot of men playing games, so they tend to be marketed to the largest possible market, that's not sexism, it's commercial good sense.

To do this. Which is, in fact, the point of the article. Do try to remain consistent; if Tomb Raider will indeed succeed or fail only on its own merits, then there should be no reason at all to not allow for more gender equality in future games. And if the marketing boards can't see that, perhaps we should get new boards.

Either quote completely and in context to show my line of thought, or don't do it at all.

Publishers cater towards their largest demographic, because they can produce the largest source of income, so of course I wouldn't have to imagine it. You need to convince the publishing company to invest in a game which follows the same line as Tomb Raider or allows one to select a gender. Not me, all that they need to convince me of is it good, as stated above.

And it's not just a strong female character, I'd say the same for any protagonist, I hated Meredith as an antagonist because she went batcrap crazy at the end, and needed more time to expand on her as changing from a side character to full antaginist in DA2. 

Tomb Raider is an established franchise, there is every reason for that weighting up of risk for a new Franchise, women in it or no, if it flops the publisher is millions out of pocket. Aliens Colonial Marines, it flopped because it's crap, not because it needed more women. I don't think a well portrayed woman would have saved that debacle. 

There's a lot more to the argument for more women in a game than, it should have them in there because it should.

[AllThatJazz]

billy the squid wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I call privilege on just about everyone here who say it doesn't matter whether there are women (strong or otherwise) in gaming. Mostly, because it's easy to say it doesn't matter if your group isn't the one being ignored. What the hell does a dudebro care if there are no women in their games if they're a dudebro? Women like me, however, would like more games where there are women in decent roles. I don't want to see sexism shoved in my face during my free hobby time.

It's just so frustrating to see that sentiment over and over again. "Why does it matter if it's a good game?" Because it does matter. Because most of these games would still be good games with women in it. Because I wonder if people would be so cavalier about it if women were dominant in video games and dudes were rare...would men be cool with being ignored in these medium if they were hardly ever represent and, when they were, hardly ever represented well?

It is an industry wide problem and John Elper tweets about it frequently.

The main reason I really enjoy Dragon Age (and Mass Effect) is because I basically know that when I play it, I won't be irritated by either the lack of women or the poor representation of them. Even the women in BW games that are sexual in nature or do, indeed, look like sex objects always have more going on with their characters.

And I call bull crap on most of the "oh it's sexist" rubbish I read around here. Potato, potato. It matters because it does? Yep an argument, which is as compelling as it comes. And no, games will not be good games if you just stick a woman in it so everyone can feel progressive. It's good if it makes sense, a well witten charcater, fits with the world it's set in etc. other than that you shouldn't give a damn, woman, man meh.

Now, Tomb Raider? One of the most succesful franchises in the gaming world... you know the one which is male dominated and yet we still pick up that game and play it in our millions. yeah, I'm not seeing you point on that front. That game will succeed or fail on it's merits as a game, not because it has a woman in it.

It's a fact of life, that yes there are a lot of men playing games, so they tend to be marketed to the largest possible market, that's not sexism, it's commercial good sense. Not to say that games can't be a success with a female protagonist, they are. Just try convincing the marketing board that they'd be able to sell a new franchise like that, there's your challenge. 

But if a franchise with a female protagonist can be one of the most successful franchises ever, then why is it so unreasonable to want more female protags/NPCs and better characterisation of women in general? Surely everyone wins. 

[jillabender]

I agree with pretty much everything that Plaintiff said, and I have to say that I'm bothered when people describe the idea that the inclusion of women shouldn't be an afterthought, or seen as something extraordinary, as an "ultra-feminist" point of view.

No one is saying that a story or a game with an all-male cast is necessarily bad in itself, especially if the story features only a few characters. What many people, including myself, find insulting, is the idea that wanting to see a wider range of female characters in games in general is an extreme position to take.

I get that it might be uncomfortable to be in the position of the developers of the Aliens game, who were confronted by fans wondering why they hadn't made women part of the game from the beginning.

But as a woman, I would like to be able to point out to a man, in a civil way, that he may have unconsciously adopted an attitude that the exclusion of women is normal, without being accused of "crying sexism."

As a straight, middle-class white woman, I'm privileged in many ways, and I admit that I'm sometimes guilty of seeing that privilege as normal. But if someone points that out to me, I try to respond by re-examining my attitudes in order to avoid further contributing to inequality - and I like to give male game developers the respect of assuming that they're capable of responding the same way.

Modifié par jillabender, 23 février 2013 - 05:51 .

[w0lfam0da1s]

James Brown said it best...."It's A Man's World" and to be honest things need to chang.
However its thigs like strip cubs and adult film makers and this supermodle crap that make change hard.
I have a female friend who is now a lawyer but to help pay for collage she became a striper. It's things like that along with so much more that prey on wemon. And the thing that pisses me off is us so called men allow it along with the wemon who also suport it.
If we just stoped and took a moment to see what damage it can cause maybe more people would take a stand and make a change.
But back to what I was going to say.
If its a game I like and can get into then yes I will play reguardless of who the lead is. However more games need to have females as the lead with out making them into a sexual object.
And yes I know how I sound. Like I'm some kind of mamma's boy or something. That's ok you can think that. I'm ok with you thinking I don't have any family jewls or what not.Take that for what you will.

[billy the squid]

Darth Krytie wrote...

billy the squid wrote...


And I call bull crap on most of the "oh it's sexist" rubbish I read around here. Potato, potato. It matters because it does? Yep an argument, which is as compelling as it comes. And no, games will not be good games if you just stick a woman in it so everyone can feel progressive. It's good if it makes sense, a well witten charcater, fits with the world it's set in etc. other than that you shouldn't give a damn, woman, man meh.

Now, Tomb Raider? One of the most succesful franchises in the gaming world... you know the one which is male dominated and yet we still pick up that game and play it in our millions. yeah, I'm not seeing you point on that front. That game will succeed or fail on it's merits as a game, not because it has a woman in it.

It's a fact of life, that yes there are a lot of men playing games, so they tend to be marketed to the largest possible market, that's not sexism, it's commercial good sense. Not to say that games can't be a success with a female protagonist, they are. Just try convincing the marketing board that they'd be able to sell a new franchise like that, there's your challenge. 

And thus, you just prove my point. If you think I'm asking for games to just stick a women in there just to be progressive, you're missing the point entirely. The point is, women shouldn't be an after thought. It shouldn't be about progressiveness. It should be a default assumption to have women in well-rounded roles in games because we are people, too.

And it is sexism on so many different scales that women as protags are deemed unmarketable. It is sexist if you're telling me that women wouldn't sell as protags because men wouldn't buy it. Why does it matter if it's a good game? If it's a good game, a woman protag is irrelevant...right?

No, it should make sense based on the world and context in which it is set. That's it. 

If it's sexist then you better take that up with the finance departments and marketing, because if they deem it unable to sell, it's not going to get the support and funding it needs, whether you see it as sexist or not. It is the point that at the moment there are a large number of men as the consumer, so it's a given most budgets are going to be catered towards that demographic, specifically for new franchises and developments.

The key issue is whether they will buy a new franchise, the gender of a protagonist is a minor tiping point. So it's most likely that they will do everything they can think of to attract the largest demographic they can, because of the competition. Yet by that point it's a bit late to change tact and the gender of a protagonist 

Can you imaging the storm of criticism if they changed Tomb Raider to a man being the protagonist? It wouldn't be THE franchise anymore, it'd be something different.

[NUM13ER]

While I think it's fair to say many games depict women as nothing more than fanservice for their target "lowest common denominator" audience, it's a much harder task to call out Bioware on this especially when looking at them relative to other developers.

They are, in my opinion, one of the most progressive developers on both females with proper characterisation and on inclusiveness for sexual minorities. Is there always room improvement? Of course, but that's true of every aspect of gaming.

However using selective bias to try and negate the fact that there are just as many example of equally "flawed" male characters within a given story isn't very productive.

[jillabender]

billy the squid wrote...

Publishers cater towards their largest demographic, because they can produce the largest source of income, so of course I wouldn't have to imagine it. You need to convince the publishing company to invest in a game which follows the same line as Tomb Raider or allows one to select a gender. Not me, all that they need to convince me of is it good, asstated above.

And it's not just a strong female character, I'd say the same for any protagonist, I hated Meredith as an antagonist because she went batcrap crazy at the end, and needed more time to expand on her as changing from a side character to full antaginist in DA2.

Tomb Raider is an established franchise, there is every reason for that weighting up of risk for a new Franchise, women in it or no, if it flops the publisher is millions out of pocket. Aliens Colonial Marines, it flopped because it's crap, not because it needed more women. I don't think a well portrayed woman would have saved that debacle.

There's a lot more to the argument for more women in a game than, it should have them in there because it should.

If all you're saying is that developers might sometimes choose not to feature women prominently for economic reasons, and not because of latent sexism, then I agree with you.

For example, dwarf women weren't included in DA2 because BioWare only had the resources to create either a male or female dwarf model, but not both. They chose the male model because they had already decided on Varric's gender. That's certainly not something I would consider sexist.

But I would hope that you wouldn't consider it "crying sexism" if I said that I'm not convinced by the idea that including a broad range of female roles would hurt game sales, and that I hope the fear of such on the part of publishers or marketers is something that will change in the future.

Modifié par jillabender, 24 février 2013 - 04:10 .

[chuckles471]

billy the squid wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

billy the squid wrote...


And I call bull crap on most of the "oh it's sexist" rubbish I read around here. Potato, potato. It matters because it does? Yep an argument, which is as compelling as it comes. And no, games will not be good games if you just stick a woman in it so everyone can feel progressive. It's good if it makes sense, a well witten charcater, fits with the world it's set in etc. other than that you shouldn't give a damn, woman, man meh.

Now, Tomb Raider? One of the most succesful franchises in the gaming world... you know the one which is male dominated and yet we still pick up that game and play it in our millions. yeah, I'm not seeing you point on that front. That game will succeed or fail on it's merits as a game, not because it has a woman in it.

It's a fact of life, that yes there are a lot of men playing games, so they tend to be marketed to the largest possible market, that's not sexism, it's commercial good sense. Not to say that games can't be a success with a female protagonist, they are. Just try convincing the marketing board that they'd be able to sell a new franchise like that, there's your challenge. 

And thus, you just prove my point. If you think I'm asking for games to just stick a women in there just to be progressive, you're missing the point entirely. The point is, women shouldn't be an after thought. It shouldn't be about progressiveness. It should be a default assumption to have women in well-rounded roles in games because we are people, too.

And it is sexism on so many different scales that women as protags are deemed unmarketable. It is sexist if you're telling me that women wouldn't sell as protags because men wouldn't buy it. Why does it matter if it's a good game? If it's a good game, a woman protag is irrelevant...right?

No, it should make sense based on the world and context in which it is set. That's it. 

If it's sexist then you better take that up with the finance departments and marketing, because if they deem it unable to sell, it's not going to get the support and funding it needs, whether you see it as sexist or not. It is the point that at the moment there are a large number of men as the consumer, so it's a given most budgets are going to be catered towards that demographic, specifically for new franchises and developments.

The key issue is whether they will buy a new franchise, the gender of a protagonist is a minor tiping point. So it's most likely that they will do everything they can think of to attract the largest demographic they can, because of the competition. Yet by that point it's a bit late to change tact and the gender of a protagonist 

Can you imaging the storm of criticism if they changed Tomb Raider to a man being the protagonist? It wouldn't be THE franchise anymore, it'd be something different.

To be fair, the only reason they made Lara a woman was to stop people saying it was an Indiana Jones rip-off.  But I get your point.

[billy the squid]

AllThatJazz wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I call privilege on just about everyone here who say it doesn't matter whether there are women (strong or otherwise) in gaming. Mostly, because it's easy to say it doesn't matter if your group isn't the one being ignored. What the hell does a dudebro care if there are no women in their games if they're a dudebro? Women like me, however, would like more games where there are women in decent roles. I don't want to see sexism shoved in my face during my free hobby time.

It's just so frustrating to see that sentiment over and over again. "Why does it matter if it's a good game?" Because it does matter. Because most of these games would still be good games with women in it. Because I wonder if people would be so cavalier about it if women were dominant in video games and dudes were rare...would men be cool with being ignored in these medium if they were hardly ever represent and, when they were, hardly ever represented well?

It is an industry wide problem and John Elper tweets about it frequently.

The main reason I really enjoy Dragon Age (and Mass Effect) is because I basically know that when I play it, I won't be irritated by either the lack of women or the poor representation of them. Even the women in BW games that are sexual in nature or do, indeed, look like sex objects always have more going on with their characters.

And I call bull crap on most of the "oh it's sexist" rubbish I read around here. Potato, potato. It matters because it does? Yep an argument, which is as compelling as it comes. And no, games will not be good games if you just stick a woman in it so everyone can feel progressive. It's good if it makes sense, a well witten charcater, fits with the world it's set in etc. other than that you shouldn't give a damn, woman, man meh.

Now, Tomb Raider? One of the most succesful franchises in the gaming world... you know the one which is male dominated and yet we still pick up that game and play it in our millions. yeah, I'm not seeing you point on that front. That game will succeed or fail on it's merits as a game, not because it has a woman in it.

It's a fact of life, that yes there are a lot of men playing games, so they tend to be marketed to the largest possible market, that's not sexism, it's commercial good sense. Not to say that games can't be a success with a female protagonist, they are. Just try convincing the marketing board that they'd be able to sell a new franchise like that, there's your challenge. 

But if a franchise with a female protagonist can be one of the most successful franchises ever, then why is it so unreasonable to want more female protags/NPCs and better characterisation of women in general? Surely everyone wins. 

I stated in another post, but I'll do it briefly here.

How do you get a NEW franchise of the ground. That's the key issue. Appeal to the largest market possible in as many ways as you can. But once it's established you then have a franchise which people recognise and decry it, if you change key aspects.

Better characterisation is not unwaranted. But, it's going to depend on the game. Gears, CoD. Most characters outside 3 or 4 are going to be nothing more than window dressing regardless of gender. Carmine from GoW springs to mind, how many of them died? Now, games with a more expansive world are going to be able to deliver larger inclusions and better characterisation due to the type of game. But as with the market's consumption, they are not going to shift the vast numbers like other games, so there are fewer of them as a type of product.

So you have you limitations.

New Fanchise.
Generalised costs and overheads
Type of genre specifically
Demographic and forcasts of income
etc.

[billy the squid]

jillabender wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

Publishers cater towards their largest demographic, because they can produce the largest source of income, so of course I wouldn't have to imagine it. You need to convince the publishing company to invest in a game which follows the same line as Tomb Raider or allows one to select a gender. Not me, all that they need to convince me of is it good, asstated above.

And it's not just a strong female character, I'd say the same for any protagonist, I hated Meredith as an antagonist because she went batcrap crazy at the end, and needed more time to expand on her as changing from a side character to full antaginist in DA2.

Tomb Raider is an established franchise, there is every reason for that weighting up of risk for a new Franchise, women in it or no, if it flops the publisher is millions out of pocket. Aliens Colonial Marines, it flopped because it's crap, not because it needed more women. I don't think a well portrayed woman would have saved that debacle.

There's a lot more to the argument for more women in a game than, it should have them in there because it should.

If all you're saying is that developers might choose not to feature women prominently for economic reasons, and not because of latent sexism, then I agree with you.

But I would hope that you wouldn't consider it "crying sexism" if I said that I'm not convinced by the idea that including a broad range of female roles would hurt game sales, and that I hope the fear of such, if it exists, is something that will change in the future.

I don't think it would hurt sales in either.

But look at the competition in the market. Publishers have a very real fear of a game flopping, thus pushing things into the largest demoraphic and using everything to appeal to it, especially for a new franchise or IP. I think that's your reason. The fear that a new IP won't take off, so they fall back into the default position of mass marketing it.

[Dabrikishaw]

chuckles471 wrote...

I just find it funny that one of the links at the bottom is "The 20 Hottest Daughters From The Sports World". How unfortunate.

[w0lfam0da1s]

billy the squid wrote...

AllThatJazz wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

Darth Krytie wrote...

I call privilege on just about everyone here who say it doesn't matter whether there are women (strong or otherwise) in gaming. Mostly, because it's easy to say it doesn't matter if your group isn't the one being ignored. What the hell does a dudebro care if there are no women in their games if they're a dudebro? Women like me, however, would like more games where there are women in decent roles. I don't want to see sexism shoved in my face during my free hobby time.

It's just so frustrating to see that sentiment over and over again. "Why does it matter if it's a good game?" Because it does matter. Because most of these games would still be good games with women in it. Because I wonder if people would be so cavalier about it if women were dominant in video games and dudes were rare...would men be cool with being ignored in these medium if they were hardly ever represent and, when they were, hardly ever represented well?

It is an industry wide problem and John Elper tweets about it frequently.

The main reason I really enjoy Dragon Age (and Mass Effect) is because I basically know that when I play it, I won't be irritated by either the lack of women or the poor representation of them. Even the women in BW games that are sexual in nature or do, indeed, look like sex objects always have more going on with their characters.

And I call bull crap on most of the "oh it's sexist" rubbish I read around here. Potato, potato. It matters because it does? Yep an argument, which is as compelling as it comes. And no, games will not be good games if you just stick a woman in it so everyone can feel progressive. It's good if it makes sense, a well witten charcater, fits with the world it's set in etc. other than that you shouldn't give a damn, woman, man meh.

Now, Tomb Raider? One of the most succesful franchises in the gaming world... you know the one which is male dominated and yet we still pick up that game and play it in our millions. yeah, I'm not seeing you point on that front. That game will succeed or fail on it's merits as a game, not because it has a woman in it.

It's a fact of life, that yes there are a lot of men playing games, so they tend to be marketed to the largest possible market, that's not sexism, it's commercial good sense. Not to say that games can't be a success with a female protagonist, they are. Just try convincing the marketing board that they'd be able to sell a new franchise like that, there's your challenge. 

But if a franchise with a female protagonist can be one of the most successful franchises ever, then why is it so unreasonable to want more female protags/NPCs and better characterisation of women in general? Surely everyone wins. 

I stated in another post, but I'll do it briefly here.

How do you get a NEW franchise of the ground. That's the key issue. Appeal to the largest market possible in as many ways as you can. But once it's established you then have a franchise which people recognise and decry it, if you change key aspects.

Better characterisation is not unwaranted. But, it's going to depend on the game. Gears, CoD. Most characters outside 3 or 4 are going to be nothing more than window dressing regardless of gender. Carmine from GoW springs to mind, how many of them died? Now, games with a more expansive world are going to be able to deliver larger inclusions and better characterisation due to the type of game. But as with the market's consumption, they are not going to shift the vast numbers like other games, so there are fewer of them as a type of product.

So you have you limitations.

New Fanchise.
Generalised costs and overheads
Type of genre specifically
Demographic and forcasts of income
etc.

That is a valid point.
Lets look at at BW game like ME where you could play as a male or female.
They could have used that to bring in more gamers in the first place if the marketed it to both female and males alike. You have to spend money to make money as they say. So taking the time to market to the female gamers would of opened up new options not just for that game but for BW as a company.
But one agaig I got off track.

[jillabender]

billy the squid wrote...

I don't think it would hurt sales in either.

But look at the competition in the market. Publishers have a very real fear of a game flopping, thus pushing things into the largest demoraphic and using everything to appeal to it, especially for a new franchise or IP. I think that's your reason. The fear that a new IP won't take off, so they fall back into the default position of mass marketing it.

I don't dispute that publishers might have that fear when it comes to featuring female characters prominently in games, and especially in the marketing for those games, but as I said, I'm not convinced it's a justified fear, and, justified or not, I hope it's a fear that will become less of an issue over time.

Modifié par jillabender, 23 février 2013 - 06:15 .

[aries1001]

Let me introduce you to the possible strongest warrior in the DA series so far: Avelline.
Avelline is a warrior, capable of taking on even the strongest warrior, male or female.
And what about Isabel, Morrigan - and Femshep in Mass Effect. Or Liara or Ashley Williams in ME3.

As for Morrigan and Isabella, have you all forgotten the debates we had when the picture of Morrigan first were shown.... I havent. People were outraged and accused Bioware of making Morrigan (only) a sexobject. But as we have seen when we did play the game, DA:O, it wasn't like this. A reason was behind this. Just like a reason is behind how Isabella looks in DA2. She's a pirate, and is dressed like a pirate. In a pirate hat, pirate's boots and a pirate outfit, a tunic. And yes, her outfit is made that way to show that she's ok with her female sexuality. Playing the game, I learned that there was much more to Isabella's stry than just being a sexobject e.g she's a strong, independent women, who likes (casully) sex.

[Melca36]

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

Danny Boy 7 wrote...
It simply falls in line with the idea that women enjoy that type of man and so he's ripe for LI status.

Women dont enjoy that type of man?

They do, but thats more of a side effect of his character rather than a...conscious choice by Mr. Gaider, Well maybe conscious isn't the right word. He (just like all of the characters) are designed to appeal or revolt  us in some way. If however you think that he was designed to be goofy simply to appeal to women....I dunno if I agree.

Perhaps I just dont see the value of the character beyond that goal, plus with Alistair being heir to the throne it also ties into that fairytale ending fantasy where the woman is swept off her feet by the handsome prince and becomes Queen.

Edit: unless you are an elf

First, this is 2013 not 1997. 47% of gamers are women now.

Second, not all female players of Dragon Age made Alistair king. <_<

[Paul E Dangerously]

Really, Alistair was that type of way not necessarily to appeal to women, but to liven up that "this is the bland NPC you get to start off with" archetype that Bioware's done a few times like Carth Onasi or Kaidan Alenko.

[AllThatJazz]

billy the squid wrote...

jillabender wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

Publishers cater towards their largest demographic, because they can produce the largest source of income, so of course I wouldn't have to imagine it. You need to convince the publishing company to invest in a game which follows the same line as Tomb Raider or allows one to select a gender. Not me, all that they need to convince me of is it good, asstated above.

And it's not just a strong female character, I'd say the same for any protagonist, I hated Meredith as an antagonist because she went batcrap crazy at the end, and needed more time to expand on her as changing from a side character to full antaginist in DA2.

Tomb Raider is an established franchise, there is every reason for that weighting up of risk for a new Franchise, women in it or no, if it flops the publisher is millions out of pocket. Aliens Colonial Marines, it flopped because it's crap, not because it needed more women. I don't think a well portrayed woman would have saved that debacle.

There's a lot more to the argument for more women in a game than, it should have them in there because it should.

If all you're saying is that developers might choose not to feature women prominently for economic reasons, and not because of latent sexism, then I agree with you.

But I would hope that you wouldn't consider it "crying sexism" if I said that I'm not convinced by the idea that including a broad range of female roles would hurt game sales, and that I hope the fear of such, if it exists, is something that will change in the future.

I don't think it would hurt sales in either.

But look at the competition in the market. Publishers have a very real fear of a game flopping, thus pushing things into the largest demoraphic and using everything to appeal to it, especially for a new franchise or IP. I think that's your reason. The fear that a new IP won't take off, so they fall back into the default position of mass marketing it.

This is true - the 'appeal to the broadest demographic' is a criticism levelled at many developers for many different reasons, Bioware included (ME3 aimed at the COD crowd, for example). And yes - taking risks is something Publishers aren't keen on in all sorts of ways - which explains why so many good ideas for games have had to go the route of crowdfunding.  One could argue that the inclusion of an optional female PC in more titles, or at least a few more female characters would broaden the appeal of a game even further, given the increasing presence of women gamers in the marketplace. 

Besides, that it is the current state of things doesn't make it right or not worth pointing out or battling for something different.  As a professional middle-class woman with a high disposable income, I am far more inclined to spend my gaming money on titles and developers who show willing in terms of writing characters I can identify with. If nothing else, the phrase 'high disposable income' should be one that resonates with developers and publishers alike, regardless of their stance on social inclusion. Wanting greater representation, and believing it to be a reasonable 'want' isn't crying sexism (hell, I've been playing games for over twenty years, I'm well used to traversing the majority of gameworlds with a bloke as my avatar) - though there is still sexism in the industry, as much as it is appreciating progress and wanting to see more of it. And it's progress I'm happy to pay for, by buying more games.

Modifié par AllThatJazz, 23 février 2013 - 06:40 .

[jillabender]

iOnlySignIn wrote...

I like strong women. But I am well aware of their rarity in real life. I have no problem indulging in Dragon Age's style of wish-fulfillment fantasy.

Incidentally, I think the "strength" of the women has declined coming from DA:O to DA2:

Anora > Leliana > Meredith > Wynne > Aveline > Morrigan > Tallis > Isabela > Merrill >>> Leandra

Merrill is a sign that the writers have folded and given in to more traditional male expectations of LIs.

First of all, I'm bothered by the idea that including many "strong women" equates to a "wish-fulfillment fantasy," because there are many different ways of being strong.

Second, I find the idea that female characters should be "strong" characters to be very limiting, at least in the way it's often stated.

If by "strong female characters," one means female characters with strong writing, I'm all for it! But what I really want to see is a wider range of interesting and three-dimensional female characters, with believable flaws. Not every female character needs to be strong in the sense of being either physically or emotionally strong.

For example, I find Leandra to be an interesting character precisely because she's not especially emotionally strong. She's not necessarily weak either, but she's so wrapped up in mourning everything she's lost - her family and status, her husband, her home, and her child - that she doesn't give very much attention to her surviving chidlren. And it's the fact that those flaws feel true-to-life that makes her feel human.

Modifié par jillabender, 23 février 2013 - 06:42 .

[Dragoonlordz]

I fail to see any relevence of this topic towards DA or ME franchises. Both allow you to play as female and male protaganists, both have some well written female characters and some well written male ones. I don't think this discussion is anything to do with DA and by proxy DA:I...better suited for it to be in offtopic section. DA:I -will have gender choice protaganists like previous games, it will have some well written female characters and some well written male ones as such I question the point of this thread in this section in the first place.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 23 février 2013 - 06:54 .

[JamieCOTC]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

I fail to see any relevence of this topic towards DA or ME franchises. Both allow you to play as female and male protaganists, both have some well written female characters and some well written male ones. I don't think this discussion is anything to do with DA and by proxy DA:I...better suited for it to be in offtopic section. DA:I -will have gender choice protaganists like previous games, it will have some well written female characters and some well written male ones as such I question the point of this thread in this section in the first place.

Very good point. And w/ ME3 the female protaganist was used in marketing, even getting her own trailer. DA3 will use both genders in marketing. And hopefully there won't be a big deal about it, both will be out there w/ equal exposure.