186 réponses à ce sujet

[billy the squid]

jillabender wrote...

Billy the Squid wrote...

You're not doing this as an avenue for social change, you're doing it because you want it to cater to you more specifically. If you want that fine. Just don't beat about the bush and proclaim it's for the good of society and social change. Because it's not, it's thinly veiled self interest.

Again, with respect, there's a difference between simply wanting to see one's group catered to as such, and wanting to see one's group enjoy the same inclusion that other people take for granted.

Yes and the inclusion extends to every genre and game in the industry does it regardless, and should it be neccessary forced into that development? I'd hope not.

[In Exile]

billy the squid wrote...
Or are you really under the impression that changing a commercial industry will change society? When it's formation is to serve the consumption pattern of that society. As things change the industry shifts to cater to new desires not the other way round.

Is this a serious question? Because the answer is obviously yes. Commercials, movies, advertisements - all of these influence the development of out tastes, attitudes and beliefs. Pretending that the media isn't part of society is just ridiculous. 

[billy the squid]

In Exile wrote...

billy the squid wrote...
Pft. One has the the central goal to make a profit. The other has the desire of personal enjoyment and is entirely based on self interest, like the former.

No, this analytical distiction is just wrong. Not all things people are interested in are equal. Even if you say that all motivation is self-interest, a white supremacist and an advocate for labour rights do not, and will never be, on the same moral ground even if they act out of "self-interest". 

You're not doing this as an avenue for social change, you're doing it because you want it to cater to you more specifically.

I'm with Xil on this one, Ms. Cleo. 

Really, sexist. Explain to me how CoD, of BF3 is sexist or maybe the sports game franchise or racing.  

You mean the two games where women apparently don't exist?

Why isn't there a drive to make those more inclusive? Why do we only see it in the games that you like. If it's a progressive ideology, then it affects the whole industry and every genre no? 

What makes you think there isn't? 

So the Business sector is the equaivalent of white supremecy is it? If you want to start engaging in hyperbole have at it. Yet both disregard the practicalities of financing a development. Or did people think it was free? So the concepts which have been espoused should be implemented regardless of the genre, story or developer's desire, for inclusiveness. Is that it? And they're going to be marked where? to the large mainstream which eats up the standard shooter. 

Ah, so I see. All games, CoD and Bf3 and all their ilk must now include a quota, because they're sexist. Regardless of the choices that a developer may which to make. So you're in effect proscribing that your personal desires, superseed anyone elses, even the developer's. Because you want that included. How were you not the same interest loby as the business groups?

Have we heard the desire for greater representation in Sports or Racing games? FPS games? Maybe because the main consumer group for these particular genres is young men? Just throwing that idea out there. And would their reasoning change as to why they bought it? I'm betting it wouldn't.

[Renmiri1]

Topsider wrote...


Publishers spend millions of dollars making these games, it's understandable when they're marketed to who they think will buy the most. In some cases the data may be outdated, but then you get stats from ME3 showing that 82% played as manShep. Marketers will assume most are male gamers even if there's a few variables to consider. 

Game budgets are simply too high to be taking unnecessary risks. It's the main reason the market is flooded with sequels. Hopefully, sequelitis is reduced when the new consoles are released which should encourage more innovation. Female protagonists will have a better chance.

I don't put much stock on those statistics. For the record, this is the EXACT SAME number that finished ME2 in 2010, again according to Casey Hudson's team.

http://www.1up.com/m...3842187&type=lg

Modifié par Renmiri1, 02 avril 2013 - 04:39 .

[billy the squid]

In Exile wrote...

billy the squid wrote...
Or are you really under the impression that changing a commercial industry will change society? When it's formation is to serve the consumption pattern of that society. As things change the industry shifts to cater to new desires not the other way round.

Is this a serious question? Because the answer is obviously yes. Commercials, movies, advertisements - all of these influence the development of out tastes, attitudes and beliefs. Pretending that the media isn't part of society is just ridiculous. 

There is a diffrence between a want and a need. Do you think that the gaming industry is so pervasive that society will change with it? Games fall categorically into a want. The key aspect is that many commercial create the idea that a lack of a product, conspicuous consumption will prevent social inclusion. It's the possesion of the object. It's far more simple than trying to drive an underlying message home, by trying to equate a charcater will change people's opinion's. 

[Xilizhra]

So the Business sector is the equaivalent of white supremecy is it? If you want to start engaging in hyperbole have at it. Yet both disregard the practicalities of financing a development. Or did people think it was free? So the concepts which have been espoused should be implemented regardless of the genre, story or developer's desire, for inclusiveness. Is that it? And they're going to be marked where? to the large mainstream which eats up the standard shooter.

Given that these shooters tend to have no story of significance, would it really hurt anything to have female protagonist options? I mean, Bioshock Infinite, where pregnancy-related alternate universe shenanigans are a major plot point, is one thing, but I wonder if there's a real need for single-gender plotlines when the story has nothing to do with gender.

[The Heretic of Time]

esper wrote...

Besides the woman in the in the picture above Miranda have an unhealthy obession with rings around her breasts, I have not played the game so I don't know if they are justified, but personally I would rather play in a pantless dress like Isabella's, than I would run around with rings around my breasts.

The rings around Anya's breasts are universal. See here:


Compare Anya, a properly portrayed and strong woman who I can respect:




to Marcus, Anya's commander and (sort-of) love interest:




See? Both have the rings. The armor their wearing is an unisex armor, the same armor worn by both the men and the women in the army.


Also, you're saying Isbella isn't a hugely over-sexualized woman who's protrayed as a lust object rather than a respectable woman?

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 avril 2013 - 04:40 .

[Xilizhra]

Also, you're saying Isbella isn't a hugely over-sexualized woman who's protrayed as a lust object rather than a respectable woman?

No, she's very much portrayed a respectable woman, at least not less respectable than most other DA companions. Her being a lust object is very much secondary to the character.

[In Exile]

billy the squid wrote...
So the Business sector is the equaivalent of white supremecy is it? If you want to start engaging in hyperbole have at it.

Of course not. But I wasn't pretending that "self-interest" always means the same thing, regardless of what that interest is. 

Yet both disregard the practicalities of financing a development.

I work in the capital market industry. I'm quite aware of how financing development works. 

So the concepts which have been espoused should be implemented regardless of the genre, story or developer's desire, for inclusiveness.

That's how development on this scale operates. Maybe Bioware wanted DA:I to have a dwarf-only protagonist because they had an amazing story to tell. Too bad. Dwarves won't push an AAA product.

There's a difference between a story that tackles, say, racism and social inequality (see e.g. Bioshock infinite) and a game that is literally about bouncing boobs bouncing (the later entries in Dead or Alive).  

Ah, so I see. All games, CoD and Bf3 and all their ilk must now include a quota, because they're sexist.

No. They're just sexist. 

Regardless of the choices that a developer may which to make.

Absolutely. If developers want to be sexist or racist, they can go screw themselves. 

So you're in effect proscribing that your personal desires, superseed anyone elses, even the developer's.
Because you want that included. How were you not the same interest loby as the business groups?

Again, you don't get to pretend that a non-progressive goal is on the same moral ground as a progressive one. My interests are better in virtue of the sole fact that they aren't sexist, even if everything else is equal. 

Have we heard the desire for greater representation in Sports or Racing games? FPS games? Maybe because the main consumer group for these particular genres is young men? Just throwing that idea out there. And would their reasoning change as to why they bought it? I'm betting it wouldn't.

The main consumers of an RPG are young men. I]m a young man. 

Even if there was nothing we could do to actually convince someone not to be a sexist, that still doesn't justify giving them a platform to be sexist. 

[The Heretic of Time]

Xilizhra wrote...

Also, you're saying Isbella isn't a hugely over-sexualized woman who's protrayed as a lust object rather than a respectable woman?

No, she's very much portrayed a respectable woman, at least not less respectable than most other DA companions. Her being a lust object is very much secondary to the character.

So you DO admit that she IS indeed a lust object, be it secondary or not?


Well, it's good that you at least don't deny the obvious facts. 

That said, I don't think Isabella is a respectable woman at all. Aveline doesn't think so either. See? Even the in-game characters in Dragon Age 2 agree with me. 

Speaking about Aveline: She's about the only strong and respectable woman in that game. At least Aveline isn't a lust object like the other women in DA2 and Aveline is a strong, independent and progressive woman. She was about the only character in DA2 I actually liked and respected.

[Rixatrix]

billy the squid wrote...
Games are not an artistic endevour, they are an intellectual property, developed and commercialised, that is the legal definition, I should know I studied copyright law. It doesn't stop them dealing with the ideas and concepts like the Bioshock series does or Tomb Raider highlights, to an extent. 

"Games are not an artistic endeavor, they are an intellectual property, developed and commercialized."  Guess what else are intellectual properties?  Books, films, works of art, music.  All of these were "developed and commercialized," and recognized as art.  People like Charles Dickens wrote books to make a buck - is his work not art?  Musicians wrote beautiful music to survive - is their music not art?  Films are made to generate money for writers, directors, producers, actors, etc. - are you saying that something like Citizen Kane is not art?

BTW, it is bad form to use personal credentials as a basis for argument.  (I could use mine, for example, but it wouldn't make my points any more or less valid.)  Otherwise all arguments about, say, global warming would end because one side says, "Well, I studied science!"  Evidence and logic should be the sole basis for argument.

Back on topic, there is no reason why video games shouldn't be considered an art form.  In fact, it is an already popular belief in the industry, and it has been said that in the U.S., they are legally considered an art form as they are eligible for National Endowment for the Arts grants.

Media arts, as defined by the National Endowment for the Arts, includes screen-based and print projects presented via film, television, radio, audio, video, the Internet, interactive and mobile technologies, video game consoles, transmedia storytelling, and satellite as well as media-related printed books, catalogues, and journals.

(emphasis added)

However, some say that the free market should decide what is "art."  After all, game developers seek to supply what has a high demand, right?  Oft-cited are games like Flower, Braid, Portal, Shadow of the Colossus, Rez HD, and yes, some would even say games like Bioshock.

The Ken Levine quote, "not every game has to be a political statement or work of art," can be true of any media that can be art.  For example, not every book has to be a political statement or work of art.  We have, say, Toni Morrison's Beloved as art, but there are books like Goosebumps, too, which are just plain fun.  There are films like American Beauty, and then there is Scary Movie.  Et cetera.  It depends on the intentions of the creator; sometimes, it is simply to entertain, but not always.

Despite all that, I wouldn't say that games should feature female protagonists because they are an art form.  However, it is no coincidence that art has often been considered a catalyst for social change.  Racial equality, gender equality, LGBT issues, economic class, and so on have all been tackled by art and have, whether you recognize it or not, shaped society's views.  Art challenges people to, at the very least, think about these issues, and, at the very best, think critically about them.  It can engage society.  Can you pinpoint all the reasons why social views about racial equality have changed over the years, for example?  Or why now over half of Americans support gay marriage?  Is it possible that at least a contributing factor was a book, movie, song, poem, performance, or other work of art that touched people?

Games are a current art form reaching a lot of people today.  If a game, through even minor inclusion of a social issue, gets its audience to think or (gasp!) think critically about it, then it has done something worthwhile, at least in my opinion.

On the topic of female protagonists, I love that the game industry is recognizing that there is a problem.  In an ideal world, male/female/gay/straight/bi/lesbian protagonists would all be common, not oversexualized, role models for society.  Right now, it is true that the game industry is dominated by the bulky, straight male protagonist, but we are seeing it slowly open up, as that bulky straight male protagonist represents less and less of game consumers.  More women and people of LGBT orientation, or straight males with open minds, are playing video games and long for something different.  

As far as female protagonists on the game cover, I really appreciate the winds of change on this issue.  I would be thrilled with it, but its absence wouldn't stop me from buying a game I am interested in.  I, for example, loved the Mass Effect 3 collector's edition case, which featured FemShep on one side.  However, I would still buy it with just BroShep on the cover (although a bit disappointed).  Neutral elements like featuring the Normandy or a Reaper would have been cool, though.

I don't believe video game companies should use exclusive female protagonists to their financial detriment, however.  If their tried-and-true formula works for them, and they want to keep using it, it's a free market, and they are welcome to do so.  However, I, like other consumers, find myself bored with the male-only protagonist formula and usually do not buy those games anymore.  I find myself saving my money for high quality games that also let me create my own protagonist (like Bioware and Bethesda games) or games with exclusively female protagonists, like the new Tomb Raider (even got the collector's edition).  I would also buy games featuring protagonists of non-straight sexual orientations.  In the end, we can talk all we want about what games should feature, but it is our money that counts and fuels this change in a free market.

Modifié par BlueMoonSeraphim, 02 avril 2013 - 04:49 .

[In Exile]

billy the squid wrote...
There is a diffrence between a want and a need. Do you think that the gaming industry is so pervasive that society will change with it?

There's shifting goalposts, and then there's punting them to the other side of the city gates. Of course, changing games wont' change society. But who was talking about social change? Changing games will change games, and that's what we're talking about here.

Games fall categorically into a want. The key aspect is that many commercial create the idea that a lack of a product, conspicuous consumption will prevent social inclusion.  

There are a great deal of theories about marketing, none of which are on especially solid ground empirically. 

It's the possesion of the object. It's far more simple than trying to drive an underlying message home, by trying to equate a charcater will change people's opinion's. 

You don't need to drive a message home. Just be less sexist about it. 

[jillabender]

billy the squid wrote...

jillabender wrote...

Billy the Squid wrote...

You're not doing this as an avenue for social change, you're doing it because you want it to cater to you more specifically. If you want that fine. Just don't beat about the bush and proclaim it's for the good of society and social change. Because it's not, it's thinly veiled self interest.

Again, with respect, there's a difference between simply wanting to see one's group catered to as such, and wanting to see one's group enjoy the same inclusion that other people take for granted.

Yes and the inclusion extends to every genre and game in the industry does it regardless, and should it be neccessary forced into that development? I'd hope not.

Personally, I don't expect every game to be perfect when it comes to inclusion. And I doubt many people would expect a game to fulfill quotas for representation, or think that was the best way to achieve more inclusion.

[Nerdage]

billy the squid wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...

Androme wrote...

 Video game developers needs to stop turning the gaming industry into a same-sex romance, ''race & ethnicity is a social construct'', transsexual-industry thing. And do what they do best: Games.

Media exploring social issues? What madness is this?!

http://youtu.be/JwsjALh2vYA?t=16m16s

The line at 17: 42  "not every game has to be a political statement or a work of art" from Ken Levine should be foremost in people's minds

Seems like the mindset that holds that 'any game containing those themes must therefore be making some kind of political statement' is part of the problem. Inclusiveness shouldn't be considered some kind of statement, it should be the norm and thus completely unremarkable; not every game needs to account for every sub-section of humanity, but treating the white-male-oriented games (for want of a better name) as 'normal games' and the rest as some minority special-interest or political statement isn't the way to expand the industry, nor to diversify the kinds of games it creates.

It's a bit baffling that "there should be more female protagonists" is apparently such a contentious suggestion; I'd hope that inclusiveness goes much further than gender before it's over.

[The Heretic of Time]

Sutekh wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

As our good friend Luke would say: "Thou hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye before thou points out the speck of sawdust that is in your brother's eye."

Watch and learn Gaider and the rest of BioWare, THIS is how you properly present women in your games:

<carefully handpicked screenshot 1>

In comparison, THIS is how it SHOULDN'T be done:

<carefully handpicked screenshot 2>

I too can post just the right screenies to make my point 

Except I'm not even carefully handpicking screenshots at all. You can look at ANY woman in Gears of War, and they'll ALL look like Anya, in the same armor, all equally strong and independent.

Clearly, DA2 still has plenty of over-sexualized lust objects as characters, with Isabella being the prime example.

Seriously, didn't carefully handpick anything. I actually took the first screenshot I found from Isabella, and the first screenshot I found from Anya (Gears of War).

You sir, just failed.

Here, have a screenshot from Samantha, my favorite character in Gears:

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 02 avril 2013 - 04:51 .

[Xilizhra]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Also, you're saying Isbella isn't a hugely over-sexualized woman who's protrayed as a lust object rather than a respectable woman?

No, she's very much portrayed a respectable woman, at least not less respectable than most other DA companions. Her being a lust object is very much secondary to the character.

So you DO admit that she IS indeed a lust object, be it secondary or not?


Well, it's good that you at least don't deny the obvious facts. 

That said, I don't think Isabella is a respectable woman at all. Aveline doesn't think so either. See? Even the in-game characters in Dragon Age 2 agree with me. 

Speaking about Aveline: She's about the only strong and respectable woman in that game. At least Aveline isn't a lust object like the other women in DA2 and Aveline is a strong, independent and progressive woman. She was about the only character in DA2 I actually liked and respected.

She's one in-universe, as a deliberate choice. Her out-of-universe role isn't intended to be one. In any case, Aveline comes around to liking her.

[Endurium]

As I recall we PC players can disable game reporting to Bioware, which I always do given the chance. That can skew statistics a bit.

On topic, I typically don't buy a game based on cover art; in fact I tend to ignore Marketing and paid reviewers. I played a few games with female protagonists, specifically The Longest Journey, Dreamfall, Syberia I & II, X-Blades, and Portal. While they sometimes provided a different perspective due to gender, gameplay overall wasn't affected and would have been the same with a male protagonist.

Most of my favorite games let me choose my character's gender.

[billy the squid]

Xilizhra wrote...

So the Business sector is the equaivalent of white supremecy is it? If you want to start engaging in hyperbole have at it. Yet both disregard the practicalities of financing a development. Or did people think it was free? So the concepts which have been espoused should be implemented regardless of the genre, story or developer's desire, for inclusiveness. Is that it? And they're going to be marked where? to the large mainstream which eats up the standard shooter.

Given that these shooters tend to have no story of significance, would it really hurt anything to have female protagonist options? I mean, Bioshock Infinite, where pregnancy-related alternate universe shenanigans are a major plot point, is one thing, but I wonder if there's a real need for single-gender plotlines when the story has nothing to do with gender.

Which was my first point several pages ago. Practicalities. Are you going to mess with a product that delivered 6 million sales in it's first day? It's the economics of doing business. Who is your main audience? So by putting a female protagonist in that game, new people will flock to play it? I wouldn't bet on it. And it's a risk any publisher is going to be unwilling to take. Are you going to risk £20 million on it. What's your marketing going to be?

Forcing in that options, this concept, that ideology. Doesn't equate to more sales. Infact with particular ones it could mean less. And there in lies the problem of interst groups. The idea that their interest superseeds all others, and it warps the context. Which was my point regarding a commercial or artistic product. It still a commercial product and  not art.

Bioshock is a bit different. But I hope you listened to the interview, I enjoyed it and it was quite an eye opener. He said that he puts the story and characters first and how they feel to him. Not based on what people expected as a positive portrayal of this group, or an inclusion of this concept. That's how it should be, interesting charcters. Quotas are the death of creative design.

[Rixatrix]

nerdage wrote...
Seems like the mindset that holds that 'any game containing those themes must therefore be making some kind of political statement' is part of the problem. Inclusiveness shouldn't be considered some kind of statement, it should be the norm and thus completely unremarkable; not every game needs to account for every sub-section of humanity, but treating the white-male-oriented games (for want of a better name) as 'normal games' and the rest as some minority special-interest or political statement isn't the way to expand the industry, nor to diversify the kinds of games it creates.

It's a bit baffling that "there should be more female protagonists" is apparently such a contentious suggestion; I'd hope that inclusiveness goes much further than gender before it's over.

A very intelligent post - well written. +1

[kumquats]

Isabela is a feminist, I can't believe people still don't understand this.
If men have many lovers and treat sex casually, everyone will high-five them. "Oh what you banged 10 women in the last month? You are the MAN."
When a woman does the same thing, she is a **** and a ****.

I think whoever wrote Isabela, exposed a lot of sexism with our own way of thinking. This person is a genius.

On top of that, Ves gets used by Roche, to use her sexappeal for her job. Lovely.
I want my next BW female Protagonist to get ****d out by her employer, so bad. :>

[Wulfram]

If Isabela represented women, then that'd be problematic. But there's lots of women who are major characters, and who are extremely diverse in personality and look, so she's just representing herself.

In gender equality terms, DA2 did very well IMO.

[Reznore57]

Aveline thinks Isabella is a ****.
Being a **** or a **** or whatever doesn't mean you don't deserve respect .
I don't think Aveline thinks Isabella is a lesser being because she's sexually very active.

People just get distracted by the name calling , but both of them are strong women and they respect each others.
They're strong because they understand that their differences doesn't make them ennemies.

[BeatoSama]

In regards to Isabela I'll just cite Characterdesign 101 tumblr:

"In characters with personalities, you have many ways to reinforce the idea of sexiness, namely animation and dialogue. If a character wants to have lots of sex, says s/he wants to have lots of sex, and actually does have lots of sex, it’s probably appropriate for him/her look like she is DTF. The quintessential example:

You see cleavage because SHE wants you to see cleavage.


She wears no pants because ISABELA NEEDS NO PANTS, and also because “how quickly can I take these clothes off again” is something I guarantee she thinks about when getting dressed in the morning (verified by Sheryl Chee, sort of, I quote: “if she has a problem she will probably just knife the clothes off”). She’s also a pretty damn good duelist, and awfully confident, and maybe for that reason she thinks avoiding damage is a non-issue. If you consider the entire spectrum of video game ladies, though, she’s fairly modestly dressed."

Isabela is the prime example of when its fine to sexualize a female character.

Modifié par BeatoSama, 02 avril 2013 - 04:55 .

[Xilizhra]

billy the squid wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

So the Business sector is the equaivalent of white supremecy is it? If you want to start engaging in hyperbole have at it. Yet both disregard the practicalities of financing a development. Or did people think it was free? So the concepts which have been espoused should be implemented regardless of the genre, story or developer's desire, for inclusiveness. Is that it? And they're going to be marked where? to the large mainstream which eats up the standard shooter.

Given that these shooters tend to have no story of significance, would it really hurt anything to have female protagonist options? I mean, Bioshock Infinite, where pregnancy-related alternate universe shenanigans are a major plot point, is one thing, but I wonder if there's a real need for single-gender plotlines when the story has nothing to do with gender.

Which was my first point several pages ago. Practicalities. Are you going to mess with a product that delivered 6 million sales in it's first day? It's the economics of doing business. Who is your main audience? So by putting a female protagonist in that game, new people will flock to play it? I wouldn't bet on it. And it's a risk any publisher is going to be unwilling to take. Are you going to risk £20 million on it. What's your marketing going to be?

Forcing in that options, this concept, that ideology. Doesn't equate to more sales. Infact with particular ones it could mean less. And there in lies the problem of interst groups. The idea that their interest superseeds all others, and it warps the context. Which was my point regarding a commercial or artistic product. It still a commercial product and  not art.

Bioshock is a bit different. But I hope you listened to the interview, I enjoyed it and it was quite an eye opener. He said that he puts the story and characters first and how they feel to him. Not based on what people expected as a positive portrayal of this group, or an inclusion of this concept. That's how it should be, interesting charcters. Quotas are the death of creative design.

I found him to be a slimy, self-righteous ****** in one or two areas, to be honest. I didn't really make it through the whole interview. Especially since he doesn't seem to understand the concept of sympathetic characters.

[The Heretic of Time]

BeatoSama wrote...

In regards to Isabela I'll just cite Characterdesign 101 tumblr:

"In characters with personalities, you have many ways to reinforce the idea of sexiness, namely animation and dialogue. If a character wants to have lots of sex, says s/he wants to have lots of sex, and actually does have lots of sex, it’s probably appropriate for him/her look like she is DTF. The quintessential example:You see cleavage because SHE wants you to see cleavage. She wears no pants because ISABELA NEEDS NO PANTS, and also because “how quickly can I take these clothes off again” is something I guarantee she thinks about when getting dressed in the morning (verified by Sheryl Chee, sort of, I quote: “if she has a problem she will probably just knife the clothes off”). She’s also a pretty damn good duelist, and awfully confident, and maybe for that reason she thinks avoiding damage is a non-issue. If you consider the entire spectrum of video game ladies, though, she’s fairly modestly dressed."

Isabela is the prime example of when its fine to sexualize a female character.

Ahhhhhh, so Isabella is SUPPOSED to be an objectified slut in skimpy armor? Ohhhhh THEN it's alright and acceptable!


You see guys? As long as women in games are SUPPOSED to be objectified sluts, it's all right! I didn't know that! Thanks for enlightening me!