9318 réponses à ce sujet

[9TailsFox]

Umm I think that female elf is a companion, not the inquisitor.

You can be right but i doubt we have 2 female elf companions. Maybe, what would be nice. Or She just change her hair and use Orlesian dye.

[Banxey]

While marketing geared towards women it's not something I feel I need, I can understand people wanting to have some representation occasionally that is not geared toward the idea that teenage boys will only play as men or hot women. I really enjoyed the new Lara Croft for this reason. I know she's still attractive, but she's attractive in the way that a lot of male protagonists are instead of the average heroine who is falling out of her clothes. 

 

The funny thing is that while I personally have never had a problem playing as a male (to clarify, yes I'm female), one of my earliest memories is of my older sisters fighting over who got to play the yellow "lady" in Wizard of Wor. It didn't bother me because they never wanted to play as the blue "man" so I always got to play and didn't have to take turns. For those interested, behold the yellow lady.

[Krystek_Ochrapka]

While marketing geared towards women it's not something I feel I need, I can understand people wanting to have some representation occasionally that is not geared toward the idea that teenage boys will only play as men or hot women. I really enjoyed the new Lara Croft for this reason. I know she's still attractive, but she's attractive in the way that a lot of male protagonists are instead of the average heroine who is falling out of her clothes.

I would say, that entire 2013 was kinda crucial for how women are portrayed in games. First the reboot of Tomb Raider - and maybe most iconic and sexualised woman character in gaming history. A very good reboot with emphasis on psychological traits, and character development rather than size of Lara's chest. Then we got a Beyond: Two Souls and first and foremost Ellie from The last of us. All these AAA games had their heroines on box-art, and did sell well. Maybe others will follow.

[Fast Jimmy]

Yeah this has happened a few times. In the concept art of the Inquisition fortress with the bald elf mage, people didn't seem to realise that the female dwarf was an Inquisitor.

I know Matt Rhodes tries to signal it by having them wear iconic colours or pieces of clothing (red cloaks, red sashes) but some people always seem to think they're seeing a new companion or major NPC, when it's actually just a variation of Inquisitor.

And I feel like this just reinforces my point. We've been getting exactly what people in this thread are asking (more female Inquisitor models used during the pre-release marketing) and the only reason we now know it is that Bioware had to explicitly come out and tag it as such.


Doesn't that suggest it is an ineffective and misleading way to advertise the choice, when people who are diehard fans of the series can't sort them out from possible other NPCs?

[FarDareisMai]

As much as I would absolutely love to see more of the female Inquisitor, to me all the marketing is just the wrapping paper. When I open that case and put that disc in my console, I'll know that I'm about to create an awesome female character. That being said, I would be really happy to see a female protagonist on marketing materials. I'm a guide book buyer (and I have friends that have told me I'm not "hardcore" because of it), so maybe having a male protagonists on the game case and a female character on the guide book (or vice versa) could be a good compromise? To me, if it's an RPG and I can be a rogue, I'm happy....if I can also choose to be female, that makes me even happier (being able to choose being an elf...that's just a bonus ). When the DAO trailer came out, as soon as I saw the Bioware logo my mind automatically thought back to NWN and I knew that I would be able to be female. Also, I'd rather have strongly written female characters (Isabela being my favorite in DA2) in the game than fret over the character on the box being such.

[ElitePinecone]

And I feel like this just reinforces my point. We've been getting exactly what people in this thread are asking (more female Inquisitor models used during the pre-release marketing) and the only reason we now know it is that Bioware had to explicitly come out and tag it as such.


Doesn't that suggest it is an ineffective and misleading way to advertise the choice, when people who are diehard fans of the series can't sort them out from possible other NPCs?

 

It's not the female Inquisitors people are having trouble sorting out, it's all of them. Elves, dwarves, qunari. Unless they're wearing a helmet or a cape with a gigantic Inquisition eye on it, people just can't tell an Inquisitor from a random NPC. When an Inquisitor can be can two genders, four races and three classes (that's twenty four combinations), pretty much any character in any scene could be an Inquisitor variation unless they're specifically marked as being somebody else. 

 

Also, I don't see why this specifically applies to female Inquisitors. If we used your idea of showing a montage of Inquisitors from different races/genders/skin colours, isn't that going to cause the same issues? They can't show *no* Inquisitors at all in the concept art, especially when it's being used internally for storyboarding or whatever.

[GVulture]

It's not the female Inquisitors people are having trouble sorting out, it's all of them. Elves, dwarves, qunari. Unless they're wearing a helmet or a cape with a gigantic Inquisition eye on it, people just can't tell an Inquisitor from a random NPC. When an Inquisitor can be can two genders, four races and three classes (that's twenty four combinations), pretty much any character in any scene could be an Inquisitor variation unless they're specifically marked as being somebody else. 

 

Also, I don't see why this specifically applies to female Inquisitors. If we used your idea of showing a montage of Inquisitors from different races/genders/skin colours, isn't that going to cause the same issues? They can't show *no* Inquisitors at all in the concept art, especially when it's being used internally for storyboarding or whatever.

Story boarding is something internal. Bioware could use a giant peen with the Inquisitor eye in the story boards, but when talking about character customization and armor variances based on class talking about the player choice in how the Inquisitor appears; they need to use art assets for both genders and use the female pronoun AS WELL. Or at least... you know... say you can choose the gender of the Inquisitor. Vital information that was completely left out.

 

Because of the way a lot of Matt's art was handled even though we saw female art in the diary thing, they were reading male because when someone you hold up a picture and say 'he' you're going to think "long haired male" not "female". I think it is glorious that Matt avoided all the female armor tropes in his Inquisitor works, but the only one that read female right off the bat for a lot of people was the dwarf and the lady with the flag and I don't remember those pieces being in the video. Even if you were, like others said, they didn't read Inquisitor because everyone was expecting the big Seeker eye (not sure why since the Inquisitor doesn't necessarily even follow the Chantry and would therefore not wear the Eye).

 

I think sometimes Bioware forgets that what they've done for decades (allowing gender options) and is a constant to them, is something that most other studios ignore. It's something that makes them different and makes them stand out. They need to embrace that and make sure that people know that about each of their games because that is something that is going to get them more customers.

[Fast Jimmy]

It's not the female Inquisitors people are having trouble sorting out, it's all of them. Elves, dwarves, qunari. Unless they're wearing a helmet or a cape with a gigantic Inquisition eye on it, people just can't tell an Inquisitor from a random NPC. When an Inquisitor can be can two genders, four races and three classes (that's twenty four combinations), pretty much any character in any scene could be an Inquisitor variation unless they're specifically marked as being somebody else.

Also, I don't see why this specifically applies to female Inquisitors. If we used your idea of showing a montage of Inquisitors from different races/genders/skin colours, isn't that going to cause the same issues? They can't show *no* Inquisitors at all in the concept art, especially when it's being used internally for storyboarding or whatever.

I don't think a montage would work. I know previously (maybe around a year ago or so) I'd pitched the idea as something that would work, just as others in this thread have, but since then I've come to realize it will lead to this exact level of confusion.

When you include fully formed images of characters in your marketing, such as images, videos, etc., people experience them as fully formed. It leads to one of two experiences, more often than not - 1) someone expecting that the character being shown is THE main character for the game (like seeing Lara Croft on the cover of Tomb Raider) or 2) the expectation that this fully formed character will be as an NPC.

People knew the male Inquisitor was just that because he was decked out in the now-iconic helmet and armor. Sure, he was white and male, but it was also ambiguous in other aspects, like class or hair type or even race (he could arguably have been human or elf, given how little of his face we saw and hiding the ears). If the other Inquisitors had been dressed exactly like him, then we would have known "oooh! That isn't an NPC female dwarf, that's a female dwarf Inquisitor rendering."

But even this hits roadblocks. One could assume that all members of the Inquisition dress the same, so this could be just another NPC. Or, perhaps worse, consumers could assume that there would be no option to change armor or equipment, that we were stuck with the Inquisitor's gear much like Kratos is stuck being shirtless.


Again... this just goes to demonstrate the weaknesses of any set protagonists at all. They, by their very nature, subvert game mechanics that Bioware has gone to pretty extreme lengths (millions, if not tens of millions of dollars worth of development) to put in. That, to me, is bad. Don't campaign against your own work and interests - capitalize on them. No one in the industry is offering as much character creation choice coupled with story control. No one. Some may point to more detailed character creators like Dragon's Dogma or Saint's Row, or point to games that offer more divergent content based on choices, such as The Witcher series... but no one in the industry marries the two together as largely (mammothly, given the work involved) as Bioware does.

Yet they actively campaign their own work and position in the industry. Simply because they feel they must use a set protagonist to market.

[ElitePinecone]

Even if you were, like others said, they didn't read Inquisitor because everyone was expecting the big Seeker eye (not sure why since the Inquisitor doesn't necessarily even follow the Chantry and would therefore not wear the Eye).

 

Just on this point, the Inquisition actually uses its own symbol which is similar to the Seeker eye - it actually combines the eye with the Templar sword. 

 

(though this new, modern incarnation seems to have dyed the eye red)

 

The symbol of the Inquisition which would be on all their armour and cloaks etc is this:

 

[Hiemoth]

Again... this just goes to demonstrate the weaknesses of any set protagonists at all. They, by their very nature, subvert game mechanics that Bioware has gone to pretty extreme lengths (millions, if not tens of millions of dollars worth of development) to put in. That, to me, is bad. Don't campaign against your own work and interests - capitalize on them. No one in the industry is offering as much character creation choice coupled with story control. No one. Some may point to more detailed character creators like Dragon's Dogma or Saint's Row, or point to games that offer more divergent content based on choices, such as The Witcher series... but no one in the industry marries the two together as largely (mammothly, given the work involved) as Bioware does.

Yet they actively campaign their own work and position in the industry. Simply because they feel they must use a set protagonist to market.

 

I don't really understand what is your proposed approach here. You just agreed that the montage approach is confusing, as it isn't clear that the shown character could be the player character when constantly changing the appearance and race of the character. So how is constantly changing the appearance of the player character to show the character creator supposed to be the solution? That would require all the trailers to focus on everyone else except the player character and be more like Skyrim, which won't really work, as the game mechanics aren't first person.

 

More generally regarding this thread, I find myself agreeing to an extent. I understand why marketing feels they need a set character that is easily associated as the player character in the marketing campaign. By constantly showing montages with different variations and possibilities, especially in a game that is also going to have a strong presence of NPCs, leads to issues in figuring out that those characters were also the player character. For instance in that concept art I really hadn't understood that they were all the player character, and not just because I have conditioned for the basic main white male character, but because signaling that effectively is really difficult. By stressing how everything is your choice in a trailer is a good idea, but would really, in my opinion, work in one trailer where that is the actual focus. If the focus of the trailer was something else, it would just reduce the effectiveness of that trailer. For example, the ME3 launch trailer which focused on the outcome of Reaper invasion and the coming counter-assault against them. When there is a clear Shepard leading them, both the male and female version, it is easy to understand the narrative of the trailer. Yet if you had a constantly changing variation of Shepard, it would reduce the impact of the trailer a lot. Again, my opinion.

 

This isn't to say that I don't want a female version of the player character visible in marketing, because I would like that. Especially since I really liked the visual design for both the set femShep and ladyHawke, I thought they both had more character in that part than the male designs, so it would have been good to see them in the promotion as well. I am perhaps hoping they would expand on the way the marketed femShep in ME3, with specific trailers featuring her and two versions of the launch trailer, one with male option and one with female option. Of course with Shepard the N7 armor always helps being iconic in it's own right, but hopefully they could do something similar with the Inquisitor armor.

 

Having both characters on the cover is something I would be vary of, as I recently saw the Divinity: Original Sin official image with a man and a woman holding hands and I had to read the developers interview to realize it was supposed to represent both male and female player characters being an option.

[9TailsFox]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I thought in Divinity: Original Sin you play with both character in all videos I saw you control both. And if you want you can have co-op.

[ElitePinecone]

By stressing how everything is your choice in a trailer is a good idea, but would really, in my opinion, work in one trailer where that is the actual focus. I

 

Definitely.

 

Even if they - regrettably - only make a default white broQuisitor who runs around in heavy armour while growling and hitting things with swords, there should be at least one pillar of the marketing campaign that shows off all the other types of Inquisitors that you can make. 

 

A trailer (or better yet a dev diary) on character customisation would be a good way to do that.

 

That doesn't excuse any lack of female characters, though - if they're going to make a default iconic Manquisitor, it'd be disappointing (and I'm sure, for others, infuriating) if femquisitor was left out again. 

[Fast Jimmy]

I don't really understand what is your proposed approach here. You just agreed that the montage approach is confusing, as it isn't clear that the shown character could be the player character when constantly changing the appearance and race of the character. So how is constantly changing the appearance of the player character to show the character creator supposed to be the solution? That would require all the trailers to focus on everyone else except the player character and be more like Skyrim, which won't really work, as the game mechanics aren't first person.

Yeah, that's why I had said a montage wouldn't work.


You'd need to not show anyone at all. The E3 trailer did this just fine. You saw Morrigan, Varric, Cassandra and the threat being presented as a threat to the world with the veil tears/demons. It showed what we can assume to be the Inquisitor, but only as a completely obscured figure. I don't think this actively worked to advertise the fact the game had choices, but it also didn't work to confuse anyone about the identity of the main character.


After all, Gaider said recently that their metrics showed that DA players were close to 50% women. ME3 metrics showed the vast majority of players (I believe over 80%) were male. Yet ME3 was the one that marketed a female protagonist in their trailers alongside a male one.

Maybe the DA:O method of promoting the ability of choice was the reason? The trailers didn't reflect this, but nearly every article/interview/statement from Bioware at the time mentioned the option of choosing and making your own character, including gender as a choice. Like GVulture said earlier, it seems Bioware has forgotten (or perhaps the media outlets who typically report their interviews/etc. have begun taking for granted) that some gamers (or even non-gamers) don't know that character creation and branching story choices even exist. It has become something Bioware has become known for that it seems they forget that it is one of their most powerful draws for many newcomers who may not know.

[Hiemoth]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I thought in Divinity: Original Sin you play with both character in all videos I saw you control both. And if you want you can have co-op.

 

I actually checked and you were right about that. They just spoke that much about the game being gender blind in interactions and romances, and also about the choices system, that I understood it focusing on a single character.

[Mes]

I would say, that entire 2013 was kinda crucial for how women are portrayed in games. First the reboot of Tomb Raider - and maybe most iconic and sexualised woman character in gaming history. A very good reboot with emphasis on psychological traits, and character development rather than size of Lara's chest. 

 

Huh... I watched Conan O'Brien's game "review". Is this the same Tomb Raider you guys are talking about? I confess, I passed the game up because in his video he kept pointing out how the camera kept caressing her assets and what have you... Pandering to a male audience in an obvious way.

 

Did the ladies who've played this game ever think this? If it's not as ridiculous as Conan made it seem (yes I know he knows nothing about games and the review is more for comedic value), then I might give it a shot.

[Mes]

 

That doesn't excuse any lack of female characters, though - if they're going to make a default iconic Manquisitor, it'd be disappointing (and I'm sure, for others, infuriating) if femquisitor was left out again. 

 

Mm. 

 

I hope that, when everything's finished (so the excuse of the lady Inquisitor not being done can't be used ), we can see two kick a$$ trailers - one of the male inquisitor, and one of the lady inquisitor. Maybe even as non-humans, too!

[ElitePinecone]

After all, Gaider said recently that their metrics showed that DA players were close to 50% women. ME3 metrics showed the vast majority of players (I believe over 80%) were male. Yet ME3 was the one that marketed a female protagonist in their trailers alongside a male one.

Maybe the DA:O method of promoting the ability of choice was the reason? The trailers didn't reflect this, but nearly every article/interview/statement from Bioware at the time mentioned the option of choosing and making your own character, including gender as a choice. Like GVulture said earlier, it seems Bioware has forgotten (or perhaps the media outlets who typically report their interviews/etc. have begun taking for granted) that some gamers (or even non-gamers) don't know that character creation and branching story choices even exist. It has become something Bioware has become known for that it seems they forget that it is one of their most powerful draws for many newcomers who may not know.

 

Maybe, but I'm sure there are many reasons to account for the demographics of a particular title's audience that extend far beyond which gender of protagonist they use in the marketing. While this thread has certainly proven that the box art and trailers are influential (in many cases decisive) in some people's decisions to buy the games, there are bigger structural reasons too. 

 

(At a guess, ME3's overwhelming focus on the war and shooting and explosions angles in the marketing would've been very popular with fans of other shooter series - which seemed to be the aim.)

[Fast Jimmy]

Maybe, but I'm sure there are many reasons to account for the demographics of a particular title's audience that extend far beyond which gender of protagonist they use in the marketing. While this thread has certainly proven that the box art and trailers are influential (in many cases decisive) in some people's decisions to buy the games, there are bigger structural reasons too.

(At a guess, ME3's overwhelming focus on the war and shooting and explosions angles in the marketing would've been very popular with fans of other shooter series - which seemed to be the aim.)

I agree... but does that subvert the entire message some are saying here, that Bioware needs to have females in their advertising to show that playing a woman is an option? If Mass Effect has guns, does that negate that it had a woman in its trailer, since women don't like war and explosions? DA is fantasy, does that mean it can get away with no women in the trailers, because women are more in tune with fantasy? If I were a cynical penny pincher, I might say ME shouldn't spend money on women trailers if they aren't going to attract a lot of women, and that DA doesn't need a woman trailer, since women already seemed to be getting on board without one.

You can see how marketing execs (who have limited budgets, just like anyone else) could jump to such conclusions, even if they are grossly wrong or inaccurate.

[9TailsFox]

Maybe, but I'm sure there are many reasons to account for the demographics of a particular title's audience that extend far beyond which gender of protagonist they use in the marketing. While this thread has certainly proven that the box art and trailers are influential (in many cases decisive) in some people's decisions to buy the games, there are bigger structural reasons too. 

 

(At a guess, ME3's overwhelming focus on the war and shooting and explosions angles in the marketing would've been very popular with fans of other shooter series - which seemed to be the aim.)

What is most profitable game Call of Duty. Shooters in general. To be honest people who bought ME1 will most likely buy ME2 so it is good business decision to find new customers and easiest to do is to take biggest group COD group in in ME case it's actually easy because it's already shooter.

And ME2 marketing makes me cry.

Just watch 2:20. I think what real problem, not what we don't see Female in trailer but because people whose job is to market game have nothing to do with actual game and it making they just have to sell game as profitable as possible.. I have nothing agents John Teti but he is definitely selling ME2 not to the people who liked ME1.

[Hiemoth]

Yeah, that's why I had said a montage wouldn't work.


You'd need to not show anyone at all. The E3 trailer did this just fine. You saw Morrigan, Varric, Cassandra and the threat being presented as a threat to the world with the veil tears/demons. It showed what we can assume to be the Inquisitor, but only as a completely obscured figure. I don't think this actively worked to advertise the fact the game had choices, but it also didn't work to confuse anyone about the identity of the main character.


After all, Gaider said recently that their metrics showed that DA players were close to 50% women. ME3 metrics showed the vast majority of players (I believe over 80%) were male. Yet ME3 was the one that marketed a female protagonist in their trailers alongside a male one.

Maybe the DA:O method of promoting the ability of choice was the reason? The trailers didn't reflect this, but nearly every article/interview/statement from Bioware at the time mentioned the option of choosing and making your own character, including gender as a choice. Like GVulture said earlier, it seems Bioware has forgotten (or perhaps the media outlets who typically report their interviews/etc. have begun taking for granted) that some gamers (or even non-gamers) don't know that character creation and branching story choices even exist. It has become something Bioware has become known for that it seems they forget that it is one of their most powerful draws for many newcomers who may not know.

 

I don't think the E3 approach would work in a general approach for several reasons. DA is a third-person game, so all the actual game actions need to be done by someone at the screen. So keeping the PC constantly obscure would making any trailers showing game mechanics, such as combat or dialogue, virtually impossible. The approach you are proposing would be good for a first-person game such as the Elder Scroll games, but would really hinder promoting a game like this, at least to me. I want to see the character interactions, I want to get an idea of the focus of the character in the game and some vague figure just being there wouldn't really seem interesting to me.

 

And I doubt Bioware forgot anything, they simply made choices in promotion. For DAO, the time when they spoke about those different character options was when they brought up the origins. And even the trailers for it that promoted those different characters were actually the Origin trailers, with each trailer having a very clearly defined character of that origin. For DA2, the focus was on Hawke's rise to power, so there was a much larger focus on that one character, which was important for their trailers and what they showed. I still would have liked to have seen more ladyHawke, but the general focus was still more on that one character, just as it probably would have been in DAO if they had only used one of the origins.

[Fast Jimmy]

I don't think the E3 approach would work in a general approach for several reasons. DA is a third-person game, so all the actual game actions need to be done by someone at the screen. So keeping the PC constantly obscure would making any trailers showing game mechanics, such as combat or dialogue, virtually impossible. The approach you are proposing would be good for a first-person game such as the Elder Scroll games, but would really hinder promoting a game like this, at least to me. I want to see the character interactions, I want to get an idea of the focus of the character in the game and some vague figure just being there wouldn't really seem interesting to me.

This is easily circumvented. DA is a series where you control an entire party equally. Unlike Mass Effect, where you into give squad commands, DA let's you take over and directly control Morgan, or Anders, or Shale. Just have all gameplay videos show a party member instead of an Inquisitor. Easy peasy.

And I doubt Bioware forgot anything, they simply made choices in promotion. For DAO, the time when they spoke about those different character options was when they brought up the origins. And even the trailers for it that promoted those different characters were actually the Origin trailers, with each trailer having a very clearly defined character of that origin. For DA2, the focus was on Hawke's rise to power, so there was a much larger focus on that one character, which was important for their trailers and what they showed. I still would have liked to have seen more ladyHawke, but the general focus was still more on that one character, just as it probably would have been in DAO if they had only used one of the origins.

Right, it wasn't perfect. But I think it was a better alternative than a set protagonist campaign, like what we saw with DA2 or ME3. Just because a set protagonist in marketing is confusing and actively misleading in a game series like this.

[Hiemoth]

This is easily circumvented. DA is a series where you control an entire party equally. Unlike Mass Effect, where you into give squad commands, DA let's you take over and directly control Morgan, or Anders, or Shale. Just have all gameplay videos show a party member instead of an Inquisitor. Easy peasy

Right, it wasn't perfect. But I think it was a better alternative than a set protagonist campaign, like what we saw with DA2 or ME3. Just because a set protagonist in marketing is confusing and actively misleading in a game series like this.

 

My apologies in responding in this way. I am having difficulties figuring out how to split the message being replied to.

 

To the first point, I fail to see how that solution wouldn't be even confusing. I mean, you do not actually control the NPCs in dialogue situations, it would prevent them showing interactions between the NPCS and PC, and it would also make it seem like you are actually playing one of the NPCs instead of creating your own character. There is a reason they use those kind of set iconic characters in promotion, it wasn't just someone suddenly going insane.

 

As for the second point, the set protagonist campaign had its advantages and was suitable for the games they were promoting, especially since they were far from set protagonists as you could alter their approaches and personalities to a large degree, but that is another discussion. This is a third-person game, in order to truthfully show the game mechanics, they need one or two set and easy recognizable characters in order to properly display a lot of the game mechanics and to give it a really strong feeling of things impacting the player. As I wrote earlier, I hope they devote one or two trailers on how the player character can be customized, but I also understand why they feel they need that set marketable character. I just wish they go more creative with that character than the standard white guy and also give a good representation to the female character.

[ElitePinecone]

I agree... but does that subvert the entire message some are saying here, that Bioware needs to have females in their advertising to show that playing a woman is an option? If Mass Effect has guns, does that negate that it had a woman in its trailer, since women don't like war and explosions? DA is fantasy, does that mean it can get away with no women in the trailers, because women are more in tune with fantasy? If I were a cynical penny pincher, I might say ME shouldn't spend money on women trailers if they aren't going to attract a lot of women, and that DA doesn't need a woman trailer, since women already seemed to be getting on board without one.

You can see how marketing execs (who have limited budgets, just like anyone else) could jump to such conclusions, even if they are grossly wrong or inaccurate.

 

No...? I think you're misunderstanding my post. Regardless of the relationship between advertising featuring the protagonist and a game's sales, if they're using a male character then they should use a female character too. There should be, at minimum, an acknowledgement that the option exists and is valid - which is something that barely happened, if at all, in DA2, ME2 and ME1.

 

The point of this thread, as far as I understand it, is not to get into the mindset of Bioware's marketing team. We can't do that, and we don't have access to their information anyway. I don't accept that their budget is so limited that the presence of a female option for the protagonist makes it into literally none of the advertising for three of their last major games - to the point where if you were a casual player you could quite possibly not know that the option existed.

 

(ME3 got five trailers in one week about its item customisation, enemies, combat, narrative choices and multiplayer characters. FemShep had to wait until fans voted on her hair and face, twice, and she got one trailer on the internet. She was turned into a beauty contest in one of the most creepy and unedifying pieces of marketing I've seen in ages. That is embarrassingly deficient.)

[Hiemoth]

(ME3 got five trailers in one week about its item customisation, enemies, combat, narrative choices and multiplayer characters. FemShep had to wait until fans voted on her hair and face, twice, and she got one trailer on the internet. She was turned into a beauty contest in one of the most creepy and unedifying pieces of marketing I've seen in ages. That is embarrassingly deficient.)

 

To be fair, FemShep did actually get two trailers, as they also did a version of the launch trailer with her. Still far too little, but still.

 

And the vote thing can actually be pretty much put on the fans, as they originally just had the vote on different versions of FemShep and what people liked. To me, it seemed reasonable, as part of the reason of including FemShep was included in to the marketing and that they were going to introduce an iconic version of the character was at least partially due to the vocal fan demand for it. So, it seemed kind of understandable giving those same fans a voice in which iconic version they liked.

 

However, when the version with blond hair won, there was some really insane backlash on the matter, because of there was, as apparently having FemShep having blond hair would have been unrealistic, bimboing or whatever reasons put out. It resulted in Bioware putting out the separate vote on the hair color.

[9TailsFox]

To be fair, FemShep did actually get two trailers, as they also did a version of the launch trailer with her. Still far too little, but still.

 

And the vote thing can actually be pretty much put on the fans, as they originally just had the vote on different versions of FemShep and what people liked. To me, it seemed reasonable, as part of the reason of including FemShep was included in to the marketing and that they were going to introduce an iconic version of the character was at least partially due to the vocal fan demand for it. So, it seemed kind of understandable giving those same fans a voice in which iconic version they liked.

 

However, when the version with blond hair won, there was some really insane backlash on the matter, because of there was, as apparently having FemShep having blond hair would have been unrealistic, bimboing or whatever reasons put out. It resulted in Bioware putting out the separate vote on the hair color.

Apparently fighting giant space squids as blond is unrealistic. It's probably same people who hate new elf mage because he is bold.