623 réponses à ce sujet

[Thermopylae]

Actual female here who would consider herself a feminist.

 

While I don't disagree with everything you've said, I do think that you're putting words into the mouth of a movement that are inaccurate (and also into the mouth of an extremely important historical figure, who is known for actively encouraging Nichelle Nichols to keep her roll as it was, and still is, a very important one). Your heart is in the right place, but representation of all kinds is hugely important to feminists, and while it may not be the most pressing issue compared to others, it still is one. Discussing it civilly in the appropriate place should not be a disservice, and if it is, then the people making those assumptions are likely letting themselves be misguided based on limited perceptions - which while it's sad, in the long run is unavoidable and not something I'd concern myself with.

 

Besides that, your final point is sort of self-negating. Thedas is not the real world. Real world history is has nothing to do with it. Thedas is a fantasy world in which women and men, while still treated differently here and there, are still considered to be equal.

 

So the question becomes, why is it that in a fantasy world where men and women are socially, politically and economically equal, are the majority of the NPC character foot soldiers who you fight, men? (Excluding, of course, the Qun and it's followers)

 

I bet that you have heard the following argument many times.

Because physical violence, especially organized physical violence such as in war is traditionally the activity of men. Ideas of masculinity involve physical strength and stamina that are part of the capacity to protect. Which can be broken down to having (or doing) capacity for physical violence in a right context. These are probably traditional answers, which everyone can say without really thinking but also, the game mechanics involve physical violence in a regular way, and the social expectation is that men will be more involved in violence than women. It possibly represents a failure of communication, ie when "diplomatic" solutions  come to no avail combat ensues.

 

I bet in Orlais, which is a fantasy culture that is meant to evoke high medieval period France, in the palace scenes it will involve more females, as representative of the more "diplomatic" setting.   

[Bayonet Hipshot]

If someone's screaming  at you while charging as they get ready to kill you with weapon in hand, are you going to notice if they are a man or a woman or even care?

 

I will just leave this line from Sten, here :- "You mean that I should remark upon the weather before I cut off a man's head?"

 

W.r.t this thread, here is my line :- "You mean that I should check if they have a vagina or a penis before I cut off an enemy's head or roast them with magic ?" 

[Thermopylae]

I understand. I had to exercise extreme self-control myself. 

 

 

 

Yeah, this. Think Game of Thrones. Extreme gender rolls implemented in Westeros, women in particular drawing the short end of the freedom stick, but there's still a huge variety of well-written, developed female characters with interesting points of view who challenge their society. 

 

This is a very good point. In a fantasy setting where there is gender inequality how the characters/ protagonists cope and get things done in this context is interesting and makes the characters more sympathetic and engaging. It also assists in giving or adjusting the audiences social schema so that they have cognitive models to interpret particular issues in their daily experience. 

[SardaukarElite]

I don't see any harm in discussing it either, but I'll have to disagree about the disruptive part. Of course people who disagree with how important the issue is will respond. That is usually how discussions flow. You can find common ground even is disagreements, even if it's only how you respond. It's only disruptive if done in a disrespectful manner. It's no more disruptive to say, "This is an issue?" than it is to say, "You can't express an opinion on this because you're a male." there has been bad behavior on both sides of this discussion. You can find this issue non-important to you, yet understand it could be important to someone else. Just as you can see it is important to you, but not so much to others. Tolerance works best when it flies both ways. 

 

Saying something isn't important is not disagreeing. To disagree would be to say that you think that game will have plenty of women enemies, or that you don't think the game should have more enemies who are women.

 

Someone could agree, disagree or be apathetic and not think that the issue was important enough to discuss. But what does joining the discussion to say that contribute? Not that there is really any point in arguing about it, so maybe I shouldn't have brought it up.

 

 

W.r.t this thread, here is my line :- "You mean that I should check if they have a vagina or a penis before I cut off an enemy's head or roast them with magic ?" 

 

If you can't tell immediately that's your problem.

[javeart]

No, but if you're going to introduce institutional inequality into your world, you should address it, rather than simply use it as an excuse to exclude women, people of color, and other marginalized groups.

 

I agree very much with this. There's a big difference between the two and it's a crucial one.

 

Personally, I'm ok with a set up with all kind of discriminations, but when I play the game I want to feel as empowered as any white straight guy would. I don't want those in-game discriminations used to make the game only enjoyable as playing as that white straight guy, or better yet, to not even be given the option to be something different to begin with, as if more reasons for the video game industry keep doing just that were necessary.

 

I don't know though, if I'm going too OT with this, so I'll stop (and sorry if that was the case  ) 

[BabyFratelli]

I bet that you have heard the following argument many times.

Because physical violence, especially organized physical violence such as in war is traditionally the activity of men. Ideas of masculinity involve physical strength and stamina that are part of the capacity to protect. Which can be broken down to having (or doing) capacity for physical violence in a right context. These are probably traditional answers, which everyone can say without really thinking but also, the game mechanics involve physical violence in a regular way, and the social expectation is that men will be more involved in violence than women. It possibly represents a failure of communication, ie when "diplomatic" solutions  come to no avail combat ensues.

 

I bet in Orlais, which is a fantasy culture that is meant to evoke high medieval period France, in the palace scenes it will involve more females, as representative of the more "diplomatic" setting.   

 

Yes, in our world and our history, which is irrelevant to Thedas unless you're arguing that because of our world's bias is why there is the gender disparity in game, in which case you would be right.

 

Then I'd go on to argue that this is still inconsistent with Thedas and also the result of an outer world bias which should be kept as separate as possible from impacting the representation in game, not just for equality reasons but for harmony between the lore and what's presented to us.

 

This all being said, I recognize and appreciate the fact that BioWare does strive towards this. 

[Orian Tabris]

For me, I am usually disappointed in games, about how we often fight males. It gets kinda dull when the enemies are the same the whole way through. I like the concept of enemies with genders having them (the genders) randomised, keeps things interesting. It would be really good if enemies in video games were random, but the gender you'd most likely expect to see in the situation, should have a somewhat higher percentage chance of appearing.

 

This thread makes my head hurt. 

 

You're new, so you probably don't know this: the BioWare Forums (formerly the BioWare Social Network), is ALWAYS like this. I've only missed about 1.5 years of this forum, and ever since I started making posts, there has always been these kinds of threads. At the very least, this thread is (mostly) civil.

[Burricho]

Saying something isn't important is not disagreeing. To disagree would be to say that you think that game will have plenty of women enemies, or that you don't think the game should have more enemies who are women.

 

Someone could agree, disagree or be apathetic and not think that the issue was important enough to discuss. But what does joining the discussion to say that contribute? Not that there is really any point in arguing about it, so maybe I shouldn't have brought it up.

 

 

 

If you can't tell immediately that's your problem.

So you made this whole thread for the explicit purpose of discussing this topic, yet you don't think joining the discussion to state your feelings contributes anything? Wut.....

[phantomrachie]

They're video games, not a podium to push your social agenda. Likewise, video games are just effing video games.  Stop taking them so freaking seriously.  You're looking at something and giving it way too much meaning.

 

Video games are a form of Media and human's who experience media learn from it. This is why propaganda is so effective.

 

You can't dismiss the inequalities in video games because they do have an effect on the people who play them. 

 

If all women in games are sex objects or princess to be rescued and all the men are heroic meat machines, then this can influence how the people who play these games view gender roles. Combine this with other forms of media like films and T.V. Shows depicting the same thing and we can already see the negative effects that this is having.

 

Women are viewed as sex objects when they appear in media and men are given unrealistic levels of manliness to live up to.

 

Games do not exist in a vacuum, they exist within our society and as such can either add to the negative media portrayals of men and women or work to  override those negative images with positive depictions of men and women in games.

[BabyFratelli]

So much good and civil discussion. 

[SardaukarElite]

So you made this whole thread for the explicit purpose of discussing this topic, yet you don't think joining the discussion to state your feelings contributes anything? Wut....

 

No, I'm saying that telling everyone you don't think what's being discussed is important to you doesn't contribute anything. You're dropping in and saying 'hey guys, I'm not interested in this conversation'.  Why bother?

 

Then I realised pointing that out doesn't offer much either.

[KBomb]

Saying something isn't important is not disagreeing. To disagree would be to say that you think that game will have plenty of women enemies, or that you don't think the game should have more enemies who are women.

 

Someone could agree, disagree or be apathetic and not think that the issue was important enough to discuss. But what does joining the discussion to say that contribute? Not that there is really any point in arguing about it, so maybe I shouldn't have brought it up.

 

 

 

If you can't tell immediately that's your problem.

If someone thinks having an equal amount of both genders representing generic enemies is important enough to want to discuss it and someone else thinks having an equal amount of both genders for generic enemies is not important--that is disagreeing. As I said, if you expect someone to tolerate, empathize and understand the importance of it to you, then you have to extend that same courtesy and tolerate, empathize and understand that some people find it an issue that is of minor or no importance at all. (You is being used in general terms here). 

 

Furthermore, one could counter and say, "If you completely agree with someone about a topic, what is there to discuss? What contributing factor lies in, "Good show, chap. I completely agree!" I say that opposing opinions often make for excellent discussions when done with a civil tongue. 

 

Sometimes, people make threads and only expect those who agree with them to join in on it. How incredibly boring that would be and would lead no where except a bunch of people patting each other on the back. (Not saying this thread is one of them)

[Samahl]

If someone thinks having an equal amount of both genders representing generic enemies is important enough to want to discuss it and someone else thinks having an equal amount of both genders for generic enemies is not important--that is disagreeing. As I said, if you expect someone to tolerate, empathize and understand the importance of it to you, then you have to extend that same courtesy and tolerate, empathize and understand that some people find it an issue that is of minor or no importance at all. (You is being used in general terms here).

Many people who have expressed the opinion that this issue doesn't matter have done so in decidedly uncivil, dismissive ways. The most polite people I've seen on this thread have been supportive of the basic premise. Why aren't you addressing those people who have contributed nothing to the discussion but rude disagreement?

[SardaukarElite]

If someone thinks having an equal amount of both genders representing generic enemies is important enough to want to discuss it and someone else thinks having an equal amount of both genders for generic enemies is not important--that is disagreeing. As I said, if you expect someone to tolerate, empathize and understand the importance of it to you, then you have to extend that same courtesy and tolerate, empathize and understand that some people find it an issue that is of minor or no importance at all. (You is being used in general terms here).

 

Okay, I've been misunderstanding your perspective. Sorry.

 

That said, I'm not sure what the point of that stance is either. I mean if it isn't important then do they object to gender ratio being changed?

[phantomrachie]

Dude, the point of assassins is they don't stand out.

 

A woman in the 1500s with a sword, crossbow and dagger on her belt as well as a suit of armor STANDS OUT.

 

As other have said a man in the 1500's with a sword, crossbow and dagger on his belt as well as of suit of armor stand out.

 

If you want assassins in Assassin's Creed Unity to be 100% accurate then they wouldn't have any of that equipment and would look like this  

 

 

There are few parts of history where you won't find women fighting in some capacity even if it meant they had to dress up as a man to do it.

 

There is no game out there that can claim to be 100% realistic, all games must sacrifice some level of realism for gameplay, be that the fact that you can survive multiple gun shot wounds in COD or the Dragons in Dragon Age, so why not add more diversity? 

 

Even if we can't always pick our gender like in BioWare games, why not add more female generic enemies or important female NPCs? It wouldn't harm the game and it would add more diversity.

[KBomb]

Many people who have expressed the opinion that this issue doesn't matter have done so in decidedly uncivil, dismissive ways. The most polite people I've seen on this thread have been supportive of the basic premise. Why aren't you addressing those people who have contributed nothing to the discussion but rude disagreement?

If someone is being uncivil or dismissive of your opinion, all you can do is explain it. Sometimes someone doesn't mean to be dismissive and once you explain your position, they'll agree to disagree or move on. If they are still dismissive, my best advice would be to ignore them and don't waste time trying to convince them. Also, I already addressed the fact that both sides have had some bad behavior, perhaps you missed that. 

 

 

Okay, I've been misunderstanding your perspective. Sorry.

 

That said, I'm not sure what the point of that stance is either. I mean if it isn't important then do they object to gender ratio being changed?

No need to apologize. Maybe I wasn't making myself clear.

 

The point of the stance is just that: sharing your view about it. Or maybe genuine surprise it's an issue to begin with. 

 

As for the last question, I can't speak for anyone but myself, but having an equal ratio of generic enemies isn't at all important to me, but I have no objection to Bioware changing it either way. If they want to add more women to the enemy roster, I have no issue. I just don't feel it's necessary. 

[javeart]

If someone thinks having an equal amount of both genders representing generic enemies is important enough to want to discuss it and someone else thinks having an equal amount of both genders for generic enemies is not important--that is disagreeing. As I said, if you expect someone to tolerate, empathize and understand the importance of it to you, then you have to extend that same courtesy and tolerate, empathize and understand that some people find it an issue that is of minor or no importance at all. (You is being used in general terms here). 

 

Furthermore, one could counter and say, "If you completely agree with someone about a topic, what is there to discuss? What contributing factor lies in, "Good show, chap. I completely agree!" I say that opposing opinions often make for excellent discussions when done with a civil tongue. 

 

Sometimes, people make threads and only expect those who agree with them to join in on it. How incredibly boring that would be and would lead no where except a bunch of people patting each other on the back. (Not saying this thread is one of them)

 

I see what you mean, and I could agree but why is it that this kind of thread gets always such a big amount of "that doesn't matter" responses? I can definitely understand why someone would think that the gender of rather irrelevant NPS which exist only for us to kill them isn't important. I disagree, but I understand. But it's really annoying how much this happens with almost any representation issue (and I'm being generous adding the "almost")...  Curiously, there was a lot of people who felt the need to state that it wasn't important that there was no marketing around femquisitor, and a lot of people who also felt the need to state that it wasn't important that the split for companions was 6/3, etc (and the same happens with other representation issues, not only sexism). I wonder why it happens significantly less with other kind of topics an requests   And it's a shame, because in the end, we almost spend more time discussing why it's important to some people (if you're lucky and the thread doesn't go out of control entirely) than discussing the topic itself

 

Honestly, I don''t feel very strongly about minor enemies being mostly males, but I think that doesn't mean it's not important. Maybe I don't even notice it, and I think the balance was right in DAO and DA 2, when maybe it was not, but if they go with males as default, that's definitely important and very indicative of how things are, IMO. Especially, because I'm sure that balancing the ratio among random enemies it's not something really difficult.

 

I have to say, though, that I do feel very strongly about the avalanche of "who cares?" this kind of thread gets usually... If for no other reason, just because I find the patronizing tone that it's used in so many of them terribly insulting. I feel so strongly about it that I'm really proud of myself about how I'm ignoring some of the posts here   I'm finally mastering the force 

[hexaligned]

Video games are a form of Media and human's who experience media learn from it. This is why propaganda is so effective.

 

You can't dismiss the inequalities in video games because they do have an effect on the people who play them. 

 

If all women in games are sex objects or princess to be rescued and all the men are heroic meat machines, then this can influence how the people who play these games view gender roles. Combine this with other forms of media like films and T.V. Shows depicting the same thing and we can already see the negative effects that this is having.

 

Women are viewed as sex objects when they appear in media and men are given unrealistic levels of manliness to live up to.

 

Games do not exist in a vacuum, they exist within our society and as such can either add to the negative media portrayals of men and women or work to  override those negative images with positive depictions of men and women in games.

 

Gender equality is a social construct, it is not a thing that exists outside of that context, it is an immeasurable attribute outside of Law.  I personally don't have a problem with any writer that wants to create a setting where society has not advanced that particular ideology. I certainly wouldn't tell them they SHOULD express themselves in anyway other than their creative instinct led them. Thankfully, for the people who want this particular ideology represented, I think Bioware already does an exceedingly good job within their settings doing just that.

[Fredward]

Gender equality is a social construct, it is not a thing that exists outside of that context

 

So are gender roles and the patriarchy though. Whether they're social constructs or not is irrelevant since they influence people and their lives, they're intangible but their effects are not. If you want to change an intangible ideology that many subscribe to without even realizing it you need to go to the grassroots, figure out why they think that way and change that. In and of itself this request seems trivial [makes me wonder why so many take the time to say how little this matters though], but it's a tiny contribution to trying to shift worldviews. And it jives with DA's lore anyway so BONUS.

[phantomrachie]

Gender equality is a social construct, it is not a thing that exists outside of that context, it is an immeasurable attribute outside of Law.  I personally don't have a problem with any writer that wants to create a setting where society has not advanced that particular ideology. I certainly wouldn't tell them they SHOULD express themselves in anyway other than their creative instinct led them. Thankfully, for the people who want this particular ideology represented, I think Bioware already does an exceedingly good job within their settings doing just that.

 

If a writer wanted to create a society that doesn't have gender equality then I certainly wouldn't stop them, but that is not what most writers of games seek to do.

 

For many games, they take the real world and alter it, if a game is based on the real world then I see no reason why all the women in that game should be sex workers or princess, or why all the men should be action heroes.

 

I agree that BioWare does a good job in including gender equality, as well as LGBT characters but that doesn't mean there is no room for improvement, like making sure that all the 'cannon fodder' isn't male.

[KBomb]

I see what you mean, and I could agree but why is it that this kind of thread gets always such a big amount of "that doesn't matter" responses? I can definitely understand why someone would think that the gender of rather irrelevant NPS which exist only for us to kill them isn't important. I disagree, but I understand. But it's really annoying how much this happens with almost any representation issue (and I'm being generous adding the "almost")...  Curiously, there was a lot of people who felt the need to state that it wasn't important that there was no marketing around femquisitor, and a lot of people who also felt the need to state that it wasn't important that the split for companions was 6/3, etc (and the same happens with other representation issues, not only sexism). I wonder why it happens significantly less with other kind of topics an requests   And it's a shame, because in the end, we almost spend more time discussing why it's important to some people (if you're lucky and the thread doesn't go out of control entirely) than discussing the topic itself

 

Honestly, I don''t feel very strongly about minor enemies being mostly males, but I think that doesn't mean it's not important. Maybe I don't even notice it, and I think the balance was right in DAO and DA 2, when maybe it was not, but if they go with males as default, that's definitely important and very indicative of how things are, IMO. Especially, because I'm sure that balancing the ratio among random enemies it's not something really difficult.

 

I have to say, though, that I do feel very strongly about the avalanche of "who cares?" this kind of thread gets usually... If for no other reason, just because I find the patronizing tone that it's used in so many of them terribly insulting. I feel so strongly about it that I'm really proud of myself about how I'm ignoring some of the posts here   I'm finally mastering the force 

I think threads like these get a lot of attention, both positive and negative, because it's a social issue that touches on a lot of convictions and emotions. For some of the "who cares?" crowd, and I am just speculating, but maybe they feel desensitized to it. We live in a society that has become obsessed with being politically correct and you just get tired of seeing demands for equality on every single subject. Perhaps some feel social injustice shouldn't be fought in art forms because it can take away the freedom a writer has, i.e. worrying about equality instead of quality. Perhaps some genuinely don't care. I am not saying that these reasons are right or wrong, just that maybe that is simply the answer. I think a lot of arguments over topics like these can be avoided if some people focus on accepting other's opinions instead of having to be "right". 

 

Also, I think people are reading too much into some of the statements using the word 'important'. For instance, when I say that it isn't important to me when it comes to this topic--I am in no way saying it isn't an important issue at all, but that it's something I don't consider a detriment in the realm of media. I am one of the ones who thinks it's no big deal that female PC's aren't used in marketing. Not that I mind those who do and I am glad those who did want it got a chance to see it recently. It's just the concept of "default male" isn't again, a detriment to me. 

 

I think it works both ways, though. I am sure that some people feel when they voice an opposing opinion, they get negative feedback, too. I have seen a lot of instances of that happening. You can't expect people to not feel a certain way, you can only hope they can articulate it well enough as to not be insulting. You can't control how others will act, but you can control how you react to them. So, kudos to you for mastering the force.

[Ianamus]

I think that gender of enemies is a problem in gaming. And even Dragon Age is far from perfect. The demons are a perfect example of this, as only one of the demon types clearly represents a real-life gender, and it's a sexualized female design representing desire.

 

The trailers with Cassandra remind me of something I've seen quite a lot in games: a female military leader leading an army consisting entirely of men. It's obviously far better than having no women at all, but I still roll my eyes when I see a female commander and her entirely male army.

 

 

Gender equality is a social construct, it is not a thing that exists outside of that context, it is an immeasurable attribute outside of Law.

 

Gender itself is also a social construct though.

[Writ3Wing3r]

Imagine a game where nearly EVERY SINGLE person you can kill is black, despite having lorewise proportional racial diversity of white and black people in armies, as the lore of dragon age states for females.

Would you consider that to be racist?

 

Except Dragon age lore doesn't point to equal gender representation in armed forces. In fact the only lore I can think of that even addresses the issue is the story of Ser Aveline and the chevaliers, and that says that women are accepted among them but are still very much a minority.

[BananaBoy]

I don't really care about the gender/sex of generic enemies.

[hangmans tree]

 

[...]proportional representation of sexes in this game.[...]

Oh my, what in heavens does that even mean???

Are people... is this for real?

People ask about fantasy - but make it realistically, and then ask for equal/proportional female representation. How the hell?

 

NPCs in general or enemies? If the latter I might ask - what's the ratio of women taking up arms and standing against men in conflict? Realistically speaking, there should be less female opponents ( as troops/cannon-fodder) in this game.