An Olive Branch in Gaming's Culture War

[CloudAtlas]

Criticizing shitty content is of course a good thing, but I think the specific nature of the criticism (an extreme emphasis on sex/gender issues) is premature, sort of putting the cart before the horse. You can demand realistic portrayals of women from Capcom all you want, but the way they write their games now, that demand is simply impossible..they don't have realistic portrayals of anything! It would be more effective for gamers to ask for well-written games first, then iron out the sub-issues (like realistic portrayal of women) afterwards.

I don't know, but I have the impression that games with shitty stories and shitty characters in general get critized plenty as well. I don't really see a mutual exclusivity here.

Whether it would be more effective your way, I'm not sure. What makes a character a good character, that is comparitively easy to grasp. Questions like does she have an agenda, does she have wants and needs of her own, and if yes is any of that relevant to the plot? Or is she just kinda there for... reasons... and doesn't really do anything? That's pretty basic stuff where many games and movies already fail. So I think improving your characters is actually a pretty good start. When you have characters that all have believable wants and needs, and act believably on them, and what they do even advances the plot, then you're already halfway there.

 

[dyre]

The Walking Dead is more of a niche game for a smaller demographic, but I agree that we do see a few well-written, mature games. But on the whole the balance is a lot less mature than more established mediums like film, theatre, literature, etc.

Yeah, I am not so certain about that. Gaming overwhelmingly has many more "genre" stories than other mediums, yes, but "genre fiction" isn't inherently less mature. We really shouldn't make the same mistakes that film and literature has, and fetishize drama. :\

Sure, there's nothing wrong with genre fiction. Mass Effect is genre; Doctor Who is genre. Both are great. Honestly, on most days I enjoy reading well-written genre more than fine literature. What I'm saying is that the perceived "misogyny" issue will solve itself as gaming elevates its genre to a higher standard of writing. The feminist side of the argument worries that too many female protagonists are one-dimensional sex objects who only exist in relation to the male protagonist, not as independent beings, correct? One would expect that sort of portrayal in a Capcom game, but in Mass Effect that sort of thing is much less common, because while both are genre, the latter is a much higher calibre of genre.

As more developers elevate their standards from "genre that attracts adolescent fantasies" to "genre that focuses on quality writing and character development," the "realistic portrayal of females" issue will solve itself.

 

[dyre]

Criticizing shitty content is of course a good thing, but I think the specific nature of the criticism (an extreme emphasis on sex/gender issues) is premature, sort of putting the cart before the horse. You can demand realistic portrayals of women from Capcom all you want, but the way they write their games now, that demand is simply impossible..they don't have realistic portrayals of anything! It would be more effective for gamers to ask for well-written games first, then iron out the sub-issues (like realistic portrayal of women) afterwards.

I don't know, but I have the impression that games with shitty stories and shitty characters in general get critized plenty as well. I don't really see a mutual exclusivity here.

Whether it would be more effective your way, I'm not sure. What makes a character a good character, that is comparitively easy to grasp. Questions like does she have an agenda, does she have wants and needs of her own, and if yes is any of that relevant to the plot? Or is she just kinda there for... reasons... and doesn't really do anything? That's pretty basic stuff where many games and movies already fail. So I think improving your characters is actually a pretty good start. When you have characters that all have believable wants and needs, and act believably on them, and what they do even advances the plot, then you're already halfway there.

Criticism for shitty stories and shitty characters exists to some degree, but the standard seems pretty low and the criticism fairly light. I think most people approach franchises like Resident Evil, Devil May Cry, Gears of War, Diablo, Starcraft, Elder Scrolls, Metal Gear, CoD/Battlefield, etc with a "the story might be mediocre but as long as it moves the gameplay, I'm fine" attitude. I actually liked the stories in some of those games but at least personally, it's clear to me that it's only because I hold them to a much lower standard than I would a good book or good film. Hell, look how much praise the new Tomb Raider received regarding the revamp of Lara Croft. I loved the game, but come on, Lara has zero personality; she merely reacts to new problems as they present themselves. If she was the main character of a book, I'd drop that book after two chapters. It's easier to get away with poor storytelling in games because the gameplay can be its own reward, but I can't imagine that in 20 years the average writing in games will still be as poor as it is now.

I think my issue with asking for good female characters before asking for good writing or even better characters in general is that if you don't hold yourself to the latter standard, you won't bother with the former standard. Why bother making better sauce if you don't intend to make good pasta in the first place? I can just imagine the developers of Devil May Cry thinking "wait, they want well-written female characters? Since when did they want well-written characters? Or good writing?"

 

[gargantual]

I thought this topic was going to be more about how split up we are as gamers but I can technically see this thread as another Anita/Female gamers, no sexism thread, instead of a small amount of that but more fixation on the PC vs console split that's been going years longer than what's recently surfaced thanks to Anita and SJW's.

I want this thread to be non (name we probably shouldn't mention) We can all steer this thread in a more welcoming direction. That situation is a internet con-beast of it's own. Cause there are other episodes of polarization going on. Posters fighting journalists on twitter and vice versa, and it aint helping the community image y'know?

 

[Something Amyss]

And again, the idea of people trying to censor something mostly only comes from the extreme fringes.

And the paranoid imaginations of the entitled children screaming about how wrong feminism is and how awful it is that women want to play, too.

I mean, seriously, someone mentioned Obama/Romney. And this reminds me of politics because I've heard since I was old enough to care about politics that whichever liberal was running wanted to take our guns away. And it's the exact same thing here. Anita Sarkeesian wants to take our games away! Random Tumblr people I hate but read extensively want to take our games away! Anyone who says anything about gaming culture I don't like is trying to destroy it and make us live in a PC world, even if I have to ignore what they actually say to get there!

And I've seen more than a few of these people turn around and ask why gamers aren't taken seriously or have a bad reputation. Gee, I wonder.

 

[Redd the Sock]

I applaud your attempt to reaching out, OP, although I don't have high hopes that you'll find many people willing to grasp your olive branch. At least your first two responders didn't.

Now, in the spirit of this thread, OP, I want to ask you, and it's not a rethorical question: How should I engage people who already seem to get angry at the mere notion that yea video games often don't really portray women in such great ways and it would be good if that changes? I mean, if you don't really care yourself, fine, but would it hurt you in any way?
You know, at the end of the day, that is all what most people are complaining about, and what they're asking for: More and better female characters. And I really don't know how am I supposed to engage people who oppose that. Now of course few people say they oppose that, yet for some unfathomable reason always find plenty of reasons (most of them ridiculous) to complain whenever someone brings that up and why all of that is supposedly bad or nonsense or whatever.

A large part of the problem with discussing these things is just that attitude: I don't understand how to engage someone that doesn't agree with me. I've said that if your entire point is "This is what I want and why" you are in a bad position because the other side doesn't give a rat's ass about what you want and has no reason to. You can't make any headway without getting to the point of "this is why you should want it too," and far too often, tactics or language can make something reasonable sound problematic. For example, calling the Damsel in Distress a tired trope points out the cliche you'd like to break free from a bit. Calling it a problematic element on the other hand sounds like you never want it to come up at all. Providing alternatives offers insight and ideas. "calling out" the "sexist" industry sounds hostile, implying other ideas are purposely being held back. Looking at overall trends provides the bigger picture. Holding up a fanservice game as a sacrificial lamb sounds like censorship. Oh, and don't even put in anything sounding insulting if you want to be listened to. Frankly I'm amazed that people think calling gamers anything like "overgrown man children" is supposed to win them over.

Engaging someone involves at least some effort to understand them, their wants, and their fears. In general, what the side you're complaining about wants is to be able to buy the games they like, and what they fear is that the new "female positive" group is no different than the anti violence parental groups gaming has been under attack from for 20 years: a bunch of busy bodies that want to control the morality the media presents. Insulting them wont' make that fear go away.

 

[gargantual]

I applaud your attempt to reaching out, OP, although I don't have high hopes that you'll find many people willing to grasp your olive branch. At least your first two responders didn't.

Now, in the spirit of this thread, OP, I want to ask you, and it's not a rethorical question: How should I engage people who already seem to get angry at the mere notion that yea video games often don't really portray women in such great ways and it would be good if that changes? I mean, if you don't really care yourself, fine, but would it hurt you in any way?
You know, at the end of the day, that is all what most people are complaining about, and what they're asking for: More and better female characters. And I really don't know how am I supposed to engage people who oppose that. Now of course few people say they oppose that, yet for some unfathomable reason always find plenty of reasons (most of them ridiculous) to complain whenever someone brings that up and why all of that is supposedly bad or nonsense or whatever.

I mean that whole 'your rights end where my feelings begin' is very one-sided.

You see, here's already where the problems start: With 'rights'. Because I no one ever said that people don't have the right to publish games with certain content, so whenever someone is defending some developers rights to do something, or the freedom of arts, or is afraid of censorship, he is pretty much fighting against windmills. Yea, they say you should not do certain things, but not that you don't have the right of doing so.
I really don't mean to be rude to you here, but whenever you hear someone invoking any rights, or start talking about censorship, or freedom of arts, or something along those line, you can usually tell where this is going - and a place that has anything to do with reality it is not.

Okay maybe some radical people on some obscure websites do want to ban stuff and censor or whatever. But frankly, I don't know, all I can say I never heard it. And that makes me wonder where all those people defending those rights heard it themselves, unless they deliberately visit such websites or similar places that have like zero influence in the gaming world, or are just repeating what someone else claimed he read or heard somewhere.

And here's also the problem with "calling people out" on this side of the fence: It's not that I wouldn't do it when someone's calling for banning all games with tits or some such nonsense and say nasty things about men or whatever. It's just that I don't know anyone who says such things. And I can't say I've ever seen anyone saying such things. And that should tell you something. My guess is that unless you go out of your way to seek them out, you won't be bothered that much by "social justice warriors", "feminazis" and all those other so fervently hated people.
However, the assholes on the other side of the fence... THEY will seek YOU out. I mean, not me personally, because I'm neither a woman nor important in any way, but others.
Here's where I feel this matt guy, and maybe you, OP, as well, are drawing a bit of a false analogy. The annoying people on the one side, they're mostly at the fringe (and quite a few of them only exist in some people's head, I'd wager). The annoying people on the other side, however, they're right in our middle. And, in contrast to the former, they do real damage, to their victims, to their fellow gamers and the reputation of the gaming community as a whole.

Edit: And I do have to say that when people, as one poster already explitly did in this thread (jpz91 or so), thinks that what some idiot on the extreme radical fringe might have said is representative for anyone who has ever expressed any desire for change with regards to the portrayal of certain groups in games... does that mean they don't mind being lumped together in return with those folks who make rape threats and say and do other disgusting things?

Well there you go. You don't like your opinion being misrepresented by extremists right. No one does.

That's enough reason to be interested. I'm usually ambivalent in my online engagements, pranksters and hackers being what they are, but I watch what I telegraph to others just like being in public, because young men and ladies regardless of their social politics, easily smell blood in the water over the most ridiculous issues in geek culture, and their vitriol isn't light fandom, its like upsetting a Christian fundamentalist whose read waaay too much into the themes and context of their favorite pasttimes. I've been passionate about fiction too but Sheeesh...

Yeah if these trolls are likely assholes in public, then its no surprise seeing it rear its head online.

Because I no one ever said that people don't have the right to publish games with certain content

Exactly YOU didn't say that. Matts suggesting he's encountered such 'your rights end where my feelings begin' in discussion. I can see you like I are pretty tolerant, and would like to see some progressive themes flourish for the health of the medium and more for games that can speak to where our lives and interests now lie, But where these comment wars descend into name calling and threats against respectable working professionals on one side and contentious bait articles implying 'such immature fantasy has no place in the games industry' I'm like this is a big medium, there's enough room for everything, and all opinion even the horrible stuff that has to be called out on its crap.


But just how you hardly see any 'Marcy's from Married with Children' fighting to shame all violence and sex out of games from one side, avg friendly gamers who primarily dig the type of games SJW's despise aren't aware they're being painted in with the worse of harassers. These debates that frequently appear in the game forums descend to levels of more like "what does this person's tastes or defenses telegraph negatively about them as a person period?"

How the hell would anyone completely know that? We see 'facets and snapshots' of who we truly are online. Most folks I assume post to unwind and share their interests. But people like you and I seek to rationalize, in contrast these folks are trying to become invisible media majorities like the most extreme of the abhorrent tea party, and make avg gamers who wouldn't give a shit think its a culture war. Especially when the 6th console gen had numerous female protagonists, millions played them and some paint the picture like things haven't progressed from Custer's Revenge. Or there are topics too sensitive for games to be allowed to cover.

Film content and community is way better than this. Its only more mature on a social level because its been around decades longer. There are narrow target markets for genres and people of different ages, gender etc can pick their poison. Fanservice and serious dramas, even pyscho surreal shit can co-exist in the same medium at large, whether its camp or serious. Thats the ideal I see for the game industry, but seeing all this art-by-commitee and pre-maturely assuming bigotry if someone's not in 'complete' lockstep with ALL ideas of social meme change, and making a habit of umbrage-taking is still unproductive too. Instead of looking for internet acolytes, people should be expecting to understand in limited degrees, because our tastes are likely very different.

 

[Riverwolf]

I, too, want this whole war to end, since there's actual issues worthy of discussion and debate going on and internet-wide flame wars just distract from them. It causes people to think this or that "movement" is something it's absolutely not, since high emotions are guaranteed to cloud reason.

I think we, as adults, owe it to ourselves to talk about these issues as adults(and if you're not legally an adult in your country, I'm not necessarily excluding you; you're no less capable of this because of fewer birthdays celebrated): calmly addressing supported arguments with contradictory supported arguments, rather than calling people or movements names simply because we may disagree (it's one thing to call an argument stupid, it's entirely something else to call a person stupid). If an issue makes us particularly angry or frustrated, we owe it to ourselves to try figuring out why that emotion is present in us but not in others, and not allowing that anger, frustration, or any other strong negative emotion to control how we interact with people in a discussion or debate.

Those who insist on continuing to express their arguments in rude, highly emotional ways absolutely have the inalienable right to do so(though administrators of social organizations, such as internet forums, have the right to create and enforce their own restrictions within their organizational boundaries). For the rest of us we owe it to ourselves to exercise our inalienable right to just ignore the emotional content so we can focus on the actual issues(since a person might express a very valid point but in a very rude way; since people who are rude aren't necessarily trolls, ignoring a rude expression shouldn't keep the valid point from being considered).

I understand the instinct to demonize the perceived enemy. As a 26-year old straight male gamer and sex-positive egalitarian feminist(I really should not need that many qualifiers), I seriously feel a strong urge to regard those who say they're anti-feminist, either explicitly or implicitly, as misogynistic, patriarchal, sexist pigs who are okay with rape and wife-beating (and I mean in the real world, not in stories). That urge largely comes from hearing about the abuse Sarkeesian got, as well as my understanding that feminism is a branch of egalitarianism seeking legal, economic, and social equality between men and women(if you think feminism is something else, that's your right but I'm not going to engage in that debate in this thread). I have to actively resist that urge by reminding myself that these people simply think feminism is something more insidious than my understanding of it, and are otherwise perfectly intelligent, sane, and absolutely NOT okay with rape or wife-beating(generally speaking; there are exceptions, though I've thankfully never encountered one, online or otherwise). That might be because they feel a similar urge, though it could easily not be since I don't know these people outside a few written messages on the internet(I don't even necessarily know their gender) and so am in absolutely no position to make any kind of judgment on their entire persons. I certainly shouldn't regard such people as enemies.

But whatever you think of Sarkeesian, her arguments, and/or feminism as a whole, at least remember this: despite the rampant, undeserved abuse, bullying, and harassment she got before her video game series was even released, she maintained her cool and didn't even dignify any of it with an acknowledgement in those videos. Instead, she calmly and politely stated her argument and her reasons. I think that's incredibly admirable and should be the example of how we handle such behavior.

For clarification, I don't equate the harassment Sarkeesian got with the aforementioned rude, highly emotional expression of an argument. The latter could still be worth considering, while the former deserves no consideration at all even if some kind of argument was intended.

Sooner or later this particular issue will die down (hopefully alongside many fantastic and diverse female characters who can make it to mainstream recognition), and we'll find a new issue to focus on. I want to see us, as a community of people who love games, address that issue, whatever it is, with far more maturity and knowledge than this one received.

A culture shouldn't be defined by its lowest common denominator.

EDIT:...one more thing: just as we shouldn't let anger cloud our rationality, we also should not be let fear prevent us from expressing our opinions. Right now, as I type this, I'm actually shaking from fear at what might be said because I've identified myself as a male feminist, and indeed just rewatched Sarkeesians video game series to confirm a few facts, and still find nothing that I overtly disagree with(though did find it noteworthy that while the first video had close to 2 million views, the other three videos didn't even break 1 million...). That fear is telling me to just delete this entire post and return to my dark closet, as it were. Fear is a silencing negative emotion if we allow it to be, but can be overcome.

 

[gargantual]

I, too, want this whole war to end, since there's actual issues worthy of discussion and debate going on and internet-wide flame wars just distract from them. It causes people to think this or that "movement" is something it's absolutely not, since high emotions are guaranteed to cloud reason.

I think we, as adults, owe it to ourselves to talk about these issues as adults(and if you're not legally an adult in your country, I'm not necessarily excluding you; you're no less capable of this because of fewer birthdays celebrated): calmly addressing supported arguments with contradictory supported arguments, rather than calling people or movements names simply because we may disagree (it's one thing to call an argument stupid, it's entirely something else to call a person stupid). If an issue makes us particularly angry or frustrated, we owe it to ourselves to try figuring out why that emotion is present in us but not in others, and not allowing that anger, frustration, or any other strong negative emotion to control how we interact with people in a discussion or debate.

Those who insist on continuing to express their arguments in rude, highly emotional ways absolutely have the inalienable right to do so(though administrators of social organizations, such as internet forums, have the right to create and enforce their own restrictions within their organizational boundaries). For the rest of us we owe it to ourselves to exercise our inalienable right to just ignore the emotional content so we can focus on the actual issues(since a person might express a very valid point but in a very rude way; since people who are rude aren't necessarily trolls, ignoring a rude expression shouldn't keep the valid point from being considered).

I understand the instinct to demonize the perceived enemy. As a 26-year old straight male gamer and sex-positive egalitarian feminist(I really should not need that many qualifiers), I seriously feel a strong urge to regard those who say they're anti-feminist, either explicitly or implicitly, as misogynistic, patriarchal, sexist pigs who are okay with rape and wife-beating (and I mean in the real world, not in stories). That urge largely comes from hearing about the abuse Sarkeesian got, as well as my understanding that feminism is a branch of egalitarianism seeking legal, economic, and social equality between men and women(if you think feminism is something else, that's your right but I'm not going to engage in that debate in this thread). I have to actively resist that urge by reminding myself that these people simply think feminism is something more insidious than my understanding of it, and are otherwise perfectly intelligent, sane, and absolutely NOT okay with rape or wife-beating(generally speaking; there are exceptions, though I've thankfully never encountered one, online or otherwise). That might be because they feel a similar urge, though it could easily not be since I don't know these people outside a few written messages on the internet(I don't even necessarily know their gender) and so am in absolutely no position to make any kind of judgment on their entire persons. I certainly shouldn't regard such people as enemies.

But whatever you think of Sarkeesian, her arguments, and/or feminism as a whole, at least remember this: despite the rampant, undeserved abuse, bullying, and harassment she got before her video game series was even released, she maintained her cool and didn't even dignify any of it with an acknowledgement in those videos. Instead, she calmly and politely stated her argument and her reasons. I think that's incredibly admirable and should be the example of how we handle such behavior.

For clarification, I don't equate the harassment Sarkeesian got with the aforementioned rude, highly emotional expression of an argument. The latter could still be worth considering, while the former deserves no consideration at all even if some kind of argument was intended.

Sooner or later this particular issue will die down (hopefully alongside many fantastic and diverse female characters who can make it to mainstream recognition), and we'll find a new issue to focus on. I want to see us, as a community of people who love games, address that issue, whatever it is, with far more maturity and knowledge than this one received.

A culture shouldn't be defined by its lowest common denominator.

EDIT:...one more thing: just as we shouldn't let anger cloud our rationality, we also should not be let fear prevent us from expressing our opinions. Right now, as I type this, I'm actually shaking from fear at what might be said because I've identified myself as a male feminist, and indeed just rewatched Sarkeesians video game series to confirm a few facts, and still find nothing that I overtly disagree with(though did find it noteworthy that while the first video had close to 2 million views, the other three videos didn't even break 1 million...). That fear is telling me to just delete this entire post and return to my dark closet, as it were. Fear is a silencing negative emotion if we allow it to be, but can be overcome.

That was a very good read. Thanks for sharing man. I mean hey, imagine if we were all on skype, these flame wars would look like considerably different forum discussion.

Not that I would advocate for any reduction of user-privacy as we barely have any these days. All we want despite our biases, and personal tastes (low-brow high brow etc) is to be understood, and I believe we still have the capacity to do that as adults. Before the 7th console gen started I never remembered 'female protagonists' being an alien concept. hell one of my favorite games was Parasite Eve.

I guess it was the suggestion somewhere in the 2nd vid that video game sexism influences real world sexism and rape culture that was the firebomb for those responders. They probably felt insulted or painted as undiscerning or unintelligent consumers is the best I can guess.

I've always been of the mind that real predators have more real world influences and real social environments of criminal tolerance as the true catalyst for their criminal behavior. (ex Steubenville rape case) and that fictional avatars aren't as nuclear of an inspiration. After all whose a better scapegoat for an offender in court 'an institutional authority figure, friend or big brother who directly or indirectly endorses such wrong or a digital avatar and an insanity defense?'

The status quo I still blame MS, EA, and Activision's game marketing. Maybe thats just the nostalgist in me, but I sense a cultural regression in AAA games promotion thats really at the heart of any current sexual polarization seen in AAA games. Outside of that, I think its just a lot of horny guy devs doing what they want, who are very aware, that reality is different, but change is already coming, and new platforms of gaming are demanding different kinds of games, so thats something to be happy for eh?

 

[Amir Kondori]

The only people who even know that this is a thing is hardcore gamers who play tons of games, read gaming sites, and participate in gaming forums. Otherwise this so called "war" is not even visible to the general public, or ever the rest of the internet.
This guy's solutions are no solution. He thinks we can "police our own", well that already happens. I have read plenty of comments on the Escapist forums where people say "The death threats are awful, unacceptable and have to stop, but I do disagree with Anita Sarkeesian's points, here is why" and what does it accomplish? Nothing, there will still be people who flip out and go to far. In fact the reason we see as little of it as we do here is because this site uses the only solution that has been shown to work at all, moderating posts. Of course the same argument's against "policing your own" as an effective strategy applies to those who call out "all hetero-normative cis-gendered male assholes who can't know what it is like to be a woman/of color/trans/etc. so their opinion doesn't count and I can dismiss any and everything they say". I have seen some feminists call out those posts but it makes no difference. I had someone make similar arguments against me and it was upsetting to have anything and everything you say dismissed out of hand. Luckily those posts were moderated.
So in conclusion, these flame wars have nowhere near the amount of impact some people think they do and so far the only proven effective method of containing the worst of it is good moderation.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

By implication, that criticism recognizes the importance of writers expressing creative freedom, but it indicates that that creative freedom should be used more appropriately.

I'm not going to bother tagging this post because I'm not interested in entering into a discussion about these things. I'm only pointing out exactly how goddamn ridiculous people have become on this issue.

Read that sentence. Truly parse that shit. You're welcome to your creative freedom... but you should use it more appropriately? What the fuck does that even mean? How are those two clauses not borderline mutually exclusive?

If there were piles of goddamn money to be made from unique games with female protagonists, you critics go right ahead and cash in. No really, I'm patiently tapping my foot. If there's this massive untapped market for the sort of games you want to play, why not gamble your own *tens of millions of dollars* on it?

The reason the industry doesn't give two shits about most of these controversies is simple: they aren't offending the people who buy games. And no amount of hand-wringing, no fleet of pointless articles from the social justice echo chamber, is going to shame people who don't care into fucking caring. Because this isn't oppression or sexism or racism. It's just people making games targeted at certain other people and hoping to sell those games for boatloads of money. End of story.

Certain movements have pushed their once noble causes well beyond the boundaries of fairness and equality into the territories of censorship and entitlement. I don't necessarily blame them; when you press so hard for so long against legitimate oppression or inequality, it's probably difficult to switch gears when you "break through". As such, these movements are starting to take on the overtones of their former oppressors. The push-back you're seeing from other corners of the internet is both timely and appreciated.

Edit: additionally, basing ANY sort of academic discussion on what happens in the festering troll hovel of internet comments sections should be grounds for immediate ejection from any debate. It is conflating two completely separate issues, and it is either 100% intentional or the product of staggering ignorance.

 

[Cecilo]

And again, the idea of people trying to censor something mostly only comes from the extreme fringes.

And the paranoid imaginations of the entitled children screaming about how wrong feminism is and how awful it is that women want to play, too.

I mean, seriously, someone mentioned Obama/Romney. And this reminds me of politics because I've heard since I was old enough to care about politics that whichever liberal was running wanted to take our guns away. And it's the exact same thing here. Anita Sarkeesian wants to take our games away! Random Tumblr people I hate but read extensively want to take our games away! Anyone who says anything about gaming culture I don't like is trying to destroy it and make us live in a PC world, even if I have to ignore what they actually say to get there!

And I've seen more than a few of these people turn around and ask why gamers aren't taken seriously or have a bad reputation. Gee, I wonder.

I am fairly sure that the people who comment on videos, or have a problem with women playing video games are also the fringe cases of the male gamer population, and as to your last sentence, it is the same reason why so many people are pushing back against Feminism now.

People are quick to say "Well, those are the vocal minority" Or, "They are just the outliers", or my favorite "They aren't actually part of group x", but for many people, the vocal parts are the only parts people see or hear, so that is their only experience with your group, so they associate those people with those group.

If you want to change people's minds you'll have to do more than just say they are the outliers, or minority. Also avoiding the hostility when speaking to people might help, starting out with calling a group "Entitled Children", probably not going to get you anywhere if you are trying to bridge a gap.

 

[CloudAtlas]

I applaud your attempt to reaching out, OP, although I don't have high hopes that you'll find many people willing to grasp your olive branch. At least your first two responders didn't.

Now, in the spirit of this thread, OP, I want to ask you, and it's not a rethorical question: How should I engage people who already seem to get angry at the mere notion that yea video games often don't really portray women in such great ways and it would be good if that changes? I mean, if you don't really care yourself, fine, but would it hurt you in any way?
You know, at the end of the day, that is all what most people are complaining about, and what they're asking for: More and better female characters. And I really don't know how am I supposed to engage people who oppose that. Now of course few people say they oppose that, yet for some unfathomable reason always find plenty of reasons (most of them ridiculous) to complain whenever someone brings that up and why all of that is supposedly bad or nonsense or whatever.

A large part of the problem with discussing these things is just that attitude: I don't understand how to engage someone that doesn't agree with me. I've said that if your entire point is "This is what I want and why" you are in a bad position because the other side doesn't give a rat's ass about what you want and has no reason to. You can't make any headway without getting to the point of "this is why you should want it too," and far too often, tactics or language can make something reasonable sound problematic. For example, calling the Damsel in Distress a tired trope points out the cliche you'd like to break free from a bit. Calling it a problematic element on the other hand sounds like you never want it to come up at all. Providing alternatives offers insight and ideas. "calling out" the "sexist" industry sounds hostile, implying other ideas are purposely being held back. Looking at overall trends provides the bigger picture. Holding up a fanservice game as a sacrificial lamb sounds like censorship. Oh, and don't even put in anything sounding insulting if you want to be listened to. Frankly I'm amazed that people think calling gamers anything like "overgrown man children" is supposed to win them over.

Engaging someone involves at least some effort to understand them, their wants, and their fears. In general, what the side you're complaining about wants is to be able to buy the games they like, and what they fear is that the new "female positive" group is no different than the anti violence parental groups gaming has been under attack from for 20 years: a bunch of busy bodies that want to control the morality the media presents. Insulting them wont' make that fear go away.

You don't know in what ways I tried to engage. You can make the most innocent statements and you will still get many... weird reactions. You can ask if they think games would be worse to them if they had more and better written female (like, not so clichee and with agenda for example) characters, if they would be worse if the outfits of these characters were less sexualized and thus more consistent with the game world. You can say it would be nice if games had more female protagonists because it would be more inclusive for women, as it's easier to identify with someone of your own gender, and nice for everyone else to have more variety. And so on and so forth. You're still bound to get all sorts of weird responses and end up having to debate censorship or freedom of arts or what some social justice warrior on some website that has nothing to do with this discussion and with its topic might have said or how equally capable female soldiers apparently destroy someone's immersion etc etc

So I and many others, are often phrasing our statements in exactly the way you want: You should support X because it makes games better for everyone. You should not oppose Y because it will at least make games better for others without making it worse for you.

But if someone is still afraid that we're "taking the games away from him", even though nobody ever suggested anything of that sort in the first place and assured him however many times that it's really really not our intention, then I just can't help him.

 

[CloudAtlas]

And again, the idea of people trying to censor something mostly only comes from the extreme fringes.

And the paranoid imaginations of the entitled children screaming about how wrong feminism is and how awful it is that women want to play, too.

I want to hope they are just an extreme fringe, but I'm not so sure.

On every pic on IMGUR or 9GAG, on every video that is somehow related to men/women stuff, you will see a fair number of people stating how they hate feminism. This apparently very popular thunderf00t guy, oft-cited in relation to Tropes vs. Women, seems to think that "feminism poisons everything". On this forum too you will see many posts of people stating how much they hate feminists and social justice warriors and the like.

And that makes you wonder if these people really are just an extreme fringe.

 

[Redd the Sock]

I applaud your attempt to reaching out, OP, although I don't have high hopes that you'll find many people willing to grasp your olive branch. At least your first two responders didn't.

Now, in the spirit of this thread, OP, I want to ask you, and it's not a rethorical question: How should I engage people who already seem to get angry at the mere notion that yea video games often don't really portray women in such great ways and it would be good if that changes? I mean, if you don't really care yourself, fine, but would it hurt you in any way?
You know, at the end of the day, that is all what most people are complaining about, and what they're asking for: More and better female characters. And I really don't know how am I supposed to engage people who oppose that. Now of course few people say they oppose that, yet for some unfathomable reason always find plenty of reasons (most of them ridiculous) to complain whenever someone brings that up and why all of that is supposedly bad or nonsense or whatever.

A large part of the problem with discussing these things is just that attitude: I don't understand how to engage someone that doesn't agree with me. I've said that if your entire point is "This is what I want and why" you are in a bad position because the other side doesn't give a rat's ass about what you want and has no reason to. You can't make any headway without getting to the point of "this is why you should want it too," and far too often, tactics or language can make something reasonable sound problematic. For example, calling the Damsel in Distress a tired trope points out the cliche you'd like to break free from a bit. Calling it a problematic element on the other hand sounds like you never want it to come up at all. Providing alternatives offers insight and ideas. "calling out" the "sexist" industry sounds hostile, implying other ideas are purposely being held back. Looking at overall trends provides the bigger picture. Holding up a fanservice game as a sacrificial lamb sounds like censorship. Oh, and don't even put in anything sounding insulting if you want to be listened to. Frankly I'm amazed that people think calling gamers anything like "overgrown man children" is supposed to win them over.

Engaging someone involves at least some effort to understand them, their wants, and their fears. In general, what the side you're complaining about wants is to be able to buy the games they like, and what they fear is that the new "female positive" group is no different than the anti violence parental groups gaming has been under attack from for 20 years: a bunch of busy bodies that want to control the morality the media presents. Insulting them wont' make that fear go away.

You don't know in what ways I tried to engage. You can make the most innocent statements and you will still get many... weird reactions. You can ask if they think games would be worse to them if they had more and better written female (like, not so clichee and with agenda for example) characters, if they would be worse if the outfits of these characters were less sexualized and thus more consistent with the game world. You can say it would be nice if games had more female protagonists because it would be more inclusive for women, as it's easier to identify with someone of your own gender, and nice for everyone else to have more variety. And so on and so forth. You're still bound to get all sorts of weird responses and end up having to debate censorship or freedom of arts or what some social justice warrior on some website that has nothing to do with this discussion and with its topic might have said or how equally capable female soldiers apparently destroy someone's immersion etc etc

So I and many others, are often phrasing our statements in exactly the way you want: You should support X because it makes games better for everyone. You should not oppose Y because it will at least make games better for others without making it worse for you.

But if someone is still afraid that we're "taking the games away from him", even though nobody ever suggested anything of that sort in the first place and assured him however many times that it's really really not our intention, then I just can't help him.

That's kind of the thing: you aren't telling me why more realistic outfits would be better. You're putting me on the stop to defend unrealistic and fanserviced outfits in some way that isn't "I'm a fucking pervert." You ask for better female leads for other people, but don't mention why that's good for us, and in my experience, get very dismissive of efforts that "aren't good enough", which comes off as bratty. If someone posts an article calling for a boycott of a game, it doesn't get shouted down by people afraid it'll make feminists look bad by coming of as censoring, making it sound like that really is the end outcome, and the politeness is a passive aggressive thing. You still aren't at that place of telling others why they should want what you do, and while polite about it, still accusatory to those of us that find realistic armor boring, or dont' write off a good female character due to it.

 

[Riverwolf]

That was a very good read. Thanks for sharing man. I mean hey, imagine if we were all on skype, these flame wars would look like considerably different forum discussion.

And, somehow, probably more entertaining to listen to. ^_^ (At the very least you'd be able to do mock live commentary as if it were a sporting event). [footnote]Yay! I can do footnotes! Now I can make my long essays of posts look even more like bad Wikipedia entries![/footnote]

Not that I would advocate for any reduction of user-privacy as we barely have any these days. All we want despite our biases, and personal tastes (low-brow high brow etc) is to be understood, and I believe we still have the capacity to do that as adults. Before the 7th console gen started I never remembered 'female protagonists' being an alien concept. hell one of my favorite games was Parasite Eve.

One of mine was the Phantasy Star games, the first of which had a fantastic female lead, and the others of which had great varieties of female PCs. [footnote]I'm actually a bit disappointed Sarkeesian didn't mention them, since they're good examples of some things done right, and other things done poorly, while still being quite ahead of their time all things considered, especially the second game. But they've always been niche even among the already niche audience of non-Final Fantasy JRPG players; it's highly likely she wasn't familiar enough with them to comment.[/footnote]

I never thought much about this issue back then, either. Though I have always felt the damsel in distress plot was stupid, not necessarily for being sexist[footnote]The earliest incarnation of the hero-rescues-princess-from-demon/dragon-type damsel in distress that I know of, The Ramayana(pronounced 'rahm-EYE-uhnn-uh'), is actually a beautiful story I'd highly recommend to any fan of ancient literature, world mythology, and/or comparative religion... well, an abridged version, anyway.[/footnote], but for being overused to the point of meaninglessness. Imagine if all the characters in A Song of Ice and Fire had the exact same basic character plot; even if it was one of the better ones in that series, it'd still lose all its power pretty quick.

I did somewhat notice that there weren't many female leads in the 80s and early 90s, but felt like that had changed since then. I wasn't well-learned enough in the art of character creation to realize that most mainstream female "characters" in gaming are essentially drawn from a small pool of archetypes: generally either good little Rapunzels waiting to be saved[footnote]I'm not referencing Tangled; I'm referencing the original fairy tale.[/footnote], or hyper-sexualized fighting machines that "don't need no man". It's a shame Laura Croft was marketed the way she was, because watching the opening cutscene and seeing the early levels of the first game(which, by the way, has aged TERRIBLY; I didn't play it until a few months ago), she really seemed like she could have been the better-developed character we saw in the recent prequel[footnote]...Tomb Raider Zero, anyone?[/footnote] but in the pre-Buffy era of the 90s.

For those of you who want an excellent example of a game featuring a female lead with a theme of motherhood, check out the indie game Shelter.

I guess it was the suggestion somewhere in the 2nd vid that video game sexism influences real world sexism and rape culture that was the firebomb for those responders. They probably felt insulted or painted as undiscerning or unintelligent consumers is the best I can guess.

That does make sense[footnote]Though I think that potential reaction is unfair, since I don't recall her ever criticizing customers for buying these kinds of games, directly or indirectly, and whenever she does refer to consumers, she always uses the pronoun "we".[/footnote], though it also could have been a misunderstanding of what she says throughout the first video (I actually doubt the vocal anti-feminist crowd even watched the other three videos based on the number of views they all have). In it, she frequently refers to the damsel in distress as trope backwards and sexist, and outright calls the girlfriend-punching sometimes-panty-flashing opening of Double Dragon "crap"(probably the most emotional she gets in all four videos). I can see that being misconstrued as calling the entire games, as well as Miyamoto and other great, well-respected game designers, backwards and sexist, even though she frequently stresses that the presence of sexist elements doesn't mean the games lack value, and that they are still great fun to play[footnote]She mentioned that she's been playing and loving Mario and Zelda since she was a kid, and that they will always have a special place in her heart.[/footnote]. She also stresses a few times, almost out of nowhere, that these game designers are NOT necessarily sexist misogynists at all, but simply well-meaning victims of cultural mythology. [footnote]As a huge fan of Joseph Campbell, I understand the enormous, often understated, power that cultural mythology has on people. Ironic thing is, much as I admire him and his theories... reading his work and watching his lectures, I certainly wouldn't call Campbell "feminist". lol[/footnote] She also at one point argues that these tropes (or plot devices, as some understandably prefer to call them) can potentially hurt men, as well. I wonder how many people are aware she says those things.

But... to be absolutely fair, I understand[footnote]I need to stop referring to so-called "anti-feminists" as "them"; our language and choice of words are hugely influential on our thinking, as well.[/footnote] not wanting to be subjected to a kind of analysis that has conclusions, or perceived conclusions, we not only disagree with but might feel threatened by. This understanding actually dawned on me just yesterday from checking out this MundaneMatt's playlist on feminism, since I'd actually never heard of him before, just to see what was there... and I couldn't bring myself to watch a single video in it, because the very titles of the videos disturbed me greatly. I'm quite tempted to make unfair judgments and comparisons based on video titles alone rather than the arguments within those videos. And no, I'm not going to say what those judgements and comparisons are, since, like I said, they're unfairly based 100% on the titles alone, and so not worth the dignity of being shared with the world. If I ever can work up the courage to watch the videos and determine for myself(that is, not based on what other people say about them) that their titles match their content, then I'll share them.

I think the first step to understanding each other when we disagree on these hot button issues is understanding ourselves and being self-critical. After all, while each individual is an individual unto themselves, human psychology is still human psychology, and there's certain behavioral tendencies that are common to most of us barring severe mental disabilities. None of us are perfect, either, and are all capable of making flawed arguments based on flawed understanding of facts, or capable of doing/saying hurtful things unnecessarily and/or unintentionally. I also believe we're all capable of being better. We can't progress without improving ourselves, and we certainly can't understand others if we don't understand ourselves.

I've always been of the mind that real predators have more real world influences and real social environments of criminal tolerance as the true catalyst for their criminal behavior. (ex Steubenville rape case) and that fictional avatars aren't as nuclear of an inspiration. After all whose a better scapegoat for an offender in court 'an institutional authority figure, friend or big brother who directly or indirectly endorses such wrong or a digital avatar and an insanity defense?'

I think she actually makes that point, as well, though not in those words or with that example: that video games don't make rapists out of people who won't rape to begin with, or turn non-sexist people sexist. It's the violent video games vs real world aggression argument all over again.

It's more that they don't help the issue, and are just one more thing that subconsciously reinforces the already-present beliefs in actual criminals.

The status quo I still blame MS, EA, and Activision's game marketing. Maybe thats just the nostalgist in me, but I sense a cultural regression in AAA games promotion thats really at the heart of any current sexual polarization seen in AAA games. Outside of that, I think its just a lot of horny guy devs doing what they want, who are very aware, that reality is different, but change is already coming, and new platforms of gaming are demanding different kinds of games, so thats something to be happy for eh?

Oh, yeah. I'm very optimistic for the future. Things were always going to look worse before they got better. I do sometimes wonder if these megacorps market they're games like that deliberately to stir up controversy, since any publicity is good publicity. That new Hitman game might not have sold as well if there wasn't that whole fiasco about the trailer, after all.

...though it is a bit disturbing to know that we're sometimes paying up to 60 US dollars for someone else's masturbation fantasies. In an era where porn is readily available, I must wonder what the point is. To quote Linkara, "If you wanted to make porn, why didn't you just make porn?"

 

[gargantual]

But... to be absolutely fair, I understand[footnote]I need to stop referring to so-called "anti-feminists" as "them"; our language and choice of words are hugely influential on our thinking, as well.[/footnote] not wanting to be subjected to a kind of analysis that has conclusions, or perceived conclusions, we not only disagree with but might feel threatened by. This understanding actually dawned on me just yesterday from checking out this MundaneMatt's playlist on feminism, since I'd actually never heard of him before, just to see what was there... and I couldn't bring myself to watch a single video in it, because the very titles of the videos disturbed me greatly. I'm quite tempted to make unfair judgments and comparisons based on video titles alone rather than the arguments within those videos. And no, I'm not going to say what those judgements and comparisons are, since, like I said, they're unfairly based 100% on the titles alone, and so not worth the dignity of being shared with the world. If I ever can work up the courage to watch the videos and determine for myself(that is, not based on what other people say about them) that their titles match their content, then I'll share them.

Yeah Matts a character alright. His pacing may remind folks of Limbaugh, and there are other issues I disagree with him on but for the most his 'politics' seem sorta okay. Sounds like he should be a radio host. He's a part of that same internet buzz news searching maelstrom as Johnathan McIntosh & Sarkeesian, Thunderf00t etc (who should really get back to making more science vids to diversify his catalog again) but at least I hear Matt admit when he's wrong and look down upon his tumblr trolling past. I was ambivalent at first, but I remember having a boss that was a tense conservative mormon whos politcs disturbed me but we always had the friendliest longest conversations, so in that same critical distance, I listen anyways. The internet is too wild west to be indoctrinated into ANYTHING. Even it if it seems agreeable.

I think the first step to understanding each other when we disagree on these hot button issues is understanding ourselves and being self-critical. After all, while each individual is an individual unto themselves, human psychology is still human psychology, and there's certain behavioral tendencies that are common to most of us barring severe mental disabilities. None of us are perfect, either, and are all capable of making flawed arguments based on flawed understanding of facts, or capable of doing/saying hurtful things unnecessarily and/or unintentionally. I also believe we're all capable of being better. We can't progress without improving ourselves, and we certainly can't understand others if we don't understand ourselves.

I've been starting to read over my posts a bit more before clicking send. I guess people turn off their NSFW meters when they leave work, and feel like they're at the bar, but they forget the internet doesn't have such clearly defined boundaries.

It's more that they don't help the issue, and are just one more thing that subconsciously reinforces the already-present beliefs in actual criminals.

Its more so their commerical volume that could be a social concern, but just like Movie Bob talked about film violence after Aurora colorado and Batman. The proclivity of dark themes and debauchery and real world influence is a small link. To combat any possible negative message, you just need more foils. Fictional consequences and balance. How many in-game 'players' risk getting STDs as a mechanic? How many responsible counterparts exist for total swingers?

I think to alleviate any cultural problems, the movement of more women and people of color into game design, and some more non-sexualized role models in other means of entertainment (not just gaming) is all thats needed to normalize and broaden the standard of social pride for people who have other genunine interests and pursuits. So anyone pursuing the pros and all the terrible cons of being a bombshell, or porn actress, model or icon of beauty etc in the real world, fully knows what they're getting themselves into, and there's less misinformation and pressure putting them in that direction. Same with over muscly one-liner guys.

Balance is all that's needed.

Things were always going to look worse before they got better. I do sometimes wonder if these megacorps market they're games like that deliberately to stir up controversy, since any publicity is good publicity. That new Hitman game might not have sold as well if there wasn't that whole fiasco about the trailer, after all.

Now here is where I as an average gamer see a problem. The hitman trailer felt way too forced on Square Enix's part. Same as EA's 'Sin to Win' marketing stunt.

...though it is a bit disturbing to know that we're sometimes paying up to 60 US dollars for someone else's masturbation fantasies. In an era where porn is readily available, I must wonder what the point is. To quote Linkara, "If you wanted to make porn, why didn't you just make porn?"

Thats that feeling of creepiness, when sexual fantasy seeps into an author's work. Chemical urges I think make that inevitable for a lot of artists. Its going to affect their work. But we can only read so far into an artist's mind. I think that it should just be handled well and not shoehorned in for cash. I've seen porny scenes on incredible cable dramas like Showtime's Shameless, but as they were in context of other on going ridiculousness, the events served their narrative purpose.

There's very little pacing with sex and violent action in modern media these days. We're over saturated with commericals (not even just sexual commercialism but ineffective commercialism period) no suspense, character development and buildup that treats such subject matter with reasonable context so that players can make critically distant judgements about authored characters and themes. or reasonable target marketing for games, that movies have in genre films. So culturally we're all being exposed to the same stuff for better or worse, rather than having safer niche boundaries. So some feminists might see all of geek culture needing a healthier social meme change and some among them calling for a complete exodus of old tropes and stereotypes, Where others see it as a merely their niche entertainment that just has too much global commercial volume and attention than it needs. After WoW there are game genres that are barely even made made any more. Publishers are focused on Meta-games where the appearance of raunchiness might have a bit more trouble co-existing with a more sensitive adult user base.

Artists who are creating dead serious works with grounded messages sometimes might be better off to completely divorce fantasy for the sake of their audience, but it really depends on the situation. There's not much of an absolute metric for every designer artist and writer. I believe art is more versatile than that, anything can be made to work depending on the creators carefulness. So I think its perfectly reasonable for them to indulge in wish fulfillment, while trying to communicate bigger messages with their artwork, as long as said fantasy is employed well and doesn't completely derail the game like Toriyama's 'Lightning fantasies in the FFXIII series (or a successful example is if its used campily like a Robert Rodriguez movie, then it could be self aware)

1993's DOOM was a mish mash of cultural fantasy and non-sensical ideas brought together in a laser focused successfully fun FPS. What else did D&D, H.P. Lovecraft, Pantera and Slayer music, and H.R. Geiger have to do with each other besides the fact they were things that Id Software staff in their youth were simply into. but John Romero and Carmack and the guys turned it into something that just worked. In the spirit of that I very much reserve my judgement on what devs should be doing, and rather see what a game turns out to be when its finished.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yeah Matts a character alright. His pacing may remind folks of Limbaugh, and there are other issues I disagree with him on but for the most his 'politics' seem sorta okay. Sounds like he should be a radio host. He's a part of that same internet buzz news searching maelstrom as Johnathan McIntosh & Sarkeesian, Thunderf00t etc (who should really get back to making more science vids to diversify his catalog again) but at least I hear Matt admit when he's wrong and look down upon his tumblr trolling past. I was ambivalent at first, but I remember having a boss that was a tense conservative mormon whos politcs disturbed me but we always had the friendliest longest conversations, so in that same critical distance, I listen anyways. The internet is too wild west to be indoctrinated into ANYTHING. Even it if it seems agreeable.

That is true.

And if he does admit to being wrong, that's absolutely great to hear. Though that also means I won't necessarily be able to know which of his uploaded videos are still descriptive of his views.

I've been starting to read over my posts a bit more before clicking send. I guess people turn off their NSFW meters when they leave work, and feel like they're at the bar, but they forget the internet doesn't have such clearly defined boundaries.

Nope.

You know that post you're responding to took me ALL AFTERNOON to write, rewrite, tweak, get away from, review, and finally send in, and even then I found a few things that needed a bit of editing. Just to keep things clear and accurate.

Its more so their commerical volume that could be a social concern, but just like Movie Bob talked about film violence after Aurora colorado and Batman. The proclivity of dark themes and debauchery and real world influence is a small link. To combat any possible negative message, you just need more foils. Fictional consequences and balance. How many in-game 'players' risk getting STDs as a mechanic? How many responsible counterparts exist for total swingers?

I think to alleviate any cultural problems, the movement of more women and people of color into game design, and some more non-sexualized role models in other means of entertainment (not just gaming) is all thats needed to normalize and broaden the standard of social pride for people who have other genunine interests and pursuits. So anyone pursuing the pros and all the terrible cons of being a bombshell, or porn actress, model or icon of beauty etc in the real world, fully knows what they're getting themselves into, and there's less misinformation and pressure putting them in that direction. Same with over muscly one-liner guys.

Balance is all that's needed.

I absolutely agree. Moderation in everything.

My girlfriend doesn't have an account here, and probably never will, so I'll just reiterate what she says to me when she voices her response to those who are afraid that feminists "want to censor games/take away creative freedom". I should point out that she's also a feminist with the same qualifiers I applied to myself(besides the "male" one), and closer to the issue because of personal reasons. She's perfectly fine with Dead Or Alive XTreme Beach Volleyball (and the Dead or Alive games in general.) She's perfectly fine with Princess Peach forever in the role of damsel in distress(though it would be nice to see her more often in playable roles like in Super Mario Bros. 2 USA). She loves the Zelda franchise. She's perfectly fine with the male-power fantasy, and actually would have gotten into God of War if she wasn't so bad at button-mashing (her words and experience). She was quite upset at Samus's new heels, but has no intention of boycotting the new Smash Bros. because of it. She's sex-positive and perfectly okay with porn. She has absolutely NO desire for censorship(both of us are very much anti-censorship of ANY kind), and has absolutely NO desire to take away what we have. All she wants, and all most gamer feminists want, is more variety.

Now here is where I as an average gamer see a problem. The hitman trailer felt way too forced on Square Enix's part. Same as EA's 'Sin to Win' marketing stunt.

Oh, gods, I remember that...

Thats that feeling of creepiness, when sexual fantasy seeps into an author's work. Chemical urges I think make that inevitable for a lot of artists. Its going to affect their work. But we can only read so far into an artist's mind. I think that it should just be handled well and not shoehorned in for cash. I've seen porny scenes on incredible cable dramas like Showtime's Shameless, but as they were in context of other on going ridiculousness, the events served their narrative purpose.

There's a Japanese visual novel called Song of Saya which is IMO another example of sex being used well, albeit quite disturbingly. There's a few scenes in it of graphic sexual activity, but while playing, I never got the sense that it was meant to be pornographic. The entire rest of the story was engaging on many levels, with the sex simply serving to help support the work's overall artistic statement.

There's very little pacing with sex and violent action in modern media these days. We're over saturated with commericals (not even just sexual commercialism but ineffective commercialism period) no suspense, character development and buildup that treats such subject matter with reasonable context so that players can make critically distant judgements about authored characters and themes. or reasonable target marketing for games, that movies have in genre films. So culturally we're all being exposed to the same stuff for better or worse, rather than having safer niche boundaries. So some feminists might see all of geek culture needing a healthier social meme change and some among them calling for a complete exodus of old tropes and stereotypes, Where others see it as a merely their niche entertainment that just has too much global commercial volume and attention than it needs. After WoW there are game genres that are barely even made made any more. Publishers are focused on Meta-games where the appearance of raunchiness might have a bit more trouble co-existing with a more sensitive adult user base.

Artists who are creating dead serious works with grounded messages sometimes might be better off to completely divorce fantasy for the sake of their audience, but it really depends on the situation. There's not much of an absolute metric for every designer artist and writer. I believe art is more versatile than that, anything can be made to work depending on the creators carefulness. So I think its perfectly reasonable for them to indulge in wish fulfillment, while trying to communicate bigger messages with their artwork, as long as said fantasy is employed well and doesn't completely derail the game like Toriyama's 'Lightning fantasies in the FFXIII series (or a successful example is if its used campily like a Robert Rodriguez movie, then it could be self aware)

1993's DOOM was a mish mash of cultural fantasy and non-sensical ideas brought together in a laser focused successfully fun FPS. What else did D&D, H.P. Lovecraft, Pantera and Slayer music, and H.R. Geiger have to do with each other besides the fact they were things that Id Software staff in their youth were simply into. but John Romero and Carmack and the guys turned it into something that just worked. In the spirit of that I very much reserve my judgement on what devs should be doing, and rather see what a game turns out to be when its finished.

I generally do, too. I agree that if we can keep our fantasies from being a distraction, then we can feel free to indulge whatever we want in our art. The qualifiers are being careful in the craft (lack of care in any craft will pretty much always lead to a shoddy product, anyway), and in being aware of what we're doing. If sex is a theme in a given work, then the authors probably should express their own fantasies since, if they know what they're doing, it might be easier for them to convey the intended emotions without having to rely on what they think others will find sexy. I definitely got the sense in the aforementioned Song of Saya that the author was using his own fantasies, but I also felt a pretty strong undercurrent of shame during the sex scenes, from the music that played, the color palette, the words used, and from the overall story.

The judgement of Linkara's question can only apply to already-existent work that's shoddy and full of careless indulgence that we're expected to pay money for. Doom worked because it's not only unconstrained indulgence in a violent power fantasy, but a fantastic game to boot with carefully crafted levels, mechanics, and software. "Careless" is not a word I'd want anywhere near Doom's development. The flip side would probably be Ride to Hell: Retribution, a game that has "careless" written all over it.

Artists can do whatever they want, and should be allowed to do whatever they want. Like I said earlier, I'm 100% against censorship of any kind. But I think we should also be allowed to be critical of poor decisions, because that's how we improve.

 

[Something Amyss]

I am fairly sure that the people who comment on videos, or have a problem with women playing video games are also the fringe cases of the male gamer population, and as to your last sentence, it is the same reason why so many people are pushing back against Feminism now.

That makes little sense, given the evidence. There's a massive pushback against "feminism" using these arguments that you claim are "fringe." You cannot be logically consistent with yourself in that framework.

If you want to change people's minds you'll have to do more than just say they are the outliers, or minority. Also avoiding the hostility when speaking to people might help, starting out with calling a group "Entitled Children", probably not going to get you anywhere if you are trying to bridge a gap.

I'm not even sure why you're quoting me. I was talking less about outliers and more about imaginary examples. I even sited the whole thing about Anita wanting to take our games away, something she's never said and yet is attributed to. You try to turn my "gee, I wonder" line around, but really, it should be puzzling to you why there is so much bile and contempt that people are willing to make up an argument and others are willing to believe it.

Would you be so accommodating if someone seriously said all male gamers are rapists? Would you say "gee, I wonder why women are scared of male gamers based on this obvious fabrication?"

You yourself tried to dismiss a major group as an outlier and then accused me of the same. That's baffling and more than a little hypocritical.