Developer Intent: Worth asking about (warning: Sexism mentioned)

[Vudu]

Because game designers have absolute control over right? And being a Game Designer is the exact same thing as being a Governor or Politician right?
if they don't answer the question directly they should be hounded for it. They're not always in control of their product. I also don't see why him not answering that question would automatically make them lose all integrity.

Absolute control over what? We're not asking them to DO anything but answer a question. And, as I've said before, a straightforward answer would not be held against them, regardless of what the answer is. But a general answer that doesn't answer anything is when we should call bullshit. If all of triple A game came out and said right now that they were only focusing on males ages 18-30, then I would accept that. I don't hound playboy for only catering to men. I don't gentlemen's clubs for only having women strippers. The problem starts when those who create CLAIM that they are looking to change things when they really aren't. When developers say they want to add a black woman but then just paint a white woman tea-colored. Or say they want to add more complexity to a female character but then end up having her cry or have a nervous break down every 10 minutes. That's why, if they claim they are looking to diversify, we immediately follow up with the question "How?".

 

[gargantual]

Well, it's true that a game developer (or an author, or a film director) can specify their target audience during creation of a game. However, I think a lot of game developers tend to make "assumptions" about their target audience then trying actually understanding them.

I'm a white male that might be the target audience for these games, but I don't find a lot of the bulk of triple-A games appealing towards me. The target audience is always generalized as a white male who likes guns, slutty women and "Michael Bay" explosions. To me that is a developer trying to make assumptions on my interests (i.e. I like guns), my sexuality (i.e. I like thinking about humping too much) and that I like gasoline being lit up (i.e. explosions). I have some interests related to these, being heterosexual, but I tend to favor high-fantasy settings versus modern settings, and I like playing as a mage character than as a hulking barbarian.

The other problem about "assuming" their players will only like X is that it sends a poor message about Y group. Technically, "Team Ninja" is perfectly fine with making their "Dead Or Alive" games with scantily clad, under-aged, jiggling boobs on a stick -- I mean 'their' women for their game. Certainly a lot of guys might be drawn into it for sex appeal, and some fighter fans might enjoy the series. But it also sends a message that all women wear skimpy outfits or fight in a sexualized manner. This can trigger unethical behavior from X group towards Y group in the form of sexual discrimination, either because group X feels justified because the game states it, or because group X is saying that group Y needs to loosen up. Anyone remember Aris Bakhtanian?

Developers are free to make any game they want to any target audience. That doesn't mean they always have a good idea of what their target audience might like, and might say something that offends another group, or makes a specific group have a wrong perception on another group.

My bad man. I apologize. I didn't want this to be long.

See while I agree with a lot of points on your post. I think the fault mainly lies with poorly informed 'marketers', who don't understand gamers but wield more creative control than they should over developers. When devs like Valve are in control, or you have publishers who get out of the way. you get Chell, Alyx Vance and Heather Mason

These statisticians come from backgrounds of pushing mountain dew, skate shoes, and other cross media so its easier to suspect thats where their cyncial disconnect about their demographics actual varied interests come from. Developers themselves that commit to all the elements of jingoism and sex conquest do it for their own interests first, comfortable in the fact that theres a market for it.

'Trigger' is a strong word.

Id look at the larger scope of commercial sex appeal and products pushed on young ladies, that doesn't create enough of a middle ground for women who don't want to emphasize their sexuality to that level and have different identities. Or not enough fictional Ellen Ripley's and real world Queen Latifah's, Gina Carano's and Rachael Maddows. But these women still fought to get theirs.

It seems really what encourages the mistreatment of women in the real world is real world group and gang behavior that endorses it and the lack of evidence that sometimes appear in he-say she-say court cases. Social predators look for signs of prey on real people. I think that's their only cue. And those folks engage in what they think they can get away with. But they know its easier to scapegoat violent offenders in a big brother authority or friend role of influence than a digital avatar (where what does one have? The insanity defense?)

But wish fulfillment for guys and de-sensitization to fiction? I wouldn't say that's an influence or subtle propaganda.

Theres always extremes in entertainment we get a rise out of but would never DREAM of doing to our friends, family or strangers. I think that same standard exists for gamers who have wider thresholds of wish fulfillment.

Also in our taboo and judgmental culture, pushing the bar gives devs more freedom to tackle subject matter responsibly or irresponsibly. When the standard recedes to being safe, (even if for cultural awareness which is good) is a slippery slope that can recede even past subject matter that you don't think has any real world ramifications. People have varying thresholds of offense too, and that can be very tricky to guage.

 

[Something Amyss]

Okay, umm... so have you ever considered the idea that people disliked Twilight because they genuinely thought it was bad literature?

No, never. That's hardly relevant, sarcasm asie.

Your implication in the first post is that only men disliked Twilight and that they "bawed about it like it was the worst thing since the atomic bomb." Uh, no, plenty of women thought it was tripe, too. And there's a reason for that. It was tripe.

And that has to do with its intended audience in what way?

Right, it doesn't.

Secondly, don't you think you might be cherry-picking a little? Hunger Games was generally well-received, and it's "for girls" ostensibly. It's got a female protagonist, at least. But by your logic, it should've been mocked and ridiculed as a "chick flick," yet it was a four-quadrant success.

Who's cherry-picking now? Hunger Games is THE example of cherry-picking, because it is the minority deal, and it was the freaking movie I referenced people losing their heads over being successful (Well, Catching Fire was).

So...Ummm...Yeah. Aren't you basically making my point for me now?

And thirdly, actually, Twilight's success heralded a massive influx of books aimed at girls.

"Massive" being a very relative concept here.

No really, to the point where I jumped at every book with a guy protagonist because I was sick and tired of Bella and Katniss clones.

Maybe you should try looking a little harder. Even with this "massive" influx, boys are like 2/3 the target audience.

Seriously, go to your local bookstore, poke around in the YA fiction section, and tell me how many "girl books" you see.

A handful. I can repeat this with every bookstore in a 30 mile radius, too.

Hell, girls actually get their own section of books, really.

[citation needed]

That's not a luxury afforded to boys.

Yes, boys only get the majority of the marketing. But they don't get their own specific section (whatever that is), so....They have it worse, or....No, seriously, I have no idea what the argument is here.

Combine that with the fact that the (admittedly slight) majority of authors are female and... well, actually, I'd say that books, especially books aimed at teenagers and children, blatantly favor women.

What does the number of female authors have to do with target audience or...Well, anything saying that the end result favours women? Women could be 100% of the authors and it wouldn't make that statement any more valid.

As for why less of these books enter the mainstream, well, good luck dictating what does and does not become popular. But that doesn't nullify the fact that they're there.

And that doesn't nullify any point I made in this thread. So again, I ask: so?

First of all, if you're a girl gamer who feels pushed out of gaming because there's nothing catering to you, how did you get into gaming in the first place? If the hobby sickens you so much, why did you continue to pursue it, to the point where you've integrated into the community enough that you can point out nothing caters to you?

That's assuming that gamers enter gaming as it is as the gamers they are today. That's a ridiculous assumption. I'd wager most gamers here got their start early on, when they probably weren't playing the same games. More to the point, gaming wasn't always this polarised. Girls weren't always threatened with rape for playing. Not every game mandated cheesecake for fear boys wouldn't play it.

And secondly, why DOES something need to cater to you, anyway?

Who's claiming they do?

Video games sure as hell don't cater to me, but I've been playing them since I was little.

Yet you're mystified that someone else might have. That's...Odd.

I've grown up with them. I think they're pretty fantastic, even in their current state, and the big AAA companies aren't exactly falling all over themselves to cater to young white girls - but it doesn't bother me.

Errr...Good for you? No, seriously, I'm, missing the point. Unless you are setting yourself up as the end-all, why does it matter if you're fine with something. Why do you get to override the feelings and desires of anyone else? Why do you get to deride them for not feeling as you do?

Why are so many women apparently completely unable to accept and enjoy "male-targeted" games - and why I do not share that inability?

Why do so many men also have this "inability?" Why is it that playing as a girl who kisses a guy puts off most men? Why are they not berated? Why is it only WIMMINZ who get crap?

I don't know why people have to make it more complicated than that.

Because it's not true? Video games are made with a target audience in mind. The fact that you can happen to enjoy them doesn't mean that they were intended for you. In fact, your previous statements would seem to indicate you're aware of this.

 

[grey_space]

In art, a work is not judged by the creator's intent. The artist is responsible for communicating his intent effectively. If the intent is misred, that is the fault of the artist for failing to do so.

Subtlety, ambiguity, these are all tools that the artist can use to hold the viewer's interest and raise questions and ideas, and a good artist wields these tools effectively. And a respectable artist won't complain when nobody "got his message" or "got it wrong", and will instead learn from that to improve his visual communication of ideas. The artist can't stand in front of his painting for every viewer and explain what was going on in his head and what it's about, so the work must speak for itself.

I look at video games in pretty much the same way.

I completely agree and you explained the idea of art way better than I ever could.

(I may quote this paragraph again in other discussions)

Videogames then, I feel as an artistic medium should not have a sticker on the cover stating 'this caters to white dwarves!' or 'black women who have weight issues!' or 'old hispanic guys!'



Art should appeal to as broad a range of people as possible. Should be as inclusive as possible in it's attempt to get it's message across. And I think it can.

I liked Tomb Raider, myself (taking it as an origin story), and Dark Souls can be as artistic, symbolic, and representative as you like without being in your face about it.

Hell, I'm a white guy and at this stage I feel that most AAA games at times don't cater to my gaming needs and deeply misrepresent what I desire in a character.

 

[Vault101]

Itwilgiht.

Twilights a bad example

A.) its generally not considered very good
B.) its considered dumb/sexist by many people including women

seriously you guys can have it

also there are so many books out there than cater to so many..preferences

games with so much of a female protagonist are a rareity thease days

 

[Vault101]

snip.

of coarse I can game without being "catered too" if we couldnt then there would be no female gamers....and thankfully there are a number of I play games that are inclusive

but really you can only eat the same old crap before you numb to its taste and you just can,t anymore...see the trailer for Watch Dogs? [i/]argle bargle REVENGE argle bargle ANGRY argle bargle THE SYSTEM[/i] its like god...[b/]don't you people TRY anymore??[/b] you don;t have to be a girl to get sick of the "grumble white guys" in games

and thats not even going into the way women and minories are portryed across media...it sucks and we shouldn't put up with it

 

[Shadowstar38]

Because game designers have absolute control over right? And being a Game Designer is the exact same thing as being a Governor or Politician right?
if they don't answer the question directly they should be hounded for it. They're not always in control of their product. I also don't see why him not answering that question would automatically make them lose all integrity.

Absolute control over what? We're not asking them to DO anything but answer a question. And, as I've said before, a straightforward answer would not be held against them, regardless of what the answer is. But a general answer that doesn't answer anything is when we should call bullshit. If all of triple A game came out and said right now that they were only focusing on males ages 18-30, then I would accept that. I don't hound playboy for only catering to men. I don't gentlemen's clubs for only having women strippers. The problem starts when those who create CLAIM that they are looking to change things when they really aren't. When developers say they want to add a black woman but then just paint a white woman tea-colored. Or say they want to add more complexity to a female character but then end up having her cry or have a nervous break down every 10 minutes. That's why, if they claim they are looking to diversify, we immediately follow up with the question "How?".

A lot of the time. It's not up to the game designers how inclusive a game can be. If you have a white protagonist, or a chick with ginormous tits, its because the publishers can down and said this needs to be in the game because the marketing department thinks it will make money.

The first question we have to ask isn't who is this targeted at, but, how much creative control were they given.

 

[Bombiz]

Because game designers have absolute control over right? And being a Game Designer is the exact same thing as being a Governor or Politician right?
if they don't answer the question directly they should be hounded for it. They're not always in control of their product. I also don't see why him not answering that question would automatically make them lose all integrity.

Absolute control over what? We're not asking them to DO anything but answer a question. And, as I've said before, a straightforward answer would not be held against them, regardless of what the answer is. But a general answer that doesn't answer anything is when we should call bullshit. If all of triple A game came out and said right now that they were only focusing on males ages 18-30, then I would accept that. I don't hound playboy for only catering to men. I don't gentlemen's clubs for only having women strippers. The problem starts when those who create CLAIM that they are looking to change things when they really aren't. When developers say they want to add a black woman but then just paint a white woman tea-colored. Or say they want to add more complexity to a female character but then end up having her cry or have a nervous break down every 10 minutes. That's why, if they claim they are looking to diversify, we immediately follow up with the question "How?".

A lot of the time. It's not up to the game designers how inclusive a game can be. If you have a white protagonist, or a chick with ginormous tits, its because the publishers can down and said this needs to be in the game because the marketing department thinks it will make money.

The first question we have to ask isn't who is this targeted at, but, how much creative control were they given.

Thank you. This is what I was basically saying but i forgot to say an important part in my response.

Because game designers have absolute control over their product right? And being a Game Designer is the exact same thing as being a Governor or Politician right?
if they don't answer the question directly they should be hounded for it. They're not always in control of their product. I also don't see why him not answering that question would automatically make them lose all integrity.

there that's better

 

[Savagezion]

If the game industry doubles, that is twice the current games by twice the number of developers. you can 100% cater to both men and women by simply growing. No need to tear down and rebuild.

I almost agree with this but I see a problem. You're saying to expand instead of asking for change but that's easier said than done. Are you saying that if a certain demographic doesn't create their own content, they have no right to ask to be catered to by those outside of their demographic? Here's the thing. I like movies, games, and books but I can't get into ALL three industries. I can't pull myself up by my own bootstraps here. I focus on writing so I have to depend on others to handle the other industries. How many black females who share similar tastes do you think are out there trying to get into the gaming industry? Even if there were quite a few, there are many times MORE white males looking to do the same thing and cater to a demographic that has already been invested into. Recommending that I just wait for the industry to just expand is unrealistic and not at all fair. I'm not looking to be prioritized because I know this is a business. But I should still reserve the right for my input to be counted as a minority by those who claim to give a shit. And please be genuine about it. If you're going to have a black woman in a game, have a black woman in a game! Not a white woman tanned just enough to pass as ANY race. (whew I dunno where that mini rant came from lol).

Sorry, I actually had typed out a wall of text and accidentally clicked back out of the thread erasing all of it. SO I threw a hissy fit, resented this thread and went into another one here. This one will be short but I still have more to post later. I am just coming back and reading what I missed after this quote and my last post. I am not kidding when I said I resented this thread. I like it, but man my long posts take me hours to post usually as I think about it while doing other things and organize it. I think I am ADD. Doing it like that helps. Not doing it makes me spout random nonsense that isn't relevant. With one click, I lost hours, I was pissed.

Anyways, I am calmer now and wanted to at least reply to this quote. We all do have our hobbies we prefer. We don't have any hard numbers of female gamers to male gamers. From my perspective it looks like a 70/30 split in favor of boys. Split evenly among different races of boys. More black and Hispanic and asian male characters should exist by now you would think. I don't know why they don't from my perspective as there is like no evidence contrary. You know what would be crazy? If 50 Cent came out with a game not about crime. What if Eddie Murphy invested in a game idea? What kind of game would that be? What would make him want to? What if Missy Elliot did? Selma Hayek?

"What do they know about games?" people would think. They may not care. They may have a neat idea. That shit is risky though. Everything is racist and sexist. I brought up 50 cent's image of crime and some people could find that offensive. It's fun to attack people on the internet. But I also get what some would see as "morbid" enjoyment from being attack online. Taboo behavior at the least.

I take it you are a black female then or black male? Not that it matters but its a perspective shift. Either way, I can see a struggle for enough people to be in power in the right places. I really don't think you have to be worried about the gaming industry not coming through on this. But gamers panic easy and need to weather the violent media storms around them. I think other medias feel threatened by gaming and are feeling a pinch and lashing out. "Gaming turns you into the devil!" It just keeps growing too. However, it's time to be a dick. As a white male I have a large library of games made for me. Not wanting to get a game because it has a black and/or female may be a racist purchasing decision, but it doesn't make the person racist because he is merely wanting to project on to identical avatars, like a black female playing a black female character in the game. It does put it on the minorities to somehow express themselves in the market. No doubt some white guys and mexican guys will jump on board too. But any white guy that doesn't probably isn't doing it to oppress. He is probably on a budget. Kids are expensive.

Alright, this post got long anyways.

 

[Something Amyss]

Perhaps I'm just blind to this sort of thing, but I simply don't believe that there have been this many cases of men complaining about things being aimed at women. Methinks you are projecting.

Have you been paying attention to gaming? Merely including women gets men complaining. Or male gamers, if you're playing a semantics game where they're not really "men."

The other famous example is the widespread bitching that there are major movies being promoted to teen girls. That's not projecting, friend.