I....just....don't even.......what?

[Astoria]

I think this is a good thread for this.


She sure has us female gamers all worked out. We just hate COD and all those silly man games. Really, what was she thinking when she said this though? Even female friends I have that have no interest in gaming at all still won't scoff at playing COD during a gaming night with friends. Oh well, her problem if she want to have this sort of view on things.

 

[Jadak]

That wouldn't work at all, where is the conflict that keeps us enthralled?

After you turn the target into sparkling butterflies, they turn on you. Presumably.

Alright you have the conflict but it is entirely at the behest of the player, that game would be deeply flawed for sure.

Nonsense, the butterflies only exist because you created them out of an existing hostile element, likely a zombie of some sort.

So really, it's a tactical choice, zombie or butterfly swarm? (may or may not be zombie butterflies)

So you're turning one enemy into another? That's a silly game mechanic, and since I assume that the butterflies would pose less of a threat to the player than any difficulty or strategy would be thrown right out the windo.

You've clearly never been attacked by a swarm of butterflies, nevermind zombie butterflies. Less of a threat? Pfft.

 

[Aljarel]

I don't think she said anything wrong.

In her defence that statement she made was highly contextual: as a direct response to someone saying that videogames cannot be used as education because of the high levels of realistic violence in them. She just gave a quick response of a completely hypothetical example where you can have the same sort of gameplay as a shooter, without the severed limbs and exploding heads.
In fact she probably deliberately made the example as girly and childish as possible to show that the games could be completely suitable to the type of people that watch My Little Pony.

That is exactly the right thing. Her research makes a point of games being able to massively improve cognitive performance. These changes are persistent for years after "game training" and improve non gaming related tasks as well.

One of the main points is that this effect should be harnessed for education and training. The only problem is that children should not be confronted with violent action games. This is a problem. When asked about this problem she replied that fast-paced action video games do not necessarily involve violent action.

Her example is a hypothetical case that could indeed work as a first person shooter game and would not rely on violence although keeping the fast paced action part. Actually non-violent FPS have already been tried (Nerf Arena Blast for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nerf_Arena_Blast )

The other point why she chose the princess and the magic wand is that it is infact problematic to get women to play fast-paced action games. Mostly because of the violence. She did not imply that all women want princesses and magic wands to play with.

I hope that puts her comment in perspective. She is actually doing great research and the results are abolutely amazing.

 

[brenz]

BEST CASE SCENARIO:

She was using an intentionally extreme example to prove a point, and you guys are the morons for missing it.

WORST CASE SCENARIO:

She made the mistake of taking a subject she knew very little about and talking about it anyway. And since it's obvious she doesn't really know what she's talking about, she should be ignored.

--


Either way, there is no reason for a hate-fest. This kind of insane defensiveness is one of the things that makes gamers so hard to take seriously. Just relax.

Your funny

 

[Najos]

Yeah, that quote in context seems more like a tongue-in-cheek statement than a serious statement. We're talking about someone who most likely has legitimate research experience. It would be...really unusual for such a person to make such a stereotypical generalization.

 

[The_Blue_Rider]

That wouldn't work at all, where is the conflict that keeps us enthralled?

After you turn the target into sparkling butterflies, they turn on you. Presumably.

but then when you attack the butterflies does every individual butterfly turn into more butterflies?

 

[targren]

Either way, there is no reason for a hate-fest. This kind of insane defensiveness is one of the things that makes gamers so hard to take seriously. Just relax.

Where do you see defensiveness? All I see is mockery, arguably well-deserved at that.

 

[DementedSheep]

?Butterflys and sparkles"? Lol most girls over 14 aren?t interested in butterflies and sparkles. Tho I agree that not all games need to be violent and the rest of what she said is valid.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

You know she's right. We need more princess protagonists. We could have a princess who uses her dance training to move parkour style through a sandbox city, and she disguises herself to go out into the kingdom and see the people her father rules, but they're all oppressed and she gets angry, so she becomes a mix of a Robin Hood/Cat Burglar icon, punishing her father's loyal nobles and giving the loot to the people. And when she had to she can throw down with a sword and a magic wand that controls plants, allowing for her to create new paths, grapple foes, and stuff like that. And when she slays a foe it turns into "red soul" butterflies that let her level up her abilities.

I need to write this stuff down. It could be a mix between Thief and Prince of Persia!

...I think I just heard Yhatzee spooge.

 

[Jadak]

That wouldn't work at all, where is the conflict that keeps us enthralled?

After you turn the target into sparkling butterflies, they turn on you. Presumably.

but then when you attack the butterflies does every individual butterfly turn into more butterflies?

No, that would be ridiculous. What's wrong with you?

 

[repeating integers]

God, you guys should read the comments on that article. High horses EVERYWHERE.

thought for the day: even diustat

 

[Frybird]

"You don't have to use shooting. You can use, for example, a princess which has a magic wand and whenever she touches something, it turns into a butterfly and sparkles."

Remember kids, ending the life of a sentient being is fine so long as it's pretty!

Great, now i want a game that features "girly" brightly colored worlds and magical princesses in pink dresses who have magic wands that shoot sparkles that make people COMBUST VIOLENTLY INTO A MIST OF BLOOD AND BODY PARTS or CAUSES MASSIVE ORGAN FAILURES THAT ENSURE VERY SLOW, PAINFUL DEATHS.

...I guess Fairytale Fights would be close enough, but i'd rather play as a giggling, pretty, omnipotent mass murderer whose enemies dispair in fear over the sparkly wand with the star on top that shoots pretty glitter that destroys a man or a village.

 

[Engarde]

Oh boy! I get to use this again.
Now on to something less PC (sorry):
So let me get this straight... In order for females to have fun, a woman in authority has to touch them with a magical wand to make their butterfly sparkly?

I thought that was only certain girls...

That video is great. Not that I'd ever play an Asura. Silly little things. Also I see what you did there!

 

[NLS]

I've actually been thinking about this before. What if you changed all the player models and weapons and locations, but kept the gameplay exactly the same. Would you still play generic FPS shooter with teddy bears and rainbow dust instead of terrorists and ak47s?

 

[bluepilot]

Butterflies are dangerous, when they flap their wings, they cause storms.

Imagine what a magical glittering butterfly would do. It may cover over a quarter of the land on Earth with a glittery ooze gel, causung mass damage, famine and pollution.

I`d rather take my chances with a bullet than outrun a glitter gel tsunami.

 

[Porecomesis]

You know what? While this is definitely not something I'd say for feminism, I would actually like to play a light-hearted game for once that isn't LittleBigPlanet or Mario or Sonic. Too many things these days are so dark and grim.

 

[AndyFromMonday]

That's a bit sexist. The author is just plain reinforcing stereotypes with that comment. Maybe she was joking?

 

[MidnightSt]

"As you know, most of us females just hate those action video games," she said. "You don't have to use shooting. You can use, for example, a princess which has a magic wand and whenever she touches something, it turns into a butterfly and sparkles."

well, putting aside that it's kind of sexist, and very clichéd/indoctrinated/out of date view of "girls", she's actually right.

i think the point of the quote is that there are many (unexplored/unused) ways to eliminate an enemy/make him harmless than just killing him, but the games tend to always use this one representation of removing the threat.

i think the issue with the quote is just picking a wrong example. take Civilization, or other 4X games, where often a fully viable way to win/defeat an enemy is by cultural victory.

"You don't have to exterminate the whole enemy populace/army, you could, for example, just develop such a strong cultural superiority that all his cities gradually flip to your side."

better, now?

P.S. i don't really have time to read the article now, but there are just two possibilities - either that i'm right about the point of the quote, or the article is mostly stupid and irrelevant :-D

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Everyone is different people need to stop answering for their gender...