"Illusions" That You Would Like Dispelled For the Good of Gaming

[Angelblaze]

"There are hardcore gamers and there are casual gamers."

Everything is only as serious as you take it, in the context you take it in. A person who spends 1,000+ hours and over 500 dollars playing Candy Crush is probably taking it waaaaay more seriously then someone who downloaded Dark Souls and played it for five minutes just to show they could.

Darker graphics, bleaker story telling and 'more complicated' mechanics do not equal a more intense gaming experience or a more 'dedicated' player base.

"By showing sex you show these characters have a history, an emotional attachment."

Not at all. We live in a culture where its considered weird to not have sex. Sex/sexual appeal permeates a large amount of our media, from television to movies to music, etc.

This of course isn't to say that sex -cannot- be used to show history and an emotional attachment, but that it should not be used on its own in an attempt to show attachment, since it is so often used to show everything else that by comparison sex is basic bread and butter.

If you want to show a heavy emotional attachment, have them casually hold hands and have interesting, intimate dialogue. Not necessarily sexual, but intimate and emotionally aware.

"Games are just shoving diversity wherever they can nowadays"

For the longest time white male protag. has been how you appeal to the main stream audience - considered to be young white adult male gamers but now even that group has grown either sick of that singular form of protagonist or is playing different character types merely because it is more adventurous and fun on average.

White bland male was the protagonist because 'no one would buy it', they flooded the market with them, people ate it up for a while, now they are sick of eating white male protagonist and want a more diverse choice. That's all it is.

Of course, that's not to say that a game with a white male protagonist wouldn't sell or that people now hate playing white male protagonists - just that games that allow you to pick other options are more likely to be sung more praises.

In addition, having a single person that happens to be a white male fighting against bad people is a bit of a played out idea just on its own - and the video game industry (Bioware and Telltale games aside) hates writers. Like, for no reason.


Also, why don't we start calling White Male Protagonists 'Wimps'?

White Male Protagonists

It would've been so perfect, just the right match for Yahztee's spunk gargle wee-wee.

 

[Fox12]

Male gamers only want white males age 20-45 as protagonists

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! When defending the typical white protagonist, I hear people say that they want creative developers to be free to make the kinds of games they like, instead of meeting some diversity quota, because it stifles creativity. They then say that developers are just chasing a target market, and that as games grow more diverse more diverse games will come out. I agree somewhat, in the sense that I support a developers creative freedom. The thing is, if you don't have a typical bro protagonist, a lot of studios will try to change that... Thus stifling creativity. One of the reasons why there are so few minority protagonists in games is because studio executives don't want to take the risk, which tells me there's a problem in the industry, and not on the consumer side. I'm a white male in my 20s, and I don't care who I play as, as long as the game is good. I never sat down and though "hey, I'm playing as a black guy" in walking dead. Lee was just another interesting character. Same goes for female protagonists. The idea that white men only want to play as white men is ridiculous. Just look at hunger games.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with a white male protagonist. Some of my favorite people are white males between the ages of 20 and 45. I just want more diversity.

 

[Cecilo]

Male gamers only want white males age 20-45 as protagonists

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! When defending the typical white protagonist, I hear people say that they want creative developers to be free to make the kinds of games they like, instead of meeting some diversity quota, because it stifles creativity. They then say that developers are just chasing a target market, and that as games grow more diverse more diverse games will come out. I agree somewhat, in the sense that I support a developers creative freedom. The thing is, if you don't have a typical bro protagonist, a lot of studios will try to change that... Thus stifling creativity. One of the reasons why there are so few minority protagonists in games is because studio executives don't want to take the risk, which tells me there's a problem in the industry, and not on the consumer side. I'm a white male in my 20s, and I don't care who I play as, as long as the game is good. I never sat down and though "hey, I'm playing as a black guy" in walking dead. Lee was just another interesting character. Same goes for female protagonists. The idea that white men only want to play as white men is ridiculous. Just look at hunger games.

There's nothing necessarily wrong with a white male protagonist. Some of my favorite people are white males between the ages of 20 and 45. I just want more diversity.

The big problem with trying to make a game with a female lead is they go "Hey our game features a female lead! Buy it!" And that is the extent of the game. Remember Me was like that, there was a big hype about how they were going to change it to a man but they fought to keep it a woman. And.. the game play sucked.

If you want the game to sell with a female lead. Make a good game first, then make a female character that fits into the world, if you imagined or thought up the game with a male lead, go with a male lead, because men and women ARE DIFFERENT, You can't just take a character model and swap it out, no one is going to mesh with a female lead that acts exactly like a man but has breasts. Let the game be, and make it good, and people will play it. Try to force things in and push that angle, it is gonna suck because that's all it has, and after people get past it, to actually playing it, well no one wants to eat a cardboard cake with pretty frosting do they?

 

[NPC009]

Exactly. It's insulting publishers think the only characters male players could possibly relate to are characters who are essentially idealised versions of themselves. It's also why just adding a bunch of female characters wouldn't solve all that much, because it's not as if women automatically like a female character just because she has a vagina.

Which reminds me...

The only valid fantasy settings are Middle Earth and feudal Japan.
A few years ago I was reading up in creation myths and other stories from around the world. Not just usual Norse stuff, but also native American, African and Aboriginal. Really awesome stuff. I'd love to play games inspired by those cultures. But nope, it's all white people speaking with English accents all the time every time. Boring.

 

[DrOswald]

I want to see great games. But with each passing year I'm having my hopes dashed more & more and, having reflected on this, it often seems down to the industry buying into "illusions" that certain things are great, when IMO they're not.

My examples are as follows:

Skyrim: "It's a great RPG and open world games are good."

It's not a bad game. I enjoyed it, and would rate it 7.5/10. But it's not an RPG, and the open world aspect of it doesn't need to be included in proper RPG's which are based around tight storytelling, to "better" them. It's a game for messing about in. It's a game for tossing it off in. It's not a game to grab you by the nuts and yank you into another realm by them. RPGs don't need to be open world to be great, it's all about emotion and the journey you undertake, not the boxes which open world games pride themselves in ticking.

I think you are judging Skyrim on the wrong metric. That is to say, your opinion is not wrong. I actually 100% agree that the game is a 7/10ish game. But to say it is not an RPG is way off base. Skyrim, and other similar RPGs, are not about stepping into the role of the character in a story. They are about stepping into the role of a person in a world. The open world is absolutely necessary for the basic theory of Skyrim. Removing the open world (or scaling it back) and shifting the focus to story would not improve Skyrim. It would make it a different game entirely. And that might be a better game, or one more suited for your (and my) tastes. But it wouldn't be Skyrim anymore, and it would not be the game that Skyrim fans want to play.

You aren't a real gamer if you only play on easy mode. - Yeah okay. I don't have an impressive collection, I can't discuss a story at length with someone, I suppose I don't even basically play, is that it? I hate the consensus of "hard mode = only way to ACTUALLY game"

I am going to second this one. Anyone who looks down on another gamer for playing easy mode is an idiot. Anyone who thinks an easy mode inherently compromises game design is even worse.

I remember awhile back people were freaking out because Dark Souls 2 might have had an easy mode. What a bunch of idiots.

 

[J Tyran]

I have "friends" who brag about playing through Mass Effect on insanity mode for like the fourth time and how it's just soooo easy for them and to me, it just comes across as pretentious. I don't judge a gamer on their mettle in simulated combat.

The Mass Effect series really isn't that hard unless you are new to the game and haven't got used to it and a starting with a low level new/imported character. With a NG+ its more like the way the game was intended to be played, you need your squad in support and you have to be aware of the maps and just be a little more tactically prepared as you have only 2-3 seconds of shield instead of tanking everything.

Oh it almost certainly was, but thats because once they looked at re-introducing open world to their games, it's natural they looked at the most popular one out there.

I'm just saying Skyrim isn't entirely to blame for the idea it should be, more that it's shown it could be worth the effort.

DA:O often felt like a game that the reason that greater freedom wasn't there was largely a resources issue rather than a deliberate aim. DA2 felt like a game that the modelling team were gain not given the resources to flesh it out.

I feel Bioware took more cues from the Ubisoft playbook rather than the Bethesda one, all those pointless busy work quests and "radio tower" unlocks where straight from Assassin's Creed, Far Cry and Watchdogs.

 

[Pyrian]

Bioshock 2: Its a terrible game!

I mean it wasn't a great game. Easily the worst of the Bioshock trilogy. But, come on people! Even the worst Bioshock game is league above 90% of the games out there. What, Assassin's Creed: Unity is above Bioshock 2? Gone Home?! Dying Light?! Hyrule Warriors?! Even Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel has a better rep that Bioshock 2, and Borderlands was a fucking map pack at full price!
Look, there's plenty to not like in Bioshock 2. But for all its polish, atmosphere, sold control, game mechanics and far above par writing, if it still gets lampooned, then we seriously need to look at the so-called great games going around and ask some pretty hard questions of them.

Maybe I'm prjecting my own views here, I'm pretty sure you just described the general consensus on Bioshock 2.

"Not bad, but not as good as the others, with pretty solid gomeplay."

There's even the odd nutter around the place who'll tell you it's the best of the bunch.

*Raises hand* I'm not sure whether I don't see what's so bad about the story in BS2 or don't see what's so great about the stories in BS1 and BSI, but regardless, the story in BS2 doesn't ruin the game for me. And that leaves the gameplay, which I think is overall the best in the series, even after BSI took significant cues from its predecessor.

 

[Syzygy23]

Well, I know this is gonna be a controversial thread!

Anyways, on to some I'd like to see, even if they're not universal.

Dark Souls 1&2: "It's a really hard game, therefore its a great game!"

I guess this is a callback to old 80s and 90s arcade games that milked quarters out of you. And it was either spend $20 trying to beat Dragon's Lair or play with a Bop-It. So I guess I understand the nostalgia of wanting to play a hard game, but holy hell guys/gals! Know the difference between a challenging, yet rewarding game, and a trial by fire for your patience. I consider it lucky I don't have a pet, because playing Dark Souls makes me want to kick a puppy.

Half-Life 2: Gordon Freeman is the best character, ever, EVER. And Half-Life is the best game ever!

Is it fair to say Gordon Freeman even has a character? I'm not convinced. As someone who never talks, or shows any emotion, I don't think its fair to think of Freeman as anything other than a tool. I mean you could convince me the Doom Marine has more personality than Gordon! His face at least grimaces when he gets hurt.
As far as Half-Life 2 as a game...its decent. I played it once when it came out. No real desire to play it again. There was just nothing that jumped out at me and made me go 'Holy Shit! I wanna see that again!' then reload a previous checkpoint just to play that last bit over. Half Life 2 is fine. Its decent. It passes the test, but that's all it does.
A solid C+ game.

Silent Hill 2: This is the scariest game of all time.

I'v seen this one a few times, notably from Yatzhee and Jim Sterling. Look, I played most of the Silent Hill games(I think I missed a OS one), and yes SH2 is good. But I actually found it funny! I laughed at most of the cut-scenes, and the enemies looked like something you'd see out of an Ed Wood movie! And I thought it was all a great laugh! I kept looking to see if I could see a zipper on Pyramid Head's helm.

But I keep reading that's its so dark, and moody and the isolation gets to you.

What isolation? I ran into dorky people doing whacky things all the time! One of them, the stripper-not-wife woman, followed me around! And the parts that were supposed to be scary were so dark I couldn't tell you what happened. There was a boss fight in a hospital with something hanging from the ceiling. No idea what it was. Like, at all! I just kept putting shotgun shells into it until whatever it was died.
I always thought Silent Hill 3 was way scarier! Even with the cult malarkey, having the protagonist be a scared teen girl is way darker than being a random yahoo like James was. For all we know James is an ex-Navy Seal with a degree in demonology and the occult, and he thinks Silent Hill is a paradise!

Bioshock 2: Its a terrible game!

I mean it wasn't a great game. Easily the worst of the Bioshock trilogy. But, come on people! Even the worst Bioshock game is league above 90% of the games out there. What, Assassin's Creed: Unity is above Bioshock 2? Gone Home?! Dying Light?! Hyrule Warriors?! Even Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel has a better rep that Bioshock 2, and Borderlands was a fucking map pack at full price!
Look, there's plenty to not like in Bioshock 2. But for all its polish, atmosphere, sold control, game mechanics and far above par writing, if it still gets lampooned, then we seriously need to look at the so-called great games going around and ask some pretty hard questions of them.

But Gordon Freeman DOES have a character!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SQhfkpX9bc

 

[Rahkshi500]

"Championing freedom and creativity, but..."

I would rather have the creative freedom be expanded out as much as possible to the maximum rather than be one of those people regardless of their beliefs who say that there should be creative freedom only to then say in the previous breath of how there should be a "right way" to make or write something regarding gaming.

 

[Dizchu]

Attractive (or even sexualised) female characters are bad/demeaning to women

One look at some of the character designers for games such as Bayonetta and Skullgirls will show that the intention isn't to spread the evil "male gaze" and subjugate women, but rather it's an attempt by female developers to inject a strong form of femininity into these games that appeals to them. Yes. Women like tits and ass too. I know, what degenerates right?

Non-sexualised female characters mean poor sales

Just look at Valve. Just look at the point-and-click adventure genre. People actually like female characters regardless of how bouncy their boobs are or how skimpy their armour is. People love Elizabeth from Bioshock Infinite, they love femshep, they love Alyx Vance... they also love non-human female characters like GladOS and SHODAN. This is a myth that is perpetuated by the industry rather than players.

Sexualised male characters don't exist

If anything is indicative of "(straight) male gaze", it's not all the upskirt shots and skin-tight catsuit-clad women, it's the complete obliviousness to what many women and men find physically appealing in male characters.

Solid Snake. SOLID GOD DAMN SNAKE. I'm not attracted to him but I actually talk to women (which I suspect many of these self-righteous "gender critics" don't). And some of those female friends think that Solid Snake is the bomb. They take screenshots of his ass, draw nasty fanart of him, endlessly ogle his physique which is covered in (very tight) stealth clothing. Come on. You can't compare him and, say... Zero Suit Samus and think that they're completely different.

If you compared him with an oversexualised female character that has little agency and needs to be rescued all the time? Sure, that's sexist. But if you look at two characters, each of opposite genders who are wearing pretty much the same thing and regard one as "sexualised" pretty much arbitrarily, that says more about your double standards than the game industry's.

Video games promote violence/sexism/homophobia/racism/the gay agenda/any other scary things

[CITATION NEEDED]

[ANITA SARKEESIAN, KOTAKU, FOX NEWS AND BUZZFEED ARE NOT PEER-REVIEWED SOURCES]

 

[SunlightHeart]

key spring board for game stories cuz men are heros women are their cheerleaders, eyecandy, conquest, cargo, care givers, revenge motivators as the dead or to be saved, quest givers, and side kicks.

If only this were true anymore. I literally just looked at the 360's entire library of games, and I can honestly say that most of them aren't like that. Dead tropes are dead.

 

[CaitSeith]

This is the illusion I'd like to be gone from most gamers heads: My point the view is the realistic one, and those who don't agree live in their own make-believe world

 

[Mister K]

It seems to me that many people think that there exist only 2 types of games: Big-budget AAA games with guns, tits and explosions (or swords, tits and explosions, if you are into fantasy) and indie games, which consist only of platformers and VN's.

Guys, you do realise that there are, for example, niche games made not by independant company, but still with all the love and care they could muster (like Platinum Games, or SMT series), or, I don't know, something else besides two groups of games mentioned in the first sentence, right?

 

[EternallyBored]

how about the myth of the omnipresent "white male protagonist"...

Spoiler

[small]most of the avatars i play with aren't even human...[/small]

While I can agree that the sentiment of "there's no female character in games ever!!!1!" is often an exaggeration that downplays the good games with female protagonists that come out, that list is shit and doesn't debunk the White male protagonist critique, at least when said critique is made honestly.

The list itself doesn't even give a good representation of games released in 2014, conspicuously missing Frigging AC: Unity, one of the biggest AAA releases of the year. The list also excludes AC:rogue and The Crew, I know its supposed to be only the top 100 from gamerankings, but that is not the way to prove that female characters aren't in a minority of games releases as it only includes a small selection of games at any one time.

The list also takes a truly half-assed attempt at including indie titles, pulled from gamerankings or not, it is not a good representation of releases in 2014 as a whole, basically excluding a rather large number of indie games released this year with male protagonists, unisex choices, or agender non-human protagonists.

Included is also Tomb Raider: DE a 2013 re-release on current gen consoles, but leaves out other re-releases like the MGS:R re-release on PC which features singular male protagonist Raiden.

The list is also including DLC in the female only column, but doesn't even bother to do this for other categories except for Reaper of Souls. Yeah, including two entries for DLC for games with White male protagonists is not proving anything, if anything it supports the point that a company will lead with a White male protagonist, then maybe follow up with letting you play a female down the line in the DLC.

The categories of some of the games is a joke as well, I don't mean the sports games, that's fine, but why the hell are both South Park and Child of Light included in the Asexual category whilst Child of Light pulls double duty in the female only column but the South Park game is not given the same consideration, same with Shovel knight, they are both male protagonists, why does Child of Light count for the female column but neither of these games count for the male column?

Some of the unisex stuff is really dubious as well. Playing as Ellie for a single chapter doesn't really discount spending 95% of the game playing as Joel in the Last of Us

Jesus, this list is a mess, even a quick glance shows glaring errors all over the place, not just subjective categorization either, but just double standards (South Park, Shovel Knight) and dubious inclusions (DLC), I'm not expecting academic research here, but some basic effort would be nice. That thing isn't going to be dispelling any illusions, the GG tag at the bottom coupled with the terrible research will just result in it being written off as propaganda.

 

[Dizchu]

Jesus, this list is a mess, even a quick glance shows glaring errors all over the place, not just subjective categorization either, but just double standards (South Park, Shovel Knight) and dubious inclusions (DLC), I'm not expecting academic research here, but some basic effort would be nice. That thing isn't going to be dispelling any illusions, the GG tag at the bottom coupled with the terrible research will just result in it being written off as propaganda.

I'm pretty sure that chart came out before the end of 2014 (correct me if I'm wrong). Around the time Gamergate blew up. There were baseless accusations that GG was trying to "keep gaming as a boys' club". With zero evidence, of course.

While the list is a bit dodgy and probably skewed in GG's favour, the fact is, news networks and clickbait sites were exaggerating the issues to cause drama. Gaming's not perfect but it's not an unsalvageable pit of misogyny either, and I think that was the sentiment.

 

[EternallyBored]

Jesus, this list is a mess, even a quick glance shows glaring errors all over the place, not just subjective categorization either, but just double standards (South Park, Shovel Knight) and dubious inclusions (DLC), I'm not expecting academic research here, but some basic effort would be nice. That thing isn't going to be dispelling any illusions, the GG tag at the bottom coupled with the terrible research will just result in it being written off as propaganda.

I'm pretty sure that chart came out before the end of 2014 (correct me if I'm wrong). Around the time Gamergate blew up. There were baseless accusations that GG was trying to "keep gaming as a boys' club". With zero evidence, of course.

While the list is a bit dodgy and probably skewed in GG's favour, the fact is, news networks and clickbait sites were exaggerating the issues to cause drama. Gaming's not perfect but it's not an unsalvageable pit of misogyny either, and I think that was the sentiment.

It's a nice sentiment, but very poorly supported by this chart. The leading question at the top pretty much destroys its credibility before it began. Answering a zero-evidence accusation with a non sequitor chart accomplishes nothing.

"are video games sexist?" this is a ridiculous question as pretty much nobody has made that argument. That's like the other side creating a chart with the question, "is there no sexism in videogames?" it creates an easy to debunk extreme question that doesn't need to be answered as nobody is asking it. Even Sarkeesian, apparently head of the gaming inquisition has never made this argument.

That the chart includes Child of Light in both Women and asexual category, but leaves out both South Park and Shovel Knight from the male category would definitely indicate either low effort in accuracy or ideological manipulation is at work here, which is not a good thing to do when one of the goals of your chart is to counter the supposed ideological manipulation of the other side.

The chart doesn't even answer the question anyway. just listing games with male/female/both/neither protagonists doesn't actually answer whether or not games are sexist. They aren't, (as a whole) obviously, but the chart is pretty much the equivalent to posting a bunch of abusive tweets to show that "all gamers are raging misogynists". At best, it is empty grandstanding, and at worst it is basically poorly done propaganda.


If anything, the chart undermines its own point, that it has to include DLC, re-releases and off beat indie games to pad out the women section, and leaves off quite a few of 2014's AAA releases, many featuring male protagonists, and still ends up with close to half as many in female column as the male is really kind of sad. In seeking to prove that games aren't sexist as some kind of singular entity, it actually does a decent job at showcasing that female protagonists do have to struggle to get their own game that isn't roster based or "choose your own gender", especially in the AAA sphere.