Let's play a game about sex and sexism.

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

It's still a reasonable indicator. When a group was given the choice between having a male or female character the vast majority of said group chose a male one. No this is not conclusive proof that these individuals would not buy a game with a female lead. But it does show what the general preference was, which gender the players would play as when given a choice.

If I'm stood in a video game store. Glancing between Uncharted 3 and the new Tomb Raider, this preference is going to come into play (amongst other preferences).

Is it a reasonable indicator though? We only know how many players played a MaleShep, not how important the gender choice was to them or even if they bothered with the choice, since MaleShep is also the generic option for those that don't fiddle around with the character creator, just like Soldier is the default class and sees the most use.

I realize this isn't hardcore scientific research, but I can safely say that there are too man confounding and unknown factors from that ME3 summary to make it a reliable statistic for indicating gender preference. For example, what would have happened if FemShep was the generic choice? Would we see more FemSheps? As Jim Sterling pointed out in his last Jimquisition, there needs to be a whole lot of more research done in this area, because right now we are in a hen/egg-situation where we simply aren't sure what's what in terms of gender preference and its' importance to gamers.

 

[Chemical Alia]

/Rant.

Can I actually enjoy my FANTASY and not have the insipid demands for realism in every game that exists? Video games are not reality and do not need to be tied down to the mundane and boring world of reality when the desires of the developers want people to actually be absorbed by the imagination.

That is one thing that is always depressing to see and demand I see mainly made by women is that they want every game to reflect reality. Yes, obviously a breast plate that is actually molded to the form of the woman is not realistic. But the universe that exists within that game isn't real. I mean for all the studies stating that women have a greater imagination than men, I am always dumbfounded at how many individuals who are women would simply want to trade in all that imagination for even more generic and boring reality.

I couldn't imagine playing through any of the Fire Emblem games if they didn't have characters that stood out by having a dynamic artistic design and personality. I mean Lyn's clothing is completely unsuited for battle and the same with Titania but god dammit they are great characters and they look good(not to mention powerful as hell) and it makes me want to use them.

Ya really think LINK if brought down to the boring mundane or reality would actually be wearing a green tunic?

On the flip side, I'd actually like to play my fantasy without having to see absolute dumbass shit like that armor, that exists for no purpose other than an artist thought "oh my god, I have to make this for a girl, this means I must sculpt out the boobs despite the fact that it looks utterly retarded!!!" Except that there probably wasn't actually a thought, that's just what happens naturally with some artists, they do stuff like that by absolute default. It gets hard to play a game when my eyes are rolling out of my head so much.

Honestly, I just like good art that's intelligently made and thought out. Whether it's fantasy or completely realistic, it should still be believable within its own setting (though you have more room for creativity within fantasy settings). "Thought-out" doesn't mean "your fun is ruined", it just means that the person who made it wasn't mentally a 12-year-old. This stands for everything from boobs to environments, as well.

 

[Milanezi]

Samus is voiced (And pretty obviously voiced, she grunts a lot when she gets bumped around by missiles and melee attacks) in the Prime series and Other M, she has a large section outside the power suit in Zero Mission, and she has narration in Super Metroid and Metroid Fusion. There's also that whole death animation in the 2D games and Other M after Super Metroid. It's kinda hard to claim that her gender is any more cosmetic than the Master Chief's.

Also, Halo CE isn't console exclusive.

THAT, in my opinion, from the games that were mentioned, only Chell is female for a cosmetic reason. Like you said, if Samus is "cosmetic", than so is Master Chief and MANY other characters... The thing with Chell is that her character is almost non-existent, she's not important to the game nor the focus of the game, Chell is merely a tool for the gameplay of Portal, in other words, it could be a dog shooting portals for all we care lol

I find it interesting to say "games with girls don't sell", if you don't make them available nor market them, well DUH, they won't sell EVER... It's a cycle, it's a refusal to break with the paradigm that was birthed in the decades ago with kids in mind and that got mostly the attention of the male audience; like most fields, people refuse to break with the paradigm for fear of failure... But then again, I think that was the point of Penny Arcade's article somebody pointed out.

 

[RatherDashing89]

Small note: I didn't include Portal in the female list because Chell's gender is entirely cosmetic. She's a silent protagonist in an FPS. I don't count Samus as a real female character in most of her games for the same reason. Or Gordon Freeman as a male one for that matter.

Chell's gender is absolutely not solely cosmetic. No, we don't hear Chell speaking, but we do spend the game learning about her. And there's another vital female character in that game as well, one we do hear talk through the entire experience. Listen carefully to Glados during Portal 2. One of the major themes of the game is Chell's relationship with Glados. Glados doesn't just generically deride her; she seeks to hurt her in many of the age-old ways women hurt each other. Portal 2 is about a mother-daughter relationship,

Spoiler

Especially when you consider the fact that Caroline may, in fact, be Chell's mother.

Chell and Glados both had to be female for the interaction to have the impact it did. And Portal may be the only video game, even when you include Metroid and Tomb Raider, to pass the (IMO too restricting) Bechdel test.

 

[Do4600]

Bothie Games:
Dragon Age: Origins: 4.37 Million
Mass Effect 2: 4.52 Million
TES V: Skyrim: 14.42 Million
.

May I point out that in all of these games playing a female character is essentially cosmetic as well? Unless you are only counting choices of romance. It doesn't change the game at all to play either gender, the plot rolls along exactly the same for both. In Skyrim if you play in first person the only way you know your character's gender is when they grunt because you got hit by a walrus...thing.

The point is also that I don't think the differences between genders really amounts to much when the objective is killing aliens, orcs, terrorists or dragons. The differences between genders only really becomes apparent when the situation is not life and death against un-human monsters. How many games that sell well are not about a life or death struggle against a superior un-human force?

If there was an option to play a woman in the latest Call of Duty it wouldn't change the game at all, you'd have a different voice-over, how is that any less cosmetic than Chell?

 

[Kopikatsu]

There was a pretty interesting post on PENNY ARCADE REPORT according to this topic.
It is about publishers and marketing, please read it ... I cannot find it though.

EDIT:

Ha, in your face internet

http://penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them

This actually explains why I haven't seen any Tomb Raider advertisements much, there were only a few upon release (please someone tell me if I need to get out from my rock if it was more wide-spread).

Back to the point, I think some of those VGChartz numbers are wrong/outdated a little, at least for Tomb Raider. Square says the game has sold approximately 3.4 million, not 1.44, unless I'm missing something about VGChartz or the 1.44 isn't global.

Square says the expected sales for Tomb Raider were 3.4 million [http://www.gamesradar.com/tomb-raider-sleeping-dogs-hitman-sell-below-expectations/] (not actual sales). That also doesn't include PC downloads. The game actually only sold 1.44 million units (including PC), which fits with Square saying it underperformed.

Let me put it this way. Lara Croft is one of (if not THE) most iconic women in the gaming industry. Tomb Raider '13 has high production values, an extensive ad campaign, scored decently on professional reviews, and it's emulating a game that has sold very well (Uncharted, which itself drew from the original TR). If you really want more female protagonists in games, then buy as many copies of the new Tomb Raider as you can afford, because that's the game publishers will be looking at. If it underpreforms to such an extent, then publishers are just going to go right back to doing what they're doing.

Bothie Games:
Dragon Age: Origins: 4.37 Million
Mass Effect 2: 4.52 Million
TES V: Skyrim: 14.42 Million
.

May I point out that in all of these games playing a female character is essentially cosmetic as well? Unless you are only counting choices of romance. It doesn't change the game at all to play either gender, the plot rolls along exactly the same for both. In Skyrim if you play in first person the only way you know your character's gender is when they grunt because you got hit by a walrus...thing.

The point is also that I don't think the differences between genders really amounts to much when the objective is killing aliens, orcs, terrorists or dragons. The differences between genders only really becomes apparent when the situation is not life and death against un-human monsters. How many games that sell well are not about a life or death struggle against a superior un-human force?

If there was an option to play a woman in the latest Call of Duty it wouldn't change the game at all, you'd have a different voice-over, how is that any less cosmetic than Chell?

The game actually does account for gender in those games. Relationships are the biggest part, but even dialogue changes. For example, in Mass Effect 2, a bouncer in Omega will ask Shepard if she's a stripper if she's a woman but doesn't make the same comment to a man.

 

[Smeatza]

Is it a reasonable indicator though? We only know how many players played a MaleShep, not how important the gender choice was to them or even if they bothered with the choice, since MaleShep is also the generic option for those that don't fiddle around with the character creator, just like Soldier is the default class and sees the most use.

We can safely assume one of 3 things about your average video gamer. They either, prefer playing as a male character, prefer playing as a female character, or do not care either way. Maleshep indicates either the first or last options. Femaleshep indicates the second option.
So what we have indicates that your average gamer either doesn't care or wants to play as a male character.
This does nothing to persuade someone who thinks having a female main character is a "risk" otherwise.

I realize this isn't hardcore scientific research, but I can safely say that there are too man confounding and unknown factors from that ME3 summary to make it a reliable statistic for indicating gender preference. For example, what would have happened if FemShep was the generic choice? Would we see more FemSheps? As Jim Sterling pointed out in his last Jimquisition, there needs to be a whole lot of more research done in this area, because right now we are in a hen/egg-situation where we simply aren't sure what's what in terms of gender preference and its' importance to gamers.

Oh definitely. The problem we have is that I've never encountered any marketing (and that is what we're talking about here) that stands up to scientific criticism.
Marketing is based on generalising which is an awful start. But another example? Publishers will say that having a non male, non brown haired lead character is a risk. Why? Not because they've had games with "non male, non brown haired lead characters" that have failed, but because the games with male, brown haired characters have sold the most.
That's the kind of counter intuitive thinking you get with marketing.

 

[Chemical Alia]

On the flip side, I'd actually like to play my fantasy without having to see absolute dumbass shit like that armor, that exists for no purpose other than an artist thought "oh my god, I have to make this for a girl, this means I must sculpt out the boobs despite the fact that it looks utterly retarded!!!" Except that there probably wasn't actually a thought, that's just what happens naturally with some artists, they do stuff like that by absolute default. It gets hard to play a game when my eyes are rolling out of my head so much.

Honestly, I just like good art that's intelligently made and thought out. Whether it's fantasy or completely realistic, it should still be believable within its own setting (though you have more room for creativity within fantasy settings). "Thought-out" doesn't mean "your fun is ruined", it just means that the person who made it wasn't mentally a 12-year-old. This stands for everything from boobs to environments, as well.

And yet hilariously you realize that your opinion is so full of your own personal opinion that you don't realize that you are throwing out subjective criteria that only meets your own personal standards on what you think is "good" or "intelligent" or "thought out".

Why must consumers make such ridiculous demands as if they have some right to control the creation of the content that should be left to each individual developer? Why can't both styles simply exist?

The thing is that individuals that you have seen are basically demanding that one style should no longer be used and that only creates stagnation and limits the many artistic styles that can be done. If that is their default thinking, why is that somehow seen as "wrong" or "bad" or "poorly thought out"? Because if it really is like you say that the side you are against then why do they even have a job working as an artist or developer? Chances are though that maybe there is that small possibility that is how they want their game to be and that's how they want their artistic style to be to ensure characters that are say important be they villains or heroes stand out.

It even makes me more sad that you yourself work in this industry and honestly look down on your fellow artists and developers for the type of content they want to create. Tell me, who do you exactly think is mentally a 12 year old that works in the video game industry? Why do you think their style or choices as a developer or artist are so inferior to that of yourself that their style should no longer exist?

What I want is for people to set higher standards for themselves. If your job is to concept a character, or an architectural piece, or designing a new fantasy world, there needs to be some high level thought and research at some point into what influences these things. How things from the real world influence fantasy, and that's what makes something feel grounded and real, no matter how abstract it is.

When it's clear that someone's just lazily pulling things straight from their head, or when their background consists of nothing but comic book characters and other video games, I feel strongly that there's missed opportunity. The end result can be anything, in any style the creators want, but I want to feel like some decision making went into the creative process, rather than relying on what you already know because you're not interested in growing.

I'm not condemning any styles at all. But having a broader knowledge of why you're making design choices can only result in a more well-rounded product, whatever the stylistic goal is. If that makes more sense.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Finally a chance to link this article: http://madartlab.com/2011/12/14/fantasy-armor-and-lady-bits/
That's why boob cups are so dreadful. Apart from being just plain ugly and sexist, of course.

 

[Batou667]

Finally a chance to link this article: http://madartlab.com/2011/12/14/fantasy-armor-and-lady-bits/
That's why boob cups are so dreadful. Apart from being just plain ugly and sexist, of course.

Yeah, it'd be like male knights having ridiculously oversized crotch armour...

Spoiler: Oh, wait...

 

[Chemical Alia]

What I want is for people to set higher standards for themselves. If your job is to concept a character, or an architectural piece, or designing a new fantasy world, there needs to be some high level thought and research at some point into what influences these things. How things from the real world influence fantasy, and that's what makes something feel grounded and real, no matter how abstract it is.

When it's clear that someone's just lazily pulling things straight from their head, or when their background consists of nothing but comic book characters and other video games, I feel strongly that there's missed opportunity. The end result can be anything, in any style the creators want, but I want to feel like some decision making went into the creative process, rather than relying on what you already know because you're not interested in growing.

I'm not condemning any styles at all. But having a broader knowledge of why you're making design choices can only result in a more well-rounded product, whatever the stylistic goal is. If that makes more sense.

Okay so you want "higher standards". But I must ask. What if the final product that goes through the standards of focus groups, team meetings, and an evolution of changes from concept art to final design is still something you disapprove of? Did they fail to meet those "higher standards" or is it really your own personal opinion that you just think less of their imagination and artistic style?

Also that is just terrible when you think that a person is lazy when their background consists of comic book character or working on other video games. You really need to realize that not everyone is going to get the opportunity to develop a strong portfolio or have access to the same resources as everyone else. I don't think you really want to dismiss a potential candidate simply because their portfolio consists of projects that they poor their blood, sweat and tears into only to be considered by you as "lazy".

But the thing is you ARE condemning other styles. I'm arguing that when it comes to video games and art we can have both what you want in terms of replicating our reality in a video game and have the complete off the wall imagination that accent the female form.[/quote]

I'm perfectly capable of thinking "boy, I hate that", but still recognizing that it's well done and respecting that. It happens to me all the time, not everything has to be your cup of tea, but it's nice when you can tell some thought went into it anyway. And yes, there are lazy artists. There are lazy people in every line of work.

People who do art for their career don't "get off the hook" for having a bad portfolio or being bad at art. Nobody's a perfect artist, but it should be in every artist's interest to improve, for their own sake, and to have more to offer where they work. There are tons of resources out there these days that any artist can utilize, so that's really not an excuse.

Art is not above criticism. Sure it's subjective, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't voice our opinions about it simply because it's "the artist's vision and who are we to question it". Critique is generally what motivates and helps people improve their work and thrive rather than stagnate at the same level.

But the thing is you ARE condemning other styles. I'm arguing that when it comes to video games and art we can have both what you want in terms of replicating our reality in a video game and have the complete off the wall imagination that accent the female form.

No, I'm saying exactly what you are. I'm not saying you can't have exaggeration, stylization, or sexuality. Only that there's good ways and shitty ways to go about it, and that I'm free to call out bullshit art when that's my opinion of it. As is everyone else.

 

[Hjalmar Fryklund]

I should preface this by saying that I don't really agree with either of the two participants of this particular debate and that I'm only adressing this snippet specifically.

Also that is just terrible when you think that a person is lazy when their background consists of comic book character or working on other video games. You really need to realize that not everyone is going to get the opportunity to develop a strong portfolio or have access to the same resources as everyone else. I don't think you really want to dismiss a potential candidate simply because their portfolio consists of projects that they poor their blood, sweat and tears into only to be considered by you as "lazy".

Two problems with this.

1. When you put together a portfolio you don't just cram whatever pictures you have on hand into it; you pick them on the basis of what you are applying for. If you are applying to say, a clothing designer, it wouldn't be terribly appropriate to just add in images of fantasy monsters for no reason (assuming you aren't applying for doing clothing print designs, of course).

2. Your argument is a very blatant appeal to emotion. "Think of the artists! Think of their feelings! Think of how hard they work!" You know something? Those things do not matter at all. What matters is if the artist can supply the appropriate art, artistry, and skillset to the job in question. The rest are not relevant to an employer.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

That is a terrible article. Really it is just him asserting his opinion and completely ignores the surrounding artistic style, the gameplay, narrative that all compliment the character or type of character that they are playing all in the name of "realism" in for the most part science fiction or fantasy.

Which is a hilarious thing to read, coming from the person who made an entire post hinging on personal incredulity, strawmen and personal anecdotes to prove his point. Really, it is fine to call out "that's your opinion" but it is pretty much akin to throwing rocks in glass houses when all of your own posts are exactly the same.

How many times do I have to mention that video games don't have to reflect reality all the time. It's not a bad thing that an artist or game decides to have their character to look a specific style that is completely unrealistic.

How many times must we mention that we don't want perfect realism in games? We just want female characters to be given the same consideration during character design as male character gets, in particular we want less casual sexualization of female characters.

Or, to put it succinctly: Stop it with the damn strawman already and start reading what we are actually writing.

It's getting to the point where I have actually seen people actually advocate that video game characters should have equal rights as people. Bloody insane.

The relevance of this statement to the current discussion? None. No one in this thread has asked for this or even implied they want this. You are, in effect, putting down a non-relevant personal anecdote in an attempt to make others see Chemical Alia's and CloudAtlas posts as guilty by association or guilty by proxy.

 

[CloudAtlas]

Finally a chance to link this article: http://madartlab.com/2011/12/14/fantasy-armor-and-lady-bits/
That's why boob cups are so dreadful. Apart from being just plain ugly and sexist, of course.

That is a terrible article. Really it is just him asserting his opinion and completely ignores the surrounding artistic style, the gameplay, narrative that all compliment the character or type of character that they are playing all in the name of "realism" in for the most part science fiction or fantasy.

How many times do I have to mention that video games don't have to reflect reality all the time. It's not a bad thing that an artist or game decides to have their character to look a specific style that is completely unrealistic.

Did you even read it before calling it terrible? He is asserting his opinion as an actual armorer, so he knows what he's talking about. He is not ignoring style, gameplay and narrative - he is explicitly saying that there often needs to be a compromise between style and functionality, but there are good ways and bad ways of doing it.
You're always invoking total freedom of art and style or what not, and I'm sorry that's just bullshit. Good design is design that is consistent within its own world, its own rules, its own framework. And if there's a need for male characters to armor up in your world, but your female characters are running around in chainmail bikini, then that's just bad design. You can only excuse so much with art and style.

Stop always bringing up art and style. The real reason why female characters are scantily clad in the first place is because it's a cheap and lazy way to pander to a segment of the male audience. Everything else are post hoc excuses.
But, unsurprisingly, that's rarely brought up as defense.