Poll: If female characters were given an advantage....

[Tulks]

El Snippo

That it's an unbalanced game. What else is there to make of it?

/thread

OT: Replace male/female with character classes, and you get an existing source of complaints about RPGs, and to an extent games in general, since before they migrated to digital media. Why would splitting the same power imbalance along gender lines instead solve the problem.

If the aim is to make it more of a difficulty selection, or to allow for self-imposed challenges, the former would give me a little cause to worry about unfortunate implications and the latter can be done without much help from the designer.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

What if I think that men and women should be equal, but I don't think the government should run the economy into the ground?

Ah, then the word you are looking for is equality my friend.
Nothing else.

AKA feminism, when discussing gender equality.

 

[Dragonpit]

I was just wondering about seeing that same logic applied to a game, and how people would react to it.

Then you have your answer. Most people would call it an unbalanced game, with some people labeling it as an attempt at feminism (whether they'd be right or not is up in the air). Visually speaking, you're right, it could be attractive to male gamers, but on a purely practical perspective, it'd be questionable.

Also, whether it would be a good game anyway or not is also up in the air.

 

[gazumped]

It'd be an interesting game mechanic to make different character choices equate to different difficulty levels.
And in that sense, it might be arguable that although the females are more powerful, playing a man is the bigger challenge so it's like if you're a wimpy girl you'll choose a girl and if you're a tough man you'll choose the man.

So... it might even be an anti-feminist element.

Either way, if it actually advertised itself on this mechanic it'd be a tacky gimick and put me off buying it. If they don't make it a big deal it'll be easier to assume things just happen to be like that in the game and not really care.

 

[plugav]

And to be honest, there have been a LOT of anime that have justified a largely female cast by saying women are better at whatever their plot device is.

It's been done in Western fiction as well, in stories of witches and the like. But I think it would only work in a game if the playable charcters were all of one gender.

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

Living in the former Eastern Bloc, I'm not convinced socialism alone is the answer to all our troubles. But that's beside the point of this thread.

 

[teh_Canape]

"woman based campaign" makes me think of BattleTanks 64

you know, the whole "Woman are the most important individuals now, and men shoot the fuck out of each other with tanks for them" =P

 

[Marcilla]

Unbalanced and silly, no thank you.

 

[tokae]

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

What if I think that men and women should be equal, but I don't think the government should run the economy into the ground?

Ah, then the word you are looking for is equality my friend.
Nothing else.

AKA feminism, when discussing gender equality.

I'll make you a deal. When feminists in my home-country, Sweden, actually start asking for gender equality then I'll concede to that.
Because they don't. I can't speak for other countries than my own, but here it's a mess.
What they want is to get special treatment, nothing else. When it comes to apply to university or other educations, women who (considering their grades) shouldn't be there get in just to fill the quota. There is actually talk about making it a law that 50% of any given class has to be women. And exactly the same goes for jobs.

I ask you now, is that gender-equality? Or is that special treatment and a complete disregard for achievments?

 

[tokae]

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

Living in the former Eastern Bloc, I'm not convinced socialism alone is the answer to all our troubles. But that's beside the point of this thread.

Well yes, more off-topic just to answer: I never said it was, socialism isn't the answer to any troubles. But there are many good things in their values.
I just retorted.




EDIT: I'm starting to realize I'm completely de-railing this thread.
I think I'll go to bed now, good night.

 

[Peteron]

Doesn't matter, I would still beat everyone. Get at me.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

What if I think that men and women should be equal, but I don't think the government should run the economy into the ground?

Ah, then the word you are looking for is equality my friend.
Nothing else.

AKA feminism, when discussing gender equality.

I'll make you a deal. When feminists in my home-country, Sweden, actually start asking for gender equality then I'll concede to that.
Because they don't. I can't speak for other countries than my own, but here it's a mess.
What they want is to get special treatment, nothing else. When it comes to apply to university or other educations, women who (considering their grades) shouldn't be there get in just to fill the quota. There is actually talk about making it a law that 50% of any given class has to be women. And exactly the same goes for jobs.

I ask you now, is that gender-equality? Or is that special treatment and a complete disregard for achievments?

That sounds a lot like affirmative action. Regardless of whether you think it works, its sounds like the goal is to achieve equity, not to give women special advantages.

Interestingly enough, in the USA it actually tends to go the other way - universities try to have a 50-50 gender ratio, but over 50% of applicants are women. So women tend to have more competition for any given college.

 

[Gudrests]

That it's an unbalanced game. What else is there to make of it?

^ exactly this. That just turned a game into crap. because you HAVE to play as a female if you want to compete at the highest level. Why should your gender make you better at something when its all coding. In real life I understand that to a point based on how the gender is made *insert reason why men are normally bigger and stronger than females after age 14*

 

[RatRace123]

I would think that it's weird and then choose a female character and continue playing it.

 

[HerbertTheHamster]

i would call it an unbalanced and sexist game.

 

[tokae]

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

What if I think that men and women should be equal, but I don't think the government should run the economy into the ground?

Ah, then the word you are looking for is equality my friend.
Nothing else.

AKA feminism, when discussing gender equality.

I'll make you a deal. When feminists in my home-country, Sweden, actually start asking for gender equality then I'll concede to that.
Because they don't. I can't speak for other countries than my own, but here it's a mess.
What they want is to get special treatment, nothing else. When it comes to apply to university or other educations, women who (considering their grades) shouldn't be there get in just to fill the quota. There is actually talk about making it a law that 50% of any given class has to be women. And exactly the same goes for jobs.

I ask you now, is that gender-equality? Or is that special treatment and a complete disregard for achievments?

That sounds a lot like affirmative action. Regardless of whether you think it works, its sounds like the goal is to achieve equity, not to give women special advantages.

Interestingly enough, in the USA it actually tends to go the other way - universities try to have a 50-50 gender ratio, but over 50% of applicants are women. So women tend to have more competition for any given college.

I'll ask one more thing before going to bed, and this is rather important on this matter actually:
Can gender-equality ever be achieved by quotas? Because the term "gender-equality" implies that people will be treated equally, again: equally.
And that can't happen before you men and women as equals and evaluate based on what they have done.

If you don't do that, it's just not equal.


Interesting that what you said about universities in the US.
I did not know about that.
Now I know...


YO JOE!

 

[Woodsey]

A new game has come out - its the bees knees, reveiwers and players are loving it, both singleplayer and multiplayer. its the hot new game, thats selling in droves...

And the basis of the game is that women are inherently better at whatever form of combat its based around. Whether its a mystical force, or a unique and powerful control system that women inherently adapt to faster and better, women are the primary force in the singleplayer, and to map this across to multiplayer by saying that female characters gain skills/ranks/abilities at a notably faster rate. A character of either gender starts even, and the nominal 'caps' are even, but a female character will gain those ranks and reach that cap faster than a male character. What would you make of this?

That it's an unbalanced game. What else is there to make of it?

Basically this.

I can kind of see what you're getting at, almost, but as it stands, its just a bizarre design choice.

 

[Zantos]

I'll make you a deal. When feminists in my home-country, Sweden, actually start asking for gender equality then I'll concede to that.
Because they don't. I can't speak for other countries than my own, but here it's a mess.
What they want is to get special treatment, nothing else. When it comes to apply to university or other educations, women who (considering their grades) shouldn't be there get in just to fill the quota. There is actually talk about making it a law that 50% of any given class has to be women. And exactly the same goes for jobs.

I ask you now, is that gender-equality? Or is that special treatment and a complete disregard for achievments?

Ah, the wonders of trying to solve the problem. I know a lot of feminists (who by all rights go by that name falsely) who actually honestly believe that because of gender inequalities in the past that men should have oppression forcibly imposed to make up for it. Workplaces that do equality properly don't actually ask for first name, gender, age or ethnicity. Then they at least get to the interview stages before prejudice can kick in.

OT: Balanced differences in gender would be fine. One being outright better than the other would be a) Unbalanced, b) Unfun, c) probably start some controversy.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Totally unbalanced, feministic bullshit. That is all.

I don't think you understand the word "feminist."

Indeed I do, and I am of the belief that it's not needed in society, because it's very well covered from a socialistic political-view.

What if I think that men and women should be equal, but I don't think the government should run the economy into the ground?

Ah, then the word you are looking for is equality my friend.
Nothing else.

AKA feminism, when discussing gender equality.

I'll make you a deal. When feminists in my home-country, Sweden, actually start asking for gender equality then I'll concede to that.
Because they don't. I can't speak for other countries than my own, but here it's a mess.
What they want is to get special treatment, nothing else. When it comes to apply to university or other educations, women who (considering their grades) shouldn't be there get in just to fill the quota. There is actually talk about making it a law that 50% of any given class has to be women. And exactly the same goes for jobs.

I ask you now, is that gender-equality? Or is that special treatment and a complete disregard for achievments?

That sounds a lot like affirmative action. Regardless of whether you think it works, its sounds like the goal is to achieve equity, not to give women special advantages.

Interestingly enough, in the USA it actually tends to go the other way - universities try to have a 50-50 gender ratio, but over 50% of applicants are women. So women tend to have more competition for any given college.

I'll ask one more thing before going to bed, and this is rather important on this matter actually:
Can gender-equality ever be achieved by quotas? Because the term "gender-equality" implies that people will be treated equally, again: equally.
And that can't happen before you men and women as equals and evaluate based on what they have done.

If you don't do that, it's just not equal.


Interesting that what you said about universities in the US.
I did not know about that.
Now I know...


YO JOE!

I actually tend to agree with you re: quotas - they're attacking inequality from the wrong end. They create the appearance of equality, but don't actually do anything to address underlying sources of inequality.