The_Kodu said:
Except games should tackle issues at least unless they're to become super safe attempts to never offend anyone. That's something media can tackle issues. I mean look as when Stan Lee defied the Comic code authority because they claimed they wouldn't let his story carry the comic code seal because at one point a friend of Peter Parker gets high on drugs and jumps off a building and has to be saved. They refused it on the grounds that it had a story about drugs in it despite the fact it was a negative portrayal where the person in question almost dies.
Most games have the villain being the one showing the violence to an extent they show the person you're trying to stop, the bad guy as doing these action along with many other negative / bad things.
And I agree. If a developer wants to tackle such topics such as domestic abuse, rape, sex work, and similar subjects, then they should be allowed. Sure, they will be held up to scrutiny, but if they can pull it off, they could tell incredible stories. Of course, to tell these stories, it is good to be aware of the history and/or culture surrounding the subject. It's this awareness that allows them to make the story so compelling.
Never played it sorry but isn't it meant to be based on a a 14th century poem ?
Yes, but they changed a few things. Among them was changing Beatrice from a guide for Dante into a damsel in distress for Dante to save. It's sort of a poster child now for how bad the trope can get.
Or you could equally argue subjectively that games are saying
"Men can just be evil on their own Women generally tend not to be evil of their own accord"
or even
"Men are corruptible while women aren't and have to be mainpulated and controlled to do evil."
But do we actually have a culture that views things in those dynamics?
Except in her third video on Damsels in distress where she actually claims it's mere tokenism and just as regressive to have have a Woman have to save a man in part of the game because um..............it's not that prevalent and common and as such it means nothing so is pointless .............
For the record, I'm not defending everything she says. I just don't think she's incredibly nefarious.
But as for the dude in distress flip of the damsel in distress, I agree that it can be problematic if the man is just viewed as win state, but just like the damsel in distress, there are ways to make it compelling.
From what I remember of the program it was Female on Male.
Eh, so I'm guess you can't find the study itself?[footnote]The closest I've come personally is the website, but I couldn't find the study itself.[/footnote] The articles I've read on it tend to mention the study, but then the following commentary, normally from an MRA group, just jumps to the conclusion that it must be female-on-male violence.
I probably should mention this could simply be related to biological reasons (Testosterone it's a hell of a drug). That is not ruling out a woman being strong but it would comparatively require more effort it the relation is to physical strength. However in terms of other strengths say reflexes or some metal abilities then women could easily be said to be stronger in those aspects than men.
Again we're talking about maximum potential here though
I'm not saying sexual dimorphism has to be completely ignored (though, let's be honest, it is based around tendencies, not fully grounded rules). Actually, possibly my favorite game of all time [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_of_Persia:_The_Sands_of_Time] based its character interactions partially off the male protagonist being stronger and more acrobatic than his female companion, but they handled it with a lot of care and never treated the female as less than the male due to those differences and even gave her a few strengths of her own.
But let's face it, this is all fiction. Our characters are often doing things that no one can potentially do, and I don't think I've ever heard anyone complaining that Bayonetta is too unrealistic, just like no one will complain that Kratos is unrealistic. And I don't think anyone complained about Saints Row's crazy antics depending on whether they went with a male or female character. In that fictional space, where the only limits to what is and isn't possible is our imagination, I don't think it is too much to ask that we also consider the dynamics of the characters we have, including their gender. Sure, the tendency (though not unbroken rule) in real life is that women are weaker than men, but that also doesn't necessarily justify us portraying women as weak people that need the protection and/or guidance of a man. Besides, it also isn't like women have never shown displays of power, both physical and social, in real life before.
MysticSlayer said:
Maybe Anita seems to be limiting (after all, she doesn't offer many alternatives to the current standards), but I personally don't find feminism to be an enemy to diverse storytelling in games. If anything, it offers was to get more diverse stories and characters. It's just focused on a very specific subject.
it could well do that but again most story tropes have been around in one form or another for many yes some even being traceable back to Greek Mythology.
Of course, there's no real need to continue using tropes in the same way that they were used back in the oldest stories we have on record. It both hinders creativity and also ignores cultural progress that has occurred over the centuries. I mean, I'd imagine very few people would actually advocate a story that openly advocates Aristotle's view of women, and even the chivalry of the Middle Ages, which itself helped advance the view of women, is considered sexist by today's standards. Sure, the sexist undertones in a lot of games' stories maybe be more subtle now, similar to how racism in American culture is much more subtle than during slavery or pre-Civil Rights era, but it still is worth finding ways to present these tropes without the negative undertones.
And to be fair, even games have shown a lot of advancement. For instance, both Mario and Zelda have advanced past making their damsel in distress simple win states, and games like BioShock Infinite have completely turned the trope around. I wouldn't say we're in a perfect position yet, as it does require some cherry picking when displaying the games that that supposedly show the industry no longer has any problems, but we're at least showing signs of making progress, and I think it is worth pointing out how we can make further progress.
Except the argument is if it was due to limitations or malice. On a Larger scale in a game you could argue problems but on an individual basis relating to one aspect then it's hard to claim it was malice when limitations such as cost, be it monetary or time, and space / storage limitations restrict it.
The difference I can best illustrate this way.
Assassins Creed not having the main protagonist being female (not an option but straight up female) could be questioned as a design decision and ask if it's a problem in the industry that it won't have female leads.
However a random female NPC in the game being killable and not having much dialogue is related to the game design. Its harder to specifically restrict players from killing someone than to have it fully open in the system hence why generally it's only important character you can't easily kill off as they often have separate coding for them. As for not being fleshed out it could again be budget issues. If the game has no fleshed out female character they you could claim it was a choice but an individual character you can't claim that for.
Of course there are limitations to what we can do, but part of making a great game, even from a design perspective, is to work around those limitations to give us something compelling. Sure, some limitations, such as offering a diverse cast, are easier to overcome than other limitations, such as offering a different model for every NPC. But if we expect developers to find compelling ways around their limitations, I don't think it is too hard to expect them to also find interesting ways to hold to certain ethical standards. Sure, some complaints Anita has, such as reusing character models, are just things we have to deal with. Other limitations at least seem easier to work around.
As for Assassin's Creed in particular, would have been too hard to have even one of the main characters in one of the cities you go to be a woman? I mean, we all know there are female assassins, and the game even gave us a character model for a female villain that got maybe a couple minutes of screen time at most. With that in mind, I don't think it is too unreasonable to expect a slightly more diverse cast than we got.
Again that's the thing in reality chances are you wouldn't see more of their character.
Games could do this to an extent in some cases but it would mostly involve having a one of the main named cast associated with the profession rather than them merely existing as part of a scene. If you're just passing through the location and it's used once then it would be hard to really give a character. Also to give an example where this was tried. They tried to add more to the prostitute in Far cry 3
[I removed the video so it doesn't take up so much space, but I do appreciate you showing it.]
^ Here's a scene that wasn't shown by Anita.
Which if anything really does suggest even in many games they are portraying a realistic approach of them selling fantasy to you not reality.
In that Far cry 3 scene above you can see the reality slipping in and the fantasy image given out being broken away.
Well, for starters, it doesn't have to be a character in that profession. Liara from Mass Effect let us understand Asari culture, which itself helped us understand how Asari view sex and why so many of them take to being dancers, including the troubles them and other Asari face due to the attached stigma. Even if Liara was simply a scientist who later turned to information dealing, she still gave us a decent look into the culture surrounding so many of the dancers and the struggles they face due to the perception others have of their culture.
Other times, it could be worked into the level itself. Dishonored let us use the heart to get more information on any NPC we wanted, and it also left a few hidden conversations and notes around the level to flesh it out more to those who explored and wanted more characterization and world building associated with the brothel. The Witcher gave us the chance to meet and interact with one prostitute outside of her job.
Sure, letting us have glimpses into many of these characters' lives may not be ultra realistic when compared to how most people interact with them in the real world, but at the same time, we're already allowing some fantasy into how interactions really occur. I'm not saying games have to completely remove the element of fantasy that sex workers give their patrons in real life, but at the same time, having a character like Carmen (The Witcher) or Liara (Mass Effect) to occasionally remind us that there's more to these workers than their job adds a lot to the world. And if developers have no intention to really develop that world, then why are they putting that place in in the first place?
And as for the Far Cry 3 video, I do appreciate you showing that. I didn't get far into the game (I mostly just free roamed for numerous hours before getting bored), and frankly everything I did see was sort of disturbing in the way it treated non-whites and women. Unfortunately, that also means I can't comment on the game as a whole, but it at least shows that there was some awareness on the developers' parts even if I didn't personally see it.
Yes but again that's elevating them from NPC to more main "Named" cast.
It's pretty tough to portray reality without having them as a more main part of the cast. If they're part of the level in passing then chances are you will only be seeing the fantasy they're selling not the reality.
Well, using the heart in Dishonored did allow us to get glimpses into every character's thoughts and life without making them more than a random NPC, and I don't think that Carmen or Liara considerably elevated the others to main cast status either. They were, however, nice stand-ins and reminders of how there's normally a cultural and historical background to sex workers and how they are people who just have a more controversial job than others do.
And I understand that it is hard to do, but at the same time, it is something that we've seen done and seen done very well. However, despite having some basis to work from, it's still uncommon to see, and even the games I have been using as examples tend to have their own set of problems (The Witcher particularly is famous for some of its problems). Really, I don't think it is too unreasonable to expect games to continue building on the groundwork we've already started laying and giving better representation to the female characters, even those that are sexualized.
