So Has the New COD Unintentionally Shifted the Medium Forward?

[Generaloberst]

Well, what's the difference? I'm not exactly going to be focusing on what they look like when I'm playing mutliplayer.

I assume it'll be randomly assigned? I don't really keep up with the Call of Duty franchise, so I don't know.

 

[Something Amyss]

There have been other games that have female characters in the multiplayer. I don't think it will be solely Activision's move that changes all of this because it's already happened quite a bit.

There were MP3 players before the iPod, but that's what is considered the game-changer.

Actually, most of Apple's ideas were done before, so pick one.

Activision has a game that is hugely popular and will be the frame of reference for other games as a result. Even if they never innovate, their changes will be taken into consideration.

 

[Something Amyss]

A best selling videogame has acknowledged that females exist? Why that's 'Political Correctness'!

I know! They're totally pandering to chicks and taking away everything good about Call of Duty!

 

[Eve Charm]

Unintentionally? : No, Shifted the Medium Forward : Yes. Putting Females in the best selling game even tho some will say that this is controversial as heck because it's a military shooter, Yes it is very much a step in the right direction for the medium. As long as they don't back down like Medal of honor did with naming names when articles come out like " Shoot woman in the next call of duty" It will be good.

 

[broca]

Much more interesting will be how many people will actually use the female avatars. Considering the reputation the cod online community as consisting of "13-year old teenage boys and bros" (i don't play cod, so i don't know whether that reputation is legitimate), one has to wonder. Does anyone has statistics for other online shooters?

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

What, CoD is the benchmark for progress now? No. We've had plenty of female avatars in multiplayer games for a long time. Just because CoD suddenly decides it would like to come along doesn't mean it's some kind of paradigm shift.

 

[wulf3n]

So by introducing female avatars in multiplayer will everyone else start adding them in to try and compete with Activision? Yeah a load of it may be a straight cash grab but I think this could genuinely be a step forward

I'd say wait and see how Ghost turns out first.

If there's one common theme across all the Ghost threads it's "I like this, but not enough to buy it"

 

[Jadak]

Well I'm not sure whether it's worth noting as moving anything forward, but in either case I don't see how it could be called 'unintentional'. I'd say adding a female character for the sake of having a female character is quite intentional.

 

[tardcore]

Pardon my somewhat angry sounding answer but, OF FUCKING COURSE NOT! I've been seeing female avatars in shoot em ups (and all sorts of other games) since the days of the original Unreal Tournament. Just being able to choose to between a male or female avatar isn't what all the grumbling over gender equality has been about. If you truly believe just adding female avatars to games that don't have them is what is going to fix everything (or anything) about this issue then I seriously feel you need to do some in depth research on the nature of gender politics in gaming.

 

[lacktheknack]

Not really. It's kind of sad if we're so desperate to "move forward" that we're willing to call an addition that lets you shoot nameless women in the face as well as nameless men is considered notable progress.

 

[Something Amyss]

What, CoD is the benchmark for progress now? No. We've had plenty of female avatars in multiplayer games for a long time. Just because CoD suddenly decides it would like to come along doesn't mean it's some kind of paradigm shift.

What do you mean, "now?" Games have been cribbing off CoD for years now!

And yes, I doubt they've come up with anything new, but being the benchmark in no way entails being the inventor.

Well I'm not sure whether it's worth noting as moving anything forward, but in either case I don't see how it could be called 'unintentional'. I'd say adding a female character for the sake of having a female character is quite intentional.

Not intending to create a wave of women in games would seem unintentional to me.

But they're not "adding a female character for the sake of having a female character."

Pardon my somewhat angry sounding answer but, OF FUCKING COURSE NOT! I've been seeing female avatars in shoot em ups (and all sorts of other games) since the days of the original Unreal Tournament. Just being able to choose to between a male or female avatar isn't what all the grumbling over gender equality has been about. If you truly believe just adding female avatars to games that don't have them is what is going to fix everything (or anything) about this issue then I seriously feel you need to do some in depth research on the nature of gender politics in gaming.

And if you had to be the first to set the standard, you'd have a point. Not to mention if "a step forward" meant "finally solving gender politics," but it doesn't. It just means a step. Women represented in a major multiplayer game where devs have been arguing against it is "a" step. Not the step, not several steps, but one.

A small, stupid, would-be-trivial-if-gamers-weren't-demonstrating-how-big-a-deal-it-can-be-by-getting-up-in-arms-about-it step.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

What, CoD is the benchmark for progress now? No. We've had plenty of female avatars in multiplayer games for a long time. Just because CoD suddenly decides it would like to come along doesn't mean it's some kind of paradigm shift.

What do you mean, "now?" Games have been cribbing off CoD for years now!

And yes, I doubt they've come up with anything new, but being the benchmark in no way entails being the inventor.

And they've all been such excellent, innovative games. It may be the benchmark for some companies and franchises but last time I checked the Escapist largely didn't regard it as anything to be strived towards. Apologies for my ambiguity.

 

[JochemHippie]

Desperate pandering to save what's left of their franchise since BF3/4 more like it.

 

[daveman247]

This is news worthy? Man they must be scraping the bottom of the barrel to be introducing this as a selling point. Then again gears 3 did the same thing :L (Not saying its bad, just shouldn't really be treated as something special.)

Besides I doubt Most would notice in multiplayer since there are no characters. I doubt you could tell much difference between "Man/ woman in ski-mask/ gas-mask". Even in Halo you have to look pretty close to tell the difference, its just all armour.

Now if one of the main characters in the campaign was going to be female/s (And not just put there for exploitation) then maybe there would be something to talk about.

 

[Saltyk]

Well, it may become a more common occurrence, but it's not like it's rare in the slightest. Honestly, CoD might have even been behind the curve on this front.

I noticed someone posted a bunch of recent games that had female avatars in multiplayer content. I'd like to mention Uncharted 2's multiplayer also did this. You could play as virtually any character from the game and unlock several others in time. You could even play as Fat Drake.

Still allowing players such customization isn't a bad thing. Though, I do wonder how many people will be playing a female character in those matches. And just what the common reaction will be to such players.

 

[Something Amyss]

And they've all been such excellent, innovative games.

Already addressed. Not sure if strawman or merely comprehension issues.

It may be the benchmark for some companies and franchises but last time I checked the Escapist largely didn't regard it as anything to be strived towards.

I wasn't aware the medium as a whole asked the permission of the Escapist forum.

Apologies for my ambiguity.

Similarly, apologies for assuming that the trends of the medium itself were more responsible for the direction of the medium then a bunch of posters on a single web forum.

Further, my humblest apologies for thinking that things like "paradigm shift" and "benchmark" were the opposite of ambiguity. It appears to my untrained eye that you in fact spoke specifically and are backtracking.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

And they've all been such excellent, innovative games.

Already addressed. Not sure if strawman or merely comprehension issues.

It may be the benchmark for some companies and franchises but last time I checked the Escapist largely didn't regard it as anything to be strived towards.

I wasn't aware the medium as a whole asked the permission of the Escapist forum.

Apologies for my ambiguity.

Similarly, apologies for assuming that the trends of the medium itself were more responsible for the direction of the medium then a bunch of posters on a single web forum.

Further, my humblest apologies for thinking that things like "paradigm shift" and "benchmark" were the opposite of ambiguity. It appears to my untrained eye that you in fact spoke specifically and are backtracking.

...

The ambiguity was I was referring to what generally I see on this forum as being benchmarks/innovation not what the industry thinks are benchmarks/innovation. Does that clear anything up? It's not about permission, the discussion is happening on the Escapist and what I consider (leaving aside what anyone else thinks, even) shifting the medium forward is not what publishers may think it is.