Women and Gaming

[ostro-whiskey]

You cant possibly know this, you are simply speculating. Although the assholes in charge have already created situations which allow women to rise, so only time will tell if they do possess the ability to do such. Ill add that the only chick I know of that was equatable to a man in achievement was Boudica.

That's why I said 'might' and 'possibility', meaning I indeed don't know but am speculating given the current state of things.
Either way it is starting to happen, although most places still want males to be in charge more than females (depends on the position/field and such, but still). Men still have a huge advantage over women, having had positions of power and influence in their grasp far longer than women, and as a whole are used to it. Naturally they will also have more achievements.
Women just need more time and experience in those types of roles.
Will they be exactly like men in their decision making? No.
Is that bad? Not necessarily.

I will say that women are better than men in certain areas, but this shouldnt be seen as "equality". Nothing in nature is equal. At school, chicks generally do better than fellas, however almost all advancements in science, physics, chemistry, and everything else have been made by men. Men have even outdone women in the field of cooking. As such, women better fill "carrier" roles, while men better fill "creator" roles, so to speak.

This of course does not mean the Boudicas should be held down because of the nature of women, but if they possess a stronger will, they will rise regardless of weak societal constraints.

 

[crypt-creature]

I will say that women are better than men in certain areas, but this shouldnt be seen as "equality". Nothing in nature is equal. At school, chicks generally do better than fellas, however almost all advancements in science, physics, chemistry, and everything else have been made by men. Men have even outdone women in the field of cooking. As such, women better fill "carrier" roles, while men better fill "creator" roles, so to speak.

This of course does not mean the Boudicas should be held down because of the nature of women, but if they possess a stronger will, they will rise regardless of weak societal constraints.

Oh, I don't see that as 'equality' in the slightest.
But that goes back to the point of, in science, physics and all those other things have been vastly/mostly dominated by men because they were allowed to dabble in those things openly when women couldn't.
Cooking can go either way, there are many women who can give a man a run for his money and be better. Actually, there are a lot of female cooks sprouting up this era and it is starting to balance out. Depending on the era, cooking can be a man or woman's field of 'expertise'. But even professionally, men were well ahead of women for some time.
But that is not to say the roles can't be reversed if one is better at it than another. It really depends on the persons personality, especially since people have more freedom to explore their interests now.

 

[Nils]

I think I know what needs to happen: Get Joss Whedon to write/produce every video game, ever.

Then no more of these threads.

 

[jimduckie]

women and gaming is great but they need to stop putting weak women who can't fight or won't shut the fuck up ... sry still pissed about mercs 2 and although a big chest is sweet ,the female with a big chest doesn't work well in combat

 

[ostro-whiskey]

I will say that women are better than men in certain areas, but this shouldnt be seen as "equality". Nothing in nature is equal. At school, chicks generally do better than fellas, however almost all advancements in science, physics, chemistry, and everything else have been made by men. Men have even outdone women in the field of cooking. As such, women better fill "carrier" roles, while men better fill "creator" roles, so to speak.

This of course does not mean the Boudicas should be held down because of the nature of women, but if they possess a stronger will, they will rise regardless of weak societal constraints.

Oh, I don't see that as 'equality' in the slightest.
But that goes back to the point of, in science, physics and all those other things have been vastly/mostly dominated by men because they were allowed to dabble in those things openly when women couldn't.
Cooking can go either way, there are many women who can give a man a run for his money and be better. Actually, there are a lot of female cooks sprouting up this era and it is starting to balance out. Depending on the era, cooking can be a man or woman's field of 'expertise'. But even professionally, men were well ahead of women for some time.
But that is not to say the roles can't be reversed if one is better at it than another. It really depends on the persons personality, especially since people have more freedom to explore their interests now.

Thats all well and good, but I maintain that because of the general nature of men and women, these fields will still be dominated by men.

 

[BGH122]

We need more Gordan Freemans and less Master Chiefs.

Othwerwise a good post... But what?

The point of that part of the post was this:

If we accept that social constructs/desirability is capable of changing our behaviour so that we mimic the behaviour that exemplifies that which is considered attractive or defining of our gender (as is suggested by the stereotypically male behavioural differences of men when under observation in the Hyde et al 2005 meta analysis (for instance, glaring/lack of smiling doubled when observed)), then it follows that we should promote a pro-social image of our gender in the media. Thus let's look at the characteristics of Gordon Freeman and those of Master Chief and decide which produces a better 'role model' (I detest that word, but it'll do).

Master Chief: All we know of the man is that he kills members of a different (apparently) evil species. This is his only characteristic. His only relationship is with a machine, Kortana, and his commanding officer who's promptly killed off.

Gordon Freeman: Not much is revealed about this character either, but we know he's a scientist. He seems to have a number of healthy human relationships (Alex, Barney etc).

Out of the two of them it appears to me that the defining traits of Master Chief are violence and emotional detachment whereas Gordon Freeman's defining traits are knowledge, violence and comradeship. Of course, the best role model would be a game in which the protagonist was a surgeon running around saving people's lives or a builder making nice houses for people at a reasonable rate, but this is unrealistic. As well as our memetic behaviour predicates (social desirability) we've got our genetic imperatives (urges etc) which would prohibit the above 'nice' games from being in any way desirable.

I hope this clears up the ambiguity in my post.

 

[Shycte]

Turn the question around. Do you want fat ugly people in your games?

I know I don't.

 

[crypt-creature]

Thats all well and good, but I maintain that because of the general nature of men and women, these fields will still be dominated by men.

Some fields will be, others will not be. As a whole, men more than likely will.

EDIT: But that isn't to say that women couldn't be close behind. Maybe unlikely, but not impossible.

 

[funguy2121]

Ofcourse Ill trivialize equal rights, its idealistic crap, what ever happened to realism, and people wonder why the western society is suffering from an existential plague.

Again you show your ability to divert conversation, ahh you socialist weasels.

You cant possibly know this, you are simply speculating. Although the assholes in charge have already created situations which allow women to rise, so only time will tell if they do possess the ability to do such. Ill add that the only chick I know of that was equatable to a man in achievement was Boudica.

Can we all pool our funds and get this boy a hooker? He needs to feel the touch of a woman!

You've proven yourself incapable of rational debate, Mr. OW, as anyone who disagrees with your arcane, rigid, stereotype-based view of the world is a "non-realist," or blinded by "idealistic crap" which is causing an "existential plague." I'm not sure which talking-head psuedo-intellectual provides your vocabulary (Hannity, perhaps? Dennis Prager?), but you've also proven a lack of ability to not only back your statements up but even to explain or qualify them. And considering that your claims involve the subjugation of over half the world's population, I'd say you'd better be prepared to support your assertions.

Smart men, secure men, real men don't dabble in anti-philosophy in an attempt to keep women firmly ensconced in traditional roles, because we aren't uncomfortable finding them outside those roles. I can't imagine the day you find yourself with a female boss, but I can have fun trying.

 

[ostro-whiskey]

Ofcourse Ill trivialize equal rights, its idealistic crap, what ever happened to realism, and people wonder why the western society is suffering from an existential plague.

Again you show your ability to divert conversation, ahh you socialist weasels.

You cant possibly know this, you are simply speculating. Although the assholes in charge have already created situations which allow women to rise, so only time will tell if they do possess the ability to do such. Ill add that the only chick I know of that was equatable to a man in achievement was Boudica.

Can we all pool our funds and get this boy a hooker? He needs to feel the touch of a woman!

You've proven yourself incapable of rational debate, Mr. OW, as anyone who disagrees with your arcane, rigid, stereotype-based view of the world is a "non-realist," or blinded by "idealistic crap" which is causing an "existential plague." I'm not sure which talking-head psuedo-intellectual provides your vocabulary (Hannity, perhaps? Dennis Prager?), but you've also proven a lack of ability to not only back your statements up but even to explain or qualify them. And considering that your claims involve the subjugation of over half the world's population, I'd say you'd better be prepared to support your assertions.

Smart men, secure men, real men don't dabble in anti-philosophy in an attempt to keep women firmly ensconced in traditional roles, because we aren't uncomfortable finding them outside those roles. I can't imagine the day you find yourself with a female boss, but I can have fun trying.

I wont object if you hired me a hooker. Also, nothing I said was irrational, and I have provided logical reason for all my beliefs. You're quite the hypocrite, when you claim I dont support my statements and then make completely unfounded claims.

Then you go off with ad hominem comments agaisnt me prsonally, instead of trying to disprove my statement. Its really quite pathetic, all it does is proves how little you actually know about what you believe in, thus making you look like an idiot.

A rational individual who knows how to structure a simple arguement would just back up their beleifs, if they do not, anyone would consider them idealistic and straying from realism. So its completely your fault, in essence you're insulting you're own intelligence.

Ill also add that its more than half the population, I havnt even begun my racist rants XD.

 

[ScarlettRage]

Meh. I don't see how one's gender has to come into anything. I'm just a human, she's just a human, he's just a human, and whatever either of us has on the monitor is - well, not even human given its nature.

Plus the whole point about females supposed to be "attractive" is being made pretty clearly in our culture. I mean, how many realistic female warriors do you see in games or what not. I'd say, if you were swinging that 2 hand sword around, you wouldn't run around in chain mail bikini, looking like a model. You'd have pretty huge muscles, which is often considered unfeminine in our culture.

So, yeah.

yeah so thats kind of a fail right there.
and very wrong lol nobody looks like that
except barbie.

 

[funguy2121]

snip

You're so right. I could never define how all women are not inferior to all men and therefore must, by default, be wrong. I've just been brainwashed by centuries of progress when what I really need is the tribal mentality you suggest. Which means, of course, that I'd have to go back to hunting and gathering as well.

This began with your claim that women do not see combat in the military, and that there's a (undefined) link between sex and violence that is the only reason a developer ever put a big-jugged bimbo in a game. I still haven't seen any support for any of this but fine, troll, ya nailed me. I'll support my objection to your initial claim:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/us/16women.html?_r=1

As for the link between sex and violence, if you defined just what the Hell you were talking about, I could respond to it. Instead, you just use words like "common knowledge" and "human nature" (again, undefined).

If you have anything else you'd like to debate I'm happy to, but I'd really appreciate you backing up your initial points first.

Sincerely,

The liberal yes-man douchebag

 

[UnlimitedCreativity]

I say to hell with political correctness. We keep going on about how there underepresentation of so many groups in different medias. Overall does it really matter. Who cares if the medic picking you up is a female, it really makes no difference... the only reason this even becomes an issue is because people point out the fact that theres no women in call of duty... in which every game except modern warfare would to historically inaccurate. While yes there are women in the military, few of them are combat soldiers. they have the option to be, but very few take this route.

Note: This isnt an attack at anyone, its the media thats F***ed

But this is the same thing as the Avatar issue. People are boycotting the movie because there are no gay blue aliens. The biggest issue is now you have to write your story based on political correctness as well. If you play a women character in call of duty and that character dies... which happens alot in call of duty.. people will take it out of context saying that the game is portraying women soldiers as incompetent compared to men. Ever wonder why there are no antagonists that are homosexual??? Games stroies use stereotypes because they are safe. No one is going to complain if a women character plays the damsel in distress or the sexy badass chick because these stereotypes are accepted. No one is going to challenge them. The problem with complex characters that are women is you are dealing with a minority group. While you can do anything you want with the standard white male protagonist and no one will complain, where if you mess around with minority groups outside there accepted stereotype you are playing with fire.

Finally, even the games that do feature women main protagnists, the protagonist is still very masculine in order to relate to games main audience... guys. I have yet to see a main female character act like an actually girl.... and no faunting a half naked body doesnt count. Take The Heavenly Swords chick for example... she is essentially a transvestite Kratos.

Why is do people feel its nesscessary to change things in attempt to be more politically correct. If the role was written for a girl, use a girl, for a Latino, use a Latino, but for christ sakes dont feel the need to change roles for the sole reason of being more polictically correct. Our generation is already gender role confused enough as it is.

 

[ostro-whiskey]

snip

You're so right. I could never define how all women are not inferior to all men and therefore must, by default, be wrong. I've just been brainwashed by centuries of progress when what I really need is the tribal mentality you suggest. Which means, of course, that I'd have to go back to hunting and gathering as well.

This began with your claim that women do not see combat in the military, and that there's a (undefined) link between sex and violence that is the only reason a developer ever put a big-jugged bimbo in a game. I still haven't seen any support for any of this but fine, troll, ya nailed me. I'll support my objection to your initial claim:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/us/16women.html?_r=1

As for the link between sex and violence, if you defined just what the Hell you were talking about, I could respond to it. Instead, you just use words like "common knowledge" and "human nature" (again, undefined).

If you have anything else you'd like to debate I'm happy to, but I'd really appreciate you backing up your initial points first.

Sincerely,

The liberal yes-man douchebag

Lol, that female military representation was just one example of afew I used to back up my point that chicks have a different mentality and a different nature to men, and therefore should not be treated as equal. If you had given attention to the point rather than focus on an example the discussion could have gone somewhere. As for the link between sex and violence, I already stated I cbf finding some academic study of it. Also human nature is self explanitory, I refuse to believe you need it defined.

I never stated women were inferior, I said they were not equal to men, one does not amount to the other. I posted an example of what differentiates them and as such how they would be suited for different fields.

Lastly, what we have today, and how it was created is a result of our (humans) tribalist nature, I do not, and have never stated that humanity should regress, I was simply stating that you cant pretend thousands of years of enviromental evolution didnt happen, or happened differently.

 

[funguy2121]

(1)Lol, that female military representation was just one example of afew I used to back up my point that (2)chicks have a (3)different mentality and a different nature to men, and therefore (4)should not be treated as equal. If you had (5)given attention to the point rather than focus on an example the discussion could have gone somewhere. As for the link between sex and violence, I already stated I cbf finding some academic study of it. Also human nature is self explanitory, I refuse to believe you need it defined.

(6)I never stated women were inferior, I said they were not equal to men, one does not amount to the other. I posted an example of what differentiates them and as such how they would be suited for different fields.

(7)Lastly, what we have today, and how it was created is a result of our (humans) tribalist nature, I do not, and have never stated that humanity should regress, I was simply stating that you cant pretend thousands of years of enviromental evolution didnt happen, or happened differently.

(1)LOL, I agree, OMFG, dude, LOL!
(2)Chicks, man. Thank you, poorly-directed low budget 80's movie surfer stereotype.
(3)Care to define this? How is it different? Do their neural patterns show a propensity for cooking and gossiping and a disdain for violence and discipline?
(4)Perhaps you should find a new society to call home.
(5)Hence, the Paul Reubens game.

Howdy, Pee Wee! I know I am, but what are you?

(6)The Law of Identity: A is A. A may, in some circumstances, be accurately defined in some manner as Z, but it will forever remain A.
If someone is found to be subverting a basic metaphysical premise such as the law of identity, I suggest to you that they are LYING.
(7)Well I can't argue with that. But ya know who could . . .


BTW thanks for torpedoing the thread.

 

[funguy2121]

snip

Oh my god, a thoughtful person! I agree with a lot of what you had to say there. It's true, no matter what kind of story you create there's gonna be some idiots who protest because it doesn't represent them, as if it were supposed to in the first place. And when something is obviously created around the marketing I can usually smell the stink of disin - diseng - disinegenuine-ness (sorry) a mile away. What bothers me even more, though, is when a product is made to be marketed to pasty pretty rich white tweens (The Hills, absolutely everything on ABC family, etc). I do think every group who's fought for their piece of the pie deserves representation, which is why more of them need to get involved in the arts and fewer of them need to protest triflin' things such as "defamation" when there are bigger issues out there.

The artist needs to respond to absolutely none of this to remain a true artist. He/she/he-she needs to ignore all the outside pressure to go in this or that direction, and if they are truly talented and can dodge the brainless suits, their story/game/movie/book will stand on its own, in spite of how ever much misguided criticism it receives.

However, when discussing gaming in particular, you cannot leave out scifi and fantasy, so there's going to be plenty of female roles anyway. So sad that Videogamia hasn't yet attracted very many good storytellers, so the designers usually say "Ah Hell, only dipshit teenage boys will play it anyway" and proceed crafting a story for dipshit teenage boys. Also, female soldiers see combat in Iraq and Afghanistan almost every day. I sourced it above, but I can't track down the better source right now.

The point is, to me it's not really about responding to the demographic. James Cameron's first 4 movies all featured tough female protagonists, and Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss and T2 were hardly marketed to women. So the situation will improve gradually as more decent storytellers armed with interesting ideas come to the medium.

 

[ostro-whiskey]

(1)Lol, that female military representation was just one example of afew I used to back up my point that (2)chicks have a (3)different mentality and a different nature to men, and therefore (4)should not be treated as equal. If you had (5)given attention to the point rather than focus on an example the discussion could have gone somewhere. As for the link between sex and violence, I already stated I cbf finding some academic study of it. Also human nature is self explanitory, I refuse to believe you need it defined.

(6)I never stated women were inferior, I said they were not equal to men, one does not amount to the other. I posted an example of what differentiates them and as such how they would be suited for different fields.

(7)Lastly, what we have today, and how it was created is a result of our (humans) tribalist nature, I do not, and have never stated that humanity should regress, I was simply stating that you cant pretend thousands of years of enviromental evolution didnt happen, or happened differently.

(1)LOL, I agree, OMFG, dude, LOL!
(2)Chicks, man. Thank you, poorly-directed low budget 80's movie surfer stereotype.
(3)Care to define this? How is it different? Do their neural patterns show a propensity for cooking and gossiping and a disdain for violence and discipline?
(4)Perhaps you should find a new society to call home.
(5)Hence, the Paul Reubens game.

Howdy, Pee Wee! I know I am, but what are you?

(6)The Law of Identity: A is A. A may, in some circumstances, be accurately defined in some manner as Z, but it will forever remain A.
If someone is found to be subverting a basic metaphysical premise such as the law of identity, I suggest to you that they are LYING.
(7)Well I can't argue with that. But ya know who could . . .


BTW thanks for torpedoing the thread.

Again with the ad hominems, are you that incapable of sticking to a simple arguement.

I already defined how the male and female mentality is different in a previous post, if you didnt care to read it Im not going to repeat it.

"(4)Perhaps you should find a new society to call home." What kind of self righteous pretentious douchebag says that.

I already stated the equality is a mathematical term, nothing in nature is equal. I have no idea what the Law of Identity has to do with my statement, I think you are just reading what you want to read, you have already shown that you lack the ability to approach this objectively.

You socialists are such hypocrites, spouting tolerance and equality until someone has a different ideology to yours, than they are villainized. This in itself should be enough to turn a reasonable thinking mans stomach.

 

[funguy2121]

(1)Again with the ad hominems, are you that incapable of sticking to a simple arguement.

I already defined how the male and female mentality is different in a previous post, (2)if you didnt care to read it Im not going to repeat it.

(3)"Perhaps you should find a new society to call home." What kind of self righteous pretentious douchebag says that.

I already stated the equality is a mathematical term, nothing in nature is equal. (4)I have no idea what the Law of Identity has to do with my statement, I think you are just reading what you want to read, you have already shown that you lack the ability to approach this objectively.

You (5)socialists are such hypocrites, (6)spouting tolerance and equality until someone has a different ideology to yours, (7)than they are villainized. This in itself should be enough to turn a reasonable thinking mans stomach.

(1)I am capable of composing an effective sentence. And why do trolls always stick to one big boy word like a child trying to impress their parents?

(2)Once more I say: Pee Wee. Quit quoting me without crediting the author.

(3) The sort of self-righteous pretentious douchebag who believes in equality and doesn't think civil rights are for sissies. You're right, I'm a prick!

(4)If you can't understand how "I never stated women were inferior, I said they were not equal to men" is a spectacular contradiction than perhaps you should be debating on an elementary-level forum. And once again, you have Pee-wee'd me. Credit the author, you po-mo fool!

(5)Ah, someone's taken a page from the Glenn Beck Villainize Your Opponent handbook. Get ready for some irony...

(6) Yes, an ideology diametrically opposed to tolerance and equality. And some more irony...

(7) Are they "than" villainized in a manner similar to calling someone a socialist?

Have a Merry Christmas, troll, I'm done talking to you.

 

[Manji187]

Can we have stronger female roles? Can we have stronger lead characters who aren't just eye candy?

Samus did a great job. The first action girl when no one knew what it was. Jade from Beyond Good and Evil was a magnificent piece. Folks, we need more. What do you think?

Define "strong" ,cuz considering Samus is suffering from the "Link-syndrome" when it comes to voice-acting, one is apparently supposed to figure out that she's strong through events and actions....which she endures without complaining .

Anyway...it seems Samus will actually SPEAK in Other M. I really hope I won't catch myself thinking "Samus...I liked you more when you were a mute" cuz that's when I know Team Ninja f*cked up.

 

[ostro-whiskey]

(1)Again with the ad hominems, are you that incapable of sticking to a simple arguement.

I already defined how the male and female mentality is different in a previous post, (2)if you didnt care to read it Im not going to repeat it.

(3)"Perhaps you should find a new society to call home." What kind of self righteous pretentious douchebag says that.

I already stated the equality is a mathematical term, nothing in nature is equal. (4)I have no idea what the Law of Identity has to do with my statement, I think you are just reading what you want to read, you have already shown that you lack the ability to approach this objectively.

You (5)socialists are such hypocrites, (6)spouting tolerance and equality until someone has a different ideology to yours, (7)than they are villainized. This in itself should be enough to turn a reasonable thinking mans stomach.

(1)I am capable of composing an effective sentence. And why do trolls always stick to one big boy word like a child trying to impress their parents?

(2)Once more I say: Pee Wee. Quit quoting me without crediting the author.

(3) The sort of self-righteous pretentious douchebag who believes in equality and doesn't think civil rights are for sissies. You're right, I'm a prick!

(4)If you can't understand how "I never stated women were inferior, I said they were not equal to men" is a spectacular contradiction than perhaps you should be debating on an elementary-level forum. And once again, you have Pee-wee'd me. Credit the author, you po-mo fool!

(5)Ah, someone's taken a page from the Glenn Beck Villainize Your Opponent handbook. Get ready for some irony...

(6) Yes, an ideology diametrically opposed to tolerance and equality. And some more irony...

(7) Are they "than" villainized in a manner similar to calling someone a socialist?

Have a Merry Christmas, troll, I'm done talking to you.

You are done because there is no victory for you here, you realize that you are just repeating yourself and still not adressing my points, you should have just kept quiet instead of digging yourself into a hole. Your point of view and entire argument is based on nothing.

I have stated multiple times that equality is a mathematical term, nothing in nature is equal. Its not my fault if you choose to ignore this, and make idiotic statements regarding irrelevant Laws.

What irony ? My beliefs do not care for tolerance, therefore I can freely abuse whom ever I want. Yours on the other hand are centered on it, which is why you are a hypocrite.