Women gaming problems, solution discussion 1

[Something Amyss]

It's all well and good to introduce your hobby to other people, but I don't see why we should specifically target women.

I've never seen someone legitimately claim they wanted to specifically target women by "bringing more" of them in.

However, after decades of discouragement, any attempt to open the market to women will have to have elements functionally identical.

Nobody's forcing women to become games. This seems like some heavily distorted arguments for the sake of talking down to the notion of diversity.

 

[Noetherian]

"Conventional wisdoms" are killing the industry.

Amen. By now it's a well-known problem with the rise in popularity of gaming that companies expect enormous profits, making them very reluctant to take "risks" on anything new or different. There are some efforts underway to reach out to indies (or so I hear), but a little startup money and hosting space on e.g. XBL Arcade isn't enough. Wouldn't it be cool if major corporations with tons of money devoted some of their marketing team to indie games?

"Hey everyone! Excited for that new Call of Duty game? While you wait, why not try out [indie game here]? You're welcome!"

See, it's not even hard. I just advertised CoD AGAIN while generating some interest for an independent game that now has a much better chance of making some change.

With all it's popularity, why not a Twilight game?

I hate Twilight, and this is still a fantastic point. Why not, for example, a romance sim? You can flirt up the vampire and the werewolf and choose your own supernatural adventure. If Bella is meant to be a self-insert/teen girl fantasy type character, why not take the logical next step and let women (or men!) actually take on her role? Go for it.
(Better yet, why not take a hint from what I hear is the greatest part of those movies-- the revisionist MASSIVE BRAWL at the end-- and make a fighting game too? The possibilities are endless!)
...then again, I strongly suspect we'll get kicked off the planet for demanding a Hunger Games-style fighter. That would make a more-than-decent RPG, though... and what a chance to expand the world with some new characters, too... you could even have them join up with Katniss at the end... OK, now I'm wandering off topic.

I gotta say, cost is a factor barring entry.

This seems like a good time to bring up the pay gap. Still an issue. I'm going to go ahead and mention the comparable problems this creates for getting more games with Persons of Color for protagonists, too. We've seen plenty of articles about the cost of games and bringing it down; when and where will there be action on this, eh, industry?

It seems like every year, I end up kicking myself for not having a Vita, and a 3ds. Why? Assassin's Creed Liberation, Gravity Rush, Style Savvy, Pokemon, etc.

Yeah, this. I'm not much of a gaming-on-the-go type, and I cried bitter tears when I heard the first and only female POC Assassin was portable-only. I guess that counts as representation... right...? T_T

ETA:

Why don't we see mentorship systems in MMOs and similar games, for example?

I love this idea. I remember TF2 has an achievement (and you get some sweet glasses) for introducing someone to the game, but I don't remember how that worked and it certainly wasn't as complex or well-done as what you describe.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

I am aware of the driving force of the market when it comes to games, but there is more to it then simple supply and demand [...] The idea was that the market only meets a demand it knows of, and that sometimes people don't realize they want something until they find it, as was the case with chunky sauces that no one knew they wanted. Increasing the range of the audience has a great chance of finding newer demands, some of which may even be the new big thing.

You seem to be looking for solutions that only come in the form of carrots for women, which frankly I think is off base. Women already are 45% of the gaming population, there is a recognized market for female-friendly games -- or rather I should say games that are friendly to traditional feminine gender roles (big point of distinction there) -- and many developers have already taken note and utilized the market. There's much room for improvement -- there's always room for improvement -- on the part of larger companies, which again will be a result of market forces applied to the companies in question and not any voluntary reform on their behalf. Companies operate with one premise -- provide a product that costs the least to make, and makes the most profit.

In terms of community participation and visibility, first you must ask yourself, "is this even a community in which women really want to participate?". The statistic that 45% of people who play games are women has genuine shock value, because as gamers women are invisible except for the "gamer grrl" stereotype which is problematic in and of itself (mainly, that to increase their own visibility they act obnoxiously and pander to male stereotypes, which is ultimately a step backward for women in gaming). That's because the community is extraordinarily exclusionary, if not hostile, to women. That's where you need a stick to apply to male gamers who would otherwise exclude women each and every change they get -- game companies and service providers need to take a strong stance and let their customers know in no uncertain terms that garbage will no longer be tolerated.

And again, game companies who operate by the profit motive. If the status quo is the maximin, there's no need to change. Change, no matter how you put it, is going to have to start with the consumer. Yes, that means you'll have to say "no" to certain services or companies, but if those companies aren't providing positive experiences are you really losing out?

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

Good points, but I do think (as someone else mentioned) that your OP needs a little bit of focus. This is the type of post that you want to do a rough draft of in a word program and treat a little bit like a paper in the editing and tightening aspects.

An additional concept I would throw out for your consideration is a bit of a history issue. When games first came forward into our culture they were toys. What they are now is evolving from that original point, and I am very keen to track and study that development as part of my academic path going into graduate school - especially as it compares to the evolution of certain literary forms, like the novel.

However, staying with my point here, they started as toys. As such, the determining factor of who they targeted and who bought them, it was parents buying for children to play with, and the dichotomy of "boy toys" and "girl toys" as it was framed 20-30 years ago by society applied. Therefore, more boys were given Nintendo and Sega systems under their Christmas trees and on their birthdays than girls were. As a result, more boys grew up enjoying them, wanted to carry that enjoyment into their adult pursuits, and ended up working in the industry as they grew big and strong. Girls did get these toys too - some of those you mention have been here "from the beginning" - like myself, who, if my father hadn't given me a Nintendo when I was 7 probably wouldn't be right here right now trying to carry that enjoyment I found into my adult pursuits and future career.

The history always has an impact and matters to the current state of affairs. Now, we are working from seeing games as a more mature type of entertainment (not a toy) even though the "video games" spectrum still includes "toy" type games. Learning games for toddlers are ubiquitous at this point, and they are marketed to parents for children of both genders pretty equally, as offering an edge for education progress - but we've somewhat cut these out of the discussion of video games and the gender discussion. This may be a mistake. As these children of tablet games and learning games grow up and desire systems and find that enjoyment - they too will grow up with it and at least some of them will want to carry that into adulthood and careers.

So what I am saying is that at least part of this problem, the root of who got games early and who was included, will resolve itself with time. The gender lines of toys and learning tools have eroded considerably in the last few decades, and that comes from the wider cultures, not the subcultural video game group. What our task is, then, is - as the sub culture - to adapt to the incoming, more gender balanced and equal, demographic of our group. Resistance to this influx is somewhat heavy now, as always tends to be the stance of any "old guard," but this is to a large extent inevitable.

Targeting current non-gaming adults is one angle, the one I see most often discussed here, and those are the issues you seem to have focused on here. That's not a bad thing, but you should recognize there are other components of this type of change and other reasons why the current situation exists. Knowing things will eventually change is not a reason to sit back and do nothing, of course. It behooves us to avoid making our group a toxic place, or a divided place, before this change occurs, at the minimum. For my part, I hope to bring video games of high narrative quality into the academy for discussion, study, and understanding of the myth making process in the modern age.

I believe that part of the universal appeal of video games (appealing to both men and women, girls and boys) is in the stories they tell and how compelling they are. That requires better writers, writers who are trained to write for games (rather than trained to write novels and porting them over to games, etc.).

 

[broca]

The only solution I see is to just make more female protagonists in a better variety than boobsticks, and ass shots.

This feels exaggerated. While there are games where females are only "boobsticks, and ass shots", it's only a small minority (e.g. DoA Beach Volleyball), especially when you look at the last few years. While i feel like many games use female char designs that feel out of place these are chars are mostly not "boobsticks, and ass shots", but often interesting characters who are also (often unnecessarily imo) designed in a sexualized way (e.g. Miranda from ME3). Even when you look at Dragons Crown and manage to ignore the art style, you will notice that the female characters are both capable fighters and as capable as the male characters. So if it weren't for the art style, Dragons Crown would be the kind of game we want more of.

Women want power trips, too! And NPCs aren't going to deliver that!

The question is what a female power fantasy is. For males it's rather easy: saving the world through violence. Of course that is a extreme oversimplification, but if you look at male power fantasies (which are mostly shooters; or would anyone name strategy or sport power fantasies?), that what it boils down to. For females it seems less clear cut to me. But then again i'm male, so perhaps there is a typical female power fantasy and i just don't know it.

And lets be realistic here. Guys, some of you like playing as a guy, right? Well, the same holds true for women.
Yeah, thre's guys that can play as women, and women that can play as guys, but guys playing as women seems to be easier because they know they don't have to often vs women who generally have to play as a guy, or not really game.
Sure that's not a universal truth among all gamers, but I still feel it valid.

In theory i agree, but i reality the important question is how many people wouldn't play a game because it has a female protagonist. Or to be precise: how many more people would play a game because it has a female protagonist and how many people wouldn't play it because of that. If, let's say CoD would sell 10% less with a female lead i wouldn't expect the developer to take that kind of loose. Of course, i don't say that this will happen, but it is a valid concern for certain games and genres and should be taken into account.

Why do we ignore a lot of the absurd character designs guys get, more or less? Sure we poke fun at the generic white guy look we get so often, and the odd JRPG buckle collector, but at least there's -some- variation. Oh, look, Death in Darksiders 2! He looks somewhat unique! He's not a typical white guy in his late 20s, early 30s!

Women don't get that sort of representation. They might be well written, here and there, but for the large part they're boob sticks, or gratuitous ass shots.
BEFORE PEOPLE RAIL ON ME HERE, I'm not saying that these depictions can't exist. They should, but they shouldn't be the near all encompassing standard. I'm pretty pro-sexuality here. Thing is, I really don't see it balanced with Agency, and playability, which is grinding my gears.
If we had a variety of female depictions in at least known games, I don't think we'd be here. Why? We'd have so many differnt opinions because we'd have so many women to have opinions on that we'd be able to use one to argue against others, and so forth.

As i said above, i disagree that females are mostly "boob sticks, or gratuitous ass shots". Also, i think the reason that there are more interesting male characters and more diverse male characters is that there are just more of them. If you take a realistic look at most male characters they are either horrible written (e.g. Gears of War) or absolutely bland (e.g. Gordan Freemann), but as there are so many of them there is a interesting character from time to time. So, for me better representation of females in games would be a byproduct of more females in games, which of course is very hard to achieve. On a more positive note, i think that the problem will be partly solved on it's own. Every year story telling in video games get's better, both because developers and gamers care more and more about it and because developers get better at story telling, thereby (amongst other things) leading to better female characters.

Okay, then there's discussion about guys who can't write for women.

Yeah, i never really understood that argument. Just hire a female writer if you don't think a male writer can do it (also, looking at books the idea that males in general can't write female characters seems kind of stupid).

"Conventional wisdoms" are killing the industry. Not just the "conventional wisdom" that women ruin a game's chances, but that proper survivor horrors shouldn't be made because they won't sell, shooters have to be like CoD, games that weren't shooters have to be shooters now, tactical games won't sell, and other issues like that.
Oh, and one of the most dangerous conventional wisdoms of them all: "If I use this formula, I'll sell tons!" Yeah, like the God of War ripoffs sold well? Or the CoD ripoffs?
Those "conventional wisdoms" need to be discarded, priod. Developers need the autonomy to experiment again. I mean they're game developers. Isn't it safe to say that they're gamers, and that they have some idea of what it is they're doing in regards of making a fun game?

But the problem is how to change the way the games industry behaves. Because changing the way big enterprises do business is extremely complicated and often impossible even if not changing means loosing money or even bankruptcy (this youtube video explains it better than i ever could https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6TmTv6deTI ).
And about the only way to challenge the "conventional wisdom" on females leads in video games is not used: kickstarter. Kickstarter is a platform for making the kind of games that "conventional wisdom" wouldn't allow and i believe that it can change the industry, as it shows that there is a market for certain games. Still there isn't a single important kickstarter for a game with female lead, which means missing a chance to show the industry that people want this kind of games.
On a side note: i really don't understand why there aren't more games with female leads on kickstarter, even as you only need a good idea and good marketing. Considering that a video series about female representation in games raised 177k, and the constant complaining about the lack of female leads, shouldn't the place be swamped with such games? It's kind of hard to not see the complete lack of such games on kickstarter as an argument against the idea that there is a important untaped market for games with female leads.

The point is, we really gotta start treating games aimed at women as better than pastel/pink games aimed at pre-teens, and giving women, and guys some mature games. Mentally mature. If we want games to be treated seriously, we need some mature games that deal in grown up stuff. Mature is more than the lable we plop on GTA, here.

More mature games are already happening, both in AAA and indie (especially in indie games). As the cost of and the necessary knowledge for making games decreases more people make more indie games that have to make less money to break even. Less necessary knowledge means more diverse developers and less revenue to break even means you can make games that are aimed at a smaller target groups (e.g. people who enjoy serious games). On the other side AAA games make more mature games (like Bioshock Infinite or Walking Dead) because both the developers and the audience get older on average, so that there naturally is more of an interest in more mature games. This luckily doesn't mean that the games for fun will go anywhere, as the serious games get made in addition, not instead of the games for fun.

I gotta say, cost is a factor barring entry. Not one I dwell on much, but this thread does remind me of it. I know I have a long backlist of games I want, and it keeps getting longer every time I can't buy a game in favor of something newer coming out.
Honestly, would games really be destroyed off the face of the planet if they had a $40 MSRP? A cool 1/3 off the cost? Man, I remember when games used to cost 40 dollars new, even on consoles. Don't you?
What ever happened to quantity of sales over quality of sales? If things cost less, more people can afford them, and thus more people will buy it, right? Surely the more people buying will overcome the discount, right?
Imagine the mania if games always cost 20 dollars? New games 20 dollars! People might start buying -2- of each game!
But that's probably a crazy idea.

I don't see huge decreases in the prices of new released AAA games happen, as i don't believe that the additional sales would offset the loses. Remember, you would need to sale 1/3 or 2/3 more of your games, which is huge, and even if gamers bought this much more games from the money they saved, instead of spending it on something else, there would be a high chance that the additional games they buy would be from other developers, so that in the end it would be still a loss for the individual developer.
But prices at release aren't that important anyway. Perhaps it's different where you live, but as i buy my console games mostly used from gamestop, i hardly ever pay more than 25?. Of course that means that i play console games often a year or later after release, but mostly that's okay. And if i feel like playing a new console game on release i just rent it from a video rental shop for 2? a day. And of course there is f2p, free games, indie games, steam sales, gog, humble sales ... on pc. So, altogether, prices really don't seem a problem to me.

Sure, indie games are out there on the cheap, but there's a flaw in relying on them. They're mostly on PC, and mobile OS. That -really- limits the audience. That -really- demands that people put up with unrelaible systems (My android tablet's pretty unreliable, or is that just me?), and my laptop has about half the power to run a game that runs fine on the Wii. I can't really PC game. I doubt I'm alone in this.
Yeah, I can buy a PC, but when was the last time a console game had problems going into windowed mode, or had a missing file error, or got a virus, lack of controller support, or, well, dealt with a lot of the problems that PCs generally run into?
Yes, PC gaming is nice. I do recognize the benefits, and I don't think ill of anyone that likes PC gaming more than console gaming, but I just prefer the simplicity of the console. A lot of women, do too.

If you're interested in innovative, diverse and mature games (or just cheap or even free games), there's no way around pc gaming. It's not like this stuff does not happen on consoles, but the same conditions that assure the simplicity you like assures that much of what happens on pc won't happen on console (most obvious example: modding). Perhaps that will change with the nextgen consoles, but i wouldn't hold my breath. Yes there will be more indie on xbone and ps4, but it will most likely still be little compared to pc.

While we're talking indie, the limited audience factor is what's also blowing the indie scene out of the water as far as being a saviours to female representation goes. Yeah, you're more likely to find women as protagonists, and tasteful representations to boot, but the audience is limited, and the gender gap remains on consoles due to that so it's not helping as much as people would like.
The PS4, and Xbone might adjust this some, but all in all, the limited audience is preventing indie games from saving us all from the sea of dude protagonists.

Further, indie games are seeds that require a lot of care, and cultivation to bring up. And a lot of those seeds are bad seeds. Those bad seeds never make it.
Even the good ones hardly compare to non-indie games at times, and I gotta ask, if you had to relegate yourself to purely playing indie games in the face of CoD, GTA, battlefield, Saints Row, Sports games, driving sims, and all the genres generally done best on a major console, would you be happy? I kinda doubt it.

I'm not saying don't support indie games, but expecting one to demolish predetermined notions in the modern main gaming industry is a bit absurd. If one does, they'll earn some respect. Eternal respect if they're responsible for slaying the conventional wisdom that playing as a woman in her own game, and causes the rest of the industry to catch on. >.>

I think that you understate the importance of indie games. Their potential audience is huge and indie games have saved hole genres (like point+click) from oblivion. Also, Indies should not save us from a "sea of dude protagonists" but provide a alternative for people who care. They are the same as independent movies in a world where most people watch blockbusters in that they allow stuff that isn't mainstream enough to exist (like female leads atm). So, right now indie games are a auxiliary release for people who want to play as females, nothing more and nothing less.

Going back to money talk, voting with our wallets won't necessarily work.
1: If you find it offensive, don't buy it! Well, what if we find shallow, half naked sex object women offensive, and/or want to play as a woman? Ah hell, there goes 99% of games that year, right? Maybe even 100% some game years.
2: "eff you! Got mine!" is a reply we'll likely hear from the well catered to people that enjoy playing as dudes. They'll be that majority that people love throwing in our faces.
3: As the well catered to are in the majority, I gotta wonder if the rest can make a financial difference?
4: Getting large amounts of people to work together for long periods of time is effing hard!
5: Ever notice 2 things happening right around the same time? A decrease in variety of female representation, and the perils the game industry faces starting, and snowballing? I put forth that maybe people have been voting with their wallets for a very long time. That said, what has it really done? Yeah, that's prolly far fetched.

1: That's once again hugely exaggerated: While there are few female player characters in mainstream gaming, it's not zero, especially not when you take into account games where you can choose your gender. Also about females as "shallow", "half naked" and "sex object": most video game protagonists are shallow, independent of gender and half naked is not sex object.
2: The important part is to convince the developer, not other gamers. And as long as male gamers don't say that they won't play a game with a female lead, it is unimportant for the developer.
3: Either females are a important demographic for a game or genre, or they aren't. If they aren't, than bad luck. If they are, their money does make a difference. The problematic part is making developers see them as potential customers.

It seems like every year, I end up kicking myself for not having a Vita, and a 3ds. Why? Assassin's Creed Liberation, Gravity Rush, Style Savvy, Pokemon, etc. Do these games EVER come out on consoles? Do games like them EVER come out on consoles? Seriously! It's like there's a few too many good ideas locked away on handhelds. Small wonder women gravitate towards them?
And, no, I'm not saying buying a handheld is the solution. I'm saying that I think handhelds are more inclusive and these games should get ported to consoles, or at least have the more egalitarian feel go to the console market.
Again, would you be happy if all you could play were handheld games? Probably not.
With handhelds, and PC, and in general, we should try not to segregate our gamers, and force them into certain game playing mediums. It flies in the face of integration.

Isn't it just that handhelds are usually japanese and therefore have alot of japanese titles that tend to have more female chars?

 

[Techno Squidgy]

Multiplayer community is a mixed bag. on one side, it is some of the best fun you can get in games just playign with other people. On the other, any sort of lack of moderation leads to the worst sort taking over.

This is why I hate Activision/IW/Treyarch for removing community run servers that you could level on. The servers I used to frequent in CoD4 were great. Friendly banter over chat, fair admins, no hackers and no shit-stains ruining everyone's fun with screams of noob, hacks and ******.

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

Why don't we see mentorship systems in MMOs and similar games, for example?

I love this idea. I remember TF2 has an achievement (and you get some sweet glasses) for introducing someone to the game, but I don't remember how that worked and it certainly wasn't as complex or well-done as what you describe.

Actually FFXI did have a Mentor program of sorts. You could switch it on and off when you wanted to be in "mentor mode" and a shiny Blue M would show by your name, and people would hang out in the starter cities with this on and help out the younglings and new players find things and find groups and make friends and such. It was a great idea I always enjoyed participating in - I think it came out in like its 3rd year or something, I'd have to look that up to be sure though. That MMO, though I thought it was always overshadowed by the WoW and other western MMOs around here, had a lot of good concepts regarding team-work and community.

 

[broca]

In terms of community participation and visibility, first you must ask yourself, "is this even a community in which women really want to participate?". The statistic that 45% of people who play games are women has genuine shock value, because as gamers women are invisible except for the "gamer grrl" stereotype which is problematic in and of itself (mainly, that to increase their own visibility they act obnoxiously and pander to male stereotypes, which is ultimately a step backward for women in gaming). That's because the community is extraordinarily exclusionary, if not hostile, to women. That's where you need a stick to apply to male gamers who would otherwise exclude women each and every change they get -- game companies and service providers need to take a strong stance and let their customers know in no uncertain terms that garbage will no longer be tolerated.

The one shocking thing about the "45% of gamers are female" statistic is how often it is misused. Just because 45% of all people who play any kind of games on any device for any length of time a week are female doesn't mean that 45% of core gamers a female. Just playing a casual game on a mobile phone doesn't make you a core gamer just as little as flipping through a tabloid in the morning makes you a reader or watching movies makes you a cineast. That's not to say that casual gaming is bad, but it is different from core gaming. Casual gamers play different than core gamers and they have different interests and tastes in games, so that mixing them up is a mistake. Most casual gamers probably wouldn't even want to be part of a gaming community as gaming just isn't that important for them.

 

[Eacaraxe_v1legacy]

The one shocking thing about the "45% of gamers are female" statistic is how often it is misused. Just because 45% of all people who play any kind of games on any device for any length of time a week are female doesn't mean that 45% of core gamers a female. Just playing a casual game on a mobile phone doesn't make you a core gamer just as little as flipping through a tabloid in the morning makes you a reader or watching movies makes you a cineast. That's not to say that casual gaming is bad, but it is different from core gaming. Casual gamers play different than core gamers and they have different interests and tastes in games, so that mixing them up is a mistake. Most casual gamers probably wouldn't even want to be part of a gaming community as gaming just isn't that important for them.

Because women aren't "core" gamers is totally an excuse for their exclusion and hostility as a community, am I right?

EDIT: Or even better, women aren't interested in "core" games because they endorse themes and mechanics that don't appeal to them, and the ones that do are only "casual" games, so it's totally cool for "core" games to remain exclusionary and their audiences hostile to women, because studies.

 

[mecegirl]

Women want power trips, too! And NPCs aren't going to deliver that!

The question is what a female power fantasy is. For males it's rather easy: saving the world through violence. Of course that is a extreme oversimplification, but if you look at male power fantasies (which are mostly shooters; or would anyone name strategy or sport power fantasies?), that what it boils down to. For females it seems less clear cut to me. But then again i'm male, so perhaps there is a typical female power fantasy and i just don't know it.

Look at the Young Adult genre or the Urban Fantasy genre. Both have a tendency to contain female protagonists more so than male ones. But especially the Young Adult genre because a lot of the books are becoming movies now. Look at the protagonist of The Hunger Games, Mortal Instruments, and Divergent. There really isn't much about those women to make them radically different from heroic male protagonists. But that has to do with the fact that heroic traits are heroic traits regardless of gender. On average there is more of a focus on the cooperation between the protagonist and supporting characters involved to take the big bad down. Also a larger percentage of the stories makeup will be dedicated to interpersonal relationships instead of the action. Sometimes love, but friendship and ones relationship with their family members are very often secondary plots. Of course it helps that loved ones are often still alive throughout the story so that a relationship can be developed alongside the action. Loved ones also have a tendency to be fighting alongside the female protagonist. A lot less of "I have to rescue my boyfriend" and more of "This damn alien invasion is putting a strain on my relationship with my boyfriend".

 

[mecegirl]

The one shocking thing about the "45% of gamers are female" statistic is how often it is misused. Just because 45% of all people who play any kind of games on any device for any length of time a week are female doesn't mean that 45% of core gamers a female. Just playing a casual game on a mobile phone doesn't make you a core gamer just as little as flipping through a tabloid in the morning makes you a reader or watching movies makes you a cineast. That's not to say that casual gaming is bad, but it is different from core gaming. Casual gamers play different than core gamers and they have different interests and tastes in games, so that mixing them up is a mistake. Most casual gamers probably wouldn't even want to be part of a gaming community as gaming just isn't that important for them.

Because women aren't "core" gamers is totally an excuse for their exclusion and hostility as a community, am I right?

A few decades ago the types of games that casual games play used to be housed on consoles and in arcades. What's the difference between playing Dr. Robotnick's Mean Bean Machine on the SEGA Genesis and Angry Birds on a tablet?

 

[Bruce]

I think part of the problem is, sexism in the consumer base is exaggerated beyond what it actually is, often by the consumer base.

Lets take female protagonists.

Most female protagonists are badly written, and their character designs are more focused on having their breasts travel in interesting directions than in actually having character.

And they end up not ringing true because every single one of us has women in our lives, and they aren't like that. So these caricatures of femininity come off as alien, their personalities fall somewhere in that uncanny valley, breaking suspension of disbelief.

But it takes some self examination to realise that this is actually the problem - not that the character is "sexy" or female, but that it is dull as paste.

And because of this, a lot of gamers think they have a problem with female protagonists, where it is actually just that we aren't being given all that many good female protagonists. Give us a few good ones, and we're happy to play as them, heck quite a few people have My Little Pony avatars.

But a lot of gamers don't really go in heavily for critiquing their games, so there is this slight sense of guilt, which leads to defensiveness, which leads to most of the angry arguments over feminism.

It is unneeded. It is not us, we're better than we think we are. We have internalised this stereotype of 'gamers are sexists', but take a moment to set that aside and you find what we really want isn't pap, its vleis (meat).

 

[CloudAtlas]

Look at the Young Adult genre or the Urban Fantasy genre. Both have a tendency to contain female protagonists more so than male ones. But especially the Young Adult genre because a lot of the books are becoming movies now. Look at the protagonist of The Hunger Games, Mortal Instruments, and Divergent. There really isn't much about those women to make them radically different from heroic male protagonists. But that has to do with the fact that heroic traits are heroic traits regardless of gender. On average there is more of a focus on the cooperation between the protagonist and supporting characters involved to take the big bad down. Also a larger percentage of the stories makeup will be dedicated to interpersonal relationships instead of the action. Sometimes love, but friendship and ones relationship with their family members are very often secondary plots. Of course it helps that loved ones are often still alive throughout the story so that a relationship can be developed alongside the action. Loved ones also have a tendency to be fighting alongside the female protagonist. A lot less of "I have to rescue my boyfriend" and more of "This damn alien invasion is putting a strain on my relationship with my boyfriend".

The Hunger Games are indeed a wonderful example. It is popular with young girls. It features a strong heroine with agency (in contrast to Twilight, for example). Sure, there are elements that pander to this audience - the love triangle, the age of the heroine, the heroine keeping her innocence in terms of killing someone, and so on - but there's a lot more. It comments on serious social issues - and prominently so, not just in the background. A large portion of the story is about fighting, weapons, combat, survival, etc - readily convertible into pretty conventional Tomb Raider-Bioware-esque combat-dialogue-gameplay. No reason why a game like this shouldn't appeal to "male core gamers" as well.

 

[SonicWaffle]

My sisters don't play games because they can't figure out that the left stick controls the character, and the right on controls the camera. It's why if they ever play a game it's either the Sims, side scrolling platforms or mobile games. They're not a glowing example of feminine multitasking.

I tried teaching a girlfriend the basics of the left-stick-right-stick control scheme once. It ended in a huge row. It's really hard to watch someone continually fuck up something that, to you, is as obvious and simple as breathing without trying to correct them.

 

[Phasmal]

I just wish female gamer wasn't so often tied to `New gamer` and `casual gamer`.
I mean, you've got a little disclaimer that female gamers have of course always been here, but then just really kinda go on to talk about new female gamers.

Every time someone brings up the number of female gamers there's always someone else quick to jump in and say `Oh but they're mostly casual gamers!`. Maybe they are, but core female gamers do exist. I can't make other women play, and frankly I wouldn't really want to.
There are some issues that core female gamers face, obviously harassment, but I'm pretty good at dodging that by remaining invisible and gender neutral in the right spaces, but there's more annoying stuff. I can't really talk as much as I'd like with new people about games without them assuming I'm either new or casual all the damn time. I've been told by different people that I'm somehow intruding on a `male space`. Then there's the stupid condescension, hell, even some of my friends get shirty when they lose to me.
I don't think we can do much about new gamers until we stop flipping out about the ones we already have.

It's kind of a no-win situation. People assume female gamers are new because we cant be `out` online safely.

 

[broca]

The one shocking thing about the "45% of gamers are female" statistic is how often it is misused. Just because 45% of all people who play any kind of games on any device for any length of time a week are female doesn't mean that 45% of core gamers a female. Just playing a casual game on a mobile phone doesn't make you a core gamer just as little as flipping through a tabloid in the morning makes you a reader or watching movies makes you a cineast. That's not to say that casual gaming is bad, but it is different from core gaming. Casual gamers play different than core gamers and they have different interests and tastes in games, so that mixing them up is a mistake. Most casual gamers probably wouldn't even want to be part of a gaming community as gaming just isn't that important for them.

Because women aren't "core" gamers is totally an excuse for their exclusion and hostility as a community, am I right?

It's always nice to have ones arguments misrepresented, especially by someone who accuses other people of using logical fallacies. Please show me where i stated that women in general aren't core gamers or where i made any comment about this assumption (which i didn't make in the first place) excusing exclusion of or hostility towards females.

EDIT: Or even better, women aren't interested in "core" games because they endorse themes and mechanics that don't appeal to them, and the ones that do are only "casual" games, so it's totally cool for "core" games to remain exclusionary and their audiences hostile to women, because studies.

Yes, what a horrible world would we live in if females just played the games they are interested in. We should not rest until exactly the same number of females and males play every single core game and if we have to force females to play them (/sarcasm). As i said before, excluding females who want to play core games is bad, but if a female doesn't want to play core games, that's equally ok. How about we try to include the ones who want to play core games and just leave the rest alone?

 

[broca]

The one shocking thing about the "45% of gamers are female" statistic is how often it is misused. Just because 45% of all people who play any kind of games on any device for any length of time a week are female doesn't mean that 45% of core gamers a female. Just playing a casual game on a mobile phone doesn't make you a core gamer just as little as flipping through a tabloid in the morning makes you a reader or watching movies makes you a cineast. That's not to say that casual gaming is bad, but it is different from core gaming. Casual gamers play different than core gamers and they have different interests and tastes in games, so that mixing them up is a mistake. Most casual gamers probably wouldn't even want to be part of a gaming community as gaming just isn't that important for them.

Because women aren't "core" gamers is totally an excuse for their exclusion and hostility as a community, am I right?

A few decades ago the types of games that casual games play used to be housed on consoles and in arcades. What's the difference between playing Dr. Robotnick's Mean Bean Machine on the SEGA Genesis and Angry Birds on a tablet?

The difference is the context. A imprecise but easy way to distinguish gamers from non-gamers would be just asking whether the person sees their gaming as a hobby or not. While in the eighties and nineties gaming were less available and people who played games most likely did it as a hobby, today games have become so common that many people play games not as a hobby but e.g. as distraction for the daily train ride.

 

[CloudAtlas]

My sisters don't play games because they can't figure out that the left stick controls the character, and the right on controls the camera. It's why if they ever play a game it's either the Sims, side scrolling platforms or mobile games. They're not a glowing example of feminine multitasking.

I tried teaching a girlfriend the basics of the left-stick-right-stick control scheme once. It ended in a huge row. It's really hard to watch someone continually fuck up something that, to you, is as obvious and simple as breathing without trying to correct them.

I didn't fare much better when I had a controller in my hand for the first time at a friends house. And I had already been playing on PC for many years at that time.
And it took me many years of occasionally playing Xbox at friends' to make me to something slightly more valuable than a meat shield / bait in Halo.

Edit: I already fear the moment when I switch from PC to consoles as primary gaming platform this winter, and have to compete with all those folks who already got so much more experience with playing shooter with gamepads.