[Merged] Women, Feminism, etc. in PE

[TheMufflon]

 

It may surprise you to know this but I do a lot of reading on this subject and it's not just me who has this opinion.

 

Why would that surprise me? And "not just me" is a far cry from "women".

 

I happen to know from being in the communities of said games that they are popular with women.

 

No, you happen to know from being in the communities of those games that they are popular among women who are actively part of the communities of those games. See the selection process at work there?

 

I read the blogs of other women who game and participate frequently in debates on the subject.

 

Most women don't.

 

Here is a link from a 'female geek' website that pretty much matches what I have said as an example. Note the many comments below lauding the piece.

 

http://www.themarysu...e-protagonists/

 

That's a pretty good article. And it does, pretty much, match what you have said. Except where the author of that article points out that she doesn't speak for all, or even most, woman gamers but is merely stating her own opinion, and further goes on to state that what women want out of games is not only diverse but divisive.

 

If 43 people (and that is assuming all comments were from women [and they are not], agreed with the article [and they don't], and no-one made more than one comment[and some did]) is considered many, it only servers to highlight the insularity.

 

As a specific counter-example let us consider the most popular PC gaming franchise of all time (a position in no small part due to its popularity among women): The Sims. The audience of which clearly want things from their escapism that you assert that women don't want. Many of them enjoy using the game a a foundation for romantic novellas.

[TheMufflon]

 

You know what Moonlight Butterfly means, you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

Me and everyone else in this thread. I mean, do you really think Obsidian will take anything posted here into account when designing P:E?

 

My reply was prompted by insular generalisations and blatant hypocrisy, what prompted yours?

[Gulliver]

"Overcoming societal obstacles and breaking gender barriers is not a power fantasy for me. In fact, a lot of the time, it’s part and parcel of my day-to-day reality. My power fantasy takes place in a world where those issues are gone, where I can be a champion without any red tape. The minute a game reminds me that my ass-kicking heroine is viewed as lesser — even if it’s done in a way that coaxes me to prove all the haters wrong — it feels like a slap in the face. It’s not fun. It’s frustrating."

 

Does anyone here truly want this game to be a power fantasy?

[TheMufflon]

 

Does anyone here truly want this game to be a power fantasy?

 

To be honest, I don't really know what that means. I don't think I've ever had one.

[Moonlight Butterfly]

snip

 

Surely it's as bad to have a knee jerk reaction and say all women want to play dress up and dollies though. My experience with the communities is that they involve a lot of women. That's nothing to do with an insular view it's a fact.

 

I like playing the Sims 3 mostly to build houses but it's not the only game I like. Some men seem to think we want to make all games like the Sims when that just isn't the case.

 

It was said earlier generalisations are okay when they speak to a pretty blatant truth.

"people don't want their gender to be represented in an objectified, one-dimensional, stereotyped fashion."

 

I think that's something we can agree on.

 

I highly doubt the majority of women are sitting out there thinking 'Oh I really love playing as this over sexualised bimbo.'

 

Is that what you are trying to argue?

 

Be back later going to play some Borderlands 2.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Moonlight Butterfly

[sparklecat]

"Overcoming societal obstacles and breaking gender barriers is not a power fantasy for me. In fact, a lot of the time, it’s part and parcel of my day-to-day reality. My power fantasy takes place in a world where those issues are gone, where I can be a champion without any red tape. The minute a game reminds me that my ass-kicking heroine is viewed as lesser — even if it’s done in a way that coaxes me to prove all the haters wrong — it feels like a slap in the face. It’s not fun. It’s frustrating."

 

Does anyone here truly want this game to be a power fantasy?

 

A game doesn't have to end with your character becoming a god/ruling the kingdom/whatever to be a power fantasy. RPGs in general do, however, provide you with the opportunity to roleplay people who have abilities and achieve goals that you simply wouldn't be able to, in real life. They're epics; some amount of struggling against enemies is necessary, of course, but the point is that you're going to win that struggle. Having systematic, engrained prejudice that hits really close to home for you, prejudice that you can maybe refuse to be held back by, but that you can't actually fight, isn't the same thing.

[Gulliver]

@sparklecat: Do you find feeling empowered to be more important than realism and plausability?

[sparklecat]

@sparklecat: Do you find feeling empowered to be more important than realism and plausability?

 

I'm not sure I'd say more important; they both matter, but if the cost of realism is frustration and ruining the fun for me, then I think that's taking it too far. For instance, realism in regard to inventory is not something that's often strictly adhered to, simply because it'd only annoy people and cut into their enjoyment.

 

For something like gender roles, that's a consequence of how our own species and societies have developed, not an inevitability. I'd rather the game decided from the start that worldwide misogyny simply wasn't going to exist; if they want to put in pockets of both misogyny and misandry, existing in specific cultures you encounter (and can avoid, if you wish), where you can choose to have your character come from them, that's one thing. I just don't want my only option to be playing a character that's grown up surrounded by the idea that women are inferior to men.

 

I play games to have fun, not have "you're a woman being competent, that's weird/good job overcoming your inherent limitations!" shoved into my face some more.

[TheMufflon]

Surely it's as bad to have a knee jerk reaction and say all women want to play dress up and dollies though.

 

Absolutely.

 

My experience with the communities is that they involve a lot of women. That's nothing to do with an insular view it's a fact.

 

They are insular because they are a self-selected sample of the population. By which I mean (for those who don't like statistics lingo) that people tend to avoid communities they disagree with.

 

I like playing the Sims 3 mostly to build houses but it's not the only game I like.

 

But for a lot of people it is the only game they like.

 

Some men seem to think we want to make all games like the Sims when that just isn't the case.

 

Some women want that. Some men want that, too.

 

 

I highly doubt the majority of women are sitting out there thinking 'Oh I really love playing as this over sexualised bimbo.'

 

Is that what you are trying to argue?

 

If that was my thesis, that is what I would have said. Your statements about what women want went quite a bit further than that.

Edited October 20, 2012 by TheMufflon

[sparklecat]

Actually, that paragraph I quoted also linked to this article:

http://www.themarysue.com/the-hey-sweetheart-scenario-deconstructing-how-role-playing-games-talk-to-women/

 

 

It's a good read, not least because it looks at two examples of how that sort of thing can be done right and done wrong, from Dragon Age: Origins. In short, handling it as people who have a different idea of gender roles because of their cultural backgrounds questioning your female characters can be ok. Having the simple fact that you're female brought up in a way that adds nothing to the story isn't ok at all.

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Surely it's as bad to have a knee jerk reaction and say all women want to play dress up and dollies though.

 

Absolutely.

 

My experience with the communities is that they involve a lot of women. That's nothing to do with an insular view it's a fact.

 

They are insular because they are a self-selected sample of the population. By which I mean (for those who don't like statistics lingo) that people tend to avoid communities they disagree with.

 

I like playing the Sims 3 mostly to build houses but it's not the only game I like.

 

But for a lot of people it is the only game they like.

 

Some men seem to think we want to make all games like the Sims when that just isn't the case.

 

Some women want that. Some men want that, too.

 

 

I highly doubt the majority of women are sitting out there thinking 'Oh I really love playing as this over sexualised bimbo.'

 

Is that what you are trying to argue?

 

If that was my thesis, that is what I would have said. Your statements about what women want went quite a bit further than that.

 

Well if you think that I'm wrong about what women want in a protagonist then you must think the majority of women want the opposite no?

[Umberlin]

Well if you think that I'm wrong about what women want in a protagonist then you must think the majority of women want the opposite no?

 

Not to take a side here, but 'what women want' and 'what men want' type discussions are always . . . so very off. You can fill rooms with ten women and ten men and get twenty wholly different opinions.

 

There is far, far more in effect than simple gender, 'men want this' and 'women want that' because from one man to another or one woman to another opinions can differ drastically. Some individuals, that happen to be female, are hardcore conservative christiams that cover up every inch of skin. Some individuals, that happen to be female, run BDSM shops downtown within walking distance and have a penchant for wearing skimpy leather outfits. And, countless other individuals, that happen to be female, are in between the two or are completely unlike either of them.

 

The same goes for men. One man shouldn't act as if his opinion counts for what all men think of as acceptable anymore than the gender reversal. Some men are more conservative, some less, some are monogomous and faithful, some never settle down In short: "Morality differs drastically by individual and things one might think of as unacceptable may be the everyday life of another." There are so many varities and flavors that one should never guess at the majority, minority or other brand of opinion. It's always best to just speak for one's self (which you're doing, and I respect that).

 

-

 

Personally I think it's best to not try and please everyone when making a game. You'll never accomplish it. Still, I also think making a game wholly by one's own morality suffers in its own way due to, as I mentioned, what's acceptable, or not, varying so drastically from individual to individual. I think good developers find a balance, but I'm sure the success/acceptability of such things is debatable on an individual level.

 

In the end I don't know what a man or a woman wants in a protagonist, or any aspect of a game. I know what I want, certainly. I know what specific individuals want, if they've made such information available . . . but entire genders, cultures, nations and so on? Not a chance.

 

Making a game must be very hard . . .

[Nidrolok]

Well if you think that I'm wrong about what women want in a protagonist then you must think the majority of women want the opposite no?

You really don't posses any reading comprehension at all, do you?

[Moonlight Butterfly]

It just feel like people are trying to dismiss what I'm saying based on semantics.

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Well if you think that I'm wrong about what women want in a protagonist then you must think the majority of women want the opposite no?

You really don't posses any reading comprehension at all, do you?

 

I don't see how I have misunderstood what he is saying, he is disputing my points based on the fact that 'I can't speak for all women' despite the fact that I spend a lot of time playing games and being around and listening to other female gamers.

 

It's kind of sad that you can't come up with any decent counterpoints and instead argue over how I have said it.

Edited October 20, 2012 by Moonlight Butterfly

[TheMufflon]

Well if you think that I'm wrong about what women want in a protagonist then you must think the majority of women want the opposite no?

 

Not at all. In fact I can (and do) think that there are many things that are wrong with what you have posted, such as:

 

(1): The implication that there are only two possible positions in an argument.

(2): What might in grandiloquent words be termed the tyranny of the masses, i.e. that the opinion of the majority counts for everyone.

(3): That speculation about what the majority wants should ever be done from a position based solely on anecdotal evidence. (i.e. you don't know what the majority of women want, and neither do I. Thus; speak only for yourself and let statistics speak for others.)

(4): Hypocrisy.

(5): How readily you reach for the same tired ad hominems. (I should note that none of my previous posts have covered this particular disagreement.)

 

None of which are the opposite of what you think women want concerning video game protagonists.

Edited October 20, 2012 by TheMufflon

[Gulliver]

I'm not sure I'd say more important; they both matter, but if the cost of realism is frustration and ruining the fun for me, then I think that's taking it too far. For instance, realism in regard to inventory is not something that's often strictly adhered to, simply because it'd only annoy people and cut into their enjoyment.

 

Realism concerning the world and realism concerning gameplay are two entirely different things. It's not like it is part of the world that people are able to carry five truckloads of weapons and armor and ten tons of gold.

 

For something like gender roles, that's a consequence of how our own species and societies have developed, not an inevitability. I'd rather the game decided from the start that worldwide misogyny simply wasn't going to exist; if they want to put in pockets of both misogyny and misandry, existing in specific cultures you encounter (and can avoid, if you wish), where you can choose to have your character come from them, that's one thing. I just don't want my only option to be playing a character that's grown up surrounded by the idea that women are inferior to men.

 

I play games to have fun, not have "you're a woman being competent, that's weird/good job overcoming your inherent limitations!" shoved into my face some more.

 

One of the things about fantasy worlds is that humans are generally still humans. Being a female warrior is on average harder than being a male warrior, simply because of differences in raw strength, etc.. So in that regard, gender roles for humans are more or less inevitable. Not to the point of "Females can't be warriors.", of course, but certainly to the point of "Competing with male warriors is a rather hard thing to do for female warriors.". If you get rid of such differences, it'd be majorly confusing to even call such "humans" human.

[Joukehainen]

Me and everyone else in this thread. I mean, do you really think Obsidian will take anything posted here into account when designing P:E?

 

My reply was prompted by insular generalisations and blatant hypocrisy, what prompted yours?

 

Maybe you could bother to read some of my posts before you jump to assumptions.

 

 

And allow me to also point out, yet again, that I think there is no need to worry too much about the representation of female characters in respect to PE, because the team looks to be doing a great job with it.

 

I LOVED both the choice of making a dwarven ranger female (not a combo you see often, female dwarf you know - "it's the beards!"); and the look of Cadegund. Both would certainly be attractive by offline human standards, but both look like they could indeed be warriors, and while Sagani is showing skin, it's clearly not done in a gratuitous or objectifying way.

 

I feel, OP, that Obsidian is on the ball with this and we need not worry too much.

 

 

And you know very well that your posts are being motivated by outright insulting others. Please maintain a respectful tone.

 

As for Obsidian, they certainly have shown they are paying attention to these issues, by for example changing Cadegund's "boobplate" into regular armour.

 

[sparklecat]

What it comes down to is good storytelling. What purpose does it serve in the story, pointing out that your female characters have to work harder than your males to be warriors? Is it being mentioned simply for the sake of "realism", or are you using it to drive the plot forward, to make a point or reveal more about the world to the player, like Sten's preconceptions about roles for men and women did to tell us more about Qunari societal structure?

 

The former is what's frustrating and hurts my enjoyment, even if it is realistic in terms of the sort of pointless comments I run into regularly in my own life.

[HungryHungryOuroboros]

 

A move which is definitely appreciated.

[Joukehainen]

And man, I'm just loving this sterling logic. "Well having women warriors is already unrealistic, so they might as well be in stilettos and have boobs bigger than their heads! Anything else would just be catering to extremists with their man-castrating agenda and take away precious development time!"

Edited October 20, 2012 by Joukehainen

[henofthewoods]

Okay so as a human being, I understand the virtue of having attractive characters in a fantasy escape. It's a perfectly normal part of human nature to want idealized figures in our mythologies and stories. It's also perfectly normal to like sex. Sex is fun and sexy and it makes people feel good. I think it's perfectly okay for a game to have attractive characters and include elements of sexuality and/or romance.

 

That said, the sheer onesidedness of how women are depicted in terms of men in video games (and how ridiculousness it's gotten) is kinda staggering. I understand that the world of game development is dominated by men and monoculture breeds these kinds of situations, but that doesn't make it okay. It's creepy, it's awkward and frankly it's lazy. It just makes me think that these folks just don't know how to make a woman likable or relatable so they just slap big boobs and show as much of her skin as possible while crossing their fingers to hope nobody notices that she's not a character so much as ornamentation. It weirds me out how quickly people are to defending all this simply because this is how it's always been and apparently if it's not exactly this way then characters are no longer allowed to be attractive ever again.

 

Boobplates look really dumb. It makes me think that either artist knows nothing about female anatomy or has no idea on how to make a lady physically attractive without relying on boobs. If this was a fetish game specifically for the sake of porn, I can understand having a metal bikini, but this isn't. If she is for-serious knight then she's going to need proper armor otherwise it looks really, really dumb. Would such a thing completely ruin a game for me? No, but it's still really stupid and I wish it wasn't so universally accepted. It's stupid the same way

is stupid. It's shallow and lazy.

 

A piece of media can have attractive people doing attractive things (and even sexy things) without looking really dumb and infantile. Other mediums have been doing it for quite some time now.

 

As for the folks that just want to get their rocks off, it's okay. It's no longer the 90's where video games are your only step up from lingere models in JC Penny magazines. The internet is here for all your porn needs. You don't need your sexual fantasies fulfilled in every piece of entertainment you partake in.

 

This isn't a matter of me wanting to cut your precious pee pee off. It's a matter of wanting a studio to take its story and design seriously, which they apparently are. This is a good thing.

Edited October 20, 2012 by henofthewoods

[Margaretha]

Speaking of boobs, what about Sagani's as an archer? It's a genuine question. I used to [do archery] in some club, and women usually wore something to flatten one of their breasts.

 

Edited October 20, 2012 by Margaretha

[TheMufflon]

And you know very well that your posts are being motivated by outright insulting others.

 

I typically don't bother replying to ad hominems, but I suppose I can make an exception. I will go so far as to say that Moonlight Butterfly made some disingenuous assertions about some dear friends of mine. And I really dislike of hypocrisy.

 

Please maintain a respectful tone.

 

Speaking of which... A good rule of thumb when maintaining a respectful tone: if all you are going to post is an ad hominem, don't post at all.

Edited October 20, 2012 by TheMufflon

[Joukehainen]

And you know very well that your posts are being motivated by outright insulting others.

 

I typically don't bother replying to ad hominems, but I suppose I can make an exception. I will go so far as to say that Moonlight Butterfly made some disingenuous assertions about some dear friends of mine. And I really dislike of hypocrisy.

 

Please maintain a respectful tone.

 

Speaking of which... A good rule of thumb when maintaining a respectful tone: if all you are going to post is an ad hominem, don't post at all.

 

Ad hominem, such as accusing someone of "blatant hypocrisy" or making assumptions about their motives. Asking for a respectful tone is not an ad hominem.