Boys will be boys on the internet (<- sarcasm)

[aluminiumtrioxid]

A proper DH CRPG would end up being rated AO.

 

If you put it full of Slaanesh-cultists, sure. Otherwise, not seeing it.

[BruceVC]

Objectification of women, isn't that totally subjective and dependant on context? Some dislike the stylisation of Dragons Crown with its very powerful but sexualised male and female characters, others dislike the brain dead slaves of Bioware whom follow the protagonist for years at a time for no good reason, and cannot do anything themselves, or even dress themselves for the climate or combat. It's a personal matter isn't it? So long as they suit the games aesthetic nothing should be out of bounds in my opinion, with obvious exceptions.

 

More female protagonists, isn't this up to the developer and the story they wish to tell? I mean if they want a genderless AI, a Nubian eunuch, a Lovecraftian alien entity or any thing else that is totally up to them isn't it, or are you saying that they must make content according to your dictates? Shouldn't they design what they want to? Amy Hennig a veteran designer and industry stalwart makes some of the best male characters around, who exactly am I to dictate to her what she wants to make? Chris Avellone writes some of the finest female characters in games, I would not whine at him and demand he make Kreia a man.

 

I see you couldn't resist mentioning Isabella's clothes...you are a naughty boy Nonek....a very naughty boy

 

Yes you right, the objectification of women in games can be subjective. For example I think the lovely Isabella represents a perfectly acceptable female character but for many she objectifies women. I suppose you can't please everyone. But take the latest Duke Nukem game, I played it and thought the female representation in that game positioned women in an insulting and vacuous way

 

Also you are right in the sense a developer can create any game they want with no regard to what people may think. For example a developer can create a game where black people are seen symbolically  as monkeys or where only  gay people are the targets of a killing spree. But then they must accept the SJ storm that will descend on them and the obvious and understandable criticism that will follow

 

To be aware of what some fans will expect from a game or rather won't accept is not hard to understand. Many development companies already do this as I mentioned, its not a big deal

[Malcador]

Well not AO for just sex, not too sure how well being allowed to torture people for information or purging mutants summarily that might be children will go down. Then again perhaps my DH sessions involved too much brutality or something (I killed an entire family, kids and all,for consorting with a Chaos sorcerer once, good times) so that might colour how I expect it to play out.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Malcador

[Nonek]

 

Objectification of women, isn't that totally subjective and dependant on context? Some dislike the stylisation of Dragons Crown with its very powerful but sexualised male and female characters, others dislike the brain dead slaves of Bioware whom follow the protagonist for years at a time for no good reason, and cannot do anything themselves, or even dress themselves for the climate or combat. It's a personal matter isn't it? So long as they suit the games aesthetic nothing should be out of bounds in my opinion, with obvious exceptions.

 

More female protagonists, isn't this up to the developer and the story they wish to tell? I mean if they want a genderless AI, a Nubian eunuch, a Lovecraftian alien entity or any thing else that is totally up to them isn't it, or are you saying that they must make content according to your dictates? Shouldn't they design what they want to? Amy Hennig a veteran designer and industry stalwart makes some of the best male characters around, who exactly am I to dictate to her what she wants to make? Chris Avellone writes some of the finest female characters in games, I would not whine at him and demand he make Kreia a man.

 

I see you couldn't resist mentioning Isabella's clothes...you are a naughty boy Nonek....a very naughty boy

 

Yes you right, the objectification of women in games can be subjective. For example I think the lovely Isabella represents a perfectly acceptable female character but for many she objectifies women. I suppose you can't please everyone. But take the latest Duke Nukem game, I played it and thought the female representation in that game positioned women in an insulting and vacuous way

 

Also you are right in the sense a developer can create any game they want with no regard to what people may think. For example a developer can create a game where black people are seen symbolically  as monkeys or where only  gay people are the targets of a killing spree. But then they must accept the SJ storm that will descend on them and the obvious and understandable criticism that will follow

 

To be aware of what some fans will expect from a game or rather won't accept is not hard to understand. Many development companies already do this as I mentioned, its not a big deal

 

 

So what you are saying is let market forces decide? If so I utterly agree, that is the only true test of a games worth in the long run. And if a game deals with brave subject matter such as racism and homophobia, like the examples you mentioned, I would positively applaud it for presenting a realistic depiction of the world, rather than shying away from content that is not politically correct.

 

So in summary developers can make what they want, the market will judge them and games are and always have been inclusive to almost everybody. Men, women and children.

 

I'm glad that's settled.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Nonek

[BruceVC]

 

 

Objectification of women, isn't that totally subjective and dependant on context? Some dislike the stylisation of Dragons Crown with its very powerful but sexualised male and female characters, others dislike the brain dead slaves of Bioware whom follow the protagonist for years at a time for no good reason, and cannot do anything themselves, or even dress themselves for the climate or combat. It's a personal matter isn't it? So long as they suit the games aesthetic nothing should be out of bounds in my opinion, with obvious exceptions.

 

More female protagonists, isn't this up to the developer and the story they wish to tell? I mean if they want a genderless AI, a Nubian eunuch, a Lovecraftian alien entity or any thing else that is totally up to them isn't it, or are you saying that they must make content according to your dictates? Shouldn't they design what they want to? Amy Hennig a veteran designer and industry stalwart makes some of the best male characters around, who exactly am I to dictate to her what she wants to make? Chris Avellone writes some of the finest female characters in games, I would not whine at him and demand he make Kreia a man.

 

I see you couldn't resist mentioning Isabella's clothes...you are a naughty boy Nonek....a very naughty boy

 

Yes you right, the objectification of women in games can be subjective. For example I think the lovely Isabella represents a perfectly acceptable female character but for many she objectifies women. I suppose you can't please everyone. But take the latest Duke Nukem game, I played it and thought the female representation in that game positioned women in an insulting and vacuous way

 

Also you are right in the sense a developer can create any game they want with no regard to what people may think. For example a developer can create a game where black people are seen symbolically  as monkeys or where only  gay people are the targets of a killing spree. But then they must accept the SJ storm that will descend on them and the obvious and understandable criticism that will follow

 

To be aware of what some fans will expect from a game or rather won't accept is not hard to understand. Many development companies already do this as I mentioned, its not a big deal

 

 

So what you are saying is let market forces decide? If so I utterly agree, that is the only true test of a games worth in the long run. And if a game deals with brave subject matter such as racism and homophobia, like the examples you mentioned, I would positively applaud it for presenting a realistic depiction of the world, rather than shying away from content that is not politically correct.

 

So in summary developers can make what they want, the market will judge them and games are and always have been inclusive to almost everybody. Men, women and children.

 

I'm glad that's settled.

 

 

 

Mmmm...you trying to catch me out....you sneaky Nonek. But I don't fall for such stratagems

 

A game will generally live or die through acceptance by the market as obviously this represents  revenue generation

 

But you must realize this doesn't always reflect what we are talking about when we say inclusivity

 

For example Bioware would still be making loads of money around there RPG if they hadn't decided to include same sex Romance. Why do you think they decided to include this as a Romance option?

Edited September 18, 2014 by BruceVC

[Nonek]

Because of their degenerate fans sickening attraction to virtual romances, this seems obvious. They don't have to make good games when they can make poor dating sims, and make the same profit. Also rather than making detailed and well written characters it's far easier to make them all Hawkesexual, a good cost cutting measure, and they can pander to the SJF's even while making those characters idle, unmotivated, incompetent idiots.

 

But are you saying there is some impediment to men, women or children playing games? Because I can't think of any. Please provide examples.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Nonek

[BruceVC]

Because of their degenerate fans sickening attraction to virtual romances, this seems obvious. They don't have to make good games when they can make poor dating sims, and make the same profit. Also rather than making detailed and well written characters it's far easier to make them all Hawkesexual, a good cost cutting measure, and they can pander to the SJF's even while making those characters idle, unmotivated, incompetent idiots.

 

But are you saying there is some impediment to men, women or children playing games? Because I can't think of any. Please provide examples.

 

Okay I now see where you misunderstand the principle of inclusivity. And I need to explain this to  you but I can't right now as I'm about to start an afterhours software  change at a customer, I'll try respond later but otherwise I'll comment tomorrow. Think how exciting it will be, you can wait in anticipation the whole night   

[JadedWolf]

I'm with Nonek. If you really think there is some sort of niche audience of gamers, be it female, homosexual etc. which at the moment is not getting the games it deserves, start up a company and go make those games. If the market is there, and the game is good, it'll be a big hit.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Well not AO for just sex, not too sure how well being allowed to torture people for information or purging mutants summarily that might be children will go down. Then again perhaps my DH sessions involved too much brutality or something (I killed an entire family, kids and all,for consorting with a Chaos sorcerer once, good times) so that might colour how I expect it to play out.

 

I was under the impression that torture and child murder are OK unless genitals are involved. Rating boards are weird.

[Malcador]

I guess they could just make it and not let you immolate children or torture people on screen and get by that way.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I guess they could just make it and not let you immolate children or torture people on screen and get by that way.

[Blarghagh]

Not to say their numbers aren't accurate, but I read some more of the CDC study on sexual violence Gromnir linked me in the post I quote below and I was seriously horrified to find "forced to penetrate someone" (i.e. a woman raping a man) was not defined as rape but as "other sexual violence" whereas only another man penetrating a man was defined as "rape".

 

If you counteract that awful misdirection on the part of the CDC, the numbers tell a completely different story. The story often derived from CDC findings is "women are at risk of sexual violence" yet if you add up the numbers coming from the "have you been raped in the last 12 months" questions and add men forced to penetrate someone (by force, coercion or drugs) the numbers become pretty much the same (both would come down to about 1.1% in 2010). If the CDC numbers are accurate then the findings are misleadingly phrased and its use to demonstrate a rape culture against women is just bogus as men and women are both victims roughly the same amount. >_

 

You guys can check the study out yourself if you feel like seeing if I made an error in calculation.

 

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_ipv_report_2013_v17_single_a.pdf

 

 

is long, but worth a read. 

 

doj study is actual excellent, but if you read the linked pdf you will observe the differences in methodology. the ncvs is an extreme useful but necessarily blunt tool, which is precisely why the cdc took a different approach. go into randomn homes and ask 'bout crime in general with interviewers who don't specific know how to talk to sexual assault victims, people who is notoriously taciturn about their victimization, may lead to deflated results, no? is just one flaw in ncvs. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

EDIT: Looks like I'm not the only one to pick up on that. Time Magazine points out the same woman-bias in that misdirection and more. Not sure how I feel about linking Time but I guess here it is: http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+time%2Ftopstories+%28TIME%3A+Top+Stories

Edited September 18, 2014 by TrueNeutral

[Gromnir]

 

I am a  liberal and due to the fact I grew up during Apartheid I have experienced first hand what happens when bigotry and discrimination become institutionalized. Its destroys people and severely impacts there dignity

 

So I am opposed to any form of bigotry that includes sexism, homophobia and racism. As far as sexism is concerned in the gaming industry I am not saying the entire industry needs to change and misogyny is rife  but there are  certain changes that should happen purely in the interest of  inclusivity. I don't think this means a paradigm shift in the development of all games but developers need to be aware of there entire fanbase. And many companies like Bioware and Obsidian are already aware of this and  ensure there games are inclusive to all demographics

 

 

stuff

ok, couple observations and comments from Gromnir.  

 

up til 'bout ten years ago, you woulda' found no more staunch detractor of affirmative action. sure, Gromnir is a minority, but we hated the idea that folks we never met decided we needed help. worse, we were offended by the perception that most people we met believed we were getting help. get some silly form with a series o' boxes asking for our race and we would invariably check "other" or white. our maternal grandmother were half polish, so we didn't feel like we were lying by doing so by claiming to be white on mindless and/or patronizing forms.

 

things change.

 

as we has grown older, we is actual more open to the potential positives o' affirmative action than we were when we were young. help minorities get into and hopeful graduate from college results in a much greater likelihood that those folks will have children who do not need affirmative action or government aid programs. affirmative action, while having some very ugly social costs, may be a long term boon for everybody.

 

things change.

 

we got a couple firemen friends who is a good bit older than we are... recent retired. one were a battalion chief at end of his career and other were a captain. musta been fifteen years ago when there were a big push to get more women into the local fire departments. our friends were educated minorities (black) and we suppose they had a kinda natural sympathy for women prospects. we had discussions with them at the time regarding women in the fire department. we mentioned the videos that the la city (county?) fire department had made to show some o' the difficulties they were having finding qualified women prospects. the videos resulted in la taking some heat from various groups 'cause they were less than flattering. show typical women trying to use an axe or carry life-sized dummies. average adult male at the time weighed something close to 185lbs, so videos showed women prospects attempting to carry 150lb dummies. videos would show women dragging the dummy by the ankles with simulated head bouncing on steps. as we said, not flattering were the videos.

 

at the time, Gromnir were still rabid opposed to any kinda affirmative action for minorities or women, but as we noted, our firemen friends were more sympathetic... initially. after a couple years o' working with women who clearly were not physically capable o' doing the job, the opinions o' our friends changed. it didn't help that as there were a significant influx o' women into the department, folks were testing boundaries-- there were some firehouse scandals involving weird sex stuff that no doubt made things tougher for our friends as they were authority figures in the department. regardless, our friends who were staunch supporters o' getting more women into the department did a complete 180 and were advocating a relative high minimum physical requirements test that would effective preclude 90% o' women applicants. 

 

different situation...

 

first couple years outta law school we actual worked in the us attorney's office. good gig for a guy who just passed the bar. the office were one o' the few districts where drug cases were rare.  anywho, we worked with a dwarf. not tolkien dwarf, Gromnir is not crazy, but a real person who had dwarfism.  the guy had a ridiculous kinda affinity for rules o' evidence that were largely wasted on the kinda crap we dealt with as n00bs. we actual worked with him kida frequent... more than a few times... never thought there were a problem til one day he kinda flips out on us. starts complaining 'bout how we were treating him like a cripple or somesuch nonsense. our grandmother, who were near complete paralyzed on her left side due to a stroke, lived with us for most o' our youth, so we were largely immune to the kinda discomfort many people seem to suffer from when they get 'round disabled folks. we didn't even think o' the dwarf as disabled anyway as compared to our grandmother, he didn't seem particular disabled to us... his complaint caught us off guard.

 

apparently we had been "disrespecting" the guy when we would open heavy doors or go and get file boxes without letting him do so or any number o' various patronizing actions. as we said, he flipped out and were shouting at us and he had never bothered to say anything previous. perhaps we were tired or insensitive, but we kinda let the guy have it with both barrels. we never shout or swear, but we were... acerbic. we explained to our dwarf colleague that he were short, slow and weak. Gromnir were none o' those things. a file box that would take us five minutes to carry back to the office would take him thirty minutes to acquire. it were foolishness that as 'tween him or Gromnir, he should retrieve the box and we would be having little time or inclination to be waiting around just so that he could prove to himself or the world that he could do everything that Gromnir could. had nothing to do with him being a dwarf but were rather that he were short, slow and weak and it were more convenient not to need wait around while he struggled with something we could do effortlessly. if he were short, slow and weak 'cause o illness or age, we would treat him exactly the same as we currently were doing, so had nothing to do with him being a dwarf. if he were wanting us to inconvenience our self so that he could indulge in various "sad and pathetic ego-boosting exercises," then we could add foolish to the list along with short, slow and weak as hurdles he woulds need overcome. 

 

well, sure enough we were called in to see our boss the next day and we got some sensitivity-training. regardless, we would observe that at least some folks with physical handicaps who claim that they wanna be treated the same actual wanna be treated special. 

 

times change

 

nowadays, faced with the same situation, am certain we would be more diplomatic, but am suspecting that our biggest problem in dealing with our dwarf colleague were that we didn't think o' him as disabled or handicapped in any meaningful way. if he were in a wheelchair 'cause he had no legs, we would not have considered him particularly handicapped as an attorney. the lack o' legs woulda' been seen by Gromnir as a largely incidental and meaningless quality for doing his job. nevertheless, we realize that being disabled or handicapped or whatever is the correct term nowadays, does result in a difference o' perspective and that we needs must be *sigh* sensitive to such differences.

 

now, as for games specific, we is more likely to see guys with prosthetics as characters than we is to see indians... our family insists that we is being insensitive if we says native american now that it is 2014. *eye roll* even so, when we makes a male character for a crpg, we invariably give him darker skin tone and black or dark-brown hair color. is kinda a reflexive thing that am s'posing has to do with identifying with the character we is creating. am not surprised when women want to make characters that they can identify with. am not certain how women feels 'bout identifying with lara croft or bayonetta, but we could see how if such stuff is their only choices, they might feel less than enthusiastic. 

 

a funny aside: we almost always make our male characters rough/borderline ugly, and we typical give'em facial hair. for obvious reasons, Gromnir cannot grow facial hair. additionally, we is considered obnoxiously handsome. nevertheless, makes a hard-bitten character with a beard or heavy stubble is typical for our avatar appearance. 

 

regardless, we has had many opinions on such stuff over the years and is amazing just how much circumstances and experience has resulted in us changing our perspective.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited September 18, 2014 by Gromnir

[Blarghagh]

Living in Europe, I've never actually met a native american in person and I had to actually google what those obvious reasons for not being able to grow facial hair were. I had no idea. I guess you learn something new every day.

[Gromnir]

Living in Europe, I've never actually met a native american in person and I had to actually google what those obvious reasons for not being able to grow facial hair were. I had no idea. I guess you learn something new every day.

 

indians (north american) is actual a misleading label that covers many different peoples. some indians actual can grow facial hair. amongst the oglala and lakota, facial hair is rare and/or sparse. we do have a couple male relatives with sad little mustaches, but they also got distant european ancestors. even so, cast a wide enough net and you can find exceptions. many indians actual have facial hair similar to what you might expect from japanese... but not ainu japanese.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[JadedWolf]

Heh, I knew a guy from Indonesian/Moluccan descent, and he was actually miffed he couldn't grow facial hair. Honestly, not having to shave would seem like a blessing but... He said he would have preferred to at least have the option.

[Volourn]

All depends on person. I've known Natives who can grow nice beards. *shrug*

Edited September 18, 2014 by Volourn

[Blarghagh]

I don't have great beard genes myself. I'm almost platinum blonde, but my distant irish descent makes my beard a very bright ginger. I used to feel really awkward about it, but honestly it became my trademark. It's a memorable trait and I often break ice by making a few self-deprecating jokes about it.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I could grow a full beard by 15. I choose the 5o'clock shadow, cause most girls seem to like that on me.