Drama in indy gaming and games journalism

[BruceVC]

@Bruce:

 

A diluted drink will never compete with a strong one.

 

True, but how is this applicable to having an option to play as a male or female?

[HoonDing]

[Shallow]

 

Generally inclusivity means stripping the game of anything gender specific allowing you to play as either a male or a female with 0 difference. Making games that "appeal to the whole fanbase" generally means a watered down gray tasteless mass that everyone can swallow even though no one will really be that into it. Individual games shouldn't be cattering to everyone, games should be specialized, the market is big, the market is growing, the market has always been branching, stop trying to tie all the branches together, all it does is create more bland "enjoyable for everyone!" content that sorta sucks.

 

So we obviously have a  disagreement of what inclusivity means, appealing to the fanbase is about inclusivity where you can play as a male or female. So we may  be debating the same point? Also female characters in a game mustn't be objectified. This does not mean now the games will become "watered down gray tasteless mass"

 

But if a large AAA gaming studio like Ubisoft doesn't offer fans the chance to play as a female then this is a problem that they need to address. This objective is relevant in most cases and of course there are exceptions

 

If a game has a set protagonist, with a plot based on that protagonist, with a lot of thought put into that protagonist, why should there be an arbritrary version of that protagonist with or without boobs to make people who are strongly attached to their gender happy at the cost of any gameplay related to gender? Let's look at Pplanescape Torment, if it had added an arbitrary Nameless One w boobs Ravel, Falls From Grace, and Annah need to be stripped off all flavor, something else will have to replace Ravels main motivation for helping you out and later not being happy about you leaving, something else with have to replace Annahs reason for following you as well. Now, our new Planescape Torment could keep the content for males and make a barebone senseless Ravel for females, not give Annah any reason for hanging around you, but it'd mean extra work that a decent portion of the playerbase (men play chicks too) will never see, and anyone playing a female char would complain that the game massively lacks flavor. You gotta either remove all gender references from the game, build new just as good gender references for females, or just scrap the idea of a nameless one with boobs.

 

Some games are built with multiple potential genders in mind, some with multiple possible protagonists in mind, some aren't, and it is good that some aren't, because those games are capable of adding much more gender specific flavor. I'm naturally biased here as I'm a guy, like most protagonists, and as I have extremely little internal gender association, if I woke up a woman, besides being very freaked out I wouldn't really care one way or another, but despite such bias I still feel it is a very valid argument that the more you try to push for everyone being able to fullfill their deepest desires in one game, the more bland that game becomes, or the more work has to go into that game for the same content per gameplay.

[Longknife]

You shouldn't look at this in the context of "lost " and "won", because if you do anyone opposed to inclusivity has " lost " because never before has the gaming industry been more concerned and determined to create games that appeal to the whole fanbase. And to honest its irrelevant that people on 4chan think that this is a bad idea as they don't officially  develop games , this is way the industry is going

Rather see this as something positive as now games will cater for all people where appropriate

 

 

Honestly dude, what planet do you live on?

 

I'm not looking at it like "lost" and "won" like "cmon guys let's beat them at gamergate!!!" I'm saying that what that quote is saying is on par with "we cannot allow the Germans to bring such atrocities such as genocide into the world. Because of the sheer dangers this, I hereby order the extermination of all Germans."  It's a self-defeating stance. It's not "we sure showed them," it's that they went about it the wrong way before the issue even began. You're interpreting the "they've already lost" as me viewing this as a competition. No, I'm saying they've got a self-defeating stance based on that quote.

 

 

 

 

Secondly....again, what planet do you live on?

 

 

Let me be very very brutally honest with you: you have one of the least credible opinions on this forum.

 

You know why I say that? Because nothing in my post you quoted mentions 4chan, nothing mentions exclusivity in games, nothing mentions anything you're talking about. My response was, plain and simple: if she thinks we should change the perceived culture of harassment within the gaming industry, that's a fair point EVERYONE would get behind 100%, but unfortunately we've already lost that battle in that the very side claiming to be anti-harassment is equally as guilty of harassment, so no one has set a good example or done anything to actually change the culture and thus this entire clash is moot and should cease, IF her stance is truly the stance of the SJW side. Go back to the drawing board and think of something else once the tension has died down.

 

  The fact that you seem to spew out the same talking points in response to everyone, regardless of what they say? People are not listening to you, and NOT because "omg how dare Bruce spew the SJW message here!" No, people aren't listening because it seems blatantly obvious your opinion cannot and will not change, and half of what's said goes in one ear and out the other. You're doing a horrendous job of representing a group that's being labeled as zealous and quasi-religious in their moral code beliefs.

 

 

If you truly want to actually discuss things, please read my f***ing post and respond to it appropriately.

 

If I see a convo go down like this:

 

"Peanut butter and jelly sure is delicious"

"I agree and I wish 4chan would realize this and stop trying to stagnate the gaming community with their misogynistic DDoS and harassment techniques"

 

Then f*** yes I'm gonna be an ass to you because nothing pisses me off more than seeing someone lie to themselves and basically pretend to be interested in productive discussion where everyone's willing to be proven right OR WRONG for the sake of and in the interest of general progress for the community as a whole.

 

 

 

 

 

Finally, against my better judgement I'll ask how on EARTH do you figure that "never before has the gaming industry been more concerned and determined to create games that appeal to the whole fanbase?" Says who? According to what statistics? The only example I can name of a game with the deliberate intent of bringing more equality to the table is The Fine Young Capitalists, which as we all know was ultimately supported by the GamerGate side and nearly snuffed by Silverstring media.

  And even if that WERE the case that we saw an increase in games being made for everyone, there's question about how that came to happen. Allegedly it could occur via coercion, intimidation and censorship. And no, I think you'll find that many of us hold the stance of "Artistic Integrity > Equality" and would NOT be ok with this if it came at the cost of (or could potentially come at the cost of) stagnating and limiting artistic expression, so again even if that were the case, many of us would potentially be very unhappy with it.

 

No one gives a flying **** about equality in video games. They care about gameplay. If you want equality, you can kindly bring it up and request it to the developers you like when they develop games, and they'll possibly consider it. I once helped a guy ask EA to include disabled people in the next Sims game. Did they do it? No. Am I gonna cry and piss and moan about it for all eternity? WTF no they have another focus, that being GAMEPLAY. I merely spoke up to say "hey EA, this is me acknowledging that yes my demographic does exist and play your games," but they're not f***ing required to meet some quota or some crap. Same goes for every minority group ever, and if you have a problem with games that aren't socially friendly, vote with your wallet.

[Orogun01]

 

@Bruce:

 

A diluted drink will never compete with a strong one.

 

True, but how is this applicable to having an option to play as a male or female?

 

You already read the answer to this question, when you read Shallow's post.

[BruceVC]

 

You shouldn't look at this in the context of "lost " and "won", because if you do anyone opposed to inclusivity has " lost " because never before has the gaming industry been more concerned and determined to create games that appeal to the whole fanbase. And to honest its irrelevant that people on 4chan think that this is a bad idea as they don't officially  develop games , this is way the industry is going

Rather see this as something positive as now games will cater for all people where appropriate

 

 

Honestly dude, what planet do you live on?

 

I'm not looking at it like "lost" and "won" like "cmon guys let's beat them at gamergate!!!" I'm saying that what that quote is saying is on par with "we cannot allow the Germans to bring such atrocities such as genocide into the world. Because of the sheer dangers this, I hereby order the extermination of all Germans."  It's a self-defeating stance. It's not "we sure showed them," it's that they went about it the wrong way before the issue even began. You're interpreting the "they've already lost" as me viewing this as a competition. No, I'm saying they've got a self-defeating stance based on that quote.

 

 

 

 

Secondly....again, what planet do you live on?

 

 

Let me be very very brutally honest with you: you have one of the least credible opinions on this forum.

 

You know why I say that? Because nothing in my post you quoted mentions 4chan, nothing mentions exclusivity in games, nothing mentions anything you're talking about. My response was, plain and simple: if she thinks we should change the perceived culture of harassment within the gaming industry, that's a fair point EVERYONE would get behind 100%, but unfortunately we've already lost that battle in that the very side claiming to be anti-harassment is equally as guilty of harassment, so no one has set a good example or done anything to actually change the culture and thus this entire clash is moot and should cease, IF her stance is truly the stance of the SJW side. Go back to the drawing board and think of something else once the tension has died down.

 

  The fact that you seem to spew out the same talking points in response to everyone, regardless of what they say? People are not listening to you, and NOT because "omg how dare Bruce spew the SJW message here!" No, people aren't listening because it seems blatantly obvious your opinion cannot and will not change, and half of what's said goes in one ear and out the other. You're doing a horrendous job of representing a group that's being labeled as zealous and quasi-religious in their moral code beliefs.

 

 

If you truly want to actually discuss things, please read my f***ing post and respond to it appropriately.

 

If I see a convo go down like this:

 

"Peanut butter and jelly sure is delicious"

"I agree and I wish 4chan would realize this and stop trying to stagnate the gaming community with their misogynistic DDoS and harassment techniques"

 

Then f*** yes I'm gonna be an ass to you because nothing pisses me off more than seeing someone lie to themselves and basically pretend to be interested in productive discussion where everyone's willing to be proven right OR WRONG for the sake of and in the interest of general progress for the community as a whole.

 

 

 

 

 

Finally, against my better judgement I'll ask how on EARTH do you figure that "never before has the gaming industry been more concerned and determined to create games that appeal to the whole fanbase?" Says who? According to what statistics? The only example I can name of a game with the deliberate intent of bringing more equality to the table is The Fine Young Capitalists, which as we all know was ultimately supported by the GamerGate side and nearly snuffed by Silverstring media.

  And even if that WERE the case that we saw an increase in games being made for everyone, there's question about how that came to happen. Allegedly it could occur via coercion, intimidation and censorship. And no, I think you'll find that many of us hold the stance of "Artistic Integrity > Equality" and would NOT be ok with this if it came at the cost of (or could potentially come at the cost of) stagnating and limiting artistic expression, so again even if that were the case, many of us would potentially be very unhappy with it.

 

No one gives a flying **** about equality in video games. They care about gameplay. If you want equality, you can kindly bring it up and request it to the developers you like when they develop games, and they'll possibly consider it. I once helped a guy ask EA to include disabled people in the next Sims game. Did they do it? No. Am I gonna cry and piss and moan about it for all eternity? WTF no they have another focus, that being GAMEPLAY. I merely spoke up to say "hey EA, this is me acknowledging that yes my demographic does exist and play your games," but they're not f***ing required to meet some quota or some crap. Same goes for every minority group ever, and if you have a problem with games that aren't socially friendly, vote with your wallet.

 

 

No need to use profanity, we are trying to have  a mature debate without feeling the need to insult each other.  And just so you don't say  "what planet are you living on "...you claimed I must " please read my f***ing post and respond to it appropriately" and you have petulantly decided to use the f**k several times in your post . Using offensive words doesn't make you sound more emphatic or clever

 

My advice is you should  learn "to  read your own  posts and respond to them accordingly " . You again have used the word " lost " which means someone has "won " or can "win"

 

To quote you  again " but unfortunately we've already lost that battle"....notice the usage of the word "lost ".

 

As I said there is no "lost " and no " won ", there is only suggested and expected change coming to the gaming industry. And then you ask " what changes around inclusivity have come to the gaming industry ". I clearly stated this which you conveniently ignored. Companies like Bioware and Obsidian already have male, female, gay and non-white characters that you can interact with. So the statistics are right in front of you if you bothered to actually see how games like RPG have changed just in the last 5 years

 

Also you say "people don't care about  equality in games"...this must be one of most bizarre points I've ever heard. Just because you don't care or think there will be any effective change that doesn't mean others don't care. The whole root cause of this Anita and Zoe furore is based on a need for inclusivity

 

And finally this will be last time I respond to you, I am tired of people who are incapable of having a debate without feeling the need to insult others. Grow up and learn to debate like an adult

 

 

 

[Shallow]

Adding slurs and insults isn't meant to indicate intelligence or make you seem empathetical, it's generally a release of frustration, in this case pretty valid frustration over your debating style. The fact that someone can lose doesn't mean they can win, it doesn't have to some great personal moral victory for us that your side is pretty hypocritical, it just means your nonharassing regulars lose the ability to have a proper moral high ground around the whole harassment thing against our nonharassing regulars. Also, whilst only addressing the whole titleish "No one gives a flying pig about equality" thing you're essentially taking it out of context, you gotta address the actual statement he made, not just the title he gave it, if you want to seriously have a discussion with someone.

 

Telling him to learn to debate like an adult is saying the exact same thing as he said, only difference is instead of writing it in a frustrated and annoyed style you're writing it in a smug and condescending one.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Generally inclusivity means stripping the game of anything gender specific allowing you to play as either a male or a female with 0 difference. Making games that "appeal to the whole fanbase" generally means a watered down gray tasteless mass that everyone can swallow even though no one will really be that into it. Individual games shouldn't be cattering to everyone, games should be specialized, the market is big, the market is growing, the market has always been branching, stop trying to tie all the branches together, all it does is create more bland "enjoyable for everyone!" content that sorta sucks.

 

So we obviously have a  disagreement of what inclusivity means, appealing to the fanbase is about inclusivity where you can play as a male or female. So we may  be debating the same point? Also female characters in a game mustn't be objectified. This does not mean now the games will become "watered down gray tasteless mass"

 

But if a large AAA gaming studio like Ubisoft doesn't offer fans the chance to play as a female then this is a problem that they need to address. This objective is relevant in most cases and of course there are exceptions

 

If a game has a set protagonist, with a plot based on that protagonist, with a lot of thought put into that protagonist, why should there be an arbritrary version of that protagonist with or without boobs to make people who are strongly attached to their gender happy at the cost of any gameplay related to gender? Let's look at Pplanescape Torment, if it had added an arbitrary Nameless One w boobs Ravel, Falls From Grace, and Annah need to be stripped off all flavor, something else will have to replace Ravels main motivation for helping you out and later not being happy about you leaving, something else with have to replace Annahs reason for following you as well. Now, our new Planescape Torment could keep the content for males and make a barebone senseless Ravel for females, not give Annah any reason for hanging around you, but it'd mean extra work that a decent portion of the playerbase (men play chicks too) will never see, and anyone playing a female char would complain that the game massively lacks flavor. You gotta either remove all gender references from the game, build new just as good gender references for females, or just scrap the idea of a nameless one with boobs.

 

Some games are built with multiple potential genders in mind, some with multiple possible protagonists in mind, some aren't, and it is good that some aren't, because those games are capable of adding much more gender specific flavor. I'm naturally biased here as I'm a guy, like most protagonists, and as I have extremely little internal gender association, if I woke up a woman, besides being very freaked out I wouldn't really care one way or another, but despite such bias I still feel it is a very valid argument that the more you try to push for everyone being able to fullfill their deepest desires in one game, the more bland that game becomes, or the more work has to go into that game for the same content per gameplay.

 

 

You make some good points

 

As I mentioned there are exceptions, for example I don't expect Lara Croft to have a male protagonist. Planescape is another example where you can't really change the main character and I don't expect that change

My point about inclusivity is more for a new RPG like the latest Dragon Age, in this case there is no issue around inclusivity as Bioware has addressed this. But Ubisoft and there new Unity sequel in the AC saga. This needs to change because its not like its not technically possible to have a female character

 

[BruceVC]

Adding slurs and insults isn't meant to indicate intelligence or make you seem empathetical, it's generally a release of frustration, in this case pretty valid frustration over your debating style. The fact that someone can lose doesn't mean they can win, it doesn't have to some great personal moral victory for us that your side is pretty hypocritical, it just means your nonharassing regulars lose the ability to have a proper moral high ground around the whole harassment thing against our nonharassing regulars. Also, whilst only addressing the whole titleish "No one gives a flying pig about equality" thing you're essentially taking it out of context, you gotta address the actual statement he made, not just the title he gave it, if you want to seriously have a discussion with someone.

 

Telling him to learn to debate like an adult is saying the exact same thing as he said, only difference is instead of writing it in a frustrated and annoyed style you're writing it in a smug and condescending one.

No he made several personal attacks on me in a childish and unacceptable way. I won't ever debate with him again. There is an etiquette to how we debate and if someone cannot make a point without offending someone that's your choice, just don't expect others to want to continue the debate

[Shallow]

You make some good points

 

As I mentioned there are exceptions, for example I don't expect Lara Croft to have a male protagonist. Planescape is another example where you can't really change the main character and I don't expect that change

My point about inclusivity is more for a new RPG like the latest Dragon Age, in this case there is no issue around inclusivity as Bioware has addressed this. But Ubisoft and there new Unity sequel in the AC saga. This needs to change because its not like its not technically possible to have a female character

 

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying, if you're saying that all new RPGs shouldn't pursue whatever storylines they please, damned be the things it means they can't include, then I strongly disagree, if you're saying that games that have no real content identifying the gender of your character, where you're already allowed to design your own character, might as well spend a bit of money on adding a seperate body with boobs (don't get why saying the t word that means boobs is any worse than saying boobs according to the forum censorship machine) then I don't see why not. I've never played AC, didn't really seem like my kinda thing, so excuse my ignorance, but isn't the initial concept supposed to be based on hashassin or something? If so it would seem sorta odd having female assassins, but again, I don't know enough to really comment, so I probably shouldn't have.

Edited September 25, 2014 by Shallow

[JadedWolf]

I'm really not quite sure what you want, Bruce. You say you want "inclusive" games. I don't really think you have any opposition here. If a game company chooses to make a game that fulfills your wishes -wishes which are not unreasonable, and I am sure have a target demographic- I don't think anyone here will complain.

 

That is something else though that trying to change existing games or preventing new games from being made that don't fulfull your wishes.

 

If you want to fight sexism in games (girls only shown as lust objects) or the way some male gamers communicate with women (the same 14 year old pimply geeks who annoy everyone else as well)  then I can totally understand that. But some games will by their very nature always be more attractive to males, and will cater more to them. I personally like to play strategy games. Not a lot of women do. Is that a problem? Can that be changed in any way to make them more inclusive? I honestly don't think so.

 

Question: which current games do you find objectionable, and what would you want to be done about them?

Edited September 25, 2014 by JadedWolf

[TrashMan]

 No one is trying to 'destroy games' or take away 'hardcore games' or tell anyone what games they should or should not play. No one is trying to say that the 'male video game culture' has to die. What they are saying is that the current culture and ecosystem surrounding games has some toxic and unwelcoming areas and THAT needs to change.

 

What many are also saying, and what I wish was considered 'obvious' to everyone, is that having a more diverse group of game developers creating a more diverse set of games played by a more diverse set of players is good for everyone in the industry. It keeps this industry sustainable and creates an environment that allows creative, engaging games of all types to be made so that everyone can experience the joys of playing video games.

 

 

Not the exact vibe I'm getting.

Every year I see more and more games aimed at females in the Steam Store or GamersGate. So it's obvious the industry is already shifting.

Not to mention that many on the "feminist" side seem to want to completely ban many games as they are now. Few talk about diversity. Some talk only about ending this and that trope or practice forever.

 

What galls me is how both sides want to just shut the other side completley up.

The Internet has always been a bastion of free speech, but it too is getting less and less free.

 

The irony here is that the "gaming culture" is not defined. Not really. We ARE talking about the internet. When you have millions of people shielded by anonimity you're going to have toxicity regardless of your sex, age, religion or whatever.

It's practically impossible to put that many different people, from different cultures and sourroundings and different experiences, and then expect they will all get along nicely. They won't.

Many seem to treat the internet as their back yard. It's not.

It's a brutal wild land and the sooner people correct their expectations, the better.

There is no inherent right or guarantee that you won't be insulted or feel bad on the internets.

[Oerwinde]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Generally inclusivity means stripping the game of anything gender specific allowing you to play as either a male or a female with 0 difference. Making games that "appeal to the whole fanbase" generally means a watered down gray tasteless mass that everyone can swallow even though no one will really be that into it. Individual games shouldn't be cattering to everyone, games should be specialized, the market is big, the market is growing, the market has always been branching, stop trying to tie all the branches together, all it does is create more bland "enjoyable for everyone!" content that sorta sucks.

So we obviously have a disagreement of what inclusivity means, appealing to the fanbase is about inclusivity where you can play as a male or female. So we may be debating the same point? Also female characters in a game mustn't be objectified. This does not mean now the games will become "watered down gray tasteless mass"

 

But if a large AAA gaming studio like Ubisoft doesn't offer fans the chance to play as a female then this is a problem that they need to address. This objective is relevant in most cases and of course there are exceptions

If a game has a set protagonist, with a plot based on that protagonist, with a lot of thought put into that protagonist, why should there be an arbritrary version of that protagonist with or without boobs to make people who are strongly attached to their gender happy at the cost of any gameplay related to gender? Let's look at Pplanescape Torment, if it had added an arbitrary Nameless One w boobs Ravel, Falls From Grace, and Annah need to be stripped off all flavor, something else will have to replace Ravels main motivation for helping you out and later not being happy about you leaving, something else with have to replace Annahs reason for following you as well. Now, our new Planescape Torment could keep the content for males and make a barebone senseless Ravel for females, not give Annah any reason for hanging around you, but it'd mean extra work that a decent portion of the playerbase (men play chicks too) will never see, and anyone playing a female char would complain that the game massively lacks flavor. You gotta either remove all gender references from the game, build new just as good gender references for females, or just scrap the idea of a nameless one with boobs.

 

Some games are built with multiple potential genders in mind, some with multiple possible protagonists in mind, some aren't, and it is good that some aren't, because those games are capable of adding much more gender specific flavor. I'm naturally biased here as I'm a guy, like most protagonists, and as I have extremely little internal gender association, if I woke up a woman, besides being very freaked out I wouldn't really care one way or another, but despite such bias I still feel it is a very valid argument that the more you try to push for everyone being able to fullfill their deepest desires in one game, the more bland that game becomes, or the more work has to go into that game for the same content per gameplay.

You make some good points

 

As I mentioned there are exceptions, for example I don't expect Lara Croft to have a male protagonist. Planescape is another example where you can't really change the main character and I don't expect that change

My point about inclusivity is more for a new RPG like the latest Dragon Age, in this case there is no issue around inclusivity as Bioware has addressed this. But Ubisoft and there new Unity sequel in the AC saga. This needs to change because its not like its not technically possible to have a female character

Have you played any Assassin's Creed games? The nature of the Animus prevents a choice in character options because you're replaying a figure's memories within a single bloodline. The only way they could have a male and female playable character would be if they were in different time periods. Unity you're reliving Arno's memories, offering another character option means writing an entirely separate game.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 No one is trying to 'destroy games' or take away 'hardcore games' or tell anyone what games they should or should not play. No one is trying to say that the 'male video game culture' has to die. What they are saying is that the current culture and ecosystem surrounding games has some toxic and unwelcoming areas and THAT needs to change.

 

What many are also saying, and what I wish was considered 'obvious' to everyone, is that having a more diverse group of game developers creating a more diverse set of games played by a more diverse set of players is good for everyone in the industry. It keeps this industry sustainable and creates an environment that allows creative, engaging games of all types to be made so that everyone can experience the joys of playing video games.

 

 

The very problem with this is that if this were their stance and their argument, then they've already lost by having people on their side partaking in the very same actions. It'd require leading by example, which clearly isn't happening. Not neccesarily by guilt of the person you've quoted, but merely by people sharing her opinions who could NOT manage to be "above it all" when it came to the bickering.

 

 

Or maybe this is a convenient excuse used by people who were determined to dismiss the other side anyways.

 

Asking the other side to behave in a manner you are unwilling to is a fundamentally dishonest thing. Also, how exactly is "you are guilty by association, therefore I don't have to listen to you" a different stance from "Gamergate is an organized harrassment campaign, and whoever says otherwise is either lying or has been duped"?

 

 

Would you rather have a more inclusive game of lower quality or a higher quality one that's less inclusive?

 

 

"Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"

 

Not only is the question very loaded, it's also not specific enough for me to answer. I mean, inclusive how? Lower quality in what areas and by how much?

For example, I'd gladly sacrifice having 5 different shaders of UItimate Prettiness (which my PC wouldn't be able to run anyway) for, say, having a diverse, well-realized cast with various skin tones and sexual orientations, but only 3 different shaders of Moderate Prettiness. I'd also be perfectly okay if the game only ended up having 436 different weapons instead of the 578 they originally planned to have.

But let's have a less absurd example and point out that in order to write a well-realized and diverse cast, the designers have to employ a more diverse cast of writers, who are, presumably, a bit inexperienced. Their work needs more supervising and polish from the lead writer, which means he has less time to do his own stuff, which ends up meaning that they have to scrap an area they wanted to do, because they had no time to flesh it out properly. Thing is, I think all RPGs have areas that could've used more polish, and now the (non-writer) energy that would've gone into fleshing out the scrapped area can be spent on polishing the other, more important areas. Not a horrible tradeoff in my book.

We could go on, but the essence of the matter is this: would I sacrifice core gameplay elements in exchange of having horrible caricatures like Whiny Gay Dude Whose Sole Defining Characteristic Was Being Gay in ME3? Nope. Would I be okay with the devs deciding they value inclusivity more than [insert fairly tangential element of the game]? Of course I would, they're the devs, they know what they're doing - if they deemed [element] expendable, it probably was.

 

If a game has a set protagonist, with a plot based on that protagonist, with a lot of thought put into that protagonist, why should there be an arbritrary version of that protagonist with or without boobs to make people who are strongly attached to their gender happy at the cost of any gameplay related to gender? Let's look at Pplanescape Torment, if it had added an arbitrary Nameless One w boobs Ravel, Falls From Grace, and Annah need to be stripped off all flavor, something else will have to replace Ravels main motivation for helping you out and later not being happy about you leaving, something else with have to replace Annahs reason for following you as well. 

 

 

...Or you can make them bisexual, therefore also increasing diversity in your game? I'm rather convinced FFG is pansexual (well, asexual panromantic, if we're really fond of labels) anyways, Ravel - being a polymorphing hag - also probably doesn't think too much about her partners' gender, species and orientation, so we're essentially at "you only have to change one character". I'm fairly sure the game has enough humanoid NPCs* to not hurt verisimilitude by making one of them bisexual, and why couldn't that one be one of the players' companions?

 

*As opposed to Grace and Ravel who aren't human and therefore shouldn't play by human rules.

[HoonDing]

AssCreed: Liberation has a female protagonist.

[BruceVC]

I'm really not quite sure what you want, Bruce. You say you want "inclusive" games. I don't really think you have any opposition here. If a game company chooses to make a game that fulfills your wishes -wishes which are not unreasonable, and I am sure have a target demographic- I don't think anyone here will complain.

 

That is something else though that trying to change existing games or preventing new games from being made that don't fulfull your wishes.

 

If you want to fight sexism in games (girls only shown as lust objects) or the way some male gamers communicate with women (the same 14 year old pimply geeks who annoy everyone else as well)  then I can totally understand that. But some games will by their very nature always be more attractive to males, and will cater more to them. I personally like to play strategy games. Not a lot of women do. Is that a problem? Can that be changed in any way to make them more inclusive? I honestly don't think so.

 

Question: which current games do you find objectionable, and what would you want to be done about them?

 

The problem being that people say "we have no issue with inclusive games " but then when these considerations  are raised there are all these objections to the inclusivity. And I'm not saying this is what you believe or say

 

I've made this point several times but what do I mean by inclusivity, well your standard Bioware game is a good example of this?

 

And yes I am also opposed to sexism in games so we agree on that. And  I understand that certain games like  COJ is probably more appealing to men, no issue there.

 

What games aren't delivering, a good example is the upcoming AC game Unity or the new Far Cry game, no female protagonist so there is the risk of any female gamer not being able to identify with the main character,

[BruceVC]

AssCreed: Liberation has a female protagonist.

 

So why aren't any of  the four available character choices in Unity a female option ?

Edited September 25, 2014 by BruceVC

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

 

Generally inclusivity means stripping the game of anything gender specific allowing you to play as either a male or a female with 0 difference. Making games that "appeal to the whole fanbase" generally means a watered down gray tasteless mass that everyone can swallow even though no one will really be that into it. Individual games shouldn't be cattering to everyone, games should be specialized, the market is big, the market is growing, the market has always been branching, stop trying to tie all the branches together, all it does is create more bland "enjoyable for everyone!" content that sorta sucks.

So we obviously have a disagreement of what inclusivity means, appealing to the fanbase is about inclusivity where you can play as a male or female. So we may be debating the same point? Also female characters in a game mustn't be objectified. This does not mean now the games will become "watered down gray tasteless mass"

 

But if a large AAA gaming studio like Ubisoft doesn't offer fans the chance to play as a female then this is a problem that they need to address. This objective is relevant in most cases and of course there are exceptions

If a game has a set protagonist, with a plot based on that protagonist, with a lot of thought put into that protagonist, why should there be an arbritrary version of that protagonist with or without boobs to make people who are strongly attached to their gender happy at the cost of any gameplay related to gender? Let's look at Pplanescape Torment, if it had added an arbitrary Nameless One w boobs Ravel, Falls From Grace, and Annah need to be stripped off all flavor, something else will have to replace Ravels main motivation for helping you out and later not being happy about you leaving, something else with have to replace Annahs reason for following you as well. Now, our new Planescape Torment could keep the content for males and make a barebone senseless Ravel for females, not give Annah any reason for hanging around you, but it'd mean extra work that a decent portion of the playerbase (men play chicks too) will never see, and anyone playing a female char would complain that the game massively lacks flavor. You gotta either remove all gender references from the game, build new just as good gender references for females, or just scrap the idea of a nameless one with boobs.

 

Some games are built with multiple potential genders in mind, some with multiple possible protagonists in mind, some aren't, and it is good that some aren't, because those games are capable of adding much more gender specific flavor. I'm naturally biased here as I'm a guy, like most protagonists, and as I have extremely little internal gender association, if I woke up a woman, besides being very freaked out I wouldn't really care one way or another, but despite such bias I still feel it is a very valid argument that the more you try to push for everyone being able to fullfill their deepest desires in one game, the more bland that game becomes, or the more work has to go into that game for the same content per gameplay.

You make some good points

 

As I mentioned there are exceptions, for example I don't expect Lara Croft to have a male protagonist. Planescape is another example where you can't really change the main character and I don't expect that change

My point about inclusivity is more for a new RPG like the latest Dragon Age, in this case there is no issue around inclusivity as Bioware has addressed this. But Ubisoft and there new Unity sequel in the AC saga. This needs to change because its not like its not technically possible to have a female character

Have you played any Assassin's Creed games? The nature of the Animus prevents a choice in character options because you're replaying a figure's memories within a single bloodline. The only way they could have a male and female playable character would be if they were in different time periods. Unity you're reliving Arno's memories, offering another character option means writing an entirely separate game.

 

 

Sure I hear you. And I played all the AC games except for Black Flag.

 

My issue is more with Unity and the four optional characters, all men. No women

[Oerwinde]

 

 

AssCreed: Liberation has a female protagonist.

So why aren't the four available character choices in Unity a female option ?

There aren't four character choices. There's Arno. You can have up to 3 others play co-op in certain missions, but to you they are brotherhood Assassins, to each of them they are Arno.

[Shallow]

Yeah Alaminium, got the same feel from FFG, however there are like half a million things that imply you're supposed to be into her, Ravel never really morphed into anything that wasn't female for the duration of the game. I'll be blunt here, I strongly disapprove of just making people bisexual for the sake of the player getting to have boobs without being locked out of content, it feels incredibly fake and forced, it's pissing all over whatever idea the designer might have, diversity for the sake of diversity just comes out trashy, you'd now get people crying about there being no male love interests or whatever for the female TNO, you'd have people crying that there are no male love interests for male TNO, and if there is any forcefully inserted diversity into the game as the intended male character you'd be detracting from the game for everyone who doesn't want to play diversity rainbowland. Of course, with all that said, if you added a TNO with boobs, made it clear the gameplay wouldn't be altered and would just be identical as the gameplay playing a male, I couldn't give a ****, of course it'd still at the end of the day probably result in more complaints like "Black Isle believes all women are bisexuals/lesbians and stuff! Straight women oppressed for sexualization of women!", but if the devs are okay with that, so am I.

[BruceVC]

 

 

AssCreed: Liberation has a female protagonist.

So why aren't the four available character choices in Unity a female option ?

There aren't four character choices. There's Arno. You can have up to 3 others play co-op in certain missions, but to you they are brotherhood Assassins, to each of them they are Arno.

 

I see your point, so  you are saying you cannot make  any of them female because of the story line being about Arno specifically

[TrashMan]

You can't please everyone. It's pointless to try.

[Oerwinde]

 

 

 

 

AssCreed: Liberation has a female protagonist.

So why aren't the four available character choices in Unity a female option ?

There aren't four character choices. There's Arno. You can have up to 3 others play co-op in certain missions, but to you they are brotherhood Assassins, to each of them they are Arno.

I see your point, so you are saying you cannot make any of them female because of the story line being about Arno specifically

Yes. You play as Arno, the co-op missions are available within the main game from taverns, but you don't switch characters when you play them. Everyone looks different in the demos because they added a bunch of clothing customization to Unity, so whatever other people you play with will have customized Arno's apearance and equipment to their preference. So within each player's narrative they are Arno and the other players Arnos are random Brotherhood Assassins. Edited September 25, 2014 by Oerwinde

[Fighter]

Here is a thing about "why are you against inclusivity when it's brought up". I would actually prefer if the next Assassin's Creed protagonist were a woman. I would like to see more female protagonists. I was one of a the few (according to Bioware's own stats) people who played the female Shepard.

 

But there is a big difference between me saying that and saying, "Oh no, Rockstar chose to do an all male cast for GTA. Rockstar you done WRONG!" It's that pro inclusivity crowd is too concerned with berating people and demonizing male specific tastes as sexist and in case of some corrupting the world.

 

 

So why aren't any of  the four available character choices in Unity a female option ?

 

There are no other male options either. You are always Arno on your screen

[JadedWolf]

For the record, I wouldn't mind, and still play, a game which only had a female protagonist if the story was interesting. Playing a different gender would not make me feel icky or confused with myself. So, game companies, feel free to make an RPG from a female perspective - no objections here. 

 

My problem with games that try to be "inclusive" is that they can only seem to do this by removing flavour. Characters being bisexual only really works for me if they are bisexual from the ground up, not basically a character that is heterosexual if you are, and gay if you are. Which is often what you get. And this happens a lot when games try to be inclusive. Their solutions are... gamey. Transparanent and immersion breaking. If you try to mold a character so that they can change to suit everyone, they end up with no personality. That's really my problem with your solution of "inclusive" gameplay. 

Edited September 25, 2014 by JadedWolf