The portrayal of women and minorities in video games

[msnoodles]

They could, but it would be very difficult to do with current societal norms, with little point other than to be balanced in gender identity.

Maybe they just wanted a story with a transgendered person in it? There can be a minority main character whose sole purpose isn't to "even the playing field", so to speak.

Why would you say that media as a whole ignores transgendered people?

A better question is "what gives video games license to ignore a certain minority while the rest of the media doesn't?" Is there anything inherent to the concept of video games, not the industry as it stands, that renders it inferior to all other forms of media?

Though in all seriousness, no one's going to say "No tits? I think I'll pass" as a rule. Doesn't mean it's not sometimes a large part of the process in determining whether they'll buy something.

I don't think hormonal teenage dudes make up as much as the consumer base as the "gamer" stereotype will have you believe. I think marketers are slow to understand that, and they're slow to understand that they're hurting their own image in the long run.

Mainstream enough for most popular games to have them. Though, wait, what's cartoon porn now?

Facetious over exaggeration, though yeah someone who doesn't typically play games can look at an image of Ivy or something and think "cartoon porn".

Okay.

Why?

Because you can play video games without being a horny pimply teenage boy, but this kind of shit leads people who don't play video games (i.e. potential customers) reason to believe otherwise. I'll ask again, why should video games be held to a lower standard than any other form of media? I don't want answers like "because idiots play them", I mean what's inherent to the concept that should make it, on a wider scale than "avid gamers", a niche for antisocial neckbeards and sex-starved 13yos?

[eclipse]

Because you can play video games without being a horny pimply teenage boy, but this kind of shit leads people who don't play video games (i.e. potential customers) reason to believe otherwise. I'll ask again, why should video games be held to a lower standard than any other form of media? I don't want answers like "because idiots play them", I mean what's inherent to the concept that should make it, on a wider scale than "avid gamers", a niche for antisocial neckbeards and sex-starved 13yos?

Let's take another very common after-work activity - watching TV.

How much brain power does it take to watch TV, compared to playing a video game? Now look at the population in general. Do you think that kind of brain power output is something they'd like to do in their free time?

[msnoodles]

So?

Loss in potential customers. You guys are lucky I don't mind repeating myself and consider myself a fairly patient person.

What do you find interesting in character designs?

Something unusual or atypical is a start. Personally, I think it's really cool when designs implicitly make sense for the game's environment (e.g. an alien race has visible physical adaptations that better suit it for its planet).

Then why does it give publishers an edge?

I don't believe it does, but I'm sure some lazy marketers do.

Are you implying that men, in general are not at all attracted to abnormally large/bouncing breasts? I don't see a reason to call something immature, unless you can demonstrate there is something immature about it.

Okay, I'll call it cartoon porn. Not all men like cartoon porn. These are video games. And no, slapping on breasts in hopes your shitty game will sell is immature because it's pandering to the lowest common denominator because it feels "secure" with this pandering.

But it's not really the norm. At least, doing it to an absurd degree isn't.

If developers have a choice between attractive and non attractive characters, they will probably choose attractive characters, as it's highly unlikely for that to reduce sales, and can in fact increase them.

I like how you equate objectification with conventional attractiveness.

Why can't you have attractive, interesting character designs?

Boobs thrown in for the sake of boobs is laziness, and I would expect a similar amount of effort would be put into making the character herself memorable.

Yeah, but is it really going to LOSE their money?

I advise you to never run a business, because this isn't a good business model, at least for something pushing for acceptance in the way the video game industry seems to be doing. "Eh, we're turning off some girls, but we get to keep our customers!" Well yeah, but you could probably keep your customers without turning away other potential customers, with such a malleable medium with the amount of potential that it has.

Okay if I answered a question could y'all please not ask it again? I don't mind discussing it, but the constant WHY WHY WHY is getting tiring, especially when I've answered it like 12 times.

[Esau of Isaac]

Maybe they just wanted a story with a transgendered person in it? There can be a minority main character whose sole purpose isn't to "even the playing field", so to speak.

Wait, what are we talking about now?

I'm not saying that no one can ever put a transgendered person in a game, and that if they do it's only going to be for balance's sake, I'm saying that stating someone should have more for the sake of being balanced is silly. If someone wants to have transgendered characters in their game, and they can devote enough energy towards doing it well, then more power to them.

A better question is "what gives video games license to ignore a certain minority while the rest of the media doesn't?" Is there anything inherent to the concept of video games, not the industry as it stands, that renders it inferior to all other forms of media?

Not inferior, but certainly different. There is less exposure than there is in other entertainment media, but that's because it's smaller I would say, and because it can't approach entertainment in the same way that television and movies do.

I don't think hormonal teenage dudes make up as much as the consumer base as the "gamer" stereotype will have you believe. I think marketers are slow to understand that, and they're slow to understand that they're hurting their own image in the long run.

Who said that hormonal teenagers are the only ones that look for sex in videogames?

Facetious over exaggeration, though yeah someone who doesn't typically play games can look at an image of Ivy or something and think "cartoon porn".

The same person who would look at Oblivion and think "fairytale bullshit".

Because you can play video games without being a horny pimply teenage boy, but this kind of shit leads people who don't play video games (i.e. potential customers) reason to believe otherwise.

What kind of people? Seriously, who are these people? You keep talking about them like the presence of scantily-clad women will make them despise the idea of a videogame, as if anyone under the age of fifty these days hasn't already played videogames multiple times.

I'll ask again, why should video games be held to a lower standard than any other form of media? I don't want answers like "because idiots play them", I mean what's inherent to the concept that should make it, on a wider scale than "avid gamers", a niche for antisocial neckbeards and sex-starved 13yos?

It's not at a lower standard. It's held to similar standards. Sexualization is just as prevalent in videogames as in other entertainment media.

Loss in potential customers. You guys are lucky I don't mind repeating myself and consider myself a fairly patient person.

If they were a very significant pool of customers, why do games still market sex?

Something unusual or atypical is a start. Personally, I think it's really cool when designs implicitly make sense for the game's environment (e.g. an alien race has visible physical adaptations that better suit it for its planet).

So can't sexualization fit within that mode of thought?

I don't believe it does, but I'm sure some lazy marketers do.

So you would say that sexualized characters provide no real increase in the attention a product receives?

I just want to be sure that you are saying this.

Okay, I'll call it cartoon porn. Not all men like cartoon porn. These are video games. And no, slapping on breasts in hopes your shitty game will sell is immature because it's pandering to the lowest common denominator because it feels "secure" with this pandering.

Can you define cartoon porn?

Why wouldn't a group of people feel secure in a product marketed to them that includes something they like?

I like how you equate objectification with conventional attractiveness.

Because they are equatable in the entertainment industry for the widest majority of people.

You're starting to go a bit off the handle here, man.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[Kanami]

Hot damn, Kanami, there's a lot of vitriol in your post. It might just be that you word things weirdly, but calling everyone you disagree with "idiots" is detracting from your point if anything else.

Personally, I'm not interested in proving myself right, though I have issues with people trying to impose certain attitudes on me (eg believe in god). And I'm not really using the term "idiot" in a hostile manner, though people interpreting it as hostile I suppose is partially the aim. Detracting from the point isn't an issue for me either, I'd rather insult someone and have them come out full force (not held back by the restraints of politeness and consideration for others) since for me at least it leads to a much more interesting argument.

I'm a straight female and my sexuality isn't at all a defining trait. When there's a conflict, sex isn't a huge priority for me. Plots need conflict. If I were the main character of any sort of story, you wouldn't see me staring at some dude's ass and breaking your immersion or whatever. Or to put it another way, there are tons of games with straight females who aren't oggling guys left and right; why would it be any different for gay dudes?

Being straight is a social norm (Screw whether gays is natural or not, it's a Minority). In that sense we are by default placed to think as all characters as straight until proven otherwise. Adding "Is a gay male" in the little book profile that comes with the game is rather pointless isn't it? So what? As I keep saying that's forcing it in there.

My issue with LGBT inclusions is that there's no way of indicating a gay as a gay without hinting at his sexual preference. Since essentially a gay man is no different from a straight man if we exclude the sexual preference. So how would you go about portraying a character as gay? The typical portrayal of gays I've seen are the "girly-gays" but that's a stereotype right? How would you portray a character as gay and "normal" without touching on the sexual preference aspect?

Also, we seem to be going arguing separate things, I'm not against homosexual characters, they've been done successfully before, however giving them the main role (You've stated in the OP about not seeing a LGBT main character) isn't something I can agree with. As for giving them important roles.... I honestly don't play enough American/European games to understand what the difference between an unimportant and important character is. Just as a basis point though is Sazh an important or unimportant character?

You act like mainstream gay fiction hasn't already struck a chord with a pretty wide audience, at least in America. Brokeback Mountain wasn't as widely distributed and actively boycotted by a pretty sizable bloc of conservatives, but it still hit #9 at the box office opening weekend. You're either assuming all straight people are cruel bastards who can't empathize with LGBT individuals or you're insulting the consumers' intelligence-- either way, I don't think they'd appreciate that.

I think it was more plot driven, and that it was more "look that's something new" then people actually liking the "gay" aspect of the characters.

Putting emphasis on the "gay aspect" is like creditting a movie as good just because it had Bruce Willis in it..... okay screw that, I don't understand you "humans" <_< My stance is, it's the plot/gameplay and issues raised(complications) which make for a good source of entertainment. And how it's done. Having more black/hispanic characters isn't going to make the game/movie/story better by any means. It opens up a new area which can be explored if a they're not all white. But there's enough areas that can be used even if they are. And with your "stereotypes" attitude, wouldn't the "new area" be nulled if we got a white single father, who was disabled that wore a MrT shirt?

I'm not saying keep races out, but more that it shouldn't be a priority or issue to force multiple races in when their not neccessary, the lack of implementation by gaming industries sort of takes a nod to this as they're not adapting to this issue of yours. And surely if you were able to think of it, (with most of your school friends) they've heard it at least once before.

I honestly don't follow. I don't know where you got the idea that people literally feel sorry that the characters are stereotypes-- not sorry that they occur, but literally sorry for some pixels. I don't even know.

~

People who are misrepresented complain about it.

You're missing the point completely, the point is, why should a black person be offended that a black person in a game is portrayed as the "funny black guy?" You're taking things way to personally if you're looking at the "funny black guy" and kicking up a storm that not all black people are "funny black guys." It's not insulting, do you honestly think game makers are going, "Hey, black people are stupid lets make him the comedic relief character?" A game isn't supposed to portray our world but their(game makers) world. And we're invited into it by purchasing the game. Attributing everything that happens into the game to the real world, is like taking everything on the internet seriously.

The FE characters don't see equal degrees of development, but as far as females go, they receive an equal amount of agency. I have no clue what you're trying to say with the last two sentences there.

So you prefer equality more then an interesting character? If so, I'm not sorry to say you have your priorities mixed up.

My issue is with 1. underrepresentation of ethnicities and LGBT people as important characters in video games

2. the exploitative nature of women in video games

3. the industry's lag to catch up with its expanding market.

1: How does this improve a game?

2:You have an issue with exploited characters? I thought the whole idea of retail fiction was to exploit characters to make the game better? If you're talking about sexual overuse I don't see what the problem is. Yes I don't want sex bogging down my game, yes I don't want the game to revolve around how attractive the characters are. However I DO want my game characters to be attractive, Using a prior example, imagine a game where you're Lehran and your team consists of the Begnion senate. If they need to show a bit of flesh to appeal to some people that's fine by me.

3: Contrary to what most of you have said, I disagree with the "catch up to expanding market" theory. Going with girl games I honestly don't believe that Pink Pony games are directed at all female gamers. It's directed at little girls. Once you graduate being a little girl you join the main stream of gaming. Halo is not a male game. And neither are all the other titles. With women coming out of the traditional roles (they've well and truly come out by now) you're the ones who haven't caught up if you think games a girl should be playing are exclusive to Cooking Mama. As for race.... I don't even want to think about how stupid making race specific games are. "This game is for asians!" <_< If you don't see how stupid that is, well, you're stupid.

Nobody's really answered the query from my OP: how would it be less profitable to stop trying to milk a tired demographic while ignoring the others? Even something like "I would stop buying a video game if it had no huge jiggly tits, regardless of gameplay, and if the gameplay sucks then I'd buy it if jiggly tits were involved" is a start, but I don't know of anyone who would admit to that or even begin to rationalize something like that.

Do you talk to any males? Hell I said TA earlier and it was interpreted as tits and ass <_< "Jiggly tits" are just as important as your "racial representation" (That's me saying both are near meaningless) Using your logic people don't enjoy "jiggly tits" but Esau has stated he does like his females characters showing some skin. Isn't that a minority group (in your eyes) then? Why should it be removed if there is a willing and buying market out there?

Welp, just because you don't understand it doesn't make it unimportant. I'm not going to tell you to put yourself into a 12 year old female Mexican gamer's shoes, but you're gonna have to accept that she'd love for there to be some sort of Latina heroine as, I dunno, a role-model? Keep in mind that the enjoyment of games and the stories therein aren't constrained to a specific demographic. If you can't sympathize with them then that's your problem, but the statement that "it doesn't contribute anything" is blatantly false. I don't see why having games with minority main characters or women with agency has to be "forced".

First and foremostly can I say something really important?

If you're looking at games for role-models, you're a fucking idiot" Yes that comment did deserve swearing for the sake of emphasis Is it not bad enough that we have young girls looking at Lindsay Lohan and Paris Hilton as rolemodels? Do we really need 12 year old Mexican girls looking at a latina version of bayonetta and saying, "I want to be an emotionless, gun wielding crazy walking around shooting people"

I've never agreed with the "violent games make violent people" concept as a whole. But if you're looking to game characters for rolemodels then that's truly pathetic regardless of what anyones opinion is. Look to real people for role models (preferably the ones which aren't breaking the law constantly)

Now that I've got that off my chest. You're method of introducing women and ethnicities is "forced" as it's supposedly pushing things into a slow moving change in attitudes. To be completely honest, I'm a Japanese gamer (said it before) and have never noticed how women aren't represented properly in games. But in terms of ethnics. What's your reasoning for putting them in? It's not because it's plot necessary, it's not because it would make the gameplay better. It's because you want representation. And if that's the sole reason of implementation, then yes it's "forcing"

As for the Mexican little girl..... so what? By making the latina heroine, you've now taken away from the white little girl who would have wanted the role to be played by a white heroine. I also don't see what you mean by "milking the same tired demographic" since I haven't actually heard a complaint saying "I'm sick of white protagonists" or is that what you're saying? Please clarify since I'm currently under the impression you trying to "get ethnics in" not "get white out"

Why are we still stuck on specific games? We're talking about an entire industry, here.

No idea what you're talking about, did I mention a specific game? I might of used something as an example, but I certainly am not referring to one stand-alone example in a game. (What game did I focus on?)

First off, when you say "changing the ethnicity of characters for the sake of representation though isn't an improvement" it implies that someone ever suggested this.

Incorrect, What it is saying is that if there's no need to change from the default of white, why change that? The character doesn't need to be established, it default is white, and default works, what's wrong with default? This is in relation to the planning stages of a character, not previously established ones.

Politically, race and ethnicity is pretty important-- if we're stuck on ethnic characters in stories, here, a person's ethnicity has the potential to have a great bearing on their personality. I don't care if you call me stupid, but you'll have to consider what that makes you, seeing as you're wrong on this point. Race does matter. Out of curiosity, do you believe in "colorblindness"? Not the actual condition, but I mean in regards to race.

I don't know what "colorblindness" is but it sounds like something I can agree with. I'd rather turn a blind eye to some being black then go "Oh, he's black, he deserves special treatment." With the exception of one specific race, I don't look at someones racial background when evaluating them. I don't do it negatively (black=Don't work) and I don't do it positively (Black people deserve extra financial assistance because they're discriminated against). So in a sense, yes. I am colorblind as I don't separate people based on their ethnicity.

I don't understand what discriminated people are trying to do. On one hand they want to be treated and looked at the same way, and the next they're saying they're different and need to be treated differently.

Using women as an example. (ignore whether you personally agree or disagree with the topic). Women can fight just as well as men, so a woman should be able to fight. However a man shouldn't hit a woman..... Are they equals or beings which need to be protected? <_< Make up your minds.

As for race directly, it matters in real life. Why it matters in your tv isn't something I'm quite understanding.

Because characters are an integral part of the story? Bland characters don't make for interesting stories, no matter how novel the premise? Stereotypes easily lend themselves to blandness, tiredness, and cliches? I argue this from a purely artistic standpoint, and my position would be the same: a cast without diversity is, well, just plain terrible writing, especially if it makes no sense within the context. I'm not going to hold video games to the same standards of literature or anything, though that raises the question of why video games shouldn't have better writing. I could at least better justify my love for them.

A character is an integral part of the story, (In my case it's the first and foremost factor in a story/plot) I'm not seeing though how a characters ethnicity comes into the equation. Diversity comes in more forms then just race. And I disagree that stereotypes are bland. Originality is overrated these days, and looking at Japanese games, I've come to love my stereotypical hot headed characters.

Can you seriously not understand how this might be valuable to someone who's been reminded all their life that they're different?

.... Make up your mind, are you trying to emphasize that you're different, or are you telling everyone you're the same? And as far as I know (supporting Esau's knowledge) there's more asians in the world then whites..... does that mean white people are a minority too?

Yeah, except like I said, I don't see why we should automatically accept poor writing in games. It's a growing media, and I don't want it to be stunted by pigeonholing its own audience. Like I said, the majority of my irl friends are non-gamers. They have a certain image in their head that's being reinforced by an alienating industry, and, to a certain extent, a certain consumer base. I don't think this is acceptable, and by alienating these people, they're losing out on potential customers.

Poor writing in games isn't accepted by me. However I don't see how racial switching will increase writing either.As for your alienated friends?.... If they're feeling that alienated then they're probably a bit too self-conscious. Are they the type of people who go to job interviews, are placed in cue of a dozen people, and come home complaining when they didn't get the job despite the 1/12 chance? Citing racial discrimination?

I have no clue how to respond to race-obsessed idiots because honestly, I think the closest you have to a race-obsessed idiot are racists themselves. Including "colorblind racists" who don't want any discussion on race whatsoever because they're afraid that it might result in them "losing" something.

The racists aren't any different in terms of obsessiveness to those who are crying out in outrage. They're just on the other side of the argument.

Even if it doesn't insult you, it still insults other people. I guess you could plug your ears and go LALALALA and pretend they don't exist, but that doesn't make you right by any means.

Now, now, no need to get all upset, I'm reading and responding aren't I? I don't like pretending, and that's why I've called you an idiot, and why I'm arguing with you now. I say what I want to say, and will voice my objection/opinion to what others say. If I was to block my ears and go LALALALA that wouldn't only be rude and stupid. But also a bigger insult then anything I can give by responding

[msnoodles]

How much brain power does it take to watch TV, compared to playing a video game? Now look at the population in general. Do you think that kind of brain power output is something they'd like to do in their free time?

Eh, games in general have been around as long as people have had leisure time, so I'd say video games have the potential to reach the same degree of popularity as television. It's a relatively new form of media, so it could happen!

I'm not saying that no one can ever put a transgendered person in a game, and that if they do it's only going to be for balance's sake, I'm saying that stating someone should have more for the sake of being balanced is silly.

It would be counter to my argument to say that anyone should throw in transgendered characters just so they can say there's a transgendered person: it goes along the same lines of the "token minority", etc.

Not inferior, but certainly different. There is less exposure than there is in other entertainment media, but that's because it's smaller I would say, and because it can't approach entertainment in the same way that television and movies do.

Why, besides the fact that it's new? And yes, it is different, but right now it's a pretty common belief among those involved in other industries-- take Roger Ebert, haha-- that video games can't ever be elevated to an art. I don't see why not.

Who said that hormonal teenagers are the only ones that look for sex in videogames?

If you're a hormonal 20-something and look for sex in video games then uh... good for you I guess? But these games are being marketed towards hormonal teenage boys, it's pretty hard to argue otherwise.

The same person who would look at Oblivion and think "fairytale bullshit".

Maybe so, but if my friend dismissed Oblivion as fairytale bullshit then I could at least have grounds to try and convince them otherwise. If it's pandering to a perceived oversexed market of guys who like pixellated tits then I'd probably just urge her out of the aisle and go "uh yeah not all video games are like this".

What kind of people? Seriously, who are these people? You keep talking about them like the presence of scantily-clad women will make them despise the idea of a videogame

Girls who haven't been playing video games since they could hold a controller like I have. I think you should watch the videos posted in the last page, I swear they're not boring, and the second one does make an interesting point about the alienating factor in the market. And the person who created it is "in" the industry, so, you know, you can take his word over mine.

It's not at a lower standard. It's held to similar standards. Sexualization is just as prevalent in videogames as in other entertainment media.

I'm not giving the rest of the entertainment media a free pass, but very few people find movies, music, or television weird because it's practically universal. Gaming is attached to this bizarre, undesirable image that a lot of people would like for it to shake off if it's ever going to see any growth as an industry.

[Kanami]

Yes it does imply he'd be oggling some other dude's tush. Not specifically, but many games have a romantic element added into them. The objective is to portray LGBT, so having brotherhood like friendship has already been done. The thing is, they're gay. Their love interest would be male. And many (regardless of whether they support or are against gay rights) can not put themselves in that situation.

You are reading WAY the hell too far into things if "brotherhood-like friendship" = "I want you in that way". Why do two perfectly good friends of ambiguous sexuality need to be in love with each other? Unless it's stated explicitly (in-game, developer interviews, etc.), I assume it's friendship. Otherwise, why not come out and say it?

Poor phrasing on my side, or rather I had too many ideas and tried to condense it too much. As you've noticed, I'm responsible for alot of the holy text walls XD

What I meant was that brotherhood like friendship "IS" different to being homosexual. And that since that's another category of relationship, it's not possible to do "brotherly friendship" and then call one (or both) of the characters gay. In that sense you'd need to go a few step further to portray a gay character. And my query asked later on in regards to this is how someone can portray a gay male as gay without using the stereotypes, and not making the man in some visible form take that sort of interest in another male character.

Your comment emphasizes my point that showing two characters that get along isn't the equivalent to "I want you in that way." So you'd need to go further. I don't see developer interviews as any good though if it's not evident in the game by itself that said character is homosexual. Though my overall comment is, why do we even need to portray homosexuals? Hell Cloud Strife could have been homosexual, and some people in fanfiction like portraying him as such. Doesn't mean we need an official statement to find out what sexuality a character is. I mean, is it really that important?

[/size][/color]

You're forgetting that there are girls out there who will look at the ridiculous objectification that seems to surround the industry, roll their eyes, and turn away.

Some people just like interesting character designs. Adding boobs is not necessarily a wise design choice; you might appeal to some teens who throw their allowance at anything that tickles their id, but it won't necessarily make the character visually interesting in the same way people'd find an attractive girl irl interesting.

A lot of straight girls play video games, and boobs that are there to get an edge in marketing isn't a really compelling ploy to get their money.

However big breasts by itself aren't bad or good. It attracts some, it repels others. You're being pretty one sided if you can claim a majority for the anti-breast group. If big breasts cater for some, that's the TAudience. If not and it repels you, you're not the TA in that aspect. The only thing that can really be said is "Deal with it" Edited October 15, 2010 by Kanami

[Defeatist Elitist]

Okay, I'll call it cartoon porn. Not all men like cartoon porn. These are video games. And no, slapping on breasts in hopes your shitty game will sell is immature because it's pandering to the lowest common denominator because it feels "secure" with this pandering.

Dude, I think you're getting kind of out of touch here. Seriously, I've never claimed everyone, or even all men like sex in video games. A fair portion of men do though.

I like how you equate objectification with conventional attractiveness.

Funny, I don't recall doing that.

Boobs thrown in for the sake of boobs is laziness, and I would expect a similar amount of effort would be put into making the character herself memorable.

Because all characters in video games are memorable, right? RIGHT? This isn't an answer. Why can't a character be both attractive and interesting? I know plenty of characters in fiction that are both attractive and interesting, and it stays the same in video games. Fuck, I referenced at least one earlier. I mean, you say boobs for the sake of boobs is laziness. Are interesting characters for the sake of interesting characters laziness? Is violence for the sake of violence laziness? Hell, is gameplay for the sake of gameplay laziness?

I advise you to never run a business, because this isn't a good business model, at least for something pushing for acceptance in the way the video game industry seems to be doing. "Eh, we're turning off some girls, but we get to keep our customers!" Well yeah, but you could probably keep your customers without turning away other potential customers, with such a malleable medium with the amount of potential that it has.

EXCEPT THAT ISN'T WHAT I SAID. What I was asking was is it really going to lose those female customers? In my experience, if people are turned off video games, that is most definitely not the reason they are turned off.

Okay if I answered a question could y'all please not ask it again? I don't mind discussing it, but the constant WHY WHY WHY is getting tiring, especially when I've answered it like 12 times.

If you agree to have actual answers, and have your answers not beg yet another question, then sure it is a deal.

[Esau of Isaac]

It would be counter to my argument to say that anyone should throw in transgendered characters just so they can say there's a transgendered person: it goes along the same lines of the "token minority", etc.

Your entire argument has been that there is an under-representation of minorities in videogames. Does that not imply that you'd like there to be more minority characters because it's unbalanced?

Why, besides the fact that it's new? And yes, it is different, but right now it's a pretty common belief among those involved in other industries-- take Roger Ebert, haha-- that video games can't ever be elevated to an art. I don't see why not.

Because it's interacted with in a different way. Movies and television are more similar than television and videogames, is basically what I am getting at.

And Roger Ebert rescinded his statement. Not to mention he's never played a game in his life.

If you're a hormonal 20-something and look for sex in video games then uh... good for you I guess? But these games are being marketed towards hormonal teenage boys, it's pretty hard to argue otherwise.

It's pretty easy to see it's marketed towards males. I certainly wouldn't say it only applies to younger males. Are you saying that twenty-something males don't like sexual content, or something?

Maybe so, but if my friend dismissed Oblivion as fairytale bullshit then I could at least have grounds to try and convince them otherwise. If it's pandering to a perceived oversexed market of guys who like pixellated tits then I'd probably just urge her out of the aisle and go "uh yeah not all video games are like this".

Games that are "oversexed" don't necessarily lack gameplay. They just have a lot of elements of sex in them. I wouldn't try and explain away the tits in Dead or Alive to someone who obviously doesn't like it, I'd just say "Hey, this isn't your cup of tea." And since they are probably not total jackasses and aren't stereotypical 90s adults, they would probably understand.

Nevermind that some other person might take Oblivion and say the exact same thing you are saying you would state to them.

Girls who haven't been playing video games since they could hold a controller like I have. I think you should watch the videos posted in the last page, I swear they're not boring, and the second one does make an interesting point about the alienating factor in the market. And the person who created it is "in" the industry, so, you know, you can take his word over mine.

I really think it's a small dividing factor. I would agree that it can be alienating, but the games that are commonly referred to as oversexed are in a relative minority. There are plenty of games with sexy leads in them, or skimpy clothing, but I have never found any of it to be inherently alienating, and none of the women I've known that found it uninteresting were ever turned off by games as a whole. They just didn't play the game that had qualities they didn't like. It's almost like they were reasonable.

I'm not giving the rest of the entertainment media a free pass, but very few people find movies, music, or television weird because it's practically universal. Gaming is attached to this bizarre, undesirable image that a lot of people would like for it to shake off if it's ever going to see any growth as an industry.

No, no it's not. Being a gamer has become a generally normal thing, and it's only going to become more and more mainstream. It hasn't been socially unacceptable to admit you play games for like a decade.

And you know why that is? Because of oversexed, incredibly violent games. It's ironic that totally stereotypical games such as Call of Duty, God of War, and Gears of War pave the way for greater social acceptance of videogame players, when they are some of the most over-the-top braindead-simple games, with little to no real story (I wouldn't say so in God of War's case, though), and plenty of pointless action. Because the majority of people like those things.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[eclipse]

Eh, games in general have been around as long as people have had leisure time, so I'd say video games have the potential to reach the same degree of popularity as television. It's a relatively new form of media, so it could happen!

This might hold true for some of the games that take less brain power (a la Wii Sports), but give the average person something with "strategy" in the genre, and it becomes a whole different kind of chicken.

"What do you mean putting Eliwood there was a bad idea? ZOMG Swordreaver, game over?!"

If I were to attempt to teach Fire Emblem to my coworkers, I'd probably have more seizures than converts.

Poor phrasing on my side, or rather I had too many ideas and tried to condense it too much. As you've noticed, I'm responsible for alot of the holy text walls XD

What I meant was that brotherhood like friendship "IS" different to being homosexual. And that since that's another category of relationship, it's not possible to do "brotherly friendship" and then call one (or both) of the characters gay. In that sense you'd need to go a few step further to portray a gay character. And my query asked later on in regards to this is how someone can portray a gay male as gay without using the stereotypes, and not making the man in some visible form take that sort of interest in another male character.

Your comment emphasizes my point that showing two characters that get along isn't the equivalent to "I want you in that way." So you'd need to go further. I don't see developer interviews as any good though if it's not evident in the game by itself that said character is homosexual. Though my overall comment is, why do we even need to portray homosexuals? Hell Cloud Strife could have been homosexual, and some people in fanfiction like portraying him as such. Doesn't mean we need an official statement to find out what sexuality a character is. I mean, is it really that important?

Okay, fair enough!

Developers have been known to spill out some very juicy facts about games outside of the game itself (for example, it doesn't really make sense that Castor is the way he is in FE3. . .unless one reads the developer's notes). It makes for much less speculation and bellyaching in the long run.

It seems there's some interest in seeing homosexuality in video games (hence, half this topic). I personally don't care. It's simply another aspect of the character, along with hair style, choice of shoes, and favorite food. I've noticed that even clearly stated sexual preference won't stop the fans from believing what they will. . .(hello there, Cain x Abel fan art. . .I didn't need to see that).

[msnoodles]

If they were a very significant pool of customers, why do games still market sex?

Because they've been doing this before the audience started broadening.

So can't sexualization fit within that mode of thought?

What kind of sexualization? Fast food is easily marketable, but it's bland as shit. The overt objectification has gotten old if nothing else.

So you would say that sexualized characters provide no real increase in the attention a product receives?

Maybe in the short-term, but I wouldn't be surprised if they could easily widen their audience by taking more risks.

Why wouldn't a group of people feel secure in a product marketed to them that includes something they like?

Talking about the industry, not the customers.

Because they are equatable in the entertainment industry for the widest majority of people.

Giiiiiiirl gaaaamers. I know that a different position might seem crazy, but you're just going to have to take my word that I'm not going insane by suggesting that demeaning women is not good marketing strategy in the long term.

I'm not against homosexual characters, they've been done successfully before, however giving them the main role (You've stated in the OP about not seeing a LGBT main character) isn't something I can agree with.

Gays are people like you and me. :)

Just as a basis point though is Sazh an important or unimportant character?

He's an important secondary character.

I think it was more plot driven, and that it was more "look that's something new" then people actually liking the "gay" aspect of the characters.

Nothing says a game with a good plot or gameplay can't have a gay main character, then? If it's fun, people will play it.

And how it's done. Having more black/hispanic characters isn't going to make the game/movie/story better by any means. It opens up a new area which can be explored if a they're not all white. But there's enough areas that can be used even if they are. And with your "stereotypes" attitude, wouldn't the "new area" be nulled if we got a white single father, who was disabled that wore a MrT shirt?

What is "the game"? I'm not talking about any specific game. I'm saying that if it doesn't make any sense in the context of the game, an all-white cast is pretty much a sign of poor writing. I don't get what you're saying with the last sentence. It'd be nice if single fathers were given more representation in general. I mean we have Harry Mason, Barrett, Sahz, that mummy guy in Majora's Mask and uh... nothing else comes to mind right now.

I'm not saying keep races out, but more that it shouldn't be a priority or issue to force multiple races in when their not neccessary, the lack of implementation by gaming industries sort of takes a nod to this as they're not adapting to this issue of yours.

Why would having a diverse cast of characters come off as "forced"? Can't there just be a black or latino or hmong or whatever character because these ethnicities exist in the context of our world?

You're missing the point completely, the point is, why should a black person be offended that a black person in a game is portrayed as the "funny black guy?"

Besides the fact that the stereotype is getting tiring, it also has some pretty nasty implications about the role as blacks in America's past so yeah, it's offensive in the same way the Uncle Tom trope is offensive.

A game isn't supposed to portray our world but their(game makers) world. And we're invited into it by purchasing the game. Attributing everything that happens into the game to the real world, is like taking everything on the internet seriously.

If it's set in modern-day or futuristic America and totally white-washed then whether you find it offensive or not, it's objectively poor writing.

So you prefer equality more then an interesting character? If so, I'm not sorry to say you have your priorities mixed up.

I have no clue what you're insinuating here. I like that Fire Emblem is egalitarian, but I've never touted it for having the best stories/characters or anything like that. Some of them endear to me, though.

1: How does this improve a game?2:You have an issue with exploited characters? I thought the whole idea of retail fiction was to exploit characters to make the game better?

WHAT GAME. What game are we talking about? I'm not talking about "a game", I'm talking about the industry. :|

If exploitation's the "point" of any form of media, it's exploitation films. Definitely not mainstream and harmful to the image of something people'd like to see go mainstream.

However I DO want my game characters to be attractive

I guess we're not accounting for taste here.

3: Contrary to what most of you have said, I disagree with the "catch up to expanding market" theory. Going with girl games I honestly don't believe that Pink Pony games are directed at all female gamers. It's directed at little girls. Once you graduate being a little girl you join the main stream of gaming. Halo is not a male game. And neither are all the other titles. With women coming out of the traditional roles (they've well and truly come out by now) you're the ones who haven't caught up if you think games a girl should be playing are exclusive to Cooking Mama. As for race.... I don't even want to think about how stupid making race specific games are. "This game is for asians!" <_< If you don't see how stupid that is, well, you're stupid.

What the hell are you responding to here? I'm pretty sure nobody in this thread has anything good to say about girly shovelware.

Do you talk to any males? Hell I said TA earlier and it was interpreted as tits and ass

I think you're getting me confused with someone else, because I never said that. I interact with a wide variety of dudes: some play video games, some don't, some are gay, some are straight, and really, I'd be insulting their intelligence to throw boobs in their face and go HERE WILL YOU BUY THIS NOW?

Do we really need 12 year old Mexican girls looking at a latina version of bayonetta and saying, "I want to be an emotionless, gun wielding crazy walking around shooting people"

Why does Bayonetta have to be a rolemodel. :|

But in terms of ethnics. What's your reasoning for putting them in? It's not because it's plot necessary, it's not because it would make the gameplay better. It's because you want representation. And if that's the sole reason of implementation, then yes it's "forcing"

Representation would probably be the byproduct of better writing.

As for the Mexican little girl..... so what? By making the latina heroine, you've now taken away from the white little girl who would have wanted the role to be played by a white heroine.

No you're not. I can't even begin to comprehend how having main characters of different ethnicities are "taking away" from white representation. The white chick is in no shortage of white heroines. :)

No idea what you're talking about, did I mention a specific game?

Your arguments seem to be framed around "a game"; when I say specific, I don't mean you're referring to an existing game, but your retorts to my arguments are basically strawmen in game form. "OH SO NOW A GAME HAS TO HAVE X"

What it is saying is that if there's no need to change from the default of white, why change that? The character doesn't need to be established, it default is white, and default works, what's wrong with default? This is in relation to the planning stages of a character, not previously established ones.

Haha so every minority character is actually a deviation from the "default"? Erm...

A character is an integral part of the story, (In my case it's the first and foremost factor in a story/plot) I'm not seeing though how a characters ethnicity comes into the equation. Diversity comes in more forms then just race. And I disagree that stereotypes are bland. Originality is overrated these days, and looking at Japanese games, I've come to love my stereotypical hot headed characters.

It's fine if you like it because you're comfortable and familiar with it, but it's not good writing.

However I don't see how racial switching will increase writing either.

Switching from what? Some people are just different colors than white.

Now, now, no need to get all upset, I'm reading and responding aren't I?

I'm not personally upset with you, but you seem to be really ignorant of the racial landscape in the West and seem to have some preconceived notion of it that I'm not sure how I could pry out, so it's probably a lot of wasted efforts responding to some of the "race isn't important" crap.

[Kanami]

Developers have been known to spill out some very juicy facts about games outside of the game itself (for example, it doesn't really make sense that Castor is the way he is in FE3. . .unless one reads the developer's notes). It makes for much less speculation and bellyaching in the long run.

It seems there's some interest in seeing homosexuality in video games (hence, half this topic). I personally don't care. It's simply another aspect of the character, along with hair style, choice of shoes, and favorite food. I've noticed that even clearly stated sexual preference won't stop the fans from believing what they will. . .(hello there, Cain x Abel fan art. . .I didn't need to see that).

Glad I got that out of the way without a fuss XD Developer interviews are interesting, I just don't agree that them saying "so-and-so" is homosexual is all that great if there wasn't material within the game which indicated as such. Likewise writing in the book that a certain character is gay isn't any better. As for arguing speculation and bellyaching.... I'm personally fine with that. If I want to think Ike and Soren "get it on" behind the scenes that's my happy little world (fortunately I don't think that) and I don't see why characters can't develop independantly within the gamers mind. Even if we played the same game, we'd get different interpretations of the character. (You might think awesome hero, while I think pesky no-good do-good'er) So while it does settle the yammerings of fanatical fans, there is merit in letting peoples imagination run wild

Waiting to see how Noodles would like to portray a gay character without using sex, without staring at another guys backside (figuratively) and still pull it off.

Okay' date=' I'll call it cartoon porn. Not all men like cartoon porn. These are video games. And no, slapping on breasts in hopes your shitty game will sell is immature because it's pandering to the lowest common denominator because it feels "secure" with this pandering.[/quote'] Porn and using sex in games is different. :/ And have different targets, porn is to sexually arouse, sex (in this case) is supposed to be pleasant to the eye. Valarevan and Esau have pretty much covered everything else T_T

EDIT: Going to reply to last post in quick sentences, writing things out seems to confuse everyone including myself, and takes too much time.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Kanami

[msnoodles]

Because all characters in video games are memorable, right? RIGHT? This isn't an answer. Why can't a character be both attractive and interesting? I know plenty of characters in fiction that are both attractive and interesting, and it stays the same in video games. Fuck, I referenced at least one earlier. I mean, you say boobs for the sake of boobs is laziness. Are interesting characters for the sake of interesting characters laziness? Is violence for the sake of violence laziness? Hell, is gameplay for the sake of gameplay laziness?

Presupposing that lazy fanservice is equitable with attractiveness. To imply that attractiveness isn't necessarily a prerequisite for an interesting character isn't the same as implying that attractive=/=interesting. When I look at screenshots of Dead or Alive, I don't see anything of interest-- generic chicks in bikinis. Boobs. Big whoop, a secondary sexual organ.

if people are turned off video games, that is most definitely not the reason they are turned off.

Yeah, the whole image of women that seems to be prevalent with "gamer culture" wouldn't alienate potential female customers at all.

Because it's interacted with in a different way. Movies and television are more similar than television and videogames, is basically what I am getting at.

So it can't be considered art?

It's pretty easy to see it's marketed towards males. I certainly wouldn't say it only applies to younger males. Are you saying that twenty-something males don't like sexual content, or something?

I would say that less 20something males buy these kinds of games compared to oversexed teenagers, yes. Just a hunch.

I really think it's a small dividing factor. I would agree that it can be alienating, but the games that are commonly referred to as oversexed are in a relative minority.

I would say that the majority of important female characters suffer from objectification problems, though you could say that oversexed games are a minority compared to every game out there ever. Or our standards of what is "oversexed' are different.

No, no it's not. Being a gamer has become a generally normal thing, and it's only going to become more and more mainstream. It hasn't been socially unacceptable to admit you play games for like a decade.

I'm friends with about 2 chicks who'd personally identify themselves as gamers.

And yeah, a lot of girls are still getting the bad image of your "typical" gamer, whether it's an overrepresented caricature or not. The industry can stand to move past that.

And you know why that is? Because of oversexed, incredibly violent games. It's ironic that totally stereotypical games such as Call of Duty, God of War, and Gears of War pave the way for greater social acceptance of videogame players, when they are some of the most over-the-top braindead-simple games, with little to no real story (I wouldn't say so in God of War's case, though), and plenty of pointless action. Because the majority of people like those things.

My grandma loves the Wii and the Legend of Zelda series. I think if anyone deserves credit for widening the market, it's Nintendo and its reach to "casual gamers".

[Esau of Isaac]

Because they've been doing this before the audience started broadening.

Then why hasn't there been a huge stagnation of sales overall?

What kind of sexualization? Fast food is easily marketable, but it's bland as shit. The overt objectification has gotten old if nothing else.

So have watercolor paintings. It doesn't mean they aren't marketable to a demographic that finds them appealing.

Maybe in the short-term, but I wouldn't be surprised if they could easily widen their audience by taking more risks.

Who should be taking these risks? With what style of game? And what risks?

Giiiiiiirl gaaaamers. I know that a different position might seem crazy, but you're just going to have to take my word that I'm not going insane by suggesting that demeaning women is not good marketing strategy in the long term.

Whoa, whoa, slow down now. How is objectification of the female figure demeaning to women as a whole?

Presupposing that lazy fanservice is equitable with attractiveness. To imply that attractiveness isn't necessarily a prerequisite for an interesting character isn't the same as implying that attractive=/=interesting. When I look at screenshots of Dead or Alive, I don't see anything of interest-- generic chicks in bikinis. Boobs. Big whoop, a secondary sexual organ.

A secondary sexual organ that happens to be pretty interesting males. It's crazy, it's like guys enjoy seeing scantily-clad women with large breasts. Like they find it attractive or something.

Yeah, the whole image of women that seems to be prevalent with "gamer culture" wouldn't alienate potential female customers at all.

Woo one image that denotes an entire culture! Good to know it can be brought down to that level.

So it can't be considered art?

Anything can be art, so long as it's used as a form of expression.

I would say that less 20something males buy these kinds of games compared to oversexed teenagers, yes. Just a hunch.

But you would agree that a fair number of males will more certainly buy a game they find good that has sexualization in it than they would otherwise, regardless of age?

I would say that the majority of important female characters suffer from objectification problems, though you could say that oversexed games are a minority compared to every game out there ever. Or our standards of what is "oversexed' are different.

What do you consider oversexed?

I'm friends with about 2 chicks who'd personally identify themselves as gamers.

I'm friends with only one man that identifies himself as a skater.

Does this mean skaters are a tiny minority or something?

And yeah, a lot of girls are still getting the bad image of your "typical" gamer, whether it's an overrepresented caricature or not. The industry can stand to move past that.

I don't see much point. If they're not going to bother looking past titles that they don't like and decide to unilaterally hate the entire industry, I don't really mind that they're not being marketed towards.

My grandma loves the Wii and the Legend of Zelda series. I think if anyone deserves credit for widening the market, it's Nintendo and its reach to "casual gamers".

You mean by using gimmicky control settings and fucktons of shovelware.

GO NINTENDO! Gotta give 'em credit for widening that market! It's really doing them well now that the novelty's wearing off and their sales are falling quicker than a high from oxygen-deprivation.

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[msnoodles]

Waiting to see how Noodles would like to portray a gay character without using sex, without staring at another guys backside (figuratively) and still pull it off.

Okay.

*gets propositioned by a female*

Main Character: No thanks, I'm not into girls.

Wowzers!

Porn and using sex in games is different.

Using sex in games to sell them is inevitable, but it shouldn't be a defining factor of the industry. Sex sells with movies and TV shows, but there's not the same icky stereotypes associated with these forms of media.

[msnoodles]

Then why hasn't there been a huge stagnation of sales overall?

The fact that it sells doesn't necessarily mean that some degree of class would do any worse.

So have watercolor paintings. It doesn't mean they aren't marketable to a demographic that finds them appealing.

The difference between art and jiggly cartoon boobs is that art isn't solely a commodity as much as it's meant to be a "life enhancer". I don't know, this comparison puts a bad taste in my mouth. It's like comparing crappy slashfic to any popular subversive novel because it "goes against the grain" or something reaching like that.

Who should be taking these risks? With what style of game? And what risks?

Okay, if you're defending that jiggletits are profitable for video games, it's implying that anything else probably wouldn't sell-- the fact that some guys you know use tit-ness as a basis for your decision is justification enough to perpetuate this portrayal. If a female main character with a. agency and b. sensible design choices is at all a risk, I think it'd be worthwhile.

They already exist, but I'd like to see more of it.

Same goes with ethnic characters. I think if there's any risk to having ethnic main characters, the potential benefits outweigh it.

Whoa, whoa, slow down now. How is objectification of the female figure demeaning to women as a whole?

Because they don't like to see characters that share their gender commonly seen as objects. Call it a gut reaction, I guess?

[Kanami]

Maybe in the short-term, but I wouldn't be surprised if they could easily widen their audience by taking more risks.

(Short-term is fine, the objective first and foremost is to get them to buy the game)

Gays are people like you and me. :)

(False... gays like people of the same gender as themselves. As stated prior social norm makes us think characters are straight. So to highlight a character being homosexual would require some sort of indication towards their sexual preference.

Nothing says a game with a good plot or gameplay can't have a gay main character, then? If it's fun, people will play it.

(There's also nothing saying people will play it if it's got "gay characters" in it. Hence this isn't debating "gays" but plot/gameplay, which we've both agreed is essential in a game. Gay characters for the sake of gay characters doesn't make sense.

What is "the game"? I'm not talking about any specific game. I'm saying that if it doesn't make any sense in the context of the game, an all-white cast is pretty much a sign of poor writing.

("The game" is any game you or myself may or may not refer to. In other words, any game. I think you're starting to brink on racism if "white cast=poor sign of writing)

Why would having a diverse cast of characters come off as "forced"? Can't there just be a black or latino or hmong or whatever character because these ethnicities exist in the context of our world?

(It's forced because you're trying to get a diverse cast in for reasons other then plot/gameplay. The reason you cited was equal representation. This is not plot or gameplay, but issues and interpretation related)

Besides the fact that the stereotype is getting tiring, it also has some pretty nasty implications about the role as blacks in America's past so yeah, it's offensive in the same way the Uncle Tom trope is offensive.

(So who's offending? The game creators? Are they making black characters funny because they think black people are stupid and only good for laughs? Do you honestly think that's what game makers are thinking? As for stereotypes, they can be used well depending on the creator)

If it's set in modern-day or futuristic America and totally white-washed then whether you find it offensive or not, it's objectively poor writing.

(I've commented on this before, and basing any game in our world is "poor writing" Am I to complain that war games based on military operations in the middle east are encouraging racism and the idea that middle-eastern people=terrorists?)

WHAT GAME. What game are we talking about? I'm not talking about "a game", I'm talking about the industry. :|

(Vala? Esau? Anyone? Please tell me I'm not wrong in thinking "a game" means any game in general and not one specific game? <_<

I guess we're not accounting for taste here.

(Then we shouldn't consider how you don't like "jiggly boobs?"

What the hell are you responding to here? I'm pretty sure nobody in this thread has anything good to say about girly shovelware.

(Did you read Kiryn's posts or not? You included seem to be indicating that games should be directed at specific ethnicities/genders/sexualities. The question is why can't Halo (or any other game) cater for these people?)

I think you're getting me confused with someone else, because I never said that. I interact with a wide variety of dudes: some play video games, some don't, some are gay, some are straight, and really, I'd be insulting their intelligence to throw boobs in their face and go HERE WILL YOU BUY THIS NOW?

(Your remarks are slowly losing intellectual value now. You can't differentiate race from quality writing, sex from porn, and now are trying to completely ignore the element of gameplay. How many times do people need to tell you that gameplay and sex are not the same issue? If I flip the question,

"I'd be insulting your intelligence to throw a game with a Latina Heroine in your face and go HERE WILL YOU BUY THIS NOW?")

Why does Bayonetta have to be a rolemodel

(Ignoring the point, and focusing on the example? :/ Now you're being stupid. Why do we need games to have rolemodels? You consider it sick to be aroused by pixel boobs, then why do you think it's okay to respect pixel characters?

Representation would probably be the byproduct of better writing.

(Fact remains, better writing can occur without representation. And Representation doesn't lead to better writing.)

No you're not. I can't even begin to comprehend how having main characters of different ethnicities are "taking away" from white representation. The white chick is in no shortage of white heroines. :)

(You should probably shut up now as you're starting to be a "racist" yourself)

Your arguments seem to be framed around "a game"; when I say specific, I don't mean you're referring to an existing game, but your retorts to my arguments are basically strawmen in game form. "OH SO NOW A GAME HAS TO HAVE X"

(Someone help?)

Haha so every minority character is actually a deviation from the "default"? Erm...

(From your definition yes. "White character is default, should have more ethnic alterations" is what you're preaching)

It's fine if you like it because you're comfortable and familiar with it, but it's not good writing.

(I don't have faith in your definition of "good writing" if representation=good writing.)

I'm not personally upset with you, but you seem to be really ignorant of the racial landscape in the West and seem to have some preconceived notion of it that I'm not sure how I could pry out, so it's probably a lot of wasted efforts responding to some of the "race isn't important" crap. Oh yay! I've found another Victim Racist! And go figure you resort to claiming superior knowledge and my ignorance.

Yeah, the whole image of women that seems to be prevalent with "gamer culture" wouldn't alienate potential female customers at all.

False

*gets propositioned by a female*

Main Character: No thanks, I'm not into girls.

Wowzers!

Please tell me that wasn't "good writing" the concept isn't even any good.

Using sex in games to sell them is inevitable, but it shouldn't be a defining factor of the industry. Sex sells with movies and TV shows, but there's not the same icky stereotypes associated with these forms of media.

I don't see your the industry reflecting your comment, what basis are you arguing that sex sells with movies and tv but not games?

Edited October 15, 2010 by Kanami

[msnoodles]

A secondary sexual organ that happens to be pretty interesting males. It's crazy, it's like guys enjoy seeing scantily-clad women with large breasts. Like they find it attractive or something.

Cool. Guys aren't the sole consumer of video games.

And no, I know a lot of dudes who are more weirded out by the unrealistic proportions than anything. Some guys find the freakishly large eyes on a lot of anime characters attractive, though a common reaction I've seen to anime is "wtf is up with the bug eyes".

Woo one image that denotes an entire culture! Good to know it can be brought down to that level.

No, I think it's unfortunate? This rightfully turns girls off. I can't believe I'm explaining this from a marketing standpoint-- objectification is, well, objectively Not a Good Thing.

Anything can be art, so long as it's used as a form of expression.

I accept that most games are a commodity, but there are also developers out there who develop games with the intention of making, well, "art". There are very few games which I would consider artistic, at least on any mainstream console.

But you would agree that a fair number of males will more certainly buy a game they find good that has sexualization in it than they would otherwise, regardless of age?

If they find it good then the sexualization's irrelevant.

If they're not going to bother looking past titles that they don't like and decide to unilaterally hate the entire industry, I don't really mind that they're not being marketed towards.

That's because you're not looking to get money from them.

You mean by using gimmicky control settings and fucktons of shovelware.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/topselling-video-games-of-2009-familyfriendly-titles-most-popular-2005027.html

Stupid Nintendo, being all accessible and shit!

[Defeatist Elitist]

Presupposing that lazy fanservice is equitable with attractiveness. To imply that attractiveness isn't necessarily a prerequisite for an interesting character isn't the same as implying that attractive=/=interesting. When I look at screenshots of Dead or Alive, I don't see anything of interest-- generic chicks in bikinis. Boobs. Big whoop, a secondary sexual organ.

Gah. Okay, so you're saying that "lazy fanservice" does not make characters more attractive? What constitutes "lazy fanservice"? Isn't that the POINT of fanservice? To take advantage of things people find attractive? Furthermore, I also don't think attractiveness is necessary for an interesting character. The thing is, it isn't detrimental. I pointed out earlier how much I liked the character Kreia. If she was a much younger (or younger looking) woman with giant breasts, it wouldn't really make her any less interesting. I probably wouldn't like her any more than I do now (because as I said, that's not a big draw for me), but it wouldn't make her a worse character. I seriously don't think it's that hard to seperate character from appearance. I do it all the time, on a daily basis, and with REAL PEOPLE.

Yeah, the whole image of women that seems to be prevalent with "gamer culture" wouldn't alienate potential female customers at all.

Funny you should link to that exact image, because probably every girl I know likes/loves Guitar Hero/Rock Band/whatever. Anyway, that's not particularly important. What is important is that I don't believe you when you say that the image of women that you claim is prevalent in gamer culture alienates most women from playing games.

Seriously, you can say that women are alienated from gaming because of the way games portray women as much as you want, but it doesn't make it true. Not only is the industry much less fixated on it than you seem to be claiming (or is that what you're claiming), as honestly most of the really sexualized games I've seen are at least somewhat niche, but it doesn't seem to have an effect on women. You've even admitted yourself that women have been "reached out to" by some companies.

Edited October 15, 2010 by ZXValaRevan

[msnoodles]

(Short-term is fine, the objective first and foremost is to get them to buy the game)

It doesn't need to be sexualized to sell. Oversexualization=lazy marketing and it stunts the industry.

There's also nothing saying people will play it if it's got "gay characters" in it. Hence this isn't debating "gays" but plot/gameplay, which we've both agreed is essential in a game. Gay characters for the sake of gay characters doesn't make sense.

Because if the writer conceptualized a character as gay then it's integral to the character. If I wrote a short story with a rich WASP main character, it'd feel weird to make him anything else but white. Nobody's asking for gays for the sake of gays.

I think you're starting to brink on racism if "white cast=poor sign of writing

For the same reason I'd consider unreasonable armor a poor design choice.

It's forced because you're trying to get a diverse cast in for reasons other then plot/gameplay. The reason you cited was equal representation. This is not plot or gameplay, but issues and interpretation related

Nothing's realistically constraining developers to make a game with a diverse cast.

So who's offending? The game creators?

The stereotype is offensive? What's hard to understand about this?

I've commented on this before, and basing any game in our world is "poor writing" Am I to complain that war games based on military operations in the middle east are encouraging racism and the idea that middle-eastern people=terrorists?

This was touched in the aforementioned video games, though I'm not going to go there as far as "minorities have mostly been nameless faceless targets in video games" goes-- if it makes sense in the context, I don't have an issue with it on a certain level.

Did you read Kiryn's posts or not? You included seem to be indicating that games should be directed at specific ethnicities/genders/sexualities. The question is why can't Halo (or any other game) cater for these people?

I think you misread Kiryn's post if you think she's happy with the kind of games that cater to young girls. And having an ethnic character as a main character isn't catering to an ethnicity. White gamers aren't immediately turned off if their in-game avatar is a fucking hedgehog, much less a mexican or something.

You can't differentiate race from quality writing, sex from porn, and now are trying to completely ignore the element of gameplay. How many times do people need to tell you that gameplay and sex are not the same issue? If I flip the question, "I'd be insulting your intelligence to throw a game with a Latina Heroine in your face and go HERE WILL YOU BUY THIS NOW?"

I can't tell if you're just being disingenuous now or what.

(Fact remains, better writing can occur without representation. And Representation doesn't lead to better writing.)

If you're able to expand your mind to include a diverse range of characters, you've shown some capability to "think beyond the box", on the most simplistic level of answering this.

You should probably shut up now as you're starting to be a "racist" yourself

Um. Ethnic main characters aren't racist towards whites. At all. I can't wrap my mind around this.

And go figure you resort to claiming superior knowledge and my ignorance.

Not really out of malice or anything, but responding to your posts are giving me a headache. Cry ad hominem or something, but you seem pretty unwilling to understand my arguments. Every time I try to explain something, you either misinterpret it or take it to bizarre extremes and I just end up confused.

[msnoodles]

The thing is, it isn't detrimental. I pointed out earlier how much I liked the character Kreia. If she was a much younger (or younger looking) woman with giant breasts, it wouldn't really make her any less interesting. I probably wouldn't like her any more than I do now (because as I said, that's not a big draw for me), but it wouldn't make her a worse character. I seriously don't think it's that hard to seperate character from appearance.

I don't judge based on appearances with real people because they are real people and not video game characters. And yeah, ridiculous proportions can be a turn-off to people. If designers put any degree of thought into character design, they make certain decisions for a reason. If the reason is "dudes like boobs so here are some boobs" then yeah it's trashy.

What is important is that I don't believe you when you say that the image of women that you claim is prevalent in gamer culture alienates most women from playing games.

Okay? I wish that just your belief would make it so!

You've even admitted yourself that women have been "reached out to" by some companies.

And then the "real gamers" make some casual gamer jokes and it's pretty discouraging to people who are just dipping their toes into the "culture".

[Defeatist Elitist]

I don't judge based on appearances with real people because they are real people and not video game characters. And yeah, ridiculous proportions can be a turn-off to people. If designers put any degree of thought into character design, they make certain decisions for a reason. If the reason is "dudes like boobs so here are some boobs" then yeah it's trashy.

:/ I don't judge video game characters on their appearance because if you're actually interested in CHARACTER (I take that to mean personality, etc) then it really doesn't matter. You're the one objectivising them if you judge a video game character by its appearance.

Okay? I wish that just your belief would make it so!

You know, I say this a lot in a very different type of discussion in this section, but it's not a belief, it's a lack of belief. You are making a claim, you need to actively prove that women are turned off of video games in general in significant amounts simply because of the sexualization of women in some of them.

And then the "real gamers" make some casual gamer jokes and it's pretty discouraging to people who are just dipping their toes into the "culture".

That has absolutely nothing to do with sexualization, and everything to do with people being elitist and wanting to feel special. Most "hardcore" games are just very very violent anyway, not massively sexualized. I mean how much sex is in CoD MW? How much in SC? How much in TF?

[Esau of Isaac]

The fact that it sells doesn't necessarily mean that some degree of class would do any worse.

If it's helping to sell the product it might.

The difference between art and jiggly cartoon boobs is that art isn't solely a commodity as much as it's meant to be a "life enhancer". I don't know, this comparison puts a bad taste in my mouth. It's like comparing crappy slashfic to any popular subversive novel because it "goes against the grain" or something reaching like that.

And the difference between any crappy slashfic and a popular subversive novel is how much a given community appreciates it. Assuming that both are objectively similar, that is.

The point, since we're kind of moving away from it, is that being old doesn't mean it should disappear.

Okay, if you're defending that jiggletits are profitable for video games, it's implying that anything else probably wouldn't sell-- the fact that some guys you know use tit-ness as a basis for your decision is justification enough to perpetuate this portrayal.

Wait, where did I say that some guys I know use this as a basis for their decisions?

If a female main character with a. agency and b. sensible design choices is at all a risk, I think it'd be worthwhile.

They already exist, but I'd like to see more of it.

Same goes with ethnic characters. I think if there's any risk to having ethnic main characters, the potential benefits outweigh it.

What come with agency and a sensible design choice?

Because they don't like to see characters that share their gender commonly seen as objects. Call it a gut reaction, I guess?

Who is they? Are you saying that all females think that viewing the female form as an object is demeaning to them?

Again, why? Doesn't it go without saying that someone looking for sexuality in a game is going to be looking out for sexual characteristics?

Cool. Guys aren't the sole consumer of video games.

Guys are the primary consumer of videogames marketed with lots of sexual content in them. You know, action games that tend to get really popular, the ones that you're arguing are oversexualized?

And no, I know a lot of dudes who are more weirded out by the unrealistic proportions than anything.

When I say large I'm not talking about titanic here.

Some guys find the freakishly large eyes on a lot of anime characters attractive, though a common reaction I've seen to anime is "wtf is up with the bug eyes".

I don't know what to say, here. I have never met anyone that thought large eyes on anime characters were in themselves attractive.

No, I think it's unfortunate? This rightfully turns girls off. I can't believe I'm explaining this from a marketing standpoint-- objectification is, well, objectively Not a Good Thing.

How is objectification objectively not a good thing?

I think you've backed yourself into a pretty bad corner here.

I accept that most games are a commodity, but there are also developers out there who develop games with the intention of making, well, "art". There are very few games which I would consider artistic, at least on any mainstream console.

And?

If they find it good then the sexualization's irrelevant.

In the same way that if I find ketchup on my hamburgers good, then mustard is irrelevant.

That's because you're not looking to get money from them.

No, and it appears not many else are either. People don't tend to try and market to an audience that blindly hates them.

http://www.independe...ar-2005027.html

Stupid Nintendo, being all accessible and shit!

http://www.pcworld.com/article/174633/nintendo_profit_halved_as_wii_console_sales_slow.html

What's that you say? Their sales are all cocked up because they didn't give a shit about gameplay and just wanted to make a fuckload of "accessible" games? No fucking way, this has caught me utterly by the nutsack in surprise!

Edited October 15, 2010 by Esau of Isaac

[Kanami]

Not really out of malice or anything, but responding to your posts are giving me a headache. Cry ad hominem or something, but you seem pretty unwilling to understand my arguments. Every time I try to explain something, you either misinterpret it or take it to bizarre extremes and I just end up confused.

(Not a comment I want to hear from you considering you've opted to ignore key points and misinterpreted several core arguments yourself. But I'll be nice and list what you've got horribly wrong in your latest post.)

It doesn't need to be sexualized to sell. Oversexualization=lazy marketing and it stunts the industry.

How about defining oversexualization? It's been asked of you before. Big breasts alone don't seem like oversexualizing to me. And as Vala has said, what's fan service supposed to be then?

Because if the writer conceptualized a character as gay then it's integral to the character. If I wrote a short story with a rich WASP main character, it'd feel weird to make him anything else but white. Nobody's asking for gays for the sake of gays.

The thing is, makers aren't conceptualizing gay characters, so why should a gay cast be included? As I've said several times, I'm not against including gay characters, but why have them? Representation?

So if the conceptualizing is a "White" What's the problem?

For the same reason I'd consider unreasonable armor a poor design choice.

That has abosolutely nothing to do with a white cast and poor writing.

Nothing's realistically constraining developers to make a game with a diverse cast.

Nothing's realistically making developers have to make a game with a diverse cast either.

The stereotype is offensive? What's hard to understand about this?

You find sole stereotypes insulting? I can understand how a PIMP town, with all black people all wearing golden chains, with slutty prostitutes around could be interpreted that way. But a funny guy is insulting to you huh? What else do you find offensive? The fact that the Wii was originally white?

I think you misread Kiryn's post if you think she's happy with the kind of games that cater to young girls. And having an ethnic character as a main character isn't catering to an ethnicity. White gamers aren't immediately turned off if their in-game avatar is a fucking hedgehog, much less a mexican or something.

Did you read my post at all? Either of them?

You included seem to be indicating that games should be directed at specific ethnicities/genders/sexualities. The question is why can't Halo (or any other game) cater for these people?

I haven't said anyones portraying girl games in a positive light. Kiryns indicated that games directed at girls were all "Pink Ponies" when realistically those games aren't directed at all females but a small group of females(children). So the question is, why do games need to be tailored to suit females? Homosexuals? Blacks? Can't they all just play the same game?

As for white gamers? If they're not, why are you turned off playing games without a racially diverse cast?

I can't tell if you're just being disingenuous now or what.

Answer the question?

If you're able to expand your mind to include a diverse range of characters, you've shown some capability to "think beyond the box", on the most simplistic level of answering this.

Oh right, and the only way to express a diverse cast is via ethnicities.

Um. Ethnic main characters aren't racist towards whites. At all. I can't wrap my mind around this.

No you're not. I can't even begin to comprehend how having main characters of different ethnicities are "taking away" from white representation. The white chick is in no shortage of white heroines. :)

What do you have against the white heroine? I'm not calling the characters racist. You seem to want to make an absolute differentiation between white characters and non-white characters. Edited October 15, 2010 by Kanami

[msnoodles]

I don't judge video game characters on their appearance because if you're actually interested in CHARACTER (I take that to mean personality, etc) then it really doesn't matter. You're the one objectivising them if you judge a video game character by its appearance.

Because their appearance isn't irrelevant to their personality. They were designed to fulfill a certain purpose. They look a certain way for a reason. IRL, people look the way they look because of their traits at birth and lifestyle choices.

but it's not a belief, it's a lack of belief.

I'm assuming this is over a theology argument or something, which is different than "I think the vg industry as it stands conveys x image".

That has absolutely nothing to do with sexualization, and everything to do with people being elitist and wanting to feel special. Most "hardcore" games are just very very violent anyway, not massively sexualized. I mean how much sex is in CoD MW? How much in SC? How much in TF?

It's still alienization? SC is hypersexualized dude.

If it's helping to sell the product it might.

If tits are its selling point then I'd demand funner games.

The point, since we're kind of moving away from it, is that being old doesn't mean it should disappear.

We shouldn't cling to it either. Jiggletits are never going to disappear, but with some significant effort developers won't feel the need to include them because oh no loss in profits otherwise!

Wait, where did I say that some guys I know use this as a basis for their decisions?

Last page you said guys you knew factored pixel tits into their decision as far as throwing their money at game companies goes.

What come with agency and a sensible design choice?

Their attire and attitude makes sense within the context of the game, e.g. if they're an adventurer then short shorts, miniskirts, dresses, and low-dipping v-necks won't afford as much protection as much as any sort of armor, no matter what kind it is. She'd be as capable and independent as any male hero in a similar situation-- that isn't to say she has to be a mindless mission machine, but just take sex out of it entirely. In some games, sex might not be on the main protagonists' minds.

Guys are the primary consumer of videogames marketed with lots of sexual content in them. You know, action games that tend to get really popular.

Because these have always been marketed towards guys. There's undoubtedly games with sexual content in them marketed towards girls, but to such a minuscule degree that it's totally negligible.

How is objectification objectively not a good thing?

Because bodies=/=objects. Video games? Sure, they're objects. Women? Mmmmmmnope.

In the same way that if I find ketchup on my hamburgers good, then mustard is irrelevant.

Nobody's taking away your jiggletits. Let me repeat that: nobody's taking away your jiggletits. They'd just like to see more games with less jiggletits.

What's that you say? Their sales are all cocked up because they didn't give a shit about gameplay and just wanted to make a fuckload of "accessible" games? No fucking way, this has caught me utterly by the nutsack in surprise!

I don't know what this says about the other companies, considering accessible Wii games basically dominated the top-selling list for that particular year. Sorry, games aren't exclusively for young white males like you seem to want for them to be.