And I’m not trying to propose some damsel-in-distress “let’s handsomely save the day” argument, either. With or without men, women are kicking ass in this industry and will continue to do so. But it’s time for men to stop acting like self-centered slobs. It’s time for men to stop turning every step of progress into an agonizing uphill battle. There’s plenty of room in gaming for everyone – male, female, gay, straight, bi, trans, or what have you – so why not use this position of leverage to roll out the red carpet? Demand better from developers and publishers. If you work in the industry, demand better from your bosses and co-workers. If you simply play games as a hobby, demand better of your friends.
I 100% defend YBourykina in defending Haz.
I have never EVER gotten the impression from him or his work that he objectified women. rather that he saw them as beautiful (and not just physically) - and wanted to dedicate himself to capturing that in his work.
The problem isn't necessarily the appearance of female characters visually (though, there are certainly questionable "costuming" practices - but rarely without alternative options, so don't blame the artists. blame the players who choose them.), but the lack of substance in most female characters in general.
While most female characters are idealized, especially playable ones, so are most male characters. What was the last game you played that had a fat/scrawny/ugly/balding male lead character?
I think the primary difference between the two is the NPC's or non-essential characters...where most female characters in that role continue to be at least some-what idealized, while male characters have a wider variety of physically appealing states. That's not across the board by any means, but still a measurable difference.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s17Sw9m8H6s&feature=context-vrec"]EXAMPLE[/ame]
note in the video: the player characters are mostly male, one of them being a dirty looking hobo guy, with one female - who happens to have tight jeans and an exposed mid-drift. and note the player reactions to her at about 1:40 (while in a light-hearted joking mood, clearly objectifying at some level).
borderlands does an excellent job of having female characters with actual CHARACTER. and that's awesome - more should do so. It never comes off as just putting them in there for the sake of having that dynamic, either - they had characters they decided were female and they gave them SUBSTANCE just like they do with the male characters.
there was a pretty decent discussion along these lines not too terribly long ago here on PC - "tropes in video games" i think it was called. In one of the videos posted there was a list spoken of. It was in regards to film primarily, but just as viable for games - and it was basically a check-list to determine if your story had a "snow white complex" (i think that's what it was called - basically the token woman among a bunch of guys)
I'm paraphrasing from memory, but it was something like this.
-you have to have more than one female character
-they both have to have lines
-they have to speak to eachother about something OTHER than men
as far as sexism in the work place - i've seen it (not while i worked in games) and it's easy to overlook until it gets super over the line...but i've never kept quiet about it - something that has made me unpopular among co-workers in the past (i've worked construction and other such things...and games have nothing on that in this area)
truth is that I was raised by a single mother, my wife is an incredibly strong willed woman and I respect them too much to let that crap go unchecked.
also - if my wife found out that i stayed out of it she'd probably kick my ass.
that kind of behavior has to be shot down by peers - all the sexual harassment seminars in the world are useless if the other guys all think it's just in good fun. (and sometimes it is - but it's a delicate question, and one that requires you TRULY know the people you're "joking" with - and they likewise know you).
I would also like to point out that the idea that any woman gets where she is because she's a woman and is getting special treatment out of extra sensitivity to sexism, is toxic.
Even if it's true from time to time, making any special note of it on a regular basis only causes unnecessary speculation and could often cause them to be brushed off out of sensitivity to that sensitivity.
How many people get special attention because of who they know, who their friends are, who they've worked with in the past - regardless if they're the best candidate based purely on their skills? it's not uncommon, but singling the gender variable out only makes it a hot-button and perpetuates the paranoia/envy/resentment.
reverendK, you're thinking of the Bechdel Test. You got the criteria right except that both characters need to have names(that are used in the movie and not just the script/credits ). It can be surprising to see how many movies fail the test! It'd be interesting to see the test applied to games as well.
YBourykina, I agree that some of those outfits from TERA are quite pretty, in a hyperdetailed kind of way, but the overabundance of flesh on display honestly just makes me roll my eyes. It's entirely possible to design attractive clothing that consists of more than panties and stockings and doesn't necessarily expose cleavage(perish the thought!) without being boring, and I feel that TERA's look rather lazily focuses on exposing either chest or thighs(or both!) to frankly tacky effect. I have gotten the impression that if I played the game I'd have a hard time finding something for my character to wear that doesn't look either deeply uncomfortable or something a fantasy-themed porno would dress its performers in.
lysaara: I can't speak for Korean game devs but I've had experience with Chinese devs and they really don't like to deviate from the scantily clad women template - they kept equating modest clothing and realistic breast sizes as ugly.
lysaara: I can't speak for Korean game devs but I've had experience with Chinese devs and they really don't like to deviate from the scantily clad women template - they kept equating modest clothing and realistic breast sizes as ugly.
this thread isn't derogatory for women at all, he just made it so those of us who want to find female character models can, and easily, because they are all in one place and i love it.
this thread isn't derogatory for women at all, he just made it so those of us who want to find female character models can, and easily, because they are all in one place and i love it.
regarding TERA - and other games that do the same thing:
the problem isn't necessarily that there are scantly clad females in the game, but how they're used.
A player can play a female character and put them essentially in whatever outfit they choose in a game like that - the question becomes weather the game promotes choosing the more revealing costumes (through higher armor stats, etc.) - often the higher level the character or equipment is the more revealing it becomes, thus encouraging players with female characters to run around with ever decreasing amounts of clothing. this is clearly an objectifying MECHANIC -- completely independent of the artwork involved.
now the amount of artwork dedicated to making the female characters look "sexy" vs. look "cool" (or whatever other non-objectifying adjective you'd like to use) is another thing to measure entirely.
there was a pretty decent discussion along these lines not too terribly long ago here on PC - "tropes in video games" i think it was called. In one of the videos posted there was a list spoken of. It was in regards to film primarily, but just as viable for games - and it was basically a check-list to determine if your story had a "snow white complex" (i think that's what it was called - basically the token woman among a bunch of guys)
The Bechdel Test - it'll be a good day when we see a majority of games passing this test It still alarms me how few films do. Of course it's not a measure of a good film - nor is failure of the test the mark of a bad one, or even a sexist one - but I think the proportion of media passing this test, be it film, games or whatever, can be a good indication of the prevalence of sexism in the industry (and hopefully its decline) in years to come.
that kind of behavior has to be shot down by peers - all the sexual harassment seminars in the world are useless if the other guys all think it's just in good fun.
Seemingly light-hearted sexist humour is an apparent non-issue that, compounded over time, can really lead to problems with discernible consequences. An environment where flagrantly sexist humour is the norm can legitimise attitudes that really could be harmful when carried over to other situations. Indeed I saw an example of this at work today. I won't go in to more detail, but it made me realise how important it is to make it clear when the line is crossed.
I would also like to point out that the idea that any woman gets where she is because she's a woman and is getting special treatment out of extra sensitivity to sexism, is toxic.
Absolutely. I see people using this kind of speculation in an attempt to justify outright sexism. My best guess is that the idea of a competent woman doesn't compute with the attitude that women exist as ancillaries to a male existence.
Problem is, it's kinda an extremely stupid situation on behalf of the girl. You can't blame this on Game-Dev as you said, and while the molester in this case is to blame, the girl could literally have cringed the guy's hand off, and called for security on the spot, she didn't, she let a man that action to her escape, WHY?! You don't need to think, a man just flashed you and dragged your hand on his balls, kick him in the nuts and call the cops, you don't have an excuse for being shocked, waiting 30 minutes, and then say you're shocked no one was able to stop him. Help people, so they can help you, no one can help you if you don't talk.
It's an extremely stupid situation on behalf of the girl? She should have done X, she should have done Y? I don't understand, what point are you trying to make here? Do any of these things lessen the severity of what happened?
the molester in this case is to blame
In what case of serious sexual assault would the molester not be to blame?
Well you see if the victim doesn't react exactly like a person on the internet said they should have then clearly they weren't trying hard enough to prevent whatever happened and therefore they have no right to feel victimized! it simple really...
if i were a female i'd probably be a lot more embarassed by this image...
...than one of a fit, hourglass-figured woman running about in a game.
I don't really get why theres such a huge focus on just the one sex though. Male characters are just as objectified, as immature action BadAsses.
I don't think i understand why idealised stereotypes are alienating women but apparently dudes just love it or have brought it on themselves or something.
I should address the fact that my post only addresses one facet of the issue - the one we as game artists are probably the most exposed to or responsible for.
I have known plenty of dudes in the industry who automatically think negatively about females - and some who (just as bad) automatically favour females. It's extremely embarassing and i try to call it out whenever i'm directly exposed to it.
The difference between idealised male and female characters in games is that while the idealised men(muscular, powerful, tough, badass etc) are aspirational power fantasies for men, idealised women(sexy, beautiful, vulnerable, thin, big boobs etc) are usually sexual fantasies - also for men. It's objectification - you're not supposed to want to be her or even talk to her, you're supposed to want to have sex with her because she is presented as little more than a sexual object.
And I'm not sure what the point of the picture of the girl with the controllers is - what's to be embarassed about?
i missed the part where you explained how that image is embarrassing.
all media uses idealized versions of things, often devolving into stereotypes...whether it's regarding gender, race, sexuality or religion...or any number of other things. video games are not alone guilty of this.
The question isn't necessarily whether it's done, or done more to the female gender difference more than anything else, but how women working (or aspiring to) in the industry are treated. and to a lesser extent how women are treated/targeted as game consumers.
The difference between idealised male and female characters in games is that while the idealised men(muscular, powerful, tough, badass etc) are aspirational power fantasies for men, idealised women(sexy, beautiful, vulnerable, thin, big boobs etc) are usually sexual fantasies - also for men. It's objectification - you're not supposed to want to be her or even talk to her, you're supposed to want to have sex with her because she is presented as little more than a sexual object.
Why is being a sexual object worse than being an object of violence? Why is it males' fault for aspiring to violence and domination? Ever think that the pressure that exists for women to be a certain way has a direct counterpart for males too? You're just faulting males as a whole and kinda characterising them as sexual or violent beasts at this point. It's like if i called females materialistic for being manipulated by societal pressure to look/dress a certain way.
No apologies required jackablade / joseph silverman, I know you didnt mention it out of spite, I've grown used to being 'that guy who makes asses and tits' so its not surprising to be referenced somewhere
I just feel every time this topic comes up, It's eluded to that what I do, by making women threads and by making my art that I'm 'not doing anything to help' and I wanted to - just one time make my stance clear.
How presumptuous for anyone assume that my spare time is spent championing ANY side for any cause whatsoever! This is a completely selfish endeavour for me nothing more.
Harry, I'm not saying that all men want to be violent or aggressive. But the difference between the two ideals there is that one is meant to make you feel like a powerful badass guy - it's an aspirational fantasy, by playing the character you are made to feel that you are that powerful figure. Rather than aggressive and violent it's just about the feeling of being powerful.
The female ideal is not aspirational - few people actually want to be a sex doll. She's just there to look nice and make your penis feel nice. A few instances of this is so much whatever, but when such a visible majority of female characters are depicted in this way then it becomes hurtful.
Your mention of pressure is an apt one, because as far as I'm concerned this entire debate boils down to the harmful effects of societally mandated traditional gender roles - men 'have to be' powerful badasses and women 'have to be' sexy and submissive.
Harry, I'm not saying that all men want to be violent or aggressive. But the difference between the two ideals there is that one is meant to make you feel like a powerful badass guy - it's an aspirational fantasy, by playing the character you are made to feel that you are that powerful figure. Rather than aggressive and violent it's just about the feeling of being powerful.
You've kinda failed to distinguish these two concepts. How do males assert power in games if not through violence?
The female ideal is not aspirational - few people actually want to be a sex doll. She's just there to look nice and make your penis feel nice. A few instances of this is so much whatever, but when such a visible majority of female characters are depicted in this way then it becomes hurtful.
Maybe i'm giving people too much credit, but i'm not thinking about sex when i play games. Maybe i don't play the kind of games you're talking about.
But yeah, like your point says below, i think they're actually both aspirational fantasies. There are still a multitude of reasons a dude would wanna be powerful and a multitude of reasons a woman would wanna be sexy. For a woman, being sexy is something that can be powerful, even... This is why young women are easilly manipulated about their own image.
We still do have a tribal brain. Being the object of desire, either because of your sexuality or your prowess in resolving violence (usually violently), is a power fantasy. The distinction between sex fantasy and power fantasy is a false one. Sex to a tribal mind, is power, and power gains you more sex. This doesn't mean everyone's an immature asshole who wants to objectify anyone, it means we're still easilly manipulated by urges which no longer serve us in the way they used to - like preferring high energy foods or feeling adrenaline rushes when we "survive combat" in a game, or do something complex without fucking it up.
I just kinda want to say this to push back against this weird conjecture that it's all a male fantasy and a bunch of creepy neckbeards are doing it all to oppress. It's a human weakness which it's useful to be mindful of. Treating it like a malicious act from one sex against another is not only misguided but makes the situation much worse.
Your mention of pressure is an apt one, because as far as I'm concerned this entire debate boils down to the harmful effects of societally mandated traditional gender roles - men 'have to be' powerful badasses and women 'have to be' sexy and submissive.
Yeah. if this point gets across then i feel like i've said my bit. I don't mean to derail conversation and i know people often assume the focus is being drawn back onto men... But i dunno. That's not my intention. I just think viewing this kind of issue from a female-exclusive perspective is just as sexist as viewing it from a male-only one. I was just trying to kind of point that out. I won't go on about it any more unless somebody asks.
How is this representation of the female body any different than what you're arguing against? I see it as an idealized design. Certainly you can't say it's 'stylized' because that's what most game characters are. My idealization of the female body is a stylized one.
Personally, I see this whole topic as subjective. What one person likes, another sees as inappropriate.
*edit** Mind you, I understand your stance on skimpy armor and stuff. I'm just genually curious why you think this idealization is better than the other.
of course it's subjective. that doesn't mean there's no value in discussing it. Digging through post history and trying to undermine someone's point because they hold an apparently conflicting viewpoint seems like a pretty lame thing to do (if that's what youre trying to do)
You don't have to morally agree with something on every single level to find it fascinating/curious/cool. It seems a little cheap and irrelevant to bring that up.
of course it's subjective. that doesn't mean there's no value in discussing it. Digging through post history and trying to undermine someone's point because they hold an apparently conflicting viewpoint seems like a pretty lame thing to do (if that's what youre trying to do)
You don't have to morally agree with something on every single level to find it fascinating/curious/cool. It seems a little cheap and irrelevant to bring that up.
I personally think it's smart to try and understand where she's coming from.
skankerzero, I've never actually said that an idealised figure is in itself a bad thing - just that the over-representation of the sexy boobtacular feminine ideal(and those dolls have extremely understated boobs and no asses worth mentioning; they're skinny fashion dolls for tweenagers, not sex dolls) in games is unhelpful when it comes to unburdening the games industry of its 'boys club' image - that image being something that actively discourages women from joining the industry. Which is the main point of #1reasonwhy; reasons why there are so few women in the games industry.
skankerzero, I've never actually said that an idealised figure is in itself a bad thing - just that the over-representation of the sexy boobtacular feminine ideal(and those dolls have extremely understated boobs and no asses worth mentioning; they're skinny fashion dolls for tweenagers, not sex dolls) in games is unhelpful when it comes to unburdening the games industry of its 'boys club' image - that image being something that actively discourages women from joining the industry. Which is the main point of #1reasonwhy; reasons why there are so few women in the games industry.
Ok, I understand what you're saying.
Now I ask, why do you allude that thin figures are not viewed as sexy or sex objects? Plenty of Asian cultures will call women out as 'fat' or 'ugly cows' if they have any kind of curves. Many of my asian female friends had to go through this, and they were barely 125 pounds.
Bratz dolls came under fire for that very reason. They were 'sexualized' and 'idealized' images of women that were hurting our nations young girls. I don't see a difference in these dolls really to those. Slightly different proportions but overall the same.
Mind you, I'm not trying to be a dick, but I do like to understand the best I can when it comes to different points of views.
I'm responsible for all the girls in BloodRayne 2 and Aeon Flux, so I've done my fair share of introducing sexy females into the industry. Though, to tell you the truth, if I ever get any complaints about their designs, it's usually from North Americans. Eastern Europeans seem to totally love the sexy, tough girl. Just an observation.
I view each game project as catering to their target demographic, and most of the time that demographic isn't everyone on the planet. Koreans love their elf chicks with little armor. Who's to blame them for marketing towards their demographic. Sure, that's not helping matters any, but this is a business. Businesses are built to make money.
Thinness in itself is not generally considered sexy(a real woman with the above body would be disturbingly unhealthy), although fatness of any kind(even when it's actually just a healthy weight) is as you have observed quickly called out as ugly. It's a shame fashion dolls are universally skinny and pouty-lipped, and I'd love to see someone buck that trend, but just as most fashion models are rail-thin(and being actual humans, that's an even more dangerous message to send) clothes-horses, so too are the dolls.
Who's to blame them for marketing towards their demographic. Sure, that's not helping matters any, but this is a business. Businesses are built to make money.
That's an argument I see a lot, and if you apply it to any other objectionable act(like say racism) you'll quickly note that it suddenly becomes far less acceptable. Exaggerating for the sake of making a point, but say you make a game to appeal to far-right skinheads, in which all black characters are literally idiot slaves. Is that acceptable, because the skinheads want to pay you a whole boatload of money for it? If not, why is it acceptable to portray so many women in games as nothing more than partially-clothed sex objects?
Money only gets you so far. Eventually, you need to stop making excuses and think about the reasoning and the side-effects of the way you describe an entire gender to the world.
lysaara: can you show me/us some of the female characters that you think are good representation in games? i'm just interested in seeing some female designs you like, thanks ^__^
Kinda related and because I knew my name would come up in this thread, this is the only time Im going to say anything like this here...
BIG POST
I just want to take the time to say that even though I myself am not drawn to, and generally stray from the type of "sexy girl" sort of threads you tend to make, I almost always take the time to look. It's pretty clear that for you this is a craft, rather than a fetish. I've always appreciated that. A lot of times I wind up using you as a mental example to try and balance out my own mentality, which is usually against the more "sexual" portrayals of women, to remind me of the other side of the coin. I do wish you'd branch out a little more from time to time, but that's mostly out of selfish curiosity.
So far as the rest of the thread goes, I've spoken enough on this sort of topic in the past. I'll just say that while I generally wish we didn't have so much "sexualization" of characters in our games, I do think everything has a place. And thankfully these days we have so many options, I can almost always find a game I enjoy.
It's nice to see things like this getting more traction, and it's nice that it's coming from girls who actually make/play games.
Thinness in itself is not generally considered sexy(a real woman with the above body would be disturbingly unhealthy), although fatness of any kind(even when it's actually just a healthy weight) is as you have observed quickly called out as ugly.
Right, and that's what I'm saying. There are cultures that think proportions like the doll are sexy, others don't. The same goes with 'full figured women'. There are plenty of cultures out there (mine included, Mexican) that love curvy women and view skinny women as unsexual. (Not me mind you. I prefer thin to overweight.)
That's an argument I see a lot, and if you apply it to any other objectionable act(like say racism) you'll quickly note that it suddenly becomes far less acceptable. Exaggerating for the sake of making a point, but say you make a game to appeal to far-right skinheads, in which all black characters are literally idiot slaves. Is that acceptable, because the skinheads want to pay you a whole boatload of money for it? If not, why is it acceptable to portray so many women in games as nothing more than partially-clothed sex objects?
As you mentioned, your comparison is exaggerated and extreme.
You're comparing racism, which is an act of hate, vs making sexy video game girls in scant clothing, which is a subjective, artistic choice. You can argue that dressing up women in games in scant clothing is sexist, which can be considered an act of hate, but I bet anyone that models any of the characters you can find do not hate women. If anything they love them.
So yes, in my eyes it is much more acceptable to market a game with girls in scant clothing vs a racist game that promotes hate.
Money only gets you so far. Eventually, you need to stop making excuses and think about the reasoning and the side-effects of the way you describe an entire gender to the world.
This goes back to the whole 'men are objectified too' argument. As a guy, I'm happy to see guys like Seth Rogan make it big in Hollywood. I like normal guys, but I understand why guys like Chris Hemsworth are super popular too. I just don't care or make a big fuss out of it. Nor do I let it get to me. Same goes with videogame characters. If I'm playing Gears, last thing I want to play as is some fat guy with a gun waddling around the arena. That's not the point of Gears.
Yes businesses are built to make money - but WE are not businesses. We as artists should feel at least partially responsible for the influence our work has on the greater culture. Especially considering the added influence that games in particular have on those still developing their own world-view. I would personally like to see the majority of games rise above TV and film in this regard (TV especially - which seems especially unapologetic about selling little more than sex/drugs/violence).
at some point pumping out more of the same nonsense is no longer excusable by "selling what sells" and there's damage done to the cultural perception of some group of people by those influenced. As artists we should always do our best to know what kind of influence we're potentially putting out there because art is influential by definition.
Sexy females and hyper-masculine power fantasy types are prevalent in all storytelling mediums. They're inevitable, they're what people typically like to see in their media.
Harry made an awesome point about BOTH being aspirational fantasies in a tribal brain.
My question, though, is how much of their continued presence in our minds is due to their continued presence in our media?
almost all people wil gravitate toward that kind of thing - choose a figure from a story and aspire to be like that (even if it's subconscious) who's your favorite super hero?...but how many choices are there to choose from?
I'd venture to say that there's a good deal more varying options for men than for women.
The problem isn't that there are women in media that are idealized, but that there's little variation on that ideal.
This is especially important in a culture like ours here in the US where children are so heavily influenced during their development by media sources. Disney channel raises kids here while both parents are working two jobs each. Girls get to be princesses. boys are soldiers, super heroes, charming rogues, princes, assassins, ninjas etc.
it's not always this way but it's a pretty solid standard.
there's one other problem with the dichotomy of the gender-based power fantasies (violence vs. sex)
When Harry points out that both essentially achieve the same goal in the tribal brain he's right, but he fails to point out one thing: the objectification of females is part of the male power fantasy, not the female one.
It's true that in some cases a female being sexy is translated into being powerful - but more often than not they're sexy to be of more value to the MAN who is in possession of them.
again - to this point i'm not speaking explicitly about video games, but about power fantasies in media in general.
but if that's a major part of a person's input while they're developing their brain-meats, then they stand a good chance to either be possessive of women (and must always be superior) if they're male, or be possessed (and therefore always submissive) by a male if they're a female.
hopefully there's enough additional influence in a person's life to counteract that kind of thinking, but every bit of media ever consumed sits in the back of your mind forming the way you look at the world. every little bit. so close your eyes when the commercials come on.
we are responsible for the seeds we plant inside of people's brains. people are silly, manipulable, crowd mentality creatures.
This goes back to the whole 'men are objectified too' argument. As a guy, I'm happy to see guys like Seth Rogan make it big in Hollywood. I like normal guys, but I understand why guys like Chris Hemsworth are super popular too. I just don't care or make a big fuss out of it. Nor do I let it get to me. Same goes with videogame characters. If I'm playing Gears, last thing I want to play as is some fat guy with a gun waddling around the arena. That's not the point of Gears.
I don't think that's what people want. They want people with some depth and believability because it's more human and interesting than alpha males and flawless seductresses.
I don't actually think it's oppression or boys' club or whatever. It's just lack of imagination or artistic finesse on the part of whoever designed those characters. Most FPS protagonists could be the exact same dude across multiple subgenres and franchises and you'd never know the difference. The ideal solution for me at least is for people to stop dickriding on game characters and instead praise games written as games, where the player has agency and their own personality is impressed upon the situation rather than fantasies where none of your personal shortcomings matter cause youre such a BadAss.
or maybe i'm totally misinterpreting the whole thing
It's true that in some cases a female being sexy is translated into being powerful - but more often than not they're sexy to be of more value to the MAN who is in possession of them.
Ever wonder that it's the same deal for men? In fact, males in pretty much any species are way more competitive for female attention. Thats why all this macho display of power shit exists in the first place. It's all about having value to women. Women have intrinsic value because they're a limiting factor in a tribe's reproduction. Men have to have utility before they're considered valuable (because really, an alpha male of the tribe could kill 75% of the other males, have more power for himself and still the tribe would thrive in their numbers) This is all natural stuff that our brains evolved to drive us towards. We don't understand it now because we no longer live in a natural environment. it's not someone being a prick for the sake of it.
AGAIN im sorry for going way off topic there but i just cant help but bite when i see something which seems like conjecture.
but if that's a major part of a person's input while they're developing their brain-meats, then they stand a good chance to either be possessive of women (which means they must always be superior) if they're male, or be possessed by a male if they're a female.
Out of curiosity, could you list me all the female vidya game characters you can think of who are the posession of a male character?
@ slipsius: Oh darn! So that's what I've been doing wrong all this time - I didn't mention in every post I ever made that I was a girl. And here I was thinking that you guys just don't want to hurt my feelings. Frankly, I get much more of this overprotective attitude from new acquaintances, then sexist remarks.
Most of my friends are guys and all of them, to an extent, would qualify as nerds. Yes, I am very fortunate to have met a lot of interesting people in my life. It was never gender that brought us all together, but common interests and hobbies. I don't feel any need to play a game designed for women. The reason I want to play something more complex than mindless hack&slash is I want a challenge, has absolutely nothing to do with my gender.
I do believe this kind of testimonials are actually detrimental to women that want to work in the industry because they portray us as little, helpless creatures that can't handle working with the opposite sex and need a special work environment to function properly.
I want to work in the game industry because I want to help create those amazing worlds that I, as a player, would enjoy exploring and deal with all the limitations and restrictions of the game engine. I want to be there for the job itself, not for social activities and I'm 99.9% sure that I'm not the only girl that thinks the same way.
Yes businesses are built to make money - but WE are not businesses. We as artists should feel at least partially responsible for the influence our work has on the greater culture. Especially considering the added influence that games in particular have on those still developing their own world-view. I would personally like to see the majority of games rise above TV and film in this regard (TV especially - which seems especially unapologetic about selling little more than sex/drugs/violence).
I don't have any issues with your post, but I will respond to this:
WE may not be businesses, but you most likely work for one. As a result, you're told what to do. It all comes back to money. If you don't like it, then start your own.
I don't think that's what people want. They want people with some depth and believability because it's more human and interesting than alpha males and flawless seductresses.
I wish it was true, but we all know the type of games that sell and sell well.
right, but those don't fall into your classification of games that have 'people with some depth and believability because it's more human and interesting than alpha males and flawless seductresses.'
angry birds was a facetious mention but minecraft is absolutely one of those games. there's actual serious player agency in that game and as a result, stepping into someone's saved world or whatever is a totally unique experience which has been shaped by that person's actual identity.
that's not to say every game should be a sandbox or anything... just that writing "characters" is always gunna leave SOMEONE alienated, and involving the player rather than just having them as an observer is going to inject all the depth of the actual person into the game and influence it in that way. Rather than boxing them into a BadAss identity.
Way offtopic still sorry, someone tell me to shut up
I want to work in the game industry because I want to help create those amazing worlds that I, as a player, would enjoy exploring and deal with all the limitations and restrictions of the game engine. I want to be there for the job itself, not for social activities and I'm 99.9% sure that I'm not the only girl that thinks the same way.
:thumbup:
i want to be there for the amazing world i can help create too and the characters that inhabit it
Way offtopic still sorry, someone tell me to shut up
I don't think you're off-topic at all. It's the natural flow of the conversation, and your posts are very interesting.
I won't say anything about the topic, though. So.... carry on.
@Harry: I pointed out that I was talking about media in general, not specifically video games. I can't think of anything off hand where a male protagonist is in absolute possession of a female character - but we could argue about the meaning of possession in this context.
Very little media would ever deliberately do that - it'd be a slap in the face to anybody even remotely concerned with what we're talking about.
So a damsel in distress. I can list those for you if you'd like...But it'd be a long list. I bring up the chliche though, to draw some comparisons:
It's a very, very old story tool, and there's nothing wrong with it except that it's used ALL THE TIME.
The princes will die if the hero doesn't save her. She has no ability to save herself, no chance of survival on her own, her very existence is dependent on his desire to save her.
or to beat a dead horse: a game like Terra where armor serves no logical purpose as armor except to make the female more appealing to male eyes. (the player - if male - being the possessor of the "hot elf chick" character).
I'm not condemning either of these things...though i admittedly roll my eyes at the latter example every time i see its ilk...
i'd venture to say that the messages that create these gender inequalities (on both sides) are less prevalent in games than in other media, though when they do appear in games they tend to do so in a bolder way, just by the nature of games having a history of spectacle and interactivity.
the problem isn't that these things exist, but that they affect us to the extent that their presence can be felt in the people we work with - in one of the very industries that makes or breaks them.
@skankerzero: sorry - i had intended to add something to that effect. You're right, most of us are both artists AND employees - but we still (at least to some extent) get to choose where we work. I doubt many PCers would take a job working on a Pr0n game on principle. Thankfully there's really not many game studios that are bad enough to truly turn ones nose up at in this regard...but it's something to keep in mind. If you don't agree with the ideals being pushed by the project you're being paid to work on it's time to look for more work.
or yeah...you could start your own studio. go big or go home eh?
again: Rorschach. have ideals and stand up for them when it comes down to it. it may some day cost me a job, but so be it.
@Harry: I pointed out that I was talking about media in general, not specifically video games. I can't think of anything off hand where a male protagonist is in absolute possession of a female character - but we could argue about the meaning of possession in this context.
Yeah. i would say its actually fairly balanced in video games. Aesthetically both males and females are probably ridiculous and idealised just as often as eachother... Actions-wise, you do get the "save/protect the girl" missions popping their heads up from time to time... though i could say not anywhere near as much as the trope of faceless, nameless, but most certainly male, characters being mowed down in the hundreds, while the death of females in games is usually highly dramaticised. This isn't to say that men have gotten it particularly bad in this respect. Male disposability is just something society is comfortable with even though it's a pretty harmful phenomenon to us now.
Female death or harm being highly dramaticised in games is actually pretty definitively objectifying because it redefines them as a victim you have to support or feel sorry for rather than an agent which is capable of competent action on their environment. That is, only when a woman being in danger is used as a plot device to advance the story of someone other than her.
But having said all that i only bring this stuff up for the sake of analysis. To be honest i dont actually really give that much of a shit how characters are portrayed in games because - like i said before - if theyre predetermined anyway then i consider them to be a poorly written character. Games just aren't like movies. My favourite game characters show themselves in games like dayZ or trouble in terrorist town.
I've made an elaborate point of it in this post earlier, so I'll just recap what I said back then quickly: it's likely that most girls don't play the kind of AAA games we're all into, less because of the scantily clad women, and moreso because they're about murdering dudes and monsters and winnings and all that. Which isn't to say that they've got a "you need at least this many Y-chromosomes" bar of entry, since we've all seen and known girls who very much enjoy these things, but they're a statistical minority. That doesn't excuse sexism even the slightest bit, though.
Case in point: visual novels. They started out as Japanese porn games. That's the least likely thing to attract female players. But with their focus on more or less 'romantic' stories, their format was easily adapted from a Boy-X-Girl to a Girl-X-Boy story, moreso because a VN requires very little coding and easy art. The result is that the amount of GxB stories has exploded; in many communities, men are underrepresented and complaining how nobody writes BxG anymore. By and large the most successful Western visual novel developer is Christine Love, a blatantly homosexual young woman. It's the saddest irony that the shadow of its Japanese erotic background still haunts the genre, when it's in many ways leagues ahead of AAA games development in gender appreciation.
The idea that you could get a lot of girls to play Gears of Duty of what-have-you if you just change its representation of women is probably fallacious. If girls and women like a genre that much, they'll take it away, they'll make their own games. They're capable and driven and they certainly don't need saving although respect can never hurt.
A minor point in addition then, because I disagree with Harry's point of view: if you'll look at the characters being created by women in visual novel communities, you'll note that absolutely none of the dateable men look any bit like the action heroes we're getting in our 'manly' games; they're usually much more slender and quirky. Their pretty girls, too, will often focus more on hair than on breasts. What we're getting in our games aren't objective pretty man/pretty woman types, but what men consider to be pretty men and pretty women.
The idea that you could get a lot of girls to play Gears of Duty of what-have-you if you just change its representation of women is probably fallacious. If girls and women like a genre that much, they'll take it away, they'll make their own games. They're capable and driven and they certainly don't need saving although respect can never hurt.
Agree in a huge way. The thing about jap visual novels was interesting too, mostly cause i have 0 exposure to that subculture and its a good case study.
A minor point in addition then, because I disagree with Harry's point of view: if you'll look at the characters being created by women in visual novel communities, you'll note that absolutely none of the dateable men look any bit like the action heroes we're getting in our 'manly' games; they're usually much more slender and quirky. Their pretty girls, too, will often focus more on hair than on breasts. What we're getting in our games aren't objective pretty man/pretty woman types, but what men consider to be pretty men and pretty women.
Alright. But i'll still say that being attractive to the opposite sex is power. I think it's a pretty different base personality type. "action" oriented games often have sexualised and physically fit/idealised women *and* men.
Consider the types of males we encounter in anime visual novels which are more concerned with storylines and interpersonal relationships.
Like you said, its probably not a gender specific thing but rather a personal predisposition to like certain "objectives" or "themes" in games. Conquest and violence are all very tribal, larger-than-life urges, dealing with primal topics. Survival, dominance, all that stuff. Dating games deal with fundamentally different themes and are about belonging, socialisation, nurturing - all still very natural impulses but usually go together with completely different mental images and attitudes.
In a tribalistic dog-eat-dog situation (in which our weird ancient brain has quite a lot of fun) the strong are admired. Men who can destroy competition and be destroyed themselves, women who can expand the tribe at a higher rate.
Point is that i think it's an immature worldview to think that "men" tend to be concerned with building things and killing enemies and being BadAss, and that this makes them less objectified and their actions less "for" the opposite sex. All of these things evolved as reproductive tactics. Reproduction relies on both sexes and not just one. There's no logical justification to say that men have more agency and are less objectified when they're being BadAsses because being a BadAss is only admired because it USED to attract/guarantee women in our primal days. It no longer has any value to modern society (while female sexiness still does) so there's a disproportionate amount of thought given to either side of the equation.
Dating and inerpersonal "games" are conceptually *much* more abstracted from our animal nature and thus concern themselves with much more abstracted aspirations, such as, like you said, pretty hair and clothes, things like courtesy and respect which mean very little to an animal-human. a meek or inoffensive personality, the ability to get along. These are post-animalistic themes and of course when these things are objectives, that which is important is portrayed differently through different kinds of characters.
As a quick N.B. When i say "animalistic" i hope that the negative stigma attached to this word is not too strong. While i quite abhor animalistic, overly competitive behaviour among humans in the real world, in games i find it completely fascinating and enlightening.
I do wish you'd branch out a little more from time to time, but that's mostly out of selfish curiosity.
This is exactly the kind of thing that a lot of people say to me - heres why I don't branch out.
I AM branching out by making girls lol.
Since I started in games heres a rough count of what I have made (just skimmed over my folders and counting whats in there kinda rough numbers) inhouse and freelance.
( again these are just what I've been paid to create / day job / freelance )
Prior to Stargate it was almost 100% ww2 soldiers or troops for fps as well as kits / weapons. Stargate SG1: out of 42 characters i think 2 we did were female. Rift: I did a few female player character heads, fixed up a few female characters in the game - but the majority was making vanity items, fixing up bits of armor, few monsters or some boss mobs / tweaking dye masks and all kinds of other stuff thats really nothing to do with females.
You could totally attribute this to the fact that aside from Rift I've gotten to work on projects that just dont have many females in them ( tbh i think thats a huge part of this problem especially with our industry, theres just not enough female characters fullstop )
Ultimately this is why in my spare time, I work on girls. Ie chun li, miku etc etc and I most certainly dont ever feel the need to 'branch out' or to broaden my horizons haha.
I decided about 4 or 5 years ago to completely remove almost everything from my folio in hope that I would garner more freelance work of the female kind. (and slowly it has started to go that way) Which makes me very happy
And this has really been the first time ive ever felt the need to justify myself. But its going to be the last - i just dont have the energy to explain it over and over again.
Anyway enough of making this thread about me, im starting to feel like an utter dickwad - theres way bigger issues here.
^ Don't want to add to any derailing, but yeah that's about what I figured and is why I never said anything up to this point. Additionally, I find there's a ton of variation even in your girls, which has so far been very refreshing. :thumbup:
Man, my female friends deal with dozens of creeps hitting on them and making degrading comments about them every week, and deal with at least ONE guy who probably (genuinely) wants to rape them every week, but you know what is a really big deal???
All the times I, the man, am expected to be MUSCULAR and HEROIC. Or because how my hobby is kickboxing/jiujitsu/mma, men and women are always telling me to go FIGHT PEOPLE for them. That happens so much, and frankly, it's degrading!
Seriously guys -- YES there are harsh gender roles expected of men, and YES it's a bad thing -- but if you think it's equal or even kinda similar to what women go through in our society your head is really deep in the sand.
(As an aside: Skimpy clothing is personal aesthetic preference, and not really a feminism issue in and of itself at all. Obviously context matters, and there are many sexist/misogynistic contexts to choose from in gaming. The most badass, feminist women I've ever met dresses kinda provocatively and did a brief stint stripping -- to each their own, it's 2012.)
Man, my female friends deal with dozens of creeps hitting on them and making degrading comments about them every week, and deal with at least ONE guy who probably (genuinely) wants to rape them every week, but you know what is a really big deal???
try not to go crazy offtopic, and try not to be just statistically wrong about actual facts
(As an aside: Skimpy clothing is personal aesthetic preference, and not really a feminism issue in and of itself at all. Obviously context matters, and there are many sexist/misogynistic contexts to choose from in gaming. The most badass, feminist women I've ever met dresses kinda provocatively and did a brief stint stripping -- to each their own, it's 2012.)
This is true in the real world. Women can do and wear whatever we want*, which is great. Unfortunately when it comes to fictional characters whose wardrobes are chosen for them, you have to put a little more thought into why your sexy warrior woman is wearing a chainmail thong(I'm thinking of Red Sonja here) - cause it sure as hell isn't for its protective or comfort qualities. Just thinking about it makes me go DD:
(* In most but not all cultures, and even then not without being subject to disapproving commentary from conservative types.)
You're comparing racism, which is an act of hate, vs making sexy video game girls in scant clothing, which is a subjective, artistic choice. You can argue that dressing up women in games in scant clothing is sexist, which can be considered an act of hate, but I bet anyone that models any of the characters you can find do not hate women. If anything they love them.
Is it really love of women to represent their entire gender as nothing more than titillation for men? Or is that just love of their breasts and ass? As long as the women shut up and we manly men can stare at their butts? How is that not hatred and contempt of women?
This goes back to the whole 'men are objectified too' argument. As a guy, I'm happy to see guys like Seth Rogan make it big in Hollywood. I like normal guys, but I understand why guys like Chris Hemsworth are super popular too. I just don't care or make a big fuss out of it. Nor do I let it get to me. Same goes with videogame characters. If I'm playing Gears, last thing I want to play as is some fat guy with a gun waddling around the arena. That's not the point of Gears.
Men do not have it anywhere near as bad as women. As a male both you and I have a multitude of Male Privileges over women that most men aren't even aware of, trying to compare a woman's societal experience to our own is more than pointless, it's damaging to us all.
oh great it's men vs women again. this is why this kind of discussion never goes anywhere.
If you actually looked up statistics and real data you'd realise what you're saying is pure conjecture. If you are completely ignorant to this information id be happy to guide you to it but probably through PM rather than cluttering this thread. Seriously, why obstruct meaningful discourse with dogma and conjecture.
Replies
(emphasis mine)
I 100% defend YBourykina in defending Haz.
I have never EVER gotten the impression from him or his work that he objectified women. rather that he saw them as beautiful (and not just physically) - and wanted to dedicate himself to capturing that in his work.
The problem isn't necessarily the appearance of female characters visually (though, there are certainly questionable "costuming" practices - but rarely without alternative options, so don't blame the artists. blame the players who choose them.), but the lack of substance in most female characters in general.
While most female characters are idealized, especially playable ones, so are most male characters. What was the last game you played that had a fat/scrawny/ugly/balding male lead character?
I think the primary difference between the two is the NPC's or non-essential characters...where most female characters in that role continue to be at least some-what idealized, while male characters have a wider variety of physically appealing states. That's not across the board by any means, but still a measurable difference.
[ame="
note in the video: the player characters are mostly male, one of them being a dirty looking hobo guy, with one female - who happens to have tight jeans and an exposed mid-drift. and note the player reactions to her at about 1:40 (while in a light-hearted joking mood, clearly objectifying at some level).
borderlands does an excellent job of having female characters with actual CHARACTER. and that's awesome - more should do so. It never comes off as just putting them in there for the sake of having that dynamic, either - they had characters they decided were female and they gave them SUBSTANCE just like they do with the male characters.
there was a pretty decent discussion along these lines not too terribly long ago here on PC - "tropes in video games" i think it was called. In one of the videos posted there was a list spoken of. It was in regards to film primarily, but just as viable for games - and it was basically a check-list to determine if your story had a "snow white complex" (i think that's what it was called - basically the token woman among a bunch of guys)
I'm paraphrasing from memory, but it was something like this.
-you have to have more than one female character
-they both have to have lines
-they have to speak to eachother about something OTHER than men
as far as sexism in the work place - i've seen it (not while i worked in games) and it's easy to overlook until it gets super over the line...but i've never kept quiet about it - something that has made me unpopular among co-workers in the past (i've worked construction and other such things...and games have nothing on that in this area)
truth is that I was raised by a single mother, my wife is an incredibly strong willed woman and I respect them too much to let that crap go unchecked.
also - if my wife found out that i stayed out of it she'd probably kick my ass.
that kind of behavior has to be shot down by peers - all the sexual harassment seminars in the world are useless if the other guys all think it's just in good fun. (and sometimes it is - but it's a delicate question, and one that requires you TRULY know the people you're "joking" with - and they likewise know you).
I would also like to point out that the idea that any woman gets where she is because she's a woman and is getting special treatment out of extra sensitivity to sexism, is toxic.
Even if it's true from time to time, making any special note of it on a regular basis only causes unnecessary speculation and could often cause them to be brushed off out of sensitivity to that sensitivity.
How many people get special attention because of who they know, who their friends are, who they've worked with in the past - regardless if they're the best candidate based purely on their skills? it's not uncommon, but singling the gender variable out only makes it a hot-button and perpetuates the paranoia/envy/resentment.
YBourykina, I agree that some of those outfits from TERA are quite pretty, in a hyperdetailed kind of way, but the overabundance of flesh on display honestly just makes me roll my eyes. It's entirely possible to design attractive clothing that consists of more than panties and stockings and doesn't necessarily expose cleavage(perish the thought!) without being boring, and I feel that TERA's look rather lazily focuses on exposing either chest or thighs(or both!) to frankly tacky effect. I have gotten the impression that if I played the game I'd have a hard time finding something for my character to wear that doesn't look either deeply uncomfortable or something a fantasy-themed porno would dress its performers in.
That's really sad to hear, to be quite honest
i keep forgetting to post there
this thread isn't derogatory for women at all, he just made it so those of us who want to find female character models can, and easily, because they are all in one place and i love it.
the problem isn't necessarily that there are scantly clad females in the game, but how they're used.
A player can play a female character and put them essentially in whatever outfit they choose in a game like that - the question becomes weather the game promotes choosing the more revealing costumes (through higher armor stats, etc.) - often the higher level the character or equipment is the more revealing it becomes, thus encouraging players with female characters to run around with ever decreasing amounts of clothing. this is clearly an objectifying MECHANIC -- completely independent of the artwork involved.
now the amount of artwork dedicated to making the female characters look "sexy" vs. look "cool" (or whatever other non-objectifying adjective you'd like to use) is another thing to measure entirely.
The Bechdel Test - it'll be a good day when we see a majority of games passing this test
Seemingly light-hearted sexist humour is an apparent non-issue that, compounded over time, can really lead to problems with discernible consequences. An environment where flagrantly sexist humour is the norm can legitimise attitudes that really could be harmful when carried over to other situations. Indeed I saw an example of this at work today. I won't go in to more detail, but it made me realise how important it is to make it clear when the line is crossed.
Absolutely. I see people using this kind of speculation in an attempt to justify outright sexism. My best guess is that the idea of a competent woman doesn't compute with the attitude that women exist as ancillaries to a male existence.
It's an extremely stupid situation on behalf of the girl? She should have done X, she should have done Y? I don't understand, what point are you trying to make here? Do any of these things lessen the severity of what happened?
In what case of serious sexual assault would the molester not be to blame?
...than one of a fit, hourglass-figured woman running about in a game.
I don't really get why theres such a huge focus on just the one sex though. Male characters are just as objectified, as immature action BadAsses.
I don't think i understand why idealised stereotypes are alienating women but apparently dudes just love it or have brought it on themselves or something.
It's all so BadAss
http://gamewit.blogs.pressdemocrat.com/files/2011/09/blog_gears1.jpg
http://api.ning.com/files/T4XokQog3rrYKHSzalLCFteWtJbH-ifRYDXIzAVudQrtbJCsDJPWTxVAUFiVEIF7e0K88DoduCge1Tf82TvB-oYUk56K3jY1/Soap_Mactavish_by_the_speedpaint_tard.jpg
http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q152/colonel-tempest/Naked_Snake.png
I should address the fact that my post only addresses one facet of the issue - the one we as game artists are probably the most exposed to or responsible for.
I have known plenty of dudes in the industry who automatically think negatively about females - and some who (just as bad) automatically favour females. It's extremely embarassing and i try to call it out whenever i'm directly exposed to it.
And I'm not sure what the point of the picture of the girl with the controllers is - what's to be embarassed about?
all media uses idealized versions of things, often devolving into stereotypes...whether it's regarding gender, race, sexuality or religion...or any number of other things. video games are not alone guilty of this.
The question isn't necessarily whether it's done, or done more to the female gender difference more than anything else, but how women working (or aspiring to) in the industry are treated. and to a lesser extent how women are treated/targeted as game consumers.
edit:
Lysaara beat me to it! how dare ye.
Idk. I just kind of imagined a guy posing in the same way and felt like i'd be facepalming.
I just feel every time this topic comes up, It's eluded to that what I do, by making women threads and by making my art that I'm 'not doing anything to help' and I wanted to - just one time make my stance clear.
How presumptuous for anyone assume that my spare time is spent championing ANY side for any cause whatsoever! This is a completely selfish endeavour for me nothing more.
The female ideal is not aspirational - few people actually want to be a sex doll. She's just there to look nice and make your penis feel nice. A few instances of this is so much whatever, but when such a visible majority of female characters are depicted in this way then it becomes hurtful.
Your mention of pressure is an apt one, because as far as I'm concerned this entire debate boils down to the harmful effects of societally mandated traditional gender roles - men 'have to be' powerful badasses and women 'have to be' sexy and submissive.
Maybe i'm giving people too much credit, but i'm not thinking about sex when i play games. Maybe i don't play the kind of games you're talking about.
But yeah, like your point says below, i think they're actually both aspirational fantasies. There are still a multitude of reasons a dude would wanna be powerful and a multitude of reasons a woman would wanna be sexy. For a woman, being sexy is something that can be powerful, even... This is why young women are easilly manipulated about their own image.
We still do have a tribal brain. Being the object of desire, either because of your sexuality or your prowess in resolving violence (usually violently), is a power fantasy. The distinction between sex fantasy and power fantasy is a false one. Sex to a tribal mind, is power, and power gains you more sex. This doesn't mean everyone's an immature asshole who wants to objectify anyone, it means we're still easilly manipulated by urges which no longer serve us in the way they used to - like preferring high energy foods or feeling adrenaline rushes when we "survive combat" in a game, or do something complex without fucking it up.
I just kinda want to say this to push back against this weird conjecture that it's all a male fantasy and a bunch of creepy neckbeards are doing it all to oppress. It's a human weakness which it's useful to be mindful of. Treating it like a malicious act from one sex against another is not only misguided but makes the situation much worse.
Yeah. if this point gets across then i feel like i've said my bit. I don't mean to derail conversation and i know people often assume the focus is being drawn back onto men... But i dunno. That's not my intention. I just think viewing this kind of issue from a female-exclusive perspective is just as sexist as viewing it from a male-only one. I was just trying to kind of point that out. I won't go on about it any more unless somebody asks.
In one of your threads you claim to love this doll
http://www.polycount.com/forum/showthread.php?t=82294
How is this representation of the female body any different than what you're arguing against? I see it as an idealized design. Certainly you can't say it's 'stylized' because that's what most game characters are. My idealization of the female body is a stylized one.
Personally, I see this whole topic as subjective. What one person likes, another sees as inappropriate.
*edit** Mind you, I understand your stance on skimpy armor and stuff. I'm just genually curious why you think this idealization is better than the other.
You don't have to morally agree with something on every single level to find it fascinating/curious/cool. It seems a little cheap and irrelevant to bring that up.
I personally think it's smart to try and understand where she's coming from.
This is what I did.
i agree. because i like to play games where my character is a sexy women with curves (and exposed cleavage or not), there is nothing wrong with that
Ok, I understand what you're saying.
Now I ask, why do you allude that thin figures are not viewed as sexy or sex objects? Plenty of Asian cultures will call women out as 'fat' or 'ugly cows' if they have any kind of curves. Many of my asian female friends had to go through this, and they were barely 125 pounds.
Bratz dolls came under fire for that very reason. They were 'sexualized' and 'idealized' images of women that were hurting our nations young girls. I don't see a difference in these dolls really to those. Slightly different proportions but overall the same.
Mind you, I'm not trying to be a dick, but I do like to understand the best I can when it comes to different points of views.
I'm responsible for all the girls in BloodRayne 2 and Aeon Flux, so I've done my fair share of introducing sexy females into the industry. Though, to tell you the truth, if I ever get any complaints about their designs, it's usually from North Americans. Eastern Europeans seem to totally love the sexy, tough girl. Just an observation.
I view each game project as catering to their target demographic, and most of the time that demographic isn't everyone on the planet. Koreans love their elf chicks with little armor. Who's to blame them for marketing towards their demographic. Sure, that's not helping matters any, but this is a business. Businesses are built to make money.
That's an argument I see a lot, and if you apply it to any other objectionable act(like say racism) you'll quickly note that it suddenly becomes far less acceptable. Exaggerating for the sake of making a point, but say you make a game to appeal to far-right skinheads, in which all black characters are literally idiot slaves. Is that acceptable, because the skinheads want to pay you a whole boatload of money for it? If not, why is it acceptable to portray so many women in games as nothing more than partially-clothed sex objects?
Money only gets you so far. Eventually, you need to stop making excuses and think about the reasoning and the side-effects of the way you describe an entire gender to the world.
i'm just gonna leave this here and hope anyone reading keeps it in the back of their head when reading material from both "sides" of the equation.
edit: oops, did url tags instead of quote tags. am an idiot.
I just want to take the time to say that even though I myself am not drawn to, and generally stray from the type of "sexy girl" sort of threads you tend to make, I almost always take the time to look. It's pretty clear that for you this is a craft, rather than a fetish. I've always appreciated that. A lot of times I wind up using you as a mental example to try and balance out my own mentality, which is usually against the more "sexual" portrayals of women, to remind me of the other side of the coin. I do wish you'd branch out a little more from time to time, but that's mostly out of selfish curiosity.
So far as the rest of the thread goes, I've spoken enough on this sort of topic in the past. I'll just say that while I generally wish we didn't have so much "sexualization" of characters in our games, I do think everything has a place. And thankfully these days we have so many options, I can almost always find a game I enjoy.
It's nice to see things like this getting more traction, and it's nice that it's coming from girls who actually make/play games.
Right, and that's what I'm saying. There are cultures that think proportions like the doll are sexy, others don't. The same goes with 'full figured women'. There are plenty of cultures out there (mine included, Mexican) that love curvy women and view skinny women as unsexual. (Not me mind you. I prefer thin to overweight.)
As you mentioned, your comparison is exaggerated and extreme.
You're comparing racism, which is an act of hate, vs making sexy video game girls in scant clothing, which is a subjective, artistic choice. You can argue that dressing up women in games in scant clothing is sexist, which can be considered an act of hate, but I bet anyone that models any of the characters you can find do not hate women. If anything they love them.
So yes, in my eyes it is much more acceptable to market a game with girls in scant clothing vs a racist game that promotes hate.
This goes back to the whole 'men are objectified too' argument. As a guy, I'm happy to see guys like Seth Rogan make it big in Hollywood. I like normal guys, but I understand why guys like Chris Hemsworth are super popular too. I just don't care or make a big fuss out of it. Nor do I let it get to me. Same goes with videogame characters. If I'm playing Gears, last thing I want to play as is some fat guy with a gun waddling around the arena. That's not the point of Gears.
a common misconception and assumption is that boys / men aren't affected by seeing muscle guys on tv and in games.
There definitely are two 'sides' to this, but more often than not the male side is ignored because it's 'just a power fantasy for men'.
at some point pumping out more of the same nonsense is no longer excusable by "selling what sells" and there's damage done to the cultural perception of some group of people by those influenced. As artists we should always do our best to know what kind of influence we're potentially putting out there because art is influential by definition.
Sexy females and hyper-masculine power fantasy types are prevalent in all storytelling mediums. They're inevitable, they're what people typically like to see in their media.
Harry made an awesome point about BOTH being aspirational fantasies in a tribal brain.
My question, though, is how much of their continued presence in our minds is due to their continued presence in our media?
almost all people wil gravitate toward that kind of thing - choose a figure from a story and aspire to be like that (even if it's subconscious) who's your favorite super hero?...but how many choices are there to choose from?
I'd venture to say that there's a good deal more varying options for men than for women.
The problem isn't that there are women in media that are idealized, but that there's little variation on that ideal.
This is especially important in a culture like ours here in the US where children are so heavily influenced during their development by media sources. Disney channel raises kids here while both parents are working two jobs each. Girls get to be princesses. boys are soldiers, super heroes, charming rogues, princes, assassins, ninjas etc.
it's not always this way but it's a pretty solid standard.
there's one other problem with the dichotomy of the gender-based power fantasies (violence vs. sex)
When Harry points out that both essentially achieve the same goal in the tribal brain he's right, but he fails to point out one thing: the objectification of females is part of the male power fantasy, not the female one.
It's true that in some cases a female being sexy is translated into being powerful - but more often than not they're sexy to be of more value to the MAN who is in possession of them.
again - to this point i'm not speaking explicitly about video games, but about power fantasies in media in general.
but if that's a major part of a person's input while they're developing their brain-meats, then they stand a good chance to either be possessive of women (and must always be superior) if they're male, or be possessed (and therefore always submissive) by a male if they're a female.
hopefully there's enough additional influence in a person's life to counteract that kind of thinking, but every bit of media ever consumed sits in the back of your mind forming the way you look at the world. every little bit. so close your eyes when the commercials come on.
we are responsible for the seeds we plant inside of people's brains. people are silly, manipulable, crowd mentality creatures.
also: my hero is Rorschach. big time.
I don't think that's what people want. They want people with some depth and believability because it's more human and interesting than alpha males and flawless seductresses.
I don't actually think it's oppression or boys' club or whatever. It's just lack of imagination or artistic finesse on the part of whoever designed those characters. Most FPS protagonists could be the exact same dude across multiple subgenres and franchises and you'd never know the difference. The ideal solution for me at least is for people to stop dickriding on game characters and instead praise games written as games, where the player has agency and their own personality is impressed upon the situation rather than fantasies where none of your personal shortcomings matter cause youre such a BadAss.
or maybe i'm totally misinterpreting the whole thing
Ever wonder that it's the same deal for men? In fact, males in pretty much any species are way more competitive for female attention. Thats why all this macho display of power shit exists in the first place. It's all about having value to women. Women have intrinsic value because they're a limiting factor in a tribe's reproduction. Men have to have utility before they're considered valuable (because really, an alpha male of the tribe could kill 75% of the other males, have more power for himself and still the tribe would thrive in their numbers) This is all natural stuff that our brains evolved to drive us towards. We don't understand it now because we no longer live in a natural environment. it's not someone being a prick for the sake of it.
AGAIN im sorry for going way off topic there but i just cant help but bite when i see something which seems like conjecture.
Out of curiosity, could you list me all the female vidya game characters you can think of who are the posession of a male character?
Most of my friends are guys and all of them, to an extent, would qualify as nerds. Yes, I am very fortunate to have met a lot of interesting people in my life. It was never gender that brought us all together, but common interests and hobbies. I don't feel any need to play a game designed for women. The reason I want to play something more complex than mindless hack&slash is I want a challenge, has absolutely nothing to do with my gender.
I do believe this kind of testimonials are actually detrimental to women that want to work in the industry because they portray us as little, helpless creatures that can't handle working with the opposite sex and need a special work environment to function properly.
I want to work in the game industry because I want to help create those amazing worlds that I, as a player, would enjoy exploring and deal with all the limitations and restrictions of the game engine. I want to be there for the job itself, not for social activities and I'm 99.9% sure that I'm not the only girl that thinks the same way.
I don't have any issues with your post, but I will respond to this:
WE may not be businesses, but you most likely work for one. As a result, you're told what to do. It all comes back to money. If you don't like it, then start your own.
That's what I did.
I wish it was true, but we all know the type of games that sell and sell well.
minecraft and angry birds?
right, but those don't fall into your classification of games that have 'people with some depth and believability because it's more human and interesting than alpha males and flawless seductresses.'
that's not to say every game should be a sandbox or anything... just that writing "characters" is always gunna leave SOMEONE alienated, and involving the player rather than just having them as an observer is going to inject all the depth of the actual person into the game and influence it in that way. Rather than boxing them into a BadAss identity.
Way offtopic still sorry, someone tell me to shut up
:thumbup:
i want to be there for the amazing world i can help create too and the characters that inhabit it
I won't say anything about the topic, though. So.... carry on.
Very little media would ever deliberately do that - it'd be a slap in the face to anybody even remotely concerned with what we're talking about.
So a damsel in distress. I can list those for you if you'd like...But it'd be a long list. I bring up the chliche though, to draw some comparisons:
It's a very, very old story tool, and there's nothing wrong with it except that it's used ALL THE TIME.
The princes will die if the hero doesn't save her. She has no ability to save herself, no chance of survival on her own, her very existence is dependent on his desire to save her.
or to beat a dead horse: a game like Terra where armor serves no logical purpose as armor except to make the female more appealing to male eyes. (the player - if male - being the possessor of the "hot elf chick" character).
I'm not condemning either of these things...though i admittedly roll my eyes at the latter example every time i see its ilk...
i'd venture to say that the messages that create these gender inequalities (on both sides) are less prevalent in games than in other media, though when they do appear in games they tend to do so in a bolder way, just by the nature of games having a history of spectacle and interactivity.
the problem isn't that these things exist, but that they affect us to the extent that their presence can be felt in the people we work with - in one of the very industries that makes or breaks them.
@skankerzero: sorry - i had intended to add something to that effect. You're right, most of us are both artists AND employees - but we still (at least to some extent) get to choose where we work. I doubt many PCers would take a job working on a Pr0n game on principle. Thankfully there's really not many game studios that are bad enough to truly turn ones nose up at in this regard...but it's something to keep in mind. If you don't agree with the ideals being pushed by the project you're being paid to work on it's time to look for more work.
or yeah...you could start your own studio. go big or go home eh?
again: Rorschach. have ideals and stand up for them when it comes down to it. it may some day cost me a job, but so be it.
Yeah. i would say its actually fairly balanced in video games. Aesthetically both males and females are probably ridiculous and idealised just as often as eachother... Actions-wise, you do get the "save/protect the girl" missions popping their heads up from time to time... though i could say not anywhere near as much as the trope of faceless, nameless, but most certainly male, characters being mowed down in the hundreds, while the death of females in games is usually highly dramaticised. This isn't to say that men have gotten it particularly bad in this respect. Male disposability is just something society is comfortable with even though it's a pretty harmful phenomenon to us now.
Female death or harm being highly dramaticised in games is actually pretty definitively objectifying because it redefines them as a victim you have to support or feel sorry for rather than an agent which is capable of competent action on their environment. That is, only when a woman being in danger is used as a plot device to advance the story of someone other than her.
But having said all that i only bring this stuff up for the sake of analysis. To be honest i dont actually really give that much of a shit how characters are portrayed in games because - like i said before - if theyre predetermined anyway then i consider them to be a poorly written character. Games just aren't like movies. My favourite game characters show themselves in games like dayZ or trouble in terrorist town.
Case in point: visual novels. They started out as Japanese porn games. That's the least likely thing to attract female players. But with their focus on more or less 'romantic' stories, their format was easily adapted from a Boy-X-Girl to a Girl-X-Boy story, moreso because a VN requires very little coding and easy art. The result is that the amount of GxB stories has exploded; in many communities, men are underrepresented and complaining how nobody writes BxG anymore. By and large the most successful Western visual novel developer is Christine Love, a blatantly homosexual young woman. It's the saddest irony that the shadow of its Japanese erotic background still haunts the genre, when it's in many ways leagues ahead of AAA games development in gender appreciation.
The idea that you could get a lot of girls to play Gears of Duty of what-have-you if you just change its representation of women is probably fallacious. If girls and women like a genre that much, they'll take it away, they'll make their own games. They're capable and driven and they certainly don't need saving although respect can never hurt.
A minor point in addition then, because I disagree with Harry's point of view: if you'll look at the characters being created by women in visual novel communities, you'll note that absolutely none of the dateable men look any bit like the action heroes we're getting in our 'manly' games; they're usually much more slender and quirky. Their pretty girls, too, will often focus more on hair than on breasts. What we're getting in our games aren't objective pretty man/pretty woman types, but what men consider to be pretty men and pretty women.
Alright. But i'll still say that being attractive to the opposite sex is power. I think it's a pretty different base personality type. "action" oriented games often have sexualised and physically fit/idealised women *and* men.
Consider the types of males we encounter in anime visual novels which are more concerned with storylines and interpersonal relationships.
http://gaygamer.net/images/web-kare-female-social-network-1.jpg
http://cdn3.spong.com/news/j/a/japaneseda236473l/_-Japanese-Dating-Porn-Games-Now-In-English-_.jpg
http://bulk.destructoid.com/ul/195528-preview-catherine-japanese-version-/Serph-image31-620x.jpg
Like you said, its probably not a gender specific thing but rather a personal predisposition to like certain "objectives" or "themes" in games. Conquest and violence are all very tribal, larger-than-life urges, dealing with primal topics. Survival, dominance, all that stuff. Dating games deal with fundamentally different themes and are about belonging, socialisation, nurturing - all still very natural impulses but usually go together with completely different mental images and attitudes.
In a tribalistic dog-eat-dog situation (in which our weird ancient brain has quite a lot of fun) the strong are admired. Men who can destroy competition and be destroyed themselves, women who can expand the tribe at a higher rate.
Point is that i think it's an immature worldview to think that "men" tend to be concerned with building things and killing enemies and being BadAss, and that this makes them less objectified and their actions less "for" the opposite sex. All of these things evolved as reproductive tactics. Reproduction relies on both sexes and not just one. There's no logical justification to say that men have more agency and are less objectified when they're being BadAsses because being a BadAss is only admired because it USED to attract/guarantee women in our primal days. It no longer has any value to modern society (while female sexiness still does) so there's a disproportionate amount of thought given to either side of the equation.
Dating and inerpersonal "games" are conceptually *much* more abstracted from our animal nature and thus concern themselves with much more abstracted aspirations, such as, like you said, pretty hair and clothes, things like courtesy and respect which mean very little to an animal-human. a meek or inoffensive personality, the ability to get along. These are post-animalistic themes and of course when these things are objectives, that which is important is portrayed differently through different kinds of characters.
As a quick N.B. When i say "animalistic" i hope that the negative stigma attached to this word is not too strong. While i quite abhor animalistic, overly competitive behaviour among humans in the real world, in games i find it completely fascinating and enlightening.
This is exactly the kind of thing that a lot of people say to me - heres why I don't branch out.
I AM branching out by making girls lol.
Since I started in games heres a rough count of what I have made (just skimmed over my folders and counting whats in there kinda rough numbers) inhouse and freelance.
Environment props: 37
Buildings: 6
Vehicles: 3
Monsters / creatures: 66
Weapons / Armor: 114
Men: 71
Women: 12
( again these are just what I've been paid to create / day job / freelance )
Prior to Stargate it was almost 100% ww2 soldiers or troops for fps as well as kits / weapons.
Stargate SG1: out of 42 characters i think 2 we did were female.
Rift: I did a few female player character heads, fixed up a few female characters in the game - but the majority was making vanity items, fixing up bits of armor, few monsters or some boss mobs / tweaking dye masks and all kinds of other stuff thats really nothing to do with females.
You could totally attribute this to the fact that aside from Rift I've gotten to work on projects that just dont have many females in them ( tbh i think thats a huge part of this problem especially with our industry, theres just not enough female characters fullstop )
Ultimately this is why in my spare time, I work on girls. Ie chun li, miku etc etc and I most certainly dont ever feel the need to 'branch out' or to broaden my horizons haha.
I decided about 4 or 5 years ago to completely remove almost everything from my folio in hope that I would garner more freelance work of the female kind. (and slowly it has started to go that way) Which makes me very happy
And this has really been the first time ive ever felt the need to justify myself. But its going to be the last - i just dont have the energy to explain it over and over again.
Anyway enough of making this thread about me, im starting to feel like an utter dickwad - theres way bigger issues here.
All the times I, the man, am expected to be MUSCULAR and HEROIC. Or because how my hobby is kickboxing/jiujitsu/mma, men and women are always telling me to go FIGHT PEOPLE for them. That happens so much, and frankly, it's degrading!
Seriously guys -- YES there are harsh gender roles expected of men, and YES it's a bad thing -- but if you think it's equal or even kinda similar to what women go through in our society your head is really deep in the sand.
(As an aside: Skimpy clothing is personal aesthetic preference, and not really a feminism issue in and of itself at all. Obviously context matters, and there are many sexist/misogynistic contexts to choose from in gaming. The most badass, feminist women I've ever met dresses kinda provocatively and did a brief stint stripping -- to each their own, it's 2012.)
try not to go crazy offtopic, and try not to be just statistically wrong about actual facts
This is true in the real world. Women can do and wear whatever we want*, which is great. Unfortunately when it comes to fictional characters whose wardrobes are chosen for them, you have to put a little more thought into why your sexy warrior woman is wearing a chainmail thong(I'm thinking of Red Sonja here) - cause it sure as hell isn't for its protective or comfort qualities. Just thinking about it makes me go DD:
(* In most but not all cultures, and even then not without being subject to disapproving commentary from conservative types.)
Men do not have it anywhere near as bad as women. As a male both you and I have a multitude of Male Privileges over women that most men aren't even aware of, trying to compare a woman's societal experience to our own is more than pointless, it's damaging to us all.
If you actually looked up statistics and real data you'd realise what you're saying is pure conjecture. If you are completely ignorant to this information id be happy to guide you to it but probably through PM rather than cluttering this thread. Seriously, why obstruct meaningful discourse with dogma and conjecture.