Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsSTATUS
Posts 
Pages:
1
ubon
66
Closehttp://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/11/22/blizzard-on-heroes-of-the-storm-female-designs-in-mobas/
as soon as character design gets brought up (and holy shit is Blizzard's whole modus of character design ever boring, samey, and sexist) the guy being interviewed just fucking locks up, gets really petty, and then sends the interviewer away
it's really dumb to try and ignore the cultural effects of what you do just because you can point at other things and go 'see, they're doing it too!'
you gotta always try to understand as best you can what you do and why you do it
'cause if you don't who knows what you might convince yourself to do
as soon as character design gets brought up (and holy shit is Blizzard's whole modus of character design ever boring, samey, and sexist) the guy being interviewed just fucking locks up, gets really petty, and then sends the interviewer away
it's really dumb to try and ignore the cultural effects of what you do just because you can point at other things and go 'see, they're doing it too!'
you gotta always try to understand as best you can what you do and why you do it
'cause if you don't who knows what you might convince yourself to do
Heh, I had a hunch you were talking about this article.
It's really weird, one of the arguments I see more and more now is "We know games don't cause violent behavior, so how can they reinforce stereotypes or deter women gamers" which seems to ignore the fact that it's a lot easier to condition people's subtle thought processes regarding, say, a particular color or creed than it is to condition people to be homicidal murderers. The idea that games don't affect people's lives or thoughts goes against a lot of evidence we have - just take a look at addicted gamblers, or addicted WoW players. If you can condition someone to dump coins into Farmville, you can likely reinforce stereotypes or cliches, even if you don't mean to, and of course that can deter women gamers... especially if you're encouraging these things in a hostile multiplayer environment.
Anyway, I've yet to hear strong arguments against more interesting or diverse characters in games, and since it's something I keep hearing people argue for, I don't see any reason not to mix it up. It's not like you can't have both - there's plenty of room for Dragon's Crown. Some variety would be real friggin' nice, though.
It's really weird, one of the arguments I see more and more now is "We know games don't cause violent behavior, so how can they reinforce stereotypes or deter women gamers" which seems to ignore the fact that it's a lot easier to condition people's subtle thought processes regarding, say, a particular color or creed than it is to condition people to be homicidal murderers. The idea that games don't affect people's lives or thoughts goes against a lot of evidence we have - just take a look at addicted gamblers, or addicted WoW players. If you can condition someone to dump coins into Farmville, you can likely reinforce stereotypes or cliches, even if you don't mean to, and of course that can deter women gamers... especially if you're encouraging these things in a hostile multiplayer environment.
Anyway, I've yet to hear strong arguments against more interesting or diverse characters in games, and since it's something I keep hearing people argue for, I don't see any reason not to mix it up. It's not like you can't have both - there's plenty of room for Dragon's Crown. Some variety would be real friggin' nice, though.
ubon
66
yeah, the thing that really gets me is that the only legitimate points people can raise in defense of the rampant hypersexualization of female characters are all themselves symptoms of the poisonous gender dynamics we've baked into the genre. why, yes, a certain subset of people respond better to games where they can ogle naked boobs -- but isn't that because we've failed them in the first place? if we made games that were worth a damn, would we need to be satisfying the basest, most easily-exploited facets of the 'gamer' demographic?
and that aside, games are a young-ass genre. I don't think that we know for sure any of the things we think we do. so people won't play a game with a lady in the leading role, huh? so you gotta feed a gamer's preconceptions and ego to even get them to pay attention, huh? I disagree! and before I die I wanna prove that all these things people cite in defense of our shitty status quo aren't actually true.
I've been really into the sociology revolving around worldview, preconceptions, and stereotypes lately. I think that if all fiction is telling you a certain thing, then yeah, that's gonna mold the way you see life -- so it's our responsibility to build worlds that do more than feed some monomaniac's power trip. even the worst, most archetypal gamer can wake up if you shout loud enough.
(I'm actually hugely optimistic about human nature... which is why I'm so rough with people. it's probably not a good habit.)
(and, hahaha. how'd you guess? I'm not sure how popularly-cited that article is, but maybe I've been raving about it a bit on irc too. or maybe I'm just predictable!)
e: oh, another interesting thing I've been kind of rolling around lately... conflict resolution. the idea that you can solve a problem by killing some central lynchpin doesn't sit right with me -- not because I'm particularly squeamish, but because it seems like a waste. like, a shortcut, y'know? death is an excellent shorthand for resolution, but there must be some other way to handle things. rpgs in particular are tough to figure out a way to apply that to, though, and I don't have a good answer for it yet.
and that aside, games are a young-ass genre. I don't think that we know for sure any of the things we think we do. so people won't play a game with a lady in the leading role, huh? so you gotta feed a gamer's preconceptions and ego to even get them to pay attention, huh? I disagree! and before I die I wanna prove that all these things people cite in defense of our shitty status quo aren't actually true.
I've been really into the sociology revolving around worldview, preconceptions, and stereotypes lately. I think that if all fiction is telling you a certain thing, then yeah, that's gonna mold the way you see life -- so it's our responsibility to build worlds that do more than feed some monomaniac's power trip. even the worst, most archetypal gamer can wake up if you shout loud enough.
(I'm actually hugely optimistic about human nature... which is why I'm so rough with people. it's probably not a good habit.)
(and, hahaha. how'd you guess? I'm not sure how popularly-cited that article is, but maybe I've been raving about it a bit on irc too. or maybe I'm just predictable!)
e: oh, another interesting thing I've been kind of rolling around lately... conflict resolution. the idea that you can solve a problem by killing some central lynchpin doesn't sit right with me -- not because I'm particularly squeamish, but because it seems like a waste. like, a shortcut, y'know? death is an excellent shorthand for resolution, but there must be some other way to handle things. rpgs in particular are tough to figure out a way to apply that to, though, and I don't have a good answer for it yet.
Yea, it's crazy dumb what lengths people will go to to defend or even deny negative things about games, sometimes - even when it's already discussed in other sources like books, movies, TV, music. If anything, the fact that we're starting to talk about things like sexism, racism and more proves that games are being considered a standard, pervasive and lasting form of media that we're finally taking seriously.
(I guessed b/c I was already discussing this article on another forum and I think I know you enough to know it'd bug you :P)
It's funny... I talk to my sister about this stuff all the time; she's a few years younger than me and an adult now, but she's always been into games, anime and nerdy stuff. This was probably in part due to me growing up (I always made her play Zelda , Mario, etc. with me) but by now she's way into her own subgenres that I don't know anything about and she's a master of. She goes to cons and tells me that they're often over 50% women, and yet guys still have trouble believing she (or her friends) could be into nerdy stuff and are sometimes even aggressive about it.
What we was talked about, and what I'm getting at is... don't people know that diversity is going to make games so much more interesting? In the future, we're not just going to have Call of Duty and Final Fantasy, we're going to have a huge variety of games that you can't even imagine now (while keeping CoD and FF). And despite these games being targeted at different audiences, I'm sure the traditional young male audience will still find new genres that they love that they'd never even considered before. It's already starting a bit in the indie scene - unique games like A Hate Story or Gone Home - and I'd love to see more of it. That's how you get games like nothing else! It's not like CoD's gonna go away because of "too much diversity".
Anyway, that's my take on it. Not only does a little variety make your game more inclusive and interesting, but variety in the industry is going to mean better games for everyone, including the traditional market.
For sure! One of the things AAA games could stand to pick up from indies is how to write and portray characters and stories. Like, I just started playing Papers, Please and damn is that a fun game mixed in with a really grim and depressing atmosphere.
(I guessed b/c I was already discussing this article on another forum and I think I know you enough to know it'd bug you :P)
It's funny... I talk to my sister about this stuff all the time; she's a few years younger than me and an adult now, but she's always been into games, anime and nerdy stuff. This was probably in part due to me growing up (I always made her play Zelda , Mario, etc. with me) but by now she's way into her own subgenres that I don't know anything about and she's a master of. She goes to cons and tells me that they're often over 50% women, and yet guys still have trouble believing she (or her friends) could be into nerdy stuff and are sometimes even aggressive about it.
What we was talked about, and what I'm getting at is... don't people know that diversity is going to make games so much more interesting? In the future, we're not just going to have Call of Duty and Final Fantasy, we're going to have a huge variety of games that you can't even imagine now (while keeping CoD and FF). And despite these games being targeted at different audiences, I'm sure the traditional young male audience will still find new genres that they love that they'd never even considered before. It's already starting a bit in the indie scene - unique games like A Hate Story or Gone Home - and I'd love to see more of it. That's how you get games like nothing else! It's not like CoD's gonna go away because of "too much diversity".
Anyway, that's my take on it. Not only does a little variety make your game more inclusive and interesting, but variety in the industry is going to mean better games for everyone, including the traditional market.
author=Liberty
Besides, it's bad and lazy writing. That in and of itself should be gotten rid of. :/
For sure! One of the things AAA games could stand to pick up from indies is how to write and portray characters and stories. Like, I just started playing Papers, Please and damn is that a fun game mixed in with a really grim and depressing atmosphere.
Everyone knows that one's worth is measured by how attractive they are.
(and if they aren't attractive, then their ugliness is relevant to the story. That or they are obnoxious comics)
(and if they aren't attractive, then their ugliness is relevant to the story. That or they are obnoxious comics)
ubon
66
the issue isn't attractive characters, but rather characters who exist for and are defined by their crowd appeal alone. at its root, the portrayal issue is basically just a plea for people to stop being so lazy when they write and design -- to stop cynically reducing their characters to nothing but devices.
Pages:
1
