Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Monster Rain wrote:
This isn't a defense of publishers, either. It's to correct the assertion that their decisions are based on misogynistic cultural influence.

Then why do said games sell less? The obvious answer is that women make a smaller % of the market, which is true given current statistics, but why?

Oh no, they only pay attention to the ones that DIDN'T sell as much as they wanted-- to this line of reasoning, the successful games with female leads or options for female leads (the mass effect and metroid series for example) are just outliers which they shouldn't evenb bother trying to reproduce.

Which, given the industry's tendency to copy successful games (often while ignoring what made them successful), is just a weird attitude.

 LordofHats wrote:
Then why do said games sell less? The obvious answer is that women make a smaller % of the market, which is true given current statistics, but why?

One obvious answer is that games with female leads receive 40% of the marketing budget as games with male leads.

So games with female leads receive, on average, less than half of the budget as games with male leads receive for marketing purposes.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
This isn't a defense of publishers, either. It's to correct the assertion that their decisions are based on misogynistic cultural influence.

Then why do said games sell less? The obvious answer is that women make a smaller % of the market, which is true given current statistics, but why?

Because the target markets don't want them, for any number of reasons?

Or the most obvious answer is maybe the games in question weren't all that great.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
This isn't a defense of publishers, either. It's to correct the assertion that their decisions are based on misogynistic cultural influence.

Then why do said games sell less? The obvious answer is that women make a smaller % of the market, which is true given current statistics, but why?

Why would this be the reason a game with a female lead sell less, I don't see how making a female lead would make men less interested in the game.

 Melissia wrote:
One obvious answer is that games with female leads receive 40% of the marketing budget as games with male leads.

So games with female leads receive, on average, less than half of the budget as games with male leads receive for marketing purposes.

But if we're judging solely on marketing would that only equate to 40% fewer sales? The figure give was that male lead games sell 75% more.

If not then what other factor(s) may be at play?

As a continuation of my last post (finishing a LoL game lol):

Think of video games as constituting a action movie genre. Most games can be most easily compared to an action movie, with others being most similar afterwards to adventure films (horror probably falls in third). These are predominantly male markets. The guys over in marketing, probably realize this, and treat video games in many ways as action movies when thinking of how to sell them. This cuts women out of the equation as the mentality is that women don't like action movies. There are few romance games, drama games (at least not outside Japan), comedies, etc. This leaves marketing obsessed with the idea that like an action movie, a game with a female lead is less likely to sell.

Think of the article Machu listed. Games that offer both male and female leads sell less but are reviewed higher. This is a meaningless connection. The games that offer both, tend to be RPG's, which are a slightly smaller market than action games, but one with consistently higher marks from reviewers. A marketing team however (as we see in the article) conflates the numbers and assumes the wrong conclusion.

I'm on Compel with this. They seem to confuse causation and correlation.

One obvious answer is that games with female leads receive 40% of the marketing budget as games with male leads.

Since women continue to become a larger demographic with each passing year, I don't think male leads have been much of an inhibition to them. Tomb Raider (before it sucked) did well for a game with a female lead, as did Metroid (before that atrocity that was Other M).

Games that break the mold, are rare, and usually you're likely to see that maybe 75% (random number off the top of my head) of them fail. Publishers are aware of this but they take it way too far. The sex of the lead hasn't stopped women from buying games, but there's an assumption that it will stop men, even though several series stand out as doing very well in spite of the gender of the lead. This then get perpetuated, because when a female lead pops up, she gets less funding for her game, the game turns out worse, and the boys over in marketing assume that her gender is the reason sales were lower than desired, not that the game was bad (cause my guess is they never played it).

That women are the smaller demographic probably plays into marketing budgets as well, but I'm not sure that it explains it either. Beyond Good and Evil is a good example of a game that had a female lead but was poorly marketed despite being a stellar title. Everyone wants a sequel but the first game's poor sales have probably lost the game into development hell (I assume, we haven't heard anything for years) and the fools over in marketing probably conflate Jade's gender as being a reason for the failure.

 Cheesecat wrote:
Why would this be the reason a game with a female lead sell less, I don't see how making a female lead would make men less interested in the game.

On the PC, overall both genders liked Zoey in Left 4 Dead more than the other characters, across both games. Similarly, female Shepard (and especially her voice actress) are often beloved more than the male Shepard. There was also a HUGE backlash, and not just from women, against Other M because they tried to make Samus a whiny pathetic child instead of someone remotely competent.

There's a lot of false assumptions being made on the subject that aren't actually reflected in the reality of the situation.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

But if we're judging solely on marketing would that only equate to 40% fewer sales? The figure give was that male lead games sell 75% more.

If not then what other factor(s) may be at play?

The obvious answer is "effective marketing can lead to a a larger higher increase in sales".

Getting people to actually hear about your game, nevermind want to buy it, is very important in actually making sure it gets sold, sometimes moreso than actually making a good game.

Mind you, I'm not saying that there aren't other factors. Frankly, there just aren't enough games with female-only leads to actually make much of a judgement-- it's a very statistically insignificant figure, especially for such a widely varying medium such as gaming.

 Monster Rain wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Having a female lead does not make a game "niche."

Until you have data to back that up it will continue to seem like you're stating an opinion as fact.

The data exists whether you care to acknowledge it or not. Google is your friend. Also, would you call Portal 2 a niche game? If so, then I guess even niche games can sell really, really well.

 Monster Rain wrote:
This from the guy throwing around the term "straw man"?

Seriously? Given your behavior ITT, I thought Strawman was your middle name. Either that or Dodger. As near as I can assume, since you insist on trollishly posting one liner gems like the one I just quoted instead of transparent reasoning, you seem to argue that female characters are objectified in video games and otherwise marginalized simply because female characters are in a sense beyond all problematic gender stereotypes and prejudices simply worth less than male characters. That argument assumes that the people responsible for measuring that value are above the cultural and political issues of gender. What you identified as a strawman argument is simply my criticism of that assumption. If it truly wasn't your assumption then how about actually posting complete thoughts rather than snipes?

 Monster Rain wrote:
This isn't a defense of publishers, either. It's to correct the assertion that their decisions are based on misogynistic cultural influence.

That is a defense.

 Melissia wrote:
The obvious answer is "effective marketing can lead to a a larger higher increase in sales".

Getting people to actually hear about your game, nevermind want to buy it, is very important in actually making sure it gets sold, sometimes moreso than actually making a good game.

Mind you, I'm not saying that there aren't other factors. Frankly, there just aren't enough games with female-only leads to actually make much of a judgement-- it's a very statistically insignificant figure.

Statistically insignificant? Someone else in the thread objected to them being described as "niche"
My point is that if they receive 40% less of the marketing budget, and sell 75% worse than the male lead games then the argument can be made that these are not as commercially viable i.e. for an extra 1/3 of the budget a male lead game will bring in 75% more revenue. Any company bases forecasts on past data. If the market does not show that something is likely to give the return as another product they'll invest less in it. The easiest way for you as a consumer to change it is either buy more female lead games, or have a Kickstarter to release your own product and show that there is in fact a viable market.

There was also a HUGE backlash, and not just from women, against Other M because they tried to make Samus a whiny pathetic child instead of someone remotely competent.

As an aside, that's what happen when you let the guys who made this:



Work on this:



Honestly not sure what Nintendo was thinking with that one...

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
But if we're judging solely on marketing would that only equate to 40% fewer sales?

$1 of marketing is worth more than $1 of sales.

 Manchu wrote:
$1 of marketing is worth more than $1 of sales.

Care to elaborate beyond this? Is there a definitive ratio, or does it depend on the product?

If it was merely 1:1::dollars spent on marketing:dollars received in profit as a result, it wouldn't be worth doing.

This just popped up on PC Gamer

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/21/mass-effect-3-writer-female-character/?ns_campaign=article-feed&ns_mchannel=ref&ns_source=steam&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0

Kudos to her! That's certainly making me wonder about getting the Omega DLC.

 Compel wrote:
This just popped up on PC Gamer

http://www.pcgamer.com/2013/03/21/mass-effect-3-writer-female-character/?ns_campaign=article-feed&ns_mchannel=ref&ns_source=steam&ns_linkname=0&ns_fee=0

Some of the comments there I think has an interesting perspectives:

While that's your opinion (and mine), perfectly valid and how I believe it -SHOULD- be, have been and always will be. However, as a former Media student I can firmly say that typically, the inclusion of any demographic outside of a white male in any form of media has a lot of "baggage" in the form of stereotypical representation and expectations. If you think about it like this, How do you know that a character that is on a TV show is gay without them outright telling you? Or that it is set in the U.S. and not the U.K. or Europe? So when it comes to writing any character for any piece of media typically writers fall back on these same, tired, old and sometimes down right insulting stereotypes, simply because it's an easy way of telling the audience what a character is about. Without having to spell it out. This means shallow, boring, one dimension characters that don't really engage people. ME3's writers have generally, from what I have seen, been above this crap and that is why they, as the article says, had absolutely no issue writing for new and interesting characters in their games. Good on Bioware, It's a shame EA still sucks.

It's the same as in films. There are lots of different roles for men but there only ever seem to be 2 for women. She's got to either be tough, a muscle mary who takes crap from no one or she's got to be a damsel in distress, totally incapable of fending for herself. They're never just normal and that's because the people thinking up the characters have issues themselves. "We're putting a woman in, we're gonna have to rewrite the whole script and create new situations". No you don't, just add a normal woman in there and give her a few lines. Simple.

 LordofHats wrote:
Honestly not sure what Nintendo was thinking with that one...

Probably nothing nice. This is Japan we're talking about. I'm certain someone will call me a racist or something, but Japanese culture is really fethed up at times, especially (but not exclusively) regarding gender and sexuality issues.

 Melissia wrote:
Probably nothing nice. This is Japan we're talking about. I'm certain someone will call me a racist or something, but Japanese culture is really fethed up, especially (but not exclusively) regarding gender and sexuality issues.

No you're mostly right.

Japan's culture has a lot of issues with sexism right now. Take the former head of Team Ninja for example. Tomonobu Itagaki is a pig, in every sense of the word. But Tecmo fired him for it, but they also fired the woman who accused him of harassment (and rumors says she's just the only one to speak out) for getting their "personal affairs" mixed up with their "corporate responsibilities." The courts, in spite of everyone knowing Tomonobu is a pig, pretty much gave him a pass.

Which is why you have comics like this"

 Melissia wrote:
Which is why you have comics like this"

I'd actually say that comic is inaccurate. A lot of the stuff made in Japan, never makes it state side.



The anime made it state side, but the game it is based on never did (as far as I know). But Saber is very popular with boys and girls in Japan, and is just one of a large number of popular female characters over there. This isn't to say these characters are not stereotyped, many of them are. But Japan has a much MUCH larger number of media that tries to appeal to both boys and girls than you find in the US or Europe. It's just that a lot of it never leaves Japan so we get this image of an extremely misogynist country when the situaion there is really a lot messier and a lot more complicated (and it part that's because marketers in Japan assume the rest of us aren't interested XD).

 Manchu wrote:
Also, would you call Portal 2 a niche game? If so, then I guess even niche games can sell really, really well

They can sell well, but that does not take away from the fact that female lead games are in a distinct minority. Hence the description "niche"

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Manchu wrote:
Also, would you call Portal 2 a niche game? If so, then I guess even niche games can sell really, really well

They can sell well, but that does not take away from the fact that female lead games are in a distinct minority. Hence the description "niche"

That's a bizarre definition of niche there. Usually I hear the term referring to it appealing to a small number of people, rather than "it's not been done much so that makes it niche therefor we shouldn't do much of it".

 LordofHats wrote:
I'd actually say that comic is inaccurate. A lot of the stuff made in Japan, never makes it state side.

It's accurate, however, if you think about it in terms of the games actually being asked about in the comic.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
They can sell well, but that does not take away from the fact that female lead games are in a distinct minority. Hence the description "niche"

By making fewer games with female leads such games become niche and we can't make niche games because they don't make money so we'd best make less games with female leads so that we can ... wait, oh right, this is circular argument.

This is what is meant by a self-fulfilling prophecy. A publisher believes a game will not do well and funds it accordingly. Surprise, surprise when it sells poorly.

 Melissia wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Hence the description "niche"

That's a bizarre definition of niche there. Usually I hear the term referring to it appealing to a small number of people, rather than "it's not been done much so that makes it niche therefor we shouldn't do much of it".

Excellent distinction. It also helps to note that female leads, even less problematic ones like Chell, can actually appeal to male gamers as well as female gamers.

 Manchu wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Hence the description "niche"

That's a bizarre definition of niche there. Usually I hear the term referring to it appealing to a small number of people, rather than "it's not been done much so that makes it niche therefor we shouldn't do much of it".

Excellent distinction. It also helps to note that female leads, even less problematic ones like Chell, can actually appeal to male gamers as well as female gamers.

Valve seems to a fairly good job at creating less stereotypical video game characters in general like Gordan Freeman is a skinny nerd.

Gordon Freeman has his flaws-- in terms of "less stereotypical", he's a white anglo-saxon protestant male hero, so... he's still pretty stereotypical in that regard-- but still, he is an interesting character, to be sure.

Good point, Milquedawg. Alyx Vance was also a more three-dimensional female character than most in video games. Didn't stop HL2 from selling and Alyx is pretty highly regarded among male and female gamers.

 Melissia wrote:
Gordon Freeman has his flaws-- in terms of "less stereotypical", he's a white anglo-saxon protestant male hero, so... he's still pretty stereotypical in that regard-- but still, he is an interesting character, to be sure.

I don't think his religion is every mentioned or is that more about what the average player would assume?

 Manchu wrote:
Good point, Milquedawg. Alyx Vance was also a more three-dimensional female character than most in video games. Didn't stop HL2 from selling and Alyx is pretty highly regarded among male and female gamers.

She's also highly regarded, and quite normally dressed:



I mean, you can't see her underwear or anything!

 Manchu wrote:
Good point, Milquedawg. Alyx Vance was also a more three-dimensional female character than most in video games. Didn't stop HL2 from selling and Alyx is pretty highly regarded among male and female gamers.

Even the AI in the portal series are more interesting than most video-game characters.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Gordon Freeman has his flaws-- in terms of "less stereotypical", he's a white anglo-saxon protestant male hero, so... he's still pretty stereotypical in that regard-- but still, he is an interesting character, to be sure.

I don't think his religion is every mentioned or is that more about what the average player would assume?

It's the standard hero for the video game industry. By my estimates, at least 85%+ of all heroes for video games are WASP males.