What problems do gamers have with how women are represented in games?

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.

**Asherian Command**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
Tangentially related, but worth posting I think:

Total Biscuit wrote:Perhaps one of the reasons why sites dont get taken seriously when they attempt to inject gender politics into articles about games, particularly reviews, is that their arguments are often provably false. This is a quote from the Verges article, which it claims is a "1000 hour review" of DOTA2.

"One of the artefacts of the game being designed by young males is in its presentation. Female characters tend to perform clichéd support roles while dressing in form-fitting costumes that seem to have shrunken in the wash. Most egregious for me is the case of Crystal Maiden, whose death animation involves a momentary glimpse of the character stripped down to her underwear. Maybe that’s an homage to Metroid, where a similar fate would befall Samus Aran, but it’s an unnecessary sexualization of a character that is made worse by its association with her death."

Now the facts. First lets address that female characters "tend to perform cliched support roles". Firstly this is factually wrong. Here is a list of the 17 female heroes in DOTA2 and their roles, as defined by DOTA2s own website:

Legion commander - Melee carry
Drow Ranger - Ranged Carry
Mirana - Carry, Nuker, Disabler
Vengeful Spirit - Support, Initiator
Templar Assassin - Ranged, carry
Luna - Ranged, carry, nuker
Siren - Melee, carry, disabler, pusher
Phantom Assassin - Melee, carry
Broodmother - Pusher, carry
Spectre - Melee, carry
Medusa - Ranged, carry
Crystal Maiden - Support, nuker
Windranger - Support, disabler, nuker
Lina - Nuker, disabler, support
Enchanter - Support, Jungler
Queen of Pain - Nuker, carry
Death Prophet - Pusher, Nuker

This "tendency" to play cliched support roles is a total of 5 out of 17 heroes. Indeed there are far more male supports than there are female (but there are also far more male heroes in the game than female so that's to be expected). Indeed female heroes represent some of the most powerful carries in the game and are frequent top tier picks. In my personal opinion, the way that this statement is written is meant to imply that a support is somehow a weaker or lesser role than that of a carry, which is complete nonsense. Supports are vital and hold some of the most powerful abilities in the game that are crucial for getting ganks and changing the face of a team-fight. Maybe in other games the support was relegated to the role of healer and ward courier but in DOTA2, a game with very few actual healing abilities, supports have an array of powerful disables and extremely high damage nukes. Maybe I'm just reading too much into that sentence but it seems to be based on ignorance and factual inaccuracies. Now this statement.

"Most egregious for me is the case of Crystal Maiden, whose death animation involves a momentary glimpse of the character stripped down to her underwear. Maybe that’s an homage to Metroid, where a similar fate would befall Samus Aran, but it’s an unnecessary sexualization of a character that is made worse by its association with her death."

This is proveably false. It is not a deliberate implementation and is in fact an old bug, causing parts of the characters modular outfit (characters in DOTA wear items individually, which allows for visual customisation, rather than having complete "skins" like other games) to not display correctly. This Youtube video demonstrates the issue - link - you will notice her hair also disappears and she is rendered for a fraction of a second as bald. This also used to (and perhaps still?) happens with Lina every now and again. If this is the authors definition of "her underwear" then you're going to have to forgive me if I don't think that's much of an issue, since we don't live in the 1800s anymore. That's her underwear? That's three times more clothes than I'm wearing right now.

This sort of thing is why I also have problems with Anita Sarkessians videos. When she factually misrepresents games like Hitman by claiming the game is inviting you to violate the bodies of dead women, where in reality the game mechanically punishes you for doing so and the poses are simply a result of the rather dodgy havok physics engine implementation, you're gong to have to forgive me if I disagree with phrases such as "players are meant to derive a perverse pleasure from desecrating the bodies of unsuspecting virtual characters. It's a rush streaming from a carefully concocted mix of sexual arousal connected to the act of controlling and punishing representations of female sexuality".

Trying to have this discussion while basing your assertions on factual inaccuracies only succeeds in muddying the waters. You weaken your own argument with such logical leaps which are based on extremely shaky ground. Perhaps we should just stick to the facts and build our arguments from there, rather than coming up with our agenda and conclusions in advance and working backwards to try and prove our point, which will invariably lead to some cognitive and confirmation bias, cherry-picking and at worst, flagrant misrepresentation.

You can do better Verge.

I completely agree with that argument! I mean its kind of funny.

**nomotog**

What is the argument?

**Asherian Command**

nomotog wrote:
What is the argument?

That people have an agenda and that is a bad thing.

It is an argument and an idea. I mean look at how many games that have come out that are considered sexist and the game reviewer thinks its sexist but hasn't played in depth as much as they should. And they just assume certain things and think it is sexist without fact checking or even worse. They don't even look at the game they are reviewing.

Or misrepresentation of the facts at hand.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Except that isn't a fighting game. It's a "sports" game that dresses the characters from a fighting game in swim wear.

It still meets the criterion used by Asherian Command

.

**LordofHats**

It's also not like the DOA girls are wearing much to start with in their fighting game

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Yeah, but the cast includes males too. That is the only reason I choose the beach volley spin-off.

**CthuluIsSpy**

In that case your example is still wrong, since Skullgirls also has men in it's roster

Now, if you were looking for genuine all-lady fighting games, I believe Bikini Karate Babes and Catfight might be what you are looking for.
Or not.

**Asherian Command**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Except that isn't a fighting game. It's a "sports" game that dresses the characters from a fighting game in swim wear.

It still meets the criterion used by Asherian Command .

What?

No it doesn't.

Stop pulling falsified facts out of your arse.

In that case your example is still wrong, since Skullgirls also has men in it's roster

Now, if you were looking for genuine all-lady fighting games, I believe Bikini Karate Babes and Catfight might be what you are looking for.
Or not.

YEs but it is overwhelmingly women.

And hell the title is Skull girls.

Not skull men

That is pretty big difference.

also....

Such sexualization!

I mean lets look at soul caliber for a second.

Hmm who is actually sexualized?

Soul Calibur.

SKull girls is not an example.

Yeah, but the cast includes males too. That is the only reason I choose the beach volley spin-off.

Yep. Lets not forget their much needed boob physics.

Which are completely needed.

**AdeptSister**

So we are given an example of someone promoting an agenda? Ok? So because of that example, are you implying that it applies elsewhere and other people's complaints are illegitimate? Or do we agree that there are some legitimate claims?

And are we arguing that because some specifics are incorrect, the overall trend is invalid. I agree that while it might weaken it, it definitely does not invalidate it.

**Talizvar**

Why does it seem like "Total Biscuit" as one of the better known game reviewers seems to make the most sense?

Just because the player can do something in a game does not mean it was core to design intent.

These ways of "proving" theories by looking around for anything that supports it without trying to dis-prove as well reminds me of a phrase: "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".

<edit> It is the full-on pointing out an issue and saying "it is bad" and not offering suggestions to improve on the matter or look at root-cause is the maddening part.
Be part of the solution! Offer suggestions on improvements to make the matter better.

Anita issues raised: It all comes down to the story/outline for a game. Have a mixed panel review the story. Take suggestions of how characters are presented. There may be certain target audiences the business is trying to get so the business decision of marketing "cat fight" can open some doors and close others (sex sells so social progressiveness may only happen with key content providers). Anita points out things in a very one sided way so can be perceived as unfair in the labeling she gives.

There is no "problem" to how a woman is represented in games if it is no more or less important if it was a man.

**Melissia**

So if all you have is hatred for feminism, everything starts to look like a "feminazi", whatever that is?

**Asherian Command**

AdeptSister wrote:
So we are given an example of someone promoting an agenda? Ok? So because of that example, are you implying that it applies elsewhere and other people's complaints are illegitimate? Or do we agree that there are some legitimate claims?

And are we arguing that because some specifics are incorrect, the overall trend is invalid. I agree that while it might weaken it, it definitely does not invalidate it.

It is not against all those arguments but it is put up to suspecting that sometimes the reviewer does have an agenda and does not see anything past the game other than what they defined as too sexy or sexualized.

They go in with a particular agenda feeling that if this game does something like 'sexualizing' its characters then that is a bad thing and is a no no.

Which is quite ridiculous. Because if you go into the game with an image and think to yourself that this is only what you are going to see. That is all you are going to see and the review will falter because you have an image in your head.

These ways of "proving" theories by looking around for anything that supports it without trying to dis-prove as well reminds me of a phrase: "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail".

Not all the time. Sometimes there are times when there are some reviewers that just see everything as either sexist and do not see a deeper meaning sometimes they are so fething blind to see it that they can't just play the game.

A designer plays the game and deconstructs it.

A reviewer should do the same thing.

TotalBiscuit does quite a bit of deconstruction and his reviews I see as a standard of how to critic a game.

**AdeptSister**

Ash, you do know that picture wasn't the main Skullgirls cast, right? With the original 8 playable characters? And then the added characters. Because I am not sure you are helping your argument using an incorrect picture.

**Bishop F Gantry**

Your hard pressed to find any game that overly sexualize women, short of niche games.

However some like to pretend this is the norm and the only form of game that exists.

**Melissia**

Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Your hard pressed to find any game that overly sexualize women

Ninety percent of fighting games.

Well, that wasn't hard!

**Talizvar**

Melissia wrote:
So if all you have is hatred for feminism, everything starts to look like a "feminazi", whatever that is?

I hate to say I agree with you... it can be apparent with some.
You defend many of your viewpoints aggressively and in most cases can be commended.
I dislike strongly bullies so I am a "bullnazi"?
I figure as long as I do not gas anyone I can do without the title.

It is when a certain degree of fanaticism is applied to fighting things out when your "red button" has been pushed that still being able to see the other side of things is all the more important.
Sometimes things are planned out carefully, sometimes people do things on a whim.
Life lesson as a parent is: there are frequently bad decisions but few bad people.

If I insist on viewing people as a person rather than a guy or girl, am I guilty of not acknowledging the components of each person whose sum of their parts makes them unique?
It is like the Skyrim character creator: It was INSANE how many different options there were to change the look of the character and it really was just the tip of the iceberg.
Slapping a single word label on someone seems inadequate and a poor representation at best.

The problem is we all have "preferences" just like we all have opinions or a backside.
I like women to be smart, mean well and not to be a stick figure (if they make puns I may be in love...): that is not everyone's preference but I hope to see that each time in a game.

**AdeptSister**

"Overly sexualize?" Once again I think the disconnect between us is what level of sexualization is acceptable. And that it happens mostly to female characters.

So, when does it get to the level of distracting you from the characters role? I know Lordofhats is frustrated with combat high heels.

**LordofHats**

High Heels no (I think I specifically said they didn't bother me that much). What irks me in female character design are the very creative and often ridiculous ways designers find to expose boobs as much as possible while not being full out porn.

Personally I find 'overly sexualized' a complete misnomer. Sexualized is a you are or you aren't situation. There is no over, except when it's taken to the point it becomes over the top and crosses into the land of satire (basically the entire point behind the outfits of the girls in Kill la Kill and Queen's Blade). Sexualizing female characters would be less of a problem if it wasn't so prolific. You rarely see a female character whose assets aren't somehow emphasized.

Not a sexualized female character, but you can still tell she's female as all the visual ques are there for us.

Even her true form manages to carry a bit of refinement to it even though it's quite fetching;

Midna was a character who was very feminine but who came off as refined and endearing for her character rather than her body. By the time we finally see Midna as a sexually appealing woman, that's kind of a footnote on her character, as we've already grown quite attached to her sheer awesomitude.

Then we have this;

You know Shang Xiang, you looked pretty cool in Dynasty Warriors 4, but I geuss you weren't showing enough skin so they had to make you look stupid. The above outfit is silly. It looks stupid and it's patently obvious why she's dressed this way. Another good example is Sophita over the course of the Soul Calibur series. Started off pretty decently, then just spiraled into the realm of the increasingly ludicrous outfits.

**Asherian Command**

AdeptSister wrote:
Ash, you do know that picture wasn't the main Skullgirls cast, right? With the original 8 playable characters? And then the added characters. Because I am not sure you are helping your argument using an incorrect picture.

Yep

**Melissia**

I'm so glad I can't see that image here on campus, LordofHats :

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Asherian Command wrote:
What?

No it doesn't.

Stop pulling falsified facts out of your arse.

I meant this:

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
I mean the entire cast is female. They all come with different skins and colors.

And they are all fighters.

Just like in DoA Beach Volleyball .

My point was just that having the entire cast female and fighter did not necessarily meant they were not sexualized. It is not really an argument.

Spoiler:

I cannot see them well, too small :(.

Such sexualization!

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I mean lets look at soul caliber for a second.

Spoiler:

.
I remember the good old days!
Compare those two Isabella Valentine, and tell me which one looks better. Really. Good old days Ivy was sexy, but also incredibly class. New Ivy is an horribly deformed women that must have fallen into a chemical plant or something.

Melissia wrote:
So if all you have is hatred for feminism, everything starts to look like a "feminazi", whatever that is?

Do not use that terrible word. I know you used quotation marks, and you do not agree with it, but this is still a terrible word, do not use it

.

Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Your hard pressed to find any game that overly sexualize women, short of niche games.

What is a “niche game”? Are all games representing women “niche games”

? Smite. Or, I guess, LoL. Are those “niche”?

**Bishop F Gantry**

Melissia wrote:
Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Your hard pressed to find any game that overly sexualize women
Ninety percent of fighting games.

Well, that wasn't hard!

Now exclude all fighting games that sexualize men aswell, give me numbers, how much percentage of the market do these games have, sales numbers anything?

**AdeptSister**

Asherian Command wrote:
AdeptSister wrote:
Ash, you do know that picture wasn't the main Skullgirls cast, right? With the original 8 playable characters? And then the added characters. Because I am not sure you are helping your argument using an incorrect picture.

Yep

So you did not want an actual discussion? OK, good to know.

Lordofhats, my mistake. And good summary.

Bishop, there has been a multiple responses on this thread explaining the difference between a male power fantasy and sexualization. While sexualization of male characters occurs, it is rare. Can you provide an example of one?

**Asherian Command**

AdeptSister wrote:
Asherian Command wrote:
AdeptSister wrote:
Ash, you do know that picture wasn't the main Skullgirls cast, right? With the original 8 playable characters? And then the added characters. Because I am not sure you are helping your argument using an incorrect picture.

Yep

So you did not want an actual discussion? OK, good to know.

Lordofhats, my mistake. And good summary.

Bishop, there has been a multiple responses on this thread explaining the difference between a male power fantasy and sexualization. While sexualization of male characters occurs, it is rare. Can you provide an example of one?

No I just can't find the right picture as of current.

And I think they aren't that sexualized.

Nor do I think they were meant to be.

There is no terrible message.

And I really won't give a

what a person wears in real life.

Sometimes styles happen and people dress like 'sluts'

So what.

Shouldn't the same happen in games. They don't care what the character wears they just make a character.

A strong character.

You can have weak people, and pathetic people, because those do exist, but if there is one woman in a game who is weakwilled, then oh well. That is realistic.

Games are not meant to be all immersive they are not supposed to replace your real life, but they can address many things and remind us and teach us.

You are going to have weak willed people who can't do anything and are desperate for attention.

We will get that weak willed character in a game that undoubtedly causes you to have a downfall. That happens in games and those are good.

If a character no matter what clothing they have adds to the story. then who the hell cares what they are dressed like.

Example: Kill La Kill, Where the female protoganist is in a skimpy outfit but after each battle she leaves her loser naked after she cut off their clothing. fan service? Yes. Is that necessarily a bad thing?

No not really. It is only a problem if they focus on it. If you just simply have it there, and don't talk about it. I won't ask any questions, but if you do drag your attention to it. (I.E. high school of the dead) Then there better be a good freaking reason why they are dressed like skimpy morons.

**daedalus**

I feel like I just opened page 4 or page 5 back up again.

**Asherian Command**

daedalus wrote:
I feel like I just opened page 4 or page 5 back up again.

Happens on threads sometimes especially when go past 60+ pages.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Now exclude all fighting games that sexualize men aswell

Could you even propose ONE example of such a game? If there is ONE sexualized male character in a fighting game, that is already a damn rare exception. A game that would sexualized most of them? Unheard of.

**LordofHats**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Could you even propose ONE example of such a game?

Poison... So 1 out of a few hundred

**Asherian Command**

Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Bishop F Gantry wrote:
Now exclude all fighting games that sexualize men aswell

Could you even propose ONE example of such a game? If there is ONE sexualized male character in a fighting game, that is already a damn rare exception. A game that would sexualized most of them? Unheard of.

Soul Caliber had some sexualized male characters.

Infact it was quite balanced in that regard.

http://86bb71d19d3bcb79effc-d9e6924a0395cb1b5b9f03b7640d26eb.r91.cf1.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/soul-calibur-5-zwei-artwork.jpg
http://static.giantbomb.com/uploads/square_small/13/132031/1872522-soul_calibur_v_maxi_concept_render_scv_.jpg
http://images.wikia.com/soulcalibur/images/archive/1/14/20121030194909!SoulCalibur_V_All_Characters.jpg
http://alblack.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/soul-calibur-4-mitsurugi_a.jpg

Showing bare chest is sexualization and is under the account of the Female Gaze (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaze)

It is very similar to the male gaze but looks at different bits of the body.

Those are sexualized characters if you like it or not.

**Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl**

LordofHats wrote:
Poison... So 1 out of a few hundred

First, she chose to be a woman, and second, well, that is one male character, not men. I made that clear in the rest of the message.

Asherian Command wrote:
Showing bare chest is sexualization and is under the account of the Female Gaze

Nope.
You got to get the whole trio working together: clothes, body type, pose.

The guy on that first picture seems to be holding that sword wrong!