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.

 Bullockist wrote:
I mean FFs those two are more profligate on sexism than Melissia is.

Going to my sig!

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Sining wrote:
If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_-

You mean like the people I keep replying to when they bring up issues about sexism? It seems like every time I step away from this thread it's back to someone posting another article about how Anita sucks or how feminism is ruining everything. Remember this little summary image that the OP posted in the middle of complaining about how everyone keeps talking about sexism?

Sexism does not exist in the industry itself, but in the community it does. You are confusing the industry with community.

They are two seperate entities. That post is completely correct. There is no sexism that we know of in the games industry. As far as we know.

Women are treated extremely well in the gaming industry.

But in the community not so well.

How do you arrive to that answer when the post you are answering to makes no mention of either industry or community?

 Asherian Command wrote:
By labeling their articles as either editorials (opinion) or news (Objective)

Every review ever is going to be an editorial then. Unless it is only repeating the facts that the company told them, like the minimal configuration or other very basic stuff, which would be pretty useless. If you want to know about some game, just learning if it has multiplayer is not all that interesting, what you want to know is whether that multiplayer is good and fun to play, but this is always going to be subjective.

Found an article from 2011 that seems appropriate:

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/business/how-consumer-revolt-works

The big thing that I think that really marks a consumer revolt is disrespect.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

Sining wrote:
If that was true, then more people other than Hybrid and Peregine would keep talking about sexism, ZQ and Anita -_-

You mean like the people I keep replying to when they bring up issues about sexism? It seems like every time I step away from this thread it's back to someone posting another article about how Anita sucks or how feminism is ruining everything. Remember this little summary image that the OP posted in the middle of complaining about how everyone keeps talking about sexism?

Sexism does not exist in the industry itself, but in the community it does. You are confusing the industry with community.

They are two seperate entities. That post is completely correct. There is no sexism that we know of in the games industry. As far as we know.

Women are treated extremely well in the gaming industry.

But in the community not so well.

If there is no sexism in the industry, why do games featuring Female Protagonists have to fight so hard to get made?

-DONTNOD's Remember Me spent years trying to find a publisher that would accept the "risk" of publishing a game with a female protagonist.

-2K eventually removed Elizabeth (Arguably the MAIN character rather than Booker in Bioshock Infinite) from the front cover because of "poor reception".

-Naughty Dog had to fight tooth and nail to keep Ellie on the front cover of The Last of Us.

-Don't even get me started on Beyond Good and Evil 2....

And that's just whats happened in recent memory; female characters are getting sidelined or just plain removed.


Now obviously having a female protagonist doesn't make a game better simply for that (Remember Me was woefully average, and I personally never really cared for BGaE), you cannot deny that apart from Samus and Lara, female characters are terribly represented.

 Slarg232 wrote:
Now obviously having a female protagonist doesn't make a game better simply for that (Remember Me was woefully average, and I personally never really cared for BGaE), you cannot deny that apart from Samus and Lara, female characters are terribly represented.

No they're not.

 Yonan wrote:
No they're not.

Oh, nice they list Alice .

 Yonan wrote:

 Slarg232 wrote:
Now obviously having a female protagonist doesn't make a game better simply for that (Remember Me was woefully average, and I personally never really cared for BGaE), you cannot deny that apart from Samus and Lara, female characters are terribly represented.

No they're not.

Quantity, not Quality wise.

I would be willing to bet a substantial amount that you could compile a list of male characters using the same criteria and get three times as long of a list, bar minimum.

How do you arrive to that answer when the post you are answering to makes no mention of either industry or community?

Because the question was there is sexism in the games industry. There isn't there never has been.

Every review ever is going to be an editorial then. Unless it is only repeating the facts that the company told them, like the minimal configuration or other very basic stuff, which would be pretty useless. If you want to know about some game, just learning if it has multiplayer is not all that interesting, what you want to know is whether that multiplayer is good and fun to play, but this is always going to be subjective.

Not talking about reviews talking about games in general if a game comes out from a major publisher and they cover it. We don't want to know what the opinion of the author is. That is news. Not your opinion on the matter. You can write an after thought, but we want facts.

If there is no sexism in the industry, why do games featuring Female Protagonists have to fight so hard to get made?

-DONTNOD's Remember Me spent years trying to find a publisher that would accept the "risk" of publishing a game with a female protagonist.

-2K eventually removed Elizabeth (Arguably the MAIN character rather than Booker in Bioshock Infinite) from the front cover because of "poor reception".

-Naughty Dog had to fight tooth and nail to keep Ellie on the front cover of The Last of Us.

-Don't even get me started on Beyond Good and Evil 2....

And that's just whats happened in recent memory; female characters are getting sidelined or just plain removed.


Now obviously having a female protagonist doesn't make a game better simply for that (Remember Me was woefully average, and I personally never really cared for BGaE), you cannot deny that apart from Samus and Lara, female characters are terribly represented.

Because publishers control what goes into the game. If any game designer throws an idea for a female protoganist guess what?

They get shot down usually. Its not a 'popular' subject. It is mostly due to the fact that the industry is trying to grow up but the publishers still hold all the cards.

And yes that bioshock thing was not really 2ks fault. They were forced into it. Critics are the ones to blame for alot of problems in the industry mainly journalists thinking it is stupid to have a sexy main protagonist.

And I disagree. Female characters are represented quite well in games itself.

Though most of them are from japan.

Most american made games usually have terrible female protagonists.

The japanese have more grown up standards for their characters. Like it or not.

Its like the difference between the reverence to the gun in japanese and american culture. American's love guns, but they see it as a tool. The Japanese see it as a weapon, that they only use in times of great peril, they revere it, fear it and honor it.

There is no sexism in the industry itself. There is no discrimination of real female people.

Discriminating against female characters is not that big of a deal.

But discriminating against real women is a problem. But that does not exist in the games industry.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Because the question was there is sexism in the games industry.

No, nobody asked this question in the discussion you quoted.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Not talking about reviews talking about games in general if a game comes out from a major publisher and they cover it. We don't want to know what the opinion of the author is. That is news. Not your opinion on the matter. You can write an after thought, but we want facts.

So, you only want the journalist to forward the press release from the developers without adding any kind of value to it?

 Asherian Command wrote:
Because publishers control what goes into the game. If any game designer throws an idea for a female protoganist guess what?

They get shot down usually. Its not a 'popular' subject. It is mostly due to the fact that the industry is trying to grow up but the publishers still hold all the cards.

And yes that bioshock thing was not really 2ks fault.

So there is some sexist problem with the publishers, that are part of the industry, right?

 Asherian Command wrote:
Critics are the ones to blame for alot of problems in the industry mainly journalists thinking it is stupid to have a sexy main protagonist.

I… what?

There are plenty of differences between America and Japan, though I wouldn't call either more grown up.


If we really wanted to bring publishers into the conversation, we could go into the argument of publishers "Wanting to diversify the audience", but yet refusing to make diverse characters, but that is a different subject entirely.


You are, however, going to have to expand on what you mean by Critics are to blame.

So there is some sexist problem with the publishers, that are part of the industry, right?

That is not sexism.

Hating an idea is not sexist.

They do not choose it because of gender, they pick it according to which game they think will sell better.

Now that is assuming that they are sexist. But I don't think they are.

I think they just choose not to. And that is not sexist.

Its not true sexism, sexism means you dislike it. In this view the publisher just doesn't want to do it. Because they think they might lose money from doing it.

If they make a quality game, what will the media think. They are a business and they need to think for the entire business they are in.

So if they take a risk like having a female character, it might not end well.

Because what will the critics think, what will the consumers think.

That is not sexism. That is just a problem with publishers. They don't like taking risks. Ever.

No, nobody asked this question in the discussion you quoted.

Peregrine said there is sexism in the industry. I am saying no there isn't. It doesn't exist as far as we know.

I… what?

That is the main reason why some characters in bioshock were cut off from the main cover, and many other characters are cut out, even if they are female its because a bunch of critics think it is dumb to have a strong female woman. And she shows some skin, like her arms and thats it. And thats considered too revealing by some critics. (I.E Feminist Critics)

If we really wanted to bring publishers into the conversation, we could go into the argument of publishers "Wanting to diversify the audience", but yet refusing to make diverse characters, but that is a different subject entirely.


You are, however, going to have to expand on what you mean by Critics are to blame.

Critics control what gets into a game. Before a game is released it is reviewed and looked through by the publishers or a trusted media associate.

That associate shares with others and then that game is criticized, sometimes they don't like certain things. And the designers have to remove or add something.

It is post production. It is something that happens quite often in the industry. The Critics control all the cards sometimes.

There are plenty of differences between America and Japan, though I wouldn't call either more grown up.

In terms of how they treat people in games. They are extremely grown up.

They take issues and they make them apparent.

I wasn't talking about television. But japan has numerous differences compared to the united states.

Aren't Samus Aran and Lara Croft pretty much Universally praised by Feminist Critics, despite one wearing a skin tight leotard and the other in short shorts and a bra?

Isn't American McGee's Alice Liddell seen as a strong character and a positive story despite the fact that the last boss is trying to rape her, which is usually considered lazy writing (Madness Returns, not the first one)?

 Slarg232 wrote:
Aren't Samus Aran and Lara Croft pretty much Universally praised by Feminist Critics, despite one wearing a skin tight leotard and the other in short shorts and a bra?

Isn't American McGee's Alice Liddell seen as a strong character and a positive story despite the fact that the last boss is trying to rape her, which is usually considered lazy writing (Madness Returns, not the first one)?

Yeah. But lets face it. That is still considered a risk by the publisher to put a female protagonist into the game.

It happens. But there are some feminists that think samus aran and lara croft are weak characters. Or just down right ignore them. Because they have larger breasts than they should.

 Slarg232 wrote:
If there is no sexism in the industry, why do games featuring Female Protagonists have to fight so hard to get made?

-DONTNOD's Remember Me spent years trying to find a publisher that would accept the "risk" of publishing a game with a female protagonist.

-2K eventually removed Elizabeth (Arguably the MAIN character rather than Booker in Bioshock Infinite) from the front cover because of "poor reception".

-Naughty Dog had to fight tooth and nail to keep Ellie on the front cover of The Last of Us.

-Don't even get me started on Beyond Good and Evil 2....

And that's just whats happened in recent memory; female characters are getting sidelined or just plain removed.

Now obviously having a female protagonist doesn't make a game better simply for that (Remember Me was woefully average, and I personally never really cared for BGaE), you cannot deny that apart from Samus and Lara, female characters are terribly represented.

I don't 100% disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure that most of the above has to do with market forces and demographics more than "Keeping the womenfolk down!". It's a bit like when Anthony B. Jordan got cast as The Human Torch in the upcoming Fantastic Four Pre-School Adventures movie, and everyone lost their gak 'cause a black guy was playing Human Torch. A lot of people assumed it was tokenism and people ticking diversity boxes but what it was more likely to be true is that he was chosen because he's seen as a hot property and the producers/studio wanted to cash in on that quickly. In other words, the phrase "Anthony B. Jordan is so hot right now!" was more likely than "We need a minority in this film!". I think the same applies to some of the above.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Peregrine said there is sexism in the industry.

Not in those messages you quote.

 Asherian Command wrote:
That is the main reason why some characters in bioshock were cut off from the main cover, and many other characters are cut out, even if they are female its because a bunch of critics think it is dumb to have a strong female woman. And she shows some skin, like her arms and thats it. And thats considered too revealing by some critics. (I.E Feminist Critics)

What the hell are you taking about? Alice has always been a strong female character that showed the skin of her arms, and no-one ever criticized that, especially not feminist critics, as far as I know.
Of course, this is different. We are not talking just showing a bit of skin here.
In what kind of bizarro word does a feminist critic ask for the removal of a strong female character that only shows the skin of her arms?

We have been over Smite and it's portrayal of the Goddesses over and over. Stop beating that dead horse, Hybrid.


Why does a God care about the feelings of Mortals (Couldn't link a ACTUAL picture detailing what I mean for obvious reasons):

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
Peregrine said there is sexism in the industry.

Not in those messages you quote.

 Asherian Command wrote:
That is the main reason why some characters in bioshock were cut off from the main cover, and many other characters are cut out, even if they are female its because a bunch of critics think it is dumb to have a strong female woman. And she shows some skin, like her arms and thats it. And thats considered too revealing by some critics. (I.E Feminist Critics)

What the hell are you taking about? Alice has always been a strong female character that showed the skin of her arms, and no-one ever criticized that, especially not feminist critics, as far as I know.
Of course, this is different. We are not talking just showing a bit of skin here.
In what kind of bizarro word does a feminist critic ask for the removal of a strong female character that only shows the skin of her arms?

Thats not sexism that is immaturity. Big Difference.

I concede its not in his messages, but he did post the image and it did say that. and I was confirming that idea. IT doesn't exist in the industry but it does exist in the community though it is not as common as people like to think.

Anyway we need more sources to talk about the gamer gate issue.

Here we go find some from searching the #gamergate hashtag on twitter.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ByRsHUhCAAAwmFk.jpg


https://medium.com/@oliverbcampbell/when-a-black-game-journalist-spoke-up-on-gamergate-a1f36421022

This portrayal is terrible and no amount of talking of how LoL is bad too is going to change that .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Asherian Command wrote:
Thats not sexism that is immaturity. Big Difference.

Did I use the word sexism in that message you quoted?

 Asherian Command wrote:
I concede its not in his messages, but he did post the image and it did say that.

He reposted an image you originally posted to show that you were starting discussion on sexism, not him. That image, if you disagree with it, why did you post it?

Did I use the word sexism in that message you quoted?

No but you implied it. You didn't outwardly say anything about that you have avoided using any word to describe it. I assumed you meant that.

He reposted an image you originally posted to show that you were starting discussion on sexism, not him. That image, if you disagree with it, why did you post it?

I agree with the picture. But it doesn't say anything about the community itself. The picture is right. You didn't read my post. You willfully ignore my points and just make an assumption and take it 180 degrees to the left. You need to rethink your argument because thus far you have not outwardly stated anything.

I am merely explaining what goes on. And what happens in it. I have debunking the idea of sexism in the industry.



Also on LOL being sexist.

You do realize half the games characters are women right?

And that there are a bunch of female designers in the company that made LOL.

Having sexy outfits is not sexist or a problem. It the portrayal of them that really matters.

Clothing does not make the character.

I have said this hundreds of times.

Just because the Prince of Persia doesn't wear a shirt does not make him a whore. Less clothing does not mean they are trying to be sexist, they are artists and as far as I am aware they can do whatever they damn well please.

 Asherian Command wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
Peregrine said there is sexism in the industry.

Not in those messages you quote.

 Asherian Command wrote:
That is the main reason why some characters in bioshock were cut off from the main cover, and many other characters are cut out, even if they are female its because a bunch of critics think it is dumb to have a strong female woman. And she shows some skin, like her arms and thats it. And thats considered too revealing by some critics. (I.E Feminist Critics)

What the hell are you taking about? Alice has always been a strong female character that showed the skin of her arms, and no-one ever criticized that, especially not feminist critics, as far as I know.
Of course, this is different. We are not talking just showing a bit of skin here.
In what kind of bizarro word does a feminist critic ask for the removal of a strong female character that only shows the skin of her arms?

Thats not sexism that is immaturity. Big Difference.

I concede its not in his messages, but he did post the image and it did say that. and I was confirming that idea. IT doesn't exist in the industry but it does exist in the community though it is not as common as people like to think.

Anyway we need more sources to talk about the gamer gate issue.

Here we go find some from searching the #gamergate hashtag on twitter.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ByRsHUhCAAAwmFk.jpg


https://medium.com/@oliverbcampbell/when-a-black-game-journalist-spoke-up-on-gamergate-a1f36421022

He should play the race card. I bet that'll confuse the SJWs.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Just read the blog post... wow. So we can add racism to the list of sins committed by gaming journalists?

He should play the race card. I bet that'll confuse the SJWs.

Probably won't work compared to what is going on.

The Journalists are on the defensive right now.

I can’t directly speak for anyone else’s experiences but my own in this situation, but I can say this much. Gamergate has been very welcoming to me as a human being and what I have to say as a critic and editorialist, while the other side has not. The narrative that I have been told is not matching up with the experience that I’ve had. When a clearly identified and not anonymous minority is able to easily corroborate many parts of the overarching Gamergate fiasco from the bottom with his own experience, I would suggest many of the sites in question and anti-GamerGate people take a seriously hard look at their position and consider the possibility that they may be in the wrong in this scenario.

Damn
DAMN

 Asherian Command wrote:
No but you implied it. You didn't outwardly say anything about that you have avoided using any word to describe it. I assumed you meant that.

I said feminists critics would likely object to that, and with good reasons.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Also on LOL being sexist.

I did not say sexist. On purpose.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Having sexy outfits is not sexist or a problem.

I think having only, or even having a huge majority of, sexy outfits is a problem. Also, the outfits are only part of the character design, the rest matters too, like the poses and the body types.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Just because the Prince of Persia doesn't wear a shirt does not make him a whore.

Few clothing is not the same as sexy clothing. You can be less sexualized naked than with clothing.

Few clothing is not the same as sexy clothing. You can be less sexualized naked than with clothing.

Yes and whats the difference. Without your shirt on is seen as sexualized to the extreme.

IF a woman took her top off. Everyone wold cry SEXUALIZED! NUDITY!

But a guy! Oh hey man hows it going.

That is a double standard and it has to die.

I think having only, or even having a huge majority of, sexy outfits is a problem. Also, the outfits are only part of the character design, the rest matters too, like the poses and the body types.

Yes but some characters it makes sense for them to do that.

Jinx is insane as her character she doesn't wear that much clothing because she is a gun happy girl.

She doesn't care what people think of her.

That is something that happens. As long as it makes sense to the character.

But the clothing does not make the character.

The character makes the character.

Just because they have sexy outfits does not mean it is bad.

I did not say sexist. On purpose.

Yes you did you have expressed that women would object to it.

In what way other than being sexist?

I said feminists critics would likely object to that, and with good reasons.

Art is Art if you don't like it then ignore it.

Don't demand an artist to change their interpretation.

As long as that artist's art is within reason.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Yes and whats the difference. Without your shirt on is seen as sexualized to the extreme.

IF a woman took her top off. Everyone wold cry SEXUALIZED! NUDITY!

Wrong. I must be the tenth time at least I post a link to this trailer for a children movie with bare breast. This is not sexualization.

 Asherian Command wrote:
But a guy! Oh hey man hows it going.

Works the same as for women: depend on how it is done. Add Chippendale-style shirt cuff and collar without the shirt itself, and you will get a whole deal closer. Poses do a lot too.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Yes but some characters it makes sense for them to do that.

If it makes sense for a huge majority of your female character rooster but none or next to none of your male character rooster, you might reconsider how you design characters.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Yes you did you have expressed that women would object to it.

I said feminist critics would object to it. Do you think feminist critics would not object to it? Because I can show you ton of feminist critics objecting to it.

 Asherian Command wrote:
Art is Art if you don't like it then ignore it.

A product made by a big company to make money is a product made by a big company to make money. If that product is not to my taste, I will let this known.

A product made by a big company to make money is a product made by a big company to make money. If that product is not to my taste, I will let this known.

Games are consider both an art and a product so that line of thinking doesn't work anymore XD

If it works for comics, it might damn as well work for video games.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
If it works for comics, it might damn as well work for video games.

Comics should be considered an art form. They are very close to books.

The thing is that people see the game maker as a toy maker.

Toy makers make things for childern and sometimes adults.

But a game is different as is a comic book. A comic book has both art and and dialogue.

They are two seperate things entirely.

You can't say. WEll both have to do it.

That is wrong.

If you can't censor a book, you should not be able to decide what goes into a game or a comic book.

Comic books were destroyed by a moron who was very much like jack thompson.

I don't think it works Hybrid. Though I am extremely biased. I see games as an art form. IT is never really a product. IT is a labor that makes an artwork that will last for generations.

But the consumer can demand that the art be better. That is fine. But if it harms the artistic image, then no.

 Asherian Command wrote:
If you can't censor a book, you should not be able to decide what goes into a game or a comic book.

Sigh. How many times do I have to say this? NOBODY IS CENSORING VIDEO GAMES. You, along with every game developer, are still free to publish whatever games you want. You might get criticized for your choices and you might not make much money if the customers don't like your product, but they can't stop you from publishing your game and selling it to anyone who wants to buy it. A for-profit business voluntarily making changes to their product to maximize sales is NOT the same thing as censorship. And you know this just as well as I do, because you don't start an epic crusade against censorship every time gamers demand that a console game be released for PCs, criticize the ending of a video game that disappointed them, etc.

In fact, according to your own standards here, YOU are guilty of censorship. You keep telling people to get out of the thread if they post something you consider off-topic, you celebrate the "death" of game journalism websites that are on the "wrong" side of the issue, and you expect people who are advocating more gender equality in games to shut up and stop making demands that you don't approve of. So how do you justify this hypocrisy?

Comic books were not destroyed by Fredric Wertham, and I'd say the fact that books like Saga and Sex Criminals can exist alongside superhero stories shows that comics are doing alright for themselves these days in terms of content variety.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
If you can't censor a book, you should not be able to decide what goes into a game or a comic book.

Sigh. How many times do I have to say this? NOBODY IS CENSORING VIDEO GAMES. You, along with every game developer, are still free to publish whatever games you want. You might get criticized for your choices and you might not make much money if the customers don't like your product, but they can't stop you from publishing your game and selling it to anyone who wants to buy it. A for-profit business voluntarily making changes to their product to maximize sales is NOT the same thing as censorship. And you know this just as well as I do, because you don't start an epic crusade against censorship every time gamers demand that a console game be released for PCs, criticize the ending of a video game that disappointed them, etc.

In fact, according to your own standards here, YOU are guilty of censorship. You keep telling people to get out of the thread if they post something you consider off-topic, you celebrate the "death" of game journalism websites that are on the "wrong" side of the issue, and you expect people who are advocating more gender equality in games to shut up and stop making demands that you don't approve of. So how do you justify this hypocrisy?

Actually, you don't have to tell someone to stop or else in order to censor them.

By not giving certain games a voice, you essentially censor them by not giving them a megaphone in the sea of other people you've given megaphones.




Can Igo sliiiiightly off topic and ask when was the press on Five Nights at Freddy's? Because I'd never heard about that game and suddenly it's EVERYWHERE. It popped out of the ground like some sort of shambling zombie.

 Peregrine wrote:
Sigh. How many times do I have to say this? NOBODY IS CENSORING VIDEO GAMES

Peregrine, I'm wondering if we've had a failure to communicate.

We've gone back and forth a little bit on censorship.

When I was talking about it, I meant in regards to the attempted silence of debate about GamerGate. For example, the Reddit graveyard, the recent 4chan purge, Ben Kuchera trying to convince Greg Tito to shut down the Escapist thread.

Did you think I was talking about censorship in games?