pardon the intrusion? ( been a reader here but have nothing to pst until this thread , sorry )
did anyone really watch the vid that was posted by poopinmymouth? the ted talk? did you watch it poopinmymouth ?
because, what i got from watching was, how she was hoping that women, would take her own stands ( like anita did, maybe ? ) but in more elegant way, more positive ways, like the part of the story about the girl who said she should keep her hands up ( it's shows how to correct things, and in beautiful way ) and then again the part where she was stating that less women was negotiating salary ( forgot how many precent exactly she mentioned , my connections was too slow to buffer it again, sorry )
all the fact she was stated there, and you only cut the part where she said about the Heidy and Howard study ( yes, this i remember correctly, it's not helen as you mentioned )
and even in that study, the respondent didn't say Heidy was a "bitch", as i recall, they say it's going to be hard working with this women, yes, this is a wrong stereotype, i agree completely! and thus, to counter this, is to be like how Sherryl ( is this the right spelling? ) promote equality towards the stereotype among the people, by pushing it from the inside, the problem is already so big, that it was even embedded deep in the women's part as thay tend to avoid making mistakes less than a man ( was stated in the vid )
and therefore, while also educating the counterpart sex,the female also need to change their attitude, and i would totally support if they go through the peacefull attemot like Sherryl, i personally don't like screamings, yelling, insulting etc, so i prefer the peace way, and i would be happy to share this Sherryl vids everywhere, but not this anita vid, sorry, not my taste of struggle, i'm in opposition if you're going to fix the problem, by becoming a problem.

and that's me musterred my strength to post here, and i hope this post did not become another flame starter.

PS : where i live, women have been trying to get their equal right and some get it but some don't, it ussually involves the religion they were in, as in here, it was a kinda major problem, first the stereotype, traditions, and religion, how bad can it be?

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

What´s so odd is that you weren't saying this same thing in the thread for Tim Schaffer's overfunded kickstarter. It´s almost like a double standard.

Well I guess she could hire weta and greenscreen the shit out of her background with some truly awesome cgi!

The point was that she really doesn't anything that she can put all that money in, perhaps marketing and such, but she doesn't do enough to write about it.
Tim schafers kickstarter is not overfunded, all the money is going into the project, games in that early progress are extremely extendable.

I do believe she'll do something good with the extra money, as I've never believed she doesn't believe in her cause strongly, just that I disagree with some of it.

I truly hope for a world where we can treat eachother equally and still have different views of eachother, equality while still being different, but what does she hope for in characters in games and movies?

More than anything I want to live in a world where people don't treat other people like shit, but I'm not sure if I want to live in a world without bayonetta, cortana, or fairy-tale princesses. Is it wrong for a female to have the classical girlish dream or like girlish things, or is this a trait of the society?

And who decides it?

Originally Posted by eld

The point was that she really doesn't anything that she can put all that money in, perhaps marketing and such, but she doesn't do enough to write about it.
Tim schafers kickstarter is not overfunded, all the money is going into the project, games in that early progress are extremely extendable.

Is it wrong for a female to have the classical girlish dream or like girlish things, or is this a trait of the society?

Actually there are lots of things she could do. She probably has to eat and live in a bed like the rest of us, so the extra money could just fund her series much longer than the original 6,000 were without needing another job to pay the bills. Maybe traveling to schools or countries without the budget to bring her themselves. The point is that when Tim's was overfunded (and it was, I was talking about going over the goal) none of us have any problem thinking of all the ways the money could be used in a game studio on a game production. I can promise you that producing videos does cost money. These aren't grainy webcam rants, they are professionally produced, and film production does cost money.

When someone logged into her kickstarter page and saw it at 60,000 USD, if they didn't think she needed any more, they wouldn't have donated, so clearly those who donated after all goals were met felt there was more she could do with extra dollars. I don't doubt for a second she'll think of something related to the kickstarter theme, and I'm eager to see what it is.

It's funny how penny-arcade can make a living from webcomics, or some of us game developers have no qualms working for a studio that charges money for name changes or faction changes or an auction house (making millions in the process) but when a girl profits off her intellectual property, sound the alarms!

Also, no there is nothing wrong with a girl (or a boy) wanting a fairy tale princess wedding and living at home pregnant and cooking. If that's what someone wants for themselves, more power to them. The idea is to make it so that no one is *forced* into that, or devalued/insulted if they deviate from that as their own goals. Here we have a woman making videos about a legitimate area of study taught in universities all over the world, doing it in a well researched fashion and using high production values, and even creating free curriculum afterwards, and as soon as she is able to make a living off of it, she's attacked. Not just by youtube or wikipedia trolls, but the commenters on Kotaku, the Escapist, and here on polycount.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

Actually there are lots of things she could do. She probably has to eat and live in a bed like the rest of us, so the extra money could just fund her series much longer than the original 6,000 were without needing another job to pay the bills. Maybe traveling to schools or countries without the budget to bring her themselves. The point is that when Tim's was overfunded (and it was, I was talking about going over the goal) none of us have any problem thinking of all the ways the money could be used in a game studio on a game production. I can promise you that producing videos does cost money. These aren't grainy webcam rants, they are professionally produced, and film production does cost money.

When someone logged into her kickstarter page and saw it at 60,000 USD, if they didn't think she needed any more, they wouldn't have donated, so clearly those who donated after all goals were met felt there was more she could do with extra dollars. I don't doubt for a second she'll think of something related to the kickstarter theme, and I'm eager to see what it is.

You should've seen the kotaku response when the star-command guys made their stats official, they raged at the "abuse" of the money, which clearly wasn't abuse, people just weren't aware of where the money was going.

But again, I'm counting her salary as being a part of any future or current product, I'm fine with that, and I don't even think anyone has a problem with her doing whatever she wants with it.

And as I've said, I'm guessing it'll all go towards her future work with in the same area.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

It's funny how penny-arcade can make a living from webcomics, or some of us game developers have no qualms working for a studio that charges money for name changes or faction changes or an auction house (making millions in the process) but when a girl profits off her intellectual property, sound the alarms!

Because profiting from important issues have always been a big no-no, that goes for any kind of thing where you are fighting for the greater good, but again: living off it and continuing the work does not equal profiting, profiting would be her sitting on her ass and enjoying passive life without further work.

Now she has the money to further the stuff she does.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

Also, no there is nothing wrong with a girl (or a boy) wanting a fairy tale princess wedding and living at home pregnant and cooking. If that's what someone wants for themselves, more power to them. The idea is to make it so that no one is *forced* into that, or devalued/insulted if they deviate from that as their own goals. Here we have a woman making videos about a legitimate area of study taught in universities all over the world, doing it in a well researched fashion and using high production values, and even creating free curriculum afterwards, and as soon as she is able to make a living off of it, she's attacked. Not just by youtube or wikipedia trolls, but the commenters on Kotaku, the Escapist, and here on polycount.

They are, and they empower her even further, in a way that I feel my own criticism gets buried, but I guess that's poetic justice in a way.

Any point they might've wanted to get across gets smeared in shit by the foul tactic they're going with, and smears everyone else that might've had that point too, in short: It's complicated.

She has a ton of good points, and a vast amount of people really need to change for the better, but she still has a bunch of less fantastic points that I wish wouldn't have been there, she'll have entire videos on subjects that are not really a part of the cause but rather just an occurance of the situation, such as the women in the freezer or mystical pregnancies.

Shit ton of text to read through (which I'm not going to read) but I'm really confused as to what this chicks plan is.

Presumably she has no game development experience and she wants to make a game (as if making a shitty game isn't hard enough) that some how empowers women (what ever that means) all because she doesn't like how games showcase women and perhaps men as well?

K... then what? Honestly, it just seems like there's this plan with no end goal for it. She basically asks for free money so she could make a game she wants to make.

I'm not going to stop her, anyone can do that and have done exactly that, but don't act like it's for anything other than to push your own ideals on other people.

Really, this entire thing (the whole "problem" with current tropes) seems pointless. Some people like using tropes, deal with it.

also, lol at the comic. Portraying this gal as some kind of super hero? lolk.

Originally Posted by Bunglo

also, lol at the comic. Portraying this gal as some kind of super hero? lolk.

sigh!

But that's the problem with the "extra money from virtually unlimited products costing zero $ to duplicate - they don't really comply with the KS guidelines. That's why I am surprised that the Double Fine project was even allowed in the first place :

http://www.kickstarter.com/help/guidelines

1. Funding for projects only.
A project has a clear goal, like making an album, a book, or a work of art. A project will eventually be completed, and something will be produced by it. A project is not open-ended. Starting a business, for example, does not qualify as a project.

No "fund my life" projects. Examples include projects to pay tuition or bills, go on vacation, or buy a new camera.

So indeed - regardless of the cause (please Ben, stop getting this all mixed up, it plays against your whole argument), if feel like there is some dangerous grey area with that kind of model.

Super weird ...

Pretty much got to that part of the comic where they talk about Lollipop Chainsaw and knew I couldn't keep reading.

I'm all for realistic and deep female characters within context, but that doesn't mean I want to see the removal of silly unrealistic female characters within context.

Originally Posted by pior

That's why I am surprised that the Double Fine project was even allowed in the first place

Because double-fine can and will utilize all that money just by expanding the project, hence my joke about her hiring someone for special effects.

double-fine originally planned for a quirky minor 2d adventure game, now with all the money they can expand that until the money runs out, and as we know with duke nukem forever it's fully possible to put a shit-ton of money into a game.

Double-fine game and wasteland 2 were very good at describing where the extra money would go, wasteland 2 even went into detail on hiring outside talent and extra ports, and that all extra money would go into making it a bigger development.

Yup I understand that and see how it can scale up in some situations ... but I don't know, when it comes to creative projects I think we all know that more money does not (if ever) equals more content or more "cool" stuff. It's a bit like playing catch up with free money ... at the risk of blowing up the scope of a project, which can be harmful.

Anyways - sorry for the slight derail. Back on track, lets keep talking about boobs! (right ?)

The negative response to this Kickstarter's been pretty shocking, while at the same time completely unsurprising - an impressive feat, all things considered. Well done, internet, old bean.

Even if there's something about a particular argument that runs against the grain, I wish more people were willing to discuss some of the issues she's bringing up without dismissing her work entirely. I've seen a fair amount of 'I didn't like the way she spoke about X, so I'm free to write it off wholesale'. Anyone taking that stance is doing themselves a great disservice, not to mention ladies in general.

Originally Posted by KateC

The negative response to this Kickstarter's been pretty shocking, while at the same time completely unsurprising - an impressive feat, all things considered. Well done, internet, old bean.

Even if there's something about a particular argument that runs against the grain, I wish more people were willing to discuss some of the issues she's bringing up without dismissing her work entirely. I've seen a fair amount of 'I didn't like the way she spoke about X, so I'm free to write it off wholesale'. Anyone taking that stance is doing themselves a great disservice, not to mention ladies in general.

While you're correct that we shouldn't be painting someone with by a few words we disagree with it is almost impossible to avoid. What she says are arguments, not simply statements. When she encodes her work, we decode it, but the only way she would want us to is in agreement. If our own perceptions find a component of her argument that exposes this process and her own unavoidable bias and agenda, we will continue to find difficulty agreeing.

Whew... very tired after reading this thread. Lots of strong opinions which makes me too scared to add any cents of mine, so I won't :P

All I can say is from my personal experience growing up with an INCREDIBLY smart / loving / busting-ass mother (at times it was just my mom, sister (who is also an amazingly strong and talented person) and I) I've grown up my entire life believing in equality, and find myself always uncomfortable when others treat people differently (both male and female).

I've seen first hand (from an industry perspective) that women are viewed differently then men and it sucks, but I've also seen first hand how a lot of these women are kicking ass much more then us manly men... The most important thing for me is knowing what I believe in, and try my hardest to at least let others know that equality is incredibly important to me.

Anywho, I'm gonna take a nap, 11 pages of reading strong opinionated posts has made me sleepy.

Originally Posted by Snacuum

While you're correct that we shouldn't be painting someone with by a few words we disagree with it is almost impossible to avoid. What she says are arguments, not simply statements. When she encodes her work, we decode it, but the only way she would want us to is in agreement. If our own perceptions find a component of her argument that exposes this process and her own unavoidable bias and agenda, we will continue to find difficulty agreeing.

Ideally she'd like viewers to agree with her, absolutely, and I don't find the idea so unreasonable. The bias and agenda you mentioned basically boil down to 'include more thoughtful lady characters', which I would've thought most everyone could find some value in, or agree with in some capacity.

There Definitely needs to be more women in the industry, mainly from getting more females interested in game development and games overall.

A scary environment full of men and the atmosphere it creates is one part, but the bigger part is the complete lack of interest, which is not a blame females, but just how it is.

I know one answer is "hire more women over men" but it isn't that simple, we're an industry of talent over age and gender, we simply don't have enough of a sample group to make the entire industry consistantly equal without things falling down.

Originally Posted by eld

There Definitely needs to be more women in the industry, mainly from getting more females interested in game development and games overall.

A scary environment full of men and the atmosphere it creates is one part, but the bigger part is the complete lack of interest, which is not a blame females, but just how it is.

How can you say that for sure without more research? Isn't it possible (and I'm not claiming it is for sure, but just follow the thought experiment) that it really is "big scary environment full of men" that dissuades women at every step?

Plenty of polycounters said that their love of games and wanting to work in them started with playing quake and other multiplayer games. Even today, these atmospheres are still hostile toward women, using rape jokes, insulting women if a girl voice comes on, sandwich jokes etc.

Next you have the actual schools. I can't make any industry wide proclamations, but at least at my college, there was only 1, sometimes 2 women per class, and guys were either hostile, or overly creepy in how they interacted with them.

The idea that "girls just aren't interested" I think is barking up the wrong tree. I think first we should focus on a more inclusive gaming industry, from the very beginnings when a girl/boy would first get interested in games by having the actual themes and characters in the games be more egalitarian (Anita's whole point of the videos) to equal treatment of women in schools, and hiring (and wages), and working with. Maybe if we get to that point of equality and women still aren't showing up in equal numbers we can proclaim some kind of gender based disinterest, but as we are nowhere near controlling for the hostile factors, I think it's a bit early to jump to that as a major (or even minor) factor.

Originally Posted by eld

I know one answer is "hire more women over men" but it isn't that simple, we're an industry of talent over age and gender, we simply don't have enough of a sample group to make the entire industry consistantly equal without things falling down.

To imply every single hire is based purely on who is the most skilled applicant is incorrect. There are still plenty of nepotist hires that totally bypass skill.

Also, while it's a bit of a derail, it's only in today's market that companies can demand that every new hire come on fully trained. For centuries it has been the company's job to provide some level of on-the-job training. There could very easily be a requirement to hire 50% women, find the best ones that do apply, and nurture the talent. Game art would not fall behind 10 years in quality, and plenty of arguments could be made that it would rapidly improve at least thematically from the wider pool of life experience now present.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

How can you say that for sure without more research? Isn't it possible (and I'm not claiming it is for sure, but just follow the thought experiment) that it really is "big scary environment full of men" that dissuades women at every step?

Plenty of polycounters said that their love of games and wanting to work in them started with playing quake and other multiplayer games. Even today, these atmospheres are still hostile toward women, using rape jokes, insulting women if a girl voice comes on, sandwich jokes etc.

Next you have the actual schools. I can't make any industry wide proclamations, but at least at my college, there was only 1, sometimes 2 women per class, and guys were either hostile, or overly creepy in how they interacted with them.

There you have it, that's what I meant with a big scary environment full of men, having one usually ends up creating one of those multiplayer scenarios.¨

I would even dare say the equalent can happen if you have a female-dominant place of work or environment and a single man pops up, these scenarios are highly rare, but displays the mob/group power.

Here in sweden the schools are (from what I've heard) proper when it comes to game-related schools, and I knew a mix of males and just a tiny few females from them.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

The idea that "girls just aren't interested" I think is barking up the wrong tree. I think first we should focus on a more inclusive gaming industry, from the very beginnings when a girl/boy would first get interested in games by having the actual themes and characters in the games be more egalitarian (Anita's whole point of the videos) to equal treatment of women in schools, and hiring (and wages), and working with. Maybe if we get to that point of equality and women still aren't showing up in equal numbers we can proclaim some kind of gender based disinterest, but as we are nowhere near controlling for the hostile factors, I think it's a bit early to jump to that as a major (or even minor) factor.

I've never implied that girls are genetically uninterested, I've claimed that statistically women are currently uninterested in games-development, even many of those that do play games.

There is a WAY smaller group to sample your workforce from, and since the act of hiring is USUALLY and HOPEFULLY blind, we'll get an equal disproportionate amount of workers completely relative to the amount of females and males in the industry.

I know a ton of places are dying to get more females in, but there's just so few that do apply, and when they do they'll follow the same percentage of pro/noob as males do, very few get in.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

To imply every single hire is based purely on who is the most skilled applicant is incorrect. There are still plenty of nepotist hires that totally bypass skill.

Also, while it's a bit of a derail, it's only in today's market that companies can demand that every new hire come on fully trained. For centuries it has been the company's job to provide some level of on-the-job training. There could very easily be a requirement to hire 50% women, find the best ones that do apply, and nurture the talent. Game art would not fall behind 10 years in quality, and plenty of arguments could be made that it would rapidly improve at least thematically from the wider pool of life experience now present.

But hiring 50% women out of a group of women that is WAY smaller than the male group results in having to hire less than stellar workers, it'll end up hurting the company.

Originally Posted by poopinmymouth

There could very easily be a requirement to hire 50% women, find the best ones that do apply, and nurture the talent.

That is complete and utter bullshit.

The problems leading to so few women being involved in game development are deeply rooted in how society itself views games both as a pastime and an industry. The mainstream opinion is still that gaming is the preserve of teenage boys and machismo-filled shooter games, even despite the huge successes of games like the Sims and Farmville which are very popular amongst women.

Growing up, I was considered a bit strange for liking games past the age of about thirteen or so, when all my classmates suddenly became much more interested in boys and makeup and clothes. Now I like those things too... but I liked games more, which is still viewed as a weird and un-girl-like thing, and ends up ostracising one from the teenage norm. This happens to a lesser extent to boys, but when the biggest budget shootiest explosion-filled games are the ones that pull in the marketing money and decorate every bus and billboard in town, it becomes more acceptable to be a male gamer.

Female game developers are rare because female gamers are marginalised and ostracised, and even when we do somehow end up in games development there are many times when you end up with your face firmly embedded in your palm wondering why you even bothered when the industry still doesn't seem to give a toss about you - lollipop chainsaw, that stupid hitman trailer, every giant-tittied eyecandy female game character, it's all rather insulting and demoralising...

I backed this Kickstarter project because I think what Anita is doing is great, she's bringing more visibility to these issues and hopefully her videos will form a valuable reference for developers on what NOT to do with their games. It's sparking a lot of debate too, which hopefully will lead to people being educated a bit about things they never considered before.

Originally Posted by lysaara

even despite the huge successes of games like the Sims and Farmville which are very popular amongst women.

Weirdly enough, I love the sims, I really never saw the point of it being a female-dominated series, but maybe it made a big enough boom to make people realize that games can be whatever they make it.

Dwarf fortress is very similar to the sims in many ways, yet that game will be forever male-dominated.

Farmville is another one of those weird realities where tons of people found a game when they could've been playing animal crossing or harvest moon ages ago, but somehow farmville is for them while those others are not.

Originally Posted by lysaara

but when the biggest budget shootiest explosion-filled games are the ones that pull in the marketing money and decorate every bus and billboard in town, it becomes more acceptable to be a male gamer.
.

True, but these games shouldn't in any way be just for the male audience, there's no breasts in modern warfare, a lot of females still play these games, the only problematic area is the online and PLAYERBASE. Still, again, this falls in the misnomer that these games are only for men. People are fast to look at the surface and forget about the actual gameplay.

It is a social problem too, gaming is still not a socially acceptable thing in a scenario where popularity and looks are important, this scares females away, and we can't say that that is a lie, it was exactly the same 20 years ago even as a male.

You would be laughed out by the same type of college-boys that are playing console games today, the nerd-factor is very high amongst females.

Originally Posted by lysaara

and even when we do somehow end up in games development there are many times when you end up with your face firmly embedded in your palm wondering why you even bothered when the industry still doesn't seem to give a toss about you - lollipop chainsaw, that stupid hitman trailer, every giant-tittied eyecandy female game character, it's all rather insulting and demoralising...

It is, but it shouldn't be the defining part of our industry, especially when we got all those games that don't go there, like mass effect series, world of warcraft, elderscrolls, fallout, halo, and super big hits like the sims.

And on top of that we should not bunch those together with other giant tittied eyecandy females that do hit home with females, such as something like the female cast of the guilty gear series or the women of odin sphere.

The problem lies with the people that let the negative atomspheres and treatment happen, characters are sometimes just characters, and even characters like cortana which will essentially just be a voice in your head will be targeted for being fap-material when gamers made her that.

Cortana rescued masterchief, masterchief rescued cortana, together they saved humanity, no amount of titties placed on her body can change that.

lollipop chainsaw, that stupid hitman trailer, every giant-tittied eyecandy female game character, it's all rather insulting and demoralising...

Now you see this is one of the attitudes I don't understand, and I'm fully willing to admit it is probably because I am a male. While I'm in full agreement that games as a whole do rarely genuinely show realistic female characters, I feel like every game and male that enjoys it gets tarred with the same brush.

These days when I look at most games the female representation tends to be in 3 main categories (authentic, independent, and ridiculous) with different levels of prevalence:

authentic and prevalent - these are the ones to be praised as their women are deep, realistic and well though out characters with plenty of them to know and male characters interact with them realistically

authentic and less prevalent - these make up most of our go-to examples, they are noticeable as the only or few female characters that impress with their authenticity eg. Alyx from HL2

authentic and not prevalent - this is where there are practically no female characters due to diegetic reasoning or technical reasoning eg. multiplayer war and army games where real-life armies have less female representation as well as the technical hurdle of requiring twice the character models and animation sets for players to use.

independent and prevalent - here is where a lot of the games where the sole player character is female. The character is rarely an authentic woman, usually unrealistically proportioned or acting uncharacteristically male. However these roles almost always star powerful independent women being the hero, showing confidence and great skill.

independent and less prevalent - poor but 'strong' or 'cool' assisting characters to the main protagonist.

independent and not prevalent - doesn't really sound like a category but would cover any game with a completely neutral stance due to no mention of women or how they would fit into the game.

(this is where it gets tricky as the next category is where most of the complaints come from and even I believe they still have their place.)

ridiculous and prevalent - the women in these games are clearly walking breasts, unrealistically beautiful, no attempts to cover up who they're aimed at. They're shallow and would subtract almost all seriousness from any attempts at it. eg. Dead or Alive, Hyperdimension Neptunia

ridiculous and less prevalent - either sole main female characters that are purely basic, or sidelined background women just to remind the player that they exist.

ridiculous and not prevalent - there is simply no female representation and it's kind of clear the developers just didn't think or care about it.

Now here's where I'm probably going to get disagrees. I think authentic, and independent categories are acceptable, and both are becoming more common no matter how much doom is spread. Also I think ridiculous can be acceptable within diegetic reasoning. As in the fictional universe of the game is so much a fantasy and ridiculous in itself that stupid female or male characters practically fit in.

My other point is that these styles were completely obvious and spread across a completely random sample, I didn't find a heavy weight towards any type and was pleasantly surprise by the amount of developers attempting to make worthwhile authentic female characters. It's changing, slowly, but it is.

Lastly I can't feel good about people bashing obviously ridiculous games like Lollipop Chainsaw. It's a glitzy poppy zombie masher that's intentionally playing to stereotypes, in this case dumb blonde cheerleaders. They're not accidentally making her that way out of ignoance, or trying to create a Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

And yes that Hitman trailer is stupid, and I agree it is uncharacteristic of Hitman games to have such schlock. But at the same time is it just too much to imagine in a fictional world a crazy hit-squad of women who think they're way sexy and enjoy dressing up as mockeries of chastity to kill men with style? I know what kind of interpellation and encoding goes into this and agree that it doesn't help women enjoy the prospect of entering the industry, but I also don't like the idea that if somebody wants to make a dumb story they should think again because somebody might not read it as a dumb story.

It becomes hard to agree with the clearly righteous side of the argument (those for women equality) when a great deal of the arguments presented are not "lets add more great female characters" but instead "lets remove all the shit female characters."

This is pretty much my favorite thing right now:

Originally Posted by Snacuum

Lastly I can't feel good about people bashing obviously ridiculous games like Lollipop Chainsaw. It's a glitzy poppy zombie masher that's intentionally playing to stereotypes...

It becomes hard to agree with the clearly righteous side of the argument (those for women equality) when a great deal of the arguments presented are not "lets add more great female characters" but instead "lets remove all the shit female characters."

Lollipop Chainsaw, alone and as a single piece of work, is totally intentional, and I have absolutely no problem with devs embracing purposeful cheesecake. I textured a smokin' bikini just last month. The problem shows up when it's put in the context of games on the whole, and to this point the medium hasn't really done the best job of depicting women or girl characters.

Alyx Vance and Elena Fisher are great, and Jade was awesome, but even with Alyx and Elena, they were unplayable side characters, and Beyond Good and Evil is almost ten years old now.

I don't think it's righteous to want to play a character you can relate to in some way, who's not then included in weird sexually violent scenes or made to strip to find out information. Heavy Rain I'm looking at y'all.

Edit: Also bendy cat? You're alright in my books.

I don't think it's righteous to want to play a character you can relate to in some way, who's not then included in weird sexually violent scenes or made to strip to find out information.

That's a very valid point and I think I can understand the feeling. However there's is something else I would like to point out, from my personal perspective as a male gamer : I don't think there is a *single* game character out there that I personally relate to simply because it is male, or because this given character looks a certain way. I do not relate more to Drake than to Lara just because he has a penis and no boobs ... However I would tend to play as Lara more, simply because I like the gameplay of Tomb Raider more than the one of Uncharted.

I tend to think that in the world of games, gameplay is the key to suspension of disbelief. The look or gender of the avatar really has little impact.... I do not look like a red-haired demon, yet I *am* Akuma when I play as him ; and I am not a hot asian girl in capri pants yet I *am* Faith when I play Mirror's Edge.

I guess I am just saying that picking a game over another just because the protagonist is male or female would just mean that gameplay takes the backseat in the gamer's decision. Now I am sure that some projects are based on demographic studies (gamers are mostly guys, so lets make a game for guys, it's bound to sell well!! Yay easy money!) but these are usually bound to be crappy products and not worth our attention.

If a female gamer enjoys the feel of twitch competitive FPSes, I certainly hope that she won't avoid playing Call Of Duty simple because the avatars holding the "virtual paintball guns" are male... Missing on a great game because of a gender issue would be a shame, I think.

Now the irony is that I could imagine how some groups could very likely complain if there was even the option of playing as a woman in CoD, because it would be degrading or something like that

Anyways - regardless of male or female characters, I suppose I just want good games...

I totally agree with you about pointless violence and sexually violent scenes. I think I am offended by them just as much as everyone else here. Unfortunately "shock factor" seems to be selling... I didn't play Heavy Rain long enough to find these parts because I didn't buy it ... since the demo was enough to convince me it was a shitty game not worth playing anyways

I could not sleep for an hour after my last post because this issue was still rattling in my head.

I don't think it's righteous to want to play a character you can relate to in some way, who's not then included in weird sexually violent scenes or made to strip to find out information. Heavy Rain I'm looking at y'all.

Of course it's not overly righteous and I was not using that word to debase the argument, I know the ladies side of this discussion are completely sincere. I realised after my last post what you said before you said it, that you want the equivalency. Many women gamers have told me they feel games are "for men" when either a) so what? then that's the target audience, or b) like the developers knew better, they're men and they just made a game for everyone. And so if a girl doesn't like Bayonetta, the issue isn't so much that she doesn't like it because it's "for men" but because she wants to like the game but doesn't because of its image.

Of course in this example I would point out Devil May Cry, but that's beyond the point. So really to be sure putting in 'relate able' characters will fix this? I gotta say as a man, as much as I enjoy games like Bayonetta, Tomb Raider, Gears of War etc. I don't relate to any of them.

But what confuses me so much, and god damn I want to learn, is that I don't know any better than probably any other guy what is appropriate. I haven't played Heavy Rain but I do want to just to see what kinds of narrative it can deliver. But my concern is at what point is a weirdly sexual scene or a stripping for information scene appropriate? When does the story or the diegetic universe allow it? Or even better is when is it not allowed? How much can we do without insulting all women, some women, or a woman?

Lollipop Chainsaw may be a horrible reminder in the current climate, but I struggle to even imagine it existing in a world where developers are afraid of spurning the women vote.

Men are dumb. In the same way women are dumb: to each other. The closest we will ever get to understanding women is when you tell us. Which has led to discussions like this, and why for so many of us the only solution we can bring is "get more women in games." As we don't know what/who you want to see and play as, or how big their boobs are allowed to be or how beautiful or smart they can be.

Where is the line that we cross so ignorantly? What standard of measure is used? It may sound obvious, but is Bayonetta insulting because she has an outfit made of hair or because she runs in high-heels? Is Samus a good female character because she looks like a genderless robot for most of the game, or terrible because she is surprisingly revealed as a beautiful woman in the same terrible trope as "a female ninja! no way!" No to mention that so many of the complaints are towards Japanese games where their culture and perspective of women is so different, and they are definitely not listening to this conversation.

Also not helping women here is the fact that while I'd still say the industry is moving towards a women embracing environment, gamers are sadly moving at an even slower pace. This is clearly not just happening because of games terrible outward image, but the same society that ostracises, criticises and pays women less.
(oh and please please never forget that so many of the kids on xbox live don't actually know how to interact with women in the first place)