Support NeoGAF

[plutoknight]

So does gender stereotypes exist because of marketing or does marketing exist to conform to already established gender stereotypes?

Chicken or egg?

The system reinforces itself, there is no 'catalyst' -- if you're looking for a catalyst, you're looking for the wrong thing.

If you have to have a starting point, though...you'd have to go back. Way back, into history. Pick any point between the beginning of what we call history, and what we call the present, and you can find a starting point. Perhaps it's the idea of the 'perfect' family and gender roles in early Colonial America. Perhaps its England's long-stiffling of the females for power in the monarchy.

Perhaps it was Disney.

But that is exactly what happens. People's behaviour is guided by social expectations. It's the truth.

The only acceptable answer to this is both work to reinforce each other, in tandem. Until perspectives change across the board, or a disruptive force comes in that is powerful enough to change this (think, say, the Feminist movement of the past 50 years...which some would argue isn't a great example), you won't see it change.

 

[B-Genius]

Interestingly that is the same single sentence I would have picked out as well.

It does illustrate how companies could position themselves differently without changing actual game content. Sony in particular has plenty of titles it could promote to a broader audience.

Edit: Although it does take some understanding of the market. People tried to push Flower as a game for everyone, but it's actually a game for the super-hardcore that need a palette cleanser. In general a lot of indie darlings that are ostensibly for everyone actually appeal to a very narrow demographic range. Arthouse films appeal to the most hardcore of film enthusiasts, the same is true of arthouse games.

That's a good point, although it wouldn't hurt to take more opportunities to show off the variety on offer, rather than see nothing but Call of Bullets IV all over the place. It'd be foolish to assume that advertising indie games would automatically convert everyone, but it'd be great if we could get these "palette cleansers" (nice) out in the wild a bit more. Like you say, they should supposedly appeal to more than just a handful of dedicated users.

I'm reminded of the Charlie Brooker vs Jon Snow segment in which they spend 95% of the time to play military murder simulator and Lego movie-licensed game #3891 in order to convince the uninvited Snow about the legitimacy of video games, and then spend like only one minute in the end talking about Papers, Please.

The thing is, it has to be the entire gaming culture that tries to shift the discussion away from big, safe, stupid, creatively bankrupt blockbusters aimed at the implied normative white heterosexual male gamer, to the more interesting cases of what the medium is able to do. It's not only marketing and publishers that have to try to talk about diversity in terms of types of experiences, but also journalists, reviewers, celebrities, distributors, enthusiasts, and consumers.

Absolutely, and I think we're getting there. When we frame the message correctly (such as in the article), we'll get more people talking with an informed, non-biased and measured opinion.
That Brooker vs Snow segment frustrated me (I'm sure it frustrated Brooker as well), because the set up was all wrong for what he was trying to achieve in that limited time. It was almost like they were trolling Brooker with the games on offer, but that's another story. The fact is, we need to show people what's available to them besides CoD and Lego Marvel; Uncharted and Mario; Clash of Clans and Candy Crush. We need to show them a fuller picture than just two extreme ends of a spectrum.

 

[Kazerei]

lol, what came first - the chicken or the egg? Social Action or Social Expectation? I'm really trying to dumb this down for you but like I said this is NOT just a one sided affair.

If overall tendency is to follow the Norm, then why is it that we are not following the norm from Victorian era or the crusades today?

Or maybe what you define as "social expectations" are just recorded observations. It is backwardness if people use social expectations to guide behavior. Which is why I fucking hate religions.

But that is exactly what happens. People's behaviour is guided by social expectations. It's the truth.

 

[Mumei]

Why not? Look, I'm all for more girls/women coming into this industry, but why should companies be forced to appeal to a market that isnt there? When the dude-bro audience came into the picture with MW, the entire industry changed. The DS had a very large female userbase, and what did you see on the DS? many female oriented games (that weren't all bratz games). Now, it isnt surprising that you're seeing the same thing with mobile games. All it takes is one game (something other than Dance Central) that will bring in casual female gamers, similar to what MW did with the casual male gamer. Until then, I don't think video game companies should be given shit for targeting the male gamer as their core demographic (which they are).

I have a problem with your formulation of the position that the advertising is problematic as, "Companies should be forced to appeal to a market that isn't there." That isn't my position, nor is it a position advocated in the article. As with most discussions about problematic behavior, the hope is that by pointing out the problem there will be companies that voluntarily choose to make changes. The hope is to persuade, not to force companies into doing things. I also take issue with the assertion that the audience "doesn't exist". It may be smaller, but market research referenced in this thread says that it does exist. I'm willing to make the argument that the female audience for those games as it exists now does not represent the apotheosis of what female interest in those games could be.

I would like to see video games in a similar cultural space as we see movies. I see video games as a highly segregated medium; while women make up a large proportion of people who play video games, those video games tend to predominantly be games that colloquially most of us would call "casual." The core male audience for video games (e.g. major publisher releases on console and PC systems) also seems to look askance at these games as not "real" games. As an aside, I think this probably contributes both to the sense that girls don't play games - those games don't count! - and girls' unwillingness to identify as 'gamers.' By contrast, while male audiences for movies might look askance at 'chick flicks', those are still recognized as being, you know, legitimately "movies," and girls who see them as still viewed as moviegoers. And not only that, but there is also a large segment of movies that appeal to both men and women and are marketed as such; something like The Avengers movies would be a good example of this.

 

[sphagnum]

Has any accepted research been done on what kind of video games appeal to girls.

I was recently on a long flight sat next to a girl I didnt know (she was around 25 years old accompanied by her boyfriend sat the other side) I saw she spent some time gaming on the inflight entertainment system in between movies.

She played:

bejeweled
chequers
solitaire

These games dont appeal to me

There's no reason women would find certain types of games more appealing than other games rooted in biological factors. If there's some sort of discrepancy it's probably due to societal factors making them feel like certain sorts of games are "acceptable".

My girlfriend likes dungeon crawlers, action RPGs, simulation, and fighting games. Individuals like different things. It's not like plenty of guys don't play solitaire...

 

[Riposte]

But people cite FarmVille in part out of inculcated gender biases. Why is the comparison between Doom (a top-fifty-of-all-time, genre-creating, industry-redefining game from twenty years ago) and FarmVille (a title that's only a few years old, is mostly known for questionable business practices, and which is widely agreed to be of poor quality)? The comparison is bizarre from any logical approach.

If we want to at least try to compare apples and apples, why not compare a niche male-oriented title (say, Yakuza) to a niche female-oriented title (say, Harvest Moon)? Or a big, super-casual, non-skill-oriented male-targeted AAA game (like Call of Duty) to an equivalent female-targeted AAA game (the Sims)?

Call of Duty doesn't fit your description at all. It is only "low skill" relative to much more demanding games, but there is still a great deal of distance between good and bad players. Moreover, it is still trying to achieve all the same feelings most other FPS games are, just it has tricks to make accessing that feeling more accessible (the importance of these mechanics scale with the ruleset being used). You are being overly punitive to Call of Duty because of its reputation among upper-tier dedicated FPS gamers and overly forgiving of The Sims because its looks amazing compared to FarmVille.

Harvest Moon is also pretty suspect, compared to Yakuza no less.

I think the reality is that you are not going to find many apple to apple comparisons because enthusiast gaming is male dominated (to whatever extent) and that's where the cutting edge of depth, immersion, and spectacle is. It is hard to find a legit Call of Duty equivalent. Especially in terms of how dominated a female audience would have to be in order to be truly equivalent. Females are dominant only in very simplistic blue ocean games (like FarmVille IIRC). EDIT: I actually suspect Call of Duty has better numbers than most of its peers due to its social relevancy.

 

[Zoe]

Why do you think he chose a 'trash' girl game like FarmVille instead of a game like The Sims to make his comparison?

Because that's the comparison the article used?

 

[Steel]

I think the reality is that you are not going to find many apple to apple comparisons because enthusiast gaming is male dominated (to whatever extent) and that's where the cutting edge of depth, immersion, and spectacle is. It is hard to find a legit Call of Duty equivalent. Especially in terms of how dominated a female audience would have to be in order to be truly equivalent. Females are dominant only in very simplistic blue ocean games (like FarmVille IIRC). EDIT: I actually suspect Call of Duty has better numbers than most of its peers due to its social relevancy.

I believe the point here is tha,t saleswise, The Sims(Which, while it may not be to the liking of you or I, is indeed an immersive game, quite probably moreso than Call of Duty) are similar enough to make the comparison. Myst is also an example of an extremely immersive, well-selling game at the time that was female dominated. I would not call Myst simplistic.

 

[Shingro]

I have a problem with your formulation of the position that the advertising is problematic as, "Companies should be forced to appeal to a market that isn't there." That isn't my position, nor is it a position advocated in the article. As with most discussions about problematic behavior, the hope is that by pointing out the problem there will be companies that voluntarily choose to make changes.

I support the games audience broadening 100% but this is disingenuous, first off it's impossible to have a range of people believe a thing strongly and have *no one* want the companies to be forced to do something. This happens to any cause people give a damn about, and there are some damns given in this case.

And second it's the same as a protest or picketing in online form, if you went to any activist rally on the steps of capitol hill and they said "Hey we aren't saying this law/policy/tendency should be FORCED to change" you'd call bullshit.

This type of conversation too often goes nowhere and angers everyone because no one's willing to state "this is what I think should be done"

It's okay to have a strong position on something, for or against.

Personally, I'm unconvinced that gaming has any more effect on society then rap/harry potter/violent video games had on youth. I feel that authorial control or even negative pressure on an artistic medium is far more destructive and inefficient then positive education. It's not about removing promiscuity from TV, it's about educating your children about positive traits and responsibility. That sort of thing.

Instead of alienating a large set of gamers with constant refrains of what is awful about their beloved medium and how they're personally responable for rape culture (yes I've heard this). Try encouraging positive examples of games and encouraging young women to break their gender roles. The market grows, games with gender-neutral traits gross more, they become the norm instead of the exception and games for specific audiences remain, as they should because there's nothing wrong with appealing to a niche market. Hell, any gamer whose been a fan of a niche title should know that fact better then anyone

and if they don't? Then the teams and artists who sell their works shouldn't be forced to throw themselves on the spikes of recouping massive development budgets to satisfy an experiment in engineering society. Nor should they be berated for the artistic choices they make. People are often saying "Why isn't your character a girl" rather then "Why is your character a boy?" It's a bummer because the second is far better at promoting analysis rather then accusation

 

[Kuroyume]

It's funny because I'm not an engineer. And I'd wager most of us are not engineers. But okay.

I used to love Ninjas as a kid too. And I can guarantee you that I'm not a ninja either. For someone to draw these connections is just so stupidly absurd. Books have existed since forever. Marketed at both sexes. About all kinds of things. Why do people ignore that? A girl could be motivated to be an engineer from a book. Hasn't changed the disparity between the number of women and men engineers though. Maybe people need to stop making excuses and look elsewhere.

 

[Riposte]

I believe the point here is tha,t saleswise, The Sims(Which, while it may not be to the liking of you or I, is indeed an immersive game, quite probably moreso than Call of Duty) are similar enough to make the comparison. Myst is also an example of an extremely immersive, well-selling game at the time that was female dominated. I would not call Myst simplistic.

I wasn't entirely aware Myst was female dominated as opposed to gender neutral, but fair enough, that's an interesting example.

 

[Juliet's 8½ Spirits]

Dude, this is like all wrong.

No one has a passion about anything when they're coming into the world. Passions have to get formed. Young girls being told that games are for boys can't possibly feel passionate about them. Besides, to kids, approval is so important. For boys there's some stigma for playing video games instead of playing outside, but it's not as prevalent. That's because of the marketing. The marketing for video games gets people to accept playing video games is acceptable behavior. But since the marketing is only aimed at boys, games are only seen as acceptable for boys.

Same thing with dudebros. The marketing is aimed towards male teenagers and the demographics follow. To get women to play games, you just have to market games to them. You can't wait for the market to appear. That doesn't work for any product at all. You market the product and then people want it, not the other way around. The female gaming community will not become large enough if the investments are not made. If investments are made, then with effective marketing, the market will grow to support larger investments.

and what would the marketing consist of? how would it be different than the marketing for games currently?

There's no reason women would find certain types of games more appealing than other games rooted in biological factors. If there's some sort of discrepancy it's probably due to societal factors making them feel like certain sorts of games are "acceptable".

My girlfriend likes dungeon crawlers, action RPGs, simulation, and fighting games. Individuals like different things. It's not like plenty of guys don't play solitaire...

I'm glad you're an authority to speak about the subject. Nature vs. Nurture, we can have this debate all night. My female friends dont like anything other than mobile games, anecdotal evidence isnt evidence.

I have a problem with your formulation of the position that the advertising is problematic as, "Companies should be forced to appeal to a market that isn't there." That isn't my position, nor is it a position advocated in the article. As with most discussions about problematic behavior, the hope is that by pointing out the problem there will be companies that voluntarily choose to make changes. The hope is to persuade, not to force companies into doing things. I also take issue with the assertion that the audience "doesn't exist". It may be smaller, but market research referenced in this thread says that it does exist. I'm willing to make the argument that the female audience for those games as it exists now does not represent the apotheosis of what female interest in those games could be.
I would like to see video games in a similar cultural space as we see movies. I see video games as a highly segregated medium; while women make up a large proportion of people who play video games, those video games tend to predominantly be games that colloquially most of us would call "casual." The core male audience for video games (e.g. major publisher releases on console and PC systems) also seems to look askance at these games as not "real" games. As an aside, I think this probably contributes both to the sense that girls don't play games - those games don't count! - and girls' unwillingness to identify as 'gamers.' By contrast, while male audiences for movies might look askance at 'chick flicks', those are still recognized as being, you know, legitimately "movies," and girls who see them as still viewed as moviegoers. And not only that, but there is also a large segment of movies that appeal to both men and women and are marketed as such; something like The Avengers movies would be a good example of this.

I hope so, diversity is never a bad thing. I just dont see the problem that many are complaining about. I think that with the indie revolution that has happened recent and is happening female gamers have no excuse anymore to complain about the lack of female presence in the industry.

I don't believe that video games are segregated based on gender, but on commitment to the hobby. I feel there are two camps; casual and hardcore (not that there is anything wrong with being either). We are still defining what both of these are, and dont fully understand where one line ends and the other begins. To me a dude-bro that only plays sports games or cod is just as casual as a woman who only plays just dance or Wii fit. This is where the money is made and extensive market research done. The biggest games in the industry right now are army shooters and fitness games; both of these games exploiting gender stereotypes of their respective genders. These casual games are games that are easily produced with large teams and corporations that are in it to only make money. On the deeper hardcore end is where you see true creative expression, primarily from smaller teams. What we're having a problem with now is where to we draw the line between creative expression and mass market appeal. Your comparison between movie goers is wrong imo. Sure those women who watch only chick-flicks and guys who only watch transformers are considered movie goers, but they would never be considered cinephiles by anyone. We're still in the infancy of the industry, let it grow at its own pace and I think there will be a place for everyone.

 

[Steel]

I wasn't entirely aware Myst was female dominated as opposed to gender neutral, but fair enough, that's an interesting example.

For citation purposes:

s the launch of Myst, which had an overwhelmingly female player base. "Myst dominated the charts, and we don't say games are dominated by women," Romero says.

In the article, also hardly the first time I heard that.

 

[charlequin]

Call of Duty doesn't fit your description at all.

I'm gently trolling Call of Duty here by calling it low-skill (and probably underestimating the significance of its MP) so feel free to substitute in, say, Assassin's Creed.

overly forgiving of The Sims because its looks amazing compared to FarmVille.

I'm definitely not being overly forgiving of the Sims, it's a legit brilliant game design and I would be hard-pressed to accept an argument to the contrary.

Harvest Moon is also pretty suspect, compared to Yakuza no less.

Janky, stamped-out titles that iterate on minor improvements relevant to series die-hards but which do nothing to win over the disinterested masses? I feel like this is a pretty decent comparison! (If anything, Harvest Moon comes out better for being enjoyable and popular with a far lower budget.)

I support the games audience broadening 100% but this is disingenuous, first off it's impossible to have a range of people believe a thing strongly and have *no one* want the companies to be forced to do something.

You can point to someone actually doing this (arguing that companies should be "forced" in some way to change their behavior) in the discussion at hand, or you can admit that this assertion had nothing to do with the discussion and recant it. Otherwise I'm not really inclined to assume you're participating in good faith.

 

[zeldablue]

So does gender stereotypes exist because of marketing or does marketing exist to conform to already established gender stereotypes?

Chicken or egg?





And whoopie, many in the gaming community, including a great number of GAF, hates them for it.

This is very true. The Wii was a hard time for many of us. D:

Instead of marketing to what people think women want, they should just make great games that aren't based off of tightly research market statistics. I think that's what a lot of people want, but know they can't really have.

It shouldn't have to be dudes = gore, guns, swords, violence, nudity, competition and skill all the time and it shouldn't be chicks = health, socialization, puppies, fashion and no competitiveness. There are obviously games that hit the perfect neutral ground.

Horror games: Girls love horror, guys love horror, fear is universally ingrained in all of us....why not look into that and see if you could scare men and women equally?

Party games: Just adding Peach in as a playable character in the new Mario made me immediately need the game. Everyone likes to party and girls will play any game if they can sit down and play it with the people they love. If you ask a girl to play a game with you they will if the game accounts for female characters.

Puzzles: Girls love puzzles and dudes love puzzles...it's as simple as that.

Animal Crossing, Minecraft, The Sims etc...Those are games that can reach everyone without causing much animosity. It really doesn't seem like rocket science to me as to why these games appeal to everyone as gender neutral.

On a side note....there are plenty of dudes who don't play games or feel unwelcomed by them. I have guy friends who don't game, and since they don't play games, they are often bad at them when they do play. This discourages them more from joining in on the fun. Same goes for a lot of girls since they've most likely never played much beforehand.

On the flipside...since I may be considered a "hardcore" female gamer, I know plenty of girls who love playing games. Everything from Mario to Zelda to Call of Duty to Assassin's Creed. Hardcore Resident Evil and Final Fantasy girl gamers. They're everywhere. Here's how they were created...it's rather simple. Someone, most likely a dad, brother, friend or boyfriend, played a game in front of them while they watched. It eventually became an extremely strong memory or bond that they shared with someone they cared about...and that eventually fostered there love for "hardcore" games. That's what happened with me, and I can't imagine my life if I hadn't fallen in love with this medium. It makes me sad that other girls are turned away from it because of silly things like "marketing." All that really needs to happen is a welcoming hand to help them join in and have fun.

 

[Nekofrog]

You're really endearing yourself here. Keep up with the personal attacks, it strengthens your non-existent argument.

I'm not sure how it's a personal attack? It's a challenge to the validity of his opinion, something that is essential to debate.

 

[Kazerei]

The only acceptable answer to this is both work to reinforce each other, in tandem. Until perspectives change across the board, or a disruptive force comes in that is powerful enough to change this (think, say, the Feminist movement of the past 50 years...which some would argue isn't a great example), you won't see it change.

Oh, I agree. I just want params7 to own up to the comment "nothing is stopping girls from playing with computers instead of dolls" (paraphrased) and acknowledge that social expectations are what's stopping many of them. Same thing that stops most boys from playing with dolls. So I'm just going to keep stating that and see how he dances around it. *popcorn*

 

[boiled goose]

The question that has yet to be answered is?

How did dudebro gaming start?

Like all market expansions, it is not a simple question of tastes or marketing or social expectations, all of these things feed into each other, as many have pointed out.

appealing games were made, marketing changed, as did social expectations of who gaming was meant for.

Why is it so hard for you to extend what has already happened to another paradigm shift for gaming becoming more appealing to women? It is already happening...

 

[Mumei]

I support the games audience broadening 100% but this is disingenuous, first off it's impossible to have a range of people believe a thing strongly and have *no one* want the companies to be forced to do something. This happens to any cause people give a damn about, and there are some damns given in this case.

I did not say "No one wants the companies to be forced to do something." I said that it was not my position and that it was not a position that was advocated in the article. I think it is also true of the people who are arguing positions broadly similar to mine, though I couldn't say with confidence that it is true for every person.

In short: I was not being disingenuous, I was not making a blanket statement about "everyone," and I don't appreciate being misrepresented so you can accuse me of being disingenuous.

And I'm going to leave it at that.

 

[inm8num2]

Oh never mind. Derail complete. Good job, now we don't have to actually talk about gender-related stuff. You got what you wanted, I guess. Congratulations.

Happens in every thread on the subject. Some people aren't ready to talk about these topics and they seemingly don't want others to talk about them, either.

 

[fallagin]

Yep, boy toys are in general far superior to girl toys. Society kinda sucks about this.

 

[Juliet's 8½ Spirits]

The question that has yet to be answered is?

How did dudebro gaming start?

Like all market expansions, it is not a simple question of tastes or marketing or social expectations, all of these things feed into each other, as many have pointed out.

appealing games were made, marketing changed, as did social expectations of who gaming was meant for.

Why is it so hard for you to extend what has already happened to another paradigm shift for gaming becoming more appealing to women? It is already happening...

First person shooters always had a masculine appeal to them (Doom/Quake were mainly played by men). To break into the mainstream it only took one game: CoD4. Ever since then, there had been attempts to imitate what that game has created, only to fail miserably. When/if the female equivalent of that game comes you'll see the market expand, but I doubt it'll ever shift like you imagine it will. I think you're already seeing it with the interactive dramas i.e Beyond: two souls and the walking dead. We're already expanding the market in different directions, and theres plenty of space left for more.

 

[Steel]

Yep, boy toys are in general far superior to girl toys. Society kinda sucks about this.

To be fair: Furbies and whatever those mini pet key chain game things were called were cool toys that were targeted at girls.

But yeah, I get your point.

 

[Margalis]

Trying to compare FarmVille to COD can only backfire.

FarmVille gets excluded from the discussion for the same reason Burger King isn't in the find dining discussion and video poker isn't in the GOTY discussion.

Plenty of mobile / FB games get ignored in games discussion, not just ones that are popular among women. The reason is that these games are crap and deserve to be ignored. The fact that games like Candy Crush aren't considered "real games" has less to do with that they appeal to women and more to do with that they are bad

 

[fallagin]

To be fair: Furbies and whatever those mini pet key chain game things were called were cool toys that were targeted at girls.

But yeah, I get your point.

Yeah, those are good stuff. The vast majority are kind of shit though.

 

[boiled goose]

To be fair: Furbies and whatever those mini pet key chain game things were called were cool toys that were targeted at girls.

But yeah, I get your point.

these are cooler.

check out their ads.

http://www.goldieblox.com/

First person shooters always had a masculine appeal to them (Doom/Quake were mainly played by men). To break into the mainstream it only took one game: CoD4. Ever since then, there had been attempts to imitate what that game has created, only to fail miserably. When/if the female equivalent of that game comes you'll see the market expand, but I doubt it'll ever shift like you imagine it will. I think you're already seeing it with the interactive dramas i.e Beyond: two souls and the walking dead. We're already expanding the market in different directions, and theres plenty of space left for more.

See, we are slowly converging to a consensus that things change when appealing games are made (not sure what shift you think I am imagining? just concede instead of arguing against an imaginary argument)

I would argue though that it was not just one game that did the trick, it was a combination of the infrastructure, accessible online gameplay, marketing, entire game library ecosystem, etc. that appealed to 'dudebro' gamers. Why did gears of war appeal more to this audience than Resident evil 4? Why did halo appeal more than quake? why did cod4 appeal more than cod2? The same thing can happen with other audiences.

Small things such as including peach as a playable character in Mario can make a big difference when taken in aggregate.

 

[fallagin]

these are cooler.

check out their ads.

http://www.goldieblox.com/

Oh wow, that is fantastic.

 

[JesseEwiak]

Trying to compare FarmVille to COD can only backfire.

FarmVille gets excluded from the discussion for the same reason Burger King isn't in the find dining discussion and video poker isn't in the GOTY discussion.

Plenty of mobile / FB games get ignored in games discussion, not just ones that are popular among women. The reason is that these games are crap and deserve to be ignored.

Romance novels are popular among women but I don't think "why don't fiction discussions include more romance novels?" is an objection that will take you very far.

The difference is, yeah, romance novels are tossed to the trash. But, so are pulpy dumb sci-fi novels and old book series like The Executioner. They aren't hailed as the height of writing, like COD is hailed as the height of video gaming to the mass audience.

Because, I hate to break it to you, but aside from visual fidelity, FarmVille and COD look the same - doing the same thing over and over and over and over, without any real skill to it.

 

[RaikuHebi]

Where does stuff like Final Fantasy and Pokemon factor into this? Or are they marketed to both genders?

 

[Steel]

Trying to compare FarmVille to COD can only backfire.

FarmVille gets excluded from the discussion for the same reason Burger King isn't in the find dining discussion and video poker isn't in the GOTY discussion.

Plenty of mobile / FB games get ignored in games discussion, not just ones that are popular among women. The reason is that these games are crap and deserve to be ignored. The fact that games like Candy Crush aren't considered "real games" has less to do with that they appeal to women and more to do with that they are bad

The fact that people are looking at farmville, candy crush, and FB games in general to dismiss arguments rather than games like The Sims(Which saleswise -does- compare to COD), Myst(Absolute classic from any gender's perspective), and Harvest Moon which all have majority female audiences is not really constructive.

 

[Riposte]

The difference is, yeah, romance novels are tossed to the trash. But, so are pulpy dumb sci-fi novels and old book series like The Executioner. They aren't hailed as the height of writing, like COD is hailed as the height of video gaming to the mass audience.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say by making comparisons to Call of Duty to bad novels.

Such comparisons are often pointless because people overlook the value of interactivity and put the majority of importance on narrative themes. Call of Duty, as an interactive activity (to exist and feel feedback within a virtual world), may be more rewarding than reading the story of Call of Duty in novel form (which is a bad idea anyway, because the atmosphere of Call of Duty designed for that interactive experience).

Unless you are saying something else entirely (like Call of Duty getting favoritism over a bunch of better games by critics), but then I probably don't care in that case.

Because, I hate to break it to you, but aside from visual fidelity, FarmVille and COD look the same - doing the same thing over and over and over and over, without any real skill to it.

Call of Duty is much more skillful and has way more stimulating visuals (and among other elements) outside fidelity. Combat in Call of Duty, as a 3D game, still benefits from a good deal of complexity compared to something like FarmVille. You're speaking in hyperbole.

Just because people are doing "the same thing over and over" (to whatever extent this can be taken literally) doesn't make them the same initially or thereafter. That doesn't make sense.

 

[Margalis]

The fact that people are looking at farmville, candy crush, and FB games in general to dismiss arguments rather than games like The Sims(Which saleswise -does- compare to COD), Myst(Absolute classic from any gender's perspective), and Harvest Moon which all have majority female audiences is not really constructive.

I agree, but the problem is usually that one person says "women don't play games" and someone else says "oh yeah? They play a lot of Candy Crush!" so the conversation becomes inevitable. Whenever someone cites a stat that women play games as much as men that's where the conversation ends up.

Especially if you are tying to appeal to game developers to make more inclusive games and market them more inclusively, "make more games like Animal Crossing and Myst" is going to be much more effective than "make more Candy Crush games."

I'm not sure what you are trying to say by making comparisons to Call of Duty to bad novels.

That was my fault, I said something about romance novels then edited it out.

They aren't hailed as the height of writing, like COD is hailed as the height of video gaming to the mass audience.

I don't think COD is hailed as the height of video gaming in terms of art or craft, it's hailed as a large commercial success that was once also pretty good but now not so much.

 

[charlequin]

I don't think COD is hailed as the height of video gaming in terms of art or craft, it's hailed as a large commercial success that was once also pretty good but now not so much.

There's much less separation on these factors in video gaming than in most other media, though (both due to the hobby's youth and to the lack of any serious critical press or schools of academic critique) which kind of compounds the gender-bias effects -- it's much easier for someone to separate the quality titles from the empty sugar-rush entertainment in other media fields.

 

[Steel]

Call of Duty is much more skillful and has way more stimulating visuals (and among other elements) outside fidelity. Combat in Call of Duty, as a 3D game, still benefits from a good deal of complexity compared to something like FarmVille. You're speaking in hyperbole.

Just because people are doing "the same thing over and over" doesn't make them the same initially or thereafter. That doesn't make sense.

I dislike Call of duty's effect on the industry as much as the next guy, but you're absolutely correct it is entirely a skill game. I actually used to like Call of Duty, and firmly believe it would get a lot less flak if the entire industry didn't get it into its head to copy it.

FarmVille and Call of Duty should not be compared, just as you say, unless you're citing time spent on each being similar(which I have no idea if this is the case) in order to make the point that female gamers would be just as willing to put the time investment into games if they were targeted in marketing.

I agree, but the problem is usually that one person says "women don't play games" and someone else says "oh yeah? They play a lot of Candy Crush!" so the conversation becomes inevitable. Whenever someone cites a stat that women play games as much as men that's where the conversation ends up.

Especially if you are tying to appeal to game developers to make more inclusive games and market them more inclusively, "make more games like Animal Crossing and Myst" is going to be much more effective than "make more Candy Crush games."

I concur, then. Though the comparison does make a good economic case for marketing.

 

[plutoknight]

There's much less separation on these factors in video gaming than in most other media, though (both due to the hobby's youth and to the lack of any serious critical press or schools of academic critique) which kind of compounds the gender-bias effects -- it's much easier for someone to separate the quality titles from the empty sugar-rush entertainment in other media fields.

One could probably delve into history of other mediums and find similar patterns.

(We need more video games in academia!)

 

[Riposte]

There's much less separation on these factors in video gaming than in most other media, though (both due to the hobby's youth and to the lack of any serious critical press or schools of academic critique) which kind of compounds the gender-bias effects -- it's much easier for someone to separate the quality titles from the empty sugar-rush entertainment in other media fields.

Depending on what you mean, all I see is a path to pseudo-intellectualism. What is a "quality" game anyway, I'm left asking.

 

[Not Actually Aisha Tyler]

That was a great read and an interesting one at that. As a female gamer, growing up games were mostly a "boy's thing". I did know girls like me that played video games, but games weren't considered something for girls or something that girls did. I'm really happy to see a lot more women are gaming today as opposed to back then. The stigma of games are "only for guys" seems to fading away.

 

[The Technomancer]

The system reinforces itself, there is no 'catalyst' -- if you're looking for a catalyst, you're looking for the wrong thing.

If you have to have a starting point, though...you'd have to go back. Way back, into history. Pick any point between the beginning of what we call history, and what we call the present, and you can find a starting point. Perhaps it's the idea of the 'perfect' family and gender roles in early Colonial America. Perhaps its England's long-stiffling of the females for power in the monarchy.

Basically. Its a classic positive feedback system: small disturbances reinforce themselves until they blow up into huge responses

 

[Kazerei]

Depending on what you mean, all I see is a path to pseudo-intellectualism. What is a "quality" game anyway, I'm left asking.

Metacritic score, of course

 

[Juliet's 8½ Spirits]

See, we are slowly converging to a consensus that things change when appealing games are made (not sure what shift you think I am imagining? just concede instead of arguing against an imaginary argument)

I would argue though that it was not just one game that did the trick, it was a combination of the infrastructure, accessible online gameplay, marketing, entire game library ecosystem, etc. that appealed to 'dudebro' gamers. Why did gears of war appeal more to this audience than Resident evil 4? Why did halo appeal more than quake? why did cod4 appeal more than cod2? The same thing can happen with other audiences.

Small things such as including peach as a playable character in Mario can make a big difference when taken in aggregate.

You were implying that there is a chance for the female gaming community to be a large proportion of the gaming community as a whole, something which I dont think will ever happen, hope to be proven wrong though.Game companies exploit male gamer fantasies, more so than female gamers.


Now you're talking about changing the game itself, not marketing. I really do hope that trend continues (mario is a great step in the right direction), I just dont want your/my ideologies dictating what developers put into their games or not. If a developer wants a female lead thats great, if not, I dont think they should be criticized for it either.

 

[Valjean Lafitte]

If you believe in science, then you are actually wrong.

Science proves that gender has nothing to do with biology? That it's how I perceive myself
that makes me a member of the male gender and not my penis?

 

[LaserHawk]

I support the games audience broadening 100% but this is disingenuous, first off it's impossible to have a range of people believe a thing strongly and have *no one* want the companies to be forced to do something. This happens to any cause people give a damn about, and there are some damns given in this case.

And second it's the same as a protest or picketing in online form, if you went to any activist rally on the steps of capitol hill and they said "Hey we aren't saying this law/policy/tendency should be FORCED to change" you'd call bullshit.

This type of conversation too often goes nowhere and angers everyone because no one's willing to state "this is what I think should be done"

It's okay to have a strong position on something, for or against.

Personally, I'm unconvinced that gaming has any more effect on society then rap/harry potter/violent video games had on youth. I feel that authorial control or even negative pressure on an artistic medium is far more destructive and inefficient then positive education. It's not about removing promiscuity from TV, it's about educating your children about positive traits and responsibility. That sort of thing.

Instead of alienating a large set of gamers with constant refrains of what is awful about their beloved medium and how they're personally responable for rape culture (yes I've heard this). Try encouraging positive examples of games and encouraging young women to break their gender roles. The market grows, games with gender-neutral traits gross more, they become the norm instead of the exception and games for specific audiences remain, as they should because there's nothing wrong with appealing to a niche market. Hell, any gamer whose been a fan of a niche title should know that fact better then anyone

and if they don't? Then the teams and artists who sell their works shouldn't be forced to throw themselves on the spikes of recouping massive development budgets to satisfy an experiment in engineering society. Nor should they be berated for the artistic choices they make. People are often saying "Why isn't your character a girl" rather then "Why is your character a boy?" It's a bummer because the second is far better at promoting analysis rather then accusation

I just wanted to mention what a refreshing and helpful viewpoint I think this is. I feel like the recent desire for the video game industry to change has been channeled in a lot of negative ways, and we'd be making a lot more progress by celebrating the positive. You have done a great job of voicing things I would have actually liked to say, but I get so gosh-darned tongue-tied when it comes to this subject.

 

[JesseEwiak]

You were implying that there is a chance for the female gaming community to be a large proportion of the gaming community as a whole, something which I dont think will ever happen, hope to be proven wrong though.Game companies exploit male gamer fantasies, more so than female gamers.


Now you're talking about changing the game itself, not marketing. I really do hope that trend continues (mario is a great step in the right direction), I just dont want your/my ideologies dictating what developers put into their games or not. If a developer wants a female lead thats great, if not, I dont think they should be criticized for it either.

Why is it OK to ask a game designer to change his 'game' by not throwing DLC or microtransanctions in it, but no OK to ask a game designer to change his 'game' by maybe having a female character who's competent and not wearing a bikini?

 

[The Technomancer]

Science proves that gender has nothing to do with biology? That it's how I perceive myself
that makes me a member of the male gender and not my penis?

Gender can definitely be fluid, yes. I believe the word you're looking for is "sex", your penis makes your biological sex male.

 

[boiled goose]

You were implying that there is a chance for the female gaming community to be a large proportion of the gaming community as a whole, something which I dont think will ever happen, hope to be proven wrong though.Game companies exploit male gamer fantasies, more so than female gamers.


Now you're talking about changing the game itself, not marketing. I really do hope that trend continues (mario is a great step in the right direction), I just dont want your/my ideologies dictating what developers put into their games or not. If a developer wants a female lead thats great, if not, I dont think they should be criticized for it either.

Of course you can't just change the marketing silly, there also have to be lots of appealing games there. The thing is, you can't just make one game when the entire activity is partially perceived as unappealing or not suited to your gender/tastes/identity/whatever.

There is not dictating here, it is about gaming as a whole becoming more inclusive. You can't criticize a single random developer, but they are not isolated, they are part of gaming as a whole. If people now are asking for more diverse characters and experiences, that means the market wants it! It means that tastes are changing faster than the game makers/publishers/etc. perceive, and that is normal. Don't fight it. Embrace it.

Changing the marketing can be part of the solution (to make games more appealing to diverse groups). Can we agree on this?

Why is it OK to ask a game designer to change his 'game' by not throwing DLC or microtransanctions in it, but no OK to ask a game designer to change his 'game' by maybe having a female character who's competent and not wearing a bikini?

edit: seems like i was not really responding to you haha, but ill leave my silly reply here anyways.

You REALLY can't see the difference in both of these? It is OK to ask for anything. Ask whatever you want. That said, not all requests are suddenly equivalent.
Asking: I don't want (arguably) anti consumer practices
Is the same as: I want a female character in a higher percentage of games
Seriously?
Let's make it easier
Is it the same to ask: I want more black protagonists in games?
the same as: I want all protagonists in action games to be white?

 

[SlickShoesRUCrazy]

I want a girl that plays video games though.

 

[Zoc]

I just wanted to mention what a refreshing and helpful viewpoint I think this is.

It also misses the point of the thread and the article. This isn't complaining about macho and sexist games pushing women away; it's investigating why games are so strongly split along male/female lines in the first place. With movies, for example, there are movies aimed at men and movies aimed at women, but most movies are aimed at everyone. How often can you say the same thing about a game, especially one with a high budget?

 

[masud]

Society up until this point has tried to force shitty toys on girls that are meant to teach them how to look after a baby instead of using their imaginations and thinking. I think that's the main reason for the divide. Most video games have "masculine" themes because of this.

 

[The Technomancer]

edit: seems like i was not really responding to you haha, but ill leave my silly reply here anyways.

You REALLY can't see the difference in both of these? It is OK to ask for anything. Ask whatever you want. That said, not all requests are suddenly equivalent.
Asking: I don't want (arguably) anti consumer practices
Is the same as: I want a female character in a higher percentage of games
Seriously?
Let's make it easier
Is it the same to ask: I want more black protagonists in games?
the same as: I want all protagonists in action games to be white?

A lot of people play the "artistic integrity" card. In that situation yeah, all requests are equivalent. Either the art is "pure" or it isn't

Spoiler

It isn't. It almost never is.

 

[MC Safety]

Sounds like a personal problem.

It isn't. The stigma was liberally applied to game fans by all segments of the non-game playing population. It wasn't all that long ago that neither the games nor the players were considered cool.

Video games probably cemented its audience back in the arcade days. And I'm not referring to the brightly lit, family friendly houses of fun popularized by Chuck E Cheese and Dave and Busters. Whatever sort of concentrated marketing strategies emerged for consoles and consoles games probably got their initial wave of data by studying patterns at the arcade.