yeah agreed, hence my point about Quiet, we don't know if there's any substance to the character or not, so it's premature to make conclusions and accusations
yeah agreed, hence my point about Quiet, we don't know if there's any substance to the character or not, so it's premature to make conclusions and accusations
BUT WHY ISNT SHE WEARING PROPER MILITARY UNIFORM.
Why is Ocelot wearing cowboy spurs and wielding a six-shooter in a game with nanomachines and gigantic nuclear robots? Why is everyone wearing dusters? Why can't they just give Snake a nanomachine eye? Cause Kojima can do whatever the fuck he wants in his game.
right... I never said he couldn't do what he wanted? merely that any criticism over her being a weak/bad character is premature since we don't have much to go off of. you can be critical of something without saying "YOU CAN'T DO THAT OH MY GOD" not everything has to be an extreme, lol.
Needs moar Rufus, Bob, Gragas, ect. I agree with you there, but 2 points:
1) Male Power Fantasy, or, more accurately, what developers think are male pwoer fantasies in the target audience
2) There have been a few (KoF, AoF, ect.), but the (poor) argument could be made that Fat =/= fightin'. A guy that punches bricks and chops boards all day is gonna be tight and lean as opposed to jiggly and round.
It is what it is, but I loved Rufus and Bob when they first came out and I'm not about to jump off the wagon now. Fat dudes kick ass. Speed and Weight, baby.
The main thing I think Salodin's posts leave out is the concept of risk.
I can certainly agree with Qalbert's sentiments in this thread to a degree and it is certainly true that deeper and more well-written characters would certainly enhance the games. There's no possible downside, right? Wrong.
There are two things you must consider, it takes longer to write deeper characters and create more inclusive designs because you must consider more factors. Is it worth spending this extra time (and remember that these people have to be paid so time really does equal money)? To you, maybe the answer is yes. To them, it might not be. At this point, the question becomes: Do certain people not play these games because the characters do not appeal to them or do the characters look and act the way they do because it appeals to the audience that began to support these games?
Its a chicken or the egg story and its not a developer's job to figure out the answer to this question. It is their job to create a product that will sell. They want money. They want their next project to be considered. They want that promotion. They need results. Some may risk it, some may not.
Its unfortunate but it is the truth.
Aren't women the fastest growing gaming demographic right now?
Are they? Are they growing in the types of spaces where these issues are supposed to exist or are they not? Why or why not?
Let us not forget, while we examine this, that there are many types of games and some of the games in the various sub-genres also target different demographics as well.
These are not rhetorical questions either. I honestly don't know.
Just chiming in for a second.
Zelda is not a damsel in distress. She's a competent ruler of a nation that is also experienced in combat. Sure she has to get link to deal with ganondorf alot of the time but so does every single other person on the planet not named Link.
Peach . Dont fuck with Peach
She will END you.
(She's also standing on top of a pyramid of bombs while doing that.)
What little I recall offhand tends to trend towards women being more interested in handheld, puzzle, strategy and simulation games which I suspect is a result of women being introduced to games through the mobile market as a side-effect of buying phones over the years. True to form, every somebody who's anybody has flooded that market to the chagrin of older gamers.
(This is probably partly responsible for all the female hate so deeply held by some old school purists. You're a chick and you're part of the shifting trends? Double whammy of nerdrage.)
Fighting, sports and FPS games are still deep in 'bruh' territory which explains huge amounts of fanservice targeted towards a young, testosterone driven market of meatheads. Or at least that's what the people marketing these games take us for. I wouldn't expect these genres to change as quickly though sports leagues like the NFL have been desperate to get women attached to their brands which may trickle down to their games. Ready for high-res zooming in on crotches? Ah, I'm only kidding.
RPGs also seem to be trending more towards a female demographic as women spread out across the gaming spectrum which is most likely to change how some genres are marketed in turn. I really, really wouldn't hold my breath on seeing anything change in the fighting game circles for a while.
+1 for linking that comic, that stuff was alot of fun.
How Zelda is sold to the character is largely dependent on which Zelda game we're talking about. Older Zelda games portray the princess as definitive damsel material - sup Zelda II - whereas newer titles has her in an action girl position. I guess if you really want to skewer me you could throw out the CD-i shit but honestly no one wants to remember that shit existed.
As a ruler? We never see Zelda or Peach rule anything. Hell, the King of Hyrule gets thrown around and he too does seemingly nothing. I'd argue they're monarchs in name alone, a high value prize for the hero to rescue. Even Malon seemingly does more working the ranch all day. Peach is like classic damsel, complete with HELP ME MARIO and crying as a power in Super Princess Peach.
Yeah man, super.
I'd close by saying these two often thrown around series have made progress in their portrayal of females. Twilight Princess had Midna in a fun role as being the one to sass Link around and be useful and then again with Fi in Skyward, Toon Link's Zelda feels equally competent as the hero and Peach has slowly been growing out of her trope of uselessness. Progress, albeit slow.
I'll just leave this here....
Actually, the biggest and most common reason given for this is because these games are cheap to produce. Combine that with microtransactions where people over time spend just as much if not more then they would on a normal game and it's easy to see why publishers want to go this route.
The problem to me in most cases is just consistency. Half-naked women in silly outfits in a world also full of half-naked men in silly outfits isn't much to complain about, but sometimes it's rather one sided. For example, many games/movies/whatever that take place in a fantasy/medieval setting, have the male knight types wearing practical looking armor, while the female equivalents have exposed cleavage/thighs, fight in ridiculous highheels, etc.
fun fact: armoring tits is hard to do well (changing the armor shape to accommodate them introduces new, vulnerable weak points in the armor), so the best solution is to bind them and wear the same armor as men.
what is a sexist portrayal of a man?