A brief moment of group-congratulatory drivel and a kickstarter link
Pages: 12
Well, again, it's the individuals, not the games. It's time to stop blaming creative works for their players' behaviour.
@Gaminic,
I agree with you on the marketing thing, it's stupid (although I do see bread advertised on TV sometimes). If you buy a shirt, it's covered in the company's logos. You're basically paying them to use you as a poster. It's sick. I only buy shirts with small or hidden logos, or else where the logo is a band that I like (because in that case I want people to see it on the off-chance that I meet someone else who likes that band and we instantly have something in common, or because if even one person sees the shirt and decides to listen to the band, I've made the band slightly more popular).
@Gaminic,
I agree with you on the marketing thing, it's stupid (although I do see bread advertised on TV sometimes). If you buy a shirt, it's covered in the company's logos. You're basically paying them to use you as a poster. It's sick. I only buy shirts with small or hidden logos, or else where the logo is a band that I like (because in that case I want people to see it on the off-chance that I meet someone else who likes that band and we instantly have something in common, or because if even one person sees the shirt and decides to listen to the band, I've made the band slightly more popular).
Last edited on
| Catfish2, you could have chosen to justify your opinions based on evidence or thought. Instead, you have chosen to repeat cliches; cliches that associate you with very unpleasant attitudes. |
Good strategy Moschops: trying to shift from what I said, to what your personal opinion about me is, or could become.
To summarize what I said in my first post:
1) won't change anything, at least not where it matters,
2) reeks of double standards (well, at least until the male version of the videos),
3) you have the right to be offended, but you do not have the right to deny me my right of offending you
It is you who writes paragraphs devoid of meaning and "thought". At least to me.
| You have chosen to pretend that her aim is to make all men ashamed; the most cursory examination of her project makes it clear that this isn't so. |
The question mark is still there, in my original post, along with the introductory "What are her aims exactly?", a question which you are still to answer. So I dismiss the above quotation as a misrepresentation of my position, made possible by an acute lack of sense of humor.
| It's a good cause and if you don't see that, I suggest you go to her youtube video and post kitchen/oven jokes like the rest of the people stuck in the dark ages. |
No, I think I'd rather donate her my money to feel better about myself.
| The question mark is still there, in my original post, along with the introductory "What are her aims exactly?", a question which you are still to answer. |
There's a kickstarter page about it. I'm not here to summarise the internet for you.
| reeks of double standards (well, at least until the male version of the videos), |
I disagree. I don't think that anything on her page indicates that what she objects to would be acceptable if "women" were replaced with "men". Fixing one thing doesn't imply condoning everything else.
| That is one of the biggest atrocities in our world |
I know you didn't mean that :)
@Catfish2:
I'm not sure if you play video games, but personally I'm quite disappointed that there are so few interesting female characters there. First of all, it's just a missed opportunity: character building is one of the primary drivers of a storyline; excluding 50% of the possible characters is just a waste.
Secondly, as the current shitstorm on her kickstarter and youtube page have shown: it gives (some/many) gamers/internetters a misguided few on the other gender. When social awkwardness turns into anger, or even a feel of superiority, that's a bad thing. Whether it's black people, homosexuals or women: anyone who thinks he's better than someone else based on meaningless characteristics, is not a good person.
Yes, because (false-)reasoning away any possible guilt is, of course, much better. Again, this isn't about making males, or male gamers, feel ashamed. Making girls in video games pretty and scantily clad isn't something to feel guilty about (even if it has bad effects). It's just giving people what they want. Any character can be made more interesting (to the viewer/player) by making her pretty. The point is that "pretty" is replacing "interesting", while it could be both. It's the same thing with many sitcoms: there's the funny one, the smart one, the silly one, and the black one. As if "black" is a character-type. What happened to the funny black one? The smart black one? Or just the black one that doesn't listen to hiphop and plays basketball?
@Moschops:
I did. Okay, minus the slight hyperbole, I did.
It's just a complete waste. I spend my life on minimizing "waste" in supply chain/production environments for clients. A few extra kilometers of transportation? Waste. A few minutes extra setup times? Waste. Keeping employees in times of low demand? Waste. Spending half your budget on programming people to buy your product by wasting their time and invading their consciousness rather than making sure you have the best product out there? Absolutely necessary and vital.
It baffles me. Pointing out the ridiculous ratio of production cost versus marketing costs is nothing short of blasphemy. Pointing out flaws in their design and getting the answer "Yeah, but they won't realize that until after they've bought it" is something I can't wrap my head around.
I may be simplifying it for myself, but it makes no sense to me. They're making people pay for the commercials that waste their time. I already bought your product. That should get me away from your ads, not encourage them to make longer, more expensive ads and play them more frequently.
I'm not sure if you play video games, but personally I'm quite disappointed that there are so few interesting female characters there. First of all, it's just a missed opportunity: character building is one of the primary drivers of a storyline; excluding 50% of the possible characters is just a waste.
Secondly, as the current shitstorm on her kickstarter and youtube page have shown: it gives (some/many) gamers/internetters a misguided few on the other gender. When social awkwardness turns into anger, or even a feel of superiority, that's a bad thing. Whether it's black people, homosexuals or women: anyone who thinks he's better than someone else based on meaningless characteristics, is not a good person.
| No, I think I'd rather donate her my money to feel better about myself. |
Yes, because (false-)reasoning away any possible guilt is, of course, much better. Again, this isn't about making males, or male gamers, feel ashamed. Making girls in video games pretty and scantily clad isn't something to feel guilty about (even if it has bad effects). It's just giving people what they want. Any character can be made more interesting (to the viewer/player) by making her pretty. The point is that "pretty" is replacing "interesting", while it could be both. It's the same thing with many sitcoms: there's the funny one, the smart one, the silly one, and the black one. As if "black" is a character-type. What happened to the funny black one? The smart black one? Or just the black one that doesn't listen to hiphop and plays basketball?
@Moschops:
| I know you didn't mean that :) |
I did. Okay, minus the slight hyperbole, I did.
It's just a complete waste. I spend my life on minimizing "waste" in supply chain/production environments for clients. A few extra kilometers of transportation? Waste. A few minutes extra setup times? Waste. Keeping employees in times of low demand? Waste. Spending half your budget on programming people to buy your product by wasting their time and invading their consciousness rather than making sure you have the best product out there? Absolutely necessary and vital.
It baffles me. Pointing out the ridiculous ratio of production cost versus marketing costs is nothing short of blasphemy. Pointing out flaws in their design and getting the answer "Yeah, but they won't realize that until after they've bought it" is something I can't wrap my head around.
I may be simplifying it for myself, but it makes no sense to me. They're making people pay for the commercials that waste their time. I already bought your product. That should get me away from your ads, not encourage them to make longer, more expensive ads and play them more frequently.
| Okay, minus the slight hyperbole, I did. |
Yes. I didn't want to start listing the actual atrocities :)
The other side of the argument is that done well, marketing and advertising can radically increase the size of the pie (by which I mean lots more people buying). Wasting zero percent of a pie is admirable. Wasting 10% of a pie double the size means you end up with 80% more pie to eat.
| Pointing out flaws in their design and getting the answer "Yeah, but they won't realize that until after they've bought it" is something I can't wrap my head around. |
I bet you can really. They don't want to provide people with the best possible product. They want money.
Last edited on
I know their reasoning, I just don't understand it. Such zero-sum mentality is just shocking.
That's not what happens. It's a typical suboptimal result of bad game theory.
Spending 10% of the pie doesn't have any result. Spending 10% of the pie more than your competitor is what gets results. That means if one competitor is willing to spend 40% of the pie, you must be willing to spend 50% of the pie.
The outcome is the same as (0%, 10%), but (40%, 50%) is the stable equilibrium point: if A lowers his %, B can also lower his %, which then means A has a chance to take the lead by increasing his % again, leading back to (40%, 50%). B has no reason to lower his %, because then A gains ground.
The silly thing is that spending that 50% on anything else can vastly improve the product or service. A vastly better product will, in time, beat its competitors. The problem is that research and improvements take time, while a marketing campaign can be launched in a day.
It's the same situation as "price wars": a competitor trying to gain share of wallet by lowering its price just forces the others to do the same, ultimately leading to the same equilibrium, but at lower prices. Companies have come to understand this, which is why prices for nearly every product are above their "full-competition price", and companies try to lure customers with additional services (after-sale help, bonus on next series of products, image, design, etc.), even if they aren't strictly value-adding.
From an engineering point of view, this is sad.
| Wasting 10% of a pie double the size means you end up with 80% more pie to eat. |
That's not what happens. It's a typical suboptimal result of bad game theory.
Spending 10% of the pie doesn't have any result. Spending 10% of the pie more than your competitor is what gets results. That means if one competitor is willing to spend 40% of the pie, you must be willing to spend 50% of the pie.
The outcome is the same as (0%, 10%), but (40%, 50%) is the stable equilibrium point: if A lowers his %, B can also lower his %, which then means A has a chance to take the lead by increasing his % again, leading back to (40%, 50%). B has no reason to lower his %, because then A gains ground.
The silly thing is that spending that 50% on anything else can vastly improve the product or service. A vastly better product will, in time, beat its competitors. The problem is that research and improvements take time, while a marketing campaign can be launched in a day.
It's the same situation as "price wars": a competitor trying to gain share of wallet by lowering its price just forces the others to do the same, ultimately leading to the same equilibrium, but at lower prices. Companies have come to understand this, which is why prices for nearly every product are above their "full-competition price", and companies try to lure customers with additional services (after-sale help, bonus on next series of products, image, design, etc.), even if they aren't strictly value-adding.
From an engineering point of view, this is sad.
| Such zero-sum mentality is just shocking. |
I think in many circumstances, it's not a zero-sum game. There is not a fixed amount of pie that you fight for, having to divide it up. You can increase the amount of pie (the amount to be shared amongst you and your competitors, at least).
| It's the same situation as "price wars": a competitor trying to gain share of wallet by lowering its price just forces the others to do the same, ultimately leading to the same equilibrium, but at lower prices. |
Until the competition doesn't exist anymore and you have captured the market, of course. Come on down, Walmart etc.
| A vastly better product will, in time, beat its competitors. |
Betamax didn't, and its by no means alone.
Last edited on
Well it does depend on more than just the product itself. Betamax is a perfect example of where it isn't enough, but marketing wasn't the solution. Installed base and compatible products played a huge role.
There's a difference between dominating the market and capturing the market. Just like Microsoft was called a monopoly, Walmart is by no means invincible. Yes, wherever they go they force out smaller shops. But that doesn't mean they have power.
A real monopoly is when the company can do pretty much anything (generally: raising prices to far above "equilibrium" pricing). No matter how strong Microsoft was at certain points in time, it never had the luxury of doubling prices. The same goes for Walmart. Their strategy is self-enforcing (low prices -> attract sales -> economies of scale -> lower costs -> lower prices), but if they would decide to change tactics, you'd see neighborhood shops open up by the millions.
[Note: We've kind of strayed from the topic. :/ sorry!)
| Until the competition doesn't exist anymore and you have captured the market, of course. Come on down, Walmart etc. |
There's a difference between dominating the market and capturing the market. Just like Microsoft was called a monopoly, Walmart is by no means invincible. Yes, wherever they go they force out smaller shops. But that doesn't mean they have power.
A real monopoly is when the company can do pretty much anything (generally: raising prices to far above "equilibrium" pricing). No matter how strong Microsoft was at certain points in time, it never had the luxury of doubling prices. The same goes for Walmart. Their strategy is self-enforcing (low prices -> attract sales -> economies of scale -> lower costs -> lower prices), but if they would decide to change tactics, you'd see neighborhood shops open up by the millions.
[Note: We've kind of strayed from the topic. :/ sorry!)
| I'm not sure if you play video games, but personally I'm quite disappointed that there are so few interesting female characters there. First of all, it's just a missed opportunity: character building is one of the primary drivers of a storyline; excluding 50% of the possible characters is just a waste. |
I can say the same about male characters. It's simply a choice whether to leave them flat, or enabling them to evolve, if it suits the storyline. So I still don't understand what (what's her name?)'s goals are.
| Secondly, as the current shitstorm on her kickstarter and youtube page have shown: it gives (some/many) gamers/internetters a misguided few on the other gender. When social awkwardness turns into anger, or even a feel of superiority, that's a bad thing. Whether it's black people, homosexuals or women: anyone who thinks he's better than someone else based on meaningless characteristics, is not a good person. |
All right... but how does this connect to video games? Do video games help people become homophobic misogynist racist male pigs? Even if they do, I think it's ultimately beneficial for a person to be honest with themselves and other people. And what about the case where they don't affect the gamers in such a way? Is it negligible, or does it instead show that truly the problem doesn't lie with video games but with the individual (as Chrisname also pointed out)?
Also.
Of course, not the internet. Just the campaign which you support, donated to, and invite us to donate money to, too.
That's great! Otherwise I would've mistakenly thought she was pushing a feminist agenda. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
| There's a kickstarter page about it. I'm not here to summarise the internet for you. |
Of course, not the internet. Just the campaign which you support, donated to, and invite us to donate money to, too.
| I disagree. I don't think that anything on her page indicates that what she objects to would be acceptable if "women" were replaced with "men". Fixing one thing doesn't imply condoning everything else. |
That's great! Otherwise I would've mistakenly thought she was pushing a feminist agenda. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
@Catfish2: Racism persists because children are taught by their parents that race X is bad. Homophobia persists because children are taught that homosexuality is wrong. If children are consistently fed the female stereotypes of "damsel in distress" or "boobs that can't survive without a strong man", those children will grow up believing that men are superior to women.
No, no you can't. If you really believe this, then I don't think this discussion has any point.
| I can say the same about male characters. |
No, no you can't. If you really believe this, then I don't think this discussion has any point.
It's worth noting that there are a bunch of of games there that features rich, female characters, who don't fit the more stereotypical roles.
Take a look of the likes of Heavy Rain. The game is played jumping between parallel storylines featuring a male and female officer.
Moreover, it's unfair to say that the views people have are cast on them as children by their parents. I say this from the point of view of a left-wing vegetarian, raised by loving, slightly right-wing, meat-eating parents. There comes a time when people need to take responsibility for forming their own opinions.
Likewise, I think it's unfair to assume that whatever conceptions have been drawn from video game characters were the intentions of the developers. People draw their own conclusions; what a designer or writer had in mind for a character will undoubtedly translate differently to different people. Some more derogatory assumptions are always going to be made by someone along the line.
Finally, I, as many others did, grew up playing a Mario, a game where the sole purpose is to rescue a princess from a villain. I also read my fair share of fairytales and watched Disney movies when I was younger, most of which would involve a male protagonist saving a female from some sort of ill-fated future. This has in no way affected my opinion of women, objectified them or give me the impression that they need men to survive.
Like art, literature and film, games are an expression of creativity. I'd hate to think that strict, overly PC criteria would need to be met prior to their release.
Take a look of the likes of Heavy Rain. The game is played jumping between parallel storylines featuring a male and female officer.
Moreover, it's unfair to say that the views people have are cast on them as children by their parents. I say this from the point of view of a left-wing vegetarian, raised by loving, slightly right-wing, meat-eating parents. There comes a time when people need to take responsibility for forming their own opinions.
Likewise, I think it's unfair to assume that whatever conceptions have been drawn from video game characters were the intentions of the developers. People draw their own conclusions; what a designer or writer had in mind for a character will undoubtedly translate differently to different people. Some more derogatory assumptions are always going to be made by someone along the line.
Finally, I, as many others did, grew up playing a Mario, a game where the sole purpose is to rescue a princess from a villain. I also read my fair share of fairytales and watched Disney movies when I was younger, most of which would involve a male protagonist saving a female from some sort of ill-fated future. This has in no way affected my opinion of women, objectified them or give me the impression that they need men to survive.
Like art, literature and film, games are an expression of creativity. I'd hate to think that strict, overly PC criteria would need to be met prior to their release.
Male and female officer? I've not played it yet but I thought it was an FBI agent, Reporter, Guy who lost his kids to the killer, and a Private investigator (male, female, male, male). I need to play it as I own it but only put it in the system for a minute then decided to program instead.
To me, looking at the replies to her YT video. Seems like A LOT of guys need to get their member out of their ear, grow a brain, move out of the past, and get over it. I didn't realize there were so many negative IQ guys on this planet. It is no wonder the good guys get a bad reputation, it is because of all the anal idiots like them.
My wife and I would donate if we weren't tight on money right now.
To me, looking at the replies to her YT video. Seems like A LOT of guys need to get their member out of their ear, grow a brain, move out of the past, and get over it. I didn't realize there were so many negative IQ guys on this planet. It is no wonder the good guys get a bad reputation, it is because of all the anal idiots like them.
My wife and I would donate if we weren't tight on money right now.
Last edited on by closed account z6A9GNh0
Sorry, you're right, it could be a reporter. Either way, her role is more or less central to the game and story and isn't the typical representation of what people might think females in games are like.
You're totally right on the few morons who post derogatory replies giving everyone a bad name. Sad fact is that this is going to attract a lot of attention from people who don't play games and, as a result of the negative and hostile comments the project as received, the connotations of your typical gamer are going to wholly negative.
However, I still can't donate to such a project as I don't really agree with it. I agree less with the reception from the YouTube morons, but I still don't agree with her core point. Seems to be a bit of a mountain from a molehill situation.
You're totally right on the few morons who post derogatory replies giving everyone a bad name. Sad fact is that this is going to attract a lot of attention from people who don't play games and, as a result of the negative and hostile comments the project as received, the connotations of your typical gamer are going to wholly negative.
However, I still can't donate to such a project as I don't really agree with it. I agree less with the reception from the YouTube morons, but I still don't agree with her core point. Seems to be a bit of a mountain from a molehill situation.
Ah this thread seems to have sparked some controversy. I like it.
Note, don't take offense to anything I say, I just enjoy a good argument.
I do have to agree that some, if not a lot, of these comments are simple trolling. I've done some dwelling in places of the internet to know that people just like to instigate. It's human nature to want that "safe confrontation". Kind of an oxymoron, but let's be honest. People like to fight, or argue, but they don't want any consequences from it. This is where the internet comes in. This allows just that, so people will take any opportunity to start a debate.
Now, on to her cause. I do have to agree that from the games I play, women are sometimes portrayed using a more physical appeal. Granted, I play a lot of action/shooters and what is the majority of people that play that? Young to middle aged males. Also, how believable is it if you saw a 90 pound woman stroll in, and KO a 250 pound body builder in one hit? I see this happen often in movies and it's just not believable. Not to sound sexist, but men are naturally bigger and physically stronger than women. This leads to women being more "support" roles in the action genre.
But, women are not always portrayed like this. I've played many games where women have interesting and important roles. But these games aren't typically the action games (which seems to the majority of what is out anymore). And even in some action games women are portrayed in a good manner. For a recent example, look at the Halo games. Cortana is a great character, and one that gives the story some great depth.
Basically what I'm saying, is you have to look at the whole picture. It would be completely unreasonable if someone visits a porn site expecting women to portrayed in a respectable manner. This applies (to a far less extreme) to the game industry. You can look anywhere and see injustice and discrimination, but when you remove the magnifying glass and look look at everything, it is not as bad as people make it seem.
In conclusion, I am donating a dime to this. I don't agree with the cause, because it is misguided, and she has already gotten well over her goal.
End rant. Like I said, don't take offense. Just a friendly debate :)
Note, don't take offense to anything I say, I just enjoy a good argument.
I do have to agree that some, if not a lot, of these comments are simple trolling. I've done some dwelling in places of the internet to know that people just like to instigate. It's human nature to want that "safe confrontation". Kind of an oxymoron, but let's be honest. People like to fight, or argue, but they don't want any consequences from it. This is where the internet comes in. This allows just that, so people will take any opportunity to start a debate.
Now, on to her cause. I do have to agree that from the games I play, women are sometimes portrayed using a more physical appeal. Granted, I play a lot of action/shooters and what is the majority of people that play that? Young to middle aged males. Also, how believable is it if you saw a 90 pound woman stroll in, and KO a 250 pound body builder in one hit? I see this happen often in movies and it's just not believable. Not to sound sexist, but men are naturally bigger and physically stronger than women. This leads to women being more "support" roles in the action genre.
But, women are not always portrayed like this. I've played many games where women have interesting and important roles. But these games aren't typically the action games (which seems to the majority of what is out anymore). And even in some action games women are portrayed in a good manner. For a recent example, look at the Halo games. Cortana is a great character, and one that gives the story some great depth.
Basically what I'm saying, is you have to look at the whole picture. It would be completely unreasonable if someone visits a porn site expecting women to portrayed in a respectable manner. This applies (to a far less extreme) to the game industry. You can look anywhere and see injustice and discrimination, but when you remove the magnifying glass and look look at everything, it is not as bad as people make it seem.
In conclusion, I am donating a dime to this. I don't agree with the cause, because it is misguided, and she has already gotten well over her goal.
End rant. Like I said, don't take offense. Just a friendly debate :)
Did you just compare the game industry to porn? How are they similar? Granted games are getting nudity, but still. Porn industry is full of women that are misguided and want to use their looks and body as a way of getting paid for doing what they are meant to be doing with their significant other. Also, in regards to the 90 lb woman versus a 250 lb body builder you forgot one thing, it depends on the 90 pound woman and what knowledge she has in way of fighting and self-defense (and whether she has a tranquillizer gun at the time).
In regards to your argument of Cortana, that is kind of a moot point in this argument as that is a computer AI given a female voice and appearance and is alleged to be coded the way she is. While I think most of her arguments or issue is the games like Tomb Raider that makes a double d (basically the physique of a porn star) bounce around levels. Lara may be an expert on history and finding objects, but they are pushing a false image of women to sell the game (which I think is what she is wanting to explore in her web series she is trying to get funded).
In regards to your argument of Cortana, that is kind of a moot point in this argument as that is a computer AI given a female voice and appearance and is alleged to be coded the way she is. While I think most of her arguments or issue is the games like Tomb Raider that makes a double d (basically the physique of a porn star) bounce around levels. Lara may be an expert on history and finding objects, but they are pushing a false image of women to sell the game (which I think is what she is wanting to explore in her web series she is trying to get funded).
Topic archived. No new replies allowed.
Pages: 12