Female sex, game devs, social justice advocates and the rift in gaming community.

[shinobi2u]

Seriously, to me is not more a matter of image or design than the role given to the female characters. I don't like maled females. I don't like sexy weaker companion, I like people, man or woman, dealing with thier emotions, doubts and believings, But tha's is me and my culture and the envvironment were I grew up.

There's actually a term for this kind of character - Manic Pixie Dream Girl/Boy. Too many times side characters or companions are just put in as fluff for the main character. I feel like Doctor Who has done a job job of avoiding this trope for the most part, giving depth to the companions and having them be their own character who grows and isn't defined by the Doctor, but they affect each other equally.

This is a difficult topic in many ways, there is no denying that men and women are different from each other. I think the main problem stems from stereotyping and not embracing the diversity of people, even within our own sexes. And yet I don't think developers should be forced to 'fill a quota' (as many of you have stated as well). I also don't think that developers should feel like they have to always make things balanced, that having a 'damsel in distress' scenario is always some terrible thing now. I think as a whole people need to just strive for more diversity, more depth, and have it make sense for what they are trying to portray and story they are telling and not just shoehorning it in.

 

[wichat]

I never felt disturbed by the "damsel in distress" but by the dumbed, weaky, screaming, yealling, useless damsel

 

[wisielec]

What is crawling in my mind is a question: can a troped game strive to be good in its standard?

I mean, have a Strong Man and (Over)Sexualized Female and be good at the same time in terms of story and character description, realization and progress. Would we discard the thing altogether, although the story was told on purpose in this manner, or would we value it as a whole? Or maybe praised only the highlights nitpicking at troped characters? But it seems to me that without those characters it wouldnt be the same gripping story, wouldnt you say?

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

Manic Pixie Dream Girl/Boy.

Interesting. Never heard of Manic Pixie Dream character before. Goes in the similar box as Mary Sue character.

 

[Phinnway]

Now that I got a few replies about my Paradox Interactive post I'll just say this: I didn't download the DLC. Here are the reasons why.

• Important women from history are already in EU4 (Isabella of Spain, Elizabeth I of England, Catherine the Great of Russia, etc. Everyone is there.)
• If a woman contributed something to history she should have been in the game at launch, not added in 2 years later.
• In the thread where Paradox announced the DLC they censored criticism that they were doing this to be politically correct. Whether they were right or wrong to do this, I don't know.

There is a chance I will change my mind later and download the DLC if I hear it's good. I get the impression the events added to the game represent women who made similar contributions as Leonardo da Vinci and Michael Angelo, and I'm not sure whether those type of characters are currently represented in the game. The female advisers makes a lot of sense to me though since I imagine there were women who sat on their royal councils, even if it might've been rare.

 

[Mataresa]

Really interesting discussion. Sadly for the moment I have nothing to contribute.

 

[dragonbird]

What is crawling in my mind is a question: can a troped game strive to be good in its standard?

I mean, have a Strong Man and (Over)Sexualized Female and be good at the same time in terms of story and character description, realization and progress. Would we discard the thing altogether, although the story was told on purpose in this manner, or would we value it as a whole? Or maybe praised only the highlights nitpicking at troped characters? But it seems to me that without those characters it wouldnt be the same gripping story, wouldnt you say?

I think that it would be much harder to make it good, but theoretically possible if you ignore issues such as the type of (not necessarily fair) criticism it would get. The problem is simply that your starting point is something that's incomplete - by portraying people as this type of extreme trope, there are immediately nuances and balances that are missing. The writers need to address that.

The obvious ways would be by showing, through time, that the character is NOT a trope but is someone else entirely, who is misunderstood by those around them because of their physical appearance, or by turning it into a social commentary, satirising itself, in the way that movies like The Last Action Hero did. But both of those solutions result in something that no longer has the tropes, so your initial criteria haven't been met.

 

[EliHarel]

• In the thread where Paradox announced the DLC they censored criticism that they were doing this to be politically correct. Whether they were right or wrong to do this, I don't know.

I've grown wary of statements like this. It reminds me of when I read once in comments section of a TW3 article someone not buying the game because "CDPR censored talk about a downgrade", which is not true.

Of course if you were in those forums and had first-hand experience then it's a bit different

 

[Phinnway]

@EliHarel They stated in the OP of the thread that they would delete any posts saying Paradox Interactive did this to be politically correct. That was after the thread was posted though. So maybe the accusations of political correctness had gotten out of hand. I don't know because I joined the thread late.

 

[EliHarel]

They stated in the OP of the thread that they would delete any posts saying Paradox Interactive did this to be politically correct. That was after the thread was posted though. So maybe the accusations of political correctness had gotten out of hand.

Hehe, that's direct.

Anyway, maybe people were being assholes in how they voiced their opinions and were attacking them. Maybe Paradox were being over-defensive. I don't know, just wanted to say how I've learned to be more careful in forming opinions about events I haven't been in or read enough about.

Didn't mean to drag off topic. So, umm... I usually play a female character when I have the chance. Does that contribute to the discussion?

 

[dragonbird]

@EliHarel They stated in the OP of the thread that they would delete any posts saying Paradox Interactive did this to be politically correct. That was after the thread was posted though. So maybe the accusations of political correctness had gotten out of hand.

I suspect it must have got out of hand, because if it was as simple as that, it doesn't really make sense. If this was explicitly marketed as being to celebrate International Woman's Day, then it was, effectively, out of political correctness. Which isn't always a negative scenario.

---------- Updated at 12:44 AM ----------

Didn't mean to drag off topic. So, umm... I usually play a female character when I have the chance. Does that contribute to the discussion?

I usually play a male character on first playthrough if I have a choice.

OK. I think that both of these are perfectly valid statements.
"I want my character to be someone I can empathise with, and who I find attractive, so I prefer someone of the opposite sex".
"I want my character to be someone I can identify with, so I prefer it to be someone of my own sex".

I don't know if that's why you pick someone of the opposite sex, but I think it's why I do.

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

OK. I think that both of these are perfectly valid statements.
[#1] "I want my character to be someone I can empathise with, and who I find attractive, so I prefer someone of the opposite sex".
[#2] "I want my character to be someone I can identify with, so I prefer it to be someone of my own sex".

So in the bad roleplaying sense (or let's say bad storytelling sense), does case #1 translate into Manic Pixie Dream character and case #2 into Mary Sue character?

 

[GuyNwah]

@Dragonbird Don't get me started on Civ V. I mean... Dido for Carthage? Are you F!@#ing kidding me? Can her historical existence even be substantiated? As far as I am aware she is only known for her role in the Aeneid, a fictional poem. And all she does in that poem is fall madly in love with Aeneas and commit suicide when he leaves her. Hardly the strong, assertive woman the social-activists are campaigning for.

I think that doesn't give credit to the admittedly sketchy historicity of Dido, who is known from multiple sources (particularly Menander and Josephus) as the brother of Pygmalion (later king in his own right), fled the court at Tyre, founded Carthage, and rejected the advances of the local chief Iarbas. Maybe it says more about Virgil's intentions and audience that he wrote a story falsifying pretty much everything known about her (no, she had nothing do do with Aeneas) and reducing her to a spurned love interest.

 

[dragonbird]

So in the bad roleplaying sense (or let's say bad storytelling sense), does case #1 translate into Manic Pixie Dream character and case #2 into Mary Sue character?

I suspect it would translate into "This is awful" in both cases.
OK. Let's try.
Playing as a male character, I would tend to either identify with the LI, or at least consider whether or not she was a suitable companion for My Hero, which means I have problems with LI's that are negative tropes, which would definitely include Damsels in Distress or Manic Pixie Dreams. Mary Sue's MIGHT be OK, depending on whether or not they were well-written.
Playing as a female character, I would be pissed off if she was a trope of any kind, as that would imply that the writers couldn't write good female leads. Incidentally, that would also include games where the female lead was really just a man with boobs. I wouldn't have much of a problem with the LI, if he's uninteresting, I'd just say "No".

And I've just realised that I misread your question. No, I don't think it translates into those tropes, just into different ways that different people play RPGs. You can be the character, or you can be the puppet-master. You can say "What would Geralt do?" or "What would I do?". Both are, as far as I'm concerned, perfectly acceptable ways of playing.

 

[Phinnway]

@GuyNwah Of course. That goes without saying since Virgil's work was fiction. I was just questioning whether there was enough evidence to substantiate anything about her historically. Anyways /off-topic

 

[Gilrond-i-Virdan]

And I've just realised that I misread your question. No, I don't think it translates into those tropes, just into different ways that different people play RPGs. You can be the character, or you can be the puppet-master. You can say "What would Geralt do?" or "What would I do?". Both are, as far as I'm concerned, perfectly acceptable ways of playing.

Yeah, I was asking it from the player to character relation perspective. Since in the roleplaying sense it's similar to the author to character relation. Since you identified common motivations for picking certain types of characters, I was asking how it might affect resulting character quality in the RPG / storytelling sense.

 

[Mataresa]

Hm, I heard somewhere, that men tend to want good characters and women more relatable characters, if they care for characters. Do you think this is true? What is the difference in playstyle?

 

[GuyNwah]

@GuyNwah Of course. That goes without saying since Virgil's work was fiction. I was just questioning whether there was enough evidence to substantiate anything about her historically. Anyways /off-topic

Not entirely, it goes to the issue of whether and how badly the Civilization games go off in pursuit of some false notion of equality by choosing females as rulers whether or not they were historically significant or actually ruled. For the most part, I don't think Sid did, and some of his choices like Theodora and Maria are inspired.

 

[Phinnway]

@Mataresa What do you mean? That men like morally good characters? And do you mean more relatable companions or more relatable main characters?

@GuyNwah Of course. The fact that most of his choices are appropriate goes without saying. The Dido example just really irks me because I took a class on the Aeneid about a year ago As for Theodora, I kind of wish they had done something unorthodox and made Theodora and Justinian one ruler just because they co-ruled equally, which was something unprecedented in Roman history at that time, and they were both incredibly effective rulers in their own right.

 

[dragonbird]

Yeah, I was asking it from the player to character relation perspective. Since in the roleplaying sense it's similar to the author to character relation. Since you identified common motivations for picking certain types of characters, I was asking how it might affect resulting character quality in the RPG / storytelling sense.

Hmmm. Difficult one.
I'm going to think about this, and may expand on my answer tomorrow, but to be honest, in most games, I don't think that the "I am the character" vs "I am the puppet-master" decision makes any real difference to the depth of the character, and therefore doesn't suddenly turn the character into a trope of any kind. The actions and choices you make are still ultimately determined by the game's writers, so it's they who have most influence on whether or not the character is realistic or a trope.

Your own influence is more at a meta-level. If you choose to play the game in a role-play mode, you will make decisions based on "What the character would do" or "What I would do". There's an argument, I think, for both mechanisms being valid role-play (and it's too late for me to go there), and both are equally able to turn into any kind of trope if the writers permit it. Alternatively, you can make decisions based on factors such as "what will give me the coolest gear" or "what will make the next boss fight easier", in which case the character's personality will become more fluid and less consistent, but that probably won't matter to you anyway.

tl;dr - it's determined by whether you role-play or not, it isn't determined by HOW you role-play.

---------- Updated at 01:24 AM ----------

Hm, I heard somewhere, that men tend to want good characters and women more relatable characters, if they care for characters. Do you think this is true? What is the difference in playstyle?

As Phinnway said, do you mean morally good, or just powerful? I can't see why games like GTA would be popular if it were true.
On the other half of the question, I can only speak for myself. I like flawed characters who are, despite that, comfortable with who they are.