Why Video Game Designers Are Missing The Mark With Women

More of the standard PC bullshit. You either make games for men, or you make games for women. The two categories don't overlap much, and where they do its mostly deviants. MMOs are a weird exception to this, as they don't appeal to men or women per se, they are designed to appeal to those with addictive personalities and aren't true 'games' as such.

utter bullshit. single (usually male) employees subsidise the time off of the women with children in the office. Men rarely take up paternal holiday entitlements as it would massively affect their promotion chances. The middle classes pay so much more tax in a 'progressive' tax system that the amounts paid 'back' for schooling is a small drop in the bucket.

You should look up the rates at which women drop out of profession such as law. I think the average law career of a woman currently stands at 10 years.

Incentives in these cases are pure affirmative action.

Its not just law. The other professions such as medicine etc also see a major drop-out from women in their 30s and 40s as they decide to raise families instead.

You don't think this has anything to do with self interest, i.e. the companies don't want to get fucked over in the courts for discrimination therefore, they go the whole hog in trying to show that they support these things.

Also, note that the people bending over backwards are the other employees in the office who have to do more work to cover the absence. This is usually unpaid in salaried professions.

Quite possibly true, but women need different games entirely to be made for them. Just as you see womens' magazines vs. mens' magazines, you will have a similar split for games. If you try and mix the two, you'll get neither customer base.

In truth I think its all the other things to do with pregnancy that makes companies dislike this on resumes. In particular, the impact on other employees is significant during maternal leave absences, as is the overall loss of productivity from the new mother (fewer office hours, less reliable attendence etc).

 

Well, that's the thing - I don't think it is useless. I don't think it is the one and only 'key' to happiness - if anything could ever exist -either. But it is something which has made me a happy guy, which isn't a bad thing among the misery of the emasculated modern age.

Don't get me wrong - I'm ALL for men being men. I live in a country that bans guns, so I won't talk of those online, but I have racks of swords, tiger-forks, grand batons (my weapon of choice) fighting canes and 20 years of competitive boxing, kickboxing, kung fu and savate behind me. Yes, that's a lot of epeen that is totally unprovable (but if there's anyone in Australia who wants to call plane tickets bitch, then we can have some fun with it - I'll say gloves and amateur boxing helms so that we don't get criminally charged, but we can negotiate whether it's boxing, MMA or kickboxing), so please let me make clear that I'm not saying 'hey guys, I'm fucking tough'. I'm saying men should be men.

But, I allso love the fact that I have a wife who is willing to attend my self-defence/martial arts (what a wanky fucking term that is) classes, and who has been willing for me to teach her to be competent with most of our weapons, including improvisational canes/umbrellas so that I can be confident she can defend herself were she attacked while I wasn't there. My wife would get her ass kicked by any serious male combatant, but she could put up enough of a fight to drastically increase her chances of escaping a rape attempt and I can use her as evidence to the young girls that come to training to show that whilst they won't be able to beat a solid competition-fit male, they can certainly get good enough to break a kneecap and escape if attacked. I'd hardly call that bad advice.

I'd also hardly call it bad advice to go out with people without emotional hangups. Fuck I made that mistake during my early uni days. I thought it was great to have a girl who was emotionally dependant on me. It was the one relationship where I was cheated on. Here's a generalisation I WILL stand by. A girl OR guy who completely lacks selfconfidence will cheat because it proves to them that (a) they're attractive and (b) they can attain some degree of power. Someone with confidence 'might' cheat, BUT (a) they are more likely to be open and agree to a non-monogomous relationship where no-one's getting hurt, and (b) if the sex is good enough to satisfy them they won't go cheat simply to boost their ego.

Every guy or girl after that I made clear that I couldn't give a shit about social standards of monogamy - just don't deceive each other if we're going to care about each other. Since then I've had several relationships and I don't regret any. Maybe that isn't a universal recipe. People have different tastes - no shit sherlock. But for me it worked, and I'd advice folks to stay clear of relationships with people who have emotional baggage. Not a universal strategy to success, but I'd hardly call it shit either.

Confidence in a career translates into confidence in life. I've got plenty of female friends who I graduated from law school with many years ago who are now earning big money in big firms. They always tell me how frustrated they get that guys are intimiated by their incomes - that they couldn't care less if they have to support their boyfriend. After all, they studied and worked hard so that they didn't have to marry for money, and they can easily afford it. But when they do go out with someone who is unemployed, it ends in misery - not because she gets upset with him, but because he is so low on self-esteem that he drags both of them down. So I don't think it's bad advice to say go out with someone strong, who is confident in their own career. It isn't going to work for everyone - some guys LIKE to be the 'sole provider'. But it isn't shit either.

Finallly, when you come to marriage, remember that every hangup your wife has is going to be passed on to your daughters and maybe even your sons. If you marry someone emotionally strong and stable, you'll not only save yourself many arguments, but your children are likely to be better off for it. Again, that isn't going to work for everyone. Some folks want to bring up daughters who are 'ladylike' and will seek a husband to support them. Personally I'd rather my daughters grow up to be independent, so they can take a husband if they want, but that with all the fuckwits out there they never get pressured into marrying for money, and they can send an abusive/cheating bastard out on his ass without having to worry about no longer having his income (when I worked in criminal law I saw so many cases where badly battered women - women whose partners have gone to work on them with fucking crowbars - would drive their boyfriends to my office and to court, because they NEEDED his income to support their kids - a fucking travesty).

Finally, by strong I'm not talking about someone with a temper, or stubborn. I'm talking about someone who is emotionally well-balanced, financially independent and confident. I'd consider myself a financially well-off, independent and confident guy. Why would I want anything less in a partner? Again, none of this is the fucking key to life.

And yes, I'm part stating the obvious and entirely relying on anecdotes. I wasn't the one that blew this thing up into a fucking ongoing discussion. All I wanted to do was point out that strong women without emotional hangups can be great for strong guys who don't want to put up with someone's prior baggage. Yes it's a fucking stupid thing to turn into a multi-post argument on a gaming forum. But I don't think it's mockworthy in itself as advice - I'd say it's stating the fuckling obvious. If you want to mock it as that, then be my guest, I'll agree.

And yes, I appreciate there ARE guys who like emotionally fragile girls, or girls with lots of emotional baggage, or girls who are completely co-dependent. If that's your thing I'm not knocking any of that. You obviously know your type and if it makes you happy then stick with it. All I was saying is don't avoid strong (and by that I mean emotionally well-balanced and independent) women out of fear or instinctive adverse reaction. Because I, and plenty of other, folk have really really enjoyed their romantic company.

Anecdotal and stating the obvious, Fucking yeah. But not stupid.

Tl;dr lots of folks have different tastes. I'm not knocking yours. But there's nothing inconsistent about being a strong guy and so wanting a strong girl to match.

 

I can tell you how that would end: Yaoi, Yaoi, and Yaoi.

(In case you don't know what that means, do google image search. And be prepared to see something you will not be able to unsee for a while.)

 

fucking wall of text faggots go write a book

 

Oh great, two dumbfucks argue ...

Loriac lessons on feminism apparently ended before the sexual revolution as Azrael is just a bizarro counter-point.

 

Great, some mangina drops in to show us how he has no balls so he can better respect his tranny girlfriend and her strap on

 

tl;dr

The commercial payoff is to only hire men and sterilized women then, who will, you know, actually work and not twiddle their thumbs for a couple of years being pregnant and taking care of their spawn while leeching the company dry for money.

An employer doesn't and shouldn't give a fucking shit about somebody's pregnancy, unless he personally impregnated the employee in question. Employees are people who get paid for doing their job. She who doesn't do her job is not an employee any longer for the time being and isn't entitled to shit. Case closed.

This is something an all-female company should long to do. Yet I'd love to see *them* paying leave when half the company at any given time is about to or had just popped up another piglet. I wonder who would actually do the fucking job?

It's not enough they exploit their men (these unfortunates had it coming) and their nanny state (with all the talk about needing new citizens, it got to put its money where its mouth is), should they also exploit complete strangers just because those were naive enough to sign them up for some job without tearing out their womb first? YEAH FUCKING RIGHT.

 

Taking about strong women in RL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Travers

Azrael the cat that doesn't give a shit about anything, except for his wife that is strong ... just stating the obvious

 

This thread makes me very uncomfortable in my no-no place.

 

Heh, not a bad read, but isn't just one of your regular posts an ongoing discussion in itself.

As for women developing for women, and getting in on that market an existing example is Her Interactive, that make Nancy Drew adventure games and do pretty damn well out of them I believe. Someone was interviewed by the guy who did the recent Tim Cain review.

They're an example of an earlier comment that feminizing games makes the main male audience lose interest. I would agree. Games should cater to wide audiences. Games, plural. Games made for specific markets have a chance at satisfying those customers, the ever growing quest for the all inclusive easily accessible casual hardcore game leads to the horseshit we get flung at us most of the time.

Its like going to make the ultimate porno, start with some hot ass chicks in some quality hetero hardcore action, couples, threesomes, gangbangs any combo they can think of. Then all the same entirely with chicks, then gay guys, then some golden showers and other piss porn, then some shit eating/swapping/fucking scat porn, then some bestiality, then some tastefully done rape scenes and finish off with some good snuff porn.

There maybe something in this that damn near everyone can enjoy, but there's also something there to turn everyone off except for some glorious omnisexual. This is the kinda thing I see with the crappy hybrid rpgs that are all we seem to get lately, this isn't broad appeal, its appealing to a broad range of tastes and niches and that is not the same thing at all.

A truly broad appeal gets distilled down to only the things that everybody likes if possible, which leads us to shitty pure lowest common denominator shit games.

tl;dr Games for girls, games for guys, everybody's happy, plus this awesome romantic thriller I'm working on

 

Women, women never change.

 

I'm not talking about adding in anything unusual or exceptional here. Just the industry standard. You seem to forget that Australia works very differently to the US, and it is in part why we have a higher standard of living. One of the main election issues this year is the two parties fighting over whose mandatory pregnancy leave is the most generous. Our conservative party - they're called liberals (to differentiate them from labour), but they're our equivalent of the US Republicans - are mandating compulsory leave of up to 6 months taken at full pay, paid for by a levy on the company tax. It can be taken by either the man or the woman or split between both.The person taking leave MUST be given their old position back, and is not allowed to be discriminated against in terms of future promotions. If they are, a government body will pay all costs of investigation and prosecution of the company involved - the woman just has to sit back and collect the damages payout. That is our equivalent of the REPUBLICAN party - the one that's all for small government, big business and free enterprise.

The US way isn't the only way, and our way works just fine for us over here.

 

I know what it means, and the strains of Metallica's 'sad but true' are running through my head.

 

Fucking commies. No wonder the one and only australian creation of note takes over 13 years to develop.

Why wouldn't your marxist nanny state just admit it and fund the breeding sows directly instead of this hypocrite "paid for by a levy on the company tax" crap?

 

Except that sex cards have nothing to do with the player character character. There's a difference between playing an super-sexy character of the same gender and getting collectible erotic pictures of characters of the same gender.
Females that want to play slutty looking fighter females do it even in single player games, because they want to imagine themselves as oversexed characters.
Apparently playing a character with practically looking armour would take away their self-esteem or something like that.

 

If you say so, my understanding is that women tend to play either MMOs or 'casual' games. Relatively very few play single player games that appeal to guys.

On the topic of the Witcher, whats the betting that Witcher 2 removes the card collectibles in an attempt to pacify the feminist harpies that screeched about how it demeaned women?

 

Enough already.

 

Ah, Codex. Nothing like five pages of manchildren wailing about women whom they likely have only the minimum of contact with, and dudes who think they're some kind of comedic genius by trotting out the "bitch make me a SANDWICH" line. There may be some kind of smart hidden here, but after this long - I mean christ, FIVE PAGES - really? That's it? Hidden in this miasma of misogynistic fuckwittery?

aaaaaaaaaaaand you wonder why I don't post much? Truly.
Oh Codex. You make me LOL. I can't quit you.

 

http://exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/shaming-tactics/

code blue
code green
code tan
and a hint of code orange as to why you no longer post here

but nice to see you posting here again

 

Don't you think it's a little shady to refute someone's post by pointing out fallacies after having made ~6 posts of your own full of even more exaggerated fallacies?

 

Code Orange.

Didn't mean to make you feel left out.


Feel free to point out any of my fallacies if you like.

 

Nice to see you recognize shaming language when you see it, Loriac.

The results of pandering to women aren't pretty.

Dragon Age is full of that. It's so obvious that female writers are responsible for a whole lot of the faggotery meant to make it more woman-friendly.

First off with Alistair who's the biggest mangina ever.

There's stuff like "in Ferelden soldiers are made out of 50% of men and women". How realistic is that to even have female fighters or have them wear a full plate armor?

Reasons like these are why I like Piranha Bytes' games so much, they're the epitome of manliness. It's a true brotherhood and there are absolutely no women who don't know their place, except in Risen but even then she ultimately ends up being a damzel in distress.

This is the biggest load of bullshit ever, as many of you have already said tell me that women don't WANT to be objectified and passive because it gets them admired and improves their self-esteem.

If that wasn't true Twilight wouldn't sell to millions of copies. No one forces them to buy it, and yet they do on their own. Because that's what they love.

It gets them off because they feel that their sexuality is powerful. Take Bayonetta, the whole game is based around that concept.

Let gaming be a man's den apart from match-3 games.

 

What is there to discuss?

What that article is the same BS feminism were women are "sexualized" on videogames and so they dont play videogames.

RIIIIIIGT!

There is really nothing to talk about it, its a logical fallacy to start with and a old one at that.

 

Soooo true, that's just yet more feminist BS.

It's simple why women won't play games:

1-They have no drive to be heroic and to compete/excel.

And mostly

2-They don't like anything that's complicated.

 

Let's see, Code Orange... elevated threat? It's not really a question of feeling threatened, because lots of people are way better at bullying rhetoric than Codexers. It was more of a wry, irrelevant one-liner, which is a different logical fallacy, red herring/appeal to ridicule. I don't know what code color that fits under.

I must decline your invitation to repost what you've already written and comment on how it's fallacious. I'm not convinced you're actually interested in a discussion, and I'm not going to post more than a few paragraphs just for laughs.