llamaRCA Posted February 13, 2017 Share Posted February 13, 2017 Tell it like it is. :kiss: It's safe to assume that different girls/females/women like to play their games in a variety of ways just like boys/males/men do. There is no one way to play the game dictated by one's gender. Do you assume that no male players spend hours and hours dressing up NPCs and their characters in the game? That behavior is basically just playing with dolls. My theory is that players would do this a lot less if they'd played with dolls when they were kids. I mostly got it out of my system when I was a little girl. Do you assume that zero male players spend hours and hours decorating their settlement/houses to make them perfectly lovely? I mean, that's "interior decoration." What man would ever want to do that? /s It's clear that every boy/man/male only wants to kill things in the the most brutal possible way braving the greatest difficulty to make it happen. All men play exactly that way, right? /s I like survival and hard fights are fun and exhilarating. Of course I feel like a badass when I take down a big enemy when it's a tough fight, but it doesn't make me glow with pride when I play that way. It's just another fun way to play the game. It's not a competitive thing for me. It's just a lot of fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fkemman11 Posted February 14, 2017 Author Share Posted February 14, 2017 Tell it like it is. :kiss: It's safe to assume that different girls/females/women like to play their games in a variety of ways just like boys/males/men do. There is no one way to play the game dictated by one's gender. Do you assume that no male players spend hours and hours dressing up NPCs and their characters in the game? That behavior is basically just playing with dolls. My theory is that players would do this a lot less if they'd played with dolls when they were kids. I mostly got it out of my system when I was a little girl. Do you assume that zero male players spend hours and hours decorating their settlement/houses to make them perfectly lovely? I mean, that's "interior decoration." What man would ever want to do that? /s It's clear that every boy/man/male only wants to kill things in the the most brutal possible way braving the greatest difficulty to make it happen. All men play exactly that way, right? /s I like survival and hard fights are fun and exhilarating. Of course I feel like a badass when I take down a big enemy when it's a tough fight, but it doesn't make me glow with pride when I play that way. It's just another fun way to play the game. It's not a competitive thing for me. It's just a lot of fun. First of all, guys typically dress "down" female chars to see how sexy they can make them without revealing everything. Sorta like a strip tease. Everywhere I go in FO4- I turn into Fusion City. So its not quite the same as when you were playing with dolls as a little girl. But I suppose thats a fair assessment. Second. Guys are the ones that build 95% of societies buildings and landscapes anyway. So doing a little interior decorating is no big stretch. Besides in some parts of nature it is the male of species that does the decoration of the "home" to attract mates. Third. In a word. YES. It is wired into a males head (or whatever) to be the hunter/ warrior in a society. That instinct manifests itself in a males game as well. Lastly. While a girl might enjoy playing with her brothers GI Joe. She's probably not going to play with Joe the same way her brother does. "Lets sit down and have a jolly cup of tea with Mr. Cuddles before we go to that awful, smelly dungeon to fight that evil brute".- By the way, for a guy its always a competitive thing. :kiss: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorKaizeld Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 t's clear that every boy/man/male only wants to kill things in the the most brutal possible way braving the greatest difficulty to make it happen. All men play exactly that way, right? /si dont First of all, guys typically dress "down" female chars to see how sexy they can make them without revealing everything. Sorta like a strip tease. Everywhere I go in FO4- I turn into Fusion City. So its not quite the same as when you were playing with dolls as a little girl. But I suppose thats a fair assessment. Second. Guys are the ones that build 95% of societies buildings and landscapes anyway. So doing a little interior decorating is no big stretch. Besides in some parts of nature it is the male of species that does the decoration of the "home" to attract mates. Third. In a word. YES. It is wired into a males head (or whatever) to be the hunter/ warrior in a society. That instinct manifests itself in a males game as well. Lastly. While a girl might enjoy playing with her brothers GI Joe. She's probably not going to play with Joe the same way her brother does. "Lets sit down and have a jolly cup of tea with Mr. Cuddles before we go to that awful, smelly dungeon to fight that evil brute".- By the way, for a guy its always a competitive thing. :kiss:yeah no comment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ethreon Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Seems to me like certain people need to get rid of some mentalities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fkemman11 Posted February 14, 2017 Author Share Posted February 14, 2017 Seems to me like certain people need to get rid of some mentalities. Why? Because you don't agree. So what. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montky Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 @fkemman11that is an interesting question, and thanks for asking it,from a compatibilist, egalite and pluralism standpoint.You're asking a lot of different questions - that go to topics of gamers, demography, methodologies of self-reporting assays and mes-en-scene analysis, metanarratives, videogame content, etc...Perhaps elsewhere and elsewhen are the more appropriate times and places to ask such a question -The Lounge off topic or Debate threads at nexus mods, or on other forums...as these forums have certain norms and mores which dictate how effable certain things can be.|Having just returned from a hiatus because I didn't format paragraphs correctly,I cannot caution enough the time and place factor.| You are quoting folks like J.B. Calhoun, C Hoff-Sommers, Hofstede et hofstede, S Molyneux etc...it would be great for people who are not familiar with the theory which informs your approach,for you to unpack your citations for people. "Determinism overrides freedom of choices/agency" in that "nature v nurture" great debate...really? really... so, we're nothing more than atoms in a particular configuration?incidentally, didn't folks also lambast videogamers as somehow being 'beta' anyway, irrespective of that gamer's background?"alphas" don't waste their YOLO TLDR with 'reified" videogames... they only make perfect alpha choices... because winning.I think folks also laughed at Turing and Conway etc... though here we are. there was a previous thread on a similar topic to this one -they're trying to understand choicespace and preferences for different groups of users.the view is to make more content that appeals to more audience-segments on more levels,and that is a great idea! there are ways we can gather more data to test the hypothesis in the first Original Poster's post in this thread -we could get a poll, we could ask questions etc.you could write a dissertation or several on these issues.certainly, A Sarkeesian and J Thompson have tried. You could try and discern if different types of players do different things in-game.how would you confine the data and discern what effect from a multivariate situation,has which quantifiable correlations with what outcomes?you're happy to make 5 sigma or greater assertions, based on a P variance or P invariance (depending on the claim) like that? ----- However, we disagree and have a nuance of opinion on;who can do what and why.Theory of Mind, Philosophy of Mind, pluralism, indiviuality, liberty... these mean that people have a mind and sense of self.it is solipsism at best to ignore the fact we are a mind among a sea of minds...we are different, yes, but in many ways, we have things in common - we are all sentient.it is the social fabric which is the basis of secular society which assumes as much.Yes, people make different choices for different factors - no, it is not the ideal of an objective society to strive for any particular set.So, things like universal suffrage and 'no taxation without representation', these apply to all citizens within a given geography.similarly, Is/Ought impositions are always an open question.That is part of the 'ultimate endings' instilled in Fallout. it rewards that particular approach for the altruistic ending,for the dystopic ending and 'bad endings', it talks about the pre-War world being remade again and again... part of the awesomeness of Fallout as a series and FO4 in particular,is that,there is so much customization.A player can do whatever, and can FORPG and explore and make it their own.regardless of that player's personal particulars -I have friends with disabilities who love to RolePlay on Fallout - they like MasterBlaster from MadMax and like to play as goodguy/badguy.female friends, LGBTQIAHO, people from all around the world, first nations peoples...all kinds of folks are Fans of Fallout. It is partly what makes Fallout awesome - it is something we have in common.Some of the best mod makers are LGBTQIAHO or female persons, and being able to find a win-win is pretty awesome.of those, some folks that like the Enclave or playing evil, are real-world LGBTQIAHO or female persons.yet, they all play in different ways.Remember Veronica from FONV? she was persecuted for being lesbian in the BoS - that story arc annoyed a lot of BoS fans;why would the BoS care about individual's personal relationships?the 'canon continuity' is found that way; there isn't a continuity imposed, and different FO fans like different parts of Fallout. While you might think that gender-influences on choicespaces would mean some players would seek non-violent resolutions to conflict,I anticipate that after you gather the data, it will be more explicable by other factors -namely, the incomplete knowledge of the gamestates across all players.most of the sentient beings who play Fallout are making choices based on incomplete sets of data and they're doing what they'd like to do.I don't think there'd be a clear difference between the various sub-segments of the playerbase for most of the stuff in FO4.ie - they didn't realize there were non-violent options in the given instance to lead to a certain outcome.that seems to be the reason whystealth gameplay and non-violent/altruistic gameplay are not as large a market segment or audience segmentas the direct approach.that isn't from a lack of the playerbase wanting more customization and options for how they play their games.these constraints are ostensibly from linear storyline imposed, and physical limitations to how games can be made. Of course, it doesn't help when constraints are placed on the playstyles by Bethesda's linear storyline in FO4, which is a rare exception thatI hope bethesda doesn't make as a new norm for Fallout games. Base FO4 had the least options of any FO game to date,and thank goodness modders have begun making more options and awesome stuff for FO4 to address that.they've restored a lot of functionality and options which were present in previous FO games, all that's missing is the Ron Perlman cards and end-game, and FO4 would be a lot more aesthetically consistent with previous FO titles. So, Fkemman11,on what basis do you presume authority to speak for all 'men'? why is your concept of manliness something all people are subject to?are you familiar with Christopher Reeve's exegesis for a film he worked on in 1978? - I think Superman is qualified when Superman says"I don't think there is one type of 'man' - there's macho men, and other kinds of men. I didn't play Superman as macho,I played Superman as questing for the Truth, Justice and Kryptonian way. He's not a man, he's an alien from Krypton"so... you'd agree that there's lots of kinds of male-ness,and hence, some males play games in non-violent ways or with different subjective tastes. I look forward to seeing discussions about a lot of the stuff here, perhaps on the Lounge or Debate forums,as talking about what FO4 means to people, what is Fallout lore/canon? andwhat are gamers and how do they play what?those are all awesome questions that we can ask and seek more about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorKaizeld Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 @fkemman11that is an interesting question, and thanks for asking it,from a compatibilist, egalite and pluralism standpoint.You're asking a lot of different questions - that go to topics of gamers, demography, methodologies of self-reporting assays and mes-en-scene analysis, metanarratives, videogame content, etc...Perhaps elsewhere and elsewhen are the more appropriate times and places to ask such a question -The Lounge off topic or Debate threads at nexus mods, or on other forums...as these forums have certain norms and mores which dictate how effable certain things can be.|Having just returned from a hiatus because I didn't format paragraphs correctly,I cannot caution enough the time and place factor.| You are quoting folks like J.B. Calhoun, C Hoff-Sommers, Hofstede et hofstede, S Molyneux etc...it would be great for people who are not familiar with the theory which informs your approach,for you to unpack your citations for people. "Determinism overrides freedom of choices/agency" in that "nature v nurture" great debate...really? really... so, we're nothing more than atoms in a particular configuration?incidentally, didn't folks also lambast videogamers as somehow being 'beta' anyway, irrespective of that gamer's background?"alphas" don't waste their YOLO TLDR with 'reified" videogames... they only make perfect alpha choices... because winning.I think folks also laughed at Turing and Conway etc... though here we are. there was a previous thread on a similar topic to this one -they're trying to understand choicespace and preferences for different groups of users.the view is to make more content that appeals to more audience-segments on more levels,and that is a great idea! there are ways we can gather more data to test the hypothesis in the first Original Poster's post in this thread -we could get a poll, we could ask questions etc.you could write a dissertation or several on these issues.certainly, A Sarkeesian and J Thompson have tried. You could try and discern if different types of players do different things in-game.how would you confine the data and discern what effect from a multivariate situation,has which quantifiable correlations with what outcomes?you're happy to make 5 sigma or greater assertions, based on a P variance or P invariance (depending on the claim) like that? ----- However, we disagree and have a nuance of opinion on;who can do what and why.Theory of Mind, Philosophy of Mind, pluralism, indiviuality, liberty... these mean that people have a mind and sense of self.it is solipsism at best to ignore the fact we are a mind among a sea of minds...we are different, yes, but in many ways, we have things in common - we are all sentient.it is the social fabric which is the basis of secular society which assumes as much.Yes, people make different choices for different factors - no, it is not the ideal of an objective society to strive for any particular set.So, things like universal suffrage and 'no taxation without representation', these apply to all citizens within a given geography.similarly, Is/Ought impositions are always an open question.That is part of the 'ultimate endings' instilled in Fallout. it rewards that particular approach for the altruistic ending,for the dystopic ending and 'bad endings', it talks about the pre-War world being remade again and again... part of the awesomeness of Fallout as a series and FO4 in particular,is that,there is so much customization.A player can do whatever, and can FORPG and explore and make it their own.regardless of that player's personal particulars -I have friends with disabilities who love to RolePlay on Fallout - they like MasterBlaster from MadMax and like to play as goodguy/badguy.female friends, LGBTQIAHO, people from all around the world, first nations peoples...all kinds of folks are Fans of Fallout. It is partly what makes Fallout awesome - it is something we have in common.Some of the best mod makers are LGBTQIAHO or female persons, and being able to find a win-win is pretty awesome.of those, some folks that like the Enclave or playing evil, are real-world LGBTQIAHO or female persons.yet, they all play in different ways.Remember Veronica from FONV? she was persecuted for being lesbian in the BoS - that story arc annoyed a lot of BoS fans;why would the BoS care about individual's personal relationships?the 'canon continuity' is found that way; there isn't a continuity imposed, and different FO fans like different parts of Fallout. While you might think that gender-influences on choicespaces would mean some players would seek non-violent resolutions to conflict,I anticipate that after you gather the data, it will be more explicable by other factors -namely, the incomplete knowledge of the gamestates across all players.most of the sentient beings who play Fallout are making choices based on incomplete sets of data and they're doing what they'd like to do.I don't think there'd be a clear difference between the various sub-segments of the playerbase for most of the stuff in FO4.ie - they didn't realize there were non-violent options in the given instance to lead to a certain outcome.that seems to be the reason whystealth gameplay and non-violent/altruistic gameplay are not as large a market segment or audience segmentas the direct approach.that isn't from a lack of the playerbase wanting more customization and options for how they play their games.these constraints are ostensibly from linear storyline imposed, and physical limitations to how games can be made. Of course, it doesn't help when constraints are placed on the playstyles by Bethesda's linear storyline in FO4, which is a rare exception thatI hope bethesda doesn't make as a new norm for Fallout games. Base FO4 had the least options of any FO game to date,and thank goodness modders have begun making more options and awesome stuff for FO4 to address that.they've restored a lot of functionality and options which were present in previous FO games, all that's missing is the Ron Perlman cards and end-game, and FO4 would be a lot more aesthetically consistent with previous FO titles. So, Fkemman11,on what basis do you presume authority to speak for all 'men'? why is your concept of manliness something all people are subject to?are you familiar with Christopher Reeve's exegesis for a film he worked on in 1978? - I think Superman is qualified when Superman says"I don't think there is one type of 'man' - there's macho men, and other kinds of men. I didn't play Superman as macho,I played Superman as questing for the Truth, Justice and Kryptonian way. He's not a man, he's an alien from Krypton"so... you'd agree that there's lots of kinds of male-ness,and hence, some males play games in non-violent ways or with different subjective tastes. I look forward to seeing discussions about a lot of the stuff here, perhaps on the Lounge or Debate forums,as talking about what FO4 means to people, what is Fallout lore/canon? andwhat are gamers and how do they play what?those are all awesome questions that we can ask and seek more about.Well said friend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fkemman11 Posted February 14, 2017 Author Share Posted February 14, 2017 Yeah. I agree. That was well said Montky. If a bit long winded. I was simply alluding to a general male profile. Obviously, not all males will feel it to be accurate in describing themselves. But, it has proven to be a common descriptive for men looking back through history. I am simply curious whether the stereotypes of males and females holds true for gamers. The 21st century is fast becoming an era of gender role swapping- enough to challenge and ultimately change traditional thinking. I believe asking thought provoking questions about male and females styles of play in FO4 is as good a place as any to obtain relevant info. I apologize if any thing I have stated sounds the least bit biased. I assure all, that was not my intent by said statements. :smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
montky Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 @qwertyzeldar, fkemman11thankyou, that means a lot to me. It's the least I can do.I've seen good gamer-buddies who have lots of stuff in common practically kill each other over this stuff,and its such a shame.Friends are hard enough to find; are these the hills we want to die on? apologies for the verbose response, though this is an awesome thread which has a lot of complex stuff going on hehe.it would be unfortunate to see so many awesome Nex-ites have a momentary misunderstanding.as a gamer - I like seeing folks ask questions about games, gamers and game futures.It is sad that such 'games journalism' is so scarce these days, in many languages around the planet.that, and videogames-history and videogames-exegetics are fairly rare anyhow -that's why GameTheory, InternetAristocrat, the HoneyBadgers, Yutaka Hanaka, FemFreq, 8BitGuy and NostalgiaCritic etc are of interest. it gets annoying when folks speak about "gamers" when they aren't really any kind of gamer -they don't play tabletop or cards or real-world, or digital and videogames etc...they don't even ask these kinds of questions. they conduct non-representative or statistically irrelevant self-reporting surveys,and extrapolate based on those incomplete sets of data.almost as much as when different sub-groups of gamer Is/Ought and 'no-true-gamer'against other gamers.gamers are gamers - they arrive there in happenstance to particular questions,and it's not a one-size-fits-most deal.I never get the difference between 'hardcore' and 'softcore' gamer/casual gamer; to me, that sounds eerily like those folkswho want to make videogaming beyond a certain arbitrarily imposed number of hours per week (ie, over 5hours out of 168) grounds to subject people to a health-intervention ala AA or other substance abuse or gambling abuse...imagine folks, DSM6 or ICD11 and beyond having 'chronic videogame addiction' listed as an affliction...or the "PC vs Console" thing -both PC and Console are computers, it's just one has not as much user-servicable parts is all hehe. Games futures are about user customization, open world design, adaptive narratives, and permutations!it's going to be a case where folks can make it however they want it,and stories are going to be what drive a lot moreso than performance and visuals themselves.(I mean, sure, we can get less fuzzy, though we've already got fairly awesome hardware and software).2ndLife, FO4 and GTA etc, these are the beginnings of those such games. @fkemman11we could ask those questions more formally,as in, we could either take a self-reporting assay etc with hypothesis and methodology etcor, we could write a google analytics web-index search routine, andas I and others suggested in a previous similar themed thread to this one --we assume that the users are reliable self-narrators and are not making metadata-mining-protection methods in inputting their user credentials at Nexus Mods-of those that do x,y,z they attain p,q,r,s,t,u,v. we could hypothetically 'ping' the gamestates of an internet enabled game, and see what hash-strings/save game configs different players had,though that is a little more technical and invasive. that would be the ultimate in hard data though,as that would contain for players over 500hours into FO4, a lot of different data than forplayers who only put 20-30hours into FO4.I would be interested to find out what factors into which audience segment not completing to say <500hours...what is the demography of gamers for which games relative to time?ie (past the 50 hours and 500 hours points for different games, which gamers play what games and why). the sample size of volunteers to this self-reporting assay would not necessarily reflectthe standard deviation from all gamers all around the world.it would be a subset of NMM gamers, and a tiny fraction of a percent of all gamers.We'd probably want to have a statistically meaningful sample set, if we wanted to draw conclusions from the data-set...that would mean doing a demographic audience assay, to understand what that composition is.if you want your sub-set sample to resemble the composition of the standard deviation of gamers all around the world,you'd have to take a median from all the different groups.theres at least 225 nationstates in the world at time of writing, and some will be under-represented as videogamers are not as prevalent there yet.A gamers-census every decade would be a very useful litmus test and benchmark. I think Hofstede & Hofstede, C Meier, N Stekelenberg and S Pinker would be very informative ingetting to grips with how to make such an assay or a self-reporting survey so as to draw useful or accurateapproaching 5 sigma conclusions from the sample set. I hope you continue to ask awesome questions, fkemman11,and I look forward to seeing what other folks have to say on this thread, and the many spin-off threads to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernt Posted February 14, 2017 Share Posted February 14, 2017 Just my two cents - for what it's worth. I'm a male and - mainly- playing a male character. I certainly like to see girls in sikimpy outfits - or nothing at all. Yet I dress up my companions - or the occassional female character- in fully covering outfits. Not as much for protection - everyone knows that the less fabric, the higher DT for female "armors" :rolleyes: But for immersion sake I think it easier to "get into the game" when Piper - or whoever- is not fighting radscorpions in a bikini. By the poolside though......... well, that's another matter :smile:As for difficulty - until now I haven't progressed beyond "hard". And even so I have boosted my beloved sniper rifles to make sneak, one shot kills on DCs etc. If they get close though.......... :facepalm:Does that make me less of a man? You be the judge of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts