The Creepy Cull of Female Protagonists

[littleork]

As a woman, I would like to see more female protagonist but they would need to be well made for me to really want them there ( I usually play male characters, even when I have a choice.)

 

I wouldn't want to play a female who is half naked, not because it's *sexist* but because when I would look at her, I wouldn't feel like she is badass like she should be. She would need a shape that fit with what she does, having an anorexic punch big guys hard in the face would make no sense to me and would drive me away from the game.Good voice acting would also be important and she would need to fit with the story,if the story wouldn't fit for a woman, then I wouldn't necessarily want a woman in the role.

 

This is just an opinion but if developers could find a middle ground that would appeal to both men and women in a female protagonist, then maybe that problem wouldn't be there as much.

 

 

The only game that I ever played female for a full playthrough is Mass Effect, I play other rpgs and I never felt like taking the female choice before this game,yes I have to say that I am a fan of the voice actress playing her so it made it easier for me to go to a female. But at the end, I liked how she talked, how she could look, how she fit in and how she dealt with her emotions and the events. I can't say that I had that feeling with other female in other games and I know quite a few guys who had no issues playing femshep and I wouldn't be surprise if it was because of the way Bioware portrayed her in the game.

Edited June 5, 2013 by littleork

[sukeban]

I think that games as a medium are still stuck in a somewhat awkward adolescent phase of development, caught between being simple "entertainment for kids" and something more meaningful, perhaps along the lines of what the higher end of cinema and literature has achieved. Right now, the medium is mightily skewed toward the former, but, if the experience of the other relevant mediums is to be considered, given enough time an equilibrium will form and all manner of consumers will be able to find what the want, be it pure entertainment or something providing a bit more intellectual or emotional stimulation. The mainstream of today's games are like the Michael Bay offerings in American cinema, pretty "lowest common denominator" in their approach to their audience but, to be honest, pretty good for what they are. They don't particularly push the envelope in any meaningful way (apart from production value and special effects) and they will never take the lead on beginning conversations about difficult social or emotional issues, but people should also recognize that that isn't what they are attempting to do to begin with.

 

Now, it is also true that just as our social fabric influences our art, so too does our art influence our social fabric, and in this way we should definitely not celebrate games like Call of Juarez that champion retrograde values and themes, but we should also recognize that most mainstream games are not anywhere near this level of backwardness. With more direct respect to the gender question, I'd agree that it isn't particularly progressive to edit the box art of a game based on the feedback from a focus group, but Bioshock is still a AAA production from a studio that is (despite its pretensions) risk-averse and very much covetous of the lowest common audience denominator, as that is where their bread is fundamentally buttered.

 

And that is probably the way that it is going to be for now, or at least until our social fabric evolves to include a more routinely heroic role for females--both in media as well as in everyday life (and let us not forget that heroism as a concept can take innumerable forms). It isn't really the responsibility of large businesses to drive public opinion anyway, as, in a market economy, that is rather putting the cart before the horse. Large studios will always be interested in making the maximum amount of money possible--and that's fine--but perhaps in the future they will have a sort of Fox Searchlight type of relationship to games of a perhaps more intellectually challenging bent, where they can greenlight potentially promising indie games with little financial risk but tremendous potential upside. Beyond that, there is a mushrooming of indie game development that is the locus of where most of the innovation--be it thematic or gameplay-oriented--is taking place today. And those indie games aren't springing forth from the ether; rather, they represent the response of many developers to one segment of the market that is not being addressed by the major studios. As the current gaming demographic ages and matures, this segment of the market will continue to grow, and, as such, its opinions and preferences will steadily gain traction in terms of influencing product offerings. Eventually, this should penetrate the lowest common denominator bubble of the larger studios; and if it doesn't, then perhaps we will witness the birth of star from the ranks of the indie studios.

 

In any case, I am optimistic that we will get more challenging, socially complex games, though that time may not quite yet be at hand. In the meantime, I suppose it is best to vote with your purchasing power and support those games and studiios that you see as representing the values and themes that you most believe in.

Edited June 9, 2013 by sukeban