Slashdot Mirror

I see a lot of articles like this, I see industry experts and teams of executives coming up with the mystical answer to how to draw women in to gaming. Scientists and psychologists desperate to crack open a new market.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/top_10_facts.php
43% of gamers are female. In certain categories more women than men.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2005/06 /15/mobile_gaming_more_popular_with_women_than_men .html
The title says it all.

http://www.wi-fitechnology.com/displayarticle2212. html
Online games as well.

One of the best articles I ever read was one written by a disgruntled woman about the fact that she just wanted games developers to develop games. She was sick of her sex being singled out by the industry as if curvy women with big breasts was any worse than he-man look alikes with a penchant for baby oil. She was right.

These 'experts' can harp on about there wonder treatment of the industry but when it comes down to it,
if you make a good game people will play it. It doenst matter what sex you are.

This is the only industry that makes such ridiculous distinctions between the sexes. The movie industry knows what its doing in regard to this. Sure some are chick flicks some are macho fests most are inbetween and most people dont complain. So why is it that in the Games industry no one can accept that if you just make a quality game half of the population isnt just going to ignore it because God forbid the female characters are quite lucky in the looks department I know for a fact the males will almost certainly be a Keanu Reves or Arnold Swarchnegger rip off.

The major problem with women and gaming is the fact people think there is a major problem with women and gaming.

As for the article. A lot of it is really really bad. The explanation of how you can use our ancestory to predict which games we would prefer is utter crap. Go back pre Wolfenstein and ask him to use his theories to take a look in to the future. Chances of him predicting the future game probably around the 0 area maybe a little more due to shear luck. It may tell us why we enjoy playing these games but as a prediction tool, not even close. Thats the key to why this article essentially says nothing. Im fairly sure if you ignored the sims (A game which has a wopping female following and does match up to his 'prediction') this guy probably wouldnt even have made the connection he did. I certainly doubt hes actually come up with the perfect game idea for women using this psychoanalysis. I there even is such a thing.

Are you talking about the ESRB or the ESA (Entertainment Software Association)? The ESRB is responsible for rating games and also vets advertizing for appropriateness, but the ESA as the video game industry policy organization I would figure to be responsible for these issues, like the ban on selling games to minors in California.

Though I agree with you. The industry, while I think the ratings are accurate, seems incapable of keeping mature games out of the hands of minors.

The Washington post is supposed to be a reputable newspaper with a reputation for reliable informaiton. So why was this article not basic fact checked by anybody?

That is, anybody before us.

Come 'on everybody! Let's all pile on to poor Jose Antonio Vargas and point out everything he just plain got wrong.

I'll take the obvious ones.

1. Tron was not a videogame-turned-into-a-movie. It was an original movie about games in general. The videogame followed.
2. Doom cannot be categorized as an Xbox game. Doom has seen basically all of it's sales on the PC for about a dozen years, with the occasional port.
3. Console gaming and movies don't "crave" the 13 - 25 year old male audience. According to the Entertainmetn Software Association the average gamer age is 30, and 43% are female. This skewes a little lower on consoles, but the numbers are far better than the shallow stereotype Vargas passes as journalism. And hasn't box office gold been Date Movies?

Arguable points

1. Doom is not the Granddaddy of FPS games. Wolfenstein 3D is. Wolfenstein 3D begat Doom. There were other FPS games before Wolfie, but it was the first to see real commercial success.
2. Half-Life was based more on classic adventure games than Doom. It certainly didn't "follow the Doom model."
3. He points to Spielberg signing a deal to create 3 franchisable games for EA as a sign that the industry is at a crossroads. However, Spielberg has worked on games many times before, though his LucasArts and Dreamworks Interactive studios. Don't get me wrong, I'm excited to see him spend more time trying to alter the craft, but it's still nothing he hasn't done before.

As a side note: Movies are about why you do something. Games are about how you do something. Movies about "how" are hollow, and games about "why" are boring.

Are you sure they didn't donate it to the ESA Foundation? They're not the same thing, you know.

-jcr

PennyArcade donated to the ESA, which is a lobbying group, not a charity.

That's bullshit.

Electronic Arts is a member of the ESA, and probably the largest member that doesn't make its own console.

Well, let's assume what you're saying is true and that doing a fighting game is indeed impossible, how much market would they actually be loosing? According to this study of the esa (http://www.theesa.com/files/2005EssentialFacts.pd f), that would be only 5.4%. I'd say it's not the end of the world.
Now use your imagination a bit, think of the nice boxing video demo shown by ea for the ps3 actually being controlled with two revolution controllers.

Actually the main purchaser aren't 14 year old males. From the ESA

"4. The average game player is 30 years old and has been playing games for 9.5 years.

5. The average game buyer is 37 years old. In 2005, 95 percent of computer game buyers and 84 percent of console game buyers were over the age of 18."

...14 year old males". Oh, wait. That's the main purchaser of games.

Oh, wait. You're wrong.

"Ninety-five percent of people who make the actual purchase of computer games and 84% of people who make the actual purchase of video games are 18 years of age or older. The average age of the game buyer is 37 years old. ... Who plays video games? 35% under 18 years, 43% 18-49 years, 19% 50+ years."

The main mistake of that poll is the concept that videogames are kids' stuff. If it had a focus on kids, that would be ok, but it clearly has an industry focus.

Sorry to turn your research into garbage, but The average game player is 30 years old and has been playing games for 9.5 years

It gets even worse. The research states that "39% of the children polled said they were happy to pay a high price for games they especially wanted". That's a shame because, according to that same page linked above, "the average game buyer is 37 years old. In 2005, 95 percent of computer game buyers and 84 percent of console game buyers were over the age of 18."

That may be true in Korea, but I don't think that it's true in the US.

* Gamers devote more than triple the amount of time spent playing games each week to exercising or playing sports, volunteering in the community, religious activities, creative endeavors, cultural activities, and reading.
* In total, gamers spend 23.4 hours per week on these activities, compared to 6.8 hours per week playing games.
* Seventy-nine percent of game players of all ages report exercising or playing sports an average of 20 hours a month.
* Forty-five percent of gamers volunteer an average 5.4 hours per month.
* Ninety-three percent of game players also report reading books or daily newspapers on a regular basis, while sixty-two percent consistently attend cultural events, such as concerts, museums, or the theater.
* Fifty percent of gamers are regularly involved in creative activities, such as painting, writing, or playing an instrument. In addition, adult gamers exhibit a high level of interest in current events, with 94 percent following news and current events, and 78 percent reporting that they vote in most of the elections for which they are eligible.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/gamer_data.php

Oh but the video game industry DOES have a lobbyist and advocacy group! A few in fact! Here are some of the people who fight against Jack Thompson and WIN!

First we have the ESA, the Entertainment Software Association!

http://www.theesa.com/

Headed by Doug Lowenstein, a person Jack Thompson REALLY hates, the ESA is video game's no. 1 lobby group and is also the organization that developed the ESRB. While the ESA and ESRB are connected, the ESRB, headed by Patricia Vance, is a separate entity from the rest of the ESA because its sole purpose is to rate games. However, whenever a law, like the one in Illinois, passes, the ESA is the first one there to counter it. AND... they bring back up!

Back up like the VSDA, Video Software Dealers Association!

http://www.idealink.org/Resource.phx/vsda/events/h omeent2005/homeentnews.htx

This group handles video games, DVDs, and much more in terms of video and digital entertainment. From movies, to music, to video games, although with an emphasis on video, the members of this group include retailers and other companies in the entertainment industry who seek to promote and discover new technologies in providing digital entertainment, and also back the stance of movies as well as video games should government legislation possibly impose on them!

While not as big a lobbyist as they are a partner, the IEMA, Interactive Entertainment Merchants Association, works with the ESRB and ESA in terms of what goes on their member's shelves!

http://www.iema.org/

The IEMA has members such as Wal-Mart, Best Buy, and Target, and most members in the IEMA maintain a "Will not stock AO ratings" policy. This is fine since they work with the ESRB and listen to what the ESRB has to say about the games being given to them. This organization works well with the ESRB and ESA, and can come to support the organizations if necessary!

Second to last, one group that is close to the heart of the games industry, the IGDA, the International Game Developers Association!

http://www.igda.org/

This group of game developers is very well spoken in terms of how the creators of games feel about laws that go against their ability to make games. Whereas the ESA could best represent game publishers, the IGDA would represent the game makers themselves. The forum here is a great place for game designers to share ideas and voice opinions on current hot topics. A great community of minds, and should some Miami lawyer try and pass laws against them... well then they start showing teeth!

And last, one that I don't see much press about, but one that is behind most of my favorite hangouts, the CMP Game Group!

http://www.cmpgame.com/home.html

While not a lobbyist or advocacy group by any means, the CMP Game Group finances and provides several methods of information sharing and acheivement recognition in the game industry. They provide the website Gamasutra.com, publish Game Developers magazine, founded the Game Developers Conference, the GDC, the Game Developers Choice Awards, and the Independent Games Festival. If anyone can provide an accurate resource on what makes games the games they are, the CMP game group can provide it or find the person or persons who can!

So the game industry is not left un-defended. There are plenty of organizations out there to help out people at the ESA and ESRB should they ever come under fire. If you really want to stick it to Jack Thompson, then I suggest becoming a member of some of these organizations and fight with them!

After all, if not for gamers like us, they wouldn't have the power they do now!

~Otaku-Man

If people actually research when they wrote articles. According to the ESA the largest group of game players lies between the ages of 18 and 49.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/gamer_data.php

Mainstream press still believes videogames are made and played by 15 year olds in their parent's basements.

http://www.theesa.com/facts/gamer_data.php

Actually, 55% of gamers are male, 43% are female (other 2% choose not to give gender).

I'd say the reason there are so many big breasted women in games is it attracts males and offends few women.

1: Good taste is very subjective. Pushing the limit usually results in new and exciting games. No one forces people to buy and play these games. People buy and play these games because they are fun and entertaining.

2: Your tolerance for annoyance must be much higher than mine. I don't think it would be so bad to do this in reality. As long as the fines and fees are more inline with selling cigs or beer to minors.

3: The average game player is 30 years old and has been playing games for 9.5 years. The average game buyer is 37 years old. In 2005, 95 percent of computer game buyers and 84 percent of console game buyers were over the age of 18. In 2004, 19 percent of Americans over the age of 50 played video games, an increase from nine percent in 1999. Forty-three percent of all game players are women. In fact, women over the age of 18 represent a greater portion of the game-playing population (28 percent) than boys from ages 6 to 17 (21 percent). (all statistics from http://www.theesa.com/facts/top_10_facts.php) What's your cutoff age? I don't think you can clearly define a store policy to inform parents who are purchasing games for children because it's simply too hard to tell in all cases. Maybe the parents could, you know, take the initiative to ask the store clerk? Why shift the responsibility?

4: Parents should be able to trust their kids, but they are kids and should understand the lengths kids will go to to get the things they want. Obviously, every family will be different, but it will not kill the parent to spend an extra 5 minutes to quickly research a game before purchase , if the kid says its appropriate for them.

The ESA (http://www.theesa.com/) is the primary game industry lobby. They've been focusing a substantial amount of effort and money lately into fighting rating regulation laws around the country. I would assume they'd get involved if the inquiry recommends legislation, but I haven't seen anything yet.

Gamers need to be on the watch out for EA and other publishers who could try to form some kind of GPAA

You mean "Game Publishers Association of America"? In that case, there is no try.

Interesting. I was recently reading the 2004 report issued by theESA(Entertainment Software Association) and it claims some 92% of parents are present at the time games are purchased or rented. Additionally, some 87% of children get parental permission before purchasing or renting a video game.

These statistics are compiled from a dozen or so gaming companies such as Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft, EA and others. I'm guessing the data could be slightly skewed to paint a more favorable picture. Though I'm more include to believe parents, on average, just don't care what kind of games there children are playing.

Nevertheless, if it hasn't already surpassed the movie industry, it will very soon I'm sure.

There already is a VGAA, and it is called the ESA.

1. Adolescent violence is a problem primarily in the US despite other countries having a equivalent number of video game playing adolescents
2. In the last 20 years (actually since 1983) youth violence has been significantly decreasing, while video game sales has become a 7 billion dollar a year business. The decrease in adolescent violence is theorized to be due to increased youth programs and decreased gang-related activity and membership.

What entertainment value vs. educational value does a game solicited towards minors which promotes violence against authority figures have?...Would the thoughts of the freedoms we enjoy come back and haunt us? Ever?...What does matter is the simple thought of society training children and students with everything they don't need for a healthy life style.

Ay, there's the rub. How does a society balance the values of freedom of speech/expression with the need to raise a moral generation? The key here is to restrict access to minors, but not to adults. The average age of gamers is now 29, so naturally the entertainment industry is going to create games that appeal to an older audience. These games are clearly labeled with easy-to-understand ratings, just like movies. Grand Theft Auto is rated "M" for mature, and should probably not be played by people under the age of 17, or people with existing violent tendencies. But even if the game IS played by someone in the restricted group, IT'S NOT THE GAME'S FAULT. Don't blame the game, which is perfectly legal and acceptable in this society of free speech, for "creating" violence.

Yes, there is a lot of violence in our society, and in the media/entertainment industries. But whether actual violence spawned violence in entertainment, or vice versa, is up for debate. We can't point our fingers conclusively at the media, and say, "if there were no violent video games, there would be no violence!" That's crap, and everyone knows it's crap since violence has existed, without the presence of video games, movies, MTV, or any of the other popular scapegoats, for many centuries. And we can't point the finger the other way, either, and say, "a peaceful society doesn't have violent images in its entertainment!" Also crap, since violence has always been present in entertainment during peacetime, all the way back to the Roman gladiatorial games.

Let's face it: violence sells, and in the presence of free speech, should not be banned from the general public. That's called fascism. However, I think certain things need to be in place to "protect the children," as cliche as that phrase has become. In this country, it is actually a crime for a movie theater to sell tickets for an "R" rated movie to children under 17. There is no such law on the books for "M" rated videogames, although there are several in the works I know of, in D.C., Illinois, and Califonia. There may be other states talking about it, too. My point is this: don't cripple the video game industry by censoring it, just because one kid predisposed to violence played a video game he probably shouldn't have, and then blew away a couple of cops. My question is this: did his parents know the type of videogame he was playing? Did they notice any warning signs of violent tendencies and seek help for the child? This was not the game's fault; GTA and its sequels have sold 32 million copies worldwide, and only one kid has acted out violently because of what he saw in them. That's hardly a correlation between GTA and violent tendencies. I have played every version of GTA, some for very long periods of time, and I haven't killed a single cop in my life. Nor have I become more violent.

Let's place the blame squarely where it belongs: on the person committing the crime. Freedom and responsibility are mutually inclusive; a society cannot have one without the other.

What do you have up your sleeve to support your claim?

Which claim, in particular?

The IDSA's report for 2003 suggests that roughly 2/3 of the game playing market were over the age of 18, if that's the claim you're talking about. Source.

If it's the claim of adults wanting handheld devices, you're the one flaming Sony (assuming you're the same AC), so I'd venture the burden of proof rests with you. Obviously they're targeting a different market for a reason; Their actions speak louder than your words and anecdote. After all, being a big bad corporation, they wouldn't be doing it if they didn't think they'd be successful by some measure of success. Meanwhile, you represent less than 0.0001% of the market.

Does Sony Electronics outsell both the music industry and the record industry along with the movie and video game industries that Sony's in as well? Does Sony own any book publishers?

That's illegal, they can't restrict that.

Oh? Which law prohibits them from doing that?

While that law may be based on real things on some level, I do not believe it to be true, and I can assure you that the ESA (formerly the IDSA) regularly sends out DMCA notices to remove ROM sites, just as MediaDefender does for other media.

I certainly cannot corroborate the bit about NOA ever giving some kind of 24 hour exemption. If anything, they have invented new restrictions I am unable to verify from copyright law (of course, I must confess that I have not read all of it, it is incredibly long, complex, and I'm probably missing most of the important case law, anyhow, since I don't have WestLaw or any of the other tools needed for proper legal research).

You can see the legal section of ConsoleClassix for some information concerning ROMs (they actually got their info from a real lawyer), but I'm a bit more leery of Nintendo's legal section, as they don't bother to give me references so that I can actually trace down some of the rules they've listed, such as that, to paraphrase, 'game copying devices are illegal AS WELL AS any backup copies made via them, even if they're used as backup copies under USC 117.'

Mind you, I did try to ask legal@nintendo.com exactly how one might exercise their right to make backup copies in light of that. They declined to respond.

The ESA thinks that less than 9% of games are sold to people under 18. Figures available in this pdf.

1. Adopt the same rating system as the MPAA and keep the ratings systems the same, this way parents can't complain they don't know what the ratings mean.

All the game publishing companies need to make a group like the MPAA and the RIAA (yeah, I know they are evil but...) to lobby against government laws against them. It's sad, but in todays world that is what a big industry has to do to survive.

1. Adopt the same rating system as the MPAA and keep the ratings systems the same, this way parents can't complain they don't know what the ratings mean.

All the game publishing companies need to make a group like the MPAA and the RIAA (yeah, I know they are evil but...) to lobby against government laws against them. It's sad, but in todays world that is what a big industry has to do to survive.

I found this interesting while I was working on a research project for school. According to the Interactive Digital Software Association, only 3.1% of those who buy computer games are under 18 years old, or 8.4% for video games. Most parents - 65% - think that these games are a positive part of their children's lives. And the most stunning stat is 96% of parents sometimes pay attention to the content of their child's games. These stats come from a pdf hosted by the Entertainment Software Association, but there is probably a similar version of the IDSA's site.

The situtation sounds generally positive to me, despite how many "kids" can supposedly buy violent games.

To sum up the essay by Crawford, he complains that the published results are not scientific. Unfortunately, an original document doesn't seem to be available from the ESA site, so all we have are a number of websites quoting/summarizing the results. This, of course, is not scientific, since important background information, e. g. definition of terms, is lacking (as Crawford notes correctly).

To be reliable, any measurement or experiment must be repeatable

So far, so good - but this, however, does not mean that they have to published. It would be nice, though. But the repeatability could also be made sure by peer reviewing the experiment. Of course I doubt that the research article was peer reviewed :)

You may be right (IANAL either though I will link to some seemingly authorative sources), but I was under the impression that as the creator of a work (or holder of the copyright, should the author have assigned it to you), you gain certain exclusive rights, meaning others are excluded from having those rights unless you grant them permission.

If you follow that link, "how it is used" is not listed among the 5 exclusive rights (3 if the work is art). There are other similar lists publiched, such as this similar one with 6 instead of 5 exclusive rights, though they are very similar.

Now, while having the exclusive right to create and distribute copies might seem to imply that you could, in theory, control who can receive a copy, in practice there is the First Sale Doctrine which allows anyone in possession of a copy to sell or give that copy to anyone else.

Now, some might argue that political climate of the late 90's (that brought the DMCA with zero resistance) and the recent lobbying of the RIAA and MPAA (which is meeting considerable resistance) has allows copyright owners to introduce technological restrictions that effectively restrict how their works are used and who can possess copies. But that sort of analysis is far beyond me.

Yeah that would be http://www.theesa.com/EF2003.pdf

I can't beleive no one has posted the link yet, but the actual report (in pdf form) is available on the ESA site.

One thing of personal interest to me, as someone who studies videogame players, is that once again, there is not one word on the race of the people who play videogames. There has been a lot of work on gender and gamers but very very little on race.

well this one sounds like a clear case of perjury.

oh BTW these are the asshats we can blame for this kind of shoddy 'patrolling' Im going to sending out some nastygrams about this one. Snailmail.

Let's point them to: Let's see . . . Disney World "Pirates of the Carribean"

"The old "Pirates!" game

Tropico 2 "Pirate's Cove"

I'm sure you get the idea. . .

If we assume that the primary gamers are young, then what's the point of this? I somehow can't imagine an eight year kid with a long list of contacts and the need to have a datebook.

The statements above completely undercut your argument. The assumption that gamers are children is wrong.

Most gamers are adults. According to the recently renamed Entertainment Software Association (formerly the IDSA -- Interactive Digital Software Assoc.) the average gamer is 29 years old. About 2/3 of gamers are over the age of 18.

With that in mind, the Tapwave Helix gaming PDA is aimed at the adults, not the children. Adults earn money and have disposable income. The average core gamer is in his mid-20s -- who do you think it is who buys the Voodoo, Falcon and Alienware rigs? Those are the same people who will buy the Helix provided the software titles are present.

Source: ESA (formerly IDSA).

Any other questions? ;)