The Escapist on Women In Games

The ever interesting Escapist has an entire issue concentrating on women in gaming this week. Particularly informative is a Chris Crawford penned piece on the subject. From the article: "I have long since given up participating in discussions on women in gaming. The games industry is so out of touch, such discussions are a waste of perfectly good electrons. When Microsoft wanted to publicize an event for women at a Game Developers' Conference a few years back, they splashed around banners showing a woman in a low-cut dress. Some people just don't get it."

Comments

I like this...

[Otter]

I have long since given up participating in discussions on women in gaming.

And therefore, I shall now declaim a pompous, long-winded pulled-out-of-my-ass speech on that very same subject, about how evolution has shaped men as a hunters and women as nurturers -- an idea no one has *EVAR* thought of before!

Honestly, we get this story here literally every week. (This is sort-of the second one this afternoon.) Have any of them ever made a single useful point?

What's your point?

[Bogtha]

When Microsoft wanted to publicize an event for women at a Game Developers' Conference a few years back, they splashed around banners showing a woman in a low-cut dress. Some people just don't get it."

Pick up a womens' magazine sometime. What's on the front of it? That's right, a beautiful woman in sexy clothes. Look at television adverts specifically targeting women. What's in them? That's right beautiful women in sexy clothes.

Believe it or not, advertising weenies aren't complete idiots. If you want a high response from men, you use an image of a beautiful woman in sexy clothes, and if you want a high response from women, you use an image of a beautiful woman in sexy clothes too. It's not the advertising weenies' faults that this is what women respond to.

Does it seem like these guys are completely clueless at first glance? Sure. But when you compare it with other markets, and, most importantly, compare it with what works in other markets, it seems not only sane, but the obvious choice.

Re:What's your point?

[screwballicus]

A very important distinction needs to be made between specifically erotic clothing and merely attractive clothing, however. And this is a distinction that straight men frequently miss, because they don't generally have much if any experience trying on, wearing and seeing themselves and other members of their gender in erotic clothing.

Put a women in an attractive evening gown, and both men and women of all sorts will prefer to look at her as opposed to a not equally attractive figure.

But put a women in a thong and fetishistic apparel and you have something quite different. It's the difference between a man in a smart suit on the one hand and a man in a pair of assless chaps, a cowboy hat and leather armbands on the other. The first is attractive, while the latter is overtly erotic. Many men would be uncomfortable dressed in the latter, and many men would have a hard time imagining themselves as being a character dressed in the latter. And men need to grasp this.

Not all characters benefit from being eroticised. It may simply not fit their character at all. And this is a problem in game design presently - sacrificing all believability in the name of exposing skin. And regardless, not everyone wants to look at erotic images constantly whilst gaming.

They could make a version of Hamlet in which the main characters consistently walk around nearly nude, in thongs, bikinis and lingerie. But it wouldn't be very believable. And on the whole, audiences tend to favour believability over eroticism in cinema where the two are in contention. They are not always in contention, by any means. But frequently when they contend against each other in gaming at present, eroticism gets chosen over believability.

Being dressed in erotic clothing feels fundamentally different from being dressed in merely attractive clothing. And playing a character dressed in erotic clothing does similarly, for those who understand that distinction.

Re:What's your point?

[porcupine8]

Pick up a womens' magazine sometime.

But there's a specific reason for that - those magazines are saying "Look at this woman! She's prettier than you, sexier than you, and looks better in her clothes than you! BUT - if you buy this magazine we can teach you how to look like her and tell you what products to buy to be just as sexy, we promise!"

Same for TV ads for beauty products. However, if you watch daytime TV, where the ads are for cleaning products and targeted at housewives, you don't see that - you see actors who look like "average" (but slightly thinner with slightly better skin and hair) hosuewives, doing their laundry or dishes or whatever.

The point of a video game isn't to sell the player something that will make them more like the character. It's for the player to identify with the character and enjoy living the character's life for a while, doing whatever it is the character does in the game.

A better comparison would be a chick flick. Women in action movies are like women in video games - busty, tight clothes, etc. Women in chick flicks are very different - prettier and thinner than average (because directors just won't hire anyone else), but much closer to normal, wearing much closer to normal clothing. Most women would choose a chick flick over an action movie, because most women identify with the female characters and enjoy living through them for a couple of hours, having whatever romantic comedy or tearjerker adventure they're having. A chick flick where the leads are all DDs wearing skin-tight low-cut tank tops and shorts with their butts hanging out would cease to be a chick flick, because women would have a much harder time identifying with the characters. (Well, occasionally such a character is in one, but they're usually scorned or pitied by the other characters.)

Re:What's your point?

[rhandir]

Holy buckets! This is the most insightful comment I've seen on slashdot...ever. Is the world ending? Is this really Slashdot?!?

Wait... the poster's name is ... screwballicus
...
Yup, it's slashdot.

What do they really want to play?

[stpitner]

I think the hardest thing of all is asking a bunch of guys (because typically the developers and game-creators are male) to create a game that women want to play. There's a problem with that right there. The closest thing I've seen to a successful game where women really enjoy the game is The Sims series. My wife loves to play that all the time and build houses and build a family. What she's doing has no point, no goal to reach, but she loves to play it. She also likes to play driving games where you're not racing, but you're just driving around because she wants to drive around.

I know that my wife does not speak for all woman-kind for the type of games that need to be created, but the stuff she enjoys to play is just so incredibly different than what I would ever conceive of creating. There's no desire for competition and winning (although I know there are many women that are indeed very competitve and really want to win), and she's content with just driving around or just having the sims do stuff. It's hard to make a game when you don't really have an objective.

I could see some women enjoying more of a game where you are more defensive than something like a FPS where you go on the offense and attack everything.

I seriously think the hardest part about finding a game that women would enjoy is just finding out what the women want to play. Any of the answers that I see in the articles is so vague (an my suggestion was vague too) because there is no real set answer as to what women would enjoy.

Re:What do they really want to play?

[OregonComputerSoluti]

"I seriously think the hardest part about finding a game that women would enjoy is just finding out what the women want to play."

Sadly, I think this is exactly the problem preventing game publishers from being more successful at tapping into the female gaming market. No-one really understands what women want in games, and I think this is largely because there are not many women involved in game creation. The reason that gaming is popular for guys is that the games are written by a bunch of guys who went and created what they wanted. We need more female game designers/coders in order to get more female-oriented games on the market.

And many women DO want a gaming experience that is VERY different from the gaming experience that most men want. My top games right now are F.E.A.R., Half-Life2, and Black & White 2. My wife's top games are Mahjongg (several variants), computer scrabble, and who wants to be a millionaire. However, the usual attitude of most guys out there is the one espoused by the comment that followed yours... (Paraphrased here): make em a game where you can fly around and beat people up with purses while avoiding obstacles and assembling the ultimate cute outfit! With game suggestions like these, it is no wonder that women avoid gaming! I am insulted, and I am a guy!

Reinvent

[Deliveranc3]

The novel as a genre reinvented women giving us what can be considered the modern western woman with the works of Jane Austin.

Perhaps if we wait long enough this medium will show some teeth, female teeth.

This guy doesn't know anything about psychology

[crazyashtabula]

This article is not very well written. From a psychologist's point of view, it's really very sloppy. I'm not the only one: http://oghc.blogspot.com/2005/11/o-chris-crawford- we-shake-our-heads-at.html That's a pretty good review of Crawford's piece in The Escapist. Unlike that guy, though- I'm really wondering what The Escapist was thinking publishing this. It brings down their repor. I think it is only because they interviewed him, and wanted to throw a bone.

Cavemen Did Not Have Gender Roles

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

And therefore, I shall now declaim a pompous, long-winded pulled-out-of-my-ass speech on that very same subject, about how evolution has shaped men as a hunters and women as nurturers -- an idea no one has *EVAR* thought of before!

This idea is one of those great uncontested theories that seems to make sense on first glance, but as soon as you delve into it it quickly falls under its own weight. From TFA:

The biggest difference was men were hunters and women were gatherers. This gender specialization did not arise because of some male conspiracy to dominate women or some other nastiness. It was the natural, inevitable result of a basic physical difference between men and women

What the hell?! Evidence please? Something beyond the musings of scientists raised in a somewhat, shall be say, biased society. Can anyone seriously suggest that half the adult population of a tribe of hungry, on the line, hunter-gatherers simply stayed at home twiddling their thumbs and watching sprogs while the other half actually went out risking life and limb to haul back the meat? You'd have to be born in the Fifties to buy this.

Oh wait. They did do something. They picked berries! That's rich. I can see this state of affairs lasting for about five minutes before someone in group A, the "hunter" group, realises and the majority of group B, the "gather" group, is reaping the benefit of this relationship far more than he.

A word to the wise who hold such unsubstanciated claims. Women have always worked. They have always been breadwinners. OK, there was a decade or two back there in the fifties where times were so good one spouse could afford not to work and stay home minding the kids. I know I would have. But apart from that, you'll find that women's hands have traditionally been just as calloused as everyone elses.

And if you bother to do any research at all, you'll find some of that modern callous is comeing from holding gampads all day.

Re:Cavemen Did Not Have Gender Roles

[Drachasor]

Your dismissal of the importance and difficulty in properly caring for and raising children is really quite disturbing. In many ways navigating the complex social structure in any society is more difficult than hunting. If you somehow think that the hunters would up and leave because the situation wasn't "fair", then keep in mind that all such peoples would die out and have no decendents.

I'd also add that he did bring up evidence, such as certain physical characteristics; only women can feed babies and men have a pelvis better suited for running--hence better suited for hunting.

It's a fact that the average male is better at spatial reasoning the the average female. It's also a fact that the average female is better at multi-tasking than the average male. Both of these come from our evolutionary origins. There are other differences between males and females as well (obviously). While many differences between men and women are negligible or non-existent, that doesn't mean all differences are so.

In any case, you need to rething your view on the care, protection, and feeding of children, and on organizing social groups to do these tasks. You hopelessly simplify evolutionary psychology (and the article we are talking about) when you pretend that all women did was "pick berries".

-Drachasor

WTF

[FreakUnique]

OK the person who wrote that article couldn't design if their life depending on it. I've been gaming since I was a very little girl. I'm now 24 and still play games and online games. Most people don't care for the fact that I'm a woman. It's the minority of idiot pre pubescent teens that start the drooling or treating me like an idiot.

I just ignore them. As for the sorts of games that I play I love RPGs, the cute Japanese puzzle games, MMORPGs, Action/adventure, and other puzzle games. I also love games like Mario Kart, Monkey Ball, and Dynasty Warriors. I play games either becuase I love the storyline and gameplay or becuase I can pick them up and have some fun as a means to kill my time.

I'm generally happy out

[MerRua]

I'm generally happy out as a woman gamer. I love RPGs so they are the main thing I play.
I also play other types of games but I devote most of my hours to rpgs.

As long as the clothes and attitudes the women have aren't ridiculous (wearing pieces of string, having to be rescued in a patietic way, signing over the men like a women in a frank miller comic) I have no problem with it.

Exceptions to 'the having to be resuced' are of course Ico. That is truely fantastic. But in Ico it wasnt shoved in your face, she has to be rescued as she is a girl, its simple because they have a good story.

One point however I would like to make is, giving people a female main character option should not mean the same, as giving a faster yet weaker character. It shows a deep lack of orginality, and a lack of considered character design. If you expect me to believe that this character can take a bullet and keep going I'm expecting a least some muscle.

No woman I know fits into this model

[RaggieRags]

What a load of crap.

The writer uses (outdated) information on what we (think) we know about the stone ages, uses it as a model of what is the most appropriate behavior model for both genders, and makes the assumption that us ladies would prefer games that are "interactive soap opera or bodice ripper, presenting the player with complex social problems as she seeks the ideal mate."

*shudder* If this is what "games for women" are supposed to be like, Im glad they dont make them.

Im a woman and I like games. Many of my female friends like games. Nearly all of them have played and enjoyed violent action games. The old fallacy is that women dont play games because they dont find what they want from games. But women do play. Each year there are more and more female gamers, without the help of "girl games". Even the thought of having a "womens game" where you are supposed to "seek your ideal mate" is frankly offensive. Just because women have historically been forced to stay at home and limit our lives to home, doesnt mean that our goals or fantasies cant include anything else. Hey, I want to be a hero, too! I want to kick butt, not socialize. I have all the social problems I want in my real life. Please dont patronize me just because of my gender.

Has anyone thought to ask if there is a problem?

[xtieburn]

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.