Yes, there aren't many female gamers. We all know that. But don't sit there and act like we're this submissive gender who have no ability to involve ourselves in gaming culture without the help of the nearest walking penis.
I have no idea what your point is. I was describing the situation as it is, that most (not all) women don't buy games and if they play them at all they play games that belong to men that they know. I made no comment on whether this is a good situation or a bad one.
Judging by the lack of female gamers (which you admit to) it is reasonable to assume that most games available dont appeal much to women (or at the very least they appeal much more to men than women). There is another possibility though which is that games in general dont appeal to women (in the same way that most women dont take too much of an interest in sport).
Even in film, the most successful medium ever, there is sometimes a clear difference between the tastes of two sexes (rom coms, which i cant stand, and action movies I find fun). It makes sense to assume that there will always be this difference with games as well (and everywhere else in life). However I belive that the game industry will develop like the film industry and there will be games that not only appeal to women but transcend the sex barrier.
Whether you want to admit it or not but the vast majority of games to day are made for men. I am not trying to belittle your intrest in them but you are a minority, so don't be upset when boys wonder why most women don't like games.
I didn't say that the number of female gamers isn't increasing, I just questioned the relevance of mentioning it.
While we are sharing, my sister plays games but until a couple of years ago she had never bought a game (she likes the sims now), when we were little she used to play on my nintendo and today she plays on her boyfriends pc.
Not that its really relevant when talking about the market as a whole and the demogrpahics involved.
the point is she is a non-exploitive female character in a game. No big tits, no skin tight leather, no navel piercings, no cowering or helplessness, no over the top "sass". Just a regular female freedom fighter in a post apocalyptic world.:-)
I mentioned games like the britney one and karaoake/dance games because these are games that seem to be entirely directed at women. Your right, the sims is a good example of a game that a women might buy for herself instead of for a man in her life, and although I don't much care for it myself, it is critically praised (unlike leisure suit larry, etc.).
The rest of your post is completely anecdotal, your a woman and you buy games, this doesn't change the fact that the majority of game purchases are by men (or male driven, mothers buying a game for her son for example).
The fact remains that the games that I like tend to be very violent (i'm a FPS junkie), not very mainstream (in terms of soceity as a whole) and not many women play them. The fact that your a nintendo fan supports my position as they are kid and girl friendly. For the record I don't play games to ogle virtual women, although thats probably be more healthy than playing lots of violent games.
Also I never questioned womens ability to play games just their will to do so.
I was pretty underwhelmed by HL2 (particularly the story) but even so I don't get why people are going so crazy for her. Her character wasn't particularly interesting, she didn't look anywhere near real enough for me to actually fancy her.
I never like lara croft either tho so its probably just me.
Its a catch 22 situation at the moment. Games are made for boys, boys buy games, developers make more games for boys.
I beg to differ about women being a large market, they are actually a very small market. Lots of women play videogames but how many actually buy them ?. Most women who play videogames only do so because they have access to them through a male in their life (boyfriend, brother, father). How many of these would actually be willing to plonk down the money required for a console and buy games regularly ?.
Boys are willing to spend large on a console and buy games fairly regularly, developers would be insane to ignore the way the market works.
I do think that girls are getting more into games though, witness britney's dance game and the karaoke games. More importantly games are starting to have a larger cultural impact, GTA San Andreas my be a strange example to cite considering the violence level but everyone (girls and boys) of a certain age (that 12 - 25 demographic) has heard of this game. It's cool cause its got gangster themes and hip hop influences. Games will get more and more mainstream and will eventually be just like movies (IMHO).
Excuse me ?, are you really suggesting this is a difficult problem ?.
In this case all the editor would have had to have done is run this slashdot like this. When I said it would be easy to automate what I meant was that every time a story is posted a search is automatically run so the editor can check if the story has already been posted.
Maybe Saddam should have gotten a clue that the US didn't approve when Bush, Sr. deployed hundreds of thousands of US troops on the borders of Iraq and Kuwait. Or in 2003. Some people are just slow learners.
Your saying that Saddam should have been psychic ?.
I'd say he was a little upset about getting his ass kicked and having his expansionist ambitions stifled.
Why do we care so much about the people of Kuwait whilst we have historically done nothing to help the Kurds ?. The Kurds really should have their country but we knew that would piss off Turkey and mean a long and protracted war against Iraq.
Saddam became a bad guy (in the eyes of the US) when he disobeyed orders by invading Kuwait.
According to Saddam, he asked the US government if they would mind if he invaded Kuwait and was told that America would not intervence. If true then it makes Husseins hatred of the US during the 90's make more sense.
You know this is interesting, I have recently just finished reading Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. Anyone who is familliar with the book will understand why christians might get upset about some of the ideas expressed in it.
I do not doubt the existence of a God, or many Gods, but I do doubt the existence of the christian God (and the deities of every other religion I know as well). While we have made great leaps of understanding since we as a species have gained intelligence, there are and possibly always will be questions that we can not answer. What was there before the big bang ?, for example. A God is as rational an explanation as any other and while you can't prove a Gods existence you can not disprove it either.
But the Bible is not in my opinion anywhere near being reliable evidence. Too much of it conflicts with what we can today sceintifically prove. According to the Bible God made man, fully formed, in one day (probably 10,000 years ago according to most christians), according to evolution life began over 600 million years ago and slowly evolved into us.
To bring this back to The Da Vinci Code, one of the suppositions made is that Jesus Christ was never a divine being, he was not the son of God, he was a mortal man just like you and me. His Divinity was supposedly given to him later on during revisions of the Bible with the aim of making Jesus more inspirational and special than the messiahs of competing religions. Although this seems to have caused a fuss this was a conclusion that I had already come to before I read the book.
I have very little doubt that a man called Jesus existed, there is no smoke without fire so to say that he never existed would be going to far. But I have always believed him to be nothing more than a human who had lead a very productive life, he probably helped many people, he spread his own religion far and he influenced many people. Its because of this that we still talk about him today. But I see no actual evidence of him being special beyond anything natural. Until I see evidence, someone walking on water, magically making bread appear, etc. I can not believe in the christian God.
Sounds like you think wiki editors should be subject to a slashdot style meta moderation system. Though there will always be an element of subjectivity anywhere where a human decision is involved.
We need some kind of AI, preferably of the non violent human hating skynet variety.
PC's are only about 20 years old but for the last decade people have been constantly saying that the "PC as we know it" only has a decade left. There still here and I can't see them going anywhere soon.
As for this proposed business model, what is it that people are actually paying for ?, people can be pretty dumb but they rarely give their money away for no perceived gain. The only way it could possibly work is for the ISP to guarantee protection from viruses and spam, I can't see how they could do that though.
I think Microsoft are probably much more clued up about this stuff than we think.
Re:Science over everything
on
One Year on Mars
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I think nothing beats that feeling when science and common sence[sic] works for whole humanity.
I think uniting the whole world might be a bit strong but it definitely shows the difference between the west and some places where intellect isn't valued at all.
Above all it is clear blind religous fundamentalism, whether prohibiting the teaching of evolution in american schools or inspiring people to attack others through suicide, is the biggest threat to our exploration of the universe we live in.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, there aren't many female gamers. We all know that. But don't sit there and act like we're this submissive gender who have no ability to involve ourselves in gaming culture without the help of the nearest walking penis.
I have no idea what your point is. I was describing the situation as it is, that most (not all) women don't buy games and if they play them at all they play games that belong to men that they know. I made no comment on whether this is a good situation or a bad one.
Judging by the lack of female gamers (which you admit to) it is reasonable to assume that most games available dont appeal much to women (or at the very least they appeal much more to men than women). There is another possibility though which is that games in general dont appeal to women (in the same way that most women dont take too much of an interest in sport).
Even in film, the most successful medium ever, there is sometimes a clear difference between the tastes of two sexes (rom coms, which i cant stand, and action movies I find fun). It makes sense to assume that there will always be this difference with games as well (and everywhere else in life). However I belive that the game industry will develop like the film industry and there will be games that not only appeal to women but transcend the sex barrier.
Whether you want to admit it or not but the vast majority of games to day are made for men. I am not trying to belittle your intrest in them but you are a minority, so don't be upset when boys wonder why most women don't like games.
I didn't say that the number of female gamers isn't increasing, I just questioned the relevance of mentioning it.
While we are sharing, my sister plays games but until a couple of years ago she had never bought a game (she likes the sims now), when we were little she used to play on my nintendo and today she plays on her boyfriends pc.
Not that its really relevant when talking about the market as a whole and the demogrpahics involved.
the point is she is a non-exploitive female character in a game. No big tits, no skin tight leather, no navel piercings, no cowering or helplessness, no over the top "sass". Just a regular female freedom fighter in a post apocalyptic world. :-)
Thats not why boys talk about her is it ?
I mentioned games like the britney one and karaoake/dance games because these are games that seem to be entirely directed at women. Your right, the sims is a good example of a game that a women might buy for herself instead of for a man in her life, and although I don't much care for it myself, it is critically praised (unlike leisure suit larry, etc.).
The rest of your post is completely anecdotal, your a woman and you buy games, this doesn't change the fact that the majority of game purchases are by men (or male driven, mothers buying a game for her son for example).
The fact remains that the games that I like tend to be very violent (i'm a FPS junkie), not very mainstream (in terms of soceity as a whole) and not many women play them. The fact that your a nintendo fan supports my position as they are kid and girl friendly. For the record I don't play games to ogle virtual women, although thats probably be more healthy than playing lots of violent games.
Also I never questioned womens ability to play games just their will to do so.
Sure its a nice story but its anecdotal. The exception that proves the rule shall we say.
I said the female market was small not non existant.
Surely you must admit that broadly speaking boys buy more games than girls ?.
I was pretty underwhelmed by HL2 (particularly the story) but even so I don't get why people are going so crazy for her. Her character wasn't particularly interesting, she didn't look anywhere near real enough for me to actually fancy her.
I never like lara croft either tho so its probably just me.
so just this once I decided to click the link and RTFA...
/. ID now.
Hand back your
Well Gordon Freeman isn't a taditional he man, not sure if he is sexy or not though.
Its a catch 22 situation at the moment. Games are made for boys, boys buy games, developers make more games for boys.
I beg to differ about women being a large market, they are actually a very small market. Lots of women play videogames but how many actually buy them ?. Most women who play videogames only do so because they have access to them through a male in their life (boyfriend, brother, father). How many of these would actually be willing to plonk down the money required for a console and buy games regularly ?.
Boys are willing to spend large on a console and buy games fairly regularly, developers would be insane to ignore the way the market works.
I do think that girls are getting more into games though, witness britney's dance game and the karaoke games. More importantly games are starting to have a larger cultural impact, GTA San Andreas my be a strange example to cite considering the violence level but everyone (girls and boys) of a certain age (that 12 - 25 demographic) has heard of this game. It's cool cause its got gangster themes and hip hop influences. Games will get more and more mainstream and will eventually be just like movies (IMHO).
And who the heck modded you offtopic? They didn't R the FA, obviously.
Oh my god, how dare they ?
Excuse me ?, are you really suggesting this is a difficult problem ?.
In this case all the editor would have had to have done is run this slashdot like this. When I said it would be easy to automate what I meant was that every time a story is posted a search is automatically run so the editor can check if the story has already been posted.
How difficult would it be ?
All slashdot editors have to do is search through their archive to see if there are any similar stories. It wouldn't be difficult to automate.
Maybe Saddam should have gotten a clue that the US didn't approve when Bush, Sr. deployed hundreds of thousands of US troops on the borders of Iraq and Kuwait. Or in 2003. Some people are just slow learners.
Your saying that Saddam should have been psychic ?.
I'd say he was a little upset about getting his ass kicked and having his expansionist ambitions stifled.
Why do we care so much about the people of Kuwait whilst we have historically done nothing to help the Kurds ?. The Kurds really should have their country but we knew that would piss off Turkey and mean a long and protracted war against Iraq.
or Russian Roulette.
Saddam became a bad guy (in the eyes of the US) when he disobeyed orders by invading Kuwait.
According to Saddam, he asked the US government if they would mind if he invaded Kuwait and was told that America would not intervence. If true then it makes Husseins hatred of the US during the 90's make more sense.
You know this is interesting, I have recently just finished reading Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code. Anyone who is familliar with the book will understand why christians might get upset about some of the ideas expressed in it.
I do not doubt the existence of a God, or many Gods, but I do doubt the existence of the christian God (and the deities of every other religion I know as well). While we have made great leaps of understanding since we as a species have gained intelligence, there are and possibly always will be questions that we can not answer. What was there before the big bang ?, for example. A God is as rational an explanation as any other and while you can't prove a Gods existence you can not disprove it either.
But the Bible is not in my opinion anywhere near being reliable evidence. Too much of it conflicts with what we can today sceintifically prove. According to the Bible God made man, fully formed, in one day (probably 10,000 years ago according to most christians), according to evolution life began over 600 million years ago and slowly evolved into us.
To bring this back to The Da Vinci Code, one of the suppositions made is that Jesus Christ was never a divine being, he was not the son of God, he was a mortal man just like you and me. His Divinity was supposedly given to him later on during revisions of the Bible with the aim of making Jesus more inspirational and special than the messiahs of competing religions. Although this seems to have caused a fuss this was a conclusion that I had already come to before I read the book.
I have very little doubt that a man called Jesus existed, there is no smoke without fire so to say that he never existed would be going to far. But I have always believed him to be nothing more than a human who had lead a very productive life, he probably helped many people, he spread his own religion far and he influenced many people. Its because of this that we still talk about him today. But I see no actual evidence of him being special beyond anything natural. Until I see evidence, someone walking on water, magically making bread appear, etc. I can not believe in the christian God.
Sounds like you think wiki editors should be subject to a slashdot style meta moderation system. Though there will always be an element of subjectivity anywhere where a human decision is involved.
We need some kind of AI, preferably of the non violent human hating skynet variety.
What about the allegations that US soldiers sodomized US prisoners with chemical lamps ?
There are a lot of photos that were considered too shocking for the press and public to see.
Eventually of course, linux users will number high enough for game companies to actually start paying attention to linux.
Love the optimism.
PC's are only about 20 years old but for the last decade people have been constantly saying that the "PC as we know it" only has a decade left. There still here and I can't see them going anywhere soon.
As for this proposed business model, what is it that people are actually paying for ?, people can be pretty dumb but they rarely give their money away for no perceived gain. The only way it could possibly work is for the ISP to guarantee protection from viruses and spam, I can't see how they could do that though.
I think Microsoft are probably much more clued up about this stuff than we think.
I think nothing beats that feeling when science and common sence[sic] works for whole humanity.
I think uniting the whole world might be a bit strong but it definitely shows the difference between the west and some places where intellect isn't valued at all.
Above all it is clear blind religous fundamentalism, whether prohibiting the teaching of evolution in american schools or inspiring people to attack others through suicide, is the biggest threat to our exploration of the universe we live in.
"Time is natures way of making sure that everything doesn't happen all at once"
What is it ?
Sometimes the slashdot summaries can be so vague.
1) The people who really need it will never hear about it.
My first reaction to this was similar, shouldn't this be built into the browser ?.