Borderlands 2 ”girlfriend mode” stirs controversy

Borderlands 2 lead designer John Hemingway appears to have stepped in it. In an interview with Eurogamer, he revealed that the game’s fifth class, the Mechromancer, will feature a skill tree designed specifically for newbies. Among other things, this tree includes a Close Enough skill that ups the odds that missed shots will ricochet into your enemies. Sounds like a great idea, except Hemingway refered to the tree as “for the lack of a better term, the girlfriend skill tree.” He then went onto reference “girlfriend mode” numerous times, according to Eurogamer.

Cue predictable outrage.

Gearbox President Randy Pitchford is doing damage control on Twitter, claiming that girlfriend mode was a “personal anecdote.” Surely, it was a poor choice of words; calling the tree “noob mode” would have avoided any controversy. But it’s also worth pointing out that the Mechromancer is a female character, and more importantly, that she bears no resemblance to a busty Lara Croft squeezed into tiny booty shorts. Hemingway hardly seems like a misogynist.

What seems to be lost in all the hubbub is that a gender-neutral-unskilled-player skill tree sounds like a really good idea. Games are increasingly offering cooperative multiplayer modes, but difficulty settings don’t account for players with mismatched skills. Heck, the original Borderlands can be a frustrating experience even when similarly skilled players play with characters that differ by more than a few levels. I’m all for something that balances the playing field a little for cooperative games, just as long as it steers clear of adversarial multiplayer.

Perhaps I need sensitivity training, but the outrage over girlfriend mode seems overblown. Then again, I’ve never been particularly offended when my girlfriend refers to taking out the garbage as a boyfriend job.

Comments closed
    • Beelzebubba9
    • 7 years ago

    300!

    Oh nerds and gender relations….

    • JdL
    • 7 years ago

    Everyone starts as a noob, yet not everyone can be a girlfriend.

    • rrr
    • 7 years ago

    What’s so outrageous? Everyone knows, he was joking, right?

    • Knee Dragger
    • 7 years ago

    These touchy broads and metrosexual fairies need to get over it. We’re men. We burp, we fart, we scratch, and we smell our fingers. I’m sick and tired of all of these hypersensitive dingleberries with a chip on their shoulder just WAITING to be offended by someone. The attempted chickification of the American male continues…

    I’m gonna go play some Duke Nukem 3D.

    • rika13
    • 7 years ago

    I am a guy, it might be due to the extreme sexism against men nowdays (no programs for men compared to various loans and grants for women, no blue stuff for prostate cancer in november vs cant help but trip over pink shit in september?, wifebeaters vs no term for women who abuse their men, etc.) but I do not feel offended at all by this. I simply see it as a realization that gamers tend to be male, especially FPS gamers (MMOs tend to have more females, due to the co-operative nature, and even then, they tend toward non-combative roles [that healer chick stereotype didnt come around because all the girls play deeps]).

    • cynan
    • 7 years ago

    I’m trying to think whether, if I was a female gamer, I’d be offended by this.

    If I was a noob female gamer I don’t think I’d have a problem, because the label would be an accurate description of my skill level requirements.

    If I was an avid female gamer, I think I’d feel indifferent as this noob mode obviously wasn’t designed for me. If anything, I’d be motivated to aspire to kick even more but at the more challenging difficulties (especially my boyfriend’s).

    Ironically, I think the person with the most reason to feel offended (if anyone) would be the noob male gamer wanting an easier difficulty level. Would this be because he would be given the message that his skills are only as good as a girl’s? No. For “girlfriend mode” does not designate all females, rather only casual or noob gamers. For in this usage, “girlfriend” is meant to convey nothing about gender. It simply means casual or noob gamer. The obvious unfortunate aspect is that it has a heavy gender connotation.

    Rather the noob male gamer would be told that it is only OK for female gamers to be casual gamers and play at the associated difficulty level. Somehow, he is not living up to expectations if he is attempting to play a game at this easier difficulty, when why shouldn’t he if he wants too and the difficulty level suits his experience level as a gamer?

    • shaq_mobile
    • 7 years ago

    i find the term “noob mode” highly offensive. i, being a noob at the start of each new game, find it offensive that we are automatically assumed to be of less skill.

    • south side sammy
    • 7 years ago

    it’s amazing how much attention this thread has gotten……….. and here we are……… it’s either cleverly by design or we’re still in our infancy, but if you pay attention we all have our prejudices. Haven’t learned anything have we ? Hoorah for da “man”

    let’s see who doesn’t get that………………

    • Chrispy_
    • 7 years ago

    If 2K make a “girlfriend mode” to introduce non-gamers to cooperative gaming, I demand a “boyfriend mode” for chick-flick movies and period dramas.

    Kudos for not making the character a scantily-clad, overly-curvaceous pinup girl though. I had difficulty defending Bayonetta from criticism, which was all the more annoying because under all the needless titilation, that’s actually a great game.

    • pedro
    • 7 years ago

    As a n00b, I find the term ‘n00b mode’ disrespectful.

    • stmok
    • 7 years ago

    Don’t you just love political correctness and victim-hood mentality?

    …It’s all about someone’s [b<]feelings[/b<]. ie: The whole point is to get EVERYONE to accommodate a specific group or person who feel like they should be entitled for something; if they [b<]feel[/b<] uncomfortable about anything that offends them. I do note they all have the same core characteristics... * Their basic stance of: "If you aren't with us, you're against us". ...They are only OK with freedom of speech as long as its THEIR view. Opinion that runs contrary to what they believe in, is not tolerated. When it comes to being tolerant, you'd come to realise they are the most intolerant in their actions! (I noticed that with Chick-Fil-A situation OR women who talk about wanting to be equal and then turn around and say men deserve something because of the past. How does that help their cause by acting hostile?) * They always name-call or label in order to try to shame others into following their views... For example: If you don't like feminism because you've come to realise its nothing more than a flawed ideology for the long term social fabric of society; they'll label you as anti-woman, misogynist, etc...And the first thing they will presume is that you want women back in the kitchen. (An automatic response based on the ideology they've been indoctrinated with.) In reality, I don't want women back in the kitchen. In fact, I don't want them anywhere near my kitchen as my last date nearly set my place on fire! The women I've dated don't know how to cook! I'd rather have a robot assistant from Japan! At least its programmable and predictable! * Victim-hood stance through myopic view of the world... They only see in terms of specific aspects based on the ideology they follow and nothing else of the world. Examples: Feminist => By gender. Gay rights activist => By sexuality. Coloured/Black rights activist => By race. (eg: White = rich/privileged; etc.) Environmentalist => All capitalism is bad. (Yet, they carry iPhones, etc.) Socialist => Rich are bad. Take from them. Equal for all. * They all have some utopian vision of the world... ...Which is often extremely idealistic to the point of delusional. The most concerning is that they don't care of the consequences it causes upon society, as long as they get their way. In practice, their utopia doesn't play out in the real world. In fact, it falls apart as everything becomes dishonest in order to fulfill the ideal utopia. Simply because the biggest flaw in their ideology is that it doesn't account for the fact that humans are unpredictable beings. (Not even scientists with vast supercomputing resources are able to emulate human behaviour with certainty.) * They all believe that the Govt should be in charge of everything. ...Even when its proven time and again that Govt is crap at doing anything useful for the long term. They want a big Govt to be the central control and provide special benefits for them. (It runs in direct contradiction to the foundations of most Americans; as any decent American sees welfare dependence as a bad thing. No American I've met wants to be an economic slave, and prefer to be financially independent by choosing their own path in life.) As an example: Just look at Obama's "Life of Julia" (Its clearly to appease a feminist lobby group). => [url<]http://www.barackobama.com/life-of-julia/[/url<] ...How are women to stand on their own feet when Obama wants them to suckle on his Govt assistance teat for most of their life time? * They always complain. But never provide solutions themselves. This is what you call "critical theory". These kinds of people (progressives?) don't want equal opportunity. They want equal outcomes in order to match their utopian ideal. They are also the very same people that don't want to do anything useful for society itself...What I mean is, the very people who call games sexist, etc are also the very same people who won't do anything tangible about it, but complain. ie: They won't make their own games because its hard work. Its easier to stamp one's feet until they get their way...Behave like spoiled/entitled children at a toy store. (IF you accommodate them like some parents would, they will keep expecting more entitlements in the future!) Over time, political correctness has made me indifferent about various groups that continue to play the victim-hood card to this very day. Its getting old, and its training me not to care. Its also taught me to always carry some sort of recording device. People lie and use political correctness to get their way. Having a solid record destroys their so-called moral high-ground and character in case of a "he says, she says" dispute. (Learned this when a friend was accused of rape. She only owned up to the lie when the police found the evidence simply didn't align with the report she filed. The case was dropped, and he was humiliated. Nothing happened to her.)

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 7 years ago

      Generalize much?

      [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization[/url<] I'm picking a few, as I don't have all night to go through all of them. 1. [quote<][b<](It runs in direct contradiction to the foundations of most Americans; as any decent American sees welfare dependence as a bad thing. No American I've met wants to be an economic slave, and prefer to be financially independent by choosing their own path in life.)[/b<][/quote<] How do you know the foundations of "most" Americans? Did you ask "most" of them? Also, what is a "decent" American? The term is subjective and relative to a person's individual values. No American YOU'VE met doesn't want to be an economic slave. You can't base "most" off of the people you've met. 2. [quote<][b<]Over time, political correctness has made me indifferent about various groups that continue to play the victim-hood card to this very day. Its getting old, and its training me not to care.[/b<][/quote<] Various groups? Or are you referring to people who are categorized to belong to a certain group who are playing the "victim" in a situation where the person(s) may or may not have been an actual victim? Real incidents of discrimination are very real, and ignoring all, ensures the oppressed will continue to be oppressed. Try not to be so cynical. Schools used to teach logic, and judging by your age, you should know better than to generalize. It wasn't long ago when schools were segregated, and women didn't have the right to vote. I guess those darned "progressives" messed up there, didn't they? Your entire argument is invalidated through your many generalizations which don't serve to be constructive, but rather the contrary. If you want people to take your posts seriously, try to keep the logical fallacies out.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      tldnr.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      Good trolling +1. You could’ve made it a bit more extreme; reading this might make someone think you actually believe all this nonsense

      • Spotpuff
      • 7 years ago

      I think freedom of speech only refers to the government not censoring people.

      It does not mean you get to say whatever you want without consequence. If you say something particularly stupid, you’re going to get negative feedback. That’s not squelching freedom of speech, that’s just how life works.

      • Turkina
      • 7 years ago

      People who make these kinds of arguments seem confused by what “freedom of speech” means. Firstly, it refers only to the government not making any laws to restrict such speech. Secondly, it does not absolve anyone of the consequences of said speech. A person or organization is certainly free to say whatever it wants. It is not “free” form the consequences that may occur, such as boycotts or stigmatization (or even, in cases of false or defamatory speech, civil litigation).
      The rest of the post seems based entirely on generalizations (ie: “all Xs are Y), and absolutely stinks of ideology.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      Don’t agree with everything you say, but I do agree with:
      [quote<] Over time, political correctness has made me indifferent about various groups that continue to play the victim-hood card to this very day. [/quote<]

    • albundy
    • 7 years ago

    it takes an extraordinarily special douchebag to keep a kid from playing his/her first FPS game. well done Johnny.

    • XaiaX
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]Perhaps I need sensitivity training, but the outrage over girlfriend mode seems overblown.[/quote<] Yeah, being a straight white dude is way awesome. You don't have to think about how people are addressed, because most things are written with you in mind. And, if someone has the temerity to write something that addresses a different audience, you can tell them they're being biased by not maintaining a neutral tone. MISANDRY

      • Scrotos
      • 7 years ago

      This seems suited to you:

      [url<]http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-the-lowest-difficulty-setting-there-is/[/url<] Or at least, you may get a kick out of it.

        • XaiaX
        • 7 years ago

        I have read that, and yes. Thanks.

      • Spotpuff
      • 7 years ago

      Relevant Louis CK bit:
      [url<]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4f9zR5yzY[/url<] I'm still trying to think of an epithet for white people. Cracker is just so... bland and tasteless. Needs more flavour, like a saltine.

        • XaiaX
        • 7 years ago

        I had some of that in mind, for sure.

        Random thing I learned recently, Louis CK’s first native language is Mexican Spanish. He lived in Mexico City until the age of 7. I imagine that has at least a little to do with his views, now.

      • cynan
      • 7 years ago

      Could someone please explain this post to me?

      1) Is the 1st sentence (and therefore entire post) sarcastic?

      2) What do you mean by “most things are written with you in mind?” Are you being literal as in, for example, the English language has no gender neutral pronouns and that more oft than not people still default to “he” over “she”? Or are you saying that most media/marketing/etc is created to be most easily identifiable by straight white males?

      3)What does women hating men have to do with this? (Hence why I asked if the first sentence was sarcasm). Are you agreeing with Geoff that the reaction is a bit overblown and that, it is, in fact, birthed from misandry?

      Apologies if my sarcasm detector is not working correctly.

        • shaq_mobile
        • 7 years ago

        [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_racism[/url<]

          • XaiaX
          • 7 years ago

          “Reverse Racism” is called that because it’s “racism” that’s going in the opposite of the “normal” direction.

          What does racism having a perceived “normal” direction tell you? Note, this is a term often used by people that don’t think racism exists. They don’t think it exists, yet they demonstrate by the use of this term that they think “racism” has an implicit direction.

            • shaq_mobile
            • 7 years ago

            For someone who is so upset about generalizations and stereotypes, you sure do feel free to use them at your leisure. :/

        • XaiaX
        • 7 years ago

        First, there’s a huge bug in this comment system. If you click on the thumbs up/down widget with a text editor open, it closes the window without warning and deletes the entire contents of the editing buffer.

        WTF is that crap?

        Now I’m going to have type out everything I just wrote *again*.

        1. Yes, all of the sarcasm.

        2. For any publication there is an audience in mind, either implicit or explicit. In the general case this will sway to the majority or those with cultural power. (E.g., in Apartheid South Africa, whites were a numerical minority but they held the actual power, so they were not a “minority” in the sense of the term people describing social structures mean) So, in the US, and especially in the tech sector, that audience is straight white dudes. There are many ways to observe how this is done, even when it’s done implicitly and unknowingly. There could be references to “your wife/girlfriend”, even without establishing that the reader *can* or *desires* to have one. There’s “wife acceptance factor”, etc. Here, from the techreport’s own contest pages:

        [quote<]Please don't try to game the system by entering [b<]your girlfriend, wife,[/b<] kids or pets.[/quote<] (Just go up to the embedded google search and run a query for [i<]your girlfriend[/i<] It'll also show lots of results from participants on the forums making the same implicit assumptions about the audience.) Now, you can easily find counterexamples, and some people assume that a single counterexample means that there is no possible general trend. These are crazy people that don't understand how probability and statistics work. Some may argue that the audience is overwhelmingly a bunch of straight white dudes, but this 1. doesn't rely on any actual evidence 2. is circular, since the assumptions of the writers will drive what kind of audience is present to read. If you write a blog specifically for gay linux enthusiasts in palo alto, the audience is probably going to limit itself to that. So, by assuming a majority straight white dude audience, you can accidentally exclude others. 2a. English has a perfectly functional gender neutral 3rd person pronoun: "they". Now, there are ignorant people that will argue that we can't use it because "it's plural", but that's stupid for two reasons. One, "you" is plural, and we use that for singular reference all the damn time. Two, it's been used as an indefinite third person non-gender-specific pronoun since before anyone even spoke what we would recognize as English, and has been used for all of that time. Shakespeare uses it as indefinite third person singular. The idiotic idea about using "he" as a generic third person pronoun is a relatively recent contrivance, by comparison. In prior years, "he" was used not as a generic, but because the writers explicitly meant to talk about men as the general case. It wasn't shorthand for anything. When they wrote the declaration of independence, they didn't just use "he" and "man" out of [i<]convenience[/i<], they meant men explicitly. There are issues with using "they" for a definite reference, but that's getting into the issue of transgender. (Not just "identity" issues, either, but expressed gendered biological features. The bits we hide when we're out in public) You can say "there's someone at the door" and someone else can reply "find out who they are" and there's no issue. If you say "it's Pat", the 2nd party can't really reply with "let them in" at that point, though. (Indefinite vs. definite is "a/an" vs. "the/the". Whether you're talking about an abstract, potential, or nonspecific subject, or a discrete, known subject. E.g., "there's an apple on my desk" vs. "get the apple off my desk". If someone says "get an apple off my desk", you will assume that there's more than one apple, and which apple you choose is immaterial.) 3. The term "Misandry" gets thrown about by dudes like "Men's Rights Activists" or "Men Going Their Own Way". These are dudes that are offended when women want to be treated like human beings, because it runs counter to thousands of years of dude-privilege. They are angry when women aren't deterministic mechanisms which they can operate like vending machines, and to counter claims of misogyny, they throw out the term "misandry". The general problem with it is that the actions they are decrying are generally criticisms of male-oriented / male-dominated culture. E.g., saying "girlfriend mode" is sexist. They don't see a problem with "girlfriend mode", and they see people calling it sexist. So they interpret the criticism of the term as an attack on them. Since they are men, it's an attack on all men. Hence, misandry. Be very wary of anyone using the term. "Misogyny" is largely used to refer to the overall cultural bias against women. Lower pay, assumed incompetence, treatment as machine that exists to facilitate pregnancy, etc. (No, seriously, look up "pre-pregnant" and "forever pregnant") There's no similar general cultural anti-men tendency. (This is the part where someone will point out some specific case that can be interpreted as anti-man, and it won't matter how specific to a location or time or field or anything else, and therefore all of society is anti-man and women are the illuminati and they're here to oppress men) For example, look at the post by stmok. [quote<]For example: If you don't like feminism because you've come to realise its nothing more than a flawed ideology for the long term social fabric of society;[/quote<] There's no actual explanation of what that means. Generally it comes down to something fake-pithy like "I'm humanist, not feminist. I believe in equal treatment, not special treatment." This is stupid because feminism is about equal treatment, specifically, treating women better, because currently they are treated worse. It came about because many want women to be treated fairly. Feminism isn't "anti-man" any more than "impressionism" is anti-photography. Then there's this doublespeak: [quote<]They only see in terms of specific aspects based on the ideology they follow and nothing else of the world. Examples: Feminist => By gender. Gay rights activist => By sexuality. Coloured/Black rights activist => By race. (eg: White = rich/privileged; etc.) Environmentalist => All capitalism is bad. (Yet, they carry iPhones, etc.) Socialist => Rich are bad. Take from them. Equal for all.[/quote<] Look at how they're attempting to rephrase things. Feminists are too focused on gender. Implicit is the notion that if feminists didn't care how women were treated, there would be no problem. It's literally saying that caring about how women are treated is bad. Exactly the same with gay rights. It's saying that someone who thinks there should be no restrictions about which pairs of people can get married because of their genders is the problem. Wanting equal treatment is the problem. They're "too focused on sexuality". What's the alternate solution, then? Then there's next line. People that care about racial inequality are the problem. They're too focused on race. Instead they should be focused on ... Nothing. There is no proposed solution. This is simple redirection to label the dissenters as [i<]being[/i<] the problem, instead of [i<]talking about[/i<] the problem. You can see the ridiculous extension of this in the last two examples. [quote<]Environmentalist => All capitalism is bad. (Yet, they carry iPhones, etc.)[/quote<] Look at the arbitrary assertion here. Somehow "environmentalism", which is simply being aware of the effect of human action on the environment, is somehow asserted to be anti-capitalist. There's no reasoning given, it's just asserted. Never mind that something like "cap & trade" is [i<]explicitly[/i<] capitalist. It creates a new kind of commodity that can be traded on the market. How is that anything [i<]but[/i<] capitalist? There's no conflict between the two, environmentalism just asks that environmental cost be [i<]recognized[/i<] and accounted for. [quote<]Socialist => Rich are bad. Take from them. Equal for all.[/quote<]Literally doesn't know what the word means.

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          Wow. Sucks that you had to retype all of that.

          Fair point regarding “they”. However, I don’t believe this is common vernacular for a large proportion of American/Canadian English speakers. At least in cases where you are referring to a specific individual. “The bus driver reached into her/his pocket” still sounds much more familiar than “The bus driver reached into their pocket”. So perhaps the point is a bit moot.

          And BTW, anyone who has spent any time around and outside of small towns with populations of a couple thousand or less knows that “you” is definitely singular. The plural being “yous”. Quoting my old bus driver (who’s to say she wasn’t a veritable “Shakespeare” in her own right?): “Yous better calm down back there”…

          As far as the rest of your post goes, I think, other than (hopefully) a small minority of unfortunately bigoted or narrow-minded individuals, most don’t have a problem with any of the ideologies you exemplified. However, it is the liberties that some of the most vocal proponents of these ideologies are granted, and then proceed to take advantage of, that may leave a bit of a taste in some peoples’ mouths. Liberties that arise largely out of guilt for past heinous wrongs. For how many generations must we feel guilty for the transgressions of our ancestors? The only way everyone will get along (or at least get along better) will be through understanding AND forgiveness . Without forgiveness, there is still hatred. And hatred is the enemy of tolerance an understanding.

          In the extreme, this can lead to some people feeling taken advantage of, or simply repressed (where the reverse-racism, etc sentiment – which I agree is a foolish concept – stems from) as they feel that their own ideologies are now somehow relegated to second tier just because they have been in the public eye longer, and therefore not as fashionable/current. But current doesn’t necessarily always equal better or more important.

          The fallacies you illuminate in the post you pick apart above may be valid, but such counterarguments likely have little impact on one who is clouded by emotion and even resentment. Emotion and resentment are enemies of reason and understanding. The same emotion that clouds the reasoning of the post from which your are quoting can just as easily cloud a gay rights, feminist, environmental, etc, etc, activist.

          In the interest of brevity, and due to the inflammatory nature of this topic, I’m avoiding any specific examples. I wholeheartedly endorse people who stand up for their freedoms and that of others, and publicize the oppression of said freedoms. However, these campaigns are fought by humans, who, in their infallibility, sometimes loose sight of the true goal and use liberties granted to supersede their agendas over the liberties of others. This has the danger to result in more, not less, oppression, or at least negative emotion and then aggression, which are precursors to the former. This certainly doesn’t mean that these people are all doing more harm than good. Far from it. Only that an ideology is only as ideal as the people championing it.

            • XaiaX
            • 7 years ago

            I ended up typing something slightly different anyway.

            Re: [quote<]For how many generations must we feel guilty for the transgressions of our ancestors? [/quote<] The problem with the world as it is today, is that people are in various situations because of what happened in the past. So, regardless of whether any given person is racist or not racist or whatever, their social situation is partly determined by the racist past. The simplest way to see this is to look at generational changes in income, for example. If your parents are dirt ass poor, you're probably going to be dirt ass poor. If your parents are crazy wealthy, you're probably not going to end up dirt ass poor. While there may be some social mobility in the US, there's not *that* much, overall. You could go up or down a bit, but large, dramatic changes are extremely rare. So, just extend that backwards and see how the effects of that extend till now. For a long time, there were explicitly racist laws regarding property, hiring practices, etc. So, those naturally limited the ability of those affected to generate wealth. Likewise, that leaves them with less wealth to transfer to their children. So, growing up as one of those children, you are at a disadvantage immediately, even if those laws ceased to exist the instant you were born. This disadvantage doesn't disappear immediately, just because the laws have changed. It's like if everyone else has a head start. You have to run that much faster just to get where everyone else is. Except, those people don't know they had a head start, they think they've just been moving along from the start. They see where they are, and that's all. And, if you tell them they had a head start, they will get defensive, because it sounds like an attack. They will say that people have a right to help their kids, and they do. They will say it's not their "fault", and it isn't. But the headstart is *there*, regardless. The *system* is what enforces the problem, and if people refuse to acknowledge that they've benefitted from the system, they perpetuate the disadvantage. Now, there are obvious differences in approach to rectifying this. Some extremists might just say to forcibly equalize everything, which is obviously unfair to people who've done nothing but accidentally be born to one side or the other of that headstart. Some will say just wait and let time sort it out as everything naturally equalizes. These people are usually the ones that would end up not as far ahead after things equalized, so deferring it is in their best interests. Then there are those that refuse to see any problem, and we shouldn't do anything about it. These are often the same people that simultaneously declare the open market to be the arbiter of all that is good, while wanting to pass English-Only laws because the market has decided that serving Spanish speaking customers is a great way to expand their business and they're no longer being exclusively catered to.

            • cynan
            • 7 years ago

            I suppose I more or less agree.

            Except that it isn’t just a “problem with the world today”. It’s the story of human nature, probably existing since the dawn of time itself. The reason why I say it’s human nature, is because the phenomenon you describe is not restricted to any one group, and in fact exists just as rampantly within any identifiable group. Ie, wealthy straight white guys will, on average, be born with more advantages than poor straight white guys. However, the matter is much more complicated than mere accumulation wealth or resources. For example, the rich straight white guy may come from a broken home or be born with an illness, and due to resulting emotional baggage/distress may face more hurdles to success overall. And then just what exactly is success? Happiness? How do you measure that (to see if rich straight white guy “Y” is as happy as gay, Spanish poor girl “X”)? It’s a very long way down that rabbit hole…

            I personally don’t think that any societal “system” could ever possibly be implemented that would resolve the issue of inequality that you seem to be describing. A big reason right off that bat may be because it is so difficult to actually define and reconcile what would be considered equitable across all groups and peoples.

            Because of the very fact that, at least at this point in our evolution, we seem to be so hopelessly lacking in our ability to solve such issues, some might turn to spirituality or religion for answers . For example a Christian might say the answer is to “love your neighbor” – essentially strive to take each social interaction and be mindful of whether you are blindly placing your own concerns ahead of someone else’s. A Buddhist might say the answer is to live your life in as much harmony with your surrounding/universe as you can, which may equate to something similar…

            On the other hand, our current system(s) does have some room for tangible improvement (eg, removing any remaining obvious existing discrimination – access to education/employment based on race/gender, etc), so I’m not exactly advocating we all throw up our hands and give up. Or that we all become monks or something ;-D Education and communication is a good start. But in order for people to properly hear each other, they need to forgive past transgressions and start to move on.

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          Long, but such a great read!

          • Beelzebubba9
          • 7 years ago

          Goddamn!

          Nice post.

      • Knee Dragger
      • 7 years ago

      That probably sounds right if you’re not a straight white dude. For those that are straight white dudes, that sounds like Bizzaro World.

        • XaiaX
        • 7 years ago

        Privilege is a headache you don’t know that you don’t have. Not being aware of it is what makes it privilege.

          • destroy.all.monsters
          • 7 years ago

          I’d say that class has much to do with this as well – a poor or lower {to lower middle) class straight white male is still looked down upon.

          Great comments. I admire your eloquence and thank you for your participation.

          I am somewhat reminded of going to a UK site where a sports writer got super bent about the use of the word cisgender. I read Whipping Girl a year or two ago and I have to say it made a big impression on me.

          • Knee Dragger
          • 7 years ago

          I’d be miserable if I was only able to see everything through the prisms of racism and classism.

            • destroy.all.monsters
            • 7 years ago

            That’s not paternalistic and dismissive at all.

            Too bad there are so many people who only ever think of themselves and not what others experience.

    • DiMaestro
    • 7 years ago

    Jesus Christ.

    Someone posted a comment that offends women. Posted a comment that goes along with the social norms of gaming – a male geek filled entertainment habit.

    IST – sorry this offended you. However I’m offended that gaming is filled with 12 year old twunts who shout curses at my moms vagina.

    It’s a common held thought/behavior/action/pattern.

    It’s also common held thought that motorcycle riders, a group which I associate and place myself into, are law breaking shitheads who hold more value with what they ride than what they are.

    Stop being so thin skinned. The worlds views/values/thoughts/opinions really don’t fucking matter. You are what you are.

    Fuck the ‘girlfriend’ mode assholes. Fuck the “I banged your mom last nite’ douchebag 12 year olds. Fuck all the ignorant cocksmoking fucksticks.

    Doesn’t matter what they think. Doesn’t matter what they believe.

    I ride motorcycle. I have tattoos. I also implement the latest & greatest computer aided dispatch & records management systems for the law enforcement agencies in my county. In other words, I a biker, aid and assist the 6 law enforcement agencies in my county into stopping the bad guys. I break the societal norms. I break the commonly held thoughts.

    In other words .. who gives a *FUCK* what other people think or say about you? The only person who truely matters is … yourself.

    Be true to thineself. .. it is brave to ‘out’ oneself as a female on a geek site, even one as non-douchebag filled as TR. Go for it. I support you and anyone who wants to game, whether it’s my 22 year old gay nephew or my 70 year old hetero aunt. Gaming is fun. Just ignore the hate mongering fucksticks. They’re just spew hate because they’re filled with doubt about who and what they are. They don’t know better.

    I do, and many many others like me do as well. We’re the silent majority of geekery. We do our jobs, play our games, mow our lawns, and get on with our lives.

      • Crayon Shin Chan
      • 7 years ago

      Who the hell downvoted this guy?

      • XaiaX
      • 7 years ago

      It’s pretty easy to say “just don’t care what they say” when “what they say” and the culture that brings it about has a generally positive effect on you.

      Telling people to not care is a just a politically correct way of blaming people for being attacked.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        I was actually thinking it’s not a answer to anything. It just breeds apathy and hate for the world that you don’t want to understand and doesn’t want to understand for the same reason.

        • Spotpuff
        • 7 years ago

        Yes you will see people with privilege (white, male, whatever) use this type of reasoning to explain a lot of things.

        The truth is obviously more complicated. But yes it would be nice if instead of people getting mad at the groups being attacked, they got mad at the people making stupid comments. I don’t see that changing though so long as one group has privilege that is steadily eroding (though not as fast as most people think).

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      I thought it was fun to imagine your rant was actually directed to Jesus Christ, in the form of an angst-filled post-game-night prayer. ‘Amen’ was missing, though

    • Visigoth
    • 7 years ago

    Nobody gives a sh!t about this stupid game anyway. Why all the drama? Get a f*cking life!

      • Malphas
      • 7 years ago

      Yes, I find it funny they thought it was necessary to dumb down Borderlands to play in an even more braindead manner than it already did.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      I believe that was the point… That would be viral marketing for you.

    • Krogoth
    • 7 years ago

    [url<]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WHptG35EWU[/url<]

      • JohnC
      • 7 years ago

      This is the only proper response to this topic 😉

    • Ashbringer
    • 7 years ago

    I’m more upset that game developers purposely put a character that they consider it to be “n00b” mode. Though it’s not the first game that seems to do this. World of Warcraft often trades classes on who gets to be OP in an expansion.

    The gender reference is not something to get your panties all bunched up for. Not a good PR move for the company, as I’m sure girl players aren’t happy about this, but I’m getting sick of the fine line that society walks on for female rights. Any women can say that men are dumb as hell, and can constantly point out lots of facts to support it. As men we’ll agree, and high five each other. Use an innuendo about women, and suddenly that line has been crossed.

    Let me know when a guy says women belong in the kitchen, and then there’s something to cry about.

    • Malphas
    • 7 years ago

    Also for those that don’t believe a male version of the female game protagonist stereotype exists:

    [url<]http://static.gamesradar.com/images/mb/GamesRadar/us/Features/2008/07/Top%207%20Lazy%20Character%20Cliches/Art/Finished/072108_t7charactercliches_obs02--article_image.jpg[/url<] and [url<]http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb57886/metalgear/es/images/1/11/Raiden.jpg[/url<]

    • blastdoor
    • 7 years ago

    The success of the Wii and iPhone games shows that there is a lot of money to be made selling games to women. Strange that some developers are not interested in that money, but it’s a free country.

    • sweatshopking
    • 7 years ago

    Whoa boys. Let’s settle down a bit. Let’s not loss sight of the discussion. Is this about roles of women in society, or about making fun of girls for sucking at video games????

    One of those is R&P, the other is hilarious. Let’s abide by the rules.

      • blastdoor
      • 7 years ago

      Ummm…. If TR doesn’t want R&P posts outside of the R&P forum, then I suggest not posting R&P news stories filled with R&P commentary from the poster.

      Either that, or maybe there just needs to be a rules clarification — TR writers can spout off on any R&P topic they want, but nobody is allowed to challenge them except in the R&P forum (which, conveniently, is hidden from view and difficult to join).

    • leor
    • 7 years ago

    I just told my girlfriend about this (we played the first Borderlands together) and her reaction was 100% enthusiastic. Her exact words were “That sounds great, sign me up!”

    People need to lighten up.

      • XaiaX
      • 7 years ago

      Women are fungible. Your girlfriend is equivalent to all women. Any woman can speak for all women.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        The converse can be said about posts by women on here.

        • Srsly_Bro
        • 7 years ago

        LOL There appears to be lots of generalizing on here tonight.

        edit: In reply to the OP of this post.

        • leor
        • 7 years ago

        Can any woman, or man for that matter, speak for all men and women? Be happy when your particular needs and values are catered to, and let other people be happy when they get theirs.

        All this oversensitivity leads to is neutered language, manufactured outrage, and less creativity and freedom. It does not and cannot change thoughts and ideas, in fact it probably reinforces them. I’m clearly not speaking about obvious oppressive or discriminatory concepts or ideas, but I’m in favor of cute or clever things that maybe toe the line a bit and actually describe something real.

        You did notice its called “girlfriend” mode, and not “woman” mode? That’s because it’s describing a pretty common phenomenon of guys who like games and have played them their whole lives sharing that enjoyment with a woman they care about who have not developed the same skills her whole life. They idea behind this is to be INCLUSIVE, you don’t HAVE to use that option, and if you are super badass at borderlands you could even have fun with this and tell your boyfriend you’re going to whoop his ass so bad he’ll have to use girlfriend mode!

        Using that language actually made my girl feel special, like, “Cool they made something for someone like me!” It fit her situation and lots of other situations out there I suspect and she would have not felt as good about it if they called it n00b mode. She finds the idea romantic because someone created something with the idea of letting her share something with me that she really wants to and enjoys but that normally stresses her out and makes her feel self conscious because the controls are not second nature to her.

        So I turn the question back to you, do you speak for all women? Would you be ok taking that good feeling away from her and probably a lot of other women because it would make women like you feel better about it?

          • JustAnEngineer
          • 7 years ago

          [quote=”John Donne, in Meditations 17″<]All mankind is of one author, and is one volume.[/quote<]

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      This should be called ‘the casual’ class and nothing would be lost. Not everyone is enthused about doing something they don’t really care about.

      • Firestarter
      • 7 years ago

      Exactly! I mean, with the rampant sexism in games (boobs everywhere!) I think the ‘girlfriend’ mode is a a rather mild and friendly jab to the perceived gaming skills of girlfriends everywhere. Treating everyone equally also means making jokes on an equal basis, and being a sport about it. Getting your panties all in a bunch does not help anyone.

        • Saber Cherry
        • 7 years ago

        Boobs are sexist now?

          • Firestarter
          • 7 years ago

          No, but the way females in general are portrayed in games borders on the ludicrous, just to get more sales from boys who barely hit puberty. I mean, I get that many girls and women don’t necessarily FPS games and the like, but that doesn’t mean that it’s suddenly ok to portay them as nothing else than 2 walking boobs and a butt in every other game! If I wanted to see that, I’d just CTRL+SHFT+N to my favourite porn site and be done with it.

            • cynan
            • 7 years ago

            ^ This. But this doesn’t stop at video games. For example, premium cable TV is getting worse and worse: I just don’t get who exactly thinks it’s a good idea to dilute/cheapen otherwise mostly excellent TV shows like Game of Thrones with borderline soft core porn (though they seemed to be getting a bit better toward the end of season 2). You can’t even use the adolescent argument here as 13-year olds aren’t supposed to be watching these shows anyway (and they sure make sure there’s good reason for it). If you want that, it’s only a click away..

    • guardianl
    • 7 years ago

    I just want to remind everyone…this is the same company that “polished” and released Duke Nukem Forever, complete with the [b<]ability to pick up turds in game and use them to draw on walls.[/b<]

      • superjawes
      • 7 years ago

      I know that polishing a turd might be one thing, but the first Borderlands was excellent, IMO, and certainly has a real following rather than the unanimous thumbs down given to Duke Nukem Forever.

      Basically, a turd’s still a turd, but Gearbox can do good things.

    • puppetworx
    • 7 years ago

    [i<]Man expresses opinion, women upset[/i<] There is nothing newsworthy about this.

    • blitzy
    • 7 years ago

    fair play, you don’t get to choose what stereotypes are thrown upon you. guy gamers have been slapped with the geek moniker for as long as I remember, and for a lot of people that is very far from the truth.

    and how can you argue against something which is generally true, most girls I have ever known that play games only take them half seriously. Too many politically correct cry babies

    • danny e.
    • 7 years ago

    And here I was hoping this would be something important like the ability to have a girlfriend in-game to spend all my extra loot on

    • hansmuff
    • 7 years ago

    Hmm, I wonder how we can get ALL the games sites to talk about our soon to be launched game… I know! Some light controversy to rile them all up, followed by a cheap apology.

    And they WILL fall for it.

    Well done, sir.

    • Welch
    • 7 years ago

    Quick… I call forth a challenge WORLD WIDE! The “Battle of the Sexes – Gamer Edition”…. 100 of the worlds greatest male gamers vs the 100 greatest female competitors. If the men win, we reserve the right to call it “Girlfriend Mode”… if not then well……. ummm, we weren’t really counting on loosing, come up with something because its not going to happen 😐

    • UberGerbil
    • 7 years ago

    Seeing this headline I was expecting this to be an NPC that offered endless “constructive” criticism of your gameplay whether you wanted it or not.

      • Welch
      • 7 years ago

      A new Claptrap designated the name “G.I.R.L.F.R.I.E.N.D” that thinks its helping you play but is really just annoying the hell out of you, I could see them doing that 🙂

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 7 years ago

        How would that be different from the original claptrap?

      • burntham77
      • 7 years ago

      No, that’s the W.I.F.E. mode.

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        only if she whines about getting stuff for her while she sits on her ass.

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    I guess this is one of those examples of ‘go make a sandwich’. Honestly I’ve never heard of a easy role referred to as ‘girlfriend mode’ either… Nublet mode or any variant of it? Sure… The term ‘bitch’ comes to mind too, but this doesn’t seem like a support role so I don’t think it would fit. Really borderlands in general isn’t all that hard so maybe the game should just be called ‘girlfriend compliant’ and skip labeling one class.

    It honestly took me a bit to get though, but this sounds more like viral marketing then a ‘oopsie’.

    Game companies are generally pretty aware of what they do. Especially if they say something that may offend the minorities. It wasn’t something he dropped once either, which means he was either consciously aware of it or it’s the norm at the company. Seeing as this is the first time this class has been mentioned as ‘girlfriend mode’ leads me to believe that this really is just a clever ploy to generate controversy and buzz. The backpedaling is just damage control, which was intended from the start.

    And yes, this is way overblown simply reading the posts below. What’s laughable is how this is approaching something like the greendale human being.

    Double standards abound.

    • bthylafh
    • 7 years ago

    This thread went to hell pretty quick.

      • kvndoom
      • 7 years ago

      Skipped the handbasket, even.

    • sweatshopking
    • 7 years ago

    COMMENTS ABOUT VIDEO GAMES AND GIRLS ARE SRSBZNS GUYS. THIS IS THE INTERNET. TAKE THIS STUFF SERIOUSLY.

    As the woman (or guy pretending to be a woman {i do that ALL the time online/video games}) on here posted video games are annoying, but i find catwomans exposed chest much more [s<] interesting [/s<] offensive than a girlfriend mode. There might be some truth to it, however [quote<] "American "Hafu" from the realm Tichondrius in BG9 can most probably be considered as the worlds best female gamer. Not only is she the only girl among the 100 highest rated WoW players in the world, but she is also leading it." [/quote<] a quick google of top female gamer gives that. only 1% of the top 100? and WOW has quite a high level of female subscribers. a report from 2007 ( a few years out of date) states [quote<] female gamers are an extremely small portion of online gaming when it comes to consoles, which is 98% male.[/quote<] [url<]http://www.joystiq.com/2007/03/21/sxsw-getting-girls-into-the-game-designing-and-marketing-games[/url<] Realistically, to state that males make up the majority of gamers is being realistic. [url<]http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01453.x/abstract;jsessionid=BFB7C552E6129B9F2C355F659DC16BBC.d03t04[/url<] states that most females play video games when a male is present but if that male is a romantic partner then aggression can be either increased or decreased for either gender. So... females make up less of the market than men, play less "hardcore games" than men, usually only play when their boyfriends are around.... I'm not saying generalizing is right. I'm saying getting worked up over this is dumb. Even from a marketing perspective, would you want to make 2% (if correct) of your market upset? It was a dumb thing to say, but getting upset over it makes no sense.

      • EtherealN
      • 7 years ago

      Dammit dude. You need to stop posting things I agree with.

      • I.S.T.
      • 7 years ago

      Imitating a woman? Go to hell.

        • grantmeaname
        • 7 years ago

        Good point. Clearly if you disagree with something it’s wrong.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          I think being called a liar would offend most people.

            • grantmeaname
            • 7 years ago

            I read that as IST being offended that ssk pretended to be a woman.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            i wasn’t trying to offend her, just stating that a LOT of guys i know/myself often impersonate a woman to get guys to play maps, give gold, etc. in games or online. after seeing it done so much, i’m often hesitant to believe when people are women online. I’m not saying she isn’t a she, just that i often pretend to be a chick, and so do lots of other guys i know. If i offended, my apologies.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            I’d give you my gold whether you’re playing a male or female character! <3

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            actually, funny story, about a time i DIDN’T pretend to be a girl online: I have never played MMO’s much. tried one back in like 2004, hated it, never played since, excepting a few weeks back, my brother BEGGED me to play wow with him, on one of his accounts. So i said fine, and started a character. Anyway, about level 6, i got a notification that I had mail. SO, i eventually figured out how to check the mail (what a stupid system, why can’t you just check it anytime? why the arbitrary walking to a stupid box? it’s 2012!!!). Once i opened my mail, i found 5 or 6 messages, each containing some 600-750 gold. I have no idea who the people were, or why they sent it to me. TBH, i thought it was just part of the game. Anyway, i was playing with my brother, and he was like WTF???!? apparently that’s a lot of money for a level 6. My brother ended up stealing all of it, as he knew the password to the account, but i didn’t care, as i didn’t want to continue playing.

            • Malphas
            • 7 years ago

            Ha ha, you dirty old sicko, SSK. Flaunting your imaginary feminine assets for in-game resources. Also, I like how the white knights are coming out of the woodwork now that a girl has posted in the comments.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Offense is subjective. Lying is objective. So…no.

          • I.S.T.
          • 7 years ago

          No, that he accused me of pretending to be female.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            not just you. all women online ever.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      His comments offend me in that they’re so stupid. Why even say such a thing?

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        which part of my original comment? which sourced info is “so stupid”?

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          Not you, John Hemingway.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            oh. that makes more sense.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      What I took away from your post: men like things hardcore.

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        you’re ALWAYS such a perv. Your point is true though.

    • moose17145
    • 7 years ago

    I thought it was funny. Enough so that I did in fact laugh out loud. In fact I serve with several women in the national guard who I know would also get a kick out of this! Nothing would please them more than playing this with their boyfriend’s with THEM having to use girlfriend mode to keep up! Oh good times and politically incorrect jokes would be had by all!

    LET THE DOWNVOTES COMMENCE AND SEE YOU ALL IN SENSITIVITY TRAINING!!!

    • PainIs4ThaWeak1
    • 7 years ago

    [Background: Straight male. Always will be.]

    Dunno about you guys, but I almost always play as a female character, if given the choice.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<] [Background: Lies.] [/quote<] fixed it for you.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        SSK is speaking from experience.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          lol. +1 because you’re you being funny ;P

      • I.S.T.
      • 7 years ago

      I tend to yo-yo, myself. Last game I was given I gender choice(That didn’t change gameplay) in, I played a guy.

      • superjawes
      • 7 years ago

      For Borderlands and Borderlands 2, I did and will play a male because the snipers are male…that’s also the class I liked best.

      But I will play a female character when I feel like it. ME2 is a good example, and I played a female in Saints Row: The Third as well.

      Although main toon in WoW is a “male” blood elf…so yeah…

        • EtherealN
        • 7 years ago

        Mass Effect series isn’t a fair comparison though – playing male character was just impossible due to the voice acting. 😛

        (I don’t know what it was that disturbed me about it, but I felt the male voice just seemed WAAAY out of place, like a bad dub.)

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          Yup, I preferred Femshep after the first one for that too. Much better voice-acting, especially when you played the ‘evil’ side of things.

      • d0g_p00p
      • 7 years ago

      Me too. In fact my Monk in Diablo 3 is a bad ass female kicking the crap out of demons. I don’t know but it feels like the designers put more effort into the female character sets. The male models are either too generic or buffed up steroid raging avatars that don’t fit my perception of “hero” in the game.

      On the same note I don’t like the big breasted impossible curvy bodies of some of the female character sets either. Someone who looks normal or a action hero is what I looking for. Example Max Payne or the newer Tomb Raider games that made Laura Croft look like a real person.

      That’s just me though.

    • I.S.T.
    • 7 years ago

    honestly, his comment makes me feel uncomfortable. I already have to put up with a lot of bias against my gender(See Malphas below me), but this is just… ugh.

    I get the feeling it’s an informal nickname in the office, and might not have made its way to Randy, but then again this is the man who called reporting of Borderlands 2’s existence days before its announcement shoddy journalism. The man is an idiot and likely lying to cover his ass.

    If it was just one dude being an idiot, I don’t think it’d be news worthy, but this is sort of a continued trend. Look at Arkham City and how Catwoman has her boobs out 24/7(And the design they based her off of had the suit zipped up, so you can’t blame that), the subtle bad treatment of female characters in Arkham Asylum, the Tomb Raider “We want the player to feel empowered so we’ll have them save lara croft from being sexually assaulted!!!!11117” idiocy, etc etc.

    It just builds up, guys. I’m getting sick and tired of this crap. If this keeps up, I’m just gonna quit buying games and just play the ones I own.

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      a female? ON THE TECH REPORT??? not that i’m complaining, i just assumed with the low level of behavior on this site, i had assumed women must have a had a secret site that had higher standards. i mean, come on, [i<] [b<] I [/i<] [/b<] post here.

        • 5150
        • 7 years ago

        Tech Report (compared to the rest of the Internet) is the pinnacle of good behavior. Quit kissing up SSK.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          don’t worry, i promptly upset her.

        • no51
        • 7 years ago

        i believe the proper response is “OGM A GURL?!?? A/S/L???!?!11ELEVEN LOLOLOL SHOW NUDZ PLZ.”

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          lolirl

      • superjawes
      • 7 years ago

      I hear ya…

      But I have to know, is it alright to parody/satire this crap? As I said below, I personally think that Gearbox should have tried the tongue-in-cheek approach, as a subtle nod that the idea is really nonsense and making fun of themselves. However, if that still makes females uncomfortable, I would rather it stop completely.

        • Flatland_Spider
        • 7 years ago

        A parody of how females are portrayed in games would have been funny. If they were trying for that, they missed… completely.

          • superjawes
          • 7 years ago

          Agreed. And this wasn’t even a game mechanic, which is why there is a controversy. It’s a real person equating “noob mode” with “girlfriend mode.” Sounds like they need a “PR” tree for people suffering from foot-in-mout or HUA synrome.

        • EtherealN
        • 7 years ago

        “However, if that still makes females uncomfortable, I would rather it stop completely.”

        Well, lots of things make lots of people “unconfortable”. In fact, pretty much everything, anywhere, is bound to make someone uncomfortable. (Or just royally annoyed and pissed off, remember when SSK got to see those Skyrim music covers? 😛 )

        My point being that the guys making Borderlands have a surprising (for this industry) level of taste when it comes to their female characters. (Well, in Borderlands at least, not sure I played anything else of theirs.) And it is a common situation that guys find their better halves aren’t as good at computer games of this type – probably because the guys do no housework so the woman has to spend time cleaning up after the slob rather than have fun, so she gets no practice. (And I’m actually only half-joking there.)

        It’s not the most tasteful thing to say maybe, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they simply got the idea from a pattern they saw in their own lives, and rolled with it. In that context, I feel it’s fine. There’s no need to take an observation that many guys share as an attack on the gender. (Hell, given the statistics on the share taken in housework, being _proficient_ at computer games might even be considered a character attack!)

        It’s a bit like when EA and Bioware held that poll to see what the “official” female Shepard was going to look at, and certain elements of geekdom got royally upset that the winning one was blonde. (Obviously, a female that is blond could ONLY have been selected as part of some sexist scheme etcetera.) Bioware promptly followed up with a vote about her har color, and she became a redhead.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          I didn’t get [quote<] annoyed and p***ed off [/quote<] i just don't understand it. it's just SOOOOO OMG NERDY.

            • EtherealN
            • 7 years ago

            I know, I just wanted to troll you a bit since I saw you were posting in the thread. 😀

            Much <3 !

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            yay! ♥

          • superjawes
          • 7 years ago

          I understand all of that, and I don’t think that we’re going to solve any issues without pushing the envelope, but we also want to be careful about pushing away the very people we’re trying to bring in and share the community with.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      There will always be idiots in the world, you shouldn’t let them ruin things you enjoy. I know this is easier said than done. You also shouldn’t let one or even several idiots speak for a whole group.

        • I.S.T.
        • 7 years ago

        Easy to say, but when you look at the sheer amount of sexism going on just in this comments thread alone…

        Like I said, it piles up over time.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          Well yes, there are a lot of idiots.

          On another note, I think the video game industry is moving quickly in a much better direction.

          As for Catwoman’s cleavage, a large amount of the video game market is adolescent boys, so there is pretty much always going to be over-sexualizing of woman, but remember this cuts both ways look how buff Batman is in the same series he’s like 2 men put together. Not that this balances out or anything, but it’s there.

          Personally, I wish they went with the Michelle Pfeiffer suit, I actually found a mod where a guy replaced the textures, but I could never get it to work.

            • superjawes
            • 7 years ago

            Catwoman is less of a problem than Tera (which I should note that I have not played). Sexual female? Okay, there are ways to work around that and not have her be another brainless bimbo (I thought she was okay).

            But then you have a game where the best armor is sexual, so, basically, as a female levels up, she wears less clothing. THAT is some BS because it equates a female’s success with sexuality.

            /rant

            • I.S.T.
            • 7 years ago

            Tera is insane. Look up the elim or whatever class.

            Then look up what they looked like in the original Korean release.

            The amount of creepyness cannot be defined and summed up in words. No language is capable of it.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            All I know about Tera, I learned from this video, [url<]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFrUwoT0tIQ&feature=player_embedded.[/url<]

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            now that’s all i know about tera too. never heard of it before this.

            • south side sammy
            • 7 years ago

            Well, it is a man’s world………………

            “But then you have a game where the best armor is sexual, so, basically, as a female levels up, she wears less clothing. THAT is some BS because it equates a female’s success with sexuality.”

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]it equates a female's success with sexuality[/quote<] Beautiful humans are generally more successful irl...so maybe it's art reflecting reality and human nature is the 'problem.'

            • I.S.T.
            • 7 years ago

            Hell as a lesbian I get tired of it. I love those bits as much as their target audience but it gets tiiiiiiiiiirrrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnggggggggg

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Saying that you preferred Pfeiffer over Berry is racist

      • indeego
      • 7 years ago

      Name a strong female lead in a movie that plays a part that has nothing to do with her sexuality. Few and far in between, and the entertainment industry should be ashamed of itself, but really I think women should stop playing these roles where they are more eyecandy than intelligent humans. We have all of us to blame here.

        • BobbinThreadbare
        • 7 years ago

        The problem is that “nothing to do with sexuality” isn’t appropriate or realistic either.

        And there are plenty of movies like that, not Hollywood action movies, but lots of smaller productions.

          • superjawes
          • 7 years ago

          I have to agree. Sexuality is part of one’s identity, so finding a sexual-neutral character (male and female) is difficult unless it is overpowered by some other trait like age or STRONG personality.

          Your best bet is not to find a female without sexual identity, but rather one who handles it well, often using it to her advantage. Hollywood? Black Widow from Avengers. Other strong females? Any that Joss Whedon creates.

          Praise what’s good, criticize what’s bad. You know the drill.

        • south side sammy
        • 7 years ago

        i don’t really think Bradd Pitt or Arnold Swartzeneger wearing cheeky shorts would do hollywood any good.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        Uh aliens is a good place to start for any geek.

        At what point does it stop being about ‘sexism’ and is instead about being ‘female’. A guy appears buff in movies with a ripped six pack people don’t go shouting ‘that’s sexist free the males’ everywhere… 300 for example.

        • Geistbar
        • 7 years ago

        Something that goes for the same basic thought as you expressed is the [url=http://bechdeltest.com/<]Bechdel Test[/url<]. It's a pretty simple test: (1) there are at least two women in the movie, (2) they talk to each other, and (3) they talk about something other than a man. Most movies don't pass all three... There does appear to be a slight trend of it getting better over time, (if you look at their imdb 250 list, the oldest movies almost all fail) at least.

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          So, if they mention a man, they fail #3?

          Name a movie which has at least two males who talk to each other and do [i<]not[/i<] mention a woman?

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t think the test is ever in the whole movie, but they have to have a conversation where they don’t mention a man.

            Also, The Thing passes your test.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      Wow, this is just wow… and this isn’t in response to the post, but the over coddling to all the posts below it.

      Remind me never to buy a game that has unrealistic stereotypes of the male model in it. For instance a guy with a ripped six pack that jumps from building to building, talks in a deep gordon freeman style voice, has untold bounds of confidence, and looks like he was chiseled out of marble.

      Yay double standards.

        • Geistbar
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]talks in a deep gordon freeman style voice[/quote<] So not talking at all? That aside, the issue isn't that women are portrayed overly sexually: it's that they're nigh exclusively portrayed overly sexually. How many games have a main character that is male and has some complexity and depth to him, not being just a fill in for "generic attractive strongman"? How many have a main character that is female and has complexity and depth to her, not being just a fill in for "generic attractive bimbo"? You could go on for quite a while on the first list (Half Life, Assassins Creed, Max Payne, Bioshock, Deus Ex, Sacrifice, Alpha Protocol, STALKER, Arkham Asylum/City, Planescape Torment, Prince of Persia, Dead Space, etc.), but I can't think of too much for the second list (No One Lives Forever, Beyond Good & Evil, Portal). Now go another step further -- how many games have interesting secondary but plot critical characters that are male vs female? Most of the time, 2/3 to 3/4 of the cast will be male, the generic enemies will be male, and even the unimportant characters you deal with will be male; how many merchants in Fallout 2 were women?

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          I’ll have you know i murdered a great many female merchants in skyrim. IDK about fallout, i was like 6 when it came out.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            Skyrim didn’t click for me so well, so I can’t speak for it much, but there are always going to be outliers. One (or even a dozen) breaking the mold doesn’t change that the mold is there. Even there, you’re highlighting an exception to a minor side observation. Many RPGs get around what I was highlighting with the main character, because you’re able to pick your character’s gender.

            Even with RPGs for party members though, look at what you tend to get! In Baldur’s Gate 2, there are 17 potential party members, 6 of whom are female. Of those female characters, 4 of them (Aerie, Mazzy, Viconia, Imoen — I excluded Jaheria because of the odd nature of the beginning) join you because you rescued them. Of the other two, one joins you because she desperately needs you to help her, and the other spends the whole game trying to move on from the death of her husband. In Homeworld, I can only recall one female character at all. In the new Deus Ex, almost every principal character you speak to is male — the primary female characters are a damsel in distress and a generic villain (who is overshadowed by all the other villains anyway). I don’t remember any women in Bastion (though I did not finish it). There is only one important female in Max Payne 1 & 2, and she’s a love interest.

            It goes on and on; that you can kill some female merchants in Skyrim doesn’t change the trend.

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          You make it sound as if they simply couldn’t replace the main character with a female in those games and have exactly the same game (which they do a lot of the time).

          I think you’re somehow mistakenly linking gender to those qualities (which is normal)

          I’m going to avoid stepping in the poo for the majority of your post, but do you believe that if you put a guy in the ‘generic attractive bimbo’ role it would have the same effect? I believe you’re mistaking love interest for side kick too.

          Guys generally fill that gender role because that’s what they match. There aren’t many conquerors or people who lead countries to freedom that are female… The only one that comes to mind is Joan of Ark. It doesn’t have the same effect if you simply impose female figure on a male role (even though it’s done a lot of the time). Imagine giving Batman breasts.

          And yes, I meant Morgan Freeman not Gordon Freeman.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            There is a Batwoman in DC.

            Also, Catherine the Great, Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth, Queen Isabella, I could go on.

            Plus, from every IST has posted she isn’t trying to force female characters into games, it sounds like she just wants to be treated as a normal person not a dunce.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            You could go on, but how many of those actually helped their country instead of their own personal interests or conquered other countries?

            Yup, Batwoman and does she act completely like Batman or is she more like Catwoman? Difference between the two is one is feminine and the other is masculine. Simply giving Batman breasts without redesigning the character would lead to an extremely awkward character and perception of them.

            You’re confusing game world for the real world. No one is treating her like a dunce here.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            Except for the guy that the entire news story is about who is making a game mode that he calls “girlfriend” mode.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            And one developer shooting out a viral ad campaign represents the entire male gender?

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            When did I say that? What are we even talking about here? The article at the top of the page is about how a guy making a video game said something stupid and sexists. Then a women says doesn’t like what he said, and feels that general attitude from a lot of developers. That’s what this discussion is about.

            You literally just said “no one called her a dunce” when the most prominent text on this page is a guy making an easy mode called girlfriend mode.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I said stereotyping the entire male gender (or all developers) based on what one developer said isn’t the norm. So stop making it seem like it is.

            You’re going off topic though. Your original response was to my response to Geist. If you want to respond to the original topic, respond to my post to it, don’t respond to a tangent that is talking about a different issue then say it’s off topic after you lose your train of thought.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]You make it sound as if they simply couldn't replace the main character with a female in those games and have exactly the same game (which they do a lot of the time).[/quote<] This is a huge part of the problem. They [i<]could[/i<] do that, but they don't. There's nothing significant stopping the main characters in, say, Bioshock, from being female. They aren't though, and that's the problem. [quote<]Guys generally fill that gender role because that's what they match. There aren't many conquerors or people who lead countries to freedom that are female.[/quote<] The nice thing about fiction is that we can escape the trappings of history. Inglourious Basterds changed how WW2 ended. The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly remakes the west into a far more violent place. 2001: A Spacey Odyssey includes AI and changes the entire history of humankind. There weren't many gun totting spies during the 60's, let alone gun totting female spies (and especially not ones that fought French mime midget assassins), but No One Lives Forever 2 managed to put in an interesting female character doing just that anyway. Why can't more games do that? (Also, you're rather oddly selecting from history -- you can rarely attribute the actions of a single person to the formation of a country. France and England almost united during WW2 anyway, and even with Joan of Arc, the English would almost certainly have won were it not for the untimely death of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_V_of_England<]King Henry V[/url<]. Not to mention that the French identity wasn't truly fully formed until around the age of the French Revolution and Napoleon.) [quote<]Imagine giving Batman breasts.[/quote<] [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_girl<]DC beat you to that by about 40-50 years.[/url<]

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Yes and the fact that characters are so interchangeable shows how little it actually matters. If simply having breasts on pixels vastly changes the gameplay experience for you then dare I say you’re missing quite a bit.

            Gender roles… Attractive qualities for men and women are different. Simply plopping a female in a male role does not generate the same reactions. How we perceive men and women is quite different and rightfully so. Men ARE different from women and vice versa.

            Yeah, the world doesn’t turn based on the actions of one person… Sure… I pointed out Joan of Ark… Yet the point I was making was there is no one like Alexander the Great or Atilla the Hun who was female.

            As I responded to Bob. Batwomen wasn’t simply Batman with breasts. They changed the character to reflect her being female. If you simply put breasts on Batman it would make the character extremely awkward.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]Yes and the fact that characters are so interchangeable shows how little it actually matters. If simply having breasts on pixels vastly changes the gameplay experience for you then dare I say you're missing quite a bit.[/quote<] No, it's that the basic role of the character can be filled by a female, that doesn't mean that making that character female without any further changes makes sense. All the roles in Alien were written without gender before they cast people for roles, and then they were fleshed out afterwards. Ripley could easily have been a male, but she was also still a feminine character. Blondie from The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly could easily have had his role filled by a woman, but the character would have needed to be changed a bit -- he's a masculine character, but not a masculine [i<]role[/i<]. I dare say it is you that is missing the point. Nobody is asking to have breasts glued to Gordon Freeman; that doesn't fix anything. They are asking for characters that fill the main role to also be feminine, on occasion, and for female characters to more often be presented as more than sex objects. [quote<]Yeah, the world doesn't turn based on the actions of one person... Sure... I pointed out Joan of Ark... Yet the point I was making was there is no one like Alexander the Great or Atilla the Hun who was female. [/quote<] Sure there are, you just haven't bothered to read about them. A quick search gets me two: [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zenobia<]Zenobia[/url<] and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica<]Boudica[/url<]. How many games do you play where you conquer large swathes of land anyway? Usually you're just a solitary individual, and history is stuffed to the gills with capable female warriors, and even legends and myths built around women warriors.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            IST IS asking for breasts to be glued to gordon freeman. Essentially IST wants a female character just to be slipped into a male role without changing the character to reflect that

            You on the other hand are stating that it doesn’t matter what pixels are in what body… So why does it matter that they’ve primarily been male if it really matters so little to you? You’re stating that the characters are essentially unisex and there is no ‘role’ they actually play (which I believe is complete BS). The audience is almost completely male to begin with, so why wouldn’t they write a story around a male lead?

            Ripley is a good example of what happens when you cast someone in a role they generally don’t fit in… Ripley is very masculine and exhibits very masculine qualities, ‘butch’ is the term most people would use. Yet you consider that being gender neutral? I think what you’re suggesting is just imposing a female on a male role for the sake of appearing ‘fair’ (I don’t believe that’s why Ripley was cast as a female though).

            I’m not saying women are incapable of leadership roles or being a main character, but HOW they interact with their environment and WHY they do what they do is different from how men would approach the same set of issues. People are simply under the impression that the way men do things in the first place is the only right way so as long as women do the same thing all of a sudden things are gender neutral.

            That’s just women dressing up as men…

            Yeah, history is full of ‘mythical’ women who exhibit masculine traits and yet some how remain very feminine… I wonder why they doesn’t work out in practice. Maybe because if you act like a guy you end up becoming one (bar physical bits which can be changed).

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]IST IS asking for breasts to be glued to gordon freeman. Essentially IST wants a female character just to be slipped into a male role without changing the character to reflect that.[/quote<] I don't believe she is, but what does it matter what I.S.T. wants when replying to what I have said? Am I I.S.T., or do I have my own arguments? [quote<]You on the other hand are stating that it doesn't matter what pixels are in what body... So why does it matter that they've primarily been male if it really matters so little to you?[/quote<] No, that's not what I've said at all. I'm saying that you can frequently take the main character of any game in pre-production and make that character either gender. This is easily seen in RPGs that let you choose your gender -- if you play a male in Fallout 2 vs. a female, you get a roughly similar experience, but your [i<]character[/i<] is masculine or feminine, depending on what you have chosen. The Prince in the Prince of Persia games is masculine, but what if the series was Princess of Persia? A feminine character could fit the role very well. You appear to have ignored it entirely, but I wrote a reply to you already explaining the problems and pointing out that 47% of gamers are female. Definitely not "almost completely" male. [quote<]Ripley is very masculine and exhibits very masculine qualities[/quote<] You must have watched a completely different set of movies than I have. She was definitely filling a motherly figure in Aliens, and in Alien there is sexual tension between her and Dallas. Unless you define "not being helpless" as masculine, your statement here makes no sense. She isn't gender-neutral, she's outright feminine. [quote<]I'm not saying women are incapable of leadership roles or being a main character, but HOW they interact with their environment and WHY they do what they do is different from how men would approach the same set of issues. [/quote<] Exactly, which is why more female characters in such roles would be interesting. [quote<]Yeah, history is full of 'mythical' women who exhibit masculine traits and yet some how remain very feminine... I wonder why they doesn't work out in practice. Maybe because if you act like a guy you end up becoming one (bar physical bits which can be changed).[/quote<] You need to read more myths than that of the common telling of the amazons then (even they are only masculine in modern portrayals -- mythologically, they were quite feminine)! [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerva<]Minerva[/url<] is one of the most feminine characters in myth. Or would you like [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Gwendolen<]Queen Gwendolen[/url<]? [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgan_le_Fay<]Morgan le Fay[/url<], [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andraste<]Andraste[/url<], [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valkyrie<]Valkries[/url<], [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shieldmaiden<]shieldmaidens[/url<], [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomoe_Gozen<]Tomoe Gozen[/url<]... As I said, history is stuffed to the gills with these women. You can't just handwave them all away as "not feminine" -- they're only not feminine if you define "weakness" as an essential part of feminine!

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            From the way you’re portraying your posts, you’re fighting for what IST is fighting for… which is two different things. They’re very much related.

            You didn’t read my post in response to your post about 47%.

            Perhaps it’s true you can interchange characters in some games. But I would say that’s what happens when a character isn’t well written or defined. The Fallout 3 character for instance had relatively little personal information about him/herself outside of a loose set of storyline. It wasn’t personalized at all. You did a lot of quests and helped out a lot of other people in their lives, but it was ambiguous when it became personal.

            Also why the storyline in the Witcher 2 was so much better then what you could find in Fallout 3. You couldn’t simply replace Geralt with a female (and all the relationship characters with their opposite sex) and have the same reaction.

            I don’t believe having a chest burster pop out of you makes you feminine or motherly… Motherly to who? Dallas so wasn’t a love interest (unless by sexual tension you mean just that… that’s not a masculine quality at all). >>

            I believe this is the list you’re looking for: [url<]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_warriors_in_folklore[/url<] You're misunderstanding me. I'm saying 'folklore' is different from reality where in women in folklore generally act quite masculine, yet somehow maintain quite a bit of femininity... That's not the way it works in real life. Ones a product of imagination combining things that don't go well together and the other is actually what happens. Two very different things and very different portrayals.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]From the way you're portraying your posts, you're fighting for what IST is fighting for... which is two different things. They're very much related.[/quote<] Related, yes. I want more interesting female characters in games (and movies). She wants less female characters that are defined by their sexuality. Those are related, but how one goes about arguing them will be different. [quote<]You didn't read my post in response to your post about 47%.[/quote<] And your response was "I don't like that fact, so I'm ignoring it". [url=http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2006/10/7922/<]Here's[/url<] another study -- 30% overall, with 62% of online gamers being female. [quote<]Also why the storyline in the Witcher 2 was so much better then what you could find in Fallout 3. You couldn't simply replace Geralt with a female (and all the relationship characters with their opposite sex) and have the same reaction.[/quote<] Sure, but they could do a story about a female witcher that is heavily involved in feudal-esque political struggles fairly easily. It wouldn't be the same story, but if that's what was planned for from the start it would have worked quite well. Bethesda doesn't really create in depth characters, so Fallout 3 isn't a good reference point. Instead, look at Metroid. Everyone thought Samus was a man originally, until the end of the first game. If it was just a one game series, it wouldn't have mattered, but Samus has been well fleshed out as a female character over the series (ignoring Other M's portrayal of her) -- they could have made her a male originally, but they didn't. And look how well it turned out. [quote<]I don't believe having a chest burster pop out of you makes you feminine or motherly... Motherly to who?[/quote<] Yep, you watched a different series than I did! Ripley had 0 chest bursters pop out of her. She was a motherly figure to Newt in Aliens. That was a [i<]significant[/i<] part of her character development. And no, Dallas wasn't a love interest; I meant what I said, and I was highlighting it to point out that Ripley wasn't just some butch a-sexual character tossed in there. [quote<]Ones a product of imagination combining things that don't go well together and the other is actually what happens. Two very different things and very different portrayals.[/quote<] If only I had listed historical figures that actually existed! Oh, wait, I did. So I did give you examples of "what actually happens." That link includes a large number of women that actually existed. I'm not sure how you're defining them in myth as acting "quite masculine" either -- you seem to be hinging your definition of masculine as including "not weak" and "warrior", which is pretty exemplary of the whole problem at hand.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Linking to a website doesn’t make something ‘fact’. Have you ever seen a peer reviewed paper?

            Your other link is to another website which cites the “Nielsen “Active Gamer Benchmark”” Have you ever even heard of them before? I spend a lot of time being engrossed in the video game industry and I’ve never once heard of them. Especially for a study that’s been done three times already. As a gamer this is something I’ve never heard of or participated in… so how can it actually be gathering statistics on people like myself? Where are they even getting their stats from?

            Now Valve on the other hand with their Steam Survey is something I’ve heard about, witnessed the results of, and participated in for many years…

            They could do a lot of stories with female leads, but they don’t because the majority of gamers are males… It’s been done and it will probably be done more and more as being a geek and gamer becomes more socially acceptable.

            I never played Metroid, but from what I gathered there wasn’t much of a story there… If you could call it that. Yeah, I thought it was a guy too till you popped out of the suit… but you could’ve stuffed a bunny in there and it wouldn’t have mattered. XD

            And what I meant about Ripley was she was filling a male role… You could almost call it being miscast. As for newt that was simply being parental. Simply caring for a child doesn’t make you male or female. It could’ve been a guy and it wouldn’t have mattered. And no, it wasn’t a chest burster… You don’t remember seeing the alien pop out of her stomach before she fell into the vat of molten metal? I do. I don’t feel like playing the semantic game with you though.

            Yeah, but you’re only choosing women that don’t because there aren’t ‘numerous’ women that fill those roles, that’s why they’re left to lore. The few women that do exist in real life in a role of power haven’t been conquerors and haven’t really lead any nations to salvation. Joan of Ark is the only one and there are disputes about if she was actually real.

            We’re talking the level of Alexander the Great here, not ‘I can wield a sword therefore I’m a hero’.

            Yes, part of my definition of a masculinity includes untold bounds of strength, which women generally don’t possess. That’s why they look for other avenues to excel at. The definition of male and female is quite hazy at that (if you look outside of physicality) and if you want to you can successfully muddle the lines so you can’t tell the difference or you can pass one off for the other. At that point though you’re no longer talking about either gender then and they aren’t what I’d consider either really feminine or really masculine. That would be androgynous (which is largely how Athena is regarded as well as a lot of women from lore).

            • willmore
            • 7 years ago

            Since this is in the context of Borderlands, may I offer an example of a male bimbo? From Borderlands: Chaz.

            Additionally, but not quite on topic, the smartest person in the game is a woman. The mayor of the largest town is a woman.

          • Malphas
          • 7 years ago

          ” You could go on for quite a while on the first list (Half Life, Assassins Creed, Max Payne, Bioshock, Deus Ex, Sacrifice, Alpha Protocol, STALKER, Arkham Asylum/City, Planescape Torment, Prince of Persia, Dead Space, etc.), but I can’t think of too much for the second list (No One Lives Forever, Beyond Good & Evil, Portal).”

          Nah, half those examples (well at least Assassins Creed, Alpha Protocol, Prince of Persia, Arkham Asylum/City) fail in that the male character is either a pretty boy A&C model type or the muscled up beefcake. Whilst Deus Ex and Dead Space had legitimate female characters as well as male ones. Also, I’d retract Portal from the list of games with non-sexed-up female characters after they made Chell about 15 years younger, gave her some makeup and a tight fitting tank top for the sequel.

        • I.S.T.
        • 7 years ago

        There is one important difference that I think so many people miss.

        The men in gaming aren’t sexualized. They aren’t. They look powerful. they are designed to look like a straight man’s ideal of a man. They are supposed to be intimidating, to be feared just by being looked at. To look badass. They aren’t meant to arouse women the way women in gaming are meant to arouse men.

        This isn’t like a romance novel cover here, people.

          • Ryu Connor
          • 7 years ago

          On the contrary men in gaming are very much like Fabio.

          Men in gaming are serious beefcake. It is an idealized image of men that really doesn’t do men any favors (pumping iron and steroids good). Only square jaws, broad shoulders, and massive muscules make a man

          It is a body type that is very attractive to some women (and even some gay men).

          So I really don’t buy the argument that men are somehow doing better in their presentation than women.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            As I’ve tried to highlight, it’s not that if you take a look at typical male character lead and compare it to a generic female lead that you get some profound difference in sexualization. Sexualizing characters is [u<]not[/u<] the problem. It's the difference in the characters themselves: what is their role, what do they add to the plot, why were they included in the game? Many female characters in games are a token addition (trying to ensure that there's at least one woman included), a love interest, a damsel in distress, a goal (sexual or not) -- they typically occupy positions of weakness. Male characters tend to be more developed and complex -- they will have moments of weakness, certainly, but the weakness or sexuality is not what defines them. To return to what I said earlier -- sexualization isn't the issue. Just look at The Witcher 2: on the surface, it treats women horribly. Many of them can be slept with or are a love interest for Geralt, and many more are dressed provocatively. Yet, many of those female characters are very strong characters. There's Philippa, one of the most influential and powerful characters in the setting. There's Triss, who while occupying a damsel in distress and love interest dual role, also is a character of some power of her own. There's Ves, a combat ready potential love interest. There's Saskia, the leader of a revolution (occupying a Joan of Arc role). Geralt (and Dandelion too) himself is heavily sexualized -- but he, like the women in the story, have more depth than that.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Honestly, I’ve rewritten this post a couple times and I still can’t quite make out what you’re trying to say. What you’re arguing and what IST is arguing are two completely different things. IST IS stating that women are too sexualized in games… And men AREN’T sexualized (even though they are).

            What you’re arguing is… I don’t really know and I really don’t think even you know.

            It seems like you’re fighting for women in games, but offer absolutely no evidence for this or reasoning for it. There are main characters in a story, side characters don’t get as much attention. There is a love interest who needs to be helped out… Yes, that’s the way it goes. You gave a good example of that with Witcher 2 (which leads me to believe that you’re confusing yourself). Male or female, lead characters always get more attention and have more depth… That’s like basics of writing a story.

            You even went on to say in the Witcher 2 example that those female characters were given a lot of thought even though they’re perceived poorly (prostitution happens), even if they don’t take the main lead. That’s a sign of a very good story line. Gender plays out fine (there are male side characters).

            Are there more male protagonists then female? Yes… That’s generally the trend as the majority of gamers are male. That’s generally the trend in general. Also notice how IST doesn’t want a game with a female that would deal with issues in a feminine way, rather she wants a game simply with a character that is female. In other words she doesn’t even care about how the character would react differently due to gender, she’s just concerned with the superficial nature of the characters themselves being male or female.

            This actually seems to be a trend between responses here. I think I’m going to take a break from replies here for a while to let things simmer. It appears you guys are trying to fight against sexism (huzzah), but haven’t completely thought things out.

            • Malphas
            • 7 years ago

            I agree with your all your posts pretty much, Bensam, for what it’s worth. I don’t think people understand what you’re saying or are too busy white-knighting which is why you’re getting voted down.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah… and for the majority of which don’t even seem to know why they’re arguing (just that they should). Geist for example is arguing against sexism, but maintains that it doesn’t matter what pixels are on what… So why does it even matter in the first place?

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            Please actually read my posts before insulting me, thanks.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I’m not going to read your responses that aren’t in response to my responses (or tangents of the argument). If you believe you have more to offer and I’m not getting the ‘full’ picture then make sure you either quote what is relevant from your posts before or direct me to those said posts that are relevant.

            I’m not going to go hunting through your posts for your own benefit. Not just that, but it’s YOUR fault for not representing yourself thoroughly enough if you believe that’s the case. I’m going off what you give me.

            Fuck people now days are so lazy they want you to argue for them, against yourself. No wonder your posts are so confusing.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            You do realize that all but one of those replies I mentioned were to you? I can’t help you out if your memory or reading comprehension is so deficient that you won’t even try to understand my responses to you.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I read your posts quite thoroughly, that’s why in one I noted that I rewrote what I was going to write multiple times because your post changed multiple times based on how I looked at it (that’s a good sign of someone either being confused or not being able to convey what they want to). All you’re doing now is quoting what I write and responding to those, which means you are no longer grasping what I’m attempting to talk about overall and just attacking little points.

            So, I can assume either you’re confused or you decided not to write out these mystical pieces that fill in all the gaps, leaving me to awe in wonder at your brilliance.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            That’s because you completely ignore my explanations of what I’m saying. You never responded to any of what I wrote in this part of another reply, for instance:

            [quote<]I'm saying that female characters are generally portrayed terribly; that many of them are reduced to being just an overly sexualized token addition to the plot, or are otherwise helpless. The issue is not female characters that are sexy -- it's female characters that are defined by being sexy. There's nothing wrong with Zelda OR Gordon Freeman being attractive. The issue comes about when the character is defined by those traits. Batman in Arkham City isn't dominated by his muscular appearance or voice -- Catwoman, however, has a significant part of her character definition in the areas of "sexy" and (for decent parts of the story) "helpless". What I'm saying is that gaming needs more characters like Cate Archer and less like Megan Reed.[/quote<] Where am I confused in there? I know exactly what I want, and I know exactly what the problem is. It's your own fault for ignoring the essential parts.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Which is talked about in:

            [quote<]How dare you? How dare me... What I meant by that is you offer random tidbits that don't match the logic you're arguing. Like your Witcher example which actually supported what I was arguing. Witcher 2 was a well thought out story with good a good male lead... It was a male lead, that's about the only bit of sexism in it. If you dropped a female in the spot of Geralt and changed all the prostitutes to male, do you think it would've felt the same or would it have been completely awkward? A side character is a side character. If the lead is male then the side character love interest will be female (unless they want to change things up), that's just the way it works. The majority of gamers are male therefore it makes sense to have a story written around a male lead. Not just that, but a lot of storylines in games are just plane bad so you can't expect them to have well fleshed out side characters (male or female).[/quote<] Also of which I described this a couple different times in different replies to you. In which I listed a love interest being a specific role (for either male or female) and of which I questioned why it even matters what gender the characters are if you believe the roles are unisex. This is only a small part of your overall posts though, which was split up by multiple quote replies.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]It seems like you're fighting for women in games, but offer absolutely no evidence for this or reasoning for it.[/quote<] I find this outright insulting. How [b<]dare[/b<] you claim that I have offered "no evidence or reasoning"? You went over some of that evidence and reasoning in the paragraph below the one that says that! My first reply to you highlights the differences in how often games have interesting main male vs. main female characters. I have a reply to SSK going over how differently NPC party members are handled in another game (BG2). In another reply to you, I pointed on NOLF2 and what it does right. In yet another reply, I expanded on that issue. Just because you're apparently too lazy to read the evidence and reasoning doesn't mean it isn't there. [quote<]What you're arguing is... I don't really know and I really don't think even you know.[/quote<] I'm saying that female characters are generally portrayed [i<]terribly[/i<]; that many of them are reduced to being just an overly sexualized token addition to the plot, or are otherwise helpless. The issue is not female characters that are sexy -- it's female characters that are defined by being sexy. There's nothing wrong with Zelda OR Gordon Freeman being attractive. The issue comes about when the character is defined by those traits. Batman in Arkham City isn't dominated by his muscular appearance or voice -- Catwoman, however, has a significant part of her character definition in the areas of "sexy" and (for decent parts of the story) "helpless". What I'm saying is that gaming needs more characters like Cate Archer and less like Megan Reed. [quote<]You even went on to say in the Witcher 2 example that those female characters were given a lot of thought[/quote<] Yes, I explained an exception to the rule and why I thought we needed more games with female characters like it. What does reminding me of my example prove? I was going over how just sexualizing the character doesn't make them a bad character -- it's when you sexualize a character and stop developing them beyond that. There is more to Geralt than being attractive to women, just as there is more to Triss than being attractive to men or needing to be rescued. It was an example to rebut the point of "but men are portrayed sexually too!!!1!!". The sexual portrayal alone isn't the problem. [quote<]Are there more male protagonists then female? Yes... That's generally the trend as the majority of gamers are male.[/quote<] Chicken, meet egg. Also, while a majority of gamers are male, the split between them is not as drastic as you would imply. About [url=http://www.theesa.com/facts/index.asp<]47% of gamers[/url<] are female, and a larger portion of the gaming market is made up of females 18 and older than by males 17 and younger. That there is a 6 percentage point gap between male and female gamers doesn't explain the extent of the differences in portrayal. [quote<]It appears you guys are trying to fight against sexism (huzzah), but haven't completely thought things out.[/quote<] No, more accurately it appears that you haven't bothered to read anything I've said.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            How dare you? How dare me… What I meant by that is you offer random tidbits that don’t match the logic you’re arguing. Like your Witcher example which actually supported what I was arguing. Witcher 2 was a well thought out story with good a good male lead… It was a male lead, that’s about the only bit of sexism in it.

            If you dropped a female in the spot of Geralt and changed all the prostitutes to male, do you think it would’ve felt the same or would it have been completely awkward?

            A side character is a side character. If the lead is male then the side character love interest will be female (unless they want to change things up), that’s just the way it works. The majority of gamers are male therefore it makes sense to have a story written around a male lead. Not just that, but a lot of storylines in games are just plane bad so you can’t expect them to have well fleshed out side characters (male or female).

            I don’t understand how this example is representative of chicken and the egg. So if more stories had female leads women would be more likely to play games? That’s BS. Lara Croft was a good example of that and women rebelled in disgust at the idea of a chick being sexualized even though she ran around blowing things up just like guys. Lara Crofts been around forever.

            I don’t believe that BS about 47% of gamers being women. I’ve read that before and know you took that from SSKs post. Maybe if you highlight specifically social networking games or like the Sims, sure… but not all games. The majority of the Sims players I know are women for instance. But there is definitely a shortage of them in FPSs, RTSs, and MOBAs. MMOs have quite a bit more then the average, but that still is no where around 47%. For the above FPS/RTS/Mobas I would say 1 in 10 of those gamers are female, probably less then that. Although that’s been improving.

            The ESA does not cite any sources or where they retrieved those statistics from. Valve would have a better idea of how many gamers are female then the ESA.

            • Ryu Connor
            • 7 years ago

            Many male characters get the shaft.

            The Hero of “Orcs Must Die” is not only Beefcake, but he’s an idiot too. Gaming meets Hans and Frans.

            Male characters are often token as well. In some cases they even end up being token minorities: Cole Train in Gears of War or Jacob from Mass Effect 2 and 3.

            I want to be clear here. I don’t think the way many female characters get treated is fair either, but I honestly believe the problem is bigger than just the potrayal of women. I think the industry still has some rather juvenille storytelling. The story of Gears of War was the quality of high school fiction.

            • bthylafh
            • 7 years ago

            Really? I didn’t get “beefcake” or “idiot” vibes off the hero. If anything he’s a takeoff of Bruce Campbell as Ash.

            Internet, why you so serious?

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            Certainly there is issue with both sets of characters, do not get me wrong. The issue with female characters is far more ingrained in the industry however. Movies are the same as games, but the industries aren’t that too apart either — and just look at [url=http://bechdeltest.com/<]Bechdel Test[/url<] for movies. How many movies would fail the test if the genders were swapped? How many games would fail either test? Both male and female characters have issues, but the male character issues are typically far less substantial.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            You know you can… You can say how women are portrayed in games is fair.

            A love interest is a love interest, a side character is a side character. That’s the way things are written. If a love interest needs to be saved, then they will be. It doesn’t matter what gender they are, that’s the role in the story they fulfill.

            Side characters aren’t always fleshed out fully regardless of their gender. That’s just a victim of poor story writing, just as you put it.

            • tfp
            • 7 years ago

            Have you ever watched TV?

            • I.S.T.
            • 7 years ago

            Gaming men aren’t like fabio in the least. They don’t have long flowing locks of hair, etc etc.

            HJell, look at any media where the man has to be drawn and not having a picture taken of them. Guys almost always have been square jawed and whatnot. Like I said, guys thinking what a powerful guy is creating male characters.

            FWIW, I do agree that it’s bullcrap, and that I’d like to see more body types for men in gaming too(TF2 is great at this, actually. Only one person, the demo, there is anywhere near beef cake. The others are either thin as a toothpick or have various levels of fat on ’em), but that’s not what this discussion is about.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            [url<]http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110607183931/darksiders/images/e/e2/War-darksiders-artwork-character.jpg[/url<] he has long, pretty hair, a sexy voice, and a tight body. in fact, you can pretty much assume that's a portrait of me, cause that's what i look like.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            Is the appearance of Death what defines him in Darksiders? Is he just a dainty man, planning romantic candle lit dinners? I expect not, based on the name Death and being one of the four horsemen. That and that action-adventure nature of the game.

            He isn’t defined by his appearance; which is the whole point.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            What? War is totally defined by his appearance. they talk about it constantly in the game.

            [url<]http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/9/2011/06/death2.jpg[/url<] and death is the same looking

            • dmjifn
            • 7 years ago

            Huh. It’s Skeletor 2010!

            • dmjifn
            • 7 years ago

            Ha. Talk about nice timing.
            [url<]http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/08/15[/url<]

            • Malphas
            • 7 years ago

            “but that’s not what this discussion is about”

            No, it really is the same thing actually. Women in games are portrayed in a certain way to appeal to juvenile men, and men in games are portrayed in a certain way to appeal to juvenile men. That’s the problem. The reason men aren’t made to appeal to women, is because that’s only a fraction of the gamer demographic.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I disagree if you think the qualities that men exhibit in games don’t also appeal to women. Strong confidence, good looks, always making the right decision… powerful as IST put it.

            The qualities are all there. From women I’ve talked to the twilight phase is a teen thing for women, not the norm. It’s different when they get older (if that’s what you’re basing it off of). You know, when life comes through and kicks their ass (like it does for men too).

            • Malphas
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah, I’m aware of this, I mean they usually aren’t specifically tailored to cater to women (although sometimes they are). But it varies, Gears of War characters clearly appeal to young boys, not women, but the likes of say MaleShep clearly does (whilst still being gruff and cocky enough not to alienate male players).

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I believe they do cater to women while catering to men. Just the same way as powerful women can cater to men and women even if how they interact with their environment is different.

            People are just only looking at this from the male side of the coin with females being submissive all the time, they aren’t. But the toolset they use to achieve their power is different then the ‘go crack some skulls’ mentality people seem to believe is the only way to do things.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            They’re not designed to cater to women. The fact that they do is a happy coincidence.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            lol, you haven’t played Witcher 2. You’re pretty much describing Geralt.

            I don’t know if I agree with you there. I play games to escape reality, not have sad reality pulled into it. I accept people in real life, but that doesn’t mean I can’t imagine better.

            • Ryu Connor
            • 7 years ago

            I would note that the Blood Elf male and Night Elf male stands out as an immediate example of an opposing view point to that statement. The image of Death SSK provides is a good one as well. Those just immediately came to mind. I’m sure we could find more.

            It’s not worth a back and forth discussion. We are agree more than we disagree. I find myself disapointed with the portrayal of characters of either gender in gaming today.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            Are you saying pumping iron is bad?

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          You don’t believe being perceived as ‘powerful’ for males isn’t a sexualized quality? You don’t believe appearing ‘seductive’ for females also isn’t perceived as a ‘powerful’ quality?

          And yes, being badass for men is different from women… because they’re two different genders and there are two different perceptions of what is an attractive quality for them. Giving a female masculine qualities isn’t the same thing as ‘badass’ for being a female.

          Ever watch a girl with a dragon tatoo? A very strong female and male lead in the movie, yet the female wasn’t some sort of butch amazonian queen who goes out of her way to act all masculine. Men are men and women are women. Women don’t automatically become equal if you super impose them on top of masculine qualities… They’re equal because they’re viewed that way.

          It’s sort of interesting because gender equality has gotten to the point where women seem to think they need to be men in order to be respected and treated equally, when that’s completely not true.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            The point is both how men and women are portrayed in video games (as a general rule, not every case), is designed to appeal to men (well adolescent boys mostly), not designed to appeal to women.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            And what’s wrong with it appealing to men?

            And why do you keep marking down my posts when you don’t even post a counter-argument stating how it’s wrong?

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            When you’re a man there is nothing wrong with appealing to men, but if you were a woman who likes games you might feel otherwise.

            Also, I haven’t voted down any of your posts on this page.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t think there is anything wrong with something targeting a specific gender regardless of yours. After you watch a ad for makeup do you go ‘oh god, that’s so sexist, why don’t they have male makeup ads more,!?!?’?

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            And if you were a man who enjoyed makeup, you might feel differently.

          • Scrotos
          • 7 years ago

          Well, what’s the ideal female for a game, then? I don’t think there’s any one archetype that females would agree on, in general. Too many muscles? Too butch. Wears a dress? Too girly. Wears a ton of armor? Looks like some random trooper in Spartan armor from Halo.

          I think part of the problem is the overall female gender’s self-image. I go downtown to work every day and see both sexes out and about, doing stuff. The guys aren’t typically dressing to impress unless they are white collar and then they are clones of each other. The gals have very varied modes of dress and far more often than the guys are wearing skin-hugging clothes and/or clothes that show off far more skin than the guys do.

          Now why is that? Even in more professional environments, women aren’t shoehorned into the same dress pants and button-down shirts that the guys are. They get to wear tons of different kinds of shoes, skirts, dresses, pants, sometimes even capris. The tops? Blouses, tank tops, random stuff, even low-cut stuff that I would argue is not appropriate in a work setting (granted, it depends on the line of work).

          The point I’m trying to make here is that the games you’re pointing out aren’t DRIVING society’s views, they are merely a REFLECTION of them. And, to make matters worse, the female gender plays a large part in perpetuating the roles they themselves are complaining about. If women stopped showing skin, over time, society’s views on what is found “attractive” would change. You need only look to different cultures to see different standards of attractiveness that aren’t tied with tight-fitting clothes and cleavage.

          Even looking at different periods of time the standards have changed, though as women have become more empowered they’ve broken out of the restrictive bindings of style of the time to enjoy wearing whatever they want now. Hey, cool, it’s no longer expected that you’ll be bound up in a whalebone corset! You can wear anything! Oh hey, you choose to wear a low-cut tank top and hotpants… um, ok.

          Does this make the situation right? No. But it doesn’t change anything; it is what it is, for better or worse. Guys dress like slobs or like clones. Women dress randomly and often in a way to flaunt their sexuality (talkin’ ’bout North America here). So who’s at fault? The guys for liking how those women dress? Or the women for dressing in that manner? It’s not like women are ignorant of what their clothing choices present. And no, this isn’t a “she dressed like a slut so she deserved to be raped” line of reasoning.

          Change comes slowly and through the actions of lots of people. I think we’re just looking for someone to blame. Blame the game makers for reflecting society? Blame the males and females for dressing how they do and perpetuating our current society? I dunno.

          I don’t have a solution but I don’t really see the solution you seem like you want. The guys should wear… what? Tight jeans and skin-tight t-shirts? The women should wear loose-fitting pants and tops that don’t show skin? The guys should be muscled (but not too much, ewww!) and the gals should have a bust and butt but not too big on either and golly not too small.

          I dunno. I’m in it for the gameplay and stories, if there are any. Sure, eyecandy is nice, but if the gameplay sucks it’s not like I’m going to stay hooked on a game just for the T&A. There’s this thing called the internet if I want my fill.

          • Malphas
          • 7 years ago

          Yeah, they aren’t sexualised but they’re still fetishised to appeal to the same demographic (teenage boys). That still isn’t any better.

          • willmore
          • 7 years ago

          Did you even play Borderlands? There are two major bimbos in the game. One is a smart business woman who uses her appearance to further her goals. The other is a male homicidal convict who’s only redeaming feature is that he reportedly makes really good chilli-cheese fries.

        • Malphas
        • 7 years ago

        I didn’t think Gordon Freeman ever had a voice? But yes, other than that fair point. It seems that at least in the minds of developers most gamers are adolescent boys so every female character is some sex vixen in tight clothing or exposed midriff/cleavage/legs, and every male character is either some gruff, hypermasculine, roided-up beefcake or an Abercrombie and Fitch model.

          • Bensam123
          • 7 years ago

          I meant Morgan Freeman. -_-

          Yeah… stereotypes on both sides. But honestly who wants to play a hello kitty fatty? I see that every day in the mirror. That’s not my ideal way to chainsaw baddies though.

            • Malphas
            • 7 years ago

            I’d gladly play a Hello Kitty fatty for a change actually. I quite like it when a game like Kane and Lynch or Manhunt or Max Payne 3, etc. crops up that lets me play as a horrible old c*nt instead of some handsome American pretty-boy or generic army man (although I look and sound like “Soap” MacTavish from CoD “irl” in fairness).

      • burntham77
      • 7 years ago

      To be fair, even Batman showed some skin towards the end of the game via his “beat up” look.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      Dear Female,
      Until your gender lets go of all the double-standards that you so vehemently latch onto, then all I have to say about your comments about sexism is “deal with it”.
      Also, you will continue to be the “lesser” person as long as things like this “make you uncomfortable”. Guys insult, berate, joke, embarrass each other ALL THE TIME. It’s what we do. Either you accept it, throw some back at them or you cry about it and get treated differently. That’s how it works. It’s that simple.
      Sexism, like racism, is still a lingering hot-button issue in society. In this very thread is a great example of a black guy who could have gone down two roads after the N-bomb was dropped: [url<]https://techreport.com/discussions.x/23412?post=659541.[/url<] Instead of getting on a soap box of not being held down by ... blah blah blah, he made light of the bad joke and moved on with life. I'm going to be sexist now and say that the entire point of what I'm saying will WHOOSH right past you. Just my opinion.

        • I.S.T.
        • 7 years ago

        Depends on the context, dude. I trash talk my friends regardless of gender too. I don’t always get pissed off when somebody makes a mildly sexist comment, because often it’s just a joke.

      • Malphas
      • 7 years ago

      It’s funny you’re accusing me of bias when I basically agree with all your points. I do happen to think female gamers on the whole aren’t as skilled as male players, but same goes for console players, casual gamers, etc. in general. Fact is, women simply aren’t as likely to be “dedicated” or long-term gamers, as opposed to guys, and are more likely to play WoW, Sims, Tropic, etc. or AAA titles like Arkham City as opposed to games like Hard Reset or Stalker. You can take that as a positive or a negative thing depending on your outlook really.

      In any case you’re not the only one sick of how embarrassingly juvenile the games industry is as a whole when it comes to women. Like Catwoman wiggling her arse about, like you mentioned, or the dire “booth babes” at expos, or the way the female version of the “space marine” archetype (which is an awful, overused cliche in itself, even when it’s male) has armour that exposed their midriff, or is contoured to emphasise their curves for some reason, etc. etc.

      • GeorgeMichael
      • 7 years ago

      I’ve played all the Tomb Raiders, and in none of them was Lara ever portrayed in a sexual manner let alone sexually assaulted.
      You obviously have never ever even played Tomb Raider.
      I dare you bring a single example of a sexual scene or act in any of the Tomb Raider games.
      BTW the upcoming Tomb Raider has nothing to do with Tomb Raider or Lara Croft. it’s a different game with the Tomb Raider name on it.

        • Malphas
        • 7 years ago

        ” I’ve played all the Tomb Raiders, and in none of them was Lara ever portrayed in a sexual manner”
        lololol

      • killadark
      • 7 years ago

      at first i thought the girlfriend mode was for guys who had girlfriends also wanting to play the game since they might not be as good as them they hav a new mode girlfriend mode where they could play and not harm the guys stats 😛

        • Malphas
        • 7 years ago

        In fairness, that is actually how it was described in it’s original context. It’s certainly been blown out of proportion but it was a dumb move to have said such a thing from a PR standpoint, regardless.

      • ludi
      • 7 years ago

      Longest…thread….EVER.

      • holophrastic
      • 7 years ago

      It’s not that I disagree with you — the man’s an idiot for saying it. And I also agree with you that the overall treatment of women, both in games and in this thread, is less than outstanding.

      But that’s your fault.

      It’s a men’s club, that you’ve entered. You’re welcome to be here. I like that you’re here. But you’re expecting the club to change just because you’re here. That’s an insane expectation. It’s very unfair to the guys who’ve been happy here since long before you arrived.

      So that’s the crap of which I’m sick and tired. You’re welcome to get a few dozen girls and start a club that treats men poorly. You’re welcome to start a gaming company that produces games in a similar manner. But you’re not allowed to yell at other people for doing what they like with their own friends.

      I don’t go into shoe stores complaining that their aren’t any high-heel shoes for men. I don’t complain that there are no more than two shampoos designed for men, and that rarely do stores even carry them.

      I don’t know what the global numbers are like, but I do keep my own statistics, so I can say that well over 90% of the gamers in games that I play are male, and similar numbers abound here too. And I’m including developers and authors.

      So really, I support the entrepreneurial drive — I myself have started a few dozen businesses over the years, and still run two today. Of all of them, only one has been successful. I’ve failed with hundreds of thousands of dollars of life savings. It can be hard. So I’d like to see you succeed in building a female-based techreport, and a female-based gaming industry. Let me know when you get to female programmers and female IT personnel. I’ve seen only 1 in my entire career.

      I can’t promiss to like your games or your articles, but that’s just the point. You don’t need me to. You just need to stop complaining about what other people do and start doing whatever it is that you want to do.

      Let me know if I can help. Small business helps small business.

        • superjawes
        • 7 years ago

        This is not a men’s club. Engineering is dominated by men, but it’s not a men’s club, either. There are not special rules that define roles based on gender, so telling women to suck it up when sexism happens is “blame the victim” nonsense that needs to stop.

        Were this actually a men’s club, where membership were restricted based on gender, you might have a point. Heck, even if content were focused to be gender-specific, you might have a point (Playboy comes to mind, as do other “regular” men’s magazines). However, the content posted here is general for everyone to enjoy, and disrespect for anyone based on gender, race, age, etc. should be fought.

        Additionally, we are specifically trying to share this medium. Perhaps you are not personally invested, but I for one would like to share my hobbies and interests with women, and to accomplish that, I try to make the environment as open and welcoming as possible.

          • holophrastic
          • 7 years ago

          It’s a men’s club for as long as it is dominated by men. It needn’t be by design, it just needs to be by being. And since the near-entire population here is both happy and satisfied, walking into it and complaining that the culture doesn’t suit your principles makes you pompous.

          And here’s why.

          There is a limited number of possibilities moving forward from here. Sure, the one you want would have most men accepting most women and the entire culture changing immediately. That’s just unlikely. The second has enough women getting involved so as to dilute the negative men thus balancing things to an acceptable state. But you won’t get that many women in this industry. Period. The third has enough men siding with the few women in a saviour role so as to change the culture. This will serve only to dissuade the majority of the men from participating at all. You’ll lose the atmosphere that exists and you’ll replace it with a defensive culture that doesn’t get involved at all. You’ll have eliminated what is and have replaced it with nothing.

          There is absolutely nothing wrong with disrespecting anyone for any reason. That’s precisely what words are for. If you choose to be offended, that’s your lack of social skill. For example, you’ve disrespected me here, in part by comparing my observations of technical fora to sexual imagery, and in part for describing me as blaming the victim where no victim exits.

          I won’t let you cross the line of calling a reader a victim. You can’t take concepts of physical abuse and oppression and then apply them to insulting verbiage. Not everyone is welcome everywhere. And in this case, we’re happily welcoming women into the existing fold, not into a new one. The original poster is welcome to be here. And we want her to be here. And we want “here” to be the “here” that it is.

            • superjawes
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]There is absolutely nothing wrong with disrespecting anyone for any reason.[/quote<]I disagree completely. In the time I've been here, the vast majority of discourse has been respectful, and most disrespectful comments are downvoted, frowned upon, or are just parody or satire jokes made for a laugh. If this site had a disrespectful culture, I would not be here. But again, just because men are the majority does not mean that said men can or should get away with freely disrespecting the minority. It excludes people from conversation, silences them, and can actually dilute the quality of conversation because of that exclusion. This is why I pointed out that engineering is also male-dominated. Excluding or disrespecting women is incredibly harmful to quality, not just public perception. And words can and are considered "real" things. As I already pointed out, certain words can used to silence an individual or group, and that does create victims. They have real effects. Just because we are "happily welcoming women into the existing fold" does not mean that we are free to force them out with said words, and insisting that "here" should not change is a "shut up or leave" mentality. That is [i<]not[/i<] includisve in any respect.

            • holophrastic
            • 7 years ago

            No, words don’t do that. The listener chooses to do that. If I swear at you here, and you choose to leave, that’s your choice, not my creation. If you choose to give me that power, well then you’ve chosen that too.

            I don’t force you to leave. You can just as easily ignore me and my comments. This one included.

            The line where words become more than words is the one where threats are of a physical violence. That line exists only because the threat of physical violence is actionable.

            Now clearly, my disrespecting you here doesn’t threaten you at all. I don’t know where you live, I’m disrespecting your ideas and your personality (or your gender) not your health, and I’ve no way of escalating any of it. Furthermore, you have the same “power” over me, we each choose to be here, and either of us can leave at any time.

            There is no human right, civil right, legal right, nor any right to discourse amongst a private group of persons. And that’s precisely what this is. Which is why techreport.com management can dump you, me, or us at any time without answering to anybody.

            And that’s just it. Their opinion is the only one that counts for anything around here. And clearly, at this time, they are satisfied with how things are. So that’s the end. If that includes me yelling at you, or you yelling at me, then it’s all good.

            You can disagree all you want, but you would be mistaken to do so. There is nothing wrong with yelling at someone, nothing wrong with considering someone else’s opinion to be idiotic, and nothing wrong with thinking of another as being completely worthless. We do it in business all the time. We do it in politics all the time. We do it in religion all the time. In fact, each of those three is based purely on considering someone else to be lesser. Oh yeah, and some countries (ehem, unnamed union of states in america) grew purely out of the concept of “I hate your dumb laws, so I’m drawing this line over here and making my own laws.)

            And again, the only time that it becomes bad (crusades, civil wars, monopolies) is when one directly inhibits the actions of another. But it must be directly, since the entire goal is to inhibit them indirectly.

            So that’s why you are wrong to disagree. By doing so, you’ve denounced capitalism, competition, religious differences, political differences, and national differences.

            Which means that if I ever discover you saying something like “you shouldn’t eat meat” or “you should pray to this thing” or “you shouldn’t pray to that thing” or “you shouldn’t have a death penalty” or “vote blue” . . .well then, I’ll already know what I’ll think of you.

            • superjawes
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<] If I swear at you here, and you choose to leave, that's your choice, not my creation.[/quote<]Do you not understand cause and effect? If words have no power, then why do you continue to use them? I could pick your post apart piece-by-piece, but I'll just take this: [quote<]you've denounced capitalism, competition, religious differences, political differences, and national differences.[/quote<]I specifically argued that exclusion is not competitive because you marginalize ideas and end up with a cheaper product. Having differences is completely different from ignoring and willfully excluding them. If you cannot acknowledge the other sides argument, you cannot have a conversation, and that is the only time that various differences are "denounced" (ahem), and real discourse becomes impossible.

    • jdaven
    • 7 years ago

    Maybe TR can invent some kind of gender identification system for the comments so that only females can comment on stories like this. Otherwise, we will get the same kind crap since all comments here are from males.

      • I.S.T.
      • 7 years ago

      Thank you omg.

        • Srsly_Bro
        • 7 years ago

        I’ve been on your side for most of this page, until I came across this comment. Segregating by sex the ability to post comments should be the opposite of the preferred end goal. How can YOU preach equality, but encourage segregation of sexes? You are not helping your cause.

      • Scrotos
      • 7 years ago

      So you either get a bunch of people making fake female accounts or, if it works, you get 2 or 3 people commenting on articles talking about gender.

      Yup. Not really an ideal solution there.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      And this IS called sexism and not just that, but also prejudice. Don’t worry, no one will notice you in the sea of ‘save the females’ though.

    • Flatland_Spider
    • 7 years ago

    The character is female only? That’s the real shocking part.

    That’s much better then I thought it would be. I was thinking it was going to be a mode where the player just ran around without the ability to use weapons. You know because girlfriends are useless and just get in the way. (Not my real opinion, but us geeks can be kind of sexist and it’s what I expected when I read the headline.)

    Calling it girlfriend mode is sexist, and there is no humor there. It would have been funny if the character could be male or female, and it ran around in tiny booty shorts. That would have been funny. As it stands, “girlfriend mode” is just a sexist term for a gamer assist feature that could be really fun, like bumpers is bowling.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      Did you play Borderlands? All the classes have a preset gender.

        • Flatland_Spider
        • 7 years ago

        Ha! No, I’m a server junkie, and I have other things I spend my time doing. 🙂

    • vvas
    • 7 years ago

    So what this comment is essentially saying is “women suck at games, so we made a dumbed down mode just for them.” And you don’t find this sexist at all? Blatantly judging people on their skill and intelligence based on gender? A need for sensitivity training indeed.

      • Malphas
      • 7 years ago

      Indeed, it’s a rather stupid thing to say when a large chunk of your target demographic is female. I mean, to be perfectly honest I do feel female gamers are crap (although Borderlands seemed like a crap-player-friendly game anyway), but I certainly wouldn’t be saying that if I was trying to hawk my crappy game to them.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      Truth hurt doesn’t it….

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      …what if it’s true for the majority of women?

      I don’t think there was anything about intelligence in there, rather the motivation to actually attempt to do well at games is different.

      The majority of women I’ve seen play games aren’t actually all that interested in the game itself, but rather socializing with people. I only know a couple that are contradictory to that. And of those that aren’t interested in the game they really don’t care how they perform or how well they do as long as they don’t get yelled at.

        • XaiaX
        • 7 years ago

        The plural of anecdote is not data.

        You’re just suffering from the availability heuristic.

      • Scrotos
      • 7 years ago

      Hey, remember that time that women and men competed at the same events at the Olympics? Because, you know, there are no differences based on their sex, it just comes down to skill and intelligence?

      Women and men are different, be it either through physical means or societal means shaping their interests and typical skillsets. Is it correct to say that all women can’t run the 100m as fast as all men? No. Is it correct to say that most women can’t run the 100m as fast as most men? I think so. Oh no, it’s a dirty nasty generalization! But that’s how people as a whole view things. That’s how we are able to grasp large numbers of things. Black people are typically darker than white people. Women typically have less upper-body strength than men. Orientals and Asians typically consume more rice than Caucasians. That’s how we as a species relate to stuff.

      Women typically are not as interested in FPS’s as men are and therefore don’t typically develop the same skillset. Why is that concept so evil? I’ve seen reports that women make up about half the gaming population. In general, it seems as though they made up more as the games have been made more accessible… mobile gaming, Wii, and flash games. Typically those games are not FPS’s. So even if half the gaming population is female doesn’t mean their skillset is the same as the males.

      Anecdote time! A coworker of mine likes playing non-violent games. She played WoW for a bit and mainly killed cows because she thought it was funny. Typically she’ll play stuff from Big Fish or Pogo or Facebook games or something like Word of Goo. Compare and contrast with my wife. She kicks my butt in WarCraft 2, StarCraft, StarCraft 2, and other games. I still have an edge in FPS’s though due to sheer practice, but she’s certainly good in stuff like Left 4 Dead despite having the handicap of my friendly fire. Hell, she even organized tournaments at QuakeCon in the early 2000’s so it’s not like she’s a casual gamer.

      And speaking of QCon, much respect to those who actually want to try changing things:

      [url<]http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2012/08/gaymercon-wants-to-provide-a-safe-place-for-lgbtq-gamers/[/url<] No, don't just skim; it's actually about making a convention for everyone and having a positive atmosphere, not just a specific group. So you know what, vvas? Women typically suck at FPS's so Gearbox made a dumbed down mode so they could enjoy the game without spending 10 years building up FPS skills. Next you're going to tell us that games have easy/normal/hard modes just for girls to play on easy.

      • Spotpuff
      • 7 years ago

      I’d imagine TR is written by mostly white men and read by mostly white men. Whites are more likely to think they are the victims of racism than their black counterparts.

      [url<]http://now.tufts.edu/news-releases/whites-believe-they-are-victims-racism-more-o[/url<] To most people this would sound incredibly stupid given the current disparity in income, education, social opportunity/justice, etc. but I've heard numerous people on places that are overwhelmingly male and white (the internet, gaming/tech sites) that reinforce this idea. They (white men) are sick of all the whining about race and people playing "race cards" and "political correctness". Everyone else should just suck it up and succeed and not be offended. Trying to educate those people is pretty hard and pointless. I definitely got tired of trying to do that. Some people want to learn about social issues, others don't.

        • Jason181
        • 7 years ago

        “Educate” is another way of saying “convince them that I’m right.”

          • cynan
          • 7 years ago

          The cool thing about communication and facilitation of open dialogue though, is that, at least in theory, both parties get the opportunity to “educate” each other. If each party goes into communication without first having decided on the outcome, then a consensus can be reached. Or at least attempted. And then attempted again. Which is better than simply drawing a line in the sand and proceeding to stick your head deep in your side of it.

          We all have our emotional baggage and preconceptions. Some more than others. And cognitive dissonance can be a scary thing.

          Furthermore, the real world can make this sort of thing difficult. The way the media works, for example, often seems to leave little room for dialogue. Sometimes I feel like one issue is championed and blared from the four corners. You are told that you should believe X if you associate with group Y. Then a few months later the issue is swept under the rug to be replaced by the next hot topic(s).

          But then what is the alternative? If not for the media, much of these issues wouldn’t see the light of day…

          “The more you learn, the more you realize how little you know” – I’ve found to be pretty accurate in life, especially for these sorts of issues.

          The key is to keep listening and keep an open mind. No matter how wearisome and onerous this may get. Anything less is a cop out.

      • EtherealN
      • 7 years ago

      No, note that the mode was not called “girl mode”. It wasn’t “woman mode” either.

      It was “girlfriend mode”.

      Obvious context: you, as a male gamer (or female, but homosexual, gamer), want to get your significant other to play a game with you, but they are not a gamer. (If they were, the context becomes moot since they’ll be playing anyway.) Thus there is a skill level gap. This is intended to bridge that gap. This is not some unusual situation – statistics bear out pretty well that most “gamers” are males. Females do play games, and they do play them a lot, but they spend less time and less money on it by a substantial margin. Thus this situation is common.

      That’s the situation, as far as I read it.

      Now, if the guy had said “girl mode”, sure. You’d have a point. But that’s not what he said.

        • cynan
        • 7 years ago

        Silly twits at Gearbox. Why didn’t he just call it Significant Other Mode? Rolls off the tongue way better to boot!

    • dmjifn
    • 7 years ago

    Ugh. For this article, TR’s showing me an ad for “FilipinoCupid.com”, complete with bikini wrapped skin. Not OK to Browse Singles Now! at work.

      • TheEmrys
      • 7 years ago

      Don’t blame this on TR. Own your browser history.

        • bthylafh
        • 7 years ago

        Indeed. We’re not judging.

          • dmjifn
          • 7 years ago

          So yeah? I’ve been to [url=http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/10/20<]badboysbigbirds.com[/url<] - what of it? 🙂

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      I think you posted in the wrong story, the Google search one is a few down.

        • dmjifn
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah, the irony wasn’t lost on me. 🙂

      • ULYXX
      • 7 years ago

      Im getting bikini midgets and spaghetti pools.

        • Flatland_Spider
        • 7 years ago

        Together or separate?

          • ULYXX
          • 7 years ago

          Oh, theyre just swimming and eating meat balls. Dont worry, they have bibs on. Nothing really too naughty. 🙂

    • south side sammy
    • 7 years ago

    kinda frosts my balls that through my adult life I saw political correctness try and take away the ability to laugh at ourselves……….

    “Perhaps I need sensitivity training, but the outrage over girlfriend mode seems overblown. Then again, I’ve never been particularly offended when my girlfriend refers to taking out the garbage as a boyfriend job.’

    nice line………………. LOL

    • Beelzebubba9
    • 7 years ago

    Possibly insensitive naming aside, this is a really good idea. It could also be named ‘I wanted to play a game when I came home from the bars at 3 AM but didn’t want to be frustrated’ mode.

    Since that’s my likely use for it. 🙂

    • WillBach
    • 7 years ago

    As a sweeping comment, it’s sexist. As an anecdote, it’s not. If we there weren’t so many similar comments that actually were sexist, we probably wouldn’t have noticed it. As it stands, he should have been a little more careful about what he said.

    • Alexko
    • 7 years ago

    Oh my God, someone suggested that women aren’t big gamers and are not very good at it on average! Which is totally true!

    Quick, quick, say he’s evil!

      • Majiir Paktu
      • 7 years ago

      Yeah… please show me all the “girlfriend” pro gamers.

      Nobody denies that girls play video games. The question is: [i<]which[/i<] games do they play? The most "hardcore" game I can think of (in terms of learning curve, requisite intellect, lack of instant gratification, etc.) is EVE-Online, and this game is absolutely male-dominated. Anecdotally speaking, as games get more fun (at least in the short term) and less bash-your-head-on-the-keyboard difficult, I see more female gamers. My best guess is it has to do with preference rather than ability. Men (generally) enjoy conflict moreso than women, so it's no surprise that men play the kinds of games where you spend many hours developing a strategy to ruthlessly and mercilessly destroy your opponent, often with lies and deceit. It's not sexism to identify a real difference in gameplay patterns. It's a generalization. Pro tip: don't take every generalization personally.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        I disagree with Eve being the pinnacle of skill… that’s more like playing with model trains. The rest I agree with though.

        • willmore
        • 7 years ago

        Cory Doctorow’s wife is/was a professional gamer. She can probably mop the floor with us on a wide selection of games. So, not ‘girlfriend’, but one assumes they went through that state on the way to marrage.

        But, as the saying goes, the plural of anecdote isn’t ‘data’.

        My wife, for one (not data), has no interest in Borderlands, but plays the hell out of any Bejeweled clone that gets in her way. Oh, well, I did get her addicted to PvZ (and *cough* some time back, to Pokemon).

        I’ve known a few women FPS gamers and they were, on average, awsome. Then again, it’s a good possibility that the poor or just good ones act like guys to avoid the whole “dude, killerbob23 is a chick!” crap.

    • Ringofett
    • 7 years ago

    Politically correct non-sense. Everything is bound to offend somebody, so grow some stones.

      • superjawes
      • 7 years ago

      For that matter, why is Gearbox backpedaling? A tongue-in-cheek game like Borderlands should double down because it KNOWS that it’s non-PC.

        • Farting Bob
        • 7 years ago

        You can shoot innocent people in the face with a rocket launcher from 2 feet away, but by god you better not offend someone by saying something that isnt politically correct.

        • Spotpuff
        • 7 years ago
          • Prion
          • 7 years ago

          As a black male on Tech Report, I feel the need to make a statement here. Unlike the average[citation needed] girlfriend, persons of African-American descent who adhere to Black American culture have the stereotype of having an above average level of skill at fast-paced video games. The real hurdle wasn’t the difficulty of the game but rather the difficulty of successfully stealing the PS3, and so naming the mode as you suggested would fail to accurately reflect its contents.

            • Scrotos
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]persons of African-American descent who adhere to Black American culture have the stereotype of having an above average level of skill at fast-paced video games[/quote<] Oh lordy, not the one I know! He's a total button masher in Soul Caliber! Weak! Lucky!

          • grantmeaname
          • 7 years ago

          How did you get through the word filter?

            • Spotpuff
            • 7 years ago

            I didn’t even know there was one.

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<]Everything is bound to offend somebody, so grow some stones. [/quote<] As a rock collector, I find that remark offensive.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      Your post offends me!

        • bthylafh
        • 7 years ago

        Your face offends me.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          It offends me too 🙁

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            well, i LOVE it.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah you do, in all its pervy goodness.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            when did you become so mischievous?

    • superjawes
    • 7 years ago

    There’s a simple solution to this…date girls who are better at video games!

    Yeah, I’ll see you in sensitivity training, Geoff.

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      [url<]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTKTh2MRm-w[/url<] I believe you need to watch this. Particularly the last part.

        • ColeLT1
        • 7 years ago

        My G/F is better at me at MOBA/MMO/RTS style of games, while I am better at FPS styles… it happens.

    • paulWTAMU
    • 7 years ago

    As someone who enjoys yet sucks at games, I want that skill tree.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      “Girlfriend mode…for players who suck!” 😉

        • sweatshopking
        • 7 years ago

        perv

          • Meadows
          • 7 years ago

          oh yes

            • Scrotos
            • 7 years ago

            And, let’s be honest here, that’s a gender-neutral and sex-neutral comment! Everyone’s a winner!

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          So, oral sex is perverted?

            • Scrotos
            • 7 years ago

            The way he does it, yes.

        • ULYXX
        • 7 years ago

        Im sold.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      Obviously ‘paul’ is a girl or ‘she’ just completely broke all the hatred for this gender barrier. A male playing ‘girlfriend mode’. *gasps*

    • BloodSoul
    • 7 years ago

    According to some statistics I found from the ESA, ~47% of gamers are women (most over 30)… so I could see how this could stir controversy. That said, I wish more games took this approach! I’ve been looking for a game to play with my girlfriend for ages, but she really doesn’t have the gaming skills necessary for anything fun!

    Side notes:
    1. This is my first 1st, I always thought it would feel more magical… oh well
    2. ESA = Entertainment Software Association
    3. I don’t typically blindly read statistics (they didn’t post their research methods), but 47% is far enough from my predicted <15% that I felt it was worth sharing 🙂

      • superjawes
      • 7 years ago

      When I have the time, I’ll look at those statistics, but I think perspective is in order. 47% does not represent the potential market for Borderlands. That drive for women playing games has more to do with the DS, iOS, and Bejeweled. Sure, more women are getting involved in the AAA scene, but 15% is probably close relative to games like Borderlands.

        • Saber Cherry
        • 7 years ago

        Try dissing the DS after you’ve played Pokemon mainline games on another platform. Oh, I’m sorry, you can’t, can you?

      • sweatshopking
      • 7 years ago

      I think it includes facebook games.

        • LastQuestion
        • 7 years ago

        Indeed.

        • BloodSoul
        • 7 years ago

        This article covers the stats more in-depth: [url<]http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/WandaMeloni/20100330/87019/The_Next_Frontier__Female_Gaming_Demographics.php[/url<] The stats on World of Warcraft surprise me the most, since that is almost the exact opposite of a facebook game.

          • lilbuddhaman
          • 7 years ago

          Have you played WoW, have you played it recently ?

          The vast majority of the “gameplay” is:
          -Collect stuff
          -Play dress-up
          -Play mini-games that are extremely shallow
          -Spam chat with unrelated gossip

          Oh and then there’s that whole pokemon thing with MoP coming.

          The same “hooks” that have been emphasized in FB games are the same one that have taken center stage in WoW. The whole “hardcore raiding” thing has taken a far backstage in focus.

            • superjawes
            • 7 years ago

            Mostly correct.

            As for the hardcore raiding, however, that is a very small subset of…well, all gamers, really. If you’re going to focus on something, you have to focus on something that a lot of people are going to use rather than something only 2% of the population will ever see.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            DRESS UP!?!?!?!?!!!!?!?! WHERE DO I SIGN?

            • lilbuddhaman
            • 7 years ago

            you mean you don’t get an email DAILY from Blizzard to play wow?

            That must be nice.

            • sweatshopking
            • 7 years ago

            Never seen one. is it amazing?

            • BloodSoul
            • 7 years ago

            Back when I played WoW it was a $15/month form of birth control, didn’t think it changed that much

            • shaq_mobile
            • 7 years ago

            -Spam chat with unrelated gossip

            Clearly you haven’t spent time in Barrens. Never have I found more articulate and enthralling Chuck Norris jokes than my pre mount runs from Ashenvale to Thousand Needles.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        About sums it up… Social networking games and The Sims.

      • allreadydead
      • 7 years ago

      Dude, every single soul of that 47% are healers in MMOs, support class in FPS, bait players in RTS. And nearly 100% are playing games because their BF, their Ex-BF or their future BF is playing games and made her play it too….Most prolly he needed a …………(pick one of the above)
      There are ofcourse exceptions; girls who are divinely beautiful, started playing by herself just for the sake of it and playing like a goddess, pwning n00bs daily. But again, if she wasnt pwning dem n00bs in cyber games, she would be doing it in real life…

      To go back to on-topic, I saw videos, SS and everything of this game and not got impressed enough to buy it. However, that single line will prolly make me pre-order it just for the sake of a dev who got balls to say it.

        • Scrotos
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]girls who are divinely beautiful, started playing by herself just for the sake of it and playing like a goddess, pwning n00bs daily. But again, if she wasnt pwning dem n00bs in cyber games, she would be doing it in real life...[/quote<] I dunno, guys don't really translate from pwning n00bs in cyber games over to RL. Wait... is this a sexist comment? Oh shi-

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      And 90% of that 47% play angry bird, farmville and the Sim, maybe WoW and other MMO.

      FPS in contrast are totally dominated by man.

      Randy knows this, and had the best intention to make Borderland easily accessible.

      Girls will be girls…

      • Knee Dragger
      • 7 years ago

      It may be true that ~47% of gamers are female, but I’m sure that number is much lower if you exclude games like Candyland 3D and Barbie’s Mystery Vacation, and include only FPS games. I don’t buy that most female gamers are FPSers, so I have no problem with FPS games being made for guys.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This