Quantcast
Are women over-represented in video games?

Forums - Politics Discussion - Are women over-represented in video games?

Which of these MOST describes your view?

Women are over-represented in video games. 8 10.13%
 
Women have too much of a ... 4 5.06%
 
Both of the above. 7 8.86%
 
None of the above. I will clarify. Honestly. 60 75.95%
 
Total:79
SammyGiireal said:

Aloy from HZD is my favorite Character in a game this gen. I don't mind women protagonists as long as the story surrounding them is good. Aloy also isn't your typical super model heroine, she is good looking but she looks believable like girl next door looks.

Same. Her and Ciri yet they keep calling me a sexist. Sigh. 



 

Around the Network

"I woman on the battle field is not realistic."

Says the guy getting shot 10 times and still running while carrying 8 weapons, 5 grenade types, 4 ammo types, never slows down, never eats, never shits, can fall from 30 feet with no broken bones, is a private but can call in a god damn air strike that conveniently happens 5 seconds later...but has a problem with a pair of boobs ruining his authentic, historical experience.

Take your bullshit and leave.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

I don't believe so. Hell, women of color are represented even less.



Darc Requiem said:

The Order and Battlefield aren't the same thing. Poor comparison. Works of fiction don't have to adhere to the facts, however Battlefield has made it a point to adhere to the historical time period it takes place. It's predecessor went back WWI and it's campaign focused on real battle units using only the weapons of the period. Battlefield isn't Resistance, The Order, or even a further outlier like Valkyria Chronicles. Those games tell you from the outset that they aren't shooting for accuracy. That aside, the situation is completely unnecessary. It's WWII game. There was country, Russia, that had women on that did serve on the front lines. Having a someone with a prosthetic limb on the front lines of game that only uses weapons of the period is just silly at best. The things she does would be difficult to do with prosthetic's of today. Why not add rail guns, stealth fighters, and hover packs too.

@bold.  No it hasn't.  Nearly every single Battlefield game was set in a fictional war.  

Even Battlefield 1, which is one of the only Battlefield games that was even close to being accurate, still had small inaccuracies with the weapons being used.  

There's nothing wrong with having a game set in an alternate history.  They're free to do whatever they want.    



Over-representation or under-representation doesn't matter to me, whether a game is good or not does. In terms of AAA video games, I'd say the representation of women is probably on par with the female audience of those games.



Currently Playing: SSB: Ultimate Splatoon 2, LoZ: Breath of the Wild, & Fortnite

Around the Network
the-pi-guy said:
Darc Requiem said:

If you are going to put a game in historical setting, you may want to abide the setting.

Why does a piece of fiction have to adhere to the facts?  Battlefield isn't claiming to be 100% accurate representation of the past.  

What about The Order?  It was set in a "historical" setting.  Yet there were apparently werewolves and sci-fi weapons.  

Battlefield has as much of a Civic duty to historical accuracy as The Order.  Both games are works of fiction. 

You didn't ask me but his answer was fairly close to what I would have answered that I'll answer this from my point of view.

For me, the answer is immersion and believability. The female prevalence in Battlefield V simply breaks the immersion for me. Battlefield has a tone serious enough for things like this to break the immersion. Female characters aren't the only issue (personally I'm also quite annoyed by all sides having the same guns and the prevalence of fully automatic weapons), but so far, female characters seem to be the most glaring one.

I haven't played The Order, but if it has werewolves and sci-fi weapons, I'm already willing to bet it has quite a different tone than Battlefield.

Last edited by Zkuq - on 03 September 2018

Zkuq said:
the-pi-guy said:

Why does a piece of fiction have to adhere to the facts?  Battlefield isn't claiming to be 100% accurate representation of the past.  

What about The Order?  It was set in a "historical" setting.  Yet there were apparently werewolves and sci-fi weapons.  

Battlefield has as much of a Civic duty to historical accuracy as The Order.  Both games are works of fiction. 

You didn't ask me but his answer was fairly close to what I would have answered that I'll answer this from my point of view.

For me, the answer is immersion and believability. The female prevalence in Battlefield V simply breaks the immersion for me. Battlefield has a tone serious enough for things like this to break the immersion. Female characters aren't the only issue (personally I'm also quite annoyed by all sides having the same guns and the prevalence of fully automatic weapons), but so far, female characters seem to be the most glaring one.

I haven't played The Order, but if it has werewolves and sci-fi weapons, I'm already willing to bet it has quite a different tone than Battlefield.

Believability?  You get shot and keep running?  That's believable?  How many weapons are you carrying?  How many ammo types?  How far can you run without collapsing from exhaustion?  How can you drive/fly all those different vehicles?  But a women just breaks it all, huh?



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

BlackBeauty said:

No, white straight males are.

The more we can get rid of them the better. (In any media) #oops

Hope this is a joke....

 

In regards to the representation, it is more of an issue of pandering and putting women front and center in an industry that has been and still is male dominated. Unless you are some kind of communist that needs to see equal outcomes in every setting in defiance of human freedom of choice and association, the actual numbers of men/women in the industry don't matter. If women want to be a part of something let them earn their way like everyone else. Don't slap a female character on the cover of otherwise male dominated franchises just to pander ... make a woman focused game and see if it can stand on its own 2 legs. Even though I thought it was trash, Horizon Zero Dawn is a positive example of this (although i would speculate that the majority of its playerbase is male) while Battlefield 5 is blatant pandering. 

Video games have been and still are male dominated and that is just fine ... no one complains about female dominated industries like fashion / etc not having enough male representation. 



I think it's clear, the sensation of an overrepresentation of female central figures in the video game medium comes more from the medias than the community itself.

We're still in an industry with a core male demographic (not adding mobile players to the equation), so it should be expected that most games would try to represent and cater to the majority of said community.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

As far as I can tell, DICE never "pandered" to SJWs with the inclusion of women. They simply wanted there to be more options for people to play as the gender they prefer. It didn't turn inherently political *until* the backlash, and even then I don't recall any specific statement from DICE regarding feminism. People made it political and then went from there, reverse engineering the discussion. It reminds me of how when Star Wars Episode 7 was releasing, I automatically assumed that Rey and Finn were just ways to pander to an audience, not realizing the irony behind judging people based on their race or sex.

Of course the counter-argument to this is that, some pandering is just so blatantly obvious that it is easy to criticize. News to me, considering I have not seen a single tweet that was inherently "SJW". The closest thing is a tweet about inviting Anita Sarkeesian to DICE ... 6 years ago, and one where they congratulate her 4.5 years ago. Wow, shocking damnation of DICE.

People want "diverse" characters to be given a reason to exist, when many stereotypical characters are not given the same requirements. I think it says a lot that we have gotten to a point where we are so concerned about companies possibly having different ideologies than are own, that we start to say that diverse characters should either have an extremely detailed reason for existing, or should just fit into the background as if they were any character in any other game. So either you're one of the best written characters in games, championing the very purpose of having different perspectives in gaming, or you're a gay guy that is just a regular guy because obviously gay people are just like everyone else right? No happy medium.

The sad thing is that very little comes from genuine bigotry. It's just paranoia. This is what happens when you have to worry constantly about being force fed a message you don't agree with. And I don't agree with the message either. But frankly, there is so little correlation between art with a diverse cast and far-left ideas, either because A ) the creators are not far-left and the want for diversity (which is not mutually exclusive to such ideologies) is misinterpreted or because B ) the company's inspiration for having a diverse cast is from political discourse, but the product itself doesn't really reflect as such (I would say this is the case for Star Wars, because although Rey is a very overpowered protagonist, the age of modern blockbusters are kind of built on overpowered protagonists ... then again, I haven't seen any film after 7, who knows).

And goddamn am I tired of seeing people say that there is "no one that are mad at Battlefield 5 for having women", or that it's a "misunderstanding" or "wrongful accusation". It's so overplayed and wrong. People only jumped to this defense after the fact that these kind of statements were common. If you have to lie about what group of people agree with your ideas, then you yourself are letting it pass. It is better to just call it out when you see it instead of being insecure.

What "Anti-SJWs" fail to recognize is that they politicize just as much as SJWs do. I don't even think politics should be out of games (they are a core component of any art form), but if they just needlessly cause controversy and don't affect the medium in any positive way than I would say both sides need to just stop the silliness already. It sucks because most of the time I'm fighting for ideas that I don't even necessarily agree with, but it's because the counter-argument for those ideas are so sloppy and I think actively hurt discussion worse. I don't like DICE, I don't like Naughty Dog for the most part, and I do think that the idea of representation for representation's sake has some possible fault lines. At the same time, if you realize that representing under-represented people does not make the game automatically better, you can not go around championing that because you think a developer is pandering that it makes the product automatically worse.