While you list many fine games that women can enjoy equally well, I think Heather (and I) is looking for games with more depth (IE: an actual narrative) to be made with more cross appeal. 

Gamerace, A book can say a lot, but it doesn't mean it's saying much.

It all depends on who is reading, this goes into individual reference, some are more wide affecting, more known as experiences these individual references help a reader to relate to what they are reading, in this case the narrative and it is because of individual reference points new references can be drawn because a conclusion was gathered.

It isn't as complex as creating something with depth, it's about relation.

That's why I've been saying demographics don't actually exist in the context of games, because games don't have narratives. Now if she was saying 90% of games were sports games and she hates them, then there would be nothing to argue about, that's her opinion. But she is speaking for all woman kind and is speaking against all man kind involved in gaming, she's simply placing her opinion as fact. I'm saying that she is wrong on all accounts.

1. Men are not neanderthals, men do like to learn, men don't have to always be in a superior position.

2. Teenage boys are not stupid, they are consumers, they know what they like and they buy it, inadvertently she's cursed the sacred rule of sales; "the customer is always right."

Sales isn't her business, she should probably find a new profession anyway. V_V

At this point I'm not interested in her supporters on this site, I'm about 70% sure that she's wrong and seeking attention or is frustrated for her lively-hood.

I stopped reading after seeing Citizen Kane being mentioned. I hate that movie more than any movie ever. It is one of the worse movies of all time.

Games are pretty damn diverse just as much as movies and music.  I see no point to this crappy rant.

@dib8rman - Did you even read it? She's clearly refering to and speaking only in terms of game developers, not men in general. She didn't call men neanderthals or any of that you're suggesting.

She clearly states game developers (95% of which are male, granted) avoid putting responsibility, introspection, intimacy, and intellectual discovery into games. In that she is right.

Her point is that the industry is still acting like adolescents because that's what it mostly displays - adolescent fantasies. Worse when it comes to female games - they're all pre-teen fantasies, not even adolescent.

Obviously games like pac-man and Wii Sports are not covered, she's clearly talking about games with a narrative. And while there are a handful of exceptions she makes a valid point.

She's not man bashing. She's bashing the industry for not thinking in broader context than just appealing to the 14-24 male demographic. Yeah, sure that demographic buys games. But so does everyone else if you give them a reason too.

Gamerace, I did read it, my perspective is that, gaming and narratives aren't one in the same, her issue is with narratives and apparantly so were your yours from:

"While you list many fine games that women can enjoy equally well, I think Heather (and I) is looking for games with more depth (IE: an actual narrative) to be made with more cross appeal. "

My point is that context:
"Chaplin traced the paucity of more mature content in games to four basic ideas that frighten men the most: responsibility, introspection, intimacy, and intellectual discovery."

Yes, sadly I did read it.

Edit-

I can't dance around the issue much more though, because eventually my soles will be sullied, I can say that anyone insulting her isn't proving her point, they are just proving they are on par with her as far as whatever her 'point' is based on the perception of someone who would think her point would be proven with their comments.

From your point of view though: I'll comment about the industry from the narrative end. An action game will always be action, be it Lara Croft or Uncharted's Drake, the narrative places the main character as Cannon, and plays on the genders weaknesses and strengths. In Lara's case she has her emotions towards her past to overcome and Drake has his naive eagerness to put his safety second to overcome.

From this side of the argument, she just seemed to make a mountain out of a mole hill and of course that's one example.

The source of this argument comes from the same ignorance that fuels the arguments about casual gamers, except she's playing the elitist role and victim all in one.

- Heh edit Again

I forgot to mention that in Lara's case her issues deal with introspection of her past which apparantly this lady whose name I will not remember has no problem detecting and appreciating, however Drakes case probably seems macho and power hungry but to guys it's just what they would do if they could after all it is fantasy.

The above paragraph is just an example of creative writings complexity, understanding relativity circumnavigates the complex demands that 'deep pandering plots' erupt with.

Fantastic post and pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter. (Though I'd love to get more into the sociopathy of this drama queen's market-illiterate navel-gazing, I'll leave it at this.)

Good post and fair enough.

Now it's not clear if 'Frighten men' is her quote or IGN's poor paraphrasing.

I do think 'intellectual discovery' is generally missing in game narratives which was her point though.

However you do identify the main problem with her whole rant - most games really have no narrative at all, and in most that do it's just a flimsy excuse for action.  Looking at it strickly from that perspective, yeah, she sounds like a stupid b----.

But would it kill someone to make a game that has those qualities?  It might surprise and sell a few million.  I'm sure most doubt that.  But then who thought Nintendogs would sell 22m?  Or the immense success of Brain Age?  Or WiiFit?  Times are achanging.

The writer is missing out on something about the game industry that is very important: the technology is still evolving by leaps and bounds. Within a few years the general standards of movies and rock and roll were set in stone. Yes, innovation still occurred, but you didn't have to shell out for a new projector or record player every five years. Once the nature of the industry stops being about the next big thing in hardware then it can start being about creating masterpieces. Plus, there have been many attempts and they tend to fall flat. You only have to pay $10 to get into a movie today (a mere 100 times as much as "back in the day" thanks to gov spending and the Federal Reserve). If Spielberg's next masterpiece really is a game, like EA wishes, then price of entry is hundreds if you don't own the console and still $50-60 if you do. Maybe once these issues are resolved, then we can see some advances.

So it's either THAT time of the month, OR her boyfriend just cheated on her lol.

Maybe she'll like that game.