Support NeoGAF

[The Librarian]

From all the descriptions it sounds like co-op is seamless with the main campaign. If you want to play as a girl in the co-op, you have to be able to play as a girl for the main campaign.

I don't see why that would have to be the case.

 

[Zoe]

I don't see why that would have to be the case.

How can you change genders on the fly?

 

[Kinyou]

I don't see why that would have to be the case.

Because that's how ubisoft likes to make their games.

I don't know why far cry 4 has to be an open world game but that's just want they want to do

 

[Azih]

To repeat attacking people who are currently making games is just ass backwards. The solution isn't to badger current developers and forcing them into a design by committee approach that churns out generic pap. It's to encourage MORE developers to make MORE games which serve under-represented points of view.

 

[figadapaura]

Well Arno would have one story and "Arnette" would have another . I could go into more historical reasons why a female wouldn't work in this situation but I would prefer not to get banned. Also don't forget how diverse the Assassin's we've gotten before are just give them time.

You do know the most famous French assassin of the time was female, right? But I'd love to hear your reasons.

 

[ab.aeterno]

No what we should be doing is advocating for MORE games to be made that offer diverse perspectives.

There's nothing wrong with boy adventures like The Hangover in the movie world because there's also a ton of stuff like Bridesmaids.

There's nothing wrong with Ubisoft making CO OP JUMP IN CHARACTERS ON A SINGLE PLAYER CAMPAIGN being male or AC V featuring a male lead. The problem is that other games aren't being made which offer different perspectives.

Certainly there's nothing inherently wrong with the existence of games with straight white male protagonists; as you say, it is because this is the huge majority of all games being produced, even as the audience widens and expands and diversifies.

The problem is that everyone can argue to justify their non-inclusiveness for other games like you are for this game. Think about that: your argument is "ok not this one, do it with others." But everyone argues that about every game. It becomes the "not in my backyard" argument.

 

[Fuchsdh]

This entire kerflulffle (and the sentiments that started it) are mind-bogglingly stupid. No duh it takes more resources to create another set of characters and with mocap, et al, do a AAA job animating it. But it's also not some crazy, mythic cost that Ubisoft can't burden either. If you want to say, "adding female characters would cost more money so we decided not to do it," just say it plainly. You'd still get flak, but at least you were being honest. This "it's just so hard!" excuse isn't going to fly, especially when there's a history (within the same franchise!) of that not being true.

 

[Azih]

I don't see why that would have to be the case.

That's like saying "I don't see why every piece of media ever created shouldn't have both male and female leads". It is absurd.

 

[figadapaura]

To repeat attacking people who are currently making games is just ass backwards. The solution isn't to badger current developers and forcing them into a design by committee approach that churns out generic pap. It's to encourage MORE developers to make MORE games which serve under-represented points of view.

Isn't this what they already do? What people are arguing against?

 

[Infinite]

they could have, but why this particular title?

Why not this particular title?

The whole point it shouldn't be treated as blanked priority for all games though

I'm not saying that

Sure, but 1. We shouldn't downplay how much work would be involved
2. It shouldn't be used as an attack on Ubisoft.

If ubisoft wanted to do it it would be done. They would have also been doing this since day one of development. Now since they haven't considered it it would be a strain on resources at this point. Also people aren't attacking the company they are merely criticizing them

Because it's literally not a priority when there's so little to gain. And that's not an issue.

I strongly disagree and it is an issue for many people hence the length of this thread and the topic at hand.

 

[benny_a]

I don't see why that would have to be the case.

You never change your character model in Watch Dogs or AFAIK AC:U. You just look differently to other players.

They do their seamless multiplayer this way to be more seamless, I guess. If they made it like GTA5 then you would be right, as the base allows for character switching but this game does not work that way.

 

[The Librarian]

How can you change genders on the fly?

Because it's a videogame.

Because that's how ubisoft likes to make their games.

I don't know why far cry 4 has to be an open world game but that's just want they want to do

What you mention about Far Cry is a false equivalence, but if Ubisoft doesn't think they can change it for story reasons, then, yeah, I disagree with that. I don't think that's a good reason.

 

[Oppo]

So are Nintendo going to offer the female Link model that we thought we were getting, now that it is Required Geometry in games?™

I'm kidding. Sort of.

 

[weralacroix]

...

 

[glimmerman]

We are talking about games. This is something we're going to continue talking about. Games are a medium that exist within the context of the culture. Like every other medium on the planet, they're open for critique on any number of levels, from technical issues to content issues.

But we're NOT talking about games. The whole point of this thread is to point out that Ubisoft is failing a social agenda

As for how many people have been banned? Lots and lots of people, largely because they're engaging in dishonest argumentation -- as you are doing here by drawing an imaginary bright line between technical and content complaints -- or because they attempt to shut down conversation on the topic, which you are also doing here.

One of the things I really dislike about gaf is how often disagreements, particularly with a mod, end up with a banning.

If you don't like discussing these issues, I can only suggest that you don't discuss them. GAF will continue to discuss them, and we will continue to ban people who engage in open bigotry, people who attempt to stifle discussion, or people who argue in a disingenuous manner, just as we do in all threads.

I don't like discussing these issues under threat of a banning. So I'll take myself out of this thread.

 

[Azih]

Certainly there's nothing inherently wrong with the existence of games with straight white male protagonists; as you say, it is because this is the huge majority of all games being produced, even as the audience widens and expands and diversifies.

The problem is that everyone can argue to justify their non-inclusiveness for other games like you are for this game. Think about that: your argument is "ok not this one, do it with others." But everyone argues that about every game. It becomes the "not in my backyard" argument.

Not at all. You're still advocating for current franchises to be modified to appease a certain segment of inclusiveness. I don't like that because it overrides authorial intent and can only be done either by a design by committee creating incredibly generic characters that can be body swapped any which way or creating a world absurd enough that it doesn't matter that a female character acts like a chauvinistic Arnold Schwarzenegger (Saint's Row). GTA V is fine, AC V is fine. The problem isn't with them the problem is what isn't being made to fill out a diverse catalog in the AAA gaming space.

 

[Kinyou]

What you mention about Far Cry is a false equivalence, but if Ubisoft doesn't think they can change it for story reasons, then, yeah, I disagree with that. I don't think that's a good reason.

No it's not a false equivalence. Both are design decisions, one is the decision to go for an open world game the other is to go for a seamless integration of coop into single player. If the game would feature a female protagonist it wouldn't be possible to play as a male either. The design decision is not about not wanting to include females.

 

[ab.aeterno]

Or alternatively we can just accept that a game includes the content that it does and move on.

Or alternatively we can criticize the content a developer chooses put in a game. People have no problem criticizing developers who include seemingly redundant multiplayer modes, or DLC, or microtransactions, or not enough maps, or whatever else. You're drawing a vague and unnecessary line in the sand and acting as though we should just shrug our shoulders and just accept whatever gets made.

Fuck that. I will criticize developers for their design decisions on this just like I do when they design a game to encourage microtransactions. They get no special exemption from criticism just because of some shirts division you've decided to invent because you can't stand the idea of "agendas" in your games.

Besides, if you want to separate games as a medium from their ability to exist in the culture it anything meaningful, then they're not an art form, they're disposable entertainment, and should be treated as such.

 

[Azih]

Isn't this what they already do? What people are arguing against?

I don't think Ezio is generic enough that you just do a skin swap with a female one and the result wouldn't be incredibly jilted and weird.

 

[Zoe]

Because it's a videogame.

I thought this game was striving for realism.

 

[Future]

I don't agree that it is trivial to add female characters. But admittedly, out of the 6 console assassin creeds you'd think that maybe they'd consider it once. I mean yeah, they did it on psp, but why not on the more main stream console version?

But the answer is the same for every other developer that doesn't bother. Only games with create a character have female options. Vast majority of games have male heroes. Ubisoft didn't build a create a character for this game. Instead they have one customizable main male hero. If you are gonna trash ubisoft, should actually be trashing the industry as a whole

 

[TheWatchGuard]

You do know the most famous French assassin of the time was female, right? But I'd love to hear your reasons.

Yes she was a great assassin...killed one guy then was executed for it. Well without offending anyone I would say besides being treated worse, using seduction as a tool, not getting respected by men, the list goes on and on why the world was a terrible place for minorities and women back then but that's historical wise, they could do whatever they want in a game. That doesn't change the fact short of erasing Arno and making a female yall wouldn't be happy.

 

[Impeccable]

I thought this game was striving for realism.

Animus is real?

 

[Galactic Fork]

True, but in that regard the cost argument gains IMO a little value again. Like would anyone be satisfied by just seeing their coop partner look like a woman? I'd assume most people would want to actually play as one. So by losing a female stand in there isn't much lost. (As long as the game still features good female side characters)

I would. Since it's the seamless kind that fits into the single player, the assassins that join you are from your game world. You are saying there isn't a loss to vanish possible female assassins from your game world. Especially since you like to talk about their artistic vision.

 

[Infinite]

I thought this game was striving for realism.

Nah it's not

 

[The Librarian]

No it's not a false equivalence. Both are design decisions, one is going for an open world game the other is going for a seamless integration of coop into single player. If the game would feature a female protagonist it wouldn't be possible to play as a male either. The design decision is not about not wanting to include female.

I think your Far Cry comparison is flawed because that has to do with the gameplay more than who you play as between modes, and I get what you're saying about design. What I'm saying is that doesn't really matter to me. I'd still like the option of playing as a girl.

 

[Zoe]

Animus is real?

No need to be pendatic. The whole premise of the series is living out past lives. Magically changing genders on the fly doesn't work with that.

 

[Orayn]

We're here to talk about games. Isn't Offtopic for all the politics and social agendas?

Jesus fucking Christ.

Games are works of art that often have stories and characters. Discussing those specific aspects of games is discussing games.

 

[Kinyou]

I would. Since it's the seamless kind that fits into the single player, the assassins that join you are from your game world. You are saying there isn't a loss to vanish possible female assassins from your game world. Especially since you like to talk about their artistic vision.

There can still be female assassins going around, they'd either just appear mostly in cut scenes or would have less extensive animations

 

[figadapaura]

I don't think Ezio is generic enough that you just do a skin swap with a female one and the result wouldn't be incredibly jilted and weird.

You could say the same about most male leads tbh, that doesn't mean they're not generic.

Generic doesn't mean that you can slap any gender on a person and it'll make sense.

Yes she was a great assassin...killed one guy then was executed for it.

That you know of.

Well without offending anyone I would say besides being treated worse, using seduction as a tool, not getting respected by men, the list goes on and on why the world was a terrible place for minorities and women back then but that's historical wise, they could do whatever they want in a game. That doesn't change the fact short of erasing Arno and making a female yall wouldn't be happy.

Did you think Aveline was completely out of place?

 

[besada]

But we're NOT talking about games. The whole point of this thread is to point out that Ubisoft is failing a social agenda

We are talking about games. We're specifically talking about a game, and what people want from that game.

One of the things I really dislike about gaf is how often disagreements, particularly with a mod, end up with a banning.

I almost never ban anyone I'm discussing with, so I'm not sure what you're talking about. You're welcome, like everyone, to PM me if you'd like to discuss moderation.

 

[ab.aeterno]

Not at all. You're still advocating for current franchises to be modified to appease a certain segment of inclusiveness. I don't like that because it overrides authorial intent and can only be done either by a design by committee creating incredibly generic characters that can be body swapped any which way or creating a world absurd enough that it doesn't matter that a female character acts like a chauvinistic Arnold Schwarzenegger (Staint's Row). GTA V is fine, AC V is fine. The problem isn't with them the problem is what isn't being made to fill out a diverse catalog in the AAA gaming space.

The reason I dislike "authorial intent" as an argument is because it's often misused as a shield from criticism, and never covers the other authorial decisions of the company for it's product, like microtransactions.

I'm not advocating for changing existing characters, by why does it have to be new franchises instead of just new games? How can you justify it for series that change protagonists so frequently that there's little excuse good it except tradition? GTA had no problem including a black protagonist in a game in an existing series, after all, so why can't that same sort of change happen again?

Am I misunderstanding your argument?

 

[Tigress]

That doesn't change the fact short of erasing Arno and making a female yall wouldn't be happy.

Uh, I'd be happy if they let me customize the character I appear to everyone else as female.

No one here is saying Arno should be female. They're saying when you get to customize your character (which I'm taking means who you appear to other players), you can choose female as one of the options.

 

[Glass Shark]

No need to be pendatic. The whole premise of the series is living out past lives. Magically changing genders on the fly doesn't work with that.

This would actually be a fantastic conceit for an Assassin's Creed game. A modern-day male descendant having to deal with being in a woman's body in a much less gender-enlightened past.

 

[Nesotenso]

I don't see why that would have to be the case.

I thought for each player their avatar is the main character while the others around them are generic dudes.

 

[Galactic Fork]

There can still be female assassins going around, they'd either just appear mostly in cut scenes or would have less extensive animations

They'll just never assist you when you need help doing assassinning. Seems to be a compromise of artistic vision.

 

[Zoe]

This would actually be a fantastic conceit for an Assassin's Creed game. A modern-day male descendant having to deal with being in a woman's body in a much less gender-enlightened past.

Sure, but that's not what she's asking for.

 

[The Librarian]

No need to be pendatic. The whole premise of the series is living out past lives. Magically changing genders on the fly doesn't work with that.

From what I remember about the Assassin's Creed games I've played, they live out memories through genetic memory. The basic premise of the game is, essentially, magical.

 

[Impeccable]

No need to be pendatic. The whole premise of the series is living out past lives. Magically changing genders on the fly doesn't work with that.

How do we explain customizable assassins though? If we are all the same main character but we all have different past lives, how does that work?

How are we all the same guy four times in one memory? Why can't we be female in that case?

"Animus" is a fair answer, heh.

 

[Crossing Eden]

I don't know the precise nature of the co-op, but in co-op I don't see why they can't give the option to play as a girl. I don't care if it doesn't fit with the story.

I'll break it down for you because you really don't seem to know that much about this game or the series in the first place.
1.AC games have always had a set narrative, a main character with a backstory, personality, character development etc

2.AC games have always taken place during historical periods. The point is that we're supposed to believe that these characters actually existed and actually affected history during their respective time periods. In other words, it's historical fiction.

3.AC games, particularly this one, have ALWAYS had one main playable character during the of the games with few exceptions.

4.Thanks to next gen consoles and the popularity of games like Dark Souls, things like seamless multiplayer is becoming popular.

5.Seamless multiplayer is one of the best things in Watch Dogs, when people come into your game to play with you, it's all seamless. They see themselves as the main character. You see yourself as the main character. They see YOU as an generic npc. They can't see themselves as anyone other than the main character. A downside of this is that it looks awkward when some npcs like a chubby women is using the same animations as a the main character who is a fit male. This includes parkour moves and melee combat.

6.In ACUnity, they're for the first time incorporating seamless multiplayer into the series SP. And like in Watch Dogs, YOU always see yourself as the main character. However, they go one step further and allow you to customize your gear, which includes weapons, outfits, skill points etc, which is also a first for the series.

7.The animation quality bar is at an all time high for the series in ACUnity.

8.In AC games the environments were created in a 1:3 scale, in AC Unity, thanks to next gen only development, they were able to create the buildings in 1:1 scale.

9.Due to the 1:1 scale, they had to complete revamp nearly every aspect of the game.

10.So developers created 8000+ new animations for the main character alone

11.Now back to multiplayer integration. During the multiplayer, you can the outfits and gear that players chose to wear/use in their game.

12.To keep the quality of the animation at the all time high that I mentioned earlier, they decided to just swap out the face of the character that you see your friends as.

13.If they would have created a female face, it would look awkward like in Watch Dogs because they were all specifically created for the MC, who is a male with a set narrative. The series does not allow you to change your gender because it's not an rpg like Mass Effect

14.Not only that, but this game has a 2014 release date and has been in development for three years. They would've had to either lower the quality of the female animations, or create ones at the same high bar as the MC. That's just not possible with the time.

15.The kicker is that the person playing would never be aware that they would be playing as a female in the first place. Meaning that the effort involved in a female character and somehow creating technology where the player has different animations onscreen than what other players see is just no worth it. Nor does it have any benefits besides a pat on the back from people who most likely weren't as excited for the game as the fans of the game/a very small increase in sales.

 

[RockTurtle]

Uh, I'd be happy if they let me customize the character I appear to everyone else as female.

No one here is saying Arno should be female. They're saying when you get to customize your character (which I'm taking means who you appear to other players), you can choose female as one of the options.

then at that point it's not telling a character's story, it becomes another "choose your own adventure" type game.

it might come to a point where you can't make a character centric title unless its anything BUT a white male.

 

[Oersted]

I thought this game was striving for realism.

Besides female representation. At this point, creative freedom kicks in.

 

[TheWatchGuard]

Uh, I'd be happy if they let me customize the character I appear to everyone else as female.

No one here is saying Arno should be female. They're saying when you get to customize your character (which I'm taking means who you appear to other players), you can choose female as one of the options.

You don't get to customize your damn character, I've said it, other posters have said it, Ubisoft has said it, even Kotaku said it all you get to do is pick outfits, skills, and weapons. I posted the link a few pages back.

Also as far as Aveline goes I just bought it last night since I just got my vita. I like the game so far but I'll keep you up to date on my impressions.

 

[Kinyou]

They'll just never assist you when you need help doing assassinning. Seems to be a compromise of artistic vision.

No, they could still do something similar to brotherhood where they swoop down from the skies. Would probably not need extensive animations just for that.

I think your Far Cry comparison is flawed because that has to do with the gameplay more than who you play as between modes, and I get what you're saying about design. What I'm saying is that doesn't really matter to me. I'd still like the option of playing as a girl.

OK, I guess that's just a different standpoint then, because I feel like the gameplay gains something from a seamless inclusion

 

[figadapaura]

then at that point it's not telling a character's story, it becomes another "choose your own adventure" type game.

it might come to a point where you can't make a character centric title unless its anything BUT a white male.

No, it's just like multiplayer already is.

 

[SocksForWoks]

I can see how this outcry makes sense as one of the most famous assassins of the French Revolution was a woman.

But is historical accuracy really that desired for a video game?

 

[Ascenion]

Uh, I'd be happy if they let me customize the character I appear to everyone else as female.

No one here is saying Arno should be female. They're saying when you get to customize your character (which I'm taking means who you appear to other players), you can choose female as one of the options.

See the problem is they don't give you that option. It's seamless co-op, therefore it is restricted by the story because you never leave the story. You can't customize him to be a woman because he isn't that kind of character and it isn't that kind of game.

 

[Bucca]

You don't get to customize your damn character, I've said it, other posters have said it, Unison has said it, even Kotaku said it all you get to do is pick outfits, skills, and weapons. I posted the link a few pages back.

Should seriously be put in the op or something, a lot of people don't seem to realize this.

And if that WERE the case, people would rather have OTHER people see them as a female than themselves?

I don't get it, honestly.

 

[ab.aeterno]

But we're NOT talking about games. The whoOne of the things I really dislike about gaf is how often disagreements, particularly with a mod, end up with a banning.

I don't like discussing these issues under threat of a banning. So I'll take myself out of this thread.

What's problematic is hiding under the imagined spectre of mod wrath for just trying to express yourself to avoid discussion. People aren't banned for expressing a well argued position, they're banned for being disingenuous and dishonest in their arguments. If you want to continue to argue about the problem of having to satisfy all "agendas" if we start being inclusive, go ahead, but you need to actually be capable of arguing that.

This would actually be a fantastic conceit for an Assassin's Creed game. A modern-day male descendant having to deal with being in a woman's body in a much less gender-enlightened past.

That is a legitimately cool idea.

 

[Orayn]

I can see how this outcry makes sense as one of the most famous assassins of the French Revolution was a woman.

But is historical accuracy really that desired for a video game?

Funny how some people suddenly speak out against historical accuracy when it happens to make the game more diverse.