Developers call out Ubisoft on their stance regarding playable female characters
- Thread starter MagicWithEarvin
- Start date
RockTurtle
Member
if the main character was female and they didn't have the time to include a male character, it would be the same thing (but without the hoopla) don't you agree?
The Librarian
Banned
To a much lesser degree, yes, but not as much because male protagonists significantly outnumber female.
Lightning4Ever
Banned
To be fair the female character in Reach was pretty much the exact same as the male except a little smaller.
It's not like they did much to differentiate them.
They should be applauded for what they're doing with Destiny right now.
Zoe
Member
Well, one's just a suit of armor.
Refresh my memory - what was DICE's excuse? Was it as insulting as Ubisoft's? Because this is the core complaint.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
Then
1.Play AC:Liberation
2.Play the seperate MP of the other games
3.Play another series
or
4.Wait for a sequel or even a dlc that features the a female main character.
The Librarian
Banned
Ascenion
Member
But that is what they always intended to do with Reach same with Mass Effect, which only just now got female animations. Assassin's Creed doesn't offer you a choice never has.
The Librarian
Banned
Neither did Halo up until Reach.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
And we shouldn't suddenly out of nowhere expect them to when they never implied it.
Zoe
Member
Did they motion cap a second actor's body and face? Did they design female versions of costumes?
The Librarian
Banned
I think so, yeah. Bungie had a motion capture studio by then and it was a big thing. At the very least, they copied Kat's walk. There's a lot of customizable armor in Reach.
Which leads me back to my original point: Bungie and other developers are doing it. So what's Ubisoft's excuse?
We can expect and we can demand, regardless of what they've implied. The status quo is no longer good enough for many people.
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
The same Bungie that people complained about when it came to over sexualizing Cortana? Don't think Bungie is the team you want to get behind in this fight.
Zoe
Member
Resources.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
This sounds so......... .. Let me not.
So that's the only choice I have huh? Play and old game for a system I may not have. Play a separate MP of another game I'm not interested...
OR wait to PAY to play as a women... Wow.
If this is how the generation is going to be where choice can only be rewarded elsewhere than a game you like and want to play just like everyone else... It's going to be one sad one indeed.
Vermillion
Banned
So why are we singling out Ubisoft?
LogicalFallacy
Member
If this hasn't been posted yet in the thread, I think it's valuable to the discussion.
http://ask.fm/daniel_floyd/answer/112932242651
http://ask.fm/daniel_floyd/answer/112932242651
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
But no one is. There excuse was bad so it deserves criticism. Are we going to pretend that Rockstar didn't get the same flack on an even larger scale? This gender discrimination in video games has been going on for a while, but people are sick of it. With the way social media is flourishing and how much everything you do and say can be held accountable at an even larger scale, this is definitely something that needs to be talked about and criticized. Say you didn't want women in the first place, don't use scaling technicalities as that excuse.
The Librarian
Banned
Stormhammer
Member
Well, this thread is about Ubisoft so it 's likely it will be the focus of the discussion.
Well, in my opinion I don't think a 5-6 hour FPS experience really needs the type of resources an open world game would.
We're not. We've had plenty of threads about issues like this and similar issues. This particular thread is focused on Ubisoft because it's based off a recent news story.
If someone wants to make another thread that's less specific, they're welcome to do so.
I guess then the question is if all games should be like Reach then and offer a female option. Not sure how you'd do that with a game like Last of Us though.
Also do many seem to demand actual female protagonist, not just optional ones. Afaik is Sarkeesian not all that happy with Femshep. And Nobel six from Reach is hardly a breakthrough in characterization. In fact am I not sure if he/she has more than three lines in the entire game
The Librarian
Banned
Nobody is saying strictly single-player games should have a female option. Because they're single-player.
I brought up Reach because it had a co-op component similar to AC: Unity.
How many people are developing this game again? If that's their excuse, it's either bullshit or their entire development process is a mess.
What's really bizarre about this to me is that previous Assasssin's Creed multiplayers had the option to play as a woman, so they aren't even holding up to the series' normal standards. This whole thing doesn't come across as sexist so much as some sort of bizarre incompetence.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
I would say there is more of having the option than just a straight female antagonist. But then again female antagonist are really cool. I feel female protagonist are also the most memorable.
RockTurtle
Member
was this a case of gender discrimination though?
i see the attitude here like this was a deliberate attack on inclusion, with Ubisoft's president twirling his moustache like a depression era villain " HAhaha that will show those women their place".
As i mentioned before, the fact that it could have been a male character being cut out and it wouldn't have been an issue due to "false equivalence" is mental gymnastics at best.
the field has become so abrasive that a simple decision like "i don't think we can meet deadline, cut this character" is now treated like social commentary instead of just technical negligence. jesus.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Same reasons as Ubi as I recall but they said it was a memory constraint as well.
Though it only applied to MP.
It ended up being dumb that they didn't have a single female model between the 3 factions in MP because in single player the main character(not player) is female, the American general you meet is a woman as is the helicopter pilot at the start of the game.
The Librarian
Banned
Campaign with skulls, meta-games, different difficulties that play vastly differently.
Comprehensive online multiplayer
Theater and screenshot support
Firefight
Forge, a map editor
Really? And you can take the same character into Firefight, multiplayer, and campaign.
Zoe
Member
We're no longer talking about multiplayer (which has been established as completely different in this game), we're talking about the main campaign. They started everything from scratch, took motion capping farther than in the previous games. It literally would be double the work to have a dual protagonist. It's a decision that has to be made at the start of development, and apparently it was a consideration before deemed to be too costly.
Ascenion
Member
That's a good read, but at this point I doubt they'd do it.
Yeah they have a lot of people, working on multiple games. This is a yearly series I can believe they didn't have the resources.
mentallyinept
Banned
Yeah, I would say that we are at the point, with large development houses anyway, that including character customization implies the choice of gender.
Everyone knows that it takes resources and time to do correctly, but it's part of the baseline.
Everyone knows that it takes resources and time to do correctly, but it's part of the baseline.
Huge gap in animation fidelity between the two games.
Simply making minor adaptations to existing rigs and animations may not be enough. I'd gather that a large chunk of the animations are mo-capped as well, which means re-doing mo-cap sessions, fixing those animations, etc. In addition to this, the complexity of the AC animation system is FAR beyond any comparable example. This is accentuated because the AC series is animation-driven to the point where it negatively impacts gameplay (try doing a 180; see how sluggish the responsiveness there is).
We also have no context as to what the competing features are. Ubisoft says there are 8000 animations to replace. For the sake of argument, let's say that 3000 of them ACTUALLY require changes to accommodate for a female frame. Let's also ignore the rigging process, texturing, modeling, VO, and more. That's still a lot of animation work, and the producers on the project have to ask:
Do we get more value out of a female character, or could we spend those animation resources on additional weapons? Better parkour? Bug-fixing? More clothing options?
We don't know any of these, but that's what comes up in any prioritization process. Ubisoft being a data-driven company, I wouldn't be surprised if they did market research into the importance of these features as well.
As someone who works with and speaks to animators, tech artists, engineers, and animation systems on a daily basis (with pedigrees like Blizzard, Vigil, Valve, Crytek, Pixar--these guys are no joke), I find it very insulting that anyone can trivialize the importance of properly done, high-fidelity animations. It's not easy. It's not a small job.
We don't know what the context is at Ubi, and they have no need to share it with us. I'm perfectly satisfied with their explanation.
3D animation is involved in literally none of those things you listed. That's design and engineering work.
I should also point out that Ubi having 2,600 people is completely irrelevant to the discussion.
Ubi is a publisher, as well as a collection of development houses. Bungie is a developer, not a publisher. If you want to make a comparison, add in Activision's entire support staff.
Zoe
Member
But customization only extends to clothing and weapons in this game. You can't change the build or features.
'We Have A Product For People Who Can't Access The Internet, It's Called Xbox 360'.
And developers are calling bullshit. But you are right, right?
Mr.Wreckless
Banned
I honestly don't believe this problem is as big as the Gaf and twitter rage would lead people here to believe. On numerous other sites I post on nobody is even discussing this Ubisoft controversy. I've never been in a discussion about female options in single or multiplayer and pretty much my entire friends circle is made of casual gamers, aka the majority of gamers.
It's quite jarring to see how big supposed issues are deemed to be here and then I go to other gaming forums and there is nothing.
mentallyinept
Banned
I missed this, buy why not? I thought in her video she liked her a lot, but wasn't happy with her lack of marketing.
AyaisMUsikWhore
Member
I've have worded it wrong. I understand that ubisoft isn't anti-femine because they aren't.
A male lead being cut out probably wouldn't have been an issue. Mostly because well, all we have are male leads everywhere. Cutting a male lead in favor for a female lead (which are rare cases), that would peak a lot of interest. Imo, it shows that they believe in adding diversity into their games, not as a secondary thought. The fact that they thought of it as a weakness to the vision and made an excuse to why they couldn't have added her is the problem. It's not like ubisoft doesn't care about their women audience, I'm sure they do. However this is one of those cases where honesty could have went a long way than to try to justify it in other means.
Not really that relevant though.
The only animation-impacting, non-sex personalization feature here is probably build. You can change facial features as much as you want, and generally you can still use the same animations (again, this also changes for sex). It's not easy work, guys = /
Zoe
Member
No, there's not. You're always playing the protagonist through SP and co-op.
There are people on both sides of the fence, as usual. I know people, even at my own company, who disagree dramatically on the issue.
As big as new as it is, it's clear they have a budget and limits. They've cut competitive multiplayer, for example.
Stormhammer
Member
That still does not compare, to me, to sheer size of say AC 4 and the amount of things you can do in that game as well.
Crossing Eden
Hello, my name is Yves Guillemot, Vivendi S.A.'s Employee of the Month!
But yea this game isn't the quo, Look how much they're changing and improving the formula in the series with this iteration.
http://blog.ubi.com/assassins-creed-unity-redefining-familiar/
It is not such a problem because my friends don't talk about it and I don't really care. Is it that what you are trying to say?
Tal Shiar Agent
Banned
Ascenion
Member
I'm not saying I'm right I'm just saying given the series annualization coupled with the fact they have 2 games releasing this year supposedly and at least 1 more in development, resource allocation probably is constrained. Its not an unbelievable claim. Its not justified but it is believable.