Support NeoGAF

[Demon Ice]

I wouldn't say Rockstar is more than capable of writing female characters extremely well. But then again, I don't think Rockstar is particularly talented at writing, well, anything.

Fair enough, and you're more than entitled to that opinion, but the main issue posters are having with Karkador is s/he's making claims like

Marginalizing 50% of the human race (and game consumers) seems like a fair thing to ask questions about.

and that's a bit ridiculous. Claiming that R* are going out of their way to maliciously "marginalize" the entire female gender smacks of a blatant persecution complex.

 

[Madness]

Lol, this game is going to sell like gangbusters and be an instant classic and be remembered for a long time. They know what they're doing and they had a specific story to tell.

You want to change the ratio of protagonists in games, want to have games be more inclusive, you're free to take up games development and do things differently.

At the end of the day, they made the game they wanted to make. They'll tell the story they wanted to tell. They shouldn't be forced to make a story they don't want to, because you feel it would've been better.

 

[The Albatross]

They call GTA games "open world" games.

In an open world, I should be able to dress however I like. I should be able to cut my hair however I like. I should be able to fuck anyone I like. And I should even be able to change my gender.

If you remove all that, because of "reasons", then don't call it open world. Simple as that.

I think that you have a different impression of "open world" than what everybody else has. Sure, there are some open world games that do let you customize your character, but requiring a character creation system for a game to be considered open-world is completely arbitrary and probably the least important factor for that game. For instance, MGS5 is considered an open-world game, Assassins Creed is an open-world game, Test Drive: Unlimited is considered an open-world game, Red Dead Redemption is an open-world game.

None of these games have character customization beyond maybe simple palette swaps and clothing options, none of them allow you to change your gender, none of them allow you to "fuck whoever you want."

If your requirements for an open world game is that you can "fuck whoever you want" then no game is an open world game for you because no games allow you to "fuck whoever you want."

None of the things you listed (character customizations, gender, and "fucking whoever you want") are things that have anything to do with "open world" games. The only prerequisite for an open world game is that it... shockingly... features an open world.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Nooo that's sexist!

/sarcasm

Everything gets people in a rage these days. A male lead? OMG SEXISM! Barbie dolls marketed at girls? OMG SEXISM!! Lara Croft is hot? OMG objectifying women! Lara Croft dies violently? Etc etc

Personally, I think a lot of the dialogue gets misconstrued. And further, if "outrage" (and I use quotes because I think the word is used very disingenuously) initiates what is very often a contentious and sometimes embarrassing conversation, then "outrage" at that "outrage" is what compounds it. Quite often, I think the initial assertion is merely something posited for consideration. After all, it's not absurd to question why the lead can't be female -- there doesn't need to be a good reason for why the character should be female. It's just something to ponder if the topic is of interest to you. Likewise, it's perfectly valid to assert that it's okay for the character to be male.

There doesn't need to be a giant argument every time the topic is broached. And before we throw our hands up in the air and blame any one side, it's beneficial to try to examine more closely the conversation taking place. Personally -- at this point without having played GTA V -- I neither know nor care whether not opting for a female lead or option is a mistake. But it doesn't help the conversation when the immediate reaction is just "oh boy, here we go again."

I don't see what's so absurd about some sort of nuanced position wherein I conclude "I think it's reasonable for feminists to question why the game can't feature a female lead while also concluding that it's reasonable to give Rockstar the benefit of the doubt and assume that they have their reasons for doing so."

 

[Zen_Arcade]

While all of that is true, this industry doesn't exactly lack stories about masculinity. Even the games with best, most mature stories in recent memory like The Last of Us and Walking Dead, are mainly about being a man and being a father. That's awesome but makes you wish for some variety.

I completely agree. I totally understand the want for variety in PCs in video games. In fact it's a concern I share. I was merely pointing out that it is not fucked up to want to create a video game that explores men and their societal standards of masculinity. No matter if it's a tired story that many have tried to explore already. There is a vast difference between something trite and expected and something that is fucked up.

To the top part, are far as social aspects goes, what is and what isn't is kind of up in the air.

as far as the bolded goes, maybe if GTA finally wanted to tell that nuanced story, they could have tried that. telling that story from a female perspective rather than Not one not two, but three three cleche's. They have shown themselves fully capable of designeiing, not generic "masculine" female characters. Why not go for it? I do not see how masculinity is is automatically assigned to the types of things you do in GTA , besides hit on women. And not even that, since lesbians exists.

I agree. Like I said its perfectly fine to think that a female perspective of masculinity is something that should be explored. I'm just saying that it's not "fucked up" to want to use masculinity and it's perception from the eyes of a man as your driving force of your story. You could explore a female perspective of it, but it would be a completely different game with completely different interactions. If that's not the game they were looking to make then I don't think it's fair to say their position is fucked up.

Fucked up should be used to describe some of the responses in this thread and their attitudes toward putting women in games in general (Such as the guy who said girls should just go play with Barbies), not to describe a quote from someone who is speaking about a particular vision for a singular game.

Could R* have used a female perspective to explore how masculinity effects women? Absolutely. Would it have made it a better game? Very possibly. Are they fucked up for choosing not to and focusing on one type of persons perspective because that's what they envisioned while making it? No, not at all.

 

[richiek]

Lol, this game is going to sell like gangbusters and be an instant classic and be remembered for a long time. They know what they're doing and they had a specific story to tell.

.

And you know the game is going to be an "instant classic" because you've played it already, right?

 

[Tarsul]

It's a better (easier to write-) story with guys. It fits better with the target audience. That's all.

Imagine a single female player character. Especially in a GTA-game there would be sooooooo many pitfalls that are simply not there when they have dudes. (is it a strong female character, is she abused, is she too sexy, is she acting like a dude etc. pp.)

Just know this: A story about a woman has to be more politically correct than a story about a guy.

And political correctness has no place in GTA. Not saying that a female PC is out of the question, just saying that GTA lends itself more to male PCs .

 

[deli2000]

I don't see what's so absurd about some sort of nuanced position wherein I conclude "I think it's reasonable for feminists to question why the game can't feature a female lead while also concluding that it's reasonable to give Rockstar the benefit of the doubt and assume that they have their reasons for doing so."

This is pretty much my opinion on things. Of course more female lead characters is a good thing for gaming. But why should we demonize a company when they've adequately explained why they aren't?

 

[Pau]

Fair enough, and you're more than entitled to that opinion, but the main issue posters are having with Karkador is s/he's making claims like

and that's a bit ridiculous. Claiming that R* are going out of their way to maliciously "marginalize" the entire female gender smacks of a blatant persecution complex.

But I do think that's a fair thing to ask questions about? I don't think most developers marginalize us completely intentionally. It's something they just don't really think about. So I think it's fair to ask them questions so that they do start thinking about it and so that they can change (if they want to).

It's a better (easier to write-) story with guys. It fits better with the target audience. That's all.

Imagine a single female player character. Especially in a GTA-game there would be sooooooo many pitfalls that are simply not there when they have dudes. (is it a strong female character, is she abused, is she too sexy, is she acting like a dude etc. pp.)

Just know this: A story about a woman has to be more politically correct than a story about a guy.

And political correctness has no place in GTA. Not saying that a female PC is out of the question, just saying that GTA lends itself more to male PCs .

This wouldn't be the case if there were more female characters in general. Then writers (and audiences) wouldn't have to act like a single female character is representative of her whole gender.

It's an easy problem to solve: Have more diverse female characters. Period.

 

[Karkador]

Jesus, looking back at the vitriol in 2004 at the very concept of GTA having a black character is just cringeworthy.

And you still can't see why people like me find the vitriol against a female character to be as cringeworthy?

Fair enough, and you're more than entitled to that opinion, but the main issue posters are having with Karkador is s/he's making claims like

and that's a bit ridiculous. Claiming that R* are going out of their way to maliciously "marginalize" the entire female gender smacks of a blatant persecution complex.

Hey, I never they were being malicious about it. It's just think it's a bad decision.

You want to change the ratio of protagonists in games, want to have games be more inclusive, you're free to take up games development and do things differently.

This is a pretty common fallacy in these threads. Men aren't incapable of writing women, as women aren't incapable of writing men. Also, good luck convincing women to join your club when you continue to make things that continue to tell them it's not for them.

It's a better (easier to write-) story with guys. It fits better with the target audience. That's all.

If Rockstar wants to take the easy route with their writing, that's fine, but they then shouldn't get the accolades of being excellent writers.

 

[Nexas]

This is pretty much my opinion on things. Of course more female lead characters is a good thing for gaming. But why should we demonize a company when they've adequately explained why they aren't?

Who is demonizing them. All I see are people questioning the validity of his statement and giving possible explanations for how a female could work in the framework of GTAV's narrative. At most people are expressing disappointment with his statement.

This is always the problem with these threads about women in games. People always seem to see any challenge to the status quo as vitriolic in nature when they are simply trying to have a discussion.

 

[Evil Monkey DTT]

I think the issue of every woman in gaming having bodies that are physically impossible and existing purely for sex is a real discussion. If a story doesn't demand a female PC then why should it, maybe next time it will but I would rather have a good story then a poor one.

 

[Gaz_RB]

I used to hate these types of threads because I felt like they never really got anywhere.

But I think it's interesting and healthy to hear from people who you disagree with or even really off base. It puts things in perspective and helps you learn and understand your stance on certain issues (or non issues) better.

I disagree with some of you that think this is a big deal, but I tend not to get worked up about these things. Sometimes people talk a little too much like their opinions are facts and that bothers me. That being said, I think that without people to disagree with, this forum would be pretty boring.

"I have this opinion"

"I have that same opinion! High Five!"

"So now what?"

 

[KePoW]

Hey, I never they were being malicious about it. It's just think it's a bad decision.

"Bad decision" in what way? Like you think GTA5 is going to be a commercial and sales failure because of the decision?

 

[Carcetti]

Personally, I think a lot of the dialogue gets misconstrued. And further, if "outrage" (and I use quotes because I think the word is used very disingenuously) initiates what is very often a contentious and sometimes embarrassing conversation, then "outrage" at that "outrage" is what compounds it. Quite often, I think the initial assertion is merely something posited for consideration. After all, it's not absurd to question why the lead can't be female -- there doesn't need to be a good reason for why the character should be female. It's just something to ponder if the topic is of interest to you. Likewise, it's perfectly valid to assert that it's okay for the character to be male.

Outrage card is pulled out a lot on GAF these days. In many of these cases there's no outrage, only a tired sigh of 'oh same old stuff again.

I guess it's easier to discount someone's opinion if you imagine them as a frothing fanatic raging at 'life's simple unchanging truths'.

 

[richiek]

Who is demonizing them. All I see are people questioning the validity of his statement and giving possible explanations for how a female could work in the framework of GTAV's narrative. At most people are expressing disappointment with his statement.

This is always the problem with these threads about women in games. People always seem to see any challenge to the status quo as vitriolic in nature when they are simply trying to have a discussion.

Exactly. As I said earlier, certain gamers get overly defensive when it's pointed out that games could use some more diversity and see any type of discussion as their hobby being threatened by a bunch of men hating feminists.

 

[Karkador]

"Bad decision" in what way? Like you think GTA5 is going to be a commercial and sales failure because of the decision?

A bad decision as in a bad writing/creative decision. It's an opinion, which I've substantiated it with posts in this thread.

 

[Kinyou]

Don't really see a problem here. It just seems like this didn't fit with the story they wanted to tell. And shoving in some token female would probably help no one.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

Apart from the fact that R* is completly against focus testing in games. Yes.

Really?

 

[freenudemacusers]

Outrage card is pulled out a lot on GAF these days. In many of these cases there's no outrage, only a tired sigh of 'oh same old stuff again.

I guess it's easier to discount someone's opinion if you imagine them as a frothing fanatic raging at 'life's simple unchanging truths'.

Seriously.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

In social aspects used to justify the exclusion of a group of people.

Yes,

Being used to identify, physical traits.

No.

If for some reason having a penis and broad shoulders is important in GTA fine, but if 4 and SA are any indicator. It isn't really.

Masculinity goes much farther than physical traits and it is pathetic that even needs to be stated. This is just getting stupid now.

 

[UltimaPooh]

A bad decision as in a bad writing/creative decision. It's an opinion, which I've substantiated it with posts in this thread.

How is it a bad creative writing decision if their decision was to tell a story about masculine gender roles through males?

It's only a bad creative writing decision if after having played the game's story they didn't live up to what they set out to do.You can't judge it on it's creativity or story telling just because you would rather see a female as the lead.

It's a bad decision in the sense that it would have been great if they did a female centered story but they didn't and while it would be great if videogames gave us more to choose from I would rather the game be fun and engaging instead of shoehorning things in.

Another thing to think about is that games that feature female characters and are good stick out more than male featured games that are bad... so while it is an incredibly small part of the pie they at least have good parts.

 

[biggersmaller]

Don't really see a problem here. It just seems like this didn't fit with the story they wanted to tell. And shoving in some token female would probably help no one.

Yup.

People need to pick their battles.

 

[KePoW]

A bad decision as in a bad writing/creative decision. It's an opinion, which I've substantiated it with posts in this thread.

Ok I've only read the first and last page of this thread.

So you're saying it's just your own individual opinion on the story. That's fine, because obviously any invididual can think whatever they want.

However, I hope you can also obviously understand that a dev like Rockstar shouldn't care about any one random individual's opinion. Especially if that opinion is way in the minority of their target customers.

 

[JawzPause]

I don't see what's so absurd about some sort of nuanced position wherein I conclude "I think it's reasonable for feminists to question why the game can't feature a female lead while also concluding that it's reasonable to give Rockstar the benefit of the doubt and assume that they have their reasons for doing so."

How is that reasonable? I don't understand why a feminist would be even asking the question.

 

[firehawk12]

Honestly, I'm not even surprised at this point. They don't want to write women, so why should anyone expect them to do it?

 

[Evil Monkey DTT]

Can you play as a woman in the multiplayer? Because then I get the anger.

 

[Sats]

Incidentally, this is one of the reasons I've never cared for GTA, to be honest.

 

[Scrabble]

A bad decision as in a bad writing/creative decision. It's an opinion, which I've substantiated it with posts in this thread.

How can you possibly say it's a bad writing/creative decision without having played the game? It's a bad writing decision because it doesn't align with your social agenda? Fuck all if the story were worse off because it included a female protagonist, the very fact there's a female means the story and writing is better. How is this attitude not in its self condemning and downright condescending to females?

 

[SillyEskimo]

I'm glad they are sticking with their own creative vision instead of being bullied. I wish everyone would stick to their guns better. When I see a female character in a Rock* game, I know it will be there for a reason. When I see them now, I just assume someone insisted one be there to fill some imaginary, self enforced quota.

 

[UrbanRats]

I'm glad they are sticking with their own creative vision instead of being bullied. I wish everyone would stick to their guns better. When I see a female character in a Rock* game, I know it will be there for a reason. When I see them now, I just assume someone insisted one be there to fill some imaginary, self enforced quota.

Asking a question is not bullying.

 

[mollipen]

Interactivity can be just as powerful, if not more powerful, when your asked to take control of someone you can't relate to or are diametrically opposed to their actions. By the time I got to the end of TLOU or Spec Ops I wasn't exactly relating to their actions or treating them like my bros, and it's because of that why those stories were so impactful.

I definitely don't want to come off as saying that I can never get into male characters, and TLOU is absolutely a great example of one that I enjoyed. The Silent Hill series is another. It's all just personal tastes. My problem is, the amount of games where I don't care about the male protagonist or his story greatly outweigh the ones where I do, because I think gaming has a lot of pretty terrible characters.

I think one of the powerful parts of video games is that engrossing stories can be told using characters we have control over. Not saying that's how it should always go, but I find myself more and more interested in that side. Why? Because gaming provides me so few protagonists I care about.

I also don't want to say that games don't have the power to force us to play characters we aren't, and in the process teach us about a different way of looking at life. I think games are very, very powerful in that regard, and I think games should use more of their power to offer players the chance to step out of their shoes and into those of someone else.

My complaint - and maybe this isn't totally fair - is that so many of those characters that I see are 20~30 year old heterosexual white men. Gaming has a great opportunity that it does a poor job of making the most of. If gaming's protagonists were more diverse, I think I'd be more okay with having characters who I had little creative control over.

Uhm, i'm sure a great deal of connection to the character is very much required for movies, too.
Besides, i'm sure you agree gender and race aren't the only elements that help you bond with a character, and you can very much empathize with a character of a different gender and race from yours.
And they feel like the control of the story must remain in their hands to a degree, since they have no problem in letting you customize you character (gender and race included) in the multiplayer, where there is no strong narrative lead.

With that said, i am absolutely not against more variety in representation, if anything because more variety is usually more interesting and fun to explore.

I don't know, maybe I just come at movies and games differently. For film or TV, of course I need (to some level) characters I can care about, but what I'm looking for from characters there is different. They need to be interesting, they need to add something to the story, they need to have reason for being there. If they fit those kind of criteria, they can be characters I'd otherwise never have much attraction to or interest in.

Like, for example, I love a good bad guy in movies or TV, but I hate playing a bad guy in video games. When I'm in direct control of a character, my attitude totally changes. What I want from that character and what I need in order to connect with them are very different. I need to directly connect with the character in some way, or else it's hard for me to care about getting them through their story. I don't come at passive media the same way, so I don't have nearly the same level of needs.

 

[LocalE]

So ?

Gives us a masculine butch lesbian =P

I want a fat, black, poor and handicapped old single-mother lesbian with a high I.Q.

 

[Rekki-Maru]

I'd imagine a female protagonist in a GTA game would resemble the main antagonist from GTA3, Catalina.

 

[Carcetti]

I want a fat, black, poor and handicapped old single-mother lesbian with a high I.Q.

Yes, that would be so boring and cliched compared to fit, white, middle-classed, athletic 25-30 old childless career military bald space marine with average intelligence and lines like 'Let's do this guys!'

Featuring a minority character would surely mean it would have to be every minority. Instead, celebrate focus-tested mediocrity. Hurrah!

 

[Kinyou]

I want a fat, black, poor and handicapped old single-mother lesbian with a high I.Q.

You may laugh, but I was a little disappointed that Snake seems to get a robo hand in MGS5 instead of keeping that hook hand. Playing a disabled character could be really interesting, especially because it would affect the core gameplay.

Yes, that would be so boring and cliched compared to fit, white, middle-classed, athletic 25-30 old childless career military bald space marine with average intelligence and lines like 'Let's do this guys!'

Fortunately are the characters in GTA 5 much more diverse than that.

 

[SillyEskimo]

Asking a question is not bullying.

It's saber rattling.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

How is that reasonable? I don't understand why a feminist would be even asking the question.

What is unreasonable about it? I think some feel that perhaps the reason why females are underrepresented is simply because developers have never been questioned/challenged to do anything but maintain the status quo. As such, I don't understand the harm in asking. Some women (or men!) may think that the series might benefit from mixing it up and perhaps bring in some increased diversity to the player-base. Now, that doesn't mean that Rockstar would be obliged to assuage these suggestions/criticisms, but I'm not understanding why the mere notion is inherently egregious.

 

[deli2000]

Yes, that would be so boring and cliched compared to fit, white, middle-classed, athletic 25-30 old childless career military bald space marine with average intelligence and lines like 'Let's do this guys!'

Yes that what GTA V is like. Good observation.

 

[Carcetti]

Yes that what GTA V is like. Good observation.

I'm not talking about GTA purely in that post but nice try.

 

[Pau]

How is that reasonable? I don't understand why a feminist would be even asking the question.

Because they want to play a game with a female lead and wonder why more developers don't seem to want to make such leads?

 

[Fjordson]

Yes, that would be so boring and cliched compared to fit, white, middle-classed, athletic 25-30 old childless career military bald space marine with average intelligence and lines like 'Let's do this guys!'

Featuring a minority character would surely mean it would have to be every minority. Instead, celebrate focus-tested mediocrity. Hurrah!

I know you're being sarcastic, but the GTA V protagonists are somewhat varied compared to a lot of games. Trevor is an older, crazy hillbilly (and he's balding, rather than being totally bald :lol), Michael is older with two kids and a wife, and Franklin is black. Though he isn't quite as different as the other two since he's younger and athletic.

 

[Nexas]

How can you possibly say it's a bad writing/creative decision without having played the game? It's a bad writing decision because it doesn't align with your social agenda? Fuck all if the story were worse off because it included a female protagonist, the very fact there's a female means the story and writing is better. How is this attitude not in its self condemning and downright condescending to females?

Maybe it isn't a bad decision creatively, but it is a safe one. Rockstar hasn't made a creatively challenging game since San Andreas. I think people forget how ballsy it was to ask a mostly white audience to identify with a majority black cast.

I believe a female protagonist could match or possibly surpass the creative challenge of San Andreas. Unfortunately, GTAV isn't that game. I'll probably still enjoy it, but that won't stop me and many others for dreaming about what could have been. All I can really do is hope that Rockstar has the creative vision to attempt something in a future project.

 

[Karkador]

How is it a bad creative writing decision if their decision was to tell a story about masculine gender roles through males?
It's only a bad creative writing decision if after having played the game's story they didn't live up to what they set out to do.You can't judge it on it's creativity or story telling just because you would rather see a female as the lead.

It's a bad decision in the sense that it would have been great if they did a female centered story but they didn't and while it would be great if videogames gave us more to choose from I would rather the game be fun and engaging instead of shoehorning things in.

Another thing to think about is that games that feature female characters and are good stick out more than male featured games that are bad... so while it is an incredibly small part of the pie they at least have good parts.

How can you possibly say it's a bad writing/creative decision without having played the game? It's a bad writing decision because it doesn't align with your social agenda? Fuck all if the story were worse off because it included a female protagonist, the very fact there's a female means the story and writing is better. How is this attitude not in its self condemning and downright condescending to females?

I'm glad they are sticking with their own creative vision instead of being bullied. I wish everyone would stick to their guns better. When I see a female character in a Rock* game, I know it will be there for a reason. When I see them now, I just assume someone insisted one be there to fill some imaginary, self enforced quota.

Okay, I'm going to respond to all three of you, collectively, with one post.

I see a pattern in your reasoning, saying that a male character in a game is the default and doesn't have to be justified, as where a female character has to be "shoehorned in", it has to be justified, has to be there for a specific reason, or else it's going to look a lot worse than if it was a male character. While it's easy for some people to see things this way, I don't, and I think if you're looking at something critically, you can't give a free pass to a male character for being poorly written or judge a female character hardersimply because you consider one to be the default.

Rockstar's response being that GTAV is about "the concept of being masculine" comes off as a lazy answer because, whether they've stated it before or not, all of their games have had something to do with the concept of being masculine because all of their games have had male leads. So to say this now is really just sounding repetitive, and using it to justify why there can't be a female lead essentially sounds like "we can't have a female lead because we have never made female leads". Which has been my impression all along, anyway.

As I said before, the idea that they're perhaps more willing to explore the male gender a little deeper is a bit interesting, and I'd like to see how it plays out- despite everything I've said, I do have some interest in GTAV. But it doesn't come off as anything very new. To be honest, the writing in Rockstar games has never been very good, in my opinion. So I'm not expecting much.

Ok I've only read the first and last page of this thread.

So you're saying it's just your own individual opinion on the story. That's fine, because obviously any invididual can think whatever they want.

However, I hope you can also obviously understand that a dev like Rockstar shouldn't care about any one random individual's opinion. Especially if that opinion is way in the minority of their target customers.

Personally, I don't think the percentage of people who have an opinion necessarily correlates to how sound or valuable that opinion is. Sometimes a minority will have a valuable opinion. But anyways, maybe these opinions might seem more prevalent if people obsessed with the status quo weren't so eager to minimize them.

 

[Fjordson]

Maybe it isn't a bad decision creatively, but it is a safe one. Rockstar hasn't made a creatively challenging game since San Andreas. I think people forget how ballsy it was to ask a mostly white audience to identify with a majority black cast.

I believe a female protagonist could match or possibly surpass the creative challenge of San Andreas. Unfortunately, GTAV isn't that game. I'll probably still enjoy it, but that won't stop me and many others for dreaming about what could have been. All I can really do is hope that Rockstar has the creative vision to attempt something in a future project.

What about making Ballad of Gay Tony? The player (who was Dominican) worked for an openly gay boss. They were best friends really and Gay Tony was practically the main character alongside Luis.

 

[prwxv3]

A bad decision as in a bad writing/creative decision. It's an opinion, which I've substantiated it with posts in this thread.

Just because they don't have a female PC does not mean the writing is bad. That makes no fucking sense. The writing could be bad in the final game but it wont be because there is no female PC.

 

[Karkador]

Just because they don't have a female PC does not mean the writing is bad. That makes no fucking sense. The writing could be bad in the final game but it wont be because there is no female PC.

I know it makes no fucking sense, it was never even argued!

 

[JawzPause]

What is unreasonable about it? I think some feel that perhaps the reason why females are underrepresented is simply because developers have never been questioned/challenged to do anything but maintain the status quo. As such, I don't understand the harm in asking. Some women (or men!) may think that the series might benefit from mixing it up and perhaps bring in some increased diversity to the player-base. Now, that doesn't mean that Rockstar would be obliged to assuage these suggestions/criticisms, but I'm not understanding why the mere notion is inherently egregious.

I guess there's no harm in asking but I personally don't see the need to ask the question to begin with. I mean what does it even matter whether they are female or male? To me it would be like asking Rockstar why one of the characters isn't wearing a backwards cap. If people are asking for a female lead to mix things up then fair enough, but if they want a female lead simply for women equality then it is a whole other issue. It's completely up to the developer whether or not they want a female or male lead and I don't really see why it's even an issue. Hence why I think it's unreasonable to ask the developers why the lead character isn't a certain gender.

Because they want to play a game with a female lead and wonder why more developers don't seem to want to make such leads?

So we are just ignoring Metroid, Mirror's Edge, Portal, Beyond: Two Souls and countless others?

 

[Karkador]

I guess there's no harm in asking but I personally don't see the need to ask the question to begin with. I mean what does it even matter whether they are female or male? To me it would be like asking Rockstar why one of the characters isn't wearing a backwards cap. If people are asking for a female lead to mix things up then fair enough, but if they want a female lead simply for women equality then it is a whole other issue. It's completely up to the developer whether or not they want a female or male lead and I don't really see why it's even an issue. Hence why I think it's unreasonable to ask the developers why the lead character isn't a certain gender.

Would it be reasonable to ask Rockstar why the lead characters are male? Why are the lead characters in all their games male? Can we ask the developers anything?

 

[UrbanRats]

I don't think they did San Andreas with a black character (despite the fan outrage) to be ballsy.
I think they did it because they wanted to and that was the story they wanted to tell.