Support NeoGAF

[mnemovore]

Personally, I just think it's a case of word limitations. The article is already pretty long, and its focus is pretty clearly on trying to demonstrate the power of 80s/90s marketing and then talking about the self-perpetuation loop.

If that's the case I can put on my editor hat and slash and burn until there would be enough room. What about examining why this loop exists at all considering what Ian Bogost says. What about the self-perpetuation loop of catering "girl games" to stereotypes held by men and blaming the market when they don't sell?

If the answer to the question "why is there a stereotype that girls don't play games" is "sound marketing decisions and media representation" someone is doing something wrong.

That not same as country spanning million dollar marketing campaign and you know it. Why do you think most images of myths and legends don't have such concrete depictions in modern society. Because even despite some depictions being more popular than others most of the time one depiction is not cemented as the depiction without some sort of organisation popularising it. Whether it be the church a monarchy or whatever.

What's your argument, that because Coca-Cola spent more money, they played the major role in popularization? Do you think Coca-Cola had that much power in the 1930s? Do you think Rockwell, Nast, and the Christmas card industry didn't? I don't know why you're being adamant about this

 

[Margalis]

It's a pretty relevant thing to bring up when someone tries to criticize the piece based on the erroneous notion that gender is strictly defined and unchanging.

The piece essentially makes this assumption itself.

 

[BurnOutBrighter]

Does it matter what believe?

If you don't think your beliefs matter, then you have bigger problems than coming to terms with gender as a social construction.

 

[Fotheringay]

Oh my, more revisionist history of videogames for a politically correct tailored "reality" where women at the beginning of videogames weren't calling us losers, geeks, nerds and so on and the vast majority of gamers weren't male.

No, it was all the marketing's fault, because companies suddenly decided to lose half of the world's population as potential customers just for fun, not because males were obviously way more interested in videogames.

You're going to get shit on for bringing that up, but I think one of the points of the piece is that marketing helped create that situation. Look at the antagonistic commercials pointed out in the piece, mocking women as nags and so forth. If you were witnessing marketing like that as a woman, wouldn't you view video games an embarrassing hobby?

 

[Principate]

If that's the case I can put on my editor hat and slash and burn until there would be enough room. What about examining why this loop exists at all considering what Ian Bogost says. What about the self-perpetuation loop of catering "girl games" to stereotypes held by men and blaming the market when they don't sell?

If the answer to the question "why is there a stereotype that girls play games" is "sound marketing decisions and media representation" someone is doing something wrong.



What's your argument, that because Coca-Cola spent more money, they played the major role in popularization? Do you think Coca-Cola had that much power in the 1930s? Do you think Rockwell, Nast, and the Christmas card industry didn't? I don't know why you're being adamant about this

No I'm arguing against your notion that Coca-Cola played no part in it, that they didn't reach and familiars many families that were not familiar with that particular image of Santa Claus and how that somehow undermines the power of advertising.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Some of the illustrations in this article are great.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I understand what your saying, but it just one of those points where the reaction to this dilemma is that's all well and good but, this current predicament the industry is in, is not a temporary rut, unless something significant occurs this industry won't changes it's course, so precisely when will the industry decide to branch out if not now?

When it has to or when something shows them that there's reason to. While you say the industry is in a rut, it just launched the two fastest selling consoles ever. This after countless doom and gloom articles about the current state of consoles. So, when companies look at that they aren't likely going to see any reason to change their current ways. That's why at least currently the current-gen looks quite like an extension of the previous generation. Similar games and similar marketing.

That's why i say they're playing it safe. They'll continue marketing to their current market because they eat up what they have at a high rate. Of course it creates a success or die scenario for some, but that's a risk that it seems that the industry is willing to accept.

 

[The Librarian]

Biological sex is defined, gender is a mutable social construct that's often associated with someone's sex.

Er, gender is social, sure, but I wouldn't say it's *entirely* a social construct. Boys and girls interests depend on a lot of things such as testosterone and estrogen, clothing depending on what looks good for a boy versus a girl, and so on.

 

[params7]

http://i.imgur.com/ivMfIj4.gif[//IMG][/QUOTE]

Nobody is stopping the girl from ditching the doll and picking up the computer. Though primary market for dolls have been females, and not because parents forced them to play with dolls either.

 

[Kazerei]

You're going to get shit on for bringing that up, but I think one of the points of the piece is that marketing helped create that situation. Look at the antagonistic commercials pointed out in the piece, mocking women as nags and so forth. If you were witnessing marketing like that as a woman, wouldn't you view video games an embarrassing hobby?

You know what does make me embarrassed is the super defensive reaction of some male gamers when it's questioned why games are heavily marketed to men, or why there aren't more better-written female characters. It's so ironic.

I don't know where the stereotype of a gamer as a fat, nerdy virgin came from, but when gamers keep insisting on gaming as a male hobby and defending the status quo, that's not helping.

 

[Riposte]

What that leaves is what he describes as infantile adolescent power fantasy games

For this to mean anything (besides a knee-jerk reaction of a haughty moralist), you'd have to first definitively state what is not infantile, i.e. what "maturity" means. Good luck!

Spoiler

Nietzsche did it best

EDIT: Hmm, they really make it sound like marketing is some magic sauce. Put in enough money, people now do what you want. If only. Rather, it makes more sense to see it that years of marketing has socialized gender norms, even entirely unrelated marketing to videogames. "Girls don't play Call of Duty" for far reasons that go far beyond Call of Duty commercials (and probably existed before Call of Duty was a brand). I think the focus on marketing at such a small scale is the wrong way to see it. Roeser sounds delusional.

EDIT: The last few paragraphs contrast in a weird way. So, why is the solution not getting girls into warzones?

 

[DICKS AHOY]

That art in the article is fantastic; here's a link to the artist's portfolio.

Anyhow, didn't really find anything objectionable in that article. I'd argue outside of the context of the 'real games' debate between Cod/BF/Wow vs Angry Birds/Candy Crush/Farmville the writer brings up, you can still find quite a lot of games that don't seem marketed towards a particular gender. It's has to have been at least a decade or so since a Mario game has been pushed specifically to boys, and I wouldn't see anyone arguing Mario Kart or 3D World aren't 'real' games to deflect that either. AC and Pokemon also seem split right down the middle (keep in mind I went on a decade-long hiatus on the latter, so I may be totally off base about how Nintendo presents it to the public), rather than favoring one particular genderc though I guess the marketing for those eschews more to younger demographics despite the likely large college-aged audience both have.

 

[Ryudo]

If you don't think your beliefs matter, then you have bigger problems than coming to terms with gender as a social construction.

I was speaking in terms of how my beliefs are viewed because they don't conform to other outspoken individuals here. That being highlighted by being called "crap, condescending, wrong, erroneous etc". It just shows people are not really interested in your views if you don't fall in line with theirs, there is always the tendency for ostracism by any means.

 

[mnemovore]

No I'm arguing against your notion that Coca-Cola played no part in it, that they didn't reach and familiars many families that were familiar with that particular image of Santa Claus and how that somehow undermines the power of advertising.

Coca-Cola advertising wasn't instrumental in cementing the modern depiction to any degree. They became a prolific channel for the concept, but it was already established. In fact, you'd be better off singing the praises of the White Rock company. This ad predates the Coca-Cola ads by about five years.

 

[Lime]

Er, gender is social, sure, but I wouldn't say it's *entirely* a social construct. Boys and girls interests depend on a lot of things such as testosterone and estrogen, clothing depending on what looks good for a boy versus a girl, and so on.

Biological determinism.

Besides, the gender/sex dichotomy exists to separate social constructivist notions of what it means to identify as a man, woman, or anything in between, whereas sex serves the purpose of specific biological characteristics (penis, vagina, etc).

Nobody is stopping the girl from ditching the doll and picking up the computer. Though primary market for dolls have been females, and not because parents forced them to play with dolls either.

Society, local social contexts, media, advertising, friends, other kids, etc. are all telling "the girl" that it is not normal for a (Western) girl to pick up a computer. Same thing with specific types of toys.

And when she gets older she'll still hear from others that computers/engineering isn't "feminine" and her peers will tell her or talk to her like she doesn't belong in the culture and workplace or hobby (as tons of Gaffers do in each and every thread about these things).

 

[wsippel]

I think some important questions never asked (or answered) in articles on that topic are: According to research, more than half the gaming population is female. Considering those women, or the majority at least, apparently don't play CoD or some Japanese games with girls in skimpy armor, what do they play? And why don't men play those game? They are probably lower profile, considering we seem not to know what those games even are. So they're not AAA I guess, and they don't have huge budgets. Or no huge marketing budgets at least, because we'd at least have heard of them otherwise. Are the games bad? Not objectively, but in the eyes of the women playing them I mean. Do women play those games simply because CoD isn't "for them"? Would they rather play CoD if it wasn't targeted at men? Because changing the marketing to be more inclusive is one thing, changing the games to cater to a lower common denominator is a different thing entirely.

 

[mclem]

There are also iconic video game box covers that started to emerge, like the cover of the game Barbarian, which featured a scantily clad, buxom woman at the feet of a barely clothed man.

Wolf from (UK) Gladiators, fact fans!

 

[Fotheringay]

You know what does make me embarrassed is the super defensive reaction of some male gamers when it's questioned why games are heavily marketed to men, or why there aren't more better-written female characters. It's so ironic.

It's easy to see where it comes from though. If you' fit the stereotype of being not well socially versed, awkward, and face ridicule when bringing up your gaming habit, as many hardcore gamers are, it's understandable that your first reaction to hearing companies saying "We need to get girls involved" is "Fuck off, who needs em". When you feel persecuted for something you enjoy, it fosters that insularity, as you said "defensive reaction". They don't see that one of the consequences of involving both sexes is to lessen the stigma they feel they face.

 

[Jintor]

I was speaking in terms of how my beliefs are viewed because they don't conform to other outspoken individuals here. That being highlighted by being called "crap, condescending, wrong, erroneous etc". It just shows people are not really interested in your views if you don't fall in line with theirs, there is always the tendency for ostracism by any means.

I don't really feel comfortable even engaging with your argument, to be honest, but you seem to inherently deny... how should I put it... the very identities of a lot of my friends? And then you immediately retreat behind this "Oh, look how bigoted you are towards my views" defense, which is a great way to play the victim.

 

[Nekofrog]

I was speaking in terms of how my beliefs are viewed because they don't conform to other outspoken individuals here. That being highlighted by being called "crap, condescending, wrong, erroneous etc". It just shows people are not really interested in your views if you don't fall in line with theirs, there is always the tendency for ostracism by any means.

Okay, instead of condescending, would "uneducated" be better to describe the opinion?

 

[SolidSnakex]

I think some important questions never asked (or answered) in articles on that topic are: According to research, more than half the gaming population is female. Considering those women, or the majority at least, apparently don't play CoD or some Japanese games with girls in skimpy armor, what do they play? And why don't men play those game? They are probably lower profile, considering we seem not to know what those games even are. So they're not AAA I guess, and they don't have huge budgets. Or no huge marketing budgets at least, because we'd at least have heard of them otherwise. Are the games bad? Not objectively, but in the eyes of the women playing them I mean. Do women play those games simply because CoD isn't "for them"? Would they rather play CoD if it wasn't targeted at men? Because changing the marketing to be more inclusive is one thing, changing the games to cater to a lower common denominator is a different thing entirely.

We've had more interesting gender breakdowns that actually do go a long way in explaining what's happening into terms what people are playing

This is from 2010, so obviously things may have changed since then. But I think it's a very interesting breakdown. Companies mainly target console gamers nowadays, and as you can see the overwhelming majority of console gamers are male. Those or similar statistics are likely what publishers are seeing and using when they greenlight or cancel games.

 

[params7]

Society, local social contexts, media, advertising, friends, other kids, etc. are all telling "the girl" that it is not normal for a (Western) girl to pick up a computer. Same thing with specific types of toys.

This cannot be a one sided affair as much as you'd like it to be. Like I said - Nobody is stopping girls from picking up the computer, but they have to show some interest or passion for parents to then provide adequate motivation and resources.


What do you mean by not normal, exactly?

 

[Riposte]

We've had more interesting gender breakdowns that actually do go a long way in explaining what's happening into terms what people are playing

This is from 2010, so obviously things may have changed since then. But I think it's a very interesting breakdown. Companies mainly target console gamers nowadays, and as you can see the overwhelming majority of console gamers are male. Those or similar statistics are likely what publishers are seeing and using when they greenlight or cancel games.

It was in a previous thread about gender in games, but someone put out numbers that put WoW at a much higher discrepancy. Like 10% female. IDK what to believe.

 

[Devolution]

This cannot be a one sided affair as much as you'd like it to be. Like I said - Nobody is stopping girls from picking up the computer, but they have to show some interest or passion for parents to then provide adequate motivation and resources.


What do you mean by not normal, exactly?

That's pretty simplistic jargon for what happens a lot to girls when they're growing up and in academia, and show interest in things that have long been "male oriented."

 

[Juliet's 8½ Spirits]

Society, local social contexts, media, advertising, friends, other kids, etc. are all telling "the girl" that it is not normal for a (Western) girl to pick up a computer. Same thing with specific types of toys.

Thats a cop-out

Wouldn't the same apply to guys who are labeled as nerds, weebs, and losers among their peers? The ostracization you mentioned isn't something limited to the female gender. You can go through your life either doing what you want or what others want you to do.

 

[boiled goose]

I was speaking in terms of how my beliefs are viewed because they don't conform to other outspoken individuals here. That being highlighted by being called "crap, condescending, wrong, erroneous etc". It just shows people are not really interested in your views if you don't fall in line with theirs, there is always the tendency for ostracism by any means.

Instead of being pathetically emotionally attached to 'your opinion', how about you instead read up a little and accept that you were not fully informed when you made your initial statements.

It is ok to be wrong buddy. No need to play the victim.

Opinions based on erroneous data or ignorance don't need to be accepted as valid. (and no this is not an attack on freedom of beliefs or thoughts, you can sure as hell believe what you want, but if it is a bunch of crap there is no reason for anyone else to listen)

Thats a cop-out

Wouldn't the same apply to guys who are labeled as nerds, weebs, and losers among their peers? The ostracization you mentioned isn't something limited to the female gender. You can go through your life either doing what you want or what others want you to do.

How is that a cop-out???
Of course it happens to all kinds of labels, not jut 'male' and 'female'. 'Jocks' and 'nerds' also get pigeon-holed, sure. Not sure what you are arguing. If you and society identifies you as a nerd and you suddenly want to try out for the football team would you feel as comfortable as if the society identified you as a 'jock'?

 

[Zoe]

yes but all of those titles in the quote are videogames. they're "very different things" in that one game might feature cartoon birds you fling at pigs and the other is about gunning down brown people with military grade weapons. both games should be considered equally as appealing and appropriate for either sex, however due to marketing, they are not.

You can't just compare games that cross genres and say the divide is because of the advertising. Why not compare Candy Crush to Bejeweled? Farmville to Sim City? (I'm assuming, never played it)

 

[Terrell]

That implication wasn't my intention. Targeting one demo doesn't mean purposely excluding another, and even if you write "males 16-25" on a form it doesn't mean you're going to exclude other players. But it does illustrate how people think about target demo, and how you can get trapped in that way of thinking. Especially if you work at/with a larger publisher, target demo is something you will discuss multiple times and for most "normal" games the easy assumption is young makes and further assumptions and decisions may spring from that.

Edit: I am highly critical of gender discussions on GAF - in my view most of them are little more than insufferable puritans throwing around words like "objectification" without thought to try to make their personal hang-ups seem like important sociological issues. But this article was pretty good, and this Santa stuff is more than a little silly. Maybe the example was flawed - move on. Marketing affects people - we know that regardless of whether that santa stuff is true. This piece deserves better than the typical "sexism would be solved if only all women wore turtlenecks" discussion we usually get.

Perhaps GAF could encourage a reasoned discussion in the matter one day. But every thread has someone who wants to discuss Santa Claus, figuratively speaking. And until that shit stops, your desires will never come to fruition. There's always a nit to pick.

Shame, too, this might have been the thread to do it.

 

[SolidSnakex]

It was in a previous thread about gender in games, but someone put out numbers that put WoW at a much higher discrepancy. Like 10% female. IDK what to believe.

That wouldn't be surprising. Like I said, those charts are from 2010, so things have shifted. That's why we need more breakdowns like that instead of generic "do you play games", which doesn't tell us much at all in terms of publisher decisions.

 

[B-Genius]

I don't usually like Polygon stuff, but this is a good article. Thanks for sharing.

The part that most resonated with me was this:

If Sony were to release an Apple-like montage showing people playing games like Journey or any of its narrative-driven or broadly appealing independent games played on Sony devices, that would send a very different message than a montage of virtual bullets being sprayed into a war zone.

It reminded me of another recent thread. I think it's so important that we alter the message gradually, to show the whole world the potential of games, and present them as a "general purpose medium".

 

[Village]

Thats a cop-out

Wouldn't the same apply to guys who are labeled as nerds, weebs, and losers among their peers? The ostracization you mentioned isn't something limited to the female gender. You can go through your life either doing what you want or what others want you to do.

Yes it does and has.

 

[Lime]

This cannot be a one sided affair as much as you'd like it to be. Like I said - Nobody is stopping girls from picking up the computer, but they have to show some interest or passion for parents to then provide adequate motivation and resources.


What do you mean by not normal, exactly?

When it comes to making decisions, it isn't as simple as just doing whatever you want to because you feel like it. Depending on your ethnicity, sexuality, gender, class, ability, etc. you are still affected by your surrounding environment. If you're told constantly by media, friends, colleagues, family, etc. that it isn't 'feminine' to code for computers, your decision-making is obviously influenced to some extent, because most people care about what others think and what is considered to be normative behaviour by society at large by virtue of us humans being social in nature.

It is not as simple as having access to whatever you want to do. That's not how the world works. There are so many forces, institutional, societal, personal, even in the way we employ language, that keep people in their assigned boxes of marginalization and discrimination based on things like sexuality, ethnicity, race, gender, etc. Thus, it is not a matter of a girl just picking up a computer instead of a doll.

 

[captmorgan]

So how does the gaming industry get more men playing pop cap games?

 

[Tagyhag]

I remember when games where about just being fun but now everything has to carefully walk a thin line or else be called sexist or racist.

 

[Ryudo]

I don't really feel comfortable even engaging with your argument, to be honest, but you seem to inherently deny... how should I put it... the very identities of a lot of my friends? And then you immediately retreat behind this "Oh, look how bigoted you are towards my views" defense, which is a great way to play the victim.

I must apologize if I came across as argumentative. I have a simplistic view of what we can control and what we cant. How we behave vs what we inherit. There is too much grey area and openness to interpretation trying to classify something based on a generalization or "norm" - let alone argue about it!

Okay, instead of condescending, would "uneducated" be better to describe the opinion?

Possibly, if you were a bigot. I care not for your thoughts pertaining to my level of education though. Label away.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Because of the demographic and the time and hell, even now, was/is predominatly male. Why should they cater to the extreme minority of the time.

God, I hate these threads.

So appealing to males (which is dubious enough, but let's go with that for now) inherently means alienating females with sexist crap in your world? Good to know. *rolls eyes*

 

[Margalis]

The part that most resonated with me was this:

Interestingly that is the same single sentence I would have picked out as well.

It does illustrate how companies could position themselves differently without changing actual game content. Sony in particular has plenty of titles it could promote to a broader audience.

Edit: Although it does take some understanding of the market. People tried to push Flower as a game for everyone, but it's actually a game for the super-hardcore that need a palette cleanser. In general a lot of indie darlings that are ostensibly for everyone actually appeal to a very narrow demographic range. Arthouse films appeal to the most hardcore of film enthusiasts, the same is true of arthouse games.

 

[boiled goose]

I must apologize if I came across as argumentative. I have a simplistic view of what we can control and what we cant. How we behave vs what we inherit. There is too much grey area and openness to interpretation trying to classify something based on a generalization or "norm" - let alone argue about it!



Possibly, if you were a bigot. I care not for your thoughts pertaining to my level of education though. Label away.

'Level of education' has nothing to do with it. You can be uneducated about a topic while having a PhD in another.

 

[Scrooged]

The fact that people are getting banned in this thread for having a different opinion is pretty troubling.

 

[params7]

That's pretty simplistic jargon for what happens a lot to girls when they're growing up and in academia, and show interest in things that have long been "male oriented."

Male oriented? Okay. I can understand that for girls trying to make the cut in their neighborhood biker or cigar club.

But videogames and computer science? I'm honestly confused.

The 'Nerd Of the 90s', since this thread is discussing stereotypes, was essentially a shy, awkward student of technology who stuttered when girls talked to him. Correct me if I'm wrong. Or did I miss the part of the culture where he devised ways to bully the girl in his C++ class in the morning?

 

[Nekofrog]

I must apologize if I came across as argumentative. I have a simplistic view of what we can control and what we cant. How we behave vs what we inherit. There is too much grey area and openness to interpretation trying to classify something based on a generalization or "norm" - let alone argue about it!



Possibly, if you were a bigot. I care not for your thoughts pertaining to my level of education though. Label away.

Your level of education has nothing to do with it. You can have a PHD and still have an uneducated opinion, which you do in this instance.

 

[Jintor]

The fact that people are getting banned in this thread for having a different opinion is pretty troubling.

Dunno, the only banned posters seem to be hit-and-run thread-dumpers rather than people actively engaging in argument.

 

[boiled goose]

Your level of education has nothing to do with it. You can have a PHD and still have an uneducated opinion, which you do in this instance.

Are we communicating telepathically? hahaha

 

[Nekofrog]

Are we communicating telepathically? hahaha

GET OUTTA MY HEAD CHARLES

 

[Devolution]

Male oriented? Okay. I can understand that for girls trying to make the cut in their neighborhood biker or cigar club.

But videogames and computer science? I'm honestly confused.

The 'Nerd Of the 90s', since this thread is discussing stereotypes, was essentially a shy, awkward student of technology who stuttered when girls talked to him. Correct me if I'm wrong. Or did I miss the part of the culture where he devised ways to bully the girl in his C++ class in the morning?

You might want to actually talk to some women in programming and engineering. Maybe broaden your perspective.

 

[SolidSnakex]

It does illustrate how companies could position themselves differently without changing actual game content. Sony in particular has plenty of titles it could promote to a broader audience.

Edit: Although it does take some understanding of the market. People tried to push Flower as a game for everyone, but it's actually a game for the super-hardcore that need a palette cleanser. In general a lot of indie darlings that are ostensibly for everyone actually appeal to a very narrow demographic range. Arthouse films appeal to the most hardcore of film enthusiasts, the same is true of arthouse games.

I think that they've tried with some games like LBP and Tearaway. They aren't really specifically marketed toward any group and they even make sure to have male and female versions of the main characters playable (Sackboy/girl for LBP and Iota and Atoi for Tearaway).

 

[Lime]

I don't usually like Polygon stuff, but this is a good article. Thanks for sharing.

The part that most resonated with me was this:


It reminded me of another recenr thread. I think it's so important that we alter the message gradually, to show the whole world the potential of games, and present them as a "general purpose medium".

I'm reminded of the Charlie Brooker vs Jon Snow segment in which they spend 95% of the time to play military murder simulator and Lego movie-licensed game #3891 in order to convince the uninvited Snow about the legitimacy of video games, and then spend like only one minute in the end talking about Papers, Please.

The thing is, it has to be the entire gaming culture that tries to shift the discussion away from big, safe, stupid, creatively bankrupt blockbusters aimed at the implied normative white heterosexual male gamer, to the more interesting cases of what the medium is able to do. It's not only marketing and publishers that have to try to talk about diversity in terms of types of experiences, but also journalists, reviewers, celebrities, distributors, enthusiasts, and consumers.

 

[Juliet's 8½ Spirits]

I
How is that a cop-out???
Of course it happens to all kinds of labels, not jut 'male' and 'female'. 'Jocks' and 'nerds' also get pigeon-holed, sure. Not sure what you are arguing. If you and society identifies you as a nerd and you suddenly want to try out for the football team would you feel as comfortable as if the society identified you as a 'jock'?

A person with a passion for what he/she loves to do wouldn't and doesn't' care about what society has to say about them. My point was, gamers (specifically male) have been overcoming negative stigma since the birth of the industry. I don't understand why female gamers feel they are specifically targeted or excluded when it comes to these things. If there was a big enough market for female gamers do you honestly think companies would spare any time targeting products towards them? When the dude-bro gamer got involved in gaming we saw a massive shift in marketing campaign, and hell, even video game trends. When/if the female gaming community becomes large enough to see an investment opportunity you'll see an automatic shift in the industry.

 

[John Rabbit]

You can't just compare games that cross genres and say the divide is because of the advertising. Why not compare Candy Crush to Bejeweled? Farmville to Sim City? (I'm assuming, never played it)

i'm referring specifically to games mentioned in the originally quoted part of the article. my point is not to say Angry Birds and Call of Duty are essentially the same (other than the medium) because they are not. rather that because of marketing they are considered "appropriate" for specific genders, ages*, and demographics. this is a fallacy. everyone has the potential to enjoy ANY kind of game regardless of it's content.


*where appropriate. obviously children should not be playing M-rated games.

 

[Devolution]

A person with a passion for what he/she loves to do wouldn't and doesn't' care about what society has to say about them. My point was, gamers (specifically male) have been overcoming negative stigma since the birth of the industry. I don't understand why female gamers feel they are specifically targeted or excluded when it comes to these things. If there was a big enough market for female gamers do you honestly think companies would spare any time targeting products towards them? When the dude-bro gamer got involved in gaming we saw a massive shift in marketing campaign, and hell, even video game trends. When/if the female gaming community becomes large enough to see an investment opportunity you'll see an automatic shift in the industry.

Ugh.

Where to start if you'll only listen instead of pull this defense.