From the article:
“Play is an integral part of human evolution and learning,” she says, mentioning that this is a topic she covers in her book. “Gaming, being the most refined form of play in our time, has much to offer. Instead of focusing on what gaming is not, it’s more effective to showcase its true essence. The industry’s effort to create a more diverse range of games, beyond merely violent and intense ones, will help showcase the broad spectrum of gaming as an expression of creativity.”
I disagree. The rule is “sex sells”, always has, always will be, period.
The people that complain about “wokeness” in games are a small but loud minority. The majority doesn’t care, hells seeing the steam achievements for some games the majority doesn’t even care to finish a game past the tutorial yet alone care about story or characters.
The problem is the approach to game design has changed. In the earlier stages of gaming, you would take a fun concept (finding perfect fits for boxes) and make it into a game (Tetris), that was all there was, Super Mario was literally called “Jump & Run Man” at one point. It was the essence of fun presented in a replayable form. Now games have to have a story, morals, relatable characters or some sort of overlaying message. This together with good gameplay can create a very good game no doubt. But each aspect has to be good on its own.
Take away the story from Last of Us and it’s essentially a 3rd person arena shooter, but it’s a good one at that. This alone would be a good selling point, add on top the story and you have an objectively good game.
But take Saint Row 5 as an example, take away the story and it’s a less than mediocre 3rd Person sandbox game, the fact that the story isn’t compelling either makes it objectively bad.
Rember the Hot/Crazy scale from His I Met Your Mother? Well there is also a Hot/Boring scale for games. If your game is boring it has to compensate by having hotter characters, if it’s fun it can get away with uglier ones. I can name countless examples where this is true.
Studios often overlook this connection. I’m all for diversification of the actual development environment but not the games themselves. It should always be fun first.
Never in my life have I heard anybody say “Are you going to get new game …? I’ve heard you can play as a black woman in this one. So cool.”
Studios then get upset because their model “Here diversity. Where money?” isn’t paying off.
It’s like not wanting to buy a cheaply made plastic valve for a boiler over a solid metal one and the company asks “Why are you not buying it? We made it blue.”
The fanbase is never going to change, because at some point we all realize that we want value for our money and often times studios spend so much time and effort making a game diverse, they forget to make it fun.
You’re blaming games not being fun on devs “wasting time” to ensure diversity in their games? You realize the people who work on the story and characters aren’t the same as the ones coding the game mechanics right? The two have almost nothing to do with one another. Studios aren’t forgetting to make games fun due to diversity lmao. They are having to spend a lot more man hours than they did in the past because of the advancements in development tenchology.
Hrm, anecdotally I have quite a lot of formerly non-gamer friends who were really hyped for say, Life is Strange: True Colors, specifically because they were excited about how Alex breaks some beauty norms and gets to flirt with Steph on top of that.
Of course, anecdotally.
But it’s important to keep in mind that we’re no longer an industry of 5 teams creating 20 games a year. There’s so many games that there is more than enough space for every game. From absolutely purist near-identityless gameplay-only designs (Which exist in droves) to huge mass-market hyper-produced open worlds all the way to purist story/feels only visual novels and experimental art pieces.
And each of these categories has more games each year than the entire market around the Gameboy time had. Gaming is insanely big now.
I have. It was more along the lines of, “Dragon Ball FighterZ has no waifus” or “there’s no one with any melanin in this game [until they found out about Nagoriyuki in Guilty Gear Strive]”. I would not be the least bit surprised if Street Fighter 6 is more popular with women than any previous entry after taking the bad male characters from previous entries and remixing them as women (Manon, Lily, A.K.I., Kimberly).
I definitely play a few horny games, and don’t recommend them to anyone. In the other hand, I have actually skipped certain games, and hated some others, because they were trying to tell an engaging story and got hung up on cringey sexualization of their female leads.
As you said, it’s all up to consumer preference. It isn’t just watch-dogging and shaming of sexualization, it’s also that there’s a lot of people that find lazy sexualization to be disengaging and hardly unique. Plenty of the time getting the characters to look unique and interesting is also a challenge; and diversity often helps with that.