Exactly! They're lucky they listened to their fans on that count. Apparently they just couldn't fathom anyone being attracted to him cuz he looks like dinobird in space-marine armour.
To be honest, the companions on the whole in ME1 did not impress me at all. I played it after playing DA:O, and it felt like a gigantic step backwards in terms of "chillin' with my companions." So while I liked them all well enough, I didn't feel any of them were particularly close to my Shepard. So I didn't feel like Wrex was Shepard's bro at all! And that was fine, really. So then ME2 happened, and Garrus and Tali turned out to be pretty cool, even with so much of their dialogue ration spent on romance dialogue that I never heard. And while I love Mordin, I never felt like he was really my Shepard's BRO. And, amusingly enough, this is when I finally got the sense that Wrex WAS my Shepard's bro. Because he is seriously the only person who seems 100% thrilled to see you aren't dead. I mean, Joker plays it cool, Garrus and Tali were both in positions where it wasn't exactly the best time for such a bombshell, and we all know how well Ashley and Kaidan take it. But Wrex? "Hey! How are you? :D" Speaking of Ashley, I cannot get through a ME3 playthrough where she's the survivor. I hate what they did to her visually. HATE. Anyhow, so then there's ME3. And Tali and Garrus are both totally awesome, and seriously my Shepard's bestest friends. But with my male Shepard, he doesn't hit the platonic ideal friendship with Tali like my female Shepard and Garrus do, because DudeShep had to shoot Tali down in ME2 and my brain refuses to forget that. And I had to shoot Liara down in ME1. And forgive me if I can't be surprised Bioware didn't expect women to really go for the space dinosaur. :P
But they did! :D I'm so happy about that. And hey, dudes went for the nontypical choice with Tali as well. Bioware figured her "duck feet" would make her less attractive or something.
I have trouble accepting the premise of that article; there's no observable difference between spending time with someone and being nice out of genuine interest (the latter especially if the player also takes Paragon route in ME games) ... and spending time with someone and being nice out of expectation that will make them put out, and being interested only in that. Similarly, the game has no way of knowing whether player says the things they say because that's what they believe in, or because that's an act they're putting on (and the latter occurs also in forming 'real' relationships to boot, further muddling the picture) As such, whether you actually play the Nice Guy or not hinges entirely on the player's motives, which is something the game can neither control, know or prevent if it attempts to allow forming relationships at all. The suggested improvement of having more relationship failures doesn't feel like that much of improvement when you consider there's already very few relationships possible to form in a game to begin with, and depending how you proceed they don't always work out. So it can be argued the games already have plenty of characters who don't view the player as plausible partner (and if anything, the most recent BioWare games feel a bit like step back in this regard, with the cast becoming more protagonist-sexual and less selective in who they're willing to hook up with... but then i also see the devs' argument about wanting to provide this experience to wider playerbase while being constrained by available resources, so it's kind of glass half full/half empty thing)
I'm a Tali fan. Wrex doesn't need to be your bro. Wrex is Wrex, and that's good enough for me. Once I got him in ME1 he was with me as much as possible and I made damn sure to keep him safe.
So I'm going to back track to Lizard_King 's post about game design/mechanics because I think it's interesting. <designer hat on> One of the things I find really interesting, that he points out, are the shortcuts that games provide, ostensibly so a romance can fit in the game mechanics. But I think that trying to fit romance plots into the game mechanics itself is a form of sexism. Take for example the amount of open world games out there. I don't actually do romance plots because I have no particular interest in them, but I think largely they all work the same, in that there's two main components: buy gifts, and explore dialogue trees. (If I am incorrect on the rough idea of how AAA games work with romance plots, feel free to fill me in). Now, one of the things I think is inherently sexist about the mechanics is that the romance plots exist largely in a parallel universe that has little to do with the game. Sure, GTA4 has 'perks' when you get a (b)romance on with someone, but ultimately the romance has little to no impact on the actual core game mechanics. In a bioware game, you can just chat people up while they are in your hub and that's good enough; hit the right trees and it's all good. But if we're talking about open world games, where you can pick your party, where you can buy things, and do various activities that count as vaguely real-esque, then I don't see why they have to shortcut with romance mechanics. One of the big disservices I feel games do to relationship fiction is embed this idea that if you say the magic words, you get sex. IE Press button receive bacon. But I don't feel it actually has to be this way. If you can pick your party, well, maybe if you want to be romantic with someone, you ALWAYS have to pick them. Maybe they aren't optimal for your party layout. Too bad! Maybe if you constantly pick someone they view as 'competition', it may trigger jealousy, if that is part of their character makeup. Maybe if you give gifts to other interests, other characters will then react to you as if you were a player and that's that. I feel the shortcuts aren't actually necessary, that largely the mechanics that exist in these games can function to give a better and more fleshed out *real* romantic story. But since the games are built with inherently sexist intentions, this doesn't work. The game is there to buy into the fiction that you don't have to actually care about a character, you just have to press the right buttons and they will magically love you. So I guess ultimately what I'm saying is that as a game designer, I believe "game mechanics" are simply a cop out, and not an actual reason.
First point: What about Chakwas? I have an obsession with her character though so I'm asking honestly with the assumption that you aren't as biased as me. I freaking love her. MOAR BRANDY! I also detest what they did to Ashley in 3. I mean, Kaiden looks more or less the same, but Ashley looks like she suddenly had a bunch of work done, and it's really off-putting. Between that and her behavior in 1, the mission on Virmire is a total no-brainer for me. I also really hate how Kelly was handled in 2. On the face of it, her character is really awesome, and I loved flirting with her even though in most playthroughs she wasn't my love interest. But once you get "quality time" with her? UGH. WHY IS SHE IN A STRIPPER OUTFIT?! And she's the only character that you can "interact" with, and also has zero dialogue at that point. Why was she treated so much differently than the other love interests? Combine that with the fact that you don't get the same romance achievement with her, and can decide to date her along with someone else... ugh.
Seriously! Of all the characters I might have fallen in love with, Chakwas was totally at the top, for reasons I can't even explain. She was just awesome in a way that none of the other characters were. Maybe because she wasn't written to be so transparently a romantic target? I'll be honest, I thought when I chose to have a drink with her for old time's sake it was going to go places. And strangely, I"m kind of sad it didn't!
Dr. Chakwas was my romantic interest in ME2/3. Bioware just hasn't gotten around to acknowledging it.
I mentioned that I wanted Chakwas as a love interest to hubby, and he responded with "BUT SHE'S OLD" and I replied "MAYBE MY SHEP LIKES COUGARS OKAY" She did kinda make me feel bad for forgetting that Jenkins was a squadmate for like 5 minutes in ME1 though. I had to ask someone who she was talking about. Whoops.
So did Wynne in DA1 and so did your mom in DA2. Bioware just sticks an old-lady head on the sexy body they use for all of their female NPCs.
I don't know if I'd consider that inherently sexist so much as just inherently lazy. While I agree that most in-game romance 'systems' are fairly crude, I've assumed (and I may be wrong) that the crudeness is due to a lack of priority in the development process and the corresponding lack of time and resources devoted to the romance content. In most of the games used as examples here, the romance plots generally feel like they were stapled on to the core game. Even in Bioware games - which generally seem to place a higher priority on enabling platonic and romantic relationships than most - feature relatively crude systems and 'press button, receive romance' mechanics. To some degree I think that's forgivable, given that Mass Effect and Dragon Age aren't specifically dating games, but I agree that it would be great to see some enterprising designers and developers spend more time implementing a romance system that is more organic and engaging, rather than a simplistic series of dialog choices and gift-giving.
Is this where we start talking about general ageism in games? I'm trying to think of any characters in general that are considered "old" and all I can come up with are the custom-characters you build yourself in games like Skyrim (which only really even applies to human characters), and Solid Snake who didn't start out that way. And we all know how gamers reacted to that.
No, they aren't stapled on. The romance plots in bioware games start being written before the game even exists, they are a core feature and they should be treated as a core feature.
I think the most boiled down version of this comes from SW:TOR where you just find an item that your love interest likes, buy a hundred of them, and just keep giving them to him/her every 30 seconds until the bar fills up and they'll sex you (Achievement Granted!) and then never talk to you again.
That wasn't really the point, but we're effectively in agreement that if a game's going to include a romance plot, it should get sufficient time and resources during development so as to make it something more than dialog choices and gift-giving. I just don't think that the reason they aren't more interesting is because of sexism on the part of the developers. I think it's more likely just a rut that they fall into because it's easier to just retread the same wheel instead of reinventing it.
If the intent is to make sexy-time be the end goal achievement of romantic relationships, maybe devs should just take a page out of the PUA playbook and make a full-blown skill-based mini-game out of it. They've already got a game system built you'd just have to model. Let the player be a playa'.
Okay, my knowledge of the Tekken universe is really really minimal, so I'm probably going to ask some dumb questions or something. Isn't he considered an enemy/antagonist? Even though he's a playable character, I thought he was a villain type. Otherwise I'd mention other villain characters that are pretty important/influential in games despite not being playable, like Illusive Man. I was aiming for the more "star" or "hero" type characters. Default protagonists rather than secret or unlockable characters. I guess I should add Mordin to the list though, since he's considered really old for a Salarian (even though old is about 30 human years to them... and perhaps that is just as problematic).
Yes, that's true, he's considered a "boss/bad guy" type I suppose. Even in the later ones where he's the deposed King of the Iron Fist. Kind of like playing as Sagat in Street Fighter. I guess you're looking for someone of the Ken/Ryu standing? Mordin's a good pick, he is clearly characterised as an older figure. I guess Samara is old in human years, although I think she's young to be Matriarch, but is definitely not portrayed as old!
There's actually several "old" characters in the Tekken universe (both "good" and "bad" guys), mostly stemming from them moving forward in time but wanting to still include most of the original characters from the first game.
Even Matriarch Benezia didn't really appear old. I'm sure someone could reason that out as a "feature" of the Asari race, that they never really visibly age, but my guess is that it's lazy design work for those characters. Mordin though does actually appear old (certainly weathered, for lack of a better term), especially in 3.
To elaborate, though, the kinds of characters who don't fit into this mold we have for protagonists (young, fit men or young, sexy women, usually) tend to take the back seat to other roles. Fat women are generally relegated to villain type roles (failing a video game example at the moment, I'm going to throw out Disney's Ursula and Queen of Hearts). Fat men tend to be a jolly stereotype or a villain. Old men and women tend to be villains or sages (see the Old Woman character carried out through the Zelda universe, as well as the Old Man).
It may not be sexism, but it's definitely a conscious reduction to elements that serve a baser nature.
As much as I'd love to hammer video games on this, it's something that is a part of our storytelling heritage. Societal standards of what "beautiful" means changes with time and locality, but those basic archetypes are almost universal. I was trying to think of a game where gender choice mattered and the player's experience changed based on it. Anyone have any ideas?
I really don't think this excuses it. It reinforces the status of "otherism" in that if you are anything other than a fit male or attractive female, your role is better suited to something else. We're okay using any kind of design for villain characters, but only specific types are suitable to be protagonists, and that's something I take issue with. Off the top of my head, I can only think of "minor" situations and conversations that change. Certainly nothing that affects "the game," but sure as hell makes me feel uncomfortable playing. Mostly these are instances where a female character gets hit on by some scummy NPC, but the male equivalent doesn't. I also remember reading an article that pointed out in Dragon Age that female Wardens are allegedly fairly common in the DA universe (through some conversation with Alistair I think, which only happens if you choose a female character), and yet there are zero female Warden NPCs to be found.
And yet something like this could be used by a talented designer to illustrate the privilege men benefit from. The biggest problem I see is that not enough male gamers immersive themselves in a character to appreciate things on that level. If they do choose a female character, too many of them are busy objectifying her themselves.
Which would be the perfect time to drop a bunch of male privilege bullshit right in their face, IMO. Of course, it would have the unanticipated side effect of being directed at real women as well. Maybe games need to ask if you are male or female before letting you pick your character. A male that picks female gets the worst experience ever, which is par for actual women, and a woman that picks female gets to have a nice gaming experience free from real world bullshit.
I personally think that fit people are sexy in general, but I find it telling that you describe the men as fit and the women as sexy. I don't know that you did it intentionally, but it seems to me that it's part of the whole issue here.
Because they shortcut everything in this manner. Press button to perform intricate combat maneuver. Press button to craft an item of highest quality. Press button to loot money and body parts out of animal carcass. Press button to do earth-shattering magic. Press button to impress another person with your wit and personal charm. No matter what you'd add to the romance mechanics that goes beyond talking --and i don't think there's anything wrong with making dialogue core part of relationship, btw-- it can be always simplified to derogatory "press button(s), receive bacon".
In Final Fantasy VII, your choices in who to talk to first in various situations, as well as who you took into your party and other in-game choices, made a difference for the, uh, "romance" subplot.
I did do it intentionally, because the men and women often serve different design purposes within games (though in the case of playable protagonists, this is getting much much better, but easy examples are fighting games like Soul Caliber, where men are generally designed with accentuated muscles and somewhat reasonable armor, and women are designed with boob windows and short skirts in order to show off the goods). I mean, really. (It's also somewhat of a holdover of arguments about sexism re: comic book characters--male characters tend to be designed as male power fantasies, and female characters are designed as male sex fantasies--hence "fit" vs "sexy;" I don't think that it's coincidence that many of the same arguments can apply to video games, as both are still largely male-dominated in production and consumption.)
