Hysterical Broads

The Madonna/Whore Complex

2010-03-29T05:38:00.001-07:00

Samus Aran is an orphan, raised by a mysterious alien race called the Chozo. Infused with their DNA and wearing a bulky power suit, she travels the galaxy as a bounty hunter. She hunts down the Space Pirates and fights alien parasites called Metroid with her cunning, her suit upgrades, and her gunship.

Isabella "Ivy" Valentine is the adopted daughter of an English noble (but truly the spawn of the wielder of Soul Edge, Cervantes, a dread pirate from the Spanish Armanda). Her parents were consumed by Soul Edge, working themselves to death over trying to find out more information of the fabled sword. She inherited their riches and in the process of vowing to avenge their deaths, ended up entangled in the schemes of various villains.

Both characters are rooted in worlds of fantasy and adventure. Both characters have backgrounds that drive them to pursue some fantastic goal with many perils.

So what's the difference?

I've picked these two characters because they perfectly fit how the madonna/whore archetype fits into gaming. Samus is the Madonna. Fans are annoyed when she only wears her Zero Suit, or even by her character design in the upcoming The Other M game. Samus is a real female protaganist, her fans argue. She's strong and determined. IGN says her theme song should be "Dude {Looks Like A Lady}" as after all - she runs around in a power suit and blasts monsters! That's masculine and so crazy a woman could do it. She's placed on hot lists and her sexuality is argued over, but there's a pretty firm consensus that Samus is the ideal that women should live up to.

On the other hand, Ivy has a dominatrix style, down to her weapon. Her legs are more elongated in every gap, her hips and shoulders narrow, her breasts are enlarged. She has a husky, sexy voice that she chuckles and taunts her opponents in. She is utterly unrealistic in every way, from anatomy to character. Ivy is the Whore of the Madonna/Whore relationship.

Of course, just as in life, neither woman gets a fair shake from the Madonna/Whore complex. Ivy's background, which initially attracted her to me, is shattered. It is hard to take her seriously at all as a character. When you complain, people tell you that it is too much to take women in fighting games (or fantasy worlds, or MMOs, or science fiction, or comic books...) seriously, as after all it is just a fantasy. Samus is treated as a novelty sometimes. In her first appearance, she poses in a pink bikini for the viewer, and many people were shocked that she was a woman. Every depiction where she is not in her suit is criticized. When gamers complain about her breasts being too large or her depiction unrealistic, you wonder where these guys were when every other game was released. It seems only protagonists like Samus deserve their defense.

It's refreshing to see games where women are rounded, complex beings. Of course, even then, these characters are not exempt from criticism. Even Commander Shepard isn't exempt from criticism, as she can be a 'whore' for having such flirty dialogue with Jacob. (Male Shepard is never called a whore, even though you can have sex with Jack then go and romance Miranda)

Ideally, women would be... well, people, and it wouldn't be a big deal if they fought monsters. They could have character designs that suited their backgrounds (as opposed to just wank material). Maybe we'd have more characters with the respect and integrity of Samus, without the impossible standards.

Sigh.

2010-03-16T09:02:00.000-07:00

This bothers me.

It bothers me a lot, basically.

First of all, CAD is a big believer in the myth of the Gamer Girlfriend. Lilah plays video games - in fact, she's better at them than Ethan! She plays them for a living! So Ethan buys her a video game even though he knows she's going to disappear into it.

Up until now I'm like "Oh okay that's not so bad" because hell, it's realistic. My boyfriend gave me a copy of The Wrath of the Lich King with tears in his eyes because he knew it was like standing at a train station watching your girlfriend travel off to an exciting new land without you. (He didn't see me for a few days, and I may have hung up on him once or twice with "QUIET I NEED TO LEVEL")

In CAD though, Ethan is the centering force in the entire comic, so he can go work for Bioware under Lucas's name or join the Mac Panthers or set a house on fire or whatever the hell wacky shit he does and that's okay. But Lilah getting tied up in a video game means he needs a boob contract.

And they say feminists hate men. I can't imagine anything more condescending then being told I couldn't let my partner do her own thing for a few hours because I needed to look at her body too much.

Another reason why the myth of the Perfect Gamer Girlfriend is poop.

Oh man.

2010-03-09T05:00:00.001-08:00

I think a great benchmark of personal success at writing online is my very first hatemail, regarding my piece up on Left Mouse Button "The Myth of Meritocracy in Online Gaming".

It calls me a feminazi and the basic gist of it is "STFU", but it's fantastic. I love it.

Things are pretty great overall lately. I'm pulling out of a hard depression, almost finished my first year of university with a pretty decent average, approaching a four year anniversary with The Boy, and the reaction to the Myth of Meritocracy has really been the icing on the cake.

I think I'm going to print this hate mail out and tuck it in a little folder that says "You're doing something right."

Identity, Choice and Gaming

2010-03-09T04:55:00.000-08:00

http://www.leftmousebutton.net/gaming/identity-and-gaming

Another new post for Left Mouse Button.

Why Dead Space 2 Is Scaring Me

2010-02-18T07:42:00.001-08:00

I have another piece up on Left Mouse Button, check it out!

http://www.leftmousebutton.net/gaming/why-dead-space-2-is-scaring-me

The Myth of Meritocracy in Online Gaming Response

2010-02-09T11:46:00.000-08:00

For those who didn't read it, I'm going to post up the post I did for Left Mouse Button last week. It is a doozy.

http://www.leftmousebutton.net/gaming/article-the-myth-of-meritocracy

Read all that? Good.

Well, it was linked on Rock Paper Shotgun as well.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/02/05/girls-just-want-to-have-dungeon-runs/

I delved into the maw of madness, and I found an interesting pattern. Mainly, there's three big categories of responses I want to think about.

The first: I/my guild isn't like that!

This argument is probably the most valid. My own guild is pretty good on the sexism front (it's not exactly feminist-friendly, but for WoW-standards it's fucking fantastic.) And I'm sure not a small number of guilds that are similar to this exist. Not everyone who plays WoW is a Jake, obviously. However, anecdotal evidence is useless for World of Warcraft. I'm sure it's possible to find a feminist-friendly guild. I'm sure it's also genuinely possible to find an Evangelical Christian guild, or a Tea Party Republican guild, or a guild of pro-wrestling fans, or a grandparents only guild, or whatever. This does not make it the norm. There are eleven million people playing World of Warcraft. I feel comfortable with saying that the majority of players aren't actively and loudly sexist - but they don't seem to have a problem letting the real sexists run rampant.

This argument also ignores a very important point: What YOU think is sexism may not be what Molly Sue, your guild's paladin healer thinks is sexism. Someone might say, "Molly Sue get your ass in the kitchen" and Molly Sue might go "lol" in chat. You don't know if she's just trying to avoid making a fuss or whatever - text has no emotion. You don't know if people whisper Molly Sue, or use Vent binds. You don't know if Molly Sue secretly hates everyone in your guild for their woman - in - the kitchen jokes or whatever. World of Warcraft's chat thrives off some measure of privacy.

Plus, there are No Girls Allowed guilds who are pretty comfortably high in world progression. The aptly named No Girls Allowed is actually 38th in world progression with that policy. I'm sure they have their pick of recruits.

Secondly, there's the 'well, girls DO cause drama and the 'good players' who get distracted by girls outweigh the girls in value so it just makes sense to have a no girls allowed policy!!'

First of all, perhaps one or two ladies caused drama - of course it's not true that all women will (but of course, that's how it works, hattip to xkcd). Secondly, I find it disturbing that people claim women bring harassment on themselves and men just can't help it.

This is obviously in different leagues, but at its core? That's the same logic rape apologists use. So when it crops up in discussions on WoW, that only cements my belief that geek culture mirrors some really disturbing parts of mainstream culture.

Then of course, there's the third argument: You're crazy, stop whining, stop being a drama queen. There's no logical response to this, as it's not a logical argument, so let me get on their level for a moment and say "Fuck no, I'm here to stay."

Long live the Feminist Geek, and it feels good to stir up the beehive. Hopefully some of the people who wrote these comments have a seed of knowledge planted, and if not, I won't let them silence me.

Good news, everyone!

2010-02-04T17:15:00.000-08:00

I have a piece up on Leftmousebutton.net about the Myth of Meritocracy in online gaming.

Thoughts on Wii Fit and Feminine Gaming

2010-02-01T03:19:00.000-08:00

The Wii Fit has recently helped a woman shed over one hundred pounds, according to Kotaku. (http://kotaku.com/5460810/woman-loses-112-lbs-thanks-wii-fit). She now parades around in sexy lingerie and feels free to have sex with her husband. Good for her, I suppose, but this got me started on a chain of thought.

The Wii has been marketed in a very unisex way - the Wii want to play campaign was aimed towards families, children, and new gamers. This has led to the Wii heavily skewing female in 'gamer' perception - when it was big and new and you had to wait for six hours at a Walmart to get one, dudebros were annoyed and vocally so about having to compete with soccer moms for a Wii. The Wii is seen as "Kidtendo", "watered down", "not for 'real' gamers" - and a large part of this likely comes from the fact that the Wii is trash talked on gaming blogs and forums. Hardcore, mature games like Dead Space: Extraction or House of the Dead aren't selling.

That's okay though - because casual games are selling like hotcakes. Wii Fit is an especially popular one. Of course, casual games are seen as 'less than', and casual games aimed at women (women disproportionally play casual games) are even less well regarded.

So the fact that Wii Fit is aimed towards women is a real thumb in the eye to hardcore gamers from Nintendo - which I have to admit, I appreciate a little out of schnaudenfreud, and I appreciate that Nintendo is continuing to cater to a female audience.

I just wish that there were more interesting results then women getting thin and wearing lingerie.

Quick Hit: Geek Comedy Interview

2010-01-19T11:38:00.000-08:00

I'm working on a book, in school, and working, so I'm busy.

Here's an interview from the book I'm working on, a little snippet while I work on some beefier projects. It's with one of the columnists from Cracked, Bobby "Fatboy" Roberts on geek comedy, women, and success.

Q: Cracked.com is a popular site, seen as being reliably hilarious. How would you describe the spirit of Cracked? What sort of reader are you appealing to?

A: This is probably a better question for the editor-in-chief, Jack O'Brien, but if I had to answer, more as a reader than a contributor, I'd say the spirit is educational smartassery. The emphasis is on the comedy, but you don't get to do the jokes if you don't know your shit. And you can't just have a knowledge of the subject you're shining a spotlight on (or skewering) you gotta know how to write succinctly and effectively. A large amount of the most-seen articles on Cracked read like textbook entries, if the guy writing the textbook was raised on a diet of George Carlin and Bill Hicks.

Q: Cracked has gone through many lives – as a MAD Magazine imitator, and later a boys magazine a la Maxim. It finally succeeded as a website. While most print media is struggling in the current economy, do you think other factors contributed to Cracked's success on the Internet?

A: From what I understand, Cracked's success on the internet came from stepping back and looking at what was already working as far as original comedy on the internet goes, and then gathering up as many of those writers and content creators as possible. Again, I'm not so sure about how it happened, I wasn't there at the time, you'd probably wanna talk to the editor on that note.

Q: Much of the content on Cracked has a similar 'feel' in terms of tone and style. Are there guidelines that writers have to follow?

A: There's not really a set of guidelines or bullet-points, so far as I know. But there is an editorial influence that does help to shape the tone of the articles, be it through suggestions or rewrites and line-edits by the editors themselves. Never so much as to erase the individual voice of the author, but just enough so that there exists a cohesive tonal whole that carries over from piece to piece throughout the site.

Q: What sort of guidelines do you follow as a writer? Are there restrictions to your style or content? Are there lines you won't cross regarding offensive content, words, or imagery?

A: Me, personally, I don't restrict myself too much. I'd like to say "I don't give a fuck about offensiveness," but the truth is, if you're writing something and you haven't done the work in the set-up to make a punchline about, say for example, the mentally handicapped, sound *right* then either that joke needs to be rewritten or jettisoned completely and an entirely different angle needs to be taken. It's a kind of a nebulous area, especially since humor is so subjective. There's a line, and it's a thin one, between being edgy and just being a jackass. I guess the first rule on that note is that if you're consciously TRYING to find that line, you're doing it wrong. There's a way to make even the most offensive topic funny, but you gotta set up that punchline pretty carefully.

Q: Cracked covers a lot of 'geek' topics, like video games, Star Wars or kids cartoons. Do you feel like there's a good way to define 'geek' humor?

A: I think the definition of Geek underwent a sort of shifting about a decade back, and has been gradually evolving as it goes. At this point a "Geek" is simply someone who is immersed in pop culture. Maybe in some instances it's more specialized than that, broken down to a more specific subset of pop culture, but really, that's it. Geek has come to mean "Enthusiast" more than anything. Sports Geek, Movie Geek, Knitting Geek, whatever, at it's core its the same sort of community-building/community-based shared interest in an aspect of pop culture at the root of it. And considering how largely pop culture plays a part in most people's daily lives, the stigma of being a "geek," is rapidly waning, save for the fact "geeks" are self-identifying with the word almost as if they're trying to reclaim it from its previously negative connotations, and in the process, prolonging those connotations as the geeks engage in this heirarchal "real geek" structure wherein they use their "geek cred" to beat up on other, lesser nerds online for not being as real.

Jesus Christ that was a long ass sentence. And geeky as fuck, too.

Basically, Geek Humor is humor that has anything to do with pop culture, period. It gets more obviously geek the more specific your pop culture reference gets.

Q: What characteristics would you apply to geek humor? Do you feel that geek humor has any negative slants, such as a strong misogynist streak or a tendency for racism?

A: I'd say the most negative slant Geek Humor has is this sort of forced, feigned sense of superiority. That slight twinge of Comic-Book Guy that a lot of essayists and bloggers and recappers glaze their paragraphs with. Snark is the easy default when it comes to these things, and a lot of authors (myself included, more than a few times) will fall back on the authoritative voice, casting themselves as the armchair know-it-all who has the easy solution at their fingertips if ONLY the world would just listen to them (and give them a couple thousand extra hits so the google ads will funnel a nickel into their paypal accounts)

Sometimes misogyny and racism sorta sneak their way into the subtext, but a lot of that seems to be done accidentally, by people who don't quite realize what it is they're saying. I don't think it's necessarily a racism/sexism thing in a lot of cases, it's just that these people aren't familiar with these other viewpoints because, yunno, they DON'T GO OUTSIDE, period. Seriously though, if you're dealing with geeky writers, writers who obviously have a bit more tunnel-visioned focus on their subjects, it makes sense that things falling outside of that tunnel vision aren't going to be as easy a grasp for that writer, at least until whatever they ARE staring at does an episode or writes an issue that covers that particular social ill.

Q: While women are using the Internet in droves, there aren't many strong female comedy presences on the web. Do you think this will change in the future? What are steps to making this a reality?

A: It'll change in the future, sure, much in the same way there's more female stand-ups than there were in the 80's. Barely, but there is more. However, the troubling part of using that analogy is that there's STILL a perception that women on the club circuit simply just aren't as funny as the guys. People have written veritable tomes on why this could be, citing delivery, inability for large parts of the stand-up audience to relate, so on and so on. I don't have the answer myself. I do know that it seems to be a little easier for that gulf to be bridged online, when the element of sound is removed and all you have left are the words. That equalizes things a little. The only way the numbers will even up is if more women put themselves out there.

Q: Overall, do you feel like geek humor a positive step forward for comedy or a negative step back?

A: I'm not so sure it's a forward/back sort of thing, really. I think it's just a decent component of the whole. I think it helps that people can get the ha-ha's they need to make their day go a bit smoother, and those ha-ha's can be a little better tailored towards their specific geeky focus. On the flip, I think it's healthy for people to step out of that geek comfort zone every now and again and experience other people's geeky interests, too.

On Risks and Writing

2010-01-15T00:59:00.000-08:00

The WGA Nominees for Best Video Game Writing are out. They are:

* Assassin's Creed II, Story by Corey May, Script Writers Corey May, Joshua Rubin, Jeffrey Yohalem; Ubisoft Entertainment
* Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, Written by Jesse Stern, Additional Writing Steve Fukuda, Story by Todd Alderman, Steve Fukuda, Mackey McCandlish, Zied Rieke, Jesse Stern, Jason West, Battlechatter Dialogue, Sean Slayback; Activision
* Uncharted 2: Among Thieves, Written by Amy Hennig; Sony Computer Entertainment
* Wet, Written by Duppy Demetrius; Bethesda Softworks
* X-Men Origins: Wolverine, Script Writer Marc Guggenheim; Activision

Now, I may disagree with some of them just by glancing at them - the fact that Wolverine is on there when that's not a proper video game franchise makes me scowl - but I haven't played all of them so I can't judge.

Let's talk about video game writing. Video game writing is different from a novel or a script or a screen play, obviously. I feel like video games have proven that they can do some things more effectively than a book - for instance, when guiding Gordon through City 17, my heart was racing, I was sweating, I was straight out terrified. There's a moment in the first Call of Duty: Modern Warfare where you play as a politician being led to his execution, and I honestly found it more uncomfortable than the "No Russian" level.

In other ways, video game writing is weak. It's immature. Characters sometimes don't talk like human beings. There are bugs. Sometimes you have to cycle through menus. ("What can I do for you?" "I want to know about the forest." "It's huge and leafy." "I want to know more. "What can I do for you?"...)

And sometimes the story in a game can be fleeting and insubstantial, not even a story at all. I remember when the writing in Left 4 Dead won awards. I was bewildered. The plot in L4D was nonexistant. You watched the cutscene, picked a survivor, and played. Of course, when panicking for the first time over witch cries and boomer bile, I missed little things. I missed the quips and relationships the characters shared with each other. I missed bodies covered with a blanket, a hasty goodbye by other survivors who had to leave their buddies behind and move on. I didn't read the graffiti at first. There is a world to L4D, and it's so very human and natural. In some ways the story is stronger for not stopping you.

But what makes the story of a game succeed? Being static and stagnant is no way to answer that question: designers had to take risks.

A lot of people are asking where Dragon Age is on the list of nominees. Dragon Age was a fantastic game. I loved it. I thought the characters were fantastic. I'll replay it a million times. It didn't take risks. The story was pure fantasy that borrowed from Warhammer and Tolkien and Blizzard and D&D and it was fantastic but it was interchangeable with other games. The characters were well-written, but in some ways they felt like a step back from your crew in Mass Effect.

(Plus, Dragon Age may have been straight out disqualified. You need a script to be nominated, it's possible that Dragon Age's sprawling RPG layout had no script that met the qualifications.)

Modern Warfare 2 took risks. I felt like it didn't succeed. I felt like No Russian was a bit of a failure. But the game tried. Infinity Ward were playing with the medium and went to a new place.

Is a game that relies on old tropes more 'successful' writing than a game that tries new tricks but fails 'better'?

That's a question that'll be answered once the winner is announced, I suppose.

D&D and Women

2010-01-11T04:01:00.000-08:00

http://contexts.org/socimages/2010/01/10/the-evolution-of-the-dungeons-and-dragons-playbook/

Sociological Images takes down the evolution of the D&D book covers here. Lisa shows how the covers evolved from archetypal male figures - the knight, the wizard, etc. into a genderless cover that merely looks like a leather bound tome. The Martial, Arcane and Divine player book shows a woman on the front in a nice change. However, she is dressed in robes that show her legs and breasts. She is sexualized, while her lizard companion is not.

Of course, the D&D cover irks me slightly. Only slightly. As a fantasy fan, I've learned to make allowances for this and fast. The revealing caster robes are a fallback for artists who can't get away with midriff baring breastplates or chainmail bikinis - it's a great way to show skin without breaking belief. It's only recently that I've started to notice the bullshit in that old trope, and as such it doesn't seem as glaringly impractical as other sexist fantasy cliches.

I have to note that the female character isn't thrusting her breasts or butt out, she isn't swaying her hips, she isn't making foxy eyes at the reader. She's wearing a stupid, sexy robe - but she's braced for battle in a dynamic pose. When you're a woman into fantasy, you take what you can get. It's not perfect, but it is better than other fantasy depictions of women. (I'm looking at you, Blizzard)

What does D&D do right? It shows women characters everywhere. Female dwarves, female elves, female paladins, female beserkers. It uses feminine pronouns sometimes in text. It shows women playing the game. It mentions women in anecdotes or in examples of rules. Reading through it, I knew that I wasn't a token or an outlier. They were acknowledging my existence and working to include me.

More importantly, it is a system that allows you to tell whatever story with whatever characters you want. The system allows for any combination of traits. Unlike Warhammer, where you are constrained by the army's lore and rules or World of Warcraft where the options are limited, you can be whatever you want.

Hell, you can even be a mage who wears padded robes that don't expose your vital organs.

Gasp!

2010-01-10T21:27:00.000-08:00

I'm working on a project right now. I'm looking for stories, anecdotes, and interviews from women gamers or men who have played with women gamers.

You can contact me at c2marshall at gmail dot com.

Thanks!

No, I'm just me.

2010-01-03T05:22:00.000-08:00

I play games. I've been told that this makes me not a 'real' gamer, an addict, a nerd dork geek and loser, and the perfect woman on separate occasions. I've had guys ask me out, propose marriage, ask me my address, tell me I'm amazing because I'm not like those other women, and so on and so forth.

Let's pretend, for a moment, that a woman playing World of Warcraft or Fallout is rare and scary. Even so -- are you really that immature that you would try to date someone based on that fact? It reminds me of how men say "I want a gaming girlfriend!" and then realize one day that that means they will have to fight for the 360 to play Dragon Age.

The gaming girlfriend trope is so hurtful because it erases the individual circumstances and personalities of women. We become collections of hobbies and looks to pick and choose from at your leisure. I like Cassandra because she plays video games - not because she's (hopefully) funny and smart. Hell, not even because she's pretty and make my boy parts tingle. Because she plays video games and she's least likely to throw a fit about me playing them.

THAT'S the measure by which you court a woman?

The 'I want a gamer girlfriend!' befuddles me for so many reasons, but that has to be the top one.

The Belivable Protagonist

2010-01-01T03:13:00.000-08:00

The protagonist is more important in a video game than in a book or a movie. In a book or a movie, the protagonist is a vehicle. We see things through their eyes, and sometimes a book about a flawed or terrible protagonist can still come out to a worthwhile experience. In video games, I have an impossible time playing as a tragically flawed protagonist. I've started up a Warden who's only goal is to eradicate the Darkspawn at all costs in Dragon Age: Origins with the goal of fulfilling all achievements -- and I hate playing her. I'm playing a Light Side Jedi in the first KOTOR, and the insane brutality of the Dark Side achievements aren't luring me at all. As a protagonist, you act in their shoes. Reading about Holden Caulfield bothered me. I can't describe how painful it would be to act out and play through his journey,

There are different types of protagonists, all with their own flaws in games. The medium is still immature -- maybe I'll be able to play a Holden Caulfield type and the game will be constructed so that I feel the same mix of empathy, pity, disdain and fear that I did when I read Catcher in the Rye. But here's what we have for now:

The Unmolded Clay: The Exile from KOTOR 2, The Vault Dweller, the Chosen One, the Wanderer from the Fallout games, Shepard from Mass Effect, The Warden from Dragon Age

The Unmolded Clay is a character who always has some consistancies - the Exile always chose to follow Revan and Malak, the Dweller always went to find the Water Chip for his Vault, the Chosen One always went to find the G.E.C.K. and ended up saving the world, the Warden is always a Gray Warden who is fighting the Archdemon, and Shepard was always the first human Spectre.

The Unmolded Clay is interesting because of the amount of variety you can have in one character (usually determined by a morality bar). Shepard, whether Paragon or Renegade, is always slightly single-minded, fiercely protective of her interests and beliefs, able to build and lead a crew and stoke loyalty in their hearts and save the day. However, Shepard can be male or female, xenophobic or inclusive, empathetic or violent, loyal or treacherous. Shepard is, to me, always a Paragon woman who is backed by her second-in-comman Kaiden at all times against all dangers, a protector of the galaxy. To you, Shepard might be something completely different.

There are obvious strengths to the Unmolded Clay - I always have insane amounts of fun talking to people about how we solved different conflicts in Dragon Age - but weaknesses too. In Dragon Age, my character never seemed to show much emotion. She was a literal blank slate. Technological limitations led to a lack of animations or voice acting for the Warden, and it limited my experience somewhat. There's also the old stereotype of saving a bucket of kittens from a villain or eating those kittens alive - the extreme black and white morality that the Unmolded Clay is only beginning to grow out of.

Fallout 3 handled the Unmolded Clay clumsily - I could shoot an innocent woman and her family in the head, but as long as I was willing to hand bottles of purified water to a hobo over and over again, I'd turn out to be an okay guy.

The Silent Protagonist: Gordon Freeman from Half-Life, Isaac Clarke from Dead Space, Mario from the Mario Brothers, Link from the Legend of Zelda, Samus Aran from Metroid.

The Silent Protaganist grunts, breathes heavily inside their armor, nods, squints, or makes facial expressions sometimes - Wind Waker Link and Twilight Princess link almost don't fall into the Silent Protaganist category at all - but otherwise they are silent, unspeaking and meant for the player to simply be.

There are of course, immediate flaws to this theory. Gordon Freeman is a white male with glasses and a degree. I'm a woman. There's an immediate suspension of disbelief there, so I have work a little bit harder to get into his head. This could arguably be solved by putting a mask on him and calling him "Doctor Freeman", but that could also eliminate the greatest strength of the Silent Protagonist, and that is his allies.

Alyx loves Gordon, not Cassandra, and the way they interact is clearly heartwarming. As was watching Link try to deal with Tetra, or save his sister. The silent protagonist allows us to inhibit an existing character and pick up his baggage, skills and charms without ever having to disagree with him. If Gordon ever told Alyx "Wow, you're really annoying. Can you shut up?" That would not be a hero I wanted to play (although some people do have this reaction to Alyx!)

Of course, it's always painful to see Alyx grin at you and go "Silent type, huh?"

Finally, we have the Full Fledged Character: Nathan Drake from Uncharted, Niko Bellic from Grand Theft Auto IV, Altair and Ezio from Assassins Creed, Harry, James and Heather from the Silent Hill series

This seems to be a less popular protagonist nowadays, and part of that is one of the earlier flaws I mentioned: sometimes you hate the guy you're suppose to be controlling. Niko Bellic was a well-rounded, well-written character. I hated him. I didn't want to play him or romance ladies or go bowling with Roman. Maybe the GTA download packs are for me, maybe not. In any case, I never beat GTA IV, because as soon as I hit a hard spot and got stuck I realized I didn't care what Niko's ultimate fate was and put in Mass Effect instead.

The most well-done protagonist of this type, in my opinion, is Nathan Drake. He shouts "Shit, shit!" when you have no cover and a grenade is thrown. He scoffs "Yeah, THIS will help" at machine gun ammo when you're up against a helicopter. He speaks for the player - he's simple, but very well written. Snake is another great example. The codex is a brilliant, optional way to bring him to life.

What sort of protagonist have you loved? What kind have you hated? I love Bioware Unmoldeds, Silent Protagonists are fine if a little weak for me, and Characters are hit and miss. It all comes down to preference -- but it really makes or breaks a game for me.

December

2010-01-01T01:44:00.003-08:00

Was busy. Things will hopefully be more productive in January. Ironically, when I'm at school, I write more. I think its because my brain is less of a fine mush.

Happy New Year, Hystericals!

Competitive Gaming and the Art of Shittalking

2009-12-29T06:23:00.000-08:00

When I was a kid, my brother got Super Smash Brothers Melee one snowy Christmas. I received Mario Kart Double Dash. As children are wont to do, we ran down to the Gamecube and had a physical fight over who would get to play first (a conflict only resolved by getting a second Gamecube for $30 at a yardsale). Since he had a few years, inches, and pounds of muscle on me from his lifeguarding job, he won. Christmas Day was spent drunk on homemade Baileys and trying to get blue sparks. It was one of the better Christmas Days that I can remember. Of course, the honeymoon with Double Dash didn't last -- I fell in love with Melee.

Melee is a pretty complicated game for a party brawler - it still has a strong tournament following. My brother and I played for years. I was always Kirby, and he was always Captain Falcon, and in retrospect I think a little bit of it was humoring me. I appreciate that, still. Years of practice eventually meant I could go toe to toe with real tournament players, even though Wavedashing was beyond me.

But the most important skill I learnt was to shittalk. Ruthless, rude, out of control trash talk that had no boundaries. Daniel and I traded harsh words before we'd beat the crap out of each other in the game. We'd unplug each other's controllers with our toes. We'd try to pin each other under giant couch cushions during an intense game of sudden death.

My oldest brother bowed out of our games early on. The other brother had no interest in video games. So it was just me and Daniel, until he moved out. Melee gathered dust.

When I began dating Aaron, we hauled out the Gamecube and plugged it in. And out of habit, the relentless foul shittalk began. Aaron was taken aback. He hated it. He grew up in a household where he played video games with his mom. He asked me to stop. I was just as surprised. What's the point of competition without a little ribbing and profanity?

Here's the deal with the practice of shittalk - it requires a deep well of trust and friendship. It's fun as hell, but you can't haul it out on a first date or to a new friend. It's something that requires consent and boundaries and it has to be talked out before hand. Shittalk is like sex, in that people love to bring it out spontaneously but it should probably have a good, open talk before hand.

And here's the other problem with it: competitive, fun, friendly shittalking is dead.

The problem with shittalking is not only that deep bond of friendship and trust that it requires -- which is certainly attainable, if rare, on the Internet. Shittalking belonged back on that couch in my mom's basement, or in my boyfriend's bedroom. It's a real life art. And games are moving off the couch that you play with friends and onto Xbox live. Shittalking still exists, but it's been perverted beyond measure. Shittalking is now teabagging a guy you just killed in Halo. It's profane. It's foul. It's a slap in the face from a stranger you haven't said two words to. It just pisses you off.

Of course, maybe it was always that way? Those fond memories of shittalking with Daniel as Captain Falcon got smashed off Hyrule Temple may be fleeting, rose-colored memories that are impossible to replicate?

Whatever the case, it's a practice that you probably don't want to bust out on first contact. It has a time and a place, as rare as they might be.

Returning to Old School

2009-12-20T10:55:00.000-08:00

Sorry for the absence lately, life has been crazy because of the holidays. I got Dragon Age as an early Christmas gift, so expect a post about that sometime soonish. In the meantime, this post has been laying unfinished for a while, so I went ahead and completed it for your viewing pleasure. Hope you enjoy it!

I am the proud owner of a SNES emulator on my computer. This emulator, in various permutations, has existed on both my current and last computer (I use Macs, so I've only had to buy two computers in the past seven years). I revel in its use, although when I have a new console game to play I don't pay much attention to it. Still, it's always there for me to fall back on, and I enjoy it thoroughly when I do.

I've always been a big fan of the SNES because it was one of the first gaming systems that made certain things possible. It seems silly to think about now, when we have such visually delightful games as Dragon Age and Mass Effect to stare at, but graphics in games like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy III were cutting age back in the day, and I think that they (unlike some games *coughcoughFFVIIcoughcough*) stand the test of time in this regard. The first Zelda game might've been an amazing breakthrough in terms of how adventure games were played, but you can't argue that the graphics still look cool. Chrono Trigger, on the other hand, with beautiful backgrounds and sprites that have real expressions (albeit a bit distorted, but you can certainly tell how they're feeling at any given time), is still visually enjoyable to play, almost 15 years after it was released. And let's not even go into how awesome FF III is and was. Personally, I think every FF since then has fallen short in one way or another, some more than others.

But the game I'm enjoying right now is a bit different from those games. Don't get me wrong, I play those games regularly as well (I even bought the PS2 port of Chrono Trigger last year, although it isn't the best port, the game still rocks), but right now I'm in the mood for a simpler kind of game, a game without swords or monsters.

Yes, this is the part where I confess that I love the original Harvest Moon for SNES. Before there were sheep, or the ability to turn eggs into mayo, or mine for ore, or upgrade your weapons multiple times, or any number of other cools things in the newer Harvest Moon games, there was just one man, his dog, and his farm. You could only carry two tools at once (no fancy backpacks for us) and only one item, and you couldn't do anything while carrying that item. Your horse required no upkeep at all, no petting or riding to make it happy. You had the choice of raising chickens and cows (on the same feed, no special feed for the chickens) and raising crops only in Spring and Summer (and one has to wonder if any of the developers for the game knew anything about farming, since most harvesting happens in Fall) and you had the choice of five lovely ladies to marry, although they all look identical post-wedding except for hair color.

Don't get me wrong, I love the newer Harvest Moon games as well. I had HM 64, as well as HM for PS, and I've dabbled in HM for GBA as well. Sheep and mining and fishing when you want to and all the interesting people in town make for a greatly expanded story, and I will admit that there are times in the original HM game (which only lasts two and a half years, giving you very little time to finish all the objectives without serious gaming chops) that I wish for all these other things.

At the same time, though, there's an attraction to working with less. Some games these days are so involved, have so many different choices, that you can count yourself as "winning" even if you get half the continent slaughtered and end up sacrificing a virgin to the gods (well, some may enjoy that, but it isn't winning in my book). There are so many side quests one can do, so many strange things to explore, that it's almost over-stimulating, and sometimes frustratingly so. Also, considering the ability to change the difficulty level of a game, and/or all the options to victory, it can sometimes be a little too easy to win. Back when Harvest Moon came out, there was one path to play. You could choose a different wife, and choose if you wanted to raise cows or chickens, both, or neither, you could choose to go to festivals or not, and that was it. Sometimes, it's more rewarding to play a game where you know there are only one or two options, because you make the most of it. Certain games these days, which would require more than 100 hours to really fully explore, can get kind of exhausting. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good replay as much as anyone, but sometimes I want to replay a game because it's familiar. Chrono Trigger had multiple endings one could try with the New Game + option, and unlocking all those endings are certainly fun, but I'm just as likely to just play it through the regular way, and beat Lavos at the end by going through the Black Omen, as to restart and beat him at the beginning, or in the middle.

Old school games can appear silly to those who didn't play them when they came out. I certainly don't know many ten year olds these days who can appreciate FF III or Harvest Moon. There's certainly a nostalgia factor at work here, but again, these aren't bad games that fall apart under scrutiny. Aside from factors of sexism and racism, these games are well-constructed and still enjoyable, more than a decade after they were released. They could be entirely updated to have modern graphics, cutscenes, and tons of new modes of play and side quests, but I would still go back to my original ROMs to play, because these are games that are enjoyable no matter when you play them.

Don't knock the old school, is what I guess I'm saying. You can have your snazzed up games, with amazing graphics and fifty different endings, and I'll probably enjoy them too. But if it weren't for my old school games, most of yours couldn't exist. No harm in enjoying an oldie, if it's worth it.

Ssssh.

2009-12-15T07:03:00.000-08:00

Exam week and Holidays. Need I say more?

Good news, everyone!

2009-12-09T03:12:00.000-08:00

Immersion in games is a tricky thing. Many times, its out of the game's control whether you're immersed fully in the story or not. One moment I'm Cassandra the Gray Warden, hacking through Darkspawn at the side of my beloved Alistair, the next the dishwasher goes off and the phone rings and someone's knocking at the door and I see that it's 4:00 and I should really get the grocery shopping done so I can cook tonight. I have adrenaline pumping through my veins as I have the perfect ambush set up, and as I rush behind a squad of enemies throwing grenades and making precision strikes, the cat starts yowling for food and the boyfriend starts asking me how I'm enjoying the game so far. I'm running at the side of Francis, Bill and Louis, shouting that there's a hunter behind us and a smoker on the ledge to the west, don't shoot that car and move move move - then my internet goes down or I have to step away from the computer to howls of 'ragequit'.

So ideally, I'm a fan of games where short bursts of gameplay with lots of opportunity to take a break is possible. I hate save points. I hate gauntlets. I hate gauntlets followed by unpausable twenty minute cutscenes. And so on.

There's a range to how much immersion breaking one can tolerate. Dungeons and Dragons has the lowest possible standard. We use broken Warhammer figures and Lord of the Rings themed Monopoly pewter figures on cardboard maps with paper grids glued on. When my cleric Anorra flips a table over, the DM puts a little paper table on its side and puts the little pewter Galadriel behind it and asks me what my next action will be while I move my chair so our rogue can go get another pop and hollers if anyone wants a refresher on their doritos. Survival horror, in my opinion, has the lowest tolerance for immersion-breaking. Dead Space and Resident Evil 4 control nearly exactly the same, but they're both billed as survival horror. Dead Space is about sixty thousand times more effective in this goal because of the atmosphere, music, sound cues, npcs, communication system, and so on. But there's a reason that people talk about playing their horror games at 3am with the lights off - they're helping the game along to create the perfect environment. This is also probably why there's the stereotypes of giggling girls shrieking into their popcorn at the slasher films - the idea of breaking the tension and denying the film's reality.

Immersion is crucial to a game because a game is useless if I do not care about its protagonist and their goals. I can barely watch movies because I don't see secret agent Salt, I see Angelina Jolie, and I spend the entire time going "Hey, why is Angelina Jolie talking to that guy? Why is Angelina Jolie in a fight? Who's car is that, is that Angelina Jolie's boss' car?" and so on. Video games don't suffer from this, as you can often create your own face, and whenever characters are 'lifted' from real people those people are not celebrities but instead models.

One of the biggest problems I have with immersion though is a wink from the devs. I can't stand it. Blizzard does this all the time in World of Warcraft and it drives me insane. When storming the dread Icecrown Citadel to confront Arthas for the evil he's inflicted upon the world - and Arthas is a big bad who's obliterated one kingdom, wreaked insane havoc upon an entire continent, genocided one race succesfully and did a damn good job with two others and then raised huge portions of them to serve him in undeath, so it's important to the story that we take him down - and we run into Professor Putricide. The name is bad enough, but he's a Futurama reference who constantly spouts "Good news, everyone, I'm going to have to slaughter you all!" and such.

Fuck!

The old Fallout games did stuff like this too, like Juan Cruz the Hubtologist in the burned out church. But Putricide is so blatant and dumb that I can't get over it. Like I've said, you're already fighting a million factors for immersion - doubled by the fact that you're playing with 9-24 other people and you're all on Vent - and they ruin what they describe as an 'epic' experience by throwing this in.

What immersion-breakers bother you? What's annoying and what's unforgivable? Is there any way to recapture immersion once it's broken? Weigh in.

No Russian

2009-12-07T20:14:00.001-08:00

This issue is a little old now, because I promised myself I wouldn't comment on No Russian from Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 until I actually sat down and played it. It's something that's gotten a lot of attention in gaming circles, but hasn't really penetrated into the mainstream media yet. Once FOX gets a hold of this, it could potentially turn into a shitstorm. Spoilers for the Call of Duty series will be heavy in this post, as well as a trigger warning for descriptions of lethal violence.

No Russian is a level in the Modern Warfare 2 campaign. You play an American agent, embedded into a Russian terrorist cell as a mole. The title, 'No Russian', refers to your orders at the beginning of the mission - don't speak Russian, kill everything, and be aware you will lose a part of yourself. You and your teammates walk through the airport, and the vast majority of the mission is composed of you and your teammates calmly walking through the airports, setting off metal detectors, and shooting everyone in sight. Screams are the only audio the game provides, there is no music or atmospheric sounds. People try to drag friends off to safety or crawl out of the fray. A few security guards are the only initial threat, though eventually government forces show up. After your battle with the Russian special forces and cops, your teammates shoot you and leave you for dead - they know you are a mole, and the airport incident is now pinned on the Americans.

No Russian explores the way we connect with our character in first person shooters and the way we follow authority mindlessly in an interesting way. It is sort of like a Bioshock companion piece in that way. The level can be skipped with no consequences due to graphic content, but it is the best look you get at the antagonist of the game.

Ultimately, the impression I got from No Russian was: "This is fucked up... but I wonder if I'd be thinking that if I was Niko Bellic, in a car, hanging up on Roman and blasting the cheesy rock station?" We inflict acts of violence on innocents all the time in video games. Give someone a controller in the sandbox world of Grand Theft Auto or Saint's Row and they'll usually throw grenades, joyride on the sidewlak, and experience the same amount of screaming. Except then, they laugh. No Russian would be far more effective without the sandbox environment.

The rest of the game weakens No Russian - it is a thriller, with explosions and intrigue and an action-movie atmosphere. No Russian feels out of place and clunky. It comes across as a shock tactic made to get internet buzz. Infinity Ward, the developers of Modern Warfare 2, have successfully used first person view as a way to inspire feelings in the viewer. However, No Russian seems to tread old ground and doesn't have the effect they were quite hoping for.

Rock, Paper, Shotgun has more.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/11/19/wot-i-think-about-that-level/#more-21358

Quick Hit

2009-12-06T00:55:00.000-08:00

http://borderhouseblog.com/?p=269

Everyone should read this post on trans issues in Dragon Age. Fantastic piece.

Mirror's Edge and 2D Flash

2009-12-03T06:17:00.000-08:00

http://www.kongregate.com/'s 'DrNeroCF', creator of the fun Fancy Pants Adventure 2d Sonic-esque platformer but with more running and jumping and less speed and rings, has apparently worked with EA to make Mirror's Edge 2D.

http://mirrorsedge2d.com/

Now, when I first saw a link somewhere to Mirror's Edge 2D, I was bored but not really that impressed at the theory of it. Like I said, the idea of Mirror's Edge had never really appealed to me that much, and how much time and effort is going to be put into a game that is meant to just be an ad? I clicked on it anyways because I love me a good flash game. I went 'hmm' when I saw the Fancy Pants Man, and then I played for a little bit.

Wow, this has the potential to be seriously addictive. It's fun, it's smooth, it plays well, it must have been out for years how have I missed it?

Part of me wants to run out and pick up Mirror's Edge right away. I probably will at one point, since it's between $15-20 everywhere I go. But another part of me mourns that the only place to get these fun 2D platformers is from quirky flash games on the web. Before the Playstation and the NES, it felt like we were about to have cartoons you could play. Then we went to horribly blocky 3D, and the 2d platformers I love are few and far between.

A third part wants to go try Dragon Age 2d after work. So I guess there's a happy ending after all.

Yes!

2009-12-02T05:14:00.000-08:00

Yes, I'm still busy at school! I have some big ol' posts coming down the drain, like one on Shit-talk and Bantering, an enormous series on Geek Culture, and why I don't like JRPGs! Stay tuned!

Yes, we're still looking for writers of all types! E-mail me at c2marshall@gmail.com if you're interested!

Yes, I'm on Twitter! HystericalBroad is the name, thanks for asking!

Yes, I'm about to go eat a delicious breakfast! Look for a post tonight!

Comment Policy

2009-11-30T19:59:00.000-08:00

We're actually starting to get some comments and discussion going up in here! Which is, of course, fantastic. It also means now this is the time where I lay down the law regarding our comment policy, so I can point to it later when needed. I swear to God, kids, I will turn this car right around.

1. Hysterical Broads is a Feminist 101 blog. Emphasis on Feminist. The 101 means that we don't go too in depth, but we're going to be tossing around terms like 'male gaze' or 'patriarchy'. Which means...

2. If you post something like 'can't we just play a game and enjoy it for what it is?!' or 'you're too sensitive!', you will be ignored at best.

3. We do not tolerate sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, or any other bigotry. This includes on our own parts. Chelsea B. and I are each privileged in our own ways, and while I am working on getting more writers on board, we may slip up. We will listen to any concerns or complaints regarding our posts.

4. I reserve the right to edit or delete offensive comments at all times.

Hopefully, I never have to yell at anyone (or be yelled at), but this seems like a pretty straightforward policy!

The Trouble With Zevran

2009-11-28T11:14:00.000-08:00

YOU GUYS DRAGON AGE IS SO SWEET I STABBED A GUY AND HE WAS LIKE HUUUARGH

Oh, what? That's not enough for a post? Fine, fine, but if you want more detail I'm going to have to warn you about light Dragon Age and Mass Effect spoilers

Well, okay, let's talk about one of your party members, Zevran. He's an assassin, a member of the Antivan Crows. He was auctioned off as a child and raised in a life based off luxury and murder. He excels in stealth and seduction. After you best him in an ambush wherein his goal was to assassinate you, he joins your party (or you can murder him, but those locks won't unpick themselves.)

I haven't used Zevran that much lately, but I talk to him in camp a lot because that's what a good leader does. I found some old leather boots that reminded him of home, and I didn't cuss him out for talking about how awesome murderin' is despite being a bastion of goodness.

And already the damned elf wants to make the sweet love to me.

Zevran is one of the bisexual options, in that he can be unlocked as a romance option whether you're a male or a female. Maybe romance is the wrong word - Zevran just wants to get mad rutty with you. He isn't big into commitment.

The other bi character, Leliana, falls in love with you and you two have a romantic courtship (she heavily leans towards women, though.) I have no problem with her, she's a wonderfully written character.

Zevran, though, is such a stereotype. The Achievement for unlocking access to his elvish wood is called "Easy Lover". He says he's not interested in commitment. It took me about six years to get Alistair to give me a rose. Zevran's just like "Hey, I have a dong, you have a hole that allows access, let's roll out."

Zevran by himself works as Zevran, in that the writing is lovely and he's a strong character, but the problem is that BioWare's last big effort was a massive failure. Mass Effect had no gay romance at all. (I feel like there was totally sexual tension between Maleshep and Kaiden though and the developers chickened out. They were totally playing gay chicken and I was sad that someone flinched. The lesbian romance was with an asexual alien who had mind-sex, which to me is a cop out. Fie on you, Bioware!

Point being, there's a history of female characters getting rich, romantic, detailed relationships and guys get either nothing or casual, meaningless sex.

(I hear Jade Empire is different, but I haven't played it. Feel free to correct me in comments.)

I'm hoping the gay romance in Mass Effect 2 is full of sultry eye-gazing, sexual tension, passionate declarations of love, and other enduring hallmarks of Bioware romances. If not, I'm going to write a post on my blog and I may even cuss a few times during it. I'll really lay down the law.

FYI

2009-11-25T17:42:00.000-08:00

I'm not dead, folks. I promise. I'm just applying for graduate school, the deadline is Dec. 1st, AND working at a grocery store (yes, the week before Thanksgiving). So I promise once Dec. 2nd rolls around, I will post another awesome, thought-provoking entry (or just my usual drivel, whatever) for you to chew on. Thankfully Cassandra's totally rocking right now.

Just thought y'all should know. Also, Aeris is the most pathetic martyr in all of FF, y/n?

Is it Art?

2009-11-25T17:06:00.000-08:00

I've been using this tag a lot - I should explain it.

I firmly am in the camp that thinks that games are worthwhile, capable of being cultural touchstones, and just as valid as movies or books in the "Are Games Art?" debate.

I also believe that video games are an extremely immature medium, full of problematic and weak tropes and cliches.

The 'is it art?' tag is meant to criticize the overall immaturity or failings of the medium while respecting the potential it has.

Blizzard

2009-11-25T09:31:00.001-08:00

I know I'm seriously late to the party with this, but I'm so glad that Blizzard's Mountain Dew commercial exists.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iioJ0UY4JHM

A commercial for a huge video game promotion with the two main characters both being women.

It's sad that this is so rare and applauadable.

You're Not Helping

2009-11-25T09:14:00.000-08:00

When you're trawling the internet for video game news, you're going to run into idiots. It's inevitable. John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory at work. I'm sorry, I'm truly am. There are comment threads on Kotaku, quotes from marketing officials apologizing that you took offense to their ad, IGN contests that exclude women, guys on Vent who holler and grunt when you speak up to call an incoming, guild officials who treat you like an idiot because you're a girl, twelve year olds on Xbox Live who ask if you're hot, people on message boards who accuse you of attention whoring for the crime of admitting your gender, and so on and so on. I get it.

There are some things that are not acceptable. I get that you're frustrated. I get that you're going for the easiest target. But when you use these weapons, you are reinforcing the beliefs that these guys are putting forth.

"Fuck you, I'm a hot chick and I'm awesome at video games." Why do looks matter? Ladies of all stripes are on your side, plain ladies and fat ladies and ugly ladies and ladies who have disabilities that make them sexually invisible to your average dudebro and ladies of color who are just as invisible and all sorts of ladies. Being singled out for your gender sucks, but don't try to turn it around by using this tool.

"I'm not like those other girls who suck at video games and only play Peggle. I play Halo and I am just as hardcore as you boys and not at all girly." If they're willing to insult and treat women like shit because they play Peggle, are these the kind of people you want to be buddy-buddy with? Why does being passionate about a hobby mean you have to treat people who don't like the same aspects of it as you like shit? Do you think puzzle affectionate people ever sniff about those assholes buying the 30 piece puzzles and how they'll never measure up to this awesome 1000 piece puzzle?

"I bet you don't have a girlfriend." Way to miss the point! Besides, women aren't prizes, we're people.

Seriously, knock it off. I swear to God I will turn this car right around and we won't go to Disneyland at all.

Canabalt

2009-11-22T16:40:00.003-08:00

Have you played this yet?

http://adamatomic.com/canabalt/

If no, why not?

DJ Hero

2009-11-19T14:34:00.000-08:00

I picked up DJ Hero for my birthday, and it's fun. I can see why it's not selling as well as Guitar Hero, but I'm getting enjoyment out of it. I'm going to really sit down and unlock everything with it after I get tired of Dragon Age (so not for a while).

But one thing struck me right off the bat: this is an insanely male-gaze oriented game. You start off with only a few DJs to pick from, and the only female amongst them is wearing barely anything at all. She's cartoonishly long legged and big eyed.

In addition to this, when you are playing your sets, the camera will move off of the DJ onto... women dancing on stage. Their heads aren't on the camera, just a zoom on their torsos.

Maybe that's another big reason why it isn't selling - after about an hour playing this game, the biggest message I got was "hey dudes, check out these rockin' tits!" Not exactly the sort of thing that gay men, women, or anyone over the age of fourteen is into.

In Search Of Story

2009-11-14T18:15:00.000-08:00

This is a post for all of us RPG gamers who love a good story. Who play even the most convoluted game with the strangest battle systems because the story has hooked us from the very beginning, and we're incapable of looking away now. This is not necessarily a post for people who play RPGs to unlock all the events, or to find all the cool leveling up combination, or to turn their characters into the biggest badasses, although you might like it too.

From an early age, I've been interested in games for their stories. My first real knowledge of RPGs came from the SNES my older brothers shared, specifically Chrono Trigger, FF VI, and Earthbound. In those early days, I would never attempt to actually play a video game. Oh no, I was much too young and unskilled for that. Nevertheless, I was drawn to these games, and if not specifically exiled (and if I kept quiet) I would spend hours watching and reading along with my brothers at each new development. If I'd missed parts, I would often ask what had happened, to their annoyance. Sometimes, if my younger-of-the-two brother was in a good mood, he would even narrate some of the dialogue for me, giving each of the characters their own unique voices (I specifically remember his very nice English accent for Magus from Chrono Trigger). I loved those parts best. Remember, these were the days before cut scenes, before voice actors, before all the bells and whistles that characterize RPGs today. It speaks to the strength of these early stories that I was even able to be so drawn to them, without all those things to draw me in. Ironically, the main reason I started playing RPGs was because I kept pestering my brothers to play games they'd long since gotten tired of, and they finally just told me to start a new game my own damn self. Thus I muddled my way through the first hour or so of Chrono Trigger, and gained a whole new understanding of how these games worked. It was a good six or seven years before I'd gained the wherewithal to actually beat any of those games on my own, but that's besides the point. The point is that from a young age, I was enamored of RPGs for their stories, and very few other gaming genres interest me in the way a great RPG can.

Earthbound, I remember, was remarkable to me because it was actually set in a stylized version of the real world. Where most games were fantastic, with swords and capes and magic, Earthbound settled firmly on the side of baseball bats and backpacks, a classic boy's adventure about a regular kid setting off into the great unknown (which was nonetheless reliably stocked with ATMs and phones) to save the world with only some companions and his awesome psychic powers to back him up. There were libraries, convenience stores, taxis, and even bathrooms (although you never saw the inside of them). In hindsight, it's a hilariously weird game, looking at the world from a child's point of view (and how magical ATMs did seem, back then), but back then it made total sense. Of course you got money put into your bank account by your dad when you fought monsters. Didn't everyone?

By contrast, Chrono Trigger was very much a classic sword n' sorcery game, with a phenomenal twist. While you started in a "modern" world that strangely mixed soda pop with swords, you quickly learned that bouncing back and forth through time, from the prehistoric to post-apocalyptic, was pretty normal. Trying to save the earth from a giant parasite that was consuming it from the inside (but never being totally sure why or how it had come), while unraveling the personal histories of the characters in your party and discovering all the funny little quirks that existed. Of course, Chrono Trigger might as well have invented the phrase "replay value", for it introduced a genius feature into the gaming world, the "New Game +". For those not familiar with the idea, New Game + was a way to start the plot all over again, while retaining the levels and items of your previous game. In other words, you could breeze through the whole game with minimal effort. Of course, this wasn't just a feature in itself. Instead, using this feature, you could go fight the final boss at any point, since you were strong enough to defeat him, and get different endings depending on what point of the storyline you were at. This gave Chrono Trigger immense replay value, as you tried over and over to see what new endings you could discover (I believe there are roughly ten in all). Of course, the original ending is lovely too. ;D

I've mentioned a game on here in an entry or two that most people haven't heard of, called Atelier Iris. Atelier Iris is actually the name of a series of games, the first one being Atelier Iris: Eternal Mana, available for the PS2. Atelier Iris is a great example of a really good, compelling Japanese Role Playing Game (JRPG). Not only is the story interesting, the game mechanics are fun and challenging, and the characters are engaging. Best of all, there's a relatively small amount of really annoying anti-female sentiments. One of the main characters is an ass-kicking girl who is one of the most physically powerful characters in the game (and there's another female character who is equally powerful). She has moments of fragility, but they're not linked as much to her gender as her past (if a man was the last survivor of his civilization, he'd feel lonely and emo too). She's also really blunt and funny in a decidedly non-traditional way. There are certain interactions that are a bit more sexist than others, but considering the baseline of sexism for JRPGs, this game is pretty high up there in terms of tolerance. The main feature that makes this (and the other Atelier Iris games) stand out in my mind is the ability to switch the voice acting from English to the original Japanese voices. This is really important to me not just from a purist standpoint (I'll admit, I'm one of those annoying people who only watches anime in the original Japanese), but from a comparison standpoint. I still retain enough basic knowledge of Japanese (long story, but I took it as a class for three years) to understand phrases and certain words, which makes it interesting when the English version isn't even close to the original version (sometimes this is because of idioms, sometimes it seems to be for no discernible reason). Also, I really just like the original voice acting better (a lot of English voice actors over-act because they feel the need to "make up" for not being able to show facial expressions). The story would be enough to make the Atelier Iris series engaging, but this extra feature really appeals to me specifically.

As far as more "modern" RPGs go, I must admit that while I enjoy cut scenes and good voice acting, I sometimes wish these things weren't used as crutches for a relatively weak story. For instance, I enjoy the Kingdom Hearts franchise, so far (technically they're more action than RPG, but I'm including them for this example). However, while the basic storyline is interesting and engaging, whenever the main characters visit a new world (based on a Disney movie), it becomes incredibly awkward. The movie's plot is boiled down to the bare bones and wedged uncomfortably into the game's overarching plot, so you find yourself playing bits of movies you saw ten or more years ago, and wondering why this is necessary when you know how it's going to turn out. Some worlds escape this, but not many. And it probably isn't surprising that there seem to be an officially mandated number (too many, in my opinion) of cut scenes for each world, to try to facilitate this awkwardness. It's one of the main failing of the KH franchise, I think, that instead of finding new ways to explore the Disney universe(s), they just rehashed already extant plots. Again, these are only parts of the overall KH games, and I find the overall plots to be good, but sometimes the in between parts can be a bit of a slog (especially Neverland and Wonderland, I really dislike those worlds).

Now, I must speak about the most unfortunate of RPGs, the ones with interesting plots and broken mechanics. While these games are mercifully few and far between, I have chanced to encounter one or two in my times exploring RPGs, and the one that sticks out to me the most is Star Ocean: Til The End of Time. This game had a very engaging plot (the huge twist in the middle was incredibly unexpected and very meta), cool characters, a unique battle system (for me, since I hadn't played any other Star Ocean games), and was overall really interesting and fun. Until a little after the Big Twist. Slowly, the game started to grind to a halt. I found that no matter how much leveling up I did, I couldn't best the enemies. Simple grinding battles became epic boss fights, at least in terms of their difficulty. Getting through two rooms started to take me a good ten minutes per room, as I was ganked by enemies and left nearly dead, having to rely heavily on reserves of items I didn't really have. I ended up stranded a few times, too weak to continue on or go back but without items necessary to heal myself. Eventually, despite my interest in the plot, I was forced to give up entirely, and did so with many qualms and a small amount of heartache. I was at least justified in this later on by an offhand discussion with a friend, who told me he'd found it impossible to beat the final boss, despite getting up to level 100 and maxing out most of his party's stats.

Most RPGs are at greatest strength when they have engaging stories. Let's face it, very few people play RPGs solely for the level grinding or completion aspects (and those who do might as well be playing Harvest Moon or Sim City). RPGs are interesting specifically because they put us somewhere we've never been, make us care about characters we otherwise would've never known, and give us the feeling of being in this other world. If they didn't, they wouldn't be worth playing. And, to me, a great story is what makes a great RPG. Even with sub-par mechanics, a great RPG can shine. On the other hand, you can have the coolest mechanics system in the world, but if your story isn't interesting, there's not much point to playing. *Shrug* In the end, what's important about any game is an enjoyable experience, and most of the joy in an RPG is going to be the plot. Of course, if you're feeling lazy, you can always watch a movie instead. ;D

Dragon Age, Warhammer, and the Happy Ending

2009-11-14T13:52:00.000-08:00

Oh my God Dragon Age is absolutely fantastic in every way.

Oh, I guess that's not really a substantial blog post at all. Okay, okay.

Dragon Age: Origins is an extremely dark universe. The long and the short of it is that mages are constantly walking a line where in exchange for their great power they must risk their humanity to an ever present demon force. However, in this world, where dark forces are brewing and will occasionally surge forward in force to destroy humanity magic is necessary to keep them at bay. Humanity as a whole cannot keep the higher ground and win, so they employ morally questionable forces. The dwarves, a stalwart ally, are nearly extinct, and humanity is the first and last line of defense.

Warhammer is an extremely dark universe. The long and short of it is that mages are constantlywalking a line where in exchange for their great power they must risk their humanity to an ever present demon force. However, in this world, where dark forces are brewing and will occasionally surge forward in force to destroy humanity magic is necessary to keep them at bay. Humanity as a whole cannot keep the higher ground and win, so they employ morally questionable forces. The dwarves, a stalwart ally, are nearly extinct, and humanity is the first and last line of defense.

So, you know, there are a few parallels.

Don't get me wrong! I am just noting that Dragon Age borrows heavily from Warhammer. They have enough differences to avoid a Blizzard style straight rip but the similarities are undeniable. I'm only about like, maybe a third or a fifth into Dragon Age depending on how many side quests I do, but that's the major thing jumping out at me. I've been involved in Warhammer for about 3 years, and I love the fluff, so I'm constantly saying to my TV "This is so Warhammer. Oh man this is awesome."

However, Warhammer is a universe. There are novels, RTSes, a table top game, spinoffs, a future (40k), pen and papers. It's a sandbox, not a linear story. There are ongoing campaigns such as the Nemesis Crown with specific ends, but overall, there's no end to the Warhammer universe. Dragon Age will likely turn into a franchise with sequels and such, but the story of my mage Cassandra will come to an end in a few dozen hours.

It won't be a happy one.

I don't know this for sure, I'm on media blackout, but Bioware has a history of loving bittersweet endings and in a universe this grim I am hesitant to hold out much hope. It's affecting the way I interact with characters - do I want to get too attached, or do I live for the now? Can I really trust this guy or will he die or betray me before endgame? If I make this choice, will it fuck me over lately?

This might not be ideal for most gamers, but I think I really like it. It's like the difference between the Wheel of Time and A Song of Ice and Fire books. If Rand gets captured, you can rest easy knowing he'll escape because he needs to be around for the other ten books in the series. If one of Martin's main characters is in trouble, well, you sweat a little. It means that the world holds a little more danger and mystery. You don't feel safe playing through.

But does an unhappy ending or a bittersweet ending sour the hard work you've spent getting there? Is a happy ending pay off for the hours of work you've done? Haven't we seen our party members suffer enough through months of trekking through this harsh world? It feels like a punch to the gut to see the main character we've invested so much in suffer (especially if you're a Roleplayer like me.)

What sort of ending do you appreciate?

Bits and Pieces

2009-11-11T07:14:00.000-08:00

First of all, I'm on Twitter! You can check me out at http://twitter.com/HystericalBroad. I'll have game related snippets, but sometimes just the misfortune that befalls me on a daily basis.

Secondly, Hysterical Broads is still interested in gamers of all types to come write for us. Please e-mail me at c2marshall@gmail.com if you're interested with a 250 word sample of your writing and a little bit about yourself.

Why I Suspect Most Final Fantasy Protagonists (And You Should Too)

2009-11-09T20:45:00.000-08:00

This entry could probably be retitled to "Why I Suspect Most RPG Protagonists", but since there are a lot more exceptions in the genre in general than there are in the FF franchise, I thought it wise to use that instead. The disclaimer here is that I have only played through FF 10, and some of them I only played briefly, but I've read and heard enough spoilers to sketch an accurate portrait of the protagonists I've mostly not dealt with. For the purposes of this post, "suspect" is a general catch all term meaning that this character shows signs of being sexist, racist, ableist, or any other general disregard for other human beings. Mostly they're sexist, but there's lots of that other stuff mixed in too. Anyway, carrying on.

Let's start from the beginning, shall we? The basic premise of almost every FF game (from the main series, at least, not counting FF Tactics or similar spinoffs), is that the protagonist is going to save the world somehow. This is a classic RPG trope, one most RPG players are quite familiar and comfortable with. Many twists and turns may happen along the way, but you know that if you reach that final boss and win, you've saved the world from the giant meteor/soul sucking energy stealers/evil monkeys/living statues/zombies/Catholics/whatever. First off, I cannot name one FF game that has a female protagonist. Hell, it's next to impossible to name a video game in general with a female protagonist (and the list is insanely short if you don't include ones specifically meant to be eye candy), so RPGs aren't exactly alone in this. The sad fact is, as we all know, that the entertainment industry still hasn't cottoned on to the fact that there are girl gamers out there, and that we actually want girl protagonists in our games who don't defy gravity (ahem, Tomb Raider, I'm looking at you). A second issue is that there isn't a single protagonist who isn't white*, hetero, male, and able-bodied (if not usually neurotypical). So we're already starting from a position of extreme privilege, when we look at the viewpoint of the protagonists of the FF series.

Now let's dig a little deeper. Almost to a man, the protagonists have either been abandoned by their parents, were orphaned somehow, or otherwise had parents taken out of the picture. And yet all of these heroes are usually in relative positions of power. Most of them have some kind of mentor/backer/parental figure who either gave them the abilities necessary to do well, financed them, or otherwise altered their basic starting point to make them ahead of the general curve of the populace (which, depending on the game, is either abject poverty or so boring it's nearly as bad). Not only that, but many of them have been genetically engineered/altered to be a kind of super-being, giving them powers far beyond the ken of all but the pluckiest of bootstrapping tagalongs. Whether this leads to betrayal, mental breakdown, brainwashing, or general depression on the protagonist's part is irrelevant to the fact that it puts them very far above the average person.

Now, stepping back for a moment, I realize that most RPGs are about wish and fantasy fulfillment. We enjoy them because they give us the ability to do things that aren't possible in real life (including fighting monsters, general kicking of butt, and using magic). I realize this and accept that there's always going to be a bit of the super hero trope to most RPGs. However, from a standpoint of "this guy is already starting from a state of extreme privilege, then he becomes way MORE privileged", it's kind of sickening.

I'm going to use some specific examples now of the highly suspect behavior of some of these heroes. The first game in the FF franchise that I have played extensively and thus know a good bit about is FF IV, with the main character being Cecil, who starts out as a dark knight and is eventually transformed into a paladin. Cecil is, in a lot of ways, the original Annoying FF Protagonist. The guy seems to have a heart of gold, yet treats his family and friends rather badly (especially his girlfriend). He's pig-headed, insists on doing things without help, and otherwise annoys the pants off of any reasonable person (well, he did me, anyway). What really gets to me is how much time he spends snubbing his girlfriend, Rosa (a white mage), only to turn around and get all pissy when she gets kidnapped/poisoned/otherwise incapacitated (and it does happen more than a few times). It's almost like the woman in his life is nothing more than an object to obsess over, rather than a living, thinking human being. Hmmm... Where have I seen that behavior before?

FF VI is probably the most well known of the SNES FF games, the precursor to the most famous FF game to date, FF VII. FF VI is one of the only FF games in which the protagonist is really only a little suspect, as for one thing the storylines to a stellar job of focusing on as many of the characters as possible without getting horribly fragmented, and for another there are actually somewhat strong female characters who get to be awesome some of the time (but there's still tons of victimization, make no mistake). Locke*, the protagonist of FF VI, is a loveable rogue, with only one real glaring flaw: he seems to think that every woman alive needs to be "protected". From the beginning of the game, every time he meets a new girl, he tells her he'll protect her, and we find out a bit into the game that he even keeps a girl who is technically dead in a state of stasis in hopes of reviving her, as she was his first love. Um... Noble? No, not really. Still, the genuine goodness of his character speaks louder than the sometimes creepy things he says, so he's pretty far down on the list of suspects.

Now we get to the most popular and my least favorite FF game of all time, FF VII. Also known as THE FF game, FF VII features one of the most suspect protagonists of any game I've ever played, and that's even including the ones where the protagonist is supposed to be evil. Cloud is universally admired by FF fans (many of whom haven't played any of the FF games before VII) as being the original Cool Male Protagonist. Cloud speaks very little and carries a huge ass sword. He has a ridiculous haircut, treats everyone with the same amount of extreme disdain (but especially Those Damn Wimmenz), and can't really even rub two IQ points together, and yet everyone seems to adore the bastard. Tifa practically worships the ground he walks on, Aeris seems to think there are unexplored depths in him (newsflash: There aren't), and even Yuffie seems to think he's worth hanging around, even if it's just to steal his stuff. Really, Cloud is nothing but an extremely poor copy of a much cooler person, with a dash of Cecil's general assholishness thrown in to make him slightly more repellant. I swear, if there was some way to kill him off in FF VII, I would've done it. Repeatedly.

By contract, Squall of FF VIII is one of those protagonists who is highly suspect, but at least not completely reprehensible. I will admit that I couldn't get more than two hours into FF VIII before the battle system made my eyes cross and I quit, so most of my understanding of Squall's personality comes from encountering him in Kingdom Hearts. Let's just say that while I don't find him particularly pleasant, I don't get the stabby pains behind my eye whenever he's around. However, his worship and objectification of a woman (and this is only from glimpses and hints of his relationship with her in the game) is deeply suspect to me. He's not the only one, of course, but that doesn't make it better.

Now we're at FF IX, which I must admit is my favorite FF game of the later generations. Zidane was highly disliked by many players, but he was very much a favorite of mine, not the least because he's directly descended from the Locke school of protagonizing. A thief who sees himself as a ladies' man, Zidane spends quite a bit of the game victimizing (and sometimes even groping) Garnet/Dagger. It isn't until quite a ways in that he even begins to see her as a person. Not surprisingly, this coincides with her ascension to the throne (and thus her becoming WAY more powerful than him). Of course, if Garnet had been created equally, he wouldn't be able to victimize her as well, but the fact is that he takes advantage, which puts him further up the list than I'd really like.

FF X is the last FF game of the main series I've played, largely because I disliked it so much that I didn't see a point in continuing trying. Not to say it was particularly bad, but the battle system was only slightly better than FF VIII, and the protagonist is one of the most suspect on the list, probably the highest below Cloud. Tidus is basically a jock who inherited the wrong family, and thus ends up in the wrong place at the wrong time when the shit hits the fan. He's crude, has no tact, and sees all women as identical sex objects (Yuna is a slightly elevated sex object, I suppose). I admit that I only got a few hours in before his attitude and the battle system combined made me want to shove a fork in my eye, so perhaps he improves somewhat, but I doubt it.

The unifying factor here is that no matter how the women in their lives are viewed by these protagonists, there's an incredibly sexist basis for all of it. Whether a woman is a being to be ignored and belittled until suddenly they're gone (and you throw a hissy fit about it) or a goddess to be elevated to the highest pedestal so she can't do pesky things like think or act (and especially not fight or hone skills), she's almost never a real, thinking person. Granted, these protagonists aren't exactly the most balanced views of humanity either, but since we're meant to identify with them, we get to be privy to all kinds of motivating factors that apparently don't exist in their female counterparts. The wimmenz are mysteeeeerious, whereas the men come from identifiable (if sometimes royally screwed up) places of logic, places many of us can identify with. Again, this is not a phenomenon that is restricted to the FF games, but the sheer concentration of sexism is something I find worthy of comment, especially since there's almost no variation.

I realize I may be stirring up some shit with this post, but I felt it was necessary to say. I could write a whole entire post just on how much I hate Cloud specifically, but this is probably a bit more universally accessible. ;D

* There are many people who subscribe to the school of thought that Terra is the main character of FF VI. While I can't claim that this view is false, given the fact that she's the most compelling female character in the entire FF franchise, I think that Locke is at least equally the protagonist with her, thus he fits on this list.

** The case could be made (and has been) that none of these characters are actually white, both because it's a Japanese created series of games and because they're set in other worlds where race may not work like ours, but the fact remains that they're the dominant race/species/culture of their various worlds, so the amount of privilege is roughly the same as being a white person in our culture.

Evil

2009-11-07T14:33:00.000-08:00

http://bitmob.com/index.php/mobfeed/the-evil-things-we-do.html

Above is a link to a discussion wherein developers, producers, and writers all talk about the absolute worst thing they've done in video games. Ranging from vigilante urges to sadistic pleasures, the acts are all familiar to me.

Discussions of violence, and pleasure out of committing violence, in video games is a complex one. As the complexity and detail in video games changes, so too do the feelings we have. After all, there's a big jump.

As the level in which we can depict violence rises, so too does the aversion to it. However, the more complex the technology gets, the more justification the game allows us through giving us and our victims characters, motivations, and so on.

More on that later.

However, there's different levels of evil, different types of evil, in video games. Some of those types aren't that bad.

There's The Meta-Gamer.

In Viva Piñata, I bred, raised, and sold 20 different species -- systematically gorging them, forcing them to copulate, and selling their offspring off for whatever price was offered.

The Meta-Gamer isn't taking any particular joy out of the horrendous acts zie commits; just the rewards that zie will end up reaping at the end of the day. The Meta-Gamer might notice that what they are doing is kind of fucked up, but at the end of the day, they don't really care beyond having a chuckle about it.

I was watching a friend play Fallout 3. He saved Megaton by disarming the bomb, and even gave the dying man outside some water to ease his suffering. He headed back out into the wastes and came across a few men transporting goods. Without a pause, my friend shot them in the face.

"What the hell?" I asked. "Why would you do that?"

"I'm going for a Neutral playthrough," my friend responded. "I want that guy in my party."

Dungeon Masters are usually found playing the Sims. I laugh every time I hear someone dismiss the Sims as a girly, harmless game focused around butterflies and rainbows. The Sims is a death simulator.

The kids would instantly go into a room and play with the toy that I had left there. But when they would try to get up and leave, they would realize that the door they went through was actually one-way, so there was no exiting the small prison. Eventually I had a handful of rooms filled with different crying kids who had no food, beds, or even toilets -- and they slowly turned into ghost children.

I tried something similar in Sims 2, but this time it was a lone female Sim who would throw parties and invite male Sims into what they thought was her bedroom, only to find out it was actually a cell. She then filled the room with more and more men so that she could have a harem. They too had no access to bathrooms, food, or beds -- and slowly, her home became a house of death.

Dungeon Masters revel in having power over life and death. They are twisted scientists held to no ethics code. They just love fiddling with little artificial intelligences to see where things lead. The Sims is merely the best place for them to try this out. Plus, it looks so innocent.

One of the most respectable forms of evil gamer is the Roleplayer. The Roleplayer is really, really into the game. The Roleplayer and the Meta-gamer are complete opposites, at different ends of the table entirely. The Roleplayer finds their home in games like Knights of the Old Republic, Fallout, or Mass Effect

There had been a slaughter at a research outpost, and when I caught up with the perpetrator, he gave me some convincing excuses for his motives. My crew talked of letting the courts decide his fate.
But I couldn't wash the blood of the innocent research crew from my mind. So I pulled out my gun, aimed, and shot him dead.

Maybe I was wrong to kill him, but he sure as hell deserved it.

The Roleplayer is in the head of the character and looks at the game from that point of view. If I fall into any camp, it's probably the Roleplayer. When playing through worlds rife with conflict and struggle, it's impossible not to commit an violent act or two to reach your goals

But I think we've all been the Sadist.

Put in GTA, Saint's Row or inFamous game and you'll find the Sadist. The Sadist takes joy in taking the tools the game gives him to create havoc. Zie takes joy in making NPCs scream and run or even die through the most ridiculous or hilarious means necessary. I have to admit, I have fond memories of killing someone so I could take their bike. I would ring the little bell as I cycled away from their corpse. Ding ding!

In Animal Crossing, I had entirely too much fun hitting folks in the mug with my bug net. I’d also run around Tom Nook’s store for no reason other to make him cart his fat raccoon ass around. I know it’s not possible for him to get tired -- or annoyed -- but in my head, I was totally pissing him off.

The Sadist and the Dungeon Master, while they would appear to be best buddies, are the opposites. The Dungeon Master watches their house of weakening Sims with cold, calculating precision. The Sadist takes genuine joy out of creating havoc.

While it can be fun to play a Sadist, it's eye opening to watch one at work.

The Sadist has a best buddy who falls outside of all of these qualifications. The last type of Evil Gamer is uncontrollable, insane, anonymous, and unpredictable.

They are The Troll.

After a couple hours of engaging dueling, the contestants dwindled down to the final two and everyone’s focus was on the arena. All the onlookers had crowded up as close to the arena as possible to get a good view, and it’s easy to picture everyone kicked back in their chairs lazily typing as they enjoyed the show at home.

Nobody really paid attention to the line of approximately eight warriors on horseback standing slightly off from the crowd in a nice row. At least they didn’t until all eight of them opened the gates simultaneously, and the horde of [Player Killers]s came screaming through.
Everyone was so packed in tightly around the arena and so focused on the tournament that the raiders cut through the crowd like a hot knife through butter.

Everyone has met the Troll. Whereas we all feel a bit of a guilty joy at being te Sadist, the Troll has no guilt, mercy, or compassion. "It's just a game!" is the rallying cry of the Troll. While the antics of a Troll can be amusing in retrospect, they are at best fuelled by restless boredom and at worst an act of real malice.

Which type of evil do you engage in? Like I've said, I'm mostly a Roleplayer with a dab of Sadist, but I've dipped my toes in all the pools. Especially when it comes to that bastard Tom Nook.

The "Woman's Role" in Sims 3

2009-11-05T19:30:00.000-08:00

First, a short intro. Hi, my name is Chelsea! I'm a future opera singer, currently working on applying to graduate school. I play mostly RPGs (Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, Atelier Iris, Final Fantasy, Pokemon, Star Ocean) with some other games mixed in (Rock Band and Kingdom Hearts, among others). I grew up watching my older brothers play video games, which sparked my interest in them. Of course, I have many other interests as well (including knitting, reading, writing, and overthrowing the patriarchy), but they're not relevant here. I hope we get along well together, and please enjoy my first post.

So a few months ago, while I was suffering from an inflamed gall bladder and was out of work for a month, I found myself with a whole lot of free time, spent mostly lying down. Like any gamer, I spent a good portion of that time playing games. Eventually, though, I got bored with the ones at my disposal and ached for something new (Yoshi's Island, while a great game, gets old after a while). Luckily, I have a great older brother, who procured for me a copy of the newly released Sims 3 to fill my otherwise listless hours.

And oh, how I played. My first Sim was modeled unashamedly after myself, same name and everything. She was going to be a rock star, and ended up marrying a lovely young woman. I've always liked how, in the Sims, relationships are possible with the same gender as your sim as well as the opposite gender, and I generally find myself more interested in female sims, both to play and to interact with, so naturally, she ended up getting married. At around this same time, though, I got bored and created a new game. XD You see, the last time I played the Sims was before Sims 2, so it had been a while. I was unfamiliar with a lot of the cool new things you could do (like gardening, collecting rocks and bugs, tinkering with stuff, writing novels...) so I kind of overlooked it the first few games. As a result, I ended up doing what I'd done in my original Sims games, which was build lavish houses (building houses is my FAVORITE PART you guys) and fill them with insane amounts of stuff, then play with some sims in it until those sims got boring, then I'd go build another house.

In Sims 3, after I finally figured out how to do all the cool things, I started playing one game extensively. I became obsessed with giving my sim (I think I was on Charlotte at this point, she was my fourth or fifth game) all the abilities and things possible, collecting all the cool rocks and painting all the awesome paintings and otherwise making her an UberSim. And it worked, for a while. She regularly got new wishes (I'd long since fulfilled her lifetime wish) for cool things to do and see, and I fulfilled them just as regularly.

Until one day, suddenly, out of the blue, she declared to me that she wanted to have a baby. And my happy little sim life came to a crashing halt. On the one hand, I'd become attached to this virtual lady, a lovely person who almost seemed like a friend in some ways (or perhaps more accurately a pet). I wanted to give her everything. But how could I condone giving her a child when I loved her as she was, single, unfettered, without a care in the world (or even a job, when she didn't feel like it)?

After this initial gut reaction, I gave myself a stern talking to about my perceptions. What right did I have to tell my sim that she couldn't have a baby when she wanted one? That's like telling someone you are friends with that they aren't allowed to breed because it might disrupt your life. How selfish was I? So I set out to get her a husband (the turkey baster option is still unavailable to lesbian sims, although adopting is possible), and got her pregnant.

As soon as she became so, however, I lost interest. Not only was her husband fouling things up (he ended up being quite a dud, and I didn't like having him around at all), I realized that a baby would create a third sim for me to be controlling and have to take care of personally. So I fled, created a new game once again and hid behind an evil sim (my first, it was quite fun). After I got tired of her and started a new game, similar to my Charlotte game, I specifically gave her the Dislikes Children trait, meaning she would never want them, even if her biological clock started ticking.

This long and rambling history of my sim games has a point, and here it is. After reviewing these happenings, I was suddenly struck with a thought. Are only female sims subject to this wish? I admit that my own propensity to play females means that I rarely start a game with a guy, so I honestly don't know. Sims is really a rather remarkably equal world, where there really is no discrimination based on gender or race (my current sim is a lovely WoC, and she's done just fine for herself). Many RPGs are horrifically unequal when it comes to male and female stats (I have a blog post about that brewing), so having a game that simulates a fantasy world where everyone is truly equal is really nice. Admittedly, I don't play online, and I have no illusions about how nice that would be. Still, I must wonder about this possible sexism. Even though a woman in the Sims can be a police officer, own a business, be a corporate leader, have children and work simultaneously, and learn all the same skills as a man, are there still underlying currents of sexism that the programmers inserted because they assumed those things made sense? No game is created in a vacuum, and while some games are inherently more sexist than others, even the most "equal" game in the world would probably have these currents. Hell, it's probably wrong of me to assume Sims 3 isn't racist, because my white privilege allows me to not see the racism that's probably inherent in it. And it was only after some thought that I even realized it might be sexist, solely because I'm living in the same inherently sexist culture we all are, and I have to work to see it sometimes, when it's really subtle. For that matter, there certainly aren't any trans sims (at least I'm fairly sure you can't change their sex once they're created), and you can't even have them cross-dress, so none of my sims get to wear a tuxedo (I love women in tuxedos) and any guy I played wouldn't even be allowed to wear a kilt, let alone a lady's skirt. 9.9

So I guess the point here is, while on one hand I would love to laud Sims 3 for being a veritable utopia of options as far as a simulated world goes, it still has a lot of problems. That doesn't mean it's a bad game (far from it), and it doesn't mean that people shouldn't play it. It's still a bit further along in acceptance terms than a whole lot of other games out there, but I think it should be viewed as a stop along the road, rather than the end result. Because really, we can do better. And I have no doubts that we will.

In the meantime, I think all my future sims will just have to default to the "Dislikes Children" trait. Because I don't want the added stress in my life of simulated toddlers. They're just too much work, y'know?

A Dizzy New Dame

2009-11-04T20:40:00.000-08:00

Like I said, I've been busy with school. The place has been a little sleepy lately.

Don't you ladies worry. There's still lots and lots for us to fret over. Stones left unturned. Characters left uncriticized. Concerns not yet voiced.

With these goals in mind, let's welcome our new Hysterical Broad. Her name is Chelsea B, and she's a big fan of RPGs of all sort. She'll be livening up the join!

Welcome, Chelsea B!

Midterms!

2009-11-03T17:23:00.001-08:00

It's quiet around here now! In the future, it won't be! Just doing my schooling!

Halloween!

2009-11-01T16:15:00.001-08:00

For pre-Halloween, I bought some cupcakes and candy and picked up Dead Space from the bargain bin. I like to look at some video games like movies: I can't play the old-school Resident Evil games or Metal Gear Solid for instance, so I watch the boyfriend play. One of the downsides of my "no hype" policy is that I hear about games in bits and snatches from people on the internet. So I figured Dead Space was a little bit like Resident Evil 4 and 5 - very violent, lots of shooting, not too scary.

Oh my god.

Dead Space combines psychological horror (think Silent Hill, or the early sections of Bioshock), and the adreneline gun and run and amounts of gore that have become the hallmarks of later Resident Evil games.

You're an engineer who's checking out a broken ship. Shit's gone down. The crew have been infested with hostile alien parasites. I don't want to spoil too much, but they are all too happy to mess you up. The death scenes are in some cases so bad, I felt sick to my stomach after hearing my boyfriend describe one to me.

I don't really do games like that.

So this Halloween, I settled down with a little bit of chocolate and played WoW instead. The point of a holiday is to enjoy yourself. I'll try Dead Space another time - like when it's not dark at 6pm and every noise makes me jump.

Romantic and 'Rousing Relations

2009-10-29T05:41:00.000-07:00

http://www.gamecritics.com/alex-raymond/women-arent-vending-machines-how-video-games-perpetuate-the-commodity-model-of-sex

Alpha Protocol is a game that hasn't been showing up on my radar very much. I've had a vague interest in it, as I hear there's some potential for exciting choices in dialogue and negotiation. There's a lot I'm willing to put up with to get to some really meaty dialogue trees. Other than that, it's a game I'm not on the hype train for.

So it's really disheartening to read that there's a "Ladies Man" achievement, wherein you have sex with every female NPC in the game.

Now, it's a pretty reasonable assumption to make that this is an achievement that you get after your first playthrough, the sort of you thing you aim for for a tiny bit of extra replay value on your third time around. On the other hand, Raymond nails it the reasons why this bodes poorly:

On top of reinforcing the commodity model of sex, it is desperately heteronormative. For all the player's "choice" of with whom to engage, there's no possibility that the player might want to have a relationship with another man. It also shows that lesbians just don't exist in this world, if every single woman is open to a sexual encounter with a man. In addition, it perpetuates the narrative of the Nice Guy (described in Millar's essay, and elsewhere): that men are entitled to sex from women if they follow the rules and do the right things, or in the case of Alpha Protocol, "select your responses wisely."

In a lot of games, especially with the popularity of 'make your own choice!' and silent protaganists, the main character just isn't the star of the show anymore: its your NPC buddies. Dead Space becomes more terrifying in the early chapters when Daniels or Hammond message you, unable to keep their cool, and the panic is evident in their voices. World of Warcraft offers only the choice of your race, class, and faction - after that you watch the story unfold through the actions of heroes and villains. Half Life 2 has Alyx and Barney. KOTOR II has one of the most stellar casts of NPCs written to date, the Exile just a pawn in a game. Even Mass Effect, where the protaganist is fully voice-acted and likable, has supporting characters with personalities and storylines that make the game the joy it is.

I like NPCs with variety. Games usually have conflict ridden setups: I like to see how different people deal with that. A lot of games cheat out on having different ethnicities and colors - there are the humans, who are usually all white, with a dwarf, elf or alien filling the minority slot - but I like to hear from different genders and races and perspectives and make up my mind on the world that builds around me.

In Alpha Protocol, the female NPCs will not be rich, developed characters. People are inevitably going to see the achievement, and immediately start seeking the conversational path that leads to sex.

Contrast this to Mass Effect. I played as female Shepard, and I knew nothing about the game when I picked it up other than that it was supposedly pretty good. I plunged all the backstories of my crew. I didn't know Liara was a love interest, so I talked to her with the intent of learning about Asari mating rituals and her mother's role in Saren's plots. When she gently tried to be more than friends, I rebuffed her just as politely. With Kaiden, I wanted to learn all about the psychic program he had gone to and what course of action he recommended. We ended up banging before our final assault, but it was a natural progression of the storyline I had chosen to pursue. (He was still pissed at me for the choices I made in the end-game.)

I want to play games without metagaming. I want to naturally work through the protaganist's story - now when I talk to NPCs I'm going to be thinking 'Oh great, I want to learn more about this, but the only way to do that is to raise my influence with her, and I don't want to trigger a sex cutscene somehow.' It breaks immersion, it's insulting, and it's just silly.

Besides, isn't it possible that some of the women in the game are gay? Or maybe they just don't find you attractive. Maybe I want to catch the eye of the guy who provides my spy-gadgets! It robs the game of character: women NPCs are to be racked up for an achievement like Stars or Coins or side-missions, and the protaganist is a macho straight guy: no exceptions.

Alpha Protocol is probably not going to end up in my collection. If the designers see me as a collectible, I'll gladly ignore their product.

Support v Interest

2009-10-25T09:44:00.000-07:00

I remember about a year ago, when the trailer for Mirror's Edge coming out, and watching the feminist blogosphere bubble with excitement. This was a game with a strong female Asian protaganist without huge boobs and a low cut shirt. This was a game that passed the Bechdel test in the trailer.

But I didn't buy it.

I just wasn't interested in the game play, a new Xbox 360 game is like $60+ and Mirror's Edge is less than eight hours, and the idea of a game scant on story didn't appeal to me. I mean, if I saw Mirror's Edge in a bargain bin tomorrow for $10 I'd scoop it up, but otherwise no.

It was a game I wanted to support - but from the sidelines. Shake my pompoms and cheer on Faith as a good character. But I couldn't bring myself to buy it.

When does the need to support a game that you want to see more of outweight the lack of desire to play the game? Ever?

Are YOU hysterical?

2009-10-23T12:02:00.000-07:00

Looking for people interested in video games and writing to help out with this project. Those are the only qualifications you need. E-mail me at c2marshall@gmail.com if you're interested in joining this blog as a writer. Thanks!

I'm Still Addicted to the DS

2009-10-23T08:32:00.000-07:00

I have a DS. It's not pink, it's platinum rose.

I bought my first DS on the day after Christmas, 2007. My boyfriend had had a black DS lite for about a year, and I wanted my own. So we headed out to the Scarborough Town Centre on Boxing Day. Since I was working at the time and he was not, it was decided that he would use the funds he had accumulated through relatives sending Christmas cards to buy me a DS as a present, and I would use my debit card to buy games.

It was our first Boxing Day shopping, and it will probably be our last. The mall was packed. Best Buy was out, as was Future Shop and one of the EB Games.

"This is a year old system!" I seethed as we fought our way through another wall of dazed shoppers, shuffling towards the neon lights of an open sign. "Why is it so impossible to find?"

"It's popular," the boyfriend explained.

"I know! That's why I want one!" I said, and we went to the last EB games in the mall. This one was just as packed as everywhere else, and after waiting in line for an hour, I asked if they had any DS Lites. They did not. I asked if they had any of the older versions, and they indeed had two. We bought a DS Original, which I gently named Fatty, and a copy of Pokemon Pearl for $90 and went home. I began to play and didn't stop.

I've never been much for graphics, as long as they don't hurt my eyes. (I can't play a lot of N64 games anymore, the choppiness of the graphics give me a headache.) And I like simple games with depth. Pokemon Pearl offered this. I gobbled it up until I got blocked on the Final Four, but my frustration was brief because my boyfriend's games were lying in front of me. I spent my Christmas vacation working through New Super Mario Brothers, Elite Beat Agents, and ramping up high scores in Tetris. Fatty was eventually snatched out of my bag with Apollo Justice and Pearl at school, but I replaced him with Rose a few months later.

The DS has a lot of advantages over the consoles, and the main one is this: accessibility. It is quite possible to pick up Pokemon and sit down with spreadsheets, timetables, a schedule, and begin to churn out the most elite fighting team ever. It is also possible to give it to your cousin and let him play around at catching Pokemon in the Safari or enter his Pichu into the beauty contest. You can make poffins with your partner. This is a pretty common theme for the console. It completely erases the argument of hardcore versus casual (which I loathe) and just offers a variety of ways to have fun.

The second big advantage is one that is debatable but: I honestly feel that with a lot of next-gen consoles, the reliance on graphics and gimmicks lead to grand attempts at art and storytelling that fall flat on their faces. I'll probably write a post on that in more detail later. Games like Phoenix Wright focus entirely on the story and characters without stretching too far to impress or outdo competitors. I still remember the feeling of dread I got in my stomach when Maya was in trouble, or the triumph at solving a particularly troublesome case. While the stories on a DS game tend to be more linear, that's not necessarily a problem. I don't even need a deep and complex story: Henry Hatworth and the Puzzling Adventure is genuinely charming and funny without being confusing or requiring a Wiki. I can still quote Elite Beat Agents's little quips.

Finally, the little DS is just fun. I don't need to worry about exclusives. I don't deal with snide fanboys informing me that the PS3 is much more capable or the 360 has more exlusives. I just pop it open, put a game in there, sit down and play.

Isn't that what gaming is about?

Quest Accepted!

2009-10-23T07:47:00.000-07:00

I love games.

I love ducking into the local game store on the way home from school and greedily rifling through the bargain bin to see if there's any awesome titles I missed. I love getting a great game home, popping it in, and spending six hours on character creation while asking my boyfriend for advice and tips. I love the bright and colorful worlds of Wind Waker, Galaxy and World of Warcraft. I love the darker and almost comically violent worlds of Fallout and Warhammer. I love giving up on the hype of the game media and just bringing a game open, pushing the CD in, and enjoying a game for what it is. I love opening a case to discover a nice, thick manual full of information about the world I'm going to explore. I love casual games and waggle; I love hardcore games and twitch. I love strategy like Starcraft and tabletop like Warhammer and platformers like Henry Hatworth and shooters like Mass Effect and RPGs like KOTOR.

I consider myself a gamer, clearly. I bring a DS on the subway. I have a pretty decent PC. I have an Xbox. I had a Wii, and I will again some day! I've even coveted a PS3.

So I'm starting a blog about games. I'm starting a blog about women in games, and the roles they play, and comparing them to men in games. I'm talking about women gamers. Gaming from a woman's perspectives. Female characters, female narratives.

And yes, I am going to be criticizing a lot. This is because I love games. I love games like an adult loves something: I am willing to recognize flaws and talk them out. I do not love things like a child: fully but defensively, unwilling to admit fault.

This is not a news blog. I'm going to be posting about games months after they come out, or years. I'm going to be posting about 2d and 3d and online and tabletop and everything inbetween.

Let's do this.