Vox Day is annoyed that people are annoyed that there aren’t enough female characters in video games. He has a post about it, titled Why we don’t put girls in games. That’s silly; everybody knows why. It’s because “we” don’t want to, because “we” think “girls” are very nice for a few limited purposes but other than that they’re just a pain in the ass.
Yet another clueless wonder is yapping about the absence of the unnecessary from video games:
There is a point to including playable female characters in games…
Having taken it as fact that there is a point to including female characters in video games, why on earth are we still hearing excuses for their absence in 2014? Because it is an excuse. There is no reason not to do it. You won’t alienate your existing market by acknowledging the existence of women. You won’t take anything away from your existing market.
See? Vox Day says it right there. “Girls” are unnecessary.
He comments on the clueless wonder’s commentary:
I am a game designer. I am designing and producing a game that does not, and will not, have a single female character in it. This is not because I am misogynistic. This is not because I do not [want] women to play the game. This is because putting women in the game makes no sense, violates the principle of the suspension of disbelief, and will not make the game any better as a game.
Sums it up, doesn’t it. Let’s face it – putting women in anything makes no sense and will not make the anything any better as an anything. That’s just how it is.
Or rather, it’s how it looks to people like Vox Day, because it’s what he’s used to, and he’s not sharp enough to try to see around what he’s used to – while keeping the interests of people who are not Vox Day in mind – and realize it could be otherwise. Putting women in the priesthood makes no sense. Putting women in movies makes no sense except in very limited numbers and with very little to say or do. Just plain including women in the real world makes no sense.
I am the lead designer of First Sword, a combat management game. The game has orcs and men, elves and dwarves. It has goblins and trolls. But it has no women.
So…the orcs and elves and dwarves are all men too? And we’re just supposed to assume that, to know that without being told? Because being male is normal and being female is aberrant and weird?
Plus, as Man Boobz hilariously points out, he’s saying that women defy belief while [male] orcs and elves and dwarves are as credible as peanut butter or crew socks. Huh.
Why not? Because the game is a gladiator game. Women cannot credibly fight as gladiators. We don’t put women in the game for the same reason we don’t put bunny rabbits or children in the game. Putting women in the game would be an act of brutal sadism, an act of barbarism even by pagan Roman standards. While the Romans did occasionally put female gladiators in the arena, they were there as a comedic act. They were occasionally matched against midgets, which the Romans apparently found hilarious.
Wow. The guy really gets everything backward, doesn’t he. Human women are totally unbelievable, and on the other hand, putting female characters in a gladiatorial game would be an act of brutal sadism. Doooooooooood, it’s a game, you’re designing it, you can make the women invincible, plus besides it’s not sadism because they’re characters in a game.
Lordy. I’m not used to this level of…um…let’s call it innocence.
We could, of course, throw out historical verisimilitude. But we’re not going to. Because we value that verisimilitude far more than we value the opinion of a few whiny women who don’t play the sort of games we make anyhow.
Historical verisimilitude? Did he confuse himself by talking about Rome? Orcs and elves don’t have historical verisimilitude.
And when we design a game with a particular female market in mind, we don’t worry about hurting the feelings of men who we know have no interest in that sort of game.
But the woman is right. There is no point in debating. We’re not interested in debating her. We’re not interested in listening to her. As it happens, we couldn’t possibly care less what she thinks one way or the other.
Oh. I take it back about calling it “innocence” to be polite. The guy is thick as two short planks and he’s nasty.
Remind me who he is again?