Yes All Men: Assassin’s Creed Bro-op Controversy Escalates
552 replies, posted
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;45086564]Why should any game dev or anyone in any form of media have to conform or listen to anyone else, even if its a majority outrage?[/QUOTE]
Good question.
But, "have to" is a strong term. People might rally together and demand change - but this isn't going to force anything... People shouldn't be able to change anything because of pure anger.
Ideally - change should only take place if there is a good reason.
So here are some reasonable reasons to listen to others when producing a media for moneys sake:
#1: [B]More Sales[/B] - A product that is known to be the desire of consumers will sell more.
#2: [B]Better Product[/B] - A product designed with consideration for its consumers, will be considered a good product.
#3: [B]Larger Consumer Base[/B] - The more people considered as important to the market - the larger the market could potentially become.
#4: [B]Reputation[/B] - A good reputation is built on satisfied consumers. A bad reputation is built on people who were not considered at all, or who were not listened to.
However, for the sake of artistic integrity: You shouldn't listen to others, if their views infringe on your artistic vision.
[QUOTE=Kardia;45087127]Good question.
But, "have to" is a strong term. People might rally together and demand change - but this isn't going to force anything... People shouldn't be able to change anything because of pure anger.
Ideally - change should only take place if there is a good reason.
So here are some reasonable reasons to listen to others when producing a media for moneys sake:
#1: [B]More Sales[/B] - A product that is known to be the desire of consumers will sell more.
#2: [B]Better Product[/B] - A product designed with consideration for its consumers, will be considered a good product.
#3: [B]Larger Consumer Base[/B] - The more people considered as important to the market - the larger the market could potentially become.
#4: [B]Reputation[/B] - A good reputation is built on satisfied consumers. A bad reputation is built on people who were not considered at all, or who were not listened to.
However, for the sake of artistic integrity: You shouldn't listen to others, if their views infringe on your artistic vision.[/QUOTE]
1 - The won't lose all female sales. They only lose the people that "will only buy the game if there's a female character". They consider the investment on female characters surpass those sales.
2 - Having females characters doesn't make the game instantly better.
3 - The consumer base would only be increased by people that "will only buy the game if there's a
female character"
4 - HAHAHAHA. If it were trully that way EA would be fucking dead.
Why is them not wanting to develop the extra assets a shitty excuse?
If I felt the game was in a good, polished state, I wouldn't want to either. I'd want to go home and have a life. If people complain about it on the internet, I say fuck em.
1 - But they'll attract more female customers if they include females in their games. Is it cost effective? I don't know. Most development teams, obviously think not.
2 - Well it does if it is optional. It's better because more people would say it is better than say it is worse. The people who say that the option makes no difference - aren't really going to affect opinion on it.
3 - Again, they create a larger market. They may attract some past complainants, but the goal is to attract more females regardless of their views on gender politics. I'd wager this group has a lot of potential.
4 - Reputation isn't necessary for success. But it is undeniably a good thing to have.
There was an interesting post by a producer/project manager on the issue.
[url]http://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/27ut97/distinct_lack_of_female_characters_due_to/ci5z8i7[/url]
I think there really need to be more female protagonists in videogames, and I think that Assassin's Creed in general is an example of a title that doesn't have enough.
That being said, this game's probably almost ready to go gold. They literally cannot get started on adding a female protagonist, and probably haven't had the opportunity to do so for at least a few months. Apparently they wanted to early in development, but time constraints said no.
Good may come of this getting more media attention. Maybe they'll put more emphasis on the importance of trying to include a female character option. Maybe they'll go entirely with a female protagonist. But I also think that people need to consider more often that game developers are people too.They make mistakes, they work with limited resources, and oftentimes they don't have nearly the amount of time they'd like to have to polish their product. They do what they do because they love to do it, it's a pretty shitty job otherwise really.
[QUOTE=Hogie bear;45081091]It's really not though. Videogames aren't supposed to be taken as seriously as they are here. The idiotic argument is how you cant have 4 assassins that are male without starting a debate about "oh there should be a girl assassin in there just because".
Ofcourse knowing you, you're not going to take anything I say about this topic seriously so I'll just drop my point of view here.[/QUOTE]
lol no, fuck off. If there are four players, you obviously have to have the asian, the black, the woman and the gay so everyones happy.
[QUOTE=autodesknoob;45088300]lol no, fuck off. If there are four players, you obviously have to have the asian, the black, the woman and the gay so everyones happy.[/QUOTE]
That's the Left 4 Dead way to do it :v:
The real idiots here are the people who debate about a vidya for 10 page
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;45086419]I can do this.
- Clementine from The Walking Dead Season 2.
- Nilin from Remember me
-
-
-
-
Welp, that's it. I had to do a lot of research for that one.[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://www.xblafans.com/wp-content/uploads//2014/02/Assassin%E2%80%99s-Creed-Liberation-HD-1.jpg[/IMG]
?
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;45081181]The Walking Dead season 1 did this (lee is a criminal after all) and no one cried racism[/QUOTE]
Because it wasn't written like shit. Who knew good writing could make people look past the exterior. :downs:
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;45088351]The real idiots here are the people who debate about a vidya for 10 page[/QUOTE]
The real idiots are the ones who complain about debate in a place where people debate.
Do you not think that others view debate as a game to some degree? Some people enjoy this sort of thing.
[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;45086066]100% of the human race are skeletons, why arent there more games where I can play as a skeleton living life on the edge and facing hardships?
Where are my skeletons? They are always enemies , its fucking bullshit and seriously offensive to me and my skeleton brethren.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=wari65;45085897]I identify as a purple furred fox. Why can't I play Assassin's creed as a fox? Plenty of other people identify as foxes. It's not that much of a workload to add a fox assassin. Foxes kill things by out-thinking them, shouldn't it be more fitting for foxes to be added as assassins? Having humans as the protagonists in games is just getting boring, why not animals? It'll add new gameplay and story opportunities. Ubisoft is just being lazy >:(((((((((((((((((((((([/QUOTE]
Whatever is going on in this weird and very long thread is all cool and stuff but I just wanted to point out these two posts which conflate women and "purple furred foxes" and "skeletons" together.
Now, be it far from me to judge your romantic life but if you're conflating fantastical entities with women what does that say about you?
[QUOTE=niel12_5D;45088615]if you're conflating fantastical entities with women what does that say about you?[/QUOTE]
Ah, it's not that bad. They're just trying to use an analogy for arguments sake.
Of course their analogies fail horribly and don't work. People aren't saddened over the lack of strange entities - their sad over the lack of females.
[b]Females. Are. Not. Strange. Entities.[/b]
[QUOTE=Kardia;45088565]The real idiots are the ones who complain about debate in a place where people debate.
Do you not think that others view debate as a game to some degree? Some people enjoy this sort of thing.[/QUOTE]
this isnt the debate forum, this is the video game update forum
[QUOTE=Kardia;45088666]Ah, it's not that bad. They're just trying to use an analogy for arguments sake.
Of course their analogies fail horribly and don't work. People aren't saddened over the lack of strange entities - their sad over the lack of females.
[b]Females. Are. Not. Strange. Entities.[/b][/QUOTE]
Not only is it a bad analogy but it's also implying that Assassin's Creed shouldn't have furry foxes or skeletons which is dumb because both those things would be improvements to an otherwise boring game no-one wants to play anyway.
[editline]12th June 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;45088681]this isnt the debate forum, this is the video game update forum[/QUOTE]
I have not elected you to the office of moderatoris. Step down before I crucify you myself.
[QUOTE=froztshock;45088015]There was an interesting post by a producer/project manager on the issue.
[url]http://www.reddit.com/r/assassinscreed/comments/27ut97/distinct_lack_of_female_characters_due_to/ci5z8i7[/url]
I think there really need to be more female protagonists in videogames, and I think that Assassin's Creed in general is an example of a title that doesn't have enough.
That being said, this game's probably almost ready to go gold. They literally cannot get started on adding a female protagonist, and probably haven't had the opportunity to do so for at least a few months. Apparently they wanted to early in development, but time constraints said no.
Good may come of this getting more media attention. Maybe they'll put more emphasis on the importance of trying to include a female character option. Maybe they'll go entirely with a female protagonist. But I also think that people need to consider more often that game developers are people too.They make mistakes, they work with limited resources, and oftentimes they don't have nearly the amount of time they'd like to have to polish their product. They do what they do because they love to do it, it's a pretty shitty job otherwise really.[/QUOTE]
This really refutes those tweets that flaunt "wow! i could do that change with my eyes closed in an afternoon!"
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;45088681]this isnt the debate forum[/QUOTE]
[b]THIS! IS! FACEPUNCH![/b] *[i]Kicks you into pit[/i]*
Debates happen all over this site.
[QUOTE=A_Pigeon;45088681]this isnt the debate forum, this is the video game update forum[/QUOTE]
God forbid people discuss video games on the video game forum.
I... think that this discussion may have lost a bit of focus.
For one moment, set aside the gender rights angle. We can come back to it, but for the next couple paragraphs let's focus on another facet as hard as we can.
Someone, it doesn't really matter who, asks the guys in charge of a developing piece of media why [THING] is not in it. The media developers reply that they would love to include [THING], but doing so would be a colossal undertaking which would require massive resources, overhauls, and work hours. It simply isn't feasible to include [THING].
Then other people who have been in charge of similar media development are asked about this. They reply that including [THING] isn't hard at all, and in fact most of the work to include [THING] is already done for other reasons and could simply be copied over. The main gist of why [THING] isn't included is for marketing reasons, and the "It's too hard" spiel is also a marketing-spawned response to stonewall people who request the inclusion of [THING]. In fact there have been several pushes behind the scenes to include [THING] in various media, but they have been repeatedly quashed by higher ups.
This information is set in front of the developers who said that [THING] isn't possible, and they are asked to explain.
They blink once, slowly. Then, visibly sweating, whisper through clenched teeth "Our media isn't about [THING]."
Can it be agreed that this situation, even without all the added problems, is [i]super fucked up[/i] and shouldn't be defended?
my 2 cents on this is that it's a masculine thing and if you applied this to movies you would complain why batman isn't a woman or why alfred is also a man
let them do their game how they want to
[editline]13th June 2014[/editline]
its all sjws up in here god
[editline]13th June 2014[/editline]
women are not underrepresented in video games, in fact, the good games of the past few years I can think of had woman protagonists/sidekicks that were not sexist, not even by a margin
[QUOTE=wari65;45085897]I identify as a purple furred fox. Why can't I play Assassin's creed as a fox? Plenty of other people identify as foxes. It's not that much of a workload to add a fox assassin. Foxes kill things by out-thinking them, shouldn't it be more fitting for foxes to be added as assassins? Having humans as the protagonists in games is just getting boring, why not animals? It'll add new gameplay and story opportunities. Ubisoft is just being lazy >:(((((((((((((((((((((([/QUOTE] Last time I checked foxes were never assassin's during the french revolution.
[editline]13th June 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Egevened;45089522]my 2 cents on this is that it's a masculine thing and if you applied this to movies you would complain why batman isn't a woman[/QUOTE] yeah I wonder why bat[b]man[/b] is male. (also there is already batwoman)
[QUOTE=Stents*;45085353]If someone actually did that people would complain that the game is implying that women are useless without sex.[/QUOTE]
Hasn't Hollywood and TV industry already done that ? In 90% of movies women are still just a pretty face or a sexual object. And best example is Game Of Thrones which half of the popularity is based on that and people seem to be more than OK with it. And don't tell me "it fits the medieval times where women had no rights". It's just a fantasy novel/series.
[QUOTE=Egevened;45089522]its all sjws up in here god[/QUOTE]
Why do people keep saying this like this just ends the entire argument? There's plenty of actually some decent arguing going on here, then you bounce into the thread all ready for your tremendous zinger against those nasty social justice warriors.
Then it's shit and you look ridiculous.
[QUOTE=isnipeu;45089631][B]Last time I checked foxes were never assassin's during the french revolution.[/B]
[editline]13th June 2014[/editline]
yeah I wonder why bat[b]man[/b] is male. (also there is already batwoman)[/QUOTE]
Last time I checked Assassin's Creed wasn't completely historically accurate.
"Women would like to play as women in video games where the gender of the character in the story doesn't matter."
x 259 Dumbs, 10 Pages
Good job you fuckin' children.
[editline]give me a rimjob so hard oh my god daddy I love it[/editline]
I'd also like to point out that Ubisoft's excuses for not making female characters in their multiplayer game were the following:
"no girl assassins in the french revolution" the most famous assassin in the french revolution was a woman
"it would take too long to make the animations" 90% of the PC in Liberation's animations were recycled from Connor with no troubles, plus there were female assassins in past multiplayer modes to recycle animations from, plus a team of 300+ talented content creators should be able to churn out a hip sway in a couple of days if some nerd in a basement can churn some out for skyrim by himself in like a week
So yeah the complaints are sound and Ubisofts excuses were weak. And yet here you all are acting like you're gonna catch goddamned cooties if a girl plays a video game. Enjoy being either thirteen or alone.
Why am I not surprised that this ended up in a shitstorm?
Also, can we just all agree that the core reason for everyone losing their shit here is because Ubisoft comes up with the worst reasoning for any of their decisions and leave it at that?
[QUOTE=Satane;45091922]This is fucking ridiculous, political correctness should not affect artistic direction.[/QUOTE]
What does this have to do with "political correctness"?
Why wouldn't men want more women as main characters in 3rd person games? Dat ass /objectifying
[QUOTE=Satane;45093305]Women want female players just for the sake of representing their gender.[/QUOTE]
From my own experience (that means talking about video games with women I know), I have never met a single woman who complained about a game not having a female player character.
It's almost like people are more interested in playing a game that's good.
[QUOTE=Ganerumo;45093342]From my own experience (that means talking about video games with women I know), I have never met a single woman who complained about a game not having a female player character.
It's almost like people are more interested in playing a game that's good.[/QUOTE]
And you experience is correct. The people who are making this hassle don't matter.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.