I honestly understand why specific games have specific gender locks. In fact, it makes sense to me. That one game (can’t remember name off the top of my head, has ‘Infinity’ in it) starts off by saying: Yes, you’re a guy. Women might have been in this role too. But this isn’t a story about you running around hiding your boobs, being awkward during showers, and freaking out over that time of the month in military boot camp. It’s about an ordinary guy in war. Deal with it.
In the same sense, Guenevere does that too, but people seem more accepting as there ‘seems’ to be less characterization to it- the only true characterization given is her stats (of which there are few, thank pete) and her personality. No customization of appearance, no name changing, etc. It’s awesome, we’re dealing with a story we know, and a character we know, but can influence.
The lack of customization is what seems to make it more acceptable, yet most complaints about lack of customization link into lack of immersion- but Guenevere is one of the most immersive WiPs in this site, in my opinion.
Is this because we associate ourselves with a role, and if it’s not a straight ‘given’ then we believe we should have far more options?
This being said, I believe that the gender plucking of choice of Romance and choice of Broadsides was incredibly awkward.
Yes, we should try to get over gender stereotyping, but by over-compensating, isn’t that a form of abuse in itself? I once read an article about a group of comedians that actively picked people out in crowds to mock at, and they tended to choose white males who sat with white female partners. A black gay man in a wheel chair called out to be bullied too, and then he was, for being gay, for being black, for being in a chair. By avoiding such things, we’re bullying them too- if I can bully a man for being white, I should be able to bully a man for being black, or chinese, or hispanic, or whatever.
So, gender stereotyping (I digressed, sorry) is done through choice of broadsides and choice of romance. It seems awkward to have a woman do what a man does in choice of broadsides. Yes, power to woman, hoo-rah, (I am female) but what happens to pregnant women? They can’t stuff their husbands back home, they have to go to sea, and work, and they could very well lose the baby during a battle, with the stress, and that leads to political issues, moral issues, and a lack of people to fight during baby booms. (We won the war, yay, have sex, oops, all our fighters are knocked up)
Choice of romance is just…ehhh. Over compensating.
I don’t appreciate all the American-centric-isms of these games, but I understand that too, most writers and viewers here are American (and too a lesser extent from the UK, as far as I know) but when they start quizzing me on American history, I give up, and say 'Well fine, I’ll write a game where you have to memorize the Reform Acts by de Klerk, and what led up to Apartheid!
And then people would moan and say: Oohhhh, no, boo South Africa, I know nothing about it.
Ehem. Such is it for many about America.
I don’t like it when character customization has zilch effects on the story. Or when they don’t matter. The game says: You can look however you want to! I say: Cool, okay, I’m a girl, and I’m bald. Game says: He grips your hair, you can’t fight away (also, he’s a lot stronger than you)
Pardon me. Girls do martial arts too, you don’t need to be stronger that him, you just pull his thumbs in the opposite direction, hit his instep, or do the main thing all girls know to do: Aim for the nuts. Thank you.
And I’m bald. What hair?
(Once again, that was some gender stereotyping right there)
At least there is little damsel in distress based games here. I remember those from quizilla (someone mentioned a couple back). They were stupid, but good for wasting time. It was hard to find a decent series then, must say.
