Bechdel Gamer (original) (raw)
I’ve decided to do some posts on what I call unexpected moments of empathy in games I don’t mean moments where the game is intentional trying to produce a moment of empathy with the character in the game. I’m talking more moments where the game come together in a way that makes you feel a sense of empathy or understanding towards people out in the real world. Especially those moments where the mechanics come together to accomplish this in unexpected ways, even ways not intended by the designers. So on to my first example:
Now this is a prefect example of what I mean by an unexpected moment of empathy. The game is just a fun little rogue-like hack-and-slash. It is in no way trying to get me to think about my fellow human beings, yet it did. For those of you that don’t know you play as a line of people in the same family trying to overcome a dungeon, each character you create is randomly generated with random traits some positive, some negative, some neutral. For example, you can have someone who is nearside (negative trait which makes the edges of the screen blurry) and gay (neutral only changes the gender of your lover at the end screen). It was playing as one such nearsighted character for the first time that I had my unexpected moment of empathy.
Those moments playing as a nearsighted character where painful and I lost extremely quickly. I am nearsighted myself but I never think of it because I have always been able to pay for my prescriptions. But at that moment I stopped and wondered how it must be for those that can’t afford proper eye care. To have what for me was a few moments of bad game playing be something they have to struggle with daily. It made me appreciate the glass I have on my head that I so take often for granted in a new light. This silly little game made me think about other suffering without even trying. From then on, I took a moment to think on things like this as I looked over the traits of my randomly selected adventures.
P.S. I’d also like to point out that due to its random nature it allows you to play as a non-abled body person and have them be the hero. Something very rare in games and is another cool yet unintentional results of the game’s mechanics.
That was my unexpected moment of empathy, since I believe moments like this really highlights the potential of game as a medium, I’d love to hear over people stories about similar experience playing games.
How Bad Sex Can Equals Better Games
This post was originally a sidebar in another post I’m writing but decided it needs to be discussed on its own. Quite simply we need more Bad Sex in games, now I do not mean poorly written sex scenes. Although I’m kind of surprised their hasn’t been a Fifty Shades of Whatever game yet. I mean we need games that show us the less glamorous side of sex: The awkward first times; the bad sex that happens before you learn what you like, the fantasies that fall far short of expectations; the mechanical sex you have because your trying to conceive, the sex you have with X till you realize you’re only interested in Y, sex sessions that for any number of reasons don’t leave us satisfied. All of these are part of sex and sexuality; bad sex that teaches us what we don’t like is as much a part of life as the great sex that teach us what we love.
This is a rare in most media but I find it especially lacking in games. I can easily name some memorable bad sex example off the top of my head in other media. Lilly Allen has made several songs about bad sex, the HBO series Girls has had some very unglamorous portrayals of sex, the movie But I’m a Cheerleader had a comically filmed make out session that illustrated how horrible it was for the protagonist to pretend to be straight. Yet I can’t think of any comparable scene in gaming yet. I sure there are a few example somewhere that I’ve missed but like I said this is especially lacking in games.
However, here is what really made me interested in addressing this issue on its own instead of just a side bar. Games are defined by their interactivity and ideally a games story should be reflected in it mechanics. However, the way I see it there is a big irony in games: we use mechanics that seem built to represent bad sex to try to represent good sex. Games have yet to really figure out how to presented sexuality via the mechanics of a game. At least intentionally, there are some games that accidentally stumbled upon some interesting possible mechanics. The intense attachment that many players have towards the Companion Cube in portal may, completely unintentionally, be the best model available for how to replicate the intense attachments of love and lust via game mechanics we’ve stumbled upon; something that is a little sad but also amazingly cool.
Sexiest Video Game Character Ever?
However, when games intentionally try to use game mechanics we usually end up with something awkward such as quicktime event style sex scene. Neither the deep intimacy of making love in a decades-long relationship, nor the raw carnality of a one-night encounter with someone you just met in a bar, nor most of the other sexual permutations of life is done justice by a quick time event. The only forms of sex that I can see working with a quicktime mechanic are, you may have guessed it, bad sex. The disconnect and loss of immersion that happens when you try to represent sex via these awkward quicktime events could be used intentionally to demonstrate bad sex. Using some of my examples, the mechanical nature of quick time events can be used to demonstrate how mechanical sex can become if you’re only having it because you’re trying to conceive or because your try to pass as something you aren’t. If we can master how to create champion cube like mechanics, we use those in the beginning of the game to show the intensity of the opening moments of a relationship but then used quicktime event sex to make a point about the difficulties many couple experience in keeping their sex lives from become stale in long-term relationships. However, current attempts to pair game mechanics to sex are a little like trying to create a hot and steamy sex scene only instead of a hot and steamy soundtrack you have a laugh track or a tear-jerking piano piece.
I’ll finish by pointing out that this post in it of itself serves as a demonstration of shorts as to why we have to ask the question of about how game portray bad sex as much as asking how we portray good sex. While I had plenty of thoughts about sex in games before the point I just made ,the irony that we don’t focus on bad sex in games but basically have a bad sex game mechanic ready to go while using that bad sex mechanic to try and represent good sex, till I asked the “bad sex” question.
How not to become the Creep Bar of the Internet
One of the most bizarre things about gamer culture is the casual tolerance of open harassment in games. The idea that it is just part of the game, that people should just grow a thicker skin or fight back themselves. Not only is tolerating this ignoring basic civility; it make no sense for self-identifying gamers to take the approach. Those that identify as the hardcore, as the gaming coinsurers should be the ones most opposed to it. As discerning consumers, this attitude makes no sense.
Let begin by looking at the C-rate reality TV show that inspired my title, Spike TV’s Bar Rescue. Now a frequent problem in bars is women being harassed.Now do you think the bar consultants’ answer to this is to pat the owners on the back and tell them how thin-skinned their customers are and start some sort of “grow a thick skin campaign”? No, that would be ridiculous. Bars like that repeal customers of both genders. Women don’t want to go to these type of bars for obvious reasons. Then the men won’t go because most heterosexual men don’t want to go to a bar with no women. This leaves us with either a closed bar or a bar frequented only by a small clique of creeps and other undesirables. Great bars don’t have this attitude, even if they don’t give a damn about decency they at least understand business and know that a female customer is just as entailed to a fun time as a male one. Good bars don’t allow harassment of their patrons. Bar connoisseur do not go to bars that have “grown a thick skin” as an entry requirement. Why should games have this requirement?
Do any other industries do this?
Restaurants ask people who disturbing the diners around them to quiet down, not ask those being disturbed to grow thicker skin.
Theaters kick people out who disturb others viewing experience, not ask people to grow a thicker skin.
Being too loud in a library you get kicked out, thin-skinned readers or not.
…and none of those examples are even cases of deliberate harassment, yet no one is pulling the stopping being so thin skinned card here.
There is no other product or service where those who consider themselves connoisseurs openly tolerate harassment. The exact opposite connoisseur would be some of the least tolerant of this carp, connoisseur appreciate the value of their money and a service that allows you to be harassed is not a service worth their money. In no other industry do its loudest defenders consider this a feature and not a problem. In no other industry do we tell paying customers to grow a thick skin when other patrons harass them. In no other industry are people seriously expected to pay only to put up with other people’s harassment. Harassment may be a problem in these industries but we don’t see people openly telling people to “grow thick skin” and expecting them to pay to be part of that experience.
Seriously, just imagine if we applied this attitude elsewhere:
Restaurant: Come eat here we openly tolerate harassment.
Museums: come appreciate the fine art and grow a thick skin because we openly let people bother you. Just part of the art world right?
Walmart: If people bother you while you shop remember it your thin-skinned problem.
Library: Come here we let you read while being distracted and bothered, unlike those other libraries that want you to enjoy it in peace.
This exception is absurd people do not pay to put themselves in a situation where other people will harness them. Just like in the above example, the majority will simply move on to something else. I want to stop to stop for a moment and note something. Why did I decide to make this post the way I did. Why of all the comparisons I could make did I make a comparison to bars? Because games are many things: a budding art, a form of entertainment, but they are also a product, and a service. They are most especially a service in the context of the multiplayer environment. No other product or service could get always with this attitude as I said before in no other product or service could harassment by other patrons be considered a feature; in no other service would a paying customer be asked to deal with other patrons harassment. A bar would get terrible yelp reviews if it told patrons being harassed being by other to get a thick-skinned. I see no reasons to treat games differently.
Which brings to the issue of games and respect, game have an image problem and this type of tolerance for harassment not only feeds that image problem it makes that image problem a reality. Just like the bar example above, most people aren’t going to stay where they’re harassed they are going to go someplace else and leave the undesirables to their holes. This is what we let gamer culture become when we tolerate harassment a pit of undesirables. It hard to fight the stereotype of gamers being immature basement dwellers and man-children, if we allow what is in essence a self-selection system for basement dwellers and man-children. Games and gamer culture is so much more than a just a virtual “creep bar”; we can be the avant-garde of artistic expression and entertainment but to reach this potential we need to have the guts to tell creeps and harassers they aren’t welcome in this establishment.
P.S. After a long hiatus after initially opening this blog I’m happy to say I should be able to be updating this at least once a week (hopefully two) for the immediate future. Preview of upcoming post: Scarlet Blade: The Junk Food of Games and Sexuality; the MMO as a sex pluralist/positive space and more.
So today, my N7 Collector edition of Mass Effect 3 arrived, the official release was yesterday. One thing about the game that made me happy was the news news that it will feature the option of having male Shepards have a romance with another male (you can pick the gender of your character and female Shepards have always had the option of same sex romances). Happy, until that happiness was replaced with more rage-y emotions when I committed the mistake of reading the comments to the articles and found homophobia abounds. So before I jump in to the last game in the Mass Effect trilogy I’m going to take some time to review the controversy, and I’ll eventually come back to it after I finish Mass Effect 3, since it will surely add to if not complicate or completely change my arguments. (Note: I basing this post off the games alone, I haven’t read any of the books)
Take this comment, (from the above link) which pretty much covers all the bases I’m going to discuss. Note this post is a good illustration because it covers everything however, it is not at all unique.
This is bullshit, bioware. Way to give in to the politically correct crap to make a few people happy who were mad at you in dragon age. Shepard is a ‘defined’ character, whether you agree with me or not. I always play as a male and no matter how i played him in my games, he had a face and a personality that had already been established. This isnt Dragon Age I, Fallout, or Oblivion where the only character you play as is the one you build. For 2 games we were led to believe he was heterosexual and also led to believe, given everything hes accomplished, that Shepard is ‘all that is man’. Now, all of a sudden, Commander Shepard likes to sleep with men between fighting the reapers. It breaks the story and breaks the image i have of him in my head. This royally pisses me off. This is completely unneeded and strictly done to be politically correct. Ridiculous.
Love,
A huge bioware fan; however, very disappointed at the moment.
And for the record, i couldnt care less if they got rid of all love interests in the game. I play this game because of the epic story and gameplay. The ‘sex scenes’ and love interests of this game are blown way out of proportion. Its sad that this game is defined by bullshit like this.
I think most here can already see that this argument is filled with bullshit, however detailing how much bullshit it is will tell us a lot about what is wrong with gaming culture. Let us start by discussing the pervious Mass Effect games and Commander Shepard for a bit.
1) The (Homophobic) Myth of a “Canonical” Shepard
I find the notion that commanded Shepard can’t be gay because “he” is a “defined” character hard to swallow. The notion of Shepard being a “defined” ,at all let alone as straight, is not only false it is an extremely problematic argument that reinforce homophobic logics. For those who haven’t played the game not only can you pick out your Shepard’s gender, but also their race, appearance (including the face), background, class, and most importantly throughout both games you are constantly picking between paragon “be a paragon of virtue” or renegade “be the ultimate badass” options. These further effect your dialogue options by unlocking either more “charm” or “intimidate” dialogue options. Now look at what I posted so far they notice how the options are polar opposites of each other? Need more convincing? You can decide to either side with a rigorous Justicar that lives by an extremely strict moral code or the murderous alien sex vampire she is chasing. You can save a member of your squad or leave them to die in a fire. You can reactive the Geth (a sentient syntactic race) that saved your life or sell it. In Mass Effect 2 The game makes these choices have literally visible consequence on your character; you start the game with your face scarred if you pick more paragon options the scares will heal, pick more renegade option the scares will get worse. (That same face that the above gamer claims is the same no matter how he plays can between character selection and facial scaring vary extremely. )
While the morality system alone crushes the notion that Shepard is a “defined” character, even the non-morality choices are still are still varied enough to bust the notice of Shepard being a “defined”. Would you describe the female Shepards that wants a relationship with the cool-headed male biotic Jacob, so cool head he was chosen for the stabilizing qualities of his personality? (Although make sure he is not planting a listening device while he’s down there) as being the same as the male Shepard who wants a relationship Jack the violent female biotic covert (so violent your optional ,notice how that word keeps popping up, pre-coital sex-ed lesson includes a friendly remainder that the doctor will be there to set the broken bones afterword.) , who rammed the Hanner race’s favorite moons with one of their space stations? Would you say that a two people with such different taste in partners are defined the same in the real world?
The counter argument to this is that all that the above boils down to commanded Shepard being either “a little bit of dick or a little bit of a nice guy”. While I disagree that the effects of the Paragon/Renegade system are that small, this argument still proves my point. The important point here is not how defining the paragon/renegaded options are to any individuals play through but they are far, far, more defining then being able to choose your characters sexual orientation. As in traits like being a “little bit of a dick” or “little bit of a nice guy” are actually defining while heterosexual or homosexual are non-defining and don’t actually tell us anything about people as human beings. It is only via othering, stereotyping, homophobia, and the out-group homogeneity effect that we come to see homosexual as a defining trait. To illustrate if I just bought a new game and you asked me what is the main character like, which would tell you more about them “heterosexual” or “well he is a little bit of a dick?”. We realize saying heterosexual says nothing heterosexual comes in every shape and form it would be useless for me to answer that question by saying heterosexual, because unlike out-groups we recognizes our own groups as heterogeneous and diverse. Homosexual is equally as un-illuminating, it tells me nothing about you as a human being it tells me the gender of you prefer your partners to be, which when you put aside homophobia tells me about as much as saying I like bolds. Indeed as I illustrated above with the examples above telling me you like more of a “Jack” vs. more of “Jacob” tells me far more about you then what gender you want that personality type in.
Now notice what I did there and mentioned one option from a female Shepard and one from male Shepard. There is a reason from that…
2) The (Homophobic and Sexist) Myth of a “Canonical” Shepard
Remember when I said in the first paragraph “female Shepard have had the options of same sex romances” . Yah. How about that Shepard is already (optionally) gay. There is nothing “canonical” about Shepard’s heterosexuality; to say that requires you to ignore the existence of female Shepards. Which is exactly what this poster does:
For 2 games we were led to believe he was heterosexual and also led to believe, given everything hes accomplished, that Shepard is ‘all that is man’
No we haven’t, we were lead to believe nothing. One of the first choices you make in both games is your character gender and thus have the option of not making Sheppard a “he”, it literally the first thing you do after clicking New Game in Mass Effect 1/Mass Effect 2. My fem Shepard and many other were getting there freak on with the female Asari (alien species) Liara. My Shepard and that of many others have already been having homosexual sex for two games and can’t exactly be “all that is man” because they we were you know women. This line of reasoning thus establishes itself as not only homophobic but sexists. It requires establishing male Shepard as the “canonical” Shepard.
It also both sexist and homophobic to use the phrase “all that is man” to prove that male Shepard can’t be gay. Your saying that only straight people can be heroic with a phrase that implies only straight men can be heroic. That he adds we know he was heterosexual because of what he has accomplished goes right back to what I said in part one about the homophobic logic that say we can define people based on sexual orientation. There is also an irony to it which I will go other at the end of the post.
Now some may argue that male Shepard is the canonical Shepard as the male Shepard is the one mainly used for marketing purposes. To that I say: Seriously?! This is probably the most desperate argument I’ve seen to try and justify the misogyny and homophobia. Marketing lies, and many ways. Marketing is not done by the writers or makers of Mass Effect it done by a separate department. Do you believe only the default appearance is “cannon” due to marketing? Are only the choices we see Shepard take in the marketing materials “cannon”? Are you really uses marketing to overrule, the games themselves? Also we are detriment cannon via percentages now, male Shepard man far and away be used for most marketing materials but fem-shep is featured in some. Is your sense of male entailment so deep you can’t see how ridiculous this logic is? Don’t answer, I sadly already know the answer.
3) Before someone says the Asari “don’t count”.
Let’s look at it from two angles…
Asari totally count…
Many people counter that Asari are monogender so it doesn’t counts. That might work better if that mono-gender wasn’t clearly written as a female monogender: female (from a mono-gendered species) + female from a (mostly bi-gendered species) = same gender romance for all intents and purposes. They have been portrayal canonically as being all an “all-female race” in the codex; all look female, uses female pronouns and are generally regarded by humans in the game (and outside the game) as female. The love scene between her and female sheared is shot as a lesbian sex scene (no matter how the Asari Vulcan mind meld meets sex system works). Additionally no one takes this argument to its logical conclusion to say that because Asari “don’t count” they don’t count as evidence of male Shepard’s homosexuality….
…and if they don’t you’re a queer (no really you are…optionally)
The reason people are saying it doesn’t count is to support their own homophobia. However, let dig deeper and say ok the Asari don’t count. The other side of the argument is that while most races may see Asari as female they themselves say they have no real concept of “man” or “women”.
So there is a legitimate argument to be made that the Asari /human relationship “don’t count” as lesbian (As in two women) or gay (as in two men) , however what is harder to justify is the implied statement that therefore Shepard’s is therefore straight. Consider this if Asari don’t count as female to make fem-Shepard a lesbian they also wouldn’t count as female to make male-Shepard heterosexual. So in that case both female Shepard and male Shepard’s are sleeping with someone outside of the male/female gender binary. And what do we call relationships that fall outside the gender binary… queer. Far from proving Shepard’s heterosexuality, it actually furthers the progress of queering him.
Now to be 100% fair I’m basing this off the definition used in Western academic discussions I think this is fair, as it is clear we are discussing Commander Shepard with in a western context. However, there are systems of gender and sexuality which define things different. As in, where there is an explicit or implicit concept of “thirdness” heterosexuality wouldn’t necessarily be defined as a “man” and a “women” as it is in a binary system but more as “gender” and anything “not-that-gender”. Under such a system Asari romances regardless of who they are with could count as heterosexual. As I said it strains credibility to try and argue this is the context in which people mean that Asari don’t count. However, even if they did most of my other points in this post still stand; that doesn’t stop the treatment of homosexual romance from being any less homophobic.
4) Do you even understand the meaning of the word OPTIONAL!?
Now let’s take a step back and realize something that if I did my job right should be obvious by now any gay romance in Mass Effect 3 will be optional, there is nothing to suggest you will be forced to take that option. Now take another step back and realize all romances in Mass Effect series are optional. This means several things:
a) Gay (and bi, and queer, and xenoqueer and other) Shepard’s Already exists
A gay man could easily play through the entirety of one and two not romance anyone and then start a gay romance in Mass Effect 3. I know gay men who’ve done exactly that, a funny example is a gay classmate who was replaying the game for second time as a male Shepard. The first time he let Ashley die; part of what he wanted to do was save her the second time around. Everything was going according to plan until he accidentally picked a dialog option that started her romance path. He then had the “most stereotypical gay male response” and decided “I rather let her die then sleep with her” and left her to die again to make absolutely sure that he couldn’t romance her. So he in effect played as gay Shepard so closeted that he is willing to send squad mates to their death to keep it a secret, by the way don’t worry he assures me he has gentler ways of letting down women in the actual world.
What the optionally nature of Shepard attraction also allows is for many other sexual identities besides heterosexual to already exists. For example, one could play a male Commend Shepard as a pure sapiosexual , or as a xenophile who only likes alien, which as I explained in the case of Liara could in it of itself constitute a form of queerness (and hence my neologisms of xenoqueer in the subheading). And all these options exist because ultimately…
b) Shepard’s sexuality is optional
If you do only the necessary core missions there is nothing mentioned that says anything about commanders Shepard sexuality unless you buy the homophobic notion that heroism equals heterosexuality. Shepard’s heterosexuality like so many other things is a choice and an optional choice at that. Thus if we ignore context and say Liara counts as heterosexual it still isn’t true that even all options in the game lead us to believe that Shepard is heterosexual. You can choose not to romance anyone. You could play the game as an asexual and has no interest in anyone if you wanted; you could play the games as Shepard being a complete professional focused on the mission never romancing anyone or reveling anything about their sexuality.
“We” were lead to believe nothing. Yet many people feel as if this somehow a massive recon of Shepard’s sexuality. This is an example of heterosexual privilege in action. We assume that Shepard is heterosexual even when no indication of this, when we are given the option of having a heterosexual relationship is not seen as an option but as canonical consummation of the privileged assumption of heterosexuality as “default”. There is an interesting parallel, many who have studied gender and sexuality understand how gay, lesbian and queer and queer identities are social constructed but yet fall in to the trap of not realizing this means heterosexuality is also a social construct. This is a similar situation in interactive forum we can perceive homosexuality as an option but still see heterosexual not as the other option but as a default you go against by pick homosexuality or bisexuality.
c) The threat of optionality
Optional means you don’t have to do it, you don’t have to make Commander Shepard gay, straight, bi, or anything else. It is entirely your choice. What is breaking the imagine many gamers have of commander Shepard is thus not that they made Commander Shepard gay or bi but that someone else can play there games differently. This is pure homophobia plan and simple, feeling your personal choices in your PC/console are under attack because someone else has the option of making different choices in their PC/console. Replace “PC/console” with “bedroom” and tell me it doesn’t should homophobic? Having the imagine of the options you chose be destroyed because someone else can pick a different options is about a logical as saying the taste of your beef meatball is ruined because the restaurant now offers a chicken meatball.
5) Let assume that Shepard heterosexuality is “cannon”…so what?.
As the game is full of options not all options you take in the game are going to be cannon and many are mutually exclusive directly contradicting each other. For the most part Bioware designed the games so as to not contradict what the player experienced. However, some options are basically non-cannon and never had a chance of being cannon i.e. the Shepard dies ending. It a games with many choices and multiple ending, it is imposable for all the option to be “cannon”.
You go in knowing this whenever you buy a game like this; does this make all the non-canonical content a waste of time? No, it remains fun and interesting to explore those option, I guarantee you many of the same gamers complaining of this have replayed games just to get extra ending that they knew or suspected would not be the canonical ending. The choices they made in Mass Effect 2 could be rendered non-canonical in Mass Effect 3, the writer could have decided the other choice makes for a better story and role with it. And if you can say that Shepard’s heterosexuality is “cannon” then you could also say Shepard is canonically white (default skin color), male (default) sex canonically a soldier class (default) class. Yet would we anyone says people are messing with cannon by merely having those options or by adding more grades of skin tone or a new class? If Bioware came out and confirmed that yes to then Shepard is canonically a white male solder (or what ever it is they play as). Would the same people screaming about cannon now complain about all those non-conical options then? No they would say Bioware has given you the options to do something fun that is not canonical, just like the previous games and just like plenty of games before it. Why is this now such a big problem to some people? The answer is this is not about “cannon” this is about privilege and entailment.
Why all this matters?
What the backlash against male-male relationship ultimately represents is a perfect example of privilege and entitlement in action. One of the great things about games is interactivity the ability to choose, yet despite this being one of the strength of games as a medium these so called “big fans” hate it whenever an option out of many goes against their notions of what the game should be. They feel every option should cater specially to them, to the point that even that they can convinces themselves that their personal play through experiences are cannon no matter how much evidence is presented otherwise. However it is even worse than that, not only should games cater to them exclusivity if a games has an option that caterer to someone else that option should be destroyed, these people would prefer a games with no same sex options then the exact same game with same sex options. Even though logically they gain nothing by removing that options, they will end up with less not more Mass Effect. However, what they do lose is privilege letting someone else keep the ability to play the way they want means they are no longer the center of everything it means people besides them matter.
At least some of the arguments are especially insidious as they are wrapped in the guise of critical analysis; others like so much of privilege appear to be common sense. However, what frightens me is how many of these examples like much of the above quote are not subtitle in there misogyny, homophobia or entitlement; they are quite blatant and the problem ultimately lies in gamer culture and it is a problem that needs to change. This type of think is part of a large system of oppression of marginalized groups; they are part of a system with very real consequences.
The irony I referred to earlier is that games have the potential to be inclusive in a way other media can’t, yet gamer culture is very problematic and exclusive. I hope I’ve made it clear that Shepard was never meant to be “all that is man” the way the poster above means it ,as in all that is stereotypically male in our society. However, they are meant to be “all that is man” in the sense of man_kind_; Shepard represent all that is humankind, if all the options in the game still result in such a narrow possibilities for Shepard then Bioware has failed. What makes Commander Shepard such a powerful symbol is that they can be so many different things. Via all the different options in the game and the range of humanity they represent, Shepard (as in the range of Shepard) can more than the static character in other media be all that is humankind. This is not just the power of Mass Effect this is the power of gaming, of interactivity as a story telling medium. It is why every gamer that truly cares about gaming as a media needs to learn bout and check their privilege. It not only makes you a better human, if we let the media take on its full potential if we allow ourselves to experience the full potential of games to illuminate and enriches us instead of simply catering to the narrow viewpoint of the privileged and entitled, it ‘ll make for better games too.
Like I said in the beginning I’ll have far more to say about Mass Effect series, but I’ve rambled on for long enough now and Mass Effect 3 awaits till then….”The Reapers are here” (and unlike the humans, they really don’t care whether or not Commander Shepard is gay).
Note: as I don’t want to be spoiled for Mass Effect 3 I’m not going to be looking at/moderating the comments as well as I should till I finish…please don’t make me regret doing that.
Status: Passing type 1 “A scene meeting these criteria is an unavoidable part of the game”
**Description:**“A marginal case. Prominent NPC characters Alyx and Mossman have two conversations:
In the first, they discuss some errors in the scientific apparatus they’re supervising; in the second, they start off partly talking about other male characters (Breen and Eli Vance) but segue into a technobabbly science discussion. It is arguable whether they count as ‘sustained’.”
Playable Character Test: There is a female playable character (who doesn’t meet the other criteria)
Note: My googe-fu couldn’t confirm that there was a female character. Please leave a comment if you can confirm or deny the presence of a playable female character.
(others have corrected this in the comments and original submitter confirmed they must have accidentally missed clicked, it happens)
Platform: Microsoft Windows, Xbox, Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, Mac OS
Source: Reader Submission by John Brindle. Thank you for your contribution. If you disagree with a game’s rating leave a comment below or E-mail me at namedbychaos @ aol.com.
Notes
Link to the Bechdel test of Half-life 1
What other have written about Half-Life 2:
Characters Done Right: Alyx Vance
Half-Life 2: Alyx and Eli Vance
Half-Life 2: Dr. Breen and G-Man
Gender in Half Life 2: Episode One – Will Alyx ever get her hands dirty?
Author Note: I feel the need to apologize for posting this so late, it was supposed to up last week wasn’t until now I realized I wrote it up and forgot to hit publish.
Cover Art for Half Life.
Status: Fail: “The game does not meet any of the Bechdel Test criteria” (PC version)
“The game has two women but they don’t communicate with each other” (PS2 version, dubious)
Description: No female characters in the game (excepting Hazard Course hologram and multi-player model). Few conversations between NPCs. Player character never speaks.
Note however that PS2 version includes ‘Decay’, a co-op mode with two female player characters who work together to solve puzzles/shoot things. Dubious whether they ‘communicate’, though
Platform: PC, PS2
Notes
(Just placeholder, for when I post the half-life 2 test tomorrow)
Source: Reader submission by John Brindle, thank you for your contribution. If you disagree with a game’s rating leave a comment below or E-mail me at namedbychaos @ aol.com.
The cover art for Perfect Dark featuring Joanna Dark
Status: Passing Type 1 “A scene meeting these criteria is an unavoidable part of the game”
Description: You play as Joanna Dark, an agent working for the Carrington Institute an R&D company secretly allied with a race of extraterrestrials called the Maian. You fight against the dataDyne cooperation who have allied themselves with an extraterrestrials race known as the Skedar, who are at war with the Maian and have dark plans for earth. You have at multiple unavoidable conversations with dataDyne’s female head Cassandra De Vries.
Platform: N64 (a remake is also available for the xbox360 via XLive)
Sources: Author play through, link to prefect dark script, links to perfect Dark Cinemas: part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4.
Status: Passing type 1 “ A scene meeting these criteria is an unavoidable part of the game”
Description: You play as Faith a female “runner” (couriers using Parkour maneuvers to avoid capture/detection while delivering messages in a future overrun by electronic surveillance). You have several unavoidable conversations with other female characters in the game, including your sister Kate and fellow runner Celeste.
Example:
Faith having a conversation with fellow runner Celeste:
Platform: xbox360, Playstation 3, and PC.
Notes
What others authors have written regarding Faith and Mirrors Edge:
Comparing Female Protagonists: Portal and Mirror’s Edge
Faith Connors: Inclusive Character Design
This is the first game to be submitted by my submission form ya!! Also on that not I’ve added the optional ability to include a screen name/handle when submitting a game if you what to be credited with the submission.
Source: Reader Submission; Description added by author.
Status: Passing. Type 1, “A scene meeting these criteria is a unavoidable part of the game.”
Description: The main characters Chell and GLaDOS are female coded (Chell is a human female, GLaDOS is a female coded AI) and the game’s cast is almost entirely female. A computer sphere at the end of the game is male coded, and “ratman” might be considered a character in absentia, as you never see him but find “dens” with his scrawled writings as you play the game.
Chell, is a silent protagonist so some may disagree that Chell and GLaDOS truly communicate. However, in the context of the game I’d say it most certainly does GLaDOS is clearly trying to communicate with Chell via her constant dialogue. The games creators have repeatedly said that Chell doesn’t talk as a “screw you!” gesture, to the robots who are all “acting like dicks”. That we as the gamer follow her instructions during the training portions of the game are another clue that we should intercept Chell and GLaDOS exchanges as communicative.
Source: Author play through, (link to portal script)
Notes
Portal and its squeal Portal 2 are two of the most ripe games for feminist analysis currently on the market. I hope to discuss some of these themes here personally. But till then here are some links to others analysis of the games:
Portal is the most subversive game ever
Video Game Feminist of the Decade: or, when “You” is a girl
The Bechdel Test is a way of measuring the degree of female representation in media. It originated in a comic strip, Dykes to Watch out For, by Alison Bechdel. As part of this site’s goal, I have modified the test to better fit into video games. (If you want to submit a game to the list please use this form, leave a comment or E-mail me at namedbychaos @ aol.com)
In order to pass, the film or show must meet the following criteria:
1) it includes at least two women*
(*some make the addendum that the women must be named characters)
2) who have at least one conversation…
3) about something other than a man or men.
The important thing to remember about this test is it is not a measure of a works overall level of feminism, but rather the trend of so many movies failing the test (and so few failing the reverse) highlights society male centric bias. I have modified the test slightly in order to make it more relevant to video game, as well as creating four subtypes, which I believe address the issue of interactivity in games.
In a game containing a recognizable narrative:
- There are at least two female coded characters…
(a) Of which both are either playable or a significant NPC (non-playable character)
…who have at least one instances of sustained commutation (a conversation) with each other,
About something other than a male coded character or characters.
This definition integrates several of the critiques I’ve heard about the Becheal test. From a gaming stand point the things I added to the test are. First is a preface noting that this test really only applies if there is a recognizable narrative. I have found two tests that can be used in case where a game still has gendered representations but not a recognizable narrative I call them the Playable Character Test and the Equal Representation Test (I will go over both at a later date although I’ve already added the Playable Character Test to my Submission form) . The second is the addition of the sub-point (a) to the list. This is on one hand analogous to frequent addendum that a character be “named” however, this also represent a point where I believe gaming starts to diverge from traditional media in meaning full ways. While these minor NPC may not be important to the game’s narrative per say, they may be important to the games ability to immerse ,to that aspect unique to gaming (post to come on this), so believe it important to note these “NPC only cases” in some way. Which is why I listed it as a separate sub-point while retain the original checklists’ form.
However, as games are interactive and filled with optional choices. I have developed four subcategories in order to better understand how interactivity and player authorship interact with the test and its associated concepts.
The Four Bechdel Subtypes for games.
Type 1: A scene meeting these criteria is a unavoidable part of the game. It is impossible to beat the game without having a scene the passes the test, regardless of any choice you make as a gamer.
Type 2: A scene meting the above criteria is an unavoidable part of the game if you play as a female character in a game where you can select your characters gender.
Type 3: A scene meeting these is an optional part of the game regardless of your characters gender; this includes side quests, optional scenes and dialogue, DLCs etc. (Games with fixed characters with optional scenes meeting the test would fall here)
Type 4: A scene meeting these is an optional part of the game if your character is female in a game where you can select your characters gender; this includes side quest, optional scenes, dialogue, DLCs etc.
- For types 2 and 4, you the gamer can count as selectable female character if the game speaks to you the gamer directly as a character.
- Note that I’m counting DLC as an optional portion of the game, because they are optional by their nature, but for large scale expansions feel free to submit an entry for just the DLC and if it as a stand alone product passes the test.
If you want to submit a game to the list please use my Submission forum, leave a comment or E-mail me at namedbychaos @ aol.com