come by if you like…your welcome
converting dragonscale to CNHF atm. Later? Who knows!?!??!?!?!?!??! o.o
Genuinely silly personal shit after the break.
This would explain much.
Also sorely misunderstood is how video game developers, in spite of their mysterious shroud of secrecy, are just people, who are perfectly capable of making bad decisions and be completely oblivious to them for years because video game development is done in a…
“The way the industry works is almost deliberately designed to perpetuate this crap.”
The way the industry works it is not “almost” but ACTUALLY designed to perpetuate this crap. Mainstream games at least.
This is from someone who works in marketing and games for almost 10 years (me):
Opening up for new audiences is a problem for marketers, which is actively avoided. For example being considerate with costumes instead of designing them to show cleavage runs the risk of getting people interested in your games, that weren’t interested before.
It sounds counter intuitive but new audiences are dangerous in the eye of marketers. IT IS NOT DESIRED TO ALLOW NEW AUDIENCES TO GAIN INTEREST IN THE PRODUCT. They bring different desires and demand different communication, which completely ruins the oh so carefully crafted data-driven marketing plan.
Why? Because you can no longer calculate and optimize the results of money spent on advertising. A game like Bioshock Infinite is planned, executed and advertised for a specific target audience. This target audience is defined by gender, age group, ethnicity, income group, education grade. And every design decision that is aimed at making the game sell goes through that filter.
Every ad buy is focussed on that target group, the cover is focussed on that target group, press releases are focussed on that target group.. like a lazer. One message packet – one target group. They do it because the target group is big enough to suffice and if they would allow different target groups to mingle with their original target group, they would have to market to multiple sometimes mutually exclusive interests, which is super expensive and tricky.
Elizabeth is on the back of the cover not because women on covers don’t sell (which is a lie) or some people didn’t care enough. She is on the back on the cover to ACTIVELY DISCOURAGE WOMEN and other people who enjoy solid female characters from buying the game. She is dressed in an outfit, where sexiness is valued higher than functionality or accuracy, explicitly to discourage people with different values from buying the game.
That’s the same thing why gaming websites are limited in their ability to open up to women. Advertisers want to know how many of the thousands of pageviews are coming from their one focussed target group, so they can calculate how much bang for the buck they get. If sites like Kotaku would start to get women friendly, they would screw with the ratio. Suddenly the pageviews would be divided between the target group and other interests, which makes buying ads there less attractive for marketers.
That’s why we can’t have nice things. Sure, developers are negligent, developers are overwhelmed. But most of all mainstream developers feel the need/pressure to optimize the ratio of success per marketing effort. Which means creating and defending an easy to understand target group which is responding to ONE specific type of messaging.
You really have to admire Bioware (and EA for that matter) to give that much attention and space to women in their target group. It is so expensive to market to multiple groups, instead of going full Halo on the franchise.