Lessee... I could talk about what I've been reading and watching lately. I mentioned one of the playthrough guys I watched, and still watch, regularly, but I don't talk much about where I get my information on games in general, so I thought I might compare notes with everyone.
In addition to the previews Giant Bomb makes of the less well-known games (I've fallen behind on the retro arcade stuff, but I still feel like I'm cheating myself if I don't go back and watch it all some day), I've spent some time at other sites to get a good range of news about games. Many of you probably know everything about most or all of these people, so if you happen to have more suggestions for video game news, reviews, or history to see, please comment.
One of my favorite sites lately has been Rock Paper Shotgun, a UK based game site that pretty much focuses on PC gaming, but often talks about the stuff that actually makes PC gaming fun for me: the older or weirder games that don't get decent coverage. They tend to write well-thought out and informative articles, or at least entertaining ones. I used to just check there occasionally, but I feel that I find something interesting every few days or so, so I've added it to my quick links list.
The A. V. Club has a cool feature, in addition to modern game reviews, called Sawbuck Gamer, which profiles cheap or free games their intrepid explorers have found. I've found many cool independent projects through this feature, and I'll be happy as long as it keeps going, even though I imagine it's not as much of a draw to the site as other features may be.
Via The Spoony One:
Larry Bundy, Jr.I discovered just today, through Noah Antwiler's site (below). He specializes in games those in the States may not have experienced-- it's always interesting to see what home programming can produce in countries that couldn't readily trade software. For me it's all about novelty, so this is a cool resource. Well...
Noah Antwiler actually talks about some stuff I've often already heard of, but never had the chance to try out. His collection of videos and articles is eclectic, including movies and even pen-and-paper RPGs (which is how I found his videos in the first place). Some of the better profiles he's done has been of the Ultima RPG series and the spate of full-motion video games from the 90's (many lessons to be learned there, sadly). His criticism sometimes moves toward the kind of bashing which often comes off as nitpicking. Hopefully he'll move on from that, since he has a really good eye for interesting games to talk about. What I think is cool is that he actually hosts shows from other people's series on his Spoony One website, which to me is rather classy, given how many web personalities tend to focus on themselves. I do feel a bit in the dark as to who these people even are, though, but once in a while they'll be interesting enough that I'll start watching their stuff too.
Via The Escapist:
Ben Croshaw may be familiar to folks here through his video series (and companion article series) on The Escapist. He tends to be harder on games than other reviewers I've seen, but I guess I prefer that. I can usually see through a reviewer's own prejudices if I'm familiar enough with them to the point where I can see if I might like the thing being reviewed, even if he or she trashes it. He's often entertaining, but he tends to take the low road in his humor, which is at times funny but can get a bit grating after a while. What I really like is that he's not afraid to say that game creators should aspire to something better more often than they're doing. I tend to enjoy his articles more than his videos now, probably because he gets the time to put his opinion down a bit more thoroughly there.
Shamus Young tries a bunch of different things, including commentated runthroughs and logging experiences (as well as trying all kinds of crazy things on the side). Guy has tried a lot of different stuff and I'm always interested in what he has to say. A good opinion writer whose views I respect beyond many other reviewers, even when I don't agree.
Cinemassacre:
James Rolfe is possibly the most well-known of the reviewers I list here, but I have no way of being sure. His Angry Nintendo Nerd turned Video Game Nerd show has shown me the dark side of game design, and I think his style has thankfully refined a bit since it began. I don't need the skits or the scat (although I enjoyed the Ninja Gaiden one a lot), I like to learn why a game is rough on the player, and what sorts of lessons can come from that, and he does all right. Sometimes I wish he would read the instructions before playing, but many of the modern game reviewers tend to make the same oversight in order to make their videos entertaining. I guess I prefer it when they're informative and entertaining at the same time, though, and not reading the instructions, as tedious as that sounds, causes some unnecessary frustrations. He has an interesting take on the latest Castlevania game, mainly because he tends NOT to play modern games much, which is something I can relate to :)
G4 TV:
Adam Sessler's one of the bigger names in gaming journalism (or whatever you prefer to call it), and he often has some great discussion starters in his Soapbox feature. Sometimes I've disagreed, but I think the fact that he and I are about the same age means we have a similar perspective on where gaming has gone and is going. Some of his stuff comes straight from him being a prominent member of a very well-known site.
Destructoid:
I haven't actually gone there much since Anthony Burch left, but still read articles when I'm referred there. Some of Birch's Rev Rants were probably the closest I ever got to seeing opinions similar to mine voiced by more famous people, though I don't think anyone on the web matches up too well with me (I'm glad for that, but anyway). His Hey Ash, Whatcha Playin' videos were ( and are) often entertaining too. Since the guy's apparently a writer in the game industry now, I hope he gets to actually help enact some of the improvements he's talked about over the years.
Classic Game Room:
This is an addendum to the original article. I meant to include this guy, but forgot for whatever reason. I probably watch his reviews more than anyone else's. He and his staff at Undertow have a good mix of old and new.
There are probably sites I should pay more attention to (or shun altogether). If you have any ideas for cool sites that might appeal to me or other folks, go ahead and post 'em!
The SuGgesTions So FarR:
HVGN
RPGCodex
(RPGWatch)
Insomnia.ac
Insert Credit
Ludology.org
Gamestudies.org
Clicknothing
Brainygamer
Gamespite
QuarterToThree (many designers make their home here, and post here regularly)
Indirect Discoveries:
Null Pointer : Interesting design case studies and interviews (via Rock Paper Shotgun), including interviews with the maker of Love, and the maker of Dwarf Fortress
Armchair Arcade : (via Owl_of_Minerva's recommendation of RPGCodex, which links it) Includes TWO interviews with makers of one of my favorite RPGs, Darklands
What I Read and Watch Regularly (about video games) UPDATED
Lessee... I could talk about what I've been reading and watching lately. I mentioned one of the playthrough guys I watched, and still watch, regularly, but I don't talk much about where I get my information on games in general, so I thought I might compare notes with everyone.
In addition to the previews Giant Bomb makes of the less well-known games (I've fallen behind on the retro arcade stuff, but I still feel like I'm cheating myself if I don't go back and watch it all some day), I've spent some time at other sites to get a good range of news about games. Many of you probably know everything about most or all of these people, so if you happen to have more suggestions for video game news, reviews, or history to see, please comment.
One of my favorite sites lately has been Rock Paper Shotgun, a UK based game site that pretty much focuses on PC gaming, but often talks about the stuff that actually makes PC gaming fun for me: the older or weirder games that don't get decent coverage. They tend to write well-thought out and informative articles, or at least entertaining ones. I used to just check there occasionally, but I feel that I find something interesting every few days or so, so I've added it to my quick links list.
The A. V. Club has a cool feature, in addition to modern game reviews, called Sawbuck Gamer, which profiles cheap or free games their intrepid explorers have found. I've found many cool independent projects through this feature, and I'll be happy as long as it keeps going, even though I imagine it's not as much of a draw to the site as other features may be.
Via The Spoony One:
Larry Bundy, Jr.I discovered just today, through Noah Antwiler's site (below). He specializes in games those in the States may not have experienced-- it's always interesting to see what home programming can produce in countries that couldn't readily trade software. For me it's all about novelty, so this is a cool resource. Well...
Noah Antwiler actually talks about some stuff I've often already heard of, but never had the chance to try out. His collection of videos and articles is eclectic, including movies and even pen-and-paper RPGs (which is how I found his videos in the first place). Some of the better profiles he's done has been of the Ultima RPG series and the spate of full-motion video games from the 90's (many lessons to be learned there, sadly). His criticism sometimes moves toward the kind of bashing which often comes off as nitpicking. Hopefully he'll move on from that, since he has a really good eye for interesting games to talk about. What I think is cool is that he actually hosts shows from other people's series on his Spoony One website, which to me is rather classy, given how many web personalities tend to focus on themselves. I do feel a bit in the dark as to who these people even are, though, but once in a while they'll be interesting enough that I'll start watching their stuff too.
Via The Escapist:
Ben Croshaw may be familiar to folks here through his video series (and companion article series) on The Escapist. He tends to be harder on games than other reviewers I've seen, but I guess I prefer that. I can usually see through a reviewer's own prejudices if I'm familiar enough with them to the point where I can see if I might like the thing being reviewed, even if he or she trashes it. He's often entertaining, but he tends to take the low road in his humor, which is at times funny but can get a bit grating after a while. What I really like is that he's not afraid to say that game creators should aspire to something better more often than they're doing. I tend to enjoy his articles more than his videos now, probably because he gets the time to put his opinion down a bit more thoroughly there.
Shamus Young tries a bunch of different things, including commentated runthroughs and logging experiences (as well as trying all kinds of crazy things on the side). Guy has tried a lot of different stuff and I'm always interested in what he has to say. A good opinion writer whose views I respect beyond many other reviewers, even when I don't agree.
Cinemassacre:
James Rolfe is possibly the most well-known of the reviewers I list here, but I have no way of being sure. His Angry Nintendo Nerd turned Video Game Nerd show has shown me the dark side of game design, and I think his style has thankfully refined a bit since it began. I don't need the skits or the scat (although I enjoyed the Ninja Gaiden one a lot), I like to learn why a game is rough on the player, and what sorts of lessons can come from that, and he does all right. Sometimes I wish he would read the instructions before playing, but many of the modern game reviewers tend to make the same oversight in order to make their videos entertaining. I guess I prefer it when they're informative and entertaining at the same time, though, and not reading the instructions, as tedious as that sounds, causes some unnecessary frustrations. He has an interesting take on the latest Castlevania game, mainly because he tends NOT to play modern games much, which is something I can relate to :)
G4 TV:
Adam Sessler's one of the bigger names in gaming journalism (or whatever you prefer to call it), and he often has some great discussion starters in his Soapbox feature. Sometimes I've disagreed, but I think the fact that he and I are about the same age means we have a similar perspective on where gaming has gone and is going. Some of his stuff comes straight from him being a prominent member of a very well-known site.
Destructoid:
I haven't actually gone there much since Anthony Burch left, but still read articles when I'm referred there. Some of Birch's Rev Rants were probably the closest I ever got to seeing opinions similar to mine voiced by more famous people, though I don't think anyone on the web matches up too well with me (I'm glad for that, but anyway). His Hey Ash, Whatcha Playin' videos were ( and are) often entertaining too. Since the guy's apparently a writer in the game industry now, I hope he gets to actually help enact some of the improvements he's talked about over the years.
Classic Game Room:
This is an addendum to the original article. I meant to include this guy, but forgot for whatever reason. I probably watch his reviews more than anyone else's. He and his staff at Undertow have a good mix of old and new.
There are probably sites I should pay more attention to (or shun altogether). If you have any ideas for cool sites that might appeal to me or other folks, go ahead and post 'em!
The SuGgesTions So FarR:
HVGN
RPGCodex
(RPGWatch)
Insomnia.ac
Insert Credit
Ludology.org
Gamestudies.org
Clicknothing
Brainygamer
Gamespite
QuarterToThree (many designers make their home here, and post here regularly)
Indirect Discoveries:
Null Pointer : Interesting design case studies and interviews (via Rock Paper Shotgun), including interviews with the maker of Love, and the maker of Dwarf Fortress
Armchair Arcade : (via Owl_of_Minerva's recommendation of RPGCodex, which links it) Includes TWO interviews with makers of one of my favorite RPGs, Darklands
Very nice list. I use most if not all of those pretty regularly. I'm not too familiar with Rock Paper Shotgun but I like what I've seen. I also used to watch 'the Happy Video Game Nerd' who covers a lot of good games the AVGN doesn't cover: there's a lot of other 'retro reviews' on that site, although in quality I'd say AVGN and Spoony are superior. Although the forums are somewhat of a cesspool, I also sometimes read reviews or features on RPGCodex as it covers a lot of indie and old CRPG releases. Perhaps RPGWatch fulfills a similar function, I haven't used that site.
Some sites I've also made use of in the past: Insomnia.ac, Insert Credit, Ludology.org (academic in focus), Gamestudies.org (academic), Clicknothing, Brainygamer.
Oh! I think I did watch Happy Video Game Nerd and a few of the other shows on the site that his show was featured on, but I remember having real trouble loading their new site, and I guess after a while there was something about HVGN's presentation that wore me down. I liked the aim, though, since trashing a bad game can be fun, but finding out about games that did things right is somehow more rewarding.
AVGN reviews games that are usually not being released, too, so that puts them in opposite ends of the spectrum. It's hard to get angry at a game maker who went out of business a long time ago, but like in the reviews of Who Framed Roger Rabbit or Dick Tracy, he was reflecting how, as a kid, these particular games were serious disappointments. There's more to that than just laughs, even if it winds up being funny in a different way.
I guess for me there's a difference between someone trying to be entertaining, and someone who's not being serious at all. I get your point with regard to AVGN, but I don't think ZP is in quite the same genre, or whatever you want to call it.
Don't bother signing up for the forums, but the retrospectives, developer boards, interviews/reviews, etc on RPGCodex are quite good for hearing about old CRPGs you never knew existed. But if you are already well-versed in late 80s/early 90s CRPGs it might not be worth trawling.
You should check out Gamespite. it's great.
Good thread idea. I'll check some of it out.
Regarding Spoony's nitpicking tendencies, I think you have to differentiate the frustrated & over the top character of the Spoony One, the person we see in his main reviews, from the normal and more reasonable plain ol' Noah in front of the camera. He's very much playing a role in a lot of his videos. I think his V-Logs are best if you're actually looking for a well reasoned critique of a game/movie .etc.
@W0lfbl1tzers: Thanks. I think I'll append my post with a running list of suggestions so far so I can keep it all straight..
Yahtzee and Shamus Young are both excellent at critiquing even great games. Mass Effect 2 is my favorite game of the year but I loved how Young tore it apart in his story analysis. Young also suffers from the post-2004 syndrome like me, where every game in the last 6 years or so looks great. Seriously, I'm playing through the Sly collection right now and I find it to be pleasing to the eye - I guess I'm more of an aesthetics guy. I'm also continuously amazed at just how much quality content Shamus is able to produce in a single week, when it's not even his day job. And he has a family. And kids.
Sessler is very articulate and manages to turn his unexceptional opinions into interesting listen. His soapbox is always entertaining but I get the feeling that's the only thing worth checking on G4TV. Apart from the Escapist and Sessler, I occasionally check Gamasutra's guest editorials. They have the largest collection of articles written directly by the developers and people involved in gaming. You can find punditry anywhere on the internet but insight from the devs is very rare.
I'd love to read more but invariably the problem is time. I don't know how you can follow so many authors on a regular basis. Maybe I should invest some time in learning speed reading.
G4TV seems to get good treatment when it comes to previews and they were pretty much the go-to for a lot of recent 'casts of those video game conferences and events.
Gamasutra's editorial tone varies a bit too much for my taste, but I've been referred there on occasion.
Shamus Young is one productive individual. I'm envious of his level of energy, and am always pleased to see what kind of new project he's working on.
@Jeust:
It's difficult knowing what to spend time on. I started out pretty small, with only a few groups I'd see (sort of like what you're saying), but dissatisfaction with only a few opinions forced me to branch out, even if I sometimes skim the many articles I see for lack of time or interest.
RPS and Giant Bomb! That's my main double act right there. Other than that I'm more interesting in the more editorial format of looking at games generally or analysing specific ones deeply than general news.
Blogs I follow include Clint Hocking's 'Click Nothing' which has already been mentioned; Tom Jubert's (Penumbra series) blog 'Plot is gameplay's bitch' which has a concentration on narrative on games but more besides; Frictional games (Penumbra, Amnesia) post some good thoughts from time to time - there are others but those probably stay most on topic on games. Games? is an online magazine that has just started (no idea if it'll keep going though) and covers games that try to do something different - worth checking out. I highly recommend checking out Irrational Interviews even if that often doesn't concentrate just on games depending on who's interviewed but is great especially if you're interested the creative process and a philosophical thinker. They have their own non-interview podcast I believe which I think is also meant to be good but I haven't checked it out yet.
Edit: Not reading, but I check out Gametrailer's Bonus Round and the Pach Attack which are quite good and I read Leigh Alexander whenever she gets linked from RPS - she tends to have lots of good opinions I find.
Blogs I follow include Clint Hocking's 'Click Nothing' which has already been mentioned; Tom Jubert's (Penumbra series) blog 'Plot is gameplay's bitch' which has a concentration on narrative on games but more besides; Frictional games (Penumbra, Amnesia) post some good thoughts from time to time - there are others but those probably stay most on topic on games. Games? is an online magazine that has just started (no idea if it'll keep going though) and covers games that try to do something different - worth checking out. I highly recommend checking out Irrational Interviews even if that often doesn't concentrate just on games depending on who's interviewed but is great especially if you're interested the creative process and a philosophical thinker. They have their own non-interview podcast I believe which I think is also meant to be good but I haven't checked it out yet. Edit: Not reading, but I check out Gametrailer's Bonus Round and the Pach Attack which are quite good and I read Leigh Alexander whenever she gets linked from RPS - she tends to have lots of good opinions I find. "Seems I have some homework ahead of me. Games and internet are like chocolate and peanut butter so it's inevitable that there'll be some writers I've never heard of. I'll be sure to check some of these out-- assuming I don't reach some sort of critical mass and can't take in any more without 'sploding.
Old Leigh Alexander sometimes comes up with smart angles to stories, but I've found her less on target with her arguments lately. Like with her argument that a certain big publisher (was it Activision? It's been a while) is actively discouraging developers from producing games with female protagonists, based on one case where a female protagonist was in the early design but later said to have been pressured out in favor of a male character, and on a lack of female protagonist in their main line.
Part of the problem was that she cited at least one game in another company's line as not being successful, Bayonetta, which did arguably pretty well, as a reason why they and others might cynically choose to excise women characters from games. I thought L.A.'s own opinion of Bayonetta itself to be pretty reasonable, given that she was all for the character and not hung up on her sexuality as being some sort of evil thing. Yet here it was used as a suggestion of industry pressure to prevent female characters from being prominently featured for fear of drop in sales.
The main issue I had with the article, though, was that she chose not only to single out a single major publisher (rather than broadening the issue to publishers in general not putting their weight behind games with female protagonists, or whatever), but also that it seemed the thrust was that they ought to make more games with female protagonists, which seems wrong to me somehow. The REAL deal with what happened as far as I could see, based on the information presented in her article, was that developers were being pressured by their producers to the point where their artistic vision was being compromised. I know that's often viewed as a bit naive, but I like to think that games tend to be better when they're not designed by committee, and they innovate when they're allowed to take risks, however minor. That they would rush in and cut out a female lead just because of financial considerations (or through overt sexism somehow, but the article only implies such sinister motives without going any further in depth with the possibility) to me is disgusting, but focusing on an already questionably run major publisher and implying that they were making a business decision, yet this was wrong on moral grounds, was muddling the point.
Companies do make all kinds of decisions to help make a project more appealing to the consumer. The bigger a film's budget gets, for example, the more producers and backers tend to try to steer the project in a direction that will more likely make them money. This doesn't make it right, but it doesn't mean they're anything more than craven when asked to give consumers a little more credit. Large scale games, like large scale films, are a collaborative medium, with a lot more money riding on them than there used to be (and a lot more careers, too). If a company makes a decision that they think will increase their share, I hesitate to condemn them for that. Who I'm more likely to condemn is the consumers themselves.
I'm perfectly OK with playing a male or female protagonist in a game (or a robot, or whatever, I don't care as long as the game's good). Some people, though, aren't OK with this. This is part of the deal, I guess, where some people can't stand the idea of playing a female in a game... or a male. And this is where her argument finally falls apart for me. Her argument is full of implied solutions but nothing is explicitly stated, which is troublesome enough, but further, it seems to me to say that the producers should allow, or even enforce, female protagonists being in games. If it's the former, fine, since it allows the creators to follow as much as they can the vision they originally had, and that should be true for any such design question as long as it's not too outlandish (throwing away a big budget design on something truly risky would be less sympathetic). Anything more than that, though, smacks of the same sort of bullying that launched the article in the first place.
But why is the gender of the protagonist important to some people? I don't know firsthand, as I'll just choose what I feel like choosing, but other people, either in social contexts or even alone, will choose a character with one sex over the other because they want to. I'm not even going to go into the details of it, because to me it doesn't need to go deeper. People choose the sex of their character, or even a game that has a character of a certain sex, because they want to do it. I know some women who choose females exclusively, and men who choose males. I know what I feel to be a greater percentage that doesn't give a damn, or cycles through all options feeling no shame. Fill in the blanks for the rest of the possibilities, but the point is, choosing the sex of the protagonist in a work of fiction is not the same as choosing the sex of a prospective employee, or the sex of your child. A game's character is often thought to be an extension of us, but even it's not, it's our choice to look at it that way, and it starts with the designers' decision to make that character come alive.
If we don't want to give money to a corporation that thinks we don't like female protagonists, that's where we vote with our dollar. That's where we nag, where we pressure, like many people have been doing to games companies and their producers (for good and for ill, unfortunately). Ultimately, though, the creators should have the first and last say in the matter. What we do, as consumers, supporters, and enjoyers of games, is vote with our attention, and our money.
The smaller the project is, the less that's riding on it, the less that's likely to be at risk, and the more likely that the creator or creators will follow their vision more fully and create something more original. Doesn't happen all the time, but take a good look at the indie games that have been coming out in the past 10 years or so. Yeah, there's a lot of pandering to specific interests, but even the gross or the profane are more likely to actually get out there as games because no one's afraid of market share. Rather than treat the big producer who is making stupid decisions as some governmental body whom we can't change and HAVE to buy games from, we can instead tell them to fuck off, and choose a game that fits us.
I think it's a shame that more game designers aren't willing to take chances, and it's especially bad when producers change the projects of those that DO want to take chances. I think women as gamers, producers of games, and as depicted as fictional characters are underrepresented, no question, and I think the more they get exposure the more normal they'll seem to those of us who are less inclined to accept their presence. But right now, those people are being ignored, in large part because we pretend that we don't have a choice. If anything, games like Minecraft, which has sold a crazy amount of units, shows how things COULD change even for the smallest of developers.
It seems timidity is the biggest problem, here. Leigh Alexander suggests there is corruption, but while it may exist beyond the bounds of what she reported, her article didn't manage to go in depth enough for the case to be made in full. It felt like a short article stretched to feature length that missed the complexity and lacked support for those who are making a difference. That's why I think I reacted as strongly as I did, and not in the way that the reactive, abusive folks who spouted obscenities at her did. It felt half-baked, to me. And I've had that impression with some of her articles lately, one with this implied middle supposition that we're supposed to fill in, as if making an accusation is enough.
Maybe the reason I react strongly is because I don't see enough people making similar points to the kind that she makes, because I feel like others might make the point more fully. That article left me feeling like it wound up degrading into snark, because it didn't follow through on the points I discussed, and I felt it was missing any sort of conclusion, or even an accusation beyond that which was indirectly implied.
So... while I'm happy to see people trying to crack gamers' shells a bit, I sort of wish she'd put more substance into what she's trying to say. At least with articles like those. All that said, other articles of hers I've found I enjoyed, even when I didn't know she was writing them. And I'm just as likely to defend her as write an impromptu essay criticizing her, because I think she gets unfairly targeted sometimes.
Anyway, if you haven't fallen asleep or clawed your eyes out, thanks for letting me unload that on you. :)
My eyes remain intact :)
A few thoughts without even attempting to cover everything you said:
- Where people might prefer a male protagonist over a female one, that will be down to the largely male playerbase in the gaming arena (at least in for the traditional AAA games) but I'm sure most of that appeal or lack of it for a female (who's non-overtly-sexualised) is a subconscious decision rather than a conscious one. I.e. I don't think it's a preference most people would verbalise but simply most males taken as a whole will connect and perhaps feel more comfortable in a male body or at least be able to empathise more with one. So that seems fair enough to me though it's nice to have diversity and play around with different characters.
- I think the impetus for seeing greater diversity of all kinds in games will come almost exclusively from developers who feel compelled and conscience-led to make brave, bold and different design decisions particularly if they're still able to make the game sell. The perfect example of this is Irrational who have earned enough trust, respect and sales that Take-Two just leave them to it and so they can include more adventurous design decisions in their games. I'm not convinced we as consumers really have any influence as just individuals with own purchase decisions. This is true of many things including voting in elections, but we would only have any influence of note if we speak up and organise other people to a cause and even then that might not prove effective. Apart from more lenient publishers which is possible but less likely I think, indie game developers have the only other possible influence by showing the way to larger developers by proving in lower-risk ventures that certain adventurous design decisions can be successful and have a market.
- I read that Leigh Alexander article but can't remember the details and I think I'd need to recall the details to comment meaningfully. She may well not have laid out a strong argument or just a partial one on this occasion, but as you also say, she's said enough good things otherwise to keep listening to her.
You'll find that, depending upon the arena and level of choice, there are skewed statistics with regard to an avatar's chosen sex. This survey, not sure if it was scientific but I've only just discovered it and it's pretty comprehensive, said that many men choose female avatars, despite the largely male player base. This is a whole other conversation, though.
As a counter some people are quoting stats from the popular Mass Effect 2 where most played the male Shepard (which is a shame just from a presentation point of view, but understandable, given the marketing the game and it's predecessor received and other factors I'm not going into), but the stats are incomplete, since you don't know the gender of the players (though it's safe to guess largely male despite the female choice being there), and it doesn't talk about new playthroughs, which I think is crucial to knowing overall choice. (Heck, I'd be interested to know how many people played it more than once, period/full stop.).
While I think player choice, organized or not, DOES have a greater impact, even on an individual level, than you're suggesting (voting has a greater amount of participants and non-participants, while in gaming participation is incrementally beneficial, especially for small-scale developers), I think we agree that the burden is on the developer themselves to come up with interesting ideas and implement them, and that independent companies are more likely to innovate due to having usually lower relative risk and greater possible rewards.
I like that Irrational seems to get free reign due to performance, and I guess you sort of need to earn that within some corporate structures that are willing to take risks and innovate.
L.A. is one of the few relatively well.-known writers, so yeah, while I often disagree with her delivery, her conclusions, and her fundamental philosophy in many places, it's more beneficial to read her stuff and the debate it generates than ignore it.
The stuff James does on cinemassacre is better than his AVGN stuff nowadays.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment