[dahart]

Does this article scare you? You sound very defensive. I'm sorry to inform you that we do have a culture problem that is well documented, and you have identified yourself as part of the problem.

> Video games already have a diverse, demographically blind audience

Do you have some data to support your assertion there? That would mean that the same number of men and women play games. Because I've worked in games, and the publishers acknowledge that games are biased toward young white men. The publishers have been trying to create games for girls, and the girls frequently won't buy or play them because, according to their research, boys won't play games oriented toward girls at all, and the feeling that girl oriented games are less cool actually gets adopted by the girls. Meanwhile games specifically and intentionally oriented toward boys outsell other types and continue to be produced.

I've never seen a survey anywhere that showed equal or greater numbers of women playing games, and most surveys are trying to boost the number of women by including games that most young men don't play. This is simply not "demographically blind".

http://www.polygon.com/2016/4/29/11539102/gaming-stats-2016-...

"60 percent of those who buy games most often are men, while the remaining 40 percent are women."

http://www.theesa.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/ESA-Essenti...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_culture#Demographic...

"according to a 2011 study showing that 58% of gamers are male and 42% female."

http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/12/15/who-plays-video-games-...

"Young men in particular play games and identify as “gamers.” Fully 77% of men ages 18 to 29 play video games (more than any other demographic group), compared with 57% of young women – a 20-point difference."

[tnones]

You're only making my point further by assuming "diversity" must imply a 50/50 gender distribution in the players.

Diversity implies differences in class, age, origin, occupation, and so on, and this is definitely the case in the consumer demographics. The fact that some games appeal more to men and others more to women is unsurprising, and irrelevant.

In fact, that you're seeing numbers such as 60/40 despite the game makers themselves being far more male-dominated suggests those men are doing a pretty decent job in appealing to people not like them.

[dahart]

> You're only making my point further by assuming "diversity" must imply a 50/50 gender distribution in the players. Diversity implies differences in class, age, origin, occupation, and so on

Sorry, but that's wrong. This is a common statistics mistake, let me try to help you.

You're conflating diversity of selection with diversity of demographics. There is one, and only one, way to demonstrate that something is "demographically blind".

The definition of "demographically blind" is when the number of people in each category playing games occurs in the same ratio as the number of people in that category in the general population. For example, for games to be demographically blind, there would need to be 3 men for every 2 women in the general population. The fact that men and women occur close to 50/50 in the population, and that men and women play games in a 3:2 ratio literally proves that games are not demographically blind.

Again I ask for some data. Have you worked in games? I have. Have you talked to publishers about cultural sexism? I have. Do you have any evidence for your claim that games are demographically blind? I provided some. Logic doesn't work, but feel free to prove me wrong with some data.

[saint_fiasco]

I notice your statistics are about things like "buys games more often" and "plays games and identifies as gamers (conjunction fallacy?).

Those are things that videogame publishers care about a lot, I suppose, because they have to do with sales and branding.

But they have nothing to do with the parent comment's assertion about the demography of videogamers as a whole. Poor minorities may just be playing less profitable games.

[dahart]

The definition of the demographics of games is the people who play games. What are you even talking about?

[saint_fiasco]

I know that is what you intended to talk about, but I'm pointing out that it's not what your sources are talking about. They are about who buys games, about who identifies as gamer (i.e. is more susceptible to marketing)

[dahart]

Only one of those four quotes said something about buying games, but you used plural language twice now. You drew a false pattern where none exists.

The fact that the stats I provided shows the same gender bias no matter how you slice it - whether it's playing, or purchasing, or identifying as a gamer, means that the bias is robust. It is more evidence of the bias, not less.

But, if you think the 4 links I posted are all wrong, feel free to actually refute it with some data instead of faulty logic.

All gamers are susceptible to marketing, whether they buy games or play free ones, that is part of the problem. Our marketing system is oriented toward boys, it is reinforcing the cultural problem we have, you can't escape marketing or divorce the problem from marketing, because marketing is half the issue.

[saint_fiasco]

Ok, so the first source is the one that says "buy" instead of "play".

The second and third are alright, and also the least outrageous ones. The 2nd says the male/female ratio is 56% to 44% and the 3rd says 58% to 42%, which are not that bad.

The fourth one is about "identifying as gamers".

I agree there is a marketing problem from our point of view, but from the point of view of the marketers it makes sense to market to boys because they buy more (per source 1) and they are more loyal customers (per source 4). Women (and for that matter, poor people) still play a lot of games, just not the profitable ones (from the publisher's point of view).

[hluska]

You know, you make some good points, but unfortunately, you're so unbelievably condescending that I can't make it through an entire comment.

[1_2__3]

If you took a less condescending tone your argument might be more persuasive with a wider audience.

[dahart]

Sorry about that, I sometimes do get condescending when I feel strongly and am pretty certain that I'm right. It is a problem, and I do want to learn how to make a strong point and not be condescending.

Do you feel like my language was more condescending than the comment I replied to? I reacted to what I felt was more or less outright sexist language.

"There is nothing to support the author's typical feminist schtick of using diversity as a shorthand for blaming white men for the problems observed."

I realize I may be wrong, but I have to admit that I felt like my language, while a little more personal, was more measured and less condescending than that.

[saint_fiasco]

"Does that comment scare you? You sound very defensive. I'm sorry to inform you that we do have a discourse problem that is well documented, and you have identified yourself as part of the problem."

That was your comment. I changed a couple of words so it would look like it was directed at you.

Calling people defensive is very condescending and shitty, because it leaves people in a position where they have to choose between responding (and "proving you right", since they are now more "defensive") or leaving the conversation (and letting you "win" the argument by default).

[dota]

I find the entire quoted line to be unnecessary. The initial question "Does this article scare you?" doesn't serve a purpose, it's just filler. I wouldn't expect the other person to really respond to such a question, nor do I think the conversation should be or is trying to be centered on the question and its possible answer. The post would have been better off not being framed by that question and instead just dive right into the actual arguments.

[dahart]

Yes, agreed, I was condescending, and I will do better next time. To be honest, I've learned a lot about how to post civilly over the years on HN, and I still make mistakes. My post above is not an example of my best work. ;)

But - answer me honestly - do you think what I said is less accurate or more condescending than what @tnones said about Brie? Do you think my comment was out of proportion or very different in tone to what he said? He dismissed Brie's words as "typical feminist schtick" when she was relating her own feelings and talking about video games, and when she clearly has mountains more experience in the industry than @tnones. Do you think that was fair and not shitty, what @tnones said?

[dota]

Do you think my comment was out of proportion or very different in tone to what he said?

I think there is a noticeable tone difference, assuming one is sensitive to these sorts of things.

He dismissed Brie's words as "typical feminist schtick"

While this is true, as a whole if you compare his first couple of sentences to yours, his remains much more closely related to the overall subject matter. He dismisses the author's words, but goes right into talking about video games.

On the other hand, your opening is too focused on tnones. The subject is always tnones and neglects the topic of video games. You can see this with the constant instances of "you" throughout the first line of the comment.

Now maybe this is because you're trying to establish the thesis that tnones is part of the problem as you state in your first line. However, I think approaching your rebuttal this way has led us to where we are now where you come off as condescending. Ultimately it distracts too much from the subject matter and distracts from the points you make later.

Simply leading off with "we do have a culture problem that is well documented" without anything else in the first line would have been a better way to start. The impact of a statement like "you have identified yourself as part of the problem" would have been better in your conclusion after all was said and done.

[dahart]

You're right, I hear you, and I appreciate the thoughtful analysis. I could have skipped the first line entirely and my comment would have been better for it. Notes for next time. I'm taking the punishment and leaving it there.

My mistake was letting @tnones' comment bother me and replying while irritated.

So let's get back to the subject matter. Is there a gender gap in games, and what should or should not be done about it? Is @tnones right that there's no evidence of a gap?

[saint_fiasco]

I think your comment was a little more condescending because the other comment invited a response (just from a non-feminist perspective) while your argument pre-emptively dismissed every possible response.

I also think it was less accurate because I believe the feminism angle is a red herring.

Like, suppose I complained that videogames are rarely marketed to poor people like me who can't afford modern hardware (when was ever "terrible graphics" and "runs on old consoles" a selling point for a mainstream game?) and then postulated some discrimination by elites against poor people, or maybe that they live in a bubble and are out of touch with the tastes of the poorer masses.

One could reasonably answer that I'm missing the point, the industry is perfectly aware of my situation and just doesn't care because I am not profitable to them. Also maybe I should support small indie game studios instead of complaining that AAA games are not being made with me in mind.

Just replace poor with women and we have a similar situation. Notice how the actions of the author (working as a game designer) actually do serve to improve the situation and it's only her discourse that is, in my opinion, holding us back as gamers. So that's why some people don't have a lot of patience for the "typical feminist schtick" (though I think this feminist is sincere and not a schtick)

[dahart]

> I also think it was less accurate because I believe the feminism angle is a red herring.

How does that reflect on me? I didn't bring up feminism, @tnones did.

> Like, suppose I complained that videogames are rarely marketed to poor people ... maybe I should support small indie game studios instead of complaining

I don't understand where you're going with this. There is a class bias in the video games market, as with more or less our entire economy. That is probably much better documented than the sexism bias. But games cost money to make and money to buy, and they're a luxury entertainment product, so I'm not sure what there is to do about it, not do I see how that changes anything regarding cultural sexism.

> it's only her discourse that is, in my opinion, holding us back as gamers.

What did she say that is holding you back? How is it holding you back or working against gamers? Did we read the same article? She's trying to appeal to more gamers, not fewer, she's trying to help people who don't current like games start to like them and see games the way gamers see games... I'm confused.

[mercer]

For my part, I'd agree with you. But I also have to admit that my tolerance for 'typical feminist schtick' is much lower than my tolerance for those who question it.

I'm fully aware that this is not fair, and I'm trying to compensate, but that's how it is for me right now. It's much harder to challenge something than to (somewhat callously) reject it, and that sucks.

[oldmanjay]

Why would you think that attacking tnones' comment is a reasonable defense of your comment?

[emodendroket]

60-40 is actually not so bad; much closer a split than I would have expected.

[hyperdunc]

The kind of "equality" you're arguing for is seriously overrated and often leads to more discrimination.