Guild Wars 2

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

This is why I get weird looks when I say Cersei Lannister is a really interesting female character.

She’s very compelling. I adore how complex she is, especially when you begin understanding her mindset and past. Obviously I don’t expect the same sort of depth in GW2 as in the A Song of Ice and Fire novels…but it’d be brilliant if Arena Net could take steps to make many of the major characters more memorable and compelling.

I gave up WoW because most of the lore began emerging outside of the game rather than within it, I’d hate to have to do the same now that Arena Net are adopting a similar model…

Garenthal.1480:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

This is why I get weird looks when I say Cersei Lannister is a really interesting female character.

She’s very compelling. I adore how complex she is, especially when you begin understanding her mindset and past.

Well, there’s the most important part: she never stops identifying as a female. And this is without flashing her bare chest at the camera. And other characters never stopped identifying as a male, without any kind of sex or suggestion of such whatsoever (Eddard Stark, for one).

I could go on for a while on strong characters I know who are either only incidentally male/female/whatever or definitely male/female/whatever without getting in the way of the character, but that’d just be citing examples rather than deconstructing why they work the way they do.

Which I did earlier.

If you want a strong female or male character . . . you start from “strong character” and then decide the gender and tweak as needed. You do not start with “hot blonde” and go from there.

Vahkris.6847:

I’ll have to find the study, but I’ve heard one referenced that when women make up 33% of the people, people tend to see it as half of the group…when they actually are 50%, then people tend to see it as women are overrepresented.

I have read this as well. Similarly I have seen a story where a number of men and women gave presentations and speeches at a conference, all of which were timed. The women’s speeches were always equal to, or shorter than, the men’s speeches. However after all the presentations, the audience consistently reported that the women had spoken more/longer than they actually had done, ie they overestimated how much the women spoke and underestimated how much the men spoke. It was a couple years ago, I’ll have to see if I can find it.

Edit: This is the best starting point I have found as there are citations at the end. Most of my searches are bringing up irrelevant stuff. http://www.pbs.org/speak/speech/prejudice/women/

The statistic Vahkris mentions I have found in relation to an interview with Geena Davis (who runs an institute on women in media) but I can’t find the actual study referenced as yet.

To me, Logan is like Worf—just there for people to tell him he’s wrong.

Oh, I think this may be what you wanted regarding perceived speaking time by gender.
“…men perceive women as dominating a discussion even when they contribute as little as 30% of the talk.” http://bit.ly/13YXnOK

I’ll have to find the study, but I’ve heard one referenced that when women make up 33% of the people, people tend to see it as half of the group…when they actually are 50%, then people tend to see it as women are overrepresented.

“…men perceive women as dominating a discussion even when they contribute as little as 30% of the talk.”

To be fair, I bet if you took any Group X and presented them with a similar situation with a Group Y. (That is, different gender, different race, different religion, etc) you’d come up with similar results.

Ask a Christian after a seminar where 40% of the speaker were Islamic, and he’ll probably say, “That was an Islam-fest!!”

Ask a white person after a meeting where 40% of the attendees were black, and he’ll probably say, “There were a TON of african-americans there!”

So on and so forth. It’s just kinda how people are, and probably not actually indicative of any sort of sexism/racism/etc.

Shiren.9532:

It’s becoming annoying to see the male characters turned into jokes or mechanisms to make female characters look good in the Living Story. Logan is a love sick puppy who becomes unbelievably stupid when it comes to the queen (it’s really annoying the writers chose not to have him grow from his experience with Snaff, instead repeating the same tired theme over again – it’s not even believable at this point that he didn’t learn his lesson after Snaff’s death, especially after Destiny’s Edge’s reconciliation). ……..

Thinks about all the people she knows in real life that repeat the same mistakes in relationships over and over and over and over…. yeah a lot of people tend to repeat the same mistakes in relationships over and over.

Rox is overly superstitious and is a Rytlock groupie trying to get into his warband. Scarlett is over the top. Players voted Kiel in.

You are just noticing what confirms what you think and not noticing what doesn’t.

It is interesting to note that after reading the OP’s thread the first thing the wife said was "Why is it ok to portray all the females in the game as “battle bunnies” then? Face it in this game or any other females are portrayed sexually while males are portrayed comically. Blame it on the target audience for the game.

it’s very fashionable these days to depict males in this way. Especially in television commercials.

Theftwind.8976:

It is interesting to note that after reading the OP’s thread the first thing the wife said was "Why is it ok to portray all the females in the game as “battle bunnies” then? Face it in this game or any other females are portrayed sexually while males are portrayed comically. Blame it on the target audience for the game.

All the females? My current guild leader actually has very concealing and not sexualized armor (last I actually saw her main).

If you’re talking NPCs I’m not going to get into that, as I think Ellen Kiel in the Inspector outfit wasn’t very sexualized either.

Edit: Yeah, not really sexual

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/8/89/Inspector_Ellen_Kiel.jpg

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Theftwind.8976:

It is interesting to note that after reading the OP’s thread the first thing the wife said was "Why is it ok to portray all the females in the game as “battle bunnies” then? Face it in this game or any other females are portrayed sexually while males are portrayed comically. Blame it on the target audience for the game.

All the females? My current guild leader actually has very concealing and not sexualized armor (last I actually saw her main).

If you’re talking NPCs I’m not going to get into that, as I think Ellen Kiel in the Inspector outfit wasn’t very sexualized either.

Edit: Yeah, not really sexual

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/8/89/Inspector_Ellen_Kiel.jpg

Just because you can choose to not wear sexualized armor, doesn’t mean the “battle bunnies” thing isn’t a problem. Although there are covering options, a lot of armors still turn into robes when put on a male, and a bikini when put on a female. Also, consider the female body types. Almost all of them look like plastic catwalk models with fake breasts.
Ellen Kiel wasn’t sexualized, but what about lady kasmiir? or riot alice? or the watch knights?

But, back to the main subject. While I do not think the portrayal of male character personalities is an issue, let’s wait and see. In the coming year, more living story expansions will come out, with many new characters. If, after a year of living stories, all the lead roles were consistently female, and all the males were consistently “Lord Faren” types—then yes, it would be cause for concern. But at this point, the Living Story has hardly begun. A few lead females doesn’t make a trend, and even then—a trend doesn’t always mean discrimination. I’m sure Arenanet will put out a fascinating cast of characters—good and bad, male and female, weak and strong, leader and follower.

Weindrasi.3805:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Theftwind.8976:

It is interesting to note that after reading the OP’s thread the first thing the wife said was "Why is it ok to portray all the females in the game as “battle bunnies” then? Face it in this game or any other females are portrayed sexually while males are portrayed comically. Blame it on the target audience for the game.

All the females? My current guild leader actually has very concealing and not sexualized armor (last I actually saw her main).

If you’re talking NPCs I’m not going to get into that, as I think Ellen Kiel in the Inspector outfit wasn’t very sexualized either.

Edit: Yeah, not really sexual

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/8/89/Inspector_Ellen_Kiel.jpg

Just because you can choose to not wear sexualized armor, doesn’t mean the “battle bunnies” thing isn’t a problem. Although there are covering options, a lot of armors still turn into robes when put on a male, and a bikini when put on a female. Also, consider the female body types. Almost all of them look like plastic catwalk models with fake breasts.
Ellen Kiel wasn’t sexualized, but what about lady kasmiir? or riot alice? or the watch knights?

I’m not getting into the watchknights again. As for Lady Kasmiir, I expect it’s intentional for the character and she is brighter than she looks. Riot Alice, I could see her using it pretty much for the sole purpose of catching out people who stare.

But, regardless, you have a point but at the same time . . . there’s this weird disconnect since I don’t often hear guys going “I want to play a fat out of shape guy” as much as I hear people going the same direction you’re going.

And on the other edge of the coin we have this: just because you look that way doesn’t mean you ACT that way. Countess Anise has one stunning outfit. I would not consider hitting on her. Ever. EVER. I’d sooner hit on Jora, and that would go nowhere much much faster.

But, back to the main subject. While I do not think the portrayal of male character personalities is an issue, let’s wait and see. In the coming year, more living story expansions will come out, with many new characters. If, after a year of living stories, all the lead roles were consistently female, and all the males were consistently “Lord Faren” types—then yes, it would be cause for concern. But at this point, the Living Story has hardly begun. A few lead females doesn’t make a trend, and even then—a trend doesn’t always mean discrimination. I’m sure Arenanet will put out a fascinating cast of characters—good and bad, male and female, weak and strong, leader and follower.

. . . you know you’re not allowed to say “let’s wait and see” when criticizing the Living Story right? I mean, that’s become an unwritten rule around here

marnick.4305:

Shiren.9532:

The Living Story is littered with female empowerment plots, unfortunately one of the most commonly used ones is the poor portrayal of male characters as a mechanism to make the females look good. I like it when stories have powerful female characters, but I resent when it’s done at the expense of male characters.

For two thousand years a book with male empowerment plots has dominated our culture. Now there’s a story with a few females in the lead, and suddenly all hell breaks loose?

You only perceive it to be that way because you’re not used to females in power, neither in stories nor in real life. Magnus is the leader of LA, and last time I checked he was still male. A lot of dungeon bosses are males (eg Adelbern). The entire Sons of Svanir plot revolves around male empowerment. Where were you with the personal story being all about males succeeding? The dungeon story is about destiny’s edge and that’s mostly about Rytlock and Logan reconciling. Logan looks far more masculine in that story while Caithe is the love sick girl. Did I hear you complain back then?

Just cherry picking a few in the Living Story doesn’t make this a bad thing. Maybe the next plot is all about a man rescuing an 8 bit princess in distress. I’m waiting for your thread complaining about that story having male supremacy themes.

Which is portrayed as a bad thing and is therefore a point in the favor of the OP’s argument, not yours.

I agree with the OP. This living story is to much into the feminist agenda.

Uh, I can understand it not being a “point” in favor of marnick’s argument (that being there are lots of male focused story elements that reflect positively on the gender) but I don’t see how that somehow proves the OP’s argument. Every single starter bad guy is the same species and extremely discriminatory in some way. Human’s fight people who are against the Queen and are racist against Charr. Sylvari fight a bunch of insane people who think being cruel to each other is a great way to do things. Asura fight even more morally bankrupt scientists (I kid, I kid). And so on.

They stated they made these sides incredibly unlikable completely intentionally. Saying that one group being incredibly misogynistic jerks (emphasis on the jerks part) means they’re blatantly trying to push “female empowerment” (whatever that means) at the expense of males is silly because it completely glosses over every other aspect of that group. Them being jerks exists because they don’t want players thinking joining up with that group should be an option. Same reason why they have the Nightmare Court torture puppies (literally). They’re trying to make you not like them on a personal level. And last time I checked misogynistic jerks are generally not well liked because of their personality, not because there is some vast “female empowerment” plot.

Where were you with the personal story being all about males succeeding?

Males succeeding? You mean the story where Trahearne fumbles around, mumbling about not being a leader while Zojja saves the world with a phaser bank she stole from the Enterprise? =D

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

I would pay much more attention for something where I wouldn’t have to be reminded a character is male, female, or otherwise except as a throwaway fact. I want a good character first, a man/woman/whatever second.

I don’t want a strong female character which is some lady acting tough, gruff, and “putting men in their place” any more than I want a strong male character who’s tough, gruff, and tells ladies to “get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich”.

I couldn’t have said this better myself.

We also have talked about how females are dominate in this game. Right now Kiel got voted in, Scarlet is some super genius, Majory is some super detective, The human ruler is a female.

Braham is a dunce, Faren is comic relief, Logan just drops everything for the queen, even his friends, Canach kills the people he is trying to save, Evon is selfish (supposedly), Trahearne is hated.

We need a male NPC that isn’t portrayed negativity. The ones we did have were killed off in the personal story.

I wouldn’t mind if it was more balanced but its not – females are dominating the males in tyria.

Canach was trying to destroy the consortium after they set him up as a patsy. The revolt he was instigating wasn’t for the good of the workers, it was just an easy way to screw up the plans of the consortium and allowed him to delude himself. So it wasn’t incompetence as far as a plan so much as he was somewhat of a tragic character.

And Trahearne isn’t hated in game. Some people don’t like him but the characters all think he is a strong character and the game attempts to show him as such (admittedly they could have done better but you can’t say launch missteps = they tried to make Trahearne a bad character).

And when did they kill off Gixx? He was a strong patriarchal figure who was far from incompetent and showed genuine concern for people under him. Knut (who did show up during the LS) also comes across as a strong leader (who unfortunately couldn’t help combat the invasion directly). And Rytlock is coming across better after he got over the grr Logan bad stuff.

Seriously, there is some pretty extreme cherry picking here (e.g. neglecting to say how Rox is about as weak of a character as Braham…she pines over joining Rytlock’s warband).

I seriously wonder how much of this is over Anise and Logan. (Seriously, is this the main thing or where people worried about this for a long time?)

Bovinity.8610:

Where were you with the personal story being all about males succeeding?

Males succeeding? You mean the story where Trahearne fumbles around, mumbling about not being a leader while Zojja saves the world with a phaser bank she stole from the Enterprise? =D

How about stopping Kellach from assaulting Queen Jenah? If I recall, at least 2 of 3 order choices were male at that point. Then there’s helping out Forgal with the ogres for the Vigil . . .

I’m sure that the weak males are balanced by twisted robotic females dying with their sexy buttocks up in the air. What you havent noticed? Maybe its just me.

marnick.4305:

Shiren.9532:

The Living Story is littered with female empowerment plots, unfortunately one of the most commonly used ones is the poor portrayal of male characters as a mechanism to make the females look good. I like it when stories have powerful female characters, but I resent when it’s done at the expense of male characters.

For two thousand years a book with male empowerment plots has dominated our culture. Now there’s a story with a few females in the lead, and suddenly all hell breaks loose?

You only perceive it to be that way because you’re not used to females in power, neither in stories nor in real life. Magnus is the leader of LA, and last time I checked he was still male. A lot of dungeon bosses are males (eg Adelbern). The entire Sons of Svanir plot revolves around male empowerment. Where were you with the personal story being all about males succeeding? The dungeon story is about destiny’s edge and that’s mostly about Rytlock and Logan reconciling. Logan looks far more masculine in that story while Caithe is the love sick girl. Did I hear you complain back then?

Just cherry picking a few in the Living Story doesn’t make this a bad thing. Maybe the next plot is all about a man rescuing an 8 bit princess in distress. I’m waiting for your thread complaining about that story having male supremacy themes.

So your strategy is an eye for an eye? You recognise something is bad and then do it to other people because it was done to someone else? That’s a real progressive way to think. Guild Wars has always had a female empowerment angle yet Guild Wars 2 and specifically the Living Story is taking it all the way to the extreme. You say I cherry picked examples, I think I covered every significant character in the Living Story (otherwise I wouldn’t have bothered to go in so much about Magnus/Rytlock/Evon/Canach).

Evans.6347:

While objectively you have a point, I’m under the impression you’re looking too far into this.

I wrote that post after doing the Funhouse instance and watching the Logan and Anise exchange. I’ve been conscious of a lot of these kinds of themes appearing for a while now and at times I liked it, but the balance shifted to a point where I became uncomfortable about it. Traditionally MMOs wouldn’t have a female queen, certainly not born into the role. It always seemed very deliberate to me that Jennah was a Queen and not a King.

I recently watched a video interview at Gamescom with three people at ArenaNet and one of them mentioned if they had a good idea they pitched it to either Colin or Kristen. I knew Colin was important but I had no idea Kristen Perry (one of the artists) was so important so I looked it up and it turns out there is another Kristen at ArenaNet who was recently hired and she’s one of the senior producers.

She writes this on her blog:

More of the negative interactions than you care to admit are due to gender and benevolent sexism. I know why you don’t believe it now – it’s what you have to do to survive. Remember when mom said, “I can’t allow myself to think that way. It would drag me down.” I completely understand, but you will learn this eventually and once you get in a position of leadership you’re going to want to change it.

Now I’ve learnt a lot about sexism and the fight for equality from the media I consume. I was a huge Whedon fan and the guy is supposed to be some kind of feminist so much so that when asked “So, why do you write these strong female characters?” he responded with "Because you’re still asking me that question.”. I watched Buffy and Xena, Motoko from Ghost in the Shell, Balsa from Seirei no Moribito and now I’m watching Aria Stark in Game of Thrones. Maybe it’s because I don’t subscribe to the belief of the “male privilege” or “benevolent sexism” neither which appear to be problems in GW2 (certainly not in the Living Story) and because of their abstract nature they are difficult to naturally identify. In fact, you could argue that Logan’s drive to protect Jennah, a woman he loves, is the story’s way of poorly portraying an example of benevolent sexism while at the same time allowing a woman to be successful at the same role. A belief in benevolent sexism is probably why so few strong female characters show femininity – because to do so would probably promote a kind of sexism. Too often it feels like a manifestation of a feminist agenda and not a strong, fluid and believable story. When I read the Kalla Scorchrazor story it felt like some feminist fantasy, like a mechanical construction to be politically correct. It’s as if a writer said to themselves “here is an opportunity for me to write a feminist character” and not “this is the best way to tell this story in the world I’m writing for”. The same when I read that the racial villains of both the norn and the charr are supposed to think of women as inferior. A designer doesn’t write it that way unless they want to make the connection between sexism and villains. I can understand – to an extent – the Flame Legion, but the Sons of Svanir always seemed confusing to me. Why would a faction that came from a culture that has Eir and Jora as their biggest heroes look down upon women? You can choose to believe that it’s because Jora killed their namesake (her brother Svanir) but I find it more believable that the writers saw it as another way to fit sexism into the story.

In a world where there is supposed to be little to no difference between a man and a woman (aside from biology) and it wouldn’t make sense to have a story deal with discrimination towards Ellen Kiel or Rox for fighting on the front lines, that same world sure doesn’t seem to have a problem showing sexism to be almost exclusive to male dominance over females in the form of the Flame Legion and the Sons of Svanir. Are the writers trying to tell us there is something inherently evil in men that causes them to become sexist or was it simply an oversight in their story telling agenda where they had their cake and ate it as well.

I don’t believe a story should be reduced to a numbers game. I will often argue for a sylvari protagonist in the Living Story and I will express disappointment at yet another human, not because I think the Living Story heroes need to be equally diverse but because I really like the sylvari culture and I want to see more of it. I still believe that forcing one of each race into a team simply for diversity and representation can result in a weaker story. It’s OK that there is a queen instead of a king. It’s OK that that the charr seem to remove the cultural differences between males and females (although it’s ironic that Kristen Perry argued 6-8 boobs – can’t remember exactly how many – or no boobs because it’s more believable, yet my understanding is that in nature, the female of the big cat species is commonly fairly maternal yet the charr dump their cubs in daycare to allow the females back on the front lines). It’s OK that Destiny’s Edge had more female members (Snaff technically counts but he never made it into the game, I personally see him as the character that was created to die) than male members. I understand that when telling a story, it’s more than a numbers game. I don’t think it’s OK when you have an obvious agenda in the writing, to suddenly swap everything is around. If you are writing for equality, you have to write for both genders, not just the one you’re trying to raise up. I don’t believe the Living Story is doing that.

How about stopping Kellach from assaulting Queen Jenah? If I recall, at least 2 of 3 order choices were male at that point. Then there’s helping out Forgal with the ogres for the Vigil . . .

Oh, sure. And the leaders of 2 of those 3 orders? Female. The person most responsible for protecting the queen? Female. And, heck why not, the queen herself? I probably don’t have to say that she’s female too.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Theftwind.8976:

It is interesting to note that after reading the OP’s thread the first thing the wife said was "Why is it ok to portray all the females in the game as “battle bunnies” then? Face it in this game or any other females are portrayed sexually while males are portrayed comically. Blame it on the target audience for the game.

All the females? My current guild leader actually has very concealing and not sexualized armor (last I actually saw her main).

If you’re talking NPCs I’m not going to get into that, as I think Ellen Kiel in the Inspector outfit wasn’t very sexualized either.

Edit: Yeah, not really sexual

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/images/8/89/Inspector_Ellen_Kiel.jpg

I agree Keil could be more sexualised than she is, but she is wearing make up and she is fairly attractive with boob plate armour (in a sense, it was a default choice because she is a Lion Guard). If a character is going to claim he high ground in my books they need to go the Brienne route. That’s a female character that earns the right to be considered as not sexualised. One of the reasons why I like Brienne is that her gender is part of her identity and it makes her story a lot more compelling to me (this same story might not work as well in GW2). I personally would have liked to see Kiel more feminine (and said so at the time) not because I need my female characters to be feminine, but because that would have given her something. Personally I think she is rubbish and forgettable – a glorified quest giver. She doesn’t need to have a battle against sexism to be her cliché role in the story (Beckett from the TV series Castle avoids this trope fairly well), but that would have been more interesting than her “nothing” story.

I shouldn’t focus too much on Kiel though. That conversation has past and I’d just like to forget about her now.

Bovinity.8610:

How about stopping Kellach from assaulting Queen Jenah? If I recall, at least 2 of 3 order choices were male at that point. Then there’s helping out Forgal with the ogres for the Vigil . . .

Oh, sure. And the leaders of 2 of those 3 orders? Female. The person most responsible for protecting the queen? Female. And, heck why not, the queen herself? I probably don’t have to say that she’s female too.

Of course . . . of course the queen is female. Why would the queen not be a woman? That’s really . . . really strange to point out.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

. . . you know you’re not allowed to say “let’s wait and see” when criticizing the Living Story right? I mean, that’s become an unwritten rule around here

Haha that’s kind of the truth isn’t it? XD

Just like the whole discussion about the whatchknights, it’s just a game.

The whole problem with this isn’t equality, it’s that we still make differences between males and females. In the end, we are all persons, regardless of gender.

You know, if the mere existence of female characters and female competence is some kind of “propaganda” or “agenda”, then what on Earth is the fact that we are consistently sexualized, stereotyped, silenced, fridged and otherwise marginalized for the benefit of a presumed sexist male audience and male character in most other settings and stories? Reminds me of how the sight of two guys holdings hands is “forcing homosexuality on decent people”, while straight couples doing the same is just fine and not even worth noticing. Just because it’s the status quo doesn’t prevent it from being a massive double standard.

The studies others have mentioned definitely came to my mind when I read this, too.

EDIT: What I do fully agree with though is that the sexism of the Sons of Svanir and the Flame Legion feels iffy at best. It’s always struck me as at odds with the setting, because an attitude of “one woman did something I didn’t like, therefor I hate all women” implicates an existing prejudice and marginalization in which the group of people in question is not truly seen as individuals but rather as a faceless collective. So if charr and norn culture is egalitarian, where did that all-women-are-the-same-and-they-are-bad spiel come from? When male characters defy a badguy, we don’t see said badguy vilifying the entire male gender. All in all, it’s just weird and completely superfluous — and it limits the use of female charr and norn as villains within their cultural context (though charr women can still be Renegades), AND it more or less equates “villain” with “male” for these two cultures, which isn’t fair to guys either.

smeen.4237:

The whole problem with this isn’t equality, it’s that we still make differences between males and females. In the end, we are all persons, regardless of gender.

That is how it should be. Still, until sexism, gender stereotypes and other crap is turned into nothing more than a distateful memory of a distant past, it will continue to matter — just as “color blindness” is a problem instead of a solution in the current reality because it continues to erase people of color and the discrimination-related issues they face.

“We are all people” is a great notion, it’s just that care must be taken not to use it as an excuse to ignore ongoing problems.

Of course . . . of course the queen is female. Why would the queen not be a woman? That’s really . . . really strange to point out.

/facepalm

Kinda why I said it the way I did.

Chadramar.8156:

EDIT: What I do fully agree with though is that the sexism of the Sons of Svanir and the Flame Legion feels iffy at best. It’s always struck me as at odds with the setting, because an attitude of “one woman did something I didn’t like, therefor I hate all women” implicates an existing prejudice and marginalization in which the group of people in question is not truly seen as individuals but rather as a faceless collective. So if charr and norn culture is egalitarian, where did that all-women-are-the-same-and-they-are-bad spiel come from? When male characters defy a badguy, we don’t see said badguy vilifying the entire male gender. All in all, it’s just weird and completely superfluous — and it limits the use of female charr and norn as villains within their cultural context (though charr women can still be Renegades), AND it more or less equates “villain” with “male” for these two cultures, which isn’t fair to guys either.

I agree that it is unfortunate that two factions are limited in such a way. But the starting opposition is pretty cardboard regardless of race (I mean, torturing puppies, really?). I think it is more of a problem where they felt they needed to have generic bad guys that are your race but that you wouldn’t have a problem killing mindlessly at every turn. So they boiled them down to ridiculous stereotypes (resulting in some pretty silly behavior). This is more of a problem with Anet giving us extremely shallow enemies and not Anet having some sort of gender agenda.

You have a very good point Shiren, I have not seen any male characters that I can really get behind or admire. I am a little tired of the ones that are added being made to look like idiots or a only present for comedy value.

Well need a decent male hero for a change. (No not Braham, he has few likable qualities and comes off as an idiot.)

We have had many great female characters and I do not want that to change, but how about throwing in a decent male once in a while.

Aedelric.1287:

We have had many great female characters and I do not want that to change, but how about throwing in a decent male once in a while.

Rytlock is a decent character. Male character, that is. I’d also say Captain Magnus is fairly decent, having the best intentions for his city at heart when he acts. (Also, he gets a lot of respect from me for pretty much mobilizing a huge effort when the karka attacked the city and he had the first clue of where to go. No “let’s send a small force to check it out”. No, he sent two ships and set about making base camps.)

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Rytlock is a decent character.

As I said and the topic states `Living Story´. I say Rytlock does not count or any from the normal story, for that matter he only had a very small cameo int he Living Story, same for Logan.

Aedelric.1287:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Rytlock is a decent character.

As I said and the topic states `Living Story´. I say Rytlock does not count or any from the normal story, for that matter he only had a very small cameo int he Living Story, same for Logan.

Then why do we keep hearing about Logan/Anise? I’ll stop bringing up Rytlock if people stop bellyaching about Logan. Because neither of them are terrible characters, they just have their moments of “whyyyyyyyyyyyy?!”

Braham seems to have potential. He’s young but he’s actually not all that different from how a player character behaves (“brawling and battles? Sign me up! Booze? Heck, just try to stop me.”). He also makes wisecracks better than anyone else did among NPCs.

Evon Gnashblade was just plain not well worked with. He was barely a character at all, seeming more interested in increasing his own political power than actually doing anything good. I did his Candidate Trial (for the achievement and shinies) and there wasn’t much redeeming in there. “Hehe, the gold will be useful funding my campaign.”

Canach was interesting, mostly sound as a character, but ultimately not someone I’d pal around with if his first instinct was to start a murder frenzy to solve a problem. Also if you count “Lost Shores” not being a part of the Living Story then he’s exempt anyway.

On the other side . . .

Rox is interesting, and handles herself well. But there’s that whole “hero worship of Rytlock” thing people seem to miss.

Queen Jennah and Countess Anise, we can also discount since they’re part of the Personal Story and not Living Story. So like Logan and Rytlock, they don’t count. No double-standards.

Inspector Ellen Kiel is an interesting case. Whomever wrote her standard idle welcome needed to really rethink it, but overall I think she came off as a strong, loyal, dutiful character. Just not necessarily female. It could have been “Allen Kiel” and not much would have changed. Seriously. Again, since she showed up in “Lost Shores” she may be exempt from consideration.

Mai Trin is not a good character, being a pirate and outlaw, and only out for herself. There was only a short time you got to know anything about her, and then it was gone.

Scarlet then is the latest female and while she’s not a terrible character she is not a good one either. And not a good portrayal of female. I’d say she’s more a crazy eggplant lady than a female character, unless she gets some development in the future (in the game).

You left your `Lord´ Faren and Marjory Delaqua.

I think these two represent the approach Arena Net have had with the two sexes in the Living Story, it paints the picture exceptionally well. Which is why we need a better more relatable male character introduced in the future.

Obviously not to take away from any female character, but in addition to them.

Aedelric.1287:

You left your `Lord´ Faren and Marjory Delaqua.

I think these two represent the approach Arena Net have had with the two sexes in the Living Story, it paints the picture exceptionally well. Which is why we need a better more relatable male character introduced in the future.

Obviously not to take away from any female character, but in addition to them.

Really? Huh, Lord Faren was in the Personal Story (Human Noble). Disqualified, thank you

Marjory Delaqua and Lady Kasmeer Meade barely registered to me at all, but if you insist? Marjory was interesting as a necromancer investigating murders by asking the dead questions. Which seems like something you’d have seen earlier in Tyria, but . . .

Kasmeer barely registered because she’s like that vase of flowers in my front hall. Pretty, but has absolutely zero impact on anything. You might as well list one of the Vigil crusaders with a name who has no purpose other than to be a training dummy or sell things as a character in the game.

wookiee.4631:

I don’t care about their genders. I only care whether the individual character is good or bad. I don’t think that Anet has some kind of man or woman hating agenda its trying to implement. I wish people would stop reading into what’s not there.

Also:

It’s a game, they are caricatures, nobody cares.

But that’s the issue – media plays a role influencing a persons acceptance of something. To simply say potentially sexist media has no effect and is just a game for which people will not be influenced isn’t productive. What is productive is producing positive characters for which people can look to change ones views. Its true that while media can’t change your beliefs, it can change your view on something. Look at some elicit material featuring two women, it may have helped the LGBT movement gain acceptance by otherwise hostile peoples who didn’t originally support LGBT, but thought that if the material featuring two woman was “ok” to watch, that all LGBT should be accepted.

What countless posters have said here – its OK to have a woman in power and for a portion of the leadership to be made up by successful (if sometimes dull) women. At the same time, its OK to have dim witted male characters who use more brawn than brain, but this doesn’t denegrate the male portion of the population. Where as I agree with some posters that Female armor is at times too revealing (I myself am determined to keep my heavy female characters in super tanky armor), I disagree that thug male characters are denegrading to the male population. The fact that some male characters are made as thugs highlights thier character strengths and weaknesses, just as female characters who are made as high status and power rulers. I more so disagree with the assertion that personality flaw = sexual denegration, where as clothing IS a KNOWN method of denegration, acting out a personality flaw ISN’T.

What some posters have said about “deal with it” is an improper path to gender equality – simply put nobody, regardless of gender or sexual preference should be held above another due to societal expectations or so call “norms”. The path to the right need not be tread on the pain of the group who once dealt the pain.

At the same time, we can’t continue the path to equality without first eliminating inequality, or the denial of inequality in media.

TL:DR – People care about equality, media affects our views and can change them, clothing is not the same as personality flaws, and we don’t need to punish one sex’s sins for the others well-being to make it equal.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Really? Huh, Lord Faren was in the Personal Story (Human Noble).

I never played a human noble, so that bit of information slipped past me.

Edit – I am not sure what you are trying to get at Tobias. Are you saying you agree with the topic and want stronger more relatable male characters or that you prefer the current Living Story trend?

Aedelric.1287:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Really? Huh, Lord Faren was in the Personal Story (Human Noble).

I never played a human noble, so that bit of information slipped past me.

Strangely, that was one of my BWE backgrounds while I was playing around . . .

I still like human commoner the most.

Personally I felt Logan didn’t come off badly in Queen’s Jubilee or Clockwork Chaos.

Logan’s reaction to the Rytlock-knight was believable whether it was pre- or post-personal story. The only reason it looks pre-personal story is Rytlock’s dialogue which is irrelevant for obv. reasons.

The living story really hasn’t been going long enough to lodge this complaint, imo. Though it’s interesting to note.

Agree with the original poster. Female characters have the better writing. Male characters seem one dimensional and brainless. I like Braham but even he is made to look stupid beside Rox.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Aedelric.1287:

You left your `Lord´ Faren and Marjory Delaqua.

I think these two represent the approach Arena Net have had with the two sexes in the Living Story, it paints the picture exceptionally well. Which is why we need a better more relatable male character introduced in the future.

Obviously not to take away from any female character, but in addition to them.

Really? Huh, Lord Faren was in the Personal Story (Human Noble). Disqualified, thank you

Marjory Delaqua and Lady Kasmeer Meade barely registered to me at all, but if you insist? Marjory was interesting as a necromancer investigating murders by asking the dead questions. Which seems like something you’d have seen earlier in Tyria, but . . .

Kasmeer barely registered because she’s like that vase of flowers in my front hall. Pretty, but has absolutely zero impact on anything. You might as well list one of the Vigil crusaders with a name who has no purpose other than to be a training dummy or sell things as a character in the game.

The topic is the portrayal of males in the Living Story. I don’t discount anyone for appearing in the Personal Story (or in a book) but I am specifically looking at their portrayals in the Living Story. Rytlock, Logan, Anise, Jennah and Faren all count, but I’m only considering the way they’ve been written for the Living Story. I’m also considering prominence in the Living Story (maybe it’s just a long time since Flame and Frost but I believe Logan to be more prominent than Rytlock due to heavily being featured in the Queen’s Jubilee while Rytlock has appeared a few times, it’s only as exposition). Events which take place prior to the Living Story (such as Logan and Rytlock’s relationship or Logan’s decision to abandon Destiny’s Edge to aid the queen) I will bring up but only if they specifically reflect on something in the Living Story. For exmaple, the recurring theme in Logan’s actions and decisions involving the queen which a better story probably would have shown character growth from, but the writers have the character repeat the same mistakes instead. I get that good characters have flaws, but no-one wants to see the same flaw appear and being prominently featured in significant events yet the character doesn’t grow from them.

Story-wise, the game really feels to have fallen short. It feels rushed and incomplete as a whole. In 1, the characters seemed natural and organic. Meaning that each one had their qualities and their flaws and they played to both sides of it, letting us see that happen. In 2, it seems that only one side of the character is given to the viewer and it takes, me at least, things out of the moment. Either they are whiny and self-absorbent, or they are so perfect and haughty, no pedestal could ever reach a height great enough for them. I have no problem with any gender being great and wonderful, but they have flaws. They show them as something more than just a passing glance. They are organic and natural. I got to the point where I no longer pay attention to the story set forth, which is a shame, really. I did read the short story about Scarlet because I was curious, but was quickly shown that it was completely superficial. It was a convenient exposition to throw in a new character without adding much depth. As a character, I just don’t buy into her. As a loot generating character, I buy lots and made a tidy, small fortune for my efforts.

I dont actually see a problem here…

You’re basically saying that the woman has to be the over-emotional one in any relationship, and because its the opposite in some cases you feel the need to make a thread about it. Atleast thats how i read it.

I still like Logan’s voice actor though :P.

edit: but i do agree that lolrd faren is an idiot… the way he talks aswell, especially in the closing ceremony cutscene >_<. I still think hes funny at times though.

Wow, good observation. On top of that we have Teyo (female) being the leader of the Inquisition & Faolin (female) leader of the Nightmare Court. Both villains, but both in positions of power. Especially Faolin, who has sway over even Caithe.

Whilst playing, I thought that Anet was doing a good job of making female NPCs that had important roles in the game. They weren’t creating endless damsels in distress and their females were strong and it was refreshing.

However, it seems that they’re having a hard time creating a strong male character that isn’t a leafy pacifist. I can’t think of many male characters that are impressive. Maybe the Vigil Warmaster…and Tybalt was cool, albeit a bit goofy.

Shiren.9532:

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

Aedelric.1287:

You left your `Lord´ Faren and Marjory Delaqua.

I think these two represent the approach Arena Net have had with the two sexes in the Living Story, it paints the picture exceptionally well. Which is why we need a better more relatable male character introduced in the future.

Obviously not to take away from any female character, but in addition to them.

Really? Huh, Lord Faren was in the Personal Story (Human Noble). Disqualified, thank you

Marjory Delaqua and Lady Kasmeer Meade barely registered to me at all, but if you insist? Marjory was interesting as a necromancer investigating murders by asking the dead questions. Which seems like something you’d have seen earlier in Tyria, but . . .

Kasmeer barely registered because she’s like that vase of flowers in my front hall. Pretty, but has absolutely zero impact on anything. You might as well list one of the Vigil crusaders with a name who has no purpose other than to be a training dummy or sell things as a character in the game.

The topic is the portrayal of males in the Living Story. I don’t discount anyone for appearing in the Personal Story (or in a book) but I am specifically looking at their portrayals in the Living Story. Rytlock, Logan, Anise, Jennah and Faren all count, but I’m only considering the way they’ve been written for the Living Story. I’m also considering prominence in the Living Story (maybe it’s just a long time since Flame and Frost but I believe Logan to be more prominent than Rytlock due to heavily being featured in the Queen’s Jubilee while Rytlock has appeared a few times, it’s only as exposition).

Yes, well, Rytlock is in it almost as much as Lord Faren or Captain Magnus.

Also, that response wasn’t to you about them “not counting”, it was to the person I quoted who said they were only considering the Living Story.

Events which take place prior to the Living Story (such as Logan and Rytlock’s relationship or Logan’s decision to abandon Destiny’s Edge to aid the queen) I will bring up but only if they specifically reflect on something in the Living Story. For exmaple, the recurring theme in Logan’s actions and decisions involving the queen which a better story probably would have shown character growth from, but the writers have the character repeat the same mistakes instead. I get that good characters have flaws, but no-one wants to see the same flaw appear and being prominently featured in significant events yet the character doesn’t grow from them.

Logan does grow from them, or rather he did decide to go out and start dealing with it. But after Zhaitan was defeated he went back to Divinity’s Reach until there was a plan for the next dragon. (He is not the leader of Destiny’s Edge, after all.) Same for Rytlock, who has duties as a Tribune to attend to.

Lord Faren is an example of a noble with more money than sense and more heart than brains. Yet from what we see? Even though there was danger he did move forward to help when it was needed. And in the Personal Story (if you care to know about it) he did offer to help. He may be a bumbling fool, but he tries to be better.

Captain Magnus I already covered.

Canach, likewise, I covered as we have very little to do with him.

Subdirector Noll is a “corrupt corporate executive” as the tropes go, and as such is an obstacle to be overcome. He also barely does anything other than act as a motivator for events.

Braham is a young idiot in some senses, but a wiser person than appears. In Flame and Frost he knew his limitations and still went after the Molten Alliance because nobody else was apparently doing so.

Seras.5702:

Wow, good observation. On top of that we have Teyo (female) being the leader of the Inquisition & Faolin (female) leader of the Nightmare Court. Both villains, but both in positions of power. Especially Faolin, who has sway over even Caithe.

Whilst playing, I thought that Anet was doing a good job of making female NPCs that had important roles in the game. They weren’t creating endless damsels in distress and their females were strong and it was refreshing.

However, it seems that they’re having a hard time creating a strong male character that isn’t a leafy pacifist. I can’t think of many male characters that are impressive. Maybe the Vigil Warmaster…and Tybalt was cool, albeit a bit goofy.

Well there’s Rytlock, once he gets over Logan. There’s Agent Ihan during the human personal story, there’s Minister Caudecus (and yes, he’s a villain, but still a strong character), but since everyone hates Logan I’ll have to leave him off the list.

We do have well-done males in the story, and we have well-done females in the story. We also have weak characters of either gender floating around too.

Tobias Trueflight.8350:

We do have well-done males in the story, and we have well-done females in the story. We also have weak characters of either gender floating around too.

We have a handful of well made relatable male characters, we have lots of strong well written females characters. It is quite disproportionate if you start to count them up, additionally, male characters seem to be cast as idiots such as Faren, Quinn, etcetera.

Asking for a couple more good lead roles is not an outrageous request, why are you against it Tobias? Can you honesty say you like the trend of Lord Faren like males?