Battlefield sexist? maybe...

[Deathmineral]

http://kotaku.com/5488592/why-modern-video...k-female-troops

 

So I just finished reading the article and I thought about it for a little bit and the only modern FPS I can remember having a female soldier was call of duty 4 and now I just kind of want to go back and play that one mission again to see if the overall form is any different for the helicopter pilot and all of the male soldiers in the game.

 

Anyone else think the addition of female soldiers would make these games more interesting? I mean heck, we've already seen what future warfare is like with women, crazy mass effect... in all seriousness though, I think it could add some well needed variety to the genre, borderlands is a great example of how it can be used to add some variety, though that's not the best example.

[bp9801]

In the SOCOM 4 thread I made, the preview talks about how one of the soldiers on your team is a woman. First time ever in a SOCOM game so it should be interesting.

 

As for the lack of female troops, I guess its the male stigma that women are "unfit" for a frontline fight. Pure BS imo, but it sounds reasonable. They probably don't want to include a woman in the game to rule out distractions since there will be people who will check out her butt the entire time and then get shot to death. Mass Effect 1 and 2 have women in the game but its a Bioware game, practically every Bioware game I can think of has at least one female party member who is fairly attractive but can also kick much butt. Other games, they are either the leading lady like in Tomb Raider or pure eye candy like in some/most of the Dead or Alive games.

[WhenKittensATK]

This is a beyond discussed topic and the majority of the time it isn't females who even bring it up. It's guys who want to oogle at female character models while they play. Look at any RPG game .

 

Even GvD said female character models in BC2 would distract him from playing (He is actually pretty good at the game).

Edited March 9, 2010 by Krazyxazn

[Deathmineral]

Okay, maybe it was a bad idea to mention mass effect, even if it was a joke. I'm trying to talk purely FPS games though, FPS games are typically only full of men, I mean this is true for TF2 even... unless you happen to mod it. I think to say that mainly men want females in games to look at them is a little ridiculous, and for that idea to be the first thing that comes to everyone's mind, that really shows how the game industry portrays women for the most part. I think a female character being in a game provides for more variety overall, but this simply isn't possible because the game industry portrays women as fan service, a great example of this would be heavy rain, Madison was clearly a fan service character in that game, I mean it's one thing to have dead or alive be fan service but heavy rain is supposed to be a serious, drama, intense, game and madison doesn't give off that idea when she is taking a shower, there is nothing dramatic about her shower scene, that was her entire purpose throughout the game, to look nice.

 

I think an example of just how bad it is would be diablo 3, female barbarian, people think that is hot, clearly the female barbarian isn't the most barbaric of the barbarians. My point is that there are times where it's appropriate to make a character fan service and there are times when they shouldn't be and I think the barbarian is definitely not someone you should find attractive, a game where there should be characters like that is grand theft auto, and the worst part is that grand theft auto makes better use of the female than any other game I've seen with female characters, I mean seriously, some of those missions were just easier to beat because you went and picked up a hooker and got your health to 150. I don't see any good reason for modern FPS games to exclude females because they would be distracting, clearly there is something wrong with the development process if they can't create a female characters without making them distracting.

 

Now then, I should probably make it clear why I feel like female characters can play an important role in games, I personally like playing as a female character, I find I strive to be better when I play as a female character in games, that's why I always try to play as zoey in left 4 dead. I prefer to play as the female character because there are a lot of gamers out there that don't like to play as female characters because they just have this idea in their head that girls can't do as much as guys in a combat situation.

[sack_patrol]

Why Modern Video Game Armies Lack Female Troops?

 

Because they are in the kitchen making me a sandwich as they should be! ZING

Edited March 10, 2010 by ballist1x

[Gr4vitas]

I wouldn't really say its a stigma we have against women being in the front lines. I personally wouldnt have a problem with it however...

 

Technically speaking, if I was in the field and a buddy or even me got taken down, I'm not 100% sure (obviously their are women that are indeed very physically strong) that I'd want a girl there to throw me over her shoulder and get my butt out of there.

 

Generally speaking they just aren't physically fit for such a thing, generally yea there wouldn't be a problem with it but unless they've specifically trained hard enough to be as muscularly powerful as any other dude out there Id want a guy backing me up that can grab me with one hand and drag my butt out real fast like.

[Deathmineral]

I wouldn't really say its a stigma we have against women being in the front lines. I personally wouldnt have a problem with it however...

 

Technically speaking, if I was in the field and a buddy or even me got taken down, I'm not 100% sure (obviously their are women that are indeed very physically strong) that I'd want a girl there to throw me over her shoulder and get my butt out of there.

 

Generally speaking they just aren't physically fit for such a thing, generally yea there wouldn't be a problem with it but unless they've specifically trained hard enough to be as muscularly powerful as any other dude out there Id want a guy backing me up that can grab me with one hand and drag my butt out real fast like.

Really? I think if you were actually in the situation where you have been shot and couldn't move and the most available person to move you was a chick you would totally feel different about it, I know for sure that if it was my butt on the line, I wouldn't sit there on the ground getting picky about who is trying to save my life.

 

As far as games go, I would say that isn't too relevant since the closest thing FPS games come to that scenario is the defibrillator. I'm not really trying to say that this is necessarily a good idea for a game like bad company 2, especially since it is a team based game so I think it would even less of a role in it than it would in a game like MW2, I can definitely see a female soldier role being important in that game because generally girls are more flexible, so anyone playing as a girl will be able to lean, something every good FPS needs. I mean MW2 is so very proud of it's perks and killstreak stuff, why not add to the fun by making stuff gender based as well.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Deathmineral

[LoArmistead]

It may very well have something to do with the military being a "man's game," but I think most of the reason we don't see many females in our military games is because most of our games take place on the front lines, and females are barred from combat arms MOSs and branches. So when you are convoying through enemy-infested streets and kicking down doors in the real world, you generally aren't going to have females anywhere near you.

[greengiant912]

It may very well have something to do with the military being a "man's game," but I think most of the reason we don't see many females in our military games is because most of our games take place on the front lines, and females are barred from combat arms MOSs and branches. So when you are convoying through enemy-infested streets and kicking down doors in the real world, you generally aren't going to have females anywhere near you.

 

 

From what I heard that will be changing soon, as there already is many women that are already on the front lines.

 

 

I think it could be a society thing that people just don't want to see women getting shot up in a video game.

[LoArmistead]

They are on the front lines, but they're in support positions (Chemical, ADA, Transport, etc...). I think some women might even be in EOD, but Congress has barred them from being in the Infantry, Armor, and Field Artillery branches. I wouldn't hold my breath on that one changing any time soon. I don't see what the hold-up is. They want "equal rights," then by God let's give it to them. I don't mind women being in combat arms at all, but I refuse to compromise the integrity of the training of our combat arms units to accommodate weak women. So if the woman wanting to branch Infantry can't keep up with the guys, she is going to have to wash out and choose a less strenuous branch. That being said, the bottom line is, if Congress allows women to be in combat arms branches, they will also lower the standards for women, and that will affect the integrity of our combat units military-wide. That's just the sad reality of our politically correct culture. Congress will not allow women to serve in combat units without also requiring the military to "dumb down" its standards in order to let a certain percentage of women pass through. Just think of what politicians have done with affirmative action in the public school system. Now apply that same template to an area where being unqualified for the job will lead to the deaths of American soldiers, and we have a disaster in the making.

 

So my proposal to Congress is this:

 

1) Allow women to serve in the combat arms, but do NOT compromise training to accommodate them. If they can't cut it with the guys, they go serve in another MOS.

 

OR

 

2) Do not allow women to serve in combat arms.

 

 

Option 3) Allow women to serve in combat arms, and lower the standards for them to enter to make sure that 15% of the total combat arms units are women, is out of the question. It isn't even an option. But I know, if Congress allows women to serve combat arms, they will place these political caveats in there, and it will be to our detriment as a military and as a country. All or nothing, none of this compromise bull crap.

[sYstEmATiC]

I wouldn't really say its a stigma we have against women being in the front lines. I personally wouldnt have a problem with it however...

 

Technically speaking, if I was in the field and a buddy or even me got taken down, I'm not 100% sure (obviously their are women that are indeed very physically strong) that I'd want a girl there to throw me over her shoulder and get my butt out of there.

 

Generally speaking they just aren't physically fit for such a thing, generally yea there wouldn't be a problem with it but unless they've specifically trained hard enough to be as muscularly powerful as any other dude out there Id want a guy backing me up that can grab me with one hand and drag my butt out real fast like.

 

 

They are on the front lines, but they're in support positions (Chemical, ADA, Transport, etc...). I think some women might even be in EOD, but Congress has barred them from being in the Infantry, Armor, and Field Artillery branches. I wouldn't hold my breath on that one changing any time soon. I don't see what the hold-up is. They want "equal rights," then by God let's give it to them. I don't mind women being in combat arms at all, but I refuse to compromise the integrity of the training of our combat arms units to accommodate weak women. So if the woman wanting to branch Infantry can't keep up with the guys, she is going to have to wash out and choose a less strenuous branch. That being said, the bottom line is, if Congress allows women to be in combat arms branches, they will also lower the standards for women, and that will affect the integrity of our combat units military-wide. That's just the sad reality of our politically correct culture. Congress will not allow women to serve in combat units without also requiring the military to "dumb down" its standards in order to let a certain percentage of women pass through. Just think of what politicians have done with affirmative action in the public school system. Now apply that same template to an area where being unqualified for the job will lead to the deaths of American soldiers, and we have a disaster in the making.

 

So my proposal to Congress is this:

 

1) Allow women to serve in the combat arms, but do NOT compromise training to accommodate them. If they can't cut it with the guys, they go serve in another MOS.

 

OR

 

2) Do not allow women to serve in combat arms.

 

 

Option 3) Allow women to serve in combat arms, and lower the standards for them to enter to make sure that 15% of the total combat arms units are women, is out of the question. It isn't even an option. But I know, if Congress allows women to serve combat arms, they will place these political caveats in there, and it will be to our detriment as a military and as a country. All or nothing, none of this compromise bull crap.

I agree with you Lo 110%. Being in the Army, and based off of what I have personally seen, most females could not cut it on the front lines. There are some, but looking at statistics, the majority cant. For example, most units in the Army require a 60% or better on the standard PT (physical training) test to be considered "in good physical health/shape", which is comprised of sit ups, push ups, and a two mile run. For males ages 17-21, the 60% minimum is 42 push ups, and 53 sit ups within 2 minutes for each event. 60% for the 2 mile run is 15:54. Now for the Females test. for 60% they must do 19 push ups, 53 sit ups, and complete the run in 18:54.

 

I hear some of the females whining because they cant pick a combat mos but yet "most" of those females are barely passing their PT tests. If you are going to pick up a fallen soldier with all their gear, you are going to need to do a lot more than 19 push ups....hardly equal.

My point is, if they (females) can complete the male standards for the test, then I have no issue with them being beside me in combat. If your only doing 20 push ups, I'm sorry but that is not sufficient enough.

[Deathmineral]

This got a heck of a lot more political than I thought it would.

 

I was really hoping this would actually stay strictly video games, where you can actually bend the rules a little bit and it shouldn't be considered a big deal to bend those rules, but as far as real life situations go I'd have to say I agree completely.