Kim Kardashian is surfing this wave of male tears all the way to the bank. In a world with limited opportunities for famous women as they age, Kardashian broke the Internet simply by lending her likeness to a single mobile game. And to read Kardashian as a vapid figure who does not deserve her fame is to fundamentally misunderstand the ways in which women exercise agency within the sexist constraints of celebrity culture.
My avatar is whisked from engagement to engagement to engagement. Literally -- as soon as I leave a cover shoot, I get a "call" from my "agent" with another offer with the implication that I should run over now. At these engagements, each action takes a bit of energy. When you run out, but try to continue, the game tells you that you are tired.
It does seem tiring. [...] For Mrs. Kardashian West, however, this isn't a diversion. This is her reality. She doesn't have a choice on whether or not she is scrutinized. She had a choice when her sex tape was released—be forever known as a woman who had a sex tape, or try and take control of that situation. She no longer gets to have "off the clock."
If the creator of an artistic work leaves gaps in the work for the player to fill in, then yes, the creator will have to expect that players will fill in those gaps themselves–but this does not change our conclusion. The player's interpretation must still be consistent with those elements for which the game does not leave gaps. Otherwise, the interpretation will be built upon false premises–which is to say, it will be wrong.
[T]he "no wrong interpretation" theory does not just promote interpretations from marginalized voices; it provides cover for unsupported interpretations from every perspective, including racist, homophobic, and misogynist perspectives. For instance: some have interpreted the inclusion of a gay character in Dragon Age Inquisition as a cynical bid on Bioware's part to push "the gay agenda" [...] If it is not possible to provide a wrong interpretation, then that loathsome interpretation must also be "not wrong."
[W]hat we can do to reconcile these two forces of text and meaning is to produce with our criticism, not data or reference work, but folklore. Communally existing knowledge that is inseparable from consciousness on a social plane, as extelligence, inverse to intelligence, consciousness on an individual plane. Much like geist suggests the mindfulness of ideas, extelligence sees ideas and consciousness embodied in cultural artefacts. [...]
The value of this comes as I accept the existence of the social world and my place in it, and contribute to it my consciousness as given in the experiences and perspectives representative of a game’s narrative through me. I accept my fallibility and fragility as a condition of this. And in admitting myself as a participant in your world, rather than maintaining we each live in distinct bubbles, I accept responsibility for my message appropriate to my failings in the context of it as a socialized text and me as a socialized person, rather than appropriate to everybody’s individual imaginations.
Like, let's talk about how gaming fandoms often have an official forum that skews heavily male. Let's talk about how that forum is almost universally an unfriendly locale for female contributors. And let's talk about how that forum is often the only point of direct contact with devs, and how it shapes their perception of fan preferences and trends, and how that shapes their future work. Let's talk about how the female-dominated online spaces are considered intrinsically easy to dismiss, the butt of a joke. "Man, tumblr overanalyzes everything and hahaha ships what's with that anyway. Oh hey so this guy did a sweet 360 noscope montage to dubstep music let's publicize that!!!"
Let's talk about how folks in fandom were rewriting [Mass Effect 3] in a massive variety of creative and clever ways for over a year before that one dudebro did it, in horribly out-of-character quasi-prose, and was the subject of front-page Kotaku articles showcasing his devotion to the series.
Let's talk about how female-dominated fannish spaces have been around for decades. Let's talk about how "fans brought back Star Trek in the 70s!" always brings to mind stereotypical Trekkie dudes and not the women who were actually organizing and running conventions.
Let's talk about how women are over 50% of moviegoers. Let's talk about how women make up nearly 50% of gamers. Let's talk about how, despite all this, the industry is still almost entirely guys making content for guys.
I'm just saying. Let's fucking talk about this.
[T]here's this whiplash inducing indecision between "Let's make this a moving, powerful game about a small number of characters" and "Let's make this a super fun video game that people want to spend fifteen dollars on" and you never know which direction the next scene's going to go.
[...] The game demonstrates that it's perfectly capable of being maudlin without ever falling into mawkish or manipulative but also without attempting to overreach and deliver a story deeper or more complicated than its lush drawings and simple mechanics can tell. It knows how to be a quiet, somber eulogy those we lost during the Great War punctuated with warmth and humor to remind you why we should mourn and what we lost. It just, for whatever reason, doesn't or can't commit to that vision.
This kind of modification makes games less fun, because it introduces tasks that are irrelevant to game mechanics. How about using games that involve math facts or words directly, instead of inserting them into otherwise perfectly good games? We go to educational games to get away from the worksheets and flashcards. When a game uses math or reading relevantly, it helps motivate children to learn those skills."
In the case of video game design, the ethic of access that was present in the early years of shooter design [shareware and engine licensing practices] was able to be coopted by the discourses that promoted an increased militarization of society in general and leisure in particular. Because of this increased in militarization discourses and of the ethic of access, the shooter design strategy was able to spread out to many other game genres. Video games that can neatly be classified into a single genre are now very rare. The spread of the shooter design -- through the ethic of access and the militarization of information technologies -- enabled an hybridization of video games that is heavy slanted towards military themes, which allows military discourses to access the private spaces of American citizens.
Now, I'm not saying that the indentured game developers featured in GDS are somehow more important than all the ostriches, golfers, firemen, alien meat-curers or even medieval brewers in all the other management sims ever created for all of the computers. It's just that I'm more familiar with the caveats and weirdness of their tumultuous real life job market. It's this added knowledge which makes the game quite difficult -- morally speaking -- to play in its intended way.
If the incentive that we present to young people for making games is predominantly a financial one [as in Indie Game: The Movie], then we are all the poorer. Video games allow people to express themselves and present the ways in which they experience and interact with the world and its systems in a unique way to others. [...]
This focus on financial gain rather than artistic gain is, arguably, at risk of turning video games into a cultural backwater. The big business side of the industry is characterised by creative conservatism, sure-fire bets based on bankable precedents.
In the Palm of Your Hand
At Lookspring, Margaret Robertson looks back at 2007's Coolest Girl in School, a game made by and for young women in an era when small titles such as this were only beginning to appear. She observes:
Contemplating 2007 from 2014 is a really good exercise in understanding how weirdly time moves for the games industry. Is 7 years a long time ago? Obviously not. Except it's an eternity ago.