Dude, if you were a 7 foot tall muscular superman with supermodel good-looks who defeats monsters and saves the innocent then every woman would probably want to fuck you too.

And not a single fuck was given.

You do realize that the part about the sarcasm was the one I put in bold above, yes? What about the rest of the post?
I don't agree to disagree, I say you're trying to upset people in purpose; so yes, the discussion is indeed impossible, and I won't waste more of my time arguing with you.

This place has become a cesspit.

It's kind of funny that the thread started with a few perfectly reasonable posts that seemed to end the pointless debate before it even started, seemed like the community here actually grew a braincell or two, but then it got resurrected, not even by the OP, and became the troll thread it was always meant to be.

Life finds a way.

As I said: "Couldn't have been any more female" ;P

I have to admit that modern adventure games became my favourite genre some years ago. I like story driven games and... most modern games really suck when it comes to that! Most modern RPGs feel like a total grindfest (collect ten red berries to cure my dogs diarrhea) and sadly this dissease (talking about grindfest, not diarrhea) spread through most other genres, too. The new-ish Far Cry games feel great, but they keep you busy with hunting, fishing and climbing stupid towers. The Tomb Raider reboot could've easily become one of my most favorite games in years, but... collect this, hunt that, craft stuff... The second one even introduced these brainless "collect ten red berries" quests -.- It's "cheap game length", but seriously distracts you from the story. It "kills the flow", if this makes any sense.

Adventures these days are extremely story driven, with dumbed down puzzles (which is okay with me) and a bit more gameplay than classic adventures. They're kind of relaxing and entertaining. And Life is Strange is definitely one of the best modern adventures out there. Way better than Telltale's games (which I like!). The thing with Life is Strange is that you can feel that it's meant to please the "social justice" crowd. But... as I said: If it's fitting the genre and doesn't feel as if they worked through a checklist, I don't really care. I even enjoyed the game because of the characters and the story (you're the one being bullied, most of the time). I just wouldn't want to see them in Fallout, Doom, HuniePop or Diablo ;)

I love Life is Strange and the prequel, although the quality dipped a little. I was sad when I saw what happened with LiS2.

As for Far Cry 5, it's one of my biggest surprises of the last few years. No HUD, Rambo-style, straight to the objective (plus some mayhem, of course). I wish the strongholds were tougher to crack, but there were some hairy moments in that one.

Have you played Shadow of the Tomb Raider? It's mostly jungles and temples, and the puzzle rooms are actually much more than a switch to press this time.

Speaking of female characters, it's insane how much shit Chloe Price gets by the fandom. When you have the whole arc and see how her home life changed over a few events, to hate on her for being difficult is almost psychopathic.

I am just curious not trolling
Just curious mate


I personally think women aren't portrayed correctly in games Nope

And now you don't put any effort in it at all.

Is that really a thing? From what I've seen, fans generally love Cloe more than Max.

I'd just like to interject for a moment and mention that FarCry 4 does not portray animals correctly: most animals don't attack on sight. Every. Single. Time. Oh, there's a honey badger! What are the odds it doesn't care at all? Zero percent chance of that honey badger merrily going along its way. That honey badger cares greatly, as all the honey badgers of Kyrat do: every animal in Kyrat is in fact a reincarnation of Inigo Montoya, and you, Ah-jay, you are the six-fingered man who killed their father, and now, prepare for aggro.

No, I wouldn't say that. Causality does not imply rationality. For instance, a paladin believes that eating children is always wrong. A character eats a child pie while under the control of strong magic. The paladin tries killing the other character. Not necessarily rational - the one who ate the pie obviously wasn't in control, and would thus be able to argue that - but certainly causal. (Using this as an example because it happened in my current DND campaign).

I specifically mentioned Kara. It wasn't rational to take the gun and rescue Alice. It was an emotional response, and still causal. Even after the big reveal, Kara retains dedicated to protecting Alice. She wavers, sure, but doubt would be expected in such a situation.

These kind of statements never made sense to me. Discussing the subject of representation in video games doesn't preclude discussion on climate change, epidemics, poverty etc., nor does discussing it imply it takes precedent over other issues. You can walk and chew gum at the same time.

As for the subject, it depends on how we define 'portraying women correctly', but based on their post, I'm going to presume OP means 'realistically'. In which case, the answer is no, but then, I imagine a lot of works of fiction (including games) don't regard realism as a priority or even desirable.

But that said, while the above isn't necessarily an issue onto itself (unless a game is specifically aiming for that), that doesn't mean that the representation of women in media (and especially video games) isn't problematic in other ways.

For example, I think female representation does generally suffer from the fact that female characters don't have as much of a range of portrayals as male characters do, at least when it comes to physical appearance. While male characters can come in practically all shapes and sizes, female characters usually tend to be youthful, slender and attractive. Obviously, this isn't true in all instances, but I don't think it's unfair to say that it's very commonly true, which can be limiting both in terms of artistic expression as well as audience appeal.

In short, while I don't think everything about female representation in video games is bad or even an issue, there are certainly problematic trends and aspects to it that are worth discussing.

I've seen that a lot, yes, from both fans and detractors. I think a lot of people tend to forget a lot about Maxine the wallflower. I'll have to replay the whole thing soon, it's so good.

If you're asking about realism, most characters in video games are pretty inaccurate, whether in terms of their personality or their looks (most people don't look that good.). That's usually fine.

If you're asking about whether women are portrayed in a respectful and non-condescending way, and are equivalent to male characters (as well as characters of other genders)......it can get more complicated

I think it's much better these years. According to personal experience, pure fanservice characters and complete damsels-in-distress, the major forms of disrespectful and objectifying portrayals, are rarer, and female characters are much less likely to be unrealistically feminine and much more likely to be as masculine as women in real life can be. Their personalities are also less stereotypically weak and dependent, are are more likely to be strong and independent like normal people in real life, which is a good thing.

In terms of excessive sexualization, fanservice still exists. I'm personally neutral about fanservice. In terms of this, l think "inaccurate" means when only women are sexualized and only the preference of men is considered, while the tastes of people of other genders are ignored. I haven't paid much attention to this issue, so I'm afraid I can't say more.

I've played through Tomb Raider (the first one of the reboot) and quit the second one after a few hours, right when I noticed that every new area started with stupid sidequests and lots of markers on your map that you have to work through. I hate it when game length gets stretched with "copy&paste not-content". The first game of the reboot had this too, but it felt much worse in the second one. I never tried the third one. Kind of sad since I really liked the other parts of the games. Climbing and jumping through the levels and even the quick time events were pretty enjoyable. They even managed to improve the puzzles a bit in the second one.

It's just that I'm really allergic to some game design decisions. Tomb Raider is about Indiana Jones-ish exploration, puzzles and stories and not about collecting sticks, scrap and animal parts to upgrade your weapons. And it definitely isn't about "Would you plese go to these five different spots on the map to push a button for me?"-quests! It's just there to put a stupid "50+ hours play time!"-sticker on the back of the game's box. Low effort "content" that's distracting from the actual game... Nah, I'll better stop ranting here. Just thinking about it is making me aggressive already... The reboot had so much potential, but this is ruining it for me.

I guess I'm lucky that I'm not much of an internet person. I don't read a lot of forums, don't listen to any podcasts and I'm definitely not watching any gaming related videos on youtube. Not knowing why good games are actually bad already let me enjoy quite a few bad games :D

Knowing Chloe from the first LiS was what made Before the Storm a special game to me. Every decission I made felt like I was doing things wrong and pushed Chloe a bit more towards becoming that broken person she was in Life is Strange. I really liked that!