there may be lots of games to play if you cut out all the ones you don’t want, but there’s no button that does that, so you have to wade through an ocean of stuff to find the comparatively few small tidepools where the things you want exist.
there’s a lot of everything now. it’s the proportion that matters.
It really isn’t, and yes you have to wade through, but that’s true of everyone, we all have to find what we like. There are a fucking ton of games.
Most of my ladygamer friends are into cozy games where they grow things, or games where they can be social with their friends who also play. Bonus if it’s both. Extra bonus if it’s cute. Its why all the facebook games were such a huge hit. Social sims are great for helping people stay in touch and giving them a reason to talk, which is a big focus of most women’s lives. We tend to have very strong social bonds, because we look for ways to reinforce them, like games.
So we don’t need a lot of games, necesaarily, we need games that suit a purpose for the people who want to play. And long-term same games are great for that.
i can’t think of a recent, decent game that screamed more “this is for girls” than this one. yes, there is stardew, which isn’t particularly gendered, even if it tends to attract more women than other games, and the less good, uh, homages to it, like the disney princess one (not sure i would call that decent, tbh). and there has always been the sims. facebook and mobile games have always had a large, often predominantly female audience, but most of those are very cheap. and world of warcraft cuts pretty well across gender lines.
but this one is so overtly about traditionally women’s hobbies and it’s also really good. that makes it rare to me.
and you know who doesn’t have to wade? people who like call of duty, madden/2k/whatever, etc. while a lot of men don’t like those games either, it’s hard to argue that their fan base isn’t primarily men and that they are marketed exclusively towards men. there is a lot of that stuff. the rest of us have to wade. women have to wade harder.
proportion is what’s important, and women are vastly under-represented.
i can’t think of a recent, decent game that screamed more “this is for girls” than this one.
Why does it need to be “this is for girls” though?
I’m not saying having more games aimed at women is bad, it absolutely isn’t.
I’m challenging the idea that there aren’t a lot of games for women. Which is objectively not true for exactly what you yourself pointed out. The games that women gravitate toward are ungendered. And that’s fine.
I’m personally never going to be interested in playing some game about fashion. It feels like barbie games from the last 40 years and no thanks. I’m glad some women and probably a ton of men who like fashion are into it. (Like you do realize there are tons of male designers?)
this sounds perilously close to “skill issue”.
there may be lots of games to play if you cut out all the ones you don’t want, but there’s no button that does that, so you have to wade through an ocean of stuff to find the comparatively few small tidepools where the things you want exist.
there’s a lot of everything now. it’s the proportion that matters.
It really isn’t, and yes you have to wade through, but that’s true of everyone, we all have to find what we like. There are a fucking ton of games.
Most of my ladygamer friends are into cozy games where they grow things, or games where they can be social with their friends who also play. Bonus if it’s both. Extra bonus if it’s cute. Its why all the facebook games were such a huge hit. Social sims are great for helping people stay in touch and giving them a reason to talk, which is a big focus of most women’s lives. We tend to have very strong social bonds, because we look for ways to reinforce them, like games.
So we don’t need a lot of games, necesaarily, we need games that suit a purpose for the people who want to play. And long-term same games are great for that.
i can’t think of a recent, decent game that screamed more “this is for girls” than this one. yes, there is stardew, which isn’t particularly gendered, even if it tends to attract more women than other games, and the less good, uh, homages to it, like the disney princess one (not sure i would call that decent, tbh). and there has always been the sims. facebook and mobile games have always had a large, often predominantly female audience, but most of those are very cheap. and world of warcraft cuts pretty well across gender lines.
but this one is so overtly about traditionally women’s hobbies and it’s also really good. that makes it rare to me.
and you know who doesn’t have to wade? people who like call of duty, madden/2k/whatever, etc. while a lot of men don’t like those games either, it’s hard to argue that their fan base isn’t primarily men and that they are marketed exclusively towards men. there is a lot of that stuff. the rest of us have to wade. women have to wade harder.
proportion is what’s important, and women are vastly under-represented.
Why does it need to be “this is for girls” though?
I’m not saying having more games aimed at women is bad, it absolutely isn’t.
I’m challenging the idea that there aren’t a lot of games for women. Which is objectively not true for exactly what you yourself pointed out. The games that women gravitate toward are ungendered. And that’s fine.
I’m personally never going to be interested in playing some game about fashion. It feels like barbie games from the last 40 years and no thanks. I’m glad some women and probably a ton of men who like fashion are into it. (Like you do realize there are tons of male designers?)
Gendering this shit is dumb.