Response to American McGee's Response to Anita's "Strong Female Characters pt 1" Video

Recently (well years ago in internet time, but recently for me) American McGee (creator of the Alice series)

Seriously, isn't Anita saying this character is acceptable because she's such a blank slate? I can't help but think the "woman" in this game might as well be wearing a burka for all the identity she has. If this is "positive" and we (as game writer/designers) are meant to emulate this model... then I imagine the characters in our future games getting some really odd looks as they walk down the streets of virtual Los Angeles, sneak through the corridors of Space Station 009, or try to blend into any world that isn't a magical fantasy world of pixel make-believe.

To me, real characters, positive characters, have flaws. They're broken. They have an identity constructed of past events - good and bad. Like real people, they might make poor "life choices" which result in them being shallow minded, skin revealing, homicidal maniacs, who wear women's lingerie under their space armor. Or, like the rest of us, they might be who they are, and wear what they wear, because society (the real world) hasn't left them many other options. If we're going to tell real stories, it's best we do that with characters who closely resemble real people.

Pixel burka woman is art. So are real people.

Let’s break this down, shall we?

Seriously, isn't Anita saying this character is acceptable because she's such a blank slate?

Seriously.  Nowhere does Anita use the word “acceptable,” nor does she say she likes it simply because it’s a “blank slate.” So right away McGee misses the point in her video and like many Anita detractors, argues with himself more than her.  

The easy answer to this question is, no. No, McGee, she isn’t saying that. At all. Seriously.

Anita points out that the Sithian is a “blank slate” in the same way that has been attributed to Mario, Chell from Portal 2, Steve from Minecraft, and many others.  The personality comes from the player, but this isn’t, according to her, the reason the Sithian is what she calls a “strong female character” let alone “acceptable.” It just is what it is.

Acceptable means it’s “allowed according to her ‘rules’” which isn’t what she’s doing at all.  She’s not making a point about what’s "acceptable" or not. It's just a strong female character. That's it.

I can't help but think the "woman" in this game might as well be wearing a burka for all the identity she has.

Really? You can’t help it?  Because I look at that and don’t see a “burka” at all. I see basic armor.  Probably studded leather armor.  

Clearly one of those multi shaded shirt length studded leather burkas

Not burka.  Armor.   Burkas don’t have shiny stud parts on them, for one thing, nor do they have, you know... pants. So like an ink blot test, McGee’s interpretation says more about him than about the image in question.

What do you see, McGee?
BURKAS! BURKAS! OMG BURKAS!

How would you propose giving her “identity?” Maybe a chainmail bathing suit and a big pink bow?  She’s wearing an appropriate outfit to go fight monsters and brave a hostile world. The character’s identity doesn’t have to hit you over the head with its appearance, it can come out in the action and gameplay.  Antia Sarkeesian didn’t invent the pixelated style, or the “blank slate” protagonist or minimalism in game graphics, so what is McGee arguing with? Those styles?  

That’s fair and certainly it’s OK not to like that style of character… Someone who put so much effort into detail on near photorealistic game characters seeing someone else selling games and getting praise for such low detail and minimal effort in that area must be frustrating on some level.  

None of that is Anita’s fault and it has nothing to do with her video. If his beef is with the “pixelated style” I expect to see his scathing review of Minecraft, because, be honest, how much “identity” does Steve have, really?  

No realism... no "identity."  (Sold to Microsoft for 2.6 billion)

Also, I can’t help but think he wouldn’t go to “burka” or have anything whatsoever to say about the “personality” or lack thereof, if the character were male, or if Anita Sarkeesian didn’t happen to like her.

If this is "positive" and we (as game writer/designers) are meant to emulate this model…

Um, no.  Watching the video, it’s pretty clear she’s not saying you literally have to use THAT exact model for every game.

She’s NOT saying: All female characters in video games have to be just like the Scythian.

She’s NOT saying:  All female characters in games have to be blank slates, or retro-pixelated.

She’s NOT saying: All female game characters have to be anything in particular.

I imagine the characters in our future games getting some really odd looks as they walk down the streets of virtual Los Angeles, sneak through the corridors of Space Station 009, or try to blend into any world that isn't a magical fantasy world of pixel make-believe.

I can’t help but wonder: What lookingglass did McGee trip through to get from what Anita’s saying about the Scythian, to some ridiculous expectation that denizens in Los Angeles, or Space Station 9  need to look like subdued pixelated medieval fantasy characters?  It’s so far from what she’s saying, I just can’t make any sense of it.

What she IS saying is:

• the Scythian character is female without making a big deal out of her “femaleness.”  
• She’s not marked with limiting stereotypical gender markings.
• She’s wearing an outfit that makes sense based on what she’s doing and where she is.  
• She’s an adventurer and a hero FIRST, and a female somewhere down the list.

McGee or any other game designer could easily emulate these principles without their characters getting any “odd looks” in LA, in space stations or anywhere else.  In fact, I’d say she’d get a hell of a lot fewer “odd looks” dressed in an appropriate normal outfit for what she’s doing than some bikini-in-a-snowstorm game heroines now.  And even these are just suggestions; nobody’s going to take away our chainmail lingerie or ridiculously impractical body armor of any kind.  

To me, real characters, positive characters, have flaws. They're broken. They have an identity constructed of past events - good and bad. Like real people, they might make poor "life choices" which result in them being shallow minded, skin revealing, homicidal maniacs, who wear women's lingerie under their space armor.

So Minecraft would be a better game if Steve had a garter belt peeking out from his plain pants, and hints of scars from the ravages of drug addiction or what?  I mean that sounds interesting, but it’s just not that kind of game.

A character’s identity doesn’t have to be ostentatiously flashing on his or her costume.  Not resorting to obvious visual clues might force the artist to dig deeper and let the identity develop and be discovered and created by the player experience, rather than shoving it down the player’s throat.

The idea that a human being or character in a game “has no identity” depending on what she’s wearing says more about McGee than it says about the Scythian or about Anita’s review of her.

Or, like the rest of us, they might be who they are, and wear what they wear, because society (the real world) hasn't left them many other options. If we're going to tell real stories, it's best we do that with characters who closely resemble real people.

So no minimalist games, no pixelated retro games, no games with animal or non-real-human characters for that matter. Only as photorealistic human characters as possible are “best?”  Talk about not leaving people with “many other options!”  That’s about as limiting as it gets.

And finally he ends with this…

Pixel burka woman is art. So are real people.

That’s “Pixel armor woman,” and no, real people are not “art.”  They’re real people.  Real people make art.  Sometimes some aspects of that art are subtle and abstract and that’s OK, even if Anita Sarkeesian happens to like it.