Far Cry 4 Is "Packed to The Gills" With Women

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Far Cry 4 Is "Packed to The Gills" With Women

Far Cry 4 Ajay Ghale

Far Cry 4's creative director says that half of the game's main antagonists are women.

Women in video games has somehow become a very hot topic as of late, with Ubisoft copping a surprising amount of flak when it stated that the upcoming Assassin's Creed title will not have any female playable characters. Alex Hutchinson, Far Cry 4's creative director - no doubt in response to the Assassin's Creed controversy - has now stated that the game will boast a life-like sex ratio, as half of the game's rebels and main antagonists will be women.

"[We] tried very hard to make sure of the four main antagonists, half of them are women, which is cool. On your side, one of the main leaders of the rebel faction is a woman, half the rebels that fight with you are women. It's packed to the gills with women. They're everywhere, just like life," said Hutchinson.

He also spoke a bit about Pagan Min, the game's main antagonist who appears on the cover, telling us that while he isn't the main player character's father, he definitely has some history with him.

"We didn't want a villain who's just shaking his fist at you and threatening to kill you and murder your family, and the inevitability of you shotgunning him in the face. And neither did we want someone who didn't know you at all. We wanted you to actually sort of have a secret history in this country."

So, while you won't be able to play as a woman in Far Cry 4, there will at least be plenty of other important female characters in the game.

Source: Outside Xbox

Permalink

Anyone kinda weirded out by the way that he states this fact?

While I think that the sentiment here is awesome, there has to be a better way of saying it then "It's packed to the gills with women. They're everywhere, just like life."

This just reminds me of the Mitt Romney "Binders full of women" scenario.

"No really guys, we have tons of women. We have games full of women!"

Epidemiix:
Anyone kinda weirded out by the way that he states this fact?

While I think that the sentiment here is awesome, there has to be a better way of saying it then "It's packed to the gills with women. They're everywhere, just like life."

I think it's kind of cute, "we got lots and lots of girls here, no fooling!", speaking of which, your avatar is adorable /)^3^(\

OT: I hope game developers don't take this the wrong way. Although i'm sure a lot of war zones are far more gender diverse then often portrayed, the reason peeps were annoyed at Assassins Creed: Unity so much was due to the heavy role of women during the games setting... right?

While I am totally on board with female villains, I feel like if you need to point out something that wasn't in your promotional material, you fucked up. I mean, that's the POINT of promotional material isn't it? I just...I feel like the devs are trying hard at Ubisoft and a bunch of corporate big wigs are making their lives really hard.

So...how much clothing are these women wearing?
'cause the way you phrase it makes it sound like...

People don't care about characters if the game is good. If some of the characters are women, fine.

What people don't want is Tokenism or checklisting for its own sake... because what's the point of making them a certain gender/race/sexuality if their character is poorly done?

Micah Weil:
So...how much clothing are these women wearing?
'cause the way you phrase it makes it sound like...

Whatever these fictional characters chose to wear I assume!

This just reeks of desperation to me...

I'm not sure what's more sickening

the fact that he think it's an achievement that he put females in his game and is trying to get recognition and respect with that fact

Or...

the fact that people consider this some kind of generous sentiment.

Somehow I get the feeling that ubisoft is missing the point.

Isn't it sad how game devs need to reassure people that there are women in their games, for fear of massive outlash. It should just be given that in an open world game there will be women.

PR is not devs who are both not writing team who isn't..., etc. I think what we have to accept is that we don't know, aside from the absence of a playable female character, how many ladies, how prominently, how well, or how respectfully they are portrayed. Ubi might do a good job this time. These female characters might be at best Citra again (prominent but problematic). They might end up being DNF-style strippers. We'll have to see when it comes out.

But I'm glad that PR finally got their shit together enough to say that there are women in Far Cry 4. That is, both as a (granted problematically worded) statement and as a confirmed fact, a good thing.

Packed to the gills with women yet I can't play as a woman. Knowing Ubi-Soft the women that are in the game will most likely just be the typical scantly clad action heroines.

teamcharlie:
But I'm glad that PR finally got their shit together enough to say that there are women in Far Cry 4. That is, both as a (granted problematically worded) statement and as a confirmed fact, a good thing.

The problem is that I don't really think anyone doubted that there would be female characters in the game. That's not what any of the criticism was about, so just coming out with a badly worded reassurance that women exist in Far Cry 4, ignoring the whole "playable" aspect people actually wanted, does them no favors.

Oh man, Ubi. Just... Wow.

"Sir, they didn't buy the 'animating women is hard' story."

"SHOVEL IN AS MANY LADIES AS POSSIBLE!"

I hope he doesn't think anyone is meant to be impressed by this. Bragging about having tons of women in an open world game is like walking up to someone and bragging that you aren't currently stabbing them, while wiggling your eyebrows. The question that comes to mind is "Yes. And?"

Dracosword:
This just reminds me of the Mitt Romney "Binders full of women" scenario.

"No really guys, we have tons of women. We have games full of women!"

haha ninja'd immediately, as soon as I saw "packed to the gills with women" I thought of this:

like it's some kind of achievement that needs special touting that half the antagonists are female, ubisoft is once again, entirely missing the point, just like fucking romney.

Okay, I understand wanting to level things after the completely stupid comments made about Assassin's Creed, but this smacks of trying too hard. And honestly a little creepy.

Here's hoping the function of the women in the story is better than how they were portrayed in Watch Dogs...where they were either around to be brutalized, killed, or merely provide further angst. I swear, the final "arcs" for the main women in that game just pissed me off...

Firstly...

Then there's...

So yeah...as long as Far Cry can avoid such stupidity in character development...more power to them. I am not a prude, I am all for the risque content, the romantic banter, etc etc...what I don't want is to somehow be forced to feel responsible for a never ending series of terrible events which then propel my MC to go on an 80's Action Movie Rampage...

Not that such rampages aren't fun...

This implies that Far Cry 4 is a fish.

That is incorrect.

"Well yeah, you can't play as a woman, but you can shoot women in the face, it's just as good, right?"

*sigh*...

well... I appreciate the effort and thought put into this. I really do. But I don't think the execution on this issue is quite right. It feels very "capcom-like" in that it doesn't really address the problem people had with Ubisoft to begin with and, in a certain light, makes Ubisoft look just as (if not more) guilty than before... even if they're sincerely trying and just not doing it right.

#1 - We wanted the option to play as a female character in a game which traditionally offered alternate character skins for online gameplay. Not to mention the game's setting made this seem like a no-brainer and having everyone be the protagonist just seemed like a stupid idea to begin with. This is Legend of Zelda: Four Swords, after all. It's motherfucking Assassin's Creed.

#2 - A response to "we want more women in our games" should be to put more women on the side of the antagonists for us to shoot. I'm not saying we can't have women antagonists or should. But... it's like saying we need more ethnicity in games and then we just texture a bunch of Latinos and African-Americans on the antagonists that we're expected to be shooting for the next several hours. It comes off as kind of creepy, just look at Call of Juarez: The Cartel

#3 - I really don't think this was something to drag Far Cry 4 into at all. The issue was with AssCreed because AssCreed has had female character models in previous games, plus the aforementioned online co-op/multiplayer gave us the belief that this should have just been part of the main game because that just makes sense. Far Cry 4 (from what I understand) has a main campaign that's offline (single player) and it's about a story of already pre-designed characters. If that story doesn't have female protagonists, not that big a deal. It's not like the setting or scenario call for it more than any other (unlike the French Revolution setting). So to make these changes suddenly in Far Cry 4 seems a little bit like pandering to the audience when FC4 really has/had nothing to do with the initial argument in the first place.

Again, I understand why and I appreciate the good intentions. Just missed the mark on execution.

Desperate to appear to be on the right side of a social issue for once, still utterly blind as to what the original outcry was about... cluelessness, thy name is Ubisoft.

Literally nothing is ever good enough for you people, is it? No concession, no apology, is ever good enough that you won't nitpick the wording to pieces, trying to find some way to declare whoever-it-is as the problem. No matter what they do or say.

EDIT: How can some of you, with a straight face, complain about female enemies being killed in games, yet not care in the slightest that throughout the history of gaming, there have been innumerable games where you kill endless waves of all-male enemies, specifically because that is less troubling to the player than killing women?

Any fish in this thread who can comment on how they pack their gills? Like seriously, do you roll or fold your women when you pack them?

Unfortunately, the gills will not be animated, because gills are too difficult to animate.

Dracosword:
This just reminds me of the Mitt Romney "Binders full of women" scenario.

Game companies often remind me of Romney and his rather stilted, out of touch approach to reality.

Epidemiix:
Anyone kinda weirded out by the way that he states this fact?

While I think that the sentiment here is awesome, there has to be a better way of saying it then "It's packed to the gills with women. They're everywhere, just like life."

It could have been worse.

Farcry 4's just bursting at the seams with women.

More women than you can shake a stick at.

We've got a metric fuck ton of women.

Due to a shipping error we're overstocked with late model female characters and we're passing the savings on to YOU!

We got women comin' out of our asses over at Farcry 4!

Farcry 4's got a lovely bunch of female characters (fiddle dee dee) here they are all standing in a row...

Ok ok, playful ribbing at their unfortunate turn of phrase aside.
I will say that I'm actually kinda glad they they not only addressed that the game has a decent sized female cast but that a decent portion of these characters are antagonists as well.

I always find it a bit unfortunate that the push for larger representation in games and popular media seems solely focused on the protagonist. While I 100% agree we need more Samus Arans and Jill Valentines we also need more Alessa Gillespies and Sarah Karrigans.

Whether any of these characters will be interesting or well written remains to be seen of course, but for now I'll grant them the benefit of the doubt.

Dracosword:
This just reminds me of the Mitt Romney "Binders full of women" scenario.

"No really guys, we have tons of women. We have games full of women!"

Lol I'm so mad I wasn't the first one to post this comment. But same.

yess siree we got all kinds of women! sissy ones fat ones ones that climb on rocks!

RealRT:
"Well yeah, you can't play as a woman, but you can shoot women in the face, it's just as good, right?"

not as good

but its a start in a way, theres no reason to only be able to kill men, (ala Tomb Raider) I'd rather have women fighting than just be victims all the time

AlexReynard:
Literally nothing is ever good enough for you people, is it? No concession, no apology, is ever good enough that you won't nitpick the wording to pieces, trying to find some way to declare whoever-it-is as the problem. No matter what they do or say.

I don't think Ubi's feelings are in any serious danger of being hurt...

zehydra:
This implies that Far Cry 4 is a fish.

That is incorrect.

Clearly you haven't heard the news. New DLC coming, Far Cry 4: Blood Fish. You play as Jawsome Megalodon Mawlone, a cybernetic street-shark cop who doesn't play by the rules and is a sex machine to all the ladies.

Vault101:
yess siree we got all kinds of women! sissy ones fat ones ones that climb on rocks!

image

your women... I want to buy your women... the little girl, your daughters... sell them to me...

SilverUchiha:
*sigh*...

well... I appreciate the effort and thought put into this. I really do. But I don't think the execution on this issue is quite right. It feels very "capcom-like" in that it doesn't really address the problem people had with Ubisoft to begin with and, in a certain light, makes Ubisoft look just as (if not more) guilty than before... even if they're sincerely trying and just not doing it right.

#1 - We wanted the option to play as a female character in a game which traditionally offered alternate character skins for online gameplay. Not to mention the game's setting made this seem like a no-brainer and having everyone be the protagonist just seemed like a stupid idea to begin with. This is Legend of Zelda: Four Swords, after all. It's motherfucking Assassin's Creed.

#2 - A response to "we want more women in our games" should be to put more women on the side of the antagonists for us to shoot. I'm not saying we can't have women antagonists or should. But... it's like saying we need more ethnicity in games and then we just texture a bunch of Latinos and African-Americans on the antagonists that we're expected to be shooting for the next several hours. It comes off as kind of creepy, just look at Call of Juarez: The Cartel

#3 - I really don't think this was something to drag Far Cry 4 into at all. The issue was with AssCreed because AssCreed has had female character models in previous games, plus the aforementioned online co-op/multiplayer gave us the belief that this should have just been part of the main game because that just makes sense. Far Cry 4 (from what I understand) has a main campaign that's offline (single player) and it's about a story of already pre-designed characters. If that story doesn't have female protagonists, not that big a deal. It's not like the setting or scenario call for it more than any other (unlike the French Revolution setting). So to make these changes suddenly in Far Cry 4 seems a little bit like pandering to the audience when FC4 really has/had nothing to do with the initial argument in the first place.

Again, I understand why and I appreciate the good intentions. Just missed the mark on execution.

The problem is that yourself and most people don't understand is that AC5 wont be offering a traditional coop experience but rather one similar to Watch Dogs. Let me explain:
In Watch Dogs when you invade another player's game your seen as some random NPC model to the other player however on your game you'll see yourself as Aiden Piece and the other player is a random NPC. In this way both players see themselves as the protagonist and see the other player and 'someone else', keeping the immersion of still playing your game while offering MP without a bunch of clones.

It sounds like AC5 is doing the same system however their using it for coop rather than verses, you will see yourself as the main assassin character and the other players will look like random NPC assassin models (both male and females), however each player will see themselves as the main character and you as the NPC model etc.

It makes a lot of sense and frankly I give credit to Ubisoft for pulling it off, when playing Watch Dogs it's quite fluid and pulls off the trick perfectly so I look forward to seeing it as a coop version in ACV, just wish Ubisoft had someone with some brains to explain it better so the general customers understood what the issue was.

Oh, yes, plenty of woman you should shoot, because they are evil of course. I see they still havent learnt how to not trip over themselves.

AlexReynard:
Literally nothing is ever good enough for you people, is it? No concession, no apology, is ever good enough that you won't nitpick the wording to pieces, trying to find some way to declare whoever-it-is as the problem. No matter what they do or say.

EDIT: How can some of you, with a straight face, complain about female enemies being killed in games, yet not care in the slightest that throughout the history of gaming, there have been innumerable games where you kill endless waves of all-male enemies, specifically because that is less troubling to the player than killing women?

For one, concession? Apology? There weren't any. For two, actions speak louder than words.
People had problems with no female protagonists because female gamers felt underrepresented, they didn't have a heroine to associate themselves with. Imagine, just for a second, if in 90% of video games you could only play as a girl. I don't think you'd be comfortable with it. Now they say that there are female enemies. They can't make a female playable character, but they are okay with females being killed in their game. That says a lot.

Huh, this is like that thing about binders full of-

Goddamnit.

AlexReynard:
Literally nothing is ever good enough for you people, is it? No concession, no apology, is ever good enough that you won't nitpick the wording to pieces, trying to find some way to declare whoever-it-is as the problem. No matter what they do or say.

Well, they could try getting it right. That might help. Yes, there are lots of different ways to get things wrong. The problem isn't that people are getting things wrong the same way all the time, it's that they are getting it wrong all the time.

AlexReynard:
EDIT: How can some of you, with a straight face, complain about female enemies being killed in games, yet not care in the slightest that throughout the history of gaming, there have been innumerable games where you kill endless waves of all-male enemies, specifically because that is less troubling to the player than killing women?

This again?

Men are killed in games where the heroes are also men, in an industry dominated by male heroes, and male characters of every type.

"Yeah, you can be in this game, you can be the villains" isn't ever likely to go down well with people wanting more inclusion. Put them as the heroes and the villains, fine, but just the villains...no.

zehydra:
This implies that Far Cry 4 is a fish.

That is incorrect.

Possibly a gay fish?

Or is that just Kanye West?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here