I think It was because rabbis will often answer a question with a question.......

I didn't say that. I say that I understand people who call her a sex object, at least if they base it on more than "she's sexy female character and was in Playboy!". Personally I think that she should pretty much be a feminist icon in video games. :P

As I said, "supposedly", it's just an anecdote that I've heard from multiple people but it's a believable one (but I'll ask a friend of mine where he got that from, he may be able to provide a source). And as for "not the first TPP game in history": what else was there before that? I'm only aware of action adventures with static camera angles, then there was Super Mario 64 with an independent camera that the player had full control over and Crash Bandicoot which as far as I can tell had pre-defined camera perspectives. To my knowledge Tomb Raider was in fact the first 3D TPP game with a camera stuck behind the protagonist's back and turning with him/her, most of the time showing his/her back.

Yeah, that's not even up for discussion. It's known that when game development began they were going for an Indiana Jones type male character and for one reason or another turned him into a woman. So yeah, it just is "Diana Jones". The question is why they thought a female protagonist would improve the game / boost the sales.

There was one more in 1996 http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/eradicator/screenshots
And for something completely different, there was one in 1989 http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/die-hard/screenshots

Oh yeah, totally forgot about those two. Although Eradicator seems to be basically an FPS like Duke Nukem 3D running on a 2.5D engine with an optional third person perspective (more useful than in Duke 3D, it seems, though).

Well, okay, you have a point, but it still applies what I said earlier, that you'd need a strong sense of mission to take an interest in an area that is generally perceived as not too inclusive of your gender or at least your gender's interests. For a woman to start her own studio and develop her own games she'd need to be really passionate about gaming, and that's where the vicious cycle of "games directed at male audience because too few female players - only few female players because games directed at male audiences" might come into play.

I also read an statement by a female developer in answer to the question whether she believed the women in the industry could make a difference, where she said that many who are passionate enough to get into the industry have been so accustomed to turn a blind eye on the imbalance of genders and the clichéd representation of women in games in order to be able to enjoy the games, that they are often desensitized to the issues. I recite it with my own words here, the way she said it probably was probably more nuanced and sophisticated than my version of it here may sound, and I don't claim that she's right, I just think it is an interesting thought to keep in mind. Female readers, too, are much more accustomed to reading books from a male perspective than male readers are to reading books from a female perspective, I think they are generally much less likely to throw a tantrum about their gender or sexual orientation not being present in a book or game than quite a few spoilt hetero men seem to be.

To bring a personal note into this and explain why I take an interest at all, is that despite being a hetero male I'm kind of bored by the same old tropes and would welcome more variety in games, experience something new or at least get the options for it. I'm all for good gameplay, but I also put much store in setting, story-telling and atmosphere, and those are influenced by the things we talk about. I guess it also depends a bit on whether you see games as a mindless diversion (they give you exactly what you expect or what they think you want, just like your average romance novel would) or also as a medium with artistic and thoughtprovoking potential (you learn something new and unexpected).

I also call BS on games not being political because every creation is based on certain values of the creators or the times they live in and they do have an impact on the people who consume it. And just because something is deliberately anti PC does not mean it's not political, because it could be seen as a political statement against being PC (at least the players in favorite of such games seem to secretly think so themselves). If someone says that something is just entertainment and therefor not political, they disregard the fact that entertainment has always been a favorite target of propaganda and that all entertainment media have a part in forming our world view. That's not meant to say that games are intentionally sending political messages, and neither that they should, just that the creators and their players should acknowledge the fact that these things can have an impact, and that they assume responsibility for it, regardless of whether it causes them to change anything or defend their vision. The less you are aware of the power of entertainment, the higher the risk of abuse. I don't think politics should restrict artistic visions, but you should be ready for criticism, and the creators denying all responsibility for the values presented in their games by saying "it's just a game", that's a pretty lame excuse (especially for someone making a living with games).

I think that's why people have been so quick to dismiss this as they can see Toilet,Paper,Turdguns propaganda and don't want it straying into their videogames.

I get that, but saying "it's just a game" does nothing to prevent someone from using games as propaganda.

Yep, you're a complete asshole. I bet you even suggest that people wear their seat belts when riding in cars because you might get into a crash. Or worse, I bet you're the sort of monster that recommends looking both ways before crossing the street.

The reality is that a lot of these crimes are ones of opportunity, and if the opportunity doesn't present itself, then the crime doesn't happen. It doesn't make it the victims fault, but it's asinine to ignore the contributions of everybody to creating an environment where it happens.

When I go on jogs or want to listen to things while walking, I never have an earbud in both ears. Not just because of the risk of robbery, but in general you need to maintain situational awareness for anything from potential stray gun fire, to serious injury and just plain old cars while crossing the street. Listening to music at all represents a bit of a risk, but it's a moderate risk and I've never had any problems from that.
The problem there is that there isn't really such a thing as a game for women or men. They target them for men or for women, but I bet if they rebranded the same game in a way that was more targeted towards women based upon market research that things would change.

It's the assholes in the community that are the problem. Women are different, but they're not that different. Some genres may be more popular with women than men or vice versa, but there are women and men to like any genre. It's just things like the misogynistic trolls and incompetent marketing that seem to be the biggest barriers. As long as women don't try to game in significant numbers, there's no point in making games for them.

I'm not sure we should be giving the privileged twats at RPS any more attention or site hits. They've figured out that being trolls is closer to their heart than legitimate journalism. Let them be trolls.

Mind you, I'm not argueing that games should be specifically targeted at women or made for them, quite the contrary. I want games for people, that allow you to relate or take an interest in them regardless of your gender. I think it's not about genres but about the way that the characters in them are portrayed. So I'm only argueing about the one-sideness of this portrayal, which more often than not puts hetero white male with preference for big boobs as the norm, and everything else as "The Other", a rather irrelevant concession to "minorities" among gamers. I'd agree though that vocal misogynistic trolls and the PR people and publishers taking them too serious for fear of lost sales are part of the problem. I don't think the majority of people playing games would actually have an issue with a little more diversity and less gender stereotyping.

then you run into the issue of publishers afraid to leave their comfort zones to really try new dymanics

The problem is that you have a chicken and egg style problem here. Back in the '80s and early '90s when the cost of developing a new game was substantially less, it would have been much easier to address this problem. But, when you've got potentially millions in development costs, experimenting with a demographic group that isn't well understood in this context is risky.

Clearly turning things pink and sparkly isn't going to win fans, but the question is what will? And ultimately they'd have to do it without turning off the people they know they can sell to. I suspect that to make meaningful progress it's going to take a long term goal of getting there and studios aren't around for very long any more.

Whereas big boobs might offend a minority of women, it's something that appears to help sales more than hurt them.
And not to mention that when movies do this, they rarely do well. The standards for breaking the rules are much higher. If you're aware of the rules and break them, the expectation is that you've put enough thought into it that you'll do it with sensitivity. If you stick to the current stereotypes you can get away with a fair amount because you're perceived not to know any better. Assuming that anybody notices.

Yes, and I think this is one of the core reasons that hinders games from evolving to an art form or being more inclusive, and what makes many of their stories so boring to me. It's kind of expected that they play it safe when there's so much money involved, but it also means that many of them are behind the times and will never been seen as grand inventors. What makes me sad is when I see other gamers vocally encouraging them to continue down this road and keep the club exclusive, even though it isn't anymore. I'd agree that the way RPS addresses the issue is quite unappropriate and doesn't seem very honest, but I also think it's unappropriate to defend the industry as much as some (mostly hetero male) gamers do and react all defensive whenever this topic is discussed.

Define meaningful progress. The more I discuss and think about this whole issue the more I feel like things are just fine. I'm actually losing track of all the supposed problems.