Topic

Glitch: Too estrogen driven to attract male players?

So, I'm a 35 year old guy with a wife and kids who was invited to play this game several weeks ago by someone at Tiny Speck. I immediately found the game to be fun enough to play as a casual experience, but I honestly have been losing interest as quickly as I progress due to the feeling that it has little or no appeal for males to play.

Glitch has a lot of potential for many kinds of people, but I honestly feel it is focusing in on the 10 to 30-something female, thus limiting its appear to the other gender ENTIRELY. If I hung my masculinity on the wall and just played Glitch, I could easily spend hours of having endless fun with this game, but I am all too often reminded of how this game is NOT geared for men. Whats more, even my wife laughed when she saw me playing this during the EOTW party, asking if I was going homo on her.

So, while I could cite several examples of how this game personally makes me unattracted to it, I'll just offer the following obvious examples as seen while visiting the site:

1) Pastels, everywhere!
Is this really necessary right down to character customization? I mean come on, this is fine in San Francisco and NYC, but as stated before: No appeal for the manly figure.

Perhaps a customizable skin chooser for the game's frame, a set of "REI-like" clothing choices and less effeminate choices would help. The awards are atrociously gag-worthy... pink buttons for planting beans or cooking... lovely: beta.glitch.com/achievements/

2) Subscribers are designated as pink hearts.
Most men (who prefer women) would not be comfortable with this and I doubt that they would buy a membership strictly because of it.

Almost anything at this point would be preferable, seriously. You can go to the grocery store and watch many men pass up on purchasing products that offer immediate donations to breast cancer. It has nothing with support the cause and everything to do with the fact that it's a pink ribbon.

3) Characters, while cartoony, lack any wardrobe or vanity customizations that would be considered masculine in ANY way.
From feathers to MORE pastels to kilts and pumps, I see nothing here created by a straight male.

Simply have a man make some shirts with sports, trucks or booze on them... add basic sneekers and steal toe boots... might help just a *wee-bit*.
 
Bash me if you will, but I am not trying to say the game sucks as much as I am trying to offer constructive criticism as to why this game will lack male players, especially ones whom have insecurities about maintaining their masculinity (which is a majority of men). If you note, I am also trying to offer suggestions to make it more appealing to the potential male players out there.

Posted 17 months ago by c0mad0r Subscriber! | Permalink

Replies

1 2 ... 5 6 7 8 Next
  • I personally don't bother with labels.

    In the World of Victoria there are just boys who like to kiss boys, girls who like to kiss girls, girls who like to kiss boys and vice versa, people who like to kiss both boys and girls, people who don't consider themselves a boy or a girl, although they have boy/girl parts. Or like to dress up like "the other sex" or look like a girl but are in fact a boy. Sometimes they feel so very much a boy that they don't just dress up but ask a nice doctor to become "a real boy" ;) Hey, some people even have both boy ánd girl parts (don't google that one without safe search on)!
    Posted 17 months ago by Victoria Subscriber! | Permalink
  • moreover, there's no sexuality to speak of in this game (seemingly quite deliberately), which makes all this recent righteous indignation over representation of all the various sexualities of the rainbow in glitch seem a little strange. i think i liked it better when i didn't know or care who my fellow glitchizens were sleeping with or wanting to sleep with in their time outside of the game, as long as we could come together to make some crystals, blocks, and food to open up fun new streets to explore. i guess i can't really go back to not knowing, but i'm going to go ahead and go back to not caring.
    Posted 17 months ago by BeatFreq Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @beatfreq: If something is to be a norm, it should, ideally, be able to be spoken everywhere in polite company. Ones general preference isn't supposed to be crass, but more matter of fact. (Although, I get it, you may be responding to different things and standards. But that's why I think people wern't necessarily going over the line talking about it just on a factual basis.)
    Posted 17 months ago by Caesura Subscriber! | Permalink
  • c0mad0r,

    What exactly is the elephant in the room? Your post above confuses me.

    The game's wardrobe needs to be more neutral in order to prevent racist comments?  Because that's all I could discern in your post.  But you want more masculine clothing? That's not asking for neutral, that's asking for diverse. As someone who dresses in a masculine style, there are ample, ample, ample masculine styles of dress to choose from, as well as many other spectrums. There's a range of colorful tones to adorn your skin, not just human "white" "brown" "black" etc.

    If people are saying racist things in-game, it's because they are racist, not because they don't have enough skin tones to choose from.

    Also, -isms begin at home. If there is a broad problem still in society with -isms, such as boorish politicians likening an African-American US president or his ideas to a 'tar baby' as happened recently in the US, it's because these people feel comfortable in their own homes exchanging 'derogatory terms' between them and their significant partners.

    At any rate, sorry to be so dense, but can someone distill into one or two sentences what the 'elephant in the room' here is and what the probable outcome will be of not addressing it?
    Posted 17 months ago by zeeberk Subscriber! | Permalink
  • One or two sentences, okay.

    Perhaps that by not addressing perceived shortcomings now investors won't see the exponential growth they might hope to in the future. Omitting a certain demographic while pandering to others.

    Something tells me though that the pursuit of excellence trumps the pursuit of monetary gain where Glitch is concerned.
    Posted 17 months ago by malo Subscriber! | Permalink
  • c0mad0r, no offense to you but I have zero interest in this discussion, still don't agree with you, BUT, I am very glad you are still playing the game, and like it, and just want to post that message.

    My simple request:  If you absolutely must post comments that will open up a can of whup ass in the forums..at least post them while the game is open, so people will be too distracted by the game to react.  

    Make shtuppin', not whuppin'!
    Posted 17 months ago by Nanookie Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @caesura - yeah, i'm not saying i think discussions of sexuality, of whatever brand, are crass or over-the-line, just irrelevant. here in the game, there is no sexuality, even our farm animals reproduce asexually, so we're all perfectly free to just check that baggage at the firewall and be glitches in here. if people want to start an in-game support group to discuss their real-life trials and tribulations, more power to 'em, i just come here to play the game.
    Posted 17 months ago by BeatFreq Subscriber! | Permalink
  • [cancelled the wall of text leading nowhere]

    Btw: C0mad0r, +1 for having the courage to come back to this thread. You got some pretty harsh words (back) at you, I would probably not dare to say anything for a while. Good to see you don't hide. Hopefully there can be an interesting debate now. (Wanted to say civil, but that's not realistic when there have been such fierce reactions about part of the subject).
    Posted 17 months ago by Miriamele Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @ c0madOr: "Who has not used a derogatory term in fun against their significant other?"

    *waves hand* During my 33 years of marriage we never used derogatory terms against each other in jest or in anger. Profanity yes---lol--oh yes.*goes back to making Awesome Stew"
    Posted 17 months ago by GreyGoose Subscriber! | Permalink
  • As a privileged minority with access to the internet, I think all the above (yes I have read them all) the rest of the planet would think wtf it's all so trivial, how am I going to feed to feed my child!
    Posted 17 months ago by Phochai Subscriber! | Permalink
  • +100 @Rachel2635  Never use derogatory terms, and hopefully taught our now grown to men two sons the same.  Anger, frustration, in jest etc.is  never a cause to degrade someone or make fun of them.  I think it's called simply treat others as you would have them treat you.
    Posted 17 months ago by welshcorgi Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @ welshcorgi: Agreed. As I was pondering why my dh and I never engaged in that sort of "jk" type of teasing, I thought that was because of how we were raised---that our parents modeled the behavior they expected of us.  I am reminded of that song "You've Got To be Taught" from "South Pacific"--it was written in the 50s, dealing with a bi-racial romance in the face of tremendous anti-Asian prejudice during and after WWII.
    Posted 17 months ago by GreyGoose Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I gave up reading the whole thread, but I did read that thing about intent and thought it was total nonsense.

    There's a huge difference between material that includes various -isms in a knowing manner and stuff that merely feeds the beast.

    It's why Chris Rock and Dave Chappelle are funny, and rubbish like George Lopez and Grand Theft Auto are just offensive and stupid.  In the best humor with racist content, the joke is that racism is stupid.  The joke isn't "ha ha that race is inferior to mine" or "tee hee those people have negative qualities".  The joke is that racism is a real thing that exists, some idiots think that way, and given that reality and within that obvious context which doesn't need explanation, "here is a funny observation about the way people behave".

    It's true that a fair amount of, say, Howard Stern's fanbase doesn't get the joke and simply identifies with the whateverist content and can't understand what's actually funny about it.  They are too stupid to realize they are the butt of the joke.

    But the world shouldn't be nerfed for the lowest common denominator.  There would have been significantly fewer joyful moments if Richard Pryor had played it safe.

    I would say this is all the more true in this specific environment, which as stoot has pointed out and at the risk of being smug, has been designed for smart people.  Given that, and the obviousness of the intelligence and intentions of the OP, he deserved slack.

    In a different context...if this were, say, Club Penguin, then OP should have been run out of town of a rail.  But, that's another story.

    tl;dr As was said, don't assume the worst.
    Posted 17 months ago by Biff Beefbat Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Hey, kudos to the OP for sticking around and for such a decent and thoughtful reply. Hope you have a safe trip and get home soon. :)
    Posted 17 months ago by Fokian Fool Subscriber! | Permalink
  • In this thread, in other events, personal experience, even the slightest infraction against... unwritten rules... or against 'common' law... against common courtesy... and the violator should be crucified according to this community. Malo says it's people standing up for one another. I just call it blind rage.

    You guys need to mellow out, and think... is this battle Really Worth It? Pick your battles. Online ones are never worth it. (Unless you do it for fun.)
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I don't see anyone resorting to, as you say, blind rage. I'd rather see responses to points and arguments made rather than deriding people who are trying to persuade or debate in earnest.
    Posted 17 months ago by hollow Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I did see people get very angry.
    Usually points and arguments aren't getting very well across then. Also, people get very defensive and if you're defensive you're not very susceptible for reason either.
    Posted 17 months ago by Miriamele Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Why do we have to argue? persuade? can't we just say, here's how I feel/think/whatever. And share. Learn, grow, experience. Why does everything on a message board immediately have to be considered an argument? 

    It might not be blind rage, but it's certainly misguided. Ill-advised. 
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Oh. I saw one or two get pissed :) But it didn't last. We're a pretty laid-back group around here.
    Posted 17 months ago by Fokian Fool Subscriber! | Permalink
  • This is why I posted another forum about how often intent is lost over the internet.

    I read a post and I assume the person on the other end means to insult me or that they are very angry and so I react with the same emotions, or even more anger.

    Misinterpretation can cause even bigger arguments. Thats why I think everyone should take a picture of their faces so we can all see exactly how you feel!!!!

    Say cheese.
    .Snap.
    Posted 17 months ago by Laurali Subscriber! | Permalink
  • sure, add some boobs and guns -_-
    Posted 17 months ago by Tarantulasaurus Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @greenkozi

    "competition is generally seen as a "man's game," and as a bad trait in women"

    You don't have any women at your workplace, don't you? Usually the most aggressive and cutthroat professionals are women. Most men I meet at work are pretty laid back, but when there are multiple women in the office, at one time or another the claws come out  :p
    And I hardly see cooking, harvesting or herding animals as a "female" occupation. And then there's mining, engineering and all the more physical activities. Are those strictly for males?

    These stereotypes stopped applying 30 years ago.
    Posted 17 months ago by Tithian Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Not trying to enforce gender roles, and I realize this further derails this thread, but who cares.

    Anyways, there are *some* tasks that men are biologically disposed to... just as there are some that women are disposed to. (Disclaimer: This is of course entirely in my opinion. I say all of this not in response in an attempt to begin an argument with greenkozi or tithian. These are merely my observations. Do with them what you will, but certainly do not become offended by them.)

    The prototypical woman is more suited to a nursing job because they have more empathy than the prototypical man. I'm not saying it's a female job, and that men are bad at it... or even that women are better at it. Just that it's a job suited for an individual with extra empathy which I see as more of a feminine trait. Not saying that an empathetic male can't also be masculine. The trait itself, in my mind, is a feminine trait.

    Lumberjack, the iconic male job, is *definitely* suited for a man. I am male and I'm not man enough to be a lumberjack. The job is extremely dangerous. Requires a lot of physical strength which is typically, biologically a male thing. There's no reason a motivated woman couldn't become a lumberjack, but the prototypical female probably wouldn't want to. Just as the prototypical male wouldn't want to become a nurse.

    As for cooking and herding animals... I agree. Neither of those are female or male. 

    Also, women are always competitive with other women. In fact, most women hate other women. I'd say it's hardwired in the brain for a lot or most of women. Not sure why women evolved that way, but it's very often the case.

    EDIT: I used the 'in fact' above loosely. I sometimes say 'In Fact' when I really don't mean in fact. I would hope most people could infer that. But oh well. My bad. 
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • @Mr. Dawgg

    Do you have any data to back up your wild claims that "most women hate other women" or that its "hardwired into their brain"?  I'm asking because the Army is using a great deal of research that demonstrates that women have skills that make them better at forming teams and keeping teams together.  Not just one woman keeping a team of men together, but women working with other women in teams.  Women work well together with other women.  And they work well together with men.

    If you have data that suggests otherwise, I'm sure the leadership and teamwork folks would love to hear about it. 
    Posted 17 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • MrDawgg, you surely must know that there are many male nurses.  I have no idea if there are women lumberjacks, but I do know many women firefighters, which is a very tough job, and some of these women are stronger than half the men I know (I know a slew of women firefighters). 

    At any rate, cloaking sexist remarks in "this is my opinion" is disingenuous.  There's an entire philosophical discourse happening in the world right now about gender, so maybe read up on some it before just spouting more of the same tired old arguments about men are suited are X, not Y, and women are better doing Y, not X.  90% of the jobs I've had are supposedly "jobs for men" by old timey thinking.  It's a new world, friend.
    Posted 17 months ago by zeeberk Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Oh and women hate other women?

    One word: lesbian.
    Posted 17 months ago by zeeberk Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Also, women are always competitive with other women. In fact, most women hate other women. I'd say it's hardwired in the brain for a lot or most of women. Not sure why women evolved that way, but it's very often the case.

    I don't think Mr. Dawgg has ever met a real live woman before.
    Posted 17 months ago by Charlotte Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Well I'm a 19 year old male and I think Glitch rules. I think it's healthy for dudes to be able to enjoy cute stuff without feeling like they are letting down some macho quota.
    Posted 17 months ago by BenAlex Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Yeah, there is definitely a lack of video games geared toward men. . .

    Seriously, though, what is wrong with you? This is the most offensive post I've seen on these forums.
    Posted 17 months ago by Elyn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Again. This isn't a debate. I don't have to provide evidence of my claims. I'm not trying to persuade or dissaude anyone. This isn't an argument. I'm not trying to win anything. Just sharing my thoughts. Do with them what you will. Good grief.

    In any event, no one is the same. But, women that I have encountered are different than the ones you have encountered apparently. You're all googlebots, go ahead. Google it. Women hate other women. I'm not alone in this notion. 

    As for your teamwork example, sure. I don't deny that a handful of elite soldiers are going to be team oriented. Duh. The military forces individuality outof you so that you become more team-minded. So your women working together thing is, probably, more likely a result of that. And saying 'women' are better at being team leaders is supporting gender differences either way. So what are you trying to prove? or disprove. That women hate other women? I'm talking about the prototypical female. Not military females. So you're going about disproving me all wrong. Not that I was even trying to prove anything in the first place. I wasn't. In fact, I clearly disclaimered that all of what I was posting was merely my opinion.

    Zeeberk, to clarify. I do not think male nurses are bad. I feel that being a nurse is more oriented to the prototypical female. Nursing is probably a bad example in general, but let's take child care. That's actually more what I was talking about. Child care type nurses. But, it could be daycare, etc. Women are just biologically suited for this type of work. Not saying it's 'female only' or that men can't do it. Just saying they have a disposition to it from both biological factors and sociological factors. Such that, in spite of our blurred gender roles in todays day and age, they are still present, and imo rightfully so. I don't think there's anything wrong with it.

    Men and women are different in a lot of ways. There are going to be jobs that the proto-woman is more oriented toward, and there are going to be jobs the proto-man is oriented toward. To deny that, is being just as narrow-minded as trying to say gender roles Have to be enforced. There aren't extremes. There is gray area, and there are some jobs where gender roles make sense. Not all, some. Even in these situations, there's nothing stopping from a motivated person to do whatever he wants. I'd say, socioeconomic restrictions are far more damning than gender ones if you ask me.

    Zeeberk, as for lesbians, sure, there are going to be hedonistic lesbians. But the ones that I've encountered are man hating lesbians. I don't think that's good either. Anyone who only has seen porno lesbians, has a very distorted view of what a real lesbian looks like. 

    Zeeberk, how did you get that I was being sexist? Really, how? Unreal. Because I shared an observation about how I see women being antagonistic toward one another? I don't dislike them for it. I love women. But, I see them going at one another's throats all the time. They're like that. But we have different experiences, I guess.

    (Disclaimer: All of the above was written as an opinion. There is not a single shred of evidence to support any of my claims. They are my personal observations that I have made through life. If you read them and adapt some of my wisdom (or lack thereof) into your own personal ideas, cool. If you read them and are put-off, write me off. I'm cool with that. Also, please respond with your ideas and observations. Maybe we can both learn from one another's experiences and thoughts. This is called discussing. We are not here to bicker and argue. Thanks.)
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • I'm responding with research, not hot air opinions that can't be backed up by anything.  Research done with civilians that the military has found so good that it is now adapting the findings to their own team-building training.  Training based on civilians that they use to turn civilians into powerful teams.  We're not talking elite soldiers here.  We're talking everyday people who, it turns out, on average, don't fit your stereotypes at all.

    Your opinion only matches a small group of people, those whom you've met in your circumstances.  Fortunately the findings being used by the military are based on research done on a broader spectrum of of people than your narrow friendships.  The same findings are being used in most businesses that are building strong organizations that can withstand the ups and downs of the economy. 

    Your reality is very limited.  Fortunately, you are only a very tiny part of the real world, and a petty small part of Glitch. 

    My personal one-on-one experiences are probably just as limited as yours.  Fortunately, I'm not limited to forming opinions based only on mind-reading the people I've met.  There are ways to gather information that are much more applicable to larger society than just guessing about my friends.
    Posted 17 months ago by WindBorn Subscriber! | Permalink
  • MrDawgg, your words are very sexist. 

    Saying that's your opinion doesn't change it anymore than if I cloaked hateful speech under the "my opinion" umbrella. Can you imagine saying, "All [this one racial group] are not very well suited for [doing X], because [another racial group] really excels at that".  That's what you're saying, and it's bullshit that's been used to keep women [and people of color] in their place for centuries.

    And 'man hating lesbians'?  Most of us are not.  Sorry.  Most of us are waaaaaay beyond 70s era separatism.  I am a woman, and I don't hate women or hate men.  Most of the women I know don't hate each other and they don't hate men either.

    I gotta step off this topic.  Good luck with it.
    Posted 17 months ago by zeeberk Subscriber! | Permalink
  • Then provide the study, WindBorn. As-is, you're just replying with hot-air claims of research rather than actual research as you claim. "I'm responding with research..." Wow. No you're not. FFS I could say any research exists to support my claims. But I'm not trying to make a debate or argument. 

    WindBorn.... instead of making a debate outof this. If you really want to reply to what I say in a constructive manner. Why don't you inquire as to the women I've encountered. Pry into why I think the way I do. Maybe, share some of the experiences you have had with women who are hateful or not hateful. That's a discussion. Try it. You'll find it's a lot more rewarding than attacking someone like me as you are now.

    Zeeberk, borderline sexist, somewhat sexist... I'll take any of those. But not VERY Sexist. You have to take things to extremes. I don't know why, but you do. How do you get what I wrote and take it as trying to put women in their place? At all. That's absurd, man. Stop doing that. Glad you're done replying. You don't bring anything but vitriol.

    And, as it turns out, blacks are biologically disposed to being athletic. That's not an opinion. It's a fact. Look it up. So yes, I can say something like that, and have it not be racist (at least, not in a bad way). 

    So because 'you' (and your friends) don't hate men or women, then all/most women don't either. That's basically what I got from what you said. And that's fine to have that notion. It 100% make sense to have your notions on things be based on your experiences. My experiences happen to be different than yours. So why are mine then invalid and 'hateful/sexist' etc. It's equally sexist/stereotypical to say all women Do Not Hate men/women. Some do. I feel that women are sociologically/biologically hard wired to be antagonistic toward other women based on my many experiences with them. 

    There *are* man hating lesbians. I did not say all, or even most are. I said the ones I've encountered are. Reread what I wrote. I acknowledge the existence of hedonistic lesbians as well. Note that. It's like you ignore what I write and let your misguided rage take over and then you aim it as hate at me. I'm not being hateful. I feel I'm being pretty fair in my opinions.
    Posted 17 months ago by Mr. Dawgg Subscriber! | Permalink
  • ... aaaaaaaaaaaaand, I think we've come to the end of this thread. Don't worry: I'm sure there will be others!

    Anyone who wants to keep going at this point can find each other in game and do it over IM or get one another's email addresses and debate long into the night.
    Posted 17 months ago by stoot barfield Subscriber! | Permalink
1 2 ... 5 6 7 8 Next