Escape from Tarkov dev says no playable women because of lore, “huge amount of work” requiredStatement made in an effort to walk back three-year-old comment that war was only for “hardened men”Rebekah ValentineSenior Staff WriterTuesday 7th January 2020Share this article Recommend Tweet ShareCompanies in this articleBattlestate GamesBattlestate Games has stated that it will not be adding playable women to its first-person shooter, Escape from Tarkov, due to the “huge amount of work” it says is required to implement them.The statement was made in response to the recent resurfacing of a 2016 interview in which one of the developers, Pavel Dyatlov, gave a very different reason for the lack of playable women in the game (which was unreleased at the time). At the end of the interview with Wccftech Dyatlov was asked about playable female characters, and said that while the studio had considered them, they “came to the conclusion that women are not allowed to be in the war.”When pressed by the interviewer on the fact that women are involved in real-world combat scenarios, Dyatlov continued:”I can agree with you and we discussed it for a very long time, but we came to the conclusion that women can’t handle that amount of stress. There’s only place for hardened men in this place.”The Wccftech interview was re-circulated on social media recently due to a sudden surge in Tarkov’s popularity with some help from a recent Twitch event. In response to criticism for the 2016 stance taken by Dyatlov, Battlestate issued a statement on its official Twitter separating itself from the expressed views.”Regarding the 3 years old article with points about women in EFT,” the tweet reads. “The answers were done by one, not a key BSG employee which probably were misinterpreted and as a result didn’t reflect the official position of the company, that we always respected women in wars and military women.”The employee was reprimanded and properly instructed. We are sorry for caused confusion.”However, when numerous replies asked if this meant Escape from Tarkov would eventually see playable women, Battlestate held firm that it would not be adding them, offering a different explanation:”First – there are women in EFT already (trader, some future key storyline quests will have women as main characters).Related JobsSenior Game Designer – UE4 – AAA United Kingdom Amiqus GamesProgrammer – REMOTE – work with industry veterans! North West Amiqus GamesJunior Video Editor – GLOBAL publisher United Kingdom Amiqus GamesDiscover more jobs in games “But there will be no playable female characters because of game lore and more importantly – the huge amount of work needed with animations, gear fitting etc.”A similar argument was made back in 2014 when Ubisoft technical director James Therien said the lack of playable women in Assassin’s Creed: Unity was a “reality of game development” and that putting a playable woman in the game would have “doubled the work” in areas like character animation and costumes. These remarks also sparked criticism at the time.The following year, Ubisoft let players choose between either the female Evie Frye or her twin brother Jacob Frye for a significant portion of the missions in Assassin’s Creed Syndicate. And in 2018, Ubisoft released Assassin’s Creed Odyssey with the ability for players to choose between female protagonist Kassandra or her brother Alexios for the entire game.Celebrating employer excellence in the video games industry8th July 2021Submit your company Sign up for The Daily Update and get the best of GamesIndustry.biz in your inbox. Enter your email addressMore storiesSecond YouTuber complains of DMCA abuse from Escape From Tarkov developerBattlestate Games accused of misusing copyright takedown notices to silence “negative hype”By James Batchelor 2 years agoEscape from Tarkov developer issues DMCA to stop story about user info leaksBattlestate Games issues takedown on over 40 videos from YouTuber Eroktic due to “misinformation” and “negative hype”By Rebekah Valentine 2 years agoLatest comments (2)Kim Soares CEO, Kukouri Mobile EntertainmentA year ago Misogynist comment from the dev and apparently the company does not care about inclusion at the situation is the same three years later. 0Sign inorRegisterto rate and replyBonnie Patterson Narrative Designer, Writer A year ago I’ve been searching for this game lore that precludes women as playable characters and it appears to be “Well, there’s fighting and stuff”.Just over 10% of the UK’s armed forces are women. It’s not a huge number but they’re there, because when we invented guns, we removed most of the “extreme physical strength” requirements for soldiery. Hell, even the vikings, who used very heavy weaponry and thus DID need to be very strong, included women warriors in their warbands and raiding parties.If more war games included playable women, if more movies and TV shows did the same, more women would probably consider the military as a career option in the same way that men do. That lack of example means that it takes a very special set of circumstances for a girl to grow up wanting to join the military, while it is very commonly seen as an option for men.In particular, the military is a powerful choice for men who live in areas where there are simply no viable career options (and the armed forces have taken measures to ensure that those who have no prospects when they join, have potential employers begging on bended knee when they leave).For girls in the same circumstances, the fallback position is instead to have a lot of babies. This is where those families of 15-20 children, whose mother is barely in her thirties, come from. And in a country overpopulated by 60 million, in a world overpopulated by 7 billion, this isn’t good.And while I’d rather live in a world where we didn’t have to ask anyone to kill or die for us, and am adamantly opposed to ever forcing ANYONE to do that, as it doesn’t seem likely to change any time soon, I’d rather the people we place at risk weren’t JUST men. Especially not when the main reason there aren’t more women in the armed forces is “I never thought of signing up. I never saw it as an option.”And yes, we in games really ARE in a position to change that. 0Sign inorRegisterto rate and replySign in to contributeEmail addressPasswordSign in Need an account? Register now.
Gaming’s lost boys embrace their inner censor | OpinionThe Last of Us 2 attracts reactionary fury for depicting diversity — and the erstwhile free speech warriors now find themselves cheering for government censorshipRob FaheyContributing EditorFriday 29th May 2020Share this article Recommend Tweet ShareCompanies in this articleNaughty DogThe news that The Last of Us 2 has been banned in some conservative Middle Eastern countries shouldn’t really come as a surprise to anyone, and certainly doesn’t seem to have been surprising to Sony — whose dry official comment that the game’s unavailability on the local PlayStation Store in those regions means it has been “banned by the competent authorities” was the corporate equivalent of a shrug. The Last of Us has never been a game remotely shy about its socio-political stances, and the shift of player character in the sequel brings the LGBT-related aspects of that particularly to the fore. Both Sony and Naughty Dog will have known and understood from the outset that those decisions would invite censorious reactions in certain regions, and decided open-eyed that this was an acceptable cost for allowing the creative team to tell the story they wanted without interference.What might have come as a little more of a surprise — wearily obvious though it is in hindsight — is the extent to which the game has also suddenly become a major focus for reactionary conservatives more broadly. It should go without saying that if losing sales in a couple of large Middle Eastern markets was considered an acceptable sacrifice for creative freedom, the disapproval of a small but noisy minority of extremely online culture warriors isn’t likely to summon even the tiniest of shrugs from Sony. Yet it’s still worth stopping for a moment to admire the sheer brass-necked hypocrisy of a group who normally scream about censorship at the first sign of a developer changing a female character’s costume suddenly applauding the actual, outright banning of an entire game by a government censor. “TLOU2 commits some clearly unforgivable cardinal sins, such as ‘you don’t play as a grizzled looking man any more'” The reason that the reactionaries have turned their attention to The Last of Us 2 is a big old mess of internet drama, as usual; an unfortunate and possibly malicious leak of information about the game is part of it, but it’s hard to escape the sense that The Last of Us — a series whose progressive themes and ideas have been worn openly on its sleeve, from a developer and publisher that have been pretty refreshingly straightforward in their support for diversity — was just something they were itching for a reason to hate. The sequel, in particular, commits some clearly unforgivable cardinal sins, such as “you don’t play as a grizzled looking man any more”, “the main character is a lesbian woman” — if they’ve only just noticed this now, of course, you’d have to wonder how many of the most vocal detractors have actually engaged with the series at all prior to jumping on this bandwagon — and “there’s a female character who isn’t conventionally attractive — so we’ve arbitrarily decided she’s a trans woman.”Nobody who has been following these kinds of online tempests in recent years will be surprised to find that there are hefty doses of homophobia, transphobia, and misogyny involved, but perhaps the most defining feature here is the sheer sense of entitlement. We’ve come a long way since the days of a shrill minority refusing to accept that they merely disliked the ending of Mass Effect 3 — a perfectly reasonable stance, since I found it pretty unsatisfactory narratively too — but rather insisting that their dislike demanded that Bioware remake it in a way that satisfied them. Now, it seems, we’ve got people who feel entitled to make demands for gigantic changes to a game that hasn’t even been released yet, and rejoice in seeing it being censored by oppressive regimes because it has made the unimaginable decision to include characters they can’t masturbate to.”The real goal is to send a message that the kind of creative decisions made here will be punished” While the core set of individuals involved in whipping up this kind of controversy and propagating it around the internet is generally extremely small, and their ability to directly impact the commercial performance of a game is pretty much non-existent — The Last of Us sold 20 million copies and its sequel will do just fine, I’m sure — it would be wrong to think that the lack of commercial damage means this isn’t harmful. We should be far less concerned with Sony’s ability to monetise its enormously successful franchise than with the impact that the vitriol and spite can have on the lives of developers and others involved with the game, and the chilling effect that a torrent of online anger can have on other creators’ freedom to make the games they want without fear of provoking a backlash that targets them personally.That’s the point though, isn’t it? This kind of outrage isn’t really designed to “hurt” The Last of Us 2, or Sony, or even Naughty Dog; the real goal is to send a message that the kind of creative decisions made here — diversity, a story exploring something other than a cookie-cutter hero’s journey, characters designed for something other than one-handed appreciation — will be punished. The Last of Us 2 was banned in conservative Middle Eastern countries for creative decisions that were already unpopular in certain corners of the internet — and those corners celebrated the newsThe bitterness being pumped into website comments, spittle-flecked YouTube videos and social media posts is meant to be a warning. They can’t hurt a juggernaut title like The Last of Us 2 — not really — but they can make creators and publishers double-guess their own decisions and ask how much they’re willing to run this abusive gauntlet. It’s a protection racket; every turn of the screw is meant to tighten the cage around creative freedom, to roughly shove developers from the largest studio to the smallest indie down a path of least resistance — which might be dull, but at least won’t get chuds on message boards trying to track down your home address and your family members. “That path of least resistance — the gaming medium that these people claim to want — would be utterly insipid and bland” That path of least resistance — the gaming medium that these people claim to want — would be utterly insipid and bland. Their comfort zone for story, art and characterisation is about the size of a postage stamp; an endless barren wasteland of grizzled yet virile men who speak in emotionless grunts and mostly communicate through violence, Barbie-Doll women who are sassy and sexually available, and occasional racial stereotype NPCs for comedy value. The reason something like The Last of Us 2 actually makes them so furious — beyond any reasoned critique of the game, some of which is undoubtedly deserved, as it would be for any game — is that it’s a big-budget AAA title whose characterisation dares to stick its toe into waters that are usually the sole preserve of indie game makers. Reactionaries have been dumping on indie game makers for exploring the existence of other kinds of human for years, but this is an intrusion from that upsetting, confusing creative realm into the usually safe and dull world of AAA. Naughty Dog has had the temerity to go and do things that reactionaries have spent countless Steam review-bombs and social media campaigns clearly indicating their dislike for. The protection racket isn’t what it used to be, apparently.Related JobsSenior Game Designer – UE4 – AAA United Kingdom Amiqus GamesProgrammer – REMOTE – work with industry veterans! North West Amiqus GamesJunior Video Editor – GLOBAL publisher United Kingdom Amiqus GamesDiscover more jobs in games Of course, it’s not that anyone is actually taking away the types of game and character which these status quo warriors profess to love, so much that they can’t help attacking any divergence from the norm. Even in Sony’s line-up alone, we’re hardly short of grizzled-but-virile men — they’re getting a little more interesting and nuanced, for sure, even if watching Kratos try to relate to humans using something other than a spine-crunching deathblow felt a bit like watching a bulldog try to ice skate — and god knows plenty of games still serve up Barbie-like sexually available women. None of this has gone away, but in recent years developers have found that they can explore other themes and other characters too, and that audiences generally respond very positively to characters that speak to the diversity of the real world around us, rather than falling back on the same tired set of cardboard cut-outs over and over again. The reason these ideas are making the jump from indie to AAA isn’t just because creators want to explore these themes — though they absolutely do — it’s because audiences also enjoy them. Trying to stop this process is like shouting at the tide not to come in. Perhaps once you’ve found yourself making common cause with oppressive regimes in the Middle East in your campaign to stop video games from being a little more diverse, it’s time to throw in the towel.Celebrating employer excellence in the video games industry8th July 2021Submit your company Sign up for The Publishing & Retail newsletter and get the best of GamesIndustry.biz in your inbox. Enter your email addressMore storiesThe Last of US Part 2 secures a record 13 BAFTA nominationsNaughty Dog’s game leads a big haul for Sony, with PlayStation exclusives accounting for 41 nominations overallBy Matthew Handrahan 2 months agoThe Last of Us Part 2 | Games of the Year 2020Naughty Dog delivered a powerful and introspective story of revenge, obsession and self-destructionBy Marie Dealessandri 4 months agoLatest comments (2)Lewis Pulsipher Game Designer, Author, Teacher 0Sign inorRegisterto rate and replyAlexander Zhukov11 months ago thank you 0Sign inorRegisterto rate and replySign in to contributeEmail addressPasswordSign in Need an account? Register now. 11 months ago Someone (Adolf Hitler, believe it or not) is supposed to have said, “Now I know men [that is, humans], I prefer dogs.”Even someone as hated as Hitler can get some things right. My variation: Now I know the stupidity and disgusting behavior and preferences of the far right and far left, I fear that humanity cannot last.