I’m glad you’re not deterred by this situation or any of the many others that you’ve doubtless encountered. Go forth and develop! Hopefully I’ll do the same.

As an aside, I have no idea how I found my way to the Shrub blog, but I’m quite glad that I did. Keep up the great work (same to you, Luke).

I think this is just another pathetic case of a sexist marketing tactic where the people involved have no shame against it.

You’re making a lot of assumptions here that aren’t supported by the facts.

1) The controversy was caused by people not in the industry (most notably Dave Cheung, who drew the comic, and Richard Kyanka, whose forums the comic was primarily distributed in and who made a stink about the C&D), therefore it’s incorrect to call it a “marketing tactic”. Cyber bulling and cyber rape are more correct terms for what happened.

2) By sending a C&D Ubisoft was taking legal recourse to protect its employee. If they, as you say, “have no shame against it” they wouldn’t have bothered to pursue it legally, but probably have done something like turn it into a joke or otherwise put out some sort of press release to capitalize on the interest.

Most male’s probably dont have a problem with this (because of sexual instinct), but I would love to see their reaction if a scantily-clad male was on the cover.

What you’re terming “sexual instinct” here is actually much more likely socially learned behaviour. While there is probably biological grounding for the use of sexual violence as a method of control, the attitude is more clearly connected to the attitudes fostered by society in regard to women.

The problem with calling it “sexual instinct” is that it erases personal responsibility in the matter, effectively saying, “I know it’s sexist, but it’s a natural reaction and therefore I shouldn’t be subject to criticism from other people or myself.” We, both as society and individuals, need to stop letting men off the hook for sexism and that starts with acknowledging the role we play in fostering sexist attitudes, including a lot of the discourse on what men and women are “naturally” like.

The reality of it is that this happens a LOT.

I’m not entirely sure why this is relevant. Of course it happens a lot; it’s a natural product of a sexist society and especially an industry that is still operating heavily withing the “boy’s club” mentality. The disturbing frequency with which these incidents occur is exactly the reason why discussion is necessary; until this kind of harassment is recognized as a problem by the gamer community/industry nothing substantial can be done to fix it.

It’s never really been admitted blatantly out in the open for a particular case like this, but behind closed doors, it’s always been a marketing factor for everything: “sex sells”.

I disagree with you about it not being admitted blatantly and out in the open; a very similar thing happened to Kathy Sierra, and I’ve heard the “sex sells” adage since I was in grade school. But, anyway, yeah, it’s a problem that needs to be recognized and addressed. It can change (and I have hopes for the “casual” market being able to bring in some maturity to the overall culture, personally), but that change needs to start with gamers taking personal responsibility for their own participation in the sexist culture.

I’m also a gamer and aspiring game designer/producer and this sort of BS is one of the biggest fears I have going into the industry. If you haven’t already, you can check out my thoughts here: Game designing while female. I’m a stubborn feminist who won’t let a little (okay, a lot of) misogyny stand in the way of my dreams, but in that way I’m the exception, not the rule and it saddens me — both as a gamer and as a feminist — that in 2007 games, and gamer culture, appears to be regressing instead of progressing. Hopefully our generation of producers, designers, etc. will be able to turn the tide, but I guess only time will tell, eh?

As a gamer and aspiring game producer, the incident is both profoundly disappointing and worrisome. The reasons it is disappointing are obvious on a personal level. On industry level and for those of us who love it, it reveals that the advancements we’ve made are constantly threatened by retrograde ideas held by people who fit so nicely into the negative stereotype of “gamer.” We play increasingly complex and beautiful games that knowingly tweak our understandings of morality, causality, and our place in the world, but we’re forever held back by the image of a basement-dwelling perpetual pre-adolescent afraid of social interaction. Even worse is the chilling effect this could have. I haven’t played Assassin’s Creed, but I’ve heard great things. Clearly, Ms. Raymond is a talented producer, and I’m certain this experience has soured her at least somewhat on the industry and its fans. There may be other women who have considered working on games who are now hesitant to do so. Driving out and scaring off new voices can only make games myopic and tired over time, and I would hate to see that happen.

I don’t know if Ms. Raymond reads this blog, or if she has any desire to dive back into what has to have been a profoundly bothersome experience, but in the hope that these words might somehow reach her eyes, I will say that I apologize on behalf of male gamers and hope that we can look forward to many more of your contributions in the future, despite how undeserving we seem determined to prove ourselves.

Most male’s probably dont have a problem with this (because of sexual instinct), but I would love to see their reaction if a scantily-clad male was on the cover.

The reality of it is that this happens a LOT. It’s never really been admitted blatantly out in the open for a particular case like this, but behind closed doors, it’s always been a marketing factor for everything: “sex sells”.

Also, you know me, it’s easier to read if you use blockquotes for your quoted text.

For example, if you type:
<blockquote>Quoted text.</blockquote>

in the comment box, you will get:

Quoted text.

It makes it a lot easier to differentiate the text you’re replying to and your actual reply.

I can see a lot of glitter, but a lot of dust under it as well. Sure there are some new things, but still there’s something lacking. And I tell it with a broken voice. The whole game business doesn’t convince me yet. There is something missing under what I define “art aspect”. I don’t want to start a discussion about what’s art and what’s not (it is impossible to find a real solution), but I think that, even though new generation games brought a lot of new inventions (mainly under the graphic aspect) they also brought something negative (what I call the “my graphic board is bigger than yours” syndrome for example). There is still too few in terms of subtext (or, you can still play some games without understanding that subtext). Game industry does what it is born for… selling. And to sell to as many peopole possible you have to create something “average”. We haven’t reached yet a “critical mass” point in which there will be market for really indipendent labels. However there aren’t people so bold, or crazy (call em artists if you mind) to create innovative games just because they want to, or there aren`t people willing to sponsor them (the so called art patrons). I know there is plenty of exceptions (I.e. Crayon Physics), but they are just exceptions. About people not evolving, they really don; do that since the times of Socrates.. I am actually beholding a genaral involution. But I am not talking about gamens here.

>Second, you suggest that games themselves have not evolved much outside of graphics. Whether games have evolved >has *nothing* to do with whether gamers tend to be sexist. Stamp and coin collecting have followed conventions for >decades–do you suggest that coin collectors tend to be sexist?

Are we sure there? Are we sure that the obsessive pursual of “X poligons in motion per frame” has nothing to do with a manly approach to the “problem?”.

>Also, the idea that games have not evolved is simply wrong. There are dozens of games today in genres that did not (or >barely) existed just a decade ago. MMOs and Rhythm games are just 2 examples. What other medium has evolved so >quickly? Your attack on FPS’s makes no sense to me either. You see no real difference between Doom and Bioshock? >Quake and Portal?

I am not talking about evolution speed. Sure it is advancing quiclky, but is not yet enough (in my humble opinion). About differences… well, no really. Last real breackthrough I saw in FPS was in Half Life 1. After is just the same soup with better graphics.

>Your second comment is bewildering. Why do you think we can’t know why Chugworth drew the comic? He has explained it. Even if it was ambiguous, Luke is attacking explicit *responses.* They believe that JR was “being a slut to sell the game” and that putting her on Assassin’s Creed “must have been a marketing stunt.” I’ve seen lengthy discussion board threads picking apart her resume trying to figure out how a pretty girl could possibly have been qualified to make a game. That’s the wrong being committed here.

Well, if it`s so it is bad. I said that before, I am repeating it. It is still a maschilistic (underdeveloped) environment, and we everybody must do something to improve it (for what I saw AC is pretty cool, not innovative but cool)

>Your discussion of satire is common, but misguided. The comic *IS* satire. So >what? Saying something is satire is not the same as saying it is “morally ok.” The >LAW grants broad brush to satire because it is “free speech,” but no one on this >page has suggested that either Chugworth or Something Awful have violated THE LAW. >The problem with this comic is its MESSAGE: What social problem is it trying to >solve through satire? I won’t link to the comic as Luke hasn’t, but if you read >it, it clearly suggests 1. JR couldn’t be smart and qualified, 2. JR is attractive >and has used that quality to sell her game. You can identify it as satire and >still recognize that it is both factually mistaken and morally repugnant.

Exactly what I said above. I agree with your statings.