NAG Online > Featured Articles > A look at E3 2014’s major controversy

A look at E3 2014’s major controversy

assassins_creed_unity_artwork_1

It almost feels like there needs to be an E3 controversy each year. This year Ubisoft has provided the vocal gaming public with something to critique. If you’ve been keeping up with the E3 news then I’m sure you’re aware of what I’m talking about: Ubisoft’s decision to cut female playable characters from the co-op portion of Assassin’s Creed Unity.

Now, however, in a perfect example of poor timing and developer stumbles, Far Cry 4 director Alex Hutchinson has revealed that his game almost allowed for a choice between male or female co-op partner avatars as well.

So that’s two of Ubisoft’s biggest franchises at this year’s E3 admitting that they had thought about but later cancelled the option to play as a female character in co-op. For both games the developers claimed that this was all down to limited resources and timing. Is that a good excuse or is it just another endemic phenomenon of the corporate status of AAA gaming titles?

First of all let’s look at Assassin’s Creed Unity. The new entry into Ubisoft’s biggest franchise has removed all forms of competitive multiplayer. In the past, it was in this game mode where players could opt to be a female assassin. Alternatively the only game (out of 10 Assassin’s Creed titles across various formats excluding browser and mobile phone) that stars a female character is the PlayStation Vita game Assassin’s Creed III: Liberation. In Liberation, players take on the role of Aveline de Grandpré who, I would argue, is one of the series’ strongest leading characters. Incidentally that game has been given the HD treatment and ported to PC, PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360; I recommend it if you haven’t played it.

assassins_creed_unity_screenshot_2

With the removal of competitive multiplayer from Unity, Ubisoft needed to tick that multiplayer tick box and instead added a four-player co-op mode for the new game. When you play online with friends you will need to have created a multiplayer avatar. That customisable avatar will only ever be seen in game on your friends’ systems; on your system you will always be the new series protagonist Arno Dorian – a male assassin of noble origin. Assassin’s Creed Unity is about Arno Dorian. One could argue that the series has always been about the leading character, as their personal lives and progression always become entwined with the series’ major plotline. With that in mind, and considering that when you are playing with friends in Unity you are playing drop-in, drop-out co-op and not a separate multiplayer mode, it makes sense that players are always Arno. If not, then Ubisoft’s writers may as well have never been hired to weave a story with a main character in the first place. Of course, one could argue then that if you are always Arno, does it matter what you look like in your friends’ games? Even if you could opt to be a female assassin in co-op, you’d never see yourself as female anyway.

I think people are more upset that they’ve had the choice taken away from them.

Despite this, Ubisoft indicated that they had originally planned to include female assassins as an option in co-op. Speaking to Polygon, the game’s creative director Alex Amancio said that that option was dropped because of “the reality of production”. He continued: “It’s double the animations, it’s double the voices, all that stuff and double the visual assets. Especially because we have customizable assassins. It was really a lot of extra production work.” With that reasoning it’s not surprising that this caused an online uproar.

It’s now been a few days since this Internet furore kicked off, and Amancio has had a chance to clarify his initial statements. Eurogamer is reporting that after speaking with him, Amancio has “switched stance” and is “insisting” that the decision to cut females from co-op had nothing to do with production. Eurogamer’s statement, however, isn’t really backed up by any accompanying quote. Rather, they quote Amancio as he provides his opinion on the fuss this has caused: “I understand the issue, I understand the cause, and it is a noble one, but I don’t think it’s relevant in the case of Unity. In Unity you play this character called Arno, and when you’re playing co-op you’re also playing Arno – everybody is. It’s like Aiden Pierce in Watch Dogs.”

assassins_creed_unity_screenshot_3

This is probably going to piss off a few people, but I’ve got to admit that I was kind of thinking along the same lines as Amancio before this new quote from Eurogamer even made it online. Yes, the fact that people get upset by the exclusion of female avatar options in games is a good thing to get upset about, but in the context of Assassin’s Creed Unity’s co-op mode, I feel that the argument is taking place within the wrong context.

What I think caused this upset is the fact that inclusivity in gaming is currently a very hot topic. When Ubisoft was quoted as saying they removed female options because of production restraints, it understandably caused an uproar because many gamers are currently hyper-sensitive to gaming inclusivity. This feels like an anger borne out of fixating on a sensitive topic, and that sensitive topic then causing heated emotions which in turn make objective deductions a little trickier. (No, I’m not being patronising; I’m just trying to make sense of what’s going on here.) It doesn’t help that Ubisoft’s representatives explained themselves rather poorly. What I think is closer to Ubisoft’s rationale is that they looked at their development plans, looked at their timing to ship the game, and decided to remove female co-op options because providing that option wasn’t going to have a direct impact on what the player sees anyway. If it wasn’t going to directly affect what the player sees, then why channel development resources into it? It was just really stupid (and one could argue topically insensitive) that Ubisoft chose to even mention that they had originally intended to include a female option.

assassins_creed_unity_screenshot_co_op

Still, their decision, from a development, gameplay mechanic, and business perspective makes sense. From a keeping-up-with-hot-topics-affecting-the-gaming-industry perspective, Ubisoft missed an opportunity to make a statement. They could have introduced co-op avatars, stated that you as the player will never see your co-op avatar during play, but then said that they’d chosen to include female assassin options anyway because the franchise has always tried to be inclusive. That would have obviously gone against their production restraints reason provided at E3, but you cannot tell me that a game that has ten separate Ubisoft teams working on it couldn’t have managed to do the extra work required to bring female avatars to co-op. Adding to that is ex-Ubisoft  employee and Assassin’s Creed III animator Jonathan Cooper’s Tweet:

Then comes Far Cry 4, which continues the E3 theme of removed female co-op partners. Speaking with Polygon, the game’s director Alex Hutchinson stated: “It’s really depressing because we almost… we were inches away from having you be able to select a girl or a guy as your co-op buddy when you invite someone in. And it was purely a workload issue because we don’t have a female reading for the character, we don’t have all the animations. And so it was this weird issue where you could have a female model that walked and talked and jumped like a dude.”

far_cry_4_co_op_e3

Good grief, it’s like Ubisoft puts their game directors through a course on how to side step stumble away from hot topics. This one is identical to Alex Amancio’s Assassin’s Creed Unity excuse, only Hutchinson hasn’t had the chance to clarify his statement just yet. We can, however, apply Amancio’s clarification to Far Cry 4 as well:

In the multiplayer of Far Cry 4, a friend can join your game at any time, or you can join a friend’s game. The two of you will both remain Far Cry 4 protagonist Ajay Ghale, only you’ll look like a different avatar to your friend. (Of course, what you look like in a first-person game is arguably irrelevant because you never really see yourself anyway; you’re just a floating camera holding a gun.) Still, Hutchinson and his team came close to including the option to play as a female in co-op, so why the change?

The answer, I think, is pretty simple and can apply to both Far Cry 4 and Assassin’s Creed Unity. Both games feature seamless co-op options; seamless multiplayer is apparently all the rage at the moment. However, seamless co-op in a game that stars a particular, narrative driven character obviously presents problems for development teams. Having your game world suddenly populated by another three Arno Dorians is going to wreck any immersion and break the game’s inherent narrative. Consequently other players need to look different to you, but not different to the leading character they’re playing on their platform, which also happens to be your leading character. By allowing the player to switch the protagonist’s gender the moment co-op starts, it creates a disconnect with the main narrative and completely negates the efforts to create a seamless co-op, and a character-driven storyline for that matter.

far_cry_4_e3_screenshot_1

I guess this is the result of developers trying to get away from separate multiplayer modes and instead provide a seamless online experience. It was one of the much-touted next-gen features, but now that it’s here it’s clearly causing some unforeseen issues insofar as gender equality and inclusivity in gaming is concerned. Perhaps Hutchinson is more spot-on than he realises when he provided the following positive note after explaining the removal of female co-op options from Far Cry 4: “I can guarantee you that in the future, moving forward, this sort of stuff will go away. As we get better technology and we plan for it in advance.” So then do we treat this as a teething period while developers get to grips with new mechanics and online gameplay features? If it is then it’s a teething period that’s come at an unfortunate time when concern for gaming inclusivity is at its highest.

That or it’s what I originally alluded to: another endemic phenomenon of the corporate status of AAA gaming titles. Make cuts in order to lower development costs, resource requirements and development times, then pump out those games as fast as possible.

  • Alex Rowley

    Well first of all i actually thought one of the Assassins in the demo was actually a girl, maybe it was a particularly skinny dude or probably because they all wear hoods.

    I really don’t get their response though, the character is just going to be a skin and them saying they can’t do it is kinda a lame excuse. having said that I don’t really know what they are trying to get excused as I don’t think it’s because they thought “those women characters ar going to hurt our sales delete them!”. So is it laziness? They brag about how much studios are used in one game so this simple skin shouldn’t be a problem. Also if the avatar isn’t that important i the first place why give the option to choose?

    Can’t say that much for Far Cry though because I don’t know how the co-op character will interact with things. Is it a silent character that might as well just be a floating gun or do they have specific roles to play and actually say things? Again if it’s a silent character that does nothing then they could make them whoever the hell they want with not that much effort in terms of making a game.

    I do think this is probably going end up getting bigger than it should because at the end of day it doesn’t really affect you all that much but at the same time I don’t think it should be ignored either, people just need to find a sane middle ground.One thing has become very obvious to me though is that people want more female leads and I for the life have no idea why people seem to be so reluctant to meet those demands

    • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wesley-Fick/184346154999538 Wesley Fick

      In the case of FC4, it’s entirely okay because you KNOW you’re playing as Hurk and Hurk is a wonderful character. I’m cool with that.

  • Viking Of Science

    Okay, Devil’s advocate here, Who the Hell Cares… This is a non-issue. If the Developer decided to not have female models in co-op, that’s their prerogative.

    • Alex Rowley

      Well considering this is being counted as a controversy and news sites are covering I would say quite a few people care. Also I think it’s fair enough to criticize a developer for leaving out what people want just don’t take it to crazy levels.

      • Stan Smith

        We gamers b***h and moan about any tiny thing we don’t like…anything can cause a controversy these days, and of course news sites like to cover sensational stories. More clicks.

        • Alex Rowley

          I think drawing criticisms to things are perfectly fine and what exactly is wrong with news sites covering stories people are interested in? It’s kind of their job

    • Squirly

      It is absolutely their prerogative, but that doesn’t mean we can’t call them out when their reasoning sounds like horse-shit. Playing Far Cry 2 I distinctly remember some of the “buddies” I could have being female. Holy shit!

      If the co-op player you’re inviting into your mission doesn’t care how his looks change or that he isn’t, strictly speaking, the main protagonist as seen by you, then why does gender matter?

      • Alex Rowley

        I was also just thinking that there was a female character in Far Cry 2. It just makes this even more weird.

        • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wesley-Fick/184346154999538 Wesley Fick

          FC2 didn’t have nine studios working on it. Don’t you know the obvious truth? The more studios on the same project, the less you can do with them!

          • Alex Rowley

            They too busy recreating that fighting system we all know and love from the previous ACs.

          • Tauriq Moosa

            logggiccc!

  • Brutus

    Most guys don’t care but when you buy a co-op game to prevent ur gf from complaining you pay attention to her, she’ll be the one complaining, guaranteed…

  • toad

    Jesus who the hell cares? It’s a frikkin game. This isn’t YOU magazine.

    • Alex Rowley

      That’s really what you think? It’s just a videogame? Come on man when that kind of argument is made it means we shouldn’t consider games as an art form or at the same level as books or movies.

      • Tauriq Moosa

        If it’s just a video game, why does this person even care? Also, it’s not about the pew pew pew, it’s about the creators’ implied attitude toward diversity and inclusion. Media matters, it’s a representation of worldviews. It’s easy not to care when you always see your sex or race as a fully-fleshed person (men, thirties, probably white, etc.) – and other types as stereotypes or caricatures.

  • WaDisMaD

    So then they must let you play as a man in Tomb Raider, and as female Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. If the game is meant to be played with a certain gender, so be it.

    • Alex Rowley

      Tomb Raider doesn’t allow you to choose what your character looks like for starters and the devs for that game didn’t go out and say “While we were going to give you the option of playing as a guy but but then we decided nope, too much effort to reskin the character”.

      As it’s been said a few times it’s a really small matter and really probably won’t affect anyone but Ubisoft responded rather poorly to the matter and I don’t really see why people shouldn’t question them on these things. If it just ends up with more choices for people then why not?

      • WaDisMaD

        Ok, point taken on Ubisoft’s response.

  • WaDisMaD

    I also think some people are missing the point, on your console/pc you are playing as a man, but on the other 3 consoles you will look different, but in the end you must still move and jump like a man. How is going to make it work, you’re playing as a man but on the other console you are a woman? So in the end you buddy is going to see a woman that runs and jump like a man. So it’s going to be a very butch looking women. So I get the point they are trying to make.

    • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Wesley-Fick/184346154999538 Wesley Fick

      In GTA Online, all the characters walk and act and jump in exactly the same way, no matter the gender.

    • Sierra53

      I honestly didnt realise men and women jumped and ran all that differently.

      • WaDisMaD

        If you say so. I can see the difference from a mile away.

        • Sierra53

          I call bullshit unless you’re using binoculars :P

          Even then, they’d have to be some pretty powerful binoculars.

          • WaDisMaD

            So if you see a person at night in the street walking you can’t say whether it is a man or women, I begg to disagree. Why do you think they call some women butch? Because they walk, run just in general behave more like men.

          • Sierra53

            Wait, why is it suddenly night time? I thought we were looking at people really far away?

            Anyway, while we’re on the hypothetical situations here, take a man and a woman, wrap them both up in a robe, pull their hoods up and tell them to run. You wont be able to tell the difference. No one will. The fact that ubisoft cited massive production costs as the reason to exclude female multiplayer characters is both lazy and asinine.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Login / Search

Latest games

Latest opinions

Advertisement

Advertisement