Jump to content

Why female soldiers


Recommended Posts

I assume you are refering to the recent Hollywood version of U571.

I'm sure there are plenty of movies around with edited history so it doesn't get in the way of a good story.

No matter which country they are made in, just most aren't so blatant or about such well known events ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone even mentioned that reason.

No need to mention that, is there? It is quite obvious the only possible reason as it doesn't make sense in that 70s setting except in some very exotic cases. Furthermore, from what I read about creating new models in 2D, it's a massive amount of extra work for zero tangible benefit.

Then again this is apparently a moot point as female models will make it into the final game after a public vote in which they scored worse than many other options. The 'winners' of said vote get to be stretch goals with sometimes ridiculous price tags. So although being set in an old fashioned scenario, the game already has some very modern quotas, it seems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually that isn't quite correct.

Female soldiers won't make it into the game in the way they were originally put forward.

That is still too expensive to do unless other features were to be cut.

Instead they will appear in a limited (and cheaper) way by sharing ground sprites (which are the expensive bit) with male soldiers.

The idea being that the armour is so bulky anyway that the differences would be difficult to spot at the scale the game runs at.

Doing it this way means that the cost is significantly reduced and should cause no conflict with other features.

Feedback from this forum was generally that they (and I) were not in favour of female soldiers taking money away from other features due to the costs of spritesheet generation, but they were generally in favour if it could be done with less expense.

Goldhawk decided that they could do that and have gone for it.

The vote you refer to was not to decide what should be core features of the game but what should be taken from the 'nice to have if money allows' pile and used as stretch goals to mark funding milestones.

They do not "get to be stretch goals" despite the vote as you suggest.

The 'price tags' used are also not precise costs for each feature, they are milestones that give a bonus when reached.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually that isn't quite correct.

Female soldiers won't make it into the game in the way they were originally put forward.

That is still too expensive to do unless other features were to be cut.

Instead they will appear in a limited (and cheaper) way by sharing ground sprites (which are the expensive bit) with male soldiers.

The idea being that the armour is so bulky anyway that the differences would be difficult to spot at the scale the game runs at.

Doing it this way means that the cost is significantly reduced and should cause no conflict with other features.

Feedback from this forum was generally that they (and I) were not in favour of female soldiers taking money away from other features due to the costs of spritesheet generation, but they were generally in favour if it could be done with less expense.

Goldhawk decided that they could do that and have gone for it.

The vote you refer to was not to decide what should be core features of the game but what should be taken from the 'nice to have if money allows' pile and used as stretch goals to mark funding milestones.

They do not "get to be stretch goals" despite the vote as you suggest.

The 'price tags' used are also not precise costs for each feature, they are milestones that give a bonus when reached.

Well, if this female 'light' version is really only a bunch of pictures I don't mind that much. Aside from the basic uniform you're probably right about there not being much of a difference in the way they look. We'll have to see about that.

As for that vote: That's semantics, isn't it? There was a vote about some optional stuff being included, money permitting. Female models among them, as well as indoor missions. They were all nice to have but once it was decided to include someting, it was basically a core feature. Only suddenly one 'nice to have' feature gets promoted ahead of all the others despite getting less votes, therefore being in the core game no matter how much money the kickstarter would raise. It even says so in the kickstarter notes.

Now, if this is achieved by only a couple of pictures then it isn't much of an issue, but still the point remains.

Female soldiers are in despite the majority of people want something different while the options that more people voted for have to be bought via kickstarter.

Also Yes, I realize that the cost of those stretchgoals are probably not the exact monetary costs of implementing the according feature. But in the end there should be some semblance between the reached goals and the included features.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will show the development of the armour fra Basic armour to the Colossus. The graphics is reduced to in game size.

This is a real spoiler - if you do not want to spoil the surprise for when the game is released do NOT open the spoiler.

This is pictures from the game that has been removed from the early (version 8) of the game.

spoiler2.jpg

Again - this is not a joke spoiler (as the one in off-topic) - do not open if you prefer to wait!

spoiler2.jpg

spoiler2.jpg.9a3766491a7211796996f2216c8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for that vote: That's semantics, isn't it?

No I don't believe it is.

I think that the female soldiers were voted much lower because of the view that they would cost so much that other, more attractive, features would be left out.

Once that objection was removed then it was moved from the nice to have list to being a workable feature.

The point was that the feedback on the female soldiers made the team aware WHY people hadn't voted for it and also that the majority of people who were discussing it were either for it because it should be there or against it because of cost.

The balance between those was to try and introduce it for minimal cost.

That is the point in 'nice to have if costs permit'.

Costs did permit so it made it in, not in the original expensive form (which was the reason it wasn't already in) but in a less expensive one.

If someone could come up with an inexpensive way to add one of the higher goals then they would also more than likely make it as well.

A nice to have feature that costs next to nothing is far more likely to be in than a more popular one that costs way more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh...I'm not missing them. Fits with the game settings (1970). Heck, even today you won't be finding many women at the front lines, it's mostly support roles.

And you won't find them AT ALL in Spec Ops units (which is what xenonauts are). And I suspect you never will given the redicolously high selection criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh...I'm not missing them. Fits with the game settings (1970). Heck, even today you won't be finding many women at the front lines, it's mostly support roles.

And you won't find them AT ALL in Spec Ops units (which is what xenonauts are). And I suspect you never will given the redicolously high selection criteria.

But.. but... Hollywood taught me differently!

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Leonatus - the reason they were put in is because people asked me why I was treating female soldiers differently to black / ethnic soldiers, which are deliberately represented in the game because I want it to feel like a proper multi-national organisation and I want everyone to be able to identify with their soldiers. Having thought it through, I thought the argument was valid (moving them out of "optional" category) so we added in women.

It's been a bit of work, but nothing too major. It also means that we won't take a load of flak from reviewers for not having female soldiers in the future, as it could have counted against us given X-Com had it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three good reasons in there.

Inclusive, Inexpensive and avoiding bad PR ;)

As long as the portraits look suitably miserable of course.

Been meaning to ask if adding the female soldiers has meant adding a way to assign different armour to individual race or nationalities to allow the basic armour to be different?

I was hoping it would so then modders could add new female armour down the line easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, those reviewers might now give you flak for breaking the immersion of the setting. There were no women to speak of in 70s military after all. I'm pretty sure that if people complain about that kind of thing they will just find something else if you try and make them happy.

Then again, now you have political correctness on your side. That should deflect any form of critic. You could even give female soldiers stat boosts, to amplifiy the effect.

I'd have to see the pictures before I decide just how much I don't like this step.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frankly, I see this hurting the game more than adding to it. I'm a sucker for atmosphere/setting and I hate anything that mars it needlesly with the itensity of a million suns.

If there is one thing I hate it's this PC bs gone mad.

In every type of media, equal representation of every race, sex, religion, creed, etc.. is enforced - regardless of the atmospehre, setting, conditions/circumstances or any other consideration. I find that far more insulting and condesending than not having a specific group present.

If female soldeirs are not a selectable option, one of the first thing I'll do once the game is out is to mod them out.

Not that I don't like female characters in games, but here they just don't fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with the intensity of a billion suns. You seem able to suspend your strict rules when it comes to weapons and aliens, but not when it comes to who would serve in a unit recruited well after humans had the startling revelation that we are, in fact, not alone in the universe, and the neighbours are not friendly.

I do not see this hurting the game more than not including them would, as fans of the original would cry out in anguish.

Luckily, they are in, but it'll probably be quite easy for you to mod them out so you can have it your way as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to disagree with the intensity of a billion suns. You seem able to suspend your strict rules when it comes to weapons and aliens, but not when it comes to who would serve in a unit recruited well after humans had the startling revelation that we are, in fact, not alone in the universe, and the neighbours are not friendly.

Weapons and aliens? What about them?

That's a different kettle of fish completely. Apples and oranges. Aliens are a core factor of the game. You cannot have a x-com like game without aliens. Also, no one ever saw an alien in real life, so there's nothing to compare it to.

Also, even if hte 1970's government would recuit women, you wouldn't be seeing them in elite units at all - and especially not days after the alines popped up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I say you can't have an X-Com game without female soldiers. It's the same thing to me.

The Xenonauts is not an entity of a government, and the aliens did not pop up a few days before the game started. It's 20 years later in fact. Everything is well within reason for Goldhawk to include females, to the delight of old fans, and for those that don't want them, it's a matter of erasing a few lines of text with notepad.

(Edit; Why does my avatar change size all the time?)

(Editt; and of course it changed back with that edit.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weapons and aliens? What about them?

That's a different kettle of fish completely. Apples and oranges. Aliens are a core factor of the game. You cannot have a x-com like game without aliens. Also, no one ever saw an alien in real life, so there's nothing to compare it to.

Also, even if hte 1970's government would recuit women, you wouldn't be seeing them in elite units at all - and especially not days after the alines popped up.

1) Aliens showed up 20 years prior to the start of the game. I think that they even came back and started buzzing around before the game starts up to allow Xenonauts establish themselves lorewise before being handed over to the player.

2) Xenonauts is not part of any government. How their recruitment process works is a mystery.

Edit: Icevamp already covered it. I posted before reading his reply :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Xenonauts is not a X-Com game. It's a X-com LIKE game. Big difference.

2. Xenonauts are funded by the governments/militaries of the world. From where do you think they get their recruits, officer, leaders, etc..? Thin air?

3. There are no female Spec Ops. and for very practical reasons.

Discussing this further is pointless, as there is nothing to discuss. The decision has been already mde by the devs, and no matter what you say you won't change my stance...besides, it's dangerously close to going off-topic anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. semantics.

It isn't. A tactical turn-based, squad-based games where you fight aliens has to have aliens.

There is a difference ebtween necessary fantastic elements, and unecessary ones.

2. As I said their recruitment process is a mystery. You can't rule out that they recruit from the civilian population or any sort of militia. (unless it shows up in their "previous experience" field that they served)

So the goverments and the people involved in xenonauts lost all semblance of common sense?

Every single recruit is listed as coming from an elite outfit.

3. Rule of fun and Rule of cool thrumps realism.

For you.

Rule of cool can go die in a fire for all I care, since it is the leading cause of some of the worst moveis/comics in history.

Also, rule of fun does not apply to pointless aestentics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but if you call this an X-comish game, and X-com type game or X-com like game is semantics really. You knew what he meant and you were nitpicking.

So the goverments and the people involved in xenonauts lost all semblance of common sense?

Every single recruit is listed as coming from an elite outfit.

This is about your lack of imagination (what could possibly play out in a radically different and fictional setting) and how you percieve cultural values as practical necessities. There is no semblance to conventional wars or combat situations at all. If anything the combat in Xenonauts are more prone to guerilla or militia tactics then any straight up warfare. In such a case where culture and modus of oprendai has been thrown out the window already, reallife Spec ops requirement hardly applies. For all you know the only requirement Xenonauts has is that the soldiers doesnt succumb to mindcontrol the moment they step on the battlefield. Something that theoretically is far more important then if they can pass the physical.

It has nothing to do with common sense or lack thereof. It has to do with your personal values and inflexible beliefs.

For you.

Rule of cool can go die in a fire for all I care, since it is the leading cause of some of the worst moveis/comics in history.

Also, rule of fun does not apply to pointless aestentics.

No, they do for everyone. It's just that "Your mileage may vary". If you read rule of cool there is a clause to it.

Note that you only get to invoke the Rule of Cool if the end product is, in fact, cool. Note also that different opinions on what is "cool" create the most arguments over this. That being said, the Rule of Cool is very subjective.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You knew what he meant and you were nitpicking.

No, you are nitpicking.

This is about your lack of imagination and how you percieve cultural values as practical necessities.

It has nothing to do with common sense or lack thereof. It has to do with your personal values and inflexible beliefs.

You have nothing to do with common sense. (pot calling the kettle black?)

It is you who tries to paint practical necessiteis as nothing and handwave them away with terrible, flawed and unsopported theories.

You can go on and try to poke at me the whole day, but in the end it changes nothing. Not a thing.

Now kindly drop the issue already.

Edited by TrashMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...