Gender-specific animation…?

Yes, that happens to everyone. It is then up to the person affected to either ignore that or throw an attention seeking hissy fit. That depends entirely on the maturity level of each individual.

Ah yes, sure, because everything's a political statement nowadays apparently.

I also noticing, not for first or third time, how in these rants those people are always only answering to either those who agree with them or those who make simple objections, but never to people who raise valid counterarguments, like "what if I can't use zbrush and morphs and retargets because my game is hand-drawn 2d animation?".

Thankfully you can sidestep the issue entirely by just simply making your game's player character female as the only available option. For the time being, anyway... I'm sure people will eventually find some other angle of attack to harass developers.

Gendered animation might be stupid in many cases but that doesn't negate the need for sexed animation in many (especially realistic) styles.

It's true a lot of people overestimate the sexed difference for mannerism and body language, almost all of those differences are only caused by people following gender stereotypes. But that doesn't negate a different physiology (that goes beyond just skeletal structure) and centre of gravity.

There's also many environment and story settings where adding gender non-conforming characters requires narrative adaption as well. Which means more work for writers and programmers. I personally would love more gnc characters and there's many games I never bought because the game wasn't interesting to me if I couldn't play as a lesbian. So I do get being disappointed by a lack of options, but at the end of the day just buy another game and maybe politely tell the developers why you didn't buy theirs.

(Seriously, more people who care about diversity need to put their money where their mouth is and actually buy the indie games that cater to them)

And not having the time or money to add a diversity option, even sometimes if it just a re-skin and not new models and animation from the ground up, is sometimes a valid excuse. Just because some lucky developers never had to cut features or prioritise away options they were aware some people wanted doesn't mean it never happens.

One thing questioning or critiquing (when it's justified, mind you), but a lot of people are jumping on the "you don't have X in your games\fiction, this means you hate X!" line of thought with frightening eagerness. I remember too well the shitstorm about some Czech developers apparently being racists because their mindbogglingly faithful to being historically accurate game set in a medieval eastern Europe didn't had any African-americans in it.

Regardless, saying "If they say they can't afford implementing a female character then punch them in the head" is neither a questioning nor is it a critique.

This is the simplest boil down to it.

And then understand that not EVERY demographic is going to be happy with every game. Economics is a guiding force in all of this...developers don't have an infinite well of time and resources. So if Developer X chooses to channel their efforts towards a certain slice of the market, that's their decision.

Only economics will change what's a profitable demographic to chase.

I never really understood that position as well, to be honest.
I wouldn't refrain to buy a game I'm interested in if I found out that the main character is female.
I wouldn't refrain to buy a game I'm interested in if I found out that the main character is Asian.
I wouldn't refrain to buy a game I'm interested in if I found out that the main character doesn't have ginger hair.
I wouldn't refrain to buy a game I'm interested in if I found out that the main character have moral values that don't align with mine (Although in this case - usually).
I wouldn't refrain to buy a game I'm interested in if I found out that the main character isn't a human.
Hell, I probably wouldn't even refrain from buying an interesting game if it would carry a disgusting anti-intellectual and offensive message "science is bad" or "we shouldn't go in space".

Those things are all sound so minor in comparison to stuff that usually gets me interested in the game, I can't quite wrap my head around dropping it because of that. It's like "I'll pass this because it doesn't have enough color yellow in it".

I wish I could like your post at least seven more times.

Well, it's not like I care about playing as a lesbian in every single game there is (that's a common misunderstanding when this topic is brought up), usually it's either:

a) immersive non-linear rpgs, with a player insert character, where romance is either a huge part of the game and/or there's unlockable content gated behind your character being into someone of the opposite sex.

b) most kinds of dating or romance simulators (although ofc there's exceptions, like parodies such as Hatoful boyfriend and I would consider serious games with great story as well)

c) games with a lot of sexual content, kinda, tbh I'm not sure if should count this since I do enjoy games like Catherine. I guess this one depends a lot on tone and context. And it's probably understandable that some kinds of sexual content is an absolute deal-breaker. Like I will never touch "Ladykiller in a bind" (even if looks hilariously bad to make fun of) because it was promoted as a lesbian game with only consensual sex, despite portraying a man raping a woman to "turn her straight" as "successful" and "sexy".
(Fun fact: I managed to avoid buying the game and seeing the (hidden, unskippable) rape scene, because the art's so bad I didn't realise the characters were supposed to be women)

I probably don't have to explain why some games in the last category are unappealing to me. As for the first two, they're just not fun (most of the time) to me if I have to play as a heterosexual. Maybe it's not fun because of the homophobia I have to deal with in real life (with is not insignificant thanks to queer-activists joining ranks with old-school homophobes in trying to force lesbians to like dick), maybe it's because of personal unpleasant experiences or something else.

I'm not really sure why and I don't think it really matters, because it doesn't change the fact that it's just not fun for me. So it simply doesn't make sense to spend my limited time and money on games were I'm forced to play a straight character in way that hinders my enjoyment of the game.

And in escapism, romance and/or role playing games that are specifically centered around freedom and player choice I think it's reasonable to ask for things like same-sex romance options. Doesn't mean all games need to have to them or that it's okay demand it from developers in rude or inappropriate ways. But I think it's okay to ask for (politely! please stop with twitter harassment and shit -.- ) and then buy the games that choose to cater to my demographic.

I do understand that this is a (unfortunately very valid) concern in high budget games where the player would have to play as a gay character. When I'm talking about representation there's a reason I focus smaller more niche games and player choice games where a straight player would have the option of never even flirting with someone of the same sex.

I don't fully agree with the argument you seem to be making to only look at economics and expected demographics. Too much of those analytics relies on past data and an over emphasis on only surveying the currently active (and actively pandering to) player base. This creates a feedback loop were other demographics never get considered.
And yes I have worked as game tester, been in focus groups and at industry events, (tho only smaller ones for full transparency. I do see how these loops get created).

Going for an underserved new or more niche demographic is always a risk but so is going for an already oversaturated demographic. I haven't even seen any reliable data which of these is the bigger risk, there might too many variables in each individual case tbh, but success stories do keep popping up.

For example, Undertale and Huniepop were definitely boosted by people who loved the representation (or in Huniepop's case specifically lesbian/bi-women who loved to get some fanservice aimed at us for once and a surprising amount of straight women who preferred the lesbian route). Both of these would almost surely have been successful regardless, but adding the same-sex romance was still a financial win.

I do think the latter option is probably easier and I don't hold it against any studio if that's what they chose. But I also know I lot of people who are open to the first "higher risk - higher reward" option don't go for it simply because they didn't think of it. So I think reminding people of the underserved demographics is a positive as long as it's done in an appropriate way.

This is really starting to get off subject but here

Oki so several things,

I think you're confusing "small audience" with "niche audience" the furries are much more widespread then people give them credit for- maybe cause they still kind of have to be in the closet for most "cultured" societies.

Second. I find it really strange at this idea that a target audience will get "tired" of the desire that they have- yes, it's true some things come in fads for the general public- vampires had there hay day, then zombies, now one could argue medieval times. But the actual "target" audience- that is, the people who are watching BECAUSE they like vampires or zombies- will always be looking for media with vampires and zombies. Those are your target audience and those will always be "niche" but their size will continue to vary over time.

People continue to say that everyone is having "superhero fatigue" and yet the marvel movies are doing fine making money. HELL transformer movies kept making money even tho no one apparently liked them. Its probably NOT because this fatigue is rampant and everywhere but because of two things- there is something about it you like IE you're a fan of vampires- superheroes- ext. so your gonna watch it anyway to get your fix. Then there's something called brand loyalty. You create a connection and you choose to believe that what you are consuming from this person or this company is worthwhile and worth the consistent pledge of money for the satisfaction you get from their product. These two groups of people are always going to be your backers and always going to be the people that you have to be concerned with first and foremost when making whatever product your making. They are how you have enough money to patch in a 4th romance option that is also pansexual. If your Role-playing vampire game has a really bad story and bad gameplay and really lackluster vampire lore. No one is prob gonna care that you spent more of your time and money on that pansexual character with a unique walking animation- if everything else is falling apart.