Yeah I call bullshit on that excuse too. Considering that every single man and woman are individual with their own habits, one CAN'T assume that all women do this and all men do that. I hate that "Men are from Mars" and "Women are from Venus" bullshit. It's really not reality and honestly, I don't think it has any bearing on games. ESPECIALLY games from a relatively large studio (I'M TALKING ABOUT YOU, UBISOFT! I HAVE NOT FORGOTTEN).

If one can make customizable characters, from face to build, etc, then I am going to seriously side-eye you hardcore if there isn't a female form in those options. However, if you're telling a story of a specific character (Witcher, God of War, Bayonetta, Control, Alan Wake), then I completely get why you wouldn't throw in another gender.

Also, it had been proven that you can make a lot of action stories with both genders. Ellen Ripley was originally written as male, but Sigourney Weaver got the role. Here are more examples:

So yeah I'm tired of that excuse. It's like they want avoid being called "Sexist" therefore they make...well inherently sexist arguments about why they didn't make any playable women in their Co-Op multiplayer game...because we wimminz walk funny.

Interesting question.
I think that different patterns of movements of men and women may have two sources:

a) Differences in men and women bodies;
b) Social norms.

By a) I mean differences in skeleton, at the first place:

But yet, I don't think that men and women physically can't move in the same way in the everyday life (it sounds like a nonsense). They just may be prone to different kinds of movements due bodie's differences. Besides, all these differences are statistical.

Usually, I don't mind if I see male and female playable/not-playable characters, who are moving in the same way. I usually don't even notice this.

My own movements in everyday life contain both men's and women's patterns. For example, you can hate me, but I like to do this:

womanspreding.jpg960x1280 162 KB

To be fair, BattleState Games is a relatively new studio with only 8 developers. Who's first and only game just started picking up traction recently (not to mention it's still in early beta). So for them I can understand why having female characters is to much work right now. Even if they decide to copy & paste animations, they would still have to render new models which seems a little unnecessary at the moment considering it's an FPS. Plus they have bigger things to worry about than the gender of a character you can't even see. Heck, you couldn't even customize clothing for the characters until a few months ago.

Although the excuse they gave is dumb, I do honestly believe that they can't add female characters right now.

I think as a writer or artist, the question we face is "What do I want my reader to see or assume?" It's not about politics or possibilities, it's about serving the story. I'd cut a small game developer slack too.

This reminds me of that famous Erika Linder photo shoot from a few years ago where she posed with herself to show that gender is a performance.

I totally agree with you, at the end these are just gender roles and not everyone follow them estrictly

It's one thing to be hand-animating an entirely new set of character sprites of a different gender (though then it's a management problem and it'd be better to have gender variety before outfit variety), but that case that got the internet talking is 3D models. It's not nonexistent work, but it's not enough to justify that excuse - just say you'll add them in future updates, take a month or 6, don't shift the blame. The rigs are different(and height/arm distance might need adjustment) but unless you're doing that Catwoman cutscene in the Batman game for every woman, please don't, it won't even be noticed by most people.

My sister used to work as an animator (and I've got to look behind the scenes in both the game and movie industry) so I can confirm you have to animate men and women differently if you want a realistic style to look good. So if we're talking about smaller studios that's not necessarily a BS excuse, at least if the only have one body type rig for the male playable character.

If they have more than one type of playable male character it's a kinda a lame reason. It's mainly very basic stuff like the walking and running cycle that have to be slightly differently animated, there's no reason you can't give female character more "masculine" body language. In some cases it may still be more work having both a male and female character rather than 2 male body types, but not considerably so.

For less realistic styles you can often get away with using the same animation but it does depend on the specific style and animation technique.

EDIT: I should maybe specify that when I'm talking about a slightly different walking/running cycle I do mean slightly . It's (usually) only in realistic animation not altering it will look off and most people won't be able to spot why unless they're trained to see it. And yes, that does include people animating women sometimes, which is why we get ridiculous stuff like female fighters walking like runway models (it's easier to copy stylised walks than learning the subtle differences).

Ugh, this is one of my biggest pet peeves in games! I absolutely hate games where female characters are given this weird dainty walk and run cycle that looks ridiculous. Women aren't that different from men and when shit hits the fan we run like hell too! Add in some extra ass shaking when running and I'm forced to choose a male character. I don't want to look at a character whose ass looks like it's trying to escape every time she takes a step. I don't get it why men can walk and run like normal humans while women's movement is made more sensual. Even when I'm a knight or some other badass in bulky armor I'm forced to move like a belly dancer.

Some of the funniest videos on youtube are about this. Male characters are given female move sets and idle animation and it. just. looks. ridiculous. When it's done to men you can really see how bizarre it all is.

Just going to talk about this with gaming since this is where I've seen this discussion the most. Honestly, I'd heard the primary issue with that whole thing was that you have to make a whole new model, rig said model, and then make animations for it. I'd say the latter probably takes the most time. Granted, I'm not exactly the best with this sort of thing, so I don't exactly know whether animations would be transferable between models. Furthermore, if the idea is to have expressive characters, then it's likely instead of transferring animations, one would opt to simply make a whole new set of them.

As for the issue of the issue between the way men/women walk, I suppose if you really went an analyzed it you might be able to find certain differences that come from biological differences at least for things like walking, but gestures and such are generally something that goes for an individual. Furthermore, there are people who would definitely go against the norm. Tying that back to animating, then the main issue there is the walk cycle I guess (that being said, i have actually animated a walk cycle before and, while it was kind of crappy, I wouldn't say it's hard thing to do).

So, in the end, I can kind of see where people are coming from when they lack a budget, team, or time in implementing this, but I don't see much of an excuse for bigger studios (well, unless we factor in the fact that they force their programmers into crunch time just to get some games out, but I think that's primarily blaming the publishers). Well, I guess there is an issue if you need to go back and change/rerecord dialogue, but that's more of a case by case thing.

Forget gestures and mannerisms for a second, there are fundamental differences in centers of gravity and movement strategies between the sexes that do affect how they move. It's not an opinion, it's a reality.

That is not point though. Those differences may be present, but they do not excuse every woman in a game to walk like they're the child of a runway model and a pole dancer. It also doesn't excuse studios from not adding women in their entirety. Guess who also have different centres of gravity? Men of different heights, men with broader shoulders, men that are more heavyset: it's not an excuse if you already have five different male characters, and definitely not an excuse to sexualise every female animation.

No, they shouldn't be used as excuses for any of the things you mentioned ( except for the part on center of gravity in different Men, the location doesn't change but it's relation to other factors like body mass does. this effects movement strategies more) but they can't also be waved away as non factors because you have issues with the things you mentioned.

The argument for those changes isn't made stronger by arguing biomechanics.

This sounds more of the same "My side is more righteous so our opinions are more right than the other side." Does the whole world agree that men and women move, sit, stand the same? Is that EVERY culture? Is the progressive notion of removing gender differences (beyond anything physical) so prevalent that it is planet earth's default? Is that even the slant of the majority of people? Worldview? What world? Your world? Where YOU are from? Did you know, that in other cultures there are still traditions and norms -- that clash against much of these current stances? Not everyone is on the same page about this and to assume everyone SHOULD be - is just as limiting an outlook.

The fact that you can write this tells me you are aware of the different behaviors and what they suggest.

I just saw a video about this and it seems like they named several reasons.
"too much work" and "not possible" (even in quotes) is not linked to their responses.
Don't do that. Make you point by making good points.

Aside from that, you guys sit on here and rally so hard at ANY suggestion of anyone telling you about your work.
You literally, flip out, at the thought of ANYONE telling you what to do.

Just the idea that some creator needs to justify a decision like this is nuts. Who cares what reason they gave. The fact that they have to give a reason at all is scary.

If you are completely lost, look up the thread where there's discussion of selling IPs to Disney.
This must be part of the

"I don't mind when people are forced to do things as long as it's the things I want them to do."

The problem is not the spreading....in the example you showed, the woman had her bag way too close to where it would be the "you-know" XD it needs space.....

As a woman, spreading is only a problem for me when there's limited space and men insist on doing it anyway, eg a plane or a public bus and we're all packed in like sardines. Then it's infuriating, because it's clearly about power and control when space is at such a premium.

Movement can be used to express a character's personality but I do feel like people get very stereotypical about it. I do think it works in a cartoonish environment but is not really a universal norm.

Edit: I also like to note, that I don't think the woman with her swaying hips from the video should be set as a "norm" for animating women. I think it is a good example of showing maybe a high class feminine woman but I think using it for something like an Action RPG video game about knights just looks weird.

That looks likes a form of Character Animation. Pity it's a lost art except in older Disney movies.

I wrote out a long post detailing my arguments but... realized some of it was motivations and observations noone asked for. So to keep it short:

Yes, most men naturally walk and sit with their legs apart for anatomical reasons.

No, women do not naturally walk and sit with their legs together for anatomical reasons. They are able to more easily do it since their anatomy doesn't immediately prevent it, but most of them do it as a result of habit caused by societal pressure. Many are unaware of this societal pressure as they just copy the behavior from their mothers like they copy other behaviors at an early age. But being repeatedly told as kids to keep their legs together when they wear skirts sure enforces the behavior too...

If a game depicts a specific country at a specific time in history, it can make sense to use gender specific animations that suit the way things were at the time. Woke-ifying history isn't all that woke, because observing history is an important part of understanding these issues at large. Most progressives wouldn't want to erase history.

But if that isn't the case, then using more gender neutral animations would be a respectable move.

The walk and gestures are different due to different anatomy, for sure.

The issue is that in real life, when average individuals are walking/moving in a natural fashion, these differences are relatively small. Noticable, but not generally enough to look really odd if used by the opposite sex.

In videogame, the differences are generally pushed to the extreme. Much more extreme than real life, even in a society with strong gender roles. I hate that, but let's be realistic, it's not going to change anytime soon.

The ideal solution would be to have multiple animations to be able to fit subgroups of both male and female population with gaits adapted to their profession, social status etc, but THAT would be expensive.

I'mma just leave this here:

In this case, I suppose that characters have not only different sex, but also very different individuality and behavior lines that's why they swapping becomes so funny

That still sounds like a bs excuse. 3D can make animation easier than 2d but using as an excuse to not take the extra effort to make it look good is creators being lazy. Plus, 3D has the ability to mo-cap people, which can help aid in animation.

My issue with a lot if 3D animation is that it looks very stiff. Richard William (the guy from the video and head animator for Who Framed Roger Rabbit) mentioned how with some movement, you might have to "break" joints inorder to exaggerate movement. A lot of schools teach to never break joints because "its not realistic" , however they end up with stiff animation.

I also can not stand the weird anime girl run trope. Arms up, knees too close together, and sometimes they have no chest support. They look so silly, no one runs like that. Is it suppose to be cute? It just looks so awkward.

Well the most blunt difference is the walking. Women don't walk the same way men do, because of the differences in anatomy playing a role in that. You can't possibly claim that anatomy is a social construct, can you?! Obviously there's gradations in that that can be amplified or negated by either the clothing or the person's decision, but it's still there, you still have either a female pelvis or a male pelvis.

I always was confused by this line of arguing. "It's fictional so you can do whatever" is exactly what it is: an excuse to not do your homework or put in any effort with the implication that "it's all a lie anyway, so who cares".

The base cost for motion capture is $4,000 a day plus $20 a second for data solving + re-targeting. Plus you'd have to edit and fix the mocap data EXTENSIVELY for it to be usable. There's a reason why mocap is being used only in productions with large budgets.
As a person whose work is 3d, it's kinda offensive to hear things like "but animating in 3d is easier than animating 2d!" ^^" It's the same BS as claims like "but you aren't really DRAWING in digital art, the computer does all work for you!"

No matter small indie dev or large AAA dev, a female animations still need to be done and they still have to be paid for, since just slapping animations made for male model on female would just plainly look ugly, since they're actually just as exaggerated as the female ones, most of the time. And for the MC of the game that usually meaning basically doubling the animation budget for that character.
They just don't always want to outright state "we won't do that because we don't have necessary money".