IGA Interview with Glixel (11-2016)

That's a poor reason for choosing a female lead as the main character, IMO. No one here on the forums seems to have a problem with it, but time will tell how well a female lead is received by the public.

I cringe to think of what they might do with Miriam just because she is female. I would have been OK with the "I'm the main character and I kill the enemy. Done." bit for Miriam. She doesn't really need more fleshing out than that, IMO. But it seems IGA has more than that planned for Miriam.

Overall a great article, and I was glad to sink me teeth into it. Thanks, crocodile . :)

One piece that I found interesting is IGA's 'conscious' effort to establish a timeline. The whole 'separate but in the same galaxy' motif just really sticks with me, and strikes me as very cool. I think it's very clever on IGA's part. :) Plus it's fun to see the gothic, evil takes on some of the darkest times of history.

Another piece I wanna point out is the bit about female VS male lead protagonists:

"Your past games have been pretty evenly split between male and female lead characters. Why did you go with Miriam for Bloodstained?"

"...It was clear that there weren't enough games out there with female leads..."

I really liked this. Something in the gaming industry (at least in my opinion) that seems like such an underrated demographic are the number of female protagonists. I think that there should definitely be a lot more than there are. I mean the population of the planet seems to be roughly even, why not do the same with video games...? And I also tend to find that I like female protagonists better, hehe.

One more piece that was VERY touchy to pick out, (And I'm even surprised that Glixel was ambitious enough to ask this) was this bit:

"It's interesting that you mention that male characters are typically portrayed in a certain way. Would you consider making a male character who's gay, or has a disability – something that differs from the typical male hero?"

And IGA's response:

"Ultimately, this is a mass-market piece of entertainment that a lot of people could potentially buy, and I don't know the culture of these scenarios well enough to feel that I can comfortably get inside it without disappointing or hurting people's feelings. So, the benefit of doing something new and innovative and choosing those different types of characters are definitely there, but there is an underlying danger that if you create that character with the best intentions and present it in the wrong or a stereotypical way, that you are going to end up alienating the very groups that you wanted to try and support."

I just wanna applaud IGA on this, and honestly I think he made the right decision with this answer. In my humble opinion, (and not just cause I'm an openly gay man, this applies to a lot of different scenarios) if you don't know enough about what your are going to work with, then don't do it. Sure there are a lot of people out there who want to portray certain demographics and certain people in particular and peculiar ways that are unorthodox, but the fact of the matter is, and just what IGA himself said, if 'ya don't know enough about what you're talking about, you may end up hurting those you are trying to help, or hinder those demographics that are few in number to begin with. Well said, IGA. :)

All in all though, a very good article, and very satiating for my Bloodstained itches that can't be scratched. I enjoyed it very much. :P

Welp. Guess you can assume that the next few Bloodstained games will have a female protagonist then.

I generally agree with the sentiment of "if I have no idea what I'm doing I shouldn't ignorantly plunge forward". That being said I think there are two issues here:

A) If a writer, designer, developer, etc. wants to do something (good) but recognizes their ignorance on a subject (and its good to recognize one's limits)  then the answer shouldn't be to throw their hands up into the air and say they give up but rather to correct their ignorance. They could do research (read some books, watch movies, go online, etc.) or even better - talk to people who would be well versed on the subject. If the question is "how to I write a gay character well" then go read some books or watch some films that you know are held in high regard that feature gay characters. Just go talk to some gay people about their life experiences, what they like/dislike and what they consider to be positive representations in media. IGA is of course under no obligation to write a gay character into any of his games but if that is something he wants to do, and I can guarantee you that many people would appreciate it, he shouldn't give up but rather learn how to do it well (or at least well enough). Feel free to replace "gay" with any other minority/gender/religious/etc. group.

B) Writing for a gay (or again any other minority/gender/religious/etc. group) character only has to be as hard as you make it out to be. Such characters don't actually have to be written any differently. That aspect of a character doesn't have to inform or overtake all other aspects of their characterization. There is value in deeply exploring that aspect of their character but you don't have to if you don't want to.

As an example lets just say you just had a game staring some badass, beefy vampire hunter dude. Demons/Dracula/etc. steal away his "beloved" and you have to fight through the underworld/a castle/etc. to get them back. At the end of the game you defeat Satan or whoever and get your beloved back - who also happens to be a dude. You hug, maybe kiss, escape the collapsing evil lair and live happily ever after. CONGRATS! You just made a game featuring a positive representation of a gay main character. It required very little flexing of your writer's brain and you offended nobody.

Another example, perhaps the ur-example though along a different axis, is Samus Aran of the Metroid series. Samus is a massively popular character but her gender was never relevant to her characterization with the exception of Other M. Samus could have been written as a male but it did matter that she was female and lots of people loved her status as an iconic, badass, female character - those are still rare in videogaming. Sakamoto is a great game designer but he can't write his way out of a paper bag. When he tried to play up Samus' femininity, because he had no idea what he was doing and clearly had some sexist tendencies in him, we got Other M. A better man would have asked someone else to do the writing or be cognizant of his shortcomings and try to rectify them. I he couldn't do either he could have stuck with what was done in the past - not write Samus as if her femininity was a huge part of her characterization even though it was an important part of her character.

As I said, being cognizant of your limitations or what you are ignorant of is very important. Other M is a good example of a man who went forward with a plan he clearly was not adept at executing. However there are options aside from "give up" or "do it anyway even if I have no idea what I'm doing". If everybody just gave up then and there then the range of media that were to ever be created would become way too narrow and samey. If you want to do something outside your current range of expertise, don't retreat from what you don't know but rather try to educate yourself so you know more


Maybe I'm wrong, and please forgive me if I am, but there seems to be an underlying presumption that a female protagonist/character has to be justified? "I want my game to have a female lead" is just as good a reason to have one as any other. A male lead shouldn't be considered a default and the only reason it has come to anywhere near that point is because of some unfortunate gender norms. There was no Bloodstained narrative that was locked in stone written with a male lead in mind that then got thrown out like halfway into production or writing. Rather we have a narrative in its nascent stages still in constant flux - that's the best time to make big changes. You talk about "vision" as if its not a malleable concept (it always is and often changes from start to finish of any project), as if it couldn't be better in its newer form than its later form or as if anything was forced on IGA by outside forces rather than him voluntarily rethinking what he wanted to do in recognition of the wants, needs, and deficiencies of the world around him. Nothing IGA did here was wrong.

crocodile You bring up a very good point, and I'm glad you brought that answer to light. :)


On the bit about using a gay character, you are absolutely 120% correct. Yes, it certainly wouldn't hurt to become educated on the topic, and THEN create something a lot more premeditated with the data you collected second hand. I get that. But what I meant was...I don't think IGA would take the risk.


I personally think it's a lot more than just representing that community or whatever demographic in a bad way. Let's think about it. If a type of game has the same feel and the same characters and the same style, then it's mostly going to consistently appeal to the same type of gamer. Now if you do something, like use a gay character, or someone with a disability, as Glixel had suggested, that could potentially throw things for a spin. (Albeit small, but it could be something that could irk some people) Let's say that you nail the character, get everything down to the letter, and you successfully pull off a non-stereotypical gay guy/girl, or someone with a disability. While yes, you may be representing that community or demographic well, there could be other potential causes for concern. Like let's say someone is homophobic. Or let's say that someone has the given disability that ails the main protagonist, and they find it offensive to include in a video game. Sure these people are a bit on the smaller mind side of the spectrum, but they're still the fans nonetheless. While you'll be representing things from a proactive, yet different stand point, you could deter others with that small change.


Shit...how do I wanna say this...I feel like I'm talking in circles.


Basically, it could end up like this:

Ex.

IGAvania uses a gay character.
LGBT community likes this.
Homophobes and small minded people dislike this.
Homophobes and small minded people bash on LGBT community.
LGBT community dislikes this.
Everyone is unhappy.

So while yes, it doesn't directly affect the LGBT community, the progressive and potential ramifications of such an act could end up touching base upon the start, as well. (And this is just one possible example of things going wrong) And not only would IGA have to be prepared to present a desirable character that doesn't follow stereotypes, but IGA would have to be informed enough to have the knowledge and insight associated with potential ramifications to deal with them as well, like the above example. So yes, it really should be as simple as the example you gave, crocodile , but at the same time, I don't think IGA wants to take a risk like that, especially since the work he's done has always been in his comfort zone. :)

Yeah, IGA has talked about his decision to use a female lead in Bloodstained before, the slight discrepancy in how that is described here could be a translation thing or just a different facet of how he's looking at it. It's not JUST the perception that games need more female leads, but that is a part of it.

I think there's also another objective truth to this - as far as the fan community goes, you will see more fan response and creations of a female lead character than you would a male. If the main character was Johannes or Gebel, you wouldn't see nearly as many cosplays and fanart. Creative-minded people I think often identify with/enjoy depicting female characters and/or are female themselves, so it works out quite well for the game's outreach to game fans/other fan communities. There also wouldn't have been all of those cute promotional Miriam images we got. Basically, good female characters can market themselves lol.

As far as disabilities and all that, I'm legally blind and IGA can totally use me in the game. I won't mind at all!