They better have female soldiers...

[Dark6-6 10]

I think some people take issue with the idea of a woman carrying a full kit having the same stats as a man...personally I would be fine having female pilots and more variety to the base personnel, but it seems a little silly to have them carrying a mk200 and running at full speed the same as men while carrying 30 kg of gear.

Still, nothing wrong with having the assets to enable people to use the models in their missions. Imagine something like Act of Valor where the woman is a CIA agent who is in country and then you fight to extract her etc. No reason to be so against it but it needs to be a much lower priority.

[daveallen10 35]

I think some people take issue with the idea of a woman carrying a full kit having the same stats as a man...personally I would be fine having female pilots and more variety to the base personnel, but it seems a little silly to have them carrying a mk200 and running at full speed the same as men while carrying 30 kg of gear.

Still, nothing wrong with having the assets to enable people to use the models in their missions. Imagine something like Act of Valor where the woman is a CIA agent who is in country and then you fight to extract her etc. No reason to be so against it but it needs to be a much lower priority.

Plenty of women can carry 30 kg or gear and run. Plenty of men cannot. Boot camp determines who is and is not cut out for combat--regardless of sex. There is absolutely no reason why there would not be some female character models, at least on the NATO side. I can't expect that Iran would be much more progressive by 2030, although they do have women in some military roles.

[Dark6-6 10]

Again, I said as fast as a man. Making them identical when they are not is a silly argument and I don't understand why people want to ignore human physiology and thousands of years of evolution to pretend women should be in coed MMA fights all of a sudden. I completely agree that there are plenty of bad women out there.

Assuming they don't lower standards like they have for fire

men

and police, then those women will look identical to men. Not seeing the benefit of allocating resources towards making some models of a 110 pound girl with cute hair when those women aren't going to be noticeable under all the gear and a uniform. And the fact is that woman isn't going to be able to carry as much as fast, and that includes dragging my ass and my gear when I get shot. I'm all for women in the military, as long as they can meet the same standards. It is what it is. I don't want a 5'4", 110 pound man with me either. Not sexism, just pragmatism.

[mordeaniischaos 3]

^^ This.

Looking at the single player campaign description "Evolve from a lone prey into a military commander", and some of the other background info that we've recieved, it seems that Miller will land on the island and start recruiting the subjugated locals into a militia in order to overthrow the occupants (probably Iran/China).

It would make sense for women to play an active role along with the men. I would also love to see some real female characters with an actual personality, since those are few and far between in shooters.

to be fair, I don't think the men will have actual personality. This is ArmA, I wouldn't want them to really. Just stilted dialogue :D

---------- Post added at 20:27 ---------- Previous post was at 20:25 ----------

i never understand why a male player wants to use a female characters in games. seeing all those 35kg, child faced, japanese anime girls with 20kg guns and warpaint makes me realy sick...

please no female soldiers in arma series!

WHAT ARE YOU EVEN TALKING ABOUT? Anime girls? What? Seriously, I'm baffled by this whole comment.

[Sneakson 1]

Why is this thread alive lol? Is anyone objecting?

My 5 cents are that character customization in video games is a big deal nowadays. Yeah? I’ve read its origins are in Asia where people struggle to achieve individuality in multi-million cities. Evidently Westerners hold their individuality in no less regard and while many different approaches have been taken to character design in video games the customization approach is becoming all the more common. It’s apparent that gamers like to play characters that they can create themselves and often this character bears some resemblance to their actual selves if often idealized. Equally apparent is that people prefer to play their own gender.

It’s all about the sense of ownership and relationship that character customization creates.

If the army consists of more men than women that is completely beside the point because video gamers in the 21st century indisputably and undeniably consist of about 50% of either gender.

Historically video games mostly portray men because men have been most of the gamers there was. The earliest record I’ve heard of video gaming women are that the original Game Boy surveyed that equal amounts of men and women played it. And that led to many more games being targeted to women and being able to play as one in the second generation of Pokémon.

Today in Sweden 52% of all gamers are men, 48% women. And more than 80% of everyone play video games.

So now we know that character customization is big today. And equality. Most people likes to play their own gender every once in a while. So add women.

If there are women in the army which there is it doesn’t matter if strong women are less common than strong men in the army. We don’t have any system that makes sure the ethnical ratios on all servers are kept at a constant realistic ratio and thus should allow women in no matter that they’re women and no matter if this leads to online play having more women than would be in modern armies.

Not to mention that ARMA is trying to be a cut above Battlefield. How about women?

Because it is fashionable these days, "important figures" of gaming "journalism" suggest that it makes you progressive and smart if you pretend to care about stuff like this. It's the hip thing to do.

Not being a sexist is fashionable today indeed. Remember this?

http://www.1up.com/news/ubisoft-issues-cease-desist-somethingawful

Edited June 20, 2013 by Sneakson

[Dark6-6 10]

For the same reason that they shouldn't "balance" Blufor weapons to be equivalent in every way to Opfor ones.

This is a combat sim. Seeing women being held to lower standards currently for PT scores and knowing the washout rates make it unlikely that 1% could be eligible, I seriously wonder why people are pushing for this so hard. The FET teams and the lioness program have shown women are tough and willing to fight, but they don't hold up to the strain as well, their lower backs get damaged, their knees blow out, and that isn't even related to their lower muscle mass. Once you get into heavy exertion and high heat which makes it harder to recover, they degrade even worse. I think it's cruel to put people who aren't suited for combat into a meatgrinder. Women make good pilots and fine support staff, intelligence, etc...all of which are just as mission critical. This is a game about infantry.

I'd be all for having them just for guerillas and resistance fighters though. Honestly, I'd like to see an expansion set in Africa with child soldiers since that is an issue most companies won't touch, but full of heroic bravery in the sea of darkness. I'd love to see a Black Hawk Down/Save the Refugee type missions.

[Sneakson 1]

For the same reason that they shouldn't "balance" Blufor weapons to be equivalent in every way to Opfor ones.

This is a combat sim. Seeing women being held to lower standards currently for PT scores and knowing the washout rates make it unlikely that 1% could be eligible, I seriously wonder why people are pushing for this so hard. The FET teams and the lioness program have shown women are tough and willing to fight, but they don't hold up to the strain as well, their lower backs get damaged, their knees blow out, and that isn't even related to their lower muscle mass. Once you get into heavy exertion and high heat which makes it harder to recover, they degrade even worse. I think it's cruel to put people who aren't suited for combat into a meatgrinder. Women make good pilots and fine support staff, intelligence, etc...all of which are just as mission critical. This is a game about infantry.

I'd be all for having them just for guerillas and resistance fighters though. Honestly, I'd like to see an expansion set in Africa with child soldiers since that is an issue most companies won't touch, but full of heroic bravery in the sea of darkness. I'd love to see a Black Hawk Down/Save the Refugee type missions.

Would it really completely and thoroughly break your immersion to see a woman in this game? Is that really on the top of your immersion breaking list right now? You have to understand that it does come out pretty misogynic.

[zipgun 0]

Damn straight! As one myself a female/LEO not soldier. I hate playing as a DUDE...:p

[Dark6-6 10]

Is Arma a Simulator or not? I don't think stating facts about women having less muscle mass due to not having the testosterone of a man as misogynistic. What about women being brave or willing to fight themselves into dogmeat while their bodies shut down seemed to be out of order?

I see this in the fire service now that they have lowered standards for women, and it is frankly disgusting.

I don't care if it is a man or a woman who has my back, I just want them to pass the same testing, not have some quota to fill determine an "equality". The fact is that we don't have coed sports because men run faster, jump higher, and hit harder. For every tough, capable, strong woman, there is a bigger man. I am not saying this makes them better people, but it makes them a better warfighter. If they are not as capable as a man would be, they are a liability to every person in their unit.

So, unless they remain truly up to the same standards, and don't cave to pressure to lower them as they have for firemen and police, I don't think we would see even 1% in combat roles, and much less than that in special forces.

[zipgun 0]

Is Arma a Simulator or not? I don't think stating facts about women having less muscle mass due to not having the testosterone of a man as misogynistic. What about women being brave or willing to fight themselves into dogmeat while their bodies shut down seemed to be out of order?

I see this in the fire service now that they have lowered standards for women, and it is frankly disgusting.

I don't care if it is a man or a woman who has my back, I just want them to pass the same testing, not have some quota to fill determine an "equality". The fact is that we don't have coed sports because men run faster, jump higher, and hit harder. For every tough, capable, strong woman, there is a bigger man. I am not saying this makes them better people, but it makes them a better warfighter. If they are not as capable as a man would be, they are a liability to every person in their unit.

So, unless they remain truly up to the same standards, and don't cave to pressure to lower them as they have for firemen and police, I don't think we would see even 1% in combat roles, and much less than that in special forces.

I agree on equal testing but from what Ive seen only the US does "Lower the standard" this sort of nonsense. Hell just look at the IDF, Russian ,Ex Warsaw Pact and many middle east countries have had woman fighting for decades along side men, with the same training. When I joined the police the test and training is no different than for males or females. I have relatives in the US who are in LE and the military. One female cousin works for the CHP and they have equal training and my other female cousin is a fighter pilot in the US Navy (she now flies an FA-18 and during training took a lot of crap from some rude and sexist male applicants most of whom flunked out lol. ) all had the same training. All you said was nothing new. Just new for the US. And look at BUD's training the fail rate is over 80% and its all MALE. And do you know who mainly passes? No not the big macho types with big attitudes. Its actually the smaller quite professional guy who has the mental and physical endurance who usually makes it. As I have both male and female relatives in nearly all the branches of the Armed US forces one of my in laws is in the Marines and the fail rate for just getting into the Marines is high even for dudes.

1st off size does not matter in a fight! Ask anyone in LE or even the military. A smaller person can be much stronger than a bigger person. Height or mass means jack and I mainly only hear that BS in the US. It's endurance, technique and skill. Im 5.9 and taller than some male officers some are stronger some not. All depends on the individual.

For every strongman or woman there always is going to be a stronger one. So that's a mute point as well.

And are we not only talking about a game? But in RL sure woman can be fighting soldiers most of the world has had many for decades, most all except the US, LOL! I mean really woman were only allowed into the military since Clinton. Firefighters even more recently and I agree lower standards to get em in is not only disgusting its a real danger to fellow firefighters and the people their there to save. But of all the US police or Fed LE depts that I know of , NONE of them lower standards only FF's as we do inter department work with the US and other countries at times, so far I did ride along's with the LAPD, SFPD, Honolulu PD and West Covina PD and Ive been told training is the same sure some woman are bad at the job but so are guys but most get weeded out during probation. IMO to most Americans it's too much too fast and many of you don't know how to deal with it.

It's so very simple, SAME testing and training for both sexes and viola no problem. It's your politicians and people with their stereotypes and old thinking that's the problem. Time to join the rest of the world and or the 21st century.

[Ash712 1]

This topic has gone waaaaaayyy out of hand...

Some of these comments make me sad/ashamed to be a part of this community IMHO.

I've played with a few women in the ArmA community, and all they want is a female character model to represent their gender. PERIOD.

They aren't even asking for it to move/animate more like a woman etc., and could care less about that...they just feel left out!

It's a rather fair request that has NOTHING to do with simulation/real life, or arguments about a woman's physical abilities etc.

If you get offended because women want to be represented in a videogame...then something is seriously wrong with you! :mad:

[Dark6-6 10]

Size absolutely matters in a fight. There is a reason MMA matches are not between 110 pound and 250 pound fighters. Likewise, why they don't have coed matches, or even sports. Again, I think women make great pilots, I am aware that women like Kim Campbell are as bad as any man. I think they are also capable of light infantry roles like MP or other security forces.

But that isn't an infantry role, and Arma is an infantry simulator.

Using your example of the IDF, a study done in 2003 after integration showed: women have "a very

low likelihood of surviving" in a role such as

infantry fighter, operator of heavy machinery

in the Engineering Corps, tank crew member or

fighter in a commando or special force. "

They are also held to lower physical standards.

Firefighters have many of the same issues. One example for LA (http://www.laweekly.com/2008-01-24/news/the-gender-boondoggle/4/) and there are many other examples in almost every major city.

Proud to be an equal opportunity employer (No matter who it kills) indeed.

While I respect the work many women are doing capably, and serving in mission critical roles, a long report from a woman I have a lot of respect for has all but cemented my thoughts with her experiences:

"As a company grade 1302 combat engineer officer with 5 years of active service and two combat deployments, one to Iraq and the other to Afghanistan, I was able to participate in and lead numerous combat operations. In Iraq as the II MEF Director, Lioness Program, I served as a subject matter expert for II MEF, assisting regimental and battalion commanders on ways to integrate female Marines into combat operations. I primarily focused on expanding the mission of the Lioness Program from searching females to engaging local nationals and information gathering, broadening the ways females were being used in a wide variety of combat operations from census patrols to raids. In Afghanistan I deployed as a 1302 and led a combat engineer platoon in direct support of Regimental Combat Team 8, specifically operating out of the Upper Sangin Valley. My platoon operated for months at a time, constructing patrol bases (PBs) in support of 3d Battalion, 5th Marines; 1st Battalion, 5th Marines; 2d Reconnaissance Battalion; and 3d Battalion, 4th Marines. This combat experience, in particular, compelled me to raise concern over the direction and overall reasoning behind opening the 03XX field.

Who is driving this agenda? I am not personally hearing female Marines, enlisted or officer, pounding on the doors of Congress claiming that their inability to serve in the infantry violates their right to equality. Shockingly, this isn’t even a congressional agenda. This issue is being pushed by several groups, one of which is a small committee of civilians appointed by the Secretary of Defense called the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Service (DACOWITS). Their mission is to advise the Department of Defense (DoD) on recommendations, as well as matters of policy, pertaining to the well-being of women in the Armed Services from recruiting to employment. Members are selected based on their prior military experience or experience with women’s workforce issues. I certainly applaud and appreciate DACOWITS’ mission; however, as it pertains to the issue of women in the infantry, it’s very surprising to see that none of the committee members are on active duty or have any recent combat or relevant operational experience relating to the issue they are attempting to change. I say this because, at the end of the day, it’s the active duty servicemember who will ultimately deal with the results of their initiatives, not those on the outside looking in. As of now, the Marine Corps hasn’t been directed to integrate, but perhaps the Corps is anticipating the inevitable—DoD pressuring the Corps to comply with DACOWITS’ agenda as the Army has already “rogered up†to full integration. Regardless of what the Army decides to do, it’s critical to emphasize that we are not the Army; our operational speed and tempo, along with our overall mission as the Nation’s amphibious force-in-readiness, are fundamentally different than that of our sister Service. By no means is this distinction intended as disrespectful to our incredible Army. My main point is simply to state that the Marine Corps and the Army are different; even if the Army ultimately does fully integrate all military occupational fields, that doesn’t mean the Corps should follow suit.

I understand that there are female servicemembers who have proven themselves to be physically, mentally, and morally capable of leading and executing combat-type operations; as a result, some of these Marines may feel qualified for the chance of taking on the role of 0302. In the end, my main concern is not whether women are capable of conducting combat operations, as we have already proven that we can hold our own in some very difficult combat situations; instead, my main concern is a question of longevity. Can women endure the physical and physiological rigors of sustained combat operations, and are we willing to accept the attrition and medical issues that go along with integration?

As a young lieutenant, I fit the mold of a female who would have had a shot at completing IOC, and I am sure there was a time in my life where I would have volunteered to be an infantryman. I was a star ice hockey player at Bowdoin College, a small elite college in Maine, with a major in government and law. At 5 feet 3 inches I was squatting 200 pounds and benching 145 pounds when I graduated in 2007. I completed Officer Candidates School (OCS) ranked 4 of 52 candidates, graduated 48 of 261 from TBS, and finished second at MOS school. I also repeatedly scored far above average in all female-based physical fitness tests (for example, earning a 292 out of 300 on the Marine physical fitness test). Five years later, I am physically not the woman I once was and my views have greatly changed on the possibility of women having successful long careers while serving in the infantry. I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion, that we haven’t even begun to analyze and comprehend the gender-specific medical issues and overall physical toll continuous combat operations will have on females.

I was a motivated, resilient second lieutenant when I deployed to Iraq for 10 months, traveling across the Marine area of operations (AO) and participating in numerous combat operations. Yet, due to the excessive amount of time I spent in full combat load, I was diagnosed with a severe case of restless leg syndrome. My spine had compressed on nerves in my lower back causing neuropathy which compounded the symptoms of restless leg syndrome. While this injury has certainly not been enjoyable, Iraq was a pleasant experience compared to the experiences I endured during my deployment to Afghanistan. At the beginning of my tour in Helmand Province, I was physically capable of conducting combat operations for weeks at a time, remaining in my gear for days if necessary and averaging 16-hour days of engineering operations in the heart of Sangin, one of the most kinetic and challenging AOs in the country. There were numerous occasions where I was sent to a grid coordinate and told to build a PB from the ground up, serving not only as the mission commander but also the base commander until the occupants (infantry units) arrived 5 days later. In most of these situations, I had a sergeant as my assistant commander, and the remainder of my platoon consisted of young, motivated NCOs. I was the senior Marine making the final decisions on construction concerns, along with 24-hour base defense and leading 30 Marines at any given time. The physical strain of enduring combat operations and the stress of being responsible for the lives and well-being of such a young group in an extremely kinetic environment were compounded by lack of sleep, which ultimately took a physical toll on my body that I couldn’t have foreseen.

By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment. Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported. Regardless, I can say with 100 percent assurance that despite my accomplishments, there is no way I could endure the physical demands of the infantrymen whom I worked beside as their combat load and constant deployment cycle would leave me facing medical separation long before the option of retirement. I understand that everyone is affected differently; however, I am confident that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.

There is a drastic shortage of historical data on female attrition or medical ailments of women who have executed sustained combat operations. This said, we need only to review the statistics from our entry-level schools to realize that there is a significant difference in the physical longevity between male and female Marines. At OCS the attrition rate for female candidates in 2011 was historically low at 40 percent, while the male candidates attrite at a much lower rate of 16 percent. Of candidates who were dropped from training because they were injured or not physically qualified, females were breaking at a much higher rate than males, 14 percent versus 4 percent. The same trends were seen at TBS in 2011; the attrition rate for females was 13 percent versus 5 percent for males, and 5 percent of females were found not physically qualified compared with 1 percent of males. Further, both of these training venues have physical fitness standards that are easier for females; at IOC there is one standard regardless of gender. The attrition rate for males attending IOC in 2011 was 17 percent. Should female Marines ultimately attend IOC, we can expect significantly higher attrition rates and long-term injuries for women.

There have been many working groups and formal discussions recently addressing what changes would be necessary to the current IOC period of instruction in order to accommodate both genders without producing an underdeveloped or incapable infantry officer. Not once was the word “lower†used, but let’s be honest, “modifying†a standard so that less physically or mentally capable individuals (male or female) can complete a task is called “lowering the standardâ€! The bottom line is that the enemy doesn’t discriminate, rounds will not slow down, and combat loads don’t get any lighter, regardless of gender or capability. Even more so, the burden of command does not diminish for a male or female; a leader must gain the respect and trust of his/her Marines in combat. Not being able to physically execute to the standards already established at IOC, which have been battle tested and proven, will produce a slower operational speed and tempo resulting in increased time of exposure to enemy forces and a higher risk of combat injury or death. For this reason alone, I would ask everyone to step back and ask themselves, does this integration solely benefit the individual or the Marine Corps as a whole, as every leader’s focus should be on the needs of the institution and the Nation, not the individual?

Which leads one to really wonder, what is the benefit of this potential change? The Marine Corps is not in a shortage of willing and capable young male second lieutenants who would gladly take on the role of infantry officers. In fact we have men fighting to be assigned to the coveted position of 0302. In 2011, 30 percent of graduating TBS lieutenants listed infantry in their top three requested MOSs. Of those 30 percent, only 47 percent were given the MOS. On the other hand, perhaps this integration is an effort to remove the glass ceiling that some observers feel exists for women when it comes to promotions to general officer ranks. Opening combat arms MOSs, particularly the infantry, such observers argue, allows women to gain the necessary exposure of leading Marines in combat, which will then arguably increase the chances for female Marines serving in strategic leadership assignments. As stated above, I have full faith that female Marines can successfully serve in just about every MOS aside from the infantry. Even if a female can meet the short-term physical, mental, and moral leadership requirements of an infantry officer, by the time that she is eligible to serve in a strategic leadership position, at the 20-year mark or beyond, there is a miniscule probability that she’ll be physically capable of serving at all. Again, it becomes a question of longevity.

Despite my personal opinion regarding the incorporation of females into the infantry community, I am not blind to the fact that females play a key role in countering the gender and cultural barriers we are facing at war, and we do have a place in combat operations. As such, a potential change that I do recommend considering strongly for female Marine officers is to designate a new secondary MOS (0305) for a Marine serving as female engagement team (FET) officer in charge (OIC). 0305s would be employed in the same way we employ drill instructors, as we do not need an enduring FET entity but an existing capability able to stand up based on operational requirements. Legitimizing a program that is already operational in the Corps would greatly benefit both the units utilizing FETs and the women who serve as FET OICs. Unfortunately, FET OICs today are not properly screened and trained for this mission. I propose that those being considered for FET OIC be prescreened and trained through a modified IOC with an appropriately adjusted physical expectation. FET OICs need to better understand the infantry culture and mindset and work with their 0302 brethren to incorporate FET assistance during specific phases of operations to properly prepare them to serve as the subject matter experts to a regimental- or battalion-level infantry commander. Through joint OIC training, both 0302s and FET OICs can start to learn how to integrate capabilities and accomplish their mission individually and collectively. This, in my mind, is a much more viable, cost-effective solution, with high reward for the Marine Corps and the Nation, and it will also directly improve the capabilities of FET OICs.

Finally, what are the Marine Corps standards, particularly physical fitness standards, based on—performance and capability or equality? We abide by numerous discriminators, such as height and weight standards. As multiple Marine Corps Gazette articles have highlighted, Marines who can run first-class physical fitness tests and who have superior MOS proficiency are separated from the Service if they do not meet the Marine Corps’ height and weight standards. Further, tall Marines are restricted from flying specific platforms, and color blind Marines are faced with similar restrictions. We recognize differences in mental capabilities of Marines when we administer the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and use the results to eliminate/open specific fields. These standards are designed to ensure safety, quality, and the opportunity to be placed in a field in which one can sustain and succeed.

Which once again leads me, as a ground combat-experienced female Marine Corps officer, to ask, what are we trying to accomplish by attempting to fully integrate women into the infantry? For those who dictate policy, changing the current restrictions associated with women in the infantry may not seem significant to the way the Marine Corps operates. I vehemently disagree; this potential change will rock the foundation of our Corps for the worse and will weaken what has been since 1775 the world’s most lethal fighting force. In the end, for DACOWITS and any other individual or organization looking to increase opportunities for female Marines, I applaud your efforts and say thank you. However, for the long-term health of our female Marines, the Marine Corps, and U.S. national security, steer clear of the Marine infantry community when calling for more opportunities for females. Let’s embrace our differences to further hone in on the Corps’ success instead of dismantling who we are to achieve a political agenda. Regardless of the outcome, we will be “Semper Fidelis†and remain focused on our mission to protect and defend the United States of America.

- See more at: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/article/get-over-it-we-are-not-all-created-equal#sthash.L7ZQjFZF.dpuf"

[Tuliq 2]

Its 2035 who knows maybe they are jacked up on steroids and nanos.

[Dark6-6 10]

This topic has gone waaaaaayyy out of hand...

Some of these comments make me sad/ashamed to be a part of this community IMHO.

I've played with a few women in the ArmA community, and all they want is a female character model to represent their gender. PERIOD.

They aren't even asking for it to move/animate more like a woman etc., and could care less about that...they just feel left out!

It's a rather fair request that has NOTHING to do with simulation/real life, or arguments about a woman's physical abilities etc.

If you get offended because women want to be represented in a videogame...then something is seriously wrong with you! :mad:

Put tac googles and a helmet on a woman with body armor and it is now identical to the male model.

[nodunit 397]

Except that's not the point.

[Dark6-6 10]

I don't take issue with animated female models, only the idea that "They better have them" and that it is a high priority. If you had the option to choose between female models and 6 new camo patterns, that's an easy choice.

I think it would be cool to have a woman pulling you out of a hot LZ, and maybe more women would be inclined to play if they felt represented.

[PN11A 2]

Again, BIS should lay the frame work with what fits their story line. From their add-on makers can run with it all. If it never comes through though I personally will work with anyone wanting to make a cst mod.

[x3kj 1247]

This topic has gone waaaaaayyy out of hand...

Some of these comments make me sad/ashamed to be a part of this community IMHO.

Yes, and people take this way to seriously imo...

i'm pretty sure the devs would include female models if it wouldn't be so much work (for the whole gear customisation to work you need a female version for every cloth/equipment piece)

Plus they might have to change animations and/or the model skeletton to be able to be smaller / whatever. Additionally they would need to record a new voice and finetune it for the voicesystem.

Work-Gain ratio is pretty bad there, so they focus on other stuff...

[dragon01 902]

Looks like the Pentagon has stated it's opinion on the issue: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/jun/17/Pentagon-women-combat-seals-riverine/all/?print

Riverine and SEALs are opening to women, other services will probably follow. I guess it'd now be simply unrealistic if ArmA III didn't include female troopers. Yes, implementing this might take some work, but I believe it's worth it. Especially that female body, voices and at least some clothes need to be made anyway, for female civilians, so I think the extra work to make them also work as troopers wouldn't be that great. It'd also avoid awkwardness when, if playing as a female civilian, you can't pick up certain items for some arbitrary reason.

[motorizer 12]

If you had the option to choose between female models and 6 new camo patterns, that's an easy choice.

It would be an easy choice yeah, modders are already churning out camo patterns at a fast rate, it's just textures...it might take them months to do a female model so it would be better if the devs did them.

I do agree that demanding them as a high priority is a bit uncalled for, but I think they should be in, in realistic roles, but with full capability.

Then mission builders can give them the more unrealistic frontline special forces type roles if they want to

Why oh why do gamers on forums always argue against adding more content? it's not just this issue, it's everything, in every game, ever....

Failing that, add them as DLC, if it came with a small campaign playing as a female pilot or something and was reasonably priced I'm sure it would sell a few copies, a similar thing to the arma 2 DLCs

Edited June 22, 2013 by motorizer

[nodunit 397]

If they follow the same style as Arma 2 then there will likely be female civilians.

It's less of an arguement about content as much as functionality.

[Dark6-6 10]

It would be an easy choice yeah, modders are already churning out camo patterns at a fast rate, it's just textures...it might take them months to do a female model so it would be better if the devs did them.

I do agree that demanding them as a high priority is a bit uncalled for, but I think they should be in, in realistic roles, but with full capability.

Then mission builders can give them the more unrealistic frontline special forces type roles if they want to

Why oh why do gamers on forums always argue against adding more content? it's not just this issue, it's everything, in every game, ever....

Failing that, add them as DLC, if it came with a small campaign playing as a female pilot or something and was reasonably priced I'm sure it would sell a few copies, a similar thing to the arma 2 DLCs

I'm arguing against wasting resources on something this trivial. Of all the animation and modeling, voice work that goes into this, time better spent of guns, vehicles, or more green army units. It's about a return on investment.

In terms of realism, having women flying and on base isn't that unusual. Make a female head on top of a male body.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2

[motorizer 12]

Make a female head on top of a male body.

I disagree with that, do it properly or not at all, as a player you'd see more of your arms and hands than your head. Plus they are a professional game studio, they can't put out something that looks like a half baked mod

Having said that using the male skeleton and animations would be acceptable, but not the body...that would need a new one, but if they kept the same basic proportions and didn't go overboard with the chest then the vests and stuff probably wouldn't need reworking

[metalcraze 290]

If you get offended because women want to be represented in a videogame...then something is seriously wrong with you! :mad:

Why are you getting offended that there are none?

Most "against"-people are not opposing females in a game. They are opposing people who whine that the biggest issue with the game is that they can't pick female which makes such people look like children who also don't care about what ArmA is.

Females are in a game? Whatever. No females in a game? Whatever. Gameplay must be the top priority and if no female models means that we will get more/better done weapons, cars, tanks - then so be it.

[Dark6-6 10]

New body requires replacing every piece of clothing, vests, and everything. Again, just seems like a waste. This is a combat infantry sim.

Women are not in combat infantry.

I would rather have a new helicopter or more weapons, etc.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2