Digital Divide

ERNEST ADAMS
Interactive Software Developer

BACKGROUND

Ernest Adams has developed interactive entertainment for 10 years. Among his credits are "RabbitJack's Casino," an early on -line game for America On-Line; "Third Degree," a multiplayer party game; and the highly successful "Madden NFL Football" simulation. Adams was also the founder of the Computer Game Developers' Association and is a regular speaker at the annual Game Developers' Conference. He writes a monthly column on game design for the industry webzine Gamasutra. Throughout his career, Adams has encouraged the game industry to take girls and women seriously as customers; to better the working conditions of women in the industry; and to improve the way women are portrayed in computer games.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Ernest Adams
e-mail: ewadams@designersnotebook.com
website: http://www.designersnotebook.com

INTERVIEW EXCERPTS FROM ERNEST ADAMS

Games for Girls

ADAMS: I don't think the strategy to create games specifically for girls is a good strategy. I think the reason that the games for girls that have come out so far haven't been very good is because they have a lot of preconceived notions about what girls are interested in or what girls like to do. And I think that is unfortunate. Some of the games that have come out for girls so far have tended to perpetuate old stereotypes about girls. The early games for girls that came out concentrated on issues involving clothing, make-up, hair and teen-age angst of various sorts. And I think that is unfortunate, frankly. It is a narrow perspective on girls to say that those are their only fantasies. I think girls have a lot of fantasies that are broader.

I think many of the games for girls that have been developed so far have been kind of feeble forms of entertainment that don't fulfill the potential the computer has to amaze and enthrall and delight. I would like to see games aimed at girls that are about tracking chimpanzees through the jungle with Jane Goodall. That are about flying around the world with Amelia Earhart. That might even be about, you know, going with Boadecia to do battle against the Romans. I mean, there are an awful lot of female role models in the world who have done a lot more than these kind of narrow activities. And I think it is a shame that we are not looking in that direction.

Software for Girls/Software for Boys

ADAMS: I think that putting “software for girls” on a box is a mistake. We don't say “software for whites.” We don't say “software for Jews” or “software for Italians.” If you say “software for girls,” what that is going to mean is that all those pieces of software are going to end up in one corner of the computer store and the girls are being told that they should go there and they should buy games from those boxes and nowhere else. And that is unfair to them. Also, I think little kids, in particular, have very distinct notions about sex roles that are no longer appropriate, but they form them automatically themselves and they decide that if something is right for one sex role, it is not right for the other. And so by saying software for girls, that will encourage little kids to think that the rest of the software is not for girls. And I think that is bad. You can have software which is made with girls in mind. You can have software that is marketed to girls, which is attractive to girls but I don't think you should say software for girls because it ghettoizes them. It makes them believe that this is all they are allowed to have. And right now in the computer store, that is going to be one tiny corner.

Girl Game Industry

ADAMS: My answer for people who claim that they have done a lot of research and that they are simply providing girls with what they want is that great works are never aimed at the least common denominator. The companies that do that kind of thing, that simply do research and provide what people want are probably going to make a mint and so, financially, that is fine. But I have hopes that the industry can do more, can make something better than that.

Play Patterns

ADAMS: Girls are interested in different challenges and they enjoy different rewards. The traditional computer game, many traditional computer games involve a lot of combat. And the reward is defeating something else, is destroying something. There are a lot explosions. In some games there is a lot of blood. Girls are not interested in having those experiences and they are not rewarded by having those experiences.

Girls and Boys Ability

ADAMS: I don't think there is any difference in girls' and boys' ability to use a computer whatsoever. I think girls and boys are absolutely as capable of using a computer. I do think there is a difference in how girls and boys approach learning about technological things. Not to suggest that girls are incapable but in that their approach is different. I have a theory about this, actually. I think men's so-called aptitude with mechanical things is really due to a willingness to try things even if they break them. And I think on the whole that women and girls are less willing to mess with something that they might break. And so on the whole, I think that keeps girls back a little bit from learning about these things. Because they are concerned about what happens if they do something wrong. Whereas the boys are perfectly happy to charge in and be damned of the consequences.

Double Standard

ADAMS: On the whole, having boys wanting to play with jet airplanes and the machineries of war, people don't feel is harmful and painful to the boys. Whereas raising girls to be constantly concerned about their appearance, people do feel is harmful and painful to the girls. So I think there are two different attitudes towards the stereotypes in the first place. Secondly, it took me a while to figure this through and to realize that it is inappropriate to apply a double standard. If you are going to have schlock stereotype games for boys, then you might as well have schlock stereotype games for girls. And it would be unfair to people trying to create games for girls to say that they must live up to a higher standard. What I object to is the hypocrisy of claiming you are doing something especially good for girls and then turning out schlock stereotype games. It is irritating to see people getting a lot of press, claiming they are doing something wonderful and new for girls and then turning out schlock for them that is no better for them than the material that is already out there.

Games for Both Sexes

ADAMS: I think it is possible to create games that are of interest to both sexes, simply by having a broad range of kinds of ways of playing. One of the things that I find very interesting is the possibility of having different sorts of win conditions. A game always has a win condition, you know, some way of describing that you have won. In the case of Monopoly, for example, the objective is to bankrupt all the other players. There was a board game called Careers that came out years ago where you decided at the beginning of the game how much of three different things you wanted to collect: love, money or fame. And they had to add up to sixty. So everybody had to collect up sixty of whatever it was. But you could set how much of whichever it was you wanted. And so you could decide on the balance for yourself. And then you went around the board trying to achieve your own goal before anyone else did.

I think it is time for some games like that so people can set goals that are of interest to them. If girls want to play a game that is not necessarily about violence, they can do it. A game like Civilization, for example. In Civilization, the object of the game is to grow your civilization. And you can do that through trade and commerce and exploration and various kinds of expansion. Or you can do it through military conquest. That is the perfect game for both sexes, because you can win the game in any of several different ways.

Content and Reality

ADAMS: I think every game, like every TV show and every movie and every book contributes to our sense of ourselves as a society and games that stereotype people, games that encourage people to do unpleasant things or to be unpleasant are encouraging society in that direction as well. Just because something is mass market does not mean that it isn't important. Often I hear from people, “They are only games. So what? Who cares?” But there is no such thing as “only.” You often hear people saying, “Don't look at me, I am just a reflection of my society.”

Creative works affect the society around, around them. And that is why, I think, people have a social obligation to create games in which they encourage worthwhile behaviors.