Homebrews with female characters

[DRW]

The problem isn't how you asked the question (this time), it's how you respond to answers to the question. Say you asked for homebrew NES games starring women. I might give you 4, Tepples might give you 6, Dwedit might give you 2. That's only 12 games.

Well, since my question is not an academic one, like in:
"Do you know any games with female main characters?"
"Metroid."
"Thanks. Riddle solved."
but since I'm actually looking for a game for my collection, I cannot just take the first few answers, say "Thank you" and be done with it.

I'm looking for a game with a female protagonist in the same way "Tomb Raider" has a female protagonist who is an action heroine who fights against evil. So, if somebody suggests me "Super Mario Bros. 2" or "Little Red Riding Hood", well, of course I have to say that these games don't meet my criteria.

Just try the 12 games.

Why do you think that I haven't tried them?
As I said many, many times now: I've tried every game that officially came out. And since most people in this thread did not suggest homebrews as I originally asked for, yes, I can shoot down their suggestions in an instant because I know the game already.

On the other hand, when I come across a game that I haven't heard of yet, like "Kira Kira Star Night", I check it out of course. But when I see that the game is just about collecting stars, then the game might be as good as any game, but it still isn't a game with an NES alternative of Lara Croft. Therefore, I'm still non the wiser since I haven't found my game yet. So, again, that game is no reason to close the question and considered it answered.

Don't tell us our suggestions don't meet your standards.

Yes, I do have to do this. If I answer the first three games with "Thanks a lot. Great suggestion", that's the situation where people would think that the problem is solved and would stop answering.

Definitely don't say they suck ass.

Since when is this unacceptable? I didn't even do this towards homebrews.
So, please tell me since when it is considered rude to say that "Action 52" sucks ass when someone seriously suggests them?

Just play them yourself and see. You didn't find one you like? Well, there are two end game scenarios in that case.

1. Others continue to post other games starring women. Even if they don't meet your criteria they won't take much time to test.

2. No more posts are made on this subject.

Yeah, but if I don't add criteria, then people will just post the same old boring examples, like "Ms. Pac-Man".
You really complain that I add criteria? Well, would you prefer it if my question was very vague, so people would waste their time posting suggestions that are doomed from the beginning?
Being very specific means that people who have a game on their mind that they would have suggested don't need to bother when they see that it doesn't meet my criteria anyway.

For case 1, giving more criteria just discourages people from posting because the lists get harder to make. For example maybe I remember a game stars a girl, but I don't remember how long it was. I have to spend time checking.

In this case, you can still say "I'm not sure if it meets your criteria." But the people who do know that their game doesn't meet the criteria haven't wasted their time posting it.

Would you really prefer, if the thread went like this?
"Do you know games with female characters?"
"Super Mario Bros. 2, Metrioid"
"Thanks. More please."
"Shadow of the Ninja"
"Thanks. More please."
"The Krion Conquest. Ms. Pac-Man"
"Thanks. More please."

At least I narrow the games, so that people don't need to post any random game.

For case 2, we've likely stopped posting because we don't know any other games starring women.

And this is a bad thing? I don't think so. I prefer no answer to a wrong answer. I mean, what have I won when I see that somebody replied to my post, only to realize that he suggested "Mach Rider"?

The game probably doesn't exist, or if it does no one that posts here knows about it. Giving more criteria doesn't help. The search already returned 0 results.

Well, that's the thing: If many criteria return 0 results, then it is like it is.
But in how far would have specifying less criteria been better? In this case, the search would have returned 0 correct results and a whole bunch of results that are unhelpful to me anyway. This would have wasted my time as well as the time of the posters.

I could understand all the extra criteria if there were hundreds of homebrew NES games starring women, but there's not.

It doesn't matter how many of these games are out there. My search is an all or nothing thing: If I can't find a game with a human female action heroine, well, then I have to do without it. But I won't go for the next best thing, like a game with a secretary or a game with a female animal action heroine or something like that just to have any game with a female protagonist.
So, yeah, the question how many of these games are out there has really no bearing on the question how strict I declare my criteria.

[Drew Sebastino]

Why does this even matter exactly?

[DRW]

Why does what even matter?

[Kasumi]

But in how far would have specifying less criteria been better? In this case, the search would have returned 0 correct results and a whole bunch of results that are unhelpful to me anyway. This would have wasted my time as well as the time of the posters.

!!!
!!!
!!!

I KNOW! I'm glad you've also reached this conclusion. Consider that you always start with less criteria. Which... in your own words. Is wasting your time as well as your fellow posters. You don't ever start the topic with all the criteria. So what you should do before the question is asked, is think more carefully about what you really want. Because when you add more criteria after the topic has started and dismiss everyone, no one wants to help even if they know the answer. Because you might just add more criteria.

Legends of Owlia is a perfect answer to your initial criteria. Then you added more arbitrary criteria. I'm not saying specifying less criteria is best (but it can still be good), I'm saying specifying more in every post of your topic's run is bad. If you already knew that extra criteria, you should have just opened the topic with it. Which you don't. But once the topic has started, all it does is make your question frustrating.

Why do you think that I haven't tried them?

Did I say you didn't? That's what the JUST in that sentence is for. Because you don't just try the 12 games. You try the 12 games and then tell us they suck, or add more arbitrary criteria. When there are so few games ANYWAY, stop adding criteria.
Ever met someone who always asks you to do a favor, and once you say yes it keeps getting more complicated?

"Hey, man, can you collect my mail while I'm away?"
"Yeah, I got you."
"Oh, while you're there could you water my plants?"
"I mean... I guess?"
"Could you please feed my cat too? And take care of the litter box?"
"..."

The reason that's annoying is not because I'm doing four things. It's because I'm now doing four things when I only committed to one. If this person had just asked for what they wanted in the first place, maybe I'd have still been happy to do it. But because it's not what was first asked, I feel like my time is being wasted. And if you can't understand why that would be annoying, and are thinking, "Well, you don't have any obligation to help me." Then I guess you don't get it, and you probably never will.

Since when is this unacceptable? I didn't even do this towards homebrews.
So, please tell me since when it is considered rude to say that "Athena" or "Action 52" suck ass when someone seriously suggests them?

It's rude to say a game sucks ass at all. But it's acceptable. None of that matters. What matters is that it hurts getting your question answered. I really, really, really hope you'll be able to learn why this might not be a helpful thing to say to get your question answered.

What you want from us is to get your question answered and you do a lot of things that make it undesirable for us to answer your question, even if we knew the answer. And sure this isn't an academic question, but there are plenty of reasons why I wouldn't keep trying to give you more games.

Would you really prefer, if the thread went like this?

I wouldn't prefer that topic either, because the more please is annoying. It's annoying when it's "more please, here's more criteria." as well. As the topic narrows in scope, it becomes helpful only to you. You come here and create topics that could potentially be fun to discuss for the community. See people sharing their comments on Layla. And then you gradually turn them into something that is helpful only to you. And as people who are not search engines, that's time consuming and not fun, and not a community thing.

This is actually where less criteria is good. If people are talking in your topic about games that might miss your criteria, it at least keeps bumping. And this means the community is having fun, as well as helping you somewhat. But you don't roll with this. You must have us do exactly what you want which is frustrating for an entirely different reason than the other things. (Ha, I've been guilty of this.) The key is to at least realize it.

[RT-55J]

Are there any good NES homebrew games that have a female main character? I didn't find one that I like among the official games.

Wait. You didn't like The Guardian Legend?

My mother is going to have a word with you.

[DRW]

You don't ever start the topic with all the criteria.

Yeah, that's true. But it's because I didn't think of those criteria before I read a concrete example. Also, I would have never thought that there's a homebrew game as big as "Zelda", so I of course didn't specify this.

On the other hand, do you know how often I've created these threads only to realize that people just read the first line anyway because they suggested works that I explicitly excluded from the list? Like in, you know, this very thread where I said that I know every licensed game and yet, people name licensed games? So, I don't know if writing the criteria into the opening post would even do something.
I half expected someone to name me "Zooming Secretary" in the first three answers.

Did I say you didn't? That's what the JUST in that sentence is for. Because you don't just try the 12 games. You try the 12 games and then tell us they suck, or add more arbitrary criteria.

So, what would be the alternative? Just trying them and not saying that I don't like them? Yeah, I'm sure that will encourage people to write more answers: If the thread looks like I have found what I'm looking for.

Ever met someone who always asks you to do a favor, and once you say yes it keeps getting more complicated?

That's not an equivalent example. Going by your analogy, my questions would be as follows:
"Can you name me a game with a female protagonist?"
"O.k., and now I'd like to find a game with cavemen."
"Now please tell me some good puzzle games."
"And now I'd like to have a shoot em up with a helicopter."

That's not at all what I did.

It's rude to say a game sucks ass at all. But it's acceptable. None of that matters. What matters is that it hurts getting your question answered.

I could understand your point if I told a homebrewer that his game sucks. Or if I shot down a perfectly acceptable game based on the fact that I personally find it crappy. But seriously: If somebody suggests me "Action 52", he has no-one to blame but himself when I react like this.

I'm grateful for every help. (Well, as long as they read my posts because I clearly said homebrew games and I told them that I know every licensed game, yet most posters suggested licensed games, so in this specific case I'm not really sorry if somebody feels pissed when I reject his suggestion.) But as I said: We're not solving a riddle here, but I'm looking for a game to play. And if somebody knows a game that technically fits the criteria, but if this game is one of the shittiest ever released, he should be able to put two and two together and realize that this might not be the best suggestion.

You come here and create topics that could potentially be fun to discuss for the community. See people sharing their comments on Layla.

But sharing comments on "Layla" wouldn't have been the intention of the thread anyway. If you want to discuss this game, you should use another thread nevertheless.

This is actually where less criteria is good. If people are talking in your topic about games that might miss your criteria, it at least keeps bumping. And this means the community is having fun, as well as helping you somewhat. But you don't roll with this.

Of course not. What use is this thread which is called "Homebrews with female characters" if the thread goes on and on for weeks, but it ends up being a thread about if you like the cutesy graphics in "Layla"? If my thread inspires you to talk about certain games, open a new thread for it.

You must have us do exactly what you want which is frustrating for an entirely different reason than the other things. (Ha, I've been guilty of this.) The key is to at least realize it.

I realize that I want this thread to go into a specific direction, sure. That's why you specify what you want in an opening post. Otherwise, I would have just called the thread "NES games" and written: "Hey, guys, let's have some fun and talk about NES games here."

Yes, it's true: This thread is about a very specific issue. And yes, it might be helpful only for me. In the same way a certain specific programming issue is helpful only for the person who has the problem.
Or do you think if somebody posts a code snippet and says it doesn't compile and you tell him that he forgot to close the second bracket, that this is a general purpose question that is helpful to many people? Of course not. That guy just forgot to close a bracket. If this ever happens to someone else one year later, he will definitely not find this thread and learn from it.

If you want general purpose topics, read a blog. Internet forums have always also been there for asking specific situational questions.

[DRW]

Wait. You didn't like The Guardian Legend?

The speed of the scrolling background in the overhead shooting levels distracts me. If I play a shooter, I want the level to scroll with a normal speed.

Also, this might be one of my arbitrary requirements, but when I'm looking for the one game with a female heroine, I prefer someone who is supposed to be a human being, not a female-looking robot that can turn into a spaceship.

[tepples]

Are there any good NES homebrew games that have a female main character?

I am not aware of any.

I'm grateful for every help. (Well, as long as they read my posts because I clearly said homebrew games and I told them that I know every licensed game, yet most posters suggested licensed games, so in this specific case I'm not really sorry if somebody feels pissed when I reject his suggestion.)

If you got posts from five different users that all said "I am not aware of any.", would that be helpful in any way? I think some people try to bend your criteria in order to make absolutely sure you aren't suffering from an XY problem.

[Drew Sebastino]

Why does what even matter?

That there aren't any females as main characters. If the games are fun, who cares?

[DRW]

If you got posts from five different users that all said "I am not aware of any.", would that be helpful in any way?

Of course not. Those are the biggest idiots of all: People who answer the thread with "Sorry, I can't help you with your question."

If there aren't any of these games, two outcomes would be desired:

Either no answers at all. In this case, when I think about the thread one week later, I realize that nobody has answered and therefore come to the conclusion that there doesn't really seem to be a game that fits my criteria or else it's very, very obscure, so that nobody knows it.

Or the answer: "I've checked all homebrew games that have ever been published. And I can tell you for sure: There isn't such a game that you're looking for."

I think some people try to bend your criteria in order to make absolutely sure you aren't suffering from an XY problem.

So, in my case, if Y is "I want to find a game with a female protagonist", what would X really be?

Why does what even matter?

That there aren't any females as main characters. If the games are fun, who cares?

In general, I don't care. But you look at it from the wrong side:

I didn't ask: "Can you name me some good video games?" and when they said: "Mega Man", I answered: "No, this one doesn't have a female character. I don't want games with male protagonists." This would have really been stupid.

Instead, I said the following: "I have a good bunch of games with various settings, topics and genres: Fantasy, science fiction, realistic, semi-realistic, robots, aliens, demons, platformers, RPG, spaceship shooter, car racing, basketball, puzzle. There are probably many more good games, but in the moment, I have a good and diverse collection for my taste. However, all of my games feature male characters. It would be nice to also have one with a female. So, if there is a game with a woman as the protagonist, I might add it to the list since it would be a nice addition and something that isn't covered yet."

[mikaelmoizt]

But seriously: If somebody suggests me "Action 52", he has no-one to blame but himself when I react like this.

No problem. I kind of saw it comming

[rainwarrior]

So, in my case, if Y is "I want to find a game with a female protagonist", what would X really be?

The real X is "I want there to be more NES games with female protagonists."

...and the solution is to make one.

(I'm just kidding, obviously. Playing and making a game are totally different acts, but we are at NESDev after all. Maybe you'd like to do some NES dev?)

[DRW]

Maybe you'd like to do some NES dev?

If I ever do an NES game, my first one will be about "A Nightmare on Elm Street".

Yes, I know that there is such a game for the NES, but I'm talking about a game based specifically on the first movie. And it shall be in the style of the first generation NES arcade-style games like "Donkey Kong", "Popeye", "Nuts & Milk", "Super Arabian" and "Mappy". As if it had come out shortly after the movie (which was released in 1984).

This game would have a female protagonist: Nancy Thompson. But she's originally a movie character, so this game would still not be the NES game with a female heroine.

Since all I have at the moment is the Nancy and Freddy sprite and some small badly written demo program where you can move around a character without any boundaries or animation and since I don't even have a conceptual idea for the game yet, I guess an advanced side scroller at the level of "Ninja Gaiden" or "Mega Man" with a female protagonist is even more of a non-issue for me to create.

[Dwedit]

The LJN/Rare version wasn't good enough? (Also female playable characters appear in a 3/4 player game)

[DRW]

The LJN/Rare version wasn't good enough?

Actually, unlike the AVGN, I thought it was a quite solid platformer.

But no matter the quality, my intention is a totally different one: I'd like to make a game that is specifically based on the first movie only, following the plot of this very film:
www.imdb.com/title/tt0087800

And, as I said, it won't be a side scroller, but an arcade-like highscore game as if it was released back then. It will probably have a top-down view and Freddy will constantly be on the screen as the main opponent while your player character is Nancy.

(Also female playable characters appear in a 3/4 player game)

Yeah, I know. Which is totally ironic since the movies always have a final girl. So, the order for players 1 to 4 should have been: Female, male, female, male. Instead of male, male, female, female.