Gender in game mechanics

It doesn't sound like that's what he was saying, but aside from that, not concerning yourself with other people who don't affect you cuts both ways. Sitting around and not caring while your neighbor's house burns to the ground doesn't make you a good person. Compassion is more or less defined by caring about people who don't directly affect you. And I'd say that gay marriage is an example of why it's actually necessary to care about other people's situations. Sitting out and "not caring" that gay people can't get married because it's not your problem isn't exactly the moral high ground... it is actually kind of selfish. It never would have passed federally without people caring about each other and holding strong to their beliefs.

 

Also, I'm not saying I think you don't care about people. I'm just saying that oversimplifying complex situations by saying "we're all the same" or "everyone should mind their own business" isn't really that helpful. In fact, it is often used to dismiss someone else's problems, by blaming them for not just going with the status quo, or that it's their fault for speaking up and making it an issue.

 

You're talking about labeling people, and the only things you can do with a label is act positively, act negatively, or not act at all, at which point what is the value of that label. Most of these labels either don't matter to me, or are none of my business anyway.

And now you've swerved straight into [that-which-must-not-be-said] territory. The height of egotism is to think you know best how to solve someone else's problem. Now, do you actually know the problems they have, or are you jumping on anything because "it's a good cause?" The fact you think this is a federal issue is enough to tell me you don't know.

 

But that does affect you, letting a house burn down in YOUR neighborhood is going to significantly impact the value of homes in your area

Also, I think some terrible things that probably cannot legally be put into words about those people who are hateful of others for no good reason. I'm pretty sure I'd be banned from this forum and be imprisoned for life if I expressed my feelings for those individuals who spread the initial seeds that lead to the bans on gay marriage - and the people now involved who CAN become more educated, but choose to remain ignorant.

Sadly, the federal ruling doesn't change how people feel and think. Given the opportunity, they'll still do their best to obstruct marriages for no good reason (for examples, see Alabama). It's pretty sickening.

The future is best left as is. Republicans will march through Florida and the coasts claiming the water level isn't rising as they all drown, and then afterwards the rest of us can begin to fix America. Not only do they seem to always vote against their best interest, they do whatever they can to be sure everyone is armed to the teeth including schools and make sure any toxin spewing company is as lowly regulated as possible. And last but not least, fracking! Gotta love the recent correlation between fracking and earthquake frequency. They can say nothings wrong while the world they're trying to screw over devours them

Not to mention it didn't even work. Some people are ignoring the ruling -.-

2015 - Ladies are work and cook
Men are watch sports

 

I was wrong. There is politics too. I wonder how many other worms I'm forgetting.

 

Well, if the khaleesi locks the thread we'll then have wyrms.

 

We got pretty far from "game mechanics"...

 

I noticed it was missing Can't have that, today is Saturday. This thread should go out with a bang!

It's just about time to summon her. This thread has been controversial yet civil, and went through an entire can of worms in just 3 pages. I'm so proud of the community

Well then, back on topic...

Gender based game mechanics consensus: bad idea
/thread

 

The only thing you can do with anything is act positively, negatively, or not at all, so what's the point of anything? I'm not sure I see what you're trying to say here.

I honestly don't know what "must not be said"... you mean religion? I guess I'm also not sure what someone else's problem it is that I have claimed to know how to solve. Do you mean the legalization of gay marriage? If so, then yeah, I think the obvious solution to gay marriage being illegal is to legalize gay marriage, and that monumental leap of logic doesn't require all that much ego. And yes, I know that there are still states fighting it; did you miss that I was responding to someone talking about how Alabama is fighting it, and that was the whole point of the conversation?

 

Yeah, I agree and it sounds like we're on the same page. But what you're saying clearly shows that you do actually care about the current gay rights battle and have chosen a side, and that's the opposite of saying that you don't care about anything that doesn't directly affect you (I'm assuming you're not trying to get gay married). Getting educated is exactly my point, as opposed to just saying "everything is fine, if everyone just stopped labeling themselves there would be no problems".

 

Yeah, because letting people live their lives as they see fit whether you personally agree with them or not is totally the same as letting their house burn down.

Which nobody in this thread has said.

Again, which nobody said. Labeling yourself isn't the problem. Labeling others is the problem. Geez, if mental gymnastics was a circus act, you'd be the greatest star in the world. You've managed to completely twist pretty much everything that pretty much every person has said into something that bears not even a passing resemblance to their actual remarks.

 

@makeshiftwings It's a step towards a future without people passing laws where people who like the color blue are sentenced to death because the son of a flaming fig leaf who birthed himself from the eye stalk of a snail told him that colors opposite of red are the devil.

I'm an asexual virgin toaster, and I find the concept of any sort of marriage silly. I just need my wall outlet and I'm good to go - but that being said, I would never trample over the wills of other consenting individuals.

I like my answer better

Doesn't every derailed thread need to go this way? It's not exactly a graceful ending, but they can't all die peacefully.

 

I was trying to skirt around calling you a social justice wizrobe.

For one, gay marriage isn't illegal. Marriage is a legal construct so it's not possible to be married without it being lawfully recognized. The issue isn't that couples can't spent the rest of their lives together, it's that they don't receive the legal benefits that marriage provides.

I should also point out that the federal government has no say in marriage at all. Marriage is state run.

 

Cylon!!!!!

I dunno, after the splash screen debacle, not being grossly misrepresented might be nice for a change.

 

Not totally true. I married my wife 19 years ago, and at the time we considered ourselves hetero, because, well, I lived as a guy.

Cut to years ago when I "came out" as actually being female...

Same sex marriage was not yet recognized. My legally changed name and gender, however, was, and I was from that point forward considered by the USA to be female. That put us in a tough spot. My wife and I were legally married, yet our marriage would no longer be considered valid in, well, pretty much everywhere in the US. If one of us ended up in the hospital, or died, or whatever, then guess what... we were two women living together in sin, not married in the eyes of the law, and guess what... no benefits or visiting or whatever spousal things we used to have when we were married according to what Bible thumpers found acceptable.

Thankfully our marriage is now recognized in most states, but we avoid visiting some states because of the bullshit that says it's null and void.

There are waaaaay many more complexities to the issues that face marginalized people that people who fit into the "norm" can never see. Hell, I had no idea about the struggles LGBT people went through until I actually became one overnight, and let me tell you, it was certainly an eye opener. I had no idea what it was like to experience what women experience until the world started treating me like one, and again... wow. No idea, but damn... mind blown.

I wasn't socialized as a female, but let me tell you, that subtle oppressive insidious sh*t takes hold fast and you quickly realize how much less people think of you when you're not a guy. Oh sure, most men would never say it to you, and they think they don't do it, but it's subtle. It happens. And I never knew. And I probably even scoffed at it at some points in my life. And I probably even reveled in my privileged position in the man's world. And I probably treated women as "lesser". Sadly enough, I actually will admit that I did, and I live with that shame. But I do that no more. Now I know.

It's very easy to say "oh, I don't see color" or "oh, I don't believe in gay people" or "oh, feminists need to not be so mad" and what not when you don't actually have to be a person who lives with that sh*t every day. It sucks. It sucks to know that you're despised just simply because of who you are or what makes you happy (that hurts no one else). To know that a large portion of America thinks you're an abomination because you love someone or your skin is some color or whatever. F*ck them.

RE: Gendered mechanics bias in games: Just stop. Seriously. People like all kinds of things. Get over it.

 

Ah, I see. Fair enough. @makeshiftwings let's just... let hippocoder have a nice weekend. Besides... @Ony just doused the flames with that.

Geez, Ony. That's quite the life story there. At least it isn't totally out of place in this thread

A sad truth indeed. It's probably not how you'd prefer to cheer up, but at least you're very likely going to out live most of those people.

 

At least UT didn't use some big-boobed bimbo to be its mascot for Unity 5.

Instead, they gifted all the female Unity developers with that hawt mustached guy.

 

Hey, look on the bright side - at least you're passing. I just get treated as a freak (another M2F here).

 

Nice to meet you. Sending a private message so as not to go too far off topic...

 

Possibly not OT, but yeah, some solidarity is good

 

They're waiting for unity 8 so they can turn the 8 sideways to highlight the massive bust on the mascot for that version.

@christinanorwood Who isn't a freak?

Hmm... it seems Unity has some degree of LGBT & support in the community. It'd be totally inappropriate but interesting to know how UT feels about that I love Unity, but I'd rather not support another 'Chik-fil-a'-like business.

 

Getting back to discussing games, while building on the turns this thread is taking...

Notice how when we ARGUE we argue about SOCIETY..., but when we make suggestions about game mechanics they were about "women smaller, men fighter" physical differences - which of course everyone says is false anyway.... See how there is a disconnect? The OPPORTUNITY here imho is to exploit the issue in a game by playing on the social issues. Make the rules of the game the social construct - it's not a player limitation, it's the gameworld's limitation. So you have male-only spaces or female only spaces..., and the game rules effect the character externally, rather than limiting or altering the player.... Like Ony's marriage. You have to change your strategy when the rules arbitrarily change.

I will bring up the manga Ranma ½ where everytime the main character swaps sex (his gender remains the same) everyone around him treats him differently. Girls who desire him as a boy are jealous of him as a girl. Classmates who fight him as a boy fall in love with him as a girl.... Meanwhile Ranma's fighting skills never change. All his alliances change. Over the series, his attitude to his female body evolves. At first he is horrified (puberty metaphor), later he starts to be like a sexual double-agent using the girl body as a disguise, towards the end of the series he is experiencing life also through his female body and exploring romantic situations....

 

Well, sorry to deter from games, but thank goodness for Ony, Wetcircuit, and Christine. I love having other women here. Sometimes I feel like a freak here! I am so glad you ladies post on these forums with me. You are all wonderful and talented and you inspire me.

Christine, my daughters and I love your stuff. You inspire budding female game developers and to them, you are not a freak. Times are changing and the younger generations, like Tomnn are taking the the lead. Even in my country and my southern state I see progress.

Wetcircuit, that manga sounds awesome. Is it available somewhere? My two daughters are big manga lovers.

 

I watched the Ranma anime... It's pretty popular. I'm sure it's been translated into english print... Probably even find it used.

I just googled and there are episodes on youtube and I even found a site that has all the manga in English... I won't direct link because I don't know the legality of that... The whole thing is pretty hilarious. It's a very clever series.

Oh, it has kung fu fighting pandas before that sort of thing was trendy...

 

Thanks, Wetcircuit! I will pass this on to my girls. Looks great!

 

women are naturally predisposed towards (what they believe to be) altruism, and against violence. just look at the vast amount of women in the healthcare industry. Pharmaceuticals is the only STEM industry that attracts any significant female attention too.

It should therefore come as no surprise to anyone that women are typically cast as the cleric/medic/healer role in class-based games. Anyone who has an objection to this is just blatantly denying reality.

Secondly, the relative lack of strength in women is well kinown. I can personally account for this myself, having taken up weightlifting recently. I'm training my hardest, but i can only progress at about 40% of the rate that men are expected to progress on the same program, and i've had to drop to lower increments per session as a result of simple biology. Testosterone is a huge factor in growth of muscles, and strength.

Therefore it should similarly come as no surprise to anyone, that women are notably absent from frontline combat roles. Infantry/assault/fighter/knight/heavy weapons, etc. Roles which require significant physical strength do not have a lot of women in them, and mostly the placement of women in these roles in games, either results in a massive bulldyke, or a laughable case of wishful thinking and denial of basic physics.

The Barbarian class in fantasy games is a notable exception. women are frequently cast in that (despite likely being unable to handle the massive weapons involved) because the role calls for skimpy clothing, and it's an excuse to show some flesh.

So yes, women are mostly support, sniper, medic, mage, and espionage classes, as appropriate. This is not any bias on the part of an author, but a simple observation of reality. What anyone thinks "Should be" is irrelevant, this is just what IS. Nobody should be criticised for honestly representing reality.

 

If you try to hard to make something appeal to someone else the chances are it won't be very good. You can look at any media to find proof of that. The best approach a creative person can make is to make something that they like themselves. I can try to understand what women would enjoy but it's never going to be as reliable as just making what I enjoy myself. In an ideal scenario you shouldn't have to think about what gender your customers are.

I know that to efficiently market a product you have to aim for specific demographics that you think would most enjoy the product, but I think that kind of thinking should come after the actual design of the game.

That said, I don't see why women can't enjoy games that men like too. In fact, it goes against the whole idea that girls shouldn't be forced to just play with barbie dolls and pink toys. Sometimes I think certain groups don't really know what they want themselves.

 

Gosh, feels like I have been in this thread before. lol

Create the game you want to create. If you choose to market to an under-represented segment of society, then do so but research first if you want to be successful.

Fortunately, games are fantasy, even realistic games have an element of the unbelievable, the ultra strong or smart hero, the ultra stacked female, the diabolical anti-hero. So make your men and women to appeal to your audience. Reality is great but it doesn't have to be the "bible" you use when you create games and it can be really limiting.

Men and women do sometimes like the same types of games and sometimes they do not. I can tell that my teenage daughters prefer distinctly different styles of games and books and just about anything else. And I do not like the same things they like. So if I was appealing to an audience of teen girls, I would choose what sort of teen girl I want to attract and make games that she might like..romantic or creative or powerful, whatever.

Gender matters as much as any other label you give to your perspective audience. You can also do what a lot of AAA companies do and just throw in everything and appeal to everyone. Of course, that means no one is 100% happy but everyone will try your game, which means you have a better chance of getting a bigger audience. Of course, some of those folks will give you FANTASTIC reviews, some will give you devastating reviews, but that is the way it works.

 

I think the telling part is the FOCUS. If you choose to focus on a war's frontline from a soldier's point of view - sure, women's roles will be few and unimportant.

If you choose to follow a MOTHER who's town is invaded by enemy soldiers and your goal is to hide political refugees, connect with the resistance movement, and infiltrate the general's household as a maid, then the "support" roles change drastically, don't they.

Of course there is Bias. There is always bias.

 

I get that, but these larger than life art styles work because they remind us subconsciously of archetypes that we all know and have similar feelings towards. I think this is the reason for a lot of the character designs, and the similarities aren't all just based on gender. The strong tank guy is usually pretty stupid for example, and the wizard always has a long beard and a pointy hat. You could go completely crazy and make the tank a crossdressing midget with an eating disorder but it wouldn't quite be the same.

 

this image is always relevant:

 

Or it could be refreshingly different. My girls love shows that have strong women who chase down bad guys, escape from criminals, etc. In fact Chuck is one of their favorites and the woman in that show is so much more capable than the man. lol It turns stereotypes around. The show is refreshing in that it is different, doesn't focus on the same old stuff but feels believable.

I actually think a game with a crossdressing midget with an eating disorder might be really fun! I bet it would be talked about by a lot of people, features in YouTube and might even get you a few more clicks on the old website.

We have been fed stereotypes for so long, that we are afraid to shed them. Archetypes work because there is a subset of our audience that wants exactly what they expect. I know these folks, I play DnD with them.

But there are entirely other subsets of folks who don't play our games because they are completely bored by the same things over and over. They want different.

So....you have a choice. Stay with the tried and true or step out of the box. In a market flooded with camouflaged dressed characters in FPS games, rambling zombies in survival games, and magic wielding wizards in fantasy rpgs, maybe it is time to step out and make a splash.

 

And crazy people like me, too!

GASP

This is typically why I NEVER play gender locked games. I'm a big fan of magic & necromancy, so I play the pet class when I can. Even if the game has male and female variants of magic characters, the female one is always the support & pet class. And also typically a loli, for whatever reason. The one thing that bothers me about it is the skimpy outfits on a character made to look like a child... It's enough to steer me away from the entire game, whether it's 'Dragon Nest' or 'Continent of the 9th' or any other game being lazy about character modeling / pretending people care about story in grindy mmos / use overly sexualized characters to draw in the sex-sells-everything audience(s).

Well that would kinda ruin the suspension of disbelief & immersion factors. How is a tank - the epitome of vitality and strength - going to sustain that role with an eating disorder? I'm sure many games have successful implementation of Dwarf tanks, but an eating disorder would only fit the role of Bo Rai Cho

Unfortunately I'm not representative of the majority of my peers. But at least the guys in ACM would rather argue about the amount of water displaced in salt water when ice melts than talk down about one another or think about & scare off girls 24/7. We've only got like 2 regulars who are girls lol.

If they aren't too young, game of thrones has a decent number of strong female characters who take part in fights. There are vastly more female characters who are employed in brothels sadly, but it's normal given the era I suppose.

Isn't that why most of us are here? Unity is a very accessible-to-indie engine for prototyping new game mechanics and ideas.

 

Thanks for sharing. Just remember, this is one point of view and not from a medical professional or anthropologist. Always good to get a variety of sources.

 

Please don't tell me there's going to be groups of people forcing developers to make their games this way or that way (like with a set of rules they have to adhere to because they're not being "gender neutral")? Because that's where I see this going. And it would greatly hinder creativity and possibilities too.

If a male developer wants to make their game from a "culturally male" perspective let them do so. And if a female developer wants to make their game from a "cultrually female" perspective, let them do so. And if an alien wants to make their game from an "alien" perspective, let them do so....lol.

All I see this argument achieving is to control what developers make in order to satisfy those people that are "offended" by "male mechanics" lol. Why they're offended by so called "male mechanics" in the first place is beyond me. There's no reason to be unless you have some sort of behavior you're wanting to force onto people.

It kind of goes without saying that developers are people. And they're going to insert their thoughts, ideas, experiences, etc.... into their games (and their mechanics). I also think a majority of developers currently are male too, and so it's not surprising that this is the case. I've seen a number of "female oriented" games as well (if you could call it that), and no one complains about that. Also, it's as if they just "discovered" that there are gender biases in aspects of things. Most people know there are, and recognize it as a non-factor -- it's actually a good thing in most cases lol.

 

I wouldn't say that sexual dimorphism is a bad thing to base some mechanics on, but we're in a very touchy feely time period. It's probably best to have male and female options for SandwichMakingSimulator2015, despite the obvious choice of protagonist for that game being @Ony.

I don't think anyone here is on Sarkeesian's level regarding this. I doubt anyone on this forum is going to start another [culture]Gate TwitterStorm. Also please don't forget that Hatred is still a thing, as is Rapelay. No one is forcing anyone to do anything, that is the will of GabeN.

ARE YOU WORTHY OF HIS LIGHT?

 

I've never seen Chuck, but those are my favorite female characters as well. Lagertha from Vikings, the Mills sisters from Sleepy Hollow, Olivia from Fringe, The Canary (Sara, not so much Laruel) from Arrow. It's pretty cool that there are a growing number of shows with women as something other than the damsel in distress. I never got the appeal of the damsel in distress anyhow. I'm not so insecure in my masculinity that I need someone to rely on me for protection and I'd much rather have my partner provide twice the strength than twice the liability.

 

if you want to acknowledge male or female perspectives, feel free. But the critical point that many seem to miss is that reality is not a perspective. Making women weaker and more inclined to peaceful classes has overwhelming evidence in real life. Yet modern feminists are trying to paint such representations as a male perspective, or as biased.

I'm actually making a game just now with an exceptionally strong woman in it. But i'm makig it very clear that she lifts weights, eats a lot of protein, and has a scifi-esque genetic advantage which explains it. It would feel disingenuous for me to just drop a random woman in there and give her the same strength as everyone else just for the sake of political correctness.

 

Not now they aren't. But give it enough time, and that's where this argument will lead us.

Picture this hypothetical scenario: "*Gasp*.....that developer made a male-oriented game. How dare he/she/it do that!!! In such an age of tolerance. I'm offended by his/her/its intolerance at making a male-oriented game. *Steam then denies his/her/its game because it's not gender tolerant*"

//end hypothetical situation (the fact that I have to insert "his/her/it" instead of just "he" also says a lot -- I can't just use a male reference that's offensive! lol)

Notice how hypocritical that scenario would be. People would essentially be saying "It's NOT okay to make a game that they deem as gender specific". But if it's "sexually dimorphic" to use your term, then it's perfectly fine. So we can exclude one, but not the other. Then the question becomes, who's actually being intolerant in that scenario?

But I hate these debates, because it ends up people hating other people and everyone ends up angry lol.

 

Why think outside the box when prefabs of other people's ideas are so cheap?

 

When you set the rules it's so easy to judge. Your "because feminists" makes me laugh. Everything you are claiming is so easy to turn around on you. "There is no such thing as bias, only MY bias... and those mono-browed femnisists are biased of course...." lol

 

The way I tend to think about it is the feminine is predisposed to internal conflict, to resolving and manipulating social problems. The masculine is more inclined to external conflicts and matters of the earth, be it working the earth or returning others to it.

Not even close. Archetypes work because they resonate. People see themselves in the archetype, or look up to archetypes they want to be like. Alternatively in the case of tragedies, the archetype is aspects/vices that should be avoided.

The dirty little secret of archetypes is that you use them whether you intend to or not. It doesn't matter if the main character is half mexican, half indian (india indian), and a ballerina, his character is still going to be definable in archetypes. Thinking outside the box actually requires pretty extensive knowledge about the specifications of the box. Trying to create complex characters is actually easier if you know how and why archetypes work.

 

Bad writing falls back on "archetypes" because you don't actually have to write a character. The audience is familiar with the tropes of this "character" based on their uniform (what Hollywood use to call a "hat"). They are easy to produce and destroy, and no one really cares about them or wonders what they had for lunch earlier that day.... Archetypes are shorthand. They do stuff "just because". You don't have to give a Nazi soldier a freudian childhood that made him evil. He wears a Nazi uniform, therefore he is evil....

In ancient Greek plays the actors wore masks because the ROLE was more important than the actor. Unique characterizations were not desired. Do you need to explain a zombie's motivation? Or a Nazi's? No because they are 1-dimensional archetypes. No need to explain them, just drop in the prefab and go.

 

See this is the thing, everyone says they want more varied and realistic female characters, but then when they describe what they want it's always the same thing. They just want ally mcbeal in everything, and sometimes they even want the women to be BETTER than the men, which is hypocritical if you're after a good balance.

 

History has set the rules, not me.
Turn it around?> What do you mean. Feel free to try.
Would you like a basic demonstration of biological fact? go and try to bench 100 kg, see how you do.
Shall i start digging up demographic data on gender distribution in healthcare and stem industries? what exactly are you trying to refute?

 

No one is stopping anyone else's right to be offended based on their own rationale. What you're saying does happen, just look at tumblr feminists

Oppression Quest 2: The Sixth Guy

I never understood that part of it. How can people get so defensive over an exchange of ideas?

I mean it's logical to approach a gendered mechanic based on sexual dimorphism, but it's not necessary in a fantasy game. As @Nanako said, reality is being interpreted by various groups of people. There are gender roles, perspectives that paint reality as an offensive troupe, and whatever else. It's kind of silly.

Sexual dimorphism is the actual difference between sexes in a species. Testosterone levels, estrogen levels, body structure and shape... we are different. But when it comes to 'gender roles', people get lazy as @wetcircuit pointed out and go with roles people are already familiar with. What is shocking about Aria Starks character in game of thrones? To people familiar with gender roles, it's weird and 'boy-ish' that a girl wants to fight. What is in reality shocking about Aria Stark's character? The fact that a child wants to and is capable of fighting.

Agreed. In fact, one could argue that female characters overpowering male characters without the correct background and genetics could even mislead people about reality. I'm going to put this in a spoiler just in case some people can't handle reality / have weak stomachs. No mods, this is not NSFW, but not everyone has the mental capacity to accept that things like this exist

Spoiler: Reality, yes.

If you want a female lead who can overpower just about any man by nature alone, include "myostatin deficiency" in her background. And yes everyone, this is a dog and it does have abs. It's a bulldog whippet, which means ordinarily it would be a small, slender version of a bulldog.

 

I guarantee you react to archetypes every day without even realising it. They aren't something you are always consciously aware of, and they are extremely powerful, and they can effect gameplay.

Look at a fast paced FPS for example. The look of the enemies, even just their silhouettes have to tell you as much about that character as possible in a split second. So if the brutes in halo were regular looking women they wouldn't really give the same feeling across.

 

LOLOL and don't forget when men save themselves by having stinky armpits. That's always been my favorite male superpower...

Again, when YOU choose the test obviously you get to select the bias. Picking things up and setting them down, yeah that sounds like an exciting male fantasy. Let me get to work on that furniture movers game that all the kids are talking about.

Have you never seen a noir film? Maybe you should. It's a genre where the women are just as likely (possibly more likely) to end up being the traitor/murderer/mastermind/instigator....



*shrug* I'm only refuting the validity of your lack of imagination. I'm not the one telling people what "reality" is, I'm the one who keeps poking holes in your cliched tropes by showing examples to the contrary. I don't *need* to prove anything. You apparently do, however. Good luck with that.

 

This isn't that archetypes are bad, just that S*** writers don't know how to write them properly. For one, proper archetypes aren't simple or one dimensional. Zombies and Nazi's aren't even characters, much less archetypes. They are only skins and nameless evils. Artemis and Freya are actual archetypes whom's stories illustrate problems they faced and how they dealt with them. It's how they respond that actually define the archetypes.