How come mostly only guys play Paradox Games/grand strategy?

[No idea]

I was commenting on the generalizations being made in this thread, that are inaccurate.

Frankly. I think they arent. Women play this kinds of games less than men. I think that is a fact. And I also think it is a fact that they dont play them as much as men because women have no interest in them (in GENERAL terms. I am perfectly aware that there are women who play grand strategy)

 

[Axe99]

Frankly. I think they arent. Women play this kinds of games less than men. I think that is a fact. And I also think it is a fact that they dont play them as much as men because women have no interest in them (in GENERAL terms. I am perfectly aware that there are women who play grand strategy)

I'll agree that women aren't as interested in strategy titles or war more generally, but there's a few comments in this thread that women aren't as interested in history, and I'm unaware of any evidence to this effect. I've had a quick gander at some Australian data, and the broad field of study 'society and culture', which includes history, has about a 2 to 1 ratio of females to males. It's getting late here, so I'm not going to look any further right now, but happy to chase up something more substantive tomorrow.

 

[Phibs]

'society and culture', which includes history

More substantive data needed. More substantive data needed, indeed.

From my personal experience (both among history students and mere enthusiasts) I'd guess history to be one of the fields with nigh gender equity.

Edit:
Oh ministry of statistics how I love thee, only took 5min to find. In the HRE it's 56m-44f.
https://www-genesis.destatis.de/genesis/online/data;jsessionid=A2EEE3DBD1DB3F37D4101534E751DF3F.tomcat_GO_1_1?levelindex=2&levelid=1421408648899&downloadname=21311-0003&operation=ergebnistabelleDiagramm&option=diagramm

 

[No idea]

More substantive data needed. More substantive data needed, indeed.

From my personal experience (both among history students and mere enthusiasts) I'd guess history to be one of the fields with nigh gender equity.

Edit:
Oh ministry of statistics how I love thee, only took 5min to find. In the HRE it's 56m-44f.
https://www-genesis.destatis.de/genesis/online/data;jsessionid=A2EEE3DBD1DB3F37D4101534E751DF3F.tomcat_GO_1_1?levelindex=2&levelid=1421408648899&downloadname=21311-0003&operation=ergebnistabelleDiagramm&option=diagramm

Statistics for XVI century countries dont count

 

[Axe99]

More substantive data needed. More substantive data needed, indeed.

From my personal experience (both among history students and mere enthusiasts) I'd guess history to be one of the fields with nigh gender equity.

Edit:
Oh ministry of statistics how I love thee, only took 5min to find. In the HRE it's 56m-44f.
https://www-genesis.destatis.de/genesis/online/data;jsessionid=A2EEE3DBD1DB3F37D4101534E751DF3F.tomcat_GO_1_1?levelindex=2&levelid=1421408648899&downloadname=21311-0003&operation=ergebnistabelleDiagramm&option=diagramm

Absolutely, it was just late and I wanted to have a good nights' sleep before I read the HoI4 DD when I woke up in the morning .

Anyways, I can find get the total number of people with post-school history qualifications in Australia in August 2011 (the time of the latest Census), and it's 13,574 males to 17,980 females (it's freely available on the net though, but requires an account with the ABS - go to www.abs.gov.au, then hit Census, then Tablebuilder, then sign up for Tablebuilder basic if you want to check I'm not just making that up ). I'm not sure how representative Australia is relative to other countries, but we're hardly a history-mad society, and you'd need a fairly large deviation from the situation here to even get gender parity, let alone more males with history qualifications than females.

 

[justin6477]

there's a few comments in this thread that women aren't as interested in history, and I'm unaware of any evidence to this effect..

My personal experience has been that history courses are pretty male dominated; women, again this is anecdotal, seemed to congregate in fields like psychology, communications, literature, biology, and pre-med. Data appears to suggest that women get ~48% of Social Science degrees in the United States, but I can't seem to find data on history alone. Theoretically, the women could all be pooled into political science or public policy and then skew the numbers for, say, history and economics (now there's a sausage-fest if there ever was one). For whatever reason, I seemed to recall more universities putting out demographic data on their student enrollment, but I can't seem to find a whole lot.

http://www.randalolson.com/wp-content/uploads/percent-bachelors-degrees-women-usa.png

Interest in history aside, I can't say that I've known many women who were willing to sink hours upon hours into a game the way Paradoxians do; at least, not unless there was a major social component (see MMO), which might be another one of the reasons for CK2's runaway success. Can't remember any numbers, but I do recall Doomdark (pretty sure it was Henrik?) saying that CK2 has a higher percentage of female players than other Paradox games.

 

[Person012345]

Plenty of girls play videogames, serious videogames on serious platforms. However, it has been my experience that they simply don't tend to be as into strategy games on the whole. I don't know why, maybe it's that they just don't like them but it could also be the same reason that PC gaming has only recently seen a decent number of girls playing - that they simply aren't introduced to it as much and at as early an age so they don't develop as much interest. Things like war, strategy and other things associated with the genre are traditionally seen as "boy" things. I think eventually it'll filter through as videogaming overall has, but it might take a while.

 

[Axe99]

My personal experience has been that history courses are pretty male dominated; women, again this is anecdotal, seemed to congregate in fields like psychology, communications, literature, biology, and pre-med. Data appears to suggest that women get ~48% of Social Science degrees in the United States, but I can't seem to find data on history alone. Theoretically, the women could all be pooled into political science or public policy and then skew the numbers for, say, history and economics (now there's a sausage-fest if there ever was one). For whatever reason, I seemed to recall more universities putting out demographic data on their student enrollment, but I can't seem to find a whole lot.

http://www.randalolson.com/wp-content/uploads/percent-bachelors-degrees-women-usa.png

That link didn't work - I'd be interested in any stats for countries other than Australia (I'm not as on top of the available statistics in other locations - I did give the OECD databases and Eurostat a gander, but neither went into enough detail to get to history - women dominated 'society and culture' or the closest thing to it in each, but as you say, that could include a bunch of other stuff). While the US may be different, I'd expect the UK and New Zealand to be at least somewhat similar. No idea about Europe, Asia or Africa though, and the Americas could likely be different.

Had a bit of a gander over at the ONS (Office of National Statistics, the UK's national statistical agency), and they're better than most (far, far better than going through the US statistical sites) - you can get numbers for 'Historical and philosophical studies' for 2008/09, with 43,600 males and 50,600 females (go to http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-...irection=none&newquery=field+of+qualification, download the excel spreadsheet for table 20 and look at table 20.9). The actual statistics keep pointing to the anecdotal feelings being expressed in this thread not being representative of the broader picture.

 

[justin6477]

That link didn't work - I'd be interested in any stats for countries other than Australia (I'm not as on top of the available statistics in other locations - I did give the OECD databases and Eurostat a gander, but neither went into enough detail to get to history - women dominated 'society and culture' or the closest thing to it in each, but as you say, that could include a bunch of other stuff). While the US may be different, I'd expect the UK and New Zealand to be at least somewhat similar. No idea about Europe, Asia or Africa though, and the Americas could likely be different.

Had a bit of a gander over at the ONS (Office of National Statistics, the UK's national statistical agency), and they're better than most (far, far better than going through the US statistical sites) - you can get numbers for 'Historical and philosophical studies' for 2008/09, with 43,600 males and 50,600 females (go to http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/datasets-...irection=none&newquery=field+of+qualification, download the excel spreadsheet for table 20 and look at table 20.9). The actual statistics keep pointing to the anecdotal feelings being expressed in this thread not being representative of the broader picture.

It's worth noting that the 20.9 table actually does show a reasonable difference once you're at the post-graduate level, with males holding an average .3 lead over females for both full-time and part-time students. While 1/15 and ~1/10 (full time and part time) aren't the greatest leads, its a much larger gulf than what the data shows at the baccalaureate level. On that point, the OP references the Fredrik Wester speech where he says some crazy percentage of the PDS audience is male, but he also mentions that they are a) a bit older (although younger than the "average gamer"*) and b) tend to have a master's degree or higher in history or war-related topics.

*I believe he put the age at late 20's while the average gamer is supposed to be more like mid-30's*

I'd say a bit more, but I really should get to bed; better to speak later than say something incoherent.

edit: the image I tried to link earlier

 

[No idea]

I have checkd data for Spain. During the year 2010-2011, 12.848 people took a History degree (not taking History of Art into account) Of them 5.243 were women, so that means around 7.600 were men.

To fully understand these figures it has to be said that in universitary social science studies (which include history) more than 60% of people are females. So, at least in Spain, it seems females have less interest for history than males.

 

[Axe99]

I have checkd data for Spain. During the year 2010-2011, 12.848 people took a History degree (not taking History of Art into account) Of them 5.243 were women, so that means around 7.600 were men.

To fully understand these figures it has to be said that in universitary social science studies (which include history) more than 60% of people are females. So, at least in Spain, it seems females have less interest for history than males.

Thanks . If I was struggling with the US, I think I'd have had no luck on a Spanish stats site! It definitely sounds like there's some variance, but I think we've got enough evidence to say with some degree of confidence that a general interest in history isn't necessarily a trait that's more predominantly male or female.

It's worth noting that the 20.9 table actually does show a reasonable difference once you're at the post-graduate level, with males holding an average .3 lead over females for both full-time and part-time students. While 1/15 and ~1/10 (full time and part time) aren't the greatest leads, its a much larger gulf than what the data shows at the baccalaureate level. On that point, the OP references the Fredrik Wester speech where he says some crazy percentage of the PDS audience is male, but he also mentions that they are a) a bit older (although younger than the "average gamer"*) and b) tend to have a master's degree or higher in history or war-related topics.

*I believe he put the age at late 20's while the average gamer is supposed to be more like mid-30's*

I'd say a bit more, but I really should get to bed; better to speak later than say something incoherent.

edit: the image I tried to link earlier

View attachment 122277

Oh aye - I was more just addressing the 'general interest in history' comments - and for that I think using the overall number of students is more appropriate. I think where HoI's male-centricness comes from is that the games tend to have a fairly warlike focus (even Vicky 2 has war-ry undertones, although it's the least warry of the PDS stable). You may well find that strategy games that can be played without such a warlike focus (the Civ games, Cities in Motion, city-builders and the like) have a bit more of a balanced gender make-up, although I think it'll still be about half a generation or so until women, on average (ie, as a group, not necessarily individuals), feel as comfortable spending their time gaming as men do (again, on average - I know more than a few blokes who are uncomfortable spending time gaming, and prefer to get on with other things).

 

[1337Hospitaller]

Strategy games appeal to the male brain which is more logical in it's design.

 

[Mikalos]

because

1) Video games outside the casual horde are still heavily male dominated dev and player wise
2) the fields that most people who ware interested in these type of games are heavily male dominate still

3) the intersection where these two meet, is logically, male dominated.

females arent encouraged to like paradox games by society, so it makes a self fulfilling prophesy.

 

[Axe99]

Strategy games appeal to the male brain which is more logical in it's design.

Technically, the male brain is better for motor skills and narrower problem-solving while the female brain is better at combining intuitive and analytical thinking, big-picture understanding, multi-tasking and memory (sources linked below). Male brains tend to focus on the left side of the brain, which is more logical, while females can use both sides of the brain, and are better at transferring data between both sides.

In the context of gaming, I'd expect females to have the 'brain' advantage with larger GSGs (at least where you're playing a major country) where you're more likely to have to remember a bunch of things and manage a lot of things going on at once, while you'd expect males to be better at smaller-scale games.

Now, if we were talking about men being attracted to conflict, by dint of their higher levels of testosterone, then you might have more of a biological argument .

http://www.fitbrains.com/blog/women-men-brains/

http://www.livescience.com/41619-male-female-brains-wired-differently.html

 

[Lord Finnish]

If I was a woman I'd have little interest in exploring the times when my kind were either non-actors in the game's theme topics or treated in a highly inferior manner.
While recent years have sparked more interest in female half of history fact just is that most of recorded history has been man stuff, especially the kind of thing Paradox games deal with.

Therefore I don't think it's just that men like war women like peace and so on, women play violent games all the same but I reckon they feel more at home in settings where they can identify with their character. I imagine science fiction to be more popular among women as a setting since our western future so far has a rather positive expectation of gender relations in the future.


And to the exceptions that I'm sure people are lining up to point out: good for you.

 

[No idea]

females arent encouraged to like paradox games by society, so it makes a self fulfilling prophesy.

I dont think everything has to see with society or culture. I think a part of it is natural (biological). You can see how girls and boys fight each other, and how often. Violence calls men more than females. Thus, war is something males feel more comfortable with than females.

 

[Axe99]

If I was a woman....

Except, we're not women, and we have different brain chemistry. Assuming we know how we'd think if our brain chemistry was altered is perhaps a little optimistic .

 

[Had a dad]

I have checkd data for Spain. During the year 2010-2011, 12.848 people took a History degree (not taking History of Art into account) Of them 5.243 were women, so that means around 7.600 were men.

To fully understand these figures it has to be said that in universitary social science studies (which include history) more than 60% of people are females. So, at least in Spain, it seems females have less interest for history than males.

Or it means that women understand better than men, that a degree in history doesn't tend to help you gain a decent paying job.

I absolutely love history, but I don't have a degree in it, so according to the logic shown above, I don't have any interest in history.

 

[Mikalos]

I'll agree that women aren't as interested in strategy titles or war more generally, but there's a few comments in this thread that women aren't as interested in history, and I'm unaware of any evidence to this effect. I've had a quick gander at some Australian data, and the broad field of study 'society and culture', which includes history, has about a 2 to 1 ratio of females to males. It's getting late here, so I'm not going to look any further right now, but happy to chase up something more substantive tomorrow.

"and the broad field of study 'society and culture', which includes history, has about a 2 to 1 ratio of females to males" is about as worthless of a sweeping net catch as you can get for proving a point, its like trying to find out statistics for the number of astrophysicists by finding out how many people are in the sciences.

I dont think everything has to see with society or culture. I think a part of it is natural (biological). You can see how girls and boys fight each other, and how often. Violence calls men more than females. Thus, war is something males feel more comfortable with than females.

"Men fight to prove a point and maintain honor/respect. It's less likely two men will fight if nobody else is around. Women will fight because they are angry, and will do so even if nobody else is around to watch"

you can just stop that nonsense.

 

[Axe99]

Or it means that women understand better than men, that a degree in history doesn't tend to help you gain a decent paying job.

I absolutely love history, but I don't have a degree in it, so according to the logic shown above, I don't have any interest in history.

Sorry, this is at least partly my fault that we're talking degrees, it was just the only indicator we could find (which turned out to be 60:40 female:male in Australia and the UK, and 40:60 in Spain, which I reckon is enough to say there's no clear trend either way from what we could find).

"and the broad field of study 'society and culture', which includes history, has about a 2 to 1 ratio of females to males" is about as worthless of a sweeping net catch as you can get for proving a point, its like trying to find out statistics for the number of astrophysicists by finding out how many people are in the sciences.

Which is why I said I'd find more if people ask, and when they did, I did, in posts #45 and #48, for history degrees specifically. The thing that irked me was this odd sentiment that males are more interested in history (as opposed to war history, which I'd bet good money has more males interested than females, although good luck finding any hard data - but I would be interested if you could ). Actually turned out to be a very similar ratio to society and culture, although that could just be good luck - there's no way it's worth doing a correlation over time to prove otherwise!