And, just for the record, this is how capitalism works:

1) Women like puzzle games (for example).
2) Women buy puzzle games.
3) Game developers see revenue numbers.
4) Game developers make puzzle games.
5) Repeat.

In short, if women game, then they’ll (obviously?) buy games that they like. If copies of “Virtual Knitting” are flying off the shelves, then you can bet “Virtual Quilting” won’t be far behind.

If, on the other hand, 38% of gamers are women and they aren’t laying down their money, but instead are just saying that they would lay down their money if only the right game came along, the developers should ignore them completely.

Which brings me back around to why have the “GirlieGamR” conference? If the money is there, they’ll develop. If it isn’t, they won’t.

Right? Or is that just the do-do talking?

Dan

WIGI helps in creating more notice of women who make games, but as important, it helps by throwing a spotlight on the fact that women do game, just not, by and large, like me do.

While I love FPS, and don’t need ‘women’s games’, many women, who don’t call themselves gamers, will spend hours on a puzzle game or a flash game and there needs to be some attention given to the casual gamer. That’s why WIGI exists.

Plus, on the selfish side, it is great for networking! Oh, and there are plenty of men involved.

Why do they have a “women in games” conference, anyway?

Do they have a “left-handed people in games” conference? How about a “blue-eyed folks in games” conference?

There’s certainly no “men in games” conference (although I can understand the assumption that any other games conference is a men in games conference)…

Just wondering…

Dan