UK Female Industry Numbers Fall By 2/3rds

She sure does like that lace revealed yesterday, that according to the research of a University of Liverpool Phd Student, between 2006 and 2009 the percentage of female staff in the videogame industry fell from 12% to 4%. The reasons forwarded by the British Sociological Association lean towards the long hours of working and inflexible working practices (with 10% working more than 56 hours a week) rather than mass female-to-male gender realignment operations. You can question the sample-size if you want (450), but this is an interesting spin on the standard debates, which have always focused around the industry’s inability to attract female staff. This paints it in even blacker shades, with the industry proving incapable of actually keeping the staff it has.


  1. Choca says:

    I question the sample-size because I want to

  2. subedii says:

    There was a little bit in this months Games(TM) mag where Tim Schaeffer talks about the industry working practices.

    When he was just starting out it was the most natural thing in the world to be doing the work at all hours, putting in effectively permanent crunch time because hey, it’s a job you love and you haven’t got any other priorities sucking up your time (he also says that after calculating the hours, they figured out they were being the equivalent of $3.30 an hour, which really puts things in perspective). Like when you’re at Uni.

    Which all naturally changed when he got a kid, and now he makes an effort to finish by 6 every day otherwise he simply won’t even see his daughter. Basically he said that it’s more a case of the industry still maturing. As people age and gain other priorities in life, the games industry will naturally have to shift to better working practices, because right now industry practices generally suck.

    • bob_d says:

      The industry definitely started with a “you must love this job and spend all your time at it” attitude, that at first may have been about people choosing to stay at work, but now it’s enforced. I know of companies where people were fired for taking weekends off, or even for going on pre-planned and pre-approved Christmas vacations (after not having taken time off all year). I know people who worked 80 hour weeks for a whole year; it wasn’t by choice. Sadly, most people in the industry are not in a position where they get to decide when they go home.

    • Damien Stark says:

      “As people age and gain other priorities in life, the games industry will naturally have to… replace them with younger people willing to prioritize games development over the rest of their life and get paid small wages to do so.”

      Fixed that for you. Like many other industries where people actively want the job regardless of its benefits and compensation, the prevailing wages and benefits are likely to remain low. Also like other jobs where adding marginal hours to the existing team (rather than adding more team) significantly adds to productivity (lawyers, software developers, doctors, etc) there will continue to be pressure to work long hours.

      If you predict a renaissance where better conditions and wages prevail, even at the expense of increased game costs, hop over to the Elemental and Starcraft 2 threads already in progress where commenters are complaining that the games cost too much and who cares about the developer, they already made MILLIONS!

      Cliffski made an attempt to dispute this, but if you’re still set on bashing those big million dollar corporations, think of the indies. You really think Cliffski, Toady (of Dwarf Fortress) or the Introversion guys work 40 hour weeks and go home to their families with lavish benefits and salaries?

  3. Starky says:

    Lots of industries are like this, it’s not unique to gaming. There are women out there willing to work the 60 hour weeks that some careers require, but they are few and far between.
    In my experience it’s nothing to do with inequality, it’s not like these roles are closed to women, simply that women do not want them – my experience is more specific to Engineering roles (I worked at a recruitment agency for a while) and large industry, though we did handle a lot of admin possitions also.

    Still, when we advertised the same kinds of jobs on the 30-40 hour per week range the number of female applicants increased quite noticeably.

    • Archonsod says:

      It’s not unique to women either. Though they tend to be more likely to say “no chance” rather than “sure, for double time, an extra day off and a cash bonus”.

    • perilisk says:

      Women might do more household work, but in a lot of households they do more… discretionary… spending. So, it’s not entirely unpaid.

    • bob_d says:

      In my experience, actually working in the game industry, women want the jobs and don’t get them. The last company I worked for hired a number of women who wanted to do game development, but couldn’t get development jobs. The industry is very much an “old-boys network” where you have to know people to break in. So these women took office jobs, with the hope of making a lateral move to development at some point. They were still working the extra-long hours, without complaint (one was getting three hours sleep a night and working the rest of the time). They all eventually quit when they realized that lateral shift was never going to happen. It wasn’t that these women didn’t have the skills needed for development – some of them eventually found development jobs working for casual game companies that were more open to hiring women developers.
      The few female developers I know haven’t been treated the same as their male counterparts, either. There’s definitely a serious level of sexism in the industry.

  4. choconutjoe says:

    The reasons forwarded by the British Sociological Association lean towards the long hours of working and inflexible working practices (with 10% working more than 56 hours a week)

    Why would this affect women more than men?

    • Rinox says:

      Because they usually take care of children in the family more than their spouses.

    • Saiko Kila says:

      Women also need more time for shopping, gossiping and hair doing.

    • Random Stranger #46 says:

      Not to be sexist or anything, but women can move their cucu and get any serious job, no need to apply for full time nerd.

    • wiper says:

      Ahh, the fine art of misogynist humour.

      But yeah, I’d hazard a guess that the fact that, even now, in most relationships women tend to do the lion’s share of housekeeping and looking after the kids (and that there are more single mums than single dads) is a pretty big issue. Also, with games companies’ famous inflexibility, you’ve got to wonder how friendly they are – or, just as important, how friendly /they are perceived to be/ – when it comes to maternity leave.

    • wiper says:

      ^oh, and a bit of plain old “women have it so easy”-chanting appeared while I was typing the last comment. Good stuff.

    • 12kill4 says:

      I’m a sociology grad… ive heard this all before. I started writing a small essay here but ill cut it short and say: Even taking into account equal amounts of paid work time, women will do considerably more unpaid work per day than their male partners. This is obviously a generalisation, and some studies have shown that this gap is steadily contracting… but i think most people would only have to look at their own families to see the truth of the matter…

    • choconutjoe says:

      women will do considerably more unpaid work per day than their male partners

      What comes under ‘unpaid work’ here?

    • bob_d says:

      I think the reason is actually pretty simple. Thanks to over-work, the burn-out rate in the games industry is huge (which is why most people in the industry are young). If you’re not being treated all that well (as women in the industry tend not to be), the burn-out rate is going to be that much higher.

    • bleeters says:

      @ frightlever

      That assumes the different motivations are naturally occuring, rather than something society pummels into you from birth. Which, given that there are plenty of cultures out there where male and female roles as we typically view them are reversed, is pretty bloody unlikely, really.

      Alternatively, grab an Argos catalogue or similiar some time , and flip through to the children’s toys section.

    • choconutjoe says:


      The nature/nurture debate is far from settled. The fact that there exist a tiny handful of maybe matriarchal societies doesn’t refute the fact that the overwhelming majority of human societies have gender roles comparable to those in the west.

      The ‘girls play with barbies’ argument doesn’t prove anything. Which toys a child prefers could just as easily be influenced by biology as which jobs they prefer. After all, the toys section of an Argos catalog is a product of consumer capitalism, not social engineering.

      Plus, given how much is known about the extent sex hormones affect, and are affected by, the brain, and given how much men and women differ physiologically in other respects, it would be somewhat baffling if men and women were neurologically identical in every respect. Such a finding would require a great deal of explanation in it’s own right.

    • bleeters says:

      Well yes, but it’s arguably neither one nor the other, which is the whole reason the debate isn’t settled. But whilst you can’t dismiss biological for the reasons you stated, you can’t rely on it as a complete explanation, either. If behavioural differences were entirely biological they’d neither support a particularly wide variety, nor be all that open to change in relatively short periods of time.

      After all, the toys section of an Argos catalog is a product of consumer capitalism, not social engineering

      It’s incapable of being both? If the cornerstone of consumerism is supply and demand, how is it then somehow impossible for bred expectations to influence that demand? Or, to put it another way, if girls play with dolls because, at least in part, the world says ‘you will play with dolls’, there’s going to be demand for dolls for girls.

  5. Dawngreeter says:

    I like the tag.

  6. Xercies says:

    i wonder how the games industry is going to survive with the new European rules that limit you to 48 hours.

    • subedii says:

      Preferably through better working practices, or if really necessary, games that don’t need to be mega-ginormous production monsters that also need to be finished in a year and a half and we’ve thrown in a free sleeping bag under your desk. This is going to make me sound like a Luddite, but considering the time and resources that are currently expended on some of the big blockbuster titles, there are a number of good reasons to scale back on production values.

      It’s not just an issue of women entering the workplace either. This is a quality of life issue that was pretty starkly brought home with the whole EA Spouse then. Permanent crunch isn’t healthy, and in some scenarios, is pretty freaking exploitative given the hours and pay newcomers to the industry deal with. There’s a reason that “burnout” is common in the first 5 years of entering into the industry.

      Also as a side-note, I fully expect Cliffski’s going to come in here now and let loose a few volleys about this. :P

    • Xercies says:

      Better Working practices in the Games Idustry? Surely You jest!

      But seriously i agree with you i actually do think its very explotative what there doing to be honest, but from what i heard it actually happens quite a bit in other creative industries as well, using peoples love of working in the medium to get them to do silly hours when really the company should be better timed then that if they have to get them to do that.

      Unfortunatly with the way thigns are going i don’t see it happenning since the companies think they need the big blockbusters every 1.5 years to get the money in.

    • Archonsod says:

      It’s not going to happen without a radical shift in the approach to management. The problem I think is that it’s still not seen as a serious career, which becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. You’ll get a fresh undergrad who’s willing to put up with a given level of shit because working in the industry is ‘cool’, but after about three or four years it’s no longer quite so cool to be treat like a skivvy while your mates from Uni are all swanning about on silly money because they took jobs in the IT sector.
      It was a particular problem when I last worked in the industry (about seven years ago, but I’d be surprised if it’s changed) because the expanding importance businesses started placing on IT meant there were no longer any jobs (at least on the coalface) which were exclusive to the gaming industry. And it wasn’t just the pay and conditions, other industries offered better pension schemes and similar benefits, annual wage rises and of course the prospect of promotion not dependent on your immediate superior vacating their role.

    • bob_d says:

      They’re going to become more productive. If you read labor studies, excessive, extended overtime causes people to become less productive than if they worked a 40-hour week. Game companies with these ridiculous working hours are actually getting a lot less work done than they could with shorter work days, ironically.

    • subedii says:

      I’m not sure about less work done, but it is true that overall it’s far less efficient per hour put in as the hours drag on. Occasional overtime is fine, constant crunch tends to grind people down. The issue however is that these are salaried positions, so even if it’s vastly inefficient over the additional hours, it’s still viewed as being in management’s benefit to have the employees working 60-80 hour weeks. At least in terms of getting additional work done over the course of a month.

      This might be relevant.

      link to

      Where’s The Break-Even?

      If productivity essentially decreases over a working day, and working lots of hours results in reduced productivity, how do we establish a method to maximize total output, and figure out where the break-even point lies?

      Unfortunately, quantifying knowledge worker output is a hard problem. I would love to be able to give a simple equation you can plug a few numbers into and pull out the magic number of hours each person should work to maximize their output. I can’t, because even when such equations finally exist, it will be impossible to find and agree on the basic numbers to plug into them. Common programming measurements, like lines of code and function points are either easy to collect and of questionable value or difficult to define and collect. Useful measures like number of bugs created and number of bugs fixed are viewed with suspicion that they will be used unfairly in annual reviews (or gamed by clever programmers in anticipation of annual reviews or performance bonuses).

      Artist output is easier by some measures (number of models or images) and as difficult by some others (subjective quality, look and feel, complexity of model).

      Tester output is easy in one sense (number of unique bugs found), expensive in a second (code coverage), and extremely hard in a third (percentage of total bugs found).

      Overall, most companies seem to have fallen to a least-common-denominator measure of team output. Either the game ships and sells — or it doesn’t. While this is indeed the metric that matters most to shareholders, it’s not terribly useful as a measure of productivity, especially daily or hourly productivity.

    • subedii says:

      Just to clarify, the study I posted there gives a point of around 60 hours per week where benefit from additional hours is actually overwhelmed by decreased quality of work. The problem is that it’s a case-by-case sort of thing, and also depends on how frequent and how long the crunch period goes on for. Unfortunately in the games industry, that’s typically something like having the final 6 months (or even year) spent in perma-crunch mode.

    • bob_d says:

      @subedii: I have friends who worked at companies where they did over 80 hours a week for a year. From what I heard, the amount of work that actually got done was fairly minimal; everyone was too exhausted.
      In one case, to make matters worse, many people had no work left to do towards the end of the production cycle, but were expected to come in for crunch hours to provide moral support for those who did need to be there. Needless to say, not a single person’s relationship out of the entire office survived working at that company.
      The sad thing is that I’ve heard stories that were even worse, where that sort of crunch time lasted for several years. No one can convince me that the work done over that period was preferable to what would have been done in 40-hour weeks with time off.

  7. Gothnak says:

    Well, we have probably gone from 2% to 10% in the last 2 years, and with 200+ people here that’s a decent rise. Can’t say i’m unhappy with the change :p

  8. Gothnak says:

    Oh, and about the hours… When we were all in our early 20’s straight out of uni, the hours weren’t a problem. Now we all have families or are in our 30’s and won’t do it anymore, we all want to go do something else. I don’t think the hours are the only reason that women leave the industry, i think it’s a combination of hours and lack of money that does it. Other industries pay a lot more, and you do it in the Games Industry because you LOVE GAMES. Games has always been mainly a passion for guys, although there is always a smaller % of women who feel that way too, hence the numbers.

  9. Heliocentric says:

    The wording in this post has led me to a differential analysys.

    Massive spike in gender assignment therapy.

  10. Mark says:

    I think the sample size is too small, that accounts for 2-4 big studios basically. A handful of female staff leaving could cause a big shift in those percentages.

    That said they sound about right in general. We have about 4-5 female dev staff out of about 200 here. You can’t really measure the change in female staff percentages using this sort of sample size though imo.

    • Markachy says:

      Exactly what I was going to post. Its not a matter of questioning the sample size, its a matter of the sample size being so ludicrously, ridiculously small as to make the so-called “result” meaningless and therefore any conclusions drawn from it equally meaningless.

      Though again as said it does show up the trend of there being bugger all females overall, exact numbers aside. Similar problems in physics academia/research as well, which they are trying to sort with all sorts of positive discrimination measures. Which REALLY piss me off.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Assuming the sample is taken widely from the industry, 450 people means – by my shitty maths* – a 4.7% margin of error. Make of that what you will.


      *Margin of error = 1/(Square root of the sample size), yeah?

    • Hentzau says:

      That’s the statistical error, certainly, but surveys and polls usually get by on small sample sizes by weighting the data they collect with several reasonable assumptions and a healthy dose of black magic, which is how ICM can attempt to predict the outcome of a general election based on a poll of a thousand people and still keep a straight face. I’m not sure it’s possible to do the same for this kind of survey with the same degree of accuracy, although I’d be interested in having a look at their methodology.

    • Markachy says:

      I’m dubious about using Poisson statistics for this sort of measurement, I suppose it depends on how the survey was done. 450 could be one developer studio for example, which most definitely could not be taken as a meaningful measurement.

      A boss in one studio could have a serious bias to sacking women because hes a misogynist, on the other hand another studio boss could be a naughty man (or positive-discriminatory woman) and deliberately hires lots of women to increase his chances of office loving (or promote her gender).

      So its not a strictly random event and could have clusters of misogynists/gigolos here and there, which is why a much larger sample would probably be required to actually claim a huge drop in female employment.

    • Jerricho says:

      It should be noted that the sample size (450) relates to the number of *women* in he industry who were surveyed regarding there feelings on their work environment. It is not a sample set of 450 industry works, 18 of whom might have been women.

  11. Fred Wester, CEO of Paradox says:

    Lack of women is a problem in the IT industry as a whole though as well. I’ve yet to work with a female sysadmin, they’re really rare.

    • Archonsod says:

      Depends on the industry. There’s a fair few in the financial sector, but what got me is in the past five years around 75% of sysadmins I dealt with in the US military were female. Though come to think of it that might be the result of the old ‘no women on the frontline’ policy they used to have.

  12. P7uen says:

    From the title I was expecting info on the UK Female Industry, in which I had hoped to get a job.

    I am disappoint :(

    • Bhazor says:

      I was afraid the manufacturing of women was in decline. I was glad to see this was not the case.

  13. RogB says:

    most women I know of in the industry are generally animators.

    and as for gender reassignment, I know a few that have gone the male->female route, which should be pushing the ratio back the other way!

  14. Tei says:

    Horrible bad news.
    What I can say? wen a industry is fucked up, and womens flee, it make looks like womens are more smarter than men. I don’t think thats the right reading, but Its the obvious reading from the data.

    This is both bad karma creating and bad karma generated. So we are creating a feedback infinite loop of bad karma.

  15. AbyssUK says:

    What are the numkbers for the UK film/media industry.. from my experiance women just seem to relate the world ‘game’ with ‘waste of time’.. but watching eastenders is fine… go figure

  16. Gothnak says:

    I’d like to know what % of women work in the HR, Finance and secretarial positions in the games industry. It’s about 80% women form the companies i have worked in.

    Dev wise, they are mainly animators, with a few artists and a smattering of coders and designers.

  17. olemars says:

    They’re probably fed up with male coworkers asking for cyber so they pretend to be men while at work.

  18. lostrootpass says:

    I question not only the sample size but also the manner in which the survey took place. Sounds to me like there’s a massive selection bias in place. Was it the same 450 people, and they asked how many had went on to better pastures? Was it a completely different 450, thereby completely nullifying the survey? I have no idea, because is behind a loginwall.

    Regardless, 450 is a tiny number.

  19. Quirk says:

    I’d guess something similar applies to the comparatively low numbers of female entrepreneurs (something that actually worsens in more developed countries). Being an entrepreneur exposes you to open-ended work hours for uncertain payoffs. This is a game men want to play more than women.

    So, I’d suggest that small, indie studios would be less likely to have many female employees generally, both because they’re small and because they’re high-risk, high-return. You’d expect most female employment in the industry to be in larger companies, and for the percentage of that employment to vary in proportion with the number of smaller companies compared to larger companies etc as well as working conditions.

    However, I’m not actually convinced that the paper being reported on is necessarily capable of saying anything accurate about the percentage of female staff in the UK games industry.
    link to

    It featured an online questionnaire completed by 457 women. It didn’t attempt to, say, sample randomised groups of games company employees in 2006 and 2009. The write-up of the presentation in the PDF linked from the page I link above doesn’t mention any research over and above the questionnaire. Without actually having a paper to investigate, it’s hard to know exactly what their methodology consisted of, but it doesn’t seem like they had enough data to make the claim being made. (It could be, after all, that whatever means they used to contact the women who were asked to fill out the questionnaire biased the response base towards people who had been in the industry since 2006, say.)

    Sociology research: take with a pinch of salt, especially if you don’t have the paper.

  20. JackShandy says:

    More posts need the tag “Ada Lovelace would be ashamed”.

    There’s certainly enough news that warrants it…

  21. vanarbulax says:

    So in 3 years 2/3 of the females in the videogame industry left or were fired and no more females were hired to replace them? Eyebrows raised by this claim indeed.

    I’d like to know where the original paper is because this seems to say they took a female heavy sample once and a female light sample another time. Unless they sampled the same companies and areas that difference can be, and probably is, purely meaningless.

    As said above 450 is meaningless especially if you take 450 from a different group.

    Sad to see that the numbers are so low regardless. And that the sexism (casual or otherwise) increase rapidly on comments in other websites holding this story.

    • vanarbulax says:

      Wait, what? The 457 is just the women who responded to the survey? It was an self-selected thing? How they hell can you calculate percentage of female staff in the industry from that? Less people responded, therefore less female employees, which would be meaningless? Unless they performed a random sample of employees at different companies and stopped when they got to ~450 women and had to go through more people to get that figure in 2009 instead of 2006. In which case a 4% female from 457 means that 11,425 people were surveyed.

      The plot thickens…

    • Jerricho says:

      No, the 450 was a survey of women in the industry who were asked about their feelings on the industry and doesn’t relate to the actual 12%-4% statistic.

    • Quirk says:

      The blurb for the original presentation doesn’t mention any other data being gathered. Also, of course, the link I posted earlier claims that the “decline” is directly derived from survey data; I’ll repost:
      link to

      So, yeah.

    • Thermal Ions says:

      Sounds more like this survey/report may be indicative of low retention rates rather than indicative of a decline in overall representation. There’s just too many question marks over what / how this survey was conducted to make the figures meaningful.

    • Thermal Ions says:

      The VG247 article talks about “intention to leave” which is totally different to “actually having left”. I work with a number of people who have been “intending to leave” for years.

  22. terry says:

    I noticed the number of argument-based RPGs has showed a similar decline :O

  23. Torqual says:

    So female game developers are smarter then their male counterparts. They don’t work for nothing.

  24. terry says:

    Beware bots bearing bottes, my grandfather once said.

  25. Dan Lawrence says:

    Unfortunately the games industry has been bound by the working time directive for years and it has made no difference because of the ‘opt-out’ our lovely government negotiated and that is included as part of most games industry contracts. You are able to rescind this opt-out at any point by writing a letter to your employer but that will tend to attract their attention negatively toward you.

    • Archonsod says:

      Signing the opt out merely gives them permission to ask you to work longer hours, it doesn’t automatically mean you agree to it unless you’re specifically contracted for those hours. If your contract states 40 hours per week then they can ask you to work longer, but you still have a right to refuse.

      Although it’s usually better to demand financial recompense for it and refusing if they don’t meet it. That way you don’t give the impression that you’re refusing to do it. Either way they can’t actually sack you for it without giving you a good claim for constructive dismissal.

  26. Devenger says:

    Damnit, why can’t I be interested in entering an industry with equal representation of the sexes… <;/

  27. Pijama says:

    Might sound a bit too much, but I never heard of the digital entertainment industry having trade unions or labour associations.

    Personally, I think it is time to get coders, artists and everybody conscious of that – by making the “game workers side” stronger, it also weakens some of the ridiculous power that companies like EA and Activision wield right now.

  28. Sagan says:

    It is just a shame.
    I think one of the reasons why the industry is only advancing very slowly in terms of storytelling and variety of scenarios is, that we don’t have a very diverse developer pool. And now the problem is getting even worse.
    This is just not healthy for the industry in general.

  29. reginald says:

    we need more images of lady lovelace, theres maybe three paintings/portraits of her, tops.

    get to it, HISTORIANS.

  30. Nallen says:

    The games industry as far as I have seen first hand and know by proxy pays turd and works you to death. You need a passion for games. When I look at my life I doubt 2% of the people I know are passionate female gamers.

    As for the declining numbers, was there a massive push to get women in to games about 5-8 years ago, and they’re all reaching motherhood and thinking ‘fuck this’?

    • RogB says:


      Fair point. Of all the women I know in the games industry, i’d say less than 10% actually play ANY games. You dont necessarily HAVE to be a gamer to make games (depending on discipline of course, which is why ive not seen any lady game designers), but it helps if you actually give a shit about what you are doing..

  31. Smeg says:

    It’s incredible what some people will waste their 3-year PHD on. The 450 sample size is indeed questionable. Were studios asked to produce employee statistics or did they ask individual people? I suspect most of my female colleagues (currently at around 10% or more at our studio across all departments) would choose not to take part in such a survey, preferring not to draw unwanted attention.

  32. jakobsbror says:

    great article pic, I have to say.

  33. Seren says:

    Well I think RPS should start setting an example to others. Add a female to your team *cough* *cough*

    It’s strange, the number of female gamers is rising apparently. So you’d think that more companies would want female devs, bringing in a female perspective. I personally don’t think their is much difference between the games women like and men like. The lines are more blurry then a Jackson Pollock in my opinion. Maybe I have that opinion because I like the gore and ass-kicking games as much as the guys? Even though it’s a common belief that the majority of female gamers only play mmo’s, it’s not always the case.
    As sad as it is, there is still a lot of sexism (or stupidity) amongst the actual gamers, so it’s not all too surprising that some of that mentality would translate to the other side of the industry. Although I do find it hard to believe the progress that was being made has taken steps backwards. Compare things now, to how things used to be. Females online were considered to be a myth, not just in gaming but simply using computers!!

    Now if you will excuse me I have some ironing and cooking to do *sarcasm*.

    • notthistime says:

      if only it was an easy case of ‘hire more women’, i get several cv’s a day (for art positions) and hardly ever get ones from women. And the ones I have got, are of a poor quality. I know that sounds harsh, but its true (so far).

      mind you, im struggling to find decent male artists at the moment which is odd considering how many places are going under around here.

      regarding sexism among making games, a lot of it comes from publishers. I’ve just been ”discouraged’ from having female members of key people in a game outnumber the male ones.. Its not a huge issue, but the explanation that ‘it wouldn’t sell as well’ is a bit disconcerting.

  34. Pzykozis says:

    I’d have to say that whilst normally I’d not really listen to a survey of this size, being a final year studying game related course at uni (wahey 3d modelling), out of the 50 or so of us left, there are only actually 2 females. now obviously this isn’t indicative of the whole country in terms of the throughput of female students into the industry but taken as a sample in a similar vein as this it’s not a pretty picture.

  35. ghost4 says:

    The industry is not at fault. Women simply aren’t nearly as interested in video game/software development as men are. To each his own.