Via Wonderland, I found my way to a few stats about girl gamers this morning.
Lots of good observation here, though I find myself strangely compelled to defend the Hannah Montana video game and its ilk. I'm not sure why; maybe just because I'm argumentative and haven't had any caffeine yet today?
Let's face it, Hannah Montana is popular; skinning games with popular entertainment tie-ins is an old practice. Pretty much every major entertainment franchise has its games, from the Matrix to Star Wars to Avatar: The Last Airbender to X-Men to Ben 10 to Kim Possible... you get the picture. It keeps happening because it moves games off the shelves.
And here's where I get to the part that's bothering me. (Note that I'm extrapolating from what the author of my linked post said -- I haven't actually played either one of these games, and I don't know if she has either. So I'm arguing against myself, here, and not against her.) The suggestion that a Hannah Montana game (and in the past, Mary Kate and Ashley games) is an inferior game on the grounds that it's skinned with a theme popular with the tween-girl demographic is a pretty big assumption. And it's an unfair, sexist assumption, too.
First, even if you just don't buy into the popular franchise the game ties into, that doesn't mean the game is bad. Maybe it's just not your cup of tea. And even for a phenomenal franchise, if the underlying structure of the game is flawed, the game still sucks (E.T., anyone?).
Worse, the idea that a game built upon a wildly popular girls' franchise must be a pretty weak game? That's exactly the sort of thinking that creates that "oh, but girls don't play games" construct in the first place. Girls DO like Hannah Montana. If you make a Hannah Montana game, some girls will play it, and bing! you have some more girl gamers. Isn't that the whole idea? Why do we have to provide girls, not just with games that appeal to them, but games that have some sort of moral authority, too? The game is selling, so it does actually have that appeal. What's wrong with that? Why is it OK for a boy to want to play Spider-Man and it's not OK for a girl to want to play Hannah Montana?
I'm not saying the Hannah Montana game is objectively fantastic, mind you, or that game developers can't or shouldn't do better. Franchise games often feel like they're phoned in, whether they're aimed at girls or no. And Hannah Montana does have the token girl-game element where you can design outfits and unlock Hannah's wardrobe... but it's not a game revolving entirely around shopping and fashion, which is the real problem with the games-for-girls space.
Oh, and... if any of you have played the Hannah Montana game... let me know what you think, 'k?

My daughter played the Hannah Montana Wii game and loved it. She loves racking up points, which she can later use to buy clothes.
She also does the dances. She has to match up her actions with what scrolls across the screen.
It's definitely a better game than some Wii games we've tried.
Posted by: Nathania | August 15, 2008 at 10:13
Good to know! Maybe we'll have to pick it up for my girl. :)
Posted by: Andrhia | August 15, 2008 at 10:16
Nathania: How old is your daughter? We're looking for wii games for our daughter who will be 6 in January.
Posted by: ann marie | August 15, 2008 at 10:40
My daughter's been asking for the Hannah Montana game. Since we've been trying to limit her Hannah exposure (omg, do you really want *everything* to have Hannah's face on it?!), we bought her one of the puppy luv games instead. We were so, so wrong. Seriously, it's the worst Wii game I've played to date. I'm surprised they even released the game in its current state. I really don't know what some of these game companies are thinking.
Posted by: varin | August 15, 2008 at 11:41
Here's an odd bit of trivia. I was a game tester for Acclaim Software for about a year and a half. That means I had to test, yes, Mary-Kate & Ashley games.
Mary-Kate & Ashley Sweet 16: License to Drive for the Game Boy Advance was a bad game. Just trust me on this, it was.
However, that game was completely different from Mary-Kate & Ashley Sweet 16: License to Drive for PS2 and GameCube. (I don't think there was an XBox version.) That game was a clone of Mario Party, and...it was actually playable. I mean, it could be tedious, but some of the minigames were fun and you could definitely imagine girls playing it.
So, really, I think like any licensed game, it depends on how much work the developers are willing to put into it.
(And you know, those MK&A games were real hits for Acclaim. They sold many, many copies and kept them in business for quite a while...)
Posted by: John Evans | August 15, 2008 at 23:22
Varin: See, we're breathing a sigh of relief as we move into Hannah Montana territory. It's giving us respite from Princess Overload.
John: Now that I know you've played Mary Kate and Ashley games, I'm not sure I can ever look at you the same way again... ;) Also, hey, did you know Jeff Smith there? He's an old high school friend of my husband's.
Posted by: Andrea A. Phillips | August 16, 2008 at 10:48
It was a job. ;) Actually, working as a tester did really hammer into me the idea that testing REALLY IS important, so I consider that a valuable lesson.
The MK&A thing...Just one of those quirks that makes me a fully realized character. ;) (What's really interesting is that the lead tester on those MK&A projects is now an aspiring hip-hop artist. Now that's an odd confluence of events.)
Jeff Smith...I don't think so. I don't remember everyone there, though. He could have been on a different shift, or maybe just hired at a different time.
Posted by: John Evans | August 18, 2008 at 13:21