A response to some arguments in anita sarkeesians interview.

[CD-R]

Well, as far as Assassin's creed goes, in 1 Lucy was a scientist who was way more competent than Desmond, the main character. Desmond snoops around at night and she removes the security camera videos of it, and she's an undercover assassin which must be a really tough job.

And then suddenly in 2 she's just the boobs who moves the story forward. So while I don't wholeheartedly agree with either of these folks, I do think there's something sexist, or at least something stupid, going on in AC.

Well you know except for that time in the beginning when she escorted Desmond out of the facility and fought off a battalion of guards with her bare hands.

 

[idarkphoenixi]

This whole issue just annoys me, for either side. Yes, there were some sexist comments out there and the beat-her-up game was just plain old silly...

But there's no denying that she's using it for her own advantage, she's made something like 200k or possibly more, you don't think she's going to use at little money as possible and pocket the rest for herself? I know I would.
All critisism is getting dismissed because she's lumping everyone into the woman-hating-sexist pile. Which is not on.

I don't really see the point of what she's doing but she's still welcome to do it, but the fact that I've talked negatively about her in the past when she happens to be a woman and then I get called someone with a problem against all women is just bull. It's a cheap way to avoid critisism and that's probably why most people actually do have a problem with her.

I don't need someone to tell me the media sexualises women - I ALREADY KNOW THAT. We all know that. Hollywood has done it ever since the birth of Cinema because it sells tickets. Sometimes it goes too far, sure, but that doesn't apply to everything just because of a few examples. Some games are very fair to women too and they deserve praise for that. Just like not ALL movies to be released treat women in an unfair light.

Honestly, I havn't even seen that many games that treat women badly. Maybe they put them in the spotlight and have them look really but that's really nothing new and I don't see her complaining about almost every film to ever come out. Not to mention every tv show and female news anchor/weather girl.

 

[runic knight]

Do advertising agencies expect people to know the lore of a game they have not bought? Yes or no.

Depends on the game. An established franchise will often make direct references to the going on's if not the lore itself when selling new parts. "finish the fight" anyone? Or how about Mass effect's lore controversial DLC character? The answer here depends on who the marketing is aimed at. Newcomers are more generically advertised to then those who already embrace the games.

I suppose you could say "no" if you are referring to marketing of most games in general, though at that point one has to look at how they are being advertised alongside how anything else is being advertised. When doing such though, any argument concerning sexism in gaming advertisement quickly loses it's luster as the same mechanisms are used to sell so many other products, regardless if they actually relate. thus the problem would no longer be any claim of sexism in gaming advertisement, but of advertisement as a whole (of which, there is indeed a case to be made there.) But that does take us farther out from games alone, so dwelling onto that broader topic seems too much a tangent.

Though it is a little funny that the less related to the game the marketing is advertising to, the more likely of idiotic or blatantly sexist tactics they will use. Less mention of story or plot and more shock/sex/graphic violence or gimmicky hook is used to get attention at all. If one were to assume they were aiming at someone who hasn't played a game before and trying to appeal to them (which many have claimed to be doing), it seems almost like they are more sexist when trying to attract non-gamers then members of the gaming community. At least, that is a potential interpretation...

 

[Jdb]

I just realized something. Can Nintendo sue Anita for copyright violation for her $50 pledge award?

That is clearly Nintendo's property, and she is clearly making money off of it.

 

[Cheesepower5]

Tranquilizing over killing - no other enemy in the game has a reward for tranks. What's the deal there? I don't know. Could be story-telling break issue, could be sexist. I'm going to go with sexist, because there's never real hesitation (or the option not to kill generally) male characters and bosses.

Actually, Metal Gear Solid Games have had rewards for tranquilizing bosses instead of killing them for a while. I don't even see how that would be sexist if the beasts were the first ones to have it happen.

 

[sanquin]

It sounds to me like this woman is biased. Don't get me wrong, as a female I do think that more attention should be given to the sexism or at the very least, male audience preference in games. But sarkeesian looks to be very biased towards females, finding sexism and such where there isn't really anything noticeable. I wouldn't call her a feminist in the bad sense, but the bias is definitely there. I do hope she gets something done properly with all the money that was donated to her. As just her own opinion clearly doesn't suffice in this matter.

 

[targren]

one does not expect anything from a customer prior to getting a copy of the game.

so no.

So that brings us to the $64 question. Is countering Sarkeesian's criticisms about the advertising by talking about the lore that the consumer would have no way of knowing about a good rebuttal?

Considering that she was the one who went beyond the contents of the advertising and decided to bring up the plot, characters, and mechanics, and get them completely wrong, yes, it is.

"Goes to credibility, your honor."

 

[Clearing the Eye]

I just realized something. Can Nintendo sue Anita for copyright violation for her $50 pledge award?

That is clearly Nintendo's property, and she is clearly making money off of it.

Fair use is such a complicated mess of grey shades.

I hope she gets successfully sued, though. I'd like her to shut up -_-

 

[Mylinkay Asdara]

Tranquilizing over killing - no other enemy in the game has a reward for tranks. What's the deal there? I don't know. Could be story-telling break issue, could be sexist. I'm going to go with sexist, because there's never real hesitation (or the option not to kill generally) male characters and bosses.

Actually, Metal Gear Solid Games have had rewards for tranquilizing bosses instead of killing them for a while. I don't even see how that would be sexist if the beasts were the first ones to have it happen.

I stand corrected - no other bosses in that game though, that I know of anyway, geez now I'm uncertain lol - and have only watched others play previous games and taken their word for some content I posted about (I will pass on the correction to them, thanks). I didn't get into the series until this title and it was hard for me to go backward on the control schemes (which is neither here nor there, just supplemental information).

Again though, wasn't about the specifics of the example - was just giving an example to demonstrate the level of complexity and dissection required to even begin to untangle portrayal of character (either male or female) in games and how many elements come into play that has less to do with gender studies than people from outside the culture may realize.

And since the conversation has tended this way: I'm not saying she isn't a game player (I have no idea if she is and I'm a tad too tired of discussing her to do the legwork to find out). If she isn't, the topic is going to be much more difficult for her to tackle. Even if she is though, the presentation is going to be seen by those who aren't, so that's still a lot of additional explanation that needs to be given to provide an accurate picture to them, and in her videos I have seen to date that isn't as deep as I think it is going to need to be. Obviously, she's much better funded for these, so it would be feasible for her to provide a lot more detailed content - I just hope she does. Again, my main concern expressed in my original post in this thread is that if this is to happen it happens in a way that can be maximally productive for the community, the industry, and the outsider understanding of games in general. I want it to have value. I don't know enough about this person to be confident that will be the case is all.

 

[targren]

And since the conversation has tended this way: I'm not saying she isn't a game player (I have no idea if she is and I'm a tad too tired of discussing her to do the legwork to find out). If she isn't, the topic is going to be much more difficult for her to tackle. Even if she is though, the presentation is going to be seen by those who aren't, so that's still a lot of additional explanation that needs to be given to provide an accurate picture to them, and in her videos I have seen to date that isn't as deep as I think it is going to need to be.

Call me cynical, but I've been wondering if that isn't her plan. To target the videos at non-gamers, I mean. She's already made it perfectly clear that she's not concerned with accuracy or facts, and those are the sort of things that gamers leap on. So what if she's not incompetent, but is trying to target a non-gaming audience, just like those "Million Mom" idiots and and endless line before them, to rabble rouse. Because she's obviously not trying to actually improve anything with empty rhetoric, buzzwords, inaccuracies, and outright lies.

 

[targren]

Considering that she was the one who went beyond the contents of the advertising and decided to bring up the plot, characters, and mechanics, and get them completely wrong, yes, it is.

If you're using the lore to counter her arguments about the lore, yes. If you're using the lore to counter argument criticizing the advertising targeted at people who have no way of knowing the lore, no.

I kindly ask people to put aside your personal thoughts about this woman for 10 minutes and attempt to make better arguments. I'm not asking for the moon.

No, you're trying to cherry-pick. If she had stuck with just complaining about the advertising, then there wouldn't be any grounds for bringing it up, but she didn't. She went beyond the advertisement, got it wrong, and tipped her hand. Just because you want to pretend that it didn't happen doesn't make it fact.

 

[Ryotknife]

one does not expect anything from a customer prior to getting a copy of the game.

so no.

So that brings us to the $64 question. Is countering Sarkeesian's criticisms about the advertising by talking about the lore that the consumer would have no way of knowing about a good rebuttal?

its advertising. It whole EXISTENCE is based around generating buzz. If your whole point is based around an advertisement, you are grasping for straws. Even an advertisement which illicit a negative reaction is STILL good marketing, it feeds off of attention. We all know about the dirty tricks advertising agencies use in any medium. If you want to hold them to a higher standard, by all means start your crusade. It has nothing to do with games only.

Is Bayonetta a good character? yes or no? If the answer is yes, then the rest doesnt matter. If she is a bad character and she is sexed up to the gills, THEN i can see getting angry because it is lazy.

Now, ill be honest, if i see a female character with two blimps under her shirt I will usually write her off as a terrible character because 9 times out of 10 that is the case. It is not so much that hot women are terrible characters, its just that devs turn a terrible character into a hot woman to give her some sort of function in the game. Whereas a terrible male character just stays as a terrible male character.

 

[targren]

Just because you want to pretend that it didn't happen doesn't make it fact.

At what point did I say she never mentioned the lore of the game? I'm saying that when addressing her arguments about the lore specifically, you can't counter those arguments by talking about the lore because the people the advertising is targeted at are not expected to know it.

(I am going to assume you mean "addressing her arguments about the advertising specifically", because otherwise what you posted is inconsistent with what you've been saying, and makes no sense. If I'm wrong, believe me that it's an honest mistake)

You're minimizing the larger point, which is that it stopped being just about the advertising when she talked about more than the advertising. She should have quit while she was ahead, and she didn't, and it cost her credibility.

 

[LetalisK]

Hm. This actually makes me curious to look at her other works. I haven't played the games in question, so it's harder for me to make a judgement about who is more right in these cases, but if correct I'd be curious to see if the article was pointing out some errors she has made or showing a consistent pattern of behavior.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

According to material published by the Entertainment Software Association, in 2011 the percentage of gamers who were female came in at 42%. More or less within spitting distance of demographic parity with the male majority. So why is it then when Bioware published a collection of anonymous player data gleaned from playthroughs of Mass Effect 2, a game only released in 2010, that only 18% of playthroughs featured a female gendered Shepard?

Are we supposed to write this substantial drop in representation as some combination between men and only men playing through the game multiple times, never playing female Shepard while the majority of female players only played the game once as male Shepard, or some combination thereof?

If there ever was a developer of triple-A gaming title that has gone out of its way to include female gamers as part of their core demographic then that company is Bioware. So if the veritable poster child of progressive Triple-A development cannot tap into that 42% that the ESA insists on existing much like a Canadian girlfriend [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GirlfriendInCanada], why on earth should development companies take the demands of feminists like Anita seriously?

It would seem to me that the biggest hurdle in better female representation in triple-A titles is still working out a way to convince more women to drop $60 on a computer game.