People freak out over Gamespot GTA V review

[Eggsnham]

Don't get me wrong, I think this situation is stupid as hell and the incessant bitching about the reviewer's decision is ridiculous, but at the same time; would you expect anything else?

For starters, this is the internet. Then when you take into account that the internet has been ablaze with flame wars over sexism for the last year or so, it really only makes sense that people reacted the way they did; especially when you consider that the reviewer in question spent a good chunk of her review harping on misogynistic situations in the game.

It's like throwing gasoline on a fire and expecting nothing to happen. Kudos to the reviewer for speaking her mind, but still, you should've seen it coming.

 

[deloftie]

Are you reading what I said or not?

I said the idea that all the women in GTA V are wives girlfriends, feminists or strippers is not true. It's bunk. But even if it did, making fun of feminists and some wives is not misogynistic. You know there are women who are neither wives nor feminists, and that making fun of some types of women is not making fun of all of them.

If you played a video game where all black people were presented as under developed characters simply present for the player to laugh at, would you consider that video game problematic, even racist?

It doesn't need to have them if they aren't relevant to the story.

That is circular logic. If you write a story without any developed women in it then of course you aren't going to have any developed female characters. But then why are you writing a story without any developed women in it?

Obama wants to legalize weed and that makes him evil.

He does not want to legalize weed and even if he did that wouldn't make him evil

Sounds like Obama really does want to legalize weed but you don't want to admit it.

You seem to be slightly missing the point here. The internet is full of people defending the game from what the reviewer said was troublesome aspects about the game. You are now saying all those people are actually defending an issue that doesn't exist.

It seems like they're defending the game's protrayal of women and saying it's not "nothing but strippers etc"

But if that's not the case then sure lots of people can be wrong.

God all mighty. The objection was not they are all strippers. Playing the game and finding a female character who is not a stripper is not demonstrating that the issue is made up.

The GTA 5 wiki lists 38 central characters. 6 of the characters are women. 3 of them are simply girlfriends to the main characters. 1 of them is the daughter.

The 32 male characters are a hugely diverse and developed set of characters. Half of them are from ethnic minorities, demonstrating that GTA 5 can write diverse characters if they actually want to.

 

[deloftie]

So writing a black man is the same as writing a woman. Got it.

So your position is that the most expensive game of all time, produced by a staff of hundreds, can't write women other than the most basic characters set up just to laugh at or lust after?

Because who can figure out women right lads, am I right, HIGH FIVE BRO!

Why does it matter if they have 9, 90 or 0 women in the game.

It matters because women make up over half of the worlds population, and when media (be it TV movies or games) present worlds were women as an entire gender are simply sidelined it re-enforces the notion that women do not matter in any genuine sense.

And before you say it is "just a game", it is just a game. And it is just one of the many games that do this. But why is that a reason not to point ou the issue?

 

[Stephen St.]

Look, I obviously haven't played the game myself yet, nor did I read her full review thoroughly. That will have to be done once I finish work. I never meant being misogynistic was just boys being boys, don't be ridiculous. You're taking part of my post and running with it. I personally just don't agree with the point she is trying to make, as the series is well known for their takes on exaggerated male stereotypes and basically pokes fun at society as a whole, bad taste or not. You know what you get when you play these games, so I think her sexism critique is misdirected.

Well, I am sorry if I misjudged you. Your comment rubbed me in all the wrong ways. I don't want to accuse anyone I don't really know of actual mysogony.

Still I think the "you know what to expect" line of argument misses the point. To take another recent example: I also expect Total War games to have a shitty AI. That doesn't mean a reviewer shouldn't mention it or deduct points for it.
So the argument only works if you say that a.) The "message" a game conveys should not be part of a review or b.) A GTA game is allowed to have a sexist message.

I don't find either alternative especially convincing.

As for you saying I'm confusing the normal identity and self expression of teenagers for a feminist agenda, you better tell this to the researchers, and not me. I'm just telling you what the report stated. I'm all for equal rights, but I don't have to agree when it's tipping in the other direction either. Maybe it's just you that are taken by surprise by the fact that feminism has taken such a strong influence over here.

Well I don't know the researchers. I can only take your word for it, which logically makes you the person I adress my concerns to. I don't think it's tipping the other side, but rather that those are natural fluctuations in gender roles that have always been changing, though maybe not as fast as they do now. But I am not prepared for a discussion on the matter, as I lack the necessary background knowledge.

Yeah, but the way he wrote it, hes asking for reasons why. So people are bringing up stuff they think is the issue, or part of the issue. I think that's part of a Forum discussion, otherwise you can just either write "Yay" or "Nay" below and that's it.

I was of the impression this particular part of the discussion had moved beyond the immediate reasons why, and focused more on whether or not the review is actually "bad", according to some standard to be agreed on. That is what I am interested in discussing, anyways.

I should've been more clear. I was focusing on the negative points she brought up, and those are the reason this whole thing started. And the mysogony-thing is the "bad" game-aspect she wrote most about. So her _critique_ is, in fact, focused on the mysogony.

I see your point, but I don't quite agree. Yes it may be that this aspect was at the center of the negative points, but that may only be because there were little other negative points to write about. The review is still overwhelmingly positive. A review is not merely the list of a game's negative aspects, it is a thorough description that consists of both positive and negative points. Therefore I think it is unfair to say that the review as a whole is focused on issues of female representation.

I'm not saying the mysogony isnt present, or not an issue. Im saying that i have an issue with the fact that she points it out as the one flaw, the one thing that made it taste sour just a bit. And be honest, it's a Gangster-Game. People get shot, people get tortured. The series is offensive and has a very dark sense of humour. If you want to staple that as bad, do it by adressing it as a whole, saying that you think its in bad taste. And dont just take the group your part of and yell "That's bad because its offensive against ME!". Doing that pretty much means you have to only care about offensive stuff if you're the one that can potentially be offended. I will have to dig into the game a bit, to see if it's really ONLY the female gender that's getting a bad picture. If that's really the case, im of course wrong and she has a valid point. But with a series like GTA, i highly doubt that.

I don't quite understand how you can take issue with her feelings toward the game. What is described is a personal experience, and it seems to me a quite understandable one at that. I think your argument conflates a games subject matter with it's message. The portrayal of violence, racism or sexism isn't itself offensive. Which is, I guess, why GTA games are considered praiseworthy despite their very dark and violent subject matter. If a game, however, sends the message that violence, racism or sexism are somehow acceptable, then that is a problem. According to that review, GTA is at least in danger of sending such a message with regard to sexism. Which is, in my mind, a valid point to critisize, no matter what the subject matter of the game is.

Regarding the second half of your post, I think here you are making a completely different argument, saying that if any issue, such a sexism, is involved, the person is morally obligated to also include all other groups that could be similarily offended. This argument makes zero sense to me, and I cannot see how such a stance is either logical or practical. Why would someone who is not offended by the specific message even consider looking for other groups that might be offended? From what principle does a moral obligation to do so stem?

It's potrayed as over the top, as laughably over the border. It's MEANT to make you point and laugh at how retarded the whole thing is. Its' the whole reason a lot of parodys are funny. Watch some "Abridged"-Series on Youtube. It's exactly the same, but instead of "overly manly man" its Anime-Chliches. And to me both are not to be taken seriously.

I can't see how this raises any new point in relation to what I have already written. You seem to imply that it is a parody, but I haven't seen anyone argue why it is a parody. A parody is something that has a subversive element. In fact, the review adresses this exact point and states that while it is obviously meant to be funny, there is nothing subversive about it, and therefore the humor doesn't change the message. Whether or not this assertion is true, I cannot judge.

This is true, the last part is an assumption. A 9 /10 while calling the thing out on obvious mysogny you saw in it, jsut doesnt sit well with me. I felt like she wanted to go further, but didnt. And the distribution of ressources, i stated my issue with that above. I'd have to look into the game's story and presentation before i can safely say if she missed some crucial stuff or not.

Well, that's understandable. Playing the game yourself is certainly the best idea to validate or invalidate the review .

 

[Stephen St.]

If you honestly think the ads in the GTA series are NOT satire and are NOT mocking things, then well ... I can't think of anything to say that's not an insult (sorry for the previous edit).

Seriously the only way they can be less subtle with their mocking is if they turn to the camera, break the 4th wall and start a stand up bit with "you know what's stupid, this stuff".

Example of their "not satire":

[video snipped]

Sure, that is satirical. Doesn't mean everything else is too.

But yeah, maybe the reviewer happened to be wrong. That happens, but it does neither explain nor justify that kind of backlash. The question for me is: Assuming the parts the review talks about are not actually satire, even though they may be over the top or funny, is the review valid?

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

It matters because women make up over half of the worlds population, and when media (be it TV movies or games) present worlds were women as an entire gender are simply sidelined it re-enforces the notion that women do not matter in any genuine sense.

Context be damned, right? You can't just put women or men somewhere to fill some kind of list of expectations. Honestly, I find that more degrading than not having women in a piece of fiction.
GTA V is simply not a game where it would be even remotely realistic to have many female characters. It's a crime drama. They are usually devoid of female characters beside love interests. Because organized crime is what men tend to do. Putting a lot of female characters in the game like this for the sake of some twisted interpretation of gender equality would be stupid. Women don't have a lot of presence in crime dramas for the same reason they're not present in WW2 war movies. It doesn't make sense.

 

[deloftie]

Context be damned, right? You can't just put women or men somewhere to fill some kind of list of expectations. Honestly, I find that more degrading than not having women in a piece of fiction. GTA V is simply not a game where it would be even remotely realistic to have many female characters. It's a crime drama. They are usually devoid of female characters beside love interests. Because organized crime is what men tend to do.

No, that is what organised crime when presented in games and movies tend to do. Like now. In GTA 5. They are making a crime drama so of course there will be no developed females. Says who? Well crime dramas obviously.

This is the whole freaking point. When media erases women from stories it gives the impression that the world is actually devoid of complex women characters. You are basing your view of what realities is like based on the false view of what media has told you.

 

[deloftie]

I don't think that's the message people take from works of fiction that are centered around specific characters. They've got tons of random women pedestrians but the story doesn't focus on them same with lots of other games/movies/books.

See Adam Jensen post and my reply to it

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Context be damned, right? You can't just put women or men somewhere to fill some kind of list of expectations. Honestly, I find that more degrading than not having women in a piece of fiction. GTA V is simply not a game where it would be even remotely realistic to have many female characters. It's a crime drama. They are usually devoid of female characters beside love interests. Because organized crime is what men tend to do.

No, that is what organised crime when presented in games and movies tend to do. Like now. In GTA 5. They are making a crime drama so of course there will be no developed females. Says who? Well crime dramas obviously.

This is the whole freaking point. When media erases women from stories it gives the impression that the world is actually devoid of complex women characters. You are basing your view of what realities is like based on the false view of what media has told you.

OK. Give me a few examples of organized crime rings being busted and how many women were among the arrested as well as what they were charged with.

 

[Gethsemani_v1legacy]

And now we're getting into quotas and the question of why does there even need to be women in it?

Oh, I don't know... Maybe because women constitute about 50% of the total human population but is lucky to be 15-20% of all named characters in most modern media?

The fact that women are still so underrepresented in media in this day and age is a problem. You can strawman that into me wanting to talk quotas all you like, but the inherent problem with your reasoning still persists: In a fictional story the writer determines the gender, ethnic and cultural composition of all characters involved. It is simply a sign of bad writing to not include strong female characters.

 

[LITE992]

It's better not to use a score for your reviews and let the review speak for itself.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

I don't get what gamers are pissed about. Scores just happen to vary, some are 9, some are 9.5, others blindly go in with a 10.

It injected personal bias into a review that didn't need to be there.

Its like saying I give a film with George Clooney in it a 9/10 instead of a 10 out of 10 because he's a democrat.

I'm sorry, the story is now off limits? Look, if a developer gets lazy in the portrayal of a certain group then why isn't it okay to call them out on it? 95% of that review covered the game as a whole and the reviewer can't bring up that they found something tasteless in a couple of paragraphs? Good lord. Ebert didn't have to put up with this shit. The protagonist not being sympathetic enough or sexist/racist portrayals of groups are common criticisms in movie reviews. Michael Bay has gotten a lot of heat for his portrayals of black people in his films. Is bringing that up in a Transformers review too subjective?