The Most Dangerous Woman in Videogames - Anita Sarkeesian
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Funny, the test holds up pretty well when you apply it to games with male protagonists. Really really well. Astoundingly well. Why am I being berated for wanting the same for women somewhat more commonly than they currently are across the systems?Gindil said:
I've never said "no representation." I know there's games with women in them, and I know they're rare. the fact they're rare is what's bothering me, and what's making the test seem arbitrary coz it's really hard to fill, isn't it?
How do you know I'm -not- taking it up with the industry? What do you knwo about what I'm doing?
I'm NOT moving the goal posts, you are with your lists that by and large ignores the rules I've firmly placed.
You use Quina as an example, yet it's obvious she doesn't fit the simple test that hundreds of modern games pass with flying colors when the test is applied to males instead.
Thank you for stating the obvious after not seemingly realizing it. I can't play all of those games. No one can. Yet you're presenting them to me like I can? And should?
Allow me to elaborate. I've played pretty much all the games I can get my hands on without ordering them online, buying a new old system, etc. etc. short of my newfound access to the nintendo handheld library.
why thank you for stating the obvious. My list eliminates 995 of every game. What would happen if it wasn't the case? what if it was easy to fill the list?
Well, I wouldn't be here for one, most likely coz my test wouldn't be hard to pass.
You wouldn't be jumping through hoops if the game industry made more female protagonists in general. The list would be easier to make, and longer... and we probably wouldn't be having this conversation coz I wouldn't be complaining a lack of representation coz there'd be representation.
But not everyone. It's not a universal thing. Simple as that.
Again, the point is made. I can't. Yet you're handing the list to me like I can.
I'm not interested much in your suggestioons for games because you can't follow the simple rules of my "test." Infact you berate me over the rules to try and make me accept games that simply don't fit. My guess as to why? Coz you know full well the list is short, which is the point I'm trying to make, and what I want to see changed in the future.
I'm just considering the eventuality that a woman will look into gaming, and see how women are generally represented, and get turned off.
Considering the rarity, the commonality that they're dressed in a way that no woman would dress outside of a cosplay event, it's gunna get frustrating when you want to play a female character that's dressed in a way you'd be okay see your female family members in.
Why are you so angry at me for wanting to play my own gender? Why are you so mad at me for wanting to see more opportunities for this in the future? Seriously.
If you think I won't play a game with a guy protagonist, you're wrong. I'm just tired of nearly having to all the time if I want to game on consoles.
You'll have to note I didn't invite you to do anything, did I? You decided to offer up lists, and berate my test, and ignore the point of it. I didn't ask for a list of games going back to the 80's that's thrown at me without care of it containing what I want. I already knew the list existed.
Unless they want one of the rare games that fit my test. Those are rare. You're angry at me for not accepting close enough, or not even remotely close.
What if the family members don't know of games? Or friends don't? Generally the games that fit my test don't get advertized all that much, do they? Nevermind made often.
Riiight, coz most games that pander/cater to women aren't pastels, and pink, right?
And generally stuff guys would shy away from instead of making a game with a female lead that guys who generally don't want to play as women (they exist. Several say as much in this very thread.) would want to play as them coz the game's genuinely good enough to have them over look the opposite gender protagonist?
The industry seems hard pressed to make games with female only leads that can stack up to huge blockbusters that star men. Especially on consoles.
Team Fortress 2 is a differnt arena from CoD. The former is whimsical, and cartooney, and not taken seriously. The latter is grimdark brown-grey toned serious stuff. Not quite fair to pit them against eachother. Or even against GTA. Same goes for maple story, which shares nothing with GTA, and CoD being an MMORPG.
Yes, Minecraft is still a thing. Coz it's stll pretty unique after all this time. It has no real competition in a 3d lego-ish building game.
Gee, I couldn't possible enjoy playing my own gender through an entire game! Being hard pressed to manage a varied library of games that manage this has to be fun, right?
And, no I'm not here looking for game suggestions. When did I ever say that? I've got another thread for that.
I'm here complaining about the bleak future of female representation I see coming coz I can't take getting games that fit my test for granted. And again, guys sure as heck can tkae it for granted, even with my test applied.
And I'd appreciate it if you didn't act like it was universally accepted by everyone. Obviously, it's not universaly accepted. I outlined my reasons. If you don't like them, then that's fine.
When your character is talked about, gender terms are often used. He, him, she, her, etc. When your character is talked to, gender terms are often used, Sir, a guy's name, ma'am, a girls name.
Women generlaly talk to women and men differently. Men generally talk to women, and men differently.
It sounds an awful like you want you want me to ignore any referrences to gender in the game. You do realize it's self defeating to do that because I'm probably going to be aware I'm doing that?
You wouldn't have to jump through hoops if the list was easier to fill while adhereing to my rules, right?
I'm not forcing you to jump through hoops coz I didn't ask you for anything, did I? I'm sorry if you misunderstood my lamentations of the bleak now, and future of videogaming as a desire to play games I can't readily get, or play on my laptop.
Really? the "make your own game" argument?
You know not a thing about the schedule I keep, nor the resources I have access to. Do you even know what it takes to make a game? And if I make my own game, and play my own game, that's pretty cheap since I already know how to go through optimally coz I made it! You may as well ask me to write my own novel, and read it.
And you expect me to play my own low quality game?
Geez.
You do know how I take the "make your own game" line, right? Not well, let me tell you, since in this case it seems like a "STFU!" move. Like pretty much every time the line gets thrown out there by people who have no idea what they're asking of people, or who they're asking to do it, and generally don't care enough beyond saying it like it's a magic cure suggestion.
That's putting it civilly.
My lens is narrow to prove a frikking point.
[/quote]
Yet, she doesn't fit my test, does she? Quina doesn't have her own game. She's not the only playable character, and I use that term loosely.
If you're not interested in my list, why are you talking about my list, and how I make it? You're awful into the idea that you can move the goalposts, and break the rules of my test like it's no big thing, ignoring the point my test makes.
It was Ron Rosenberg [http://kotaku.com/5917400/youll-want-to-protect-the-new-less-curvy-lara-croft] and he was not the Lead Developer, he was the Executive Producer.Fistful of Ebola said:
Producing is different from company to company, industry to industry but the role of the producer is generally to ensure the game gets made, not how the game gets made, or what its intent is. His interpretation of the role of Lara doesn't necessarily reflect the intent of the designers.
edit: Removed link to his LinkedIn profile as evidence, changed to initial interview instead.
Didn't seem proper.
It all comes down to interpretation i guess.Fistful of Ebola said:
To me the struggle and eventual triumph [note: I haven't played it yet so I'm basing this on what I've heard] demonstrates a greater strength than that of Nathan Drake etc.
It's the difference between John McClain and Dirty Harry.
What I believe the Developer/Producer distinction does indicate is the intent of the design of Lara's character.
If it were a Lead Developer or Lead Designer then I would worry as it would indicate a bias that could be deeply interwoven into the narrative. As it stands I think it's just the opinion of one person trying to describe what they believe the target audience wants from the game.
Fistful of Ebola said:
Eh?
You do know what a citation is right? A citation is a small line of text that credits the source of an example ( Be it a video, quote, picture or whatever ).
So if I took say, a picture of a cat for my use in a research paper, I would have to credit lolcatz or something, as the image was taken directly from lolcats.
I do not dispute that Anita's "research" itself requires no citation since she came to that conclusion herself. But the videos ( which she used as examples to support her ideas ) were not personally filmed by her, they were from various Lets Play videos.
Since she used those videos. She should have credited the source of them, real name or the youtube channel, it does not matter. As long as you point out that you did not take the gameplay footage yourself, and it is someone else's. It is not plagiarism.
However she did not do that. Hell she didn't even need to make a proper citation. A small note at the end of the video " gameplay footage courtesy of BronyMaster" would have been sufficient in my opinion.
While youtube isn't very strict on this sort of thing, I would say it speaks poorly of the person committing the act of plagiarism, as it speaks of sloppy research and process.
But what do you think it says about the issue and community when the face of the movement to change things is largely considered an opportunistic charlatan? Yes, she is the most well known name, but that is because of controversy and sensationalism making her infamous, and say what you will, that doesn't help things in the end. It makes her, and by extension the issues she is associated with, all the easier to dismiss. It adds fuel to the presumption that gamers are all just whiny entitled privileged brats with "first world problems" and paints the community itself as even more volatile then politics, and therefore not to be paid much attention to. Furthermore, because she eclipses the issue, it means the discussion is more about her and less about the issues, to the point that people who don't care about games in the least will still get into screaming matches of over the differences in political ideology in discussions that should be about the medium itself. Movements are seen in the public light by who they choose to represent them. If you have an Alex Jones or Bill O'Riley representing you, you aren't taken seriously, all the more when you lack the numbers to force them to acknowledge you. But having Anita be the face of this issue, by allowing the sensationalistic bullshit and volatile drama to be how the topic is discussed, it makes it very easy for people to dismiss or not care about the topic at all. This sort of fame wears on people and unless they have a vested interest, it becomes white noise ignored if not spited. Tell me, how has accepting the Demagogues of politics to be the face of their parties and ideals worked to actually solve problems?Rebel_Raven said:
You undervalue kickstarters quite a bit. No, they are not a golden bullet, but they can and have earned enough to make games, especially when one steps back and remembers games do not need the best graphics or the deepest gameplay. I really think you also dismiss the pc and tablet markets to concentrate on consoles because that is what you are most familiar with, and to your harm for it. The triple A market is shrinking, the corporate culture behind it mixed with the draconian control of the product to the customer and lack of innovation (in regards to marketing or gameplay, not the innovation for innovation sake gimmicks and hardware they push) has stagnated it quite a bit and it does seem content to be what it is now more then ever. But look at the new consoles. Look at Sony's and Microsoft's push for indie titles, look at GoG and Steam's audience base. Look at the indie titles that have boomed beyond whatever the AAA industry shoveled out that year except possibly the company cash cows. Hell, look at the likes of http://freebirdgames.com/to_the_moon/ a game that I swear was made on a RPG maker online. You can and will find great games everywhere, even games that suit and represent your taste in protagonist and story as soon as you break free of the Triple A box you keep locking yourself in. And even if you only stick to consoles, the industry has noticed the rise of the indie to the point they are marketing consoles on how well and easy they are to get you those indie titles too.
I get the feeling that you want something quite specific here. There is some genre or bunch of titles that you want a female protagonist or a decent story for in particular, and I can relate there. But I am willing to bet that those titles and genre are so saturated by people who are receptive to lowest common denominator marketing and design, that those games are very unlikely to give you what you seek.
You say minecraft and the like are pet projects of companies, but the opposite is true. They were threats to the companies because they were so popular so they put them on their consoles as well. I am sure losing audience to a competitor or to pc gaming does scare the big 3, all the more with the leek to mobile gaming and the fickle audience taste making the multi-million dollar investment strategies the AAA use all the riskier. Hell, they would not have made the access to indie and the like part of the system if they did not see both threat and potential profit sides of that coin.
I'll have to re-read the last few pages but at least in the case of chaosord I feel like he is stating that the term "gamer" has become too ubiquitous for people to try to broadly define all gamers as hateful towards women.Fistful of Ebola said:
I feel like regardless of the level of realism you expect from modern military themed FPS's with regenerating health; with the exception of those games that take place in years like 2030, not having a female presence on the battlefield because of their setting is a perfectly valid justification for their lack of presence. Keep in mind that in most militarized countries where women participate their still exists a minimum physical standard for groups like the U.S. Marines or the British SAS that presents a hurdle that has yet to be successfully and consitantly cleared by women. This is not a condemnation of the female sex just a statement of truth regarding the current climate of modern military statistics. Women are not in branches of military that games like COD relegate to main character status, and if my memory serve correctly their are still women in those games as pilots, civilians, and a few other roles. Not glamorous in light of the actions of the main character but not offensive either. And those games do feature
No complaint here. I agree that the whole "dad saves daughter surrogate" plot device is starting to get played out with modern AAA releases. IMO it still hasn't gotten to the point where it's particularly egregious to see it happen but it's getting their pretty quickly.
The name you are searching for is Rapelay and yes that is the game I am referring too. I wasn't trying to make a distinction between the body positive women blogs you are referring too and some mythical female gamers who doesn't have any interest in pornography. It's just that games like Rapelay or Custer's Revenge seem like they would be immediately off-puttting due to their subject matter and handling of content.
Their is also no evidence that these games are intentionally trying to keep women out. It boils down to consumer tastes and preferences. For those gamers who want to play as a female avatar in a modern military setting they will be hard pressed to find that kind of game in the current market. But this does not directly conclude that these games are sexist towards women with their subject matter, just that the current market is limited in how it appeals to specific demographics.
And like I said above, even if the game features unrealistic mechanics ripped straight from an action movie; if the setting is set in a time and place where you wouldn't see women on the battlefield you cannot fault those games for not putting them out there. I haven't played a COD game since World at War but I've never seen the lack of female soldiers as an attempt at being exclusionary.
As for Dragon Age, the game features a female playable character and possible romantic leads seems like a direct appeal to the female demographic. Outside of that the gameplay distiction between the male and female avatars are virtually identical because the larger narrative does not utilize the gender of the character as an ultimate determination of how the story goes does not hinge on whether you are a man or a woman. You have to start off the same and you kill the same final boss.
This is true.
I think the real issue at work here is a matter of scope and prevalence. I play a lot of RPG's and in my history with the genre you will find a mix of playable characters ranging from guys and girls of all types of makes. But the conversation at large seems to be focused on the current AAA industry which favors genres like the FPS and sports games. That limited focus is going to skew perceptions because outside of those genres you will find a multitude of games that either feature female protagonists, or games where gender is not an issue because you can create your own character(s) and fluff them up how you want.(e.g. Sim games, MMORPG's, games with non-specific PC's)
As far as the constant repetition of games with male heroes and female's who need help, I look at this issue as a sort of cultural lag that occurs whenever a large change occurs. The perception and reality of gamers in the 90's was that men were the largest audience. That has changed in the recent decade but our current industry hasn't fully caught up with the change in community. I can sympathise with female gamers who are tired of the same cliched stories, or feel excluded from certain gaming experiences because they lack an avatar to project themselves onto.
As for your final statement I'll say this. The idea that men are protectors is something that is deeply ingrained in our planet's collected cultures. It's an idea that has existed for as long as we have developed cultures. I won't decry this idea for existing within our society even if the fairer sex feels like it is oppressive to them. But you bet that both you and I can agree that without variety in our narratives ideas begin to stagnate and lose their meaning.
Plus I could do without hypothetical games that try to make sexual gratification an incentive for cleaning. I have enough problems getting my roommate to keep his half in order.
Just some notes here
They said conspiracy, not patriarchy itself. And given how Anita presents things in her video, it does suggest decisions were made with intent in relation to gender (her outlook on damsels and especially her presentation of star fox). Say what you will about what patriarchy means, but attributing motivation for choices to sexism is insinuating a conspiracyFistful of Ebola said:
Actually, I don't see them saying the result is true or not, I see them criticizing the method, which is what you just did by mentioning fallacy at all. Attacking an argument for how it doesn't follow the path of logic doesn't make the conclusion right or wrong, it just invalidates the argument itself. Also it seems this was mentioned as a rebuttal to the idea that gamers hate women, which is a sound rebuttal (not sure if someone in the thread mentioned that as an argument so it is a little out of place but still, sound rebuttal)Fistful of Ebola said:
Doesn't the fact that most gamers largely ignored the themes and subversion to instead concentrate on memes and gameplay sort of undermines the entire argument that the "implied" themes and interpreted undertones you claim are there in a lot of games actually have an effect on gamers or contribute to any grand patriarchal ideal? Hell, the fact that gamers loved the games and ignored the feminism does more to support the guy saying that games are just games, then it does to support you here. If they obviously largely ignored a feminist message, then it didn't do anything to "rock the boat" so to speak and threaten their manhood or whatever, despite being designed with the intent to do just that, by being a subversion of the norm. If there was some sort of patriarchy within gaming, then any such inversion of expectation or standard would have resulted in a backlash because it upset the status quo and people don't like that. But that didn't happen, and in fact most games on the list are beloved by fans and critics alike. It is almost like gameplay and enjoyable characters are what players actually care about, and most couldn't give two shits about whatever personal interpretations one can take from the story for these sorts of games.Fistful of Ebola said:
The game has a cult following, a rapid fanbase begging for the sequel, regarded as a failure monetarily (it sort of was at the time most likely due to poor marketing choices) and is brought up to demonstrate a lot of things, from how good games can still appear from the industry to how their has been a shift in the industry that means such games are no longer likely from the triple A market. But it does showcase well that regardless what you may think about the industry having some goal of keeping female protagonists out of games, they aren't trying to, they simply act in a way that is practical according to the bean counters in charge of the show.Fistful of Ebola said:
Game where you play as Alice in some sort of twisted wonderland. Had a sequel. Probably fits with the Beyond good and evil in your mind here.Fistful of Ebola said:
Oh nos! People are vitriolic on the internet? Who'd have thought? Should we now move on to water being wet or was there some point relating specifically to gaming that somehow separates this bit of common sense from any other instance of internet hate you would see over religion, politics, movies, or favorite snack food?Fistful of Ebola said:
You mean when it comes to anonymity, having an active moderation team and a clear list of rules can do stop nearly all and most of the worst asshattery you would see in a completely free forum? Yeah, I think people already knew that, and make that argument quite a lot as for why pc gaming (with the player controlled and moderated servers) are so much better and nicer places then the likes of X-box live.Fistful of Ebola said:
Anytimesky14kemea said:Sadly we can't lock Featured Content/News Threads, but thank you for the smile while I was clearing the queue.Auron225 said:I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts, fee-dee-dee-dee
There they are standing in a row,
bum-de-bum-de-dum...
Big ones, small ones,
Some as big as your head!
...Just thought I'd lighten the mood around here. Give the mods something kinda happy to read before they lock this thread
I guess that would explain why this thing is now 29 pages long...Auron225! Awaaaay!
This thread is beginning to smell like a nuclear powered ball of fail.
Theres like a warning/suspension handed out every two pages or so.
Hell i don't even remember the main driving point of this thread now.
Theres like a warning/suspension handed out every two pages or so.
Hell i don't even remember the main driving point of this thread now.
One of the favorite anti-sarkeesian arguments is that by disabling comments on her youtube videos she's censoring her critics and shutting down debate, and I'm sure people would complain here if they weren't allowed to weigh in on the discussion as such.IceForce said:
I try. And since I won a nice and shiny warning for my post, allow me to be more clear:Iszfury said:
I have no strong feelings one way or the other! ... Because I don't think it really matters what I think. I've been through several pages of this thread, I've seen this internet dog fight before. Everyone has their minds made up. You either love her or hate her, and neither side is willing to hear the reason on both sides. At the end of the day, nothing I say or what anyone else says will change anyone's mind. It's fine to dislike her approach to things, just as much as it's fine to like her.
It's natural for there to be conflict on any subject. I just choose to not really let the thoughts/feelings of any male/female I would have never heard of if not for the internet either better or worsen my day.
I'm going to assume that you changed your statement for fear of the moderators, not because you realized your mistake. I was, of course, referring to the word 'upset', not the word 'imprudent'.Captain Pooptits said:
That's like me saying Basketball is a sport and you posting the definition of sports and basketball and pointing out they are not the same thing.wulf3n said:C.S.Strowbridge said:Yup. Totally the same thing
The media you consume includes advertising. Not all media is advertising, but all advertising is a form of media.
Not all sports played is basketball, but if you play basketball, you are playing a sport.
Provide evidence that a square as four sides of equal length. The very definition of the word is all the evidence you should need. Asking for more than that is proof you are not interested in an intellectually honest debate.wulf3n said:
If advertising weren't a form of media, then no one would see it. Media is a method of mass communication. Ads only work if people can see them.
I'm actually surprised that anyone still cares about Sarkeesian.
From what I heard, her Tropes in Gaming thing just reiterated a bunch of things we already knew, then locked comments so that no one could facilitate further conversation.
Didn't care for the project, and the fallout made me even less interested.
From what I heard, her Tropes in Gaming thing just reiterated a bunch of things we already knew, then locked comments so that no one could facilitate further conversation.
Didn't care for the project, and the fallout made me even less interested.