Actually they changed a lot of Dante's Imferno. In the Divine Comedy Dante was not a crusader and Beatrice helped to guide him. The murder, the kidnapping, the turning to evil, all of it was added in the video game.Ronack said:
Tropes vs Women SECOND VIDEO - "Damsel in Distress: Part 2"
- Thread starter IceForce
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Heh. Student of history or a fan of Manda Scott?BeeGeenie said:
So given that we're talking strictly in terms of characters and not real people, my question to you is this: why is it even worth pointing out, talking, or complaining about?Darken12 said:
The Lyre" post="9.409111.17113256 said:
Oh but i agree with the contextual explanation, however i was merely applying the same shallow reasoning (just in a non-twisted way) of Anita to make a point. And let's not forget that even MGS is to a certain extend very guilty of that. The B&B squad got deaths which were much more emotional than any boss fights. Or take Sniper Wolf's death, or the Boss's death. All the female bosses' deaths where filled with emotions. On the other hand Killing Liquid didn't make me feel bad, neither did killing Solidus, Ocelot, Psycho Mantis, Fatman, Vamp, etc. (only exception would be Big Boss's Death). And Heck even Fortune got a somewhat emotional death. So if you decide to look too much into things MGS is quite clear: men's lives are more dispensable. (and when it comes to the NPC's it's true that the FROG's were also given little attention emotion wise it doesn't take away the fact that for the characters given/worth story the attempts at making you feel sad were much stronger with the women)firmicute said:
I hope you'll understand my confusion here; if this is the case, if it isn't actually a problem, if it isn't causing any harm at all, then why is everyone discussing it? If it is genuinely, utterly harmless, why was it ever raised in the first place? If it is in no way offensive or harmful, why is Anita devoting a video series to it?Darken12 said:
It certainly isn't for entertainment purposes - and it's not even for discussion any more, it seems.
I mean, come on - the show is called Tropes Versus Women. The antagonistic relationship is already well established. She clearly thinks there's some harm going on.
And, again;
Did you type this incorrectly then? Or did you just not understand what you were saying?
Trivialising real world violence is pretty damn harmful.
The natural extension of saying something is bad is saying that you think it should be different or improved.Darken12 said:
"This kind of content is not good enough" implies that you wish it to be better - to be different.
I am not accusing you of book-burning, I am accusing you of personally desiring a specific kind of content to be removed from fiction.
"This is shitty and demeaning, I don't want to see it any more" - censorship can be perfectly benign. Use a different word if you want - remove, alter, diminish.
You aren't really responding to my post, so far.
You're definitely saying that these tropes trivialise real world violence. Anita said it multiple times, you've said it multiple times. That's definitely the issue that you brought up. Don't put that on me - this is your assertion of trivialisation and reinforcement, not mine.Darken12 said:
So, are you saying that trivialising violence against women does not make it easier for men to justify harm against women?
Because Anita clearly thinks that this 'narrative' is reinforcing aggression in men.Based Anita said:
So Anita's assertion, Anita's scandal, not mine is that this 'narrative' increases aggression in males, trivialises their attitude towards violence against women, whilst simultaneously putting them in a position where they have 'aggressive command' over women.
She is painting a picture of an angry, violent, commanding man over a subordinate, helpless, powerless woman.
Yeah, it's not implied or stated at all.
At the very, very least, I've got Anita saying that this narrative of hers;
A) Trivialises violence against women
B) Reinforces the idea that men in relationships should be more aggressive
A child could make the connection that this would lead to more violence.
That's pretty much me done - if you can provide actual evidence, actually try to make an argument that explains this or directly contradicts my interpretation, then I'll respond tomorrow, but if you're just going to dodge the issue again, don't bother. I actually watched the video - I know what the women explicitly stated.
I think the subject of value and gender is worth talking about. The first obstacle we find is that value is not an inherently good or bad attribute. On one hand, value represents an empathetic reaction while on the other it represents a pragmatic calculation of benefit. Women are valuable because society sees them as possessions to be gained. Men are seen as worthless because at best they are just another merchant and at worst they are unwanted competition. Men are constantly portrayed as a threat. I dislike many things about the portrayal of men and women in media.Nepukadnezzar said:
It's all about supply versus demand. Until proven otherwise the demand is low and as consequence so is the supply. Forcing the supply to increase through guilt tactics will only cause profit losses and bankruptcies.Darken12 said:
And the reason that amount of sales is disappointing is because of the budgets assigned. Big development costs combined with big marketing costs mean that the game needs to sell a lot. There is nothing wrong with choosing for a high volume strategy.
And how big is that demographic precisely? Do you have statistics?
And as i said in previous discussions, until tangible evidence is provided I will assume the marketing departments of big publishing companies are more aware of the real situation than forum posters.
Nono, she's not explaining why she feels it's harmful. She's explaining why it IS harmful. She's stating her opinion as a fact. She's not saying "these tropes may possibly have certain effects on social behaviors". She's saying "games don't exist in a vacuum and have an impact on society, etc.".
No - I would say you missed my point entirely. I like these games, so I find her accusation against women portrayed in games in general, to be wrong _because_ of these games. These games have well written women, and I hope she underlines that to some extent or greater detail - so far she hasn't.firmicute said:Rpgs where the main char isnt written: skyrim, WOwPhaerim said:First of all I don't agree with her on the part of games having problem portraying women, because some of my favourite games (Baldur's Gate, Guild Wars, Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Mirror's Edge, Final Fantasy X, Skyrim, World of Warcraft, Bioshock, Silent Hill series etc.) include so many well written female characters.
We think alike
dragon age&mass effect are from a studio which is known for their way of progressiveness and good characterization-so ther is nothinc to critizise-and she does not. These tropes (euthanized girlfriend, murdered and stolen girlfriend etc) arent in this games, so you i thing you just missed the point.
and-its not about one game or another-ist about all, ist about the prevalence of this kidn of tropes in games in general.
she eeven named/showd mirrors edge as a good example for good characterization of women (with-a female player character AND a PoC player character. which isnt very often the case.Soo remember me)
The problem is that the companies assume that the demand is low, when it actually isn't. The companies are so afraid of trying new things to appeal to the other demographics that they prefer to stick to the tried and true ways.generals3 said:
And it also has nothing to do with how niche the game is. The game ends up costing more than it makes back, so it ends up failing. Jim Sterling has said it in an episode quite succinctly, a game that is focused to a niche audience can be a commercial success without needing to debase itself by appealing to the biggest audience. So long as it knows its niche audience and delivers what the audience wants, it will be a success.generals3 said:
http://www.theesa.com/facts/gameplayer.aspgenerals3 said:
And I see that as her expressing her opinion, not a fact. I think she does genuinely believe what she's saying, and that's why she speaks so factually, but I wouldn't consider her statements as factual when the term "harmful" is so ill-defined and difficult to find proof for.generals3 said:
There are things that we individually (and subjectively) perceive as worthy of being changed or improved. Anita feels that way about video games, and I agree with her. I think that we could stand to have more diversity in video games, and that some tropes reinforce the absence of diversity.The Lyre said:
I would agree or disagree, depending on your specific definition of harmful. I would agree that it is very disrespectful, that it is callous and thoughtless, but I am not entirely sure that it is actually harmful, or that, if it is harmful, it is excessively so.The Lyre said:
This is not what I want. What I want is diversity (so the trope stops being a problem because it's no longer gendered). You can address a problem without censorship. I have never advocated, nor will I ever advocate, the use of censorship to solve a problem. I advocate for education and diversity. This is what Anita is doing: she is educating the viewer on why she feels that this or that trope is in poor taste, and providing examples of its unilateral genderedness. This way, she inspires viewers to take a proactive role in reshaping the future of the medium without having to do any form of censorship.The Lyre said:
That's exactly what I'm saying. The trivialisation is a matter of respect and empathy. The developers are displaying disrespect, thoughtlessness and a callous disregard for the treatment of violence against women. This in no way affects men; it affects women, because it sends the image (again, unintentionally) that the game industry could not care less about women, and only considers them as worthy of being victims and prizes for the male hero. This has nothing to do with the effect video games have on men, it's about the way the game industry creates an unfriendly and unappealing environment for women through the use of gendered tropes, and the inadvertent image that this sends of the gaming industry itself.The Lyre said:
I think that what Anita is saying in those points is that the trivialisation of violence against women sends an image of callous disregard towards violence against women. I think that her point is not that video games are responsible for violence against women, I think that what she's saying is that video games fail to treat violence against women with respect and gravity, and instead use it as a way to further a male hero's narrative, and for cheap shock value. She never mentioned that any of these things are correlated with real-life violence, what she said was that the image that the gaming industry is projecting when it does this is one of callous insensitivity for the plight that so many women have to go through. Women, in real life, get kidnapped, raped and murdered distressingly often, and what Anita is getting at, I think, is that the gaming industry exploits these events for cheap shock value and for the sake of the male hero's narrative, which sends the message that the gaming industry could not care less about the feelings of the women who suffer this violence in real life.The Lyre said:
The point, I feel, is not that "video games create violence!", but "video games are callous and disrespectful in the use of violence!"
If you think videogame stories are just unsophisticated and convinient motivations for the player we have very different positions. I also don't agree 90s action movies have simple stories. Most of the best narratives in action movies belong in the 90s.generals3 said:
Games where you're avenging a male family member or friend, or where his death is used as an early plot point?Jarimir said:
Red Faction: Guerrilla
The Sabotuer
Deus Ex (ok, technically, you can save him, but it's hard, and he's incapacitated)
Final Fantasy XII
The Witcher
Assassins Creed 2
...
Because a male character would never ask to be killed...Jarimir said:
Because VIDEO GAMES ARE FUN! I don't play Mario to rescue a Princess and satisfy the male power fantasy Anita would like to believe I have. I play it because I love the level design. A lot of the games that Anita rips on fall into the John Carmack school of thought...Jarimir said:
So to write the plot, a lot of game companies will hire the worst writers on the planet. There are some exceptions, but, again, most of what Anita brings up fall into the half-assed plot category. That's my problem with this video. She's picking on games that simply don't deserve to be defended. Duke Nukem Forever sucked? Sorry, but I figured that out TWO YEARS AGO...John Carmack said:
There is actually a Joan d'Arc game out there, sadly it's a jrpg where she's a damsel in distress...Halyah said:
Anyways, don't really have a view in this conflict, I can't stomach the videos since her voice is so damn boring.
Captcha: blinded by science
Really? I am? Wow
I can agree with a lot of games having lazy writing, that much is obvious. I dunno how much acting on power fantasies in games affect real life because I have no evidence either way but I think its safe to agree some better writing is needed if we are going to continue using these tropes. They can be done well given enough time and when they are fleshed out hopefully other stories can start being tol in new and creative ways.
My suspicion is that Nintendo cracking down on all their IPs on YouTube might have had something to do with this video getting smited.
That being said, thought provoking material, and a necessary insight; I had no idea just how problematic this trope can be.
That being said, however, I'ma g'head and stand up for Max Payne, because while is wife and daughter do get traded up for his vengeance motivation, their murder happens as a direct result of his wife actually investigating the production of V, an investigation that, while not formal, was nevertheless conducted independently.
So... yeah.
Preeow.
That being said, thought provoking material, and a necessary insight; I had no idea just how problematic this trope can be.
That being said, however, I'ma g'head and stand up for Max Payne, because while is wife and daughter do get traded up for his vengeance motivation, their murder happens as a direct result of his wife actually investigating the production of V, an investigation that, while not formal, was nevertheless conducted independently.
So... yeah.
Preeow.
Because there are people who care about these things.DjinnFor said:
I never said "ought". I stated the exact opposite: if you don't want to care about it, don't. If the pseudo sales pitch fails to convince you to care about the subject, that's okay.DjinnFor said:
I don't know if "lazy" is fair.Dark Knifer said:
It's straight out of folklore, is evident in every narrative driven medium and has survived precisely because it's effective. I have a feeling that we're not as complicated as we'd like to believe. We can craft more convoluted stories, but we can't make ourselves care about those stories if they don't work for us on a base level.
Example: Did you play Metal Gear? What stands out in your memory as effective in that narrative? The political waffle? Or maybe when Meryl got shot?(it's a 15 year old game, if that's a spoiler... sorry?) If it's not the latter... I don't think I trust you as a person.
Folklore excells at knowing what is important to us, on that base level... I think.
Sis, not bro, but not to worry. Anyway, I misinterpreted your reaction. Apologies. Part of the reason I saw you as being annoyed is that she's not just reading examples from a TV Tropes page, she's identifying and discussing them. It would be more akin to writing a TV Tropes page. However, given that she has plenty more videos still to come, it would again be more akin to writing a series of pages... but with the added expense of video, audio, post-processing, etc.Westaway said:
Why pay her to do it? Honestly, I had never heard of her until I saw people trolling about her on this site while the Kickstarter was running. While I did watch a few of her videos on YouTube subsequently and reckoned that work was worth supporting at a higher level, my main motivation was standing with someone who was being persecuted and showing the people who were abusing her that such actions would only make her cause stronger in the end.
It's worth pointing out that she didn't ask for that much money. She only asked for a few thousand quid to make her videos. And no one had to give her even that. It's not like she felt entitled to even the sum she asked for. She just gave it a try and this is what happened.