Honestly though, I'm not yet seeing where the money's really gone.
EDIT: Oh wait - here it is.
I assume that stack of Wii games she's leaning on indicates there's even more behind the XBox ones.
Money well spent. :rolleyes:
Sounds to me like a scam.
She most likely bought all these games (and probably at full retail price) rather than renting them. Plus, many of these games are not necessary in finding material to be used in this video series. Also, she likely bought a VERY fancy video camera and Adobe Photoshop/After Effects, when I'm sure there are plenty of good lower priced products (Corel Paint Shop Pro X5 is only $70, and GIMP is free. Windows Movie Maker is also free.)
As has been said, many people have made much better videos which are more interesting and informative than this, for a lot less money. Why people paid her to make Youtube videos is beyond me.
Actually, looking at those games, I see several that have absolutely NOTHING to do with what she's talking about. Beautiful Katamari? Fairytale Fights? Gunstringer? Kinect Adventures? Skate 3? Twisted Metal? Virtua Tennis 4?
What the hell do any of those have to do with how women are portrayed in video games?
Actually, looking at those games, I see several that have absolutely NOTHING to do with what she's talking about. Beautiful Katamari? Fairytale Fights? Gunstringer? Kinect Adventures? Skate 3? Twisted Metal? Virtua Tennis 4?
What the hell do any of those have to do with how women are portrayed in video games?
I personally think she just showcases her private collection.
So far we’ve purchased well over 300 games for this project. As of now we can play games from the following systems: SNES, Gamecube, Wii, PS2, PS3, PS Vita, Xbox, Xbox 360, iPad and PC/MAC. We are also looking to acquire a 3DS XL when it becomes available next month. Note that not all of the games being researched for this project are pictured above. All the digital games downloaded via Steam, PSN and XBLM are sadly not nearly as photogenic, but rest assured we are looking at classic titles from throughout the history of gaming.
Disclaimer: I didn't watch the video. But I thought it was interesting that today, CNET posted an article about someone hacking Donkey Kong so Mario is the one who has to be saved.
Disclaimer: I didn't watch the video. But I thought it was interesting that today, CNET posted an article about someone hacking Donkey Kong so Mario is the one who has to be saved.
So I decided to pop in this N64 game I own that I've never played before. It's called Battletanx: Global Assault. I press Start and I'm treated immediately to this.
So I decided to pop in this N64 game I own that I've never played before. It's called Battletanx: Global Assault. I press Start and I'm treated immediately to this.
That's like, exactly the opposite of this book I was planning, called Synthia's Daughters where 99.9% of men had died in a plague. The difference, of course, was that the human race could keep on going, just with only one gender and egg cell fusion.
That's like, exactly the opposite of this book I was planning, called Synthia's Daughters where 99.9% of men had died in a plague. The difference, of course, was that the human race could keep on going, just with only one gender and egg cell fusion.
...you're defending the Arkham games based on their treatment of women.
Yeah, no.
But Dashing She's talking about Damsels in Distress which means women being kidnapped or in trouble and having to be saved which does not happen that often in the Arkham games.
I didn't notice her flaunting a strong vocabulary in the video. Maybe her intended audience is slightly more cultured and intelligent than a forum full of people who think that The Longest Journey, Syberia and The Secret of Monkey Island are the Western world's greatest works of art?
Methinks this first video is just an attack on Japanese culture in general.
That's racist!
No, this is not serious. But it is obvious where her examples come from. And what now? 15 parts "damsel in distress", one part "evil women" and then no part at all because heroines like Lara Croft or Jade are not interesting or do not fit a series called TropesVERSUSwomen? She talks about Prince of Persia, does she not know Elika, who saves the Prince a 1000 times? But she does announce to get to Elaine Marley EVENTUALLY.
I'm sure she's aware of the counter-examples, probably more than you and me are. And she will very likely be exploring them later in the series. However, a handful of examples of positive portrayals of women in video games do not cancel out the thousands of examples to the contrary.
I am watching this right now and really wonder: Why did she need money for this again?
I know a lot of Youtubers that produce better videos free of charge.
She most likely bought all these games (and probably at full retail price) rather than renting them. Plus, many of these games are not necessary in finding material to be used in this video series. Also, she likely bought a VERY fancy video camera and Adobe Photoshop/After Effects, when I'm sure there are plenty of good lower priced products (Corel Paint Shop Pro X5 is only $70, and GIMP is free. Windows Movie Maker is also free.)
As has been said, many people have made much better videos which are more interesting and informative than this, for a lot less money. Why people paid her to make Youtube videos is beyond me.
Who the fuck are you to tell her what kind of camera she should be using or how much she should be spending on games? What the fuck?
The original amount she asked for was $6,000. If Matt Barton of Matt Chat fame were to ask for a few grand to do a collection of videos on X topic with higher production values, I would hope and expect to see him make his goal. Not everybody has the time or money to make high-quality videos for "free". If some people do, that's great; enjoy them.
But you're suggesting that a woman (with a long track record of producing videos) who has a project in mind that she can't do for free is scamming the 7,000 people interested enough to donate? SCAMMING? So not only is she an incompetent woman with a boring voice doing a badly researched video, wearing ridiculous earrings and an ugly shirt, but she's a fucking SCAMMER? I don't know what your issue with women is, but if you don't want to continue to come off as trash you should probably avoid topics like this in the future.
But he's wearing casual clothing that doesn't clash with the background or his skin tone, and while his hair is pulled back, it still frames his face properly. And the clutter only matters if it has nothing at all remotely to do with the topic at hand or his internet persona in general, or if any part of it is particularly flashy for no apparent reason.
If this woman was wearing the same clothing he is, (or similar, like her grey hoodie in other videos) it wouldn't matter. Similarly, if he was wearing 00 (double-zero) gauge earrings, or had a big tattoo on his arms, or was morbidly obese or something like that, yes it would be distracting (to varying degrees, of course) just as her earrings and makeup are also distracting.
... Well, I say that, but it depends on the subject matter. Her earrings might not be so distracting if she actually had vocal inflections that sounded like she actually cared about the discussed topic. The only reason why it seems that she cares is not because of her tone, but the fact that she won't shut up about it.
THIS woman, on the other hand, has eyebrows that are obviously drawn with a makeup pencil:
And again I say that that shirt is ugly. it doesn't matter who wears it.
I cannot believe that you're serious with this post. Why don't we go ask 5,000 random people which one presents themselves better on video?
You're criticizing the woman about her fucking eyebrows?
So here, what you're doing is yucking it up in the ole' boys' club, trying to turn the whole thing into a joke. Because misogyny is a fucking punch line, and the fact that thousands of gamers have piled vitriol onto Sarkeesian, including rape threats, death threats and creating a video game where you get to beat her to death is no big deal. We all need to lighten up! Right?
I didn't notice her flaunting a strong vocabulary in the video. Maybe her intended audience is slightly more cultured and intelligent than a forum full of people who think that The Longest Journey, Syberia and The Secret of Monkey Island are the Western world's greatest works of art?
You seem kinda bitter.
idk, on one end, free market, people paid for it, ect whatever
on the other end, the entire kickstarter idea was really dumb. it was essentially a way to get a shit load of video games and put sparkly imagery on videos that she proved she could make without kickstarter.
the whole thing is dumb and all she's doing is collecting a paycheck from preaching to the crowd who already know and complain about these tropes as well as the controversy from how absolutely ridiculous the whole thing is.
I didn't notice her flaunting a strong vocabulary in the video. Maybe her intended audience is slightly more cultured and intelligent than a forum full of people who think that The Longest Journey, Syberia and The Secret of Monkey Island are the Western world's greatest works of art?
Then I suggest you watch the video again. There's a lot of complex words in what she says. For example, here's the second 'paragraph' from her video (thankfully transcripted on her website):
This series will include critical analysis of many beloved games and characters, but remember that it is both possible (and even necessary) to simultaneously enjoy media while also being critical of it’s more problematic or pernicious aspects.
The underlined words are the sort I was referring to, and it's these sort of words that I find problematic. They're not really the sort of words you'd hear in everyday conversation - they make her sound like a teacher, preaching down to her students by reading from a textbook.
As well as this, I consider myself a fairly intelligent and well-spoken person, and even I don't know what 'pernicious' means. I can guess, but if you're making a video supposedly explaining something to people, then I shouldn't have to make an educated guess at the meaning of what you're saying.
I could easily rewrite this to mean exactly the same, but not sound as complex. Watch:
This series will take a look at a lot of well-loved games and characters, but you have to remember that we can enjoy something while still taking issue with some of the more problematic aspects of it.
Although, to be honest, I'd probably have said something totally different. But hey, that's just me.
I'm sure she's aware of the counter-examples, probably more than you and me are. And she will very likely be exploring them later in the series. However, a handful of examples of positive portrayals of women in video games do not cancel out the thousands of examples to the contrary.
True. But so far she's pointing out the early examples, and she doesn't point out what one or two others have done in this thread - early games had very simple plots with a traditional goal because they couldn't have anything else. They were incredibly simple games, and so the plots had to be simple as well. The simplest and most easily remembered plot? Save the girl. Or gold, but hey, women are more visually entertaining.
If she'd mentioned that and then said that she was disappointed that games continued to use the trope even after games got more complex and had the opportunity for more expanded and interesting stories, then it would have been fine. But she doesn't. She just seems to pick on early games for using the trope, end of.
Who the fuck are you to tell her what kind of camera she should be using or how much she should be spending on games? What the fuck?
The original amount she asked for was $6,000. If Matt Barton of Matt Chat fame were to ask for a few grand to do a collection of videos on X topic with higher production values, I would hope and expect to see him make his goal. Not everybody has the time or money to make high-quality videos for "free". If some people do, that's great; enjoy them.
But you're suggesting that a woman (with a long track record of producing videos) who has a project in mind that she can't do for free is scamming the 7,000 people interested enough to donate? SCAMMING? So not only is she an incompetent woman with a boring voice doing a badly researched video, wearing ridiculous earrings and an ugly shirt, but she's a fucking SCAMMER? I don't know what your issue with women is, but if you don't want to continue to come off as trash you should probably avoid topics like this in the future.
Dude's entitled to his opinion.
We haven't seen where the money's gone. She's never actually told the general public anything specific, like a breakdown of expenses or whatnot. She's told us that she's bought a whole bunch of games, and then posed next to them, which is easily the point that's going to stick in most people's heads, and she's told us that she's hired a couple of people ("I can now also hire my producer full-time for this project. Plus we are in the process of bringing another writer/researcher on board part-time." - from the same post where the picture was shown), but the majority of updates were for backers of the project alone, and since I didn't back the project, I couldn't tell you what they say.
They could very well explain where all the money went. BUT I DON'T KNOW. And if people don't know, they're going to form theories, ones which the previously shown picture do NOTHING to dissuade.
If she'd released a detailed breakdown on where all the money went, the theories that she's scammed people would vanish, because we'd probably know that she hasn't just used the money for games. But she hasn't, so they won't. Quad Erat Demonstrandum.
I cannot believe that you're serious with this post. Why don't we go ask 5,000 random people which one presents themselves better on video?
You're criticizing the woman about her fucking eyebrows?
He's pointing out that the eyebrows (which are clearly the result of too much make-up) were distracting, just as I pointed out that her earrings were distracting. WHICH THEY ARE.
It's a perfectly valid comment to make, and he's not the only person saying things like it.
So here, what you're doing is yucking it up in the ole' boys' club, trying to turn the whole thing into a joke. Because misogyny is a fucking punch line, and the fact that thousands of gamers have piled vitriol onto Sarkeesian, including rape threats, death threats and creating a video game where you get to beat her to death is no big deal. We all need to lighten up! Right?
In case you haven't noticed, people here have a habit of trying to lighten the mood when things get too serious, which it kind of is here. Also, most of us appear to be guys (though I could be wrong, I usually am when it comes to identifying people's gender), so a bit of guy humour isn't entirely unexpected.
Funnily enough, in an earlier post, Vainamoinen said this:
Youtube commenters. I hate them. Hate, hate, hate.
Criticise the video, but bashing the commenter LIKE THAT? That's just crap.
Hell, even Secret Fawful showcased how bad some of the YouTube comments were.
We're not ignoring the fact that Anita got a lot of shit from internet fuckwads. We just know that that's how the internet works. It brings out the worst in people. We know this. It's a sad fact of life, but it IS a fact. You give people anonymity, they're going to abuse it.
Doesn't mean we can't have a small laugh every now and again.
On a related note, here's a brand new article on the objectification of women in art - book covers, to be precise. It's more of a finger pointing, actually.
The underlined words are the sort I was referring to, and it's these sort of words that I find problematic. They're not really the sort of words you'd hear in everyday conversation - they make her sound like a teacher, preaching down to her students by reading from a textbook.
She walks the high road of language. I won't blame her. My English has formed at the university, I'm kind of used to having new words tossed around my ears, judging their meaning from context alone. Thing is: She DOES take the role of a teacher, so she isn't supposed to chum up to viewers by dumbing down her language. Is what she does pretentious? Possibly. But definitely less than you'd find daily in an educated environment. Then again, I've been taught gender roles so thoroughly in literature that all the terms she uses which are needed for fully understanding the video are so engraved in my memory, it's not even funny any more.
If she'd mentioned that and then said that she was disappointed that games continued to use the trope even after games got more complex and had the opportunity for more expanded and interesting stories, then it would have been fine. But she doesn't. She just seems to pick on early games for using the trope, end of.
Certainly. It's this first video that's starting a massive riot because a lot of 30-something video gamers feel their most precious childhood memories badmouthed. That's not what's happening here. As I said, it's basically a history lesson. She hasn't said anything untruthful. The trope IS there, and its prevalence in these early games is INCREDIBLE. If I had to count how many times April O'Neil ALONE was abducted in these glorious late 80s, early 90s, I probably wouldn't get to finish today. Sarkeesian HAS to pick on these early games, because that's exactly how they were. Not mentioning them is like cutting out the first chapters of your history book, and we can't understand modern VG culture if we don't look at the old games first.
We haven't seen where the money's gone. She's never actually told the general public anything specific, like a breakdown of expenses or whatnot. [...] And if people don't know, they're going to form theories, ones which the previously shown picture do NOTHING to dissuade.
If she'd released a detailed breakdown on where all the money went, the theories that she's scammed people would vanish, because we'd probably know that she hasn't just used the money for games. But she hasn't, so they won't. Quad Erat Demonstrandum.
She hasn't shown a breakdown of expenses, but she has offered an abundantly precise sum which she needed to make this series. Six thousand dollars. Which the kickstarter, I think, reached within day one. In essence, everyone who gave her money afterwards was well aware that it was surplus money. No one was "conned" of course. This is all crystal clear. Maybe Sarkeesian will give to charity eventually. Maybe she finds a way to further her cause elsewhere with the money. Maybe she just keeps the leftovers for herself. I really don't care. I don't envy the position she has moved herself into. And I don't want to be in the same situation for those surplus 100,000+ dollars.
She lucked out because her idea was obviously lucrative. Deal with it.
We're not ignoring the fact that Anita got a lot of shit from internet fuckwads. We just know that that's how the internet works. It brings out the worst in people. We know this. It's a sad fact of life, but it IS a fact. You give people anonymity, they're going to abuse it.
Sarkeesian put those first comments on her blog openly. It's shocking to see that the whole internet can be disgraced. But I'll have a jab at those eyebrows EVENTUALLY. But not the earrings. I like those earrings.
Also, I reject the notion that finding fault in what Anita's doing is misogyny simply because others have been such. That's like saying people who joke about Obama are racist because some of his dissenters are. And let me tell you something, far more people want him dead than Anita. And many of those are legitimate threats and not just angry teen boys raging on the internet.
This forum is actually one of the most "egalitarian" forums I've been to, not to mention the most chill ones because most of the people are older and educated.
To be honest, I refuse to watch these on the same grounds as I refuse to read TV Tropes articles nowadays (or at least try to restrict it to cetain types of tropes), and that is because it would ruin any chance for me to work on my projects without taking these tropes into account. The more tropes you know, the more you either try to avert them, deconstruct them or try to add a new spin on it, which is why I mostly just restrict myself to sex tropes and stuff, things I will never actually put in my work.
So here, what you're doing is yucking it up in the ole' boys' club, trying to turn the whole thing into a joke. Because misogyny is a fucking punch line, and the fact that thousands of gamers have piled vitriol onto Sarkeesian, including rape threats, death threats and creating a video game where you get to beat her to death is no big deal. We all need to lighten up! Right?
Then take the fight to them instead of picking a fight with me. I'm not the one piling vitriol onto her, threatening to rape and kill her, nor have I made any video games where you can beat her to death.
You might be on the right side, but your white knighting is sorely misplaced.
Also, I reject the notion that finding fault in what Anita's doing is misogyny simply because others have been such. That's like saying people who joke about Obama are racist because some of his dissenters are. And let me tell you something, far more people want him dead than Anita. And many of those are legitimate threats and not just angry teen boys raging on the internet.
This forum is actually one of the most "egalitarian" forums I've been to, not to mention the most chill ones because most of the people are older and educated.
*shrug*
Careful, Tope. JuntMonkey might consider you a SEXIST who HATES WOMEN and wants everyone RAPED AND MURDERED.
There's nothing wrong with it, but actively trying to will often hamper your creativity. Making anything creative is partially using tropes, partially inserting your own DNA in a non-sexual way. Trying to actively insert as many tropes as possible or doing the exact opposite will make that which you created more tropes and less you.
There's nothing wrong with it, but actively trying to will often hamper your creativity. Making anything creative is partially using tropes, partially inserting your own DNA in a non-sexual way. Trying to actively insert as many tropes as possible or doing the exact opposite will make that which you created more tropes and less you.
I know my stuff contains lots of tropes, but I don't really care. The only tropes I avoid are the ones that matter to me such as those that portray groups in a negative light (which I describe below). But if I inadvertently write something that has a trope that could be considered a stereotype, it won't bother me too much.
That's the thing to me, if it's done inadvertently, I'm not worried about it because there was no malicious intent involved. The hero saves the princess stories are like this. In fact, if you want to go into it that's a negative stereotype for men too (having to be strong and throw safety to the wind). But, like I said, the stories weren't made to purposefully put down anyone, so I'm not bothered by them.
The stuff where they make the bodies of females disproportionate in order to enhance sexuality or dumb down their intelligence, or the stuff where they make the guy a big hulking man who is macho and rude (and often dumb down their intelligence too) because they want to appeal to a teenage male demographic is the stuff that bothers me, because that stuff is not done inadvertently, but rather purposefully. The stuff where they portray gay men as womanly or gay women as manly, and transexual women as manly, and transexual men as manly lesbians bother me too since they are done purposefully and maliciously. Additionally, I'm also bothered by the stuff that's made (in a non-satirical fashion [to a point, stuff labled as satire that is done just for the shock value bothers me as well (since that stuff really isn't satire, but is malicious in nature)]) that reinforces the race role such as black people as drug users and thieves, hispanics as lazy people living off the government, white southern Americans (and sometimes Americans in general) as inbred gun-toting rednecks, etc. This kind of stuff is so stupidly prevalent in our society, that it does re-enforce negative stereotypes, no doubt (and it keeps misogony, racism, and bigotry alive).
If she thinks Peach and Zelda are portrayed in a sexist manner, she should check out what freaken' POKEMON got away with in the origenal japanese version of the manga, "The Electric Tale of Pikachu", every female charicter in that book is sexualized! Even Misty, and she's only 12. By that example, I think we should just count ourselves lucky Peach and Zelda don't run around in thong bikinis all the time.
TL;DR: Japanese children's media can get FAR worse, in terms of being sexist.
Seriously, this is what this discussion had become. This guy is speaking out against the abuse Sarkeesian has endured, but then goes on to directly accuse her of trollbaiting:
She wants to make money off the back of this internet hate campaign. She knew exactly what she was doing. She did whatever she could in order to make sure that she got the types of comments she wanted to get [...]
Anyone here who WOULDN'T call this absolute sexist crap? Kickstarter successful, all the money on the bank, hey, now let's get me some RAPE THREATS because that was what I was after all along? This is ludicrous. Someone punch this guy in the face. :mad:
I've watched a whole lot of these rebuttal movies and they all make the most desperate attempt at misinterpreting what the original video was there for. "Why doesn't she mention this or that game as a positive example?", I've been asking myself as well when I started that vid. Weeell, because the title is "tropes VERSUS women". Because this series was always meant to have a focus, possibly EXCLUSIVELY on the most sexist crap in the history book of video games.
And what she presents with the damsel in distress standard story is completely undoubtedly where_video_games_started, overwhelming in quantity, whether we like it or not.
I want a second video now... but fuck do I understand why it's late.
Wow, a LOT of game stories are spoiled in a major way in the most recent Tropes Against Women video. The first one dealt largely with set-ups, but this one deals a lot more with endings, and as such blithely throws out several successive end of game twists in rapid succession.
EDIT: Yes it is. Hope you don't mind me moving your post, Dashing.
For the record, here's the list of games that receive spoilers (as taken from the video description):
· Bionic Commando (2009)
· Borderlands 2 (2012)
· Breath of Fire IV (2000)
· Castlevania: The Dracula X Chronicles (2007)
· Castlevania: Lament of Innocence (2003)
· Castlevania: Lords of Shadow (2010)
· Dante's Inferno (2010)
· The Darkness II (2012)
· Dead Space (2008)
· Devil Summoner: Raidou Kuzunoha vs The Soulless Army (2006)
· Double Dragon Neon (2012)
· Gears of War 2 (2008)
· God of War: Ghost of Sparta (2010)
· The Godfather: The Game (2006)
· Grand Theft Auto III (2001)
· Hotline Miami (2012)
· Ico (2001)
· Infamous (2009)
· Inversion (2012)
· Kane & Lunch: Dead Men (2007)
· The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (2006)
· MediEvil 2 (2000)
· Ninja Gaiden 3 (2010)
· Pandora's Tower (2011)
· Prey (2006)
· Resident Evil 5 (2009)
· Shadows of the Damned (2011)
· Tenchu: Shadow Assassins (2009)
That's... yeah, that's quite a few. And to have the list pretty much buried in the video description with only a basic caption in the video itself warning of this... hmm. there's warnings about the violence, sure, but not the spoilers?
EDIT II: That was a really depressing video. Like, REALLY negative. Can't see many people siding with her on this video in particular. Yeesh.
Also doesn't help when she makes mistakes. At the end was footage from The Darkness, but she labelled it as the sequel. I can see LOTS of people calling her out over that.
Hmmmmm. That wasn't perfect. But really, it was wayyyy better than the first video and to me, actually enjoyable. What now, you can't connect to that idea? All right, let's attempt to list some of the improvements which were obvious to me.
less theory preaching. The first video tried to flatten the audience a bit with latin nomenclature, antique trope history and possibly psychology. This one doesn't.
more expression of emotion. Sarkeesian makes a far more successful attempt to posture herself as an involved presenter. The first video only had the continuously raised eyebrow, although that might have just been the way she shaves those things. In this one, the expression of despair at 12:25 stands out. She'll have to practice all this a bit more though. It's not easy talking in front of a camera.
positive examples are acknowledged. It's not all bad for Sarkeesian this time. She shows games with female main characters - all in the blink of an eye of course because, again, this is not the topic of those videos. The warning at the beginning is, word by word, the very same as it was in the first video - of course you can still enjoy those games, but be the fuck aware of what gender roles you're being fed!
tropes are diversified and own theories formed. The first video was a yawny history lesson interspersed with examplemania. It felt rather stretched at a half hour length. This one tries to identify variations of the damsel in distress and - surprise - she's actually not bad at categorizing and naming them. This is new theory. These are modern narrative twists that have become a trope in the last 20 years; it's important that someone makes a decent attempt at classifying them.
Modern examples of the trope(s) are more convincing. It might have been her mistake to start with the past and get to the modern games only two months later. I myself got the "she dumps on all our childhood games" impression in that first video, which was the misled assumption of all those rebuttal video makers later on. And I think even in this thread I've voiced issues with where this series would go as I believed there really couldn't be THAT many examples in present games with their "more sophisticated stories". It's good and I believe very necessary that she finds and lists these games. I myself have played exactly one of the games she shows footage from (Prey) - and must admit that I have been impressively appalled by how many modern games she could put of the table with perverted, but clearly identifiable variations of the damsel theme. Really, just wow.
The responsibility of the game developers is not exaggerated. These reservations at the end are something that was missing from video 1. Because of course these 'lessons' look like she's trying to find someone whose fault this narrative bullshit is. Turns out, she really isn't - yet another thing that people have just not understood in that first video although it was already stated in there to some degree.
Psychological effects of the trope are not exaggerated. This is a very important part at the end where she finally speaks on what kind of influence she thinks these tropes have on our society, on male as well as female behavior. Surprise again: Not that much.
EDIT II: That was a really depressing video. Like, REALLY negative. Can't see many people siding with her on this video in particular. Yeesh.
Well, of course it was negative. Ask all the gratuitously killed women in those games. But it's hardly a question of siding with her. The tropes are there, that's the fact. You can't argue that.
Crap. Are there actual spoiler spoilers of Hotline: Miami or is it just a general reference to it? I can deal with being spoiled on everything except that.
Comments
She most likely bought all these games (and probably at full retail price) rather than renting them. Plus, many of these games are not necessary in finding material to be used in this video series. Also, she likely bought a VERY fancy video camera and Adobe Photoshop/After Effects, when I'm sure there are plenty of good lower priced products (Corel Paint Shop Pro X5 is only $70, and GIMP is free. Windows Movie Maker is also free.)
As has been said, many people have made much better videos which are more interesting and informative than this, for a lot less money. Why people paid her to make Youtube videos is beyond me.
Yet completely subtitled.
Awwww... look at that genuinely happy expression. Then again, who wouldn't be with such a pile.
Actually, looking at those games, I see several that have absolutely NOTHING to do with what she's talking about. Beautiful Katamari? Fairytale Fights? Gunstringer? Kinect Adventures? Skate 3? Twisted Metal? Virtua Tennis 4?
What the hell do any of those have to do with how women are portrayed in video games?
I personally think she just showcases her private collection.
What?! Noooooooooo. No one in her right mind buys Diablo III without being forced to.
BTW, research: http://tropesversuswomen.tumblr.com/
Like it or not, she knows her shit.
And I'm still unimpressed! XP
Sounds like a fun project of hers.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57573628-1/dad-hacks-donkey-kong-so-daughter-can-save-mario/
Its a nice gesture, but let's be honest.
Its just a sprite hack.
(I'd be more impressed if she played differently)
Its a little sensationalist, redditish d'aww story that got a little too much attention. -_-
Yeah, no.
That's like, exactly the opposite of this book I was planning, called Synthia's Daughters where 99.9% of men had died in a plague. The difference, of course, was that the human race could keep on going, just with only one gender and egg cell fusion.
But Dashing She's talking about Damsels in Distress which means women being kidnapped or in trouble and having to be saved which does not happen that often in the Arkham games.
I'm sure she's aware of the counter-examples, probably more than you and me are. And she will very likely be exploring them later in the series. However, a handful of examples of positive portrayals of women in video games do not cancel out the thousands of examples to the contrary.
Who the fuck are you to tell her what kind of camera she should be using or how much she should be spending on games? What the fuck?
The original amount she asked for was $6,000. If Matt Barton of Matt Chat fame were to ask for a few grand to do a collection of videos on X topic with higher production values, I would hope and expect to see him make his goal. Not everybody has the time or money to make high-quality videos for "free". If some people do, that's great; enjoy them.
But you're suggesting that a woman (with a long track record of producing videos) who has a project in mind that she can't do for free is scamming the 7,000 people interested enough to donate? SCAMMING? So not only is she an incompetent woman with a boring voice doing a badly researched video, wearing ridiculous earrings and an ugly shirt, but she's a fucking SCAMMER? I don't know what your issue with women is, but if you don't want to continue to come off as trash you should probably avoid topics like this in the future.
I cannot believe that you're serious with this post. Why don't we go ask 5,000 random people which one presents themselves better on video?
You're criticizing the woman about her fucking eyebrows?
So here, what you're doing is yucking it up in the ole' boys' club, trying to turn the whole thing into a joke. Because misogyny is a fucking punch line, and the fact that thousands of gamers have piled vitriol onto Sarkeesian, including rape threats, death threats and creating a video game where you get to beat her to death is no big deal. We all need to lighten up! Right?
You seem kinda bitter.
idk, on one end, free market, people paid for it, ect whatever
on the other end, the entire kickstarter idea was really dumb. it was essentially a way to get a shit load of video games and put sparkly imagery on videos that she proved she could make without kickstarter.
the whole thing is dumb and all she's doing is collecting a paycheck from preaching to the crowd who already know and complain about these tropes as well as the controversy from how absolutely ridiculous the whole thing is.
As well as this, I consider myself a fairly intelligent and well-spoken person, and even I don't know what 'pernicious' means. I can guess, but if you're making a video supposedly explaining something to people, then I shouldn't have to make an educated guess at the meaning of what you're saying.
I could easily rewrite this to mean exactly the same, but not sound as complex. Watch: Although, to be honest, I'd probably have said something totally different. But hey, that's just me.
True. But so far she's pointing out the early examples, and she doesn't point out what one or two others have done in this thread - early games had very simple plots with a traditional goal because they couldn't have anything else. They were incredibly simple games, and so the plots had to be simple as well. The simplest and most easily remembered plot? Save the girl. Or gold, but hey, women are more visually entertaining.
If she'd mentioned that and then said that she was disappointed that games continued to use the trope even after games got more complex and had the opportunity for more expanded and interesting stories, then it would have been fine. But she doesn't. She just seems to pick on early games for using the trope, end of.
Dude's entitled to his opinion.
We haven't seen where the money's gone. She's never actually told the general public anything specific, like a breakdown of expenses or whatnot. She's told us that she's bought a whole bunch of games, and then posed next to them, which is easily the point that's going to stick in most people's heads, and she's told us that she's hired a couple of people ("I can now also hire my producer full-time for this project. Plus we are in the process of bringing another writer/researcher on board part-time." - from the same post where the picture was shown), but the majority of updates were for backers of the project alone, and since I didn't back the project, I couldn't tell you what they say.
They could very well explain where all the money went. BUT I DON'T KNOW. And if people don't know, they're going to form theories, ones which the previously shown picture do NOTHING to dissuade.
If she'd released a detailed breakdown on where all the money went, the theories that she's scammed people would vanish, because we'd probably know that she hasn't just used the money for games. But she hasn't, so they won't. Quad Erat Demonstrandum.
He's pointing out that the eyebrows (which are clearly the result of too much make-up) were distracting, just as I pointed out that her earrings were distracting. WHICH THEY ARE.
It's a perfectly valid comment to make, and he's not the only person saying things like it.
In case you haven't noticed, people here have a habit of trying to lighten the mood when things get too serious, which it kind of is here. Also, most of us appear to be guys (though I could be wrong, I usually am when it comes to identifying people's gender), so a bit of guy humour isn't entirely unexpected.
Funnily enough, in an earlier post, Vainamoinen said this: Hell, even Secret Fawful showcased how bad some of the YouTube comments were.
We're not ignoring the fact that Anita got a lot of shit from internet fuckwads. We just know that that's how the internet works. It brings out the worst in people. We know this. It's a sad fact of life, but it IS a fact. You give people anonymity, they're going to abuse it.
Doesn't mean we can't have a small laugh every now and again.
http://muddycolors.blogspot.de/2013/03/objectify.html
However...
She walks the high road of language. I won't blame her. My English has formed at the university, I'm kind of used to having new words tossed around my ears, judging their meaning from context alone. Thing is: She DOES take the role of a teacher, so she isn't supposed to chum up to viewers by dumbing down her language. Is what she does pretentious? Possibly. But definitely less than you'd find daily in an educated environment. Then again, I've been taught gender roles so thoroughly in literature that all the terms she uses which are needed for fully understanding the video are so engraved in my memory, it's not even funny any more.
Certainly. It's this first video that's starting a massive riot because a lot of 30-something video gamers feel their most precious childhood memories badmouthed. That's not what's happening here. As I said, it's basically a history lesson. She hasn't said anything untruthful. The trope IS there, and its prevalence in these early games is INCREDIBLE. If I had to count how many times April O'Neil ALONE was abducted in these glorious late 80s, early 90s, I probably wouldn't get to finish today. Sarkeesian HAS to pick on these early games, because that's exactly how they were. Not mentioning them is like cutting out the first chapters of your history book, and we can't understand modern VG culture if we don't look at the old games first.
She hasn't shown a breakdown of expenses, but she has offered an abundantly precise sum which she needed to make this series. Six thousand dollars. Which the kickstarter, I think, reached within day one. In essence, everyone who gave her money afterwards was well aware that it was surplus money. No one was "conned" of course. This is all crystal clear. Maybe Sarkeesian will give to charity eventually. Maybe she finds a way to further her cause elsewhere with the money. Maybe she just keeps the leftovers for herself. I really don't care. I don't envy the position she has moved herself into. And I don't want to be in the same situation for those surplus 100,000+ dollars.
She lucked out because her idea was obviously lucrative. Deal with it.
Sarkeesian put those first comments on her blog openly. It's shocking to see that the whole internet can be disgraced. But I'll have a jab at those eyebrows EVENTUALLY. But not the earrings. I like those earrings.
This forum is actually one of the most "egalitarian" forums I've been to, not to mention the most chill ones because most of the people are older and educated.
*shrug*
Also why I stopped watching Extra Credits.
Then take the fight to them instead of picking a fight with me. I'm not the one piling vitriol onto her, threatening to rape and kill her, nor have I made any video games where you can beat her to death.
You might be on the right side, but your white knighting is sorely misplaced.
Careful, Tope. JuntMonkey might consider you a SEXIST who HATES WOMEN and wants everyone RAPED AND MURDERED.
FUCK WOMEN
*rips out own ovaries*
That's the spirit.:cool:
There's nothing wrong with it, but actively trying to will often hamper your creativity. Making anything creative is partially using tropes, partially inserting your own DNA in a non-sexual way. Trying to actively insert as many tropes as possible or doing the exact opposite will make that which you created more tropes and less you.
That's the thing to me, if it's done inadvertently, I'm not worried about it because there was no malicious intent involved. The hero saves the princess stories are like this. In fact, if you want to go into it that's a negative stereotype for men too (having to be strong and throw safety to the wind). But, like I said, the stories weren't made to purposefully put down anyone, so I'm not bothered by them.
The stuff where they make the bodies of females disproportionate in order to enhance sexuality or dumb down their intelligence, or the stuff where they make the guy a big hulking man who is macho and rude (and often dumb down their intelligence too) because they want to appeal to a teenage male demographic is the stuff that bothers me, because that stuff is not done inadvertently, but rather purposefully. The stuff where they portray gay men as womanly or gay women as manly, and transexual women as manly, and transexual men as manly lesbians bother me too since they are done purposefully and maliciously. Additionally, I'm also bothered by the stuff that's made (in a non-satirical fashion [to a point, stuff labled as satire that is done just for the shock value bothers me as well (since that stuff really isn't satire, but is malicious in nature)]) that reinforces the race role such as black people as drug users and thieves, hispanics as lazy people living off the government, white southern Americans (and sometimes Americans in general) as inbred gun-toting rednecks, etc. This kind of stuff is so stupidly prevalent in our society, that it does re-enforce negative stereotypes, no doubt (and it keeps misogony, racism, and bigotry alive).
TL;DR: Japanese children's media can get FAR worse, in terms of being sexist.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mow7acLq0b4
Seriously, this is what this discussion had become. This guy is speaking out against the abuse Sarkeesian has endured, but then goes on to directly accuse her of trollbaiting:
Anyone here who WOULDN'T call this absolute sexist crap? Kickstarter successful, all the money on the bank, hey, now let's get me some RAPE THREATS because that was what I was after all along? This is ludicrous. Someone punch this guy in the face. :mad:
I've watched a whole lot of these rebuttal movies and they all make the most desperate attempt at misinterpreting what the original video was there for. "Why doesn't she mention this or that game as a positive example?", I've been asking myself as well when I started that vid. Weeell, because the title is "tropes VERSUS women". Because this series was always meant to have a focus, possibly EXCLUSIVELY on the most sexist crap in the history book of video games.
And what she presents with the damsel in distress standard story is completely undoubtedly where_video_games_started, overwhelming in quantity, whether we like it or not.
I want a second video now... but fuck do I understand why it's late.
This is a good point, and it's probably true to varying degrees for any group of people that isn't white males.
EDIT: Yes it is. Hope you don't mind me moving your post, Dashing.
For the record, here's the list of games that receive spoilers (as taken from the video description):
· Bionic Commando (2009)
· Borderlands 2 (2012)
· Breath of Fire IV (2000)
· Castlevania: The Dracula X Chronicles (2007)
· Castlevania: Lament of Innocence (2003)
· Castlevania: Lords of Shadow (2010)
· Dante's Inferno (2010)
· The Darkness II (2012)
· Dead Space (2008)
· Devil Summoner: Raidou Kuzunoha vs The Soulless Army (2006)
· Double Dragon Neon (2012)
· Gears of War 2 (2008)
· God of War: Ghost of Sparta (2010)
· The Godfather: The Game (2006)
· Grand Theft Auto III (2001)
· Hotline Miami (2012)
· Ico (2001)
· Infamous (2009)
· Inversion (2012)
· Kane & Lunch: Dead Men (2007)
· The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess (2006)
· MediEvil 2 (2000)
· Ninja Gaiden 3 (2010)
· Pandora's Tower (2011)
· Prey (2006)
· Resident Evil 5 (2009)
· Shadows of the Damned (2011)
· Tenchu: Shadow Assassins (2009)
That's... yeah, that's quite a few. And to have the list pretty much buried in the video description with only a basic caption in the video itself warning of this... hmm. there's warnings about the violence, sure, but not the spoilers?
EDIT II: That was a really depressing video. Like, REALLY negative. Can't see many people siding with her on this video in particular. Yeesh.
Also doesn't help when she makes mistakes. At the end was footage from The Darkness, but she labelled it as the sequel. I can see LOTS of people calling her out over that.
Well, of course it was negative. Ask all the gratuitously killed women in those games. But it's hardly a question of siding with her. The tropes are there, that's the fact. You can't argue that.