Tropes Vs Women in Video Games

[Cube]

In short: Some games are bad because they make you kill one woman (in some cases, only when you fail at a game and get the "bad" ending) amongst the thousands of men you kill.

 

And, as she says herself, there is a logical in-game reason why you (may) have to kill this one woman.

 

On top of this: she claims this stuff is making "domestic violence" seem like a "normal thing", with no statistics or facts to back up that point. I don't think there have ever been as many awareness groups and campaigners as there are now - there are even talks of a "domestic violence register" in the UK. On top of this, violent crimes as a whole are reducing. This, coupled with how domestic violence is now considered a more serious crime, suggests that domestic violence against women is on a low point and is reducing further.

 

So, if you wanted to put two unrelated points together, you could potentially claim that these games are causing the reduction (but obviously, that's rubbish).

Edited May 28, 2013 by Cube

[Ramar]

Video removed?

[gaggle64]

That was excellent. I would also like to add Deus Ex: HR to the Euthanised Damsel trope, where in the final section you have to execute 3 women who have been wired into a machine with no option to rescue them. It was a horrid end to an otherwise strong game and left a hideous taste in my mouth. I'm glad she made passing mention these things are incredibly clumsy lunges to engage the player emotionally, we all want video games to be "taken seriously" but I feel a lot of the mainstream stories aren't giving people a lot of tremendous reasons to do so.

Edited May 30, 2013 by gaggle64

[Rummy]

Tbh I don't think I've played more than one or two games she mentioned, or been bothered by the rest of them. I don't know if that says anything about anything, but it makes me find some of the aspects and point irrelevant to me personally. I still feel she presents with a bias, but I can't argue against most of what she says because I just don't have the knowledge.

[Yvonne]

Something I liked about this installment was that it addressed a lot of the arguments I saw going around against the position she had in the first part. I also thought it was a stronger production.

 

Cube I think you may have reduced her argument to the point that it has lost its meaning. It's not about the quantity of people killed, it's the manner in which they are killed and how much power is involved. You kill a thousand dudes who are trying to kill you. You each have a shot at controlling your destiny. The girls in the games she mentions never get that opportunity.

[Rummy]

I'd agree with that. I'd wondered with the time taken between videos if she was going to be approaching the series in a manner of parts that might then address criticism as it goes along. I, for the bits I could relate to, did appreciate this one a bit more.

[Agent Gibbs]

I'd agree with that. I'd wondered with the time taken between videos if she was going to be approaching the series in a manner of parts that might then address criticism as it goes along. I, for the bits I could relate to, did appreciate this one a bit more.

 

Yeah i agree with that Rummy, and your earlier post, i knew very little of the games she commented on so felt out of my depth. She did certainly seem more balanced in her opinion this time round, more that she'd make a point then offer a counter, rather than the more biased first installment.The first generated so many angry responses because it was so biased, this is much more thoughtful and concise and as such provokes more reasoned debate.

 

I particularly liked the bit where she commented she didn't mean the trope should never re occur but the actions/character development etc could be done differently(or words to that effect), and also how the trope reflects 1 dimensional male characters reduced to unthinking machines

[Jonnas]

1. I like the presentation better, now.

 

2. Her point does come across much better than it did the first time around. Yvonne hits the nail in the head when he says it's about how much power and relevance is given to these female characters.

 

3. I do hope the next video mentions games like Spirit Tracks and Paper Mario, where the damsels still have an active role in the main plot (ST especially so, with the oddity of the damsel being on the quest to rescue herself)

 

A couple of examples I would've liked to see mentioned, from Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin (A game in which you control a man and a woman simultaneously):

 

-The two antagonist witches you've been seeing throughout the game turn out to actually be brainwashed by the villain. During your fight, you are penalized for taking the gung-ho choice (they die, and nothing gets truly resolved), and the game ends prematurely. What should be done is the harder path of chanting a loooong spell during the fight to break the curse, all while you're doing your best to defend and avoid, attacking as little as possible, all for the sake of a peaceful resolution;

 

-From the same game, there's also an interesting inversion: one of the bosses (a Cleopatra-looking succubus) brainwashes the male protagonist, and the girl is the one who needs to defeat both to snap him out.

Edited May 31, 2013 by Jonnas

[Ville]

 

I think this pretty much sums it up: where's the evidence these games have any kind of impact on anyone? Like thunderf00t puts it, you could as well argue that the Mario games incite people to be violent against turtles. I mean you can theorise all you want, but that doesn't mean anything without actual studies. Just like with the "video games make people more violent" argument; a very easy accusation to make, yet no connection has been found.

[ReZourceman]

The next part is up.

 

She just irritates me.

[Cube]

It's funny how she came up with a game to "solve the trope" while completely ignoring that a massive blockbuster game that came out this year did the exact thing she wanted (except better, as she escaped straight away instead of waiting) - Tomb Raider.

[Diageo]

The latest installment is up called Ms. male character, and I've got to say I agreed with most of it.

[ReZourceman]

Funny that she would criticise Dixie Kong. The character that saved the title hero twice and was main character in two games.

 

She just irritates me. She has some points but she chats so much shit too. She is not well informed enough to make these kinds of videos.

[Diageo]

Just because the character is good in one way doesn't make it good in all ways. The only problem she said diddy kong had is that she's the only female in a male populated game and is stereotypically shown by wearing pink. You can't contest that? Not necessarily the worst thing in the world though.

[Cube]

While there are some good points (and some bad ones, like Mass Effect's marketing), a lot of it just brings up the response of "so?". While they aren't great, there's nothing really all that wrong with them.

 

Also, weren't all of Wonderful 101's characters hilariously ridiculous stereotypes?

[Diageo]

What do you mean so? Do you think women shouldn't be better represented in games?

[ReZourceman]

Also, weren't all of Wonderful 101's characters hilariously ridiculous stereotypes?

 

Its stuff like this that shows she doesn't play the games she references.

[Cube]

What do you mean so? Do you think women shouldn't be better represented in games?

 

As she said herself, this stuff is true in a lot of media. In plenty of the examples, the male characters have one or no personality traits. These things won't go away, and the characters are so unimportant that they really don't matter. Complaining about these just seems trivial.

 

The best way of showing that we want women to be better represented is by focusing on the good. The Last of Us showed that it doesn't need a generic tough dude cover to be successful, Tomb Raider showed that we don't need a oddly proportioned woman in over the top right, revealing clothes, Mass Effect showed that gender has no impact on how great you can be.

 

Things are getting better, but the games with single-personality characters probably wont.

[Zechs Merquise]

The best commentary on these videos can usually be found over at 4chan, this fella nails it:

 

No, this **** makes me rage. Purely at the fact at how bullshit ALL of her arguments are, and the very fact she doesn't allow comments, she doesn't respond to counter arguments against her. She bans people from anything she has who make responses to her.

 

Her entire argument is so flawed that she knows it won't stand up to critisism, so she shields it all costs and screams "muh-sojiny".

 

She hates the "damsel in distress" trope yet she used exactly that to get over a hundred thousand dollars from White Knights to keep making these videos.

 

The best part? She doesn't even play the games, she steals 100% of her footage from 'Let's Play's on other channels, doesn't credit them and makes vague assumptions.

[Debug Mode]

I really, really have trouble taking the criticism for this trope seriously. Like sure, if it were about heavily story focussed video games, then yeah, I'd maybe start asking questions myself about how those 'damsels' are being portrayed.

 

But no, these are basic games. I don't care who I'm saving or whatever, as long as the motivation for the character I'm playing as is quickly expressed to me the player, I don't give a shit. Could be the queen, could be the king, could be the girlfriend, could be the boyfriend, could be an animal, heck it could eve be Luigi and I still wouldn't give a shit.

 

The only people who think women are objects or helpless are fucking idiots and grow fewer in numbers, and I very much doubt video games are why they have this view. Those I know who think like this seem to have older than average parents, which seems more indicative to me a problem of growing up in an environment that's behind the times.

 

But seriously, I think there should actually be some form of survey about the negative effects of this trope. Ask every one why Mario saves Peach or some shit. If the dominant answer comes back as "Because she's a girl", then we really need to act fast as a society.

[Ashley]

Lily Tomlin!

 

This is the first one I've watched and I can see why there have been some troubles with the series if they're all like this. She's look at things in a very narrow way. Her discussion of Ms Pac-Man completely overlooks the fact she was created in the mid-80's, a time when gender representations were different.

 

Plus she has the charisma of a plug, which makes it more difficult to watch.

 

Now I want to make a series of videos actually exploring women in video games.

Edited November 19, 2013 by Ashley

[MoogleViper]

Now I want to make a series of videos actually exploring women in video games.

 

Do it. I imagine a lot of people would watch.

[Ashley]

Exploring the representation of women...not exploring women.

 

Besides, I'd imagine I wouldn't be very interesting to watch.

[Diageo]

Just because she's a bitch, or doesn't play the games, or makes money hypocritically, it makes no difference. It's the discussion around the topic that matters, not who's saying it.

 

I thought her explanation that any characters like animals who have no immediately feminine signals are considered male. I find that I do that a lot. While people may argue it's not harmful or particularly important, it's interesting to look at. And it probably shouldn't be that way. Whether these games were made in the 80s or not, it's pretty bad that it still happens so frequently today.

 

Sure there have been some games that are doing it well, but why can't we look at the ones that haven't. She's even looked at some she thought did it nicely, like Tower Fall.

 

I think people need to get over their gripe with her and actually think about the content. Why is it different, should it be different, should we let it be different?

[Ashley]

It's the content I have a problem with.

 

As the video posted above explains, its approaches the discussion from an opinion-first angle. She has already decided that video games "are patriarchal" and has asked for money to make a series of videos where she just explains why she believes this is the case. She's pointing out tropes, and yes there are issues within those tropes, but any old website can do that (such as tvtropes.com). If she was actually doing some research (at a very basic level doing focus groups, interviews etc with gamers and non-gamers to find what impact the representation of females in video games has on them/how they perceive the effect on society) then it would be worth backing and considering. As it stands she's said "video games are patriarchal, give me money so I can make a series of videos where I just say this over and over again having "researched" [looked at videos/blogs] the topic".

 

If this were a BA dissertation it would be fine. But if she wants to claim herself to be a cultural researcher, then she is (theoretically, although apparently not in practice) inviting herself and her notions up to criticism. Academic papers have to be peer reviewed, it's a shame she didn't consider it for this.