Tropes vs. Women in Video Games Kickstarter -- and the hate it's received


Video Games

301 to 350 of 613 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

Alice Margatroid wrote:

@Fyre, I haven't watched all of Sarkeesian's videos, but I don't think she is particularly militant or extreme.

@Aron, yeah, I agree, it really is just a respect thing. I open doors for other people, people open doors for me. I get mildly irritated if someone doesn't hold the door open for me because it breaks one of those unspoken social rules of politeness.

That said, I can kind of understand the feminist point of view as well... Since changing into a Computer Science degree and being around more men on campus, I've noticed that men will hold open doors for me or let me go first through places even when it's slightly more inconvenient for them to do so - e.g., standing back and holding the door open for me to go first instead of just walking through and keeping one hand on it until I can keep it open to walk behind them, kind of thing. (That was a terrible explanation, I hope you get what I'm saying.) And it bothers me to a degree.

I know it's not malicious. I don't get offended whatsoever. In fact I'm sure many people do it to everyone just out of extra politeness. But in a lot of cases it's just one of those learned behaviours that ever so slightly reinforces gender roles that makes you sigh just a little before moving on.

Yeah I agree it is somewhat programmed, more so in the UK with how polite everyone is (so i've been told by many american friends that it seems we're too polite in that reguard) so it's just natural to me and not a gender issue.

Also I understand what you mean, i've done it many times for both women and men. Generally when it's one that opens towards me. However sometimes the politeness gets carried away and I find I've been holding open the door for a whole minute as people keep coming.

I believe that with Feminism there is the same kind of approch as everything else. You get those who take it in their stride and some who seem to go way out of their way to see something as a plot to get that person into bed, though thankfully I've never run into that case, only heard stories.

Sovereign Court

Alice Margatroid wrote:

I don't have time to re-watch right now, but like I said before, I got the impression it was targeted more at the other Youtubers she referenced rather than all men ever.

That said, it's probably a problem with the marketing rather than the message itself, if you get my drift. Good message, bad execution. Especially with Youtube videos, you often find yourself preaching to the choir in an attempt to keep your subscribers... and that includes the "style" of video presentation you create for yourself too.

For example, Azaelas posted a video earlier in this thread (I believe?) with a cartoon squirrel doing an angry rant about door holding and various things. I stopped watching it early because I found it obnoxious, both because of the voice and also because of the way they worded things... fundamentally I agreed with a fair amount of what they were saying but it was too annoying an execution for me to stick with.

Don't get me wrong, not trying to say that Sarkeesian is correct in giving the impression you got - if that's what you (and others) took away from it that's not exactly helpful - just have to try and not throw the baby out with the bathwater I guess.

Awww, you don't like Foamy? Foamy is awesome.


Alice Margatroid wrote:
For example, Azaelas posted a video earlier in this thread (I believe?) with a cartoon squirrel doing an angry rant about door holding and various things. I stopped watching it early because I found it obnoxious, both because of the voice and also because of the way they worded things... fundamentally I agreed with a fair amount of what they were saying but it was too annoying an execution for me to stick with.

Wasn't me but I do love Foamy the Squirrel. He is wonderful. And is more fleshed out than any Twilight Character.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm pretty sure we all agree that is a fairly low bar...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal wrote:
I'm pretty sure we all agree that is a fairly low bar...

Priceless!


Well, I'd never heard of Sarkesian until I watched the Twilight video, which meant nothing to me since I have never read nor watched Twilight, but now her videos keep popping up on my recommended list and I did read The Hunger Games, so I linked it.

Smash Panem Through Worker's Revolution!

EDIT: Man, no controversy, how boring!

2nd EDIT: Armenian chicks are hawt!!

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
John Kretzer wrote:
Alice Margatroid wrote:

I'd feel really uncomfortable if someone felt like they had to stand up and help me with my coat, unless I was obviously struggling for whatever reason... it might be out of chivalry or niceness or whatever, but it's still kind of weird to me.

Holding doors is one thing (because it's really rude to let a door slam in someone's face or let the elevator close when someone's clearly running towards it) but helping with someone's coat or chair... yeah, no. Maybe it's because I'm fairly young, but if anyone did that kind of thing for me I'd feel really weirded out. Like, personal space intrusion kind of weirded out.

And after all, you wouldn't do that for a guy (I assume), so why do you do that for a woman? The reason is because of learned behaviours related to gender roles more than anything else. And a lot of chivalry stems from treating women as weaker than men... so yeah, feminists often take affront to it.

EDIT: I'd also note I've never seen anyone stand when a woman stands / help her with her jacket or chair. So it might be an age thing. (Thank god!)

It also has a root cause that women are more important than man to a society.

Nope, this is the root cause.

John Kretzer wrote:
Standing when somebody leaves is a sign or respect. You will see it in courts and such when a king leaves a room...or a judge enter or leaves a room people are expected to stand.

Men stood when a woman left to make it clear that she wasn't one of the serveants. They wouldn't stand for each other because they would be hanging out all night and would move from place to place together (nobody stands when anyone pops to the toilet, regardless of gender).

John Kretzer wrote:
Men are taught never to hit a women...not because they a weaker but because they are more important than you. I mean the old saying of 'Never getting between a Mother Bear and her cub"...or "Hell has no fury like a women scorned" don't seem to me to stae women are weaker.

Nope, men are taught not to hit women for the same reason they're not allowed to hit infants: "Pick on someone your own size!"

Picking on an inferior opponent (like a woman) makes you seem weak and cruel. Just like when the villain is established in a movie by having him beat up some old guy.

John Kretzer wrote:
I am not saying men have not mutated this to be 'women are weaker'. Or even that now women are more important than men...and we don't need to change this. But to put as chivalry as means to oppress women...I don't think is entirely accurate.

Chivalry was a way to encode slightly less destructive morals on the aggressive amorality of wealthy aristocrats who bullied, killed and raped their way through life. It always emphasises the notion that women were weak (men fighting and being virile while women sit simpering is the classic image of chivalry).


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Well, I'd never heard of Sarkesian until I watched the Twilight video, which meant nothing to me since I have never read nor watched Twilight, but now her videos keep popping up on my recommended list and I did read The Hunger Games, so I linked it.

Smash Panem Through Worker's Revolution!

EDIT: Man, no controversy, how boring!

2nd EDIT: Armenian chicks are hawt!!

The thing on this is her saying those things means she hasn't actually watched any interviews. The whole reason why they didn't focus on the violence or sexualize Katniss is because it wasn't in the book and the Author actually wrote the Screenplay it wasn't some chump who was interpreting it.


Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Well, I'd never heard of Sarkesian until I watched the Twilight video, which meant nothing to me since I have never read nor watched Twilight, but now her videos keep popping up on my recommended list and I did read The Hunger Games, so I linked it.

Smash Panem Through Worker's Revolution!

EDIT: Man, no controversy, how boring!

2nd EDIT: Armenian chicks are hawt!!

The thing on this is her saying those things means she hasn't actually watched any interviews. The whole reason why they didn't focus on the violence or sexualize Katniss is because it wasn't in the book and the Author actually wrote the Screenplay it wasn't some chump who was interpreting it.

Why should she need to follow interviews when her topic is about how the film portrays things? It doesn't matter what the author's intent was. What matters is the result. In many ways, she was pleased with the result.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

On "chivalry," manners, and other things:

- Different generations do definitely have their own standards for what is polite and what is creepy. That is a different issue from gender politics, though sometimes they can intersect. Different cultures alone have different rules.

- In my own culture, I've never specifically seen men standing for women, but people will stand up when a new person enters to introduce themselves, and stand again to say goodbye. This is not gendered behavior as far as I can see. It's never been explained to me, but my sense is it's about showing respect for the individual--first, it's to pay attention to them and give proper greetings and farewells (if you stay seated when they leave, it looks like you don't care they're going), and my sense is it's rude to talk to someone when they're standing and you're seated because you are physically in a relaxed mode while they are standing (or alternately, if you are standing, you loom over them and that's kind of creepy).

- I don't care if you, man or woman, open a door for me, hand me my coat, pull out a chair for me--and likely, I will do much of the same for you (though I usually don't pull chairs out for people), and I don't expect you to think much of it. We call this courtesy.

However, if you offer to assist me in some way, and I politely decline your offer of assistance, it is equally courteous and "chivalrous" for you to accept my declination without argument.

We shall illustrate this idea with Example A and Example B:

Example A:
DQ is walking down the hallway heading toward a door.
Bob sees DQ and goes to open the door for her.
DQ says, "Thanks, but I'll get it. I need to [tie my shoelace/practice door opening/jump up and down/whatever] first, so please don't hold it for me."
Bob replies, "Oh, okay, cheers. Enjoy tying your shoelace/practicing door opening/jumping up and down."

Example B:
DQ is walking down the hallway heading toward a door.
Dave sees DQ and goes to open the door for her.
DQ says, "Thanks, but I'll get it. I need to [tie my shoelace/practice door opening/jump up and down/whatever] first, so please don't hold it for me."
Dave replies, "GOD, B#$%$, what is wrong with you, I was just trying to be CHIVALROUS!" He then holds the door open anyway, getting in DQ's way as she does her requisite jumping up and down, and then slams it behind her hard enough for the picture on the wall to fall off afterward.

Bob is a courteous and respectful man.

Dave is a selfish asshat.

Frankly, in my personal every day anecdotal experience, many men who complain that women won't "let them be chivalrous" tend to be more like Dave than Bob. When they say, "I want to be chivalrous," they mean, "I want to show off and impress you with how amazing I am." Fortunately, in my personal every day anecdotal experiences, I also know far more Bobs than I do Daves, so that's all good.

Now, yes, there are women who take offense at men who open doors and the like, and they are the reason even some Bobs may complain about them. Some of these women are high strung b$!*!es who you should ignore and accept that they don't represent all womenkind--just like most Daves should be ignored and be accepted that they don't represent all mankind. Now, some of those women have had to deal with Dave far too often and forget that Bob exists, and if they become exposed to more Bob-like behavior, they might chill out eventually.

TL;DR: treat people with respect, which includes taking no for an answer when it is offered. Decent people will respond to you with decency, and indecent people don't matter anyway.


Imho, the cool thing about chivalry was: you weren't supposed to have hawt sex with your wife or girlfriend, you were supposed to do it with your bosses's wife or girlfriend. (Or boyfriend.)

More importantly: I don't know. I can't see how it makes much difference to the argument either way whether Ms. Sarkeesian knew or didn't know that Ms. Collins wrote the script.

Much more importantly: I'm not sure I follow her on the whole girl who got killed by the black guy in revenge of her killing the black girl. IIRC, Katniss spends the whole book fighting against her natural inclinations to humanize the Tributes. As, I think, would only make sense.

I laughed, though, when she talked about how Jennifer Lawrence wasn't sexualized. Partly because I think my post record will show that my initial posts about that movie were about how hawt JL was and partly because it reminded me of an argument I had with a female comrade on International Women's Day that began when I started talking about how bad I wanted to f~%# Hermoine Granger.

In my defense, though, we had just been discussing our shared tastes in pornography.


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Imho, the cool thing about chivalry was: you weren't supposed to have hawt sex with your wife or girlfriend, you were supposed to do it with your bosses's wife or girlfriend. (Or boyfriend.)

More importantly: I don't know. I can't see how it makes much difference to the argument either way whether Ms. Sarkeesian knew or didn't know that Ms. Collins wrote the script.

Much more importantly: I'm not sure I follow her on the whole girl who got killed by the black guy in revenge of her killing the black girl. IIRC, Katniss spends the whole book fighting against her natural inclinations to humanize the Tributes. As, I think, would only make sense.

I laughed, though, when she talked about how Jennifer Lawrence wasn't sexualized. Partly because I think my post record will show that my initial posts about that movie were about how hawt JL was and partly because it reminded me of an argument I had with a female comrade on International Women's Day that began when I started talking about how bad I wanted to f@++ Hermoine Granger.

In my defense, though, we had just been discussing our shared tastes in pornography.

I think you may have just hit an interesting nail. I find many women in media that are not sexualized to be way more attractive, and I am way more interested in them than women who are.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Caineach wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Imho, the cool thing about chivalry was: you weren't supposed to have hawt sex with your wife or girlfriend, you were supposed to do it with your bosses's wife or girlfriend. (Or boyfriend.)

More importantly: I don't know. I can't see how it makes much difference to the argument either way whether Ms. Sarkeesian knew or didn't know that Ms. Collins wrote the script.

Much more importantly: I'm not sure I follow her on the whole girl who got killed by the black guy in revenge of her killing the black girl. IIRC, Katniss spends the whole book fighting against her natural inclinations to humanize the Tributes. As, I think, would only make sense.

I laughed, though, when she talked about how Jennifer Lawrence wasn't sexualized. Partly because I think my post record will show that my initial posts about that movie were about how hawt JL was and partly because it reminded me of an argument I had with a female comrade on International Women's Day that began when I started talking about how bad I wanted to f@++ Hermoine Granger.

In my defense, though, we had just been discussing our shared tastes in pornography.

I think you may have just hit an interesting nail. I find many women in media that are not sexualized to be way more attractive, and I am way more interested in them than women who are.

I think this is because (in my opinion) the sexiest characters are the ones that have actual characterization - otherwise they're just bodies. The problem is that, in the media, "characterization" and "sexuality" are usually treated as dichotomies.


Luna Lovegood got me pretty hawt under the collar, too. (In the books, not the movies.)

Sovereign Court

Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
Luna Lovegood got me pretty hawt under the collar, too. (In the books, not the movies.)

Really? I'd always go for Ginny. I know that the weird ones have their perks, but give me a hot, smart redhead and all other women just fade into the background.


Bah! I would have pushed Ginny off the ramparts of Hogwarts and then waited until Neville Longbottom wasn't looking and then I would've ava kadava'ed his ass, and shiznit, while I'm at it, I'd take out Ron, too, and I would collect Hermoine and Luna and Miss Trelawney, and Cho Chang, and the Patel twins, and hell, I'd even take Mrs. Weasley (Julie Walters was hawt back in her day) and then I would've established myself as the new Dark Lord, Doodlebug Anklebiter, the Goblin Who Lived, and I'd have a harem and...

What are you frowning at, Ms. Sarkeesian?


Caineach wrote:
Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

Well, I'd never heard of Sarkesian until I watched the Twilight video, which meant nothing to me since I have never read nor watched Twilight, but now her videos keep popping up on my recommended list and I did read The Hunger Games, so I linked it.

Smash Panem Through Worker's Revolution!

EDIT: Man, no controversy, how boring!

2nd EDIT: Armenian chicks are hawt!!

The thing on this is her saying those things means she hasn't actually watched any interviews. The whole reason why they didn't focus on the violence or sexualize Katniss is because it wasn't in the book and the Author actually wrote the Screenplay it wasn't some chump who was interpreting it.
Why should she need to follow interviews when her topic is about how the film portrays things? It doesn't matter what the author's intent was. What matters is the result. In many ways, she was pleased with the result.

But she references that the Film Makers chose to do things that way. They didn't.

Sovereign Court

I wonder, AF, did you watch both parts of her Hunger Games video?

Because I can't see how you're responding to what she said...

In the second one she congratulates the film-makers for not sexualising characters or sensationalising the violence.

She applauds them because, in her view, so many other books are sexualised and sensationalised when made into films.

She is not criticising them for leaving out sex and violence, she is applauding them for not adding sex and sensational violence in a way that she believes many other hollywood films do.

Her criticism is that it does not explore the trauma of violence as much as the book but she blames that largely on the medium, rather than the artists.

She also criticises the film for
A: making effemiate men only exist amongst the decadent elite
B: the film plays down the extra-layer of performance that comes from the 'tribunes' knowing they are being watched
C: manipulating the audience into the disturbing 'cheering on violence and murder' which the horrendous elite carry out (Clove's death)
D: casting: Katniss in the novel has olive skin and straight black hair, the casting call was for caucasian woman and the job went to a blonde, white actress

She criticises both for
x: dehumanising the career tribunes

Then she applauds the film for
1. the uprising scene
2. humanising one of the career tribunes at the end

"Catniss is one of the best female characters I've seen on screen for a long time."


It wasn't the Filmmakers who decided that though.

And the books doesn't explore the trauma in detail until the 2nd.

The reason for that was because the first Casting Call failed to find a good fit.

The first and third are there because that is how the book is set-up. The Capital Men can afford to be overly Effeminate and they enjoy the Blood sport of the games just as the Roman Elite enjoyed the Colosseum

The Dehumanizing is realistic. A lot of Warriors trained from birth, such as the Spartans and Gladiator Legacy Slaves, tended to be very far from Human when in the combat. The "Career" tributes are trained for the Games. They would disconnect while in said games and fall onto their training and base instincts.

The one true criticism that can be told in it that can't be refuted is them down playing the Mockingjay Pin's significance in the overall story. BUT again that was the Authors choice and that was to cut the time down so that they wouldn't go over budget. Which is why a lot of things were made lesser as well.

Dark Archive

Yeah watching the video I found it poorly reaserched at best with a lot of it debunked already in various places.

Sovereign Court

Azaelas Fayth wrote:
snip.

Obviously, we can all interpret things differently and have a variety of perspectives.

It just seems that this is reasonably well-argued and thought out.

It is interesting, for example, how differently you both view the dehumanisation.

She regards it as unrealistic.
You regard it as realistic.

That essentially boils down to your different perceptions of human nature.

It is interesting that you say, "A lot of Warriors trained from birth, such as the Spartans and Gladiator Legacy Slaves, tended to be very far from Human when in the combat."

But I don't think she was talking about that, she was talking about the fact that these are people who have been damaged in order to become killing machines and that they must have trauma and suchlike within them. That they are still human, and that as damaged humans we might feel greater compassion for them, not less.

(also, I'd be fascinated to see your evidence for Spartan inhumanity.)

Do, here's a question.

Do you agree with her that this is an excellent novel, and an excellent film?

Do you agree that Katniss is a superior portrayal of a 'tough' woman to many others in fiction?

Do you, however, still recognise that the novel and film have minor flaws which you might want to mention in a thoughtful critique?


It is an excellent series both in Novels and Film.

No, Katniss is not superior to many others. A few perhaps. But to most she is equal or inferior. She is however more relate-able to the targeted demographic however.

Most of the Flaws the movie has are do to the breaking from information that is in the Book. The Book has only a few flaws if you look at it from our modern world view and not from a world view similar to that of the book's world.

To the Spartan Inhumanity: A Spartan is more than willing to commit actions, while in combat, that would be viewed as Atrocities and War Crimes in the modern world while not doing so outside of a combat situation.

The thing I was getting at is the information on the Careers outside of the Competition shows them as just like the others in the world outside of the Capital. Whereas inside the Competition they are "Dehumanized".

Being "Damaged" has nothing to do with becoming a Killing Machine. That is a Modern Fallacy. In fact the opposite is true for most cases. It is training and education that causes it. The Careers are trained to win not unlike modern pugilism and sports. Most of them are trained that they are superior to the others in the competition.


For the record, I thought the book was pretty good for what it was and, surprisingly for a novel aimed at preteens, I thought it lent itself very well to intersectional analysis.

I thought the movie was okay, but after the [bubble bubble bubble] wore off, I wondered to myself: how can anyone who hasn't read the book understand this movie? And when discussing the film with people who hadn't read the book, I found many didn't really understand what was going on.

I wanted to go back to the effeminate men thing for a second, though.

So, in the year 2013, which, at least here in the U.S., is probably more pro-effeminate men that at any other point in our nation's history, where do you think we find more openly effeminate men? In the former mining towns of, say, Appalachia, or the among the "decadent elite" of, say, Los Angeles?

I mean, I understand what Ms. Sarkeesian's saying--especially since it's a work of fiction meant for teenagers and you can always make your fantasy worlds more pc than the real one, but, then again, if the world was so pc, they probably wouldn't be forcing 24 teenagers to fight in deadly bloodsports.

Also, I wonder whether Peeta, whose superpowers are an ability to decorate cakes and empathy (much more so than Katniss--playing with gender roles?), passes for an effeminante man in District 12.

Smash Panem Through Worker's Revolution!


Peeta is pretty Effeminate... Though he also has Strength backing that up. Though I know a Guy that literally looks, sounds, and acts feminine. He is literally 5'5" and capable of throwing my ~300 pound self.


So, yeah, what about that, Anita? The male frickin' lead was effeminate, but you couldn't see it 'cuz you don't think effeminate men can be wicked strong! So, sister, who's dealing in sexist tropes now?!?

Anyway, I think today I'm going to put down the book I'm in the middle of and start reading Catching Fire.

Everytime I think about the The Hunger Games I get all emotional and start crying, and now that I know the Big Brother-type is freakin' Donald Sutherland, I know it's going to be awesome!

Smash Panem Through Worker's Revolution!


That is one of my favorite scenes. That and the one before it.

He also doesn't look Effeminate or have the body language. Which is a plus to me.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:
So, sister, who's dealing in sexist tropes now?!?

And therein lies the reason I am switching her off, she does exactly what she accuses other people of.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to watch them all. Armenian chicks are hawt!

(Regina Armustayan, if you're out there, I still love you! Give me a call!)


They are, but that I have to turn the volume off really ruins the immersion.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Interestingly a show over at the escapist has I feel managed to show issues with the game industry better than these kickstarter funded videos

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7044-The-Creepy-Cu ll-of-Female-Protagonists


That guy made a better point than the Sarkeesian videos.
He actually made me laugh whilst making a pretty sore bunch of points, and on a side note, that game 'Remember Me' looks awesome.

So how does this argument stack up in the age of Fallout and Skyrim and Dragon Age, and Mass Effect, and.. well all these games where you just make up the protagonist any way you want, male OR female (or does Gender actually matter when your character isn't even human? Does being a Male or Female Arcturian Worm-Monkey count?)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

After watching some of these videos (I don't even recognize like half of the pop culture stuff and, sadly, The Hunger Games seems to be the only book she's talking about) my final appraisal is:

Man, is she boring.


In case anyone is interested, here is what an interesting feminist on pop culture sounds like.

Although not as hawt.


Don Juan de Doodlebug wrote:

2nd EDIT: Armenian chicks are hawt!!

For some reason this got me thinking about this Persian girl I knew from Turkey when I was in college. She had the most beautiful caramel colored skin.

Dark Archive

Shifty wrote:

That guy made a better point than the Sarkeesian videos.

He actually made me laugh whilst making a pretty sore bunch of points, and on a side note, that game 'Remember Me' looks awesome.

So how does this argument stack up in the age of Fallout and Skyrim and Dragon Age, and Mass Effect, and.. well all these games where you just make up the protagonist any way you want, male OR female (or does Gender actually matter when your character isn't even human? Does being a Male or Female Arcturian Worm-Monkey count?)

I could be mistaken but it seems in most those games (If not all) the default is assumed to be the male version.


That is because they are typically made by male devs aimed at male players.

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

......aaaaand we come full circle back to the point of all this.......

It's a cyclical thing. Games are being made by men, for men. Women are discouraged and excluded from the gaming industry and gaming in general because they aren't being considered in design. They aren't being considered in design because of the "fact" that women just "aren't interested" - -a fact that is difficult to combat when such a high proportion of game devs are men who don't think there's a problem with the status quo. And of course so many people on the internet who agree with them.

Also, Shifty: I tend not to consider those games with a customisable lead character in these conversations, primarily because the choice of gender generally becomes as irrelevant as the choice of clothing colour. Not that this is a bad thing, but that it's looking at the wrong sort of thing. Kind of like looking at Tetris and claiming it's a good (or bad) example for protagonists in games. Apples to oranges, in other words. You should be looking at the number of games with only a female protagonist to only a male protagonist, and the depiction therein.

I feel like I'm repeating myself on this matter. Again.


Actually it is typically because Women don't go into the Field and the Devs design games they would like to play.

What is interesting is most of the Games that don't have Female Protagonists are typically to avoid other Cliches. Such as Uncharted with a Female would be called a rip off of Tomb Raider even before it was released, well more than it is now at least. It also wouldn't have as many Fans as it does now.

And some games having a Female Protagonists doesn't fit for Story Reasons and would require a drastic story change. Shadow Walker is a good example. The Female Storyline is longer and different from the Male simply because of it being based on Medieval Culture.

NOTE: Uncharted was called Tomb Raider with a Male Lead by a lot of critics even before its release...

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Aaaaand why don't women go into the industry?

If women aren't interested in games, they're unlikely to go into gaming...

If women aren't marketed to (and in fact are pushed away from gaming due to various factors, such as the ones Ms. Sarkeesian talks about), they're unlikely to become interested in games...

Even if they ARE still interested, there's all sorts of shit awaiting them there...

And in the meantime the suits in AAA companies believe that women aren't a major part of their market and that women protagonists won't sell games.

ugh yeah I should have just kept up my decision to avoid all these threads from now on, I think.


Actually most off the reasons why the Female Protagonist Games don't get as much Advertising is simply because most can't afford the Advertising.

Have you heard of Midnight's Kiss? No? Why? It's advertising budget was 100$ after they paid everything they had to. The Ironic Part? The Project was part of a Major Company. The one who gave them their budget was a Woman. She didn't feel it would sell and gave them such a small budget they had to find workarounds constantly just to get what they wanted done and in the game.

Most of the AAA Companies in Gaming are more interested in making profits. That means marketing with what has proven successful. Those that actually push the envelope don't sell mainly because they can't afford to market.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Alice Margatroid wrote:

Aaaaand why don't women go into the industry?

If women aren't interested in games, they're unlikely to go into gaming...

If women aren't marketed to (and in fact are pushed away from gaming due to various factors, such as the ones Ms. Sarkeesian talks about), they're unlikely to become interested in games...

Even if they ARE still interested, there's all sorts of s~@* awaiting them there...

You missed the most recent one ...

Alice Margatroid wrote:
And in the meantime the suits in AAA companies believe that women aren't a major part of their market and that women protagonists won't sell games.

Even when there is ample evidence to the contrary? (Bayonetta, Lara Croft, Samus Aran, etc?)

Alice Margatroid wrote:
ugh yeah I should have just kept up my decision to avoid all these threads from now on, I think.

/sorry

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Most of the AAA Companies in Gaming are more interested in making profits. That means marketing with what has proven successful. Those that actually push the envelope don't sell mainly because they can't afford to market.

Tomb Raider didn't sell?

Azaelas Fayth wrote:
Actually most off the reasons why the Female Protagonist Games don't get as much Advertising is simply because most can't afford the Advertising.

Article supporting this point.


That one fits into the Sex Appeal Category.

I think Samus Aran is one of the Few Non-Sex Appeal Female Protagonists that is well selling.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Azaelas Fayth wrote:
That one fits into the Sex Appeal Category.

Ah, but the "Sex Appeal Catagory" (if not overdone) is a way to get Female Protagonists published. My understanding, is that Lara Croft was quite popular with female gamers - at least in her earlier incarnations.

Sometimes progress has to move in "baby steps."

Liberty's Edge

I was reading about that incident this morning, Fyre. :( The good thing to take away from it is the reaction; it's not being laughed off or ignored anymore. Yay!

And yeah, despite all evidence to the contrary, it's one of those "realities" that aren't so real -- this article calls it "industry accepted wisdom". Logically speaking it makes no sense! It's so easy to debunk it from many many fronts. And yet......

Another article I read today about some women expressing why they're in the industry and their experiences. Note that one of the women on the panel is one of those who left the IGDA over that stuff... :|

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Alice Margatroid wrote:
I was reading about that incident this morning, Fyre. :( The good thing to take away from it is the reaction; it's not being laughed off or ignored anymore. Yay!

As I said above: "Sometimes progress has to move in 'baby steps'."


I think the Stupidest thing that hurt the Women in Gaming Side was a Female Developer going on a cussing fit simply because a Middle Eastern Inspired Game had (2) Belly Dancers at their Booth the rest of their 10 Models were Men in Middle Eastern Dress. & the Game actually has a Female Protagonist.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Azaelas Fayth wrote:
I think the Stupidest thing that hurt the Women in Gaming Side was a Female Developer going on a cussing fit simply because a Middle Eastern Inspired Game had (2) Belly Dancers at their Booth the rest of their 10 Models were Men in Middle Eastern Dress. & the Game actually has a Female Protagonist.

I can see where that would be unhelpful. :(


It also adds to the fact that she got the Game Boycotted by A LOT of gamers. The Company went under and got bought out. & the game was excellent. It literally had a story that rivals most others. It literally has 40+ Hours of content. It is open sandbox & Stealth focused. Literally think Infamous but everything is open to you.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Azaelas Fayth wrote:
It also adds to the fact that she got the Game Boycotted by A LOT of gamers. The Company went under and got bought out. & the game was excellent. It literally had a story that rivals most others. It literally has 40+ Hours of content. It is open sandbox & Stealth focused. Literally think Infamous but everything is open to you.

Good to know that it is not only men who can be immature.

Of course, I can also remember when "Booth Babes" were all but required at shows like E3.

301 to 350 of 613 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Entertainment / Video Games / Tropes vs. Women in Video Games Kickstarter -- and the hate it's received All Messageboards