I couldn't decide where to put this thread so it ended up here, Becuase while about video games, the subject is more definitely about about the social issues in it.
So a friend of mine that is a game programmer posted a video on my Facebook.
Anita Sarkeesian’s Damsel in Distress: Part 1 - Tropes vs Women in Video Games
I heard all about this a few month ago or so. Didn't really pay attention, I didn't care if she made a video or not, I would check it out to see what kind of opinions are to be had on the subject. Also keep in mind through most of this, that gaming in general was marketed at boys and teens, for the last few decades.
But wow this kind of threw me for a loop, I mean there's opinions then there's lies or twisting the truth to make you seem better or make the subject worse than it actually is.
I understand where shes coming from but she omits the facts that go into this trope. She constantly keeps saying "Women are objects for the men to play with" Um, WHAT?
Mario and Peach are in a "relationship" least that's the idea I get from the trope, or you're trying to save a loved one. I've never played a Mario game and went, "You know I need to go get back the princess from Bowser because shes so weak and stupid and have my way with her" More of a "Awe damn Bowser took Peach because she is the princess of the Kingdom he wants to rule, and Mario likes her so hes going to save her"
She glosses over there is tons of games that you try to save your brother or buddy, because they detract from her agenda. Seriously I understand some of the old games were limited and could only do so much, so much is implied in graphics.
As for Zelda, again a love story to a part, I've never once looked down at either of these characters because they are girls as less able, but the video depicts men as "Only wanting the object i.e. girl" The motivation of the character isn't I want my woman back, its I love her therefore I'll fight for her. If the woman was just a prize or object, then wouldn't it be just as easy to go get another? Why is X girl character worth so much to X main guy character.
Her comments about how this awesome game was in development but they cannibalized it and made it a "Male hormone trip", this happens a lot in the game industry. They do this to save money and time, It so happened a character that RARE was making would fit nicely in a Starfox game, so Nintendo buys the assets from RARE, and puts their own spin on the character, to fit it in with the TITLE CHARACTER of the game, and? Whats so bad about that, RARE probably didn't feel the game was going to do as well as the offer from Nintendo, nothing to do with a the character being a girl.
As for the Double Dragon thing, really? Would it have been better if the guy was a girl that punched her in the stomach? Does it make it more 'right'? I mean she gets punched once the characters get punched much more then that. As for the panties comment, what relevance does it have?
I don't know this just pressed my buttons bad, I was hoping her little series would actually be insightful or interesting, but instead it feels like propaganda and reverse sexism. Also take note that up until recently homosexual relations were a big taboo in most cultures, and is still a hot button topic, so if you're trying to appeal to a broader range of players a male/female relations is usually a safer option, and since most games are targeted at guys in general. Where in her assessment that it's just because they are weak girls, is wrong.
A great line to describe this, from Chronotrigger:
Frog: "This is no ordinary woman, meet the magician, Flea."
Flea: "What the...? Hey, I'm a GUY!!"
Flea: "Male....Female...what does it matter? Power is beautiful, and I've got the power!"
Edited, Mar 7th 2013 9:18pm by BeanX