Jimquisition: Gamer Guys

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT
 

Biceps... Muscular Chests...Calves...

Sorry what were we taking about?

... Great vid Jim!

At first I didn't get the satire because I thought he was being serious and making an excellent point. Back in the NES/SNES days the "dudebros" thought gaming was for nerds, and that was fine by me. Then they started picking up the habit and now gaming has devolved into noting but mindless PvP crap because the dubebros don't care about games, they just want to pwn newbs with there massive deeps.

So I'm going to pretend this video is a serious one and applaud it for showing how "Fake gamer guys" are a bigger threat to our hobby than "Fake gamer girls". Death to competitive multilayer, it lowers the bar for all gaming. Let that moronic caveman mentality stay on the football field. Co-op or SP only please.

cthulhuspawn82:
So I'm going to pretend this video is a serious one and applaud it for showing how "Fake gamer guys" are a bigger threat to our hobby than "Fake gamer girls". Death to competitive multilayer, it lowers the bar for all gaming. Let that moronic caveman mentality stay on the football field. Co-op or SP only please.

The video works on so many levels. Just more of Jim's brilliance.

Rebel_Raven:

Why ya gotta keep Zelda in the role of getting kidnapped? Are you saying it's impossible for Zelda to be the hero?

If she were well written as the hero of her own legend, she could pull it off without being mary sue.

A gender select Link would be ok, I guess, but I think Zelda as a hero would be more pallatable for me.

Ultimately, a big theme in the underlying mythos is that the same basic series of events happens time and again (though there are lots of arguments regarding the timeline, one thing is pretty consistent -- that Skyward Sword is the first game chronologically, and that Demise's curse is likely responsible for the whole repetition throughout history). I may be forgetting something, but I can't think of anything that says that the core characters in that particular story have to be any particular gender, just fill their specific positions. There's nothing that says that next time around it can't be Prince Zelig (with the blood of the goddess / triforce of wisdom) being taken and ultimately saved by Lana (with the spirit of the hero / triforce of courage).

What you are suggesting is breaking the entire "doomed to repeat itself" scenario because gender complaints. But the repetition of that scenario is core to the series.

Schadrach:

Rebel_Raven:

Why ya gotta keep Zelda in the role of getting kidnapped? Are you saying it's impossible for Zelda to be the hero?

If she were well written as the hero of her own legend, she could pull it off without being mary sue.

A gender select Link would be ok, I guess, but I think Zelda as a hero would be more pallatable for me.

Ultimately, a big theme in the underlying mythos is that the same basic series of events happens time and again (though there are lots of arguments regarding the timeline, one thing is pretty consistent -- that Skyward Sword is the first game chronologically, and that Demise's curse is likely responsible for the whole repetition throughout history). I may be forgetting something, but I can't think of anything that says that the core characters in that particular story have to be any particular gender, just fill their specific positions. There's nothing that says that next time around it can't be Prince Zelig (with the blood of the goddess / triforce of wisdom) being taken and ultimately saved by Lana (with the spirit of the hero / triforce of courage).

What you are suggesting is breaking the entire "doomed to repeat itself" scenario because gender complaints. But the repetition of that scenario is core to the series.

Not really gender complaints since you're open to gender swaps, rather I'd like to see/play as Zelda in action on her own outside of smash bros. :P

Doomed to repeat itself doesn't mean it happens the exct same way every time, does it? Variations, maybe like a plot revolving around Zelda's escape to find Link, while Link tries to get to her in a dual adventure game that can be played like a traditional LoZ Game, Zelda's Escape, or a switching perspective, maybe, culminating in them meeting up, then going to battle Gannon.

Of course it could take part in Zelda's time as Shiek, or Tetra in something of a prequel?

Oh, the game could mix ideas! You're Zelda resisting capture, possibly with an alter ego, but eventually, inevitably she gets captured (as heroes tend to be) then she attempts to free herself while Link tries to free her.

But honestly, it's up to nintendo if, and how they handle a Zelda game, or if they simply gender swap. Either way, they're shaking things up if they do, and I'd appreciate it.

tklivory:
Thank you, Jim. Though this issue has more awareness these days, it is still a problem. I'm glad there seem to be so many people who seem genuinely convinced that this is not a problem anymore, but I would venture a guess most of these respondents are male who truly do not personally have an issue with this (which is fantastic).

I see this problem online, in video games, in comic books, in certain genres for movies and books... In many places. Someone wanted examples, and I gave up mentally cataloging all details of what's happened to me because they all just became more of the same over time.

Is it better than five years ago, ten years ago? Yes. But in the meantime, over the course of several years, I have opted to give up on any multiplayer outside of Assassin's Creed, physically going to video game stores, and engaging in conversations with people I don't know well about the things I love and am passionate about. I've been asked "oh, your boyfriend plays it, right?", "Well, yeah, but most girls pretty much play only Final Fantasy, don't they?", and "Oh, well, you just liked Avengers because of the actors, right?" more than once, from several different people.

And I have a pretty easy time of it compared with many of the other gamers I know who happen to be female, since I work in IT. I literally do not know a female gamer of my acquaintance who has not had condescension or antagonism directed towards her for playing in that playground (oh, unless they 'just' played Farmville or SIMS - those are fine for a girl to like. It's worse for those whose primary enjoyments are FPS or Sports games.)

By this point, my habits have been formed, and it would take a lot to convince me to change them simply because "it's better now." I hope the next generation of gamers who happen to be female reap the benefits of this time in which more guys respond with "What? This is still a problem?" than "Well, of course girls don't really mean it!"

But please don't dismiss the experiences of those who have withdrawn from a community because you haven't seen it yourself. It's out there. It has hurt people. And dismissing it should not be your first instinct.

I wonder how much if this is regional, as in it's an issue in the US but since most if not all gaming sites are based in the US and report on US issues it gets displayed as a world wide issue rather than a local one. Reason I wonder is that I know a few gamers that are girls, both online and off, and it's never been an issue in our groups but the girls have experienced it often from American's (not always though). What we have here isn't just gamers and non gamers, but rather gamers and non gamers in god knows how many nations with varying degrees of acceptance and social stigma. I think this year at the EB expo I'll pay a closer attention to who's at the expo, from memory there were girls there and there weren't any issues/they weren't being harassed from what I saw but I wasn't paying attention. Sorry to hear you've had bad experiences, hope that changes soon.

I think you're all missing the biggest issue: Some think it's about these frat boys that play Call of Duty and "think they're gamers", and some think it's about how we disrespect girls who "act like they're gamers" when in fact we've been gaming for so much longer. It's not about either of those in my eyes: It's about how no matter what game you're playing, even if it's Farmville, WE. ARE. ALL. GAMERS.

We ridicule men and women by hammering them with questions about obscure games they'd never know about just to prove that we're better gamers than them. We blame them for how gaming has "degraded". Yet they're not the problem. The companies make the decision to release games that cater only to them, not to hardcore RPG players like most on here seem to be. There are, however, games still coming out for those folks.

We need to stop shoveling blame onto one another, in some desperate grab for the "Good ol' days". We have indie companies gladly filling this role, and hardcore games like Dark Souls that hit their target audience and become successes. We also need to stop being exclusionary. We hated it when it was happening to us, now we're just doing the same thing we had done to us, when we fought to make it where gaming would be seen as a healthy, enjoyable hobby.

We have it pretty damn good now folks, and there are enough companies and genres to where everyone can get what they want. Be it the twitch gamer that loves shooters, the methodical grinders that play RPGs, or the strategy gamer that have night terrors about unit costs, we're all gamers, and there's enough of this digital pie to go around. If anything, we should be thanking them, because things like Kickstarter Games and Retro Indie Games exist because of the popularity they brought with them. I dare argue that they made things even more awesome for us and made the genre evolve even further.

At least be kind enough to give me a head start before you flame me. I'm allergic to death.

I always failed to see the point of elitism in hobbies or media preferences. Sure, I jokingly sometimes play the elitist, but I've never understood those who literally feel assaulted by the fact that some people do not fit their idea of what a (in this case, but it applies to many passtimes) gamer should be. Why someone should give a tin shit about that while simultaneously tolerating sexist, homophobic, and racist people is beyond me. If someone wants to call themselves a gamer because they play Farmville, let them. If someone wants to cosplay as a character because they like how they look, not because a particular affinity for the character or the media they come from, how does that harm you? I consider myself a football fan, but I don't know most of the players, I don't know how each team measure up, and I don't know the stats for each team. I only pay attention to the teams and players I like, and that fact means that someone could call me a "fake football fan" despite the fact I enjoy the game. There are no qualifications to be a gamer. Deal with it. Fake gamers are much less concerning than all the crap that actually does affect the community.

Zachary Amaranth:

Lightknight:
Well, our culture hasn't exactly been known for social aptness, particularly around women. We do have extremely anti-social or just plain awkward members in our ranks.

Well, a couple problems there:

1. This isn't the same culture anymore. Whether or not you (or anyone else) likes it, video games have developed into a much larger community.

Ok? I'm not sure how this relates to my comments that nerd culture includes a non-trivial number of socially inept individuals. The expansion of ranks only serves to dilute the proportions, not remove them.

2. This is at the same time we're seeking legitimacy from the mainstream. And since you think women should expect gamers to behave like hostile basement-dwelling manchildren, I expect you agree that gamers should at the same time expect to be treated as hostile, basement-dwelling manchildren. I mean, it's only reasonable, right? I hope you've never been one of those folks to act like we should have legitimacy.

? I did not say that. I was merely explaining why several odd interactions would happen, not that everything that happened was somehow ok and to be accepted. Don't read into social commentary as justification.

Numbered again for my sanity:

1. You just spent two paragraphs excusing, explaining and justifying a behaviour you don't believe is actually prevalent?

Seeing as you mistook my meaning to be a justification of sexual harrassment then I'm going to assume my clarification on my intention of the social commentary to annul the reasoning behind this point.

2. Examples have been given frequently, including this thread. I'm always wary of people who ask for evidence after evidence has been given. Perhaps you really did just saunter into the thread, but it seems suspect. Especially when you're already making excuses for the behaviour.

So no, you don't have evidence of events in which people have behaved innappropriately or said ridiculous stuff but no information regarding the prevalence of the mindset. I agree that anywhere it happens is a problem and, frankly, stupid. But I'm trying to figure out if this is a broad problem with a mainstream mindset or if we're looking at smaller cases and ballooning them. That's an important question to ask and asking it shouldn't make me out to be some kind of anti-woman person, it just makes me inquisitive. Does that make better sense?

I'd also attest that the continuation of this thread largely hinges on such a mentality. I'm not sure what else people are protesting. Well, most people. Some people seem to be trying to skirt it.

I'm not sure what this point is supposed to be. Are you saying that the continued discussion in this thread is ipso facto evidence of a larger trend against women in gaming? I see some discussion on people being frustrated about individuals being 'fakers' rather than individuals who are genuinely interested in our culture. While I think that's nonsense I wouldn't necessarily equate that to them hating all women entries. But to take it a step further and to actually start quizing people on their nerd knowledge is nonsense. Especially when one of the things that make us nerds is devotion to specific sub categories. Also, you've got to start somewhere. Some people are going to be new nerds. To believe them not knowing information that you know is just silly. It's like a person finding that they love sushi and then someone claims they don't because they've never had a particular kind of sushi.

Was kinda hoping to see Jim in drag again. :D

It's not really satire when the supposedly 'absurd' occurrences are pretty commonplace.

Geek-chic is still a thing - a ridiculous thing, where men now try to dress as some bizarre idealised version of the same tiny bespectacled kid we all laughed at and even bullied for no reason in school. I feel bad that we locked Joel in a closet, but apparently my old classmates now want to dress like him.

Youtube personalities do base their video-game related channels entirely on their own looks/loud online persona - and, in rare cases, charisma - rather than their actual knowledge of the industry. Sorry to be 'elitist', but I'd still rather watch Sterling than PewDiePie, even if I disagree with Sterling half of the time.

I don't know if I'd play Tomb Raider if it was Nathan Drake in a man-thong, but I wouldn't begrudge the fact that it was supposedly meant to 'appeal' to women. That's what, well, Boys Love manga and VNs are for. Apparently. I wouldn't know.

Of course, I don't have the right to tell people what they should or shouldn't watch, but when Sterling brings up the supposedly 'absurd alternate reality' of men using their looks to gain fame, wealth and popularity, I sort of wonder what planet he's living on where, apparently, male models don't exist. And, again, sorry to be elitist, but if I want information or news on my particular hobby, I'm going to trust someone who seems to have extensive knowledge in that subject rather than a model. It has nothing to do with them as people - I don't know them - and everything to do with their careers. One is modelling, the other is...what exactly is Sterling's job?

And as for obnoxious 'guy gamers' on Xbox Live...uh...can I have access to the VIP servers Sterling uses? Apparently he doesn't have to deal with the same riff-raff as I do.

I realise that I'm just being pedantic, and that this video is aimed at people who get bizarrely outraged at the idea of attractive people being successful for being attractive etc. but this whole video just goes straight over my head because everything he mentions actually exists.

WaitWHAT:
Y'know what? Imagine if there were such things as fake gamer girls and everyone integrated them into the community anyway! That way, the 'real' geeks would be accepted without protest, and the 'fake' ones would be forced to suffer an eternity of desperately pretending to enjoy something they don't.

image

EDIT:

Monxeroth:
image

B-b-baka Jim!
I-it's not like i..i enjoyed the..episode or anything...stupid!

This does strange things to my undercarriage. But....please continue.

Oh WaitWHAT, you're such a naughty feller ;)

As for the video, yeah really amusing. I remain on the fence as to the existence of these "fake gamer girls" but certainly, I don't think we should be scrutinising everyone to see if they're allowed into our specialised club. What are we? The ever so Glorious PC Gaming Master Race? :P

Funny thing to me is that it is not any where nearly as "satirical" as it is supposed to be. I can see rationalization for loathing toward the dudebro "hardcore" FPS/WoW gamer archetype that created this massive influx and social acceptance towards gaming and brought with it a far worse result.

But OT, I find it somewhat messed up that for someone who has preached that "we cant even discuss the topic of equality in gaming without someone getting hostile and offended" to constantly harp and essentially demand acceptance of their personal position as the only possible correct one. Its like most of those amongst the faux enlightenment crowd. You have to wonder who they are trying to convince.. you or themselves

Edit: if you DO decide to go back to the sarcasta-verse, perhaps you should do it right complete with the prerequisite black goatee.

image

Imma just saiyan

Rebel_Raven:

Funny, you say no one's against it, but here you are saying you're against it since it makes no sense in game, and she'd become mary sue, and she'd be uninteresting. That's very much against Zelda having a more heroic role as the protagonist.
And lets not forget the comments section on that article, here.

Shiek? Tetra? Both combat capable Zeldas in the mythos of the game. Zelda helped fight now and then actively as herself, especially in fights vs Gannon.

How does it make sense that she's as powerful as all that, yet gets kidnapped in nearly every game? How wise is it to leave yourself vulnerable to being kidnapped in the first place, or not have people won over so you have a legion of people who volunteeer to, or insist on defending you? It's a bit of a long standing peeve of mine with "intelligent" people in games, tv, and movies. They seem to know everything but how to defend themselves.

Why ya gotta keep Zelda in the role of getting kidnapped? Are you saying it's impossible for Zelda to be the hero?

If she were well written as the hero of her own legend, she could pull it off without being mary sue.

A gender select Link would be ok, I guess, but I think Zelda as a hero would be more pallatable for me.

Uhm... No?

Maybe I see a character for something besides the one time they're captured, particularly when I see Zelda as this strong progressive woman that's a nuclear threat who has so much power as to create the Master Sword and give it to her Hylian Hero that the gender doesn't matter to me. Maybe instead of just whining "Oh she's captured, she's now useless" you could see that she never gives up on her realm and even as a princess with constraints, she finds ways to help you, the player, in completing the quest.

And she's fought in four games IIRC, while people also ignore how Midna helped out Link so much that it was basically her game far more than the listless Link. Then people forget that she was playable in the CD-i games and those sucked.

All you seem intent on doing is saying "Damsel = useless" based on what... A video from a media critic who just barely got into the game industry but markets herself as a gamer?

Honestly, what makes Zelda being playable so much different than having an option of a female Link? It's the same difference without changing the core mythos.

Gindil:

Rebel_Raven:

Funny, you say no one's against it, but here you are saying you're against it since it makes no sense in game, and she'd become mary sue, and she'd be uninteresting. That's very much against Zelda having a more heroic role as the protagonist.
And lets not forget the comments section on that article, here.

Shiek? Tetra? Both combat capable Zeldas in the mythos of the game. Zelda helped fight now and then actively as herself, especially in fights vs Gannon.

How does it make sense that she's as powerful as all that, yet gets kidnapped in nearly every game? How wise is it to leave yourself vulnerable to being kidnapped in the first place, or not have people won over so you have a legion of people who volunteeer to, or insist on defending you? It's a bit of a long standing peeve of mine with "intelligent" people in games, tv, and movies. They seem to know everything but how to defend themselves.

Why ya gotta keep Zelda in the role of getting kidnapped? Are you saying it's impossible for Zelda to be the hero?

If she were well written as the hero of her own legend, she could pull it off without being mary sue.

A gender select Link would be ok, I guess, but I think Zelda as a hero would be more pallatable for me.

Uhm... No?

Maybe I see a character for something besides the one time they're captured, particularly when I see Zelda as this strong progressive woman that's a nuclear threat who has so much power as to create the Master Sword and give it to her Hylian Hero that the gender doesn't matter to me. Maybe instead of just whining "Oh she's captured, she's now useless" you could see that she never gives up on her realm and even as a princess with constraints, she finds ways to help you, the player, in completing the quest.

And she's fought in four games IIRC, while people also ignore how Midna helped out Link so much that it was basically her game far more than the listless Link. Then people forget that she was playable in the CD-i games and those sucked.

All you seem intent on doing is saying "Damsel = useless" based on what... A video from a media critic who just barely got into the game industry but markets herself as a gamer?

Honestly, what makes Zelda being playable so much different than having an option of a female Link? It's the same difference without changing the core mythos.

Uhm, yes? You said no one is against the idea of Zelda having her own game, and yet here you are, being against it?

Really? we're involving "her?" This is why we can't have civil conversations, and I'm being dead serious. It's rediculous!

No, my opinions aren't based on she who shalt not be named lest the entire conversation derail into personal attacks on her.
Is it impossible to people that others might have reached a similar conclusion without her input? Yes, I've seen her videos, and they didn't really change a damn thing for me save enlighten me on Dinosaur Planet's fate as an example of something I bloody well hate in the game industry.

Off camera rulership doesn't count for me, nevermind off camera actions period.
Even if it -did- count, the idyllic worlds of peace with little to no military prepared to do anything more than one guy with a wooden sword, even with a chunk of triforce, can do is really -bad- leadership to me. I don't care how long peace has gone on, if a kingdom lacks a decent army, it's a failure. It doesn't have to be personally led by the ruler, there can be delegation to someone who can make an army worth a damn.
If the princess were really so beloved, there'd be an army of volunteers trying to rescue her at the least, and not just one guy. There'd be people training to be her bodyguard to keep her safe beyond, ya kknow, her one hero. Where's the fanatics trying to save her along with Link?
Why has the kingdom seemingly given up on Zelda when she gets captured? Why is there no more than one champion? Is she really thought of that poorly that no one, by hire, by volunteer, or by any reason, doesn't want to be there to defend her, and get better in preparation of it?
But I guess that's the curse, isn't it?

Lets not forget that the instant she drops disguise, she's captured. Regardless of anything she's done before. Regardless of all her power you boast she has. She's utterly helpless in the face of being captured, and generally does nothing until the end. It's irritating. I've always found it irritating when things like that happen. Me, personally, with no input from others.
I don't believe in power I don't see in action, or better yet, control via a playable character. Actions speak louder than words. Being playable speaks louder than being an NPC. Seeing that the evbents don't back up the boasts makes those boasts ring false with me.

It's ALWAYS been a peeve of mine that the wisest, most intelligent of people in media like TV shows, movies, and games are still dumb enough to not be able to defend themselves, either personally, or by having others at the ready, or what have you.
This is compounded by the fact that if they know they're a frikking target (I.E. being important to the society in any way), and it's compounded moreover when they continually ignore the threat over and over again!

Heck, considering it's Link who saves Zelda time, and time again, it seems more reasonable that -he's- the real threat that needs to be kidnapped, and rendered helpless. Seriously, one guy curbstomps an army, plus the puzzles, and he's left alone consistently to fight in his own element to come out on top time and time again? That's pretty dumb villainy there. It's not like the person kidnapped over and over again is going to be able to resist being captured anyhow, right? Go for that target second.
But I guess that's the curse isn't it?

Being temporary help isn't particularly awesome to me. An NPC is an NPC to me. No NPC can rival a player character for me. All it can do is make me wish I could be that NPC.
NPCs dont get the spotlight, they're shunted off into the background, or off stage completely while the playabale character gets things done. Playable characters do get the spotlight since nothing gets done to solve the problems without the playable characters.

There's prolly a plethora of reasons people forgot about the CD-I games.

So, why Zelda instead of gender swaps? What does it do for -Zelda- here if we just gender swap? Male, female, Zelda's role is the same, time, and time again with little variation.

Even gender swapped, Link is Link. Link will likely play the exact same regardless of gender. Possibly more annoying is that gender won't likely play any real role in the story. It'll likely just be link as a girl, not really being treated diffirently than typical link. Sure that's something akin to equality, but what's the point of a gender swap if it's so shallow to the point that nothing else has changed?

I'd like a female protagonist in a Zelda game to be a somewhat meaningful change, here, gender issues aside. Wouldn't you?

...I'm suddenly remided of Shamus's videos...where he goes...crazy for the purpose of entertainment and laughter.

Regardless.

LOBSTERCLAWS! :D~
...

LOBSTERCLAWS!

Fake gamers (which are not just girls, that's just the easy target) really have nothing to do with gaming itself really. It only affects the gamers themselves. They don't play games with anything like the kind of veracity that would incite the industry Jim loves to lambast to cater to their tastes (whatever the heck those are).
It's more the sense of camaraderie, of comradeship with gamers they seek. Nowadays those groups are seen not as the ostracized social leftovers, but a strong social demo in and of itself. We're catered to in other industries with some of the choicest and well-assembled ways by gamers in other industries, because people whose hobby is partaking of media know how to shape a product to appeal to the senses. A lot of people want that kind of love, but they don't understand how to get it.
The problem is that this kin of attention was never addressed to people who get with it for it's own sake. You can't be part of the gamer crowd just by playing games and buying the t-shirts; Contrary to a lot of arguments, supporting the industry is not what it's about. There were gamers before games were an industrial force, and just buying the NES Pad belt buckle and wearing proudly does not mean that it's a symbol that represents you any more than doing so with sergeant stripes does.
Playing games doesn't qualify you either, not anymore. It's a new era with a class of games targeted for the everyman, and everyman that plays them is not the gamer the belt buckle was meant for.
You have to adjust your attitude. You have to get into the details of the game instead of 'god, just enjoy it'-ing. You gotta try games that might suck, or have been said to suck, or are not similar to the games you usually play. You have to know something about aspects in the games you do play that isn't presented in the games you do play. Notice none of this requires arbitrary obscure knowledge, just a little more effort than buying a bastaging mario cap. I have no problem with people who want to be gamers now that it's popular, but you do have to earn your stripes.
(the people who make bastaging mario caps have no problem with taking 'fake' gamers' money either, but don't think for a second they'd call you the real deal just based on that.)

Monxeroth:

WaitWHAT:
"Guys leading me on with their muscular buns and slick calf muscles."
"using their supple, smooth bodies and elegant nipples to sell themselves on sex appeal"

Jim....it's time for you to come out of there.

image

(<3)

OT: Well, I didn't think that this was such a problem. I'd've thought that everyone could get on nicely, liking the things they like and peacefully letting others do the same. But if Jim's having to do a video on it, I may well have been wrong.

Even i wouldnt fit in there...

I probably could. Then again I'm tiny as fuck. Great when you don't want to be notice also all the spaces you could fit in. It is wonderful especially when you want to frighten anyone. Anyway all this talk about sex is boring.

Jimothy Sterling:
Jimquisition travels to another time and another place, examining a world taken over by gamer guys and their testosterone-addled inanity. Something must be done!

Excellent video Jim! As always, I thank the gods for you. ^^

Aside from that, I just wanted to say that I got a real kick out of seeing several things I've said in the past visualized in this episode. This episode is particularly awesome. Well done.

So apparently Jim doesn't know about Female Hypoagency cause he doesn't read too much.

Lets GirlWritesWhat handle this, cause i will assume that no one will hear me cause i am supposedly a "male gamer in its basement" and therefore biased for no apparent buttfucking reason, so i will let her explain for you kiddies:

That little clip at the end of the rant with the prawn on a white background and piano music was hilarious.

JellySlimerMan:
So apparently Jim doesn't know about Female Hypoagency cause he doesn't read too much.

Lets GirlWritesWhat handle this, cause i will assume that no one will hear me cause i am supposedly a "male gamer in its basement" and therefore biased for no apparent buttfucking reason, so i will let her explain for you kiddies:

One of her less wooden presentations, IMO. Still pretty stiff, though. It's hard to sit through her videos most times, and I commend people that do regularly.

The vid barely touches on videogames, and videogame culture which this thread is about.

The largest point seems to be that women want to be included for a safety/control factor, and it may be true for some women, but lets not pretend all of them are like that. I can't deny it happens just because that's the way it is because that's the way -humans- are wired.
We all want inclusion when all is said and done. When there's a group having fun, and we're not having as much fun, we want in. Guys, and gals will both play the poser to try and get in.
That isn't to say all of them are going to be posers. They could be genuinely interested rookies, or knowledgeable people who have flown under the radar.
To be included, representation is going to be appreciated, and clammored for if it's felt lacking.

Rebel_Raven:

One of her less wooden presentations, IMO. Still pretty stiff, though. It's hard to sit through her videos most times, and I commend people that do regularly.

The vid barely touches on videogames, and videogame culture which this thread is about.

The largest point seems to be that women want to be included for a safety/control factor, and it may be true for some women, but lets not pretend all of them are like that. I can't deny it happens just because that's the way it is because that's the way -humans- are wired.
We all want inclusion when all is said and done. When there's a group having fun, and we're not having as much fun, we want in. Guys, and gals will both play the poser to try and get in.
That isn't to say all of them are going to be posers. They could be genuinely interested rookies, or knowledgeable people who have flown under the radar.
To be included, representation is going to be appreciated, and clammored for if it's felt lacking.

The thread is about females taking over gaming via abusing the fact they are females and can get away with everything they do thanks to Double Standards at work (well, Female Hypoagency technically). And we can't say anything wrong about them cause, you know, saying that she has her hair on fire would be sexist, no matter how true that might be. Shining examples of this?:

image

I remember MovieBob (back when he was still sane) mentioning that gaming needs to clean its image, due to a bunch of assholes making us look bad.

GAME OVERTHINKER V33: Building a Better Gamer

But now the assholes of yesterday are gone, replaced by one similar in every single way (saying insults, whining about everyone but himself is to blame for the failure of the campaign, using racial/gender slurs, so on and so forth. We have seen it before) except....they are females now. And we can't do the same we did before to males this time cause......they are females? what is the difference here? an asshole is an asshole no matter what gender you are....except not for Jim and everyone else.

JellySlimerMan:

Rebel_Raven:

One of her less wooden presentations, IMO. Still pretty stiff, though. It's hard to sit through her videos most times, and I commend people that do regularly.

The vid barely touches on videogames, and videogame culture which this thread is about.

The largest point seems to be that women want to be included for a safety/control factor, and it may be true for some women, but lets not pretend all of them are like that. I can't deny it happens just because that's the way it is because that's the way -humans- are wired.
We all want inclusion when all is said and done. When there's a group having fun, and we're not having as much fun, we want in. Guys, and gals will both play the poser to try and get in.
That isn't to say all of them are going to be posers. They could be genuinely interested rookies, or knowledgeable people who have flown under the radar.
To be included, representation is going to be appreciated, and clammored for if it's felt lacking.

The thread is about females taking over gaming via abusing the fact they are females and can get away with everything they do thanks to Double Standards at work (well, Female Hypoagency technically). And we can't say anything wrong about them cause, you know, saying that she has her hair on fire would be sexist, no matter how true that might be. Shining examples of this?:

image

I remember MovieBob (back when he was still sane) mentioning that gaming needs to clean its image, due to a bunch of assholes making us look bad.

GAME OVERTHINKER V33: Building a Better Gamer

But now the assholes of yesterday are gone, replaced by one similar in every single way (saying insults, whining about everyone but himself is to blame for the failure of the campaign, using racial/gender slurs, so on and so forth. We have seen it before) except....they are females now. And we can't do the same we did before to males this time cause......they are females? what is the difference here? an asshole is an asshole no matter what gender you are....except not for Jim and everyone else.

At the same time, the thread is about the people trying to prevent women from getting any sort of foothold.
I feel like the satire in Jim's Vid is aimed to help guys understand what gets lobbed at women time and time again deservedly or not.

I think I need to put forth a disclaimer before I go on. I'm not accusing you of anything, nor am I accusing you of accusing me of anything. There's no implications either way, here.

This isn't a binary battle. There is no black, and white. There's a rainbow of people, opinions, and personalities involved. You shouldn't condemn a person to a lable just because they happen to agree with a movement you're not fond of.

If a woman speaks up about wanting more, and better (Not better than males, better than the status quo of women) representation, and the first thought you get is "Damnit, another one of -her- followers?!" or "Another feminist?!" then, well, kinda try to stop that train of thought? It seems like I run into this pretty commonly. It's a bit of a headache, especially when some people rant on, and on about it when their point is made clear long ago.

I definitely don't blame all men because some men disagree with me. I don't think a guy that's disagreeing with me is one of those MRA people I hear about. Frankly I don't care what they're representing, it's how they present it to me.

I guess I don't clearly see the whole "Oh my god, women are trying to take over games, and will lilely DESTROY US ALL!!!!" because I'm a woman who's not trying to take over, rather I just want more, good female protagonists, and maybe see things get shaken up a little to help shatter conventional wisdoms.
These things that don't necessarily require women being in charge of anything (Though I do say that input from several women for varied opinions couldn't hurt!), rather requiring people being more accepting that there's people who want more female representation in games, and them stop trying to prevent the creation of female protagonists.
Maybe sorta get back the creativity the game industry used to have which sorta got sapped away in some of the by the numbers game creation methods.

That doesn't mean I -want- those women that are trying to put every character in the game in a tuxedo, or pants suits, or ball gowns, or what have you to win. Nor the sort trying to abolish women being in violent situations as the violent, or the victim to win.
I likes me some Mai Shiranui. A violent, compeditive woman who's not as flat as she might seem in writing, in a dangerous scenario wearing, well, do I gotta gotta describe that?
I'm not saying there's no room for a woman like King from the same series as Mai Shiranui, either. King wears a tux in a bartender motif.
I'm a fan of diversity.

At the same time, I'm assuredly not going to throw in the towel, and shut up about wanting better written (compared to some other female protagonists) female protagonists, and more female protagonists than what we get.

I doubt you're saying I am, or intend to imply any of what I said above, I state it for clarity's sake. People often confuse me for a raging feminist.

And, yes, there's assholes on both sides. There's little that can be done about that.
What can be done? Police the assholes in a civil manner, male and female alike. Treat them with civility, kill them with kindness, and so forth. I doubt you're going to come off as a troll if you argue against their point in a kind, intelligent manner, and don't fall into their traps. Easier said than done, I know.

If they call you sexist, racist, bigoted in general, etc. when you've displayed nothing of the sort other than disagreeing with their points in a civil manner, then kindly point out that you're not arguing with them with any less respect than you would someone else. They shouldn't be able to cite anything you've said. If they do, explain, and shut them down.
Of course that's not a free ticket to be what you're fighting, an asshole, just because you're an ass to both genders, especially when you stoop to slurs, and insults. Level heads shall prevail, and all that.

Maybe, just maybe, if you see an asshole on your side of the argument, put the kabosh on them, and tell them to butt out if they're just spewing absurd hate. Easier said than done, I understand, but all they're doing is making the opposition less receptive, and more likely to generate their own assholes to counter, and add those to those that already exist. It can be difficult when you see they're obviously on your side, but are they really helping?
Aknowledge that there's asses on both sides of the argument.
I've no problems saying that both Jim, and Anita aren't the best representatives for trying to get women better representation in videogames. The problem is, who else is there? I'd love to know.

When all is said and done, you -can- disagree with, or call out anyone. The problem arises when you disagree with a person using slurs, threats, and so forth. When people put forth the notion you can't disagree unless you're sexist, bigoted, or something like that, perhaps they're basing it more off the trolls, and uncivilized people... Oh who am I kidding?! There's people who'll stoop to anything to defend their side.
The point is, you can disagree with them, and call them out, and doing so in a level headed manner will work wonders.

Lastly, we all have bad days. Being bombarded by hatred can make people angry. Judging a person when they say something once, is not the greatest idea. They may well be influenced by the BS they've been buried under. It's a matter of how consistent they are in being a bad person, IMO.

Now keep in mind I'm not accusing you of anything. I don't know you, and I think I've really read all of 2 of your posts lately, and you seem pretty level headed.

I doubt I'm following my own advice as well as I'd like, or prescribe. I've said it's often easier said than done in numerous suggestions of mine.
Hell, maybe I am one of the assholes? I don't know, but I know people have tried to talk to be about how passionate I can get on the matter. Still, like your second video states, we can strive to be better.

I doubt that any of what I said is news here, but I feel better having said it.

Therumancer:
"what is your favorite Shadow Hearts transformation?"

Shadow hearts transformation? Hah! It's Shadow hearts FUSIONS, you're obviously one of those gamer guys that pretends to be a girl so he can fit in, begone with you!

OT: Fides, maybe Libertia, but Fides's attack up is too damn sexy. I needa get Shadow hearts 3...

Rebel_Raven:

SNIP

Let me go to Wikipedia for this, because apparently i ended up in another planet. In the meantime, watch the footage of this video in this timeframe 8:11 to 10:49.


And yes, i do know that the one making the video is also an asshole but i couldn't find the footage he was using, so i will use his video instead.

Oh here is it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asshole
The word is mainly used as a vulgarity, generally to describe people who are viewed as stupid, incompetent, unpleasant, or detestable.[6]

Say, does that word describes the people presented in that video? because i am pretty sure it DOES. Does that people just happen to be a female version of what we already have before? as in, assholes gun-ho male Bro-dudes that come from Brotopia, whining and bitching when no one pays attention to them and their Bro-tastic way of life, except with tits? they do, huh? how curious.

Ok, with that established, what is so fucking hard to understand? we have an asshole (that might be a man/woman/Cthulhu/a cat is fine too/God/Transexual/black/whatever) fucking around with a larger group of civilized people that just want to have fun (that might be a bunch of men/women/Cthulhu/a cat is fine too/God/Transexual/black/mixed people). Its presence its not tolerated cause it ruins the fun of everyone, therefore we either calmly tell them to GTFO until they behave, or get the PERMABAN.

That is ALL it EVER was, but nooooooooooooooo. The journalist have to pretend that its sexism or whatever, instead of actually looking at the facts, just like they did with the Hepler "controversy". I can't blame them, since they depend on sensationalism to make money after all, no matter who gets destroyed in the process.

It was never about sexism, its about common fucking courtesy. If it was about females being into gaming the shit would have hit the fan back when Amy Hennings worked for Crystal Dynamic to work on Legacy of Kain. And i REMIND YOU, that those guys invented Lara Croft, the sex symbol of gaming back then. If there EVER was a problem with females being in a "male space" then it would have started a looooooooong time ago.

Because that is what the video of Jim was about, right? mocking the idea of girl gamers taking over, right? its kinda self defeating to make such a video when you reverse the roles because, guess what?, it shows that BOTH genders can be assholes.......which is what we ALREADY know and established already.

So what boundaries have been pushed with this? other than the boundaries of the obvious?

Acknowledge that there's asses on both sides of the argument.

Ok..... what does that have to do with what i said? did i say that there were no assholes on my side? i say there are assholes, and whoever that asshole is, it must be told to GTFO.

I've no problems saying that both Jim, and Anita aren't the best representatives for trying to get women better representation in videogames. The problem is, who else is there? I'd love to know.

No one can. Except maybe Morpheus if they ever make it in Real Life™:

And just because there isn't someone fighting for the representation of women or whoever, that doesn't mean you have to do a piss poor job at it. The situation is already confusing BETWEEN the same ranks of Feminism (see the Ripley Vs Clarice Starling debate of a "proper" female protagonist). I am, however, offended to be playing as a human being instead of a robot or something. I feel that my Misanthrope Supreme + Asexual + Nihilistic tendencies are not represented or appealed properly :D

The end of that video would have been infinitely more nerdy if jim used something more obscure like Psi-Ops instead of Killzone at the end using the exact same message just with a more less known title in which I say that watching that killzone footage I'm just aptly reminded of psi-ops even more and pretty much they took that idea from that game to theirs oh sure it's a nazi thing and so they didn't really but still the similarities are a bit uncanny to me

JellySlimerMan:

Rebel_Raven:

SNIP

Let me go to Wikipedia for this, because apparently i ended up in another planet. In the meantime, watch the footage of this video in this timeframe 8:11 to 10:49.


And yes, i do know that the one making the video is also an asshole but i couldn't find the footage he was using, so i will use his video instead.

Oh here is it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asshole
The word is mainly used as a vulgarity, generally to describe people who are viewed as stupid, incompetent, unpleasant, or detestable.[6]

Say, does that word describes the people presented in that video? because i am pretty sure it DOES. Does that people just happen to be a female version of what we already have before? as in, assholes gun-ho male Bro-dudes that come from Brotopia, whining and bitching when no one pays attention to them and their Bro-tastic way of life, except with tits? they do, huh? how curious.

Ok, with that established, what is so fucking hard to understand? we have an asshole (that might be a man/woman/Cthulhu/a cat is fine too/God/Transexual/black/whatever) fucking around with a larger group of civilized people that just want to have fun (that might be a bunch of men/women/Cthulhu/a cat is fine too/God/Transexual/black/mixed people). Its presence its not tolerated cause it ruins the fun of everyone, therefore we either calmly tell them to GTFO until they behave, or get the PERMABAN.

That is ALL it EVER was, but nooooooooooooooo. The journalist have to pretend that its sexism or whatever, instead of actually looking at the facts, just like they did with the Hepler "controversy". I can't blame them, since they depend on sensationalism to make money after all, no matter who gets destroyed in the process.

It was never about sexism, its about common fucking courtesy. If it was about females being into gaming the shit would have hit the fan back when Amy Hennings worked for Crystal Dynamic to work on Legacy of Kain. And i REMIND YOU, that those guys invented Lara Croft, the sex symbol of gaming back then. If there EVER was a problem with females being in a "male space" then it would have started a looooooooong time ago.

Because that is what the video of Jim was about, right? mocking the idea of girl gamers taking over, right? its kinda self defeating to make such a video when you reverse the roles because, guess what?, it shows that BOTH genders can be assholes.......which is what we ALREADY know and established already.

So what boundaries have been pushed with this? other than the boundaries of the obvious?

Acknowledge that there's asses on both sides of the argument.

Ok..... what does that have to do with what i said? did i say that there were no assholes on my side? i say there are assholes, and whoever that asshole is, it must be told to GTFO.

I've no problems saying that both Jim, and Anita aren't the best representatives for trying to get women better representation in videogames. The problem is, who else is there? I'd love to know.

No one can. Except maybe Morpheus if they ever make it in Real Life™:

And just because there isn't someone fighting for the representation of women or whoever, that doesn't mean you have to do a piss poor job at it. The situation is already confusing BETWEEN the same ranks of Feminism (see the Ripley Vs Clarice Starling debate of a "proper" female protagonist). I am, however, offended to be playing as a human being instead of a robot or something. I feel that my Misanthrope Supreme + Asexual + Nihilistic tendencies are not represented or appealed properly :D

I did say there are assholes on both sides of things, including gender, didn't I? I'm not saying there aren't female gamer assholes out there. Gender shouldn't give leniency in the way people act in a venue not their own. If a person acts up, they should be reprimanded, yes.

You're right. Sensationalism is what journalists live for. That's painfully obvious. It doesn't make it right, but it's not likely they're going to stop. Boring news doen't really get read/noticed. Problem with me is all that sensationalism is a large scale turn off.

Women playing games was an issue back then. It just didn't have the wide avaliability of the internet, and the disgruntled persons able to focus to make the issue known.
Seriously, why do you think girls playing games were almost unheard of way back then? It's not that they weren't gaming, it's that they had it a lot worse then they do now, and were keeping it on the down low.

Mind you I'm not saying it was a cakewalk for the guys either. They were definiutely treated worse back then, too.

Games eventually became more widely accepted, and female gamers felt like they would be more accepted, too. They came out in apparently large numbers. Having came out, they are still meeting resistance, but they aren't exactly being pushed into the darkness, either.

Further, back then, online gameplay wasn't as widespread, or as accessable. It was a lot easier to fly under the radar as a girl gamer.

Speaking of Lara Croft, Tomb Raider games came out pretty steadily back then. There were more than a few female protagonists in the era getting decent showings in her time, in fact. People that liked playing as women didn't get the same sense of depravation as we're getting now.
That feeling of depravation was created largely by the "conventional wisdom" that female protagonists make a game fail, the overall lack of female protagonists in mainstream gaming, and the news that female protagonists were being taken out of lead roles in favor of more guys, among other bits of news that broke. Naughty Dog having to request female focus testers, and fight for Ellie to stay on the front of the box, Levine making a dudebro cover for Bioshock Infinite, and so forth.

Yes, I'm fully aware Lara Croft was created by guys. She was intended to be well written, and well defined, and atteractive. Still, we all know what really got focused on. That didn't stop her from being a well adored, iconic character, though, obviously. Not just for her looks, either.
Hence me saying that women don't have to be in charge for well written female protagonists to be more common.

Yes, Jim didn't exactly tell us anything we didn't know in this vid. There's assholes on both sides, and he was looking to offer up a dose of what women go through towards guys, hence the parallel universe.

People have speculated this video also has something to do with the news that Nintendo would consider a game where Zelda is the hero of her own story if fans wanted it it.
You can imagine that the jerks came out to bash the idea, and the general hate towards one another. Jerks everywhere, on all sides, with reasonable people doggypaddleing to not be drowned out.

You missed my disclaimer, didn't you? Where it said I wasn't accusing you of anything? :P
The quote has everything to do with it in that it's the simple fact that there are assholes on both sides. Pardon me for stating the obvious.
And, yes, obviouly assholes need to be dealt with regardless of gender.

As far as I'm concerned, despite them doing a less than stellar job at it, I'd rather have Jim, and Anita fighting than no one as they're far far far more likely to get noticed than I am, and they spark debates, and I feel this subject needs to be talked about so long as it exists. I doubt we'd be better off without either of them.
You may not like their work, and that's fine.

The reason that there's confusion in the ranks of feminism about the proper female protagonist is simple. Feminists aren't a hive mind entity. Everyone has opinions, even among feminists. There are no solid rules, and guidelines to live by in feminism as far as I know, and none on representation in the media. Even if there were rules written in stone, it's obvious not everyone follows it, eh?

Rebel_Raven:

Uhm, yes? You said no one is against the idea of Zelda having her own game, and yet here you are, being against it?

Except I'm not if it's core to what Zelda is instead of making her out to be a female Link in the first place

No, my opinions aren't based on she who shalt not be named lest the entire conversation derail into personal attacks on her.
Is it impossible to people that others might have reached a similar conclusion without her input? Yes, I've seen her videos, and they didn't really change a damn thing for me save enlighten me on Dinosaur Planet's fate as an example of something I bloody well hate in the game industry.

Yes, let's talk about a game that had the exact same rescue plot that she complained about because it's pretty clear you read the source material and got mad because Crystal bared her midriff.

Off camera rulership doesn't count for me, nevermind off camera actions period.

Nonsensical argument is nonsensical.

Even if it -did- count, the idyllic worlds of peace with little to no military prepared to do anything more than one guy with a wooden sword, even with a chunk of triforce, can do is really -bad- leadership to me. I don't care how long peace has gone on, if a kingdom lacks a decent army, it's a failure. It doesn't have to be personally led by the ruler, there can be delegation to someone who can make an army worth a damn.

Okay. So when the going gets tough, Zelda should get going. Awesome to know.

If the princess were really so beloved, there'd be an army of volunteers trying to rescue her at the least, and not just one guy. There'd be people training to be her bodyguard to keep her safe beyond, ya kknow, her one hero. Where's the fanatics trying to save her along with Link?

That's what the Sheikh are for, to protect the royal family while the people have a hero. We call that a sidequest. And maybe, since there's split timelines in Hyrule, there are other heroes but they failed too. Just a thought.

Why has the kingdom seemingly given up on Zelda when she gets captured? Why is there no more than one champion? Is she really thought of that poorly that no one, by hire, by volunteer, or by any reason, doesn't want to be there to defend her, and get better in preparation of it?
But I guess that's the curse, isn't it?

Or maybe they died in the attempt and you haven't read the books and just want to complain about something that isn't relevant to the story...

Lets not forget that the instant she drops disguise, she's captured. Regardless of anything she's done before. Regardless of all her power you boast she has. She's utterly helpless in the face of being captured, and generally does nothing until the end. It's irritating. I've always found it irritating when things like that happen. Me, personally, with no input from others.

rolls eyes

Right, because she's not relevant to the plot at all, she didn't give Link any songs to sing, didn't rescue any princesses along the way, nor do anything like contacting the Sages to help Link out while evading Ganon for seven years. No plot relevance whatsoever. She's just a girl and that means she can't protect the world because she believes in Link to help save it. Great thinking there.

I don't believe in power I don't see in action, or better yet, control via a playable character. Actions speak louder than words. Being playable speaks louder than being an NPC. Seeing that the evbents don't back up the boasts makes those boasts ring false with me.

Ah, so all you care about is the gender of the characters and the overall mythos and the significance of the Triforces means nothing to you. Gotcha.

It's ALWAYS been a peeve of mine that the wisest, most intelligent of people in media like TV shows, movies, and games are still dumb enough to not be able to defend themselves, either personally, or by having others at the ready, or what have you.
This is compounded by the fact that if they know they're a frikking target (I.E. being important to the society in any way), and it's compounded moreover when they continually ignore the threat over and over again!

Or maybe the fact that their royalty makes them a larger target than some plucky hero who no one knows. Maybe, the fact that Ganon keeps underestimating Link over and over means Power won't ever overtake Wisdom and Courage. You know, one of those moral things we learn from stories like fairy tales?

Heck, considering it's Link who saves Zelda time, and time again, it seems more reasonable that -he's- the real threat that needs to be kidnapped, and rendered helpless. Seriously, one guy curbstomps an army, plus the puzzles, and he's left alone consistently to fight in his own element to come out on top time and time again? That's pretty dumb villainy there. It's not like the person kidnapped over and over again is going to be able to resist being captured anyhow, right? Go for that target second.
But I guess that's the curse isn't it?

When you only see the large threats to you, the small ones and their personal journeys don't mean all that much. That's like saying Wall Street cares about your local little league team. Unless they do something major to catch their notice, they aren't going to see them as a threat.

Being temporary help isn't particularly awesome to me. An NPC is an NPC to me. No NPC can rival a player character for me. All it can do is make me wish I could be that NPC.
NPCs dont get the spotlight, they're shunted off into the background, or off stage completely while the playabale character gets things done. Playable characters do get the spotlight since nothing gets done to solve the problems without the playable characters.

And that's great for you. But that has nothing to do with the topic of just a female Link who continues to have courage under fire and maybe has different items and spells that could make a game more intriguing. Having a female Zelda in games where you can't have a second game on the console still doesn't explain that Zelda's actions (which you've greatly ignored btw) have caused the defeat of Ganon over and over. No, she doesn't give the killing blow, but she ensures that Link has the tools to take him down, particularly with the sword she crafted.

There's prolly a plethora of reasons people forgot about the CD-I games.

But they exist.

So, why Zelda instead of gender swaps? What does it do for -Zelda- here if we just gender swap? Male, female, Zelda's role is the same, time, and time again with little variation.

Which is the point here. Gender doesn't matter for a hero. Katniss is every much a hero as Harry Potter save for the gender.

Even gender swapped, Link is Link. Link will likely play the exact same regardless of gender. Possibly more annoying is that gender won't likely play any real role in the story. It'll likely just be link as a girl, not really being treated diffirently than typical link. Sure that's something akin to equality, but what's the point of a gender swap if it's so shallow to the point that nothing else has changed?

Like I said, there could be game differences, but that'd have to be worked out. You'd still be the same avatar, entering into the world of Hyrule, and partaking in an adventure while looking at how the people react to the story of the three Triforces.

I'd like a female protagonist in a Zelda game to be a somewhat meaningful change, here, gender issues aside. Wouldn't you?

Never said I didn't. I just said that if you make a game about Zelda, a female Link would do just as much. You'd probably learn more just as much about Zelda as Link if you'd actually pay attention. From what I know, she's just as courageous and dedicated to the realm as Link is. And given that Nintendo has a history of silent protagonists, you'd really be hard felt to find a lot out about Zelda if you played as her compared to having a champion based on what the prophecies foretold about a hero coming to the fore.

Rebel_Raven:

Women playing games was an issue back then. It just didn't have the wide avaliability of the internet, and the disgruntled persons able to focus to make the issue known.
Seriously, why do you think girls playing games were almost unheard of way back then? It's not that they weren't gaming, it's that they had it a lot worse then they do now, and were keeping it on the down low.

I kinda wish for once that such information actually end up being uploaded to the Internet. We have access to the Epic of Gilgamesh (2000+ years old poem), and we can even have images of men being lynched to death because of mystreatment of women back in the 1900, but we can have the news of women being excluded in gaming Pre-2000.

Games eventually became more widely accepted, and female gamers felt like they would be more accepted, too. They came out in apparently large numbers. Having came out, they are still meeting resistance, but they aren't exactly being pushed into the darkness, either.

Everyone is meeting resistance, not only women. Here is why:

That feeling of deprivation was created largely by the "conventional wisdom" that female protagonists make a game fail, the overall lack of female protagonists in mainstream gaming, and the news that female protagonists were being taken out of lead roles in favor of more guys, among other bits of news that broke. Naughty Dog having to request female focus testers, and fight for Ellie to stay on the front of the box, Levine making a dudebro cover for Bioshock Infinite, and so forth.

And where does this conventional wisdom comes from? cause i am pretty sure that back then no one had a problem with women in games. Hell, Samus is loved more in the Western hemisphere than in her home country Japan, that is why they gave the rights to an American developer to make the Prime series (Retro).

What about MS.Pacman? she was invented in America. http://classicgames.about.com/od/arcadegames/p/Ms-Pac-Man-The-Unauthorized-History-Of-Arcades-First-Female-Hero.htm

How about Zelda portrayal on the godawful American cartoon? take a guess:
http://www.filibustercartoons.com/index.php/2013/03/10/a-rebuttal-to-anita-sarkeesians-tropes-vs-women-episode-1-damsels-in-distress/

I DO know that publishers do NOT want females on MODERN times. As evidenced by the "Remember Me" fiasco:
http://www.shacknews.com/article/78281/remember-me-rejected-by-publishers-due-to-female-protagonist

But WHERE do they get that info? what was the E.T from Atari 2600 with a female on it that sunk the whole industry to the point of NEVER AGAIN try with a female protagonist? was it Beyond Good And Evil? the game that they didn't fucking market to begin with, and therefore not the fault of the audience for not buying something they didn't know it existed?

I know what you are going to say: "They clearly use a test audience to measure their success, and they most likely say that they dont want to play as a female" And to that i ask: Where in the fuck do they get these people? i mean, are they the same people that said this:
http://www.siliconera.com/2011/03/28/nanashi-no-game-was-considered-for-north-america-focus-groups-killed-it/
"The opinion was you couldn't shoot anything."

Savor it. Embrace it. And apply directly to the forehead, if possible.

No shooting in a horror game? NO FUCKING SHIT.

Where do they GET these guys?


1:07

Are they hobos from the street? or are those COD lovers? if the later then i want to ask one simple question to the publishers: What reaction did they expect from that focus group? a COD gamer is only going to play COD and nothing else. They dont want to be challenged, they don't like to think, they just want to shoot the assholes that called them a "meany" on the last multiplayer match from the previous COD. That game is the only thing they know, and the publishers expect input from those fuckers? as opposed to get input from people from different areas and tastes in gaming to see if they can appeal to those they have to yet reach?

This is pure incompetence no matter how you slice it. Which is par of the course for the industry after all. Just look at Microsoft.

People have speculated this video also has something to do with the news that Nintendo would consider a game where Zelda is the hero of her own story if fans wanted it it.
You can imagine that the jerks came out to bash the idea, and the general hate towards one another. Jerks everywhere, on all sides, with reasonable people doggypaddleing to not be drowned out.

I didn't know that they were going to make a Zelda Zelda game.

As long they dont make another Zelda CDI game by sending it to the Russians that made the drawings there shoudn't be any problem. People got a VERY strong impression for a game with Zelda.

And if they are going to make a Zelda Zelda game, then she is going to start as a commoner rather than a princess or queen. Remember that the reason she is kidnapped is because she is powerful enough to fuck up the plans of the whoever is trying to take over the world, kinda like this trope if you want to win at all:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShootTheMedicFirst

Its common warfare tactic. Take out the leader or the enemy best weapon to ensure victory. Even in the old NES games like Super Mario Bros this is true. The Koopa used black magic to turn the Mushroom Kingdom and its people into stone, and guess who the fuck can cure that shit? The Princess Toadstool....who gets kidnapped to ensure she doesn't undo their plans. www.mariomayhem.com/downloads/mario_instruction_booklets/Super_Mario_Bros-NES.pdf

If Zelda is NOT going to get kidnapped, then that means she has ZERO powers both in political and magical sense, to the point the enemy wouldn't even register her presence as a menace to begin with. She is going to start from nothing and go Metroidvania on the world of Hyrule.

Is that the source of controversy? that you can get to play Sim City with you playing as the Princess and manage the Kingdom? or was that they are just going to be lazy, make a Female Mute Link, and call it Zelda?

As far as I'm concerned, despite them doing a less than stellar job at it, I'd rather have Jim, and Anita fighting than no one as they're far far far more likely to get noticed than I am, and they spark debates, and I feel this subject needs to be talked about so long as it exists. I doubt we'd be better off without either of them.
You may not like their work, and that's fine.

Implying that NO ONE was talking about sexuality and gender in games before? this person did on Metroid Other M and for all its efforts no one cared:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/lb_i.php?lb_id=13373815860B43920100&i_id=13384263550I62094100&p=17
So no one talks about it until there is a controversy? that was made years AFTER the M:OM fiasco, its not like they needed the spark of the moment to do it, they need time to process the bullshit, like any research should.

And guess what? Anita and her lack of effort is going to make things worse for other females that want to work in the industry. When Anita's brand of feminism ends up not selling the copies the publishers want (she is working with EA now, and given THEIR sale expectations they had for Dead Space 3, i would say that Anita was bound to fail no matter what) the industry is going to make a laughing stock of her, and anyone trying to argue her points after that. Not to mention how some female developers will have a hard time being included in the industry because of the publishers fear of a fiasco like this happening again, so they will play it safe and not hire ANYONE that has similar mentality.

They will point out this incident and the lack of sales of Mirror's Edge 2 as: "SEE? THIS IS WHY WE DONT MAKE FEMALES PROTAGONIST FOR THESE GAMES. IF IT WAS SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE A FEMALE THEN WHY DIDN'T YOU BUY THE 5 BILLIONS OF COPIES WE DEMANDED?" because scapegoating is the way to go in the industry.

And even if she had a good research, guess what? you CAN'T change the industry. Not even Orson Welles did it for Hollywood nor can people on the gaming industry. You don't reason with the industry, you just DO.

Listen to the poor man, he knows what it means to waste your life for nothing. She may as well make her own games, with the sweat of her brow. Ayn Ryan would be so proud of her.

The reason that there's confusion in the ranks of feminism about the proper female protagonist is simple. Feminists aren't a hive mind entity. Everyone has opinions, even among feminists. There are no solid rules, and guidelines to live by in feminism as far as I know, and none on representation in the media. Even if there were rules written in stone, it's obvious not everyone follows it, eh?

Is not JUST that she doesn't specify what brand of feminism (who was supposed to be about equality) actually WANTS this brand of inequality as presented on her thesis. Cause apparently having "self control" is not positive for females somehow:
image

Is just that she doesn't make sense even in her terms:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/FeministFrequency

And, that even if Feminism ISN'T a hivemind, the mainstream audience doesn't care. If YOU criticize it in ANY shape or form, no matter which brand you are complaining about, you are either a misogynist or a gender traitor. I remind you that, after all, one CANT make even a sarcastic comment without being put on jail. So the logical step to it is to lynch everyone that complains on Feminism: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125833-Petition-to-Free-Jailed-League-of-Legends-Player-Reaches-100-000-Sigs

God bless false dichotomies.

Lightknight:
Ok? I'm not sure how this relates to my comments that nerd culture includes a non-trivial number of socially inept individuals. The expansion of ranks only serves to dilute the proportions, not remove them.

The culture you're talking about is not what the culture is, but rather what it was. Arguing that this problem exists because of something the culture isn't is inane. Surely you grasp that.

? I did not say that. I was merely explaining why several odd interactions would happen, not that everything that happened was somehow ok and to be accepted. Don't read into social commentary as justification.

And I asked you a question and you dodged it. If you had said it, I would not need to question you in the first place.

Further, you used the word "expect." Suddenly, I use your own terminology, and I'm accusing you of justification. This is an interesting logic loop, as you seem to be acknowledging your own terminology as justification, but are accusing me of falsely equating your words with justification.

However, I didn't say you were justifying it. I merely repeated what you said.

Do then then NOT believe the words you yourself said?

And still, if women should have an expectation of being treated as they are (which is actually what you said, whether you condone it or not), should gamer culture as a whole expect to be deliegitimised? It'd be nice if I got at least one answer out of you.

Seeing as you mistook my meaning to be a justification of sexual harrassment

Not sure if false because of misinterpretation or false for the sake of convenient dodge.

I'm not sure what this point is supposed to be.

Of course not, because that would require actually addressing something I said.

Raven I give you that Zlda is a supporting NPC. But she isn't the only girl in gaming we HAVE rpg female characters of messianic repuattion who wield that power on screen and even in player hands. We have Skullgirls, most rpgs (Japanese and Western), and etc. But that goes out the wall because apparently Zelda getting kidnapped is oppressing female gamers?

Zelda was made links PARTNER in Spirit Tracks, was hinted at having a parallel coming of age story in Skyward Sword. This happened with Groose and people love him. Its why male gamers feel the argument is specious. you got that already and you're still upset and moreover games aren't intended to do whatever for gender but convey their entertainment.

Now I'll admit, Tetra just hiding out was kinda bad... and then she shoots at ganon in the final battle as acknowledgement hey she's the princess and its her life. Zelda was practically shoehorned into Twilight Princess because, get this, SHE WASN'T THE FOCUS that was Midna (btw way to ignore the four other significant female characters not counting the Zora Queen there) in the title and please don't say *she* was shortchanged.

And that's just Zelda. There are games conceived of with female characters from the beginning or aimed at female players (the various bishi laden ones) that have diverse powers and grappling with dramatic situations. The mystery series from Nintendo on the DS... Eternal Darkness, Atelier series, Tales, Sands of Destruction, Pokemon, Persona, and others.

So then we get to the more specific issue. There aren't badass females, who don't sexual appeal to male gamers, in "hardcore" titles. The DOA girls, Bayonetta, Bullet Witch, Sheeva Almar, Jill Valentine, and etc.

See dig in its less a desperately superbad situation of "no girls" and more a "not girls in titles I like in the roles I want" and sorry THAT'S NOT OPPRESSION.

Now it is a lack of serving to the customer base and acknowledgement of them.

Yeah it wouldn't hurt for the not exactly strapped for cash Call of Duty series to fit in a lady into the macho tired war stories as they "go deeper" (especially when America is under attack by Russia). But it can also backfire (Other M, the gamer shorthand for sexism in videogames. I'll even concede it didn't do Samus right but was trying and the story isn't more "sexist" than throwing all these paternal issues in video games currently is.. seriously take a step back and Other M is practically a Bruce Willis movie in space)

Gindil:

Rebel_Raven:

Uhm, yes? You said no one is against the idea of Zelda having her own game, and yet here you are, being against it?

Except I'm not if it's core to what Zelda is instead of making her out to be a female Link in the first place

So how would -you- make a game centering around Zelda as a playable character?
I'm not limiting the idea to Zelda swapping positions with Link in the usual story, am I?

Ugh, after reading the rest of your post, I'm going to have to deal with you narrowmindedly chewing my head off. The rest is mostly you chewing my head off with a narrow mind tainted by misdirected hatred for Anita fgetting aimed at me.
I probably shouldn't even humor it since you don't respect my position at all, but I am since you'll oriolly get offended if I don't.

No, my opinions aren't based on she who shalt not be named lest the entire conversation derail into personal attacks on her.
Is it impossible to people that others might have reached a similar conclusion without her input? Yes, I've seen her videos, and they didn't really change a damn thing for me save enlighten me on Dinosaur Planet's fate as an example of something I bloody well hate in the game industry.

Yes, let's talk about a game that had the exact same rescue plot that she complained about because it's pretty clear you read the source material and got mad because Crystal bared her midriff.

WRONG! Dinosaur Planet originally featured a brother-sister team where you could play as Krystal, or her brother Saber.
I'm MAD because she stopped being a character choice. You assume way too much.

I don't have a huge problem with sexuality in female characters. I don't mind Bayonetta, or Mai Shiranui. Things can go a bit overboard on the sexuality front, but in general, it doesn't.

I don't mind it when the character isn't a sexual bombshell either.

I'd appreciate it if you stopped painting me with the disdain you have for Anita, which, frankly, I don't care about.

Off camera rulership doesn't count for me, nevermind off camera actions period.

Nonsensical argument is nonsensical.

Exactly the way I see "Oh, but she's a powerful NPC!!"
That NPC isn't a person I spend most of the game with.

Even if it -did- count, the idyllic worlds of peace with little to no military prepared to do anything more than one guy with a wooden sword, even with a chunk of triforce, can do is really -bad- leadership to me. I don't care how long peace has gone on, if a kingdom lacks a decent army, it's a failure. It doesn't have to be personally led by the ruler, there can be delegation to someone who can make an army worth a damn.

Okay. So when the going gets tough, Zelda should get going. Awesome to know.

No, when things get tough, she, or her kingdom needs to be prepared to be tough. Preferrably both.
"getting going" is basically what she's doing now. She's gone for most of the game, if not all of it.

If the princess were really so beloved, there'd be an army of volunteers trying to rescue her at the least, and not just one guy. There'd be people training to be her bodyguard to keep her safe beyond, ya kknow, her one hero. Where's the fanatics trying to save her along with Link?

That's what the Sheikh are for, to protect the royal family while the people have a hero. We call that a sidequest. And maybe, since there's split timelines in Hyrule, there are other heroes but they failed too. Just a thought.

It's apparent they weren't exactly all that well trained. Zelda gets captured each, and every time. They aren't exactly an army trying to rescue her either, are they?

The other heroes don't get played as, do they?
And forget "heroes" I mean an army of people angry that their beloved princess was taken away.

Why has the kingdom seemingly given up on Zelda when she gets captured? Why is there no more than one champion? Is she really thought of that poorly that no one, by hire, by volunteer, or by any reason, doesn't want to be there to defend her, and get better in preparation of it?
But I guess that's the curse, isn't it?

Or maybe they died in the attempt and you haven't read the books and just want to complain about something that isn't relevant to the story...

So the entire kingdom died, and zelda, link, and gannon are the last people on the planet? No? Then the people have pretty much given up if they're not trying to save Zelda.
And you're bringing sources outside the game to this? You do realize not everyone's going to be that invested, right?

Lets not forget that the instant she drops disguise, she's captured. Regardless of anything she's done before. Regardless of all her power you boast she has. She's utterly helpless in the face of being captured, and generally does nothing until the end. It's irritating. I've always found it irritating when things like that happen. Me, personally, with no input from others.

rolls eyes

Right, because she's not relevant to the plot at all, she didn't give Link any songs to sing, didn't rescue any princesses along the way, nor do anything like contacting the Sages to help Link out while evading Ganon for seven years. No plot relevance whatsoever. She's just a girl and that means she can't protect the world because she believes in Link to help save it. Great thinking there.

And for all the power you boast, she's kidnapped. It's up to Link.

If you're not going to be civil, GTFO of my world. If you can't respect the person you've decided to argue with, then don't bother arguing with me.
I am NOT ANITA. Do not direct the dislike you have for her my way.

I don't believe in power I don't see in action, or better yet, control via a playable character. Actions speak louder than words. Being playable speaks louder than being an NPC. Seeing that the evbents don't back up the boasts makes those boasts ring false with me.

Ah, so all you care about is the gender of the characters and the overall mythos and the significance of the Triforces means nothing to you. Gotcha.

Both mean something to me.
Apparently both mean something to the fanbase if there's interest in seeing Zelda as a playable protagonist.

It's ALWAYS been a peeve of mine that the wisest, most intelligent of people in media like TV shows, movies, and games are still dumb enough to not be able to defend themselves, either personally, or by having others at the ready, or what have you.
This is compounded by the fact that if they know they're a frikking target (I.E. being important to the society in any way), and it's compounded moreover when they continually ignore the threat over and over again!

Or maybe the fact that their royalty makes them a larger target than some plucky hero who no one knows. Maybe, the fact that Ganon keeps underestimating Link over and over means Power won't ever overtake Wisdom and Courage. You know, one of those moral things we learn from stories like fairy tales?

That doesn't change the fact that it annoys me that Zelda in all her wisdom doesn't know how to defend herself from being captured since she continually gets captured.

Heck, considering it's Link who saves Zelda time, and time again, it seems more reasonable that -he's- the real threat that needs to be kidnapped, and rendered helpless. Seriously, one guy curbstomps an army, plus the puzzles, and he's left alone consistently to fight in his own element to come out on top time and time again? That's pretty dumb villainy there. It's not like the person kidnapped over and over again is going to be able to resist being captured anyhow, right? Go for that target second.
But I guess that's the curse isn't it?

When you only see the large threats to you, the small ones and their personal journeys don't mean all that much. That's like saying Wall Street cares about your local little league team. Unless they do something major to catch their notice, they aren't going to see them as a threat.

Huh, a lone guy steadily approaching unravelling your entire scheme, evidently the bearer of a chunk of the triforce is escaping Gannon's notice?

Being temporary help isn't particularly awesome to me. An NPC is an NPC to me. No NPC can rival a player character for me. All it can do is make me wish I could be that NPC.
NPCs dont get the spotlight, they're shunted off into the background, or off stage completely while the playabale character gets things done. Playable characters do get the spotlight since nothing gets done to solve the problems without the playable characters.

And that's great for you. But that has nothing to do with the topic of just a female Link who continues to have courage under fire and maybe has different items and spells that could make a game more intriguing. Having a female Zelda in games where you can't have a second game on the console still doesn't explain that Zelda's actions (which you've greatly ignored btw) have caused the defeat of Ganon over and over. No, she doesn't give the killing blow, but she ensures that Link has the tools to take him down, particularly with the sword she crafted.

You didn't read the last paragraph before you replied to this, did you? I don't want just a female Link here. There's not a whole lot of point in a simple gender swap.
Of course Zelda didn't land the killing blow. A lot of people would hate it if they did all the work playing through the game only to have their thunder stolen by an NPC.

You might wanna clarify the topic here. I'm talking about Zelda being the protagonist of the story. You're talking about a female Link.
Those are not one in the same.

There's prolly a plethora of reasons people forgot about the CD-I games.

But they exist.

And?? Why's it only in those mediums, heck, that medium, that Zelda is playable?

So, why Zelda instead of gender swaps? What does it do for -Zelda- here if we just gender swap? Male, female, Zelda's role is the same, time, and time again with little variation.

Which is the point here. Gender doesn't matter for a hero. Katniss is every much a hero as Harry Potter save for the gender.

It apparently -does- matter since people -do- want a female hero in LoZ. It does matter since people want to play as Zelda.

The second part of what you said is throwing me, though. "save for gender." Wanna elaborate on that?

It apparently does matter in the grand scheme of things as far as the game industry goes because female heroes tend to get shut down before the game gets fully developed, or the game gets changed after development since the producers don't think a female hero will sell.

Books generally are diffirent breeds from videogames. Videogames generally have you play as one person from start to finish, and are generally limited on point of view. There generally isn't room for more than one hero at a time. It's pretty much apples, and oranges.

Even gender swapped, Link is Link. Link will likely play the exact same regardless of gender. Possibly more annoying is that gender won't likely play any real role in the story. It'll likely just be link as a girl, not really being treated diffirently than typical link. Sure that's something akin to equality, but what's the point of a gender swap if it's so shallow to the point that nothing else has changed?

Like I said, there could be game differences, but that'd have to be worked out. You'd still be the same avatar, entering into the world of Hyrule, and partaking in an adventure while looking at how the people react to the story of the three Triforces.[/quote]
I wish you read this, and the bit after this before you decided to chew my head off for most of the post. You seem to be accusing me of wanting to put Zelda in the exact same role as Link when that's not the end all, and be all of my point.
I'm certainly open to variations, here. By "hero" I don't mean the exact same role as Link, I mean the protagonist since protagonists usually are the hero.

I'd like a female protagonist in a Zelda game to be a somewhat meaningful change, here, gender issues aside. Wouldn't you?

Never said I didn't. I just said that if you make a game about Zelda, a female Link would do just as much. You'd probably learn more just as much about Zelda as Link if you'd actually pay attention. From what I know, she's just as courageous and dedicated to the realm as Link is. And given that Nintendo has a history of silent protagonists, you'd really be hard felt to find a lot out about Zelda if you played as her compared to having a champion based on what the prophecies foretold about a hero coming to the fore.

You apparently assumed I did, though.
Like I said, actions speak louder than words, and being the playable character speaks louder than being an NPC. I might just learn a good bit playing as Zelda that I might not have otherwise since she'll be in another role, silent or not. If I do is the great mystery, isn't it? We aren't going to know until we see how Nintendo handles Zelda as a protagonist, are we?

The way you've been going on, you seem to have been basing my entire argument on the idea that Zelda will be placed in the exact same role as Link, when I certainly do not limit her potential to that.

JellySlimerMan:

Rebel_Raven:

Women playing games was an issue back then. It just didn't have the wide avaliability of the internet, and the disgruntled persons able to focus to make the issue known.
Seriously, why do you think girls playing games were almost unheard of way back then? It's not that they weren't gaming, it's that they had it a lot worse then they do now, and were keeping it on the down low.

I kinda wish for once that such information actually end up being uploaded to the Internet. We have access to the Epic of Gilgamesh (2000+ years old poem), and we can even have images of men being lynched to death because of mystreatment of women back in the 1900, but we can have the news of women being excluded in gaming Pre-2000.

Even if it was, I doubt most people would actively look it up. It's either common knowledge, or they don't care about adding it to the conversation. I dare say only a few people would care enough.

Games eventually became more widely accepted, and female gamers felt like they would be more accepted, too. They came out in apparently large numbers. Having came out, they are still meeting resistance, but they aren't exactly being pushed into the darkness, either.

Everyone is meeting resistance, not only women. Here is why:

[/quote] I'm fully aware isn't not just women being given a hard time. I said as much, didn't I? :P

That feeling of deprivation was created largely by the "conventional wisdom" that female protagonists make a game fail, the overall lack of female protagonists in mainstream gaming, and the news that female protagonists were being taken out of lead roles in favor of more guys, among other bits of news that broke. Naughty Dog having to request female focus testers, and fight for Ellie to stay on the front of the box, Levine making a dudebro cover for Bioshock Infinite, and so forth.

And where does this conventional wisdom comes from? cause i am pretty sure that back then no one had a problem with women in games. Hell, Samus is loved more in the Western hemisphere than in her home country Japan, that is why they gave the rights to an American developer to make the Prime series (Retro).

What about MS.Pacman? she was invented in America. http://classicgames.about.com/od/arcadegames/p/Ms-Pac-Man-The-Unauthorized-History-Of-Arcades-First-Female-Hero.htm

How about Zelda portrayal on the godawful American cartoon? take a guess:
http://www.filibustercartoons.com/index.php/2013/03/10/a-rebuttal-to-anita-sarkeesians-tropes-vs-women-episode-1-damsels-in-distress/

I DO know that publishers do NOT want females on MODERN times. As evidenced by the "Remember Me" fiasco:
http://www.shacknews.com/article/78281/remember-me-rejected-by-publishers-due-to-female-protagonist

But WHERE do they get that info? what was the E.T from Atari 2600 with a female on it that sunk the whole industry to the point of NEVER AGAIN try with a female protagonist? was it Beyond Good And Evil? the game that they didn't fucking market to begin with, and therefore not the fault of the audience for not buying something they didn't know it existed?

I know what you are going to say: "They clearly use a test audience to measure their success, and they most likely say that they dont want to play as a female" And to that i ask: Where in the fuck do they get these people? i mean, are they the same people that said this:
http://www.siliconera.com/2011/03/28/nanashi-no-game-was-considered-for-north-america-focus-groups-killed-it/
"The opinion was you couldn't shoot anything."

Savor it. Embrace it. And apply directly to the forehead, if possible.

No shooting in a horror game? NO FUCKING SHIT.

Where do they GET these guys?


1:07

Are they hobos from the street? or are those COD lovers? if the later then i want to ask one simple question to the publishers: What reaction did they expect from that focus group? a COD gamer is only going to play COD and nothing else. They dont want to be challenged, they don't like to think, they just want to shoot the assholes that called them a "meany" on the last multiplayer match from the previous COD. That game is the only thing they know, and the publishers expect input from those fuckers? as opposed to get input from people from different areas and tastes in gaming to see if they can appeal to those they have to yet reach?

This is pure incompetence no matter how you slice it. Which is par of the course for the industry after all. Just look at Microsoft.

I wish I knew what the pivotal point where the conventional wisdom came to be was. I can only guess, myself. I do have a strong feeling it reaches back as far as Mirror's Edge.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/report/article/games-with-female-heroes-dont-sell-because-publishers-dont-support-them

I definitely agree that the gaming industry as it is is incompitent on so many levels. Developers are dieing off, producers are dieing off, people are getting laid off, people are taking pay cuts, the industry goes for quality of sales over quantity of sales, games are loosing their souls to market testers or being denied outright, and so on.

Hell, it might be that conventional wisdom that's playing a role in killing the industry. Modern games exclude female protagonists, so women, and the guys that like playing a women are getting ticked off, and not buying.
I know I'm less interested in games these days because of that conventional wisdom being put into practice.

People have speculated this video also has something to do with the news that Nintendo would consider a game where Zelda is the hero of her own story if fans wanted it it.
You can imagine that the jerks came out to bash the idea, and the general hate towards one another. Jerks everywhere, on all sides, with reasonable people doggypaddleing to not be drowned out.

I didn't know that they were going to make a Zelda Zelda game.

As long they dont make another Zelda CDI game by sending it to the Russians that made the drawings there shoudn't be any problem. People got a VERY strong impression for a game with Zelda.

And if they are going to make a Zelda Zelda game, then she is going to start as a commoner rather than a princess or queen. Remember that the reason she is kidnapped is because she is powerful enough to fuck up the plans of the whoever is trying to take over the world, kinda like this trope if you want to win at all:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ShootTheMedicFirst

Its common warfare tactic. Take out the leader or the enemy best weapon to ensure victory. Even in the old NES games like Super Mario Bros this is true. The Koopa used black magic to turn the Mushroom Kingdom and its people into stone, and guess who the fuck can cure that shit? The Princess Toadstool....who gets kidnapped to ensure she doesn't undo their plans. www.mariomayhem.com/downloads/mario_instruction_booklets/Super_Mario_Bros-NES.pdf

If Zelda is NOT going to get kidnapped, then that means she has ZERO powers both in political and magical sense, to the point the enemy wouldn't even register her presence as a menace to begin with. She is going to start from nothing and go Metroidvania on the world of Hyrule.

Is that the source of controversy? that you can get to play Sim City with you playing as the Princess and manage the Kingdom? or was that they are just going to be lazy, make a Female Mute Link, and call it Zelda?[/quote]
I don't know the plans Nintendo has for Zelda being the protagonist in her own game, or even if they are going to make it. It's certainly been brought up enough in this thread as a reason, though. I can't read Jim's mind, so I'm willing to consider it as a possibility.

As far as the Zelda game, I'm open to the possibility that she is fighting against the people that have captured her, or is going to demonstrate the power to resist being captured in the first place, and has to fight to prevent further capture attempts.

But your ideas on the Zelda game are as good as mine.

As far as I'm concerned, despite them doing a less than stellar job at it, I'd rather have Jim, and Anita fighting than no one as they're far far far more likely to get noticed than I am, and they spark debates, and I feel this subject needs to be talked about so long as it exists. I doubt we'd be better off without either of them.
You may not like their work, and that's fine.

Implying that NO ONE was talking about sexuality and gender in games before? this person did on Metroid Other M and for all its efforts no one cared:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/lb_i.php?lb_id=13373815860B43920100&i_id=13384263550I62094100&p=17
So no one talks about it until there is a controversy? that was made years AFTER the M:OM fiasco, its not like they needed the spark of the moment to do it, they need time to process the bullshit, like any research should.

And guess what? Anita and her lack of effort is going to make things worse for other females that want to work in the industry. When Anita's brand of feminism ends up not selling the copies the publishers want (she is working with EA now, and given THEIR sale expectations they had for Dead Space 3, i would say that Anita was bound to fail no matter what) the industry is going to make a laughing stock of her, and anyone trying to argue her points after that. Not to mention how some female developers will have a hard time being included in the industry because of the publishers fear of a fiasco like this happening again, so they will play it safe and not hire ANYONE that has similar mentality.

They will point out this incident and the lack of sales of Mirror's Edge 2 as: "SEE? THIS IS WHY WE DONT MAKE FEMALES PROTAGONIST FOR THESE GAMES. IF IT WAS SO IMPORTANT TO HAVE A FEMALE THEN WHY DIDN'T YOU BUY THE 5 BILLIONS OF COPIES WE DEMANDED?" because scapegoating is the way to go in the industry.

And even if she had a good research, guess what? you CAN'T change the industry. Not even Orson Welles did it for Hollywood nor can people on the gaming industry. You don't reason with the industry, you just DO.

Listen to the poor man, he knows what it means to waste your life for nothing. She may as well make her own games, with the sweat of her brow. Ayn Ryan would be so proud of her.

Where's Korval now? If a person is going to champion the cause, they need to stick with it, or they're going to fade into obscurity, or the fact they tried certainly is.

You make solid points about the industry. I can easily see your predictions coming true.

They've used female protagonists as scapegoats before, and they'll do it again.

Its going to be bad for Mirror's Edge 2 now that people associate it with Anita. These people that coat everyone speaking up for female representation with their hatred for Anita are everywhere, and they're likely to not buy the game just because they hate Anita.
Then, as you stated, there's going to be expectations set way too high for the game's sales.
It's not going to be supported by the producer either, I wager. We won't see a single TV commercial, I bet.
Moreover, I bet it'll be xbone exclusive, which as we know is going to be a limited console in itself thanks to it's bad rep, the sales of it, and it's limited release.
I've little doubt the game's going to fail and by fail, I mean not live up to the astronomically stupid expectations of the company.

Indeed, a person can't change the industry all on their own. Especially an industry that doesn't want to change, even if the stubborness is out of stupidity. It's a sad fact.
It's going to take many hands to get the ball moving, and critics like Anita, and Jim to make people aware that people want change, and help rally the people.
That said, I don't believe it's a waste to try to create change. You might start a domino effect, and get support, and get those many hands to help you push against the status quo. If you leave a legacy of trying to change things, people that know of it may well remember it.
People have to try, or else nothing gets done.
The real trajedy is when these changes, some much needed, don't happen in the lifetime of the person trying to make the change, or they give up. They never get to see what they worked so hard for happen.
Passion is not a waste.

The reason that there's confusion in the ranks of feminism about the proper female protagonist is simple. Feminists aren't a hive mind entity. Everyone has opinions, even among feminists. There are no solid rules, and guidelines to live by in feminism as far as I know, and none on representation in the media. Even if there were rules written in stone, it's obvious not everyone follows it, eh?

Is not JUST that she doesn't specify what brand of feminism (who was supposed to be about equality) actually WANTS this brand of inequality as presented on her thesis. Cause apparently having "self control" is not positive for females somehow:
image

Is just that she doesn't make sense even in her terms:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/YMMV/FeministFrequency

And, that even if Feminism ISN'T a hivemind, the mainstream audience doesn't care. If YOU criticize it in ANY shape or form, no matter which brand you are complaining about, you are either a misogynist or a gender traitor. I remind you that, after all, one CANT make even a sarcastic comment without being put on jail. So the logical step to it is to lynch everyone that complains on Feminism: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125833-Petition-to-Free-Jailed-League-of-Legends-Player-Reaches-100-000-Sigs

God bless false dichotomies.

The only brand of feminism I can think of that Anita represents is her own, or possibly one created by the input of many feminists provided she's in touch with the community, and wants to represent as many feminists as possible.

Yeah, there's going to be those people who try to demonize you for disagreeing. It's the easy way out, but what are you going to do? Give up? Stoop to their level? Keep being civil? You could call them out on it?

Luckily the kid that got jailed is getting support by people that believe in justice. His case was pretty damn extreme.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here