Darklink42
-
Posts
1,073 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Darklink42
-
-
I think part of my problem with her arguments is that she assumes too many things about both the creators and the content without contextualizing it. She makes good points, but her argument consistently boomerangs back to "these creators know they're doing wrong and they're doing it anyways, shame on them." This happens as she presents developers who offer options for gender customization, developers who make tributes to an era gone by, and developers who parody the trope. Her choice of words and phrases, things like "attempt to get away with," "does not excuse," and "free pass to continue exploiting" don't present the argument that developers are thinking about the trope, but instead are a conniving bunch of presumably males forever attempting to circumvent a sense of social responsibility. One of the weakest arguments that can be made is attempting to argue the intent of a creator, but she relies on that heavily to make her point. Even if some cases of this may be true where sexism is both intentional and exists as a an attempt to excuse it within the culture, others do not. The same with this trope being used as humor. It's a pointless dead end that detracts from her point instead of reinforcing anything meaningful, and it undercuts the integrity of her argument pretty badly.
It begs the argument of whether her problem really lies with damseling, or with the idea of a kidnapping as a whole. In a way, the latter seems to be her overarching point, and it's not a very strong one. Kidnapping, by definition, disempowers the kidnapped, with options for regaining the empowerment ranging from the rescuer to the self-empowered escapee. It would have been more fitting for her to have left it at the unbalanced percentages of women in the kidnapped role instead of men. She loses her point and her edge in the discussion, at least for me, at about the moment she points out that reversing the genders changes little, again without acknowledging the context of the creators for doing so. I know at least one of those mods was created as a tool of gender empowerment by a father for his daughter. If that's not a subversion and change to the trope, then what is good enough at that point?
I get her point that Spelunky changes little by offering a male damsel instead of a female as an option, in regards to reinforcing a negative stereotype versus not doing so with the male, but it comes at the expense of her larger point that developers and creators aren't doing enough to challenge or change it. Spelunky's option is, given it's offering, at least an acknowledgement that more is at play than just the damsel in distress, offering an awareness of the hand-in-hand sexualization via the empowering smooch. I've never played the game, but I wonder what might have changed if the character were a friendly NPC, some acquaintance of the hero who offered the life-up as a reward upon their rescue. I figured when I first saw the dog, that might have been an option. I guess I really can't comment further without understanding what the others options change (does having the male character make the hero gay? Does the dog also offer a smooch?) Context, again, is needed to judge whether the mechanic in place is sexist for the sake of playing along (For instance, is the male "damsel" a gay man by virtue of the bow on his neck and the thong he's wearing?), or if the additional choices were a way of changing the trope for a different reason (Something that is more powerful than copy-pasting the trope in with no alterations).
Perhaps where she finally loses me is at the 12 minute mark where she points out that in order for ironic humor to work, the assumption has to be that what is being played for a joke has no relevance or power, which is flat out fallacious. If that were the case, Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert would be out of a job. This is the point in which she begins to argumentatively hammer tent pegs into the ground and blanket the whole area. She ditches contextualization by essentially making the claim that there really isn't any humor at all that may be used to challenge or change this trope, failing to mention that some of the games she picked, like Rochard, Earthworm Jim, DLC Quest, and even arguably Castle Crashers, are parodies of genre and time, mocking everything rather than specifics. It doesn't grant them the "free pass" she's assuming the creators were gunning for in order to avoid critique (Which is a very large assumption on her part about their intent), but the lack of contextual acknowledgement hurts her case. And although she brings up some games that promote conversation, a larger list or more in depth discussion of the games that do that would have greatly helped reinforce her position. I wouldn't go so far as to say she's purposefully cherry-picking, but her arguments do seem to tend towards very focused, narrow points that assume broader context merely backs them as she goes.
Speaking of cherry picking, she picked Eversion as a reference for humor towards the trope, but failed to mention that the good ending is the reveal that it wasn't a joke at all, but a hint at what the good ending was to contain. If she was a looking for a game that subverted the trope, she might have done well to investigate the whole game given that (spoilers) the hero in end is a monster who is trying to return to his own monstrous world, where his assumed love interest resides.
In one of those rare instances where Bleck has chosen to throw out more than a deconstructive one-liner and put his reasoning on full display, I do agree with him that it's a good thing she's out there making videos to promote conversation. But I'm disappointed with the arguments she's making and the lack of context and even depth disguised by a march of talking points and narrow looks at the medium. It doesn't feel like she's making these points as a means to enable active change. Rather, her whole argument is presented as a passive blanket indictment of videogaming as a whole to see what sticks and what doesn't, enabled by a few powerful examples in her favor (some with and some without context.) It rings hollow for her to claim to wish to see this trope subverted, challenged, or changed when she dismisses some of the efforts made, especially any and all humorous ones, and fails to look in-depth at other games which do go all of those routes.
-
so wait, that's not venom
I was pretty sure it was Candlejack myself, but no one disappeared.
-
Any ideas, DarkLink42? I'm pretty happy with it as it is, but I'm open to ideas.
As far as the listy-ness goes, I think it works together. I tried some different combinations, but LT has a pretty good flow going in this bio, so breaking it up worked worse any way it went.
The only edit I have a suggestion for is the phrase "Numerous gates", which was just added. It makes sense to me, but the sentence as is leaves their purpose and placement somewhat ambiguous. Adding something like "...gates in his path..." or "...gates blocking his way..." would help clarify it without making it run overly long.
Nice touch, by the way, with the second to last sentence LT. It's a good, subtle wink to the player and a hint to future players.
-
Would it help to rearrange the two lists so they aren't in close proximity to one another? It doesn't read like there's too much listing to me, just that the two sentences which do it come right after one another.
Also, some further thoughts on the exclamation are above, but shortly before you posted, Dafydd. My bad.
-
Ho, when used as an exclamation, is the equivalent of saying "let's go" or "off we go." I'm not 100% but I think it might just be a shortened version of "tally-ho." According to the wise sage Wik E'Pedia, that was a phrase used in fox hunting to excite the hounds into the chase. So not terribly far off from how it's being used in this context. In the case of the bio, I'm not sure why it's included. I feel like there should be a destination or action included before the word, as an indicator of what is being exclaimed. ("Adventure, ho!" or "Off to the rescue. Ho!" for example) Unless that's a trademark thing Arthur says.
Also, LT, I have a question about the armor. I've only really watched review shows about the games (they were way too difficult for me as a kid), but isn't true at least of the first two or three that Arthur's armor always falls off after just one hit?
Edit: Ninja edits are ninja.
-
Well, your wish is granted. It's now the midweek madness sale.
-
Retroactively I got two of the exact same coupon for Toki Tori 2. Which puts my count of those coupons to three at the moment. They're only 10% off, and I doubt they stack with each other, but if anyone wants one for a card or something, that'd be cool.
I think I'm kind of, overall, disappointed with this year's sale gimmick. In the past, the badges handed out involved playing games as well as sometimes buying new ones. I liked the addition of achievements in games I hadn't played yet. It felt like an incentive to digitally dust off the older titles in my library and give them a go. This one felt more buying oriented than playing, which made it less accessible or interesting to me. I ended up at level 2 with 2 spare cards just floating in my inventory. And that was with voting every day and some trading involved. No cool coupons, no real reason to play any games that I would have bought or that I already have.
-
spawn
There just aren't words adequate for that caption.
-
That was a great thing.
Personally, I've never had bad employee experience there, but all of the friends I've had that worked there never had good stories to tell about the job. That being said, Gamestop will remain if only because it's easier, faster, and more instantly gratifying than waiting around on Amazon, shipping the thing out, and waiting for the money to come through. As for me? I'm all Amazon and Steam these days, and happier for it.
-
Are you really buying that many games?
He's talking about the summer sale Steam Cards.
-
Been following this game for quite a while, only to come up short on funds when the alpha released. Still looks like a blast though, and it's on the top of my to-buy list once I've got the cash.
-
Aight.
I have 2 extra Football Managers and 2 Dead Island Riptides for trade for the cards remaining in the steam getaway set. Help me out.
I have Dead Island Riptide, Bioshock Infinite, Football Manager, Prison Architect, Reus, and Tomb Raider. If you have one not listed (Skyrim, Torchlight, Kerbal Space Program, or Chivalry) and need Dead Island or a Football Manager, send me a trade request on Steam.
Got a Kerbal card for you, if you still need it.
-
Excellent, bio adjusted accordingly. That's another bio down. Thanks for hanging in there, Darklink42.
As always, it's been a pleasure. I may try a second one once you guys finish this batch, but we'll see what happens.
-
Well, as far as my sources go, he's been "the" Skull Kid, as a differentiation from the "Skull Kids" that are generically within the universe. I haven't seen, in any of the three (four if you count the Majora's Mask text dump)sources I used, the character referred to as just "Skull Kid". This was why, by the way, "skull kids" was not capitalized at first, to avoid confusion.
When last I put together a bio, the bold was the first mention of the character in question's name, so that's what I went with unless that rule has changed or I'm recalling it wrong. My English major sensibilities made me italicize the game titles, since I don't remember whether we had a rule about that or not. It's up to you guys.
Edit: Alright, so there is, upon further review, some slight ambiguity. One of the wikis does simply use "Skull Kid", where the other does not. The game text has most characters refer to him as "the Skull Kid", but in direct conversation, the "the" is not present. I'm not really sure how to approach this one, as far as that goes. It seems like within discussion of the character, but not with the character, "the" is warranted. To me, that seems the easiest way to avoid confusion, and it reads better, but that's personal preference.
The game text dump, if you're interested, is found here: http://www.gamefaqs.com/n64/197770-the-legend-of-zelda-majoras-mask/faqs/20239
-
I do believe so.
Introduced in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Skull Kids are impish creatures that live within the mysterious Lost Woods. Unlike the monsters of the forest, Skull Kids don’t appear to be evil, merely mischievous. They are said to have once been children who wandered too far into the forest and were transformed by the forbidden air. While their trickery can tend toward cruelty, in the end they’ve helped Link, the Hero of Time, on his quests more often than hindered him. It’s only when they come into contact with adults that they turn violent, displaying a childlike fear that is the last remnant of their former lives.One Skull Kid in particular formed a friendship with Link, happily trading music and masks with him whenever the hero returned to the woods. What began with a chance musical jam, however, would later force Link to undertake a quest in an alternate world closely related to his own: Termina. In The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s Mask, the Skull Kid ambushes a wandering salesman and steals a mask of great evil. Known as Majora’s Mask, it subtly takes control of the Skull Kid, negatively influencing his personality and granting him access to dark magic, which he uses to pull down the moon from the sky in order to destroy the world. He also waylays Link, stealing his possessions and later transforming him into Deku Link. Although the people of Termina, and Link himself, have reason to fear and hate the Skull Kid, his fairy friend Tatl maintains a different perspective. She believes that the mask completely possessed the forest imp, deepening the anger and loneliness he felt after some of his closest friends abandoned him one night and didn't come back.
-
Does it hurt anything particularly if we simply leave the sentence to end at "...abandoned him one night?" If it doesn't work, your suggestion works for me.
I think part of the problem with the sentence is that we're trying to balance out what we know will happen with what the Skull Kid knows about where he's at within the time frame of the bio. I don't disagree that it's disingenuous to say "never" only to have them come back during the game. The ending of the sentence seems to ultimately hinge on whether we decide that the reader is privy to the hint of something more developing, or whether we leave the moment shrouded in mystery.
-
She believes that the mask completely possessed the forest imp, deepening the anger and loneliness he felt after his closest friends abandoned him one night [and did not come back].
We'll keep working this thing until it shines!
Edit: not to make things more complicated, but if we go with the above, would the correct phrase be "had not" or "were not"?
-
Last sentence has been changed once more. Is it odd that I look forward to reading your guys' thoughts and edits on these?
-
http://leo.stcloudstate.edu/punct/col-semi.html
http://www.gcsu.edu/writingcenter/colonrules.htm
These two help a lot with that. In the way the bio is now: "closely related to his own: Termina", the colon can't be replaced by a semicolon because Termina is the explanation for the alternate world of the previous sentence. My proposed alternative: "a quest in Termina: an alternate world...", is more ambiguous as far as the usage goes, which makes it, now that I'm thinking about it, an unfair sentence to use as an example. But I went with the colon because I perceived the sentence that followed to be an explanation of the previous, not a stand-alone, related sentence by itself. I've never been 100% clear on that particular use of a semicolon, since the situations in which it, the colon, and the comma can be used all overlap slightly. It's entirely possible in the second sentence that I incorrectly used a colon, and should have put a semicolon instead.
Disclaimer: I just woke from a nap and am a little woozy, but I think I'm making sense. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon (also this, for fun.)
-
In this case, the colon is for introducing the subject of the clause before it. It's sort of an emphasis shortcut. A semi-colon wouldn't fit there because they are supposed to be used to join two stand alone clauses rather than emphasize. A dash is typically used as a pause indicator, and is what people (IMO) ought to use instead of an ellipsis at the end of sentences that trail off as well. I'm just going off of memory here though. Stylistically I could have gone with a comma, but that ends up kind of blah. I see your point about the ambiguity though. I'll mess around with it and see if I can up with something better.
-"force Link to undertake a quest in Termina: an alternate world closely related to his (their?) own" Maybe?
I took the "seemingly" out, I think you're right about the sense of finality not being out of place, as far as that goes. I think I also like "never to return," it gives the sentence more flair. Consider it added.
-
"Deepened" works for me. "Seemingly" does sound rather weak, yeah. Are you saying they didn't actually abandon him? If they never returned, I'd say that's what they did. I've read your sources and I still don't get the whole picture.
Eventually, Link finds out that the giants left because they had a duty to fulfill, not because they were angry with the Skull Kid. But that's nothing something that's really found out fully until the end of the game when the four giants are all awoken and called forth. In the mean time the Skull Kid was convinced it was because they were angry with him, and had left him behind to be lonely and miserable.
-
Wouldn't be the first time.
So much YES!!
-
Moved up and edited once more. I like "abandoned", but I added "seemingly" since the truth is ambiguous (to someone who hasn't played through.) Does that weaken the sentence though? Also changed "enhanced" to "deepened". Thoughts?
Introduced in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Skull Kids are impish creatures that live within the mysterious Lost Woods. Unlike the monsters of the forest, Skull Kids don’t appear to be evil, merely mischievous. They are said to have once been children who wandered too far into the forest and were transformed by the forbidden air. While their trickery can tend toward cruelty, in the end they’ve helped Link, the Hero of Time, on his quests more often than hindered him. It’s only when they come into contact with adults that they turn violent, displaying a childlike fear that is the last remnant of their former lives.One Skull Kid in particular formed a friendship with Link, happily trading music and masks with him whenever the hero returned to the woods. What began with a chance musical jam, however, would later force Link to undertake a quest in an alternate world closely related to his own: Termina. In The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s Mask, the Skull Kid ambushes a wandering salesman and steals a mask of great evil. Known as Majora’s Mask, it subtly takes control of the Skull Kid, negatively influencing his personality and granting him access to dark magic, which he uses to pull down the moon from the sky in order to destroy the world. He also waylays Link, stealing his possessions and later transforming him into Deku Link. Although the people of Termina, and Link himself, have reason to fear and hate the Skull Kid, his fairy friend Tatl maintains a different perspective. She believes that the mask completely possessed the forest imp, deepening the anger and loneliness he felt when some of his closest friends abandoned him one night and didn't come back.
-
Edits have been made above. I went with "closest friends" and added some specificity about their exit as well, since "departed" by itself didn't sound right.
I love working in this thread, I always get to learn new things about the English language. I'm also going to give some serious thought about how to incorporate oobalabooba (not a capitalized word
) into a conversation.
Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies
in General Discussion
Posted
Even in her latest video she messes it up with her references to Eversion's bad ending as a joke. She very clearly didn't understand or care to look up the context of the good ending or the game itself which was a, surprise, subversion of the DiD trope, among others.