Jump to content

Tensei

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,455

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Tensei

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Your criteria is extremely flawed, because under it, you can fucking include every media that has ever included a female, ever.

    Damsel in Distress specifically refers to the fact that the female herself is entirely powerless in her own situation and she is little more than an object or token to drive the plot. You could replace her with a car, or a can of orange juice, or anything else, and very little would have to be changed. That is literally the trope. "A female character has to be saved" is not a DiD, there are plenty of examples of "female character has to be rescued" that are NOT DiD, and as said, Borderlands 2 and Dark Souls both feature them, because the women in them either have agency, don't function as the sole driver of the plot or quest, or aren't in distress that any other character, male, lizard, walrusman or whatnot, isn't.

    Dark Souls especially is exceedingly neutral in how fucked everyone is. I took away from the game that in a lot of the cases, you're late to the party. There is no damsel in distress. They're already fucked. You can't save them, the most you can do is sift through their remains hoping for something useful, or put them out of their misery in a few other cases.

    Again, "woman needs help at some point" is not DiD. Final Fantasy 8 you mentioned is an excellent example of the trope, and how it's misused to create a false sense of urgency at the expense of a female character, when Rinoa could have been replaced with a copy of the game script that was actually good, and nothing would have changed. Hell, that'd inspire me to move faster. 7 and 9? Both of them feature female characters who at some point are rendered helpless, but are not DiD. Tifa, Aeris, and Yuffie all have depth and logic - Aeris herself is absolutely fucking astounding because by every account she comes off as one, and then within 20 minutes she's threatening to stomp balls and it's clear she knows exactly how people see her and fights that image. Dagger starts out somewhat weak, but by the end, she's very strong. Characterwise, anyway, she could never beat out Steiner in my playthroughs.

    Uh, have you played Dark Souls? You initially rescue Dusk of Oolacile from inside a Crystal golem, she gives some background exposition, then promptly gets kidnapped by Manus, and the entire DLC is about saving her again. Reah of Thorolund instantly turns into a damsel the moment her two bodyguards go hollow in the Tomb of Giants, and will actually die if you don't kill Petrus afterwards too.

    Are you saying that for it to count as a DiD trope, it has to be the *main* motivator of the plot? You're trying to apply the standards of games of 20 years ago to modern games, which is incorrect, and I'm sure that Anita's next video will highlight this difference as well (as I said in an earlier post).

    I don't think a modern example has to have a complete lack of characterization to count. The point is that at some point in the game, in spite of any strengths or character depth, a female character is helpless to save herself and requires the (male) hero to rescue her.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Yeah and that's where the whole 'moving the goalposts' thing I touched upon comes in. All these games fit the criterium, because in all of these games you have to save a female character who is helpless to save herself at some point. That is literally the trope. I didn't actually comment on the quality of the games themselves, and in fact quite a few of these games do a good job with characterization and equality despite still using the trope.

    Dark Souls arguably has some of the most sensible female character and armor design of any game, but that doesn't take away the fact that Dusk of Oolacile and Reah of Thorolund fit the trope pretty well.

    I think that's pretty much going to be the point of the distinction between the first video and the next one. To show that things nowadays are better overall and that there are far less cardboard cutouts, but that the trope still sees quite some unfortunate use in one form or another.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    also... there have been no updates since the last video came out. not even for supporters. my theory on this is that she's having a REALLY hard time finding examples of damsels in distress over the past ten years that aren't a) peach or B) zelda. like seriously. try naming some off. what can you come up with?

    Sure, do you want them just off the top of my head or should I make an alphabetic list?

    - Devil May Cry 4

    - Max Payne 3

    - Resident Evil 4

    - Resident Evil 5

    - Monkey Island 3

    - Eversion

    - Super Meat Boy

    - Prototype

    - Alpha Protocol

    - Borderlands 2

    - Star Fox Adventures

    - Sonic 2006

    - Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow

    - Dark Souls

    - Alan Wake

    - Bioshock Infinite

    - Asura's Wrath

    - Duke Nukem Forever

    - Far Cry 3

    - Overlord 1/2

    - Scribblenauts Unlimited

    - Final Fantasy VIII

    There's bound to be more comprehensive lists out there, this is just what I could quickly think of on the fly. But yeah, I'm suuuure Anita has trouble coming up with examples, good 'theory'! I'm eagerly awaiting the motion of goalposts and excluded scotsmen.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    Sorry for the metaposting, but I think it would be for the best if we could refrain from making posts along the lines of

    Does anyone here really believe that creating some bland, inoffensive, homogenized representation of the sexes in video games or whatever would change how one gender sees the other?

    Not only is it phrased extremely suggestively, but it's also something that, to my knowledge, nobody in this thread has actually said, i.e. a strawman. If you're going to make an argument against something that has been said, just quote them directly in order to avoid this.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I read the DJP Manifesto - 2013. Look like we sing the same tune. I especially loved those quotes at the end. The sexes should be regarded equally but our innate differences should be embraced, and the complementarity manifested within those differences is something to celebrate. How many of us are so stupid as to actually regard women or men as they are depicted in popular media? Some people, for sure, but most of us trust our own experiences in reality with the other gender, I reckon. Does anyone here really believe that creating some bland, inoffensive, homogenized representation of the sexes in video games or whatever would change how one gender sees the other? It certainly wouldn't affect my perception because I have a mind with the ability to think critically about what I see and assess its validity based upon what I know

    And can someone tell me exactly what it is that's wrong with a female character with big tits or a male character with big muscles? Those are things that, like, actually are on women or men. I understand that the backlash comes from essentially ALL current games having big-boobied women and jacked-out men, but if the feminist agenda were to come to fruition and some normative bodies were used for character models in most games, what do you think the reaction would be to a character designer deviating and creating, say, a chesty female character? Is this an issue with designing ALL characters around exaggerated aspects of gender-specific anatomy, or is it with designing ANY characters AT ALL as such? I certainly hope no one wants things to tend towards the latter...

    What is the 'feminist agenda' you are talking about? Who in this thread was in favor of creating a 'bland, inoffensive, homogenized representation of the sexes' that you seem to be arguing against?

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    E: You know what? It doesn't even matter. This thread is about the video series in specific, not about the person behind it. It doesn't matter if Anita Sarkeesian eats babies or the entire kickstarter is one big ponzi scheme. I'm here to talk about the contents of this video series, so I'm not gonna post til we're back on topic.

    BioShock Infinite

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    My beef is that is IS a modern FPS. It wasn't supposed to be. There are ton of Open World / RPG style games out there, and before that "MetroidVania" or "MGS" style games where you can go to any place in the entire game. Again pointing to BioShock 1 and System Shock 2 as games made by the same team that have far more openness then this one. I don't really play many modern FPS games because they do nothing for me, so I couldn't tell you if a game is more or less open than Infinite. But I know Infinite is SIGNIFICANTLY less open then BS1/SS2 and many other games that it was supposed to be like, and far less open then it was advertised.

    It may have more openness then COD/Halo style games that are a dime a dozen. But is that really an achievement? It is a step backwards IMO compared to its history

    For a modern FPS, I would have to say it is doing well for itself. Maybe its pushing modern FPS forward a tiny bit. It just could of, and should of, been more than a modern FPS in the first place

    I don't recall saying the combat was better in the original. The original wasn't a combat focused game so why would it? It was even more focused on story telling (though much more indirectly, the recordings were actually useful for expanding the story), had a much slower pace, combined the games creepy and atmospheric setting. The game has challenging enemies you had to kinda solve like puzzles or just sneak passed because you were outclassed, along with actually having some small puzzles. The Plasmids were pretty powerful and useful in the game where I feel like im wasting my time using them in Infinite because the game just wants me to constantly move and shoot and the enemies rarily ever fall for the traps. There was far less ammo to boot making a small amount of resource management / survival horror going on.

    Every single enemy in infinite is just plowing down with the most powerful weapons (which are laying ALL OVER THE PLACE in the multiple battlefields you come accross) you can find while hiding under chest high walls and enemies ducking and covering "realistically"

    Well there's also the fact that being able to backtrack to any place locks you into a particular narrative where all of the levels you pass through have to remain unchanged. Things like the statue getting partially destroyed, or permanently passing through tears to alternate realities don't gel with that.

    Also, implying that the recordings in this game aren't useful for expanding the story is just ridiculous. You won't even know half of what's going on if you don't listen to the recordings, and they touch upon some major plot points. The world building and the characters are generally much denser and thought-out than the original.

    I'll give you the lack of optional Big Daddies (even though Handimen are very similar). 90% of the enemies in the original, however, were leadhead splicers (shoot at you from a distance) or thuggish splicers (run at you with a melee weapon). There was a small amount of special enemies such as Houdini or spider splicers, but nowhere near the variation presented by firemen, patriots, crows, boys of silence and all the different variations on the standard vox/policemen enemies.

    Maybe you're playing the game wrong or you lack the imagination to use the vigors creatively if you're playing it as an actual military shooter? I used most of my vigors throughout the game, and I don't actually see how you can finish the game on Hard difficulty without doing so. Bucking Bronco, Possession, Charge, Crows, the bullet reflector and the water tentacles all were lots of fun and offered a lot of options. In fact, Bucking Bronco is a vigor that specifically counters the whole "hide behind cover and shoot" aspect of the game. Devils Kiss and Lightning Jockey were kinda generic but needed for a lot of fights as well. I don't understand why you would limit yourself from using half of your arsenal and then claim that the game is bland.

    BioShock Infinite

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    What do you consider backtracking if it's not the ability to walk to the beginning of a level from any point? It's not necessarily even level-bound. You can have a locked safe in Battleship Bay, go do the entire Hall of Heroes section, and come back with enough lockpicks for the safe. Areas like the Fink factory and the entire section before the Comstock House consist of multiple interconnected levels that allow you to travel around freely between them. What modern FPS are you comparing it to when you say that it has no openness?

    Also, I don't see how you can say that the combat is any worse than the original. This game has a greater variety of weapons, a big number of QoL improvements (such as the ability to use vigors and weapons at the same time), and generally less claustrophobic areas which allow you to vary your approaches, not to mention the mobility you get from Hooks, Skyrails and the Charge vigor. Combat is still the weakest aspect of the game, enemies have shitty AI and too much HP, but claiming that the original was any better takes some huge rose-tinted glasses.

    BioShock Infinite

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    Fair enough, but Bioshock 1 was a game from the start of this console cycle. We're 6 years further now, graphical standards have increased correspondingly, but we're still on the same consoles.

    I guess what I'm saying is that considering the limitations of consoles and the current trend in FPS level design, it's impressive that they went and made such a beautiful-looking game that has nonetheless relatively open level design, allowing for significant backtracking and a lot of optional side-areas. Also Bioshock 2 was a far better game than the first one, it just had a worse story and characters. Maybe you haven't played the first one in a long time but its general gameplay/combat was pretty mediocre, even for the time. 2 improved on the combat a lot, and Infinite is an evolution thereof.

    Also I refuse to believe that you think this game would have worked better as a visual novel. Like, seriously?

    BioShock Infinite

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    I think it really is a fantastic game. Not perfect by any means, with combat arguably being the weakest link, but just the feeling of virtually walking through such an exquisitely crafted world makes up for a lot.

    And I really have to appreciate the game for that. Modern FPSes have this tendency to put all the graphical luster on a single angle right in front of the player, and make sure that they never turn around or take a detour in order to save on graphical resources. Maybe my standards are low, but in a day and age where FPSes block off the way you came every five steps you take, it's a breath of fresh air to be able to save up 5 lockpicks and then backtrack to the start of the level in order to open a safe. I still don't see how it's any more limiting than the original game.

    The combat really is just Bioshock 2 with skyrails and tear-objects, which I guess is adequate enough for me. I guess I have the benefit of not having watched any PR on the game whatsoever, so I didn't come into the game expecting dynamic Zeppelin appearances (as opposed to scripted ones) and whatever else the demo showed off.

    The real strength lies in the graphics, aesthetics and the worldbuilding: there's so many memorable setpieces and symbolism/foreshadowing all over the place. Again, you can really feel that a lot of time was put into polishing absolutely everything. Plot is good, pretty ambitious, and a bit sloppy towards the end, but resolves satisfyingly enough.

    BioShock Infinite

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    So far I am not digging the modern shooter (CoD/Halo) style plastered all over this game. Nothing at all like System Shock 2 / Bioshock 1 which is heavily disappointing to me as I was looking forward to playing a game in the same style. Maybe it changes, but so far I'm being lead like a dog to each location, with big banners that say "GO HERE" and its just running a straight line with little exploration. I can't even go back to old areas unless the game wants me to. I wasn't expecting the game to be like everything else on the market so I'm a little disheartened.

    It is a pretty game at least

    I don't know at which stage of the game you are, but there is actually a lot to explore (including side missions) and you can absolutely backtrack through an entire level. I don't think it's very fair to say that it has the same amount of railroading as a CoD game, and level design-wise it really does remind me of a Bioshock game.

    And what is the significance of the collar you choose? Between cage or bird. Will it actually BE anything? DO THE CHOICES ACTUALLY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE?!?!?!??!

    I think that in the end, the choices (HUGE FUCKING SPOILERS THAT ACTUALLY MATTER UNLIKE THE FACT THAT THE LIGHTHOUSE AT THE START IS A CALLBACK TO THE ORIGINAL)don't matter, but only serve to illustrate the infinite alternate timelines/universes that slightly diverge. That's where the whole constants and variables thing comes from.

    Unrelated, but be sure to listen to every song in the game when it starts playing (especially the calliope song at the beach), you might recognize some interesting things. Also from what I hear this game runs/looks kinda shit on consoles.

    BioShock Infinite

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    I went in mostly blind (haven't watched any dev videos or previews). Loved the callback to Bioshock 1 in the intro (going up the lighthouse instead of down). The 'prize' for winning the raffle was a real holy shit moment for me because I had no idea what this game was going to be about up to that point.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    i'm bringing it up because it's PART OF THE CONVERSATION.

    NOTABLY THE PART YOU DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT.

    But you just said it yourself when you reversed my quote about theorizing about Anita's agenda to be about game developers. I don't see the merit in talking about intentions, because you can't come up with a conclusive answer anyway unless you can somehow contact every game developer and ask them what they were thinking when they wrote their plot.

    then what exactly is taking away the power of all these female characters? games don't just pop into existence. it doesn't much more than putting two and two together to figure this one out. also, if i can't critque her for her implications and editorial intent because she hasn't clearly stated *exactly what it means*, then she can do the exact same thing to games... why? seriously. saying she is immune to the same criticism she is doling out even when she is working in the same realm, media for consumption by the general public, does not make sense.

    But she isn't doing this. Where is she doing this? You're implying that at some point in the video she says something along the lines of "Game developers put this trope in because they're all sexist pigs."

    I don't know how to make this any clearer. She never delves into the game developers intentions, and certainly makes no definite statement about them.

    "tapped into adolescent power fantasies in order to sell more games to young straight boys & men"

    "tapped into" & "in order to" = pretty darn close to a statement of perceived intent, wouldn't you say? So many ways to phrase the sentiment... just bad writing, then?

    I don't think so. Male power fantasies can be (and probably usually are) created without even being aware that they are a thing. Granted, 'in order to sell more games' is a pretty obvious statement of intent, but not a particularly farfetched one, so I'll give you that.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    We can *theorize* about game maker's agendas, but I think that's sort of pointless until they explicitly state their purposes (if they ever will). honestly if she's not pointing this directly at game developers, and this is just a 'general awareness' series, then it's as big a publicity stunt as a politician trying to ban violent video games. it's using the 'games are bad' demon as a way to get people listening. honestly, most anyone on this site could have probably told you all of the examples she talked about except for the castle quest one. and anyone who's been a consistent gamer could do the same. she's added nothing to the conversation other than 'and it's sexist.' and it IS. i get that it is. there's a constructive conversation to be had. but the issue at hand is not even close to the degree she's attempting to make it out to be. telling me a game from the 80's like castle quest is sexist, is that really supposed to surprise me? or be relevant to what's happening today? guess what else was sexist. THE 80'S.

    She's not saying "developers are bad" or "games are bad" or even implying something like that. It's exactly what it is. She *is* listing examples that any consistent gamer could come up with and pointing out where she thinks the problem lies. I think it's good if only for the amount of attention it generates because it also creates discussions, people are talking about what they think about the trope.

    I also wouldn't overanalyze too much of her intentions based on just this first video and at least see how it ties into the next one. If anything, I can imagine that she will make a lot of comparisons between older and modern iterations of the trope, so for that reason it would be necessary to first have a video about the trope in older games, even if to you and me the examples might seem a bit obvious.

    Mmmph. You've now conveniently characterized my entire post as a misunderstanding of insider jargon. My objections - and criticisms - all spoke to substance more than style. I have pointed out how, and why, I feel that her arguments are flawed oversimplifications, and I have offered alternative means of making the same fundamental point about video games without employing such means. If that's the end of the story and there's nothing left to do but assume I didn't know what she meant because she was using secret Feminist codewords that would take too much time to explain and reconcile with my apparently inadequate understanding, I guess we're done.

    I didn't intend to be as dismissive, I just thought that it would be too much of a derail to bring up my own interpretation of each of her quotes. I think that if we're at the point where we are picking apart the etymology and exact phrasing of what are, from my perspective, reasonably well-defined concepts such as the male power fantasy, it might be time to take a step back.

    Tropes vs. Women / #GamerGate Conspiracies

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Tensei

    @ DJP I don't know if it would be beneficial to try and pick apart your analysis of the direct quotes, and I guess that I can agree that at points she starts to sound a bit buzzwordy. It might be more accurate to say that she uses a lot of rhetoric that is common in feminist discourse but might not be as well defined outside of it. For example regarding the 'adolescent male power fantasy', that's something I feel I have a decent understanding of, but at the same time I can see how out of context it can sound like a bunch of buzzwords.

    We can *theorize* about game maker's agendas, but I think that's sort of pointless until they explicitly state their purposes (if they ever will).

    This would almost be clever if it wasn't a complete nonsequitur. What are you even talking about here? The video and by extension this thread is about examples of the trope in videogames. Intentions and agendas of the developers behind the games are really not touched upon at all. So I really have no idea what you are getting at here.

    also, there is nothing in her work that is as fair, balanced or objective as any documentary. that's about as congruent as saying that she talks, just like people in documentaries do.

    Fairness and balance aren't necessarily integral parts of documentaries, as I'm sure you could find in many films made in totalitarian countries, or even in things done by people like Michael Moore.

    That is not the point though, my point is that similarly to a documentary, her primary stated goal is to be informative.

    quite frankly if your best defense is 'well nobody knows for sure what she thinks (despite overwhelmingly strong statements and implications directly at a certain point, often to the point of clear bias) so that's an unfair criticism' then there's not much left to defend.

    That is not my defense. I am saying that you shouldn't pin things on people that haven't actually been said. If she hasn't actually openly stated her agenda, well then you can only kind of guess, right?

×
×
  • Create New...