The Derrit

and here is the post of the thread in the past couple months also, i might note that ZERO mainstream gaming sites are posting about her videos. at all. and i can see why; frankly, as prizm is saying, it would be bad business to acknowledge her in any way. think of the flame wars that would appear on an ign or a gamespot. she's bad press for anyone who associates with her, because the only thing she represents is "overt" sexism.

what conclusion has she come to, exactly. all of her videos have been 'hey look at this, damsel in distress' with a 'HEY DISCLAIMER there's not anything actually really *wrong* with any of this, just thought i'd point it all out' at the end. if her point is that sexism in gaming is bad then congratulations, she's right. but in terms of any other truly specific points, i'm really striking out on actual arguments she's made. and finding different types of damsels in distress from different eras isn't a point. also djp has already done all of those things. much better than she has. also you do not have to come up with a better idea to disprove a bad one. that is not how science works, social or otherwise.

i'm enjoying it so far though it's a bit slow to get up to speed

i really wish that mario vs donkey kong could have continued in the direction of donkey kong 94 instead of puzzle game with mini marios

all of the new additions are really cool except for the original donkey kong. the game boy version is already available and infinitely better. if you haven't played it you're doing yourself a disservice

on one hand i'm happy all these unlikely games are coming to america on the other hand my superiority complex of having them all in japanese already is highly diminished

i think you meant

and it's still sexist fighting sexism with sexism seems like the proper way so solve problems

no they're exactly the same, the only difference is historical context, and the idea that one is fine and the other isn't is *ironically* INCREDIBLY SEXIST. if one is okay because 'deal with it you're men,' and the same thing isn't okay because women are involved instead of men, that. is. SEXISM.

my copy shouldcome in the mail tomorrow very excited. also, mario and luigi dream team in one week good time to have nintendo

any game that gives players total control of the world will be broken quickly to the point of no fun for 95% of the players. imagine if raid groups in WoW made the rules for the rest of the game world because they were most powerful. who would want to play that game

that it really doesn't need to be said in the first place, at all. "I used some chiptune elements to give my OCRemix a retro sound." "You don't need chiptune elements to give your song a retro sound. You could do something else, such as x, y, or z." "Yeah but that's what I felt like doing so I did it." and yeah i am comparing chiptune to DiD. they're both about as tired, both stopgap, and both harmless.

something that does not exist on a case by case basis and cannot be proven in the aggregate means nothing.

she'd be a lot easier to take seriously if she didn't say, like literally say, out loud, it's fine as long as it's not happening to women. like 'historical context' can go screw itself seriously. i don't see minorities being like 'yeah police brutality and harassment is fine as long as it's not happening to minorities like it historically has,' or women saying 'sex trafficking is alright as long as it's not girls,' or people in Africa suffering from wars and genocide being like 'genocide would be fine if it were just happening to someone else!' the point of fighting for equality and respect is that you wouldn't wish your problems on ANYONE. if it's not okay for it to be done to you, it's not okay to be done to anyone. that's what equality means. if she seriously thinks it's fine for the problems she's so vehemently attempting to combat to just be someone else's problem, that's indefensible. the problem with her series is she started with a small, simple idea that everyone can get behind; better opportunities for women in game narrative. let's call it a fruit tart. tasty, who wouldn't enjoy it? and then she just pulls down her pants and shits all over it with bias, combative language and generally poor rationale, until no matter how sweet and tasty that original fruit tart was, the shit that is now covering it ruins it beyond repair.

i just realized i can download retail games on my japanese 3DS guess i get to play ace attorney and professor layton still woo

the irony here is that to make most of her points on 'pernicious behavior' she completely ignores context to do it. her point on spelunky was absolutely preposterous. she literally was like 'it's fine if a guy is captured. it's not fine it a woman is captured.' and i get your point at context here but here's what the context ACTUALLY is: that what you're rescuing is completely inconsequential and holds no weight in the narrative or in anything else. what if the default setting was the dog? literally nothing would be different. the only good part about this video was when she listed games that she thought did what she wants well, and the example at the end. those were constructive.

so her point throughout the first half of the video has been "when the person in peril isn't female, it doesn't matter because it's just a dude. but if it's a girl, it's sexist and bad." also her comment around 6:30 is the biggest pot shot i've ever heard, despite the fact it's actually proving how little it matters.

my favorite part of her videos so far is the two sentence blurb where she says 'in most games, there is "context" used to "explain away" these acts of violence.' as if the context was completely irrelevant because something bad happened to a woman.

while i get that mistakes happen gamestop is pretty much the only big box store at which there's even the possibility of you walking out without what you paid for. you can't take pages out of books, or CDs out of cases, or PC hardware out of boxes. Gamestop is the only place that puts itself in the position to have this problem.

i think Fat Princess is a really good example of this. It's capture the flag with princesses, and as a mechanic you feed your princess to make her harder to transport. It's really easy to be like 'why damsel in distress OMG sexist' but when you look at it objectively, what's the point of it? it's a game mechanic based on the simple idea of 'hey princesses always get captured in video games, isn't that funny. and wouldn't it be funnier if you could make them fat so they were hard to capture?' when you look at the overall picture, they could be capturing rubber band balls, it really doesn't matter, but the idea of a princess getting fattened up fits the core mechanic. the fact that it's a princess has literally no purpose in the game other than to justify a core game mechanic. But it would be really easy for a sarkeesian-esque person to say, "in Fat Princess, the entire point of the game is to capture a helpless princess, who the sexist game designers also made fat. This is troubling and pernicious." But if you actually play the game, you realize in about 5 seconds fat that the princess bit is a means to an end, and you don't ever think about the fact that it's disempowering women at any point while you're playing it. Which is why it's important to actually play the games you critique, which frankly should be obvious to begin with.

because it's plagarism. if someone taking an ocremix song and posting it on newgrounds as their own is plagarism how would taking part of someone's youtube video and posting it on youtube as your own not be plagarism and it's not fair use because she is using her work to turn a profit.

a capture card setup and a 1 TB hard drive is really cheap. if you're going to play 'all these games' (she's not actually playing all these games) it takes literally zero extra effort to just record gameplay while you do it. i wouldn't even care if it were all stock footage but taking other people's material from their youtube channel and not even saying so is kind of bullshit. it would take no effort whatsoever to just put the people who actually recorded this footage in the credits or something. acting like it's all you when it's actually all wikipedia/tvtropes/giantbomb/other people's youtube channels is completely bullshit.

it's not like she hasn't proven herself time and time again to be a complete skeeze is anyone really surprised that she's plagarizing and lying about her work? she already did that in her bayonetta video that was removed when the internet called her on not knowing what actually happened in the game.

the complexity of game systems within a game has exactly zero to do with the programming involved and the level of quality control required to bug-test a game. example: metroid prime vs. borderlands. do both have physics? yes. do both have complex 3d environments that interact with both AI and the player? yes. do both have collision detection? yes and kind of sometimes, in the case of borderlands. does the AI do what it's supposed to? once again, yes and sometimes kind of. structurally speaking they are the same because they are 3d, free-movement games. you can't just say 'it's simpler so it's easier for nintendo' because it's not simpler OR easier. at all. and the same goes for pretty much ANY GAME that's not a 2d platformer. on top of that, even if you WERE right, it's a pretty moot point. it's like saying 'chess is less complex than calvinball, so no wonder it doesn't need any patching; chess is dumb and simple.' an elegant system that works all the time is 150% better than a 'we made all these crazy, off the wall, unbelievable interactions! but sometimes they don't work and make the game go crazy. have fun!' don't be an apologist for shoddy quality control as a way to try and act like nintendo games "are too simple." because you're a) wrong and wrong again. the fact that companies would complain about patches being difficult to put out (which is a legitimate gripe) pretty much exposes the entire rest of the industry for being okay with putting out a game that's got bugs all over it still. just to bring this entire debate full circle: TL;DR you guys: nintendo games are glitchy. me: no they aren't. you guys: nintendo never patches their games. me: they have when they've needed to, but they pretty much never need to because they have the best quality control. you guys: nintendo doesn't need to patch their games because they're too simple. me: your logic is flawed and inaccurate, and even if it was accurate is a completely moot point. there's no other angle you can take at this you're just wrong in every direction. you've even argued opposite sides of the same point to try and find a new way to paint nintendo in a negative light. i mean, come on. you should be embarassed.

nice link. and "research."