RWarehall: Gamergate became popularized by 6 or 7 articles written within a day or two calling gamers "basement dwelling neckbeards", implying that gamers are backwards, slow, and violent misogynists. Their games have to change so we can have a new age in gaming.
Vainamoinen: In the immediate wake of Adam Baldwin's indefensibly misogynist reposting of the "Burgers and Fries" video in a tweet that first bore and created the hashtag "#gamergate", there has to my knowledge not been a single article that described the industry created hobbyist identity "gamer" as a bunch of "basement dwelling neckbeards". It would only be an accurate description of the industry's decades old target group.
Those 6 or 7 articles (some sources list up to a dozen) were a reaction to and description of the exploding gamergate phenomenon (with, granted, differing levels of justified anger at those developments in one's own hobby culture involved); Baldwin gleefully named the phenomenon
before those articles were published; the sudden emergence of press coverage on the matter evidently followed a long phase of deliberation as to whether the press should report on the cultural suicide at all or not; and either press decision was later painted as "corrupt".
RWarehall: Because Anita Saarkesian is a woman, any criticism of her is called sexism by you extremists.
Vainamoinen: If the criticism is first and foremost a loose assortment of ostracism, misrepresentation and slander, we could of course find that it is rooted in sexist attitudes. If, for example, people argue that her videos "
paint[ed] gaming as a whole as sexist" – even though she clearly repeats at the beginning of each new topic that criticism of details does not ruin the enjoyment of the entire work of art, and has e.g. repeatedly professed her love for the Zelda series while also criticising the treatment of the eponymous figure – that could be one valid way to dismiss criticism because it clearly fails to miss the mark at its very outset. More concrete, borderline vile misrepresentation of her arguments (
"Pac-Man [is sexist] because it came out before Ms. Pac Man") would of course solidify our impression further.
RWarehall: Only the radicals see the princess in Donkey Kong as a symptom of sexism while the rational people see it as something different. I see it as a symbol of the depths of love, what one person might be willing to do to save the one he or she loves.
Vainamoinen: The still vast prevalence of the Damsel in Distress trope is a symptom of fixed gender roles prevalent in our society. The Tropes vs. Women idea is not to wipe these stereotypes off the creative plate, but to make room for alternatives, for variety and balance. Those "radicals" you speak of are actually able to capably criticise details of a work of art while still loving the very same piece of art. Which is a very sensible thing to understand as an avid hobbyist, in my opinion; it does not deter us from interpreting a love story as a love story.
Some people would like the game mechanics to meet certain standards, some people would like the story to meet certain standards. Nothing radical to it. Some people don't need standards of any kind, they just play the Steam best sellers. Which is also OK.
It's just important that we don't want to become mindless consumers who, say, have the uncontrollable reflex to mass pre-order expensive mediocre Japanese mini-game fests from some devs with a lolita complex just because some import service insinuated it wouldn't come to America in fear of the – gasp –
criticism it could potentially face there.
Oh, and there's no princess in Donkey Kong.
''Indefensibly misogynist re-post of a video'' lol
Not either decision would be seen as corrupt. Factual coverage would not be seen as corrupt. And that was missing and still remains missing.
''If the criticism is first and foremost a loose assortment of ostracism, misrepresentation and slander, we could of course find that it is rooted in sexist attitudes.''
So any impolite criticism of a woman can only be driven by sexism? And who the fuck is Anita to have such high standards for critics? The slew of abstract terms you cite as her defense for not addressing criticism is completely based on your opinion. For the umpteenth time please understand that these terms have no precise meaning. ''Ostracism'' is based completely on opinion, ''misrepresentation'' because she was unclear as fuck in her own representation (or how about a defense more understandable to you; it doesn't matter if critics misrepresented her because she misrepresented the games) and ''slander'', please don't rape it like every other word, it already has a clear definition but the absolute presence of it is for a court to decide.
''The Tropes vs. Women idea is not to wipe these stereotypes off the creative plate, but to make room for alternatives, for variety and balance.''
Who or what gave this woman the right to ''wipe stereotypes from the pallet''? She has no right to enforce any opinion on any developer, and to think she does so is retarded and ignorant of the value of creative freedom in media.
''It's just important that we don't want to become mindless consumers who, say, have the uncontrollable reflex to mass pre-order expensive mediocre Japanese mini-game fests from some devs with a lolita complex just because some import service insinuated it wouldn't come to America in fear of the – gasp – criticism it could potentially face there.''
So important that we need moral arbiters to prevent ''gaming culture'' from becoming ''mindless consumers who, say, have the uncontrollable reflex to mass pre-order expensive mediocre Japanese mini-game fests from some devs with a lolita complex'' ? And who is the conspiracy theorist here when someone connected absent dots between a multimillion dollar publisher and some random import and shipping service?
