That’s the whole point: the concern of profit is, by very nature, immoral.
3 Likes
Frankly, I’m really sceptical of the claim that a game that had a non-objectified female character would do worse. There’s just not data to support this assertion. The decision taken to not offer games like this stems from the empty sexist assertions of companies making product and the tantrums thrown by people clinging to structural privilege.
4 Likes
The notion that game companies are going to go out of business by not showing people’s butts in every game is ludicrous. There are also distinct differences between profits and costs. Lesser profits might not cover your costs, if you are more of a gambler than a bidnessperson, but they aren’t the same.
2 Likes
FTFY
And that makes it right every time. I’m a big fan of Teddy Chainsaw Bear, myself. It’s harmless!
1 Like
If you imagine that human misery is an acceptable price to pay for a consumer good, then I’m afraid you’re the naive one. Market capitalism doesn’t exist to answer moral questions, so relying on it to dictate your actions is an unreliable guide.
2 Likes
No, it’s amoral.
Stop being a sell out; especially to the man.
3 Likes
Marketing largley exists to justify itself; there’s a lot of truth here. In particular, the Ashly Burch / Rosalind Wiseman talk at GDC 2015 - linky - is a pretty persuasive data-point.
2 Likes
Agreed, from personal experience, I can say desert dwellers know what’s up.
13 Likes
Okay, that actually looks really, really comfortable.
Putting aside that the new Tomb Raiders just use new technology differently to provide the porny experience expected, whether it’s watching her butt climb up a tunnel, or watching a photo-realistic not-quite-rape death at the hands of her adversaries,
putting that aside, because as you point out, at least she’s got pants on now?
but putting that aside, including old TR in the mix is not cherry-picking. It isn’t. Sorry.
Really, the fact that the new TR are better-not-better but different, and are not included in the choices of —flaws---- related directly to the trope —specific to the subject at hand---- “butts” does not in any way represent evidence suppression.
-
Multiple examples are provided.
-
They represent the trend under discussion --important that you remember at this point that not discussing things that are not being discussed is not data suppression!!–
-
Even you recognize that trend, and that ----TR ASIDE---- that trend continues to this day in major studios.
-
c’mon, really?
5 Likes
YOU are not attacking weak points. ANITA is targeting the lowest hanging fruit in the industry outside literal porn games.
My criticism is that she has a lot of room to improve in Tropes vs. Women in Video Games, and I have acknowledged every video is getting better. Multiple times.
But you are not interested in anything but saying this media is above reproach and that media will never be acceptable. That’s not how this conversation should work.
If you found the new TR’s illicit in any way I don’t know what to say to you (or anyone else). Violent pulpy stories are not and never should go away. The game abandoned its target audience and both games are considered flops - though they made their money back. The new audience for the game is more diverse because the changes and it got a sequel off of a “flop” because of it. It is an example of things moving forward, and the critism needs to shift to reflect that. You know, like the Fem Freq review of the latest game.
Small bytes and the occasional nibble.
Ok, let’s put aside Tomb Raider and take the other claims of the video at face value. Like
In a Batman game, it is almost impossible to show his butt! (video of batman turning around rapidly while walking, but cape does not flap around to reveal luscious bat-buttocks)
Here’s me spending literally 5 minutes in Batman: Arkham Knight right now trying to catch a glimpse of the Dark Knight’s … er … assets:
Turns out, it’s pretty easy to see batman’s butt if you really want to.
But (butt) if you’re trying to make some artificial, contrived, cherry picked point about something to advance your agenda, such as “look, those sexist men won’t even allow us to look at male character’s butts!”
well… 
pickers gonna pick, I guess.
1 Like
5 minutes following Batman and it wasn’t there, bouncing about enticingly for 300 seconds?
Point failed.
Binary argument fail.
3 Likes
Well, the guy does wear a cape. Has since 1939 AFAIK?
If you have any other elements of the video that you’d like to point out as “not cherry picked” let me know. 
I don’t disagree with the message (hey, representation of women could be better in games) I just disagree with the Fox News way it’s being presented, with the “examples” carefully selected for maximum controversy. But controversy is one way of achieving progress, I guess.
The series is called “Tropes vs Women in Video Games.” You do recognize that describing a trope is not making an absolute, universal claim, right? While I don’t think “cherry-picking” is a fair term here, even if it somehow were, it would be a completely reasonable and appropriate way to illustrate a trope.
I don’t really play these sort of games much, and don’t have much emotional investment in the topic one way or another (besides loathing MRAs), but I am grateful to Sarkeesian at a minimum for causing two dudes so far to go out of their way to find a pic of a male character’s butt to share. #notAllButts
10 Likes
It isn’t cherry-picking.
Here, let me lay it down Godwin style so you can find your points in a mirror.
A discussion on anti-semitism is had. The presenter begins with a synopsis of historical data on the matter that includes half a dozen examples of well-known documented examples of anti-semitic events that includes The Holocaust.
An observer, having taken in the whole of the speech, asks a question in the Q&A that follows;
Q. Where in your synopsis is your mention of modern-day Germany and the German people?
A. Your pardon? I don’t understand the question…
Q. You specifically mentioned The Holocaust, several times in fact, and attributed the acts to the Germans of the day, particularly the Nazis.
A. I did indeed, the historical synopsis that helps us see the trend would be lacking if I hadn’t. The Holocaust is widely known, and should be.
Q. Yes, but you didn’t tell us how the Germans have since stopped doing that sort of thing!
A. I’m sorry… why would I do that?
Q. Because it matters! It isn’t fair to the Germans to NOT mention that they no longer do that sort of thing to the Jews!! And the Gays! You didn’t even mention them! Your data is incomplete without mention of how the Germans quit doing that!
A. Are there any other questions? Anyone…?
Sorry to take it back to Godwin, but hey, it’s the language of the internet.
#NotAllCherries
8 Likes
He knew Camie, one of his pals at Tosche Station.
1 Like
