The big Phil Fish, Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian discussion thread

Mal-Adjusted · 26-08-2014 8:53pm

Does anyone else remember when this thread used to be about Phil Fish?

Retr0gamer · 26-08-2014 8:55pm

With referencing. It's not exactly difficult to point out sexist tropes in games or other piece of media. Asking the questions about the effects this has on people and society is when you've got to be thorough in your analysis and reference. I don't even think that would be that difficult since games don't differ much from literature or visual arts, the groundwork is already laid out there in terms of what has been written. For a YouTube video you don't have to go too indepty but you still need to support your arguments.

However I think an even bigger failing of Anita's work is that all she is capable of is pointing out tropes. Big deal. The real question is what are the effects of these tropes. It's so etching she rarely touches on and when she does its backed up extremely poorly. There's tonnes of great research done on this area that she can draw on, look at parallels with other media or the effect of desensitising a trope can have, but without that its just a vapid series of YouTube videos that might as well be an extended sexism series on 'did you know gaming'.

the incredible pudding · 26-08-2014 9:00pm

I found myself agreeing with all the points in her video but found some of the examples used to be somewhat unsatisfactory. The inclusion of Bioshock in particular didn't really make sense. The character Jasmine Jolene isn't decoration, she's

Jack's mother

and she's not a stripper either, she's a singer. I don't really see how the corpses are sexualised either, they're certainly gruesome but not remotely erotic in comparison to the fashion magazines she used as examples.

A lot of her examples in other games support her arguments very well, I find it frustrating when it seems like she stretches certain games just trying to find something, it reeks of confirmation bias, which is unnecessary when there's so many other, valid examples she can and does use.

Reekwind · 26-08-2014 9:03pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Wie es eigentlich doesn't excuse bias in a study.

That's exactly the point. That Rankean approach - in which the social scientist assembles facts and in doing so draws objective conclusions from those facts - is over half a century out of date. You cannot avoid bias in social sciences because, in the absence of strict laboratory environments with reproducible conditions, the choice, assembly and interpretation of the facts/evidence is key. There is no such thing as true scientific objectivity in history, cultural studies, etc.

Which is why, since the 1960s, the onus has shifted from simply recording facts/evidence to developing new theoretical models and frameworks to interpret these. Obviously any theories need to be supported by evidence (which I believe the points in question are) but it is not a case of coming to the evidence with a blank mind. Because that is an impossibility.

However I think an even bigger failing of Anita's work is that all she is capable of is pointing out tropes. Big deal. The real question is what are the effects of these tropes. It's so etching she rarely touches on and when she does its backed up extremely poorly.

That's because the focus of the entire series is 'pointing out tropes' and not studying 'the effects of these tropes'. Really, that's it. You can't criticise someone for 'poor research' and 'lacking objectivity' for doing exactly what they said they would do.

It's an introductory work that examines narrative tropes in computer games from a feminist perspective. The series doesn't pretend to be anything else. If you're already past that stage then fine. Feel free to move on to some more advanced works. But it's pretty clear from the outrage and discussion that the videos have generated that there are plenty of gamers that are not, and that have not seriously considered the prominence of sexist tropes in the medium that we all enjoy.

Evade wrote:

The game actively discourages violence against those women in the form of a penalty to your over all score for the level. There is no incentive in the game to kill those women, Anita made it up.

So why were those women there in that setting? Why was that environment explicitly set up to allow you to kill them?

Her point was that these virtual environments are there to allow the player to indulge in, at best, digital voyeurism. The choice was the players to indulge as they wish - but someone had set the scene and facilitated them in doing so.

Then again most Youtube series are not trying to get those series on to school and college curricula.

Why do you keep saying that?

Sarkeesian's previous videos have been used, without her advocacy, by parents and teachers to illustrate feminist critiques of popular culture. That is not the same as creating an academic work for inclusion on a set curricula. You might as well berate Notch for not making Minecraft more 'educational', despite its subsequent use in many schools.

Retr0gamer · 26-08-2014 9:29pm

Reekwind wrote: »

That's because the focus of the entire series is 'pointing out tropes' and not studying 'the effects of these tropes'. Really, that's it. You can't criticise someone for 'poor research' and 'lacking objectivity' for doing exactly what they said they would do.

True, perhaps I'm expecting too much. I just do not see any point in pointing out these tropes and not dealing with them or creating any kind of discussion. Everything she has said has been very obvious. She's even missed pointing out less obvious tropes like the ms male video and not looking at women who just act like men in games.

Meh, file under missed opportunity then. I'll keep watching to see if they improve.

Evade · 26-08-2014 9:50pm

Reekwind wrote: »

So why were those women there in that setting? Why was that environment explicitly set up to allow you to kill them?

Her point was that these virtual environments are there to allow the player to indulge in, at best, digital voyeurism. The choice was the players to indulge as they wish - but someone had set the scene and facilitated them in doing so.

Because pretty much much everyone in a Hitman game can be killed. The point is to kill the assigned target with as few, or no, additional casualties. And if you really need a reason as to why those women are specifically there, they have a conversation which you can over hear that paints the target of that level as a complete b*stard.

Reekwind wrote: »

Why do you keep saying that?

Sarkeesian's previous videos have been used, without her advocacy, by parents and teachers to illustrate feminist critiques of popular culture. That is not the same as creating an academic work for inclusion on a set curricula. You might as well berate Notch for not making Minecraft more 'educational', despite its subsequent use in many schools.

I thought one of the goals of this series was to intentionally get it into classrooms? Maybe I'm weird for thinking that something designed for a classroom should be held to a higher standard.

johnny_ultimate · 26-08-2014 9:57pm

Retr0gamer wrote: »

She's even missed pointing out less obvious tropes like the ms male video and not looking at women who just act like men in games.

Actually, the 'Ms Male' trope already has a video (http://youtu.be/eYqYLfm1rWA) and 'man with boobs' is one of the listed planned videos on the original Kickstarter page (which I imagine will be the whole women who act like men angle)

Edit: sorry, might have missed out on the meaning of your post there with the link.

Retr0gamer · 26-08-2014 10:13pm

Just finished watching the women as background decoration video. Some real embarrassing stuff there, well for anyone calling themselves a gamer. Videogames need to be written by less man children.

Anyway at the end of that video Anita started to touch on a what I want to see, the effects on society of what she was talking about. Unfortnately she only gave it about 3 minutes worth of time. It's far more important and interesting than the tropes she was pointing out. I hope she goes into it In a lot more detail later on.

BMMachine · 26-08-2014 10:13pm

so at the crux of it, a guy very few people liked got doxxed and f**ked over by a load of angry gamers because he defended a friend (probably "the straw that broke the camels back") and now has to sell his company. there seems to be a feminist/gamer side issue going on too about that girl who made some videos about sexist games and gamers.
from my (pretty vast) experience with the average gamer they are literally the last people I would ever listen to about any kind of important thing ever. I know that seems pretty sweeping and a lot of you guys will react negatively, but Im not talking about you. Look at you conversing in quite logical and thought out manners on this forum, you aren't the average moron who quite literally infests gaming servers and lowbrow troll forums like reddit and 4chan. you are very much in the minority though, which is the problem. so as long as the larger problem (young angry male gamers filled with spite) then yeah, sexism and stupidity and destroying peoples lives will continue unabated and theres damn near nothing you can do about it. its such a reactionary and over the top audience (look at that girl you are talking about, got what, $150,000 for a startup? and at the same time gets completely railed by thousands - thats far far far too reactionary for the actual content and message, on both sides) that the smallest things cause peoples brains to explode. I suppose it is to do with how easy it is to voice an opinion to an audience nowadays that in order to get noticed you need this extremism, or at least think you do.

I feel sorry for the guy, even if he was a tool (i don't know that so i wont judge) and as for the whole sexism in games goes, yeah, its one of the worst offenders by miles.

Retr0gamer · 26-08-2014 10:21pm

I doubt it's the majority of gamers, at least I hope not. The most moronic and stupid are often the loudest and the Internet has unfortunately given them more of a soapbox than they deserve.

the incredible pudding · 26-08-2014 10:28pm

BMMachine wrote: »

from my (pretty vast) experience with the average gamer they are literally the last people I would ever listen to about any kind of important thing ever. I know that seems pretty sweeping and a lot of you guys will react negatively, but Im not talking about you. Look at you conversing in quite logical and thought out manners on this forum, you aren't the average moron who quite literally infests gaming servers and lowbrow troll forums like reddit and 4chan. you are very much in the minority though, which is the problem.

Is the average gamer just not the average person (well... average male under the age of around 40 or so)? They way you describe angry troll-like people seem to me to be respective of large internet communities as a whole. I'd argue thatthe issue with bulk of people's inflamed reactions is related to anonymity and how it allows users to basically vomit out their angry thoughts without any fear of consequence. I also don't think it's fair to call these people a majority at all, they're just loud and vulgar, and thus stand out. It's a shame that their voices end up being loud but the best way to deal with it is just to mock or ignore it to be honest. I think that's why Boards works for the most part, because we mock/ignore the majority of the eejits.

BMMachine · 26-08-2014 11:09pm

the incredible pudding wrote: »

Is the average gamer just not the average person (well... average male under the age of around 40 or so)? They way you describe angry troll-like people seem to me to be respective of large internet communities as a whole. I'd argue thatthe issue with bulk of people's inflamed reactions is related to anonymity and how it allows users to basically vomit out their angry thoughts without any fear of consequence. I also don't think it's fair to call these people a majority at all, they're just loud and vulgar, and thus stand out. It's a shame that their voices end up being loud but the best way to deal with it is just to mock or ignore it to be honest. I think that's why Boards works for the most part, because we mock/ignore the majority of the eejits.

you are actually right there. I would say then the vocal majority, as in those that actually comment on the internet are what im talking about. there is an awful amount of crap posted, far more then actually useful and informative stuff online. online gaming to me is also just full of the worst people, id honestly say that id actually get a long with about 1 in 10 people i play with, the rest are just carbon copies of themselves - angry over sexualised individuals with downloaded personalities. they say the same things, act the same way, react the same way and are just a problem.
another problem that is related to that kind of thing is that its infectious. people think that its the proper way to act just because everyone else is doing it so you get entire generations of sheep. theres always an "accepted line" with these communities and it absolutely disgusts me that this is the case. the accepted line in this scenario is "Phil Fish deserved this" (not here per se but amoungst the dribblers) and its that non-chalant "its the internet and its my right to be a lowbrow dribbling troll" attitude which can destroy peoples lives and leads to extremely nasty sexism and racism.

to me its just dumbculture getting its way again. drag people down, be spiteful, rail against any individuality and always follow the accepted line.

nesf · 26-08-2014 11:28pm

BMMachine wrote: »

you are actually right there. I would say then the vocal majority, as in those that actually comment on the internet are what im talking about. there is an awful amount of crap posted, far more then actually useful and informative stuff online. online gaming to me is also just full of the worst people, id honestly say that id actually get a long with about 1 in 10 people i play with, the rest are just carbon copies of themselves - angry over sexualised individuals with downloaded personalities. they say the same things, act the same way, react the same way and are just a problem.
another problem that is related to that kind of thing is that its infectious. people think that its the proper way to act just because everyone else is doing it so you get entire generations of sheep. theres always an "accepted line" with these communities and it absolutely disgusts me that this is the case. the accepted line in this scenario is "Phil Fish deserved this" (not here per se but amoungst the dribblers) and its that non-chalant "its the internet and its my right to be a lowbrow dribbling troll" attitude which can destroy peoples lives and leads to extremely nasty sexism and racism.

to me its just dumbculture getting its way again. drag people down, be spiteful, rail against any individuality and always follow the accepted line.

For your own sake stay away from Political reddits and the like around election time if gamers have you this negative.

BMMachine · 26-08-2014 11:44pm

nesf wrote: »

For your own sake stay away from Political reddits and the like around election time if gamers have you this negative.

barge pole

e_e · 26-08-2014 11:53pm

BMMachine wrote: »

barge pole

https://twitter.com/AvoidComments

I think following this twitter is a good rule of thumb too.

Davei141 · 27-08-2014 2:29am

Reading this thread makes me thankful I don't keep up with the worthless behind the scenes drama of being a "gamer". What a load of utter nonsense.

Mr Freeze · 27-08-2014 9:10am

Sand wrote: »

I don't know who Phil Fish is and I've never played Fez so his threat never to make Fez 2 is...underwhelming. So I don't appreciate the "Kony 2012" rage this man seems to inspire. If Phil Fish is a giant self entitled dick, then he's just reflecting the online community for most games. People need to grow up and develop thicker skins.

Most individual game devs really don't need individual gamers as much as individual gamers believe they do. That said, it going by the OP it seems like the online community is living up to his low expectations of them.

You should watch the film called Indie Game.

I had heard of him before it and knew he made Fez, but he came across so bad in the film, I never seen anything like it in a documentary.

All the other Dev's came across great, and you really felt for the guys making Super Meat Boy and the pressure really got to them, one lad in particular was a wreck by the games release.

But Fish, it was impossible to like him watching the film, he was in a blind rage cursing people and saying he would kill himself if things didn't go his way...

nesf · 27-08-2014 9:18am

e_e wrote: »

https://twitter.com/AvoidComments

I think following this twitter is a good rule of thumb too.

Nah, the comments make sure you stay thinking 18 is too low for the voting age. :P

Burning Eclipse · 27-08-2014 10:37am

e_e wrote: »

https://twitter.com/AvoidComments

I think following this twitter is a good rule of thumb too.

Excellent twitter account, thanks for the link

Generic Dreadhead · 27-08-2014 11:07am

Having watched 3+ hours of Anita and 3+ hours of the most popular Anti-Anita videos I have to say her points/arguments/examples are built on shakey ground at best.

Also if anyone is going to consider her an academic then I'd like to see a few point addressed:

She doesn't write her own work as I mentioned before
She doesn't own the games or even the rights to the game footage she uses to make her points, it's blatant Plagiarism http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/2013/07/anitas-sources.html
She has not played the games she uses in her videos and that is obvious - Check out her Bayonetta standalone review
She establishes "groupings" when there are games that are "outliers" which do not fit her rhetoric - One (of many) example being defining what the "Core" Zelda games are to refute that Zelda herself ever starred in her own CDi game.
She tries to preemept counter arguments by mentioning games that go against her point but they literally "dismissed" in both the time-devoted, context-lacking and even down to her tone of voice and expression. It reeks of a poor mans offensive-defense, "I know these things exists so don't even bother citing them as examples" *dip of the eyebrow, half smile*

She over labours her points and has a massive tendency to use overly long, multiple sentence-break, high syllable count sentences and words to establish a level of importance in her words that is inflated.
Anyone with a good grasp of politics and english will know this is an issue and is used as a "convincer" as it psychological makes you feel like you are bering spoken to by a Teacher and you regress to an "guilty info-sponge" state.... I could go on about this more but whoever knows what I'm talking about will know and whoever thinks this is a non-point will still think that (ironically this point is an example of what she does :pac: )

She clearly has an agenda, I liken it to watching a school debate team where only one team turns up.
Many on this thread have pointed to the Evidence/Conclusion issue and I think this is spot on.

Also, maybe it's just me but i reckon i'd take her at least a little bit more seriously if she was more concise.
75+ minutes on one subject is too much. If she can't make her point in 1/2 that time, that to me, shows her in a bad light.

I would barely even consider her a journalist, never mind an academic.
The only positives to come out of this are that people are discussing it.
But she's done damage to the actual serious debate by sensationalising her overly laboured points.
People are going to dismiss her points hand over fist more and more as the flaws in her videos are pointed out. Looking at her youtube figures her viewship is dropping in a way not in line with what one would expect from the time between videos

TL:DR, her videos are so un-acedimic it's laughable, she's raised some valid points but buried them in bad examples, she has started good conversations but I do not believe she should be considered as a serious insight into inherent sexism in the gaming industry

Edit: Perhaps this should be broken out into a thread of it's own.... we're nowhere near Phil Fish territory anymore and unlikely to return

salamanca22 · 27-08-2014 1:11pm

Cormac... wrote: »

Having watched 3+ hours of Anita and 3+ hours of the most popular Anti-Anita videos I have to say her points/arguments/examples are built on shakey ground at best.

Also if anyone is going to consider her an academic then I'd like to see a few point addressed:
She doesn't write her own work as I mentioned before

She doesn't own the games or even the rights to the game footage she uses to make her points, it's blatant Plagiarism http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/2013/07/anitas-sources.html

She has not played the games she uses in her videos and that is obvious - Check out her Bayonetta standalone review

She establishes "groupings" when there are games that are "outliers" which do not fit her rhetoric - One (of many) example being defining what the "Core" Zelda games are to refute that Zelda herself ever starred in her own CDi game.

She tries to preemept counter arguments by mentioning games that go against her point but they literally "dismissed" in both the time-devoted, context-lacking and even down to her tone of voice and expression. It reeks of a poor mans offensive-defense, "I know these things exists so don't even bother citing them as examples" *dip of the eyebrow, half smile*

She over labours her points and has a massive tendency to use overly long, multiple sentence-break, high syllable count sentences and words to establish a level of importance in her words that is inflated.
Anyone with a good grasp of politics and english will know this is an issue and is used as a "convincer" as it psychological makes you feel like you are bering spoken to by a Teacher and you regress to an "guilty info-sponge" state.... I could go on about this more but whoever knows what I'm talking about will know and whoever thinks this is a non-point will still think that (ironically this point is an example of what she does :pac: )

She clearly has an agenda, I liken it to watching a school debate team where only one team turns up.
Many on this thread have pointed to the Evidence/Conclusion issue and I think this is spot on.

Also, maybe it's just me but i reckon i'd take her at least a little bit more seriously if she was more concise.
75+ minutes on one subject is too much. If she can't make her point in 1/2 that time, that to me, shows her in a bad light.

I would barely even consider her a journalist, never mind an academic.
The only positives to come out of this are that people are discussing it.
But she's done damage to the actual serious debate by sensationalising her overly laboured points.
People are going to dismiss her points hand over fist more and more as the flaws in her videos are pointed out. Looking at her youtube figures her viewship is dropping in a way not in line with what one would expect from the time between videos

TL:DR, her videos are so un-acedimic it's laughable, she's raised some valid points but buried them in bad examples, she has started good conversations but I do not believe she should be considered as a serious insight into inherent sexism in the gaming industry

Edit: Perhaps this should be broken out into a thread of it's own.... we're nowhere near Phil Fish territory anymore and unlikely to return

I agree with you and am of the opinion that she has done way more to harm the feminist movement than to help it directly in her drawn out non-expert opinions and videos and indirectly with her relatively small militant following who have made fools of themselves over and over again on various websites and is causing people to dismiss the feminist movement altogether even though they don't represent even a small percentage of the feminists out there, most of whom are working hard for a great cause!

Potatoeman · 27-08-2014 1:12pm

Cormac... wrote: »

Having watched 3+ hours of Anita and 3+ hours of the most popular Anti-Anita videos I have to say her points/arguments/examples are built on shakey ground at best.

Also if anyone is going to consider her an academic then I'd like to see a few point addressed:
She doesn't write her own work as I mentioned before

She doesn't own the games or even the rights to the game footage she uses to make her points, it's blatant Plagiarism http://victorsopinion.blogspot.be/2013/07/anitas-sources.html

She has not played the games she uses in her videos and that is obvious - Check out her Bayonetta standalone review

She establishes "groupings" when there are games that are "outliers" which do not fit her rhetoric - One (of many) example being defining what the "Core" Zelda games are to refute that Zelda herself ever starred in her own CDi game.

She tries to preemept counter arguments by mentioning games that go against her point but they literally "dismissed" in both the time-devoted, context-lacking and even down to her tone of voice and expression. It reeks of a poor mans offensive-defense, "I know these things exists so don't even bother citing them as examples" *dip of the eyebrow, half smile*

She over labours her points and has a massive tendency to use overly long, multiple sentence-break, high syllable count sentences and words to establish a level of importance in her words that is inflated.
Anyone with a good grasp of politics and english will know this is an issue and is used as a "convincer" as it psychological makes you feel like you are bering spoken to by a Teacher and you regress to an "guilty info-sponge" state.... I could go on about this more but whoever knows what I'm talking about will know and whoever thinks this is a non-point will still think that (ironically this point is an example of what she does :pac: )

She clearly has an agenda, I liken it to watching a school debate team where only one team turns up.
Many on this thread have pointed to the Evidence/Conclusion issue and I think this is spot on.

Also, maybe it's just me but i reckon i'd take her at least a little bit more seriously if she was more concise.
75+ minutes on one subject is too much. If she can't make her point in 1/2 that time, that to me, shows her in a bad light.

I would barely even consider her a journalist, never mind an academic.
The only positives to come out of this are that people are discussing it.
But she's done damage to the actual serious debate by sensationalising her overly laboured points.
People are going to dismiss her points hand over fist more and more as the flaws in her videos are pointed out. Looking at her youtube figures her viewship is dropping in a way not in line with what one would expect from the time between videos

TL:DR, her videos are so un-acedimic it's laughable, she's raised some valid points but buried them in bad examples, she has started good conversations but I do not believe she should be considered as a serious insight into inherent sexism in the gaming industry

Edit: Perhaps this should be broken out into a thread of it's own.... we're nowhere near Phil Fish territory anymore and unlikely to return

I watch them with an open mind. I thought her detractors didnt do a great job of highlighting some of the issues and came across badly too.

She raised a good chunk of money for herself for a youtube video that is barley mediocre and seemed to already own the equipment needed.
She doesnt try and convince you of much. She seems to start from a position that she is right and not explain why. The one that sticks out was that having a princess as the goal is sexist but a male prince as the goal is fine as it subverts the trope.
The other point would be that these are not game tropes but general tropes that could be just as easily be blamed on pandering and last writting.

Timmyctc · 27-08-2014 1:12pm

Agree wholeheartedy with all of Cormac's points :P But we were back on Phil Fish topic before you posted that haha

deathrider · 27-08-2014 1:26pm

Potatoeman wrote: »

She seems to start from a position that she is right and not explain why.

I've been trying to suss out what it is that she does, and what exactly kinda bugs me about her videos. For a while, I though tthat it might be that she only owns a single shirt, but I reckon Potatoeman hit the nail on the head for me there. It's the "I'm right. The end!" kind of vibe she gives off that annoys me.

Generic Dreadhead · 27-08-2014 1:26pm

Timmyctc wrote: »

Agree wholeheartedy with all of Cormac's points :P But we were back on Phil Fish topic before you posted that haha

True, but after doing like 7 hours of research I wanted to row in with what I thought.

But since you agree with me already, can you now give me €6,000 to so I can outline retrospectively why I'm right so you agree even more :pac::pac:

Timmyctc · 27-08-2014 1:32pm

Cormac... wrote: »

True, but after doing like 7 hours of research I wanted to row in with what I thought.

But since you agree with me already, can you now give me €6,000 to so I can outline retrospectively why I'm right so you agree even more :pac::pac:

**** that; 100k it is!

BMMachine · 27-08-2014 2:13pm

id like a girls opinion on Anita

Generic Dreadhead · 27-08-2014 2:17pm

Did a quick search there and there doesn't seem to be any discussion on a thread or forum about Sexism of Feminism for 7-40 months..... looks like it's just us.... Who hear is female?

Otacon · 27-08-2014 2:21pm

Cormac... wrote: »

Who hear is female?

/checks genitals

Not me.

Timmyctc · 27-08-2014 2:22pm

BMMachine wrote: »

id like a girls opinion on Anita

Its hard to get consistent unbiased opinions of her on the net. This brief bit about her on this thread has been probably amongst the most objective I've come across tbh. Most of the girl's opinions I've seen about her have been misinformed or extreme. (Tbh thats the same for all the male opinions on her from 4chan and Reddits circlejerk over hating her)

I've yet to see a proper unbiased review of her work from a femal too. For example recently there was some silly campaign about getting some AAA title to introduce a choice for Female lead character (months into development) and when that obviously didn't happen there was loads of uproar from misinformed fauxministic types assuming that they it was just a matter of implementing a female asset in place of the male character.
It was from these people that I've only seen female opinions on Sarkeesian personally.
The only games my female friends play are generally Pokemon and a few select DS or wii titles. Most wouldn't be that IN to gaming to actually have been acquainted with Sarkeesians work.