- Princess Peach actually gets to be a playable character in the Paper Mario series. At least one of them, I'm sure about, where she actively tries to escape and help Mario, and in fact does end up being a vital part in defeating Bowser. I know Paper Mario isn't exactly the main franchise, but if I've heard about it, and I don't actually research these things, she should have mentioned this also. She either didn't consider it worhty of mention - in which case I'll argue she's only considering limited examples, or she didn't do her research.

Yeah, and Super Mario RPG. I'm not sure why a couple of the most popular side franchises are being left out...? I could understand not counting the mini-game festival or the go-kart racer, but SMRPG and Paper Mario have actual stories, quite in depth compared to the rest of the franchise, and each offer at least one game where she actively fights alongside Mario to help him defeat a baddy that's even beyond Bowser. In fact, the Paper Mario example is more of a platformer than an RPG... very similar to Super Mario 2 actually... I understand that the core franchise is MOST popular because, well, its core... but all of these games share the franchise's general popularity and have their place in the collective subconscious of gamers. This could have been a good moment to be like "Well, actually, here's this one time they did it right..." and then explain how this is better for women in gaming or empowerment or something.

You know, somepeople produce videos like this without having to resort to a kickstarter. Look at some people like the AVGN or Nostalgia Critic (two I'm most familiar with). They didn't have tons of initial funding, and they weren't even doing it for a cause, they were just doing it for fun. If she really cared she basically could have done this with little or no funding.
In a very ironic way, she becomes her own damsel in (financial) distress, unable to do what other people have done, without the support of an outside (funding) source.

What she intends to do is something like a documentary. This fits really well a kickstarter campaign. I dont know about those other people you cited, but the amount of money she asked for is not a ton (6k only).

Here's the thing: she INTENDS to do a documentary, but what we've gotten is at the level of videos that hobbyists are doing right now for free- like the Nostalgia Critic and AVGN as he mentions. And with six months of production time for this one video, it's obvious this wasn't just money so she could do her research without the distraction of a job, since her research is very shallow. It's relatively obvious that the entire thing went into visual effects and probably licencing characters and commercials so they could be used here, which probably means she intends to sell this on DVD or something.

If you really care about games you can make one yourself. Why pay developers?
If you really care about music you wouldn't expect to be paid for people downloading your album. You should be happy just to have it heard.
Fresh water and sanitation is important, so people should gladly treat the water and install sewers for you and enjoy the pride of a job well done and countless lives saved.

I'm sorry if this comes across as aggressive, but your post really pisses me off so I may sound a bit irrational here. Here's the problem with your argument: she wasn't paid to do work, or because she sold a product. She basically just talked about something she wanted to do to the internet and people gave her money. That's fine and dandy if those people want to do that. But when she turns around with that money and puts out a lackluster video with shallow research, uninteresting delivery, a tired out message, six months after she announced the project... YEAH. She could have probably done this for free. Probably most of the money got put into the special effects budget and legal stuff concerning the images and video she showed. Probably so she can turn around and sell this on DVD.

The thing about the people he was citing as examples of people who do something for fun just because they like doing it, they do actually get paid. From ad revenue, but yes the Nostalgia Critic and AVGN are a couple of the most successful video creators on the internet. But they don't get paid for promising six months after their kickstarter money comes in that they'll act like an idiot on camera and make lame jokes, they just do it because it's a hobby turned career for them and people eat it up AFTER they've done the actual work.

That's like people from this site going to kickstarter and being like "Hey, I've got a cool idea for a game- with no playable demo or anything -give me money so I can turn out a cheap Mario ripoff I could have done for free!"

Maybe I'm more of a gamer than the average person, but I knew most of this info. Her research barely goes in more depth than what an average gamer could've done in a few weeks. Again, this is really subjective so, its highly debatable.

I think the biggest weakness of her research and/or delivery is she just tries to come off as a hip gamer. What would have been interesting, if she really cares about this, would have been to do some deep research into the trope: more than a two minute history on where it came from, why it appeals to mass audiences so much, the psychological impact on people who are ingrained with this trope, etc. But most of this stuff could probably be found on TvTropes anyway... Also, I think another thing that would have been good for her to do is instead make a blanket statement about ALLLLLLLLLLLL the games that use this trope, and end up mentioning five, would have been to reach for examples where this ISN'T the case. Be like "This is an example of a good female character".

The most interesting part of the video was how she explained the transition from Dinosaur Island to Star Fox Adventures... which I think I'd heard before anyway but meh. Although, level with me for a second here, in that example was it REALLY the need for an disempowered damsel that was the real nature of the change... or was it really that a game made by a tiny (and close to failing) company wasn't able to have its own voice because it wouldn't sell and so they sloppily put a franchise character from a bigger company in order to improve the sales. As an Indie Developer that makes me much more mad than the fact they used a tired out trope that has no bearing on reality.

I'm not the biggest feminist in the world, in fact I think most feminists (like her) are kind of ridiculous, but I do understand the desire and want for the sexes to be equal. I understand things like unequal pay and a frivolous attitude to certain violent crimes towards women are some of the REAL things that still affect us socially. I also think that when you cherry pick a medium for the answer, it's ridiculous and completely ignores the real problem. Saying that video games and tropes are the cause of society's ills is exaggerating at best and just misdirection at worst. You want a good argument why this is true? Look at PETA. Look at how they pick out games, because they're topical, and try to make them seem like the cause of the attitudes they're against. It's ludicrous, video games have little to no effect, at least to my knowledge of any studies on the subject, on actual animal abuse. It comes from a society that values monetary gain above all else and are willing to fight animals against each other, beat seals to death for fur, or find the most efficient but painful and humiliating way to store farm animals for slaughter. Same thing with feminists: the idea of the patriarchy is much older than video games. Video games with this trope aren't a cause, they're a symptom of the actual problem.

I'm sorry if this comes across as aggressive, but your post really pisses me off so I may sound a bit irrational here. Here's the problem with your argument: she wasn't paid to do work, or because she sold a product. She basically just talked about something she wanted to do to the internet and people gave her money. That's fine and dandy if those people want to do that. But when she turns around with that money and puts out a lackluster video with shallow research, uninteresting delivery, a tired out message, six months after she announced the project... YEAH. She could have probably done this for free.

So basically, what you are saying is that if she had made this in only 3 months, and come to a conclusion you agree with, you wouldn't be bashing her on the internet?

How many of the video games you see on kickstarter will actually be finished, in a timely manner, and to a quality to compete with AAA titles?

You can't (without a healthy dose of hypocrisy) go around bashing her for doing exactly the same thing everyone else does with kickstarter.

this makes men the subject of narratives, while relegating women to the role of object. This is a form of objectification, because women are being acted upon.

*Except Battletoads. That combined a damsel in distress with a female villain.

Am I just the least-offended person regarding this video? Maybe it’s tolerance built up from living in so many different cultures over my life.

She has her views and you have yours. Is that not the end of it? Why 2 pages on this?

Ironically I see most of you battling your sides as unrealistically as you claim she is battling hers.

Criticizing her amount of research is basically just lame, since there is always a way to criticize that no matter what the production is. You can always say they didn’t mention this or that with a subject such as this. There is literally no such thing as “enough” research. What you say she did not mention in this video she may mention in the next, to which you would reply, “But she still didn’t mention blah blah blah.” Do you want a 100-hour video in which all she does it mention every possible thing there is to mention?

Seriously.

It is usually more about what she chooses to mention rather than what she failed to research.

And since this is a feminist video it’s fairly obvious that she will be a bit picky on what she mentions and how she presents things.

Frankly I applaud her restraint in some cases, but her biased view does take shape in subtle areas. She does in a few cases mention the other side of the story, but quickly gets back to her side as if to hope that we will quickly forget the exception.

Both she and most people here are making both correct and moot points.

She tries to come off as a hip gamer? No. She doesn’t. No clue how anyone would think that.

She is correct that women have a certain traditional role in video games.

She is incorrect in how to go about changing that (it is assumed this is her goal, because what else would her goal be?).

Video games are made by males for males. The only hope there is for changing that is to get more women to be gamers and especially to be developers.

When women are a major target audience, games for women will become more common-place and their role in games can slowly be changed.

A recent study showed that females have a hard time in game companies and most of them leave the industry.

I am sorry, but what do you expect to change by leaving?

You can’t make a video bashing a male-oriented industry when the only people who have a chance at changing that are just giving up. A video aimed at bashing the females who left the industry would be more effective. As the only possible solution to the problem, is it not their fault that it perpetuates?

But I am also tired of saving princesses etc. She is correct that that is a very shallow and easy plot point.

But feminism in itself is also a useless thing.

Females have a role in society, which changes based on culture, but is ultimately a role they accepted over the course of the evolution of humans as a species.

You don’t see men being portrayed as helpless victims to be rescued by women.

Why?

Because men do not and never have had any tendencies to accept that role. In fact nature dictates that men are hunters and gave them the physical structure of such.

Why are games oriented towards males?

Because they appeal to males more than they do to females.

If you want to change that, put a chemical into the rivers that will make females as competitive as males.

That being said, it is understandable to spite video games as a female.

Since men and women are definitely mentally different, there are male-only and female-only industries. And neither has a problem with the other.

You never see women saying, “More women should be car mechanics,” nor do you see any men saying, “More men should be seamstresses.”

Both sides are happy to let the other just be.

Why? Because those industries do not portray the other side at all.

Video-games are a male-run and male-consumed industry (you can cite statistics that show females gaming as much as males, but unfortunately the games they play are free or very cheap—an industry thrives on money, not just the total number of players, and most of it comes from males).

So why not just let the males be?

Because their games include females.

That is the source of females’ rage, but reasonable people would not be so bothered by that.

Females are the weaker sex.

Just not where it matters.

Physically? Yes. And a bit more submissive.

But physical strength is no longer a part of our lives. Who cares? Women still have an equally important role in society as men do. There is no reason for males and females to be treated equally in all things. If men and women were exactly the same, how could society even function?

We need to be different, and as long as those differences add up to the same overall value—which they do—then why all the fuss?

Get over it.

Women, want to get revenge on the men?

Disappear from the Earth. That would drive the men absolutely batshit crazy. A sign of females’ value to men despite any perceived objectification.

L. Spiro

I don't think there would be much disagreement that "save the princess" is lazy and overdone. But so is "zombie apocalypse" and "legendary hero" and "super marine who can save humanity" and "small time criminal working his way up the crime chain".

But the same way "save the princess" is contorted into sexism, I could contort "zombie apocalypse" as Christian bashing, "legendary hero" as racism and "small time criminal" as anti-capitalist. It's really just simplistic and lazy.