User Avatar Image

Tropes vs. Women in Video Games

posted by Darth Marsden on - last edited - Viewed by 7.5K users
So, remember that whole brouhaha with that woman doing a Kickstarter to make a series looking at how women are portrayed in video games that got a lot of people behaving really, really badly?

Yeah, the first episode of her series went live yesterday: Damsel in Distress.

I watched it yesterday.

I had to fight not to fall asleep.

I get what she's doing, but she's doing it in a very dull manner. Her voice is very monotone, her script is full of "impressive" words, the cuts between takes is jarring and doesn't flow well at all, and what she's saying is stretched out far too much - she basically takes 20 minutes to say stuff that could easily be compressed into 5.

Also, and I freely admit this is a very silly thing to focus on, but those earrings are ridiculous. I can't take her even remotely seriously when those things are dangling around. Ugh.

Wondered what you guys thought of it.
247 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • User Avatar Image
    Vainamoinen Moderator
    HelloCthulhu;833098 said:
    That's right, these guys are in politics...so you still trust the facts coming from them at face value?
    On top of that, they didn't even do the research themselves.
    You read the facts, but you make conspiracies out of them. I don't understand how you could. The ESA represents software publishers. The ESA is paid by software publishers. The software publishers have an inherent interest in analysing their target audience correctly. Hence, the chance that they're purposefully telling bullshit to others here - and themselves to boot - is zero. There is nothing to be gained by anyone if these statistics are a misrepresentation.

    Indeed, if software publishers just wish to go on and on to cater for primarily a male audience, as they have been for 30 years, it would be in their best interest to downplay the percentage of female gamers. But obviously, even 30 years ago, women were already growing strong as gamers.
    Anita Sarkeesian said: My dad was a computer networking engineer, so while I was growing up our house was full of computers and he would always have a few machines loaded with games for me. When I was about 10, I remember I campaigned for months to convince my parents that the “Game Boy” was not in fact just for boys. Eventually I won the debate and got my first portable gaming device the following Christmas.
  • User Avatar Image
    Jennifer Moderator
    HelloCthulhu;833098 said:
    On top of that, they didn't even do the research themselves.

    That's right, they hired another company to do their job for them, and do not site any actual sources for their statistics...just a vague "study." I'm sorry, but if you handed this in to any organization with no sources to back it up, how much would you be taken seriously?
    That's the way market research works. Companies have to hire independent sources to conduct the research for them, or else questions of bias come into play (since the interested party will often skew questions towards how they think the result will turn out, both intentionally and non-intentionally). That's the reason research agencies exist.

    In this case, since the research is conducted by an independent organization that has no connection to the subject matter, and the fact that the agency in question is one that is well known (Ipsos is the third largest research agency in the world), the study is actually more reliable, not less.
  • Jennifer;833502 said:
    That's the way market research works. Companies have to hire independent sources to conduct the research for them, or else questions of bias come into play (since the interested party will often skew questions towards how they think the result will turn out, both intentionally and non-intentionally). That's the reason research agencies exist.

    In this case, since the research is conducted by an independent organization that has no connection to the subject matter, and the fact that the agency in question is one that is well known (Ipsos is the third largest research agency in the world), the study is actually more reliable, not less.
    So because this company did it and not another we are supposed to accept it blindly without numbers and actual data?
    image
  • User Avatar Image
    Vainamoinen Moderator
    Jennifer;833502 said:
    the study is actually more reliable, not less.
    HelloCthulhu;833669 said:
    So because this company did it and not another we are supposed to accept it blindly
    If you'd like to engage in a meaningful discussion, you'd better quickly learn not to exaggerate opposing standpoints. You're concocting straw man arguments. It's just not nice.

    We have more trust in studies from independent, experienced institutes as opposed to studies carried out by random organisations with zero experience in the field of scientific, large scale surveys. There wasn't more in these words.

    And if you'd really like to insinuate that the study purposefully lies, please at least add a reason in how far this specific lie by the contractor (Ipsos) would in any conceiveable way be in the payer's (ETA) interest.
  • HelloCthulhu;833098 said:
    if you handed this in to any organization with no sources to back it up, how much would you be taken seriously?
    Jennifer;833502 said:
    the fact that the agency in question is one that is well known (Ipsos is the third largest research agency in the world), the study is actually more reliable, not less.
    HelloCthulhu;833669 said:
    So because this company did it and not another we are supposed to accept it blindly without numbers and actual data?
    Vainamoinen;833682 said:
    If you'd like to engage in a meaningful discussion, you'd better quickly learn not to exaggerate opposing standpoints. You're concocting straw man arguments. It's just not nice.
    Seems to me she is being evasive rather than me concocting a straw man when I asked a specific question. And I have no need to speculate to motivations if you are going to simply refuse to answer my question, which hasn't changed.
  • HelloCthulhu;833669 said:
    So because this company did it and not another we are supposed to accept it blindly without numbers and actual data?
    Ipsos regularly releases their full data and methodologies on certain studies. You can take a look on their website and point out any flaws if you wish.

    It's not in Ipsos' best interest to fudge their data. If it came out that they did that, even in one instance, they'd be ruined.

    There's no reason to believe this data is inaccurate.
  • No! Statistics only matter when they work for ME!
  • User Avatar Image
    Jennifer Moderator
    HelloCthulhu;833669 said:
    So because this company did it and not another we are supposed to accept it blindly without numbers and actual data?
    What more numbers and data do you want? It's all in the ESA's 2013 Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry pamphlet that was linked before).

    Note that this is an annual study. This study has been going on by Ipsos for years. If there was a flaw in their methodology, it surely would have been pointed out by now. It's an annual study the ESA uses to judge it's market, and it does show a sharp increase in female gamers over the past five years (Check out the 2008 statistics as comparison).

    And here's the statistics for each year of the study since the Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry pamphlet has been produced:
    2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
  • I stand corrected and thank you for answering my question. It is interesting to notice that the number of women seems to have gone down this year, as 2012 was 47% women.
  • User Avatar Image
    Jennifer Moderator
    HelloCthulhu;834026 said:
    It is interesting to notice that the number of women seems to have gone down this year, as 2012 was 47% women.
    Statistically, a 2% decrease is negligible (since statistics gathered by survey always have a small percentage of a margin of error, simply for the fact that all members of the population can't be surveyed). That's the reason why surveys try to get as large and as varied a sample as possible (in this case, over 2000 varied individuals).

    Surveys which include a large number of a varied sample size have been proven to be pretty accurate for the population as a whole, since they commonly have a margin of error of only about 5%.
Add Comment