Growth could be a bad thing if it involves appealing to a wider or different audience. Just like old-school FPS fans object to regenerating health, old-school Zelda fans object to Skyward Sword's ridiculous level of handholding, or practically everyone objects to Farmville-style F2P business models. If the industry tries to appeal to other people, then it's not trying as hard to appeal to the core audience.
I don't like any of the above things either, was more talking about the characterisation in games. And because that core audience is evolving as games become more popular, if they're set in the modern day then it shouldn't be too extreme to argue that characters perhaps ought to - within reason and context - come to represent modern day society. That is a good point about gameplay though, and the whole thing about 'dumbing down' for a wider audience. Whether something like Dragon Age 2's 'awesome button' happened because of more non-core players in the fanbase...who knows. Maybe it was to address younger fans who wanted easier action, or to do with the greater trend of games in general where hand-holding and easy gratification sells. It's the whole 'console player' argument again, and I wouldn't think that more, say, girl fans or whoever would necessarily be happy about it either.
I'm also not sure where you're getting that impression of Sarkeesian's work. I've only watched the Tropes videos, but they haven't struck me as coming "from a basis of respect." To me they've just seemed like a list of "In Mario you rescue a princess. In Zelda you rescue a princess. Deus Ex HR has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Red Dead Redemption has prostitutes, and you can kill them. Grand Theft Auto has prostitutes, and you can kill them."
Maybe I'm projecting or being overly sensitive, but when I see that I think that her goal is to change games I like to appeal more to other people. But... I like rescuing princesses. It's simple and easy, plus the structure of Mario and Zelda games has some far-reaching nostalgia. I like seeing gritty slums populated with thugs, hobos and hookers. I like knowing that, if I choose, I can push the button to kill NPCs. And while I didn't play the game, I thought it was hilarious that RDR had a trophy for tying a woman to the railroad tracks, something Sarkeesian specifically pointed out as troubling
The videos highlight how they rely on a certain pattern of portrayals that pop up regularly to the point of cliche, with the intention of, you know what, let's think of some new ideas apart from 'women need rescuing'. They're just showing us what we've become so used to to the point where we don't question things. Yeah, this brings up the issue of whether we even
want to question things in a game at all - many don't obviously - but ultimately I believe she wants games to be innovative
and still appeal to core players and a growing, maturing, audience. Basically, it's "video games, you can do better than age old fairytales", and we can have reversals of what we see now, like in The Last Of Us where the characters, from male and female perspectives, can save each other and show strength and character and don't need to be revealing cleavage while they do it.
Sarkeesian's videos are inherently destructive criticism. She puts together a collage of things she views as problems. Which can put people who don't view them as problems on the defensive.
That's where I'm coming from, at least. The Jack Thompson comparison is apt in my view: how is it wrong in yours? (aside from the fact that JT tried to enforce his views legally, as has already been pointed out)
Re destructive criticism, sure, I see where you're coming from. They've got plans for a positive female characters video and one wonders whether things would be any different had that come out earlier... hmm. But again, as above, an alternative voice can be a good thing. That Gaider talk I mentioned before (
linking again - it really is eye-opening) gave a specific example of someone from a different background being able to aid in improving a particular segment, and were it not for that input, the idea could have overshot the mark. Nothing's being censored ... they're being improved.
As for JT, the difference is that he wanted to discredit and destroy games entirely, whereas with Sarkeesian the mistake is to interpret criticism with condemnation. Right from the Kickstarter phase she's framed games as being capable of creative thought, teamwork, problem solving, etc., BUT with these certain issues which, frankly, gamers have known about for ages. She does point out positive examples in her videos, but maybe not enough of them and so people get riled. It's only natural for to become defensive, but you wonder if that reaction is because something she said has hit a bit too close to home? And now that gaming is massive it's to be expected that outside observers wonder what all the fuss is about - but if all they see are certain portrayals of women, it's going to affect the stigma of games and its consumers, and has a subsequent effect on how attractive the industry is for a wealth of talent out there if it appears to be an all-boys' club where it's "fit in or get out".
