I haven't finished it yet, so this isn't really a spoiler so much as my impressions and what I've heard down the grapevine. I'll tag it anyway.
despite setting up Zelda to have a more active role, the game doesn't really allow her to do that and she is stuck in the castle pretty much the entire time. Everyone constantly reminds Link that he needs to go help her, but she's an afterthought - when you're running around completing side quests and finding things you really don't care about her, or even think about her. When she is shown in flashbacks, she has very little agency, and when she does she is almost solely defined by protecting others by... not doing anything active. It's very trope-y in that regard.
However obviously thatbgame has a range of female characters, many of whom are awesome.
That's a shame, there was a real opportunity here to give her some meaningful agency. I really want a Zelda game that allows you to play both characters, or even flips the roles entirely, I'd hoped this would be a step toward something like that.
As you say the rest of the game does do some good, it's still frustrating though.
We can do better with companions in videogames. Glad she mentioned Last of Us, Gears Of War 4 as positive examples for equal footing in female companions.
Bulletstorm's Trishka and Wolfenstein The New Order/The Old Blood would be other positive examples for female companions who are on equal footing or at least don't need your help or are their own characters with agency, too.
Completely agree about Elizabeth in Bioshock. Having so much plot significance only to end up being a glorified master key and item collector was a major disappointment.
That's a shame, there was a real opportunity here to give her some meaningful agency. I really want a Zelda game that allows you to play both characters, or even flips the roles entirely, I'd hoped this would be a step toward something like that.
As you say the rest of the game does do some good, it's still frustrating though.
Same, it is really frustrating. I really thought they would do more with her, given that her main marketing design had her wearing field clothing and even her amiibo has her in it.
Does that Bioshock part have (big) story spoilers in it? I'd really like to watch this video in it's entirety, but not gonna rush to install and play the game right now. I don't care at all about location spoilers or anything like that, just the story stuff.
Does that Bioshock part have (big) story spoilers in it? I'd really like to watch this video in it's entirety, but not gonna rush to install and play the game right now. I don't care at all about location spoilers or anything like that, just the story stuff.
All right thanks, yeah I intend to and I've been actively avoiding spoilers just because of that. But don't wanna miss this, especially when this is the last episode.
Edit: Good video! Nothing to add or disagree with. Though haven't played Bioshock yet as I said. But I understand and agree with the point of the critique.
It's hard to not grow up with pretty strong "men are the protectors and fighters" mentality when your country has a mandatory army training period for the male populace but not female populace(Finland). Sure, I'm growing/grown out of it because of internet and exposure to different ideas and fallacies but I don't actually blame myself for initially having that mentality. Solid video.
Another good episode from Anita but I do take issue with one major thing: Ellie in TLoU. Grouping her in the same category as Ashley from RE4 or Yorda from Ico is just wrong. I know she did say she's not a Yorda but still calling Tess or even Riley a refreshing subversion compared to how Ellie felt in the original game is just something I cant agree with.
Ellie is a 14 year old girl who the game has a very real reason as to why she cant swim. Of course she cant fight or swim like Joel but she grows in the game and by the end Ellie ends up saving Joel as much as he does, if not more! Hell, you even (winter season spoiler)
play as her for an entire portion of the game saving Joel's life in the process
(arguably the best part of the whole game!). Aside from the swimming part (which I think has at least a good reasoning) Ellie by the end of it is a very changed and capable character from the one we begin with.
Anita is usually better than this and I tend to agree with almost everything but Ellie in TLoU as a "negative" example of this trope is below her.
We can do better with companions in videogames. Glad she mentioned Last of Us, Gears Of War 4 as positive examples for equal footing in female companions.
Which reminds me, Since this is the last one, time to dig my PMs for that bet that I made about every game would show positive examples because anita was not a hater =P
Sidekicks and companions in games or general media are often designed to function as glorified gatekeepers, helpless burdens, and ego boosters, It's not define by their gender, how many times Batman had to save Robin ? I'm not saying everything she's saying is wrong but she's not right with everything either and her analyze about Ellie is garbage.
Elizabeth is a weird one because despite not explicitly helping Booker combat wise, we know that she's never left the tower so why would she ever get access to a gun or any sort of combat training. It also helps she's the most powerful character in the game and can manipulate tears that are more often than not are very useful and necessary in combat.
There is also the story prompt that
Elizabeth has to be manipulated by Fitzroy/the Twins to lose her innocence and kill someone, which is why she never outright killed anyone before. Sure she could hypothetically start gunning down people after but that raises the combat training question again. She does get captured a couple of times but we know Songbird is exceedingly powerful and could easily kill Booker, and Elizabeth generally offers herself anyway. I'm pretty certain she's the only reason that stupid ghost boss dies as well but I've tried to wipe that section from my memory.
This certainly isn't to say this isn't a legitimate complaint though, but I don't think it's as big an issue as she's raised before. In The Last of Us the only reason Ellie isn't initially useful is because of Joel's character (the swimming thing is a complete non-factor) and we know she becomes a badass later on.
Resident Evil does suffer from this but Resident Evil has always had awesome female leads in pretty much every game (literally only Resident Evil 4 neglected to have a main story female lead and even then there was the Ada campaign). Ashley was kinda silly but at the very least she has a small section where she holds her own.
Metal Gear Solid is the fuckin worst though, pretty much every female character is useless, sexualised or Meryl.
Elizabeth is a weird one because despite not explicitly helping Booker combat wise, we know that she's never left the tower so why would she ever get access to a gun or any sort of combat training. It also helps she's the most powerful character in the game and can manipulate tears that are more often than not are very useful and necessary in combat.
There is also the story prompt that
Elizabeth has to be manipulated by Fitzroy/the Twins to lose her innocence and kill someone, which is why she never outright killed anyone before. Sure she could hypothetically start gunning down people after but that raises the combat training question again. She does get captured a couple of times but we know Songbird is exceedingly powerful and could easily kill Booker, and Elizabeth generally offers herself anyway. I'm pretty certain she's the only reason that stupid ghost boss dies as well but I've tried to wipe that section from my memory.
This certainly isn't to say this isn't a legitimate complaint though, but I don't think it's as big an issue as she's raised before. In The Last of Us the only reason Ellie isn't initially useful is because of Joel's character (the swimming thing is a complete non-factor) and we know she becomes a badass later on.
Resident Evil does suffer from this but Resident Evil has always had awesome female leads in pretty much every game (literally only Resident Evil 4 neglected to have a main story female lead and even then there was the Ada campaign). Ashley was kinda silly but at the very least she has a small section where she holds her own.
Metal Gear Solid is the fuckin worst though, pretty much every female character is useless, sexualised or Meryl.
If there was a bigger overarching issue with Elizabeth as an NPC, I'd say that towards the end it makes no sense that enemies ignore her, even unarmed. The Vox are out to kill anyone aligned with the Founders and the daughter of the despot seems like a good enough target. She also has the "where is that NPC—OH GOD SHE TELEPORTED RIGHT BEHIND ME" syndrome, especially when she's flinging ammo and health at you from two feet away. Basically her conceit works early in the game, doesn't by the end.
Really, the sad thing is that the game is years old and we still haven't see an elevation of NPCs to a baseline that Infinite set, let alone consistently better. I agree with Anita that I'd love to have more time for characterization with my companions, but if they're gonna' be as dumb as rocks and be a pain in the ass I'd rather they stick with Infinite's lead and stay the hell out of the way (although this and Anita's video suggests that you cannot have characterization while also having the NPCs be tools for game design, which I'd wholeheartedly disagree with. Elizabeth is a great character because you do get a lot of time to talk with her and experience the world along with her.)
Sidekicks and companions in games or general media are often designed to function as glorified gatekeepers, helpless burdens, and ego boosters, It's not define by their gender, how many times Batman had to save Robin ? I'm not saying everything she's saying is wrong but she's not right with everything either and her analyze about Ellie is garbage.
In videogames though, male sidekicks especially in shooter games are often on equal footing with the male protagonist and that's the difference she's bringing up that there isn't enough examples of equally capable female companions past the ones she mentioned.
If there was a bigger overarching issue with Elizabeth as an NPC, I'd say that towards the end it makes no sense that enemies ignore her, even unarmed. The Vox are out to kill anyone aligned with the Founders and the daughter of the despot seems like a good enough target. She also has the "where is that NPCOH GOD SHE TELEPORTED RIGHT BEHIND ME" syndrome, especially when she's flinging ammo and health at you from two feet away. Basically her conceit works early in the game, doesn't by the end.
Really, the sad thing is that the game is years old and we still haven't see an elevation of NPCs to a baseline that Infinite set, let alone consistently better. I agree with Anita that I'd love to have more time for characterization with my companions, but if they're gonna' be as dumb as rocks and be a pain in the ass I'd rather they stick with Infinite's lead and stay the hell out of the way (although this and Anita's video suggests that you cannot have characterization while also having the NPCs be tools for game design, which I'd wholeheartedly disagree with. Elizabeth is a great character because you do get a lot of time to talk with her and experience the world along with her.)
I think ignoring Elizabeth is more just to make gameplay less of a gigantic pain in the ass. Imagine if Elizabeth gets torn apart and you cant help it. Resident Evil 4 is the only game to ever pull off having a useless companion that can actually get damaged and even then Ashley mostly just gets carried away and you just have to shoot the dude and then you're in the clear.
I don't think that would work in Bioshock though. If there were combat segments where it was better to tell Elizabeth to sit in a bin for half an hour, you would lose the tears and item scavenging mechanics of the combat. I guess she could fight back like Ellie but even in The Last of Us the enemies just ignore Ellie despite her actually being a threat.
Even when that army is mandatory for men but not for women? I disagree completely.
How SHOULD one interpret such a policy? It only makes sense if you assume that women aren't required to serve because either (A) they wouldn't be good enough or (B) their lives are too valuable and need to be protected.
The trouble with Elizabeth is that she has a major role in the story (which has problems of its own), but in actual gameplay she amounts to little more than an extra skill set for Booker. That's really fucking boring, tbh.
May be an obscure pull, but my favorite female sidekick was the short amount of time you get to hang out with Sheriff Sarah Breaker in Alan Wake.
Mainly I like her because when you're fighting possessed people with her she makes it feel like you're her sidekick as she's way better than Alan at killing the bad guys.
Even when that army is mandatory for men but not for women? I disagree completely.
How SHOULD one interpret such a policy? It only makes sense if you assume that women aren't required to serve because either (A) they wouldn't be good enough or (B) their lives are too valuable and need to be protected.
It's a stupid remnant from the past, most people with any brains acknowledge it as such instead of going through a thought process "men have mandatory army + women don't = women can't do anything in certain situations and that women need to be protected, especially since even though it's not mandatory, women can go to the army too. It is unfair for men to have to do it but the thing to take out of the experience shouldn't be sexist attitudes towards the potential & skillsets of women. Those kinds of thoughts have to come from somewhere else (home? friends? internet?)
Good video but I don't agree with the TLOU part. I don't think it's some holier than thou video-game but the fact that Ellie can't swim fully makes sense in the context of the game. I don't think it's a matter of Damsel in Distress, just as Anita points out, she's a pretty strong character - it's more a problem of uninventive puzzle design (something Naughty Dog is very guilty of).
May be an obscure pull, but my favorite female sidekick was the short amount of time you get to hang out with Sheriff Sarah Breaker in Alan Wake.
Mainly I like her because when you're fighting possessed people with her she makes it feel like you're her sidekick as she's way better than Alan at killing the bad guys.
People who disagree with the Ellie thing need to look at it a little more to see why it is a problem. Ellie goes on the raft and Joel guides her across. In this instance Ellie is totally helpless without Joel. As Anita says in the video there's nothing wrong with people helping one another but it is the way in which Ellie is helped IMO. It doesn't like wreck her character or anything but in that moment she is a burden to the player, a helpless girl.
Imagine for a moment that instead of Ellie who couldn't swim it was Joel. So in those sections Ellie dove in and got the raft and he stood on it to get across. Don't you think that would undermine Joel as a capable survivor that he needs someone else to help him get across the water? And sure, in the story it makes sense because Ellie doesn't know how to swim but the story can be whatever the game developers want. She could've snuck out of the Quarantine zones and learned through time out in the wilderness. She could've been unable to swim but would jump across some debris or something. Ellie is helpless on that raft because that is where the game designers wanted her to be.
Also, Ellie is brought up specifically to show that even when a dev gets the female sidekick thing 99% right there is still that last little bit that isn't quite there. I didn't take it to mean that she is an example of a bad sidekick but rather how this trope infects many examples we might think are totally fine.
I agree with her in that Bioshock infinite really didn't have much to say at all on pretty much anything...
But with TLOU i disagree. Elie may be a girl, but she is also a little kid compared to Joel who is an adult and obviously going to be caring for her. If they were both adults it would be different like with Tess, she is the equal to Joel and can obviously take care of herself as we see in the game.
When its Riley and Elie, they are portrayed as both on an equal level because they are the same ages.
i don't think its a gender thing.
also,
I don't really follow anita at all...has she ever done anything regarding Ico? It would be interesting to hear her opinion on that. In that game the main protag and the girl are the same ages, but the secondary character needs to be lead around because her faculties are low from being always locked up, and its apart of the gameplay mechanics...
Also i agree with her on Zelda...Zelda is becoming more and more of her own character, but the next logical step has to include her directly into the player's perspective IMO.
I agree with her in that Bioshock infinite really didn't have much to say at all on pretty much anything...
But with TLOU i disagree. Elie may be a girl, but she is also a little kid compared to Joel who is an adult and obviously going to be caring for her. If they were both adults it would be different like with Tess, she is the equal to Joel and can obviously take care of herself as we see in the game.
When its Riley and Elie, they are portrayed as both on an equal level because they are the same ages.
i don't think its a gender thing.
also,
I don't really follow anita at all...has she ever done anything regarding Ico? It would be interesting to hear her opinion on that. In that game the main protag and the girl are the same ages, but the secondary character needs to be lead around because her faculties are low from being always locked up, and its apart of the gameplay mechanics...
Also i agree with her on Zelda...Zelda is becoming more and more of her own character, but the next logical step has to include her directly into the player's perspective IMO.
Characters need to be flawed in certain ways to be real enough to work. Ellie's inability to swim went against her head-strong nature and gave her some fragility which is kind of essential to building a character.
I get the trope exists, but I think ND handled it perfectly well here.
If she didn't have that, it might have weakened her characterization. Also, comparing her to quiet's stupid reason for being mostly naked, LO FUCKING L. I'm sorry but that was a stupid comparison.
Like I said, I know. I'm also not referring to the idea of "women can't do anything for themselves". I've never thought that, but I and all men I know did grew up with the notion of men being the protector/fighter and not women, and the nationwide culture of only making men go to army was a big part of that.
It's a stupid remnant from the past, most people with any brains acknowledge it as such instead of going through a thought process "men have mandatory army + women don't = women can't do anything in certain situations and that women need to be protected, especially since even though it's not mandatory, women can go to the army too. It is unfair for men to have to do it but the thing to take out of the experience shouldn't be sexist attitudes towards the potential & skillsets of women. Those kinds of thoughts have to come from somewhere else (home? friends? internet?)
You don't maybe get what I mean here. I mean being born and then from the very beginning that mentality is hammered into you because the whole army thing is so prevalent in the culture. Most adults these days with any brains do acknowledge that it's not true, but I'm talking about kids, toddlers who are hammered with the "men fight and protect the women when the war comes" mentality. Now it's an adult's responsibility to keep him/herself informed about these things and not stay in the ignorance and that's what we do but that was unmistakeably the mentality that was pushed on me and every man I know personally, and all of them kept themselves with the times as they grew up and do not think archaicly like that anymore but that's definitely how they started.
May be an obscure pull, but my favorite female sidekick was the short amount of time you get to hang out with Sheriff Sarah Breaker in Alan Wake.
Mainly I like her because when you're fighting possessed people with her she makes it feel like you're her sidekick as she's way better than Alan at killing the bad guys.
Oh it's the last one? kinda of a shame, but hopefully it's just because that's all she has to say for now. I hope she starts something new after that, maybe periodic reviews of how newer games are handling those tropes or something like that.
I really enjoy watching her takes and opinions, even though I don't always agree, because since she has such a different point of view, very often she raises attention to things I would never notice on my own. This entire series was extremely important in my opinion, it definitely helped the industry to adjust itself in a better direction (I'm not saying it solved the entire problem, i'm just saying that it was effective to some degree).
It's indeed a shame that this is the last video. She started some big waves with her series and it clearly was needed. Hopefully things don't start to slowly regress when her voice is lost if others won't step up.
How is Ellie a 'damsel in distress' example just because she needs help getting across deep water? She's 14 and can't swim because no one has taken the time to teach her that in a "zombie apocalypse". Joel is basically a dad to her so helping her isn't really a sexism issue.
Levine's words about Daisy after the fact are almost cowardly. In Burial at Sea he specifically walked back her actions in the biggest, most obvious "LOOK GUYS WE KNOW WE FUCKED UP THERE IS THIS BETTER" way.
I wonder how much of this is due to streams crossing w/ the game tackling multiple things at once. I felt the Daisy v Evil Corporation plotline was strongly echoing both the Russian Revolution and US labor struggles of the era, much moreso than race relations, even though the game was also targeting white supremacy and the use of religion in US history. So even though Daisy was black, I didn't see the plotline as an intended commentary on race relations, but I can understand how someone could take it that way.
The working underclass on Columbia was exclusively Black and Irish, IIRC. If that's the case, I don't think those two ideas can be separated. If he was trying to treat them separately, that's a fuckup on his part.
I've always disliked this notion that some moments of weakness or flaws become the main focus and somehow undo every other good thing the female character does.
Ellie is resourceful and strong, but can't swim, oh no! Zelda is a badass pirate or ninja, but oh shit she got kidnapped in the last 30 minutes of the game, character destroyed. Or in BotW where she's a
Princess that does all her obligations, often defies her father, is an adventurer, a scholar/scientist and saves the world by trapping herself with a demon and fighting him for 100 years because the main (male) character failed (oh and she also saved his life)
, but shit, you need to save her, so it doesn't count.
I don't even know what she's trying to say about Alyx.
I realize she isn't outright saying that these bad moments make everything else disappear, but that's the point that comes across, just as it always has for years with discussions around female characters in videogames.
I think this recent obsession with tropes and what fits x label someone created leads to a very eschewed point of view, where content, context and quality is ignored in lieu of making a wider point. When you're selling hammers, every problem is a nail.
Which is valid to an extent, certainly improving female representation in games is much more important than specifics about game x or y, but when you go with sort of a No True Scotsman point of view, something is lost along the way.
Most of those criticisms are valid for any AI companion, sidekick or NPC, pretty much everything and everyone in every game exists to help you, the awesome super fantastic hero. Yet, it's still important to tackle this subject, because decades of an industry basically made for men by men (not ignoring the huge contributions of many women) lead to the natural consequence of having to rescue or be validated by women, preferably hot and with very little clothes and it's important to be aware of that.
I realize she isn't outright saying that these bad moments make everything else disappear, but that's the point that comes across, just as it always has for years with discussions around female characters in videogames.
she isn't outright saying that because that's not what she's saying at all.
one of the slogans of her organisation is "be critical of the media you love". she's not saying that ellie not being able to swim invalidates ellie as a character, or makes TLOU a terrible sexist game, or any of that. if you asked her what she thought of ellie as a character, she would probably really like her.
Also Zelda in Wind Waker was the funniest shit ever, to the point that if it was someone that wasn't Nintendo doing it I'd almost see it as lampshading. As soon as Zelda became Zelda, she disappeared until the end of the game. "Now I'm a princess and will stand here while you do the adventuring!"
Edit: The worst thing BotW did to Zelda was give her that voice actor. It generally treated her pretty well.
The way Zelda is presented initially is that of a steadfast heroine marching into danger to protect her people after the hero was struck down.
Does this become undone later on with classic damsel tropes? I wasn't expecting this game to be wonderful in that regard, but it would be a real shame if she just slides into damsel mode.
All things considered, BotW handled Zelda very well.
Spoilers:
In flashbacks to the past, when Calamity Ganon first appears, Zelda is still struggling to unleash her powers. They finally kick in at the moment a wounded Link is about to be killed by a Guardian. Not only does Zelda saves Link in this instance, she arranges for him to be taken to the Shrine of Resurrection so he can recover from his wounds. She then returns his sword to the Great Deku Tree, and proceeds directly to Hyrule Castle to confront Calamity Ganon. It's Zelda who spends the next 100 years keeping Ganon in check; if not for her, Hyrule would've been destroyed while Link was sleeping. When Link returns, he helps gather up the Champions while Zelda keeps Ganon trapped in Hyrule Castle; the Champions and Link then weaken Ganon enough that Zelda — not Link — deals the finishing blow, using her powers once again to seal him away.
One could argue that, pound for pound, Zelda actually did more to contain and defeat Ganon than Link.
All things considered, BotW handled Zelda very well.
Spoilers:
In flashbacks to the past, when Calamity Ganon first appears, Zelda is still struggling to unleash her powers. They finally kick in at the moment a wounded Link is about to be killed by a Guardian. Not only does Zelda saves Link in this instance, she arranges for him to be taken to the Shrine of Resurrection so he can recover from his wounds. She then returns his sword to the Great Deku Tree, and proceeds directly to Hyrule Castle to confront Calamity Ganon. It's Zelda who spends the next 100 years keeping Ganon in check; if not for her, Hyrule would've been destroyed while Link was sleeping. When Link returns, he helps gather up the Champions while Zelda keeps Ganon trapped in Hyrule Castle; the Champions and Link then weaken Ganon enough that Zelda not Link deals the finishing blow, using her powers once again to seal him away.
One could argue that, pound for pound, Zelda actually did more to contain and defeat Ganon than Link.
Story-wise, it takes up 100 years! But if you mean in terms of screen time, sure, she doesn't appear often. But then again, the original point of discussion is how she's depicted when she does appear. And in that respect, Zelda is handled very well — surprisingly so, given how weak they made her look in the trailer.
she isn't outright saying that because that's not what she's saying at all.
one of the slogans of her organisation is "be critical of the media you love". she's not saying that ellie not being able to swim invalidates ellie as a character, or makes TLOU a terrible sexist game, or any of that. if you asked her what she thought of ellie as a character, she would probably really like her.
Yes, that's why I said what you quoted and that these things become the focus and overshadow everything else.
That's not what she's saying and it's probably not even what she thinks, but that's what comes across when you cherry pick and put in the spotlight a specific part of a character to make a wider case, but the character doesn't fit the bill at all.
In the end, she isn't actually saying anything about Ellie other than using her as a negative example because she can't swim.
Is there any specific amount of time a character needs to be on screen for her actions and personality to be considered? Even ignoring the fact that Zelda (and Ganondorf) are almost always written as very distant from the player and almost unreachable, seems very arbitrary to me. Ellie not swimming is a tiny part of the game, yet it's brought up, same with Zelda. With the exception of BotW, in 3D Zelda games, Zelda is only kidnapped at the very end after a whole game where she's getting shit done and she ends up helping you defeat Ganondorf. If that tiny bit where she's kidnapped is the focus, why is it a problem that positive examples take little time? Especially in a game with minimalist and emergent storytelling.
It's sad that TvW project is ending, but I greatly appreciate Anita's videos shedding light on the various tropes and problems regarding female characters within video games.
Hopefully more developers at least take in consideration what she has talked about.
I haven't watched a FF video in ages but I feel like she's done the thing that I remember her doing before that I really didn't like.
That being in the end of her video pointing to "good" or "positive" examples of the trope she's talking about, but the games she's talking about are pretty much solely based on that one concept, while the games she brings up the tropes in are not about that and honestly cant feasibly be that. There isn't going to be a mainstream shooter where a support character is as finicky to deal with as Triko from the Last Guardian just because it "feels more realistic".
Resident Evil 4, Last of Us, bioshock infinite are games designed primarily as shooters intended to give a power fantasy (or realistic desperation fantasy for LoU). While they arent immune from criticism for the way character interactions within can feel artificial, the designers still thought managed to integrate the characters into direct gameplay in useful supporting roles (or to vary objectives in RE4's case), which was likely their primary intent.
May be an obscure pull, but my favorite female sidekick was the short amount of time you get to hang out with Sheriff Sarah Breaker in Alan Wake.
Mainly I like her because when you're fighting possessed people with her she makes it feel like you're her sidekick as she's way better than Alan at killing the bad guys.
Can she actually die at all? She was definitely a nice NPC in that she didn't get in the way, didn't get stuck on anything that I recall, and worked as a pretty nice reprieve from running around creepy areas alone.
Levine's words about Daisy after the fact are almost cowardly. In Burial at Sea he specifically walked back her actions in the biggest, most obvious "LOOK GUYS WE KNOW WE FUCKED UP THERE IS THIS BETTER" way.
.
Burial at Sea was a terrible piece of DLC for Elizabeth and Fitzroy. Fitzroy gets turned from a smart if bloodthirsty revolutionary into a dumb patsy, and Elizabeth ends up invalidating the core themes of the first game to needlessly tie into the trials of BioShock protagonist Jack, who is basically barely an actual entity in his own game. If there's an example of where developers reacted to criticism and made things worse, it's got to be BaS.
The working underclass on Columbia was exclusively Black and Irish, IIRC. If that's the case, I don't think those two ideas can be separated. If he was trying to treat them separately, that's a fuckup on his part.
Taking Infinite as being about current (or even past) U.S. race relations makes about as much sense as assuming the original BioShock had a lot to say about 1940s America. Columbia is a caricature of turn-of-the-century America's worst elements; the whole point of Columbia is that they thought the U.S. was being too lenient to those swarthy Chinese and seceded from the Union to go full-on Sky Fundamentalists. I think the big issue is people wanted Levine and Irrational to make a game they clearly weren't making (one that was specifically focused on historical or modern race relations in America, rather than merely using some of that as part of its setting), and at some point that's your own issue not the game's.
... as the game tells players a garbage story which suggests that oppressed people are just as bad as their oppressors and the truth is always somewhere in the middle.
I haven't watched a FF video in ages but I feel like she's done the thing that I remember her doing before that I really didn't like.
That being in the end of her video pointing to "good" or "positive" examples of the trope she's talking about, but the games she's talking about are pretty much solely based on that one concept, while the games she brings up the tropes in are not about that and honestly cant feasibly be that. There isn't going to be a mainstream shooter where a support character is as finicky to deal with as Triko from the Last Guardian just because it "feels more realistic".
But if you mean in terms of screen time, sure, she doesn't appear often. But then again, the original point of discussion is how she's depicted when she does appear. And in that respect, Zelda is handled very well — surprisingly so, given how weak they made her look in the trailer.