I’m tempted to lump this one in with “But I Ignored Her Video!” but I’ve seen enough responses like this to give it its own category. Here’s a representative quote:
Your sojourn to rescue Eleanor isn’t simply a grail quest—she’s not an object—it’s a quest to be a father. Through the game, the decisions you make impact Eleanor’s view of the world, leading to a multitude of endings. Bioshock 2 is a game about how parents impact their children more than anything else.Sarkeesian specifically mentioned this point toward the end of her video. Most games with the damsel-in-distress trope have a plot-based reason for her to be distressed, or killed, or killed and then in distress, or (and I’m sure this exists somewhere) killed, then in distress, then mercy-killed by the hero. But just because there’s a narrative reason for it doesn’t mean that it’s not problematic.
I mentioned this in my last post, but it bears repeating. Games don’t just exist in a vacuum. They don’t spontaneously come into existence, fully formed and thus beyond criticism. People design them, write them, render them, and voice them. The things they write aren’t above criticism or discussion. Claiming that there’s a narrative reason for a problematic element doesn’t cancel out the problems with that part of the game. Just because there’s a narrative reason to mow down civilians in Modern Warfare 2 doesn’t mean it’s not a problematic scene. The protagonist in Bioshock 2 has a narrative reason for chasing Eleanor, but that doesn’t prevent Eleanor from also being a damsel-in-distress.
The damsel trope is not based on plot. Tropes in general aren’t based primarily on plot. Plots are endlessly variable, and so very difficult to broadly characterize (and broad characterization is the purpose of the trope-as-category). No, I’d tentatively argue that tropes are built on function. Tropes do things. The damsel-in-distress trope motivates the player. The problem is that it motivates the player by using a woman as a finish-line, rather than a person. That’s the functional reading, not the narrative reading. When we’re talking about tropes, we’re talking about functions.
Sarkeesian could be making videos about women in game narratives, but she’s not. She’s making videos about tropes. Trying to switch the argument away from tropes and toward narratives (where an endless series of exceptions and particularities can smoke-bomb the issue) is just bad arguing.
Finally, the presence of a sexist trope in a game doesn’t mean it’s a bad game. It just means we need to be aware of the problems it presents. You can shoot virtual civilians in MW2, but it’s probably good to question it, to take a closer look. That’s all Sarkeesian is asking for. She wants you to take a closer look, not toss it on a problematic videogame bonfire.