Follow TV Tropes

Following

Discussion YMMV / BatmanArkhamCity

Go To

You will be notified by PM when someone responds to your discussion
Type the word in the image. This goes away if you get known.
If you can't read this one, hit reload for the page.
The next one might be easier to see.
Nithael Since: Jan, 2001
Dec 11th 2011 at 10:03:12 AM •••

I cut Unfortunate Implications and put it there. Can we try without the Wall of Text, Natter, talking in the first person or with This Troper, and Understatement Sink Holes?

  • Unfortunate Implications: As at least two reviewers have noted, literally every female charater, Catwoman in particular, is lambasted with disturbingly derogatory insults. Then there's the fact that it's emphasized that it's very cold in Arkham City, yet in comic book fashion all of the women dress scantily.
    • On the other hand, almost all mooks in the game are male. The female mooks of Talia's personal guard, cannot have the limb breaking finisher done to them while the male mooks can. On top of that, Catwoman can use the limb-breakers on male mooks. The game seems to unknowingly advocate women can cripple evil men but men cannot cripple evil women and its okay to hurt men because there are no female criminals with a few supervillainous exceptions. In a world like Gotham City, there would be a lot of female criminals (like in the comics, where there are many lesser known female supervillains and mooks; rather than just Catwoman, Harley, Ivy and Talia)...but not in Arkham City for some reason...
    • This troper can attest with his experiences of many trials in Hell's Gate Challenge Mode that one can break the ninjas' limbs. In fact, Nightwing and Robin just love beating the shit out of them if one can take anything out of their animations on ninjas compared to Catwoman and Batman. So half of what the troper above me just said is wrong. Another point that the troper is missing is that the women weren't meant to be there in the first place. Harley was not thrown in Arkham City, but she chose to stay there. Ivy was meant to be killed because of the destruction of Arkham Asylum, but survived at the last minute and was unceremoniously shipped in a pod there. Catwoman lives in the confines of the area and could have left if Stange didn't steal her belongings. Also, Gotham would never allow Quincy Sharpe to throw female inmates with male inmates for obvious reasons.
    • My apologies, I had not played as Robin or Nightwing. However, what you say about Gotham never allowing female criminals in the city is still wrong in my opinion. Gotham, is well, a Crapsack World. It is highly unlikely that citizens would decide to not let female criminals in there, as they already have experience with them (Poison Ivy has killed hundreds of citizens according to Batman Arkham Asylum and in the comics, has killed a lot more; Harley enjoys killing arguably as much as The Joker, and there are quite a few female villains in the comics such as Roxy Rocket, Lady Clayface, Jane Doe, Magpie, Nyssa Al Ghul, Lady Shiva (although Shiva can range from Anti-Villain to Evilly Affable), etc. ...in general, in Gotham, it doesn't matter if you're male or female, or really even who you are at all...you could still be a huge threat to general society...even children have turned out to nearly bring Gotham to its knees such as James Gordon Junior). As for Gotham not allowing female criminals with male criminals due to law...in the comics, Arkham Asylum and Blackgate are mixed gender facilities due to the insane amount of criminals of both sexes in the comics. Arkham City having male and female criminals is not that much of a stretch, especially considering who is running the show. Since Hugo Strange is a perfect example of The Sociopath archetype if not for his obsession with Batman (arguably the only person he can be emotionally attached to, even if its in a "Why can't I be you?" way), he would have no problem putting women in Arkham City and no problem with men and women dying in Protocol 10. Additionally, Ra's al Ghul in the comics, has no problems with killing anyone who is either 'evil' in his opinion or could pose a threat to his plans; to the point of attempting to kill his own daughters. Considering Strange has a grip over Gotham's law and government with Ra's, at least two major prison facilities already being mixed gender and Gotham's horribly jaded population...to say that women could not go in Arkham City makes no sense,( Especially considering the Final Solution for all criminals). As for Catwoman, Harley and Ivy as examples...Strange enjoys interviewing any "freak" (costumed criminal); and considering Catwoman is a kleptomaniac (unless Batman is involved), Harley is a mass murderer and Ivy often fantasized about killing all of humanity to 'help' plants and has killed a lot of people...well, there are reasons they are in Arkham City. And remember, any crime can get you in there (or if Strange doesn't like you)...even The Carpenter, arguably the most ineffectual of Batman's villains (though she can make a mean Death Trap), got locked up in there in the tie-in comics.

Edited by Nithael Hide / Show Replies
PriceCheck Since: May, 2013
Jul 3rd 2013 at 12:00:41 PM •••

How about, "The fact that there are no female (criminal) mooks to be found in the Arkham City game proper. The implication is either that women are incapable of being thugs, or that only men deserve to be thrown in a prison to die. The game also had many accusations of sexism due to some of the offhand comments and insults the mooks made toward female characters, among other things. These have been analyzed in a number of debates and articles, some more objective than others—suffice to say that there was some minor controversy."

Edited by 216.99.32.42
Larkmarn Since: Nov, 2010
Jul 3rd 2013 at 12:15:47 PM •••

Got any sources? UI requires citations now.

Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
PriceCheck Since: May, 2013
Aug 4th 2013 at 7:51:00 PM •••

Nothing comes to mind for the first one (it's a personal opinion, which I guess isn't appropriate for the trope), but the second, sure. Lots. This one discusses the controversy and the actual comments in a more analytical light, though I might be biased in my linkage because I'm of the group that thinks the whole thing was blown out of proportion.

Edited by 216.99.32.44
Top