Malaki-LEGEND.sys
-
Posts
2,642 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Malaki-LEGEND.sys
-
-
I've been trying to avoid this thread so much because I haven't been able to be that active at all since my thorascopy after TWO instances of my lung collapsing!
I still have another few weeks before I can do anything intensive and I'm going CRAZY! -
Tomb Raider's controversy if I recall had very little to do with the level of violence present, but instead with one particular scene early in the game where Lara is groped and the implication that rape was just around the corner. Of course this scene was also greatly taken out of context by critics who then decided to brand the game as sexist and harmful to women instead of understanding the severity/gravity of that moment in the game and what it meant within the context of Lara's growth as a strong character who, to paraphrase a song lyric, ain't nuthin' to fuck with. If we want to treat video games as an art form, this kind of criticism has to stop.
And I can't blame you for feeling uncomfortable with No More Heroes. It was a crappy, repetitive game... Which I guess makes Suda 51's continued career questionable. Bad jokes aside, given that the narrative and world of that game as well as the grit and nasty of all of its characters, I can't imagine the game not having gore all over the place. We're not talking about an "elegant" world like the original Star Wars trilogy or the UC Gundam series.
-
Well body mutilation is ostensibly a huge part of trying to convey a type of horror, so yeah, I'd imagine in keeping with the theme it stands to argue that it just wouldn't have the same impact if a horror game didn't include it. Granted, there are many different aspects involved as well such as suspense, timing, and the like, so simply relying on gratuitous grotesque violence really won't get the same effect, and could be seen as lazy.
I think your post raises another interesting(and probably more rich) discussion involving the role of violence in video games and how it can be effective(or not) in transmitting a certain message within a or feeling within a given narrative without crossing the line into absurdity town.
-
What are "ignorant" people, exactly?
Well that's the million dollar question really, and honestly I have no idea. I'm more speaking to the point that saying a person is mentally fit or "ready" to handle a certain type of content at an arbitrarily set age is a bit bonkers. I mean, I understand the intent behind it, but that doesn't make it any less so. People's developmental tracks are unique, so who's to say that a 13-year-old for example isn't or is ready to consume the type of content a 24-year-old would be able to consume? I mean this is tangential to the actual point of discussion I guess, but I just wanted to touch on part of the whole "games can promote/encourage/etc. real life violence".
As for feeling uncomfortable playing violent video games where there is an excess amount of killing or very realistic depictions of polygons resembling people getting maimed, tortured, or otherwise killed in grotesque ways, just avoid 'em? I really don't know what else to say except I think you're focusing far too much on the superficial, especially when discussing scenes in gaming such as the White Phosphorus scene in Spec Ops: The Line. Melbu makes the point that it really depends on what you get out of the experience, and I think where there's a compelling enough narrative, then there shouldn't be that big of an issue. After all, there are so many compelling movies with graphic depictions of violence, and what is a video game if not an interactive narrative? This is especially true if we want to treat games as art.
That being said, I'm not above feeling uncomfortable with a game's violence to the point where I can't play it. I can't play the Manhunt games for example.
-
The moral of the story here is that ignorant people should not be exposed to thought-provoking, graphic, or complex material, because they might make the jump from completely fake to real. I mean really, what other conclusion is there to make? I'm of the mind that many people who are playing games like Grand Theft Auto V who are playing it who are "of age" really shouldn't be, because an arbitrarily set age where we say people are "ready" to consume types of content is just that: completely arbitrary.
But what are we going to do? Are we going to extend the same type of strict laws from say, gun control, to the types of media we consume? Are we going to tell game creators what they should and should not make, and that they have some sort of responsibility to society to educate and raise children and non-children on traditional values, social contract, and responsible living habits? I don't see either of these working particularly well.
I mean, like what you like and like liking it as I always say(and vice versa), but really, it's just a game, guys. And if you're going to start feeling uncomfortable about all of that, then I can't imagine you ever feeling comfortable given all the messed up stuff that wanders through our heads during the course of a day.
-
The very definition of a tank is monotony. That's why I could never do those classes and respect the crap out of people who do go through with them.
Are you kidding? You're probably not tanking right then. As a tank, you're constantly going nuts with abilities and managing hate between multiple mobs, all the while making sure you out hate the rest of your group. Tanking is hella fun.
-
I think the problem with Crystal Bearers is that the gameplay mechanics weren't particularly deep. The fact that Layle essentially had psychic abilities really could have opened up a lot of possibilities. Maybe at one point gain the ability to hold on to two objects using the Wiimote and nunchuck, and maybe hold them in a certain way to activate some kind of shield, or maybe hover around somehow.
To me, much like the 3DS at its early days, it was simply just lack of quality software that held the Wii back from the "hardcore" audience, which may very well happen to the Wii U if Nintendo isn't careful about it.
-
What were the sales numbers on that new Wii redesign in Canada? I can't help but think that this new 2DS was born out of the same ethos; provide a cheaper, more durable version aimed at the kiddies at a much reduced cost at the expense of some functionality.
Either way, I don't like it. It has little to do with its aesthetics(but damn is it ugly), and I realize this isn't "made for me"(and yet we have several adults saying they'd be all about getting it posting in this thread), but I can't see how this can be healthy for the 3DS as a whole.
It was bad enough that Nintendo decided that they wanted to include the 3D slider on the original system, thus already creating a fragmented user-base, which has already meant less daring efforts into 3D-dependent gameplay experiences, but now we have a version of the system that straight up can't even produce the effect. I'll be interested in seeing sales numbers on this thing when it hits, because regardless of what Nintendo is saying now about how they aren't abandoning 3D with this model, sales are going to dictate what they actually do.
-
It's not officially confirmed but there's a pretty strong rumor that he signed a 6-movie deal.
Also why is nobody talking about Matt Damon potentially playing Aquaman?!
Batman and Aquaman are totally going to be best buds in this one.
-
Not even lung surgery can keep me from early access to the game! Hit me up on Adamantoise-soon-to-be-Hyperion, folks! Ariadne Marduk!
-
Guys, it's Batman. It's going to be OK. You can stop taking comic books seriously now.
-
Because it forces developers to create games based on the question of "How can we make money off this?" rather than "how can we make this game fun(and by extension make money off it)?"
That's one short argument. There's a much larger one relating to how businesses misinterpret certain trends, but I'm in a hurry.
-
-
Thanks for the well wishes, people. This is the second time within a month and a half that this happens, so I'm slightly worried they might actually have to staple the thing shut this time.
But this thread is about Dragon's Crown! So let's all talk about why this game gets better the better you get at it and the more time you put into it!
I have a sorceress that I leveled at first, but then after I understood the leveling and combat a little better, decided to create a more Paladin-like fighter, and now I'm experimenting around with the Amazon and eventually elf. I love the versatility of the classes and the short burst feel of playing it on the Vita. Good times.
Name's Malakhim2004 on PSN if anyone wants to actually get in some game time tonight.
-
I seriously cannot believe how far they went with the Monty Python reference. It would have been so perfect if they had a Black Knight.
-
So Dragon's Crown on my Vita has been single-handedly keeping me sane while I've been stuck at the hospital again for my second lung collapse within 1 and a half months. Seriously, this game is so good... Online and ad-hoc multiplayer have been working pretty well for me so far.
And holy god, guys! The references!
-
That's actually kind of cool. Be sure to share it when she starts putting entries up (if she hasn't already).
Well she says she wants to do a few more entries, but essentially this is her informal introductory piece on the issue(on a new site no less!)
-
Well if anything, Anita Sarkeesian has motivated my girlfriend to start up a blog discussing these issues and why Sarkeesian's perspective is not only damaging to video gaming, but to feminism as a whole.
-
Just chiming in in response to Final Metroid's point regarding the dismissal of anectdotal evidence:
Aside from scientific and academic reasons why you don't just accept anecdotal evidence in the first place, I'ma be hella pissed if anyone here did, as I've gathered plenty of "anecdotal evidence" for arguments in a similar previous thread, and was totally lambasted for it. I don't think you get either side of the argument(if there are even sides) gets to pick and choose what they'll consider valid on a whim.
-
Grabbed a Vita just to play this game. Name is Malakhim2004. Somebody play with us!
-
Is it actually even possible for you to ever just simply disagree with someone? Or do you just have to be a condescending asshole about it all the time?
You ARE talking to a dude with a very condescending attitude towards people for deigning to like World of Warcraft after all...
That's why I dropped out of social science type courses. Because unlike natural science, there are no real, concrete answers. Only flawed theories that often have little to no compelling evidence to back them up.Dude, I have a master's in I/O psychology, and this is pretty much why I gave up on it: social sciences are far, FAR too transient, dependent on cultural context, and subject to the worst kinds of bias to really be taken seriously. I can't even count the amount of people I know who dropped out of the programs for that very reason...
-
my favorite part of her videos so far is the two sentence blurb where she says 'in most games, there is "context" used to "explain away" these acts of violence.' as if the context was completely irrelevant because something bad happened to a woman.
Yeah, Heaven forbid there's an actual reason as to why these female characters are in the conundrums they find themselves in. Unless it's objectification within objectification!
I mean to be totally honest, half the time I find most female characters I either play as or see in game as relatively competent(sometimes even more so than the men), caring, strong women; or tragic, or just sultry, boisterous, sexually-confident, etc. characters. Sure they sometimes might be scantly clad or showin' quite a bit of curves, but for fucks sake, how many girls today aren't flaunting their curves or trying desperately to be more attractive for whatever the reason? If you're bold enough to deny the previous, then you're either lying or have been living under a rock. Of course you can argue that "it isn't for you" or some such other nonsense, but let's be real; we WANT other people to find us attractive in some fashion or form. Yet for some reason, we can't just admit to that fact because it makes us look "selfish" or "arrogant/full of ourselves"/etc.
If anything, video game narratives have been a huge force in telling me that women(and indeed people) can be so much more than we might see in our normal routine and should be valued highly, and THAT'S why context is so important.
I'll just reiterate stuff I've mentioned previously: as an ideal, I absolutely agree with the idea that the gaming industry(and society in general) needs to really evaluate certain "problematic" aspects such as comic book maturity(but maybe it doesn't? Creative license and all that), but I want solutions that are all-inclusive and not over-antagonizing/stigmatizing against any one person or group. I.E, I really don't think Sarkeesian is the one we should be listening to.
It's like Garnet Lee versus Jeff Cannata on Weekend Confirmed. Cannata while well-meaning, has a habit of getting overly passionate when speaking out against certain remarks on the episode discussions(which to be fair can be pretty snarky on occasion), which only serves to ignite an even larger fire, whereas Lee has a little more bedside, and can really control and tone down a discussion where all parties' discussions are analyzed and dealt with in a positive fashion.
-
In other words, context isn't necessarily vital to simply identifying a trope, but if you're going to proceed to discus its implications or its nature, it can be rather crucial.
This pretty much sums up the entire issue. Yes, it's completely easy to identify a trope just by observing the work, but when discussing the implications of that trope and what it means(which I REALLY hope Anita is trying to do because otherwise she's about 10+ years late to the party and took all your money at the same time), context is extremely important.
As to why it's important to actually cite what are essentially her references, any serious academic/professional worth his or her own salt knows that it's important that readers and others in the community are able to corroborate what they're pointing out. Is citing needed in this case? Well, it all depends on what she's showing, whether it be a snippet of gameplay, a piece of the narrative, or more likely just a scantly-clad female taken entirely out of context.
Furthermore, if I remember correctly, didn't she say she needed the money to actually play the stuff? It seems very odd to me that she'd have to use anyone else' footage in the first place.
And yes yes, it's true that we can't easily say she didn't play the stuff, but it's equally true that we can't really say she did either, as we have no direct proof either way. If I were part of a thesis committee, I'd have serious concerns about giving her the green light on this.
Of course this is just a reflection on her methodology and not necessarily related to her overall topic. To be fair, I AM glad that someone is talking about this sort of thing, I just think it should be someone else who doesn't seem as polarizing about it.
-
Actually it does matter, because context is important when trying to use narrative as an example. It would be fine(although a bit incomplete) to simply use the imagery itself as sole examples of blatant oversexualization.
Nintendo Wii U
in General Discussion
Posted
Whether or not you like motion controls will determine whether or not a person liked Skyward Sword over Twilight Princess. I am one of the people who actually loves well-implemented motion controls, so I love Skyward Sword much more than Twilight Princess.
It's a tough call to make, since they both excel very well at what they do, but still falter slightly in a few respects. Now if they remade Twilight Princess to fully take advantage of Wii Motion+ AND put it in HD on the Wii U...