I think it's a bit disingenuous to compare violence in games to sexism in games one to one.
For one thing, in a lot of violent games the people you kill tend to either be in self defence or otherwise threatening the lives of civvies/supporting characters/etc. Games that have you killing without at least trying to justify it absolutely get criticism.
Now that doesn't mean that most of these that try to justify it do it well, or that there isn't deeper issues with how common it is, but I think it's important to consider that one can be morally okay with shooting someone who is trying to set off a bomb and not morally okay with treating a woman like a sex object.
I think it's also important to note that we don't live in a culture where common citzens are constantly running around killing people for fun, but we do live in a society where women are marginalized and objectified across the board in nearly every aspect of our culture. The general attitude about murder is that it's wrong. But a LOT of people are openly sexist and misogynistic and are encouraged to behave that way by our culture and entertainment.
It's not a good argument to say "well if you're not okay with sexism in games then you can't be okay with violence in games" because the former is reinforcing a common problematic behavior and attitude while the latter usually isn't. That doesn't free the violence from criticism by any means but these two things exist in pretty wildly different contexts and are relevant in completely different ways. We don't critique them in the same way because they aren't the same thing.
You realize that when these discussions have pertained to a game in the past, the moderators have made it absolutely clear that you don't get to dictate what is or isn't actually acceptable to talk about in a thread right?
Also yes, some people do actually have an issue not only with the narrative dissonance by the whole "murdering hundreds of people" part. I in fact would be one of them, even if I enjoy all three games immensely it's possible to think both are actually quite absurd and that one creates the problem for the other. It's like with Tomb Raider, that game was fantastic but it had the same problem Uncharted did with Lara being upset over her first "kill" then literally 5 seconds later headshotting 5 guys for +15 EXP! each.
Again, you're still just complaining about the narrative dissonance between the characters personality in the cutscenes with their horrific actions in gameplay. You obviously don't have any problems with the morality of wanting to murder virtual people for your own pleasure, or else, you would not have enjoyed the game's immensely.
Coming into this thread to let people know what sick fucks they are for enjoying their creeper simulator would be the equivalent of going into the Uncharted or Tomb Raider threads to call them sick fucks for enjoying their murder simulators. They would tell you to fuck off.
Actually I wouldn't, because as I tried to explain (and obviously failed to do so) I do in fact have problems with games over-relying on murdering hundreds of people, plus I am capable of giving a response that is far more mature than that (this argument says a lot about you though). Can I make this actually any clearer for you? Here let me spell it out in detail: I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH NEARLY EVERY GAME BEING ABOUT MURDERING HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE IN PSYCHOTIC WAYS. Of course I see it as a different argument with different basis in culture/gender politics than I do this particular issue, where it's obvious from numerous comments that gamers in general have much more of a problem with gender related issues being a problem than they do realizing that murder is not okay. This tangent isn't for this thread though because it doesn't relate to the game at all, but that's why the argument is very different between why I have a problem with - but do continue to buy - games with violence and why I don't buy games that cross the line into blatantly awful sexual objectification of women.
I mean again, this game literally devolves women into objects called "Targets" that you creepily stare at while they aren't looking to have sex with them. That's just something out of a creepy PUA book.
And I know game threads aren't required to be limited to positive talk about the game, but I don't really understand why there needs to be so much discussion about it from people who have no desire to play it.
I can't figure out how you get to this point when I have owned or played nearly every one of his games to some capacity, so obviously I did and then I saw the reviews and was like "LoL, nope".
I mean I didn't buy Dragon's Crown for its hideous objectified depiction of women, but this game is well and truly beyond what I thought Dragon's Crown did terribly.
I can understand if you perhaps liked Suda 51 in the past, but are upset that he "crossed a line." But if you don't like Suda 51 games, you think Killer is Dead is tasteless, and have no desire to play it, why bother talking about it?
Because these sorts of things are more than worthy of criticism and deserve to be criticised for it.
I mean your argument boils down to "Why don't you just shut up?" and the more you say that, the more I think there is a legitimate argument that has to be made. Only when a point truly sticks home in something important does someone tell you to shut up.
And if you did like Suda 51 before, you did notice that his main characters routinely objectified woman, right? You were okay with it as a passive observer, but became sickened when it became interactive?
Yes I did and I have criticised them before, but he has done considerably better with past games - even Lollipop Chainsaw (which actually inverts a few negative female stereotypes considerably - consider that the only significant male character is reduced to a disembodied head attached to her waist for most of the game) does a lot better. Again, if I didn't play games that objectified women I wouldn't be playing a lot of games full stop - but there are limits and the gigolo minigame is well and truly over what I will tolerate.
Seriously, my problems with the likes of Lollipop Chainsaw, No More Heroes (which actually kind of inverts things a bit in fairness) are MOLEHILLS compared to the crap this game does. In fact I would say in some ways his previous games have been much more self aware (even if they do objectify women in them) than this game by miles - it's actually what makes this so disappointing. It shows that probably that "self awareness" from previous games was entirely accidental and not deliberate.
It doesn't mean people who play said game are creepy by association, though.
I also think that makes it more of a game with creepy elements. Persona 4 Golden has some questionable stuff in it too, hardly anyone goes crazy over that.
Actually while Persona 4 does the general context and fact they are not routinely objectified makes a huge difference. Horny teenage boys being portrayed as horny teenage boys, who are SUITABLY called out on it and their behaviour CHASTISED not glorified/encouraged is significantly different. In fact I was even immensely impressed that if you dress up the female characters in the Bikinis and similar if you talk to them in a Dungeon they actively complain about how impractical/silly it is (They have costumes they particularly like as well, EG the Kung Fu costume for Chie). The games overall context fits this sort of thing in well and none of the women are objectified, in fact there is a magnificent line in the game you can give to one character that they shouldn't be ashamed of their gender at all.
Really, Persona 4 Golden isn't even in the same ball park of this game in terms of sexist objectification: Don't even pretend they are.
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited August 2013
Honestly, at the end of the day I think Grasshopper is free to make any game they want.
And at the end of the day you buy it or you don't. Because at the end of the day money is the only thing that really matters in the equation.
I mean I'm not saying you can't criticize, but really most of the back and forth about this stuff usually ends of being a lot of shouting that I don't see serving much purpose.
Dragkonias on
+1
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
Actually while Persona 4 does the general context and fact they are not routinely objectified makes a huge difference. Horny teenage boys being portrayed as horny teenage boys, who are SUITABLY called out on it and their behaviour CHASTISED not glorified/encouraged is significantly different. In fact I was even immensely impressed that if you dress up the female characters in the Bikinis and similar if you talk to them in a Dungeon they actively complain about how impractical/silly it is (They have costumes they particularly like as well, EG the Kung Fu costume for Chie). The games overall context fits this sort of thing in well and none of the women are objectified, in fact there is a magnificent line in the game you can give to one character that they shouldn't be ashamed of their gender at all.
Really, Persona 4 Golden isn't even in the same ball park of this game in terms of sexist objectification: Don't even pretend they are.
I was referring to the added hot spring content, which basically amounts to more 'let's poke fun at Naoto's ridiculous bust! and put the cast in towels again! that's cool, right?'.
It's not in the same camp as this, but I still think it's in pretty poor taste. Satomi Tadashi would be ashamed.
cj iwakura on
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Actually while Persona 4 does the general context and fact they are not routinely objectified makes a huge difference. Horny teenage boys being portrayed as horny teenage boys, who are SUITABLY called out on it and their behaviour CHASTISED not glorified/encouraged is significantly different. In fact I was even immensely impressed that if you dress up the female characters in the Bikinis and similar if you talk to them in a Dungeon they actively complain about how impractical/silly it is (They have costumes they particularly like as well, EG the Kung Fu costume for Chie). The games overall context fits this sort of thing in well and none of the women are objectified, in fact there is a magnificent line in the game you can give to one character that they shouldn't be ashamed of their gender at all.
Really, Persona 4 Golden isn't even in the same ball park of this game in terms of sexist objectification: Don't even pretend they are.
I was referring to the added hot spring content, which basically amounts to more 'let's poke fun at Naoto's ridiculous bust! and put the cast in towels again! that's cool, right?'.
It's not in the same camp as this, but I still think it's in pretty poor taste. Satomi Tadashi would be ashamed.
Even that was pretty tame to be frank compared to the vast majority of games (and again, the boys trying to be perverts is actively chastised and made fun of, not encouraged or promoted - a significant difference). I mean, if you want gross and simply awful to know where I think the line is go look at the Warrior Monk or Bound Spirit of Dragon's Crown as good examples. Persona 4 - in context - is actually miles ahead of most games on gender even with some of the common Japanese anime tropes it fits in (EG the Harem anime aspects that you can pull off and Marie is a pure fanservice-y character).
Criticisms of Persona 4 to me on this boil down to mostly quibbling and has to deliberately ignore everything else it does extremely correctly. On the other hand, games like Killer is Dead do literally nothing correctly, so it's immensely disingenuous to compare them (except as extremes on how female characters can be portrayed in Japanese games).
You and Jeddy both need to show me the part of my post history on this thread that I said this game can never be criticized, because I just read it over and I'm not seeing it. What I have done however is call into question a bias on the part of reviewers that I consider against the norm and wonder aloud if that bias must be considered when considering their reviews for this game. Reviewers can be as petty and biased as they like, yes. They have no obligation to be able to take a dispassionate stance on games they may not like the content of, yes. They can use their position as a bully pulpit to try and further their political ideas, yes. However if that is the case, do I as a potential consumer not have the right to take these biases into account and contextualize their reviews accordingly?
Is their bias "women are people with equal agency to men and treating them like sex dolls is a really creepy thing to do"? Because I don't want to read a review from anyone who DOESN'T have this 'bias' honestly. The fact that you consider "don't be a creep to 50% of the human population" something that's 'against the norm' is SUPER telling. You might be more right than you know, but that's not exactly something to be celebrated.
Honestly, at the end of the day I think Grasshopper is free to make any game they want.
And at the end of the day you buy it or you don't. Because at the end of the day money is the only thing that really matters in the equation.
I mean I'm not saying you can't criticize, but really most of the back and forth about this stuff usually ends of being a lot of shouting that I don't see serving much purpose.
Also gotta disagree with this. Verbal criticism has a very real effect in this day and age. If sales were all that mattered, why did the XB1 make all these (no doubt) costly policy changes? Being afraid of the loss of future sales? Well, sure but the vehement backlash was a tip that that outcome would occur. Also, awareness is a purpose.
+2
Options
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
Honestly, I think the problem with Killer is Dead is like Aegeri said.
As far as these giggilo missions go, the womem are simply props with no real agency of their own. They are literally objects for your character to oggle and then have sex with.
Compare to Persona, yes there is a hot tub scene and it is probably pervy, but there is much more to the characterss than that so people are more willing too go eh.
Honestly, I think the problem with Killer is Dead is like Aegeri said.
As far as these giggilo missions go, the womem are simply props with no real agency of their own. They are literally objects for your character to oggle and then have sex with.
Compare to Persona, yes there is a hot tub scene and it is probably pervy, but there is much more to the characterss than that so people are more willing too go eh.
So...yeah, I can see why it annoys some people.
The scene still objectifies the Persona 4 cast, as if one scene in the original wasn't enough.
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Honestly, I think the problem with Killer is Dead is like Aegeri said.
As far as these giggilo missions go, the womem are simply props with no real agency of their own. They are literally objects for your character to oggle and then have sex with.
Compare to Persona, yes there is a hot tub scene and it is probably pervy, but there is much more to the characterss than that so people are more willing too go eh.
So...yeah, I can see why it annoys some people.
The scene still objectifies the Persona 4 cast, as if one scene in the original wasn't enough.
And yet, they never have their own agency taken away and its never done to the benefit of the player or the main character, in fact the scene in question is arguably positively pointing out the feminity of the character in question (who if you've played the game, spends a lot of time trying to pretend they aren't). In context with everything else the game does, it doesn't actually have anywhere near the same effect: This is the point you are missing.
You are comparing the literal example of the molehill to something that's pretty much the equivalent of Mt Doom.
I mean if we wanted to get equivalent, we'd need to have a minigame where you perv at them at the spa secretely while dodging their gaze or some such nonsense. Thankfully, a cutscene for a few minutes that's mostly filled with dialog where you can't actually see anything significant in the first place is quite a bit different. For those curious, this is literally what we are discussing: A cutscene where the girls (and boys) are both in bath towels where you can't see overly much in a spa. Which then has an incident where the boys accidentally go to the spa while the girls are there, only to have objects thrown at them before making a hasty retreat. It's a single cutscene in a game that can take 65+ hours to complete, with many more scenes that establish every single one of these characters as actual people with their own thoughts and opinions.
This is being compared to a game where you actively creepily stare at women, who are devolved into nothing more than sexual objects that you have sex with and labelled "Targets" to earn bonus items. Nothing else and as far as I can tell, there isn't a significant female character in the game who isn't there to A) Have sex with, Murder in some way or C) Be murdered in some way. Killer is Dead literally hits every single one of the "This is really terrible and sexist" tickboxes just about.
Honestly, I think the problem with Killer is Dead is like Aegeri said.
As far as these giggilo missions go, the womem are simply props with no real agency of their own. They are literally objects for your character to oggle and then have sex with.
Compare to Persona, yes there is a hot tub scene and it is probably pervy, but there is much more to the characterss than that so people are more willing too go eh.
So...yeah, I can see why it annoys some people.
The scene still objectifies the Persona 4 cast, as if one scene in the original wasn't enough.
I'm not saying it doesn't.
I guess at the end of the day the problem with this entire argument is that everyone takes a for orper against stance on what is or isn't approriate. So either all of this or that is acceptable or nothing is.
Personally, I feel its up to the individual to decide what they think is and isn't approriate and I feel trying to police others and tell them what they should and shouldn't do is silly.
But at the same time, I feel that completely dismissing someone's complaint is silly.
I mean we can go though what we do and don't think is approriate all day but it isn't going to go anywhere.
(this argument says a lot about you though). Can I make this actually any clearer for you? Here let me spell it out in detail:
Yeah, I stopped reading right there. If you can't make your point without being deliberately insulting and antagonistic, I really don't care what you had to say. This is far too heated for a silly video game.
(this argument says a lot about you though). Can I make this actually any clearer for you? Here let me spell it out in detail:
Yeah, I stopped reading right there. If you can't make your point without being deliberately insulting and antagonistic, I really don't care what you had to say. This is far too heated for a silly video game.
Did you read what you wrote? You said pretty much just to "Fuck off" as an appropriate response and then I pointed out that wasn't an appropriate response.
What wasn't insulting and deliberately antagonistic about what you wrote? Or does tone only matter in response to you?
Maybe I'm being reductive, but we are taking this way too seriously.
And I never told you to fuck off. I said if someone went into the Uncharted thread to call fans of the game sickos, they'd probably be told to fuck off. But its okay to come here and call Killer is Dead fans perverts, whatever.
I never said you should stop talking about the game. I merely questioned why you would want to discuss a game you don't want to play. I hate Call of Duty, but I don't click on the thread, let alone post in it.
Maybe I'm being reductive, but we are taking this way too seriously.
And I never told you to fuck off. I said if someone went into the Uncharted thread to call fans of the game sickos, they'd probably be told to fuck off. But its okay to come here and call Killer is Dead fans perverts, whatever.
I never said you should stop talking about the game. I merely questioned why you would want to discuss a game you don't want to play. I hate Call of Duty, but I don't click on the thread, let alone post in it.
An interesting issue certainly. As someone brought up earlier though, statistics prove that people who play violent video games by and large don't replicate their game actions in the real world in any way, shape, or form. However, do consumers of sexist media (say cartoons or video games) carry sexist attitudes into their real lives? Youtube comments and etc would rather suggest that they do, but this is of course not an academic study, just conjecture. It's worth noting that murder and ultraviolence is strictly illegal, with obvious and well known consequences, whereas being a creep at bars is (and often has been) a rather celebrated process, see the rather pathetic MRA's for examples if you wish.
shoeboxjeddy on
0
Options
BeezelThere was no agreement little morsel..Registered Userregular
The difference between this and Dragon's Crown is Dragon's Crown had the benefit of being a pretty damn good and fun game. I'm of the mind that Suda 51 doesn't make good games. That doesn't excuse the rest of it but Suda 51 has never made good games. He made an interesting but flawed game and a sequel but everything else he's ever done has always been WAAAAACKY WEDNESDAAAAY for the sake of doing it and forgetting the core product had to be good. He's the Robert Rodriguez of video games.
PSN: Waybackkidd
"...only mights and maybes."
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
edited August 2013
You(and most anyone not in Japan) probably never played Suda's Kill The Past series. It started with The Silver Case, and also includes Flower, Sun, and Rain and ended with Killer7. His wacky shenanigans started with No More Heroes.
Maybe I'm being reductive, but we are taking this way too seriously.
And I never told you to fuck off. I said if someone went into the Uncharted thread to call fans of the game sickos, they'd probably be told to fuck off. But its okay to come here and call Killer is Dead fans perverts, whatever.
I never said you should stop talking about the game. I merely questioned why you would want to discuss a game you don't want to play. I hate Call of Duty, but I don't click on the thread, let alone post in it.
An interesting issue certainly. As someone brought up earlier though, statistics prove that people who play violent video games by and large don't replicate their game actions in the real world in any way, shape, or form. However, do consumers of sexist media (say cartoons or video games) carry sexist attitudes into their real lives? Youtube comments and etc would rather suggest that they do, but this is of course not an academic study, just conjecture. It's worth noting that murder and ultraviolence is strictly illegal, with obvious and well known consequences, whereas being a creep at bars is (and often has been) a rather celebrated process, see the rather pathetic MRA's for examples if you wish.
It's a discussion worth having, but I think it's also a discussion that's much bigger than just this game.
Either way, I'm kinda done for now. I've barely started this game. Maybe when I actually get to those missions, I'll be every bit as disturbed as everyone thinks I ought to be. Maybe I'll see a reason to justify it. Maybe I am a depraved pervert. I'll check this thread again after I finish it.
Yeah, I got wary of that after Shadows of the Damned. It was decent anyways so it didn't deter me from grasshopper games. I used to get every game they released, but Lolipop Chainsaw definitely broke that habit. That game was terrible despite its attempted satire. What has Suda been doing lately if he's not involved with the games?
and FSR came out on the DS right? I haven't played anything he put out pre-Killer7, I've been wanting to give that a shot but I had no idea what the series was about.
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
edited August 2013
He's pretty much GHM's CEO. He oversees concepts and gets the games into motion, and his name is a solid marketing tool nowadays. He doesn't really have a direct role in the game like he used to.
FSR was on the PS2, then ported to the DS(the only localized version). Silver Case was PS1 and never localized.
There is a game in this, right? Or is the entire point of this thread to debate sexism in video games? Honest to God, I originally came to the thread to hear what people thought about the game as they played it, but instead I just get a ton of philosophical debate. Fucking GAMEFAQS has less talks about this stupid issue. What does that say about this entire thing? Okay we get it, the game has a super sexist gameplay mode, no one is denying that; but there's more to the game than that and THAT is what should be focused on.
XBL: GamingFreak5514
PSN: GamingFreak1234
0
Options
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
Maybe I'm being reductive, but we are taking this way too seriously.
I find it personally very aggravating to have a conversation that goes something like this:
Nobody complains about morality of murdering virtual people in other game threads!
Actually I do and others do.
But nobody complains about morality of murdering virtual people in other game threads!
Actually I do and others do.
But nobody complains about morality of murdering virtual people in other game threads!
ACTUALLY I DO AND OTHERS ACTUALLY DO.
You can understand that by the third time I am saying the same thing I get quite aggravated.
And I never told you to fuck off. I said if someone went into the Uncharted thread to call fans of the game sickos, they'd probably be told to fuck off. But its okay to come here and call Killer is Dead fans perverts, whatever.
Firstly, that is exactly the implication of your argument.
Secondly, people telling someone to "fuck off" makes them the problem and while I (and certainly others have) will criticise Uncharted, Tomb Raider and as another example, Far Cry 3, for the way they depict violence I can also equally defend the use of violence in these games. There are legitimate arguments that fighting against armed enemies who are there to actively kill you isn't inherently morally reprehensible - just the way these games create narrative disconnects while murdering an incessant amount of people that is. For example in Uncharted 3 the widely mocked scene (even if it is cinematic as hell) where armed enemies are fighting you in a burning building with no regard to their own lives. It's ridiculous on every conceivable level, who the fuck is paid enough to fight to the death in a burning building?
By telling them to fuck off instead of making an actual reasoned defense gives the original opinion the merit it doesn't deserve. Of course, I have literally never seen this kind of response and generally there is an actual discussion. So your argument doesn't have any merit in the first place because these arguments have been had and are allowed in those threads. Oddly, only talking about how games objectify and regularly demean women are regularly shouted down (or attempted to) in threads.
I wonder why that is? (rhetorical question, for the record)
And frankly, what is the defense of the incredibly gross objectification of women in this game? Because I honestly have no idea who it is supposed to appeal to or why it should be in the game. I haven't had an answer to that. On the other hand, while I find numerous dubious connotations of trying to make Lara "human" by being upset about killing someone and then rewarding you for headshotting 5 guys immediately after for bonus EXP - I can actually defend why the use of violence in the game should be there.
Can you say the same about this aspect? Does anyone think it adds genuinely anything to the game?
Or is the only answer basically being told to "Fuck off" like with the most recent post? Guess what, when games grossly depict women as objects and make it a part of the gameplay, it is okay to actually criticise that as a part of the game in the thread for it! Because that's exactly where the discussion should be on an individual case like this. You don't get to silence discussion you don't want to see by shouting about how you think it's not relevant: You only prove how important it is to have it by doing so.
You need to calm down a bit since you seem to be missing the point completely. He's saying If you came into the thread for the sole purpose of insulting the people playing the game because they enjoy the game they will tell you to fuck off. There is no insult there, implied or otherwise, unless that's the reason you are here. and even then the message is "Don't be surprised when people hate you."
Now, can actually give me a breakdown of the combat. Thats all I really care about.
There is a game in this, right? Or is the entire point of this thread to debate sexism in video games? Honest to God, I originally came to the thread to hear what people thought about the game as they played it, but instead I just get a ton of philosophical debate. Fucking GAMEFAQS has less talks about this stupid issue. What does that say about this entire thing? Okay we get it, the game has a super sexist gameplay mode, no one is denying that; but there's more to the game than that and THAT is what should be focused on.
People can focus on what they want to. Oh, and it's actually really sad that Gamefaqs of all things isn't having a crying fit because people focusing on a serious issue within the game.
Having said that, @Aegeri, you can tone it down a tad and ease up on the brick walls of text.
It probably has more to do with the fact that no one bought this game.
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
Some impressions about the plot are coming through, and comparisons to Killer7 are being drawn, in that the story is very fractured and convoluted.
A ray of hope!
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
If anyone cares, some impressions from people who've played it:
They're honestly pretty boring to play. You'd think from all the press they got from various sites that they were some ultra racy stuff, but there's hardly anything even remotely offensive about them outside of the premise. That being said, they did a great job with the character models for the girls, and Mondo's goofy animations are fun to watch.
Did a [gigolo] mission and don't see what the big deal is. I can't believe people were making such a big fuss over it lol. Reminds me of Yakuzas Hostess mini games.
A few points come to mind reading through the rhetoric in the thread.
1) Correlation is not causation. The fact that misogyny is alive and well today is in no way evidence that this M rated piece of media is likely to propagate that. In fact I'd take the studies that show that playing violent video games do not increase violent tendencies to be pretty good evidence that this is likely to be the same here. By the time someone is playing this they should be a grown adult, not an easily influenced kid.
2) Films, TV and Books portray unlikeable protagonists doing unlikable things all the time. This isn't a blank slate self insertion game. It's a story about a character. Suda has done plenty of unsympathetic protagonist pieces before.
So does this thread actually even talk about the game? Because I came in here to learn about if the game is good and such and instead saw a really silly and overheated internet dick-measuring contest that has nothing to do with the game at all.
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
There are posts talking about the game, yes. The drama will die down as more people play it. General consensus so far is that the story is bonkers(in a good way), combat is simple but fun, Yamaoka's OST is all over the place, and the gigolo stuff is tongue-in-cheek silliness being blown way out of proportion.
Got this game a couple days ago but haven't played it yet. I will say that I love how XSeed went all out with the extras. The artbook and soundtrack are very nice.
Nintendo Console Codes
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
I've played a couple hours so far and I'm enjoying it.
Yes, the combat isn't as deep (complicated) as Bayonetta or DMC, but for someone like me who gets overwhelmed by the systems in those games it's fine.
Yeah, I'd say the combat is on par with NMH, and I think it might exceed it once I get more of the upgrades and moves.
I'm really tired of people saying "well it's not as good as Bayonetta" as if anything less is not worth playing. I don't think Okami is as good as most 3D Zelda games, but it's an awesome game in it's own right. There is a whole spectrum of quality between Bayonetta and crap.
0
Options
cj iwakuraThe Rhythm RegentBears The Name FreedomRegistered Userregular
Suda doesn't really make over the top action/platformer games, his are more hack'n'slashes usually.
Yeah, I got wary of that after Shadows of the Damned. It was decent anyways so it didn't deter me from grasshopper games. I used to get every game they released, but Lolipop Chainsaw definitely broke that habit. That game was terrible despite its attempted satire. What has Suda been doing lately if he's not involved with the games?
and FSR came out on the DS right? I haven't played anything he put out pre-Killer7, I've been wanting to give that a shot but I had no idea what the series was about.
I don't think Lollipop Chainsaw was that bad. It's not GREAT and it hasn't inspired me to replay the game or anything but it was decent enough that I finished it once.
I just felt like there wasn't much depth to the combat, the level design wasn't great, and I didn't like Juliet or her boyfriend. It just got stale very quickly and that rocker boss killed any interest I had. I played a little further than that but it didn't get much better.
Decided to pick Killer is Dead up even though I don't know exactly how combat works. I'll try to post some impressions about it later.
Square to sword. Circle to dash, R-something + X to gun. I think. It's not deep and it's not not-deep. It's just a bonkers game. Combat is more about timing and how to attack the enemy rather than about the controls themselves.
Yeah, Drez I get what you mean, this game is actually pretty fun. I got it right when I said it was basically No More Heroes meets Ninja Gaiden.
Combat is based completely on momentum, think Arkham city/asylum. You start off with a slow-pace of attacks but you get a speed boost every dozen or so hits. By ~30 hits you are attacking at a pretty decent pace. These boosts go away if you don't land an attack for a while (doesn't count if they block and you don't guard crush) or if you get hit. In addition to the speed boost, you can do special executions if you kill an enemy at a high enough combo level. Each execution has their own bonus too, there's one for each type of exp (green increases max HP, red increases the energy bar, and yellow gives you upgrade points) and another that turns the enemy into a grenade. There's also a parry system that stuns enemies if you block at the right time and a dodge that lets you land a high-speed sword rush if you time it right (like NMH Darkstep). There are also a decent amount of upgrades that give you the usual damage increases, base attack speed increase, new moves, etc.
I don't mean to say the game is flawless though. It desperately needs anti-aliasing and the framerate drops a bit in some areas (I'd estimate it was somewhere around 18-20 fps at the worst, might be wrong but its definitely noticeable). I didn't notice any screen tearing like the other people saw, but I did notice a lot of jagged lines. The intro, up until you beat the first real boss, is pretty slow both combat and story wise; they lock away most of your abilities and it doesn't bother to explain much either. So far the story has completely been a case of style over substance. But it seems like its getting better, the 4th wall has been broken a couple of times now and its starting to feel more like Shadows of the Damned.
Now, about the Gigolo missions. They're out of nowhere but they're also pretty funny, I couldn't stop laughing during the first mission. There's no real context to them (other than he's actually out on a date with the girl at the bar), but the scene itself is pretty silly. It feels like its being played more for laughs than anything else.
Posts
For one thing, in a lot of violent games the people you kill tend to either be in self defence or otherwise threatening the lives of civvies/supporting characters/etc. Games that have you killing without at least trying to justify it absolutely get criticism.
Now that doesn't mean that most of these that try to justify it do it well, or that there isn't deeper issues with how common it is, but I think it's important to consider that one can be morally okay with shooting someone who is trying to set off a bomb and not morally okay with treating a woman like a sex object.
I think it's also important to note that we don't live in a culture where common citzens are constantly running around killing people for fun, but we do live in a society where women are marginalized and objectified across the board in nearly every aspect of our culture. The general attitude about murder is that it's wrong. But a LOT of people are openly sexist and misogynistic and are encouraged to behave that way by our culture and entertainment.
It's not a good argument to say "well if you're not okay with sexism in games then you can't be okay with violence in games" because the former is reinforcing a common problematic behavior and attitude while the latter usually isn't. That doesn't free the violence from criticism by any means but these two things exist in pretty wildly different contexts and are relevant in completely different ways. We don't critique them in the same way because they aren't the same thing.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Actually I wouldn't, because as I tried to explain (and obviously failed to do so) I do in fact have problems with games over-relying on murdering hundreds of people, plus I am capable of giving a response that is far more mature than that (this argument says a lot about you though). Can I make this actually any clearer for you? Here let me spell it out in detail: I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH NEARLY EVERY GAME BEING ABOUT MURDERING HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE IN PSYCHOTIC WAYS. Of course I see it as a different argument with different basis in culture/gender politics than I do this particular issue, where it's obvious from numerous comments that gamers in general have much more of a problem with gender related issues being a problem than they do realizing that murder is not okay. This tangent isn't for this thread though because it doesn't relate to the game at all, but that's why the argument is very different between why I have a problem with - but do continue to buy - games with violence and why I don't buy games that cross the line into blatantly awful sexual objectification of women.
I mean again, this game literally devolves women into objects called "Targets" that you creepily stare at while they aren't looking to have sex with them. That's just something out of a creepy PUA book.
I can't figure out how you get to this point when I have owned or played nearly every one of his games to some capacity, so obviously I did and then I saw the reviews and was like "LoL, nope".
I mean I didn't buy Dragon's Crown for its hideous objectified depiction of women, but this game is well and truly beyond what I thought Dragon's Crown did terribly.
Because these sorts of things are more than worthy of criticism and deserve to be criticised for it.
I mean your argument boils down to "Why don't you just shut up?" and the more you say that, the more I think there is a legitimate argument that has to be made. Only when a point truly sticks home in something important does someone tell you to shut up.
Yes I did and I have criticised them before, but he has done considerably better with past games - even Lollipop Chainsaw (which actually inverts a few negative female stereotypes considerably - consider that the only significant male character is reduced to a disembodied head attached to her waist for most of the game) does a lot better. Again, if I didn't play games that objectified women I wouldn't be playing a lot of games full stop - but there are limits and the gigolo minigame is well and truly over what I will tolerate.
Seriously, my problems with the likes of Lollipop Chainsaw, No More Heroes (which actually kind of inverts things a bit in fairness) are MOLEHILLS compared to the crap this game does. In fact I would say in some ways his previous games have been much more self aware (even if they do objectify women in them) than this game by miles - it's actually what makes this so disappointing. It shows that probably that "self awareness" from previous games was entirely accidental and not deliberate.
Actually while Persona 4 does the general context and fact they are not routinely objectified makes a huge difference. Horny teenage boys being portrayed as horny teenage boys, who are SUITABLY called out on it and their behaviour CHASTISED not glorified/encouraged is significantly different. In fact I was even immensely impressed that if you dress up the female characters in the Bikinis and similar if you talk to them in a Dungeon they actively complain about how impractical/silly it is (They have costumes they particularly like as well, EG the Kung Fu costume for Chie). The games overall context fits this sort of thing in well and none of the women are objectified, in fact there is a magnificent line in the game you can give to one character that they shouldn't be ashamed of their gender at all.
Really, Persona 4 Golden isn't even in the same ball park of this game in terms of sexist objectification: Don't even pretend they are.
And at the end of the day you buy it or you don't. Because at the end of the day money is the only thing that really matters in the equation.
I mean I'm not saying you can't criticize, but really most of the back and forth about this stuff usually ends of being a lot of shouting that I don't see serving much purpose.
I was referring to the added hot spring content, which basically amounts to more 'let's poke fun at Naoto's ridiculous bust! and put the cast in towels again! that's cool, right?'.
It's not in the same camp as this, but I still think it's in pretty poor taste. Satomi Tadashi would be ashamed.
Even that was pretty tame to be frank compared to the vast majority of games (and again, the boys trying to be perverts is actively chastised and made fun of, not encouraged or promoted - a significant difference). I mean, if you want gross and simply awful to know where I think the line is go look at the Warrior Monk or Bound Spirit of Dragon's Crown as good examples. Persona 4 - in context - is actually miles ahead of most games on gender even with some of the common Japanese anime tropes it fits in (EG the Harem anime aspects that you can pull off and Marie is a pure fanservice-y character).
Criticisms of Persona 4 to me on this boil down to mostly quibbling and has to deliberately ignore everything else it does extremely correctly. On the other hand, games like Killer is Dead do literally nothing correctly, so it's immensely disingenuous to compare them (except as extremes on how female characters can be portrayed in Japanese games).
Is their bias "women are people with equal agency to men and treating them like sex dolls is a really creepy thing to do"? Because I don't want to read a review from anyone who DOESN'T have this 'bias' honestly. The fact that you consider "don't be a creep to 50% of the human population" something that's 'against the norm' is SUPER telling. You might be more right than you know, but that's not exactly something to be celebrated.
Also gotta disagree with this. Verbal criticism has a very real effect in this day and age. If sales were all that mattered, why did the XB1 make all these (no doubt) costly policy changes? Being afraid of the loss of future sales? Well, sure but the vehement backlash was a tip that that outcome would occur. Also, awareness is a purpose.
As far as these giggilo missions go, the womem are simply props with no real agency of their own. They are literally objects for your character to oggle and then have sex with.
Compare to Persona, yes there is a hot tub scene and it is probably pervy, but there is much more to the characterss than that so people are more willing too go eh.
So...yeah, I can see why it annoys some people.
How about that sword fighting game? I think we used to talk about it in this thread. I'm still waiting for someone to describe the combat
The scene still objectifies the Persona 4 cast, as if one scene in the original wasn't enough.
And yet, they never have their own agency taken away and its never done to the benefit of the player or the main character, in fact the scene in question is arguably positively pointing out the feminity of the character in question (who if you've played the game, spends a lot of time trying to pretend they aren't). In context with everything else the game does, it doesn't actually have anywhere near the same effect: This is the point you are missing.
You are comparing the literal example of the molehill to something that's pretty much the equivalent of Mt Doom.
I mean if we wanted to get equivalent, we'd need to have a minigame where you perv at them at the spa secretely while dodging their gaze or some such nonsense. Thankfully, a cutscene for a few minutes that's mostly filled with dialog where you can't actually see anything significant in the first place is quite a bit different. For those curious, this is literally what we are discussing: A cutscene where the girls (and boys) are both in bath towels where you can't see overly much in a spa. Which then has an incident where the boys accidentally go to the spa while the girls are there, only to have objects thrown at them before making a hasty retreat. It's a single cutscene in a game that can take 65+ hours to complete, with many more scenes that establish every single one of these characters as actual people with their own thoughts and opinions.
This is being compared to a game where you actively creepily stare at women, who are devolved into nothing more than sexual objects that you have sex with and labelled "Targets" to earn bonus items. Nothing else and as far as I can tell, there isn't a significant female character in the game who isn't there to A) Have sex with,
You can decide for yourself where the problem is.
I'm not saying it doesn't.
I guess at the end of the day the problem with this entire argument is that everyone takes a for orper against stance on what is or isn't approriate. So either all of this or that is acceptable or nothing is.
Personally, I feel its up to the individual to decide what they think is and isn't approriate and I feel trying to police others and tell them what they should and shouldn't do is silly.
But at the same time, I feel that completely dismissing someone's complaint is silly.
I mean we can go though what we do and don't think is approriate all day but it isn't going to go anywhere.
Maybe it is too heated in here, but please don't use the "tra la la, just kid's stuff in here" position... ever. It's really just the worst.
Did you read what you wrote? You said pretty much just to "Fuck off" as an appropriate response and then I pointed out that wasn't an appropriate response.
What wasn't insulting and deliberately antagonistic about what you wrote? Or does tone only matter in response to you?
And I never told you to fuck off. I said if someone went into the Uncharted thread to call fans of the game sickos, they'd probably be told to fuck off. But its okay to come here and call Killer is Dead fans perverts, whatever.
I never said you should stop talking about the game. I merely questioned why you would want to discuss a game you don't want to play. I hate Call of Duty, but I don't click on the thread, let alone post in it.
An interesting issue certainly. As someone brought up earlier though, statistics prove that people who play violent video games by and large don't replicate their game actions in the real world in any way, shape, or form. However, do consumers of sexist media (say cartoons or video games) carry sexist attitudes into their real lives? Youtube comments and etc would rather suggest that they do, but this is of course not an academic study, just conjecture. It's worth noting that murder and ultraviolence is strictly illegal, with obvious and well known consequences, whereas being a creep at bars is (and often has been) a rather celebrated process, see the rather pathetic MRA's for examples if you wish.
"...only mights and maybes."
Again, this is what he was capable of before:
This is why I get disappointed whenever a new 'Suda' title gets announced and he really had little if nothing to do with it.
Either way, I'm kinda done for now. I've barely started this game. Maybe when I actually get to those missions, I'll be every bit as disturbed as everyone thinks I ought to be. Maybe I'll see a reason to justify it. Maybe I am a depraved pervert. I'll check this thread again after I finish it.
and FSR came out on the DS right? I haven't played anything he put out pre-Killer7, I've been wanting to give that a shot but I had no idea what the series was about.
FSR was on the PS2, then ported to the DS(the only localized version). Silver Case was PS1 and never localized.
XBL: GamingFreak5514
PSN: GamingFreak1234
I find it personally very aggravating to have a conversation that goes something like this:
Nobody complains about morality of murdering virtual people in other game threads!
Actually I do and others do.
But nobody complains about morality of murdering virtual people in other game threads!
Actually I do and others do.
But nobody complains about morality of murdering virtual people in other game threads!
ACTUALLY I DO AND OTHERS ACTUALLY DO.
You can understand that by the third time I am saying the same thing I get quite aggravated.
Firstly, that is exactly the implication of your argument.
Secondly, people telling someone to "fuck off" makes them the problem and while I (and certainly others have) will criticise Uncharted, Tomb Raider and as another example, Far Cry 3, for the way they depict violence I can also equally defend the use of violence in these games. There are legitimate arguments that fighting against armed enemies who are there to actively kill you isn't inherently morally reprehensible - just the way these games create narrative disconnects while murdering an incessant amount of people that is. For example in Uncharted 3 the widely mocked scene (even if it is cinematic as hell) where armed enemies are fighting you in a burning building with no regard to their own lives. It's ridiculous on every conceivable level, who the fuck is paid enough to fight to the death in a burning building?
By telling them to fuck off instead of making an actual reasoned defense gives the original opinion the merit it doesn't deserve. Of course, I have literally never seen this kind of response and generally there is an actual discussion. So your argument doesn't have any merit in the first place because these arguments have been had and are allowed in those threads. Oddly, only talking about how games objectify and regularly demean women are regularly shouted down (or attempted to) in threads.
I wonder why that is? (rhetorical question, for the record)
And frankly, what is the defense of the incredibly gross objectification of women in this game? Because I honestly have no idea who it is supposed to appeal to or why it should be in the game. I haven't had an answer to that. On the other hand, while I find numerous dubious connotations of trying to make Lara "human" by being upset about killing someone and then rewarding you for headshotting 5 guys immediately after for bonus EXP - I can actually defend why the use of violence in the game should be there.
Can you say the same about this aspect? Does anyone think it adds genuinely anything to the game?
Or is the only answer basically being told to "Fuck off" like with the most recent post? Guess what, when games grossly depict women as objects and make it a part of the gameplay, it is okay to actually criticise that as a part of the game in the thread for it! Because that's exactly where the discussion should be on an individual case like this. You don't get to silence discussion you don't want to see by shouting about how you think it's not relevant: You only prove how important it is to have it by doing so.
Now, can actually give me a breakdown of the combat. Thats all I really care about.
Having said that, @Aegeri, you can tone it down a tad and ease up on the brick walls of text.
A ray of hope!
1) Correlation is not causation. The fact that misogyny is alive and well today is in no way evidence that this M rated piece of media is likely to propagate that. In fact I'd take the studies that show that playing violent video games do not increase violent tendencies to be pretty good evidence that this is likely to be the same here. By the time someone is playing this they should be a grown adult, not an easily influenced kid.
2) Films, TV and Books portray unlikeable protagonists doing unlikable things all the time. This isn't a blank slate self insertion game. It's a story about a character. Suda has done plenty of unsympathetic protagonist pieces before.
Yes, the combat isn't as deep (complicated) as Bayonetta or DMC, but for someone like me who gets overwhelmed by the systems in those games it's fine.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
I'm really tired of people saying "well it's not as good as Bayonetta" as if anything less is not worth playing. I don't think Okami is as good as most 3D Zelda games, but it's an awesome game in it's own right. There is a whole spectrum of quality between Bayonetta and crap.
I don't think Lollipop Chainsaw was that bad. It's not GREAT and it hasn't inspired me to replay the game or anything but it was decent enough that I finished it once.
Decided to pick Killer is Dead up even though I don't know exactly how combat works. I'll try to post some impressions about it later.
Combat is based completely on momentum, think Arkham city/asylum. You start off with a slow-pace of attacks but you get a speed boost every dozen or so hits. By ~30 hits you are attacking at a pretty decent pace. These boosts go away if you don't land an attack for a while (doesn't count if they block and you don't guard crush) or if you get hit. In addition to the speed boost, you can do special executions if you kill an enemy at a high enough combo level. Each execution has their own bonus too, there's one for each type of exp (green increases max HP, red increases the energy bar, and yellow gives you upgrade points) and another that turns the enemy into a grenade. There's also a parry system that stuns enemies if you block at the right time and a dodge that lets you land a high-speed sword rush if you time it right (like NMH Darkstep). There are also a decent amount of upgrades that give you the usual damage increases, base attack speed increase, new moves, etc.
I don't mean to say the game is flawless though. It desperately needs anti-aliasing and the framerate drops a bit in some areas (I'd estimate it was somewhere around 18-20 fps at the worst, might be wrong but its definitely noticeable). I didn't notice any screen tearing like the other people saw, but I did notice a lot of jagged lines. The intro, up until you beat the first real boss, is pretty slow both combat and story wise; they lock away most of your abilities and it doesn't bother to explain much either. So far the story has completely been a case of style over substance. But it seems like its getting better, the 4th wall has been broken a couple of times now and its starting to feel more like Shadows of the Damned.
Now, about the Gigolo missions. They're out of nowhere but they're also pretty funny, I couldn't stop laughing during the first mission. There's no real context to them (other than he's actually out on a date with the girl at the bar), but the scene itself is pretty silly. It feels like its being played more for laughs than anything else.