I decided to give Marvel Heroes another try shot tonight, I remembered finding it kind of dull a few months ago and heard good things recently so I decided to give it another go.
It being lame is no longer the case! It is super rad and 6 hours disappeared at an alarming rate. I recommend giving it a shot again, especially if you have any interest in Marvel and/or ARPGs.
Like, on one hand they don't do any hokey borderline racist shit with it where he has to go on a journey of self discovery to meet his spirit animal or anything.
On the other hand, the tribe is basically just used as an easy shorthand for "tight knit community" to lend credence to the idea that he is going out of his way and risking his life to save these people. Its effect on the narrative is a very subdued, background effect. The fact that it is a made up tribe feels largely academic because the details of the tribe itself do not play into the narrative in the slightest.
I feel like it's probably for the best that they don't bother to really go into details and don't really go out of their way to make a big deal about it, but I don't really have the right perspective to really have an informed opinion about it either.
I just listened to one of the GZ audio tapes from the previous thread
The one about the bombs
I feel actually physically sick
The sound effects did not help
I'm assuming that one of these bombs is in the long E3 trailer, getting pulled out of a kid's stomach
Which was absolutely fucking gross. I'm willing to reserve judgment on whether Kojima is going for raw shock value or actually trying to say a thing.
GZ stuff
GZ can be seen basically as one big condemnation of Guantanamo Bay and things of that sort.
Now, of Kojima said what he is trying to say well and if it was necessary to use the things he did to say it, is up to the individual. I haven't gotten to the tapes yet myself in GZ, and kind of want to wait to see things in the light of Phantom Pain before fully lock in my opinion.
I'm curious what @Poorochondriac would think if they had gone with the decision to put in a real tribe and then left the evil ending the way it is
I don't know what the ending is, so can't really speak to it specifically.
But in theory, I think representing a (real) tribe well, having a well-defined protagonist, and then giving players the option to be evil anyway would actually be pretty baller. The "noble savage" is as damaging a stereotype as the "bloodthirsty savage," so having an Indian protagonist who's villainous can totally be a win for representation in my book.
Like, on one hand they don't do any hokey borderline racist shit with it where he has to go on a journey of self discovery to meet his spirit animal or anything.
On the other hand, the tribe is basically just used as an easy shorthand for "tight knit community" to lend credence to the idea that he is going out of his way and risking his life to save these people. Its effect on the narrative is a very subdued, background effect. The fact that it is a made up tribe feels largely academic because the details of the tribe itself do not play into the narrative in the slightest.
I feel like it's probably for the best that they don't bother to really go into details and don't really go out of their way to make a big deal about it, but I don't really have the right perspective to really have an informed opinion about it either.
Genuinely glad to hear they avoided the spirit quest trap. As soon as it came out that the tribe was fake, I was instantly concerned they'd go that route.
But now I'm even more confused as to why they didn't just do some dang research and use any of the real Pacific Northwest tribes. You've got access to a massive audience, and a chance, however small, to educate some people about a culture they are likely unfamiliar with. And then you make up a gatdamn tribe for no discernible reason. It's silly as hell.
I'm curious what @Poorochondriac would think if they had gone with the decision to put in a real tribe and then left the evil ending the way it is
I don't know what the ending is, so can't really speak to it specifically.
But in theory, I think representing a (real) tribe well, having a well-defined protagonist, and then giving players the option to be evil anyway would actually be pretty baller. The "noble savage" is as damaging a stereotype as the "bloodthirsty savage," so having an Indian protagonist who's villainous can totally be a win for representation in my book.
I'm curious what @Poorochondriac would think if they had gone with the decision to put in a real tribe and then left the evil ending the way it is
I don't know what the ending is, so can't really speak to it specifically.
But in theory, I think representing a (real) tribe well, having a well-defined protagonist, and then giving players the option to be evil anyway would actually be pretty baller. The "noble savage" is as damaging a stereotype as the "bloodthirsty savage," so having an Indian protagonist who's villainous can totally be a win for representation in my book.
Alright, but what if in the ending
He killed his entire tribe?
Depends on his motivations, but again, I'm theoretically on board.
You know how the biggest, most central narrative structure in western storytelling is the hero's journey? One dude venturing forth, being changed, conquering evil? Well, in tribal storytelling, one of the most central narrative structure is about a figure falling out from the tribe, being changed, and being brought into the fold. Instead of an individual conquering the many, it's about the individual being subsumed back into the many.
For one guy to violently reject the tribe, be the one above the many, that's saying some pretty powerful things about his struggles with tribal identity. It could be a very affecting tragedy, done right.
Granted, you could achieve the same result without mass violence, but hey, video games.
Still not a particularly compelling reason for a fake tribe
+6
Options
turtleantGunpla Dadis the best.Registered Userregular
I guarantee at least part of the reason, if not THE reason they went with a fake tribe is marketing/corporate going "oh god oh god oh god what if we fuck it up". I wouldn't be surprised if at least some of the devs wanted to go with real tribe at some point, but couldn't get a pass on it.
I guarantee at least part of the reason, if not THE reason they went with a fake tribe is marketing/corporate going "oh god oh god oh god what if we fuck it up". I wouldn't be surprised if at least some of the devs wanted to go with real tribe at some point, but couldn't get a pass on it.
Avoidable enough had they genuinely collaborated with a tribe, hired somebody as a consultant, done the research.
Assassin's Creed 3 is sorta my goto, I know, but some of its kanien'kehá:ka characters were dickheads. Not on a large scale, but in petty, human ways. Which actually made the tribe seem more human, more real. Nobody gave 'em an ounce of grief (that I saw) over the "bad" kanien'kehá:ka, because Ubisoft put in the legwork, hired consultants, and wrote their asses off. Hell, Ratonhnhaké:ton is a friggin' assassin, and murders hundreds of people. But with a strong foundation of an accurate tribal portrayal, having a flawed protagonist is golden.
Fear's a perfectly valid response to delving into something new that has a high chance of you being raked over the coals for regardless of how well you pull it off. We've seen from people on these very boards and this thread specifically who have let their fears of being wrong about social issues or saying the wrong thing affect their posting to the degree they've basically become lurkers. The only problem with being afraid as an excuse in this situation is that a company is better equipped to handle criticism from failing and so rather than the company discouraging taking risks they should encourage it and pointedly act as a shield for their wellmeaning employees against the inevitable tide of discontent.
0
Options
miscellaneousinsanitygrass grows, birds fly, sun shines,and brother, i hurt peopleRegistered Userregular
Fear's a perfectly valid response to delving into something new that has a high chance of you being raked over the coals for regardless of how well you pull it off. We've seen from people on these very boards and this thread specifically who have let their fears of being wrong about social issues or saying the wrong thing affect their posting to the degree they've basically become lurkers. The only problem with being afraid as an excuse in this situation is that a company is better equipped to handle criticism from failing and so rather than the company discouraging taking risks they should encourage it and pointedly act as a shield for their wellmeaning employees against the inevitable tide of discontent.
Questioning the part in bold
And I think I was pretty clearly talking about this situation? I mentioned what another game developer did with their own game, as a model for this game developer and this game. If I was talking about general social interaction or forums or lurkers or whatever, I would've been talking about those, I reckon.
Not trying to be a dick or anything, just not really sure of the relevance
I'm enjoying Diablo 3 now. I really like the new scaling levels; where you just choose a difficulty at the beginning, and no matter where you are, the area is scaled to your level; so I never have to worry about being under or over leveled. Also, I like the new paragon system, especially since it filters down to sub-60 characters.
It was super dumb, but also clearly a fantasy sequence from the jump, with absolutely no pretext about being a thing that was actually believed in. It was a deliberate corruption of reality, and the logical part of Ratonhnhaké:ton, the part trying to fight off the hallucinogenic influence of the Piece of Eden, keeps going, "Wait, this is all bullshit, we don't even believe in this nonsense."
It would have been a lot more palatable, though, if it had no ties to the tribe, and the "magic tea" was delivered by, like, Achilles. Have the mysticism rooted in Assassin mythology, rather than ambiguous tribal earth-magic nonsense.
That said, turning into a bird to divebomb people was so dope that it kinda overwhelmed my ability to be too upset.
Pooro it sounds like the specifics of the tribe are not delved into. In that case what difference would it make if they offhandedly mentioned a real tribe name but didn't talk about any of their specific customs?
When games mention things that sound interesting I research them sometimes. If it is something that is fake then my google search doesn't teach me much.
For example though I am working through a history book on the Cold War right now because of Peace Walker bringing up a lot of real historical ideas like deterrence and detente and SALT etc. And I am also reading through Moby Dick because of the Phantom Pain.
So, if Second Son had a real tribe I would be more likely to end up researching them, while a fake tribe might end with that line of inquiry basically being a dead end.
Pooro it sounds like the specifics of the tribe are not delved into. In that case what difference would it make if they offhandedly mentioned a real tribe name but didn't talk about any of their specific customs?
Like I said, it's about having an opportunity to spark curiosity, educating, broadening horizons, and then refusing to do so.
Had it been a real tribe, somebody who dug what little they did learn (Blankzilla on the previous page, for a possible example) might be driven to dig a little deeper, learn a little more, come away worldlier and wiser than they came in. Folks from that tribe could've had the thrill of being acknowledged by triple-A entertainment, represented in a medium that freeeeequently overlooks folks like 'em. Conversation about the game could've been leveraged into conversations about matters important to the tribe. It could've been neat as hell, at a cost that is absolutely negligible to a massive corporation.
Instead, they didn't. They made up a tribe, while bragging about the verisimilitude of their world. I ain't saying it's an egregious offense, or anything like that. Just a big ol' missed opportunity, when it would've been so simple to score a direct hit. If they'd put a scintilla of the energy they put into their representation of the Space Needle into their representation of a real tribe, they could've done something super cool.
I'm just worried because we've finally gotten to where minority protagonists are mostly not racist caricatures but if the company feels like they are getting reamed on this then their next game is gonna have a white male protag again
AegeriTiny wee bacteriumsPlateau of LengRegistered Userregular
edited March 2014
I was excited about Buried at Sea Part 2 and was hoping it would be good, but I am severely underwhelmed and yet again baffled by Bioshocks story missteps/dumbness. Serious spoilers for Buried at Sea Part 2 here:
They retcon Daisy Fitzroy into deliberately being a homicidal jackass, almost as a way of deflecting the criticism they got over how they handled that in the main game. The new explanation actually manages to make this more offensive and dumber than it already was.
And of course, we can't have a female character in the lead without having an extended first person torture sequence specifically dealing with her. Where all previous games have done a very "Show, not tell", Buried at Sea apparently goes on for quite a while making sure you know how much Elizabeth is being tortured.
Sigh. At the very least Buried at Sea makes an attempt to add non-lethal approaches and gameplay to the mix, apparently successfully. Just don't have the incentive to check it out that I did now I know about the aforementioned plot elements.
I'm just worried because we've finally gotten to where minority protagonists are mostly not racist caricatures but if the company feels like they are getting reamed on this then their next game is gonna have a white male protag again
Who is reaming? Expressing disappointment ain't reaming. Particularly not on a forum they ain't even gonna read.
And saying nothing, tacitly endorsing fake tribes and cop-outs? What message does that send? How does that solve any problem anywhere?
Posts
Lol bet your a filthy chainer
It being lame is no longer the case! It is super rad and 6 hours disappeared at an alarming rate. I recommend giving it a shot again, especially if you have any interest in Marvel and/or ARPGs.
Steam: abunchofdaftpunk | PSN: noautomobilesgo | Lastfm: sjchszeppelin | Backloggery: colincummings | 3DS FC: 1392-6019-0219 |
so godlike
If you think otherwise, I have a message for you
The one about the bombs
I feel actually physically sick
The sound effects did not help
Which was absolutely fucking gross. I'm willing to reserve judgment on whether Kojima is going for raw shock value or actually trying to say a thing.
I'm kind of torn on this fact myself.
Like, on one hand they don't do any hokey borderline racist shit with it where he has to go on a journey of self discovery to meet his spirit animal or anything.
On the other hand, the tribe is basically just used as an easy shorthand for "tight knit community" to lend credence to the idea that he is going out of his way and risking his life to save these people. Its effect on the narrative is a very subdued, background effect. The fact that it is a made up tribe feels largely academic because the details of the tribe itself do not play into the narrative in the slightest.
I feel like it's probably for the best that they don't bother to really go into details and don't really go out of their way to make a big deal about it, but I don't really have the right perspective to really have an informed opinion about it either.
GZ stuff
Now, of Kojima said what he is trying to say well and if it was necessary to use the things he did to say it, is up to the individual. I haven't gotten to the tapes yet myself in GZ, and kind of want to wait to see things in the light of Phantom Pain before fully lock in my opinion.
But, Kojima is definitely trying to say a thing.
GZ spoilers if you really care at this point
And then the bad guy's like
And now let's put another one where they'll never check
squelch
SQUELCH
I may not have much else to get for the PS4 but guaranteed I'm skipping GZ now
Actually to be fair I have fuck all idea what the evil ending is, I'm still going through my evil expert playthrough.
So some of the stuff I said may be totally out of my ass! Who knows.
Except the "fuck blitzball" part
Love.
Blitzball.
Inazuma Eleven
Which is basically just a fully fleshed out blitzball game except it's soccer
he has added some truly terrible music
This is what I feel blitzball should have been
Fuck your menu-based stats game
Just stick a small minigame in there that actually has the pace and control style of an actual sports game
I don't know what the ending is, so can't really speak to it specifically.
But in theory, I think representing a (real) tribe well, having a well-defined protagonist, and then giving players the option to be evil anyway would actually be pretty baller. The "noble savage" is as damaging a stereotype as the "bloodthirsty savage," so having an Indian protagonist who's villainous can totally be a win for representation in my book.
Genuinely glad to hear they avoided the spirit quest trap. As soon as it came out that the tribe was fake, I was instantly concerned they'd go that route.
But now I'm even more confused as to why they didn't just do some dang research and use any of the real Pacific Northwest tribes. You've got access to a massive audience, and a chance, however small, to educate some people about a culture they are likely unfamiliar with. And then you make up a gatdamn tribe for no discernible reason. It's silly as hell.
edit: HOW EVEN?!?!?
Alright, but what if in the ending
Depends on his motivations, but again, I'm theoretically on board.
You know how the biggest, most central narrative structure in western storytelling is the hero's journey? One dude venturing forth, being changed, conquering evil? Well, in tribal storytelling, one of the most central narrative structure is about a figure falling out from the tribe, being changed, and being brought into the fold. Instead of an individual conquering the many, it's about the individual being subsumed back into the many.
For one guy to violently reject the tribe, be the one above the many, that's saying some pretty powerful things about his struggles with tribal identity. It could be a very affecting tragedy, done right.
Granted, you could achieve the same result without mass violence, but hey, video games.
Still not a particularly compelling reason for a fake tribe
Oh my god. The starts shine
Avoidable enough had they genuinely collaborated with a tribe, hired somebody as a consultant, done the research.
Assassin's Creed 3 is sorta my goto, I know, but some of its kanien'kehá:ka characters were dickheads. Not on a large scale, but in petty, human ways. Which actually made the tribe seem more human, more real. Nobody gave 'em an ounce of grief (that I saw) over the "bad" kanien'kehá:ka, because Ubisoft put in the legwork, hired consultants, and wrote their asses off. Hell, Ratonhnhaké:ton is a friggin' assassin, and murders hundreds of people. But with a strong foundation of an accurate tribal portrayal, having a flawed protagonist is golden.
And "being afraid" is a crummy excuse
#BLITZSQUAD
Questioning the part in bold
And I think I was pretty clearly talking about this situation? I mentioned what another game developer did with their own game, as a model for this game developer and this game. If I was talking about general social interaction or forums or lurkers or whatever, I would've been talking about those, I reckon.
Not trying to be a dick or anything, just not really sure of the relevance
EDIT: Storyline is still butts though.
Steam ID - VeldrinD | SS Post | Wishlist
Mixed
It was super dumb, but also clearly a fantasy sequence from the jump, with absolutely no pretext about being a thing that was actually believed in. It was a deliberate corruption of reality, and the logical part of Ratonhnhaké:ton, the part trying to fight off the hallucinogenic influence of the Piece of Eden, keeps going, "Wait, this is all bullshit, we don't even believe in this nonsense."
It would have been a lot more palatable, though, if it had no ties to the tribe, and the "magic tea" was delivered by, like, Achilles. Have the mysticism rooted in Assassin mythology, rather than ambiguous tribal earth-magic nonsense.
That said, turning into a bird to divebomb people was so dope that it kinda overwhelmed my ability to be too upset.
For example though I am working through a history book on the Cold War right now because of Peace Walker bringing up a lot of real historical ideas like deterrence and detente and SALT etc. And I am also reading through Moby Dick because of the Phantom Pain.
So, if Second Son had a real tribe I would be more likely to end up researching them, while a fake tribe might end with that line of inquiry basically being a dead end.
Like I said, it's about having an opportunity to spark curiosity, educating, broadening horizons, and then refusing to do so.
Had it been a real tribe, somebody who dug what little they did learn (Blankzilla on the previous page, for a possible example) might be driven to dig a little deeper, learn a little more, come away worldlier and wiser than they came in. Folks from that tribe could've had the thrill of being acknowledged by triple-A entertainment, represented in a medium that freeeeequently overlooks folks like 'em. Conversation about the game could've been leveraged into conversations about matters important to the tribe. It could've been neat as hell, at a cost that is absolutely negligible to a massive corporation.
Instead, they didn't. They made up a tribe, while bragging about the verisimilitude of their world. I ain't saying it's an egregious offense, or anything like that. Just a big ol' missed opportunity, when it would've been so simple to score a direct hit. If they'd put a scintilla of the energy they put into their representation of the Space Needle into their representation of a real tribe, they could've done something super cool.
Instead, they didn't.
And of course, we can't have a female character in the lead without having an extended first person torture sequence specifically dealing with her. Where all previous games have done a very "Show, not tell", Buried at Sea apparently goes on for quite a while making sure you know how much Elizabeth is being tortured.
Sigh. At the very least Buried at Sea makes an attempt to add non-lethal approaches and gameplay to the mix, apparently successfully. Just don't have the incentive to check it out that I did now I know about the aforementioned plot elements.
Who is reaming? Expressing disappointment ain't reaming. Particularly not on a forum they ain't even gonna read.
And saying nothing, tacitly endorsing fake tribes and cop-outs? What message does that send? How does that solve any problem anywhere?