ListenToMe.net Forums Forum Index
Author Message
<  Listen To Me  ~  Tough Love
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 12:31 am  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

LTM's stupid FTP seems to have its time of the month every single time I go to update it, rare though that tends to be, so I can't for the life of me manage to update the front page with this at the moment, but I have this new video series where I talk about how gamers and gaming culture are the worst things ever. This website paid me pennies to make it so if it does well I guess I'll make more and get at least 3 more pennies.

First one is a two-parter. Here are links:

http://youtu.be/t_ES4J7XhBc

http://youtu.be/0DCgzVtsE7k

I also made a promo video for my channel that will hurt your ears and body. I love it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhWMMDeRpR0

K that's all hope u like.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jeff
PostPosted: Wed Jan 16, 2013 5:40 am  Reply with quote
Sheckerz
Sheckerz


Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 150
Location: Shermer, Illinois

Do consumers really hold that much influence though? Lately game companies have fired back at angry customers calling them entitled or simply insult them instead of addressing valid complaints about their shoddy products. They point to sales charts and quote glowing reviews from websites bloated with ads they purchased as evidence that their shit is solid gold despite opinions of people who paid for the game saying otherwise.

Of course they wouldn't be making money if the games weren't selling but they always are. Gotta get little Johnny the new Call of Duty cause it's easier than being a real parent. Oh, this game has a celebrity I like in the ads, I'mma buy it. This is the next big AAA title everyone will be playing, can't be left out. All the masses need to throw their money away is a reason, no matter how trivial.

They're not the ones who care about vidya games as a hobby but as something to do while waiting to do something else. They see a commercial on TV and get hyped even though it's the same game they bought last year but with a new hat. Unfortunately, they are also the ones who fork over lots of $$$ on these yearly installments and rehashes. So, sadly, theirs is the voice that gets heard while the rest of us have to choose to put up with it or move on.

Look at Final Fantasy 7's ad campaign. Every commercial showed only footage from cutscenes and CG renders of the characters in print. It was the best selling game Square ever had in part to people not familiar with the franchise or willing to do a bit of research flocking to buy it. Some thought they were getting what the ads showed instead of an RPG with Lego men. Square raked in millions and continue to use the same method to this day. A more recent example is Diablo 3, same premise, same result.

So, as long as publishers are making money, they'll see no reason to change anything. At least that's what I think, you could rely on Indie titles for "creative" games but, let's be honest, they're just slapping paint on old ideas. I played VVVVV recently and, while I enjoyed it, the gravity shifting gimmick was nothing new, I was doing that in Metalstorm on the NES.

What was the question again?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2013 1:39 am  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

Oh, crap. I wrote a big long response to you yesterday but our host was in the process of moving LTM's ancient bones over to another server or something so apparently all evidence of yesterday has been magically eliminated.

Uh, it was a well-thought out response. I'll try to write something like it again when I can muster the energy. Unless you saw it already and can kinda remember it...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jeff
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2013 3:01 am  Reply with quote
Sheckerz
Sheckerz


Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 150
Location: Shermer, Illinois

I saw a reply listed the other day but it wasn't showing up here when I clicked on it. If you don't want to type it all out again, how about a quick summary?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 11:06 pm  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

Right, so what I basically said was that I'm less concerned with a total overhaul of gaming and its cliches because that's unrealistic and that I also think brainless games will always have their audience. I just think some of the particularly alienating issues like the incredible amounts of glorified violence or the adolescent depictions of sexuality can be gradually altered by way of consumer feedback. As I said in the video, this is already starting to sort of happen. Also, just a few days ago, if you saw it, there was this ridiculous Dead Island collector's bust made and it got backlash immediately.

I still get the feeling that developers don't usually know WHY what they did was wrong. They just know it's apparently bad because they got told by the public that it was bad. So if people's reactions to this stuff are negative enough that companies have to at least respond, eventually I feel like measures will have to be taken to avoid making this stuff happen in the future or, in other words, we'll need better depictions of violence, sexuality, etc. and I actually think a lot of this just comes down to good storytelling. If you have better depictions of stuff, you have a more rounded piece of work, which means better games, which basically means ending cliches and doing some innovation. So I guess I do think all this stuff can happen. Just super slowly.

Another way to look at it is that, even if the people involved in games right now don't get it, the fostering of new opinions about how games handle things (and for now I'll keep mentioning violence and sexuality just because they're the easy ones) might influence the upcoming generations of gamers who will recognize, for example, the industry's short-sighted depictions of women. And these are the people who may grow up to make the next games.

I also agree that indie games have their own sets of cliches. I do think indie games currently have the greater potential to do new stuff because a game can come out of a small team of people with their own unique visions, but, yeah, a lot of it is the same old bullshit.

But I think it's worth calling this shit out. It may make developers or future developers think about it. If you get enough people pissed about a thing, eventually publishers have to take notice. And I think that starts within the gaming community. If everyone stops being as awful as the games they play, that'd help out.

I should also make clear how little faith I actually have in gamers because they are generally so awful. But I think it's better to hold out some hope and make some effort because there's also this weird gamer attitude I've found of being totally fucking defeatist and acting like the industry is this impenetrable thing that can never change and I have no idea why we got this way. Is it because we secretly don't want it to change or are we just losers? Either way it is annoys the shit out of me and an iota of positivity is all I'm asking for at this juncture.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
USAgent
PostPosted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:04 pm  Reply with quote
Professorman Johnson
Professorman Johnson


Joined: 29 May 2007
Posts: 252
Location: The Great USA

Your brief summary, while reading like something that oozes out of an infected wound as always, was super thorough. And I wanted you to know basically what I just told you.

_________________
Arguing with the cops is like shaking your fist at God. There's nobody there; and if there is, he's not listening. And if he's listening, all you're doing is pissing him off.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 4:11 pm  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

Dunno if anybody is lookin at this shit AT ALL but updating LTM is still an imposs so here is the new vid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbCfvXDaAFk
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jeff
PostPosted: Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:19 pm  Reply with quote
Sheckerz
Sheckerz


Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 150
Location: Shermer, Illinois

It was ok, just that the violence in games thing has been talked about since the 90's and it's been the same points being made over and over.

Let's compare a gory film like The Collection to a game such as the remake of Splatterhouse. The content of each is similar, they're both filled with lots of blood and gore. The difference is that, in the movie, those scenes are over with in a minute or so while the game exposes you to it constantly through repetitive gameplay. This makes it seem worse cause it's happening more often but it's no different than rewinding a scene.

The people that complain about this, like you mentioned, hardly play games at all. There's a huge gap in regards to video games and the people who condem them never got past them being toys for kids that make beeps and boops. When they saw something like Doom, they assumed it was marketed towards little 5 year old Billy and not his teenage brother. This is still happening even though the average age of gamers is in the mid-thirties to late twenties now because an entire generation grew up playing them when they weren't looking.

Not to say games aren't violent today, it's just that they're no worse than what's been in other forms of media. Nobody attacks those though because they have some kind of legitimacy that games don't. How his Leon getting his head cut off worse than seeing Jason do the same to an unlucky camper?

I don't even think todays games are that bad compared to the past. Worst thing I've ever done in a game was enter a town in Fallout 2 and place a timebomb in one of the kid NPC's inventory. He ran over to a group of other kids and exploded, killing them all. That shit wouldn't fly today and yet I never heard anyone complaining that you could even do it or much worse back then, ever.

I don't know, it doesn't really bother me cause it's just human nature to glorify violence and we've been doing it since Ugg first smashed in Krunk's skull so he could lead the tribe. You ever hear Veterns tell war stories and listen to them laugh while talking about how they "Fragged them Charlies"? If they can find humor in ending a real, living persons life than I'm not gonna lose sleep over some pixels and polygons.

Besides most of the fun games aren't violent at all and the ones that are go over the top with it to the point of parody.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Sun Apr 14, 2013 8:28 pm  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

First off, I would argue a game based around constant violence is vastly different than rewinding a single scene. A violent moment in a film with other elements around it is one piece of an overall composition. In games, frequently the entire composition of it is violent moment after violent moment. If you judge them in full as pieces of art you have little more to go on than violence, violence, violence, rather than violence for a few seconds with other events surrounding that.

Beyond that, I'll admit people have been mentioning game violence for ages. I'd like to think I'm not making the exact same points. My main point is that it's boring. And, yes, there are films where the violence is as grotesque as game violence (arguably more grotesque). But (though I have to admit to not doing the research here), I think it's less often that hugely violent works of cinema are considered classics. Or, rather, I'd at least say that if we have horror classics up there (like Texas Chainsaw Massacre), then there's loads of other non-violent classics (Citizen Kane or whatever) to stack them up against. And yearly we have more of a variety. There's the occasional Saw or whatever that pops up occasionally and is a run away success because people are curious to check that kind of shit out from time to time, but violence over-saturates our medium. A lot of our really important stand-out games from year to year are games about murder, murder, murder. Obviously I don't give a shit about Mario jumping on goombas, it's fine. But it was the genesis of where we are now, with games basically centered entirely around killing things. It's just the killing has, in many cases, gotten a lot more graphic.

I'm not asking people to feel morally bankrupt about the violence they see in video games. I'm just asking, as I am when it comes to everything with games, that we try varying things up largely just because otherwise gaming gets boring. I should imagine that would have the added incentive of people who don't play games noticing that they aren't all just the same thing about killing stuff all the time. But it's mostly a self-centered desire to want to try new things. Murder as mechanic is hugely played out. It's worth exploring gaming as an artform in different ways just because otherwise you make shitty, boring, samey art all the time. I would RATHER I was losing sleep over gaming violence as that would mean it had on impact on me rather than it just being another stupid game full of throat-stabbings in a long line of them.

The huge games nowadays that matter a lot are still very frequently the violent ones. And I do believe people are beginning to talk about it in different ways. BioShock Infinite is an amazing example because people are now actually discussing how the violence or even how the very GENRE holds that game's story back. It has a fantastic story, setting and characterization and then it's all based in over-the-top violence and killing everything. This cheapens the other, stronger, aspects none of which have much of a meaningful relation to the murdery parts. And yet there's a (probably quite accurate) belief that a high-budget title like that would never have gotten produced at all if it WEREN'T an FPS. These are the sorts of things I want to change. We should be able to have these awesome experiences that aren't afraid to be more experimental. We shouldn't HAVE to be tied down to violence.

I mean, think about the way the adventure genre got shafted over the years. Telltale is helping it make a comeback (though admittedly with a hugely violent franchise), but basically people started being afraid of producing that gameplay style and went "We need to add some fightin and killin!" Dreamfall and King's Quest 8 are examples of adventure games becoming afraid they didn't have anything the market would be interested in so they added terrible action gameplay (KQ8's nasty blood-puking monsters were an especially sad and embarrassing thing). Honestly, thinking about this now I'm kind of upset I didn't bring it up as a point in my video.

Also, I brought up the chainsaw guy in RE4 as an example of violence being awesome anyway. I wasn't decrying it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jeff
PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 3:48 am  Reply with quote
Sheckerz
Sheckerz


Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 150
Location: Shermer, Illinois

Oh, no, I understood the chainsaw guy I was just saying that when people talk about violent games, they'll point at something like that but ignore similar (and more graphic) scenes from popular movies.

I don't think there's all that much of a difference between films and games these days. Even the most violent games out there aren't nonstop blood orgies. Splatterhouse had lulls in it and used the down time for platform segments and lever puzzles. One of the best things about it are Rick and the mask having conversations during these moments for character development while using cutscenes to move the plot. Most games today are just interactive movies anyway, your entire goal is getting the main character to the next scripted scene.

It seems to me like we've got to the point where visuals are making the things we've done time and again seem worse now. Take God of War and imagine it as a side-scrolling SNES game like Castlevania with pixelated graphics and the same content. Doesn't seem all that bad now, still violent, but not as bad as before. Now imagine Dragon's Lair with modern, realistic graphics and you'd have an extremely horrifying game instead of cartoony antics. In Super Mario Bros., Bowser falls into the lava and that's it but, in New SMB, the same event plays out only it looks worse cause he's fully animated and his skin is melting off as he thrashes about.

I do agree that the murder mechanic is played out and more of a showing of bad design then anything else. I didn't like having to kill everything in the room to open a door in the Legend of Zelda and I still didn't like having to do it in Darksiders 2. What I do like, is a bit of freedom in how to approach a problem. Some games offer it, most don't, but those that do have the possibilty of allowing a "pacifist run" turning an M-rated game into an E or T one just because the player felt like it. I played through Jurassic Park for the SNES once using nothing but tranq darts instead of rockets just because it gave me the option. Not to say violence doesn't have it's place. I haven't played Infinite but the scene with Andrew Ryan in the first Bioshock was a good use of a violent act to prove a point.

It's kinda hard to blame companies for putting this stuff out if people are buying it. Bloodpocalypse 1 and 2 sells 10 million units each so why ruin a good thing with part 3? Any lines that would've brought about real change from within have either already been crossed or buried in advance during the 90s. There's the consumer approach except it's easier for people to say they won't buy X because of Y than it is to make good on it.

I get being bored but what doesn't become boring if you expose yourself to it enough. I went from Dead Space to Mad World to No More Heroes stopping near the beginning because I was bored of slicing and dicing so I played Wario Land instead, it was fun.

Again I just don't see much of an issue with game violence cause I'm looking at it from a graphic evolution standpoint. Yeah, it's a crutch for sales but shooting someone as Solid Snake is the same to me today as it was back then only with better visuals and more red. A good story's a good story no matter how it's told and if I have shoot a couple hundred mooks to hear it then I'm fine with that.

Not trying to have an argument, I'm honestly curious why the subject is popping up again (not just in your video) when it's no better or worse now, imo, than it was the past ten or so years. Is it because games truly are the most violent they've ever been? Maybe today's commentators are starting to have kids of their own and don't want them exposed to this stuff. Could be people jumping on a bandwagon. I have no idea.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:42 pm  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

OMG sorry I take so long to respond at you. Big busy guy (in my mind).

Yes, people will point out the violence in games more readily because films are more established, sure. But I don't think it's a bad thing for us to try and be less violent so they have less to point fingers at or so we can show that we have games that don't do the violent thing. Obviously, we have quite a few like that, but my big issue is that most of the REALLY big AAA titles are pretty damn violent. And, yeah, I guess there are lulls in gameplay, but in a lot of games the main mechanic is "do violent shit."

I think that, with films, there are far fewer that are consistently graphically gory that get a lot of attention and dominate the box office and such.

And, yeah, if you made God of War a pixellated side-scroller, fine, it wouldn't look as bad. But we are at a point now where plot-based games are expected to be better structured (as well they should be) so no matter HOW the game looks, part of my problem with violence is a lack of awareness of pacing or of how to temper the violence with other stuff. The lulls are not that extensive. It feels like what you said, getting to the next cutscene. Ideally, the non-violent bits should also be engaging, playable parts. One of the only series that understands this at all is Half-Life. It is, of course, still violent, but also has parts just about solving how to navigate the environment or searching abandoned areas and it's enjoyable in its own way, not to mention the contrast amplifies the action in the violent scenes.

I also don't care if a good story is told with violence, of course, but, in such a case, the violence should be conducive to the narrative. But there's a LOT more out there beyond violence to explore narratively, too. And, again, Bioshock: Infinite is an example of a game that feels as though the violence actually holds the narrative back. It's not just "oh this is violent but, who cares, the story is great" it's "the story is great and too bad it's violent because it could've been a massive, massive turning point in gaming." I don't want to shoot a couple hundred mooks when the mooks are completely boring to deal with and the only good part is the story. There must be better ways to interact with the mooks that would've bolstered rather than hindered the narrative. And we should be thinking about these things. (haven't played original Bioshock, fyi, but intend to some time)

And, yes, it's a gamble to not makes games about killing. But it has to be done anyway. Perhaps it won't come from the big companies, but it should come from somewhere (indie games very often feel as though they should and can be the place for it but they're chock full of cliches too). Plus, this whole cyclical argument that companies make violent stuff because we buy it doesn't always hold up. Sure, it does sometimes and games that take risks don't sell as well as they should but then there are the times something like Katamari Damacy gets made and released with little fanfare and is a shockingly huge success with a fervent fan following (or FFF). So there ARE times a lot of people at once accept something because it is just plain different and inventive and new and interesting. I will always champion experimentation in art, even when it's completely impractical. I know one can't have such an idealistic view at every level, people's jobs are at stake, yadda yadda. "Take risks" is still, ultimately, my motto.

And you are arguing with me! To some extent. We are arguing. So what? Arguing is good.

And I think the reason for violence talk is probably the violent stuff happening in schools and the talk of gun control is reviving it somewhat but I also think a lot of our big games (and maybe even more recent movies) are going for pretty severe violence and people are actually noticing. Also, most exciting to me, is I think there's just a recognition that our game stories are actually getting within the realm of being half-decent. So we're starting to genuinely assess them as narrative works of art, rather than just collages of mechanics and anti-aliasing effects.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Michaeljohn
PostPosted: Mon May 06, 2013 3:58 am  Reply with quote
A girl.


Joined: 06 May 2013
Posts: 2

amplifies the action in the violent scenes.



__________________________________________________
wow gold|Diablo 3 Gold kaufen|Guild wars 2 gold|

_________________
john Michael
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Tue Jun 04, 2013 12:14 pm  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

http://youtu.be/48fLur0GuOk

This one is about sex. Sex 'n' fucking.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Jeff
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 2:02 am  Reply with quote
Sheckerz
Sheckerz


Joined: 27 May 2007
Posts: 150
Location: Shermer, Illinois

Like the violence issue, I have no idea why people are suddenly concerned about female character designs. Did everyone forget about the chainmail bikini wearing ladies from Golden Axe, Gauntlet and numerous other games over the decades? Nobody had a problem with it back then, not even Samus taking her clothes off as the player's reward in several Metroids. Is it because there's more jigglin' now?

Let`s look back for a bit here. When technology finally allowed for real character graphics, developers, both East and West, probably used fantasy art and photographs for visual aides. This is where the standard super muscular man and stripperific woman came from and could explain why it was so common. Both of them are appealing, just about all media and reality proves that, so why suddenly fault an industry for capitalizing on a stereotype it's used for 30+ years?

Sure the women sometimes wear skimpy outfits and have exaggerated "features" but so do women in real life. Why? Why not, same with game developers. Toss in a redhead with 34G's and an ass as round as the moon because it's a video game. If gaming embraced realism then Mario would just walk along a brick road, dicking around with flagpoles.

It's not like developers are sitting in a room saying "How can we objectify women in our next game?". They want the characters to stand out so their product gets attention in a crowded market and it's easier to do that by showing off a sexy character then an average looking one. Hell, how often do average looking characters even show up in games as anything more than a throwaway NPC? The ones that get attention are usually comically fat/ugly or ridiculously attractive, same as other media.

As for sex in games, it's pointless, something thrown in to make it seem more mature than it is. In reality, sex is pretty damn immature when you get right down it. Fun? Of course but the only mature thing about it is the postive and negative effects it can have which few games go into.

I'd say older games like Leisure Suit Larry did a better job handling the subject than modern ones. Relationship building in Harvest Moon was more complex than anything Bioware has come up with and it actually led to something (a family). Fallout 2 had a same sex marriage option that would end with the bride or groom's family disowning them adding some harsh realism. I also remember Phantasmagoria having an awkward as hell rape scene.

I'll stop with that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FortheLoveofJoe
PostPosted: Thu Jul 04, 2013 9:45 pm  Reply with quote
Degrassi School President


Joined: 26 May 2007
Posts: 901

Oh I never responded to this ok i will respond.

Jeff wrote:
why suddenly fault an industry for capitalizing on a stereotype it's used for 30+ years?


Right, well, first off, I don't know what makes this an argument in the first place. Who cares why we're concerned about it now. Because we're slow to deal with issues, I guess? It honestly doesn't really matter to me. If we're concerned about it now, that's good. That just means the industry has been getting away with churning out shitty depictions of females and sexiness forever. Finally they're getting taken to task on it and I couldn't care less what's made that happen.

But if I were to venture a guess anyway, yeah, as you mentioned, for one, better graphics with more detailed sexy characters and extra jiggling probably genuinely DO make a difference. That stuff is more obviously stupid and crass than Samus in her 8-bit bikini. And other reasons might be that gaming is actually a hobby for all ages now, so more mature people who use their critical faculties are weighing in on it. Also, the amount of women and men who play games is divided pretty well equally at this point, so that's likely to have something to do with it, too.

But, again, my main thing is I don't know why this is an argument. If you're accusing it of being a bandwagon situation, again, I don't really care. It's a bandwagon I'm happy to ride on because this period where it's starting to be annoying and sound like everyone's talking about it all the time means we're probably on the cusp of stuff actually changing.

Quote:
It's not like developers are sitting in a room saying "How can we objectify women in our next game?".


No, you're right, they aren't. I specifically said in the video that they probably don't even know they're doing it. But lack of intent doesn't necessarily mean that the message doesn't come through anyway. It's almost WORSE to me that they don't think about it because that just means it's normalized in their heads, in which case they've basically just internalized objectified females as the default depiction.

Quote:
They want the characters to stand out so their product gets attention in a crowded market and it's easier to do that by showing off a sexy character then an average looking one. Hell, how often do average looking characters even show up in games as anything more than a throwaway NPC?.


Okay, so, sex sells, yes? But a character doesn't have to be necessarily sexualized to be appealing. And of course you want your lead character to stand out. It's not like Jade from Beyond Good & Evil is ugly, but she's not overtly sexualized either. And then you've got characters like Sonic or Crash or Mario who aren't humanoid or even remotely sexualized (ignoring the fact that tons of people find a way to find Sonic sexy anyhow). They're just stylistically pleasing. I'm not saying WE NEED MORE UGLY FEMALE PROTAGONISTS. I'm not a fucking idiot. I'm just questioning why there can't be more female characters who aren't ridiculously over-the-top sexy. Or why can't there just be female characters who we aren't reminded are bangable? It's a LOT harder to think of examples of such characters for women than it is for men. As you mentioned, even Samus had to get her clothes off at the end.

Quote:
The ones that get attention are usually comically fat/ugly or ridiculously attractive, same as other media.


This is also not really an argument to me. You're saying that this problem of superficiality extends outside of gaming? Okay, then it's a huge fucking problem. Agreed.

Quote:
As for sex in games, it's pointless, something thrown in to make it seem more mature than it is. In reality, sex is pretty damn immature when you get right down it. Fun? Of course but the only mature thing about it is the postive and negative effects it can have which few games go into.


Sex is a big LIFE THING. I don't think it's simply immature in real life. The actual act of sex can be more than just throwaway fucking and, yes, consequences are a big deal, too. Again, I'm not requesting that every game make me think about the perils of possibly getting a girl pregnant or something. I'm just saying it gets really boring and makes gaming look really shortsighted when it apparently can barely ever present ANY version of sex other than the immature, pointless kind. In other words, I'd be happy to just say "oh yeah this game just has sex for fun in it" if that was one game in a selection of many other games with different depictions of sex but it's really almost EVERY game with sex in it and then it starts to feel shameful to even be involved with this industry of teenage boy wet dreams. Plus, as I keep saying, IT'S GETTING BORING. I like NEW THINGS.

Quote:
I'd say older games like Leisure Suit Larry did a better job handling the subject than modern ones. Relationship building in Harvest Moon was more complex than anything Bioware has come up with and it actually led to something (a family). Fallout 2 had a same sex marriage option that would end with the bride or groom's family disowning them adding some harsh realism. I also remember Phantasmagoria having an awkward as hell rape scene.


I didn't know about this Fallout 2 thing but that's really interesting. I never played Harvest Moon but maybe that did a decent job too. I do feel pretty confident saying that these are still exceptions, however.

Maybe LSL did a decent job of putting you in the role of an immature ass trying to score. I just found the writing and puzzles too stupid to keep going with the series after playing 1 and bits of some of the others. Phantasmagoria was a huge piece of crap. Which is kind of my other problem with most of gaming. A game can attempt interesting stuff but if it's got bad writing (as most games do), that kind of ruins the whole attempt (see: everything David Cage makes).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
All times are GMT - 5 Hours

View next topic
View previous topic
Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next
ListenToMe.net Forums Forum Index  ~  Listen To Me

Post new topic   Reply to topic


 
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB and NoseBleed v1.08