Ok, I play games. I spend a ton of time enjoying them, and a ton of time dissecting and "ughing" them as well. A trend I am seeing, mostly a company that I won't name but start with Call and ends in Duty, I've got a beef. Games have always been in love with movies and so they try and recreate the tones, scenes, and violence they depict. I do believe there is something about the violence in games issue here as some of these companies are making you do things that only Jack Bauer does and I can sit back and my conscious is clean. Games are missing that key element when I can watch a horror movie and go "aww, none of that I have to do". I'm clear. Bioshock gives you choice, help the girls or destroy them. I always saved but have no issue when others don't because I got to play the way I play. Playing off of consequences and peoples decisions is a powerful tool. GTA you can play an entire game without killing hookers or the innocent. I am talking about when I don't have a choice and the uncanny valley merging. These games are now making me put a piece of glass in a person mouth then repeatedly punch him in the face until he talks. The last game made me shoot civilians in an airport. I played that stage 8 times dying each time because it wouldn't let me play the whole level without killing people. I tried, lord I tried. And then I sold the game immediately. And that's the deal, taking away my right to choose is forcing me to play these games their way, the opposite of what makes games different then movies. And I'm not talking games that revolve around "Saw" etc. Notice I'm not talking about the violence as I knew what games I pick up. Bad guys shoot at me, I shoot back. If these games were called Black Ops Jack Bauer edition or Splinter Cell: interrogation head into water faucet Theory I couldn't have complaints. The issue is torturing without the ability to decline and killing innocent people because I have to to keep playing in games that aren't about that. This is lazy design. It's not edgy, it's not taboo, it's lazy. Give me choice. k, done, I'll post art later.
7 comments:
Amen! Thanks for putting my thoughts so eloquently :)
Where I see the differences between game and cinematic media is in choice. As an observer of cinema, I can't choose how to deal with a situation as a character. That's fine, because I'm still me sitting in a chair, with a degree of disconnect between me and the screen. But in a game, the nature of the media are my choices withing that context. If I don't even have that, that is the point where I turn my attention to another title or back to a movie.
Like in your example, arguments toward "choreographed emotional impact" aside, if I can't do things my way: FAIL.
thanks Geoff. And as a side note, I can' believe you don't have a fulltime position yet. C'mon people, look at his stuff! click his name...click it. Someone get this guy on a job.
Yeah! Fully agree. The start of Fable 3 was like that: choose to kill the legitimate protestors or your best friend. That's not edgy, it's mean in a (if you choose to play it that way) light-hearted game.
Glendon, Man I totally forgot the train wreck that was Fable 3. agreed. And don't let me rant about the "year" I was supposed to have to save my country...... day 165...... END OF YEAR!
I like that in the Mass Effect games you ALWAYS have a choice (as far as I can remember...) There's usually even good, bad, or passive options, which I think is GREAT design.
Ezra, I agree. Mass effect has awesome design but a horrible black eye from random planet mining. It just broke all momentum when you needed to do it. More options for minerals is needed for #3 IMO
Yikes, that's crazy they even made a game like that. I don't play games nearly as much as I use to but even then there were always options. Give me Kingdom Hearts over that Call of Duty crap any day though. I don't like "realistic" war games, i need some sci-fi/fantasy stylization in there some where.
Post a Comment