Worth Reading: 05/23/2014

Lets remember that all humans, no matter of race, gender, sexuality, religion, culture, class can be good, bad and somewhere in between. I don't see a problem in anyone portrayed as the bad guy. Its this one person, it doesn't represent the entire group.

Crusader Kings 2 eh? Color me excited.

I've been one of the detractors of the Quick Look Solo, but it has nothing to do with you personally Patrick. Frankly, I don't enjoy watching or listening to anyone's solo content. The thrill for me is in the conversation in the group and the zaniness it brings. I've been super glad you've been able to team up with Alex to get both of you more camera time, and I'm excited to see how things out there keep growing.

Far Cry 3 had the best story ever. I loved the scene where the turtles get blown up with C4. Truly moving.

That John Oliver clip was pretty great. Definitely knew Link and Mario had a thing.

I wasn't making a joke either, i was making a point. and what you don't realise is human trafficking isn't just woman, its men and woman; also its not just sex either, there are many different types of trafficking such as indentured servitude and labor trafficking. I don't think many people realise that this happens right on our soil, people from the united states trafficked to people in the united states; but since Texas is so close to the border often times people will see the labor trafficked and not even know that they are slaves.

People aren't judging the game, though (at least not the reasonable ones). They're judging the cover, which is what we've been presented. And given the strong reaction to FC3's racial themes, it's hardly a surprise that people are skeptical and critical of this first glimpse we've been given of the game.

It's possible the game will address the cover art in a way that's reasonable, but the picture alone, without any additional context, is leaving some people with an eyebrow raised until we know more.

The joke is about how someone suggested that unlike those conservative gun nuts in Texas, the Himalaya region is a bastion of love and acceptance, and then someone else pointed out that they have a huge human trafficking problem.

You don't get much more loathsome than the idea of sexual slavery, but the women involved or the idea of sexual slavery are hardly what I was joking about.

[edit] Reading more from that wikipedia link:

Many [abducted sex workers who manage to escape] have extreme difficulty reintegrating into society due to the strong stigma they face of being previous sex workers regardless of the fact they were forced into it. When survivors return to home villages, they are often cast out by family members and home communities. Survivors consider marriage to be the most reliable and desired social reintegration strategy; some hide their previous lives and HIV status from their new husbands. Because of the stigma and lack of skills and education, combined with Nepal’s limited employment and livelihood opportunities for women that are considered socially acceptable, many survivors re-enter sex work.

Oh yeah, it sounds like a great place to live, unlike that awful Texas. So full of love and acceptance.

I don't want to be that asshole; but, making jokes about women that are sold into sex slavery isn't really a joking subject.

at least texas and nepal have something in common then.

I'd be interested in seeing you team up with a female writer, would fit your style of journalism, similar to your Pax panel.

@conmulligan: It's foolish to judge by the cover, no matter how the game is marketed.

@video_game_king: this video was great...

@spaceinsomniac said:

This attitude doesn't make any sense to me. Cover art is perhaps the single most important piece of marketing for a game. Variations of it appear in almost every kind of advertising from E3 banners to cardboard standees, not to mention being plastered across the front of every copy sold at retail. Saying you can't judge a game based on it, when publishers design it exactly with that in mind, is crazy.

Why, it's almost as if you CAN'T judge a book by its cover!

You know, I agree with your assessment @patrickklepek, but it goes both ways, we should not just assume the content cannot not earn its status to talk about the uncomfortable topics by being offended as a default. After all there is such a thing as depict a topic without being the topic (which is something videogames and their audience seem to fail at grasping).

An image doesn't necessarily require a disclaimer to clarify intentions, subtlety and discussion are vitally important for all modern art.

IE: The thin red line is a movie about the pointlessness of violence and war, that depicts a lot of violence and war. In this sense, most media today is not so roundly solipsistic. Most of it understands that it exists and that it is unavoidably and immediately faced with the reflection of itself in the audience.

I guess anyone can be offended by anything, and we cant really tell anyone that they are wrong for whatever offense they take, but I tend wonder what would happen if someone said : "I find that homophobic, because the man in pink is evil, and why should the gay guy be bad". ( I don't think this at all, but someone could ) And in the end it is taking offense based on a personal prejudice, which speaks more of my abstract sensibilities than the content itself..

So we end at an impasse, where all media is potentially offensive without the proper explanation, and judgement is passed on a superficial outlook. I suppose the guilty here is Ubisoft, for not presenting all their information, but I kind of appreciate them being suggestive instead of explicative. I'd dread a world where all information must be presented for PC's sake.

I dunno, man. When I look at him in the cover art, he looks like he came from Afghanistan, or thereabouts. Just what I see, at a glance. And yeah, I played the game, so I know that's not true.

Not that you can tell from the art alone.

@spaceinsomniac said:

So the picture is of a "white" guy playfully and sadistically tormenting a local guy, and you're telling me that they would never make the same sort of image with their roles reversed, right?

Yeah, Vaas wasn't exactly a white guy in Far Cry 3.

On another note, how crazy is this stupid long live action commercial of sorts?

Loading Video...

Vaas really isn't anything like the man holding the grenade when you compare the two boxarts. He's got a trendy haircut/ear gauge and western clothes. He doesn't look like "video game cannon fodder" the way the guy in the first picture does, he mostly just looks like a murderous psychopath. The tone is also important. Vaas looks far more sinister, and the use of less vibrant colors and harder shadows gives the picture a much more serious and dramatic tone overall. It could almost be the cover of a horror movie.

I have to stress that the image is more careless than anything as a first reveal for Far Cry 4, and I'm not saying they should "ban this filth" or anything of the sort. Just that it's totally understandable WHY people reacted the way that they did when the image was first released, especially considering the criticisms of the previous game.

And that video series was pretty great/ridiculous; it's cool seeing how well the voice actor plays the character live. I *kinda* wish they had made an FMV game out of the material, though.

If I was a non-white robber in the US I would only go after while young males, because it's obvious that they would not do a thing in self-defense because that would be racist.

I think the foreword to Worth Reading is my favorite thing about them.

So the picture is of a "white" guy playfully and sadistically tormenting a local guy, and you're telling me that they would never make the same sort of image with their roles reversed, right?

Yeah, Vaas wasn't exactly a white guy in Far Cry 3.

On another note, how crazy is this stupid long live action commercial of sorts?

In the piece of art we have a large powerful man who appears to be a wealthy westerner in a position of violent dominance over a much smaller dishevelled man who appears to a poor foreigner of Asian or Middle Eastern descent. Pretty much par for the course, really. And this isn't cherry picking one image out of dozens. This is THE way they decided to unveil Far Cry 4 to the world.

And it's hard to imagine them treating this subject matter seriously, because the tone of the piece is downright playful, from the bright palette and even lighting, to the weapons on display, to the jaunty pose of the man in the middle and the cheeky way he's holding the grenade pin and smirking.

It may not be "racially motivated" in any conscious way, but it fits neatly into the cultural narrative that people who look like the guy holding the grenade are pawns at best. They would never make this picture but with the two guys reversed.

Add that to the questionable-at-best portrayal of race in the previous game, and you can see where people are coming from.

But I'm sure it's the most accepting and wonderful human trafficking.

can someone tell me the issue with the farcry 4 art?

Yeah, they're just way into human trafficking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_Nepal

To quote myself from the previous page:

At this point, you're attacking an "I don't see race" straw man argument that nobody is actually arguing.

Like, perhaps seeing someone in a purple suit, and thinking "I bet he's gay!" Or maybe seeing someone being cruel to somebody else who has slightly darker skin and thinking "I bet he's a racist!." Because those are both examples of stereotyping and pre-judgment.

Nice to keep seeing these peeks behind the GB curtain Patrick. Glad that, recent hard times aside, it's been moving well for the crew. I'm looking forward to some quick look solos with someone else along for the ride as well.

Crusader Kings 2 though? You are a brave man to try and tackle that beast

SHUHEI IS IN THAT VIDEO AND ALSO ON TWITTER, MEANING WE CAN CONVINCE HIM INTO MAKING A NEW PS4 APE ESCAPE, PLEASE SHU PLEASE.

Also the "I don't see race" claim is 100% garbage crap, you are not above bias. In addition, the existence of race does not create racism, it is white supremacy, oppression, prejudice, stereotyping, etc. that leads to racism. Please. This is stuff we learn in middle school.

Man I loved Far Cry 3, but the story was pretty bad(at least after the first half) and ended up being painfully racist in the end. But hey the wingsuit was pretty cool.

Crusader Kings 2 is a hell of a game. It has the greatest and most engaging emergent storytelling I have ever experienced in a video game. Because of the paper thin narrative elements and lack of in game goals I was able to spin amazing tales about centuries of hatred between Scotland and Norway, the treason of Erie, the insanity of the British-Sweedish Excommunication Wars, witness the emergence and disappearance of a tradition of fratricide upon the ascension of a new king, and turn the subjugation of captured enemy lands by the king's son into an enduring right of passage that trained all young heirs to the throne to be rulers. Its remarkable that a game which basically amounts to me telling stories to myself has my current Kingdom of Scotland game at over 70 hours in with no signs of stopping.

APE ESCAPE!!

@hailinel: I'll switch to PM.

"I don't see race" is not so much naive, as it's essentially impossible. "I don't see what about this situation made you come to the conclusion that race is a factor" is what we're arguing here.

@marokai said:

I've already made two serious posts, and I'd just be saying the same thing over and over. At best, "I don't see race" is naive and overly simplistic and does nothing but help keep the status quo exactly where it is. At worst, it's bigoted and spiteful and is used to actively downplay and dismiss very real racial issues.

"Fight your dad, fight god. Sometimes your dad and God were the same person (a lot of people answered "of the Christ" when I asked about "passion"; you know, crucifixion, self-sacrifice)."

- A snippet in Leigh's article where she either completely misses the movie reference or tries to spin it into something way more serious than it should be.

@kentonclay: Everytime someone tells me "we need to have conversations about this topic, it's important and brings us together" I look at posts like this and remember "Oh, right, I'm not the one that's refusing to actually talk about it in a back-and-forth manner."

Nope. I just saw one guy being a dick to another guy. Didn't see anything racial about it.

Am I the only who didn't think of race at all with the Far Cry 4 cover? I saw it, it reminded me of Far Cry 3, and made me super excited.

I think one of the things regarding discussions of potential racism, sexism, etc., that we need to remember is that those discussions ARE worth having. These things are (and will always be) elements of our society because that's part of being human. Even if people want to jump on the Far Cry cover, they certainly should be at least considered, even if they are disagreed with (as I disagree with them).

People tend to want to avoid these discussions. It's tiring to think about this stuff, it's hard work, and sometimes we just want to play games. I get that, but at the same time, just because a discussion is difficult or uncomfortable or even consistently advanced to the point that we are momentarily tired of having it is no reason not to have it.

People sometimes say things like, "But this gets in the way of REAL racism/sexism/etc.," as if they have some clear definition of what separates "real" bigotry, whether purposeful or subconscious, from "not real" bigotry. I disagree with this notion. We need to do more listening to one another (even if we end up disagreeing) than talking about how we know what is real racism, etc.

I think this goes for everyone on all sides of any of these sticky social issues. People jumped on Mark Cuban last week for admitting that he, like all of us, is bigoted in some ways. In fact, he noted that the key is to be cognizant of how we might be acting in this way, which really is a great message. It takes maturity to admit your own weaknesses no matter what they are. However, some people jumped on the "I'm bigoted" part and Cuban apologized to the family of Trayvon Martin for being insensitive even though "black guy in a hoodie" bigotry is what played into Mr. Martin's death in the first place. I'm glad we can bring that discussion of judgment by clothing choice back out into the light. We all do it, and we all need to be reminded not to do it.

As for Far Cry 4, I'll hold judgment until I play the game. Art always gets criticized by many types of people, and one thing I'd like us to do is to deal with the criticism without pooh-poohing the critics. If video game fans want games to be taken seriously as art, it's time to develop stronger critical minds and to be able to intelligently discuss (and if need be, counter) some of the ideas that people have about the fans, games, etc.

I see. And how are 'people' so certain that it is a white man subjugating a person of color and it isn't just a person subjugating a person?

Nothing implies that it is the former. That's 'people's' perception of it. It's 'people' who are being racist here. They are making a distinction between the color of someone's skin.

@hassun: I'd appreciate a better explanation, then. The one you provided is woeful.

@hailinel: Don't worry, I know very well what I'm talking about.

Keep killing it PK.

Not according to the guys who named the Millennials, in the book in which they named 'em: [i]Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069[/i] by Strouss and Howe.

Also, the Baby Boomers lasted until around 1962-1964ish. There is no hard or set time length for what a "generation" is. It's an arbitrary grouping of people born within an arbitrary set of dates.

And there is not yet a name for anyone post-2004. The internet generation and the information generation are two names being thrown around, but those are far from being concrete.

lol Patrick really loves to talk about himself at times. Anyway I hope to hear more about what Vinnys and Alex's set up situation is going to be sometime soon.

Even if the villain was horrible racist piece of shit, that doesn't make the game (or even just this image) racist; it all depends on how he's portrayed and how he fits into the greater narrative. The question isn't "Is the villain racist?" because the villain isn't a real person. He can't be "judged" as a human because he doesn't exist.

What we ACTUALLY have is a piece of art, fully formed. Not only that, but this is the first piece of art to be released about the game. This is the thing that they specifically chose to be people's first impression of Far Cry 4.

If we're going to be actually critical, we have to judge it on those merits.

I agree Patrick's doing a great job and his output is only going to get better - I absolutely cannot wait for his Crusader Kings 2 coverage as that game is completely amazing. Well worth watching the Idle Thumbs play through and the story of that magnificent bastard Ragnar if you've never seen CKII.

However I'd hope Vinny is going to do his own thing and not follow the same template so to speak? What works for Patrick works for Patrick I reckon.

In the end though, I think a wider spread of Giant Bomb geographically is a fantastic opportunity for the content to broaden to the gaming community around them. It's all good.

Giant Bomb UK next please! ;-)

A lot more contentious articles this week, huh? I read a number of them, and I'll read some more next week while you're gone. Your thoughts on Vinny ring true. I have no doubt that the man will make cool stuff. But it will be different, and I really loved what was already there, and I'm going to miss his interactions with everyone so much. You've done great on your own, Patrick, but you are primarily a really good news reporter(and... interview reporter??). Vinny has always been cool as a producer and a collaborator, and wishing no offense to Alex, he is no replacement for the combined Brad, Jeff and Drew in terms of "cool people to work together with on something". This would have happened anyway, it's because of family. But I have no idea why you guys felt the need to expand a site popular for the chemistry between a small crew into a franchise of small crews that may or may not also have that chemistry. It's like if Supergiant Games decided that what their focused little indie team with their own voice and style really needed was Greg Kasavin and JenZee leaving to start their own, even smaller studios that don't really work together but sort of call each other once in a while.

Thought Leigh Alexander's article would be about her passionate writing style. I dislike it when she describes single games and "emotional journeys" through them or whatever, but I appreciate it in articles like this about, you know, the feelings you get from playing games(or rather, procrastinating) in general. It was nice. I can certainly see a bit of myself in the way she plays games(or doesn't play games, rather).

The Bulletstorm article sounds like the Ghost Trick/that scifi game on kickstarter thing of solving your own murder. I'm glad the most resonant part of their ideas has lived on even if their game never got to see the light of day, it has proven to be a fun idea. They talk about how it would be the most amazing game ever, but so is every project that never got made. It's a shame the studio has had rotten luck, but like their publishers, I can't take them on their word when they say their game(that sounds like it would be spread very thin))would totally be amazing if I just gave it a shot.

Christian Nutt's article about "roguelikes" is a bit of a bummer to me. Yeah, it's good that gamers get new and exciting experiences every time they turn in, and that developers get to make more stuff more easily and cheaply. But the other side of that coin is that procedurally generated environments can make for way more boring games than a planned experience, where every environment looks the same because they are the same and excessive difficulty is eased by carrying some stuff over into your next life instead of proper balancing. Some roguelike(like-likes) are great, especially ones with a ton of content and good basic gameplay like Spelunky, and they make for good games to watch streams of. But I sorta hope it dies out as a "trend" soon. It's part of the reason I'm excited for Hyper Light Drifter(as far as indie games go), to capture a sense of adventure in the traditional sense rather than a sense of "Going as far as I can, then die and do it again and this time the dog will be in a different spot, just another run".

Last week with John Oliver's take on Tomodachi Life was super funny! Was really surprised by the effort they put into it, did not expect 3D animation.

Kris Ligman finding a representative (in her headcanon, mind) in Phoenix Wright is good for her, I suppose. It's cool to find a character that mirrors you. To my mind, there are a lot of characters who care about others without having sexual relations to someone, especially in stuff aimed at families(One of her criteria was "not aimed at children", but what's Phoenix Wright then, rated M for Mature?). I have no idea about her question, though, how to represent an asexual romance in a game. But it sounds like it would be the most unobtrusive romance subplot ever.

Adam Sessler's article was a great read. I know next to nothing of the man. From my impression, he was some guy at Gamestop with a huge head that Jeff talked with about Bioshock Infinite on camera that one time. I never knew he had such a history, and I'm sad he had such depressing last years. Although when he describes working as not being able to stand any aspect of his job aside from playing the games, I'm glad that he stopped.

The Far Cry 4 cover stuff just reminds me of this article by Shamus Young(about this video by Errant Signal) http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=22737

It talks about how people don't seem to get the point of discussing things like how the game mechanics are in conflict with a game's themes, how they try to reduce it to a "Is this game good or bad?" rather than an interesting discussion for its own sake. Paraphrasing, "it doesn't mean that the developers were racist or it's a bad game, it's just where the most interesting things to talk about are". Personally? I do not think these things are very interesting, but I do feel like people try to make it a "good or bad, is this racist" thing whether they have the impression that it is or not. It does not make for an interesting discussion, it makes for finger pointing("This image is racist!" "You must be a racist for thinking this image is racist, that man isn't white." "This image is clearly homophobic." "Anyone in a pink suit has to be gay now? What a stereotypical view you have of homosexuals."), and I'm never happy when the number of comments on Worth Reading reaches triple digits because people are calling one another out for being sexist or racist or whatever the most divisive topic is about that week.