Gee_rad's forum posts

  • 27 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
#1 Edited by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

@mrgtd said:

Man, this "WHY IS BIOSHOCK INFINITE A SHOOTER" thing irritates me. BioShock Infinite HAS to be a shooter. That's the best way to convey the setting. Columbia is a dangerous, dark, violent place. If the entire game was just exploring the city without incident, that would not be true to the story. Comstock is a dangerous, violent man. Booker DeWitt is a dangerous, violent man who has committed horrific atrocities in his past and this is his last ditch effort to save himself. There is no other way for anybody or anywhere in the game to be.

I disagree with your premise that only shooters can convey danger and violence. I disagree with the implication that conveying danger and violence are BioShock Infinite's primary goal. I especially disagree with the false dichotomy that the game can only be either a shooter or "exploring the city without incident". (And for that matter, "exploring the city without incident" would be true to the story, it would just be true to a different story.)

I don't have a problem with the fact that BioShock Infinite is a shooter per se; my issue is that it is most of the time a mediocre, mostly-linear shooter, albeit one with outstanding art direction. It adds a couple of gimmicky mechanics that seem cool at first glance but add little depth. And, as BioShock nodded toward objectivism without having a great deal to say about it, BioShock Infinite invokes American exceptionalism and racism only to say very little of substance, and in a ham-fisted way at that.

For all that, I don't hate BioShock Infinite. I think it's okay. But the first hour or so, when it seemed to be trying for something more, that was the part of it I most enjoyed.

#2 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

@shingro said:

Yep, exactly this. I respect that everyone has different perspectives on things, but the wierdness of people who fought for 'Games as art!' and 'Games as safe escapism!' Immediately turn around to deny games artistic privilege, and decry based on unproven 'effects on society as a whole.'

The difference? People in the US are comfortable with violence and uncomfortable with sex.

So all it needs is a moral wrapper and it goes down easy as pie.

I'll be very interested in @patrickklepek's opinions on whole matter in 5-7 years. Personally I think feminism is doing itself great harm in attaching to a cause with no good 'end game.' Betting against sexual fantasy being included in any media (especially new media) is a very very bad bet.

We're humans, and we have dark and twisted desires, and we'll always want a safe (often fictional) space we can explore our human darkness. Breaking bad, games of thrones, walking dead. Most of us (ESPECIALLY @patrickklepek) are familiar with that drive.

That is always going to happen. Prior mediums have been imperfect for that, and by contrast games are exactly perfect for that.

So strap in everyone, we're going to see games do things that'll make us faint before our lives end. The world will steadfastly refuse to end, and everything's going to be alright.

No one is making the argument that there should not be any sexual fantasy or sex or sexuality in video games, not @patrickklepek, not Anita Sarkeesian, not anyone, except maybe Fox News.

The issue is not that some women in some games are portrayed as mere sexual objects or thinly characterized romantic interests; the issue is that most of the women in most games are. (Yes, of course there are exceptions, but they're, well, exceptions.) Individually, these characters are (in most cases) defensible, though not exactly laudable; collectively, they are problematic.

This is not an issue unique to games by any stretch of the imagination: in comics, the overwhelming majority of female superheroes have large breasts and skimpy outfits; in movies, there's something called the Bechdel test:

1) Does it have at least two women in it

2) who talk to each other

3) about something other than a man.

Only a relatively small number of movies pass that test, whereas if you apply an analogous test about men, nearly all of them pass.

This is not about censorship or removing artistic privilege. The best response to speech you don't like is more speech. If you don't like how women are portrayed in video games, write an article. If you don't like that article, write a comment. If you don't like that comment, reply to it. Pointing to something and saying "This is wrong!" isn't censorship: it's the opposite.

This isn't about taking away people's freedom to say what they will; it's about reminding them that while they have the freedom to say anything they like, they also have the responsibility to carefully consider what they are saying when they create works with complicated, interesting, human male characters and cardboard cutout female characters.

#3 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

@Baconbot: @Baconbot said:

@Godlyawesomeguy said:

I want the sequel to be named Saints Row The Third- II.

Needs a subtitle too.

Saints Row: The Third II: Electric Boogaloo

#4 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

@Megasoum said:

@Brighty said:

@Megasoum said:

How about clicking on the spellcheck in Word? Or you know...reading your article before putting them up? It's not like you are writting a 1000 pages long book.

Jesus Christ man, stop being such a condescending dick. I'm sorry you're bitter and jaded at the world around you, but manifesting that teenage angst and lashing out over the internet over typos on a news article won't solve anything. All it does is just make you look even more pathetic. The delicious irony of it all is that there are nearly half a dozen grammatical mistakes in your three sentences alone that are complaining about there being grammatical mistakes.

Anyway Patrick, keep up the good work.

Wow really? lol... Who's condescending and "lashing out" here?

Did I do something to you in the past that I might have forgotten? I killed one of you puppy or something? Wow wtf...

Dear Megasoum,

I respectfully request that you stop being such a jerk. Thank you.

Yours truly,

Gee_rad

#5 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

I've often thought it would be interesting to rate games as dollar amounts, because there are a lot of games I wouldn't want to pay $60 for, but might be worthwhile at $15. It might not be a good rating system, but it'd be interesting.
 
From best to worst:
no score
Buy/Rent/Skip
letter grade
integers or half-integers out of 5 or 10 where the entire scale is used
integers or half-integers out of 5 or 10 where nothing gets below a 50%.
movies ("On a scale of Gigli to Citizen Kane, I give it an Empire Strikes Back.")
adjectives (e.g., "joyous" [Katamari Damacy], "surreal" [Deadly Premonition], "adjectival" [Super Scribblenauts] )
Start To Crate
nominally out of 10, but nothing scores higher than 3 (except for Shaq-Fu)
any real number
any complex number
2d6-2
integers out of 100

#6 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -
@MikeinSC:  What makes you say Kagan should recuse but won't? First of all, she has not been shy at all about recusing herself in cases where she should: she has recused from all cases where she has been in any way involved as White House Counsel. However, I don't think there's any reason she needs to recuse from this case. Although she was in that position while this bill was being created, she was not involved with the bill. In fact, the bill wasn't even written by the White House directly. Obama pushed for Congress to pass a healthcare bill, and he was involved in some of the negotiations, but Congress wrote the bill, not Obama, and certainly not Kagan. I understand that you'd prefer she not get a vote because she's likely to vote to uphold the bill, but arguing that she should recuse is a big stretch. Besides, the absolute worst outcome of this case is that the Supreme Court votes 4-4 (which would uphold whatever the Court of Appeals rules).
#7 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -
@K9:  I think you don't realize the number of web games there are. There are approximately twice as many flash games on Newgrounds as there are for all consoles since the NES combined ( source). Web games would ALSO include Flash games not on Newgrounds, Java games, AJAX/CGI games (such as die2nite or Neptune's Pride), Facebook games, etc.
 
Secondly, while there is no shortage of bad console or PC games, web games have a lower barrier to entry and consequently a lower signal:noise ratio.
 
Third, the worst of the web games are far more derivative, shorter, and just generally poorer quality than bad console or PC games.
 
Fourth, bad console/PC games are usually still notable. For one thing, a team of people spent a lot of time working on it and it cost some publisher a lot of money. For another, it gets written about. Velvet Assassin gets written about. ET gets written about. Epic Mickey gets written about. Even Power Gig gets written about. The vast majority of the stuff on Newgrounds has no impact whatsoever on the industry or indeed anybody but the creator, some of his friends, and a subset of the Newgrounds community.
 
I think that's a pretty good case for not allowing every single web game.
 
On the other hand, there is a lot of good/important stuff happening in web gaming, like Canabalt; I hate Farmville, but it's important because it made tons of money and it's affecting the gaming industry. Neptune's Pride has gotten write-ups from the likes of PC Gamer and Rock Paper Shotgun. I think those games probably SHOULD be included on Giant Bomb.

While I understand the desire for a more precise set of guidelines/rules (especially since it's easier to remove them than to add them later), I think even a minimal policy on web games being notable MIGHT be good enough. As long as it's clear that the list of web games isn't intended to be complete (and therefore nobody should attempt to add every game on Newgrounds), most of the crap web games will be excluded by the simple fact that no Giant Bomber knows or cares about them.
#8 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -
@luciano34: 
I think you are asking what "no 'I' in 'team'" means. "There's no 'I' in 'team' " is a common saying (particularly in sports). It means that you should do what's best for your team, even if it means you don't get as much individual glory. For example, in basketball, if you have a teammate who is wide open, you should pass him the ball and let him shoot, even though that means he gets credit for making the basket and you don't.
#9 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

I think the more important question than ghost nudity is ghost selective solidity. Ghosts can go through walls. But they still walk on the floor or sit on chairs. Are their butts/feet more solid than the rest of them?

#10 Posted by Gee_rad (61 posts) -

I hate teasers like this that don't tell you anything. Movies do that all the time to try to get viral marketing. That said, I'm curious to know what 5th Cell's twist on it is. I don't see them making a generic shooter.

  • 27 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3