LackingSaint's forum posts

#1 Edited by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

Analysis, not abject lecturing. We need more Louis Theroux-types in games journalism, more people who can study a subject in-depth without deciding to make it blatantly obvious where their personal bias lies. We can say "Well journalists deserve an opinion" and that's totally right, but the huge percentage of personality-driven journalistic articles are just "Hey I have an opinion, here's a few extremely loose examples that justify that opinion". I don't want soulless content where people discuss topics they don't care about, and i'm not saying we should surgically remove any kind of personal bias. But for god's sake, enough with the soapbox journalism!

On a smaller note, basic integrity. Actual journalists referring to the Zoe Quinn story with "What does it matter if she slept with the people who review and feature her game?" freak me out; people blatantly not caring about journalistic ethics is incredibly unhealthy for the industry.

#2 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

@juno500 said:

@lackingsaint said:

Regardless of whether all of this is completely true, the complete radio-silence by the gaming press, especially after the huge fuss that was made of the Max Temkin accusations, seems kind of spooky to me.

Maybe I missed it but I didn't see any fuss from the gaming press about Max Temkin when he was accused.

Looking back over the post, that statement was definitely not written properly; I was more talking about the community outcry about it. The vast majority of people, as far as I saw, were able to take the victim's word for it and really quickly came to damn Temkin. At the very least, I don't remember there being this vocal stance by influential people in the industry about him not being in any kind of wrong. Honestly though, the comparisons to the Temkin situation are kind of weird and sketchy and i'd hope not to dwell on it.

#3 Edited by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

This has all gotten very out of control very quickly, and I was really hoping this would be a space to talk about this in a semi-serious respect.

Yesterday, an ex-boyfriend of game developer Zoe Quinn (Depressiong Quest, Jazzpunk) posted a long diatribe which revealed that she had cheated on him with five separate men, many of whom work without the games industry. As a tl;dr to the tl;dr, lengthy chat-logs were posted and the ex spelled out exactly what happened over the months; Zoe slept with games press, including her own boss, while convincing him that he was paranoid and going insane. Now obviously there's only so much stake you can put in the post, but the quantity and quality of what was shown (and Quinn's resulting radio-silence) seemed pretty damning that there was some foul-play on her part, and it brought into question her involvement with the games media.

Skip forward, and another game developer comes out on twitter claiming that he was sexually harassed by Quinn at a friend's wedding. Minutes later, Phil Fish chimes in and completely unloads on the guy, calling him a little shit among other things, and eventually decrying the gamer demographic as a whole. (Yes, among the first to favourite Fish's tweets were one of the journos accused of sleeping with Quinn).

Regardless of whether all of this is completely true, the complete radio-silence by the gaming press, especially after the huge fuss that was made of the Max Temkin accusations, seems kind of spooky to me. It also seems to speak to a bit of an ideological disconnect that people like Phil Fish are now attacking people who are getting up and arms about these allegations; now apparently it's the people in the games industry taking accusations of sexual harassment TOO seriously that makes the community so intolerable? When mere months ago we were decrying people being too ready to shrug this stuff off? I'd love to hear thoughts on this, being someone who has really just been taken aback by the whole thing.

EDIT: In case this thread becomes something much larger, can I please underline that I don't have an agenda here, I just feel like this whole thing has lead to a discussion really worth having, and it's disconcerting that nobody is having it. That said, please don't be antagonistic in this thread and ruin the potential for dialogue.

#4 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

Shadow of the Colossus.

#5 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

I know Silent Hill has been a consistent disappointment for a long time.. but I can't help but be insanely excited about this.

#6 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

That'd be a pretty insane roundabout way of them making a Mass Effect movie, but sadly I don't think that's gonna be the case. More than likely the two are just approaching similar ideas of mankind discovering a way to "warp" through the galaxy and traverse great distances through space.

#7 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

This one's pretty out-there because it's not neccesarily "story-driven", but X-COM: Enemy Unknown? The personal narrative you build as your units progress and specialize, and the heartbreak when they suddenly die from some new threat, is pretty engrossing in much the same way as something like The Walking Dead.

The Stanley Parable could be a fun one for you both to play. It won't take you more than a couple hours but it's pretty funny!

#8 Edited by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

@nervecenter said:

I'm still confused as to why this story was realized as a video game if this is how Sony continues to celebrate it. Not to mention the critical tidal wave of praise for absolutely everything but the gameplay. Oh, and the movie is going to be a direct adaptation of Joel and Ellie's story.

I'm a little worried that the part of the industry that's trying so hard to be mature is also, in doing so, trying very hard to be like movies, in form as well as storytelling. Absolutely baffling.

There are also live performances of video-game and film soundtracks. Games are an all-encompassing medium that bring all sorts of arts together; just as it's fine to celebrate great art or music in a film, there's nothing wrong with celebrating good writing or performance in a game.

#9 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

Kentucky Route Zero is probably one of the best-written video-games i've ever played, and that really comes through with how it handles the player's emotions. Those heartfelt and bittersweet moments REALLY sneak up on you.

#10 Posted by LackingSaint (1785 posts) -

Saved Sarah from the trailer park.

Did not steal from Arvo.

Crawled under the door. (This was apparently a meaningful choice?)

Hugged the baby. (...and this?)

Shot Rebecca.

Man, what a disappointing episode. While the ending was certainly tense and scenes like convincing Sarah at the trailer park were pretty emotionally-stirring, I think overall the game's writing has suffered tremendously as the season has gone on. Beginning with a complete invalidation of the only choice in the entirety of Episode 3 that mattered at all, and then progressing into a meandering conversation about how Rebecca is tired, I kind of already had a bad taste in my mouth. But the kicker had to be the point-blank sudden death of Nick; Nick, who had not one but TWO SEPARATE "IMPORTANT" DECISIONS ABOUT WHETHER HE GOT TO SURVIVE OR NOT, who ended up getting about two scenes of conversation in four episodes, just dead. I thought Nick was interesting, and there were so many things they could've done to make me care about his death. But no, I just had his body thrown in a chain-link fence because they were too lazy to write in an ending scene for a character that could have died earlier in the game. It brings to mind the immediate death of Alvin in episode 3, another storytelling cop-out that completely invalidated your character's actions for the sake of less development time (luckily Alvin died in episode two for me, meaning I didn't have my survival choices be blatantly transparent three times in a row).

The scene at the trailer park made little sense, with the apparent distraction of the honking truck (something an entire scene is based around) just sort of disappearing to facilitate a tense scene, though the interaction with Sarah was a highlight, and signaled the beginning of a much more consistent latter half of the episode; though I really wish we were farther along in character development by the penultimate episode, it was nice to see a little more of the interactions between Luke, Jane, Mike and Bonnie. The Arvo choice was interesting in its parallels with Season 1 Episode 2's ending, though it has its own problems i'll get to later. Finally, the ending was very well-presented, a lot of important moments thrown together to build a very natural but solid conclusion. This was all slightly dampened by the realization that Jane, who had already been disturbingly similar to Molly in both her character motivations and basic traits ("i'm a hardened independent woman who used to take care of her sister but eventually had to leave as forces beyond my control meant I couldn't protect her anymore"), was going to be given the exact same Farewell treatment that Molly got in last season's Episode 4. This frankly just came off as lazy writing, maybe an attempt at drawing parallels but mostly just felt like an "oh this again" moment that took me out of the experience. I'll then throw in how the Arvo choice played out as the other main thing that bugged me with the ending; why was he yelling at me for stealing supplies when I explicitly said I wouldn't steal supplies? You guessed correctly, my choices were invalidated yet again! Turns out no matter what you decide in this "hard choice", Jane steals the supplies and pisses off the bandits. It makes me nervous that the final choice, Shooting Rebecca, will also be completely meaningless to the ending. Considering the streak TellTale has been on lately with this season, I wouldn't at all be surprised if it had absolutely no impact on Episode 5.

Unless they really pull it out with Episode 5, I think i'm done with The Walking Dead Games after this. That really bums me out because I enjoyed the first season tremendously, but too much of this season has felt like aimless, completely unsatisfying busywork. I don't care about characters dying when you haven't let me have more than one damn character-building conversation with them. I don't care about my choices when, without fail, you immediately resolve them to a single "correct" answer. I care about having a goal to strive for, and characters to connect with, and seeing the hope I have slowly get slashed and gnawed at. The Walking Dead Season 2, so far, has had no interest in inspiring the hope that's actually needed to be upset when things don't work out.