Demokk

@hurricaneivan29 said:

No offense to anyone, but some adults do need ratings boards as much as children/parents. A lot of people suffer from mild/not extreme mental instability that they are not even aware of (thanks to the stigmatization and total dismissal of mental health in western societies). That is not to say that it should be banned, but don't just think that age is the only thing that defines what kind of effect media can have on different people.

@joshwent Thanks for sharing the interview. I wasn't aware of it. I am glad that they included that option, and that they are open to feedback, but they still contradict themselves a couple of times in that interview.

They say "I don’t think it’s right to just say, “You’re wrong. You’re just looking at it wrong.” That’s not the way to go." at the end, yet they say the exact opposite at the beginning with "But there’s gonna be a lot more to these characters." while they still chose to show that specific part of the demo.

Same with "Like, the first movie was really violent and bloody, and that was controversial. The next tries to [be equally controversial] with a big next step", yet they claim to not do it just for the sake of controversy.

Not to mention the "So almost doing that with the illusion of an assault but then having the game stop you" part. To me that just looks like a cop out, like when someone says something racist and tries to get away with it by saying "It is just a joke".

I am open to them exploring different themes and ideas, but it has to be done with extreme care. This kind of delicate themes should be treated with the audience in mind, worst possible cases and such. Triggering content has the potential to affect someone deeply in a worse manner than those of us who are "mentally stable" in theory.

@spraynardtatum said:

I don't want to start any conspiracy theory type stuff here, but I seriously doubt that showing this scene out to the press was in any way unplanned or not given a second thought. Especially coming from a studio with previous experience. As far as I know the developers are not naive, they most likely knew exactly what kind of reactions and controversy this was going to cause. I would argue that it was for that very same reason that they put it out in the first place.

I entirely agree with you regarding censorship and jumping to conclusions. The game has every right to say what it is trying to say, and we don't know the full story yet. However, I think that there should be a clear warning/indication that this game contains triggering content that may not be right for certain audiences (regardless of age). And that it definitely shouldn't be glorified just because of its "edginess" or because it is somehow "pushing" some sort of arbitrarily defined boundaries.

Thank you, Patrick!

@theacidskull: Betrayal implies that the company even cared about "loyalty" in the first place. As far as I know Capcom never promised anything to anyone. It is the fan base that is assuming that Capcom would have done differently. It is no surprise that companies (especially the big ones) care more about the money.

Like I said, I definitely think it is a self-interested move. It is totally fine to disagree with it and feel something because of it, but shouting to the wind out of anger and emotional impulses is a different thing.

This is exactly the type of reaction that I am criticizing in that post. Savings, money, whatever is a personal thing, and as such it is up to you to figure out how deal with that (whether that means changing your situation, receiving help or trying to get Capcom to listen). However, it doesn't mean that you get to live in your own individual echo chamber or that you should start insulting or attacking other people. There are much better ways of getting companies/people to listen to you, and being angry/offensive is starting on the wrong foot.

By the way, "should not matter to you nor to society" is a perfect example of what I am referring to as being self-centered.

I suggest you research a little bit into the concept of hyper-individualism and related theories. I'll give you some links just as a quick-start:

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hyperindividualism

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

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

Hope this helps make my point clearer.

@frostyryan: @theacidskull: Really liking something, especially something as luxurious as video games, doesn't make you entitled to it. Getting upset and ruining your day (and possibly other people's day too) just because of misplaced expectations and a sense of entitlement isn't helping anyone. Of course, I am not saying that it is a good move at all by Capcom, but then again it is always a matter of business first. Nothing new or unexpected in this industry, and definitely a bad thing.

Change the situation or change your expectations. Let's not be dependent on something as banal as a single piece of media.

Behaving like a self-centered entitled child because we can't have the newest and shiniest toy whenever we want it sure says something about modern society, doesn't it?

Nice post!

I entirely agree on that nobody should be upset. Letting one's emotions control the discussion is one sure way of making it useless and frustrating.

I would change the feminist analysis to something more like representation analysis, or add a few more types of analysis that deal with other types of representation of people. Other genders, sexual orientation, race, and age, just to mention a few, also get misrepresented a lot in media.

As far as "correct" or "wrong" critiques, I would only consider a "wrong" critique if it is not backed up by good arguments, it doesn't matter if they are subjective or not. Saying things like "it should be like this because I say so" doesn't add anything to the conversation. It is a balancing act between objectivity, subjectivity, and context.

In my opinon, art is just a label that means something different to everyone. There is no point in arguing about what art is, what it isn't, is it pornography or not, etc. Media is not mean it is necessarily art, just the same as art not being exclusive to traditional media. The key is its critical analysis and its effect on the society-media-culture cycle. Nothing exists in a vacuum, and even more so nowadays that anything can have an effect on any place and anyone across the world.

@kestrelpi: As a backer who has been pretty satisfied with what they have delivered so far (especially the documentary), I agree with you on most of what you have said on this thread, but to be honest, it is getting quite tiring to hear this "it is going to be so much better, you'll see" rhetoric again and again. I am pretty sure it will be great, but the game has to come out at some point and it still needs to be relevant when it does. People aren't going to wait forever, let alone the fact of how fast this industry evolves and changes.

This looks like the classic ever growing scope problem to me. We all love to go crazy when planning and daydreaming about a project, but the scope needs to be defined and limited early on, especially if you have to answer to so many backers that were told an estimated delivery date even before the project was funded. We, as backers, were never told that this was an experimental project on how much it can be done with crowd-funding, but a definite game project.

I am sure the game will be awesome, but they could have handled communication about the project way better.

First of all think about why you want to learn as this will greatly impact the kind of style that you would benefit the most from. Any martial art or combat sport will help you learn self-defense, but from very different perspectives. Styles can vary a lot, one style of karate can be very different from the next one.

Martial arts (such as Wing Chun, Hung Kuen, Goju-ryu, Uechi-ryu, Tae Kwon do, Hapkido, BJJ, etc...) are much more complete in my opinion, as they offer a holistic approach towards your well-being, not just knowing how to defend yourself physically. Fitness, nutrition, psychology, philosophy, self-control, etc.. A lot of self-development (if you train under the right instructor). They incorporate much more elements like forms, sparring drills, history, ranking systems, etc.

Combat sports or self-defense systems (such as MMA, krav maga, savate, boxing, some kickboxing styles, etc..) on the other hand just focus on technique and exercise. Most of them lack a lot of self-development that, in my opinion, is really important when teaching someone how to potentially injure or kill somebody.

Have in mind that each style focuses on different things. Soft and internal styles like Tai Chi Quan, Aikido or Bagua Zhang are more about redirecting the opponents energy, circular movements, minimum effort and maximum efficiency, and so on. Hard and external styles like Tae Kwon Do, Muay Thai or Hung Kuen focus much more on striking, overpowering, power and agility. Of course that there are a lot of in between styles like Goju-ryu, Hapkido, Uechy-ryu, or Wing Chun, like I said, each style can go pretty deep, so be aware that they vary a lot even from club to club.

All in all feel free to try several of them, find something that you like and have fun! Don't just train to punch, kick or grapple.