Fiyenyaa's forum posts

  • 19 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#1 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@kierkegaard said:

@austin_walker, you added an important voice for labor rights, diversity, and other vital topics to the Giantbomb team, along with an incredible knack for storytelling and analysis. I'll miss your voice immensely, but the VICE job sounds like a dream come true. Build something that matters and enjoy!

This from me too. I really appreciated the conversation about these important things in a videogame context that came from Austin. I hope the other guys and whoever they hire next keep this conversation going.

I'll miss you Austin, you were amazing.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#2 Edited by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@gnatsol said:

Everything about Quiet is awesome. I won't judge, nor am I easily triggered. There's enough of that going around.

Even if Kojima just told everyone she's fanservice, he would still get all of this but like a boss he said fuck it.

And everyone played and praised his game and this subject was left to be forgotten and lost in the shuffle.

He'd still get some criticism if he said it was just fanservice, for sure - some of it hyperbolic, some of it well thought-out, most of it in-between. But he most certainly didn't say "fuck it", he said we'd be ashamed because the reason would be so compelling. It wasn't - at least not to me (and many others).

If you like Quiet 100% how she is, fine. Some of us don't, and there's nothing wrong with saying that.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#3 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@jadegl said:

I don't have a problem with sex, sexuality or female sexuality. That argument kind of makes me laugh when I read it, as though me thinking that Quiet's attire is silly says something about my personal politics or something. Here's the deal. As a woman, I find Quiet's outfit stupid because it's stupid. It's not practical and not even attractive or sexy in it's application. Not only that, but it's the dishonestly that comes with the outfit from Kojima, that I would feel "ashamed" when I found out the real reason for her running around in a bikini. Guess what? I don't feel ashamed, I feel like Kojima would have been better served by saying "I like boobies and butts and I wanted the ladies in my newest game to show theirs off as much as possible." It would have been more honest, because let's face - the reason is ridiculous.

The design is silly. It looks like it was made by someone who has no idea how breasts work and how they feel when a person is active. Also, wearing the bottoms she wears in the environments she may go to, with sand and other annoying things, would lead to some serious... well... issues. Of course, in a series like Metal Gear Solid, no one really considers whether someone, male or female, has issues arising from certain types of underwear, but there are concerns that arise and could detract from the person being an effective soldier and sniper. Even a pair of booty shorts and bra with an underwire would improve the believability immensely. On top of that, it would be just as sexy, if you want to keep the sexy intact. I just, it's so stupid. It's so painfully stupid and stretches my suspension of disbelief, and in a Metal Gear game, that's really saying something.

Another issue is just aesthetics. I think the design is ugly looking. Quiet is beautiful, but the attire is just not eye pleasing to me. It's not that I find it uncomfortable to look at or anything, I just personally find it to be unattractive. It looks to me like someone was given the task of coming up with a sexy soldier and tried too hard. It's like how I view early to mid 90s super hero designs. Too many pockets, too many muscles, to much crap, and it all looked like the people designing it were trying too hard to make a "bad ass" hero. Wolverine was a bad ass and all he needed was jeans, a white shirt and a leather jacket. There is a point where the design overtakes the character you're making, and that is a bad thing. Being a slave to a certain look, in this case a sexy almost naked look, can actually detract from the overall whole of the character. There is a balance to be made, at least to me. I think other Kojima characters have hit that balance well, being sexy, showing a lot of skin, and not feeling like someone was trying to push an envelope.

Bringing up Until Dawn is interesting. Until Dawn, in my view, is aware of what it is. The tone in consistent. It is a schlocky, campy horror movie, and so far it has delivered on that in spades. The interesting thing is, I feel like the violence has been minimal when compared to the rest of what you're doing in the game, it just happens quickly and is quite severe. I like it in spite of the violence. I like the tension and the story and I can stomach the brief moments of gore because it's an interesting experience that isn't trying to sell itself as deeper or more profound. It is what it is.

Kojima has been saying that he is trying to tell more mature tales, but his tone is all over the place. Personally, I find it odd to have stories that include rape, child soldiers, torture and murder, and yet also have cyborg ninjas, vampires, arms that control people and almost totally naked women (and once or twice a dude) running around because, reasons. It's scattershot. Some people dig that, so more power to them. I find it weird to go from dead seriousness one minute to a guy pooping his pants the next, but to each their own. I think that when you try to tell people that this is a serious story, you have to also expect the criticism if you keep in the goofy stuff. I think it takes a deft hand to be able to balance those types of things. I personally don't think Kojima is that good at the balance. I like goofy Kojima, the serious stuff is just not hitting me right and never really has. But I won't begrudge anyone who really likes it. We all have our own likes and dislikes.

Wrapping up, in general I find the outfit stupid, both in appearance and in practicality. I find it pretty much one of the ugliest designs (male or female) in a Metal gear Solid game, and that's saying something. And it is a real shame because I feel like a slight tweak here or there would have saved it completely, retaining the sexiness but also being more aesthetically pleasing. And let's just forget in universe reasons, they're just silly and carry no weight with me. What is the difference, really, between one type of bikini top with another that has an underwire, or a cropped halter top, or the slight difference between underwear? As someone who wears that type of stuff every day, the only difference is that some make more sense than others if you're looking for both comfort and style, or depending on what you will be doing, whether it is running a marathon or sitting at a desk in an office setting. It's pretty silly. It is explained, but that doesn't stop it from being silly. And I'm okay with that. But just don't expect me to not call a silly thing a silly thing.

100% with you on this. I would have a million times more respect for Kojima if he had just been honest about (what I perceive to be the real) reasons behind why Quiet is designed like she is. There are other games that have this level of leering or more - take Dead or Alive as a very obvious example. But when interviewed, people like Itagaki don't try to make some grand point about why the character is like that and how those people who criticise it are so wrong and they'll be ashamed. No, they say "I like tits, I wanted them in my game". I have much more time for that. There is a (fairly big) niche for that, and that's fine. I don't like it, so I'll avoid it where I can and get over it where I can't (example - I am loving MGS V right now; something can have bits that people don't like and still be a great overall package). That's it; I feel like most people who agree would do the same.

I'm think your assessment of Kojima is pretty spot-on as well. It feels like he is a person who doesn't know what editing is. He has an idea, he puts it in the games and it never goes away. And lots of them are really stupid (and I ain't talking about the stupid of "there's a character who has one trait; he shits himself all the time", I'm talking the stupid of "let me tell you about the Patriots for 15 minutes")

Here's the thing I don't get about these conversations though. There are people here and elsewhere who seem to take criticism of something as an attack on them or their favourite games. Maybe I'm pissing in the wind here, but do we have to take everything so personally? If you think the story of MGS is a masterpiece - I disagree but that's fine. If you think Quiet is an example of an amazing character with an amazing design - I disagree but that's fine. Why are we getting so "if you don't agree then I'm going to have to make some weird pseudo-assertion about you/your beliefs"? People have different tastes and beliefs, and that's fine. I think it's fine to be uncomfortable by the way Quiet looks, it's fine to love it, it's fine to think it's stupid, it's fine to say it's an example of the male gaze in design, it's fine to think it's empowering, it's fine to just simply not care for it.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#4 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@shinluis: Dude, the greatsword in Dark Souls is pretty much the same model as the greatsword in Dark Souls 2. Gigantic weapons are par for the course in all the Souls games.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#5 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@karkarov: "You can't critique it because it doesn't conform to your idea of inclusion and social equality."

Dude. You cannot critique for this reason? Cannot? Really?

That article you linked to is about how discourse is being shut down by people overreacting to things (to grossly simplify). And before you link that, you say something cannot be discussed because it's subjective? That sounds like you have an extremely weak argument to me, I'm sorry to say. Why does saying "I don't like this thing about a game" make it seem to you that they are placing their feeling above the creators right to make the work to you?

I think most people are not as extreme in their position as you think they are. I am a pretty standard social liberal in most ways. So here's a quick video game example. I see Dead or Alive and I think "man that looks sleazy!". I say to my freinds "what's up with that sleazy game, right?". At no point am I infringing the right of Team Ninja to make it (beyond the scope of my opinions to influence my friends/people who happen to see/hear my opinion expressed), and nor would I ever want to.

You want the creative process to be sacrosanct? Good. So do I. But I also want criticism to be sacrosanct. In an ideal world, people should be able to make whatever they want to, and everyone else should be able to say whatever they want to about it.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#6 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@itssexytime: So you don't like the current state of a particular slice of the games media? I guarantee you there are other outlets out there that will cater to the way you want to be given news.

As for those sites you've mentioned; as someone for whom these issues are important, I am so glad they exist. You say 99% of gamers don't care about social issues in gaming - there is no way you can prove that. The group of people I play games with online is mainly people who do care, and a few who are ambivalent; to say 99% of people don't care is not reflective of my experience. I won't say my anecdotal experience proves anything explicitly, but it does make a dent in your idea that 99% of gamers think as you do.

These sites that talk about social issues - there's a reason they are big, there's a reason they get read, there's a reason they are profitable businesses. There is absolutely an audience out there for this content.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#7 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@mano521: You don't get to choose what people are offended over. People can joke about what they want to, and people can get offended about what they want to. That's it really.

Now personally, I was one of those who were pretty disappointed about GBs new hires - I won't go over that whole debate again because it's been talked about an awful lot, but I must say Dan has been a lovely surprise. I like that's he's optimistic (although I think it can maybe be a little crazy when you're playing a really bad game like that rails shooter from the other day), I like his infectious laughter, I even like that he's so immensely ignorant about some things (how did he grow to be in his 30s with the diet he's had?); it gives him a sort of guileless charm. I've been watching his videos where he plays games with his dad; love them.

I will say that joke about deporting football fans makes me think he probably could stand to think a little harder about what he says.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#8 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@jazz said:

No Caption Provided
  • After a wee bit I went into DOTA2 with the idea of picking up where I left off with the Agility heroes.
  • Funny to note, it's been a week but I still haven't played against people yet...don't think it would be fair to the rest of the team. Nor have I played all the heroes.
  • Started with Medusa. I liked some of her stuff - her mana snake thing is cool but too tanky for my liking. Slow I guess.
  • Naga Siren: A beautiful model and great fun to play..if I knew what I was doing. I can imagine her scream would set up well with Tide.
  • Mirana: Meh...giant meh.
  • Lone Druid: Items on the bear? What madness is this? He's cool..I seem to like playing characters that have extra..erm...characters? Which brings us to:
  • Phantom Lancer - I enjoyed myself so much with this guy I played him 3 times in a row. Once you have all your abilities up and attack speed up..good luck stopping this guy. By the end my illusions were killing the bots by themselves. Oh and then there's the vanish....
  • Necrophos - kinda cool I guess. His aura slows/stops regen which is nice and he has heals..pretty tanky but slow. The hook stun is great.
  • Razor - Boring but effective. Press Q to farm with not much movement needed.

  • I used bottles a lot more today - allowing you to stay in lane longer is always a good thing.
  • How do you level items? Diffusal blade (apparently a must have for PL) could be idea how.

- I wouldn't hold yourself to "playing all heroes" as a precursor to playing with others. I played a grand total of two or three bot-games when I dived into matchmaking (albeit with a team of similarly-skilled people), so I think you've already done far more preparation than many have.

- Medusa: she's very much the definition of a carry. She's the hero that'll win the 60-90 minute games if she gets good farm; with good farm she can destroy an enemy team pretty much single handedly.

- Naga is a great character; she can support or carry, and her ultimate is very, very useful. Having said that; her ultimate is also capable of ruining pretty much any good play you can think of; it works well to set up a Tide ultimate, but if the Tide uses it a little too soon; the ulti just did a fat lot of nothing. Communication and good timing are key to using that song right.

- Mirana - funny you don't like her because she's up there as one of the most-picked heroes in the pro-scene right now (or at least, that's my understanding as someone who barely follows the pro-scene). Her arrow is a really great long-ranged stun, her ultimate is super useful for escapes or for setting up plays (ganking and teamfights), her leap is an excellent escape/mobility skill, and her starfall gives you extra damage. She starts off fragile and with pretty low base damage, but she's a really strong hero.

- Lone Druid I find really complicated and counter intuitive. Apparently you're supposed to put the fun items on the bear. Maybe that's true, but I don't like that one bit. Having said that, playing against a Lone Druid who knows his stuff; terrifying. Truly terrifying.

- Phantom Lancer is another super-carry guy; with enough farm he can almost solo a whole team too (although funnily enough Medusa is a good counter to him because of split-shot making short work of his illusions).

- I don't play Necrophos much but he's cool. People have an annoying habit of building a Dagon on him which allows him to take a big chunk of your health off then use his ultimate to finish you off more-or-less instantly. It's gimmicky, but it works well if you're snowballing ahead.

- Razor is pretty great, and has the amazing benefit of being able to make an enemy right-click damage hero completely ineffective with his damage drain ability. I've not played him much though.

- Bottles are awesome, but tend to be given to one, *maybe* 2 players on a team. The reason is because you can refill them with runes. The classic bottle carrier is a mid hero who has sight on at least one of the rune spots (from wards), and can use their bottle charges fairly freely because every 2 minutes a new run comes along and when they pick it up, it goes in their bottle and with it refills all 3 charges. This is contingent on the other team letting you do this of course.

- Levelled items (Diffusal Blade is one (has level 1 and 2 variants), as are Necronomicon (Level 1, 2, and 3 variants) and Dagon (goes from level 1 to level 5)) are upgraded by buying the recipe for that item. For example; a Diffusal Blade level 1 is built from 2 blades of alacrity, a robe of the magi, and a diffusal blade recipe. If you buy another diffusal blade recipe, it'll upgrade to level 2.

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#9 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

With regards to jungling, and when to do it;

So I've mentioned before, the classic laning setup at the beginning of a game is 2 safelane, 1 middle, 2 offlane. However, there are heroes who excel at being on the offlane (or more rarely the safelane) on their own without needing another hero to keep them safe (they tend to be called "offlaners"). This means your 5th hero can either be on the safelane (which becomes a "trilane" as there are three heroes on it) - but this is risky because the experience is shared between 3 heroes instead of 2 and levelling will become very slow - risking an underlevelled team. So, there are some heroes who can (with the right build) start out in the jungle at level 1, making the lanes 2 on safelane, 1 on middle, 1 on offlane, 1 in jungle.

A few heroes who can do this fairly well; Enchantress (she has a skill which allows her to take over an enemy or neutral creep, allowing it to tank and do damage for her in the jungle), Enigma (he can turn an enemy or neutral creep into 3 allied creeps, fighting for him), Lifestealer (he has an excellent lifestealing (go figure) skill which gives him sustainability in the jungle), Chen (has a similar skill to Enchantress, with similar advantages), Ursa (his fury swipes skill allows him to kick out a lot of damage, and people tend to build lifestealing items on him very quickly), Axe (he has a skill that gives him a chance to do a high-damage attack every time he is attacked). A good first buy for melee junglers who are actually fighting the neutral creeps is a stout shield, and a good first item on almost any jungler (at least ones that are trying to carry) is a Hand of Midas (this item can be used every 90 seconds to turn an enemy or neutral creep into 190 gold and 4x experience for you).

In essence, the jungle can be used to attempt to get more farm for more heroes, although it does require you to be wary of people ganking in your jungle, as well as having a good offlaner who can survive 2-3 enemy heroes on their lane. Also, the jungle can be used late-game for heroes to just get a bit of farm when the lanes aren't looking safe (example; they are too pushed out and enemy heroes are alive).

Avatar image for fiyenyaa
#10 Posted by Fiyenyaa (82 posts) -

@jazz: Welp, I was gonna add you on steam so I could say "hey, if you want any pointers then feel free to ask" but I searched for "jazzy_p" and found some guy in America who hasn't played Dota for a year, so I dunno what's going on there.
If you want me to say "hey, if you want any pointers then feel free to ask" then you can add "Fiyenyaa" and I'll be happy to oblige.

  • 19 results
  • 1
  • 2