Wednesday, April 22, 2015

catching a killer



So this happened again. I usually expect better from PS lifestyle. They usually have better writers who generally speak with more common sense and don't fall into this weird resentful trap that a lot of journalism is turning into. Heck they even used to have a series that delved into criticizing other outlets for it, and informing the viewer on how things worked from the journalistic end to explain mindsets, goals, and methods of internet journalism. To be fair, I don't recognize that writer and maybe that's the problem, a new staff guy that got rejected from Kotaku or Polygon (the sort of site you'd expect this junk from). However lets not make it about them so much as this issue I've had (and probably stated somewhere in a smaller piece) about a small portion of hatred towards the core mechanics of a genre. You know, like calling action heroes murders because they... do actiony violent stuff. Yeah its kind of like complaining that a race is fast, or that carnivores aren't vegans, or that ice cream is cold.

Now often I've been a little critical of some of the crap that comes out of Naughty Dog's PR area, like their resentful tone on imagination, or their terrible claims on framerate (which look more like a PR lie to sell you a remaster and then turn around and claim its okay again to do 30fps when they need to sell you on Uncharted 4's graphics). However they aren't all that bad, and sometimes they say something brilliant like even giving this terrible article an answer ahead of time. I really appreciate them attempting to silence the naysayers, but it would appear some just don't get it. Back then I wrote this in response.

"Finally, its about time this response was given from a developer. I'm really tired of the argument that games are somehow primitive or have automatically terrible stories because of "mass murder" gameplay. Its a part of the conflict and fun that comes with a shooter, that's all there really needs to be to it. Asking for that to stop or rework itself is like asking that sports games can only be playayable in sync with events, and we might as well kill and bury turn based games because those certainly don't tie in with stories or realism. Sometimes game rules or fun traditions set up silly little premises that go unanswered, but that's just fine since they have a fun purpose or mechanical significance within their existence."

 And now it looks like this in the recent article:

"Ugh, I will never understand this sort of topic. Even if it were not for the self-defense argument, it still doesn't matter that much. Its a game based on fun summer blockbuster style story presence. Its mechanical drive is better with you killing a small army because that's what 3rd person shooters are good at, and it kind of feels right with the story being that of an action adventure flick. You don't stop a JRPG to complain that the story is void just because time has this weird thing of stopping for turns during combat, so why are some shooters being pegged down because they *gasp* have lots of shooting in them? You can sit there and try to say "but the story must include EVERYTHING to be good" but at the end of the day there's a reason Uncharted actually does great. It strikes a perfect balance of great gameplay, a fun story, and an adventure many people can come to appreciate. That's not to say the stories are flawless, but this is not one of their primary problems so much as underdeveloped villains, and smaller plot holes."


Oh and of course that well established self-defense argument posted by another (not me):


"People who argue that are the flawed ones. In DF drake is stranded on an island with crazy pirates. You never in the entire game initiate combat. In fact every encounter in that game seems to be wave defense . In the second Drake and flying don't kill the guards but simply put them to sleep. Drake and sully are ambushed in borneo and are forced to get outta there by force.. hell in 3 they Brawl their way outta the bar.. instead of going guns blazing. When drake fights the pirates he uses non lethal methods up until you get to the open area and again are put into wave defense . Drake isn't a blood thirsty killer neither is joel from the last of us. Kratos on the other hand is."
...but you're still a monster Jason, because the writing says so to be edgy
The thing is while the self-defense argument is a good one and one that is almost always present in games (with AI that will kill you or fail you if you don't react well to it), it shouldn't be the necessary example. Of course its going to be self-defense, but that's because the game needs to set it up so that you mechanically have an obstacle to conquer. Its for the game, its for the fun, its for basic mechanics like resource management and conflict. Its to establish a conflict. Do you really want to play a game where every single kill is contextualized with the guy having a major background, family, and then a therapy session for your character as he's having trauma effects? Does every shooter suddenly need that now? Does development really need to focus on the life of every virtual guy it makes and worry about overspending their already bloated budgets there rather than gameplay? No!While certain strides in that area are appreciated from the nemesis system in Shadows of Mordor, to the horror segments of MGS3 or Spec ops, its ultimately something that would be tiresome and unwanted in every action game. It simply doesn't fit for every shooter out there, or even the narrative. Its not even desired in other mediums. Did we need Indiana Jones to stop after sword fighter scene and cry about the possible family he just effected, or pondered if that guy had the solution to cancer if he had lived? No, we just laughed at the funny anti-climax of the scene and enjoyed an action flick which would become known as a classic. That's something these preachy drama queens can't seem to get about the entertainment industry. They seem to lack a fundamental understanding of the conflict, plots, and proven fun formulas. Unfortunately that and a series that has earned over 10 million dollars isn't enough though. Because its commited the crime of being fun and popular its holding back the medium. Read this quote if you can stomach it....

"Knowing the deeply flawed character that Nathan Drake is makes his role as a heroic symbol for Sony incredibly hypocritical. Maybe even damaging to the medium as a whole, for this is a character that’s supposed to appeal to a broad audience and is even one that many new to games encounter first. Many other games, and specifically shooters, have much smarter stories than Uncharted. Heck, even Naughty Dog’s own The Last of Us hinges on its main character being a killer. The reason that game works so well is that its gameplay is tied to its narrative in a way that makes you empathize with the main character, but know that what he does isn’t necessarily morally right. It’s a game that cares a lot about what you do in it.

Uncharted though, doesn’t seem to care at all, and that is a problem if you want to see game stories mature and grow to resonate with more people. Characters like Drake are reminiscent of what games were, when they were not expected to be much more than entertaining toys where story was secondary to fun, visceral experiences. A lot has changed since then and it’s going to take much better icons than Drake to keep pushing forward."

Yeah I know, I feel this way to

Oh and keep in mind this came out of a series known as "inventing an icon". Yeah, sounds more like this guy is obsessed with fear mongering around it instead of covering why its a good icon. Uncharted by its very existence is not holding back or damaging anything, its instead giving us another choice. People like it because its a damn good choice to make. People buy it because they love it for what it is. It keeps them entertained, it relieves them of stress, it has got people who aren't even gamers engaged in a great adventure, and it has been one of the few examples of a massive Triple A developer and publisher keeping high enough quality that they don't have an angry mob waiting for them (even if I am quite critical of ND personally). How the hell is it holding games back? I guess by this logic Terminator 2 stopped movies because it didn't emotionally touch people and elevate the medium? On no wait, we've enjoyed years and years of movies and have had quite a few masterpieces since its time. It didn't need to pander to anyone's pretentious idea of forced morals and over-emotional story segments. You want to focus on something that is actually holding gaming back through? Greed, terrible business decisions, a struggling field of reporters who still barely hold a basic grasp of ethics, and those that are harassing creators into censorship. Those are problems that cripple games and fans of all kinds, and generally hurt the medium going forward. Instead of any of those problems being addressed, this guy is hating on fun because apparently its not good enough to just settle there.

Its pretentious progressive babble without a real goal or direction. I'll give a pleasant direction, actually multiple directions: Gaming as it is. Where there are many different games with many different goals, choices, and messages. Gaming where mechanics give you purpose, and a story sits besides you to amuse you in between the fun. Communities and people of all different types coming together to find a solution in a cryptic horror game puzzle, or to help you figure out what that weird dude in Dark Souls actually meant. A place where when real life stressed you out, you can safely excuse yourself for a little bit and entertain yourself in a different world with different rules and results. People are even making it their sports and TV type entertainment now. That doesn't need to be taken away and forced to be bottled up in some hyper realistic drama about why killing people is wrong in an overblown PSA message, or turn every light hearted action romp into a dramatic Last of Us type "violence is so serious that our wallpapers are in black & white" scenario. If you do want Last of Us, great that's out there and you seem to love it. Now leave Uncharted alone because a ton of people also love that, and unlike some people they seem to have a basic understand of telling fact from fiction and can tolerate a bunch of pixel people dying without needing immediate realistic story context.

I want to think that this year will be amazing with so many potentially impressive titles of all kinds, but when this stuff happens its just... depressing. Its not just this one person I'm upset with, but rather its one of a growing minority that is strangely coming in and demanding change where it doesn't belong and it doesn't even make much sense. For example a solution is never actually addressed, its instead just convictions that this game is secretly terrible for being a more light hearted action adventure. I'm really just sick and tired of the blind progressives at this point, and its worrying that they're into everything from loud vocal press sites to being on the actual writing team and screwing up stuff by worrying about a morals over quality.

This is the kind of thing that makes me say stuff like I did for awesomenauts, sly cooper, or R&C where I talk about how good it is just to have a shameless fun and awesome gamey experience. Its because of guys that talk or make games with this progressive holier than thou mindset that resents the very act of gaming and treats it like a toy someone grows out of. I wouldn't put Uncharted within the same tier as shamelessly gamey fun stuff, but its still kind of around that area and it clearly doesn't need that much changing when so many people adore it, and yet this person actually equates it with toys. I don't force it to change and I love that big cinematic but dumb fun games exist, I just personally prefer more sillier stuff. I wouldn't want somebody to force them away, or to sit there wag their finger at it and make up silly nonsense about how its holding back gaming by being... well, a game. Uncharted still puts a smile on peoples faces. Its aiming high with that big blockbuster mark and the audience says it hits it every time, and contrary to this article its obviously doing well. So I say to Naughty Dog and Uncharted... thanks for providing a lot of entertainment, not just to me, but to everyone. Don't let critics like this hold you back from producing high quality and exciting content. You don't need to explain why Drake kills, those with common sense know enough and don't expect you to stop to mourn generic enemy #34. As for PS lifestyle... well it could be worse; this guy could be working on a Nintendo site!

Holding back gaming since 1985
So with all that venting out of the way, I guess we can leave on a good note. Its earth day and I guess it'd be nice to show off a funny video of a Pangolin for an ending.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Too good for fun

Before I even start, I know in some capacity this article is either silly, or ironically getting worked up in semantics as a resp...