• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Feminist Frequency: Deus Ex: Mankind Divided Review

Lime

Member
From a somewhat cynical point of view I can see why a game wouldn't make an unequivocal statement about a social issue, especially when playing around with real-world phrases for marketing purposes, to avoid alienating (the wallets of) the segment of their customer base that doesn't view these things favorably.

Yup, I also wonder if that's a reason for this. Square Enix / Eidos Montreal probably don't want to put off people who do not support oppressed groups.

I think one of the guys involved in the game also used the #notyourshield last year when Mechanical Apartheid was criticized by going on some gamergater board. (assuming the post was real)
 

SomTervo

Member
The Bechdel test :p

it's useful for measuring the amount of female characters in a work but that's about it, as you can have very feminist films that don't pass it and very non-feminist films that do pass it. As an example, Transformers passes it yet there's the Megan Fox bike scene.

However from some impressions in this thread it does seem like the review focuses heavily on the social aspects of the game which is good, as that is probably going to be a relatively unique take on it.

That's the one - of course it's not that useful or practical at all - I just meant it's the sort of thing which would be super easy to drop into a review just as a talking point. Just to hang some discussion on.
 
Why do people expect political statements from entertainment products again?

Because its the centerpiece of this game and the previous one. In the video the speaker makes a great point about how the greatest sci fi is an exploration of the human condition and really extrapolating those concepts. Great Sci Fi can parallel today's problems that make people feel extremely uncomfortable and bring it to the forefront in a way that has enough buffer that people can look at it more objectively. The criticism here is absolutely valid, the characters from my experience so far are incredibly shallow. Some of the situations have been set up so well but needed to be flushed out more whatever the players choice. But that's just partly a limitation of video games right now, writing is still not as valued a factor.
 

faridmon

Member
To be fair, they could have picked a game with a better story than this game. This games story and themes are frustratingly under-cocked.
 

Henkka

Banned
The Jim Sterling review had the following to say:

Thought I'd quote the entire relevant part, if that's ok

In its own earnest way, Mankind Divided explores themes of prejudice, social divides, and authoritarianism, though it has better luck with some aspects of its social commentary than others. Despite the surface veneer of neutrality and the risk of running into a fallacious “both sides are equally bad” justification, it’s pretty clear where Deus Ex stands on certain issues.

The Augmented are portrayed with near universal sympathy, while Prague’s sneering police officers are discriminatory, oppressive, and often violent. Jensen, despite being committed to his job and seeking justice no matter the politics, is an Aug himself, and Mankind Divided attempts to portray the city’s mistreatment through his eyes.

Jensen is regularly stopped before entering new areas of the city, forced to wait as police officers check his identification. Passers-by will mutter slurs such as “clank” as the player navigates the streets, and there are constant scenes of the Augmented being put against walls and threatened at gunpoint by those in charge.

It’s not a particularly deep exploration of the subject, but Mankind Divided tries, and for the most part is pretty good at not trying too hard.

While there are some missteps – I think referring to the anti-Augmented as explicitly “racist” is tone-deaf for a start – Mankind Divided is nowhere near as on-the-nose with its commentary as previous Deus Ex games have been. It’s not sitting on the fences, but it’s not going so far as to put its foot in its mouth – for the most part.

http://www.thejimquisition.com/deus-ex-mankind-divided-review/

It's clearly at odds with FF's review.
 

Lime

Member
Thought I'd quote the entire relevant part, if that's ok



http://www.thejimquisition.com/deus-ex-mankind-divided-review/

It's clearly at odds with FF's review.

I don't know if Jim still posts here, but I'd love for him to elaborate on the "The Augmented are portrayed with near universal sympathy", because the game and the video review here do have instances where the Augs are not portrayed with near universal sympathy, as far as I've gathered (bombs, violence, etc.).
 
I don't know if Jim still posts here, but I'd love for him to elaborate on the "The Augmented are portrayed with near universal sympathy", because the game and the video review here do have instances where the Augs are not portrayed with near universal sympathy, as far as I've gathered (bombs, violence, etc.).

They are portrayed as one side clearly being in the wrong, Jensen often has stinging remarks whether it's about treatment of the Augs or corporate greed etc.. The Civilians will sometimes say offhanded disgusting things. I heard one lady talk about how she got a really really nice car and her friend asked her how she could afford it. She responded with "I got it at a police auction, some Aug got deported and I managed to buy it cheap, not like they need it where they're going." Friend responds with "Their loss is our gain!." and they laugh or something like that. That's usually the anti Aug dialog you hear. It's caricatured anti-aug sentiments. The tone is clearly in favour of saying the Augs are being wrongfully oppressed.

The other people are those lamenting about their losses, or the horrible treatment of Augs. Loved ones, friends etc being arrested or displaced etc. Just walked by a group talking about how they couldn't imagine having Aug family members, having their loved ones taken away, the stress and talking about setting up a relief fund for them. Things like that.
 

Lime

Member
They are portrayed as one side clearly being in the wrong, Jensen often has stinging remarks whether it's about treatment of the Augs or corporate greed etc.. The Civilians will sometimes say offhanded disgusting things. I heard one lady talk about how she got a really really nice car and her friend asked her how she could afford it. She responded with "I got it at a police auction, some Aug got deported and I managed to buy it cheap, not like they need it where they're going." Friend responds with "Their loss is our gain!." and they laugh or something like that. That's usually the anti Aug dialog you hear. It's caricatured anti-aug sentiments. The tone is clearly in favour of saying the Augs are being wrongfully oppressed.

The other people are those lamenting about their losses, or the horrible treatment of Augs. Loved ones, friends etc being arrested or displaced etc. Just walked by a group talking about how they couldn't imagine having Aug family members, having their loved ones taken away, the stress and talking about setting up a relief fund for them. Things like that.

That's the depiction of the oppressors, and I see how that might lead to sympathizing with the oppressed, but what characterization of the Augs is it that inspires 'universal sympathy'?
 
I don't know if Jim still posts here, but I'd love for him to elaborate on the "The Augmented are portrayed with near universal sympathy", because the game and the video review here do have instances where the Augs are not portrayed with near universal sympathy, as far as I've gathered (bombs, violence, etc.).

I'm 2 hours in and maybe half of that game time was getting harassed by police and shaken down for being an aug, then bailing out another augmented person who has an anti-aug gang coming after him. There is no ambiguity that the game is portraying augmented citizens in a sympathetic light so far.
 

Lime

Member
I'm 2 hours in and maybe half of that game time was getting harassed by police and shaken down for being an aug, then bailing out another augmented person who has an anti-aug gang coming after him. There is no ambiguity that the game is portraying augmented citizens in a sympathetic light so far.

But this particular dialogue shown in Petit's review (spoiler?) tells me something different in its depiction of the oppressed and the ARC movement. The ensuing clip of the 'terrorist attack' on a train station similarly makes the struggle against oppression morally ambiguous, thereby underlining the narrative's depiction of the oppressed as somewhat equivalent to the oppressors. As the review states:

Emblematic of the game’s unwillingness to take a stand is the way it positions a group called ARC, or the Augmented Rights Coalition. Posters in the game that include the words “Augmented Lives Matter” explicitly link ARC to the contemporary American civil rights movement, Black Lives Matter, which arose in response to the very real, widespread, systematic dehumanization and murder of black people by police. It is simply outrageous for Mankind Divided to appropriate the language of this vital and necessary social justice movement for its own narrative, which has no moral backbone whatsoever, and to apply that language to a fictional organization that, like everything else in the world of Deus Ex, is neither just nor unjust, but resides somewhere in between.

ARC presents itself as an organization that strives to push back against systematic oppression and assert the basic human rights of augmented people. But is ARC really a nonviolent human rights group, or is it a terrorist organization? Of course in Deus Ex, it’s both, or neither. The game raises real-world issues about which there are very clear things to say, and then it refuses to say anything about them. It has to take place in an entire world of moral ambiguity, where everything is painted in shades of gray, where the oppressors and the oppressed are all bad and neither side is entirely wrong or right.

The various interviews with the executive narrative designer similarly confirms this intention to foster moral ambiguity in how they strived to make a morally grey treatment of segregation and oppression.
 
Why do people expect political statements from entertainment products again?

If developers add real world references to their videogames, you can easily draw your own parallels to the art. Did you also wonder why readers criticized Mark Twains stance on slavery? Of course not
, you weren't even born yet.
 

Lime

Member
I don't know if it's thread-worthy, but Gamasutra had a longer interview with the narrative designer of the game and she tried to address (read: skirt around) some of the criticisms (but she also states that criticism is good and that if anyone is offended by their work, she apologizes):

Question: It must be tricky. This game seems to be trying to reference and reflect a number of real-world issues -- I'm thinking of apartheid, the Black Lives Matter movement, and the like. These are emotionally-charged subjects; how do you handle that?

Well, it is a big challenge. From the beginning of this franchise ten years ago, we started dealing with -- well, the first thing we did was we started researching. We researched where technology is taking us. And what is happening in the biotechnology field. And that's where we hit, by totally layering it into our research.

And we looked at everything from scientific articles and things to philosophical articles and social commentary articles. So we did a lot of research in the beginning, in order to lay the groundwork for what Human Revolution was. And once we finished Human Revolution, we took that farther. So we begin by putting in all of - by kind of putting in all that focus into the initial research.

And then we say to ourselves what our job is, and what I'm often saying to the team is, our job is to hold a mirror up to the world. And expose it.

And allow -- because one of the precepts of Deus Ex is, we don't tell you what to think. You have to make your own decisions. You live it. And we try to present all sides of that issue to you. And that does get very challenging, as a writer, because you have to be constantly questioning your own biases, many of which you may not even know you have.

So you have to kind of always be looking at things from all sides. And present it from one side, then look at it and figure out okay, how do I present it from the other side? And it's a very difficult thing, and a lot of the time you do run into situations where people on the team will be like, this is too controversial. We can't put this in. This is too much, we can't do that.

And then we kind of have to talk that out, and say, if we approach it with as much respect as possible, and if we remember what we're trying to do here is tackle deep issues and show the world is shades of grey, and always allow the player to decide, not try to inflict a judgment. But it does put us into scary territory.

This game is about many, many different subjects, one of which of course is terrorism and terrorist attacks. And I tell this story that, we'd been working on this -- we started this game right after Human Revolution. So long before so many of the news stories that you now hear almost every day came out.

And we'd been working on the train station explosion for years, when all of a sudden the Paris attacks occurred. And that weekend, when the Paris attacks occurred, I just had a moment of like, "Oh my god, are we really doing justice? Are we handling this the right way?"

Because we think we're experiencing it, but we're not sure. And it does give you those moments of pause. Where you're like, "We need to double-check. We need to go back. We need to make sure we're handling this with as much sensitivity as we possibly can, but still be true to what we're trying to do."

So that's kind of a philosophy that we try to instill. And I think the core team has that belief themselves. But we're also there to provide each other with checks and balances.


Tanya DePass, founder of INDG, had some good points about the interview:

*The person being interviewed dodges whenever the question of comparing to real life issues comes up, i.e. BLM. Giant pull quote about being worried over the bombing scene in the game remind ppl of Paris but nothing about comparing to BLM.

*Seems like they did due diligence in researching the technology but not the human part they wanted to reflect. How does that work?

*Also she mentions that criticism when given fairly is fine but criticism was given fairly and not a peep from the studio was heard
 

SomTervo

Member
Why do people expect political statements from entertainment products again?

Where does entertainment end and art begin?

Where does everything you see and hear about friends, families, politics, economics, shopping and society on a daily basis end and the stuff you create begin?

Everything is political, even if nary a conscious 'political' thought went into it.

(And in cases like this the game is clearly political in the first place, going by advertising, series history, etc.)

I don't know if it's thread-worthy, but Gamasutra had a longer interview with the narrative designer of the game and she tried to address (read: skirt around) some of the criticisms (but she also states that criticism is good and that if anyone is offended by their work, she apologizes):

Tanya DePass, founder of INDG, had some good points about the interview:

I have a feeling there was already a thread about this, pal.
 

Lime

Member
I have a feeling there was already a thread about this, pal.

I don't think so, the interview was published online yesterday. But it's probably just repeating the things we've heard before and the writer skirts around the issue a lot.
 

MartyStu

Member
lol


You're telling me that someone had issues with how oppression is conveyed in a game where their marketing has bluntly used "Aug Lives Matter" and "Mechanical Apartheid"?

Color me shocked.

The latter was definitely heavily featured. The former came out of some artist's featured works. It was not used to promote the game.
 

sk3

Banned
I don't know if it's thread-worthy, but Gamasutra had a longer interview with the narrative designer of the game and she tried to address (read: skirt around) some of the criticisms (but she also states that criticism is good and that if anyone is offended by their work, she apologizes):


Tanya DePass, founder of INDG, had some good points about the interview:

Does BLM have any relevance outside of the US? It doesn't seem that big of a deal that a non-us company would be more concerned with terrorist bombings than BLM associations.
 

Opa-Pa

Member
I read that interview yesterday and I swear I re-read her answer to the BLM issues like four times looking for a straight answer, but she just danced around it.

Does BLM have any relevance outside of the US? It doesn't seem that big of a deal that a non-us company would be more concerned with terrorist bombings than BLM associations.

That's irrelevant. She says in the same interview that they're committed to inform themselves as much as possible on the modern topics they mirror in their games. If they reference it explicitly then it's responsibility to make sure they handle it well.
 

Infinite

Member
Does BLM have any relevance outside of the US? It doesn't seem that big of a deal that a non-us company would be more concerned with terrorist bombings than BLM associations.
I'm not sure what you mean by relevance but there's BLM chapters outside of the US.
 

Tapejara

Member
Does BLM have any relevance outside of the US? It doesn't seem that big of a deal that a non-us company would be more concerned with terrorist bombings than BLM associations.

Yes, BLM has a presence in Canada. We also get quite a bit of news from the US and BLM is featured prominently. It's unlikely that Eidos Montreal wouldn't have been aware of the movement.
 

Lime

Member
Does BLM have any relevance outside of the US? It doesn't seem that big of a deal that a non-us company would be more concerned with terrorist bombings than BLM associations.

Montreal is closer to the US than it is to the 'terrorist' attacks in Paris.

And Eidos Montreal is already using the language and iconography of these movements, so obviously the developers are "concerned" with associations to BLM. I have no idea why she mentions actual train attacks while failing to address the interviewer's explicit question about the use of BLM.

BLM is also relevant outside the US, such as Canada.
 
That's the depiction of the oppressors, and I see how that might lead to sympathizing with the oppressed, but what characterization of the Augs is it that inspires 'universal sympathy'?

I'm not sure what kind of an answer you're looking for here. Do note that Jim says "near-universal" sympathy. But for the most part the augmented citizens you see interacting with others are regular NPCs being abused by random police checkpoints or what not. I'm not up to the "Golem City" part, but I expect that's going to be pretty comparable given that it's an enclosed, checkpointed ghetto that the police sends you to if you get caught without valid documentation in the rest of the city.

But this particular dialogue shown in Petit's review (spoiler?) tells me something different in its depiction of the oppressed and the ARC movement. The ensuing clip of the 'terrorist attack' on a train station similarly makes the struggle against oppression morally ambiguous, thereby underlining the narrative's depiction of the oppressed as somewhat equivalent to the oppressors. As the review states:

The ARC is a global, loosely controlled coalition of activists. The question of whether or not the bombing of the train station was really carried out by members of the organisation is one of the plot points, I don't know the answer. But considering this is a Deus Ex game, I'm not saying it's the Illuminati, but it's the Illuminati. From the Deus Ex wiki:

"Although ARC considers itself to be a peaceful organization, it is accused of numerous terrorist attacks beginning in 2028. These accusations are largely being made by right-wing media and politicians. Due to these suspicions, the anti-terrorist group known as Task Force 29, takes interest in them. Following the bombing of Růžička Station, Task Force 29 sends one of their members to the ARC base in Golem City to bring Talos Rucker in for questioning. It is unclear if ARC is actually responsible for these attacks. However, when questioned, Rucker admits that he suspects members of ARC are secretly behind them. He privately investigates the attacks in an attempt to locate the real terrorist and prevent them from further tarnishing ARC's reputation.[2] "

I think it's not correct to say that even if we are taking this at face value, that there really is a small rogue subgroup of the ARC which is willing to carry out terrorist attacks, that therefore the game is not being "sympathetic" towards to the augmented citizenry who are bearing the brunt of this oppression. The police and "augist" NPCs are almost cartoonishly evil and exploitative. You would have to be a robot to read the in-game situation as one where there isn't a clear asymmetry of wrongdoing, despite there being some wrongdoing from people in both camps. The game is not in favour of concentration camps.

As an aside, a connection to BLM thematically seems extremely marginal at best to begin with. It's got shades of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, shades of Apartheid, shades of 1930's Germany, I can only assume they tried drew a connection to BLM in the marketing (and like, that one thing you find on the ground in game?) mainly on account of how contemporary it is.
 
I was so hyped for Infinite and all they made was a racism theme park with a stupid "both sides" message and dudes to shoot. Its reception really showed up the lack of critical thinking within the gaming press and the immaturity of games as a medium.

Funny that BioShock 2 (including Minnerva's Den) played a lot better and had a much better story than Infinite despite have a fraction of the latter's budget.
I really need to play Minerva's Den, I've heard nothing but good things about it and I even own it but I just haven't got to it yet. :p

I agree about Infinite though, what a mess.
 
As an aside, a connection to BLM thematically seems extremely marginal at best to begin with. It's got shades of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, shades of Apartheid, shades of 1930's Germany, I can only assume they tried drew a connection to BLM in the marketing (and like, that one thing you find on the ground in game?) mainly on account of how contemporary it is.

That's what I felt also. Seemed mostly just the advertising aspect.

Also I find it funny that people think Canada is culturally so foreign to America. Lol. Montreal is like 6 hours drive from Manhattan. Lol.

Also Quebec culturally in general can be a bit more controversial or up front when it comes to opinions on racial issues. A lot more traditional culture in Montreal and Quebec overall too than compared to the other big cities in Canada.

And yes there is a BLM chapter in Canada, specifically in Toronto. They interrupted a Pride Parade this summer, because of apparent LGBT community discriminating against black LGBT people. Which I think was good, because Pride Parade was itself founded as a rebel and protest cause in the first place.
 

Izuna

Banned
Trying to skate uphill, moths to a flame, lemmings attracted by cliffs...some people just can't help themselves

Lemmings aren't actually suicidal, it was a marketing tool used by Disney where they essentially forced Lemmings to fall to their deaths.

The game perpetuates this stereotype. If anything, it should be "lemmings attracted to PC cases".

--

Does this game have multiple hub worlds that are filled with quests, and not just one like HR?
 
I still haven't played through Human Revolution much. I want to like it as I love the original, but I was never a fan of the games cover system. But aren't the way points suppose to be a little vague in this game, as you are given multiple options to do them? But I do agree with the main character, as I feel like he needs to lighten up a bit.
 

Freshmaker

I am Korean.
Review was pretty good.

I don't agree With Carolyn on her point about the "misstep" of trying to link the Augs situation to contemporary, real events though. She points out that Augs have been shown to be a threat - people fear them, and so it's a different situation.

Yeah. It made me think about Muslims in France first thing.
 
Yeah. It made me think about Muslims in France first thing.

This is the closest example.

Just got to Golem City. After that depiction, there is no way you can say Eidos is "both sides!".

Right out the gate you talk to a doctor. She gives exposition over their conditions and how brutal the cops are. Hack her computer and you can read even more how the gov't and companies are fucking over the Augs.

Even though they give you a choice to be the law at any cost type of guy, you'd have to be willfully obtuse to not see ARC and the Augs in a sympathetic light.

About to meet Talos Rucker... we'll see if he somehow makes me eat my words, but from previews from before the game launched, I doubt it.

edit big spoilers:
nope. good guy Arc Leader.. damn that was a painful death
 

Lime

Member
Thanks for the replies thosedeafmutes and alpha centauri in explicating how the power relationship is depicted. I see how sympathy is fostered for the oppressed and there isn't a "both sides" as such, at least in terms of the oppressors being cartoonishly and maliciously evil.

As an aside, a connection to BLM thematically seems extremely marginal at best to begin with. It's got shades of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, shades of Apartheid, shades of 1930's Germany, I can only assume they tried drew a connection to BLM in the marketing (and like, that one thing you find on the ground in game?) mainly on account of how contemporary it is.

I gotta call this out though - it's not just one thing on the ground or relegated to marketing, it's posters and magazines replicated across the world:

CqkvW1TUkAAHRAo.jpg
CqsNqk7WcAAZKhm.jpg
CqpB0FnXEAAmAiZ.jpg
 

nOoblet16

Member
It feels like she didn't finish the game with her lingering question that ARC's motivations are grey they are not, Talos Rucker specifically mentions that within ARC there are people who want to go the route of violence but that does not necessarily make it ARC's stance.

For instance the Israeli-Palestine conflict, you can say it's grey compared to BLM but I disagree and you clearly have an oppressed population there, but even within the oppressed population you have groups that would prefer to handle things violently (Hamas). Now Hamas wouldn't be doing what it is doing if there was no operation, but at the same time it does not make Hamas right nor does it make them the voice of reason of Palestinians (despite the fact that they were once democratically elected, which does not matter because people didn't know in much the same way when they elected the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt only for them to rally against the government once they realised it was wrong) Infact, it's one of Jensen's quotes and it is included right in her video right after she implies that it does not handle the situation properly..as this guy mentioned:
"Unfortunately the game lacks any moral convictions and ultimate doesn't have anything to say about the very serious issues that it raises."

Proceeds to play clip of Jensen having a moral conviction and having something to say about the very serious issues that have been raised.
That was a dialogue that she chose and that's a fact that needs to be noted that the conversations and dialogues depends on the players themselves, including the dialogues. If for some reason you found his dialogues to be grey then it was because you choose that dialogue when you had the option to choose something more objective...and vice versa.

Btw on a separate note, the game has a story that has a goal and it achieves that goal at the end of it, just because there's still an overarching thread that leads to a sequel does not make it unfinished or unexplained, it finishes the story of Mankind Divided. I mean that's how you plan a story that's to be told over sequels, instead of ending in abrupt cliffhangers or ending like everything is fine at the end only to be told it's not in the sequel. Someone once equated this to the Harry Potter stories, the main plot gets addressed but Voldemort is still out there...does not mean it's unfinished or that it ends in a cliffhanger.
 
Top Bottom