If you don't wanna be lectured at and disapproved of every time you boot up a game to shoot people, yes.
Christ! It is like my mum made a video game!
-
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.
Killing is Harmless: A whole book of critical analysis on 1 game (Spec Ops The Line)
- Thread starter Messofanego
- Start date
If you don't wanna be lectured at and disapproved of every time you boot up a game to shoot people, yes.
Christ! It is like my mum made a video game!
Important?
Who knows
Is it interesting enough to carry this level of discussion? Evidently
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
"Hey guys, how it was the new Batman movie?"
"I got bored after Bane killed the secret agents. So it sucked, socialist indoctrination BS"
"That was not the point, you see, Bane was onl..."
"It sucked, stop lecturing me"
Konrad also lectures Walker during his hallucination sequences. Walker's teammates also stop periodically to tell Walker off. "Why the hell are you even still going on?" "You think doing any of this is going to make you a hero?" etc. Plus the condescending tooltips on the loading screens during the third act.
I've not seen it, but how much does The Dark Knight Rises go out of its way to tell people who like Superhero movies that they are terrible people?
It goes about as far as Spec Ops tells people who like 3rd person action games that they are terrible people
In that it doesn't
At all
So now it's a poorly written game that also happens to be self-aware?
Suspension of disbelief doesn't work when plot holes compromise the underlying motivations of certain organizations in the game. There are a couple of inaccuracies in Argo, for example, that are intended to make particular events more intense or exciting. I am willing to suspend disbelief in those particular cases because they are largely incidental to the main story. Additionally, it was quite clear that Argo's writers did their homework and really tried their best to accurately portray 1980's Iran.
I can agree with that
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
And that was, again, not my point at all ErikB.
There's nothing wrong with a didactic game, especially when it can effectively force a certain level of introspection on the player's part. It's not telling you that "you're terrible" for such and such, and to say it does is to miss the point to a fairly hilarious degree. It's asking rhetorical questions that it wants you to consider.
It's a million times more interesting than the schlock we tend to see.
It's a million times more interesting than the schlock we tend to see.
Femmeworth
Banned
Very interesting. Maybe I should pick this game up on Black Friday.
It was, however, my point.
Which is largely that something that wants you to pay for it to tell you off is dumb.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
Different people have different points of suspension of disbelief, and different works can function at different levels.
Specially when is pretty clear that game is in the scale of "weird and fucked up things happen" in the controversial spectrum.
XANDER CAGE
Member
I'm certainly willing to hear that opinion from a critique, but I still think, if that's true, it's a silly way to get a message across in a game. If the joke/message/punchline of a game involves "ha ha it wasn't fun on purpose" then ultimately, I've still played a bad game and not had much fun. Doses of ironic or intentional not-fun can be done well (I think Work Time Fun is pretty brilliant at it, as is the button-bashing QTE at the end of MGS4) but it can't span the whole game. Through and through, Spec Ops isn't a very good shooter.
I think there are better ways to make something "not fun" while still being mechanically engaging. Fun doesn't have to mean pure bliss; horror games and movies wouldn't exist if that were the case. In a game like Spec Ops' case, I think developers would benefit from making sure that the core mechanics are still engaging.
I can definitely appreciate the suggestion or idea that Spec Ops wasn't supposed to be "fun", per se, but I'm not convinced how much water that argument holds. Either way, Spec Ops is an interesting baby step.
Mr_Appleby
Member
Not clear how Apocalypse Now is such a brilliant film worthy of critical analysis when it's just a retelling of Heart of Darkness, unless I'm missing something.
By that logic, no one should ever critique plot holes or narrative inconsistencies.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
It was, however, my point.
Which is largely that something that wants you to pay for it to tell you off is dumb.
Then you are evading my point or you don't want/ cannot address it.
Erik, for someone that don't want to hear a lecture, you are pretty willing to gives is one. How do you want that we listen what you have to said when you are not even listing us?
CornBurrito
Member
Hmm, from what I heard the game pulls the "humanize the enemy" thing but still forces you to shoot enemies in order to advance in the story. It seems kind of cheap to do that. Like if a game forcing you to be a serial rapist tried pushing a "rape is wrong" message.
How accurate is that? I haven't played the game, but I've never heard really good things about it.
edit: Decided to watch the youtube video. Seems good thus far.
edit2: slightly off topic but the video gave an example of Portal being a feminist deconstruction of shooting mechanics... wut?
How accurate is that? I haven't played the game, but I've never heard really good things about it.
edit: Decided to watch the youtube video. Seems good thus far.
edit2: slightly off topic but the video gave an example of Portal being a feminist deconstruction of shooting mechanics... wut?
John Rabbit
Banned
you haven't finished the game. you aren't arguing your point from a position or intelligence. you should really stop typing.It was, however, my point.
Which is largely that something that wants you to pay for it to tell you off is dumb.
the game doesn't tell you off. at no point does any one person or bit of text specifically break the 4th wall and tell you, the player, to turn the game off and stop playing. if you're taking the in-narrative moments of characters shaming walker (the player character) for his actions and questioning his motives, decisions, and actions; then you're completely unable to separate fantasy from reality. you're taking these comments from one virtual character to another as statements made to you, an ostensibly "real" person. the bigger problem here seems to be that you feel personally slighted by a videogame.
as a player, i was invested to see the story to it's conclusion, regardless of what i was made to do as walker. the repercussions of his actions are logical, and in most cases, completely justified. in fact 2 of the 4 endings end just as they should, in my opinion.
but again, you haven't seen any of them, so you're ignorant.
That is indeed the way it normally works, yes.
If someone can make a game that lets the player lecture the game designer, we may be on to something...
Kenshin001
Member
While the developers deserve praise for pushing the boundaries some of it was really contrived and the ending made no sense given what had just immediately preceded it. Seemed like a massive plot hole to me. There were some pretty interesting, twisted parts and I'd recommend a play through. I'll give it that.
Not sure the game is worthy of such an in depth analysis but given how shallow the vast majority of games are I guess they have to work with what they've got.
Not sure the game is worthy of such an in depth analysis but given how shallow the vast majority of games are I guess they have to work with what they've got.
28 Posts Later
Member
Campster has some...controversial viewpoints, especially when it comes to gender depiction in games. His Dishonoured video in particular picked up a fair amount of anger due to his claim the game has 'occasionally awkward presentation of women'. I haven't played the game, but from the responses it seems he takes things out of context. His videos are always interesting, even if it's easy to disagree with him on specific points.
There have been arguments put forward that the Portal series is feminist though, including this on Gamesradar.
boiled goose
good with gravy
That is indeed the way it normally works, yes.
If someone can make a game that lets the player lecture the game designer, we may be on to something...
o ffs. you haven't even played the game???
Why to hijack a thread without even having a properly informed opinion. :/
Spec ops is interesting not because of what it says, but because of how it says it. Using gameplay as metaphor and as a way to deliver narrative is extremely interesting from a game design perspective (regardless of the story or message). That is what spec ops did that is interesting, not the story itself.
You spend most of your time shooting Americans in self-defense; you don't necessarily think they're bad people, but they're shooting at you, so you shoot back.
There's one specific moment where the game forces you to do something, not in self-defense, to advance the plot. It winds up being way worse than your character expects, and is a massive guilt moment The lack of choice in this one particular action rubs some people the wrong way.
The actual act of shooting isn't so much what's questioned, as the Real American Hero mindset that motivates the protagonist, and the unquestioning belief players tend to have of following what the game says to do always making everything end up okay, because it's what the game says to do. In retrospect I wish they'd, at at least two points, let you opt to just turn back and let the game end, to get rid of the lack-of-choice issue, but for the most part you always understand why the character believes what he's doing to be the right thing.
TheBaronOfNA
Banned
By that logic, no one should ever enjoy a work with factual discrepancies that doesn't interrupt the internal logic of the story or the themes that try to convey.
Sure. But having the message be 'you are a bad person for playing this game' is something I really hope doesn't catch on.
I can get disapproval of my gaming habits for free from a number of sources, and really don't need the games themselves to get in on it.
CornBurrito
Member
You know your argument is a terrible one when you make a claim about human psychology and use the word "all."
No I don't think less of my self for not being a soldier.
So all it takes for a game to be feminist is to have an unsexualized female protagonist, and not using bullets? The article claims that using portals to disable turrets is feminine. What...?
The Companion Cube is a father figure? What in the actual fuck....
Messofanego
Banned
I understand the point of it being parody isn't a good excuse but Spec Ops isn't a bad playing game unlike Matt Hazard (parody was its only selling point).
This comes down to opinion, I found the game fun to play. Aiming was responsive. The shooting mechanics were decent, getting headshots in slow-mo was satisfying and gave time to assess your surroundings. The combat arenas were well-paced and varied (the water tanker level comes to mind with its verticality). I was compelled to try other weapons because ammo isn't plentiful and so you weren't stuck to cover all the time. The enemies weren't bullet-sponges which is a flaw in other shooters especially in Uncharted where they wear less clothes. The cover system was more preferable than Gears of War where it's "sticky" and focused on too many actions for one button.
Just put it on easy and tear through it. It's actually worth it.
Don't you think the game thinking you are a terrible person for caring about that stuff kind of takes the fun out of it?
boiled goose
good with gravy
play it first. see how it makes you feel. then come back.
I don't want to be lectured at.
boiled goose
good with gravy
try it.
experiencing different opinions and ideas, getting pushed outside of your comfort zone, and being more open minded can only make you grow and mature as a person.
If anything, it can help you consolidate and validate your own ideas.
And it will at least make your input into the thread more relevant.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Sure. It definitely wasn't broken or terrible. It just wasn't particularly interesting or engaging to me (it felt clunky and dissatisfying to me, but that's opinions), which is why I don't think the game was wholly successful. I think we can all agree that the most interesting part of the game is the story, which in my opinion, should rarely if ever be the most engaging part of a game.
I hope I'm not coming across as if I hate the game and don't think it's worth the critique. I definitely found it refreshing, even if I didn't really fall in love with it.
YOu seriously havent played it? After calling the people that did "stupid"?
Your posts in this thread are irrelevant and you are a moron.
I would at least have said that suggesting that gamers will show resistance to getting the same Jack Thompson shit from the games themselves is at least tangentially relevant.
Hey man, when the game said jump, you JUST FOLLOWED ORDAS!
I stopped when I saw the way it was going. Kinda. I didn't think it was going anywhere good.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Oh my god play the game. It is not "Jack Thompson shit", I don't even know where you're getting that from.
I personally found the endings and overall theme of the game a tad pedantic, but if you think the entire point of the game is "shooters are 100% bad and evil you're bad haha we tricked you!" you're completely wrong. They wouldn't have made a shooter if that was the case. You don't have to hate something to deconstruct it.
I don't want to be lectured at. :0)
Haunted
Member
So if you don't want to inform yourself and want to keep arguing from a position of ignorance, all I can tell you is to STFU and keep your wrong assumptions to yourself.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Does your smiley's nose grow a size every time you tell yourself a lie? The game isn't a lecture. You'd know that if you played it, or would at least have a basis to argue that it did.
You have repeated this about 10 times per page in every page of this thread. You are apparently incredibly sensitive about this for some reason, so let me ease your mind: You are not a terrible person for enjoying these kinds of games, no matter what any imagined hippie lectures in Spec Ops: The Line might say.
You are a terrible person for being willfully dense and close-minded, though!
I have seen it used as a stick to beat games I enjoy, by, for instance, Kevin Van Ord, Yahtzee, some tosser on Capcom Unity and I assume Extra Credits, but I was kinda avoiding spoilers in case I wanted to go back to it later but I guess it is a bit late for that.
How To Avoid Even The Remote Semblence of a Lecture in the Game:
1.) Don't read the loading screens.
2.) At. The very end, when you meet the guy you've been trying to meet all game, he's going to give a speech about the main character's actions. Plug your ears and go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!" until he stops talking.
Those are the only two points in the game that even approach lecturing.
Or you can just not play it and continue spouting shit against the version of the game you made up in your head that you're super offended by.
1.) Don't read the loading screens.
2.) At. The very end, when you meet the guy you've been trying to meet all game, he's going to give a speech about the main character's actions. Plug your ears and go "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!" until he stops talking.
Those are the only two points in the game that even approach lecturing.
Or you can just not play it and continue spouting shit against the version of the game you made up in your head that you're super offended by.
XANDER CAGE
Member
Does anyone know how much of Greg Kasavin's work ended up in the actual game? Is the whole thing written by him, or was his stuff far gone by the time the game came out? I forget if he showed up in the credits or not.
Funnily enough, I actually think Bastion does a better job than Spec Ops in terms of matching gameplay and story, but Spec Ops is probably the more ambitious game even if I didn't find it particularly successful.
Funnily enough, I actually think Bastion does a better job than Spec Ops in terms of matching gameplay and story, but Spec Ops is probably the more ambitious game even if I didn't find it particularly successful.
FWIW, I think it is a dead end in game design because if people even perceive that something will lecture them they won't want to play it. So why would I want to play (and especially pay £40 for) a game that will lecture me about my choice of entertainment is a question worth answering.