Spec Ops directly addresses the appeal of such games.
It is well that war is so terrible -- lest we should grow too fond of it.
That's the point.Well, for what it is worth, I don't think a game that has you unthinking do something that makes things worse and then tells you off for it works because most games don't have you do something that makes things worse. The games go to insane lengths to assure you that shooting these dudes will make the world better (at least for the character you are playing, if he is that kind of guy). So the message when Spec Ops tries to make you feel bad isn't that you should feel bad, it is that you should stop playing the game.
Intentionally so.Wait Spec Ops: The Line was a good game ? This is the third person shooter that looked like every other popular third person shooter?
I've read the book and also find dubai's glamour "cold"; hence my description of it as the jeweled whore of the middle-east. hey, I've also read snow white but still found snow white and the huntsman a pretty entertaining way to kill 90 minutes on a transatlantic flight. I'm really not sure where you're going with this.
But it does it by telling you you are a bad person for liking them, which is pretty... un-nuanced.
Yager only chose Dubai because the city looks exotic and can easily be very easily made into a no-man's land. Otherwise, they wouldn't have done such an incredibly poor job depicting the city, the UAE, or its neighboring Arab states.
And for that matter, it is also true that all men think less of themselves for not having been a soldier.
It's not telling you that you are a bad person. Walker is, though. It's saying that Call of Duty/Gears of War/Mass Effect/Uncharted/etc. are ridiculous and stupid.But it does it by telling you you are a bad person for liking them, which is pretty... un-nuanced.
and the fact that it's an example of the "western" values of ostentatious success being transplanted into another cultural context entirely, but I guess that's irrelevant.
...
wow
You admitted you haven't played the game up to the point these themes really kick in, yet you're trying to berate the degree of subtlety by which they're discussed?
and the fact that it's an example of the "western" values of ostentatious success being transplanted into another cultural context entirely, but I guess that's irrelevant.
Well, how subtle do you think it is. But I thought the opening with you shooting down a whole bunch of helicopters was dumb. Where the fuck did all these little birds come from? And then I'd swear I heard someone involved with making it say it was supposed to be dumb, which doesn't give me much hope for subtlety or respect for the player.
I'm not sure if I follow. Are you speaking to the real world Dubai, Yager's depiction of Dubai, Walker's behavior, or something entirely different?
Well, how subtle do you think it is? But I thought the opening with you shooting down a whole bunch of helicopters was dumb. Where the fuck did all these little birds come from? And then I'd swear I heard someone involved with making it say it was supposed to be dumb, which doesn't give me much hope for subtlety or respect for the player.
ErikB , if you really want to criticize the game, please, play it first.
Why would I want to be lectured about my choice of entertainment?
Why would I want to be lectured about my choice of entertainment?
Still, would people say that the game shows much understanding of or sympathy for the attraction of these games?
I've heard the developers speak. This is a lecture.
Maybe I'm just reading it wrong, and his posts are actually a brilliant metaphor comparing message board posting to Spec Ops. By the end, you question what you've done and realize the only choice you had was to stop posting.
I dunno. Think of a game where someone says 'This game is awesome. You have to be really pretentious to play it, but every time you show how pretentious you are it calls you a pretentious twat!'
So you're making arguments based on what you think the work is like.
Well, how do you feel the game shows respect for players of Call of Duty?
Why should it?
Well, how subtle do you think it is? But I thought the opening with you shooting down a whole bunch of helicopters was dumb. Where the fuck did all these little birds come from? And then I'd swear I heard someone involved with making it say it was supposed to be dumb, which doesn't give me much hope for subtlety or respect for the player.
He's talking about Dubai in general.
So you're making arguments based on what you think the work is like.
Cause if it just gonna lecture me, I ain't gonna play it.
Assuming he is, that has absolutely zero bearing on the game and doesn't excuse how poorly Yager handled Dubai.
Cause if it just gonna lecture me, I ain't gonna play it.
Assuming he is, that has absolutely zero bearing on the game and doesn't excuse how poorly Yager handled Dubai.
How does Spec Ops lecture you?
Why do you feel it doesn't lecture the player?
Certainly, the developers seemed to WANT to lecture the player, and most of the cocks who are really pushing this seem to think that the players could deserve a good lecturing.
Well, how subtle do you think it is? But I thought the opening with you shooting down a whole bunch of helicopters was dumb. Where the fuck did all these little birds come from? And then I'd swear I heard someone involved with making it say it was supposed to be dumb, which doesn't give me much hope for subtlety or respect for the player.
Why,? apart for not being a realistic depiction as the Giant sandstorm that Eats Skycrappers make statement in the first minutes
What is it juxtaposing exactly?I'm not sure the setting has "zero" bearing on the game - as he says Dubai is seen as a transplantation of western decadence in an arid setting. It's a juxtaposition; and one that reinforces the major juxtaposition at the heart of the game. How accurate their depiction is is another matter.
But it does it by telling you you are a bad person for liking them, which is pretty... un-nuanced.
Soldiers have often said that killing people is fun, when it is going well. And for that matter, it is also true that all men think less of themselves for not having been a soldier.
It might be worth noting in this instance that no one who played Spec Ops was left confused about how to slide into cover. QED?
I'll check out Nier, I've always wanted to because of the soundtrack and multiple playthrough business.Sorry to harp on about this, but although I quite enjoyed that video and roundly agreed with the sentiments it raises most of the larger issues it mentions should be self-evident to anyone with any sort of social conscience or understanding of history.
Militarism is not good. For anyone but the evil fucks who make vast profits from the sale of arms and spoils of war. Its an industry of death.
War-porn shooters are obviously operating in some deeply suspect moral areas especially when they deal with contemporary situations and locales. Its making light disposable entertainment out of inhuman atrocities, and whichever side of the political divide your conscience places you, you simply cannot discount the fact that its celebrating human sacrifice. Not to abuse the meme, but this really, really, is serious business.
Beyond that obvious socio-political dimension, what the game is doing is, as I mentioned in my previous post, pretty much exactly the same things that Nier did two years ago.
The framework that game worked in was the classical hero's journey mythology of the JRPG genre, whereas The Line works within the tropes of the military shooter. Cultural and presentational issues aside, the aspects of the human condition being addressed are the same.
What concerns me, and why this post is absolutely not about criticism of SO:TL as a work in itself, is that the way this title is being highlighted whereas Nier was roundly ignored, seems like yet another case of cultural imperialism at work.
You want to elevate discourse, you need to be able to look past superficial aspects of presentation to what these "texts" are actually saying.
I hope that one day soon we start getting games that are both provocative from a story point of view and actually fun to play. Spec Ops has some pretty interesting writing in it (the very end aside, which I didn't particularly care for) but gameplay-wise it's fairly mediocre.
We've already established it's not lecturing you - but it's a ridiculous sentiment; the game respects the player as an intellectual and as someone who is willing to think about what they're doing. Not just shooting because you're following some arrow around a bunch of corridors.
Why do you feel it doesn't lecture the player?
Certainly, the developers seemed to WANT to lecture the player, and most of the cocks who are really pushing this seem to think that the players could deserve a good lecturing.
The game completely ignores modern geopolitics right from the get-go. The UAE explicitly denies any and all requests for foreign assistance following the sandstorm. Yet, The US army sends a battalion there against everyone's wishes. Why? Who knows. Also, strangely enough, not a single member of the Arab League offers a helping hand to one of its richest and most valuable members. If Yager elects to ignore the presence of the Saudi Arabia, much less the entire Arab League, and, at the same time play up the relations between the U.S. and other Arab countries as a motivating factor for the CIA's presence, then they have done a poor job of establishing the setting.
Some us want to tell you that you are critizising the game and making counter arguments without actually playing the whole storyline.
The game completely ignores modern geopolitics right from the get-go. The UAE explicitly denies any and all requests for foreign assistance following the sandstorm. Yet, The US army sends a battalion there against everyone's wishes. Why? Who knows. Also, strangely enough, not a single member of the Arab League offers a helping hand to one of its richest and most valuable members. If Yager elects to ignore the presence of the Saudi Arabia, much less the entire Arab League, and, at the same time play up the relations between the U.S. and other Arab countries as a motivating factor for the CIA's presence, then they have done a poor job of establishing the setting.
Additionally, one particular nitpick I have is related to the native language. In a country where the overwhelming majority of residents speaks and reads in Arabic, why does everyone in the game use Farsi (Persian)? While they share the same alphabet, and some loan words, the vocabulary and syntax are incredibly different. That in and of itself is not a huge issue, but it does seem to be indicative of how the writers didn't put very much effort into researching the city.
You haven't established anything, just been repeating "The game does not lecture you".
Which is false. The game does, in fact, lecture you.
You haven't established anything, just been repeating "The game does not lecture you".
Which is false. The game does, in fact, lecture you.