Support NeoGAF

[Super Muffin]

This article is trying embarrassingly hard to paint the game in a negative light. There's a lot of omissions here which would heavilycontest the author's point.

 

[Velkyn]

Do you disagree with Robert Rath's assertions in this piece?



I.e. the societal context in which Division sets itself has ramifications on how we interpret and understand the cues in the game. To set it up point by point, you have:

• Rioters.” That’s a loaded term to start with, given the complicated history of labeling black protesters “rioters” in order to violently suppress them
• hoodies, ball caps, and often sport bandanas over their faces
• Lord of the 212’s and Five-0
• In post-Ferguson America, a game where tactical teams -- with no official oversight -- “clean up the streets” by gunning down people in hoodies is difficult to dismiss as fantasy entertainment.
• The Rikers are escapees of Riker’s Island, and take revenge on society by capturing, torturing, and killing anyone wearing a uniform.
• Their leader LaRae Barrett is a violent [Black] woman who gives rousing speeches about striking back at the society that victimized them.
• The Cleaners are a band of city employees gone awry, who attempt to eliminate the infection by torching anyone, or anything, they suspect might be infected. Cleaners speak in blue-collar New York accents, like a bit-part cabdriver in Seinfeld.

There's no denying that it's not a very good representation of the Clancy brand. Ubisoft, at this point, has co-opted the Clance to mean "vaguely present-day-ish military action movie plot". I also disagree that there's no tactical depth here due to RPG mechanics. It's actually the opposite. If I get a truck of enemies dropped on me in a mission, the team is going to work out a plan. Which skills to use, where to set up, who to focus down first, that sort of thing.

The term Rioter: It's true that it does have a complicated history in America, but that's largely an American thing. Here in Canada, and elsewhere, riot doesn't have the same racial connotation, at least that I'm aware of. Considering we've had about 4 racially motivated riots total, this doesn't surprise me. I don't think it has the same connotation in Sweden, either.

Apparel:

That's a picture of student protesters in Montreal in 2012. They are largely white students. Note how they are dressed. I find assuming anyone dressed in a hoodie, bandana and cap is black problematic.

Lord of the 212s and Five-0: This doesn't say anything to me on its own. I'm honestly not sure how this is racial in any way.

Tactical teams gunning down people in hoodies: Simplification. This sentence presumes that a player is randomly gunning down poor innocent people in hoodies who are just exercising their right to assembly and protest. I would be on board with this imagery being disturbing if there was an early mission with your character gunning down civilians running in a panic, or people looting TVs, but it's been months since NYC has collapsed, according to the game. Anyone covering their face with something other than a filter at this point or still alive and dressed in a prison uniform is a bad dude.To talk on the rioters, they are objectively awful people who aren't trying to just get by or survive. They're, at the start of The Division an organized gang stealing resources from people to stockpile.They are a criminal gang. The game is not shy in showing the player why they are terrible people.

The Rikers: Are a GROUP of escapees from Riker's Island that stuck around just to murder JTF members. The game doesn't claim that this is every single person in jail at Riker's Island, these are the dudes who just want to kill anyone in uniform as brutally as possible.

LaRae Barrett: Haven't encountered her yet, so I won't comment.

Cleaners: To me are the embodiment of the "don't tread on me" right-wing nutjob fantasy. They can't trust the government to fix the situation. Some of them know you're a clandestine government agent, and that you're trying to fix the problem, and just don't care.

 

[LordRaptor]

It isn't as simple as skin color or ethnicity. Visual and linguistic cues can also establish which social group is being referenced, along with the context in which looters and rioters are usually used exclusively on one specific group (mostly applied to Black Americans in the US).

I don't disagree with you or the piece you quote, but baggy clothes, hoodies and bandanas are a practical choice stemming from actual criminal street gangs and the need to be able to conceal weaponry and identity, so its only "dressing black" in as much as hip-hop culture has appropriated gang culture.
Before guns were quite as prevalent as they are today, urban criminal clothing ("street punks") was much more along the lines of leather jackets and jeans etc for the practical consideration of being body armour in a knife fight

 

[Lime]

There's no denying that it's not a very good representation of the Clancy brand. Ubisoft, at this point, has co-opted the Clance to mean "vaguely present-day-ish military action movie plot". I also disagree that there's no tactical depth here due to RPG mechanics. It's actually the opposite. If I get a truck of enemies dropped on me in a mission, the team is going to work out a plan. Which skills to use, where to set up, who to focus down first, that sort of thing.

The term Rioter: It's true that it does have a complicated history in America, but that's largely an American thing. Here in Canada, and elsewhere, riot doesn't have the same racial connotation, at least that I'm aware of. Considering we've had about 4 racially motivated riots total, this doesn't surprise me. I don't think it has the same connotation in Sweden, either.

It is true that other countries in terms of their context would not posses the same contextual clues, but this is a game that is (1) set in New York with representation of US citizens, and (2) the US is the biggest video game market for this game and is certainly inserting itself in a context where 'rioter' has specific connotations. Especially in light of post-BLM. Same applies to your Montreal picture - this isn't set in Canada, it's in New York.

Lord of the 212s and Five-0: This doesn't say anything to me on its own. I'm honestly not sure how this is racial in any way.

Racialized linguistics.

Tactical teams gunning down people in hoodies: Simplification. This sentence presumes that a player is randomly gunning down poor innocent people in hoodies who are just exercising their right to assembly and protest. I would be on board with this imagery being disturbing if there was an early mission with your character gunning down civilians running in a panic, or people looting TVs, but it's been months since NYC has collapsed, according to the game. Anyone covering their face with something other than a filter at this point or still alive and dressed in a prison uniform is a bad dude.To talk on the rioters, they are objectively awful people who aren't trying to just get by or survive. They're, at the start of The Division an organized gang stealing resources from people to stockpile.They are a criminal gang. The game is not shy in showing the player why they are terrible people.

The current situation in contemporary US politics is militarized police moving in against Black (and non-Black) protesters and communities, similarly to what the Division's premise is. This is the argument, not that people in hoodies are gunned down (although that might also be another argument, (cf Michael Brown and/or Trayvon Martin).

The Rikers: Are a GROUP of escapees from Riker's Island that stuck around just to murder JTF members. The game doesn't claim that this is every single person in jail at Riker's Island, these are the dudes who just want to kill anyone in uniform as brutally as possible.

The game is still representing prisoners or convicts who after the collapse of the prison industrial complex will become murderous psychopaths turned loose.

Cleaners: To me are the embodiment of the "don't tread on me" right-wing nutjob fantasy. They can't trust the government to fix the situation. Some of them know you're a clandestine government agent, and that you're trying to fix the problem, and just don't care.

Again, the game is still representing this particular social class in this particular light. It is class politics once more.

I don't disagree with you or the piece you quote, but baggy clothes, hoodies and bandanas are a practical choice stemming from actual criminal street gangs and the need to be able to conceal weaponry and identity, so its only "dressing black" in as much as hip-hop culture has appropriated gang culture.
Before guns were quite as prevalent as they are today, urban criminal clothing ("street punks") was much more along the lines of leather jackets and jeans etc for the practical consideration of being body armour in a knife fight

Right, but the Division cannot escape the context in which it is received and the context it relies on to depict a major US city in contemporary times. This context is what is feeding the interpretation and analysis of the game.

 

[Dame]

So this character who calls out the Division is a bad guy? And the game dispenses of him by having the player kill him?

Almost all the time some progressive or challenging thought comes up in a story, it is reduced because the bad guy says it and all that matters is killing the sociopath in your way. In this case at least

Spoiler

he was an ally saying it in the beginning.

that's something, I guess

This type of martial law is happening too. Obama was given the sanction to enact martial law should ever protests like the 99% ones occur again. To me it feels like, no matter the figurehead, The Division could make this in any time frame and it applied/will apply. Glim view of the state of our future, but I doubt any leader now would cease taking advantage of such a conservatively powerful/oppressive tool.

 

[LordRaptor]

Right, but the Division cannot escape the context in which it is received and the context it relies on to depict a major US city in contemporary times. This context is what is feeding the interpretation and analysis of the game.

Sure, I just think the design choice of hoody + bandana as criminal wear can be pretty easily defended and is probably the weakest part of the overall argument.

 

[Messofanego]

The story of the game, given what little there is, is that the whole thing is started by a Division agent gone rogue in the first place.

You never actually shoot any "looters" either, since the three enemy types have clear ideologies (a private security force, ex-cons, and sanitation workers). The enemies also shoot you on sight without a chance for negotiation and you actually fight anyone for property, outside of trying to recover supply drops or medical supplies.


It's a misreading though, or at least one based on a misunderstanding of the game.

Yeah, the devs designed it for the enemies to shoot you on sight. Makes their lives easier not having to develop a negotiation system.

I've played 15 hours of the game, I'm agreed with a lot of the article. I don't agree it's a misunderstanding.

 

[Ric Flair]

The game is as seriously political as "escape from New York". I never once thought about the political ramifications of my actions as I put on my trendy skinny jeans or went to battle with the bullet sponge flamethrower bosses

 

[PBY]

This article is trying embarrassingly hard to paint the game in a negative light. There's a lot of omissions here which would heavilycontest the author's point.

The article isn't meant to attack anything, I don't think. What omissions are those?

 

[Lime]

Ubisoft and Ubisoft Massive need to be better at this. I literally cannot believe the associate director and no one at any meeting said those things in the interview:

“It’s the first time I’ve ever been asked about it, and it hasn’t really crossed any of the meetings that I’ve done on it before.”

When I pressed further on the game’s themes, whether it was the inherent anti-capitalist message in centering the game around a virus spread through money, or the draconian justice of armed peacekeepers indiscriminately shooting down looters and escaped Riker’s Island inmates (another class of enemy in the game), he told me, “At the end of the day, it’s a videogame, it’s an entertainment product… There’s no particularly political message with it.”

How oblivious and ignorant can you be when these people are in charge of multi-million international project.

Sure, I just think the design choice of hoody + bandana as criminal wear can be pretty easily defended and is probably the weakest part of the overall argument.

How can it easily be defended? The game is set in the US and implicitly carries with it a host of cultural references by virtue of the context it places itself in.

 

[Deleted member 126221]

The game is as seriously political as "escape from New York". I never once thought about the political ramifications of my actions as I put on my trendy skinny jeans or went to battle with the bullet sponge flamethrower bosses

Escape from New York had a political undertone. The fact that it's not the central point of the movie/game/whatever doesn't mean it's not there.

 

[mclem]

How can it easily be defended? The game is set in the US and implicitly carries with it a host of cultural references by virtue of the context it places itself in.

I can at least hope that "The Division" is intended to be a title with a secondary meaning; that would suggest a little more awareness, at least.

 

[pineapplepizza]

The majority of the game I played the story first. So I didn't play through the DZ much until after I hit 30 which was 40+ hours of time into the game. This entire thread is talking about representation in the game which is pushed by the story.

So I am going to go through your posts one by one because it really doesn't seem you understanding what we are talking about.

I'm going to have to repeat myself, my original post was a response to one of the first posts in the thread. You have gone on to explain the story and your own gaming experience. Let me repeat, the original post I responded to mentioned that the article didn't talk about the story with agents going rogue (which was a critique on the political views and corruption of the division). This is as though some small story blurbs clear up what makes up 99% of gameplay! It does not. Again you preface the discussion with "We were talking about story" "This entire thread" "What we are talking about" - you're not grasping that I responded to one of the first posts in the thread. I was not speaking to everyone in the thread in the manner you're presenting. "Except, the game addresses the issue by having one of characters call out the Division for the mockery it makes of Democracy in the best dialogue of the game ... then it shows what happens when agents with no control go bad." So again, no the game does not 'address' the issue in depth because it simply shows what happens with some rogue agents etc (that barely represent majority of the gameplay).

The sum of the article is fairly accurate description of what you can expect (but it can be misunderstood if you don't actually play). The extra pieces of info you're referring to that you learn through echos etc do not change the fact that the gameplay mostly involves roaming NYC, shooting and looting baddies from the 4 groups. The significance of the story is not there. It's not there also because it is not a required mechanic that is embedded into the gameplay of each mission. They are optional.

This argument reminds me of Quiet in MGSV, Kojima tweeted something like "you will feel ashamed for your actions or something" regarding Quiets skin condition or w/e the fuk. Cool story bro but that doesn't change the fact that I have a barely clothed chick in my helicopter/base making sexual poses all the time. You can plaster all the back story you want, it doesn't change or represent the actual experience. The gameplay does. The story in the Division is weak. And as per numerous challenges and morality vices presented by the author the game in the end is a murder simulator of those 4 groups (lmb, rioters, rikers, cleaners). That's what represents most of the experience.

 

[semiconscious]

Escape from New York had a political undertone. The fact that it's not the central point of the movie/game/whatever doesn't mean it's not there.

yeah, it's there. but it's also very, very secondary to the pulpy wackiness. it's the cherry on top of the sundae. & in the case of the division, i think it pretty much leaves it to you to draw your own conclusions ...

 

[PtM]

i did not enjoy reading that. But thanx for posting.

Dat user name.

Thread reminds me of Far Cry 3 and its own irksome things, which turned out to be intended to unsettle the player.

 

[Cynn]

This may have been said before but there's an audio file in the game where a squad of soldiers refuse to stay in the city because the people are all gone and they won't die to protect empty buildings and "property".

I guarantee you that the game is setting this narrative up on purpose. Who says in the expansions that we won't become the next set of Division Agents to defect?

 

[SuperStiltzkin]

I mean, let's unpack that, you have a great point there;

In TPP, your "heroes" are a band of lawless, stateless PMCs that roam around Afghanistan and Africa indiscriminately murdering and kidnapping soldiers, hell bent on getting your revenge for having your other lawless, stateless oil platform in the middle of the ocean shot up.

Well the entire point of TPP is that you are bad guys.

 

[Metrotab]

I hope I never consume media the same way the author does.

 

[queequegs__coffin]

I hope I never consume media the same way the author does.

Here, here. I can't wait for the gaming industry to grow out of its anemic temperament and get over itself so video games can explore and mature as a medium (especially with vr on the horizon!!) without being so overly didactic and political (perceived or otherwise).

 

[ISOM]

I can see some points of what the article is saying but it's also leaving out a lot of details of actual crimes being committed. It's not like as a protagonist that you're just executing people.

 

[Orayn]

Here, here. I can't wait for the gaming industry to grow out of its anemic temperament and get over itself so video games can explore and mature as a medium (especially with vr on the horizon!!) without being so overly didactic and political (perceived or otherwise).

If you think "evolving as a medium" will mean games getting less scrutiny, in-depth discussion, and politics, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[Ryouji Gunblade]

Excellent analysis. I wonder of we'll ever get Tom to leave his comfort zone.

 

[Kinyou]

Excellent analysis. I wonder of we'll ever get Tom to leave his comfort zone.

Tom already went into his eternal comfort zone

(He died in 2013)

As far as I know he wasn't actually involved with the story of this game.

 

[kyser73]

Ubisoft and Ubisoft Massive need to be better at this. I literally cannot believe the associate director and no one at any meeting said those things in the interview:



How oblivious and ignorant can you be when these people are in charge of multi-million international project.



How can it easily be defended? The game is set in the US and implicitly carries with it a host of cultural references by virtue of the context it places itself in.

Very easily. How many Movie & TV directors & writers are consciously aware that a lot of whet they write is essentially reinforcement of status quo norms & values?

There's also probably a misunderstanding of what is meant by 'political' - as seen in this thread, lots of people assuming it's a party-based thing, rather than a critique of power and how the game reproduces certain ideas that are assumed but not questioned - the idea that post-disaster environments will always descend into lawlessness without draconian measures being applied, for example.

The kind of power critique in the article is good for games journalism, and is at its best when talking about the reinforcement of property protection and the class & racial depiction of the characters.

Still, it isn't going to stop me going back to NY and running a line up some dudes back while he beats on a corpse with a bat.

 

[The Technomancer]

The Division, however, treats it with a strange reverence, fashioning itself as a celebration of absolute power. As a Division agent the player is portrayed as the best hope for the city, an everyday hero in a beat-up parka and jeans, ready to fight anyone who might resist. Empowered by Directive 51, they can cut through the red-tape of the judicial system and civil law, to supposedly impose order back on a lawless city through running battles and military assaults. It’s a muddled fiction to step into, one that casts you as an authoritarian enforcer with an unlimited license to kill, as well as “the savior of New York.” But when the game says New York, it isn’t referring to the citizens or the culture, instead it is referring to that most important of features in a capitalist society—property.

This is, really, sort of the problem with all fantasies of vigilante justice as a method for peacekeeping.

 

[Of All Trades]

How can it easily be defended? The game is set in the US and implicitly carries with it a host of cultural references by virtue of the context it places itself in.

The US is not a monoculture and you are engaging in critical tunnel vision by assuming that cultural references only go back about 18 months. Hoodies and bandannas were, for example, heavily attributed to white rioters throughout the majority of this century following the Seattle WTO protests. The previous major riot associated with black Americans in 1992 did not have the imagery of attire you are ascribing. Most other recent riots or protests with violent outbreaks had, at least after a cursory image search, little if any overlap between the outfits in question and race.

 

[hiex_]

This article perfectly encapsulates the way the batshit insane regressive left consumes media, good grief. Embarrassing to read, like cringe material.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

We just can't have a simple shoot and loot game can we?

Sure you can.

This article perfectly encapsulates the way the batshit insane regressive left consumes media, good grief. Embarrassing to read, like cringe material.

Wot? I don't think that means what you think it means... unless the article defends barbaric religious/tribal customs in the name of respecting all cultures or something. xD

 

[Of All Trades]

This is, really, sort of the problem with all fantasies of vigilante justice as a method for peacekeeping.

Maybe you could be a bit clearer on what the exact problem you are referring to, because the last line of that text block is deeply moronic unless you are critiquing capitalism as bad because personal property (like shelter) tends to root people, families, and culture into specific locations.

Or maybe I havent got for enough to protect the stock exchange for global capital overlords.

 

[Mman235]

The Division is kind of odd in this regard since the base concept is a bunch of right-wing wank but then it has bunch of stuff that subverts it like various things calling the Division as a concept out somewhat and multiple central characters who aren't straight white men. It's like the developers knew they were saddled to a Tom Clancy concept but then slipped in stuff to try and subvert it as much as they could. Unfortunately that criticism/exploration is mostly just throwaway stuff rather than anything central so it ends up being kind of shallow (unless something changes later in the campaign anyway, but from what I've heard it doesn't).

 

[Deleted member 126221]

Here, here. I can't wait for the gaming industry to grow out of its anemic temperament and get over itself so video games can explore and mature as a medium (especially with vr on the horizon!!) without being so overly didactic and political (perceived or otherwise).

So for the medium to mature, we need to... stop analyzing and discussing the content of games?

What's up with all the anti-intellectualism in the gaming community? Every time there's a thread about slightly deeper analysis of games, people get angry that a discussion is even happening. I'm baffled.

 

[ArkkAngel007]

An interesting analysis, but between it and with reading this thread: goddamn are we not allowed to have convict or citizen-based groups as enemies now? And where the hell is hoodies=blacks suddenly manifesting from? It's pretty much a very common ware for youths in general and has little to do with the violent tendencys of them. Given it's the dead of winter, need of pockets and concealment, it's a rather sensible clothing option.

Hell, isn't the LMB or some other faction's sniper always a woman? Seems like the game gives zero shits about race, gender, or political alignment. People playing the game won't be not noticing or ignoring these subtexts, because most of them just aren't present despite what some want to attach to the elements of the game.

Edit: Fuck right-wing/left-wing BS. Doubt it actually means what many seem to think it does.

 

[Spikematic]

I don't see how anyone who has actually played enough of the game can side with that article. Or well, everything in there at least. I just "ended" it today (as in hit 30 and completed all the story missions) and I can plainly see all the liberties the writer took with representing the facts. I'm not saying that people shouldn't analyze games deeply or raise legitimate concerns, especially in this troubled climate where we desperately need more awareness. That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm simply pointing out that writer is either making shit up to push his agenda (which to me is simply trying to get hits for an article based on the most popular game at the moment) or is actually a somewhat loony conspiracy theorist.

Anyway, my personal opinion is that the developers and game director definitely didn't have any sort of sinister agenda to portray stuff in the way the writer seems to think the game does. He is either very delusional or just very clever at trying to get hits. Either way, he wins I guess, because we're all here talking about this instead of playing the game! Which by the way I had a blast with. Doubt I'll dabble in the endgame loot grind, but in any case I'm sure I'll be able to enjoy it without taking any of that absurd shit he wrote up seriously.

 

[Puck Beaverton]

A critical analysis of something that feels more like product than an actual piece of art feels weird to me.

That said, people wanting games to be taken seriously and then cry when they are will forever be confusing.

 

[rakkadakka]

Yeah I think for many games if you dig deep they're terrifying.

Hotline Miami comes to mind pretty quick.

Did have to laugh about using victims as "human petri dishes" because that mission you're looking for survivors to create a vaccine. I'm not sure anyone would refuse or have issues with this if the division was reality.

Writer has a point but like many articles on the internet the writer takes leeway with reality to prove it. The game itself criticizes the division and the agents throughout.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Here, here. I can't wait for the gaming industry to grow out of its anemic temperament and get over itself so video games can explore and mature as a medium (especially with vr on the horizon!!) without being so overly didactic and political (perceived or otherwise).

So...you're saying you hope games mature by ceasing on self reflection and critical analysis, and instead continue to be nothing more than shiny toys. Huh.

This thread is fucking depressing. Even criticism of incredibly blatant themes such as those in the Division is met with such strong pushback. Did other forms of literary criticism have such a difficult time establishing itself?

 

[TC McQueen]

This thread is fucking depressing. Even criticism of incredibly blatant themes such as those in the Division is met with such strong pushback. Did other forms of literary criticism have such a difficult time establishing itself?

Maybe, but most of them probably weren't open to public scrutiny from the beginning. Most literary criticism is pretty much confined to academic journals and magazines that statistically no one reads, and has pretty much been that way for at least a century.

It probably also doesn't help that as a society, we've been primed to see literary criticism/analysis as bullshit, because we've done it in high school and college and know it's bullshit. As an English major, I can't tell you the amount of bullshit I've spun connecting completely fucking unrelated things because I had to.

Hell, I did a paper on how Fuqua's King Arthur movie was connected to Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica and the Iraq war or some shit like that.

 

[Drac84]

I find it hard to visually distinguish the rioters from ordinary citizens. Accordingly, I'm always responding to being shot at. I've not once shot a bloke for rummaging in bins or looting, so that aspect of the article doesn't resonate with me.

Something that often gets lost in a lot of these discussions is that it's a videogame. And by that I don't mean it shouldn't be analysed or critiqued, but that in a videogame the player needs things to do. Gameplay and narrative aren't always in full alignment. In a film or book the concept of a US government operative performing summary executions on hundreds of US citizens would certainly be more extreme from a narrative/political standpoint, but in a videogame the player needs something to do for dozens of hours of gameplay, and in this particular game that 'something' is shooting NPCs.

It's the same problem I have with the 'Nathan Drake is a mass murderer' argument that gets wheeled out every few months. In those games I personally see that aspect of the gameplay as separate and distinct from the main narrative.

Overall though was an interesting read and a good way to start my Friday, cheers for bringing it to my attention OP.

 

[JoeBoy101]

So...you're saying you hope games mature by ceasing on self reflection and critical analysis, and instead continue to be nothing more than shiny toys. Huh.

This thread is fucking depressing. Even criticism of incredibly blatant themes such as those in the Division is met with such strong pushback. Did other forms of literary criticism have such a difficult time establishing itself?

If you have to overlook details, make logical jumps, and downright misrepresent some facts to make your criticism, it says to me that the author is not confident of that criticism. He might have a point, but I would have found it more compelling if he addresses those things that conflicted with his position.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

Maybe, but most of them probably weren't open to public scrutiny from the beginning. Most literary criticism is pretty much confined to academic journals and magazines that statistically no one reads, and has pretty much been that way for at least a century.

It probably also doesn't help that as a society, we've been primed to see literary criticism/analysis as bullshit, because we've done it in high school and college and know it's bullshit. As an English major, I can't tell you the amount of bullshit I've spun connecting completely fucking unrelated things because I had to.

Hell, I did a paper on how Fuqua's King Arthur movie was connected to Ron Moore's Battlestar Galactica and the Iraq war or some shit like that.

This was actually going to be my follow up question. I was wondering if American schools even taught literary criticism. I mean, yeah it was a lot of bullshit in high school; I think all of us have spun last minute bullshit about books we read the cliff notes for.

That said, I thought that most people would have the basic skill of interpreting a text in a way that's at least a little deeper than the most surface level, but it honestly doesn't seem to be case.

 

[partyphone]

Here, here. I can't wait for the gaming industry to grow out of its anemic temperament and get over itself so video games can explore and mature as a medium (especially with vr on the horizon!!) without being so overly didactic and political (perceived or otherwise).

how do you envision video games maturing?

 

[SolicitorPirate]

If you have to overlook details, make logical jumps, and downright misrepresent some facts to make your criticism, it says to me that the author is not confident of that criticism. He might have a point, but I would have found it more compelling if he addresses those things that conflicted with his position.

If that was the problem a lot of people were having with the article, they would be making counter arguments. Granted, there have been people doing so. But we'd be lying to ourselves if we pretended a good number of respondents aren't just lamenting the fact that people are looking at the Division at a level more nuanced than 'is the shooting good?'

 

[reptilescorpio]

It's obvious very early on the Division aren't entirely good guys. Hell a lot of the early banter is about how the first wave of agents abandoned their post or got slaughtered. The echo about the agent who straight up murders a cab driver drove it home for me.

 

[120v]

the game does happen to tread a lot of landmines... the base concept is basically 9/11 times 10 and probably couldn't have been made over five years ago.

end of the day though there's really not much "ideology" under the hood, if one could ever be culled from an MMO shooter

 

[TC McQueen]

That said, I thought that most people would have the basic skill of interpreting a text in a way that's at least a little deeper than the most surface level, but it honestly doesn't seem to be case.

Honestly, as an English major, all I do most of the time is look for the numerous storytelling flaws that either undermine the message in whatever media I'm dealing with or just make it a shitty story. I really don't give a shit what the authors are trying to push, I just want a decent narrative and characters to give a shit about.

 

[SolicitorPirate]

It's obvious very early on the Division aren't entirely good guys. Hell a lot of the early banter is about how the first wave of agents abandoned their post or got slaughtered. The echo about the agent who straight up murders a cab driver drove it home for me.

I think a lot of the problem lies in the fact that your Agent is entirely silent. You're railroaded into following the orders of the Division with nary a protest, which creates a sense of implied approval of how the Division operates and conducts itself.

 

[Garrett Hawke]

how do you envision video games maturing?

mario as a form of storytelling

 

[Neoleo2143]

mario as a form of storytelling

To be fair, Rosalina's Story book is a solid emotional piece.

 

[queequegs__coffin]

As an English major, I can't tell you the amount of bullshit I've spun connecting completely fucking unrelated things because I had to.

Amen.

The thing with most criticism, literary and otherwise, is that it often misses the mark completely. Just because something can be intellectualized (to use a word somebody said earlier) ad nauseum doesn't mean you are benefiting anybody by doing so, especially when it is wildly speculative opinion masquerading as intelligentsia.

It's hard this day and age to read a critique without the author wearing their bias on their sleeves. And the thing with most critiques is that they rarely see the game on its own terms and fail miserably to acknowledge, very simply and obviously, what the game is designed to do. Instead, a list of grievances of who slighted who. The games journalism (to use the word lightly) needs a massive throat-clearing and a sober look in the mirror to figure out what they are in aid of.

 

[TheYanger]

The Division is kind of odd in this regard since the base concept is a bunch of right-wing wank but then it has bunch of stuff that subverts it like various things calling the Division as a concept out somewhat and multiple central characters who aren't straight white men. It's like the developers knew they were saddled to a Tom Clancy concept but then slipped in stuff to try and subvert it as much as they could. Unfortunately that criticism/exploration is mostly just throwaway stuff rather than anything central so it ends up being kind of shallow (unless something changes later in the campaign anyway, but from what I've heard it doesn't).

People call out pretty early on that the entire concept of The Division is fucked up, and their fears all turn out to be correct as you find otu what happened.

People saying "Maybe yo uARE the bad guys" - the dark zone is intended for you to make that choice. You can either be a rogue agent or try to uphold 'peace' in a lawless area, and it makes sense in the context of the world and story once you play farther or listen to the storytelling going on.

I can't even take arguments saying the Rioters reprsent racism...not sure what to say, LOOK at the rioters in the game: They represent all ethnicities. Just because the kinds of riots we've had lately in the US have been racially motivated does not mean that anyone who ever riots or wears a hoodie here would be black, and as much as they're covered up you CAN see their faces, so to assume that there's any racial element at ALL there when you can just look at the characters themselves, and see that they're not mostly black, is far more racist than the game assuming there would be lawless rioter type folks in this situation. Here, I went and pulled a random group of Rioters, this is what they actually look like:

I know they're not amazing pictures so it might be hard to tell, but only the guy on the right is black. To me this makes the assumption that they're all black far more disgusting than what the game itself has portrayed: That EVERYONE is capable of some bad shit in desperate times.

Larae Barrett is a black woman leading the Rikers... who are mostly white male guys that are truly fucked up individuals. (I actually think every rikers npc model is white, besides Larae, but I could be wrong, just guessing off the top of my head). There are several instances in the game of dialogue and phone recordings saying most of the people there aren't bad people, as it is in real life, but some are fucked and want revenge. There's even a side story that basically tells you flat out that all government and aid was abandoned on Rikers and the prisoners were left to die wtih no medicine, no food, no water. That the government fucked them hard. They're only alive because of Larae Barrett, and the ones that hold a grudge hold it pretty hard, understandably I think.

I think the hoops you have to jump through to be offended at this game involve a LOT of assumptions (All rioters are black, The game encourages you to just gun random people down, the government is shown as absolute and lawful while citizens are not, etc), while not actually paying attention to ANY of the game's story or setting. Seriously, if you listen to the dialogue and watch the echoes and read the shit in this game, the Division is routinely called out, the government is shat on, and in the end those criticisms all end up being completely merited (

Spoiler

Just spoilering in case anyone really cares, but the gist of it is after all this went down and the first wave of agents got abandoned in the dark zone, protecting buildings and not people as they put it, a section of them went rogue and are now the REAL bad guys, thus validating all of the fears that people who cried about absolute power and how the Division is a bad idea had. They flat out say "Go to the Dark zone and see how fucked things are, you'll want to join us" to explain why you yourself can be a huge asshole if you want. It's implied you've done it several times already even.

).