+- The VG Resource (https://www.vg-resource.com)
+-- Forum: Archive (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-65.html)
+--- Forum: July 2014 Archive (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-139.html)
+---- Forum: The Archives (https://www.vg-resource.com/forum-66.html)
+---- Thread: Gaming Lounge (/thread-20426.html)
RE: Gaming Lounge - puggsoy - 06-15-2012
I took a look at hex editing ROMs sometime, never got enough time/patience to do it. There's an easy-looking NSMB level editor that looks pretty interesting to use though.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Dazz - 06-15-2012
I never did get into rom hacking... It's just never seemed interesting to me.
I think I just don't find level design interesting so I've not seen much point, the game is already better than I could ever do anyway, so why change it?
RE: Gaming Lounge - puggsoy - 06-15-2012
Well some guy made NSMB3, which basically replaces all the NSMB levels with those from SMB3 (effectively making SMB3 with new graphics). It's an interesting idea, and although I probably won't play it any time soon it shows the potential of editing the levels. Personally I think messing around and using certain features to their extremities would be fun
RE: Gaming Lounge - Dazz - 06-15-2012
I agree that is kind of cool, I mean it extends the life of a game, and I think that's awesome. I just wish companies would realise this and release legal level editing tools (Valve, ily)
RE: Gaming Lounge - Chutzpar - 06-15-2012
i had a big ol' wall of text here in response to yours but i can distill it pretty quickly;
you're basically pulling the gender equivalent of the 'white women's tears' defense.
you're making it all about how your feelings are hurt by accusations of sexism (which, i hasten to add, nobody accused you of), and in doing so cheerfully ignoring the feelings of people who are actually affected by sexism
angie already pointed out;
if you haven't read up about sexism or if you're not actually affected by it, you need to sit the fuck down. discussions of sexism are the one, one single situation in the entirety of human interaction in which men are expected to defer to women's experience. because, you know, we're the ones actually affected by sexism and all
unless someone else is going to tell me that an industry run by men, designed for men, staffed almost entirely with men, and depicting stories about men, is somehow sexist against men, in which case i would like to know what colour the sky is on your planet
CHEERFULLY AWAITS BAN
E M B R A C E D E A T H
RE: Gaming Lounge - Previous - 06-15-2012
Hadn't headr of the NSMB hacking before, but it really sounds neat. But emulators run really laggy on my machine and I don't do flashcards, soooo. Well, I still have the SNES version of SMB3, so whutevers.
Gotta play some SNES again at some point, it was a big part of my childhood.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Dazz - 06-15-2012
(06-15-2012, 07:55 AM)hugbox Wrote: i had a big ol' wall of text here in response to yours but i can distill it pretty quickly;
you're basically pulling the gender equivalent of the 'white women's tears' defense.
you're making it all about how your feelings are hurt by accusations of sexism (which, i hasten to add, nobody accused you of), and in doing so cheerfully ignoring the feelings of people who are actually affected by sexism
angie already pointed out;
if you haven't read up about sexism or if you're not actually affected by it, you need to sit the fuck down. discussions of sexism are the one, one single situation in the entirety of human interaction in which men are expected to defer to women's experience. because, you know, we're the ones actually affected by sexism and all
unless someone else is going to tell me that an industry run by men, designed for men, staffed almost entirely with men, and depicting stories about men, is somehow sexist against men, in which case i would like to know what colour the sky is on your planet
CHEERFULLY AWAITS BAN
E M B R A C E D E A T H
My points are still valid that in my eyes, the fight to reduce sexism is being hindered by people being too extreme in their attempts to stop it.
This Tomb Raider fiasco got out of hand before it should have, and because of it people came across like idiots... And now they need a reason to still be angry so they're making points which just hold no ground to me. So I can't support that.
I don't understand how a lot of men can argue to be effected by the sexism, though I understand their reasons to support. I mean I do... And I really have no reason to, since it doesn't effect me at all (obviously I give a shit about other people, so there's that...) besides from a quality point of view.
Also, I felt like I was being accused. Probably because Tyvon's "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem" post basically made me out to be a major issue when I fully support it...
Also, why would I ban you for voicing an opinion?
also, just to point out: You were quite passive-aggressive or whatever that stupid shit is about something that I had previously mentioned irks me, and made it out like it was really important. When it isn't, I said it was a peeve, not a major world problem.
RE: Gaming Lounge - GrooveMan.exe - 06-15-2012
Ah; before this gets potentially buried in a "NO ARGUING ABOUT CONTENTIOUS TOPICS GUYS" post-cleanse, let me make a few things clear. (Some of this is a repeat of what I've said elsewhere, so forgive me if it sounds like I'm repeating myself).
Firstly, no one is calling posters ITT a sexist. In circumstances like these, it's a "what you said" discussion, not a "what you are" discussion. Save the "what you are" accusations (both offensively and defensively) for more concrete evidence. There's a great video by Ill Doctrine that talks about this (from the point of view of Racism, but the concept still stands)
What discussing minority issues with people of those minorities (or those researched in the theory) achieves is to pinpoint attitudes and ideas of what's problematic, and getting people to realise that it's problematic and why. This is a two-way game - it's not the 'duty' to minorities to explain to others why things are/are not problematic, and people outside of a minority are well advised to hold the opinions of said minority with a little more weight; since they're actually talking about something they directly experience.
What people are taking issue with in this thread (I obviously can't speak for anonymous internet posters the world over) are two things:
- That because a woman character in a game has revealing clothing, that it's not sexist if they're compromised because 'the game's designed that way'
- That the new Tomb Raider isn't sexist because 'she's in the same position as other male characters'.
Right, the skirts issue first:
These characters are designed by people, and people design things with reasons in mind. While from a 'Death of the Author' point of view, it may seem like a revealing clothing on women characters is justified within its own setting - bear in mind that the setting was still created by someone. (Let me also say, that 'Death of the Author' is NEVER the only way to look at a work, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise)
In the case of Lollipop Chainsaw, someone designed the character to be a cheerleader in a short skirt who fights using cheerleader-style moves. They also decided to give her a more air-headed personality than her equally athletically-competent sisters, and detailed circumstances where the player could try to intentionally look up her skirt - and what the game does in response (unique dialogue and an achievement what the fuck).
For another example, try Bayonetta. In solely the context of the game, Bayonetta feels empowering - she's very sexual, yes, but it's entirely on her own terms, and she actively combats people who try to put her down.
But if you read up a little about the games designers and director - it's stated that Bayonetta's design is generated from the design team pooling their kinks together; and Bayonetta's aggressiveness is generated from the director believing that womanhood/femininity is inherently competitive and sexual. Now Bayonetta's design becomes a lot less cool (I was actually sort of upset when I found that out. =c )
This kind of 'design justification' is sexist. And in the case of it being a design generated from the designer's own opinion of women, that arguably makes them sexist.
Right, now for Tomb Raider:
The complaints here are again partially down to Author Intent. On paper, this is a game where a woman protagonist is exploring and shooting dudes, in a manner akin to Nathan Drake (it's a bit amusing to make that comparison, when a few years ago, Nathan Drake was exploring and shooting in a manner similar to Lara Croft). However, the gameplay trailer last year, where Lara had to escape entrapment while moaning a lot from various injuries felt a little off. To some (many?) the moans sounded more sexual than pained, and the grabbing, shadowy figures reminded a little too much of a sexual abuse parallel.
This would all just be conjecture; until this year when a statement was made by the director that Lara was written in a way where the player is prompted to want to 'protect' her. Not be her; as would be the case for more or less any other action game where your actions are part of a power fantasy; but an intentional distancing. Why? Why wouldn't you want be Lara Croft? Well if you craft a story where the protagonist has her friend kidnapped, her plans destroyed, and her getting kidnapped herself, then you're engineering a situation like that.
The director also made a statement about having sexual abuse be part of the game (and since backpedalled); but even without an overt reference to rape; it's clear that this Tomb Raider reboot is not functioning on the same level as other action games in regard to its characterisation.
So, these games are sexist. Does that make them bad games?
No, not necessarily! There are plenty of instances across all media types that are well made; but are problematic in a way (or multiple ways!). Lollipop Chainsaw is looking kinda average for reasons outside of its sexism; but Tomb Raider may still turn out to be an accomplished game despite its creepy undertones.
But what's REALLY IMPORTANT to process is that just because a game is good, doesn't mean that any problematic features it has are absolved. Part of enjoying a piece is properly accepting its flaws and shortcomings. If you personally can enjoy a game, or any kind of media while still recognising its problems then all the power to ya. What's shitty is denying or excusing something's flaws just because you like the game as a whole.
As a bonus aside to Feminist Frequency
That project's actually pretty cool; and all the shitty internet backlash it's gotten makes me like it even more. She's not the best person ever existing to talk about these issues (nor am I for that matter); but the fact that she's willing to discuss it, put time and money into researching and discussing both the good and bad representations of women characters in games is admirable, and I wish her all the best. Apparently because of the large amount of money she's gotten; part of the project will be creating class materials and doing talks; which is really cool!
The damsel in distress thing may be an old - mythological even - archetype; but that doesn't mean it's not a sexist one. That story archetype could be done with any combination of genders. The Fighting FuckToy archetype would be characters that are SUPER AGGRESSIVE MASTER FIGHTERS but are also designed to be super sexy, and sometimes if it calls for it, emotionally vulnerable. Nina from Tekken is a great example. Funnily enough, she also has sexual-sounding moans when she's hurt.
Men can fall into these archetypes, but the thing is, this isn't a discussion about men. To go "what about the men" in a discussion specifically about representation of women is a derail; and a way to common one at that. Y'know how ridiculous it is when people complain that gay marriage will somehow affect the sanctity of all straight marriages? Same kind of derail (with roughly the same amount of meaningful input, too).
So yeah. That's out lesson on feminist theory in video games for the day. Tune in next week where I'll talk about how few black characters there are; and how the ones that exist are largely Dumb Muscle.
Quote:I also recently decided that retired staff should no longer see the happenings of the admin board because it is none of their business how the site is conducting itself when they have no direct involvement. Meta doesn't like that, likely because it means that because it might be seen as me prevent Grooveman and Alpha Six seeing the discussions held in there which have nothing to do with these debates. But when the time comes around that they decide to peek their heads out and argue their point, they should have the advantage of seeing my discussion with the rest of the staff. Cool stuff.Unrelated thought, but this is really amusing. Please don't shit the bed just because we don't see eye-to-eye on minority issues.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Chutzpar - 06-15-2012
hahaha i was just coming here to edit my post and post that jay smooth video :V
like really can we just make ill doctrine and feminist frequency / tropes vs women required viewing before anyone discusses minority issues ever.
e: and can we all fucking stop with the "YOU'RE GOING TOO FAR" thing because that's like a hairs-breadth away from throwing in the word feminazi. yet again; SIT THE FUCK DOWN. you don't get to dictate what is an appropriate response to something you will literally never experience.
and honestly tyvon was 100% right that if you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. if you aren't actively fighting bigotry (and this goes for all forms of bigotry, not just sexism), you are complicit in that bigotry. you only have the option of apathy because of your relative privilege, and if you're happy to continue receiving this privilege and the benefits that confers, you are part of the problem.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Dazz - 06-15-2012
I still hold it in my opinion that people are being picky for the sake of being picky on certain points, but yeah, I do feel slightly more enlightened after Nate's post.
That being said, I won't change my mind that people need to see the broader picture - the point about "what about men" isn't that they're being discriminated, it's that they go through the same thing in multiple cases, and the argument is less "it's bad for men" as it's "not so bad for women" in those exact cases.
I.E. Nathan Drake Lara Croft.
I look forward to more diversity in the gaming industry with female roles being regular, but I think companies decide not to do for the reasons stated. If they try, and they screw up, it's a major issue. With a male role, if they make them a straight white male, it's easy street. That is the norm in the gaming world at the moment. Doesn't mean it's right, but a company is there to make money, indie games perhaps not so much, but they don't want to make risks. So when one does, commend them but assist, don't explode.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Chutzpar - 06-15-2012
It's not 'commendable' to write a female character as a stereotype, for fuck's sake. That's not an attempt at diversity, that's absolutely maintaining the status quo. We want to see women put in good roles. We want to see black characters who aren't just a ~wacky urban sidekick~ or dumb muscle. We want gay characters who aren't just cartoonish sexually-predatory stereotypes. We are allowed to get angry when this does not happen. I'd rather see none of these minorities represented at all than see yet more stereotypical and pandering shite, because that is not any kind of progress.
I feel like I've said this countless times before but INTENT IS NOT MAGICAL. If you (general you, largely referring to game devs atm) fuck up, you've fucked up. It doesn't matter if you didn't mean to fuck up, because the end result is the same. If we were talking about a bug that made a game absolutely unplayable, nobody would be mimbling about how they didn't mean to crash your computer, why can't you be more civil?? You'd be pissed, and you'd expect the devs to fix it and not just post some weaselly explanation of why really their intentions were good when they made a game that you paid $40 for and can't actually play.
Are you even aware that you're ignoring posts from Actual Women in myself and Angie to give Nathan buttpats for opening your eyes, when he's making largely the same points as we've already made?
i mean honestly would you rather be insulted than ignored
that's essentially what you're saying here, that women + other minorities should be happy that they're being insulted in gaming because at least that means they're being acknowledged
RE: Gaming Lounge - Dazz - 06-15-2012
Alright I'm sorry, what?
He explained it more indepth to a point that I could relate.
Don't get fucking angry at me for trying to understand something, for fuck sake, that isn't helping.
I'm not IGNORING your fucking posts, I'm just directly replying to Nathan because he took the time out to explain everything in depth for my stupid brain to understand.
I'm not going to discuss this anymore because I'm seeing this now as largely pointless and you picking a fight with me about the entire thing when I don't see certain points as seriously as you do. Perhaps because I'm a man, sure, I don't know. It's just how it is. If that bothers you, I don't care, because I really don't know how to see it differently. I disagree that being picky about something that isn't black and white is a good thing.
A bug is a defined moment when something breaks and is unplayable. A female role that isn't quite right, but is stepping in the right direction, deserves being commended and reinforcement.
If a kid gets a B at school, you say good job and encourage them to keep trying hard to improve. You don't slap them round the face and tell them they're doing a shitty job and need try harder.
(See, I can do analogies too.)
This is my opinion on how we as a culture need to improve, and you disagree. That is fine. I disagree with your direction for it too.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Cobalt Blue - 06-15-2012
i believe its been clear that "dazz knows he's right and we should not bother arguing about why he is not".
RE: Gaming Lounge - Dazz - 06-15-2012
Nice passive aggressive there.
I believe I'm right, of course I do. Why would I not think that? I don't know the answers because nobody SHOULD. Because there is no right and no wrong. Christ almighty, that should be obvious.
RE: Gaming Lounge - Chutzpar - 06-15-2012
Oh well we've stopped making her aggressively sexualised so instead we're going to make her vulnerably sexualised, that's progress, I'm very progressive for wanting the player to feel as if they should protect and snuggle the poor precious woman with her delicate fee-fees.
That's progress, women, because I said so, and my opinion trumps all yours because of reasons.
Or you know if you want me to actually be serious about this; sexualisation is a big problem for women
so is infantilisation and the assumption that we are weak
switching out one for the other is not a "step in the right direction" and you need to stop fucking telling women that they're just LOOKING FOR STUFF TO BE OFFENDED ABOUT (which i add again, angie addressed, and you ignored!!)
PULLING ON MY WELLIES BECAUSE I AM KNEE DEEP IN POOP