Decieve, despise, and murder men -
February 23, 2001 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed
within this column are those of the participants and the
moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the
GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive
material afoot.
It's about a dude who drive a bus by day... but by night fights vampires
in a post-apocalyptic war zone!
Don't say we didn't warn you.
Mmm.... MGS2, the game that's minty fresh and snowy white all at once.
I'll hold off a bit until I can play the demo myself to comment much on
the plot, but this may be the first game ever to have a pregnant woman as
anything but a secondary character... and a knife-throwing pregnant woman
at that. Kojima just keeps pushing the envelope, and more power to him.
Onward.
| Get a hold of
yourself, man! |
| The Steve wrote:
I admit there're no games that match the simplicity and tragedy of Death
of a
Salesman, but they're better than most of the stuff Dickens wrote.
That just about says everything, doesn't it? Why should we possibly expect
anyone outside the hobby to take games seriously when we, without a trace
of irony, make totally ridiculous statements like this? Nobody else takes
it seriously in great part because we take it way, way, *too* seriously.
But that's okay, one might say. Everyone takes their hobbies more
seriously than, in all objectivity, they probably deserve.
The thing is, though, it's just this sort of self-satisfaction that
prevents the genre from growing, because if everyone insists on insisting
that something like Xenogears (I ask you!) is deep, symbolic, meaningful,
great-work-of-literature, etc, then what impetus is there for things to
actually get to BE that way? To be honest, I have serious doubts that
games are ever going to be able to match literature as an artform, but if
you're really interested in the ideal, you should avoid making statements
like that. It's embarrassing.
--Geo |
This letter's a bit condescending to The Steve, for which I apologize,
but it does make a few good points. In The Steve's defense, Dickens, while
an excellent writer in may respects, was overly verbose and fond of social
issues that, while still important, don't really pack the same punch they
once did. In contrast, Xenogears probably is overly pretentious and
bloated, but it did a relatively good job of coating its religious/philosophical
payload with a lot of action and sf trappings, which made it very
interesting to a lot of people who probably hadn't ever been in a college
philosophy class before. (And to some who had, as well.) It should
probably be remembered that Xenogears came out in 1998, and although there
are several games that have improved on it since, it was still pretty damn
revolutionary for the time.
That said, I agree that Xenogears is more an interesting historical
footnote at this point than an example of what games ought to be like...
heck, even Vagrant Story's not at classic literary status yet.
Yet.
| It's the unusual back and
forth |
| Ah hell, I've been sitting here for too damn long,
trying to think of some way to start this letter. Screw it.
WHY do people think that games haven't given us stories that are on par with
movies or novels? Metal Gear Solid would have made a brilliant book, as would
have Planescape:Torment, as someone pointed out the other day. But what is
it that these games have that others do not? What makes these two shining
examples of video gaming excellence so memorable, when so many others
fall flat? What IS it about them that 0wnz j00?!
Here, I'll tell you (since I'm obviously such an authority on the subject, you
best ph34r m4 l337 r00l1n6 ;): Character interaction.
MGS and Planescape had it in spades. Not only that, but they did it WELL..
By "WELL", I don't mean the token interaction you get in your everyday FF or
that undulating pile of pure character crap that we were fed in Chrono Cross!
No! I mean good healthy interaction between a lone government agent and his
caring support crew or the pure love that's exchanged between an immortal and
his floating skull. Did Bilbo Baggins and his posse only talk to townsfolk?
Did Rand, Mat and Perrin speak to each other only during "Big Plot Points"?
Did Ender and Bean stop talking after they became good friends? Hell no!
Its not better storylines we need; its better chemistry! I'd rather watch that
manly, platonic love grow between Rod and Rue than see intriguing character
after intriguing character lose their personality and fall into line mindlessly
after the main "hero". I almost wept, WEPT at the ending of Dewprism!
All these wonderful people, I watched their friendships grow and then they
all went their seperate ways...of course, I was always kind of teary-eyed at the
end of summer camp, too. Teary-eyed in that hairy, masculine way, that is.
Ah, manly, platonic love...sigh...
Um, well, I think you get the gist of it.
-Jason, who cried when Big Joe fell so low as to resort to selling Drive...
|
Counter example: Grandia. The characters had regular periods where they
did nothing but chatter back and forth over the dinner table... although
the chatter was less of the character-building type you describe, and more
of the "here's my back story, this is here we go next" type.
You're right, of course - we need characters, we need interaction, and
we need more scenes that don't do much to advance the plot but do lots to
make us care about the people the plot's happening to. Game
characters were tiny 32x32 sprites for so long that it's still hard to see them
as anything but heroic archetypes, but with new graphical styles should
probably come new ways of looking at characters, and new types of
characters with inner selves that match the realism of their outer
selves.
| I Fear Effect 2 |
| Chris,
The following are my impressions of Fear Effect 2, the game whose ad
campaign has done more to push 'alternative lifestyles' than the rest of the
industry put together. First off, the controls have been tweaked rather
than overhauled (there is now an auto-reverse button, but weapon juggling
can still be a pain). However, the designers kept the limitations of the RE
control scheme in mind, so the controls won't get you killed. As promised,
the after-death load time is practically nonexistent (two seconds or so).
As with the original, the puzzle design is quite clever and requires minimum
back and forth (an annoying phenomena which plagued even the great MGS).
The dialogue kind of reminds me of Pulp Fiction, in that while people may
not speak that way in real life, the constant (sometimes sexually charged)
back and forth, liberally salted with snappy one-liners, is extremely
entertaining. Like the original, the graphics style lays polygonal
characters over looping fmv (which animates things like waves, swaying
chains, convulsing bodies) to good effect (yes, it looks clearer than the
original). The storyline is the same type of John Woo meets Hellraiser deal
as the original (some don't like that style, I do). As for adult content,
the game doesn't have much that wasn't in Ninja Scroll or Robocop ten years
ago (with the point of divergence being some very friendly females). In
conclusion, people who appreciate a little story with their asskicking
(which probably sums up the readership of the GIA) and can handle mature
content should give FE2 a try.
- Mark |
Two strikes against this game: first off, they didn't fix the
control scheme (which, although livable, didn't really come close to
the MGS style that the action sequences demanded.) Second... well,
IGN's review
(and some of the associated screenshots)
pretty much say it all, and then some. Still, it's just as easy to find
some of that stuff completely ludicrous as offensive, and I did truly
enjoy some of the inventive settings and endings of the original. I still
gotta finish Skies of Arcadia, hopefully before ZOE comes out, but if
you're interested in FE2... well, to each his own.
| Uh oh, I've ticked off
the Canadians again... |
| I know this shouldn't bug me, but after a while
it gets annoying like a grain of sand stuck in the back of your eye
and you have to say something. As a Canadian, I play the exact same
games you Americans do. My games are released on the same date as
yours. My video game systems are identical to yours. You may not think
about it, but approximately 1 out of every 10 visitors to this site from
North America is a Canadian. I don't know if it's typical American
ignorance that we Canadians all know and love, but whenever someone
refers to the 'public' they refer to it as 'Americans' or 'America.' I don't
know if every other Canadian agrees (and any other country for that matter),
but it makes me feel like I'm looking in from the sidelines. I don't want to be
looking in from the sidelines, so please take into consideration that there are
other English speaking people almost identical to you just outside of your borders.
I'll shut up now and go back to my igloo...
Anonymous |
Ok, you're marginalized, but so are a lot of other people. The
entire US market is marginalized when it comes to RPGs, although things
are far better than they were in the past. I'll try to watch my
language (although what's the alternative? "Westerners" is both too
broad and has the vague ring of a cultural statement.) At the same
time, there are people far worse off than any of us, as this next
letter shows.
| More of the
disenfranchised speak out |
| When i am writing this, thousands of gamers have already gotten their
hands on Skies of Arcadia, while i, on the other hand, have to wait. Reason? I live in
Europe(my parents from china). You guys just don`t realise how lucky you are, i have
to wait until March 2001 to play that game. It is sadistic torture to have to wait maybe a
year(or two) after the Japanese release before it comes to Europe, i just hate the fact that
the Europeans only likes footy- or shooting games(most of them). |
See? It could be worse... you could be European. (Worse as
far as games are concerned, that is. Believe me, I'm not trying to tick off you
socialist, brie-eating elitist snobs... oops.)
But seriously, I think your situation isn't all that bad - you seem to
be able to deal with English quite well, so why not just get a US console,
a PAL converter, and some import copies of whatever game you're interested
in? True, it'd be more expensive, but one of the big complaints I've heard
this past year is that there are too many games to deal with out on the
market - limiting your budget should let you pick and choose only the
really good ones.
| The invisible media |
| Hi,
With regards to game music and the media, it's pretty simple.
I *have* heard beautiful game music on TV. Used as background music in
drama serials, no less. The only thing is that I never see the composer
being credited. Not the game company, either.
One show lifted tracks from Xenogears, two others from a number of Final
Fantasies. Nowhere were Yasunori Mitsuda or Nobuo Uematsu mentioned in the
credits.
Is it that game music is so insignificant that the copyrights can simply be
ignored? But if the media has thought highly enough of those tracks to
actually use them, refusing to acknowledge their source isn't logical.
Another thing I noticed: a Singaporean tabloid reported that Faye Wong
"scored a big hit in Japan with the English song 'Eyes on Me' ". Again,
nowhere is FF8 mentioned. It's not even as though it was that phenomenal a
song to begin with. Without the association with Final Fantasy, she would
never have got much publicity.
The media underestimates videogames. What with all that, we can't really
blame people for thinking games are, well, blips and bloops. Look at the
*irony* of the situation. People hear tracks from Xenogears and FF and they
don't even know that they're from games. And they just go on thinking that
game music all sounds like Pac Man.
I really feel like throwing stones at the TV sometimes.
WindSprite
P.S. I've converted one of the skeptical simply by making her listen to
Xenogears Creid. That generally works fine. She's got the name 'Mitsuda'
imprinted in her subconsciousness now. *grin*
|
I don't think that kind of stealing from game music is all that common
as of yet, but it is pretty common with another type of music: film scores.
If you know what to listen for, you can hear certain soundtracks popping
up over and over again: Driving Miss Daisy, The Hunt for Red October, and
The Matrix, used in either commercials or for preview trailers for films
that haven't been fully scored yet. Although it is possible that as games
become more and more mainstream (and game music increases in fidelity) we
could start hearing Uematsu or Mitsuda pop up on car ads... and I'm
not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing.
And throwing rocks at a TV is fun, as long as the TV in question isn't
your own. Very cathartic.
| Nintendo gets into the
old school war |
| Christof,
I happened to read a couple of interesting interviews yesterday, which I
thought you might enjoy, from an intelligent gamer's point of view. (links
provided at bottom). The first is an interview with the infamous Yamauchi,
who actually makes quite a bit of sense in it. The second interview is with a
few of the Zelda 64 developers. It seems Nintendo has a sweeping attitude in
it's design policies, an attitude that has probably led to the fame it's
games have been given. Both Mr. Yamauchi and Miyamoto (as well as Mr. Aonuma,
director of Majora's Mask) have a very intense focus on gameplay, and believe
it is THE fundamental elements of games. Now you may think this is a rather
"No duh" concept, but if you compare it to some games that are being released
lately, the focus has been much more so on eye candy.
"The average gamer's perspective has gradually shifted over the years.
They're getting sick of games that are nothing but graphics and force; they
want something to play that's actually fun. So why are companies still aiming
for nothing but graphics and force?....games with incredible, utterly
beautiful graphics were completely dead in the marketplace [versus games like
DQ7]. This just backs up what I've always been saying -- games have nothing
to do at all with graphics." -Yamauchi
While I think that graphics are certainly an important part of games, they
are not necessary to have an enjoyable game in itself. Games such as Tetris,
heavily gameplay oriented, are much more fun than LoD is, in my opinion,
despite graphical differences.
"I start with certain actions. By touching the controller myself, I start
with asking myself 'Is this going to be a fun action, something enjoyable if
I move in this direction?' Based upon certain actions I think about the story
which will incorporate and require these actions. Then graphics and pictures
are determined depending on the story and actions. That's my way of making
videogames." - Miyamoto
Words from The Man himself, about how he develops games. And what games are
among the most raved and blessed in our little gamers society? Miyamoto
games. Perhaps all developers could take a clue from him.
When the current generation of consoles came out, I didn't pick up a PSX till
FF8. It's my RPG machine now. The N64 is my "fun" machine. While I have fun
playing my rpgs, sometimes I just need a break so I can play a round of
Perfect Dark, Mario 64, Star Fox, or Zelda. Those games are always a blast to
play, and have the kind of replay value that you can't get from an RPG. This
is not a "gameplay over graphics" argument, just a simple pointing out that
we should be much more concerned with how a game plays, and now how it looks,
when we consider what makes a game and which is better. (This can apply to
the next-gen systems too. It's one reason I think the Gamecube has a more
than fighting chance.)
On a side note, Yamauchi has an interesting comment on the state of the
industry, that applies somewhat to yesterday's topic of how games are viewed
by the public.
"The thing with this industry is, no one actually needs what it produces.....
If it came to pass that people started saying 'These games are all stupid, I
gotta stop playing them all the time', then what do you think would happen?
You don't need games to live, after all, so the market could fall right out.
It could even shrink to a tenth of what it was."
Interesting thought.
~Lord Byron
The Yamauchi interview can be found at:
http://www.video-senki.com/feat/yama22.html
The Zelda interview can be found at:
http://www.armchairempire.com/Interviews/miyamoto_teleconference.htm
|
Most of the quotes you used sound like Nintendo's trying to posthumously
dance on the PSX's grave - the PSX was capable of storing rendered
backdrops and FMV, while the N64 was not, and that added up to "the PSX is
more concerned with graphics" for a lot of people. Miyamoto is most concerned
with gameplay, no question, but he was also stuck on a system that didn't
give him the ability to experiment as much as he might have, so I'm not
sure how much insight he can actually have on the subject until he's worked
for a while on a disc-media system himself.
The last comment is also worthy of some discussion. In Ken Burns'
recent documentary series on jazz, Wynton Marcelis pointed out that jazz
(and all art, by extension) wasn't necessary to live... but at the same
time, it made life worth living. Marcelis described how people
who had absolutely nothing during the Depression would scrimp and save
every penny they could get their hands on just to go to a jazz club once a
week or once a month. Hardly anybody reading this is likely that bad off,
but life can still be tough... and if games give you a bit of enjoyment
and fun in the middle of the everyday grind, who's to say they're not
important? With those words, Yamauchi disrespects his own company, and many of
the people who grew up with his company.
| Back to the future |
| CJ,
With all of the news of the FF Wonderswan remakes, I must ask, why is the
GIA, or anybody for the matter, concerned? I have played FFI and FFII for the
original NES via emulator, and I have to say the games aren't that good (as
compared with FFVII or FFVIII). Also, the remakes only look like beefed up
versions of FFIV for the SNES. Why all the concern, really? Who is out there
anticipating the re-release of said sub-par titles? I used to be on that
boat, but now that I think about it, do I really want to play Chrono Trigger,
FFIV, FFVII, FFVIII or FFIX again?
The answer: no, despite the fact that they're all great titles. Now,
considering Square has made so many improvements in the series and even
venturing off into other titles, shouldn't the general concern be for these
upcoming games? When can we say we're sick of living in the past? Nostalgia
can only mean so much, there are message boards all over the net dedicated to
this very sentiment. There's a point when you have to ask the question: Am I
more interested in my memories as a child or the advancement of RPGs?
Thanks for letting me rant.
-mista tea
|
Good rant... and one that leaves me a topic like a lit stick of dynamite
to toss over to Drew.
Closing Comments:
So are remakes really that interesting, and if so, why? I know lots of
people will say "because I never got to play them back when" or "I lost my
copy, and getting an original is expensive" or "my SNES got
sold/lost/destroyed"... but there's still gotta be a substantial number of
you who owned the game, played the hell out of it, and even still have it
tucked away somewhere. Why do you want a PSX or PS2 remake, in that case?
Tell Drew and I'll be back Monday.
-Chris Jones, thinks AJ
Durai just needed some Valium
|
