|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 7:10:54 GMT -5
I just thought I'd nip this particular rumor in the bud, as Team Outrage1is getting pretty desperate in looking for ways to get you to *not* buy this game.
GO BUY THIS GAME!
And, my God, if I read one more opinion from someone that hasn't even touched the game ("it sucks! it's not worth full price! my vagina hurts! oh, and yeah, i haven't played it but I know it sucks because the Internet told me so!"), I'm going to continue to, uh, rant and rave about it!
(Also: if anyone actually believed this rumor, you need to get your credulity meter re-calibrated 'cause if it did have such a level, it would have been blared from every news outlet in the world from the moment comp and review copies were made available. Plus, does anyone really think 3DR and/or Gearbox are that stupid? Well, maybe 3DR...)
1 Made up of feminists (that don't actually play video games), half-men (but I repeat myself) and those seeking to curry favor w/ group A and B. (And remember: GTA is art; Duke Nukem, which is about as offensive as Benny Hill, is not because you can't shoot hookers in the face...which seems to be the conclusion drawn by many (most?) in the gaming media.)
|
|
AllenSmithee
Stripling
Compulsive Pedant
dead men don't have dog days
Posts: 92
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Jun 14, 2011 9:35:11 GMT -5
The game itself doesn't seem my style, not to mention that I'm not keen on comedy games, most of the time.
Is that alright?
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 9:52:47 GMT -5
The comedy is ancillary to the game (minus maybe one, fleeting, level). If the whole game was built around the jokes, then that might be a valid pov, but it isn't. (And if it was, I wouldn't play it.) As for "style", I'm not sure what you mean unless it's because of off-color jokes and 'sex' that is tamer than scrambled cable circa 19871.
What you have here, as a game, is an FPS, period, with a crazy quilt (a melange, ifyou will) of play mechanics that cohere into a nice, frothy, utterly entertaining romp. It's not an "experience"; it's not "art"; it's an awesome video game. The end. (And if you don't play it, you're denying yourself a fun little ride.)
As far as being "alright", it's OK as long as you aren't one of the people mentioned in the above post. If you are, then I have tire iron w/ your name on it! *shakes fist*
1 That reference probably means nothing to you, but trust me: the 'sex' is entirely implied (though there is copious nudity, but if anyone is getting turned on by this, well, stay the hell away from me...furry.)
|
|
AllenSmithee
Stripling
Compulsive Pedant
dead men don't have dog days
Posts: 92
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Jun 14, 2011 15:38:06 GMT -5
Well reading about and watching videos of some of the scenes and such, it actually does bother me. I really just can't laugh at the blatant mysoginy. I can't laugh at Family Guy, and it isn't me refusing myself of anything, but it is me not finding it entertaining.
This doesn't mean I can't wait a Lucio Fulci movie, because it isn't played up the same way.
I never killed prostitutes in GTA when I played that, I didn't even sleep with them. In fact, most of the time I avoided killing anybody, because that wasn't how I saw CJ.
That said, it is not the case that this shouldn't have been made -- Just as all people have a right to speak, all people have a right not to listen/approve. It is the same for art -- when you create, create it as you wish. But anyone and everyone can ignore/dissaprove it as they wish.
And this Duke Nukem thing bothers me for its rampant mysoginy. Just like Battle LA bothers me for its rampant jingoism. Just like South Park bothers me for its casual anti-semiticism and unfunny political/social commentary.
I don't even like Duke3D, so there's that.
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 16:19:54 GMT -5
OK, so, you love (or loved, at any rate) Lady Gaga. And she kinda-sorta1 exploits her sexuality for maximum gain, as do 95% of recording artists, male or female. And, collectively--hell, singularly--do far, far more damage to women than Duke Nukem (or a thousand games) could ever do and, yet, you're perfectly fine w/ that, right? (And you *are* fine w/ it if you support them financially.)
And if you support a game like GTA, where the misogyny is real (insofar as violence against anyone is concerned since, technically, it also supports misanthropy), then you are tacitly supporting it period, since you know it's there and your money helps fund continued development of something that lets people act out those fantasies. I don't buy GTA for this very reason because it isn't played for laughs, it's played for 'real' and I don't want my money supporting that sort of thing2. (The inconsistency here is blinding, btw: just because you aren't doing it doesn't mean it isn't happening and that does not, somehow, absolve you of your support of it.)
And while we're at it, anytime you've played a beat 'em up where you punch women in the face, be it Final Fight or God Hand (and everything in between) that is more misogyny (not exploitation, not objectification, misogyny, as you would define it) than there is in all of DNF and, yet, I'm sure you play and love beat 'em ups where women are regularly beaten to a bloody pulp. Or fighting games. Or first person shooters or pretty much anything that isn't a puzzle/shooter/platforming game.
Now can you explain to me why, on the one hand, it's OK to 'degrade'/'exploit'/'objectify' or be misogynistic to women (a la recording artists who exploit the female form be they male or female or nearly every videogame on the market to some degree or another), and on the other it isn't (Duke Nukem, which is rife w/ 'exploitation', but misogyny...no)?
And so we're clear: these aren't rhetorical questions, I'd like an answer that reconciles these conflicting points of view, otherwise your 'outrage' is highly selective.
(And do not take my inquisitorial tone for anger--I just want a reasonable answer for how you reconcile this.)
1 Like I kinda-sorta take issue w/ your reasoning. 2 I have a raft of issues w/ the GTA games and it is not limited to whether or not it contains misogyny as popularly understood.
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 16:52:45 GMT -5
True, you have to have intent to be guilty, but let's be honest: plenty of people play these games and get off on punching women. The thing is, you can't really do *anything* to the women in DNF: they're window-dressing, except for one level that is a riff/rip-off of Aliens, in which case, that would make Aliens misogyny for putting someone out of their misery. But that's my point: Duke cannot be misogyny if those other examples are not. But if Duke *is* misogyny, so are all of those things. And if they're all misogyny, either you need to stop partaking of all of them, or your criticism of this one instance is invalid. (And, really, the definition can be wildly elastic but not so elastic that you comfortably exclude things that are far closer to 'hate' by any objective view (and, in the case of recording artists, far more damaging to girls), and topless chicks acting like bimbos is not closer to 'hate' than punching a chick in the face--Mad Gear gang or no 1--and/or tearing out Sonya's (etc.) spine in Mortal Kombat.) True misogyny is crazy-rare in mainstream videogames. I can't actually think of any examples offhand. Well, there was the one part in GTA: Vice City where the lady was crying and you had to shoot her in the head to continue with the game. That's where I stopped playing. Damn you stealth edit! But, yeah, that's kinda why I won't play GTA games anymore: there's just way too much of things like that and I just can't bring myself to support it financially. 1 And Poison, unless something has changed, is a dude...thanks Nintendo for that one. (No, I don't buy that Poison was always supposed to be a tranny., regardless of what Capcom is saying now, centuries later. Wait: what's hatred of tranny's considered? Oh no! Another can of worms!)
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 17:28:24 GMT -5
Aye, they've been (or were--not sure if they've just kinda let that go, but it's kinda ingrained now, so it's probably too late) saying that for quite a long time now. But, again, if it's a dude, then you're beating up cross-dressers and/or trannies which someone isn't going to be happy about1
(It also shows how far we are from the late '80s, too, when, I guess, it was cool to beat up trannies...if they were in the Mad Gear Gang, of course.)
1 Personally, I don't care since it's like Duke: so over-the-top that anyone that takes issue w/ it needs to lighten up. Plus, Poison was a bitch and had it coming.
|
|
AllenSmithee
Stripling
Compulsive Pedant
dead men don't have dog days
Posts: 92
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Jun 14, 2011 17:50:50 GMT -5
Oh, I honestly didn't buy San Andreas, and played it for all of 3 minutes. I just didn't kill anybody like that.
And I do think that sometimes putting the player in a terrible and uncomfortable position is great in terms of artistic expression.
Lady Gaga exploiting her own sexuality in an empowering way is different from playing a character who one of the lead staff members of the game assures you you should relate with because he loves women and isn't a terrible douche (this isn't the case) where the game constantly devalues women.
It is the character of Duke, juxtaposed with the macho american bullshit that pisses me off in Duke Nukem's case. It is totally different in pretty much everything else you mentioned, in my eyes.
I actually always felt bad attacking the Mad Gear game because it is clear that most of them are insane, in poor guided youth, drug addicted, et cetera. People aren't in gangs just because "they're bad people". Everyone has a history.
When I used the word misogyny I was referring to a devaluing of women in a specific set of parameters that bothers me. In a certain style of off-colour humour that leaves a bad taste in my mouth. In total broguy macho bullshit stylings.
If I were to say that you can't fight women in games, that would be bad because it would mean that I think that women cannot put up a fight. Of course given biology, men are 'made stronger' (of course this is case by case) but I do believe women are the superior sex.
You're all assuming I like killing men in video games. I don't really like the amount of violence in games at all! Sometimes (like Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days) it can be used as commentary, and make you feel really really bad (which is good!), but other times it can be way too hollywood and end up glorifying something unpleasant.
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 18:16:53 GMT -5
Going against my own desire/nature (blood!), I will only add this:
Forgetting everything else, I just want to be clear: you do not think, by any reasonable definition of the word, that Duke Nukem Forever is misogynistic? If that is the case, I consider the matter closed (though now I wonder why we had this conversation in the first place).
/kinder, gentler, ECM (for today)
|
|
AllenSmithee
Stripling
Compulsive Pedant
dead men don't have dog days
Posts: 92
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Jun 14, 2011 18:19:51 GMT -5
Yeah, I suppose that DNF isn't misogynistic. I used the wrong word. Although I would say that the game is sexist and chauvinistic.
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 14, 2011 18:20:28 GMT -5
And I would agree w/ that wholeheartedly.
|
|
AllenSmithee
Stripling
Compulsive Pedant
dead men don't have dog days
Posts: 92
|
Post by AllenSmithee on Jun 14, 2011 19:35:05 GMT -5
Yeah, it don't tickle my fancy.
I think one of the things is that for the games experience to be truly misogynistic it would require an unavoidable reveling in the pain of ladies.
|
|
|
Post by Justin on Jun 14, 2011 21:10:01 GMT -5
Duke Nukem is awesome because you gain HP when you flush the toilet.
|
|
|
Post by feilong80 on Jun 15, 2011 17:48:00 GMT -5
So, the PR company for DNF announced that they think many reviewers went too far and would re-evaluate who receives free copies in the future. A bunch of "journalists" -- many of whom admitted to not playing the game yet -- were stunned that their peers' DNF criticism wasn't swallowed in silence, so they proposed a boycott of coverage for future games and Twitter-raged about PR bully tactics. Meanwhile, the PR company re-tweeted fans' comments about the reviewers being daft. I don't know if the game is good or bad, but I found this all very amusing to watch, until the PR company -- being a PR company -- issued a public apology for letting their emotions get the better of them. Lol yeah, that was some weird recursion, when you consider: PR firm.... needs PR firm! It's like, yeah, after reading the reviews I totally get their anger, and they should have remembered that despite that, complaining about it publicly only makes you look worse... But that is exactly the kind of advice you'd expect to get... from a PR firm!
|
|
|
Post by ECM on Jun 15, 2011 19:58:21 GMT -5
THE GAME IS AWESOME! YOU SHOULD BUY IT! GAME REVIEWERS ARE POOPY HEADS!
(This message paid for by Obvious Joke LLC.)
|
|