Disco Elysium Pre-Release Thread [GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Fenix]

Any society that employs slavery is a breeding ground for degeneracy and shall, ultimately, fail.

Looks like muslims arn't going to fail. So...

freedom

Freedom is nonexistant thing.
Usually (or always) calls to feedom used to further enslave society.

 

[ArchAngel]

It is more fair to say freedom means something different to different people.

 

[Chateaubryan]

Politics is the study or practice of the distribution of power and resources within a given community (this is usually a hierarchically organized population) as well as the interrelationship(s) between communities.

Also

"philosophy of human affairs." The title of the Politics literally means "the things concerning the polis (city)."

As soon as you're writing a story that includes any kind of society, any kind of balance of power between individuals in a greater context, or any kind of community dynamics, you're producing a political representation. Whether you like it or not. It's just as Stakhanov said : you can't produce anything out of a vacuum. The way you're setting things up in your story is never impartial. At the very least, it will reproduce some of your biases. It's to be expected, as nobody is omniscient.

As readers and players, we can either deny that fact and subconsciously accept all the content we're exposed to and internalize it without question, or we can accept the fact that our games and books are produced by other human beings with their own worldviews, and that we would be wise to question what we're reading.

If you find yourself not offended, nor challenged by a story, it's not because it's apolitical. It's because it simply doesn't challenge your current worldviews.

 

[Fenix]

It is more fair to say freedom means something different to different people.

It is even more fair to say that some people live in dreaming all their life.
No matter what mean for whom, all these delusions and plain dream-o-hallucinations, the only thing that matter is truth.

At the very least, it will reproduce some of your biases.

Looks like people never have beliefs, only biases right?

 

[Kuattro]

If any story with some depth, with even a hint of social perspective, is inherently political and, therefore, never neutral because it will always show the biases of their authors, why would anyone defend that authors need to stop being neutral in order to write great stories? Why would anyone say that there is very little side taking in videogames today, when most of them have certainly stories involving political themes, not even blatant ones, just, as some of you say, offering a greater vision, looking at social organizations, etc.

Either everything is political, and nothing political is neutral, or it isn't and writing needs to start getting political, which according to the panel description that started this discussion, is "taking sides", as everything else is deemed "apolitical".

I don't see how we can have it both ways.

 

[MasPingon]

I see what's the problem here. Some of you use a word "political" to categorize every human activity and treat it like some kind of axiom. That's a hell of a wrong supposition and a reason why you're missing the point of what groups of political agenda want to achieve by provockng discusson about taking sides. Witcher, Fallout, Deus Ex are not politcal in this sense, that's an absurd. What they got in common is rich philosophical background, which includes elements of anthropology, ethics and politics. That's why those game are often questioning your world view, without giving you an answer. They are thought provoking, but not at all political. You can't just lump everything into "political" category because that's the perfect way to trivialize the problem here, which is a pressure to put a political agenda into creativity and legitimazing paternalitic approach to a viever/consumer as something right.

 

[Lurker King]

From my point of view, the game with an upfront political stance is far less insidious than the one proclaiming to be closer to any kind of universal truth : a half-truth claiming to be objective is far more harmful.

But you don’t need to proclaim universal truths. You just need to present different points of view without caricatures. In AoD you have a few communists, but they are not caricatures.

Exactly, you don't necessarily learn any truth by playing a video game. You turn to science and studies for that kind of enlightement (but that's another debate). What you can expect from a game, or a book, or a movie carrying worldviews is to be challenged by it. You might learn something from it if it drives you to a corner or maybe ask you a question you haven't considered before... And if the game - or book - is upfront with its stance - generally, you can't miss the cues - you can't tax it with dishonesty : you're confronted with a postulate you're free to criticize, answer to, or dismiss.

But how can you be challenged by a game if it doesn’t contain anything remotely truthful? I can be wrong, but in my way of seeing things, movies and games with narrative aim to provide an experiential knowledge that you can’t, or usually don’t have on your personal life due to a series of contingencies. I’m not expecting the same level of a treatise, but I don’t think that cardboard characters are good enough either.

 

[MasPingon]

From my point of view, the game with an upfront political stance is far less insidious than the one proclaiming to be closer to any kind of universal truth : a half-truth claiming to be objective is far more harmful.

But you don’t need to proclaim universal truths. You just need to present different points of view without caricatures. In AoD you have a few communists, but they are not caricatures.

He can't see it. It looks like utilitarian attitute gone wild.

Exactly, you don't necessarily learn any truth by playing a video game. You turn to science and studies for that kind of enlightement (but that's another debate). What you can expect from a game, or a book, or a movie carrying worldviews is to be challenged by it. You might learn something from it if it drives you to a corner or maybe ask you a question you haven't considered before... And if the game - or book - is upfront with its stance - generally, you can't miss the cues - you can't tax it with dishonesty : you're confronted with a postulate you're free to criticize, answer to, or dismiss.

This is really sad. You are reading books only to learn/judge if it's true or false? Criticize, aswer to, dismiss? That's the options you have? Bacause whole my life I thought the biggest value of reading books is to find other point's of view, "feeling" them and trying to understund the genesis of those. It has nothing to do with truth, it seems you are the one making some big narration here. I can't even imagine reading any kind of prose in such miserable way as you try to picture it.

 

[hello friend]

ITT we learn that buying a burger at McDonalds is an inherently political act.

 

[Irenaeus]

ITT we learn that buying a burger at McDonalds is an inherently political act.

Did you know that in Australia there are Kangaroo meat burgers at McDonald's?

 

[Chateaubryan]

This is really sad. You are reading books only to learn/judge if it's true or false? Criticize, aswer to, dismiss? That's the options you have? Bacause whole my life I thought the biggest value of reading books is to find other point's of view, "feeling" them and trying to understund the genesis of those. It has nothing to do with truth, it seems you are the one making some big narration here. I can't even imagine reading any kind of prose in such miserable way as you try to picture it.

You're trying to make me say something I didn't. Did you read my post at all? I never told that you should absolutely look for truth in work of fiction (quite the contrary), what I 've said is that good work of fiction can be intellectually stimulating, regardless of the assorted political stance. Nothing more, nothing less.

Basically, it's Lurker King's point you're criticizing here.

But how can you be challenged by a game if it doesn’t contain anything remotely truthful? I can be wrong, but in my way of seeing things, movies and games with narrative aim to provide an experiential knowledge that you can’t, or usually don’t have on your personal life due to a series of contingencies. I’m not expecting the same level of a treatise, but I don’t think that cardboard characters are good enough either.

I'm not saying you can't get anything worthwhile out of work of fictions. You will eventually gain some new perspectives, new tools, new concepts, new ideas, and new insights in some cases (and when it comes to video games, that's already quite the achievement), but if you're trusting a writer to teach you some truth about the world, you're bound to be deceived at some point, even if the writing is good and consistent.

 

[KILLER BEAR]

The predictable knee-jerk response to political writing here reads as some kind of weak right-wing (((safe space))) hand-wringing. Given the way the narrative mechanics in No Truce have been described, with the thought cabinets, etc., agency isn't going to be taken out of the player's hands, nor is it going to be videogame equivalent of reading the Little Red Book. I don't see the problem.

Read the thread. The talk is not about Not Truce, it's about this:

For Games to Evolve They Need to Get Political

ROBERT KURVITZ
ZA/UM
MARIA REINUP
ZA/UM
CHRIS AVELLONE

The next step in creating big narratives for video games can not be made without political side-taking. There is no such thing as great apolitical writing. It is a responsibility of writers which they take upon themselves. They choose a side and fight it. We see it in literature but there is very little overt side-taking in video game narratives. Games have pussy-footed around political issues. How do we get beyond mere indications, on to real political side-taking and after that to offering solutions?

Now why Infinitron decided to move the conversation from Chris Avellone's appreciation station to here is very curious indeed. Maybe someone should ask him.

 

[Kuattro]

Now why Infinitron decided to move the conversation from Chris Avellone's appreciation station to here is very curious indeed. Maybe someone should ask him.

It's no great secret, because I complained about having this conversation divided in two different threads.

Of course, maybe the better solution would have been to create a new thread instead of turning the thread about NTWTF into this.

But on the other hand, Kasparov called me buttwipe so ha!

 

[ArchAngel]

ITT we learn that buying a burger at McDonalds is an inherently political act.

If you understood what people before talked about you would understand it is. People that don't eat meat and don't like people killing animals will never go there to eat. For them it is a political act, both their choice and yours.
It is just they are like 0.01% of total population while the rest don't see it as political because they don't care about animal killings and turning into meat. Use you brain for a change..

 

[ntonystinson]

Anyways back to the GAME WHICH IS WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT.
So am learning this game is going to be extremely storybased which to be honest is a little dissapointing. They talk about all this new RPG mechanics they have to show but in story based games, they dont ever matter because all you "perceive" is what the devs want you to regardless of your "Visual Calculus" skill. Story in games is great and all but there are already lots of good books out there if that's what the player is looking for. The ultimate aim and purpose of games( especially RPGs) is to create a world where the player can make his own story through his own actions, inactions, skills or lack of skills. eg M&B Warband, Crusader Kings 2, Academagia and Battle Brothers (and maybe Archmage Rises when it comes out). These games give you something new and different literally everytime you start a new game, you get real consequences of action and you actually get to see a little luck randomness and unpredictability because everything isnt nailed down by the developers. Like I said story is great and all but it can be extremely limiting

 

[Karwelas]

ntonystinson
Holy hell man, what the fuck. I know that generating your own story through the game is great, but you are pushing it way to far. This game is RPG with closed story, where you are Cop. You will have shitload of ways to be this Cop as far as creators are planning it. P:T, Desu Ex and others games praised for it's story are generally one of that cases.

 

[Durandal]

Doesn't seem like you guys were important enough to warrant having your panel recorded and uploaded to YouTube aside from a brief mention in 0:48
It would be a whole lot more refreshing to know what you guys actually had to say about it other than add ten pages to the thread overnight based on nothing but the title of the subject itself

Story in games is great and all but there are already lots of good books out there if that's what the player is looking for. The ultimate aim and purpose of games( especially RPGs) is to create a world where the player can make his own story through his own actions, inactions, skills or lack of skills. eg M&B Warband, Crusader Kings 2, Academagia and Battle Brothers (and maybe Archmage Rises when it comes out). These games give you something new and different literally everytime you start a new game, you get real consequences of action and you actually get to see a little luck randomness and unpredictability because everything isnt nailed down by the developers. Like I said story is great and all but it can be extremely limiting

Eh? I don't see how total freedom in what you can do is always better than more straightforward experiences. Sometimes it's the limits that you have which make you think outside the box.

 

[ntonystinson]

You will have shitload of ways to be this Cop as far as creators are planning it.

My point exactly. Only what the devs plan you to be

 

[Fenix]

So am learning this game is going to be extremely storybased which to be honest is a little dissapointing.

You should check Copper Dream then.

 

[Zombra]

The purpose of games (especially RPGs) is ...

Finally, someone tells us What Is RPG once and for all.

Fuck off, there can be more than one kind of game.

 

[gestalt11]

Did Avellone actually agree with the stupidly obviously wrong premise of that speaker series? If so I am disappointed. While you can write a very good work that takes a political side, for example 1984, you can also write one that simply shows things from a POV and deal with life as it currently stands in the setting and make as good of a story as any that has existed buy having rich characters with good plot etc.

The idea that video games MUST take a side is just plain proven wrong by thousands of years of writing and storytelling. The same is true for the statement that they MUST NOT. Good writing/storytelling is good writing/storytelling. There great works that takes a side, there are great works that are purely personal and there are great works that show many sides purely from a characters point of view and you have no idea what or if the author is "side-taking".

The real problem is that "politics" is usually a one stop explanation that is conviently used to explain everything for shallow and simple minded people. Typically writers who use politics as a crutch write shallow stories and shallow characters. There is a strong correlation between putting politics into writing and bad stories because the people doing are hacks who have short circuited their brains with trite bullshit. But we merely need to look to Orwell and Huxley or Heinlein to understand that this strong correlation is not in fact causation.

This speaker series seems to assert that video games must be Orwell or Huxley. I hope this was just a bit of hyperbole, because otherwise they are allowing themselves to be conned into making themselves into fools. A foolishness that will actually make them significantly worse writers.

It is absolutely not true that video games writers should never have politics in their writing/story. But I would add the following caveats:

-Most video game writers are not good enough writers to pull it off in a non-childish, non-shallow, non-naive manner and adding something that is basically playing with fire it can ruin an otherwise serviceable or even good story.
-Modern politics is mostly infantile bullshit and is just a front that none of the conmen espousing it actually give two shits about or are just plain delusional. Actually writing a story with real depth around such a thing is like walking on ice, its possible possible but you need to be real careful and perceptive about it.
-Far too many people lie to themselves far too much to ever put politics into a story without ruining it and always have. If you know you do this, which is unlikely because you lie to yourself, don't even try. If you do not understand that the vast majority of politics is a con game you should never be putting politics into your writing as you will be truly unable to relate them to human motivations and human interactions in way that jives with that resonates with a person outside of your political tribe because you will be writing a shallow and trite piece of shit.


This whole thing reeks of the current trend of trying to con everyone into joining into ideological tribes so they can get robbed blind while they become stupid due to fighting each other over made up crap their leaders don't give a rats ass about and will never do anything about. Its the "intellectual yet idiot" class's version of pablum. They are so easy to con, they do half the work for you since you just need to convince them it was their idea and since they are smart it must be right.

 

[hello friend]

ITT we learn that buying a burger at McDonalds is an inherently political act.

If you understood what people before talked about you would understand it is. People that don't eat meat and don't like people killing animals will never go there to eat. For them it is a political act, both their choice and yours.
It is just they are like 0.01% of total population while the rest don't see it as political because they don't care about animal killings and turning into meat. Use you brain for a change..

Don't be a retard. Yes, people have different worldviews. It shapes their actions. Big deal. The point that seems to be zooming over your head is that by calling every act political, no act is not political. The word itself is rendered superfluous, might as well chuck it out of the dictionary.

Fucks sake, man. You act like this is some stunning revelation. It's puerile fauxlosophising, my dude. It doesn't describe anything meaningful, or insightful. It's just white noise, like bees buzzing.

 

[ArchAngel]

ITT we learn that buying a burger at McDonalds is an inherently political act.

If you understood what people before talked about you would understand it is. People that don't eat meat and don't like people killing animals will never go there to eat. For them it is a political act, both their choice and yours.
It is just they are like 0.01% of total population while the rest don't see it as political because they don't care about animal killings and turning into meat. Use you brain for a change..

Don't be a retard. Yes, people have different worldviews. It shapes their actions. Big deal. The point that seems to be zooming over your head is that by calling every act political, no act is not political. The word itself is rendered superfluous, might as well chuck it out of the dictionary.

Fucks sake, man. You act like this is some stunning revelation. It's puerile fauxlosophising, my dude. It doesn't describe anything meaningful, or insightful. It's just white noise, like bees buzzing.

It is low level politics but it is still politics. You just don't care to think about it. And yes it is philosophy, but has been this whole topic from the moment this was brought up. Since we don't have VODs from the talk and devs didn't explain in more detail what they mean by it, all we do is use philosophy.

 

[MasPingon]

Why do you use philosophy as a dirty word for fucks sake? Do you even know what it means?

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Can we just ask Avellone direct what his take is, instead of misinterpreting?
Also, is insisting, that a-fuckheapload-of-stuff is political, mainly a leftie thing?