Tasteful Understated Nerdrage/MrBtongue Thread

[Monk]

It looks like a logical consequence (e.g., the enemy will know the location of the vault) vs. an illogical one (e.g., if the NPC is not loyal enough he will die).

 

[grotsnik]

It's a messy thing to have to define, and I'm not sure he should have gone with the Mass Effect 2 loyalty example on its own, but I think he's trying to place more of a distinction between implicit ripple-effect 'choice and consequence' that rises organically out of world reactivity, and the Bioware/Alpha Protocol explicit 'choice and consequence' that halts the game at a pre-determined point and yells at the player to choose the blue pill or the red pill and then shows them the impact of their choice.

By which I mean, it isn't that the second category is necessarily illogical, or divorced from gameplay - just that it's a writer's plot device to put more interactivity into the game, rather than something that's built up from the gameworld's logic, which means that in clumsy hands it will almost inevitably feel arbitrary in its consequences (why does X result in Y?), antithetical to narrative logic and character motivation (why did Marburg waste time organising his men/hostages/bomb at both ends of the museum to create a tricky ethical choice for Thorton, instead of just blowing the place up right away?) or outright dumb (you must join either one of these two equally one-dimensional and dislikeable factions, NOW! They won't start fighting each other until you've made up your mind), in the same way as a shocking twist or betrayal might in another story if it's just shoved in by a bad writer without justifying its own existence first. Which it all too frequently is. I have no idea if it's said explicitly, but I'm pretty sure the Bioware writers/designers do genuinely think that they have to find a way to ensure that as many levels as possible climax with a Big Binary Choice For The Player, no matter how cosmetic or forced-in or silly it ends up being. And they really shouldn't.

...and if that is what he means, I 100% fucking agree with him.

 

[PlanHex]

MrBtongue chimes in on the whole games journalism thing.

 

[Jarpie]

MrBtongue chimes in on the whole games journalism thing.

I disagree with him profoundly, gaming journalism is irredeemably broken and it can't be fixed without tearing the whole shit down and there can'be be proper academica in gaming because the idiots have flocked and drowned rest of the gaming community. I'm starting to believe that the whole gaming industry and community/communities can only be lifted to the next level if there's another (video-) game crash what would wash away the 'filth'.

The corruption and idiocy has been integrated too deeply into the whole thing that the only solution would be...

 

[warpig]

I'm starting to believe that the whole gaming industry and community/communities can only be lifted to the next level if there's another (video-) game crash what would wash away the 'filth'.

I think the industry crash is unlikely to happen, unless some new form of entertainment/time wasting is invented and the "retards" will flock to it leaving video games. The most positive scenario imo would be smaller, alternative "gaming culture" that would exist aside the mainstream industry.

 

[sea]

I disagree with him profoundly, gaming journalism is irredeemably broken and it can't be fixed without tearing the whole shit down and there can'be be proper academica in gaming because the idiots have flocked and drowned rest of the gaming community. I'm starting to believe that the whole gaming industry and community/communities can only be lifted to the next level if there's another (video-) game crash what would wash away the 'filth'.

Actually we have started to see the rise of many academically-focused and journalistically-focused web sites, ranging from sociological journals to much more thorough news sites like Polygon, GamesIndustry.biz, and Penny Arcade Report. You're looking at the IGNs and Gamespots, but there is much more out there which simply does not have full mainstream acceptance or exposure. Once enough time passes, gaming audiences will realize the distinction between advertising and actual journalism, because people will grow up, those more legitimate sites will gain more exposure, etc.

I think one possible solution to the journalism problem is to draw the distinction between journalism and entertainment coverage. Perhaps for proper games industry news we need to start looking to news channels, newspapers, and so on, and let game reviewers continue doing what they're doing, i.e. marketing. There is a profound difference between investigative journalism and providing customer recommendations for products, and perhaps it has to be reflected in the choice of medium.

NOTE: Have not yet watched the video.

NOTE 2: Have watched the video. I agree with his assessment that prestigious RPG Codex and like-minded sites represent the gaming academia. However I am not so sure that the suggestion that we're missing academia in gaming is fair. It's also not an immediate solution; it could be well 50+ years before we start to see discussing of gaming in liberal arts programs for example.

I think what the real issue is is that games industry news and games news are separate from one another. They aren't the same thing, but they are linked more than perhaps they should be, and very rarely can you get in-depth news about the industry from sites like IGN; it's all third-hand info at absolute best, and they don't have anyone dedicated to uncovering and producing interesting stories themselves; it's just lots of nerdy man-children rating games in various capacities. While The Globe and Mail, New York Times, whatever all tend to feature a pretty good mix of consumer news and news news, the games industry is conspicuously lacking that; moreover, the industry news it has tends to be targeted exclusively at people in the industry rather than general audiences.

 

[Gozma]

Twinning commie calvinist academics to capitalist GJ bootlickers recapitulating the ubiquitous brainfog of the modern world

no thank you TUN

praise be to internet forums

 

[Akratus]

I simply gather my own conclusions from the mainstream gaming journalism, when you KNOW it's all bullshit you can still interpret the information in a good way. Of course, I spend little time doing that.

I also visit http://www.youtube.com/user/Instig8iveJournalism, MrBTongue himself and Yahtzee's articles and Zero Punctuation, as well as newsfeeds of the developers themselves and individual designer formsprings. And forums like this one. NMA, RPG Codex. All of these are better than IGNorance or Gameshit.

 

[Delterius]

I think what the real issue is is that games industry news and games news are separate from one another. They aren't the same thing, but they are linked more than perhaps they should be, and very rarely can you get in-depth news about the industry from sites like IGN; it's all third-hand info at absolute best, and they don't have anyone dedicated to uncovering and producing interesting stories themselves; it's just lots of nerdy man-children rating games in various capacities. While The Globe and Mail, New York Times, whatever all tend to feature a pretty good mix of consumer news and news news, the games industry is conspicuously lacking that; moreover, the industry news it has tends to be targeted exclusively at people in the industry rather than general audiences.

Forbes is the future.

 

[Dreaad]

Once enough time passes, gaming audiences will realize the distinction between advertising and actual journalism, because people will grow up, those more legitimate sites will gain more exposure, etc.

Oh for hood's sake! I agree with most of the stuff in this thread, but let's be realistic not optimistic. The decline will continue for a long long (you will not live to see the end) time, oh sure there will be pockets of intelligent well made games and places to discuss said decline but overall people aren't going to get magically smarter. There is almost no entertainment medium that is not horribly impacted by decline through advertising and just in general becoming popular with the masses. Slowly but surely the internet itself is being swallowed by consumerism. Remember a time when there was no advertising on the internet? How long do you think before you are charged money for DLC content in youtube videos.

The reason for this is very simple, things made for the masses are made for stupid morons who think their local newspaper accurately describes the world's affairs in an unbiased fashion. These people that will happily sit through 10 minutes of advertising for every 30 minutes they spend at home. A huge number of these people have never read one, just ONE... book after leaving secondary education and that's assuming they finished secondary education at all.

These are the people who are being targeted as an audience, and these people will accept anything if you tell them it's true. Gamespot write a review proclaiming that Diablo 3 is a masterpiece and it takes the community of people playing it a FUCKING year to realize how bad the shit that's right in front of them is even though they can finish the game in 10 hours on the first play though..... I can't even describe the

 

[Sranchammer]

Fuck Hood

 

[Gurkog]

Hood is that undead orc jaghut from the malazan series, right?

The last 2 books in that series were so awful that my mind is trying to block all related memories.

 

[Dreaad]

inb4 your mum is a jaghut hur hur

 

[Minttunator]

These are the people who are being targeted as an audience, and these people will accept anything if you tell them it's true. Gamespot write a review proclaiming that Diablo 3 is a masterpiece and it takes the community of people playing it a FUCKING year to realize how bad the shit that's right in front of them is even though they can finish the game in 10 hours on the first play though.....

Good post! Another hilarious (or rage-inducing, take your pick) Gamespot-related example: before The Last Of Us was released, Gamespot rated it 8/10 (which is a pretty bad score by modern game review standards) and a large number of retards actually raged on them because other sites had rated it 10/10 - so the game had to be perfect, right? The funny bit is the fact that these idiots hadn't even played the game themselves (it wasn't out yet), they just took what other 'quality' gaming sites had said as absolute truth.

 

[Akratus]

Maybe more of them will appear and get more mad. It's these retarded sites and their journalism that breeds these fags, so I hope they drown in them.

 

[Cursed Platypus]

he's praising plot elements in dragon age 2 which are also simplistic anyway.

Authors not making allegories doesn't mean they aren't pushing dumb/naive world/life views into their games.

And him trying to compare things to real life was stupid, his political/sociological points are highly disputable and therefore are not pertinent.

Who cares if the macro plot (the one which only gets you an a priori) tinily deviates from the typical (He forgot about Baldur's Gate 2 BTW) Bioware one. What counts is if you can keep up with the originality on the micro scale (the one which really compose your plot and your experience). And anyway, the plot is still simple and unsophisticated, as much as the cliche ''hero's journey''. Nothing one cannot come up within 5 min on his toilet bowl.

Just another faggot trying to look like the ''rational guy'' by using 2 unimportant details from the game to fuel his moderate (Must absolutely not sound radical in the slightest) and calm slight ''disagreement''.

I'm sure he considers dragon age 1 a masterpiece, but with some slight flaws of course, he needs always to be moderate only for the sake of being moderate.
These retards will never really go against the consensus. Only nitpicking just enough so that he looks likes the guy with a wiser opinion.

 

[Ninjerk]

I've never seen anyone call Bioware out for lifting the plot for Mass Effect right off of Halo.

 

[Lhynn]

Hes alive.

Thought he died

Anyway, the newest entry is here for your entertainment.

 

[Infinitron]

Finally, some incline on Youtube.

 

[hiver]

Good. Very good.

 

[Akratus]

Finally, some incline on Youtube.

Did you put so few points in your youtube archeology skill?

 

[sea]

Good video, though I feel it's a bit on the truncated side and could have gone into a bit more detail. The point made is worth making but I think more examples and more discussion could have arisen from it. Maybe that 8-10 minute limit for audience attentiveness is rearing its head.

 

[Newfag-er]

I've been trying to re-find this person on the codex for some time now...

Thank you Lhynn for your

a imaginary for youhttp://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?members/lhynn.17197/

 

[Horus]

I lost all my respect for him when i see what games he likes. I can't believe the words of a person that doesn't admit fallout 3 is steaming pile of shit.

 

[eremita]

NOTE 2: Have watched the video. I agree with his assessment that prestigious RPG Codex and like-minded sites represent the gaming academia. However I am not so sure that the suggestion that we're missing academia in gaming is fair. It's also not an immediate solution; it could be well 50+ years before we start to see discussing of gaming programs in liberal arts for example.

I disagree. Sites where like-minded people gather together and discuss shared interst might be a good start but they certainly don't represent 'gaming academia'... Not even close. We haven't developed special tools, notions, criteria and especially categories to discuss 'gaming' in any meaningful way yet. We lack definitions, we lack concepts. Therefore any serious analysis is impossible. Good, intersting point maybe but not analysis... RPGCodex has clever people with interesting ideas but that's about it. Brainstorming, yes. Gaming academia? Hell no!