Many words, but nothing really said.
It presents a coherent and dramatic visualization of various parts of the setting, deemed important/interesting by the video game developers, with a rather powerful and original plot and dynamic gameplay, realizing the experience of being a vampire in the midst of mortals, fighting alongside and against various factions of fellow vampires and interacting with other related supernaturals and mortals.
How it does so? Again, you are just saying
it does. Not saying how it does so, not pushing examples of what elements actually are good representations of the setting's themes. You cannot into the definition of objective, right? Let me explain: Show me undisputable evidence that it transmits the themes and elements of the setting as described by the setting itself. You are saying it's a good adaptation, we are saying it isn't. We have discused some elements of why it isn't and can add more. You have not shown
a single element of why it is outside that you like the mood.
Again, VTMB cannot be and does not need to be a perfect reflection of real-life, and, more importantly, it doesn't need to be a perfect reflection of paperback VtM. Paperback says that weresharks cannot be encountered on the surface (white-wolf-wiki claims otherwise but whatever)? It doesn't matter. Paperback says werewolves "tend to" attack in packs, whereas the game shows exactly two? It doesn't matter. Paperback makes numerous references to the importance of the masquerade, whereas the game reuses a public area for vampire combat (which may or may not shows events of a supernatural nature, depending on how you play it)/ Again, who cares. It's a game, it punished me for telling people I'm a vampire before, it managed to convince me that masquerade is important, and that's what counts. After all, who knows, maybe the player DOES violate the masquerade in that Santa Monica endgame sequence? Maybe it's an option that SHOULD be indirectly given to a fledgling vampire, or rather, the player who controls him, when it's appropriate story-wise?
So, now you are saying we need to forgive the game because Troika didn't had the resources, skill, or time to actually do it right and instead had to cut corners? And that makes it a good adaptation? Instead of exploring the elements of the setting in any depth (the beast, the paths, the relationship of the diferent clans and human society) they threw in stage after stage of monsters and soldiers to kill. In a setting about
vampires ruling the fate of human society from the shadows to ensure their own power and survival. That's one of the themes, where is it seen in any depth? Another is how a vampire is constantly fighting the beast and the hunger inside, where is that seen in any depth? Another is how vampires must embrace diferent ideals and philosophies to keep that very same beast at bay, but where does it becomes an issue the conflict between the diferent factions and paths? In which way a good adaptation of that setting reads like
action game about killing endless monsters in Hollywood sewers?
Troika did what it was able to do. It had not the resources, manpower, or skill to pull it through all the way through. I never said it did not try: The begining of the game actually looks like they are trying, and the problems are nitpicky. But it doesn't builds on that. It gives the setting some small mouth service and then goes in any random direction. I am not playing their good intentions, i'm playing the game they did. A game that has nothing in common in setting nor themes with Vampire: The Masquerade. It's just an action game with Vampire: The Masquerade names and skins thrown on it.
Look, it's a Malkavian. Look, it's a Nosferatu. Look, it's a Toreador, a Ventrue, a Gangrel, a Tremere. Each Clan has it's own theme and concept, are they explored? Not at all. The setting itself has it's own themes and concepts, are they explored? Not at all.
I'm not claiming Vampire is high art. I'm not claiming WoD is, either. I'm claiming regardless of it being bad, good, stupid, whatever, the settings have very clear themes that Troika did not touch at all. And not, the theme of the Toreador isn't
Max Payne, and the theme of the Tremere isn't bald pimps, and the theme of the Tzimisce isn't armies of mutant running through the sewers. It uses elements of the setting
completely out of context. That's not a good adaptation.
This is why I'm telling you that you're a stuck-up moron and a snot-nosed girly girl, Black Cat. Grow up.
Because i'm not giving Troika a free pass because it's Troika?
1eyedking said:
ITT Black Cat speaks of setting coherence while he alt-tabs to his favorite anime movie.
Not he, but whatever. And it's a common misconception I like anime, i have said from the very begining it was mostly crap. I don't like, again, people saying something is good or bad without good arguments, instead going for
west = good, east = bad kind of crap. Outside of that, sure, most anime is crap. My first mention of anime ever in this forum was saying most of it was crap, and then saying those i liked where mostly guilty pleasures. Most TV series from the west are also lesser common denominator crap. Is about people being crap, not about it being from the west or the east.
"Nya."
