Modifié par N7 Shadow 90, 30 novembre 2013 - 11:35 .
Mass Effect on TV
Débuté par
N7 Shadow 90
, nov. 30 2013 11:31
#1
Posté 30 novembre 2013 - 11:31
N7 Shadow 90
-
- Members
- 1 428 messages
In the UK, Channel 4 just aired a two hour long show on ''How Video Games Changed the World''. The show was brilliant and went into difficult topics on violence and sexualisation in video games, and I was pleased to see that they used Mass Effect as an example of great gender and sexual equality in video games. They were showing how a lot of games had became very straight-male centric and reduced females to objects of eye candy, however there were exceptions, such as Mass Effect. They showed clips of the FemShep+Traynor and ManShep+Cortez romances and spoke about how you can represent your own gender and sexuality. Just thought that this was worthy of a thread here, as it was a brilliant show that looked at video games as more than just 'Blow a man's head off simulators', and they spoke about Mass Effect in a great light.
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 30 novembre 2013 - 11:38
Condooo
-
- Members
- 22 messages
Yeah, Bioware have aimed to cover all aspects of that, and i respect them for it. While I might not use those options myself, it pleases me that those options are available for those who DO want to play their game that way. Bioware in particular have been doing it for a while, the Dragon Age series being another great example.
#3
Posté 30 novembre 2013 - 11:45
N7 Shadow 90
-
- Members
- 1 428 messages
As a side note, the awesome Felicia Day, the voice of DA2 Mark of the Assassin's Tallis, was on the show giving her thoughts.
Modifié par N7 Shadow 90, 30 novembre 2013 - 11:57 .
#4
Posté 01 décembre 2013 - 12:09
AlexMBrennan
-
- Members
- 7 002 messages
I see that they left out Miranda, probably because they didn't find any scenes with the camera not zoomed in on her ass.They were showing how a lot of games had became very straight-male centric and reduced females to objects of eye candy, however there were exceptions, such as Mass Effect.
#5
Posté 01 décembre 2013 - 12:17
Sir George Parr
-
- Members
- 1 052 messages
It was a good show. worth a break from gta online.
#6
Posté 01 décembre 2013 - 12:17
N7 Shadow 90
-
- Members
- 1 428 messages
Consider that all the characters are physically fit. Male or female. They're soldiers. And, Miranda's sexualisation was a big part of her story.AlexMBrennan wrote...
I see that they left out Miranda, probably because they didn't find any scenes with the camera not zoomed in on her ass.They were showing how a lot of games had became very straight-male centric and reduced females to objects of eye candy, however there were exceptions, such as Mass Effect.
#7
Posté 02 décembre 2013 - 07:55
Abraham_uk
-
- Members
- 11 713 messages
It's a good show. Charlie Brooker nails pretty much everything he does.
Nice retrospective on the video gaming industry.
Interesting how this thread is in the Mass Effect section, given that Mass Effect is little more than a footnote in the documentary.
Can we call that program a documentary?
It's more of a retrospective with aspects of comedy than a documentary.
I think the only thing that makes it a "documentary" is the fact the program is informative and counts as "non-fiction".
So basically the term documentary is just the film/television version of the non-fiction book genre.
Nice retrospective on the video gaming industry.
Interesting how this thread is in the Mass Effect section, given that Mass Effect is little more than a footnote in the documentary.
Can we call that program a documentary?
It's more of a retrospective with aspects of comedy than a documentary.
I think the only thing that makes it a "documentary" is the fact the program is informative and counts as "non-fiction".
So basically the term documentary is just the film/television version of the non-fiction book genre.
Modifié par Abraham_uk, 02 décembre 2013 - 07:59 .
#8
Posté 02 décembre 2013 - 08:02
Abraham_uk
-
- Members
- 11 713 messages
I really love the idea of video games being a satire of real life.
I love this idea that instead of a character performing dubious actions to highlight the flaws in human morality, it's you that does so.
Also, I find the darkest games are the ones that give you the choice to be evil or good. That way, when you choose the evil path, it's you who becomes the anti-hero. You are the one becoming corrupt. At least when a fictional character makes the corrupt choices you can say "I would never do that." Find a well written game that makes the corrupt choices irresistible and highlights your own corrupt nature and you'll have a lot to ponder over.
To me that is darkness personified.
I love this idea that instead of a character performing dubious actions to highlight the flaws in human morality, it's you that does so.
Also, I find the darkest games are the ones that give you the choice to be evil or good. That way, when you choose the evil path, it's you who becomes the anti-hero. You are the one becoming corrupt. At least when a fictional character makes the corrupt choices you can say "I would never do that." Find a well written game that makes the corrupt choices irresistible and highlights your own corrupt nature and you'll have a lot to ponder over.
To me that is darkness personified.
#9
Posté 02 décembre 2013 - 08:15
Linkenski
-
- Members
- 3 452 messages
Yes, especially ME3 and the latest Telltale games have been pretty good at exemplifying that you speak of @Abraham_uk.
I still think the idea that you have to be the guardian for a little pretty innocent girl in an apocalyptic and desperate scenario was a very good setting for a choice-based gameplay. Especially with the timer on even a person with good intentions might give in to the stress and say something morally wrong to, or in front of Clementine as Lee. There were a lot of scenes in TWD that explored this.
Seemingly ME3 did the same thing with the player being able to reflect as Shepard what it means to fight a war. Is it about overcoming the odds no matter the cost or doesn't the end justify the means. There were a couple of scenes on the Normandy with Garrus where they reflected on this with Garrus's mention of the "ruthless calculus of war" which I thought was pretty poignant. How far do we go to make sure we won't go extinct when every civilization is threatened with doom?
But about that TV show. I wish video games were more "normal" where I live. It's still very much regarded as a "toy" thing. People in my age do play it and such, but there's not really a lot of people in the older generations who acknowledge the artistry of videogames as a medium.
I still think the idea that you have to be the guardian for a little pretty innocent girl in an apocalyptic and desperate scenario was a very good setting for a choice-based gameplay. Especially with the timer on even a person with good intentions might give in to the stress and say something morally wrong to, or in front of Clementine as Lee. There were a lot of scenes in TWD that explored this.
Seemingly ME3 did the same thing with the player being able to reflect as Shepard what it means to fight a war. Is it about overcoming the odds no matter the cost or doesn't the end justify the means. There were a couple of scenes on the Normandy with Garrus where they reflected on this with Garrus's mention of the "ruthless calculus of war" which I thought was pretty poignant. How far do we go to make sure we won't go extinct when every civilization is threatened with doom?
But about that TV show. I wish video games were more "normal" where I live. It's still very much regarded as a "toy" thing. People in my age do play it and such, but there's not really a lot of people in the older generations who acknowledge the artistry of videogames as a medium.
#10
Posté 02 décembre 2013 - 08:47
Abraham_uk
-
- Members
- 11 713 messages
The biggest problem with evil choices is that they're color coded as evil.
Paragon and renegade weren't quite so black and white, since you could be paragon evil or renegade good. Paragon and renegade were a combination of attitude and morality.
The worst case is Infameous. The evil path was not fun for me at all. I never felt tempted to be evil. I had no incentive to be evil. There was no situation where the evil choice was preferable to the good choice. Every time it was be a mean spirited evil doer and get everyone throwing stones at you, or be a nice guy who everyone roots for.
How about this? If you act like an evil person you get paid and get to survive, and if you act like a good person, you might lose your job and end up homeless. Oh dear, now I am not asylum seekers from trouble nations into my country, just so I get paid. Am I a horrible person? I actually love the good/evil dichotomy. When it is done well, it actually gets you asking challenging questions about yourself.
Paragon and renegade weren't quite so black and white, since you could be paragon evil or renegade good. Paragon and renegade were a combination of attitude and morality.
The worst case is Infameous. The evil path was not fun for me at all. I never felt tempted to be evil. I had no incentive to be evil. There was no situation where the evil choice was preferable to the good choice. Every time it was be a mean spirited evil doer and get everyone throwing stones at you, or be a nice guy who everyone roots for.
How about this? If you act like an evil person you get paid and get to survive, and if you act like a good person, you might lose your job and end up homeless. Oh dear, now I am not asylum seekers from trouble nations into my country, just so I get paid. Am I a horrible person? I actually love the good/evil dichotomy. When it is done well, it actually gets you asking challenging questions about yourself.
#11
Posté 02 décembre 2013 - 08:55
Abraham_uk
-
- Members
- 11 713 messages
One of my favorite dilemmas of all time is the whistle blower dilemma.
Your company is doing something dubious. You know what your company is doing is morally wrong.
Do you betray your company and your oath to secrecy by exposing the company's actions, not only loosing your job, but also leading to the collapse of the company (with thousands of job losses)? Or do you keep your trap shut, so that the company continues to enslave people from nations you've never heard of, working hours you cannot possibly imagine. Perhaps that company's actions are funding wars too.
So you have one option that makes you a social pariah, unemployable and causing loss of jobs. Not only that, but the whistle blower actions means that you have broken the terms of agreement and betrayed the people who believed in you, trusted you, nurtured your talent and possibly saved you from a life of dread and misery.
The other option makes you corrupt and actively involved in slavery and war crimes. You are causing dread and misery. However, it's the same dread and misery that puts food on your plate, gives you a shelter and prevents you from living a life of homelessness. Which is fine until someone else blows the whistle, and those who knew about the corruption (including yourself) are deemed to be accessories and are placed behind bars. Congratulations buddy, regardless of what choice you make, you lose! Best dilemma ever!
Now imagine a game where you reenact a similar kind of dilemma. Where if you try to be the good guy, you get punished for it. When you support the evil doers you get rewarded. But should your support of the evil doers be spotted you're punished anyway.
Your company is doing something dubious. You know what your company is doing is morally wrong.
Do you betray your company and your oath to secrecy by exposing the company's actions, not only loosing your job, but also leading to the collapse of the company (with thousands of job losses)? Or do you keep your trap shut, so that the company continues to enslave people from nations you've never heard of, working hours you cannot possibly imagine. Perhaps that company's actions are funding wars too.
So you have one option that makes you a social pariah, unemployable and causing loss of jobs. Not only that, but the whistle blower actions means that you have broken the terms of agreement and betrayed the people who believed in you, trusted you, nurtured your talent and possibly saved you from a life of dread and misery.
The other option makes you corrupt and actively involved in slavery and war crimes. You are causing dread and misery. However, it's the same dread and misery that puts food on your plate, gives you a shelter and prevents you from living a life of homelessness. Which is fine until someone else blows the whistle, and those who knew about the corruption (including yourself) are deemed to be accessories and are placed behind bars. Congratulations buddy, regardless of what choice you make, you lose! Best dilemma ever!
Now imagine a game where you reenact a similar kind of dilemma. Where if you try to be the good guy, you get punished for it. When you support the evil doers you get rewarded. But should your support of the evil doers be spotted you're punished anyway.
