Justin confirmed for best big bro.
This looks incredible, though I’ll keep a place in my heart for the old pre-rendered look.
That’s faulty logic. The game also doesn’t specify if Epona speaks French, but it never says she doesn’t speak it, right? Could be!
The dating sim aspect of ME has been pure pulp so far without any real depth. Adding a bunch more options is fine, but won’t really matter if it remains so superficial.
Is it not allowed to be sardonic?
The co-op characters are male because every single player is the male protagonist in their instance of the co-op missions. That’s it. That’s the whole reason. But feel free to misinterpret.
There’s barely any Dali in that trailer, the more pronounced references were to Twin Peaks.
So is Polygon ever getting a videoplayer that isn’t garbage?
Excellent article, and now I’m listening to Young Americans again.
Did you read my post? Just because you’re interacting with it doesn’t mean a fixed narrative choice like that shouldn’t be an option for the creators.
Ubisoft should have never taken an apologetic stance. In the co-op, everyone plays as the protagonist, who is a defined character, so no, there is no character customization. Instead they’ve opened the door to all sorts of criticism, no matter how contrived or unfounded.
I would hate to see every game that has a protagonist be able to pick your gender. MMOs, Animal Crossing, Saint’s Row, Mass Effect, anything explicitly designed and tailored around those kinds of choices? Yes, obviously!
The Last of Us, GTA, Uncharted, etc. – anything explicitly written for a specific character’s arc, be it pulp, satire or more in-depth? No. Just no.
This notion is as absurdly detrimental to the medium’s narrative value as reprinting literary classics with all the gender nouns switched. It serves no real value, cheapens the characters and makes it impossible to write something rooted in cultural realities regarding gender, be it progressive, regressive or simply neutral.
I wouldn’t worry about that, none of this is real outside of some pockets of the internet.
Any story with a defined male or female protagonist (so almost all stories in the history of mankind) have “excluded half the human population”. Diversity is great when the avatar is an expressive choice, but when the player is asked to play a role in a narrative it should be a complete non-issue. The only reason this game has been singled out is because of the developer’s comments being taken out of context. He should have never taken an apologetic stance and simply explained that in the co-op sections, each player will be the game’s protagonist in their experience and see random assassins for the other players. That’s all there is to it.
The discussion on the need for more diverse protagonists is different from this non-issue.
We can thank Mario for this really.
I think that’s kind of unfair, as the Booker/Comstock duality is a more personalized look at the issue of absolutism in any self-imposed narrative. One foregoes the right of absolution and lives in guilt and the other takes the baptism as an excuse to validate all of his choices by demonizing the other parties. The game certainly never abandoned its themes, it just shifted from a societal angle to a personal one, and never resorts to a fully black and white depiction of its characters.
The “angry black woman” in Snowpiercer was equally stereotypical to Daisy Fitzroy. The only difference is one panders to the notion of the angelic, righteous oppressed, and the other turns that cliche on its head.
Guess which one people took offense with. It’s so blatantly hypocritical it’s hilarious. No one actually thinks Tanya was well written, right? It was cliched, sappy and boring.
The movie was alright, but it felt cheap in spots, and completely went off the rails at the end (ho ho ho).
My biggest gripe with this article is comparing the pacing of a movie to a game and expecting that to be valid. Infinite used the FPS gameplay as a cruth for pacing, I would never deny that, but it’s also pretty integral characterization for Booker who is more than just an avatar or power fantasy. Nevertheless the game could have done with a more dynamic, open-ended design like shown in the 2011 E3 demo, which felt more like a true successor to the Shock heritage. These are all valid criticisms.
But simply pointing to a dystopic movie and going “see? Like that!” offers nothing. A movie’s pacing is inherently static. A game has to create conditions and perimeters for possible pacing. There is really not a lot of value this comparison.
The scene with the butcher knifes and the fish was far more juvenile and pulpy than Bioshock ever was, and only detracted from the weight it was trying to convey. Point being that if you want to call Infinite hamfisted and praise Snowpiercer I think you have a double standard or can’t take the context of the medium into account.