“Maybe they thought to include it because it’s a real threat that woman face?”
Or maybe they thought to include it because it was the only “creative” thing they could think of for a woman character. Males cannot biologically become pregnant, but they can be sexually assaulted. Your reply implies that you think the two situations are similar for portrayal purposes, but they simply are not.
The point is men and woman both can be sexually assaulted but you don’t see that ever being portrayed because it doesn’t fit the stereotype for a male protagonist. Whereas it is sadly one of the “go-to” storylines for a female protagonist even when it is completely unnecessary to the story simply because it is a gender stereotype. There is something most definitely wrong with that fact.
Actually, I was surprised to find that it played almost exactly like a Batman Arkham game, except with mostly guns instead of punch combos.
You are absolutely correct. It is a gender thing.
The Lara Croft prior to this game was Nathan Drake in the sense that other than some odd scene in The Last Revelation of her as a child (and even then a very capable one), Lara was a “Do-er.” When Ubisoft rebooted the franchise, for whatever reason they decided that the all wonderful franchise saving (at least of late) “origin” story was the way to go. When they did that, they set Lara up as an inexperienced teen who has to suffer some trauma that “hardens” her up and makes her the strong determined woman she becomes. And then they decided that the physical adversity had to have some sexual assault component. At least there did in Ron Rosenberg’s view and enough to put a minor suggestion of a potential sexual assault in the game.
Had Ubisoft rebooted a male character like Nathan Drake, there never would have been a thought in anyone involved in writing the game’s mind about making the adversity, even if it was physical, into sexual assault. At worst it would have been some brutal interrogation, or being shot and left for dead. More likely it would have been the wanton, tragic death of a parent figure a la Batman or Spiderman. Interestingly that gender neutral loss of a parent figure was Lara’s original backstory motivation as well. Amazing that the people involved in this game don’t see that point.
So what you are saying is it was not your cup of tea, eh. All I said was I didn’t have a problem with it. I didn’t praise it, but I didn’t pan it either. How you could somehow turn that into “Are you joking?” seems a bit of an overreaction.
Agreed. Having played most every console Tomb Raider (with the exception of AoD), it was a pretty solid and entertaining Tomb Raider story. The game mechanics modeled after the recent Batman Arkham take on the Metroidvaniazelda formula were pretty well incorporated. I thoroughly enjoyed the game.
I loved Mirror’s Edge and didn’t have a problem with its narrative either, although I never saw the anime or comic book or whatever made up its source material.
“Tomb Raider writer Rhianna Pratchett described her frustration over the over-zealous reaction of gamers and press when it was revealed the reboot would include the suggestion of rape”
I think she should be more annoyed with executive producer Ron Rosenberg and the fact that he chose to use the word rape, or even suggested any sexual assault takes place in the game, rather than the gamers and press who took the Developer’s representative at his word that the game included such a “push button” issue.
I finished Tomb Raider about a month ago. There is no rape or sexual assault scene. There is a scene where the lead kidnapper leers at Lara and suggests that maybe (yes, suggests and maybe, it is not overt and if you blink you can even miss the suggestion) he is interested in getting off rather than just killing her outright, but Jabba’s scene with slave Leia in ROTJ was more overtly sexual. Maybe the scene changed after the blowback to make it less overt, but that can only be a good thing, because the motivation to save her friends was more than enough in that story.
The “potential rape” of Lara had nothing whatsoever to do with Lara’s “character development” into fighting back against the island inhabitants. It was the fact that she and her friends were kidnapped and they were killing her friends with no physical way to get off the island.
Rosenberg’s representation was at best an overstatement of the actual cutscene, at worst a blatant misrepresentation or misinterpretation. The fact is, he chose to use the term without context of providing the scene under discussion. Any blowback he, the developer and the game received from his misrepresentation suggesting the game included such a horrendous act was absolutely justified.
“Pratchett went on to describe her disappointment in the community, which reacted without an understanding of the context of the scene and its writers.”
And whose fault was that? Your creative director casually threw out the term “rape” in a discussion specifically about what motivates Lara to change from a meek character to a strong, gritty survivor (not to mention killer) and he does not provide the “context of the scene and its writers.”
Sorry, but IMHO, she should direct her disappointment and comments where they actually belong.
Your post is quite intriguing. Would you mind elaborating? Do you have a source for your claim? I only point this out, because as I read the comments here they seem to fall into two arenas – one asking for more information and the other engaged in obvious speculation with little to no foundation. Your post, however, seems pretty confident in its assertion and hints at either personal knowledge of Bungie’s current or recent culture, or some close association with a third party that has such. Additionally, you signed up for a commenting account just to type this out.
I am curious because you use the metaphor “pirate ship” which is one that I don’t think a lot of gamers would label the makers of Myth, Marathon and Halo (although most of those people that made those games are gone). Moreover, in Russ’ feature on Bungie and Destiny a year ago, the only real hint of ego at the developer was actually attributed to only two people, Marty, specifically (but in a somewhat half-joking tone), and Jason Jones, if you read between the lines as a one of a few potential interpretations of his quite notable physical absence in the piece and Russ’ discussion of him and the effort to talk to him.
Before Destiny was revealed, there was a leak by a “contractor” who not only claimed to have been let go by Bungie, but said that others had been as well. If memory serves, it was not a flattering take, but it was anonymously attributed by the gaming press at the time. Other than that instance, not much negative has been reported about Bungie, although again referring to Russ feature, there was a valid interpretation of mildly “cultish” overtone in the developer’s corporate culture. Nothing, however, that would have led one to state: “Many people have been given their walking papers who have been with Bungie for years, because they disagreed with the bullies who call themselves creative directors and art directors who rule from a place of fear,” without further information.
Also – computer text sucks for gauging tone. Please understand I am not trying to hound you, I am simply genuinely curious because the confidence behind the assertions in your post really stands out from the rest of the comments on virtually every article I have read reporting this news (including reddit’s discussion which basically amounts to one big “WTF Bungie!?” when often they have someone claiming (true or not) to have some inside information on a story like this).
The story of Marty’s firing alone is newsworthy enough. The fact that he announced it on Twitter almost a week after it happened at a time when at least two gaming news sites had to report it via reporters located in Australia (so late night in most of the Americas) gives it an even more ominous overtone.
Heck – do a RCT Original/CF/LL port to the iPad and I would buy it for $30. No joke.
Glad to see I wasn’t the only one who remembered this excellent feature by Russ: http://www.polygon.com/features/2013/1/24/3908184/heart-of-bungie-destiny-jason-jones-marty-odonnell-halo#sect-five
It was a stand out part of the feature and even given the authorial interpretation and spin, the “Famous One” section was noticeable by virtue of the fact that something was palpable enough even to mention it. Rereading it in the context of this news gives it even more of an ominous note.