Neil Druckmann talks about Nathan Drake mass murderer discussion, calls out NeoGAF
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
This line of logic got me but the Indiana Jones one was a much better analogy that got the point across.
Kageshinzo
Member
I hope you're joking. NeoGAF is not as important as you think. Hell, Reddit is much more influential than GAF (yeah, there, I said it).
Applying literary criticism only gets you so far when it comes to popcorn entertainment; just look at the history of Mortal Kombat and how it's more violent than ever 
There's the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles but that has far less killing if I recall correctly anyway
There's the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles but that has far less killing if I recall correctly anyway
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
This thread has taught me that people take reality and story in videogames waaaaaay more seriously than I do and what I thought they did.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
Within seconds of destroying a small military, Drake feels up his girlfriend.
"Is that a dagger in your pocket?"
"Ever do it in a burning warzone surrounded by freshly shredded PMC's?"
"Is that a dagger in your pocket?"
"Ever do it in a burning warzone surrounded by freshly shredded PMC's?"
Messofanego
Banned
It is tone and the main character. I have no problem with Blazko in Wolfenstein TNO cause "he's the biggest god damn Nazi killing machine ever to walk the planet earth" and makes no bones about it. He is aware that he's just a tool and if it weren't for Anya, he'd be happy dying anytime like the hasbeen warrior he and Fergus Reid are. The game treats itself as a dark comedy, from the wild shifts in tone and humour down to the writing in the littlest things like the newspapers (crocoduck, the death fish and chips). A FPS like that knows it's over-the-top, and the developers like Jens Matthies have been clear about the tones and influences like Inglorious Basterds/Verhoven in interviews. Because of the game being in full command of its varying tones and having enough time to flesh everything out in the details, it can go from holocaust to mecha turret sections in the same level without feeling tasteless. They sometimes bother with humanising the enemies in various conversations like a long chat a Nazi commander has with a higher up about his wife being pregnant and he can't wait to get back or how one nazi soldier is coughing because of the new concrete so he's told by another to try lemon coffee.
Drake or the Uncharted games don't come across as self-aware imo and the developer's response to that kind of criticism is indicative of that compared to Wolfenstein's.
You know ever since i joined the Gaf, i have questioned if i'm a good person or a good person for today's world. I think i am a good person and try to be a good person but these kind of discussions and PC related discussions crop up constantly on here but they either never bother me or i never notice or pick up on the 'problem' until i read it on here.
It makes me think i don't fit in this current world.
It makes me think i don't fit in this current world.
And the kill counts are way different. Somebody posted a graphic earlier where Indy kills like a dozen guys in each movie? Drake is taking out entire mercenary bands singlehandedly. Potentially hundreds of dudes.
I think TLOU is way better than the Uncharted games with how its tone works with its gameplay. Yeah, Joel kills a lot of people. But he kills a lot fewer people at once. His total kill count is way lower. The game's tone works better in establishing how all that killing might affect a character. Ludonarrative dissonance is not a problem in TLOU.
Videogames are not really used to hardhitting criticism. Because they are videogames I guess.
Commando, tho.
Oppo
Member
of course they're self-aware; it's an obvious homage to pulp fiction and the serials of the 50s and 60s. blatantly so.
by the opposite argument, you would have to have a huge problem with musicals, because it just simply isn't real.
you're just making a tone judgment, and deciding that they're on the other side of the arbitrary line.
I get this, but I've had this thought with countless games. Why not accept that the creators wanted a story and characters based in reality but reality severely limits what you can do with the gameplay and the disconnect is unavoidable?
TimeEffect
Member
I think if there is a choice to play as a pacifist (stealth or tranquilizer) the responsibility would fall on the player to shape the narrative.
Especially for areas where Drake isn't threatened and where in past games, he is an instigator.
Especially for areas where Drake isn't threatened and where in past games, he is an instigator.
It's not hard hitting criticism. This is verbal ejaculation from someone who doesn't like a movie. It's a bleeping action movie. Fiction doesn't have to follow rules, it's fiction. Die Hard is far more beloved then anything that pompous jerk ever wrote. Morals belong in movies that want to deal with morality. Good fun should be good fun. PEACE.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Die Hard used to be grounded is some type of semblance of reality.
It started off 1 vs. 12, where stepping on glass and crashing through it caused legit bodily harm to John. Then after the third movie it quickly spiralled out of control where John is a fucking terminator.
So I think it's fair to criticize current Die Hard movies for it's insanity when compared to the original.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
lol
Killing in shooters is bound to happen, but Drake's kill count gets so ridiculously high that it just gets weird and kind of terrible when he's shouting out one-liners after slaughtering dozens. The game's writing is just garbage Summer blockbuster stuff in general though.
Grant Morrison is definitely on-point here. Until the "Drake is a mass murderer" threads popped up (think there was a Penny Arcade comic too?), I didn't even think about how many people I was killing. Never even popped in my head. It's a 3rd person shooter, with the primary enemies being random mercenary dudes who attack me on-sight, of course there's going to be a high body count. After I had the notion implanted in my head, I simply found it humorous. I would hate to be genuinely bothered by it.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I see numbers on the dozens, not in the hundreds....
It follows the rule of action sequels. The body count must climb. Look at the Fast and the Furious. Every sequel has outdone the last, and that's why the franchise maintained its success. You can't downscale without running into problems. I believe 24 ran into this problem after they detonated a second nuke. It's like there was nowhere to go but down, and I stopped watching. PEACE.
RustyNails
Member
Whynotboth.gif?
Thats always been the problem with the gameplay and the story at hand. First, I've never cared for the term murderer when the only way to interact with the NPCs (who are trying to kill you BTW) is to shoot them. I think its more fair in GTA where you are given a choice, at least when not in mission. Nathan Drake is definitely a killer, which I think is stark enough.
I don't think the criticisms about Uncharted or Tomb Raider or whatever game by GAF or some other community of fans is completely off base though. If the kill count in these games is so disproportionate that its hard to view the character without taking that into account, then its good that the developers are aware of the issue. If you don't want Nathan Drake to be portrayed as a murderer, then you need to give him non violent options in interacting with the game environment.
Being self-aware is rather overrated imho, e.g. Kevin Smith's Tusk taking the cheesy horror genre and putting the roll-eyed sidegrin in it. It's almost like a half-apology.
I'm guessing you're talking about TR1, the only classic TR game where Lara primarily kills animals. Any other TR doesn't fit what you're saying in any way, shape or form.
This is low on multiple levels.
Well, let me do this:
1. Indy kills 11 people in a Raiders, with 69 people overall dead.
That makes him a mass murderer. He is actually responsible for 69 deaths. Thats more than most mass murderers that we know off. Right? Thats just 1 movie.
2. TLOU is very violent game to me. It is way more violent than Uncharted. It feels personal, like you are actually killing someone, vs Uncharted where it feels very distant. To me it makes world of difference.
Most horror or thrillers with violent killers/murderers/psychopaths dont have them killing 700 people... they kill 5-6 people and they are terrifying. On the other hand, 69 people die in Raiders, and we all laugh.
Do you not see the difference?
As a game you subconsciously forgive the inaccuracies serving gameplay, just like you forgive a movie editing out time to create a narrative.
This can be applied to many different things; in Westerns movies where people die like flies, whereas in reality the body count was much, much lower, the style sells you on the idea that a death in fiction can have a very different weight than it has in real life.
Again, it's only a problem if they make it a problem (Tomb Raider) and Uncharted doesn't do that, for the most part.
It's not a situation where you're either super campy like Django, or serious like Deadwood.
There are infinite shades of gray in between.
Uncharted is campy enough to justify the massacre without raising an eyebrow.. it has enemy classes, ffs.
You all are making wrong Indiana Jones comparison. You should be comparing not to the movies but Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_and_the_Fate_of_Atlantis
Now check this out:
This is great illustration of how game meduim could be BETTER than film. And it came out more than 20 years ago. Now people freaking out about people wanting more from games?? Mind blown.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Jones_and_the_Fate_of_Atlantis
Now check this out:
This is great illustration of how game meduim could be BETTER than film. And it came out more than 20 years ago. Now people freaking out about people wanting more from games?? Mind blown.
Fallout-with-swords
Banned
I don't get the whole, "mass murder", "killing spree", "cold blooded" stuff that gets associated with Uncharted. Yes, Drake kills hundreds of bad guys in one of his games, but he kills all of them in self-defence. If any one of those pirates were to throw his gun to the ground and raise his hands in surrender we know Drake wouldn't kill them. But they don't do that, as soon as they see Drake they shoot to kill. Even when Drake sneaks up on enemies, and he shoots first it's already established that these guys are looking for Drake and have been ordered to kill him.
but sonygaf
Dozens is "normal" to you? It's not, it's the same exact principle.
Games are in the hundreds just because you have to actually play them for more than 40 minutes, and often replay them multiple times.
But so what if it wasn't campy?, its not real life.
I don't know, i don't get it. If people can't distinguish between a game/film and real life then that says more about some of you than the actual game/film.
that's die hard 2
Something tells me it was easier to do those things in a point-and-click game 20 years ago than it is to implement something like that in a AAA production these days.
That's not even the discussion i'm having.
I'm not talking about ethics or morality here, i'm talking about style and what i think works and what doesn't, stylistically and narratively.
Jeronimo Jones
Member
Seems legit. I ignore NeoGAF too.
snoopeasystreet
Member
I agree but it also works both ways. The major tonal inconsistency in the Uncharted series is, despite being the most efficient killer that universe has ever seen, Drake always considers himself the underdog. In movies like Die Hard or Indiana Jones, almost every kill the protagonist makes is a struggle or the fight is on a more fair footing. Drake dispatches his enemies so quickly and with such ease that it's almost hilarious that he considers any group of dudes to be a challenge. If he was more confident in his actions, it would be more tonally consistent with how he behaves under player control. At the moment he's John McClane out of combat and Rambo in it.
I think designers should either write the main character and story arc to more consistent with the gameplay or reduce the player's power within the gameworld to make the story about a more believable character.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
Particularly, I don't believe the whole "sticking to your guns" shit, I feel is just because designers, or rather the industry, don't know how to create an action game that dosn't involve killing hundreds of enemies.
Or maybe they don't want too. And the easiest way for writers to deal how a character can kill so many people without feeling anything at all, is just...not dealing with it.
That creates a big disconnect in some cases, because there's clearly some thought on Drake's evolution and grow, but the more they flesh him out, the more sticks that omission.
Is not normal, but makes way more sense that someone who fights for his life takes that number of lifes and dosn't leave a mark.
We talking of hundreds of people, is laughable to think a character (videogame or not) wouldn't have a problem after taking so many fucking lives. And that he can still crack jokes after taking one.
Or maybe they don't want too. And the easiest way for writers to deal how a character can kill so many people without feeling anything at all, is just...not dealing with it.
That creates a big disconnect in some cases, because there's clearly some thought on Drake's evolution and grow, but the more they flesh him out, the more sticks that omission.
Is not normal, but makes way more sense that someone who fights for his life takes that number of lifes and dosn't leave a mark.
We talking of hundreds of people, is laughable to think a character (videogame or not) wouldn't have a problem after taking so many fucking lives. And that he can still crack jokes after taking one.
I still think Uncharted games are garbage, but this is definitely the right choice.
Mario is exactly that, there are plenty of examples.
I think there's too much reliance on combat in the medium, and it stagnates things a bit, sure, but if Uncharted wants to be a third person shooter, and finds new interesting things to do in that space (and it does) it's silly to point at it and say "why don't remove the shooting?".
Might as well look at a Jackie Chan movie and go "can you do without all the punching?".
After reading that I still don't know why we should be comparing a Indiana Jones licensed game with a third person shooter that takes inspiration and tone from Indiana Jones films.
RustyNails
Member
It's a dude fighting armies, paramilitaries, pirates and bandits....it's completely made up make-belief world where an adventurer is thrown in to. How many such bad guys Gordon Freeman, a nuclear physicist by profession, has killed? It's sort of what ND imagines you would do in a Indy Jones type movie. You are Drake/Gordon Freeman. You're not gonna reason with Mola Ram. You're gonna kill the bad dudes and push them off cliffs.
Do you have a pount?
Enosh
Member
nah "ludonarrative dissonance" was all the rage in the media around a year of so back about a variety of games, think bioshock, TR and UC were kinda at the forefront but other fps/tps games also got mentioned
kinda died down and didn't see much discussion about the whole thing until this thread
theignoramus
Member
Its a way to take a shot at the series making Drake a charming, wise cracking guy. But its a no win situation for ND. If they made him like 95% of the soulless action clones out there, people would complain about his lack of personality. Give him one and it's "well how come they try to make me like a sociopath?"
Some people are idiotic and like to complain about everything. You want morality, play a Bioshock game.
Keihart
Member
So the people that find the quips of Nathan while killing people disturbing, also have a problem with John Mclain? or Bad Boys? or any action movie with that kind of heroes?
I find it super fun , and without it, it wouldn't be half as fun. Then again , i like 90's action movies...
I find it super fun , and without it, it wouldn't be half as fun. Then again , i like 90's action movies...
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I'm not talking about removing the shooting, just make it distinct. Maybe starting to not make the protagonist a one-man-army, could be a good start. Is not like I have the answer, but I feel that for the medium to go forward, is a problem that should be tackled sooner or later.