Support NeoGAF

[DexterPepper]

Getting up in arms and writing articles that spoil unreleased art because it makes you uncomfortable makes you the worst kind of editorialist imaginable.

Is that really your impression from Cara's article? I would totally agree that there are terrible, awful articles out there that are just looking for page hits. But you'd put this PC Gamer article (where she acknowledges her own hypocrisy) in that category?

I don't understand what you think is wrong with her editorial.

Also, if they didn't want the scene spoiled, they shouldn't have included it in a preview build at a press event. I've said it before, but I think they wanted to see how the community and media would react.

 

[akira28]

Other forms of media aren't immune to this. I think this argument manages to completely side step the issue any way.

games are particularly vulnerable. Because instead of mere entertainment, they're supposed to be ah, an even more engrossing exchange, an engagement. So games are supposed to be something more than just seeing an art moving on the screen. If there is rape portrayed in a movie, you generally don't have people asking about the children, or asking why it was put in to a scene for story telling. It's just understood. Context matters of course, but in this game, it's only rape in context, and it's seconds later to be shown as a false context at that. But the criticism hits harder, because the critics are swinging harder.

edit: they way they set it up, I almost felt like I was going to end up having to kill this guy later in the game. No way the protagonist would be doing this. Instead they're plying the snuff film meme, I guess to show how much of a sleaze this guy is, and to show what some of his motivations might be. A fake rape scene as character development. The differences I guess are the forced perspective, and the fact that it's a setup. But it's not portrayed as a joke, or making light of anything. It's not even particularly a trick, it's just a quick change of direction. It IS a manipulation, deliberate, and intentionally raw. They weren't trying to entertain you with that, they were trying to grip you and shock you and make you feel revulsion and disgust and a lack of control, and suddenly oh...you're just fucking with my head. Is that wrong?

Or is it only wrong in context?

 

[mclem]

It's OK for art to make us uncomfortable. Some art is good specifically because it makes us uncomfortable.

I love this film. I despise this film.

 

[Palette Swap]

Yes its good to express an opinion. But the discussion has long turned into one of censorship. It's as if violence in media is OK as along it doesn't involve gender or even race sometimes.


Here is one of my favourite comments from the original Pcgamer article comments:

I haven't seen anyone here calling for censorship. All the censorship discussion came from people here assimilating an opinion to censorship and a single person expressing that opinion to more people.

By the way, it's not exactly great to make a point about freedom of speech with "it's good to express an opinion but..."

I'm all for freedom BTW, I have zero opinion on the game scene, I think devs should do whatever they want. And to the same extent, I think anyone should be free to say whatever they want about it without being silenced by accusations of censorship.

 

[Infinite]

games are particularly vulnerable. Because instead of mere entertainment, they're supposed to be ah, an even more engrossing exchange, an engagement. So games are supposed to be something more than just seeing an art moving on the screen. If there is rape portrayed in a movie, you generally don't have people asking about the children, or asking why it was put in to a scene for story telling. It's just understood. Context matters of course, but in this game, it's only rape in context, and it's seconds later to be shown as a false context at that. But the criticism hits harder, because the critics are swinging harder.

This isnt really true at all. Maybe because you're a gamer who posts on a gaming forum and read gaming news sites which means that such issues are magnified through your lenses of reality. Not to mention this thread is about an article posted on a gaming news site by a gamer. However movies and other forms of media gets criticized for problematic depictions of sexual violence, they don't at all get a free pass like you seem to imply.

Recently musicians like Tyler the Creator was criticized for his lyrics that depict sexual violence. Who can forgot the whole debacle with the comedian Tosh? These issues hit mass media and wasn't just restricted to enthusiasts blogs and press like this one.

Let's not turn this into a pissing contest in who's the biggest victim of criticism. That isn't really what this is about

 

[Brashnir]

Also, if they didn't want the scene spoiled, they shouldn't have included it in a preview build at a press event. I've said it before, but I think they wanted to see how the community and media would react.

The fact that it's included in a preview build does not justify writing an article spoiling it. Movie reviewers are frequently given preview screenings of upcoming films, and they don't go writing articles complaining about how Soylent Green is all about cannibalism months before the movie comes out.

And the ones that do should be criticized and reviled for it.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Sure, they do. But there's a countless amount of movies out there with rape scenes. And not just implied ones, but visual ones, even pretty graphic ones and ones involving underage teens/children (the latter usually not being very graphic).

Meanwhile, rape is pretty much a taboo theme in games. In movies, sure, it gets criticized, but in games it goes much farther than that.

I tried to make a comment about why violence seemingly gets a pass in video games, but something like this doesn't. I feel like the crux of my arguments there also apply to why different mediums are seemingly held to the same standard. I'm going to quote that post again -- not because I think it's a great post or anything, but because I have to get ready for work and I'm not sure how soon I'll be able to follow up here -- and preface this with advising that if you substitute "violence in video games" for "rape scenes in movies," the spirit of my arguments still applies.

One thing that is worth considering -- and I'm pretty late in jumping into this so my apologies if this has already been covered -- is that once upon a time, violence was a big deal in games. We're going back a long ways, but when Mortal Kombat was unleashed on the world back in 1993, it did stir up a lot of controversy. It's just that -- like a lot of things in life for better or for worse -- this stuff often becomes the de facto standard as many people that aren't overly concerned about these activities move on.

But for what it's worth, many people today are still concerned about violence in video games. Mind you, it only becomes a hot button issue when a mass murdering gunman is suspected to like video games, but it's not like everybody on the planet has embraced violence in video games. And even people that often aren't up in arms about the prevalence of violence in video games will often concede that violent aggression is probably an overused mechanic in gaming. Recently -- and though I haven't played the game myself -- I noticed a lot of people criticizing that the shooting in Bioshock Infinite was at odds with its narrative. Given that, it's important to me that people realize that the over reliance on violence does not go unnoticed.

Also -- and I'm quite certain that I'm not breaking any new ground here -- I think the difference to be noted is that I think people would be hard pressed to explain why being able to rape would be mechanically necessary from a gameplay perspective. Killing really isn't either, but unfortunately so many games are just centered around the idea that the focal point of the title is a violent conflict where killing is inevitable. That still leaves narrative, mind you. So I can't completely toss out any arguments that a character raping another isn't somehow integral to that game's story, but I'll just kind of recuse myself from that discussion as I'm not the biggest proponent of narrative as an important part of gaming to begin with.

And finally, getting back the original observation about the length of time separating Mortal Kombat making waves on the scene way back, it's worth noting that this too may become accepted and uncontroversial for people out there that think it's important for creators to be able tell the stories they want without fear of the angry populace lashing out and threatening creators that aren't ready to stand behind their work. Personally speaking, I could do without characters raping other characters in my video games, but if creators stick to their guns and this becomes more common place, I wouldn't be surprised to see that rape in Hotline Miami 10 in ten years is almost completely uncontroversial.

 

[Screaming Meat]

Games get accused of meaning and intent? Or lack of foresight or social awareness?

So do films and literature, though, many of which have questioned the culpability of the audience watching violent acts. Some examples of films would be Funny Games, for instance, or Man Bites Dog. Both of which are excellent, by the way.

Can't think of many games with rape or implied rape so ill ask the same question you are. Also

Here's probably the most famous (and utterly disgusting) example of a game whose chief mechanic is rape. It's very old, mind.

 

[Gun Animal]

What the hell did people expect from Hotline Miami 2?

It's okay to push people out of their comfort zones - not every game is for everyone. I find it kind of hilarious that people who supposedly love Hotline Miami, despite the fact that you slaughter hundreds of people, splattering their blood and brains on the floor in the most gruesome ways possible, are so, so disappointed at an "implied rape scene," something that anyone whose been to an R-rated movie once in their life has experienced.

Actually I was reading very similar responses to Django Unchained, some journalists seemed to be very upset about a particular nude scene. However, I believe it's less an issue of people being genuinely offended and more an issue of journalists wanting to attract page views by creating any fake controversies they can, and internet commentators parroting them.

 

[Screaming Meat]

Actually I was reading very similar responses to Django Unchained, some journalists seemed to be very upset about a particular nude scene. However, I believe it's less an issue of people being genuinely offended and more an issue of journalists wanting to attract page views by creating any fake controversies they can, and internet commentators parroting them.

I don't think this is a fake controversy. We're here discussing an article about a game that involved rape, something that every medium has found problematic. Games are relatively young in that respect and are still tied to being considered purely entertainment. That may change in time as it did with films, comics, books et al. There are no cries for censorship here, we're discussing the article's reaction and our own.

It's OK for art to make us uncomfortable. Some art is good specifically because it makes us uncomfortable.

Games press needs to learn that just because something makes you uncomfortable, that doesn't make it bad or make it something that needs to be shunned or excised from the industry.

Deliverance is a great film that has parts that are intended to make the audience uncomfortable. Requiem for a Dream is another example. You don't have to like the things that are going on in these movies. In fact, you're supposed to not like them. That's the point.

Getting up in arms and writing articles that spoil unreleased art because it makes you uncomfortable makes you the worst kind of editorialist imaginable.

I agree. But it then begs the questions: Are video games Art? Is Miami Hotline Art? Is this Art? Are all films Art? Are all books Art? What the fuck is Art?

That's a rabbit-hole for another thread, methinks.

EDIT: Cool avatar, btw.

One thing that is worth considering -- and I'm pretty late in jumping into this so my apologies if this has already been covered -- is that once upon a time, violence was a big deal in games. We're going back a long ways, but when Mortal Kombat was unleashed on the world back in 1993, it did stir up a lot of controversy. It's just that -- like a lot of things in life for better or for worse -- this stuff often becomes the de facto standard as many people that aren't overly concerned about these activities move on.

But for what it's worth, many people today are still concerned about violence in video games.... [snip].

Spot on.

 

[akira28]

This isnt really true at all. Maybe because you're a gamer who posts on a gaming forum and read gaming news sites which means that such issues are magnified through your lenses of reality. Not to mention this thread is about an article posted on a gaming news site by a gamer. However movies and other forms of media gets criticized for problematic depictions of sexual violence, they don't at all get a free pass like you seem to imply.

Recently musicians like Tyler the Creator was criticized for his lyrics that depict sexual violence. Who can forgot the whole debacle with the comedian Tosh? These issues hit mass media and wasn't just restricted to enthusiasts blogs and press like this one.

Let's not turn this into a pissing contest in who's the biggest victim of criticism. That isn't really what this is about

Actually, you inferred, I didn't imply. We all know that movies have censors and ratings and have been watched and criticized and policed since forever, so kick that idea about movies getting a free pass out of the pool, thanks. I didn't say that. What I did say is that games as a medium are more vulnerable to criticism of this type than movies are.

And music and other forms of media and entertainment that AREN'T games. And I tried to go into some of the reasoning for that. Another reason is experience. Games even being capable of showing this, or having the level of production where they try to be cinematic and play the story out in different ways. I don't think the subject of sexual violence has even been in games much, certainly not the depiction of it. I can only think of Phantasmagoria (written by a woman by the way) that did that, and there was a huge shit storm and sales were dramatically hit. They wanted to ban it, people wanted it pulled from stores and hidden behind shelves. Movies have moved beyond that. Music can move quicker than that. A censored version and a public apology. Games seemingly don't have that resilience. And that was my point, not who has been victimized more.

 

[Infinite]

Actually, you inferred, I didn't imply. We all know that movies have censors and ratings and have been watched and criticized and policed since forever, so kick that idea about movies getting a free pass out of the pool, thanks. I didn't say that. What I did say is that games as a medium are more vulnerable to criticism of this type than movies are.

And music and other forms of media and entertainment that AREN'T games. And I tried to go into some of the reasoning for that. Another reason is experience. Games even being capable of showing this, or having the level of production where they try to be cinematic and play the story out in different ways. I don't think the subject of sexual violence has even been in games much, certainly not the depiction of it. I can only think of Phantasmagoria (written by a woman by the way) that did that, and there was a huge shit storm and sales were dramatically hit. They wanted to ban it, people wanted it pulled from stores and hidden behind shelves. Movies have moved beyond that. Music can move quicker than that. A censored version and a public apology. Games seemingly don't have that resilience. And that was my point, not who has been victimized more.

I'm not sure what your point is then. How should games handle the subject of sexual violence if it is as you say able to mature like movies? Is criticism of sexual violence in video games valid?

Also I doubt that the because you play video games makes it more vulnerable to criticism. What type of criticism are we talking here? If you're thinking about Jackson Thompson styled rhetoric about games teaching people how to murder and kill that's one thing but that wasn't what this article was about.

Why point out that Phatasmagoria was written by a woman?

 

[sonicmj1]

Actually, you inferred, I didn't imply. We all know that movies have censors and ratings and have been watched and criticized and policed since forever, so kick that idea about movies getting a free pass out of the pool, thanks. I didn't say that. What I did say is that games as a medium are more vulnerable to criticism of this type than movies are.

And music and other forms of media and entertainment that AREN'T games. And I tried to go into some of the reasoning for that. Another reason is experience. Games even being capable of showing this, or having the level of production where they try to be cinematic and play the story out in different ways. I don't think the subject of sexual violence has even been in games much, certainly not the depiction of it. I can only think of Phantasmagoria (written by a woman by the way) that did that, and there was a huge shit storm and sales were dramatically hit. They wanted to ban it, people wanted it pulled from stores and hidden behind shelves. Movies have moved beyond that. Music can move quicker than that. A censored version and a public apology. Games seemingly don't have that resilience. And that was my point, not who has been victimized more.

The mid-90s were a difficult time for games, but I think things have changed. With the exception of countries like Germany and Australia, games are as safe from government action as they've ever been, and they aren't individually used as news scapegoats as much as they used to be. Even when organizations like the NRA were trying to single out games during the spate of violent shootings that happened in the US a year ago, there never seemed to be any real threat of people or the government taking it seriously.

I think games are enough of an entrenched institution at this point that they can endure this sort of criticism without being hurt.

 

[Moon_frogger]

The reaction to that movie was so strong that Kubrick withdrew it from British cinemas, and edited the US version of the film.

It was almost impossible to see in the uk for like 27 years lol

 

[Screaming Meat]

It was almost impossible to see in the uk for like 27 years lol

Yeah, Kubrick banned it himself.

 

[akira28]

So do films and literature, though, many of which have questioned the culpability of the audience watching violent acts.

All art is subject to criticism. And yes some people will try to be very forward with their aspersions and say that the media you consume, or even more acutely, the art that you experience makes an imprint on your psychology and morality. Possibly making you less sensitive to, or even worse, prone to violence or anti-social behavior.

But we experience games from a different level than we do music or video or print. I think the mindshare that we devote to games, the mindset that we have towards games comes with an expectation. That little character is our avatar, we control them, we're responsible for them, they represent us in this created world. And we don't expect to see our avatar raping someone. If something is in a movie or a book scene, the assumption is that it needed to be there for the story. In games, it seems that we expect everything to be more deliberate, not just telling a story but crafting the experience. So the question is, was the rape gratuitous? I feel like someone may ask that question hypothetically for other media, but with games, they're expecting an answer. Or the assumption is yes, the rape scene didn't need to be there.

I think another issue is with the execution. The callous depiction, in 8-bit arcade glory. The reviewer seems to have a big problem with that. How cheap and gory it was, the worst possible thing, in the worst possible way, they pressed the button, but then again, they didn't. They just wanted to make the viewer feel that they did. So it has the punch, and the effect, but no substance, because it's faked. So you just get to feel icky and confused or worse. But that's where they were trying to go with that. IS that insensitive in the way that abuses the agency, the rights, the images of others? Particularly women?

I'm not sure what your point is then. How should games handle the subject of sexual violence if it is as you say able to mature like movies? Is criticism of sexual violence in video games valid?

Also I doubt that the because you play video games makes it more vulnerable to criticism. What type of criticism are we talking here? If you're thinking about Jackson Thompson styled rhetoric about games teaching people how to murder and kill that's one thing but that wasn't what this article was about.

Why point out that Phatasmagoria was written by a woman?

Because a depiction of rape written by a woman in a game (a damned good one for it's time) made by a woman certainly wouldn't be disregarding the effects of such a scene, or the living reality of women. But boy did she catch holy hell for the effort.

And video games, subject to valid criticism as long as critics understand the artform and offer reasonable criticism instead of scoring coups. They actually weigh the story telling and the gameplay, and don't just compare it to killing hookers for money in Grand Theft Auto. I took a shortcut on this one.

And I don't understand your middle paragraph.

I feel like the issue, and the question being asked by those who have a problem with this depiction is, 'why does it even exist?' And the subtext question is "do they even realize what they're doing?" Viewed in context of the recent questioning of the roles of women in games.

 

[Scrabble]

Every possible offensive issue is a straw man. We're talking about a very specific issue that hits close to home because it targets a particular gender more often. The reason people don't get upset at killing mass hordes of people is because it's usually directed a general audience. There's also a difference between just cartoonish killing or hordes in games and actively making a character suffer. Killing in most games is a means to an end, making people suffer is something else entirely.

If someone is a rape victim and the mere notion or subject matter is enough to send someone in post traumatic stress or disarray, than I feel very sorry for that person and it's extremely unfortunate and loathsome what happened and I hope that person is able to seek help and continue living life as back to normal as possible. That said, artists still can't be held responsible for ensuring to never cross into touchy subject matter just for the purpose of making sure to not upset certain people. And just don't casually write off any other offensive issue as some sort of straw man argument. Should we not have war movies to ensure veterans with PTSD never have flashbacks and go into shock? Should addiction, drug use, alcoholism, etc never be topics of storytelling since these are very much real and every day issues that millions of people deal with on a day to day basis? Again, if these topics make you uncomfortable than stay away from the material.

 

[Screaming Meat]

All art is subject to criticism. And yes some people will try to be very forward with their aspersions and say that the media you consume, or even more acutely, the art that you experience makes an imprint on your psychology and morality. Possibly making you less sensitive to, or even worse, prone to violence or anti-social behavior.

That wasn't quite what I was getting at. The films I mentioned ask the audience, at times literally, to question whether or not they are culpable for the onscreen violence they are watching because they are watching; not far off from what I've been told Hotline Miami actively does.

That little character is our avatar, we control them, we're responsible for them, they represent us in this created world.

I think this is definitely the case in games where you are able to create a character or even have at least some ownership over it, like naming it; it may even be the case when your character is the classic silent protagonist of an FPS. However, if there is a fully formed character like, I dunno, Guybrush Threepwood or Max Payne, I wouldn't say that at all. You are partaking in their story as much as any other medium, illusion of agency nonwithstanding.

And we don't expect to see our avatar raping someone. If something is in a movie or a book scene, the assumption is that it needed to be there for the story. In games, it seems that we expect everything to be more deliberate, not just telling a story but crafting the experience. So the question is, was the rape gratuitous? I feel like someone may ask that question hypothetically for other media, but with games, they're expecting an answer. Or the assumption is yes, the rape scene didn't need to be there.

I don't get this division. Why do you think that? Why is telling a story not a deliberate act?

But that's where they were trying to go with that. IS that insensitive in the way that abuses the agency, the rights, the images of others? Particularly women?

That is an interesting point. I don't think anyone could say for certain without playing the game and putting that scene into it's full context.

Right now (out of context), it seems like they are trivialising the act. If later on we find that it was to make the director character come across as super-evil so the player has reason to hate him and the drive to kill him, that would also be resting on a terribly over-used and insensitive trope. If we find out that it's a big fuck you to the player for taking part in the violence, then it'll seem somewhat paradoxical; the developer, after all, made the game to be played in the first place.

I'm not sure how they can fully justify it, although many people here have put forward some thought-provoking suggestions.

I'm not sure how I feel about the whole thing myself.

 

[Not Spaceghost]

I agree. But it then begs the questions: Are video games Art? Is Miami Hotline Art? Is this Art? Are all films Art? Are all books Art? What the fuck is Art?

Yes, Yes and unfortunately yes.

Sure why not

Definitely not

Beats me.

 

[Screaming Meat]

Yes, Yes and unfortunately yes.

Sure why not

Definitely not

Beats me.

Hahaha! Great post, Spaceghost, I had to explain to my Boss what I was laughing at.

I have to say though, The Supreme Court only get to decide what is considered Art in terms of American Law.

 

[Karkador]

People really need to separate the idea of criticism from censorship and outrage.


I also think, judging from HM1, that it's quite possible that Dennaton, while being excellent at styling their games and giving it a very surreal feeling, aren't actually the most capable artists to give weight and meaning to a rape scene, even a mock rape scene.

It's hard to really judge it without playing the game, but from their past work, it does seem quite possible that this bit is erring more on the side of "hot edgy bullshit" than something interesting and rewarding to explore.

 

[Clear]

Seems like legitimately "challenging" content to me; as in it really does confront head-on the whole atrocity-for-pleasure dimension of violent pop-culture entertainment.

It also throws into sharp-relief some truly horrible double-standards about what is considered "unacceptable" sadism when applied to a female icon, versus a male counterpart.

I say, good job, at starting up a discussion.

 

[FairFriend]

It's OK for art to make us uncomfortable. Some art is good specifically because it makes us uncomfortable.

Sure, and there is a number of ways to do so.

For example The End of Evangelion opens with a scene showing the main character intent on masturbating. The scene perfectly fits in the development arch of the character and by defying the spectators' expectations succesfully establishes an uncomfortable mood.

Inland Empire made me feel uncomfortable, but I don't recall any rape scene, nor unpleasantness of the sort.

I think nobody would successfully argue that Hotline Miami 2 is a social commentary. Therefore, if the author's objective was to make the player feel uncomfortable for the sake of the emotional impact, why did he have to resort to such controversial imagery? We don't feel uncomfortable because we are taken aback by the author's fantasy, his original sentiments or his provocative thoughts, but beacause, as educated individuals, we refuse to concede to his bad taste.

 

[Pinko Marx]

.

I think nobody would successfully argue that Hotline Miami 2 is a social commentary. Therefore, if the author's objective was to make the player feel uncomfortable for the sake of the emotional impact, why did he have to resort to such controversial imagery? We don't feel uncomfortable because we are taken aback by the author's fantasy, his original sentiments or his provocative thoughts, but beacause, as educated individuals, we refuse to concede to his bad taste.

Hotline Miami had some pretty strong meta commentary on the games industry, the ultra violence within it, and the justification for it.
It wouldn't be far fetched to think that HM2 is along the same lines.

 

[FairFriend]

Hotline Miami had some pretty strong meta commentary on the games industry, the ultra violence within it, and the justification for it.

In part this might be true but I feel that the author's statement should have been less subliminal. If you are not casually hinting at the problem for the sole purpose of justifying the use of violence in your own game - that is if your commentary is not a mere exercise of self-awareness - then I think you ought to elaborate your opinion on the subject, hopefully taking advantage of the medium qualities. And right now I truly think that videogames are inadequate to serve this purpose.

 

[inky]

I think nobody would successfully argue that Hotline Miami 2 is a social commentary.

As much as one can argue Evangelion is. Why does it have to be social commentary anyway? We have all yet to play it, but if it follows HM1, it isn't unimaginable that it can contain a certain amount of commentary between violence in-game and the role of the player in connection with the main character.

 

[GameGuru59]

I agree. But it then begs the questions: Are video games Art? Is Miami Hotline Art? Is this Art? Are all films Art? Are all books Art? What the fuck is Art?

This is easy for me to answer...

1) They can be. Games can be design or art on the whole. They can also contain both. Determining whether a game is art on whole is subjective. In my case however, I'd consider games like Flower and Hotline Miami art. Usually with most things (not just games), the better question to ask is: "Is it more design than art?" For example, a mural may need to be within a certain size to fit on a ceiling (design); and may need to depict Christian imagery (design); but the painter may have free reign to paint whatever imagery he wants as long as it is the right size and of Christian imagery (art). I would consider a situation like that to be more art than design.
2) Depends on how its being created, it does contain art though.
3) Almost certainly not. That game was designed to be offensive as an adult joke game. It does contain art though, within itself.
4) No. Point 1 also applies to movies.
5) No. Books may can definitely be almost pure design. See textbooks.
6) Anything not designed to meet certain expectations or specifications, but still done for a purpose.

 

[FairFriend]

As much as one can argue Evangelion is. Why does it have to be social commentary anyway? We have all yet to play it, but if it follows HM1, it isn't unimaginable that it can contain a certain amount of commentary between violence in-game and the role of the player in connection with the main character.

I've never stated that Evangelion is a social commentary (but I understand that my English is rather poor and that there may have been a misunderstanding. O mabye my argument is not very sounded ).

As I noticed that scene fit well in the character development. Secondly the way it plays out doesn't pose a particular question but it merely serves a narrative function. Finally its imagery doesn't necessitate a commentary to be properly understood.

Apparenlty the same doesn't apply to the rape scene of HM2.

 

[UrbanRats]

People really need to separate the idea of criticism from censorship and outrage.


I also think, judging from HM1, that it's quite possible that Dennaton, while being excellent at styling their games and giving it a very surreal feeling, aren't actually the most capable artists to give weight and meaning to a rape scene, even a mock rape scene.

It's hard to really judge it without playing the game, but from their past work, it does seem quite possible that this bit is erring more on the side of "hot edgy bullshit" than something interesting and rewarding to explore.

Judging from HM1, i disagree.

 

[Zoe]

Apparenlty the same doesn't apply to the rape scene of HM2.

Isn't it a bit premature to make that claim?

 

[inky]

As I noticed that scene fit well in the character development. Secondly the way it plays out doesn't pose a particular question but it merely serves a narrative function. Finally its imagery doesn't necessitate a commentary to be properly understood.

Apparenlty the same doesn't apply to the rape scene of HM2.

And I think all those points do apply given the context of the scene, but we'd have to wait, play it and say for sure.

 

[Screaming Meat]

This is easy for me to answer...

Thanks for the really thoughful response.

1) They can be. Games can be designed or art on the whole. They can also contain both. Determining whether a game is art on whole is subjective. In my case however, I'd consider games like Flower and Hotline Miami art. Usually with most things (not just games), the better question to ask is: "Is it more design than art?"

What do you mean by "contain both"?

Personally, if Art is a subjective term, then anything can be Art, rendering the term meaningless. I'm one of those people that hates Andy Warhol

3) Almost certainly not. That game was designed to be offensive as an adult joke game.

We don't know that. You said earlier that Art is subjective, so where do you stand if someone genuinely considers this Art...?

 

[FairFriend]

And I think all those points do apply given the context of the scene, but we'd have to wait, play it and say for sure.

Isn't it a bit premature to make that claim?

The violence in the scene might be perceived less gratuitous when the game is played in its entirity.

 

[UrbanRats]

I think art escapes intention, that's what makes it relevant.
So whatever the intention behind it is, is of little interest to me.

 

[Dark Octave]

Of course people have the right to say something. People complain about all the tasteless junk in movies like "The Human Centipede 2" all the time. Saying that you find a piece of art offensive is as fine as making a controversial piece of art.

I guess I forget that other mediums go through this as well. I only keep an eye on the games industry so it's easy to assume that everything is fine over in movie land where things like rape and other heavy subjects are much more common.

 

[Infinite]

Because a depiction of rape written by a woman in a game (a damned good one for it's time) made by a woman certainly wouldn't be disregarding the effects of such a scene, or the living reality of women. But boy did she catch holy hell for the effort.

And video games, subject to valid criticism as long as critics understand the artform and offer reasonable criticism instead of scoring coups. They actually weigh the story telling and the gameplay, and don't just compare it to killing hookers for money in Grand Theft Auto. I took a shortcut on this one.

And I don't understand your middle paragraph.

I feel like the issue, and the question being asked by those who have a problem with this depiction is, 'why does it even exist?' And the subtext question is "do they even realize what they're doing?" Viewed in context of the recent questioning of the roles of women in games.

You're saying that video games are more vulnerable to such criticism because you play them correct? I feel this argument is more likely a response to people who think video games actually teach people how to commit violent crimes which is a silly assertion. I disagree with you there. Video games are probably more vulnerable because t's a younger less accepted less understood medium by many even by people who play and are paid to talk about them. The point initially made was that yes movies and and other forms of media get the same criticism and this remains as a fact.

Overall it doesn't seem like there's much else we conflict on.

 

[Morrigan Stark]

Obviously this is a different type of combat to the one involving shooting people in the head with live rounds. The point of my argument, was that if you hate violence you wouldn't be playing COD and Battlefield, you'd be playing Laser Tag video games instead.

It's not about hating violence, on the contrary, it's about enjoying it but not because of the "murder" aspect. You completely missed the point of that post. He's saying that the reason people enjoy game violence is because of the thrill of combat, not because people die. Basically, a serial killer simulator where you'd murder helpless children in their sleep would be as creepy and reviled as a rape simulator.

 

[Adam Blue]

I also think, judging from HM1, that it's quite possible that Dennaton, while being excellent at styling their games and giving it a very surreal feeling, aren't actually the most capable artists to give weight and meaning to a rape scene, even a mock rape scene.

It's hard to really judge it without playing the game, but from their past work, it does seem quite possible that this bit is erring more on the side of "hot edgy bullshit" than something interesting and rewarding to explore.

I implore you to look more into the original game.

 

[UrbanRats]

I could do a better job than most people in the industry even with the limitations imposed by marketing.

In a studio that seems to empower its writers like Bioware, I could write significantly better stories than they could.

And yeah, I realize that sounds amazingly arrogant, but understand--I'm just a film student taking screenwriting classes. I'm no pro. I'm nowhere near as excellent as the writers and artists I idolize.

I feel I could do better than most people in the games industry because most of them are abhorrently bad. Yeah, that might be offensive, or mean, or whatever, but... why not demand better than what we're given?

You have the right to demand whatever you want.
I'm saying everyone read books and everyone watches good movies.
People know what a decent story is or isn't.

If so many videogame stories are shit, it can't be only due to hack writers, and when execs start asking you to change this and that, to include X Y and Z popular things, you start to lose control over what you can and can't do.
On top of that factor the fact that stories are mostly secondary in videogames, and a key passage can get cut if there's a gameplay problem related to it, it must not be easy.
That said, no doubt there are a lot of shitty writers around.

 

[Clear]

The real point, surely, is that what the game is showing is not actually rape, but a dramatic presentation of rape in the context of "entertainment".

The reactions to this becoming fixated on the "rape" -which doesn't actually occur within the fiction of the scenario- really reminds me of the backlash Chris Morris faced over the Brass Eye "Paedogeddon" special.

For those unfamiliar, this was a faux-expose on paedophilia done by respected British satirist Chris Morris that caused a whole shitstorm of tabloid controversy at the time of its airing.

The bottom line was that the show was specifically mocking the media's hysterical fear-mongering and paranoia about paedophiles, not the act, and especially not the victims of the act.

As with this case some people are seemingly unable to get past the taboo element (Paedophilia in BE, Rape in HM2's case) and appreciate that its the medium itself that is being spotlighted.

The insensitive/sexist comments of the "director" in the reveal/aftermath are important to understand the context and meaning of the scene. That's the "punchline" to this particular gag, and what is supposed to get us to react to and think about.

 

[Karkador]

I implore you to look more into the original game.

I played through it

 

[TheTylerRob]

I played through it

Did you forget everything about it? It handles it's themes really well.

 

[Burt]

People really need to separate the idea of criticism from censorship and outrage.


I also think, judging from HM1, that it's quite possible that Dennaton, while being excellent at styling their games and giving it a very surreal feeling, aren't actually the most capable artists to give weight and meaning to a rape scene, even a mock rape scene.

It's hard to really judge it without playing the game, but from their past work, it does seem quite possible that this bit is erring more on the side of "hot edgy bullshit" than something interesting and rewarding to explore.

But the whole point is that it's not being given any weight. It's being glamorized and idolized and commercialized because the people taking part in the film are morally bankrupt turds. Giving weight and meaning to the "rape scene" would just undermine the themes of the game.

 

[GameGuru59]

Thanks for the really thoughful response.



What do you mean by "contain both"?

Personally, if Art is a subjective term, then anything can be Art, rendering the term meaningless. I'm one of those people that hates Andy Warhol



We don't know that. You said earlier that Art is subjective, so where do you stand if someone genuinely considers this Art...?

1) See (3) below.

2) Just because something is subjective doesn't make it meaningless. "Good" is subjective, and is certainly not a meaningless term.

3) Yes we do.

Custer's Revenge (also known as Westward Ho and The White Man Came) is a controversial video game made for the Atari 2600 by Mystique, a company that produced a number of adult video game titles for the system

The purpose of Custer's Revenge was to meet Mystique's specification that the game be lewd and offensive. It was designed to be such. In my opinion that is too far on the design side of the design-art gradient to be considered art. It does contain art however. The characters and background are all art. Though they were designed to meet certain specifications (the hardware limits of the Atari, and that they be relevant to the game), they are still art because the designer had a wide degree of freedom to depict the scene as he wanted. You could also that the gameplay itself is art, because its not likely Mystique told the designer how to design the game's gameplay. However, the game as a whole was designed to be lewd and offensive, in line with Mystique's other titles.

An example outside of videogames: The Statue of Liberty is art, however it (literally) contains design. Its interior structure had to be designed to support the weight of the statue's outer shell.

 

[I NEED SCISSORS]

LordJim got banned for that post?

Fuck this forum, i'm out.

 

[freenudemacusers]

RIP in peace

 

[Row]

I was expecting much worse when I clicked the link.

 

[Screaming Meat]

2) Just because something is subjective doesn't make it meaningless. "Good" is subjective, and is certainly not a meaningless

Yes, it does in this instance.

If 'what Art is' is entirely up to each individual, then anything can be Art, right? That includes Custer's Revenge, regardless of intent.

Yes, it doesn't fit your personal description of what Art is, but you said yourself Art as a label is subjective. Art has to have some objective basis, otherwise it could be literally anything, from a hydrogen molecule to a shower curtain, rendering the need to label something art pointless. It isn't (or shouldn't) be a value judgement like 'good' (which is also objectively meaningless).

 

[Sakujou]

This is a fictional game, not something encouraging you to do so.

Hotline miami was so awesome, looking forward to part 2

 

[mavs]

If we find out that it's a big fuck you to the player for taking part in the violence, then it'll seem somewhat paradoxical; the developer, after all, made the game to be played in the first place.

The first game tried to do this. Despite the interesting things they did to toy with the player's perception of violence, they saved the worst for last.