Support NeoGAF

[SolidSnakex]

Yep. That poorly chosen comparison and a bit of a Captain Obvious factor (with respect to vampires and sexualized violence) are what caused Kat's article to cause the controversy it did. It's unfortunate, because I don't really disagree with her underlying sentiment that the scene in question was trying way too hard to be dark and edgy, just like the rest of the game.

I think Cox even admits that (well, not about it trying too hard, but about it being dark). They wanted that scene to make people uncomfortable. He even brought it up specifically in the Q&A because of that. But it was also never intended to be what she thought it was.

 

[Bedlam]

Yep. That poorly chosen comparison and a bit of a Captain Obvious factor (with respect to vampires and sexualized violence) are what caused Kat's article to cause the controversy it did. It's unfortunate, because I don't really disagree with her underlying sentiment that the scene in question was trying way too hard to be dark and edgy, just like the rest of the game.

1. Add her call to remove the scene to the reasons for why her article caused controversy.
2. Have you seen the scene (and the whole game) or are you just one of those ignorant LoS naysayers?

 

[MetroidPrimeRib]

Tomb Raider all over again.

 

[Sneds]

1. Add her call to remove the scene to the reasons for why her article caused controversy.
2. Have you seen the scene (and the whole game) or are you just one of those ignorant LoS naysayers?

Why do you have to go nuclear right off the bat?

 

[Abriael]

Details?

The character talks about getting captured and pretty much done unspeakable things, even if I don't remember the exact wording. Unfortunately it's not between the ones that have replayable cutscenes. The name of the quest is Big Trouble in Little Ala Mhigo, level 28

 

[AppleMIX]

Uh, she never said the game actually had rape in it and I was one of the persons who though the article was terrible.

 

[Bedlam]

Why do you have to go nuclear right off the bat?

I'm just asking. Either he has seen the game or he is judging it without having seen it, which would make him exactly that (ignorant naysayer).

 

[Abriael]

Uh, she never said the game actually had rape in it and I was one of the persons who though the article was terrible.

"blatant."

It was not.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Uh, she never said the game actually had rape in it and I was one of the persons who though the article was terrible.

With this being ESRB they'd have something in their description even if it's just heavily implied as it's their job to try to cover all bases in terms of being descriptive about the content.

 

[Sneds]

With this being ESRB they'd have something in their description even if it's just heavily implied as it's their job to try to cover all bases in terms of being descriptive about the content.

Even if it's metaphorical?

 

[Abriael]

Even if it's metaphorical?

"blatant" =/= "metaphorical"

The position is indefensible. May as well retreat.

 

[Sneds]

"blatant" =/= "metaphorical"

The position is indefensible. May as well retreat.

You don't think it's possible to have a blatant metaphor?

Did you read Kat's article? She was arguing that it was a blatant rape metaphor.

 

[Zincalloy]

Well I for one am disappointed.

 

[Abriael]

You don't think it's possible to have a blatant metaphor?

Did you read Kat's article? She was arguing that it was a blatant rape metaphor.

"blatant" = Openly and unashamedly.

A metaphor involves hiding a concept behind another.

I did read the article, and this is just another demonstration of the fact that no matter how badly someone screws up on the internet, no matter how much he flies in the face of artistic freedom and freedom of expression going as far as invoking censorship, there will always be someone defending him by hiding behind a finger.

 

[Hubb]

You don't think it's possible to have a blatant metaphor?

Did you read Kat's article? She was arguing that it was a blatant rape metaphor.

Does Allusion = Metaphor to you? Honest question.

 

[Infernal Monkey]

What a surprise.

 

[SolidSnakex]

You don't think it's possible to have a blatant metaphor?

Did you read Kat's article? She was arguing that it was a blatant rape metaphor.

She said that it had blatant allusions to rape, if it had that then I can't see why the ESRB wouldn't mention that. Don't you think it'd be in their best interest to add that to the description? Their job is simply to describe the more questionable scenes in the game. Heavily implied rape seems like something that should rate fairly high on that scale. Especially since it's a very visual scene.

 

[Orayn]

1. Add her call to remove the scene to the reasons for why her article caused controversy.
2. Have you seen the scene (and the whole game) or are you just one of those ignorant LoS naysayers?

1. Not gonna voice my opinion on those comments because I don't want to start that debate again, but yeah that probably contributed too.
2. I don't think LoS is terrible or shitty or anything, but I've seen enough to say that I don't particularly like its tone or presentation. That said, I'm still crossing my fingers for it to be a great game mechanically.

She said that it had blatant allusions to rape, if it had that then I can't see why the ESRB wouldn't mention that. Don't you think it'd be in their best interest to add that to the description? Their job is simply to describe the more questionable scenes in the game. Heavily implied rape seems like something that should rate fairly high on that scale. Especially since it's a very visual scene.

It's not controversial to say that a lot of vampire tropes allude to the intersection of sex and violence, but they're so old and firmly entrenched that the content doesn't really stick out any more.

 

[Dr. Buni]

Damn so the horrific violence is fine but god forbid an allusion to rape...

Horrific violence is a common place in video games, movies etc.

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

I for one will skip this game (that looks truly awesome in many ways) because of Konani's stupidity.

 

[Sneds]

"blatant" = Openly and unashamedly.

A metaphor implies hiding a concept behind another.

I did read the article, and this is just another demonstration of the fact that no matter how badly someone screws up on the internet, no matter how much he flies in the face of artistic freedom and freedom of expression going as far as invoking censorship, there will always be someone defending him by hiding behind a finger.

If you read my previous posts in this thread you'll see that I didn't find Kat's article convincing. I especially didn't find her comparison to Rapelay convincing. But I don't think it's fair to mischaracterise what she actually said.

Metaphors can be blatant. If you dispute that then I don't think you fully understand what a metaphor is. Have you ever read Animal Farm? That's as blatant a metaphor as you could hope for.

And in relation to "no matter how badly someone screws up on the internet", I think you need to get some perspective. We're talking about an article covering a video game. She didn't support genocide.

 

[Hubb]

Horrific violence is a common place in video games, movies etc.

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

Allusions to rape on the other hand is something that is tolerated in movies, books, music, so on.

 

[AppleMIX]

She said that it had blatant allusions to rape, if it had that then I can't see why the ESRB wouldn't mention that. Don't you think it'd be in their best interest to add that to the description? Their job is simply to describe the more questionable scenes in the game. Heavily implied rape seems like something that should rate fairly high on that scale. Especially since it's a very visual scene.

The problem is that other previews had literally no mention of rape. Which tells me that it isn't nearly as cut a dry as people make it out to be.

Horrific violence is a common place in video games, movies etc.

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

I for one will skip this game (that looks truly awesome in many ways) because of Konani's stupidity.

I disagree. We're talking about Art and nothing should be considered off limits. Moreover, I feel like this completely circumvents author intent.

and I quote

Cox then goes on to explain that while players should feel "really powerful" and "cool" fighting paladins and titans, they should also reflect on the fact that Dracula is "this bad guy": "Playing through the game, you notice some tender moments with Trevor in the castle; you can see this is a character that has emotion, that has feelings, but at the same time, this is a guy who's not afraid to do horrible things, and we do show that in the game."

 

[Abriael]

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

So let me understand.

According to you the existence of rape should be ignored (or not tolerated) by all forms of narrative media?

Or just games for some weird reason?

 

[Sneds]

Does Allusion = Metaphor to you? Honest question.

Not always no. In the context of her article? Yes.

She actually describes the scene and says that the way the murder transpires "evokes" sexual assault.

 

[Killer]

Neat.

`HOT

 

[Zornack]

Horrific violence is a common place in video games, movies etc.

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

I for one will skip this game (that looks truly awesome in many ways) because of Konani's stupidity.

Why are you skipping the game?

 

[Abriael]

If you read my previous posts in this thread you'll see that I didn't find Kat's article convincing. I especially didn't find her comparison to Rapelay convincing. But I don't think it's fair to mischaracterise what she actually said.

No one mischaracterized it. It was an evident call for censorship motivating with something that simply isn't there going by every other source. And that's what it's being criticized for.

Metaphors can be blatant. If you dispute that then I don't think you fully understand what a metaphor is. Have you ever read Animal Farm? That's as blatant a metaphor as you could hope for.

Not as blatant as you think, as it has several layers of reading. And literature professors still discuss about its true meanings.

And in relation to "no matter how badly someone screws up on the internet", I think you need to get some perspective. We're talking about an article covering a video game. She didn't support genocide.

No, she didn't support genocide. She invoked censorship and the choking of artistic/expression freedom.

It's not as bad. But it's pretty bad.

By the way, what you just did is called strawman argument.

 

[Hubb]

Not always no. In the context of her article? Yes.

She actually describes the scene and says that the way the murder transpires "evokes" sexual assault.

I guess I just don't understand then. Those 2 words are different words for a reason. The scene isn't a metaphor, she is claiming it is an allusion to rape. In fact in her second paragraph she goes on to say the allusion is so blatant that it forcibly reminds her of the rapelay boxart (however you forcibly remind yourself).

That and an allusion is something not specifically identified but expected to be recognized. I would assume if it was as blatant as she said, it might have set off red flags at the ESRB. I imagine they'd rather be safe than sorry.

 

[Darknight]

I hope Devs always go forth with their vision as not all games are meant for all audiences just like films or other mediums, not that this game had any rape scenes in the first place.

This reminded me of Hotline Miami 2 and the movie scene that was cut because someone did the same BS in a story. Makes the medium that less interesting and off putting. If "journalist" arent gonna be adults, stay away from media that you cant stomach ffs.

I wonder what a person making a review of Beserk would say of it if it were as sensitive to some of these "game journalists", lol.

 

[Abriael]

I wonder what a person making a review of Beserk would say of it if it were as sensitive to some of these "game journalists", lol.

Berserk is Japanese media. In Japan journalists dedicated to games or anime like to write about games or anime, not about their political/social agendas.

They also have a firm and strong respect of authors and their position as artists. Which, unfortunately, is going lost between the western media that too often places itself above game developers.

 

[SolidSnakex]

It's not controversial to say that a lot of vampire tropes allude to the intersection of sex and violence, but they're so old and firmly entrenched that the content doesn't really stick out any more.

I don't think that there's any doubt that there's a connection between vampires and sexual violence. But every other description of that particular scene paints an image of it being uncomfortable because Dracula is murdering some random family rather than it being about some allusion to rape. With it being set in the real world it gave them a chance to explore scenes with regular humans.

 

[Sneds]

I guess I just don't understand then. Those 2 words are different words for a reason. The scene isn't a metaphor, she is claiming it is an allusion to rape. In fact in her second paragraph she goes on to say the allusion is so blatant that it forcibly reminds her of the rapelay boxart (however you forcibly remind yourself).

That and an allusion is something not specifically identified but expected to be recognized. I would assume if it was as blatant as she said, it might have set off red flags at the ESRB. I imagine they'd rather be safe than sorry.

She describes the scene. Clearly she wasn't arguing that it was a literal rape. She argued that the scene "evoked" and "alluded to" sexual assault due to the way the murder was carried out. How can that be anything but a metaphor if she isn't arguing that it's literal?

What do you think her argument is? That Dracula literally sexually assaults someone?

And again, it's quite possible for something to be both metaphorical and a blatant allusion to something.

The pig society in Animal Farn is an allusion to the Soviet Union under Stalin. It's blatant. No-one would deny it. But it's still a metaphor.

 

[Abylim]

Look, Vampirism has always had a sexual element to it, sometimes its more subtle, or completely absent, and sometimes its blatant.

This really doesnt seem like a blatant one. Maybe you could argue a slight sexual undertone, but how? Wouldnt it be more weird that he feeds on the kid, then?

Whats more likely is a journalist looking to cash in on something sensational and over the top.
And that disgusts me =\

 

[Hubb]

What do you think her argument is? That Dracula literally sexually assaults someone?

I think you are confusing the words. Allusions aren't literal and I never said they were or I thought she meant literal rape. Animal Farm is an allusion to the Soviet Union under stalin and the individual animals are metaphors. The book isn't both an allusion and a metaphor, it does contain both devices though.

Metaphor - I am such a cry baby
Allusion- I opened the door slowly, took one step and said “One small step for man and one giant step….”

What do I think her argument is? Exactly what she says it is. This scene is too much like rape for it to be in the game so please remove it before the release date. And that is my problem with it.

 

[ambientmystic]

Berserk is Japanese media. In Japan journalists dedicated to games or anime like to write about games or anime, not about their political/social agendas.

They also have a firm and strong respect of authors and their position as artists. Which, unfortunately, is going lost between the western media that too often places itself above game developers.

And there you have it. Western journos (especially in the past decade or so) seem have the need to shove in own PC oriented political/social agendas when previewing/reviewing games nowadays when they should be focusing solely on the merits/mechanics of the games they were assigned to report. They should not be injecting their own worldviews into their articles.

I sometimes feel like they're trying to be activists at times, dictating to us what we should or should not be able to view/purchase/experience in games that are released by developers/publishers. They call for scenes to be changed, content to be censored/removed, or in the worst case scenario, to have said game be pulled from circulation just because it is in opposition to what they stand for. And for what?

I say let the devs/publishers release whatever they wish to release as they originally intended to, without the fear of censorship. The proper regulatory bodies, e.g. ESRB, CERO, ESA etc will handle the appropriate classification of those games. As it should be.

 

[Sneds]

I think you are confusing the words. Allusions aren't literal and I never said they were or I thought she meant literal rape. Animal Farm is an allusion to the Soviet Union under stalin and the individual animals are metaphors. The book isn't both an allusion and a metaphor, it does contain both devices though.

Metaphor - I am such a cry baby
Allusion- I opened the door slowly, took one step and said “One small step for man and one giant step….”

What do I think her argument is? Exactly what she says it is. This scene is too much like rape for it to be in the game so please remove it before the release date. And that is my problem with it.

She doesn't actually use the word metaphor so you may be right. Part of the reason her argument is weak is because she doesn't do a good job of explaining why she feels that the scene makes an allusion to rape. I had the impression that she felt the whole scene was a deliberate metaphor but maybe not.

 

[Orayn]

And there you have it. Western journos (especially in the past decade or so) seem have the need to shove in own PC oriented political/social agendas when previewing/reviewing games nowadays when they should be focussing solely on the merits/mechanics of the games they were assigned to report. They should not be injecting their own worldviews into their articles.

I disagree with this. Video game reviews are a very holistic, subjective thing, and those kinds of impressions do matter because they're a part of your overall experience. Doesn't mean they're automatically bulletproof arguments, but let's not pretend that reviews are anything more than someone's opinion with a mostly-arbitrary score tacked onto it.

I sometimes feel like they're trying to be activists at times, dictating to us what we should or should not be able to view/purchase/experience in games that are released by developers/publishers. They call for scenes to be changed, content to be censored/removed, or in the worst case scenario, to have said game be pulled from circulation just because it is in opposition to what they stand for. And for what?

There are relatively few examples of this, though. Most of the supposed cases are just a journalist giving their two cents and everyone else overreacting to their opinions.

I say let the devs/publishers release whatever they wish to release as they originally intended to, without the fear of censorship.

The ESRB refusing to rate a game and effectively blocking it from sale until content is changed is an example of de facto censorship. Acquiescing to complaints from potential customers could have a similar end result, but it isn't censorship per se.

 

[Abriael]

I disagree with this. Video game reviews are a very holistic, subjective thing, and those kinds of impressions do matter because they're a part of your overall experience. Doesn't mean they're automatically bulletproof arguments, but let's not pretend that reviews are anything more than someone's opinion with a mostly-arbitrary score tacked onto it.

What you describe are bad reviews. Good ones tend to stick as much as possible to the facts and merits of a game, in order not to superimpose the writer's opinion on the reader. A degree of opinion is ok, but it shouldn't overpower the facts as it often does.

That's the difference between a bad reviewer and a good one.

The more the writer's personal opinion/agenda weights on a review, the more that review becomes useless.

 

[Orayn]

What you describe are bad reviews. Good ones tend to stick as much as possible to the facts and merits of a game, in order not to superimpose the writer's opinion on the reader. A degree of opinion is ok, but it shouldn't overpower the facts as it often does.

That's the difference between a bad reviewer and a good one.

No, I'm pretty sure that what I'm describing is just a review. Without critical analysis (which is also pretty subjective), all you have is a description of a game's features and bugs.

Just about anything a reviewer can say about a game other than clinical statements like "The game follows the story of a character named Thusandsuch, who undergoes trials and hardship." You press buttons to attack." "There are various enemies and boss fights." is going to be colored by the author's individual impression of how well those elements worked in the context of the whole game. Their arguments may or may not be persuasive and well thought out, but they're pretty much never going to be objective or "factual."

If you as the person reading a review think that the reviewer's reasoning is flawed, that's fine. It means you have an opinion, just like them.

 

[Thorgi]

What you describe are bad reviews. Good ones tend to stick as much as possible to the facts and merits of a game, in order not to superimpose the writer's opinion on the reader. A degree of opinion is ok, but it shouldn't overpower the facts as it often does.

That's the difference between a bad reviewer and a good one.

The more the writer's personal opinion/agenda weights on a review, the more that review becomes useless.

No, that's pretty much a review. There's no such thing as an "objective" review, and every time I see the word "agenda" bandied around I know it's because someone like you just wants to silence someone for having an opinion you disagree with.

 

[ab.aeterno]

What you describe are bad reviews. Good ones tend to stick as much as possible to the facts and merits of a game, in order not to superimpose the writer's opinion on the reader. A degree of opinion is ok, but it shouldn't overpower the facts as it often does.

That's the difference between a bad reviewer and a good one.

The more the writer's personal opinion/agenda weights on a review, the more that review becomes useless.

In what world are reviews anything but subjective? The very notion that a review can be objective is absurd; the notion that it should be is, quite frankly, fucking ridiculous. If you want an objective covering of a game, read the press release. Because by definition, that's the only place to find only the facts about a game. Once you make an assertion of quality that cannot be measured in absolute terms, it's subjective. There is no such as thing as objectively good or bad when it comes to one's enjoyment of art.

I mean, seriously. What a preposterous idea on its face.

No, that's pretty much a review. There's no such thing as an "objective" review, and every time I see the word "agenda" bandied around I know it's because someone like you just wants to silence someone for having an opinion you disagree with.

Fucking seriously. I have never heard the term used in a context that didn't have the end goal of discrediting or silencing someone for speaking their mind. Which, given the arguments crying censorship and oppression, is almost too ironic to be believed.

 

[Shmuely Bully]

Let them make up however much nonsense as they want about the game, so long as it doesn't result in it being pulled from shelves it can only benefit it. I don't see a ton of grandmothers buying this for little Billy as is.

 

[Valnen]

Fucking seriously. I have never heard the term used in a context that didn't have the end goal of discrediting or silencing someone for speaking their mind. Which, given the arguments crying censorship and oppression, is almost too ironic to be believed.

She was saying she wanted a scene to be pulled from the game. That's a call for censorship.

 

[Crayons]

Horrific violence is a common place in video games, movies etc.

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

I for one will skip this game (that looks truly awesome in many ways) because of Konani's stupidity.

Are you American by any chance?

 

[Sneds]

She was saying she wanted a scene to be pulled from the game. That's a call for censorship.

She said, "I really hope they cut the Family Scene before Lords of Shadow 2 launches next month." It's fine for her to hope that. I don't think it constitutes a call for censorship.

 

[Jomjom]

Yeah she definitely asked that the scene be removed which is not right. You can say you are offended, nobody will begrudge you that. But obviously she has never heard of the line, "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

 

[Sneds]

Yeah she definitely asked that the scene be removed which is not right. You can say you are offended, nobody will begrudge you that. But obviously she has never heard of the line, "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

When did she say that Konami shouldn't have the right to include the scene in the game? She never said Konami should be forced to remove it. She hopes Konami make the decision to remove it

 

[Thorgi]

Yeah she definitely asked that the scene be removed which is not right. You can say you are offended, nobody will begrudge you that. But obviously she has never heard of the line, "I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

There is nothing wrong with saying "I hope they change/remove this." That's not censorship; she's not imposing her ironclad will on a company that has to change or face the consequences. Every one of you claiming it is censorship should be thankful you've never had to deal with true censorship in your lifetimes.

 

[Gaz_RB]

Horrific violence is a common place in video games, movies etc.

Allusion to rape, on other hand, is something that shouldn't and will not be tolerated. Some people just don't get how serious "rape" is.

I for one will skip this game (that looks truly awesome in many ways) because of Konani's stupidity.

Wait are you kidding? First of all the game doesn't even really have an allusion to rape. Second of all just because violence is common place, that doesn't mean that we can't talk about it or accept it. Lastly, why shouldn't a game be able to allude to rape if it wants to? As long as it doesn't take it lightly and comes at it in a mature way, what is wrong with that? And why are you skipping the game if there isn't even really anything about rape unless you're a ridiculous games journalist trying to drum up views? Crazy comment.

 

[Crayons]

When did she say that Konami shouldn't have the right to include the scene in the game? She never said Konami should be forced to remove it. She hopes Konami make the decision to remove it

When you have an incredibly vocal minority that can cause a big uproar online, asking someone to remove something can be a thinly veiled threat.

Didn't the Bioshock Infinite developers make Elizabeth's breasts smaller after complains from @femfreq?