- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Okay, I’m all for good, complete education, but blaming people not understanding media on “too much STEM” is a bit ridiculous.
I dunno. Math asks me to just accept it’s normal to have 60 watermelons and is trying move bulk orders of melons on a regular car. The goal is to figure out the problem and not accept that the person who is a wholesale watermelon dealer in denial is commiting tax evasion.
Or to discover that the melon seller has a regular job in ag and gets a bunch of melons on the side from the field and sells the harvest at cost to make up the part of their paycheck that was paid in perishable food.
Should we shame the seller for breaking the law or sympathize for being forced into that situation? People don’t have the energy to care; they just came for a maths question.
Sorry, dude, what you said must have been very interesting, but at some point I just stopped reading to optimize a watermelon workflow instead. Weird.
I don’t know how i got here, but I seem to have purchased 7 watermelons.
I wrote a melon API to facilitate the melon management and shipping
but… this is not the math you see at STEM, this is the math you see at high school at best. There’s no deeper meaning in actual STEM math problems, they are way too abstract or specific. There’s no watermelons, it’s just some a, b, n1, nk… maybe some physics formulas that apply to velocity, mass… I read 0 problems in my uni math and physics courses where they used real world examples.
I see your point but that’s for high schoolers, not STEM students or alumnus.
My physics dissertation was actually about how many watermelons you can fit in a 1996 Honda Accord.
It’s weird. I credit my scientific education with waking me up to questioning stuff. Like when you learn about how we know stuff, the limits of proof (e.g. can’t prove empiricism is “true” it just works extremely well for certain things), how hard it is to wrangle stuff into scientific questions and so on the elephant in the room is how fucking impossible most questions are.
Then you get thinking about how untested most of society is, how many different ways there are to interpret things, how unknowable the “goodness” of your preferences is and so on.
Yet, in the same cohort as me there were a lot of people coming out extremely certain of their own worldview and blindly faithful in technocrats and the mystical power of throwing data at stuff to solve enormous problems. Like we are anywhere near being able to calculate out a human society.
So idk, I think it’s less stem vs not stem and education quality and kinds of people/where they’re at in life. You could probably go through a lit crit course and come out blinkered too, being able to do lit crit doesn’t guarantee you’d have good opinions.
This is what bothered me in the original discussion, making it seem like being in STEM somehow doesn’t prepare you at all for critical thinking in general. On the contrary, I believe too there are people who develop it in part because of the S in there. It’s not necessary, but it’s an important tool.
Hopefully people don’t need a college degree in literature to understand basic subtext. We ask kindergarteners to do that with Dr Seuss.
Hopefully people don’t need a college degree in literature to understand basic subtext.
I think it’s about learning that it’s worth doing more than anything else.
It’s more that when the writing is bad something is perceived as “political”, as the insert of whatever political messaging is being used comes out of nowhere and smacks the player like a cudgel. That’s what most gamers have a problem with, obviously there’s a loud minority that rage about stupid shit like Jesse Faden being too masculine. But that’s not what most people are talking about.
Games need to tackle these issues head on and fully integrate them into the world, not just tack on preachy dialog that doesn’t make sense within the wider game world.
FF16 is blatantly about slavery and no one really complained, it’s not exactly peak fiction, but they at least had everything contained within the world. FF7 is the same but with fossil fuels and much better writing.
New Vegas is the best example, it’s simply written well and gives the player agency.
Death Stranding did a great job of both integrating it’s themes directly into the world, and also tackling them head on without any remorse.
Helldivers is so ludicrously full on and absolutely dripping with it’s pro fascist ideology that everyone knows what they’re getting into from the intro video, and then the game starts adding texture and “are we the baddies” energy straight away.
Fucking Disco Elysium is near universally praised by the wider gaming audience, and I don’t even think I need to explain how that one is political.
It’s the same reason why most ideologically driven media is cringe as fuck. Christian media being a prime example, it’s contrived slop that doesn’t make sense within its own story. Like God’s Not Dead and it’s illogical legal system built on feels and Shapiro logic.
Who remembers the weird pro-life Doctor Who episode? That was bizarre and out of place. The characters stopped acting like themselves for the sake of whatever message it wanted to get across. It just felt really out of place.
The Last of Us Part 2, to label the most controversial example, had periods of good and bad writing, but focusing in on the “violence bad” part of it’s messaging, it completely missed the mark. Giving the characters names that they shout was just hilarious, and having Ellie repeatedly kill dogs whilst Abbie pets them was just so hamfisted. Then making the gameplay violent and fun which just divorced it further.
TLDR:
GamersPeople love politics invideo gamesmedia, they hate hamfisted preaching invideo gamesmedia. Especially when it doesn’t make sense in the crafted worldThe drama with helldivers was because fascists saw the over the top campy depiction of fascism and unironically agreed with it. They had no idea they were the ones being lampooned. You should look at the reactions when they found out the devs were actually not fascists. They were distraught.
Please could you provide some examples? I’ve legitimately never seen someone upset at the devs for not literally being fascists.
If I have to go out of my way to find this, I’m assuming it falls under the “loud” minority group. I’m sure these people exist, but it’d surprise me if they made up a significant amount of the over 12 million players.
Edit: Had a further look, there seems to be more people complaining about people taking it literally than people actually taking it literally. I did find like 3 Reddit posts, but all had 0 upvotes and like 30 comments telling them they’re wrong and stupid
Specifically starship troopers, but you know what kickstarted that discussion again. Also a bunch of Twitter discourse. Reddit is generally left adjacent. You won’t find too much fash shit there.
Sorry man, but that’s a relatively milk toast YouTube video with 81k views. Definitely very right leaning, but outright fascist is a bit much. She clearly has no media literacy or is deliberately misleading people.
Her latest video got only 11k views, and most of her titles look like some right wing grifter shit like “Ben Shapiro SILENCES Candace Owens, CANCELS Debate?”.
And I’m sure that right wing grifters will use this for content, that’s what they do.
I wouldn’t say that shows anything more than a loud minority. Honestly 81k views is lower than I expected and more proves my point
I think this person means non partisan, because Metal Gear Solid is filled with political intrigue.
I kinda assumed people understood the messages behind Battlefield 1, Death Stranding, and Helldivers 2, lol. Most of the messages are telegraphed pretty clearly.
16 Final Fantasy Games and the Earth is still getting consumed by us.
Has anyone actually seen anyone actually complain about having politics in games, and not just obnoxious politics, like Specs Ops where they force you to kill civilians and then act like your the bad guy because you wanted to see the content you paid for? If you dont give us a choice to be good, and if you’re super preachy about it, then its just bad writing.
Look at New Vegas, plenty of politics, but you get to make choices, and its not preachy at all. Then look at the Last of Us 2, where they force you to kill a dog the other character petted, and it comes off as blatant emotional manipulation. Which game is widely considered a masterpeice?
Has anyone actually seen anyone actually complain about having politics in games
Yes. Under this post, too.
I even remember people complaining about re-releases that had disclaimers that the game has racially insensitive enemies.
People will complain about anything.
Where under this post? Cuz I dont see it.
Gotta look for the downvoted ones, lol
One example…
People play games for escapism, not to be reminded of politics. Not every story needs deep political roots, people just want to have fun and forget about real world bullshit.
Tbh, I can see that. I hop in CS and its political, but I play it for escapism.
This misses the point of spec ops the line
What, war is bad and glorifying war is bad? The point has been made, no one missed it. Its just wasnt worth mentioning.
You’re doing the thing in the post.
Spec Ops actually did have choices where you could be good (or at least less bad), but ironically people missed them because they didn’t think being good would work.
For example, at one point you’re being harassed by an angry mob of locals. A lot of players simply shot them because a lifetime of experience with shooters told them that no other input would be recognized. But in actuality, if you fired warning shots at the ground or over their heads the civilians would flee without incident.
I didnt know that. After the forced willie pete bit, I thought all the other bits were forced too. Specs op unintentionally set a rule “if theres a choice, youll be forced to take the evil one” which made the entire thing feel obnoxious.
I think you’re actually engaging with it a bit shallowly. You are the one who invented the rule and a different framing is exploring how, if games seem to put us in situations where we must do horrible things to advance even a couple of times, we take that as a rule instead of risking losing to find other ways.
Which is a fairly glaring indictment of the whole military shooter genre which is all about “hard men and hard choices” that completely dehumanise the factions you’re in opposition to.
A lot of gamers thought it was forced. Its just bad communication with the player.
Military shooter games glorify war and shallowly reward horrible behaviour. Spec ops does it differently.
Majority of people: do horrible thing
Some people: experimental and find heroic thing is rewarded.
Discussion possible, why did the majority do that? could we talk about horrible and uncreative design patterns in the genre of military shooters? How media portrayals of war train us not to look for peaceful solutions? Whether this feeds into how we view American imperial wars?
you: no spec ops bad video game because I didn’t do the good option.
People did experiment, in the first scene with the wp. That experiment told them that the game would force you to make evil decisions to continue playing. I saw that narratively there was a good option, but the game told me that that option wasnt available in the WP scene.
you get that this wouldn’t work as a critique if it was obvious you could make different choices right? Then it wouldn’t make the player complicit. If you’re not complicit it’s just a game saying “military shooters could be different” which is a nothing statement.
Like how games with a “get the information (evil)” and “get the information (good)” button aren’t offering real moral choices. Or how deus ex would lose all impact if the “here’s a gun, go kill these people” starting mission tempting you with a rocket launcher popped up a “you might change sides in the future” warning.
By involving you, leading you just like any other military shooter for a bit then cutting you loose is what creates the critique. You compare notes after playing and someone points out something and you go “huh, why didn’t I try that?”. It’s not condemning you for not trying that, it’s asking you if you’re happy with a genre which trains you to never to try it.
People play games for escapism, not to be reminded of politics. Not every story needs deep political roots, people just want to have fun and forget about real world bullshit.
It’s not a very popular opinion it seems but I agree, I rather like a bit of mindless escapism sometimes, not everything has to teach me a lesson, sometimes things can be just fun. Not that we can’t have both, of course.
And that also doesn’t mean you can discredit the message of a game just because you don’t like it or want to engage in it. But so many people play a game with a strong political message, and then complain constantly how it’s ruined by it. Okay so don’t play it play something else.
That’s why my favorite book is Moby Dick. No froo-froo symbolism, just a good, simple tale about a man who hates an animal.
One of my favorite lines ever
I like your style
Don’t go to the article, it’s click bait garbage
Neat stuff.
That part’s wild to me, when people are like “This villain in your story seems to have said and done bad things? So that means you agree with them, yes?” No! Of course not! It’s the literal villain in the story, man!
But there is no utilitarian point of art. It exists to express ideas and to tell truth. I think maybe a lot of people get upset because from their point of view, they are paying money, and they have this relationship where it’s like “If it’s not giving me what I wanted out of this transaction, then it’s bad.”
To be honest, “If it’s not giving me what I wanted out of this transaction, then it’s bad.” is a heuristic that works well for most things we buy. If I buy candy and it doesn’t taste good, it’s bad. If I buy a car and it breaks down, it’s bad.
I think the real problem is that some people see games as a product and others see it as an art piece. Some games fail at being either, some succeed at both.
A thread of the problem is likely the publisher/developer conflict of interest. When the two can’t come to an agreement, the end result usually fails horribly in both aspects.
I hate those people who take content for validation. If I have a nazi in my story I am not, myself, also a nazi.
aesthetics. people will perceive the aesthetics more than anything else.
startship troopers is a good example: it satirizes fascism but has the aesthetics of fascism, so thats what people perceive.
the boys was the same when conservatives liked homelander. he is the good looking blue eyed aryan with an epic powerful portrayal and those are usually the heroes.
If you liked the guy who murders a load of civilians in like the second episode then I don’t think you can pretend it’s because he’s handsome!
It’s his piercing eyes
the ‘good guys’ go in murderous rampages all the time in movies. its just usually framed as a good thing. ‘oh those they killed were evil!’, ‘oh the city they destroyed was for the greater good!’
real life isnt so black and white but they do that same framing irl with varying levels of success.
Gamers are not very smart, and they are the most readily twisted by alt right deception brokers.
Man… Read the title as “Politicians” at first and was like “I could have been teabagging Trump and not even know it.”
A lot of people are just… not so bright. I remember seeing the video of all those trump supporters rocking out to “killing in the name of” by rage against the machine. Waving a thin blue line and american flag around with the lyrics blasting in the background.
Its the same with that new game Helldivers 2. Zero awareness.
Do we always want to play as the good guys? Are all actors to be prohibited from portraying bad guys? Is all media going to end up like Barney the Purple Dinosaur episodes? Games, movies, books, songs are supposed to be entertaining.
I think this explains at least part of the phenomenon…
Guilty as charged. I’ve played hundreds of hours of souls games and all I know about the lore is that souls are money
Now compare that narrative experience the Super Mario Bros.
Im sure it’s been done, but i would love to see interpretations of a First Time User Experience of OG mario if it came out today.
I cant tell you how many games ive just noped out of because i just want to actually play the game and not read or listen to either dialogue or forced tutorial railroading for 20+minutes (even 5 minutes of NOT being in control of what im doing is annoying) when you start a new game.
Even character creation can impede just wanting to get started. Let me come back later, or engage with that as i PLAY the game. Injecting extensive dialogue or forced interactive tutorial should be a reward or a much appreciated rest from the action, not a burden i must bare.
Not every game needs to be story rich to be fun, thank you vampire survivors
My friend has told me to watch a bunch of YouTube videos for the lore. It’s apparently very deep.
