God of Wha--?

Another fine moment of "What in the hell were you thinking?"

(Violence in video games, and the most recent controversy)

     I'm a "gamer", whatever that means in the current social context, but beyond that, I think of myself as a defender of video games. Despite video games coming back as a very important medium in the spectrum of media, they still seem to be the center focus of attack when things head south, so to speak. As everyone has seen in recent times and mass shootings/massacres, video games are immediately thrown under the bus, right behind the gun lobbyists (I'm leaving political views out of this). This unfair and unfounded attack on video games isn't targeted at television or film either, for reasons unknown to most. I fail to see how playing Call of Duty will turn you into a mass murderer, while watching the Saw film series will apparently have no such effect. I won't tell you, or anyone else where to place the blame for these actions, however I do not believe that games or other media are the appropriate place to point the finger.

      Some of my friends are "gamers" as well, however the rest of the people I interact with tend to shy away from video games, and really just don't know a lot about them. There are some that I know who even agree with these viewpoints that video games if not cause violence, at the very least facilitate it. I always jump to the defense saying that their arguments are not just wrong, but borderline absurd. The fact someone tries to equate violence to the actions and content seen in video games is ridiculous when you factor in that video games are a relatively new form of media and art (and when I say art, yes, I mean ART). If you want to make a baseless accusation that these things cause violence, I will assume that you mean before video games existed, no violent acts like these things occurred before this time. One of the most blatant examples of this unfair persecution games have faced was the reporting after the Virginia Tech shooting that the shooter was "very into violent video games". The only problem with this was that when police raided his room there were no traces of these video games that allegedly drove him to cause this massacre. (List of evidence gathered from Cho's residence)

     I've spent numerous hours playing the various iterations of Grand Theft Auto, Far Cry, Condemned, and other incredibly violent video games, yet I've still managed to find a way to keep the murderous rampages non-existent. I've run over a hooker in GTA and then taken all of the money I had just given her. I've cleared out 20+ encampments of "pirates" in Far Cry through what sometimes are psychopathic methods. Now, based on the heat this topic gets, I should be a mass murderer by now, so I can't figure out what's wrong with me. 

     The point I want to make is that it's not responsible or logical to blame any type of media; television, film, music, or video games for the actions of certain individuals. I'm a fan of Dexter, Mad Men, and Breaking Bad as well, and I'm not a misogynistic chain-smoking, meth dealing, serial killer. There's also a reason for this little thing called a rating system. These are prominent in all types of media, although slightly harder to account for and control in television. My parents didn't want me to play Mature rated games when I was younger, but I found ways around that (mainly going to friends houses). I understand why games are rated, and rating systems are necessary. When/If I have children, I won't want them to play some of the ultra-violent video games I have played until I think that they're ready or old enough to experience those things. As for parents who don't think their children should play these games, here's a major news flash; children under 17 cannot buy an M rated video game, and on top of that, new video game prices are on average 40-60 dollars. I'm 21 and I still have to show my ID when I purchase mature rated video games at almost any store. These games are not marketed in a way so that children under the appropriate age can easily get their hands on them. As a parent, you should be responsible in knowing what you child takes in, media wise, and adjust accordingly to what you deem as appropriate. Just as parents need to be responsible for what their children take in, adults playing these games and use them as excuses for violent behavior need to take real responsibility for their actions and stop relying on excuses. The aspects of mental health and conceptualization of things within media are too complex, probably out of my range, and possibly subject for another post at some other time.  

     However, one of the new hot topics in video games is the occurrence of women in said games. Unfortunately, because it is a relevant topic, there's some negative ground that's been uncovered most recently thanks to the latest God of War iteration; God of War: Ascension. I have not played God of War: Ascension, just as a precursor to this next segment, however having seen the moment of the game in question, my mouth was left agape. The moment is an interactive sequence where Kratos is stomping and brutally beating a Fury (one of the enemies in the game) up to an including impaling her on a massive spike. After another short cutscene, the player is awarded a trophy with the title "Bros before Hos" for "Escaping the Fury ambush". Now, a lot of people's response to this was "well yeah, it's the God of War franchise, the same series that had a sex mini-game in the very first game", and while that is all good and well as your opinion, it's enough to make my stomach churn. To clarify, while the act Kratos makes may be visually repulsive to some, that is not where my issue is. The issue I hold with the game is in the award given after beating said "Fury" (female) character to a semi-pulp. Seeing as violence against women is an important topic (as it should be) right now, especially with the most recent passing of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), this could not have come at a worse time. Regardless of how you view violence against women, the fact that the game gives you a facetiously named award for viciously beating and murdering a woman is in horrible taste. While mainstream media has not yet gotten their hands on this, the gaming culture has, and opinions across the board have been voiced. It's things like this that make it so much harder for me to defend video game to those who attack them ruthlessly.
     Gender roles are being broken down across the board in all different ways, and with video games that change is highly visible. Video games are no longer just for "boys", and one piece of evidence to that fact is Mass Effect 3 and their highly publicized ability to play the game as a woman (often referred to as "Femshep"  but also just known as Commander Sheppard, like her male counterpart). While the ability to play as the female Commander Sheppard was in the games from the start, the ability to do so was not very hyped until the third and final installment, including the option of flip the cover of the game to have the front of the case sport a picture of female Commander Sheppard (and having gone to many used game stores, I see quite a few copies of Mass Effect 3 with that happening). These changes that are leading more women to gaming are important, not just because it makes gaming more important, but because there is more integration of the types of people, making the gaming culture larger and more diverse. The impact of women in gaming is another topic all together, and something for another time as well, but the way to get more women or really anyone, into gaming is not by bashing a woman's face in and then handing them an potentially highly offensive/controversial "award" for sticking with your "bro" and not being tricked by a woman. "Femshep" might have been a step forward, but I can't help but think that this God of War scene was two major steps back. More importantly, when will women in games become a commonplace so that when we refer to female Commander Sheppard, we can just say "Commander Sheppard" and have others know what we're talking about. Companies need to stop doing things like this, not just because it may hurt their business, but it hurts progress that has been made.
    I'm not saying that violence needs to be taken out of video games, that's just absurd, what I am saying is that there should be a clear effort to make it not as blatantly tasteless as it was presented to us in the latest God of War game. Make it a relevant piece of the game not just a shock factor of the audience. 

     

Far-Cryin' Out Loud...

This may contain spoilers for those who have not yet played/completed Far Cry 3 

     If you have eyes, or ears, and pay any amount of attention to anything gaming related, you already know that Far Cry 3 came out back in November. If you pay closer attention to any type of gaming media: websites, blogs, reviews, you'll also know of the controversy that some discovered throughout the story line. Having just recently finished the game myself, I understand where these complaints and observations are coming from. The complaints most commonly expressed are that this game is just another typical "Let the white man come on in and save the day." While I totally understand why people felt like that, mainly because that is a very strong plot line of the game, I'm apathetic in a sense because we deal with this issue quite often. While grasping at the quasi-social issue of the white man saving the day because the natives just aren't strong enough, I found myself way too often  being thrown out of the game play experience. Having addressed the issue most seemed to have with the game, I'm going to go on with my own issues in the game.
     My issues with the game itself don't come from wonky controls, weird visuals, or bad game play (none of which Far Cry 3 suffer from), but instead it comes from the downright terrible characters that inhabit that entire gaming world/island. I pound my head against the nearest wall while asking myself how Ubisoft could create such awful avatars for what appeared to be a fantastic game. I was given plenty of fair warnings from multiple parties before I purchased the game, including from my local Gamestop employee who spat out while handing me the game: "You'll love it, but all the characters are total douches". After playing the game for a certain amount of time I was able to ascertain that the main group of characters in Far Cry 3 are just your typical "College Bro" types. By "a certain amount of time" I mean the end of the game's opening video sequence.
     The "group" is essentially a bunch of college aged friends (with wealthy parents) who take a vacation tour of Asia and end up on an island where, as quoted from the game "You can do whatever you want, for a price." and naturally the group jumps on this proposition. The characters include Jason Brody (your main character), his brothers Grant and Riley, his girlfriend Liza (perhaps the most tolerable, save all the crying she does), and a few other various friends thrown in there like extra herbs and spices that just kind of ruin your favorite dinner. The most atrocious character, possibly because you spend the entire game as him, is Jason. Starting the game trapped in a camp with a deranged psychopath (or light-hearted, endearing fellow depending on your viewpoint) on a mysterious island with your ex-army brother Grant and missing compadres, may seem like an exciting jumping off point, however considering the end result 5 minutes later, it all seems very contrived. There is a window of time, roughly 45 seconds to a minute where Jason's brother is murdered in front of him, and when Jason kills his first ever victim by shoving a knife through his throat. At this point Jason takes the appropriate 10 seconds to gasp in horror at what he has just done, and even drops the "Oh my God, what have I done" line, or something equivalent. This however, is just the start of the blood that Jason will spill, and the innocent college kid who just wanted to go on a vacation with his brothers, girlfriend, and company turns into one of the most vicious and brutal killers I've ever seen in a movie, television show, or other video game.
     These character development traits are starting to become utterly ridiculous and quite frankly need to be put to a stop if developers ever want the player to be able to connect to a character ever again. As a college student myself, I found all of these characters (except for one of the villains, Vaas) to be completely unlikable  with no way to connect to them. Scratch even the connectable part, just likable. I don't care if I can't connect to a character such as Brody in this game, or Master Chief in Halo, or Corvo Attano in Dishonored, but I should be able to actually like and tolerate the people that I have to control or be, for at the very least 15 hours. Far Cry made this task damn near impossible. I found myself very often pressing the mute button and enjoying the game much more until I realized I would miss audio cues of an impending attack by a pack of Komodo Dragons. Far Cry 3 turns this college athlete Jason into a mass murder machine in roughly thirty minutes with no breaks in between. I have such a hard time believing this guy went from tossing/kicking/hitting footballs/soccer balls/baseballs to shoving a machete through a man's chest, while drawing out his pistol and shooting his 4 fellow cronies in their heads during a 4 second time frame. Rant all you want about adjusting to conditions, however this isn't the only example of this happening (i.e. Tomb Raider) in very recent times. I beg of you developers, let us like your characters, we really want to, but some times you make it oh so difficult.  
     Now, despite the rant in the above 4 paragraphs, I believe that Far Cry 3 is an absolutely beautiful and amazing game. The game play is incredibly fun, from hunting to creatively finding ways to take over enemy outposts. The ability to play this game as a run-and-gun like Rambo is there, as well as the option to take an almost Sam Fisher-esque approach to levels by pulling enemies down off of ledges, or putting well placed arrows between their eyes. Visuals and audio are phenomenal, the only place needing improvement being the voice acting. There are definitely great times to be had, even with a some what lack luster story, there is at least 20 hours worth of missions, plus much more time in finding collectibles and unlocking weapons. Overall, Far Cry 3 is definitely worth being checked out.


Here's a tip to all of those making video games: likable characters are one of the most important things in a game, when you're forcing the player to inhabit those characters.