Jake

Idle Thumbs 160: Die Übiverse

Recommended Posts

I think the issue is that the designers added this mechanic and didn't think to question whether or not they should, or how this would play out. I think they just considered it as yet another item that one would want to keep private that the player could release. They were probably viewing in terms of general privacy rather than trying to consider that particular situation and what it meant for the individuals involved.

 

I guess I don't know the gamut of things that are used for distractions. I also don't know the animations and sounds for how the distraction plays out. I can understand it being a fact that the person in question would like to control the privacy of. Hearing it on its own just makes it sound terrible though.

 

Regarding music, the relatively low number of songs in older games point was pretty interesting. Sonic Colours, the Wii release, basically had two unique songs for each zone: the map theme and the Act 1 theme. Each following act would either use that first Act's track or one of two remixes of it. Then you unlock a retro mode and there are chiptune versions of the Act 1 themes. The end result is quite similar to a Genesis Sonic game in that you end up associating each zone with a specific song. Luckily that game had

otherwise it would end up being an annoying experience, but now I realize that a lot of the catchiness is due to the repetition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hulu Plus ads make me secretly miffed because Hulu still isn't available in Canada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a quick aside, but I've always felt the real best games are "high 7s." Speaking broadly, it's the sweet spot of competent mechanic design, but something a little too specific for what a review might feel would engage a mass audience.

 

I think it's ultimately another marker of the ongoing lack or real critical philosophy. Historically critics in other media have been wary of that perfect corporate gloss, though the universal love of superhero movies seems like an aberration. 

 

unrelated: this is that Polygon article about Alice: http://www.polygon.com/features/2013/2/7/3960084/alice-ubisoft-storytelling-video-games-corey-may-assassins-creed-far-cry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Watch Dogs and its distractions, how do they work?  Do you just tap "Transexual" on the screen and...what happens?  Does it explore the consequences of outing people at all?  Or is it just essentially flavor text for a mechanic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Hulu Plus ads make me secretly miffed because Hulu still isn't available in Canada.

 

Me too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the fact that it is a point that a bunch of people have thought 'this is something to be ashamed of' is the problem with it. It's similar to outing someone being gay as a thing that's something to be ashamed of.

 

If that makes sense. The fact that it has become a point is the problem.

Again! I think that's the point. You're explaining things to me that I'm already well aware of. I don't believe Ubisoft had any ill intentions. I do believe they're overstepping their bounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A friend just pointed out the Google car is totally Tachikoma from Ghost in the Shell.

 

I had 2 thoughts during the discussion of the Google car.  That was my first thought.  My second was that they should do a remake of The Love Bug except that this time Herbie is a sentient self driving Google car.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again! I think that's the point. You're explaining things to me that I'm already well aware of. I don't believe Ubisoft had any ill intentions. I do believe they're overstepping their bounds.

 

Yeah, I don't doubt that there was someone in Ubisoft in charge of making a list of secrets that NPCs could have and someone else in Ubisoft in charge of designing a distraction mechanic, but they never once talked about it (or even crossed paths). It's just unfortunate, because 1) being trans* shouldn't be something of which to be ashamed, and 2) even if it were, we have articles like this one, where a reporter helped drive a woman to suicide by writing a story about how she was a "fake" doctor and a "fake" woman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The dissonance in Watch_Dogs is worse than just the typical open world maniac driving (running people over at least hurts your reputation a little bit giving you an incentive to not drive through a crowd of people). While your character thinks of himself as a vigilante occasionally doing bad stuff to protect Chicago, with a single press of a button you can drain every random stranger's bank account for little or no reason as money is almost completely worthless in Watch_Dogs and with seemingly no consequence to you or anyone (at least I haven't run into a consequence so far)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I don't doubt that there was someone in Ubisoft in charge of making a list of secrets that NPCs could have and someone else in Ubisoft in charge of designing a distraction mechanic, but they never once talked about it (or even crossed paths). It's just unfortunate, because 1) being trans* shouldn't be something of which to be ashamed, and 2) even if it were, we have articles like this one, where an  reporter helped drive a woman to suicide by writing a story about how she was a "fake" doctor and a "fake" woman.

 

That story is exactly why I think a game could do a really good investigation into what actually results when you do spill people's secrets like this. Maybe you threaten it, but ultimately the person doesn't care, or finds acceptance when you reveal their secret. A real exploration of breaches in privacy would be fascinating...

 

 

Yes I am aware I sound like Peter Molydeux.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That story is exactly why I think a game could do a really good investigation into what actually results when you do spill people's secrets like this. Maybe you threaten it, but ultimately the person doesn't care, or finds acceptance when you reveal their secret. A real exploration of breaches in privacy would be fascinating...

 

 

Yes I am aware I sound like Peter Molydeux.

That's exactly what I was trying to get at, but failed, when I said I think a game COULD address it. But Ubisoft is very obviously not the developer to pull it off, because all they really want to do, at the end of the day, is make gamey games. Ain't nothin' wrong with wanting to make gamey games, but you have to be aware of your limits, and I don't think Ubisoft is, in this particular case.

 

There's a few really interesting concepts in Watch Dogs, including this, and the invasion of privacy in general. But at the end of the day, it's just (allegedly! I haven't played it) another GTA clone. It's a real shame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

watch underscore dogs seems to be about ideas of privacy and surveillance in the same pretentious way that nolan's batman films are political. like they want you to be 'oooh look how clever and political and prescient it is' but also not actually be thoughtful or interesting and concerned about following the consequences of those ideas. they're ultimately just window dressing for the fundamental story about a cool man dressed as a bat hitting criminals or a shady badass in an iconic cap shooting people and driving cars fast and killing with hacking powers. as well as feeling unsatisfying it can also lead to unintended consequences like the last batman film feeling fascist or watch underscore dogs thinking it's a goofy power to out trans people, because they just haven't put much thought into what it means but are happy having their cake too by playing around with serious issues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that's pretty much it.

 

Also I just noticed I used "at the end of the day" twice in my last post. Fucking kill me now guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

like they want you to be 'oooh look how clever and political and prescient it is' but also not actually be thoughtful or interesting and concerned about following the consequences of those ideas.

Very well observed; I notice this a lot lately in popular media. It's pretty insulting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah that's pretty much it.

 

Also I just noticed I used "at the end of the day" twice in my last post. Fucking kill me now guys.

Wait, so "the point" you mentioned earlier was that there was no point? It's just a piece thrown in without thought? Cause that seems like the opposite of having a point. >_>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, so "the point" you mentioned earlier was that there was no point? It's just a piece thrown in without thought? Cause that seems like the opposite of having a point. >_>

Nnnno? What? I feel like I explained it pretty clearly, because it was a very simple thing I was trying to say. You're going to have to pinpoint exactly what you don't understand about what I said for me to attempt to clarify. For now, I'll just summarize everything I've said and hope you're less confused...

 

Well, first I'll explain what people were talking about that I responded to. Ubisoft has this whole invasion of privacy thing going on in Watch Dogs. This includes lots of personal things about various people's lives in the game. You can reveal this information to the public, and the public will react. Yes? We can all agree that's what's happening. Some of these pieces of information are sensitive things in our modern society.

 

They chose to use a set of characteristics and facts that might be controversial precisely because they might be controversial. But they fail executing this in a meaningful or respectful way because they are Ubisoft and they're making a Video Game first and a Statement second. Or maybe third or fourth or last.

Still confused?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I thought Wario's naming was just about the flipped 'M' but wikipedia says: The name "Wario" is a portmanteau of "Mario" with the Japanese adjective warui (???) meaning "bad"; hence, a "bad Mario".

 

So Waluigi as a name isn't so silly after all. Still I already had started to wonder - Would evil Peach be princess beach? Evil (or good?) Bowser is also Bowser? Should there be a Mario Mare - collection of horse micro games, and Mario's Moods - an existential journey into Mario's true feelings?

Also that Google car's face looks like the murder protocol has already been activated (and yes, I used the nose as his its eyes...)

post-26597-0-36300400-1401392972_thumb.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had 2 thoughts during the discussion of the Google car.  That was my first thought.  My second was that they should do a remake of The Love Bug except that this time Herbie is a sentient self driving Google car.

Why not Nightrider?

 

Also every time I think of sentient-cars I think of Doomie from the Beetlejuice cartoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm, I thought Wario's naming was just about the flipped 'M' but wikipedia says: The name "Wario" is a portmanteau of "Mario" with the Japanese adjective warui (???) meaning "bad"; hence, a "bad Mario".

 

So Waluigi as a name isn't so silly after all.

 

Yeah, Wario's name is clever because of the consonance.  Waluigi's name is not as clever, but it's not as pointless as it first appears.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nnnno? What? I feel like I explained it pretty clearly, because it was a very simple thing I was trying to say. You're going to have to pinpoint exactly what you don't understand about what I said for me to attempt to clarify. For now, I'll just summarize everything I've said and hope you're less confused...

Well, first I'll explain what people were talking about that I responded to. Ubisoft has this whole invasion of privacy thing going on in Watch Dogs. This includes lots of personal things about various people's lives in the game. You can reveal this information to the public, and the public will react. Yes? We can all agree that's what's happening. Some of these pieces of information are sensitive things in our modern society.

They chose to use a set of characteristics and facts that might be controversial precisely because they might be controversial. But they fail executing this in a meaningful or respectful way because they are Ubisoft and they're making a Video Game first and a Statement second. Or maybe third or fourth or last.

Still confused?

I get that they chose the contents of their list of secrets because they are controversial. However, I feel like the specific case of outing someone as trans and using the intense reactions as a distraction touches upon a way more real experience that they're using as a throwaway random element of a mechanic. I couldn't really find more examples of that system, but I assume that case is a level of magnitude more messed up than most of the others. I guess originally I thought you were saying something about that specific case being designed for controversy, so it seemed weird that you agreed it was an unintended consequence of them filling their game controversial buzzwords.

I get what you're saying now, though. Although when I imagine a game by Ubisoft (or any large company) being controversial I expect lip service, not anything anything that provokes a reaction in me like the example in question did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I get a self drive car my alcohol consumption is going to go through the roof. This was my amazing dawning realisation when I was reading about the google cars yesterday

http://googleblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/just-press-go-designing-self-driving.html

 

It's all part of Google's master plan.  Once we're all rollicking (or dismally) drunk, we won't even notice that robot cars are taking us to the Soylent Green factory before our time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wapeach -- an angry princess who never needs saving by anyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MARIO: Wapeach! I'mm'a here to'a rescue you!

WAPEACH: Get your fucking hands off of me.

MARIO: Waaaa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MARIO: Wapeach! I'mm'a here to'a rescue you!

WAPEACH: Get your fucking hands off of me.

MARIO: Waaaa?

Best

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wapeach respects both Wario's funny pranks as well as his bigass castle. She comes to him of her own accord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now