Forum - View topicGAME: Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
EastN3
 Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
|
Yes, I understood what he was trying to say, I was just angry that he cherry picked one poorly thought up analogy despite my numerous statements condemning rape and pointing out that it is horrible, all for the sake of trying to make me look like a jerk. And on the other hand, while victim-blaming and slut-shaming are disgusting, I'd rather go through that than be.....well, dead.
|
||||||
|
||||||
whiskeyii
 Posts: 2245 |
|
|||||
Fair enough. I agree even hypothetically speaking, choosing between death or trauma is being caught between a rock and a hard place. But again, that's what I find so frustrating about this game. I agree murder and rape are both terrible, horrific things. But at least in games, I've become accustomed to violence, for better or worse. Rape is less common, and I would like to see it treated with more respect than what I perceived in GZ. Because I've seen this particular subplot of "a woman is raped, and it empowers the hero to take revenge" kind of thing so terribly often. Except in this case it seems to be trying to empower the player to take revenge, which just seems like a cheap emotional ploy. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
EastN3
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
|
I'd say if anyone, it makes Chico want revenge, seeing as when you listen to the tapes, Snake just sits there happily smoking a cigar.
|
||||||
|
||||||
ikillchicken
 Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||
And there's no way you can argue that torture isn't technically "the application of certain sensory stimuli to persons in order to produce a result" or that blowing up a building isn't technically "the randomization of organized matter through the rapid release of energy". But that would be a ridiculously disingenuous way to phrase it designed to intentionally dismiss the horror and depravity of the acts.
If by argument you mean rhetoric then yeah. Describing rape in a totally impersonal, reductionist capacity that deliberately strips away all the trauma and complexity works great when you want to make rape sound not so bad. It's not so much an actual argument though as just playing games with semantics. Although I guess if you want to get into technicalities (I know you're a fan of those) fallacious, disingenuous comments can still be "arguments". They're just terrible ones.
So basically, you admit it was a dumb thing to say but you're mad at me for pointing it out. Sorry? I guess? |
||||||
|
||||||
|
EastN3
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
|
Seeing as I likened murder to "putting lead between someone's eyes" I was being equally dispassionate about both subjects.
"Fallacious" is insinuating I lied, or stated something false, which I don't believe I did. Care to elaborate? Also, once again, you fall back on this trite, unsubstantiated idea that rape is so much more complex and horrible compared to other violent crimes like murder, torture, etc. and therefore deserves to be placed on a pedestal. I don't buy it. Lastly, I agree that to others it seemed cold, and therefore poorly thought out, but the way you tried to use that one line to flanderize me into some peabrained misogynist is what angered me. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ATastySub
Past ANN Contributor
 Posts: 647 |
|
|||||
And you don't see this as a problem? People are not robots. Pretending to be one is not something to be proud of.
You are playing semantics and pretending everything exists in a vacuum. That IS fallacious. When you discuss things you discuss them within the context that comes with them. Ignoring those things because they hurt your terrible argument doesn't make them not exist.
Seemed? So you did think that out and still ended up there? And if you're upset over one line then let us take the sum of your words. You completely ignore any emotional aspect of anything and hold that as a superior position. Congratulations. When you apply this to everything it makes you a sociopath. When you apply it to the subject of a woman being raped it makes you misogynist sociopath. Happier now? Also the argument that Chico's character needs to rape someone to grow is simply awful. He could've been forced to do any number of things, but raping another character just to then explode the rape victim without a care? That is incredibly lazy writing and a horrible attempt at any type of discussion about human atrocity. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Lavnovice9
Posts: 276 |
|
|||||
|
I'll have to side with EastN3. I'm genuinely surprised people are actually saying rape is worse than murder. It pretty much trivializes any victims into being told that no matter what they do, they can never recover from it, overcome it, and have the opportunity to move on with their lives because it will always be there defining them. It basically condemns victims and tells them being killed would have been a more preferable outcome for them. Absolutely shocking. And while the victim may be unable to feel anything in death, it does nothing for the friends and family of them who must now live the rest of their lives without a loved one in this world. Please think about what you're saying when you say someone is better off dead than raped. It's incredibly insensitive to survivors who have managed to move on, and especially to those who never had the opportunity to overcome the ordeal because their lives were unfortunately taken from them.
|
||||||
|
||||||
shamisen the great
 Posts: 658 Location: Oregon, USA |
|
|||||
(Although, I would be fine with never hearing about spoiler[nanomachines] again) |
||||||
|
||||||
Rahxephon91
 Posts: 1859 Location: Park Forest IL. |
|
|||||
Wow. It's like you couldn't miss the mark more if you tried. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Rahxephon91
Posts: 1859 Location: Park Forest IL. |
|
|||||
SPOILERS FOR MGS4 and PW I guess. The story in MGS4 is awful. It is not a good conclusion at all. In my opinion of course. It begins with ripping the soul out of it's characters. It is retcon after retcon. MGS1 is about Snake finding a new role in life, a new lease. He starts the game basically with little will and through the story and really from Grey Fox he ends it with a new lease on life. MGS2 proves this as now he has his own mission. He isn't a "tool of the government". He's started his own organization with Otakon and they are making a better future for the next generation. He passes this ideology to Raiden at the end. Snake is nothing short of the most optimistic heroes in MGS2. MGS4 rolls back that character development for cheap reasons. "Oh he's old"! "Oh he's facing his morality". Crap. Snake always faces life or death situations no matter what. The Snake at the end of two would face the situation with no lame angst that MGS4 pushes on the character. It's a terrible turn for the character and a mark of poor writing. He had no arc to go through so Kojima made up a poor one. He also had to screw with Raiden in his attempt to make him cool. I guess cool means angsty dude who break dances on robots. Raiden was never annoying to me. He was a heavily manipulated person in MGS2 and he fir that story. At the end of MGS2 he is left with Snake's and in turn Grey Fox's ideology. Instead of becoming a worthwhile hero he becomes a guy who cries "Jack is dead" for really dumb reasons. The whole backstory with him becoming sad is so contrived it boarders on insulting. Returning characters are handled just as lame. What was up with Namoi and hugging Vamp? Oh Vamp, remember him? The guy who had powers? MGS is a series where people just have powers. It dosen't need to be explained, every MGS after three needs to explain everything though so his powers are actually nanomachines which by the time they reveal that is already an annoying plot magic item. I didn't need to see an ugly and very unlikable meryl either and jesus all those cutscenes with Johnny are so cringe worthy. Instead of Mei Ling being a respectable older lady, we have to play up her cuteness(and ass). it would have been better if she wasn't there. The whole Patriots thing is a bitch slap to the characters in MGS3 and it dosen't make much sense. Zero was just a commander who liked James Bond movies. He's the leader of the patriots and MGS has just been this war between Zero and BB? Um why? First Zero shown no real connection with the Boss in Snake Eater so there's no reason that he would be inspired to make her world a reality. Then to make Zero, Para Medic, and Signet these terrible people is just so unsatisfying. No build up and no nothing. It's like he just randomly chose them to be villains though MGS3 has no implication that they would or have a connection with Boss. Hell they can't even really tell why Big Boss is so pissed during the handshake scene in MGS3. If they felt so sad shouldn't they? Oh maybe later they did? BS, there was no build up to this and it was a lame cop out. Ocelot pretending all this time to be Liquid is stupid. There really is nothing else to say. It's a lame retcon made because I bet Kojima liked all the praise The Boss got in three. So he decided to make a character also be this big self sacrificial character. Except it the Boss's case she didn't have to retcon anything and it made sense. This idea that Ocelot was mind controlling himself basically just is so silly that it boggles the mind. It's worse then the hand thing. the hand thing makes sense in MGS. MGS has dumb ideas about how genes work. Also three further cements that the arm is controlling him through Ocelot's latent psy powers, which he has because he is the Sorrow's sun. It's just a stupid twist that replaced a perfectly good one. Well maybe not good, but one that was already out there and worked within MGS. Besides it's not even fitting for the series. In a way MGS1 and 2 have been about the legacy of Big Boss and his sons finding thier own legacy. Snake has taken his own path, Solidus tried his which was somewhat actually like Big Boss' own mission, and Liquid also tried to imitate it. MGS4 would have been better if it was the two Snake sons fighting it out. Snake fighting for a new world which is still free, with Liquid doing the same but in his own selfish way. Plus Liquid just sucks in MGS4 and is nothing like his normal self. There is so much more wrong with the story that I'd have to look over millions of posts that I've written about why MGS4 is terrible as I sure don't remember everything. The actual game part is terrible as well. While it may control well it sure dosen't have anything special. The boss battles lack any real imagination so they aren't fun. Doesn't help that that BB Corps lack personality and presence like past Boss groups. Drebin's "let me drop info on you" is lame and comes off as lazy. They also all seem the same so you may be prone to just ignore them. MGS1 is the puzzle stealth gameplay. MGS2 is the perfection of that. MGS3 is a radical change which makes new use of it's juggle setting. What does MGS4 do? Nothing. The entire "war on the battlefield" thing that was promised might as well not be there. Besides a few scripted sequences it's not really there and war hardly effects your stealth. The entire fraction thing is half-assed as you basically are auto sided with the rebels. You don't even have a real choice. Whatever the game drops this halfway with the terrible Act 3. Act 3 is so boring to play I'd almost kill myself. You also can not skip the tedious tailing sequence. Then you get a MGS3 retread and a boss who's point is "I guess the building is falling apart". It sucks. The less said about act 4 the better. Act 5 has maybe two rooms of stealth. It's not a good game. This would be fine if PW was ok. It is'nt. I don't even remember the story of PW. It may not be worse or as forgettable as PO's, but it's close. It's a story where they further take a crap on MGS3's story. You see actually the Boss did'nt just chose to sacrifice her. This annoying Hot Coleman and the US government set up the whole thing. A great, one of the best things about MGS has been messed up and further confused for no real reason. Also Big Boss get's over her and I guess now the idea of Outer Haven is in his head. As compared to just getting the idea of Outer Haven as seen in PO. Wow we've had two games and still we haven't gotten to MG1. Two games that basically serve to keep adding and messing up with the character known as Big Boss. Two games that get us to the point that MGS3 already did. At the end of MGS3 it's obvious Snake is sour about the Boss' death. He's disillusioned about everything. it's pretty obvious that this is what leads him to creating Outer Haven. That was it, we didn't need more. Except every little thing in MGS needs to be explained and we have to know every little detail as to how he got to Outer Haven. I don't even understand the history or character of Big Boss anymore. I don't even understand MGS which was not confusing before 4. Jack dosen't see himself as a tool of the government. Or he didn't. His motivations change with each game. The entire reason he creates Outer Heaven has nothing to do with reseinging himself to fate as PW now makes it out to be(the entire PW end spech about hell is like this). After Snake Eater, he feels extremely sour about governments role in Snake Eater(which has changed 2 times now) after the Boss got a raw deal. That's the entire thing in the cutscene where he refuses to shake the FBI guy's hand is about. Except Kojima couldn't leave that alone, so now we have what 2 maybe three games trying to explain that one cutscene. Either way MGS3 leads us to believe that Big Boss creates Outer Haven because of his respect of the Boss and her ideals. Or did he? If anything here his version of the world is free of government and almost anarchy. MGS4 leads us to believe that for whatever stupid reason all of MGS is some ideological battle between Big Boss and Zero. So actually all this has been a proxy war between Zero and Big Boss who have different interpretations of the Boss' World. Big Boss thinks her world is a world where soldiers are always needed. His determination against government and the Patriots is what earns him the respect of Ocelot, Eva, and others. So was that what Big Boss was about? Because here comes PW and it's PMC nonsense which reveals he actually got over the boss, so forget everything you knew from MGS3. Snake "IS A GUN" and thus now his PMC things are merely weapons for the world. But yet aren't they fighting against Zero and The Patriots take on the Bosses ideas? Who even knows anymore. It was so simple back in MGS3. PW's gameplay sucks. Boss battles(lame weapons this time) are unbalanced for single play which means you now have to grind. Grinding entails playing over and over the same boring missions. The missions aren't fun and are super easy. You can just run up to guards and cqc them or go into a corner and shoot. Even better if your playing the HD version and have less trouble aiming. It's a poor game. The series has been pretty poor. V at least seems to have good gameplay and has the situation awareness feeling that MGS3 did. I just could care less about the story it's telling. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
shamisen the great
Posts: 658 Location: Oregon, USA |
|
|||||
|
Fair enough. I disagree, but I appreciate you explaining your reasons for disliking it. I just know I felt satisfied by the end, even though I did notice some of the problems you mentioned. I haven't played PW or Revengence yet, so I can't really comment on them.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
ikillchicken
Posts: 7272 Location: Vancouver |
|
|||||
Your specific statement about what rape is is not technically false. But the implication that this statement is anything but utterly trivial is thoroughly false.
For the record, I'm ambivalent as to which is "worse". But that whole line of discussion is just a red herring anyway. The real relevant issue is that rape is really, really different than murder. The nature of the crime is entirely different. The context surrounding it is entirely different. If you're looking purely at the degree of harm done to the victims, yeah, you might argue murder is worse. But that's a erroneous way to look at it to begin with. It's the same reason zombie movies can get away with showing the eradication of 95% of the population but you would need to show some tact in addressing, say the genocide of a specific ethnic group. It's not just about the sheer scope of the harm done. That's a huge oversimplification.
So you recognize how making such comments make you sound. And yet, when you typed it, no big red "Boy, this makes me sound like a peabrained misogynist maybe I shouldn't say it" flag went up in your brain. Go figure. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
EastN3
Posts: 149 |
|
|||||
|
As to Ikillchicken, you didn't really disprove anything I said, so much as reiterate and clarify your previous positions, so I'm not going to argue against them for the second time.
To ATastySub.....wow. Just wow. Despite writing multiple posts that had obvious emotion (which you evidently didn't read, otherwise your entire accusation falls to pieces), you take one sentence that was clearly meant to be completely objective, for the purpose of an argument, and use that to call me a sociopath? Wow. I'd hate to see what you call your ex. Also using semantics isn't fallacious, although you may dislike them. And lastly I never argued that Chico needed the rape to develop, I just stated that the rape did develop him, despite whether you think it needed to be used. I think I may need to remind you, name calling doesn't make you a big boy, so try having some actual positions you can back up next time. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
ATastySub
Past ANN Contributor
Posts: 647 |
|
|||||
|
Name calling? No, I'm just using the definition of sociopath as one who can not understand the concept of human empathy. I thought you liked semantics? Are you trying to say defining you as such is fallacious? That ignoring context is bad?
The Chico comment was not directed entirely at you because it seemed to be the defining concern of those defending the inclusion of Paz's rape. That all it serves is for Chico to want revenge IS the problem. Any number of things could not only be used, but make a ton more sense. "You made me rape someone now I will get you!" Is horrific in how much it ignores the rape victim. Especially so when you conveniently dispose of the victim so they can't even have a say in the matter. For the purpose of providing one character the simple motive of revenge on a bad guy Paz is raped, sexually abused, tortured via the insertion and removal of bombs, and then exploded anyways. Her entire character in Ground Zeroes is to be abused and thrown away in the worst ways possible for no other reason than to make another character feel kinda bad. That is bad writing. Also you might want to read and respond to ikillchicken. So far this has been you being called out then covering your ears and ignoring what others have to say while reiterating your same lame talking points that others are trying to address. As he said,
So this is what, the third time it has been mentioned that even you realize how awful the stuff you're saying is but you straight up ignore when others confirm it? Anyways I think this thread needs to die. I think it's clear many (myself included) that played it are really disappointed in the direction Kojima's taken it, and that hopefully MGS5 is not a continuation in the same direction. Others don't because they feel the MGS franchise has historically been kind of tone deaf, and the times where it wasn't were the fluke. Oh, and as always a third group shows up just to shout a person I disagree with politically talking points about how rape isn't THAT bad. Bottom of the ninth, all bases covered, time for the walk-off. |
||||||
|
||||||
Mister Ryan Andrews
 Posts: 219 |
|
|||||
General rule, mate, people generally don't appreciate being spoken for. Especially if it's just going to be a strawman argument. We can only speak for ourselves, and my own reasoning for not having issue is simply because I don't believe in censorship. If I don't like a game, or it deals with a subject I don't like, I just won't play it and move on rather than demanding there only be one way to present a complex issue. Perhaps if you wish for a game to be done in your specific ideology, you could make one yourself? Seems like the most logical progression for your clear passion of the issue and a better way to spread your views compared to complaining about it here. You're not going to see games which handle issues the specific way you think they should only be handled unless you make them. Don't expect other people to do it for you. Own your passion and make it a reality 
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group