PlugMonkey Comments

Page 1 of 99

  • Searching for a video game hero

  • PlugMonkey 20/05/2017

    I love Dale Cooper. Even a passing llama gets the "you might be the single thing my life is míssing" treatment.

    Reply +22
  • The state of Elite Dangerous

  • PlugMonkey 11/05/2017

    Elite Dangerous, which was successfully Kickstarted to the tune of £1.5m back in November 2012, promised so much. But has it delivered?
    Yes. I played it for a couple of hundred hours, so I'm pretty happy with my investment.

    The problem is that gamers these days will play a game for a couple of hundred hours and then slag it off because they've run out of things to do.
    Reply +51
  • EA reckons 40% of console game sales will be downloads by the end of 2017

  • PlugMonkey 11/05/2017

    @bigmalky

    Once again, for luck: there is nothing remotely logical about your viewpoint.

    1. These companies can't all hike up their prices because they are in fierce competition with each other to sell you non-essential luxury items.

    2. They can't 'hold you to ransom' because you can simply leave and take your custom elsewhere.

    This is logic. Poke a hole in either.

    Fighting for digital only is self serving for those who forget that other people might not be as fortunate as you.
    I'm not fighting for anything. There isn't even a fight happening. Getting you to even understand that would be a start.

    I'm commentating on what is happening and has already happened. If you take out the cost of manufacture and distribution of physical media, it creates savings. As highspeed broadband connections catch up to the task, more and more consumers will switch to the format that can offer them these savings created by lower overheads.

    On PC, this has already happened. With music, this has already happened. With music, physical media only persists for high end enthusiasts who are willing to spend MORE.

    Digital is fundamentally cheaper. Your position that physical media keeps prices low is illogical and indefensible. Extra costs cannot be responsible for lower prices. There is no logic to be found there.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 10/05/2017

    @bigmalky

    Absolutely. The electorate's heart is fickle and fake news has taken propaganda to a new level so Steam must surely fall before Origin. It's only logical if Origin offers a worse service at a worse price.

    Gaming is doomed. I'd start looking for a new hobby now if I were you. Get out while you still can.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 10/05/2017

    @bigmalky

    I'm going to keep saying this in the insane hope it sinks in: I'm PC only now. I didn't bother buying either of the new Sony or MS consoles because games are so much cheaper on the digital only PC platform. Even after I've paid extra for the hardware, it's much, much cheaper to game on PC because of the digital only environment.

    *tap* *tap* Hello? Is this thing on?

    It's the first time in 30 years I have skipped a console generation. The future is now, and it's not the future you describe. I am drowning in games. Drowning.

    How long before the sky falls in? How high will prices go? How stripped down will games get? For as long and as far as consumers still think it's good value. Exactly that long, and not a moment longer. We have all the power, after all. If consumers think the Star Wars IP is worth the premium, they'll buy it. If they don't, they won't. I don't, so I don't. After all, it's not like I'm being held to ransom.

    I just bought Prey for £39.99. It's brilliant. There's a whole game there. A whole VERY BIG game. Yes, prices will eventually go up. £39.99 is how much a AAA game has cost since the 1980s. Everything else in the world goes up in price. Games go up in quality, but are expected to remain at the same price forever.

    This is not how economics works.

    Or ransoms.

    The future you describe won't happen. It has already not happened.
    Reply -5
  • PlugMonkey 10/05/2017

    @bigmalky

    Anyone who thinks they will be held to ransom doesn't understand basic economics. Or ransoms.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 10/05/2017

    @bigmalky

    Once publishers get everyone herded into digital, they'll overprice,
    Aren't they sort of in competition with each other though? I'm pretty sure they are.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 10/05/2017

    @pleshy

    If physical copies were to go, and publishers would very much like that, we'd live in a world of monopoly
    No we wouldn't, because EA would still be competing with Ubisoft, and both would be competing with Activision and Take-Two and Zenimax, and if all five of them got together and formed a cartel it would just leave a huge gap in the market for Devolver to expand and fill.

    Video games is a consumer lead industry, and a ruthlessly competitive one at that. PC games are entirely digital these days, and they are by and large cheaper than console disc games.
    Reply -2
  • Prey review

  • PlugMonkey 10/05/2017

    Three hours in and absolutely loving it. Love the slow pace. Love the exploration. Love the lack of hand-holding and nagging. GOTY so far by a mile. Reply +3
  • Gears of War movie is still go, gets Avatar screenwriter

  • PlugMonkey 04/05/2017

    @djarcas

    The Warcraft movie seemed quite faithful to me, although that is entirely based on my recollections of Warcraft III and a few hours of Hearthstone.

    Can any WoW fanatics confirm or deny?
    Reply +1
  • Anita Sarkeesian brings Tropes vs. Women in Video Games to a close

  • PlugMonkey 01/05/2017

    @man.the.king

    What I was referring to was the level of Sarkeesian-worship that seems to be going on among some of her supporters, where any critique is derided.
    Then there's the level of of Sarkeesian hatred that goes on with some of her detractors, where the initial critique is equally derided.

    These are the extremes, not the norm, and I don't think presenting either of these groups as the norm helps anyone. There are loons on both sides, and we should ignore them on both sides.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 30/04/2017

    @momentarylogic

    It reminds me of when I try to breathe a word about how meh some of the Marvel movies are
    Even worse, I think Christian Bale is a really shit Batman.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 29/04/2017

    @craigm

    Thanks. I really appreciate you taking the time. Disagreeing is fine. I don't agree with all of it, but it's important to know what you're disagreeing with before you post a video online explaining why.

    Personally I think this more holistic approach to the problem is far less "them vs us" than blaming it on a group of 'bad' people.

    But I also think it's far too simplistic to pretend that sexism runs along a single axis. Society discriminates against men and women in different ways. One more than the other, but you'll never fully address one in isolation. That's the debate I'd like to be having. The 'damsel' trope, for example, is just as much about men having no value as it is about women having no agency.

    (As far as Anita being misandrist and not engaging in discussion goes, I think that's the sort of ad hominem attack we could all do with a lot less of from both sides.)
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 29/04/2017

    @craigm

    This is going to be a long one, so if you're not genuinely interested in understanding 'Sarkeesian' feminism then you can safely skip it. That video you posted got me thinking though, and I need to get this out to move on with my weekend. :)

    The problem is I myself watch things like that Troy Leavitt video and am staggered by how much anyone can manage to miss the point by. The eye-bleedingly obvious things that he says aren't things that people like Sarkeesian have missed, they are based in his own simplistic pinhole view giving him no understanding of Sarkeesian's position in the first place. I find it genuinely quite painful to listen to, to be perfectly honest.

    For example, when Sarkeesian says that sexism doesn't exist for men or that sexism is everywhere it's not because she's deluded or blinded by her own prejudice, it's because contemporary philosophy on the issue has moved beyond what Leavitt understands it to be.

    By my understanding, she's not looking at it through a pinhole, but rather she's stepping so far back that the individual disappears from the equation. Instead of their being people who are sexist and people who aren't sexist, there is a giant system of culture and society and civilisation that is biased against women. Maybe only slightly, maybe less now than 50 years ago, but biased nonetheless.

    This is the only level that sexism exists on.

    ^^^Understanding this is crucial to understanding Sarkeesian's position.^^^

    Then some people in that system are assholes and some people aren't assholes, but they're all 'sexist' because it's the system they're in that is sexist, not them individually. (Some of those assholes, it should also be pointed out, are women.)

    Given that position, the REAL problem of sexism (or racism, or homophobia) is that it allows assholes easy victims that society has taught them are valid targets, and taught too many of the rest of us not to defend. By this definition of what sexism is and why its bad and how it works and how to tackle it, sexism is indeed everywhere, and doesn't affect men, because society does not turn a blind eye to men being targeted by assholes purely on account of them being men. This is the theme behind all of Sarkeesian's videos: what teaches assholes that women are valid targets? Why do we stand for it? And how can we stop it?

    Now, I don't think this model is perfect. I think there are genuine counter arguments that could advance Sarkeesian's position, but none of them are being presented! All of Leavitt's counter arguments completely fail against what Sarkeesian actually means rather than what he thinks she means. This leaves no debate to be had.

    But if Anita Sarkeesian says that she's shutting him down as a critic because she can't take criticism. The real problem is that most of her critics, like Troy, haven't bothered to take the time to understand her position in the first place in order to present a counter argument that is genuinely valid. Tom Bramwell of this parish wrote an article along similar lines that nobody bothered to take the time to try and understand either.

    You don't have to agree with this definition of sexism, but to enter into a debate over it you do have to first understand and acknowledge it.

    Have a good weekend, and if you made it through all that, my hat is off to you!

    Edit: neglol! "Well, that's not what I want Sarkeesian's position to be." *neg*
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 29/04/2017

    @-Gemini44-

    I love this gif. Here, Charles Foster Kane drowns out his detractors by too loudly applauding a performance he knows in his heart is terrible.

    That is what you were going for, right? :-P .
    Edit: FFS, it was a joke. Gemini got the joke. So how about the rest of you mute neglol 'snowflakes' all have a giant communal y-front unbunching. ;)
    Reply -7
  • PlugMonkey 29/04/2017

    @craigm

    Anyone who came to an Anita Sarkeesian story to read about games clicked the wrong link.

    Online harassment is undoubtedly a 1st world problem, but is it not quite a serious 1st world problem?

    Or am I to take the opinion that no-one actually raped and killed these women and so them being threatened with rape and death can be safely parked until with have eradicated famine, corruption, global warming, suppression of women's rights, honour killings, genocide, sex slavery, forced marriage, hiv epidemics, malaria and a multitude of other issues you can't even think of?

    I'm not sure I'm 100% comfortable with that.
    Reply -6
  • PlugMonkey 29/04/2017

    @SuperShinobi

    but if any man replies with a different point of view and with his own critical analysis - nevermind if it's with well-argued and reasoned points - it's immediately dismissed and shot down by her defenders as "mansplaining", misogyny, harassment, hate, trolling, arrogance, bigotry, idiocy, vitriol, being thin-skinned and defensive, being a manchild and against progress, anti-intellectualism and so on.
    While there is undoubtedly some truth to this, stating it as a blanket fact is about as accurate as saying that Sarkeesian's own analysis was immediately dismissed and shot down shot down by gaming culture's defenders as "feminazism", "libtarded", political correctness gone mad, man-hating, harassment, trolling, arrogance, bigotry, idiocy, vitriol, being thin-skinned and defensive, being an SJW, being "anti-fun", pseudo-intellectualism and so on. It was, but it also wasn't. Some people replied with well reasoned points.

    It was a pretty volatile atmosphere all round, and I think saying Sarkeesian was "free" to offer a critical feminist analysis of video games but men weren't "free" to reply because they copped some flak for it is disingenuous. If she had been free to offer this criticism, I think people would also have been a lot free-er to offer counter criticism.

    The gamergate lot started the shitstorm, and in a shitstorm everyone gets covered in shit.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 29/04/2017

    @pelican_

    It's not about being 'misled'. I subjectively disagree with some of her subjective opinions.

    I don't think me subjectively disagreeing with her subjective opinions a handful of times undermines her valid points, nor do I think her subjective opinion aligning with mine 100% of the time is a remotely reasonable expectation.

    The fact that over all her videos this only happens a handful of times definitely means I didn't leave feeling I'd been "yelled at for having a penis", just that me and Sarkeesian have a different interpretation of the character of Bayonetta. That's OK. That's allowed.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @Bauul

    a) and b) I completely agree with, but c) I've never actually heard her say.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @nickthegun

    People do sometimes put other people's posts that they agree with in quote marks and then, if they really agree with them, post things like "this, x100". Or just "x100".

    C'mon, you must be able to at least kind of see where the confusion arose? :)
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @Sober-Si

    What NullDev just posted would get you banned pretty much anywhere.

    He gave him no choice. It was like the ending of Falling Down in here.
    Reply -7
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @NullDev

    Yes, why on earth would any self-respecting mod delete comments like that? It MUST be a conspiracy!
    Reply -4
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @Fourfoldroot

    I know, but I don't see how you can reasonably expect anyone to separate the two, especially not in a situation that extreme.
    Reply -4
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @nickthegun

    Oh, I do apologise. Clearly there's a language barrier at work here. Is multiplying a sentiment by a hundred not generally seen as a sign of agreement?

    That seems confusing to me, but I'm not really down with all the hip kidspeak these days.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @Fourfoldroot

    deserved someone more objective and less biased
    I find it very hard to pick the chicken from the egg here.

    I challenge anyone to remain objective and unbiased in the face of the that level of abuse and threat. Anything she says nowadays I have to filter through the last five years of her having been Anita Sarkeesian, which is a shame in itself.

    It's a wonder that she's sane, and if she's become increasingly entrenched and critical of video game culture it's hardly a surprise. I know I have, and I was just watching.
    Reply -13
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @nickthegun

    a retort that makes sense?
    Oh, I'm sorry. I'll break it down for you.

    You think Anita Sarkeesian deserved all the harassment she got for "getting games wrong". x100.

    This is a pretty clear indication that you got Anita Sarkeesian's videos wrong. x100.

    I wondered how much harassment that might warrant.

    Make sense? In hindsight, it probably was aiming a bit high considering the main thrust was that you aren't very good at understanding things.
    Reply -6
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @nickthegun

    And what do you deserve for getting her videos wrong x100?
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 28/04/2017

    @williamarthurfenton

    We aren't talking about honest criticism here in Anita saying "Oh, this game is bad because of poor mechanics, bad story." she's charging the gaming community with a charge of culturally ingrained sexism.
    In the videos I've watched, I've mostly seen honest criticism of the laziness of game developers. Using a woman's death or kidnap as a motive is lazy. Making a female character's defining characteristic her sex appeal is lazy. I agree. It is lazy. We can do better than that, and make better games as a result.

    The games she highlights as doing these things better - and she does highlight games that do these things better - are generally games that we gamers agree are better. The only time I can think she was completely off base was with Bayonetta, but I can agree to disagree once in a while.

    The gaming community is only charged with "culturally ingrained sexism" in the context of the entire world being culturally ingrained with sexism. That's a view you can either subscribe to or reject, but either way it's not an attack on 'the gaming community' so I've never really understood why people go out of their way to perceive it as such.
    Reply +3
  • Julian Gollop launches $500,000 crowdfunder for X-COM spiritual successor

  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2017

    @nottorp

    I didn't find the timers in XCOM2 anywhere near as invasive as the ones in the bomb defusal missions in XCOM.

    Basically, they fixed the way the enemies used to spawn in in XCOM, which enforced a slow turtle-y playing style because moving fractionally too quickly into new areas brought more enemies down on your head. This allows the missions to be played at a quicker and more satisfying tempo, but without the timers nobody would ever have known. They would have kept playing it the same way as XCOM.

    It never gives you as much of a hurry up as the bomb defusal missions. It just helps you notice that you don't need to be quite as cautious as you used to be, and encourages you use the improved non-sniper classes more, and ultimately those are good things. Once I got into a groove a barely even noticed them.

    All in all, I found it to be a much better balanced and more rounded experience. If you got 400+ hours out of the first one, then it's definitely worth a dip if you see it cheap enough not to worry.
    Reply +4
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2017

    @nottorp

    You should give XCOM2 a go if you see it cheap. The turn limits actually work pretty well, and they also fixed the class balance so it wasn't all about the snipers any more. I enjoyed it a lot more than XCOM.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 26/04/2017

    @Binba442

    What differentiates this from something eg. Xenonauts?
    The same thing that differentiates the next Song of Ice and Fire book written by George RR Martin from the billions of words of Game of Thrones fan fiction not written by George RR Martin.
    Reply +8
  • Older iPhone, iPad games now warn they'll soon become obsolete

  • PlugMonkey 11/04/2017

    @Zerobob

    Sounds like I made the right decision buying FTL for my Mac and not buying an iPad to game on.
    Noop. Assuming they don't patch it anyway, my iPad can stay on it's current OS for the rest of time and will still be well worth the investment for FTL alone.

    My god, the journeys that game has made disappear! It's 2nd only to being drugged unconscious on departure and revived at the other end. I already had it on PC and rebuying it on iPad is possibly the single best gaming purchase I have ever made.
    Reply 0
  • Hands on with Volition's Saints Row spin-off

  • PlugMonkey 04/04/2017

    @its-ruiN

    If you look on Metacritic, the last two Saints Rows were already 'polarizingly mediocre'.

    Strong flavours are never to everyone's taste.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 03/04/2017

    RPS have a slightly more positive take on it. Reply +3
  • Mass Effect Andromeda is another failure for trans representation

  • PlugMonkey 31/03/2017

    @dansword

    Cor! You're late to the party! Welcome!

    Diversity for its own sake is not art. That is how it's a bad thing.
    I'm not asking for diversity for it's own sake, I'm asking for diversity for the sake of diverse art.

    Diverse art is surely inherently more interesting than narrow, repetitive art. Now, there are obviously loads of ways of doing that, but drawing characters from a more diverse pool is certainly one of them.

    That's not propaganda.

    It's their over-representation in certain titles *cough cough Bioware* and the extremely hamfisted and overly explicit way they are handled.
    Yeah, that's my problem too. Well, more the 2nd bit that the 1st bit, which I don't think would be such a problem if the 2nd bit wasn't true.

    That 2nd bit is this article's author's problem as well. So if we all have the same problem, what's to fight over?
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @the-Uncle-show

    But cis doesn't mean straight. I could be cis and gay.
    Reply +1
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @Cassterix

    And if you are straight, cis and white, it's nicer to see characters drawn from a deeper pool than a shallower one.

    So again, how is diversity a bad thing?
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @remielpollard

    oh you want to make this about free speech?
    Lol. Nope.

    everyone has agendas, mate. everyone.
    Oh, good, a minute ago he didn't.

    Bye.

    Mate.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @remielpollard

    Yes, he did. He pushed the anti-SJW, gamergate, "no politics in games" agenda.

    they SEEK these 'transgressions' out just for the sake of having something to whine about in their boring little lives.
    You mean like you claiming a games journalist is "demonising" people when they've demonised no-one?

    Like him building a conspiracy of strawman 'SJWs'?

    Yeah.

    I'm going now.

    Bye.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @remielpollard

    I'm gonna make this real simple for you. REAL simple. I am my own person. If I suddenly realised needed to 'identify' with someone else in a video game for any reason, I'd seek a therapist.
    Oh, good. Of course, I never asked that, or suggested anything other to be the case, but thank you for making it REAL simple.

    No, 'minority' people shouldn't stick to playing 'minority-people-games'. What even are those?
    I've no idea, that was your suggestion. I just re-phrased it. People who want games with certain representations should play those games, you said. OK, I said, but those are Bioware games. After they play them, can they not comment on them?

    And that's where the footstomping begins
    How is me asking if you should be allowed to comment on how an autistic character is represented "foot stomping" and you shouting at me about how simple you're going to make things not foot stomping?

    I never said you'd care, I asked if you should be allowed to comment on it. Which you are doing, so I guess that answers the question. Or are people only allowed to comment (loudly and with much foot stomping) if they don't care but not if they do?

    It's a system I suppose.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @peytonlind

    Oh how I miss the old school days of gaming when I didn't have SJWs pushing their whining and agendas in my face
    He said, pushing his whining agenda in my face.

    Yeah, I miss those days too.
    Reply -3
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @remielpollard

    The game's job is to entertain. One of the ways it tries to do that is by creating characters believable enough for us to care about their problems.

    This game has an unbelievable trans character that it is therefore very hard to care about. This is the game failing at its job.

    Above we have a critic critiquing the game for failing at its job, and drawing on their personal experience to explain why - in their opinion - it fails. That's their job.

    Who is 'foot stomping'?

    Who is 'demanding'?

    Who is being 'demonised'?

    If there are games that achieve the 'representation' that you want, and that is your criteria for a game that you like, then play those.
    Bioware games, you mean?

    So, minority and pro-minority people should stick to playing minority-people-games, but if they play one and don't think it did it very well, they also have to keep quiet about it?

    Now it is you who is asking too much.

    Edit for your edit: And what if a game included an autistic character that you thought was wildly off base? It should be okay for you - or anyone else - to comment on it, shouldn't it?
    Reply -3
  • PlugMonkey 29/03/2017

    @wooferz

    He says, not giving the identity politics a fucking rest.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @williamarthurfenton

    The actions they took, the way they took them, their motive for doing them, their philosophy of life etc. etc.. It feels like we're arguing at cross purposes, or at least with a very different definition of 'personality'.

    A white Muhammad Ali would literally not have been 'Muhammad Ali'. Literally. He would never have had that defining moment of rebirth when he rejected his 'slave name'.

    He's on record as being driven to be a champion for black people. Had he not been black, he would have needed a very different drive. Maybe he still succeeds, but not in the same way.

    These things are parts of him that you can't remove and keep the same person, just like he wouldn't have been the same person if he hadn't been so pretty, or if he hadn't had the necessary physical attributes to be the greatest boxer in the world. They are necessary components for the personality that made him a legend.

    The difference between a male human and a female attacking a Krogan is minimal because both should lose horribly in equal conditions
    I don't think it is at all. A female human attacking a Krogan is unprecedented on a far greater level. Male Shepard's act could have got him killed. Female Shepard's act could have started a war destroying all of humanity, and Wrex's act of loyalty in that circumstance is far greater, and riskier, than if Shepard was at least a man.

    I can well imagine a crew of ten insecure vain arseholes with Napoleon complexes, with one of each race and sex represented.
    How many of them would be tall? ;)
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @Superabound

    Thats because it is not a true ideology with actual beliefs and principles, but rather a psychological pathology, a collective delusion built around receiving and doling out persecutions and counter-persecutions.
    No, it's not a real ideology. It's a made up ideology used as a strawman to argue with.

    And that indeed is a psychological pathology. A collective delusion built around receiving and doling out persecutions and counter-persecutions with an imaginary enemy.

    "A snake eating it's own tail" is spot on too. There are no 'SJWs' on this thread. No-one demanding more minorities in games in the name of social justice, but here you lot are to fight them anyway.

    Honestly, you're so close to seeing it that you're actually describing it and you still can't see it. It's weird.
    Reply +5
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @liammcnulty

    And what % of the population are moaning twats who use trite epithets like 'SJW' to complain about things that have literally no effect on them?

    And again, the irony of you taking this much offence at this harmless little article and then have the temerity to call other people 'snowflakes' remains priceless.

    It's humour value is only exceeded by your impending inability to see said irony.

    Edit: Which he then dutifully did. Bless him.
    Reply -1
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @williamarthurfenton

    Yes, I will acknowledge that re-reading your post, I did misinterpret much of what you said.

    However, my points still stand firm, just they shouldn't be applied to you entirely.
    Heh! The same was true of my reply to Malek, possibly going back in an unbroken chain to the dawn of the internet...

    My point is having a certain shade of skin, for example, isn't a meaningful contributing aspect to personality-- because of the clear fact that people from all backgrounds and circumstances have wildly varying personalities.
    That doesn't make sense. Being black didn't make Malcolm X, Muhammad Ali and Virgil Tibbs all have the same personality, but saying it didn't have a meaningful contribution to their personalities is bizarre. You couldn't write a white Virgil Tibbs and have him be the same character, just like you couldn't write a stupid or ugly or millennial Virgil Tibbs. They would all result in a different person.

    You're divorcing character and personality not just from other traits but the also the context they are set in and the conflicts they generate. Context and conflict is exactly what drives both.

    To bring this back round to Mass Effect, the male and female versions of Shepard say the exact same lines in the exact same scenes, but still end up being very different characters because the contexts and conflicts their different genders generate are also very different.

    A puny human male headbutting a Krogan on the nose is a pretty gutsy move, but a puny human female headbutting one is an act of almost insane bravado. Compared to him, she's off the scale.

    Then Wrex backs you up; in the one case showing that he values Shepard more highly than a young Krogan pup, and in the other case showing that he values her more highly than even their most deep seated patriarchal conventions. He, too, will do literally ANYTHING for her and for this mission.

    It's a better scene with a female lead than with a male lead, and THAT'S why it should have a female lead. Not for 'social justice' (whatever the hell that is), but because it's a better scene with much more going on.
    Reply 0
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @williamarthurfenton

    You seem to be magically disconnecting personality from physical traits and societal influences. As if you would be exactly the same person regardless of whether you were stupid or smart, ugly or pretty, rich or poor. You wouldn't be. You would have faced a substantially different set of challenges and opportunities to the ones that shaped you into who you are today. The same is also true of your gender, ethnicity, sexuality, and every other cumulative part of what makes you be you.

    Why explore characters with variations in the first set but not the second? That was all I asked. More diversity is more interesting. That's not to say that all black lesbians are the same - or are all 'quirkily' different - but then I never said all straight, white men were the same either.

    Why do you label me as labelling some of them as 'quirky', BTW? I'm just describing FOLK here. I never said anything remotely like that.

    Excuse me but my character is nothing like that of nearly all other white blokes.
    That is just stating the inverse of my original point, isn't it? Isn't me not being like all other white blokes entirely consistent with me not needing a character to be one to relate to them?

    I said 'diversity is interesting'. How is that the same as 'people with a couple of similarities are identical in all respects'?

    No wonder you find this mistake so common if you go around painting it on people for no good reason.
    Reply +3
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @Malek86

    That's a fair point.

    The thing is, I can see where they are coming from. If I was in a minority who never saw themselves reflected in our art in a way that demonstrates society recognises their existence, that's probably where I would focus too. It's something which I find hard to imagine, to be honest.

    We still shouldn't be carrying that argument on as 'minority characters for minority players' though. The author is right. This IS a failure for trans representation because it's clumsy and ill conceived and detracts rather than adds to the character's believability and depth.
    Reply -2
  • PlugMonkey 28/03/2017

    @Malek86

    When people started asking for more women in main character roles, their argument usually was that just as many women played games as men. I really doubt you can say that about trans people, who are a minority indeed. Having a trans main character would make it easier for them relate, but also risk making it harder for the rest of the players base.
    That's a terrible reason, imho.

    FemShep was a massive breath of fresh air because I was (and still am) bored of playing close cropped white male dudebros.

    I'm not bored of those characters because of my achingly hip gender politics, but because I've seen them a thousand times.

    I don't need someone to be just like me to be able to relate to them. I need them to be a bit fresh and new and different to engage my interest. I need them to be well rounded, which is to say that they have a lot going on in their lives, which is to say that they are diverse - both as individuals and within the range of the full cast.

    This entire argument is permanently on its head. Diversity isn't about inclusion, it's about diversity. The more diverse our characters, the more interesting our fiction. The fact that it also allows people to see themselves reflected in our art in a way that demonstrates society acknowledges their existence is merely a happy bonus.

    You can argue that entertainment would benefit from being less political, but you can't argue that entertainment would benefit from being less diverse. Who in their right mind wants to see the same characters over and over and over again?
    Reply +6