Loading... hold tight!
I'm all for fighting the good fight, but this isn't one of those times.
The original comment didn't suggest it as less prevalent in the East. You've read that into the comment yourself. The opinion expressed about the West being cybernised is completely independent of whatever is happening elsewhere.
Your interpretation of the article and subsequent replies is definitely up the swanny here.
The protagonist is a white American male soldier, the antagonist is a white American businessman, a significant proportion of the cast are white English-speaking Westerners, and the plot is chiefly concerned with threats to the USA, the USA's military-industrial complex and the USA's status as self-proclaimed head of the global order. If you want a longer analysis, I'll have to see if I can pitch one! Of course there are the usual sops to other nationalities and cultures – see also, Hollywood action movies - but to suggest that it is simply invalid to look at the game (not exclusively!) in the context of the capitalist west is silly.
It is an American-made game for an audience that consists overwhelmingly of Americans and Europeans.
I would argue that the difference between “glamourising” and “implying the West is technologically ahead of the rest of the world” is negligible here.
Glamourise - to look upon or depict as glamorous : romanticize
Had I portrayed the west as more technologically advanced, this would not be the same as claiming that the west is in some way superior, because, amongst other things, the article describes the technology in question as a dangerous force.
In my experience, one's “times” are partly the product of one's specific geographical circumstances, and in this case, the game is strongly focused on the US. Of course the topic is bigger than one country, but the object of discussion here is a game with a specific cultural orientation.
I strongly disagree with your reading of the piece, and I feel many of your follow-up points are clutching at straws, but I'm grateful that you took the time to defend your position. All best, genuinely.
No, Sledgehammer made a game about white American men waging war across the globe on behalf of US strategic and corporate interest.
Please, let's not try to recast Advanced Warfare as some sort of uber-cosmopolitan project for the sake of having the last word in a comments thread. It is an American-made game for an audience that consists overwhelmingly of Americans and Europeans.
And again, to claim a greater "prevalence" of certain products in one region (which I wasn't!) is not the same thing as stating that one culture is superior to another.
I'm sorry to hear you've been subject to this kind of snobbery, and I apologise if you feel slighted here, but I think you are projecting an *enormous* amount onto a fairly innocuous sentence.
The sentence you quote describes the society you accuse me of glamourising as "inglorious". I have no idea how you're getting from all that to some kind of racist manifesto.
If you don't like the way I write, by all means give me some criticism I can work with
I singled out the west in this para because that's where Sledgehammer is based.
how you'd get from an observation that certain products are more prevalent in some regions than others to outright racism escapes me.
As the rest of the article makes plain, I'm very ambivalent about this kind of technology, and I don't regard access to it as some kind of mark of cultural superiority.
...and speaks to how we inglorious denizens of the 21st century have grown accustomed to cybernetic prosthetics and peripherals in daily life...
Sledgehammer's series debut both follows on from the brilliant Dead Space, in which every menu is a delightful hologram emitted by Isaac Clarke's vacuum suit, and speaks to how we inglorious denizens of the capitalist west have grown accustomed to cybernetic prosthetics and peripherals in daily life - from actual, commercially available exoskeletons such as the US-made $77,000 ReWalk, to touchscreen watches equipped with performance monitors that look disturbingly like XP wheels.
@spamdangled as Gareth says in the article, this wasn't particularly well communicated. I didn't know this, and I consider myself pretty well informed. Also I saw plenty of people asking about destruction following the E3 showing last week.
Until Dawn developer Supermassive Games is releasing its second Until Dawn VR spin-off. This time it's a prequel called The Inpatient.
Lastly, I recommend multiplatform for everyone. That way you can play whatever you want, no struggles with that painful cognitive dissonance about good games on "rival" platforms.
Of all the gaming systems I own, PC gaming is by far the fastest to start and, more importantly, the fastest to load sections of the game and load saves.
Remind us again how much time some current-gen console games require to actually start up and then load saved games. Or does that aspect conveniently not matter in your one-policy tone?
Yes everyone is aware of the difference between subjective and objective, but no Britney Spears is not as good as Mozart, despite that being an instance of the former.
Not all opinions are created equally. You are entitled to prefer Britney Spears to Mozart but unless you have a compelling counter case the argument underlying the contrary is more compelling.
There are some artifacts indicating quality, e.g. Metacritic scores, which I would be confident support the conclusion that PS4 have far more exclusives over the 80 point category than the XB1.
I've owned all 3 Xboxes, and the PS4 is my first Sony console, and I use my Xbox for cross-platform games, but I cannot see any compelling argument, subjective or otherwise, to overcome the evidence that the PS4 has had considerably more success with console exclusives.
Skyrim, Fallout 3, Infamous 2