|
Arglebargle III posted:I think this is a pretty unfair. The player can react naturally to a scene without having delusions of being a "super-awesome space knight." The player is genre-aware, and knows that, for example, Shepard and Garrus are going to wreck whatever NPCs are standing in their way, the villain is a jerk and/or doofus, and that comic relief characters exist to be comic relief. Garrus gets to voice these certainties. I'm not neccessarily saying it is a conscious thing, but I've noticed that a super common nerd power fantasy is basically being Garrus in various shapes and forms. I have my own opinions on why this might be but it is a surprisingly widespread theme and it crops up again and again in video games and movies; the characters that nerds (and thus the people on the internet) like the most are the snarky ones who always have something witty and relevant to say and never take poo poo from anyone. There's nothing wrong about power fantasies by the way, enjoying them is a sign that you are a perfectly normal human being. I also don't mean to sound like Garrus is a bad character because he is a power fantasy; he's a fairly well written and well executed power fantasy and I give the writers credit for that but let's not pretend Garrus isn't what he is.
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 17:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
Garrus knows exactly how to calibrate my heart.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Neruz posted:I'm not neccessarily saying it is a conscious thing, but I've noticed that a super common nerd power fantasy is basically being Garrus in various shapes and forms. I have my own opinions on why this might be but it is a surprisingly widespread theme and it crops up again and again in video games and movies; the characters that nerds (and thus the people on the internet) like the most are the snarky ones who always have something witty and relevant to say and never take poo poo from anyone. He's somewhat like Shepard in that respect. Part of the appeal of Garrus overall isn't just Garrus's character, it's the idea of BEING Garrus's character.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
I would be willing to bet Garrus talks directly to other NPCs more often than other party members. Inside the first minute of the video he gets confrontational with Wreave. Now, maybe everyone would have a line there just to maintain the conversation's continuity, but I think Garrus does take a more confrontational tone with NPCs more often than other party members and that makes him similar to the PC in yet another way.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Neruz posted:power fantasy This is something that gets thrown around all the time, at science fiction especially. Could you explain how Garrus is a power fantasy, and how he could serve his role in the story without being a power fantasy? Or are we supposed to only consume fiction in which the protagonists are equal to or weaker than the reader? What if I'm in Afghanistan with the special forces and play Mass Effect 3 on my xbox 360 in my downtime. Is Garrus a power fantasy then?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Wait, did Lt. Danger do that LP of the weird Russian game about a bizarre dream world? I thought I recognized his voice. To avoid quadruple-posting, I really hope you have the Leviathan DLC and are going to play through it, because without it the game has much less of the theme you're interested in. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 18:20 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
No, you're thinking about this. http://lparchive.org/The-Void/
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Let's talk about characters that challenge us - and those that don't. I agree with your assessment of Mordin, though. As for Eve, I think what's perhaps more crucial is not so much her seemingly passive role as the fact that she is cast into the most fundamentally sexist role for any woman to play: that of existing specifically to create offspring. What complicates this, however, is that she's clearly highly intelligent and also very level-headed. What complicates it further is that she voluntarily chose this role, by initially allowing experiments to be performed on her in the hopes of curing the genophage. Her being unable to take control of her own life at this point, in my opinion, is secondary to the fact that everyone - Shepard included - ends up treating her like a baby-making machine. That's Eve's sole reason for being, and regardless of BioWare's intentions, that is (or should be) a highly challenging issue. EDIT: In light of the above, I actually think "Eve" is the best name they could've picked, as clichéd and obvious as it may be. After all, there's a strong case to be made for the biblical Eve being the most damning example of what are considered traditional gender roles and the role of having and raising children in particular. Eve is created after Adam, specifically for his benefit, is tasked with the responsibility of giving birth to children so that the species can survive, and is punished for her disobedience to God by being made to suffer excruciating pain in the process of giving birth. I can't think of any other name that better communicates the indignity of being defined by the ability to be fertilised and have children than Eve. Sombrerotron fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:This is something that gets thrown around all the time, at science fiction especially. Could you explain how Garrus is a power fantasy, and how he could serve his role in the story without being a power fantasy? Or are we supposed to only consume fiction in which the protagonists are equal to or weaker than the reader? What if I'm in Afghanistan with the special forces and play Mass Effect 3 on my xbox 360 in my downtime. Is Garrus a power fantasy then? He's not supposed to not be a power fantasy. Like Neruz said, there's nothing wrong with Garrus being like that. I'm just going to link a short article here, since this is a pretty common hangup that's likely to come up in discussions like this many times. Tropes Are Not Bad The tldr of it is, you can't think of descriptions like power fantasy as inherently negative. They are what they are, and all tropes may be used well or poorly. Montegoraon fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:36
|
|
|
I think part of Garrus' appeal is that it's just nice to have a character that trusts the player's motivations and goals without being self-serving or demanding. While it makes sense for NPCs to challenge players for the benefit of their own characterization, the player knows that they're pretty much unambiguously in the right at all times in these games and slogging through the suspicious or probing dialogue is fatiguing. ME2 was particularly annoying for this, especially with Tali and Ashley/Kaidan. If you're going to accept the idea that Shepard really was revived instead of being replaced by an imposter, as pretty much everyone seems to almost immediately, then there's no reason to question Shepard's motivations given the events of the story. "Cerberus could be behind these abductions" is probably one of the stupidest moments in this series, just purposefully dumb to generate false conflict for one of the games themes. A Curvy Goonette posted:No, you're thinking about this. "If you liked this thread, you might also enjoy 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand by Chip Cheezum."
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
oops
Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Montegoraon posted:The tldr of it is, you can't think of descriptions like power fantasy as inherently negative. They are what they are, and all tropes may be used well or poorly. So tell me this Neruz posted:Garrus is popular because he is well-written and snarky and nerds love well-written snarky characters because they like to imagine that is how they would sound if they were a super awesome space knight. doesn't come across as contemptuous.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:So tell me this It doesn't. Because I read to the end of the post. Neruz posted:There's nothing wrong about power fantasies by the way, enjoying them is a sign that you are a perfectly normal human being. I also don't mean to sound like Garrus is a bad character because he is a power fantasy; he's a fairly well written and well executed power fantasy and I give the writers credit for that but let's not pretend Garrus isn't what he is. e: And about the video, I disagree very strongly with the idea that Eve is presented as simply a baby making machine. Whether Shepard treats her like that is dependent entirely on how much time you spend talking to her. Even though her role happens largely off-screen, she acts as a political figure and leader, like the scene where she stops Wreav and Wrex from fighting and rallies the Krogan to attack the Shroud. And if she survives to the end, she has enough political clout to keep Wrex in check if necessary. So saying that she's passive just because she doesn't take part of the direct action is simply wrong.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:44
|
|
|
Sombrerotron posted:It's not a character you listed, or even appearing in ME3, but I can't help but comment on the fact that you put Sten in the same list as Morrigan, Canderous, HK-47, Edwin, Korgan and Wrex. It seems to me that Sten was anything but an immoral character, and that it's missing the point to stress that he doesn't understand our values. Fair point. It's a relative matter in any case - there are many parts of the Qun way of life your typical player would find objectionable, like the absence of freedoms, and there's a couple of parts in Dragon Age where Sten becomes confused or annoyed if the Warden doesn't take the most immediately expedient path (killing Connor vs. exorcising him). I list him alongside those other characters because like those other characters, Sten doesn't tend to object to 'evil path' options. That makes him part of the 'evil' roster, even if he's quite strongly moral - same as Mordin. You're definitely right that's Sten's a very strong challenge to the player. He even defies the basic expectations of the companion dialogue tree with his aloofness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 18:51
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:Fair point. It's a relative matter in any case - there are many parts of the Qun way of life your typical player would find objectionable, like the absence of freedoms, and there's a couple of parts in Dragon Age where Sten becomes confused or annoyed if the Warden doesn't take the most immediately expedient path (killing Connor vs. exorcising him). Sten is challenging in the same way Morrigan is challenging. He annoys you a couple of times with his stupid counter-productive bullshit and gets benched in favor of the dog.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 19:03
|
|
|
Montegoraon posted:e: And about the video, I disagree very strongly with the idea that Eve is presented as simply a baby making machine. Whether Shepard treats her like that is dependent entirely on how much time you spend talking to her. Even though her role happens largely off-screen, she acts as a political figure and leader, like the scene where she stops Wreav and Wrex from fighting and rallies the Krogan to attack the Shroud. And if she survives to the end, she has enough political clout to keep Wrex in check if necessary. So saying that she's passive just because she doesn't take part of the direct action is simply wrong. Not sure if you're talking to me there. This is why I don't want to dismiss Eve as just another damsel in distress - or for that matter another unrealistic Strong Female Character. She's a victim of salarian paternalism and Wreav's domineering (although Wrex treats her a lot better) but she's also aware of her plight and struggles against it, and exercised her own agency long before the experiments when she chose to become a shaman. It's recursive - the game presents her as being presented as a baby-making machine and disapproves. My question is, is this right? I mean, we're willing to have Shepard be our power fantasy, and Garrus/EDI/Tali feed into that, but the only krogan female we see, one of the major female characters, has to be even partly a victim? (I think it's okay, for the record. There's always female Shepard, and Liara's not too bad at this point in the series, so maybe there's room to tackle this kind of issue. But I thought it was worthy of discussion.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Montegoraon posted:e: And about the video, I disagree very strongly with the idea that Eve is presented as simply a baby making machine. Whether Shepard treats her like that is dependent entirely on how much time you spend talking to her. Even though her role happens largely off-screen, she acts as a political figure and leader, like the scene where she stops Wreav and Wrex from fighting and rallies the Krogan to attack the Shroud. And if she survives to the end, she has enough political clout to keep Wrex in check if necessary. So saying that she's passive just because she doesn't take part of the direct action is simply wrong. Put differently: Eve proves her worth and strength in the course of the Tuchanka story arc, and succeeds in becoming something more than merely a fertile krogan woman, but that is not how she is initially presented at all. Lt. Danger posted:Fair point. It's a relative matter in any case - there are many parts of the Qun way of life your typical player would find objectionable, like the absence of freedoms, and there's a couple of parts in Dragon Age where Sten becomes confused or annoyed if the Warden doesn't take the most immediately expedient path (killing Connor vs. exorcising him). EDIT: Lt. Danger posted:It's recursive - the game presents her as being presented as a baby-making machine and disapproves. My question is, is this right? I mean, we're willing to have Shepard be our power fantasy, and Garrus/EDI/Tali feed into that, but the only krogan female we see, one of the major female characters, has to be even partly a victim? Sombrerotron fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 19:07
|
|
|
There's one scene with Mordin in this game that is my favorite moment in the series. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out with Wiks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
All right, so. Wrex. Shepard. Now comes the time to talk (start talking about?) about why people consider his absence to be the "wrong" choice. Beyond personal attachment (which the series as a whole sort of has as a staple, all things considered), there's the issue of choice and knowledge of the consequences. It's more than everyone's crazy headbutting uncle being dead, it's that they see what the alternative is: Wreav. Unlike Wrex, Wreav never really left Turchanka to go exploring/merc-ing his way across the galaxy like Wrex did, never got the grander perspective on both his own species and the aliens that Wrex got, and more importantly, never got the personal connection with and respect of Shepard/the player that Wrex earned. And all this leads up to Wreav being a "typical" krogan. He isn't really in this for the sake of the galaxy or even the krogan, he's in this for himself and clan Urdnot's rise to power. He wants a legacy, he wants power, and he wants everyone else in his debt. His dialogue with other characters, his treatment of "Eve", everything points to him being... well, in the long term, potentially dangerous as the "face" of the krogan. He's a bad choice. Unlike Wreav, Wrex is a radical, and thanks to Shepard's influence has a sense of restored idealism and grander perspective. Wrex doesn't want the krogan to dominate the galaxy as top dogs, he knows that they can't, not without a repeat of the Rebellions. Wrex is willing to change the very culture of the krogans to make sure that doesn't happen. Wrex has friends and allies and while not exactly on best terms with the rest of the species has a sense of respect towards them. Even the difference between his treatment of "Eve", where Wrex's actively worried about her, personally, compared to Wreav's "SHE'S MINE, STEP AWAY." Wrex, to the player, isn't potentially dangerous. He's the better choice as leader of the krogan. This may be on a meta level but I'd say that's exactly why people would choose Wrex over Wreav, consider Wrex's absence to be "wrong." It is, on a meta level, a failure that stays with the player until the end. You made a choice and you chose wrong. It will happen to a number of other characters/choices later on in the game, but none to the same degree, I'd say. One of them is Maleon's cure data. You're already seeing the difference between Eve's health in the related video. You have, on a meta level, the hindsight/foresight of making a potentially wrong choice. I'm also surprised you didn't mention Morinth, my personal second most reviled character in the entire Mass Effect franchise, among the "obviously evil" characters there, Lt. Danger. Unless there's something you have to show later down the line for it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
^^^^ ayagree Watching the video I'm again reminded of how unconnected the Crucible is to Shepard's actions. Shepard brings it up apropos of nothing. It's not related to what Shepard just did except in that both things are related to the war. Then after about 60 seconds of Crucible-looking-at, the game goes right back to the totally unrelated plot. Joker's fourth-wall breaking is amusing. The heroes' plans are meaningless, the actual resolution is much closer to "time travel or teaching the Reapers to love" and Padok Wik is not-Mordin as far as most players are concerned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:
I'd take issue with the characterization of Mordin in the video. He's not Mengele, at any point. Mordin's approach is that of the pragmatist, it's almost his one defining feature. It somewhat confuses matters, to be fair, that across the series there seems to be some back-and-forth in terms of the plot as to whether the genophage is a slow-burn genocide or simply a form of population control. It's suggested at some points that it wasn't meant as a genocide but that the Krogan can't arrange proper breeding practices to maintain a stable population (Wrex, ME1); but Wreav suggests in the video that they do have a breeding plan and are still dying off; yet Mordin explains in ME2 how he recoded the genophage while with STG to stabilise a population that had started to increase again due to evolved immunity. It's a hot mess and maybe it's not something they actually needed to resolve as part of ME3. Without wanting to spoil anything from the Tuchanka arc, though, the same "pragmatism vs objective morality" questions will ultimately be put the player. Without the genophage, there becomes a real threat that the Krogan population will quickly exceed a level where the rest of the galaxy would be able to protect themselves against Krogan aggression. The story that's told with Mordin in that regard ultimately ends with him making some form of decision on the basis, again, of pragmatism. In many ways, he's actually one of the most consistently written characters across ME2 and ME3. With Eve, I think I've already staked out my ground in terms of video game feminism ("an awful thing for awful people"), so I'm probably not going to introduce anything revolutionary on the topic, but I think you have to reach a lot to see her as symbolic of anything other than the requirements of the character that she's forced to be. She's written as something of a counterfoil to Wrex and Wreav. In order for her to be not completely overawed by the intensity of those two characters, you have to make her very strong and intense but in a completely different way, hence the final character that we're presented with. Similarly, I think the way she's dressed has most to do with the idea of the character designers sitting down for lunch and desperately trying to create a toadmonster-thing that is visibly feminine from a human perspective, without it just being Wrex with lipstick and a beauty spot. Presumably they then got to dessert and decided, "gently caress it, just put her in a niqab and we'll go get high and watch hockey". Garrus is quite complex by contrast, because I think if you'd introduced him at this point in the story, he'd be another Vega or Cortez and largely get relegated to the background. As you mentioned in a previous video, if he's a self-insert character, then Vega has roughly the same purpose and was explicitly designed as such. Garrus is a consistently friendly face across all three games, with no underlying agenda, and I think people warm to him on that basis. Where most of the characters you're introduced to are portrayed as having complex moral backgrounds, Garrus is written as the classic good guy character, his revenge arc in ME2 aside. He doesn't fight with Shepard because he's waiting for a favour, or because he owes one, he fights with Shepard because *somebody* has to save the universe from the bad guys. Hence why when Shepard dies, he basically does the exact same thing on Omega. I don't think that would mesh if you want to then reduce him to Birdface Waylon Smithers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
StrifeHira posted:All right, so. I both agree and disagree, but I'll save it for the Tuchanka mission proper. I left out Morinth because I forgot about her - I largely think of her as just an adjunct to Samara anyway. She's important thematically on a couple of levels, but for what she represents, not so much as a character in herself.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:27
|
|
|
Morinth represents the gay menace. This is actually pretty hard to escape, hilarious and unintentional as it may be.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:30
|
|
|
Oh my god you're right.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:36
|
|
|
Lt. Danger posted:I both agree and disagree, but I'll save it for the Tuchanka mission proper. And that's one big issue I have with her. The choice to let her live tries to pretend she's a character on the level of Samara, when she really isn't. Morinth is an unrepentant monster that makes it abundantly clear that she literally wants to kill Shepard and gently caress her corpse. She doesn't even help Shepard in any regard in ME3 if that doesn't happen. She's one-note and Samara herself bluntly explains that note to Shepard; while Morinth may have a supposedly tragic backstory there's not a single thing about her that's sympathetic. The game is so abundantly clear that letting Morinth live is one of those "wrong choices." Arglebargle III posted:Morinth represents the gay menace. This is actually pretty hard to escape, hilarious and unintentional as it may be. And... that's the other big issue I have with her. The implications you can draw from her and the Adrat-Yakshi in general. They most certainly weren't intentional (I'd hope) but... wow can you see it if you think about it. They're either forced to spend their entire lives in monasteries deprived of any romantic involvement in the slightest, or they turn into unrepentant space vampires who exist only to feed their lusts. You can probably guess why I'd have issues with that kind of thing because of my own orientation, unintentional as it may be. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I'd recommend those unfamiliar with it to look up the earlier part of the mission involving Morinth, especially the part about Nef and her mother.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
Wow, I mean, it is pretty incontrovertible when you think about it, but wow.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Morinth represents the gay menace. This is actually pretty hard to escape, hilarious and unintentional as it may be. I'm slowly starting to believe the only reason Bioware's writers have a reputation as liberal minded is because everyone is misunderstanding what is essentially their glorified lesbian porn.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
StrifeHira posted:And... that's the other big issue I have with her. The implications you can draw from her and the Adrat-Yakshi in general. They most certainly weren't intentional (I'd hope) but... wow can you see it if you think about it. They're either forced to spend their entire lives in monasteries deprived of any romantic involvement in the slightest, or they turn into unrepentant space vampires who exist only to feed their lusts. You can probably guess why I'd have issues with that kind of thing because of my own orientation, unintentional as it may be. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I'd recommend those unfamiliar with it to look up the earlier part of the mission involving Morinth, especially the part about Nef and her mother.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Sombrerotron posted:It seems to me that, functionally (as it were), the Ardat-Yakshi are more like child molestors. Of course, it must be admitted that homosexuality and pedophilia are often conflated, so I can see how the Jack-Chick-tract-reading type would be quick and keen to identify Morinth as representative of lesbian women in general. Honestly, though, the entire asari species is rather problematic to begin with in that respect. Here's the point that drives it home: Nef. You really start to see the implications there talking to the girl's mom and seeing her diary. So... yeah. Different subject before I start frothing at the mouth over this, the other ME2 character whose name beings with "Mor-". Mordin was probably my second favorite character in ME2 and sadly the only death in my first playthrough, so I got to see Wiks' actions before I got to see Mordin's actions in the game. I'm actually OK with Wiks as a character, even if he has shades of "what 'Hollywood' understands about scientists" in regards to his science, but I think he did his job fairly well. I still personally prefer Mordin over him and sort of like his end being the more ironic one of the two, curing the thing he re-engineered due to what he says is a change in circumstances surrounding it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 21:35
|
|
|
I enjoyed that video but do take issue with a couple things. You said you killed off Mordin because he changed and you didn't like the change. Right before this you said that Mordin was the best character because he wasn't black and white. What you seem to be saying is he is a great character for the exact reason you chose not to have him around. So what is it? Also, it's obvious, I think, where you are headed with this now, but is this just for the game, or do you actually believe there is no fundamental difference between something animated with life and something animated with electricity?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 21:46
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:Also, it's obvious, I think, where you are headed with this now, but is this just for the game, or do you actually believe there is no fundamental difference between something animated with life and something animated with electricity? Do you think you're not animated by electricity? How are you even defining "animated by life" in this context?
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 22:18
|
|
|
I'd never actually played/seen/done anything Mass Effect (or any Bioware games for that matter) before watching your videos. I'd heard a lot of negative stuff being said about the third game and there being as well as there being a particular brand of Bioware writing that is hackneyed and melodramatic. Maybe it's because I've never played the games and come to this with fresh eyes but I'm hugely impressed with the way the Krogan female was dealt with in that video. There's a clumsy and pawwing way that writers try to redeem misogyny by making a particular character badass. You're all familiar with what that entails: kung-fu flipping around and giving an acceptable (not too much and never on a serious issue) amount of lip to the male characters. It's a terrible way of depicting the structural and societal factors and incentives that prop up misogyny, because it transforms a problem in the fabric of society that affects all women to a problem of individual women just needing to try that much harder to be equals. It ignores the real brutality of misogyny. That scene where she shotguns the two jerks aside, there's a definite feeling that no matter what happens the Krogan female will more or less continue to be the plaything of Wreav, Shepherd and the Salarian scientists. No act of combat prowess is going to change where she's embedded in Krogan society. So how then to make her an interesting or powerful character? I think Bioware takes a good approach. Make her deeply, intuitively aware of the hypocrisy and empty rhetoric that goes into her subjugation and calling the male characters on their poo poo. It's not redemptive, but she is powerful without stretching into incredulity. I actually like the name Eve, maybe for a reason that wasn't intended in the game. Krogan female chooses not to reveal her name because of a decision to surrender it to the females of her clan, so she has a name imposed upon her by the men operating on her anyway. The name is historically associated with evil female sexuality. It's not a particularly apt choice and it's not one the female Krogan'd probably choose herself but it's what she ends up being called. Independent of that, the beats and delivery in that last conversation about Krogan mating were fantastic as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 22:20
|
|
|
Waltzing Along posted:You said you killed off Mordin because he changed and you didn't like the change. Right before this you said that Mordin was the best character because he wasn't black and white. I don't really understand your line of reasoning here. Lots of characters aren't black and white. Wrex is not black and white, Sten is not black and white. That's not why Mordin is the best character. Mordin in ME2 is the best character because it's probably the only time Bioware has written anything with subtlety or nuance. Mordin legitimately advances a considered and coherent argument for involuntary abortions for an entire species. This is cool writing because:
Plus the usual technical stuff - the instantly-recognisable writing 'voice', the use and re-use of specific phrases in different situations to mean different things (how many times have we heard "somebody else might have gotten it wrong?"). Mordin in ME3 is a different character - not in the sense that he's abruptly changed into someone else, but in how he fulfils a different function. He's a redemption-seeker and sacrificial lamb. It's not bad or wrong, it still works and works well for a lot of players, but it's not something that I like as much, and a lot of this ties into why Wrex is dead in this playthrough as well. But I haven't killed anyone off because I don't like them. The two are wholly separate and it's something I'd like to comment on more when I meet Jack. There's more I'd like to say on Mordin and this issue when we get to Tuchanka. quote:animated with life lol
|
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 22:32
|
|
|
StrifeHira posted:Here's the point that drives it home: Nef. You really start to see the implications there talking to the girl's mom and seeing her diary. I see Morinth as a predator in general, not any sort of statement about homo or heterosexuality. Nef may have been discovering her sexuality, but nothing says she was wrong for being with a woman. Just for that one particular woman exploiting whatever vulnerability she could find in the girl to secure another victim. Morinth isn't that picky, she's equal opportunity gender-wise when hunting for new toys. It's the domination and control she gets off on, not the sex itself. Now if they said Nef left a boyfriend presented as "perfect" for her or something, I could understand your point. Without that, I just see how the kid was an easy target for this particular serial killer. Edit: I do agree about why Mordin works well. His main issue comes from a morally questionable, but potentially necessary forced sterilization on an entire species. What really makes it work is that it is applied to the krogan: a race that does present a very real threat, especially if they return to their ridiculous birth rates, but remains just barely sympathetic enough to make you question the necessity of situation. Geostomp fucked around with this message at 23:01 on Aug 6, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 6, 2014 22:57
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:I see Morinth as a predator in general, not any sort of statement about homo or heterosexuality. Nef may have been discovering her sexuality, but nothing says she was wrong for being with a woman. Just for that one particular woman exploiting whatever vulnerability she could find in the girl to secure another victim. Morinth isn't that picky, she's equal opportunity gender-wise when hunting for new toys. It's the domination and control she gets off on, not the sex itself. That's why we know it isn't intentional. It's not really some Jack Chick message on how the gays are evil and also servants of the Pope (who is also pagan and responsible for D&D and tummy-aches etc). If it were it would be more... blunt, given Bioware's track record. It's the unfortunate implications one can draw from the scene. Shy, young, artistic girl who is slightly uncomfortable about her orientation (be it homosexual or xenophile or whatever) gets seduced by an older woman who drags her into clubbing, drugs, and promises of sex. Girl ends up spending all her free time with woman, is obsessed with her. Eventually ends up murdered by the sex itself. Morinth is most certainly just supposed to be a Space Vampire, and while Carmilla she is not, you think about it for a while and you start to realize how it can be taken.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:07
|
|
|
Mordin, at least, keeps it real. Wrex, Eve, or both of them together are important ingredients in this situation. A pair of leaders of messianic stature, who would be able to keep the Krogan from expanding unchecked. Without them, it's much more risky. That's why if they're both dead you can talk him out of it. So he hasn't lost his pragmatic understanding, he's just trying something new. Now, the optimal solution to this situation in terms of war asset points is to have Wrex dead, Eve alive, and shoot Mordin. It's a good thing reaching the limit of the assets you need is so incredibly easy. That's really the gameplay element that bugged me most. Unless you're incredibly lazy and don't do the missions and the scouting, you can't actually fail to get most of the war assets you need. And another thing. The assets really ought to have been divvied up into Sword (ships), Hammer (ground forces), and Crucible divisions. Considering the galactic situation, I'd've liked to have seen a system where the more Crucible assets you acquire, the faster the weapon gets built, with Sword and Hammer assets getting slowly whittled down with each mission you do, so you actually do need to get those assets early unless you're on a pretty much perfect run. That would make the Dalatrass's deal an awful lot more appealing in regards to the "hard choices" theme they try to have. But that's just my opinion, so never mind.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:27
|
|
|
I like that Joker says what we are all thinking. Not-Mordin indeed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Morinth is better read as an attachment to Asari culture as a whole, as an Ardat-Yakshi rather than as an individual character. It's Bioware's "reasonable" conservativism: the Asari are portrayed as an entire race of Sex Positive strong female characters, who are, of course, sexually available and desirable to the rest of the universe (it's homage, or ironic, or lampshaded, whatever). This has to be paired with a warning. "Be Reasonable," Bioware says, "there are drawbacks to excess licentiousness!" Nef's story is basically a lurid, 50's "Your daughter and motorcycle clubs!" rather than just homosexuality (though certainly, homosexuality has been a major subject/association of such material). Things outside heteronormative values are acceptable and cool, but you can't go too far before Bioware yanks the rug out from under you. Merrill, for instance, is a variation on the theme, only hetero and looking from the opposite direction (the naive virgin rather than the seductive despoiler). I draw this distinction because I think Wrex and Wreav have a similar problem, though I can save that for later.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Precambrian posted:Morinth is better read as an attachment to Asari culture as a whole, as an Ardat-Yakshi rather than as an individual character. It's Bioware's "reasonable" conservativism: the Asari are portrayed as an entire race of Sex Positive strong female characters, who are, of course, sexually available and desirable to the rest of the universe (it's homage, or ironic, or lampshaded, whatever). This has to be paired with a warning. "Be Reasonable," Bioware says, "there are drawbacks to excess licentiousness!" Nef's story is basically a lurid, 50's "Your daughter and motorcycle clubs!" rather than just homosexuality (though certainly, homosexuality has been a major subject/association of such material). Things outside heteronormative values are acceptable and cool, but you can't go too far before Bioware yanks the rug out from under you. Merrill, for instance, is a variation on the theme, only hetero and looking from the opposite direction (the naive virgin rather than the seductive despoiler). I think you're reading way too much into it. I don't see that message in the Ardat-Yakshi at all. Not everything has to be a parallel to the real world. Sometimes aliens are meant to be just alien. For example, how purity is usually seen as a positive trait in human culture, but for Asari, calling someone pureblood is a terrible insult. Likewise, I don't see how Morinth is meant to be anything more than what she is portrayed as: a roving psychopath who seduces her victims and kills them in the course of her species' rather unusual style of sex. You can say that it speaks to an adult fear, of one's children meeting someone dangerous out in the world, but just because her killing method involves sex, that doesn't mean it's making a point about Asari sexual behaviors and attitudes in general.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:48 |
|
|
Montegoraon posted:I think you're reading way too much into it. I don't see that message in the Ardat-Yakshi at all. Not everything has to be a parallel to the real world. Sometimes aliens are meant to be just alien. For example, how purity is usually seen as a positive trait in human culture, but for Asari, calling someone pureblood is a terrible insult. Likewise, I don't see how Morinth is meant to be anything more than what she is portrayed as: a roving psychopath who seduces her victims and kills them in the course of her species' rather unusual style of sex. You can say that it speaks to an adult fear, of one's children meeting someone dangerous out in the world, but just because her killing method involves sex, that doesn't mean it's making a point about Asari sexual behaviors and attitudes in general. Eh, it's not deliberate 1:1 referencing. Bioware's just fairly conservative in its sexual politics while at the same time considering themselves fairly progressive, which is fairly common in contemporary conventions on human sexuality. The Asari, Morinth, etc. are a product of Bioware's worldview, so you get that cultural cache in what they consider moral/immoral. Your point on "purity" is kind of a weak one, since it's just wordgames. Ardat-Yakshi are still about sexual self-control, it's still about modesty, even if they made a shocking reversal in the terms. Even the Space Women from Planet Sex must have sexual prohibitions, and Morinth transgresses. She's a "Black Widow," a "vamp," a sexploitation archetype where a woman's voracious, predatory sexuality, often associated with a "degenerate" subculture or sexual identity, destroys her innocent lovers, drawn into a lurid web of sin. I have to add, Mass Effect is not a really good example of a series that has aliens who are particularly alien. Beyond being inspired by aliens from Star Trek and the like (which was all about the metaphor), they're all supposed to be highly recognizable just in terms of anatomy, but also personality and society, and their character arcs are usually morality plays that end in a "paragon" or "renegade" choice. The "weird" aliens are either side color or things to be shot. People like Legion because of how "alien" he is to the series, as a beep-boop robot, and even then, his plot involves him dealing with inexplicable human emotions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2014 03:51
|
|