|
I've been enjoying the videos, and I remember enjoying the bit of the game I played with my brother. However, some of your analyses fall flat. The ISA Logo stuff is an interesting take, but the "greatest hits of WWII" needs more personal insight. With the amount of WWII subject matter inundating every form of media, especially when it comes to FPS from around this era, what is the significance of Killzone reminding us of the war? Movies such as Saving Private Ryan, shows such as Band of Brothers, and video games such as Medal of Honor have already become an established part of the player's pop culture. Are we, as the player, supposed to draw upon our meta-textual knowledge of WWII and apply that to what we have seen in the game? Is this so that even if we don't fully understand the universal causes of KZ's ware we can still sympathize with fictional characters, to understand the scale of war, or to understand (or trick us into thinking) that sometimes bad guys are just bad? All of this is positive for KZ, except that just leaves the negative. With all the praise that the analysis has been giving, the thread would be remiss without some scoffing. The usage of meta-textual knowledge could be smart, but it could also be lazy. The idea of fighting space Nazis in a space WWII appears to be a well-used video game cliché repackaged. The developers could have taken a popular formula (WWII era FPS) that would have been an easy cash-grab and "prettied" it up to separate it from the rest. A lot of the changes sit on the surface of the game, but never penetrate the plot or story enough to really test the limits of the genre. While most players see this as just another Call of Duty or Medal of Honor with a sci-fi setting, the developers try to tell that they are wrong, and that this game is more than the common FPS's that have been flooding the market. Also, and this is something I don't suggest, you could probably go into all sorts of Jungian ramblings about the number three.
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 14:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 04:59 |
|
|
Blind Sally posted:And holy crap, this wound up being a much longer response than I intended. Uh, how'd I do? You answered the questions I had. Since I never played any of the sequels, I will be interested to see how the idea of meta-textuality will apply to them, especially since, judging by what you said, that seems to be one of the aspects that discerns this series from other FPS's.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Neruz posted:Some of that is probably from publishers going "no it needs to be more like Call of Duty" or something to that effect; forcing the devs to 'genericify' the good guys but not caring about whether the bad guys are deep or interesting so long as they look evil. So the devs can probably get away with a lot more storytelling with the Helghast because they're the antagonists. It might also be that bad guys need more of a reason to be bad. The good guys always have a fundamental sense of duty and honor, the definitions of which are deeply ingrained in the player. They do what they do because it is the right thing to do and the player doesn't need any convincing. Where as the bad guys need a reason to be bad. If they are bad just because it is sometimes part of human nature to be bad, then the entire Helghast population is turned into psychopaths.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
The melee not being a one-hit kill is one of those details that should bother me but it doesn't. I understand the game nature of melee attacks as part of a risk/reward system (the risk of getting close is higher than hiding behind cover so, naturally, the reward should be higher), however you are just punching someone who does seem to be wearing a pretty boss helmet.
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Having certain characters better with certain weapons is one of those gameplay decisions that looks and sounds good at first. It would cause players to strategize with their ammo so that they are thrust into a large fight with only a "bad" gun; it would give the players a reason to try multiple playthroughs; it would also direct players into the play style that best fits them. Plus, it is a departure for an FPS protagonist to not be the most proficient in every weapon in the arsenal, but not all that unrealistic. Maybe if the game's controls weren't so clunky to begin with. Also, wow, General Anime is pretty generally designed. All he's missing is a gold earring that can shimmer the next time he talks about a higher power as a threat.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
I wonder if Rico's "assassin" line isn't just that he is a brute and that his style of operation is at the opposite end of the spectrum, but that assassination is not honorable. He took on a large number of Helghast in open combat by himself. Even though he did somewhat sneak up on them, he announced his presence by yelling. For him, combat could be the chance for individuals to show off the true extent of their might; if two men engage in fair play, the winner will be the more skillful, more competent. Combat is effectively an extension of a social system with unsaid rules that should be followed by all those wishing to engage in the system. Assassins represent the unfair, almost deconstructive, side of the combat system. With assassins on the field, combat is no longer bound by rules and conditions. I think this mindset would fit for someone who comes from a large family that would have probably been highly structured with superiority done by age. The oldest sibling would always be the oldest and therefore would have an automatic and permanent (until death) position above the others. Also, man, that dialogue between Jan and Luger sure was awkward. Though I can't be too bothered by the awkwardness since, judging by Jan's reactions, it was intentional. However, one thing you skipped over, and one thing I never like about this kind of dialogue, is that Luger's half falls into cliché. Her being up front with "asking if I got laid" response is meant to show that she is able to engage in "guy talk" just like any other soldier. She is not limited by her gender and actually probably exceeds other male soldiers. I don't pretend to know the male to female ratio in fictional Killzone army, but I'm guessing that the majority of soldiers are male. With this in mind she has to remain strong-willed and can't show weakness. All of this is fine. What I don't like about the exchange is that it is a clichéd way of showing a strong female character. It is a paint-by-the-numbers way of establishing that the character is operating, with success, in a field that is naturally assumed to be opposing her. Luger and Jan's conversation could've come from any exchange of ex's having to work together.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 02:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 04:59 |
|
|
And Don Quixote has a whole chapter devoted to Sancho pooping in bed.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2014 03:26
|
|