Far Cry 3

[Thief]

When it comes to killing and being brutal in video-games, I find it no different than watching a film. Some people would argue that by pushing the buttons I'm directly causing enemy deaths, however, I'm just playing it out how the game was intended. If you stick my character in a room with a guy, him with a chainsaw and me with a gun, and if I don't shoot him the game ends, I'll shoot him. It's what I was intended to do. It's no different then pressing play on a DVD player. Some games will give me alternatives, other's won't. Sometimes I'll intentionally choose the brutal option but that is just me choosing to change what I consider fiction; even historical fiction is still fiction. When it comes down to it, games are stories that require input from the audience, yet they are still bound by the rules of the people who programmed it.

[Segata Sanshiro Jr.]

When it comes to killing and being brutal in video-games, I find it no different than watching a film. Some people would argue that by pushing the buttons I'm directly causing enemy deaths, however, I'm just playing it out how the game was intended. If you stick my character in a room with a guy, him with a chainsaw and me with a gun, and if I don't shoot him the game ends, I'll shoot him. It's what I was intended to do. It's no different then pressing play on a DVD player. Some games will give me alternatives, other's won't. Sometimes I'll intentionally choose the brutal option but that is just me choosing to change what I consider fiction; even historical fiction is still fiction. When it comes down to it, games are stories that require input from the audience, yet they are still bound by the rules of the people who programmed it.

But you're essentially saying you have no choice, which isn't true.

If you really wanted to keep from killing the person you'd stop playing.

We are only bound by the rules we choose to be bound by, saying we're anything but free is untrue.

Well... I'd say that while video games show those things, they occur in mostly action-type games which, moreso these days, follow narrative and directorial imprints set in television and movies.

We're getting into "why is killing appealing" or "why do we use stereotypes" but one tends to think that has a very deep root that probably comes from the need of assertiveness and cultural and visual identification that is probably picked up, even if unconsciously, from the first interactions with a world, as you associate with what's near you, common and familiar and distrust what's different. Only later can you be taught otherwise, even though intrinsecally, I think it runs structurally deep.

Using video games I think is just like TV or movies, it's just made worse because you get to interact with it, so it's not as passive because you can't say "oh, it's the director/writer's fault, I'm just watching it". But, on the other hand, I don't think it's used as an end in itself, so it's probably just a way of commercializing on intrinsicalities, and that's why, I think, war is appealing as a subject. Far beyond the strategical implications and the tragic life stories and all that, I think it's really the basic instinct of us vs them, of asserting dominance over something.

Does this virtual dominance speak to the subconscious need for violence? Or worse, an actual enjoyment of killing? The interactive nature of the medium doesn't necessarily guarantee that the player will act out the scenes of the game, but the player maybe become unable to empathize. Theres also the overabundance of action games, especially ones that strive for realism.

If this is only a game, why is there always a push to make things more realistic?

I keep trying to understand, but only find more questions.

[MiTT3NZ]

Here's an idea. Remove all story content from games. Remove all characters. Replace everything with plain white textures/skins, and we have to interpret what's going on, projecting whatever image we like onto everything.

[Bluecast]

Here's an idea. Remove all story content from games. Remove all characters. Replace everything with plain white textures/skins, and we have to interpret what's going on, projecting whatever image we like onto everything.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opVmjPGzBUg[/youtube]

[Thief]

But you're essentially saying you have no choice, which isn't true.

If you really wanted to keep from killing the person you'd stop playing.

We are only bound by the rules we choose to be bound by, saying we're anything but free is untrue.

If we stop playing and get offended when are we ever going to encounter anything interesting? Sounds like an extreme case of censorship to me.

[Bluecast]

Manny is pretty sensitive when it comes to Natives and that's understandable and ethnic situations. However I agree with thief. I also don't think Ubi Soft is Activision giving into the AMERICA FUCK YEAH and kill everything with an accent. Manny what I meant was Altiar looked exactly like Desmond and white. SO a white guy playing an ethnic part. I know the memory thing,i'm just pointing out a technicality esp when the other two characters Ezio and Connor did not look like Desmond. Just saying it's easy to find something offensive in small things

[MiTT3NZ]

...Ezio looked exactly like Desmond...

...until Revelations.

[Golf Wang]

In the case of Far Cry 3, why is it okay to have a bunch of "Magical Negros", why is it fine that blacks are still portrayed as mewling, uncivilized brutes unable to form a proper civilization and thus offering only a mystic alternative to higher society. What would make things that are seen as unacceptable like blackface, or mammy archetypes worse?

I think maybe you should play Far Cry 3 first. There's only one major black guy, the rest of the natives are Malays/Pacific Islanders, not black.

[Segata Sanshiro Jr.]

But you're essentially saying you have no choice, which isn't true.

If you really wanted to keep from killing the person you'd stop playing.

We are only bound by the rules we choose to be bound by, saying we're anything but free is untrue.

If we stop playing and get offended when are we ever going to encounter anything interesting? Sounds like an extreme case of censorship to me.

Who ever mentioned Censorship? If anything playing the game is an even greater exercise in censorship. If the game only offers you lethal means and you don't want to kill anyone. I didn't say to close your eyes and pretend it never happened, but when it comes down to "do or die", "die" is a choice.

I think maybe you should play Far Cry 3 first. There's only one major black guy, the rest of the natives are Malays/Pacific Islanders, not black.

I do, but even if we change the race does that make it any better?

Manny is pretty sensitive when it comes to Natives and that's understandable and ethnic situations. However I agree with thief. I also don't think Ubi Soft is Activision giving into the AMERICA FUCK YEAH and kill everything with an accent. Manny what I meant was Altiar looked exactly like Desmond and white. SO a white guy playing an ethnic part. I know the memory thing,i'm just pointing out a technicality esp when the other two characters Ezio and Connor did not look like Desmond. Just saying it's easy to find something offensive in small things

Well I'm not trying to find it offensive I was pretty much okay with Assassin's Creed 3 except for the one thing and was pretty happy they did their homework for the rest of the game. I actually kind of wish Connor looked a bit more like Desmond/Ezio/Altair to help the continuity.

See this is another much larger problem, I'm basically being told I'm looking for stuff to complain about. Its fine if most of you don't know why this stuff is racist, or how it can be hurtful, but it is.

Look at it this way, Resident Evil 5 happens in Africa, you get Sheva and Josh, two black protagonists that are normal human beings, no super powers or anything. The antagonists are of mixed ethnicity, with white, black and brown enemies being fought.

Now look at Black ops 2, where you start the game and a plump black man carrying a grenade launcher tells you to "slaughter" enemies and displays almost complete disregard for human life(this is the good black guy). The enemies come charging at you with knives and all have distorted faces, as if monsters.

[Golf Wang]

I think maybe you should play Far Cry 3 first. There's only one major black guy, the rest of the natives are Malays/Pacific Islanders, not black.

I do, but even if we change the race does that make it any better?

Well, it completely debunks your "magical negros everywhere" statement, as there was only one major black character and the rest were Malays/Pacific Islander.

[Segata Sanshiro Jr.]

I think maybe you should play Far Cry 3 first. There's only one major black guy, the rest of the natives are Malays/Pacific Islanders, not black.

I do, but even if we change the race does that make it any better?

Well, it completely debunks your "magical negros everywhere" statement, as there was only one major black character and the rest were Malays/Pacific Islander.

No it doesn't. The "Magical negro" is a trope, it doesn't necessarily mean "black people everywhere" part of it is "noble savage" which was used to talk about "indians". The reason its hurtful and condescending is the same regardless of race specifically.

Its only a deflection to say that theres no racism because they're not black.

When you turn on a tv and you see a Hispanic cleaning lady who is unable to speak proper English being made fun of thats racist. It'd still be racist (and accurate) if it were a Polish person or a person from China but the media almost exclusively portrays Hispanics in this fashion. Isn't the singling out of a particular race...racism? Wouldn't it still be wrong if it were any of the other examples?

[Golf Wang]

I think maybe you should play Far Cry 3 first. There's only one major black guy, the rest of the natives are Malays/Pacific Islanders, not black.

I do, but even if we change the race does that make it any better?

Well, it completely debunks your "magical negros everywhere" statement, as there was only one major black character and the rest were Malays/Pacific Islander.

No it doesn't. The "Magical negro" is a trope, it doesn't necessarily mean "black people everywhere" part of it is "noble savage" which was used to talk about "indians". The reason its hurtful and condescending is the same regardless of race specifically.

Its only a deflection to say that theres no racism because they're not black.

When you turn on a tv and you see a Hispanic cleaning lady who is unable to speak proper English being made fun of thats racist. It'd still be racist (and accurate) if it were a Polish person or a person from China but the media almost exclusively portrays Hispanics in this fashion. Isn't the singling out of a particular race...racism? Wouldn't it still be wrong if it were any of the other examples?

Well at first you said something along the lines of "magical negros everywhere" and I thought you meant just black people. I know about Hispanic racism. I'm Mexican and it's happened to me on several occasions. The reason they usually show Hispanic women as maids on US television is because usually Hispanic people do the majority of service jobs like gardening, construction, cleaning, etc. I don't how it is where you live, but here in the US it is that way. I don't think it's so much racism as it is stereotyping.

[Segata Sanshiro Jr.]

I live in NY. There are a lot of Hispanics in service here but we get a lot of immigrants from Europe, which is where I get the Polish comparison from. In the east, a large number of eastern European people get jobs in unskilled labor and I have a very good friend from Poland who I've helped (since we were both in ESL classes as kids despite the fact that I spoke perfectly good English and was put in the class before I even arrived at the school)

But then again, isn't stereotyping a type of racism?

[Golf Wang]

I live in NY. There are a lot of Hispanics in service here but we get a lot of immigrants from Europe, which is where I get the Polish comparison from. In the east, a large number of eastern European people get jobs in unskilled labor and I have a very good friend from Poland who I've helped (since we were both in ESL classes as kids despite the fact that I spoke perfectly good English and was put in the class before I even arrived at the school)

But then again, isn't stereotyping a type of racism?

I consider them separate but related issues. Stereotyping, while insensitive, is not always a viscous thing. Some people stereotype based on ignorance, not because they're racist. I would put it like this, not everyone who makes stereotypes is racist, but everyone who is racist uses stereotypes. It's a complicated issue.

[Perfect_Chaos]

edit: OOPS!