Creepy Summer Lesson PSVR Game Gets New Trailer, Details

Nov 9, 2015
323
80
33
Darth Rosenberg said:
I'm afraid 'Eh?' sums up my reaction to that question. "Feel" in this context is insanely subjective, and define what "the older games" actually means and I might be able to reply.
I wanted to show how important violence is in the generic shooter, not just hyper violent shooters like Doom. Those who play these games probably indulge in killing people, not just aiming the crosshair faster than the enemy. That's not to say that it isn't important, but rather it is greatly enhanced by, I don't know, theming, or attributing meaning to aiming. Shooting aggressive white boxes is boring, but make it representational of a soldier and it becomes a whole lot more interesting.

I think the feeling I am talking about can be generalized to tons of people, maybe most people. For example, Splatoon, a family friendly, not very violent shooter, still has the rhythmic sound of the Splattershot, squids having death cries, and exploding upon death. So, doing something like aiming, along with predicting where the slow projectile of ink will land and constantly re-calibrating to hit a moving target is tough work, but seeing your opponent violently explode along with a satisfying sound gives you pleasure for your hard work.

When I compare killing in the modern shooter compared to the older shooter, the modern shooter is more interesting because the devs have put effort in making it more realistic. Without ragdolls, enemies looked like they were tripping on a banana peel upon death, and the visual indicator of a hit was this low resolution red sprite. With ragdolls, you can see the body react to the momentum of the bullet, and sometimes you have particle systems for blood and dust. They also put effort in making canned death animations detailed and more entertaining, and then transitioning it into a ragdoll.

Now, as for the reason to why this is better, perhaps certain aspects of realism is just more aesthetically pleasing. For example, animating a ball to bounce up and down at the wrong timings just looks wrong. This is probably why shotguns can look great in older games, because that one powerful shot lines pretty well with the death animation.

But we still have to look at the big picture, why do we enjoy shooting people to death? Why are some death animations more appealing than others (think more along the lines of movie choreography)? Why is stopping something trying to kill you pleasurable? Why is stopping an animal perceived to be running pleasurable? Could it be that humans are predatory creatures? I don't know, I'm just conjecturing.

Either way, as I said to Hentropy; this isn't about violence, and no amount of pointing out perceived double standards mitigates or absolves one or the other.
Well, double standards are fun to point out, because they give perspective. I was going to say that Brazzers really likes student-teacher relationships, but I think something along those lines of that has already been said. You see, student-teacher relationships aren't acceptable in Japan. Now, if you are going to learn life lessons of what is acceptable through things like dating sims and pornography, overriding real-life common sense, then it had better offer a really convincing reason as to why. Of course these things usually never do, but there are a lot of old incest and homosexual fiction in Japan where the couple runs away from home or commits suicide, and you can empathize with these characters. The natural side effect is that the taboo wears out for some, including me.

So, yeah I mean judge all you want, I can't really agree with you. These things are hard to "safely" explore, without downright condemnation by the story so that no one gets any funny ideas. To say "I'm not asking for it to be banned, I'm just criticizing this work of fiction, why can't I criticize things?" is rather disingenuous, and it's kind of playing the victim. The offensive material is either gone and you're happy, or it's not and everything is the same. I apologize if I come off as rude, but the "I like porn and freedom of expression, but let me filter it out" kind of statement irks me.

Edit: Actually, it's more like saying "I'm fine with this existing in an ambiguous, abstract sort of way, but once you show me I'm going to say it's not okay" deal. You probably did not mean it that way, and now I am just ranting.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
Darth Rosenberg said:
If you've read most of my posts in this thread, you should see I'm not beginning and ending with that gut reaction. What I won't do, however, is bow down to platitudinous moral relativism where nothing can ever mean anything, and no contrary reaction or opinion can be tolerated.
I understand that you're tired of restating your points, and I appreciate that you've taken the time and effort to engage here. I'll try to be brief.

I'm not advocating "platitudinous moral relativism" either. But I do feel it's important that what we call "morality" be closely engaged in what's real, what's achievable, and what works.

There was an article I read many years ago- I think in "Dragon"- where a panel was discussing, among other things, the recent release of "Doom". A Canadian on the panel, regarding the American penchant for violence, said something like "I would say [real-world violence in American society] was due to violence in the media... But we have all the same stuff in Canada..."

When I bring up things like first-person shooters, it's not because I think you're ignoring one creepy thing for the sake of another out of some sort of puritanical obsession with sex. It's because it would be quite understandable for a reasonable person, from the outside, to consider both to be creepy- but a deeper examination seems to suggest their niche isn't actually engaging in harmful behavior.

If someone should be required to try to understand another culture's quirks and foibles, then the 'defender' of such quirks and foibles needs to understand the perspective of the perceived outsider. The rationale for why someone in the West would see Summer Lesson as creepy or disturbing surely isn't hard to follow (the NSPCC pdf I linked to should suffice).
I do follow. And if someone were acting that way towards a real student, I would think that was a warning sign. But I don't see evidence that, say, "Summer Lesson" is teaching someone in a position of authority how to desensitize a real-world student towards inappropriate behavior.

The whole "junior/senior" dynamic is so deeply rooted in Japanese society, to my understanding, that it's difficult to envision how such a scenario could be envisioned that didn't involve a lopsided power dynamic. Perhaps that is a reason to look askance at it, but again, I have to recognize that that's an outsider's perspective.

Again, pointing that out doesn't magically make everything Summer Lesson may represent beyond reproach. And, for the hundredth time in this thread, perhaps; I object to my own culture's attitude to violence (and objectification/sexism).
And here, perhaps, we diverge.

I once had someone online say they wanted to kill me because I had the audacity to suggest that "Stand Your Ground" laws had the unfortunate effect of giving almost anyone an "alibi" that a fatal shooting was self defense, merely because they "felt threatened".

That someone felt they could make a plausible threat against me, based on my stance on a real-world issue, troubles me.

That someone could, conceivably, obtain a real gun, use the Internet to obtain my real address, and shoot me, troubles me.

That an attitude suggesting violence is a solution to problems might be implied by a piece of media or a work of art...? Not so much.

I have to believe- sometimes against evidence- that, presented with ideas, adults are capable of separating good information from bad, and judging their merits. And that as a whole, we have a better ability to do so if we're subjected to a broad array of ideas. Some of those ideas may be appealing, others unappealing but necessary, and some maybe downright disturbing. But that those ideas themselves aren't quashed because people fear being pre-judged just by their expression.

And, yeah, it's a balancing act- because the criticism of something is, itself, an idea.

But as far as violence: I look at the availability of weapons, I look at population density in urban centers, I look at unemployment and education, I look at the lack of teaching on many levels on ways to safely handle conflict... And I look at the lack of correlation between annual rates of violent crime and the perceived levels of violence in video games... and a focus on the latter begins to feel like a distraction.

Though I'm sure the whole life-imitating-art-imitating-life argument will persist long after I'm dust.

Must a game or any work of entertainment/art be proved to be solely responsible for harm for it to be criticised, or for it to reflect unsettling things about a given culture or society?
Solely responsible? No. Nut there's a certain excessive ease to "slippery slope" arguments that shouldn't be ignored, either.

I'm not entirely sure how I can even begin to respond to that. A scumbag like Rogers was, seemingly, the product of a dysfunctionally masculine society and culture on a number of levels. If something as 'pitiable' as Summer Lesson is the answer, then you're surely asking the wrong questions.
The pitiable homeless person is a problem we try to address. We don't complain about their alcoholism or their drug addiction, their bad teeth or the way they smell. We say: this is a human being who doesn't have shelter, and that reflects badly on us all. Maybe somewhere up the line, we'll work on addiction counseling and job training, but right now, get them under a roof.

The creepy bum is a problem we walk around. And maybe ask someone in authority to move out of sight.

It would have been better if Rodgers had been shot and killed before he had killed anyone.
Still better if someone had seen his video, taken it seriously, and arrested him.
And better than that if he had had some sort of counselling that made him never think murder was the proper response to his sense of persecution.
...And possibly even better than that if he had the kind of supporting social network that never made him develop a sense of persecution in the first place.

It's easy in the aftermath of a terrible tragedy to react in anger- to say that Rodgers didn't deserve any of the things it might have taken to steer him on another course.

Much like it's easy to say a drug addict deserves scorn and misery, not treatment.

But that may not be what works, and I see an awful lot of people who seem to put indignation above pragmatism.

There's an argument to be made that much of the extreme behavior- criminal behavior- that societies witness comes from people who are so estranged from their peers that they don't feel there's any significant consequence to acting out. Jon Ronson's So You Have Been Publically Shamed includes a chapter on a prison for extreme violent offenders- many multiple murderers- and found that the common thread among inmates was that they were so ashamed- so filled with self-loathing- that their emotions, their ability to connect with others, simply shut down.

I guess what it comes down to is, subjectively- obviously- I can't, and don't, "disagree" with your labeling Summer Lesson as "creepy". But I'm far from confident that label is helpful.
 

saltyanon

New member
Sep 18, 2013
81
0
0
Darth Rosenberg said:
hentropy said:
You'll need to elaborate on the underlined, as I've no idea what you mean. The only thing I know about that game is that I don't like FF (bar VII and VIII back in the day), and those odious seeming, terribly designed protagonists are reason enough to avoid any game.
The boytoys and the Summer Lesson girls are both designed with sexualization in mind. There's enough fodder in that setup alone for straights and fujos alike.

I thought you're supposed to be familiar with Japanese stuff? You should've sniffed this from a mile away. Those イケメン are just as creepy as Summer Lesson's girls. Do you think Free is an innocent show about boys and swimming and friendship?