Extra Punctuation: Manly Vs. Macho in Gears

major_chaos

Ruining videogames
Feb 3, 2011
1,314
0
0
Zhukov said:
That reminds me, why exactly were the Locusts in Gears deemed evil?

Sure, they didn't exactly treat their pets nicely, but beyond that, what gave them the "bad guy" label apart from being slightly uglier than the average human soldier?
because with out any warning or attempt at communication they started killing every man woman and child they could find with the end goal of total genocide. seems rather evil to me

OT: I will say that story is not the strong point of gears but I take issue with the reasons in this article. first off the colony attack the people who died were not Griffin's "family" they were his bitter murderous underlings and his rage at their death was more "you broke my toys" than "you are responsible for the loss of life" . and second the scene at the end with the locust queen she isn't justifying anything, she is mocking the death of Adam Fenix and condemning Marcus never mind that she was screaming "YOUR SPECIES WILL DIE" a second ago and any sympathy you had for the fact that her people had to die goes away when you consider that if ANY effort had been made to make an alince with humanity with the locust providing the muscle and the humans working on the cure a massive genocidal planet wrecking war could have (possibly) been avoided
EDIT: additional point that occurs to me I don't understand the people who say that the series has failed because they needed book to expand the universe and add depth to the cast, name for me games that have been under 1o hours in length that had well developed narratives and a cast a large as the one in gears. the way I see it a games do not often have the time to have a deep universe or cast so there is a need for ways to flesh out the story like:
1. being long, like JRPG long
2. have tons of cutscenes (Xenosaga) or tons of expository dialog (metal gear solid)
3. in optional in game reading (the codex in mass effect or the log book in Metroid prime)
4. non game content (the GOW books).
and out of those I prefer the books because the lead to the most development and the least frustration but i suspect that the real issue with the books is that no one wants to spend any amount of time looking at something that doesn't have a screen and buttons
 

Krion_Vark

New member
Mar 25, 2010
1,700
0
0
Pyramid Head said:
Wait... wait... he lures an entire swarm of Locusts to a town and causes a massacre? I'm sorry, but isn't Fenix supposed to be a professional? HE NEVER LEARNED TO CHECK HIS FUCKING TAIL?! NO ONE ELSE ON THE TEAM KNEW TO MAKE SURE THEY WEREN'T BEING FOLLOWED?!
Suddenly i'm very glad i didn't bother with Gears 3 and am holding out for the new Batman and Saint's Row titles to review. But still, sometimes you look at this bullshit and are tempted to try and make a game yourself only to realize you don't have the money or resources to do so. Then you get real depressed, and then your neighbors go missing and you've got a two day gap in your memory.
The time that she attacks the tower and the last time that you see her in game is actually a couple of days time. They also wipe out all locusts that have been tailing them and haven't run into any for at least a day and a half. I mean just before reaching the city and tower all they have fought are Lambent even in the city all they fight are lambent. They are always surprised that she shows up until then when they realize that she has been following them since that is the first time the queen shows up with her war beetle to wreck destruction.
 

Falseprophet

New member
Jan 13, 2009
1,381
0
0
Ariseishirou said:
Just saying, I think a middle ground between grr arrrgh Fenix and ~~~my chillllld~~ Capelli is where it's at.
A writer might imagine what the cost of war might be to Marcus Fenix's psyche that would make him an emotionless killing machine. A writer might also sentimentalize Capelli's attachment to his family and how the "home front" motivates him to go on. But a good writer might also do some research and try to find examples from the real world to flesh out and inform their writing and give it some authenticity and humanity.

I'm talking about soldier's memoirs, which are plentiful. Since Thucydides there have always been combat vets eager to tell their stories. For example, there's a site full of interviews with Soviet Red Army vets from World War II [http://english.iremember.ru/infantrymen.html]. Citizens of a brutal, oppressive dictatorship subjected to intense propaganda and indoctrination forced to fight for their nation's--and probably their own--survival against a brutal, genocidal tyrannical invader. It's probably one of the best examples in living memory of an apocalyptic conflict with existence at stake. And yet the full range of humanity of the soldiers is on display. Some examples below:

Our training in the school lasted 9 months ? since November 1943 till late August 1944. [http://english.iremember.ru/snipers/24-nikolai-nadolko.html] We were trained thoroughly. At that time the situation at the Soviet-German front no longer required ?raw meat? to be sent to the front line untrained. After completing the training we continued to be privates.

I also would like to remark that at this school we all were about the same age. And in the interrelations among us there wasn?t any infringement or physical violence or anything similar. Sergeants and officers treated us normally, humanly. (In regard to that, to put it mildly, exhausting training was considered normal at that time). Our sergeants were just a bit older than we were but much more experienced ? they had already prepared several sniper classes. They even trained us how to wind the foot wraps and gave many useful lectures. They treated us fatherly.

And there was nothing similar to this in our army at this time ? humiliation, infringement, outrage upon recruits, in other words, ? the so-called ?grandfathery.?

I remember how I killed my first fascist. [http://english.iremember.ru/snipers/23-alexandra-medvedeva-nazarkina.html] Together with my partner Zina Vershinina we occupied our sniping positions. While observing enemy positions, I spotted a machinegunner. I aimed and shot. It was unclear whether I hit him or not. But when I returned to the detachment, everyone already knew I?d killed an enemy. An artillery observer reported this. He saw it in his periscope, how the enemy machine gunner was killed. Everyone was joyous, they hurries to congratulate me. And I wept, for I had to kill a man?

The Germans were advancing, so the wounded were being evacuated. [http://english.iremember.ru/tankers/28-arsenij-zonov.html] It was very cold, and I didn?t have my greatcoat ? so I asked them for one. They told me they didn?t even have enough for all the wounded. So I went back to the main road, and that?s when a ?Willis? jeep and a couple of supply carts drove up. We always called these things ?hoofers?, basically horses pulling peasant carts with rations or ammunition. So the ?Willis? pulled up to me and stopped, a colonel came out in a fur coat and hat and asked me:

- Where are you coming from, Sergeant? ? And I was just dying from the cold at that point.

- From the other shore.

- What other shore, - he asked?

- Just keep driving down this way, Comrade Colonel, and you?ll see for yourself! ? The colonel then called a soldier over.

- Come here soldier! ? The soldier came over. ? Stand guard over this one ? I?m going to drive up to the head of the column, line everyone up and have him shot for panicking.

- You know, Comrade Colonel, - I said, - you can shoot me right now if you want. I?m not going to just stand here and freeze.
 

DTWolfwood

Better than Vash!
Oct 20, 2009
3,716
0
0
Now, bearing in mind that Fenix should have been well aware that the Locust were following him since he'd encountered them many times up to this point, the settlement's leader quite justifiably chews him out. Fenix responds by changing the subject and whining like a fucking child: "I JUST LOST MY BROTHER!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND?!!" Yes, Marcus, I'm pretty sure he does understand, because you just killed his entire family and everyone he knew. You ****.
i genuinely lol'd after reading that. Its moments like that that completely make me despise a character to no end.

I had a similar moment of intense anger when i watched any movie with Ziyi Zhang in it. They always make her play an insufferable ****! i.e. House of Flying Daggers, Hero, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. (She probably has played likeable characters but every movie i've seen her in has made be rage!)
 

HappyWyvern

New member
Oct 12, 2011
1
0
0
Wow he really didn?t like the plot of Gears 3.
I would be the first to admit the deliberate mystery they kept around for the first two games meant that I did at least want to see where it all ended, would also be the first to admit that anyone who came to me and said the plot was a work of Shakespeare I would think that they may want to check for other signs of a stroke.

Now Marcus, I personally think they stumbled upon a fun character concept, most stories of this ilk have the silent broody tough guy, you all know him and he is always loved but by and large he?s there for the odd defining moment of awesome where he rips the bad guys no2 henchman?s head off or some such, but otherwise that?s him (In a movie he will be played by that guy, you know the one who always plays that part oh what?s his name again you know the guy who was just in that film with Jason Statham)... What they did here however is make this pillar of background characters the front man, complete with all the woes and attempted development plot turns etc small wonder he didn?t know what to make of it all... bless him its hard to fight typecast?

But I will say one thing the Locust were the bad guys plain and simple Daddy Marcus that is 1 man 1 single scientist could not meet the deadline so they went straight to 'us or them' Genocide full stop no plan B or anything else attempted. Good grief the ones they didn?t slaughter they put into labour camps and worked to death, im surprised Myrrah didn?t just cut the pretence grew a Charley Chaplin Moustache scream about Lebensraum and surround herself with Goose stepping Kantus.
 

internetzealot1

New member
Aug 11, 2009
1,693
0
0
Oh don't go defending Griffin Yahtzee. He didn't care about any of those people. He was just mad that he didn't get to be king anymore.

Also, yeah the Locust were just trying to protect themselves. But they were doing it at the expense of the humans, which means that they had to die. For those who don't know, its not really a secret in the Gears universe that the COG is a fascist government. The Gears games are aware of their own...brutal utilitarianism maybe? Just look at the man in charge, Prescott. He oozed something along those lines.

But yeah, Marcus shouldn't have stabbed the Queen so fast. Because we still don't know WHAT THE FUCK A HUMAN IS DOING LEADING THE LOCUST.
 

internetzealot1

New member
Aug 11, 2009
1,693
0
0
Joshimodo said:
Anyway, other arguments aside, the 2 things that really irked me in the Gears series is this:

If the Locust and humans had contact prior to E-Day, why didn't they announce themselves and peacefully surface, explaining the reason and why they should combat it? Yes, Adam Fenix basically betrayed them, but that wasn't the reason.
Adam Fenix was the only human that knew about the Locust. The Locust didn't announce themselves simply because they didn't want to share the space with the humans. That's why they were the bad guys.

What was the point of the Sires? Apart from theory and speculation in the aforementioned thread, there is little explanation of what they were beyond experiments.
I think someone said that the experiment was aimed at making humans immune to Rust-lung.
 

Joshimodo

New member
Sep 13, 2008
1,956
0
0
internetzealot1 said:
Adam Fenix was the only human that knew about the Locust. The Locust didn't announce themselves simply because they didn't want to share the space with the humans. That's why they were the bad guys.
Yeah, but he later told the government. Point is, only a select few were in any contact/knowledge. Why? Seems daft.

As for the Locust being unwilling to share, where does it explicitly state that? Obviously, I know they're a warlike species etc., but it seems illogical to both start a war on both fronts AND to attack the species that contains the person who can save your own.



internetzealot1 said:
I think someone said that the experiment was aimed at making humans immune to Rust-lung.
Pretty much all of the info we have is speculation, based on the collectible's information. This is pretty accurate, but that's a very small fraction of information for such an enigmatic chunk of the story.
 

cross_breed

New member
Mar 22, 2011
28
0
0
Maybe I'm the only person on earth who thinks this, but I actually don't hate Marcus Fenix. Yahtzee's rhetoric in this article shows Marcus as nothing as growling and impotent, but telling the same story, but with different rhetoric shows a completely different character

I see Marcus as being a tragic figure reduced to joyless rage by constant exposure to nothing but violence. He has seen so many people mutilated, so many awful things, he has had no choice but to harden his mind to any emotion. However, the death of Dom proved to be a catalyst for him, and all the work he had done to completely desensitize himself to death, to disavow the effect of violence on his soul, all of it means nothing. His spirit is broken by the death of his friend to the point where nothing else matters but vengeance, but since violence and rage are all he knows, that is the only way he can respond.

Many of you likely feel I'm reading way to far into this, and I probably am, but I did this to prove a point. With enough analysis, you can do this with (almost) any character. So any character can be compelling, given sufficient analysis.
 

Saelune

Trump put kids in cages!
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
8,411
15
23
Darkong said:
Zhukov said:
That reminds me, why exactly were the Locusts in Gears deemed evil?

Sure, they didn't exactly treat their pets nicely, but beyond that, what gave them the "bad guy" label apart from being slightly uglier than the average human soldier?
They were the non-human party, because as well all know, humans are always the bastions of good and righteousness.
Its called perspective. Regardles sof which if either side is bad, if you played as Locusts, you would see the humans as evil.
 

ironlordthemad

New member
Sep 25, 2009
502
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
ironlordthemad said:
OK for what has too be the hundredth time on these forums, I'm going to point at the Gears of War novels by Karen Travis and say that "If you want to realy see whats going on under the hood of some of the best known characters in video gaming, read these books."

It will explain why marcus has the mental capacities of a 12 year old.
It will explain why he is distant, even too those he loves most.

Hats of too Therumancer for sticking up for a good set of video games with logic and reasoning rather than just jumping on the "GRRRR I AM MARCUS FENIX AN ANGRY ROBOT!" bandwagon.

Quick question, did anyone see the final scene in Gears of War 3?
Seriously anyone?
You know that bit where it all hits Marcus and he takes off his armour for the first time (metaphorically and physically) since we knew him as a video game character and we realise just how deeply unwell he is a a person?
Nah just me then.

Or did you miss it in Gears of War 2 where he shows concern for the love of his life, the woman he hasn't made a move on because it would get in the way and just complicate things?

How many of you have realised that the ENTIRE point of Marcus Fenix is just plain and simple: you wont see much of him as a person, he raises his shields around himself so he doesn't get hurt, but when something hits home, when something realy hurts, you see it and you realise how hard he has to work to keep himself protected because he is so weak?
"Read the books" is never an excuse for the game failing to characterise him properly. That excuse would not slide in a movie, a play, or any other form of medium.
The games haven't failed to portray their characters, people have just failed to pick up on what the character are.

Just because your jaded by 17 years of war doesn't mean you aren't a character.
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
ironlordthemad said:
The games haven't failed to portray their characters, people have just failed to pick up on what the character are.

Just because your jaded by 17 years of war doesn't mean you aren't a character.
Yeah, he is a character. A shitty one.

It's slightly ridiculous to claim that Marcus Fenix's hypermasculine attitude is the result of him being 'jaded' by constant war. Jaded people are normally characterised as pessimists or at the very least, cynical realists. Fenix makes absolutely no sense because he is snarky to his superiors and carries out their orders with disdain, but he reacts to everything else with the same psychotic machoism that people drill into elite soldiers to make them unthinking killing machines. The two are completely incongruous.

This is not rocket science: people have been creating very evocative soldier characters for years, especially ones who are 'jaded'. Captain Willard from Apocalypse Now is a better example of 'jaded'. Elias from Platoon is a better example of 'jaded'. Heck, even Arnie's character in Predator is a better example of 'jaded'. Marcus Fenix can only be described as a parody that takes itself seriously; completely and thoroughly oxymoronical.
 

KilloZapit

New member
Jan 28, 2011
39
0
0
Therumancer said:
Sometimes it bugs me how often Yahtzee can give biting insights, and other times he can miss a huge amount of the point almost entirely. Sometimes I thing he's just sounding off for the sake of sounding off.

I'm not a huge "Gears Of War" fan, but understand that we're dealing with characters who are career military, and a protaganist who is a hardened veteran before the game even starts, and has also done a fairly notable stint in a military prison.

Military training by it's very nature is supposed to strip away most signs of emotion and individuality, the idea being to replace everything you are with something better... well better in the context of killing people and breaking things in pursuit of a goal someone else decides on. Soldiers who recognize the enemy as having valid points of view, or being regular people with lives and families are kind of useless in reality. All arguements about politics and morality, when your fighting to win soldiers who pause to contemplate the inhumanity of war and what they are doing to their enemy in the midst of a battle can't do the job. The last thing you need is for the guy standing there protecting you to pause and go "OMG, I can't kill this poor unfortunate" while that guy proceeds to kill him and then turns around and massacres you and your entire civilization.

We could sit here and argue about the morality of this entire thing, and the nessecity of it, but I doubt I could do a better job of explaining it and WHY it's needed anymore than say Heinlan's "Starship Troopers".

When looking at a game featuring the military, especially characters who are supposed to be experienced veterans... yes, they are going to be fairly uniform. That's actually good writing since this is what the system produces. Take one of those guys, toss him into a military prison where emotion is a weakness (prison can be very dehumanizing on people who want to survive it, especially military prison), and then toss him back out into an apocolyptic war... and yeah... Marcus Fenix is pretty much what your going to get. If he was any other way it would actually have been bad writing given the backround which ties into the entire thing.... and this is a defense being made by someone who doesn't paticularly like the game in question.

Simply put the whole "Macho" attitude we see here, is kind of realistic for the kinds of characters we tend to deal with. In general people have differant mechanisms for turning out that way. Joking about everything and becoming a sort of macabre clown who takes nothing seriously while doing their job with lethal precisian, or becoming the aloof "Marcus Fenix" type are both very typical ways of dealing with this kind of life.


As far as cutting down bad guys who have legitimate points of view and/or justifications for what they are doing, that's pretty much reality. In general nobody wakes up and decides "we're going to be really evil today just for the heck of it" everything happens for a reason. Of course the Locust/Chimera/Muslims/Whatever have legitimate reasons for doing what they are doing from their own perspective, some of which might even seem fairly reasonable to the other side, if they didn't there wouldn't be a massive scale war. This is incidently exactly WHY you dehumanize your soldiers and strip away a lot of their empathy. In the end pretty much all wars come down to "us or them", "my side, and their side", the bad guy and the good guy are all matters of point of view, and when it's come down to a war only one side is going to be left functioning, and that's the side that gets to record history.

A situation where a bad guy goes off about how legitimate their cause is and then gets cut down by some grunting soldier who might have a personal vendetta is pretty much a summary of war in a nutshell. In the end the point of view of the loser doesn't matter, it's all about who wins.... and in "Gears Of War" it is very much an "us or them" type situation no matter who might have the overall moral high ground when you scrape all the muck away.

Honestly from what I know of the series "Gears Of War" set out to make a sort of commentary on the nature of war, and really from the plot points I've seen it's done a fairly good job of making the points it set out to do. Marcus Fenix might be stereotypical to some extent, but I suspect that's kind of the point, as is the simple point that once a war breaks out
the reasons behind it no longer matter, with it being the job of a soldier to end the war favorably for their side or die trying.

But then again, the realities of war have never really sat well with the left wing regardless of what name it uses in a given country.
All that may be true to a extent. People can break under pressure or become jaded or dysfunctional. War does more or less boil down to us or them, not right or wrong. And soldiers can probably act exactly like Marcus Fenix in that situation. But that still doesn't make him a good character or the story a good story. A character who fails to grow or have any redeeming qualities is a bad character. Having a huge grey on grey morality war staring absolutely no one who can be sympathized with is bad writing. A attempt at commentary on something that offers both nothing we haven't seen before a million times, and no outside viewpoint that we might be expected to sympathize, is a bad commentary (if it even is a commentary at all, which I am doubtful).

Furthermore, this is all a worse case scenario situation engineered from the start to provide as much drama as possible while at the same time failing to actually address any problems. Most wars are not fought by two genocidal enemies who's only goal or choice is the complete annihilation of the other. Most soldiers in command are not put through military prison and years of combat until they turn into macho retards, and those that are often end up too unstable to be trusted. And the story offers no salutation to any of the problems it has brought up. Yeah, yeah, war is hell. Duh. So? What can we do about it? What is the cause of it? Does this, or Starship Troopers, or any other over-glorified story of macho pissing contests with random aliens for vaguely explained reasons, try to offer anything other then an excuse for a story where people commit acts of violence?

And really, I don't say this because I refuse to accept "the realities of war", I say this because "the realities of war" are just not interesting to me. A lot of the strategy and logistics are interesting, a lot of the human drama of those effected by it is interesting, and people struggling for what they believe in is interesting. But emotionally jaded soldiers fighting for no reason then because there is an enemy in front of them isn't. Maybe it's sort of realistic, but it's not any more interesting then watching a bored office worker type up a word document. It's just a guy doing his job, only with more guns.