AnarchistAbe said:
Why is the Macho-Man so hated in the gaming community? Am I the only one who likes playing an 80s Action Hero as my video game persona? I love the Rambo/John McClain macho badass banter, but it seems that it is constantly ripped apart in the games media.
Have all gamers been so emotionally ripped apart by "bros" and "football jock douches" that they can't enjoy the macho-man for fear of being thrown in a trashcan and given a wedgie? All joking aside: really, what is the issue with having a character that has muscles on his muscles and uses a gun as big as he is?
I started to suspect a while ago that there are some massive insecurity issues here, especially considering how little most of their complaints have to do with what these characters are actually like. Some people seem to take it so personally that I'm not sure there's any other explanation than them feeling threatened by any man that doesn't act like he has a vagina.
Take Marcus Fenix: This is a guy who has been shown to not actually like the war he's fighting. He ranges from being annoyed at some of the more minor stuff (taking orders from guys he doesn't like, having to train a rookie) to being horrified at the more serious stuff (What happened to Thai) to showing concern for Carmine, to trying to comfort and console his friend when his wife dies. All in all, he gives off the impression of someone who is just tired of it all, but doesn't have any way out.
Marcus never engages in any of this overly-macho behavior that these characters supposedly wallow in. He's entirely driven by a sense of duty: he has to fight. Mankind's survival is on the line; it's entirely selfless. When he finds out that the locust have been taking people, he goes after them to try to help them. When he finds out that Dom's wife may be alive and nearby, he's torn between helping his friend and completing an important mission.
What, exactly, do people want from the guy?
No, he never breaks down screaming at the sky or goes into the fetal position crying, but there's a difference between a character being stoic or understated and only feeling rage. Subtlety in writing is actually considered a good thing in most places.
Master Chief is another example. He's shown to be respectful to pretty much everybody except for the aliens that he's fighting. He's got a dry sense of humor. He never shows any arrogance. He never uses violence in any kind or uncontrolled or unnecessary manner. All in all, he's a highly disciplined soldier who acts with every ounce of maturity that you'd want from mankind's last hope.
Where, exactly, does this image of him being an obnoxious meathead come from other than people
who have never played the game?
This stereotype really came from 90's comicbook characters where the 'heroes' were undisguised sociopaths with an overabundance of pouches and guns that made no sense whatsoever who we were supposed to think were awesome because of how EXTREME they were (think Rob Liefield), but it gets horribly overapplied to places where it really isn't true.
AnarchistAbe said:
I love the Rambo/John McClain macho badass banter, but it seems that it is constantly ripped apart in the games media.
This is another good example of people getting confused by mixed stereotypes: Rambo was never a 'banter' guy. The first movie was about him having a breakdown because he couldn't adjust to civilian life after the war. The movie ended with an old friend talking him down and getting him to surrender to police. He didn't want to be 'macho', he just wanted to find a way to get his life together again. Hell, the movie could be viewed as a deconstruction of overly macho heroes.
John McClain became famous for being a more human action hero. He got beat up a lot. He bled. He was trying to fix a broken marriage. He was only fighting a handful of guys, and he only ever took them on one at a time, and it was never easy. The first Die Hard was practically wrote the book on the more grounded action hero (Or course, the movies got less grounded as they went on).