Why must every game revolve around making my balls feel big?

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Any gameplay based around a dude running round with a gun/sword/magic wand is bound to suck. Well okay, it can be a little fun for a few hours but those types of games are never going to be as good as dynamic, puzzle or strategy based games, no matter how good the story is.
Those people who say they can go through three Mass Effect or Resident Evil playthroughs spending hundreds of hours doing the same thing over and over are aliens to me.

 

[LilithSlave]

Your assertion that gaming themes are responsible for peoples behaviour is exactly that... A strawman.

You don't know what a strawman argument is, do you?

And responsible isn't exactly good wording. More like feeding and feeding into a cultural construct that isn't super-duper healthy.

 

[Nomanslander]

Well I guess it's the same reason it's easier to program an NPC to try and kill you than ask you how your day has been. Let me explain since I know this might sound a bit off.

When you're playing as some super bad-ass, you're really only tasked with doing one thing. Killing waves and waves of bad guys till you reach the end. But when your character is a bit more flawed, the task of winning tends to be more difficult. Playing as a flawed character means a game is going to need to be more elaborate in its means of resolve than just simply shooting things dead.

The trait of being some super bad-ass just happens to compliment the simplicity of most games today.

Think of it like this. If you're playing a game where you're some space marine tasked with killing hundreds and hundreds of evil aliens, what else could you be but some super bad ass?

I guess that's just one reason why games are like that.

 

[dyre]

Because only badasses can kill loads of enemies, and killing loads of enemies is important for gameplay in most games! Well, not really, but a physically or mentally handicapped protagonist, or a coward, or a normal office worker with normal combat ability won't make much sense for gameplay, and is likely to make for a boring game (though that's a rule with many, many exceptions).

Also, I think you end up assuming your character is a badass simply because he does badass things necessary for making a game fun. He might not be a badass at all. I mean, Sergeant Ramirez in Call of Duty is treated on the internet like some kind of super badass marine, but for all we know he could just be a regular soldier. It's just that when he's a protagonist his commander has to throw more difficult tasks his way to make the game fun.

 

[lacktheknack]

Well I guess it's the same reason it's easier to program an NPC to try and kill you than ask you how your day has been. Let me explain since I know this might sound a bit off.

When you're playing as some super bad-ass, you're really only tasked with doing one thing. Killing waves and waves of bad guys till you reach the end. But when your character is a bit more flawed, the task of winning tends to be more difficult. Playing as a flawed character means a game is going to need to be more elaborate in its means of resolve than just simply shooting things dead.

The trait of being some super bad-ass just happens to compliment the simplicity of most games today.

Think of it like this. If you're playing a game where you're some space marine tasked with killing hundreds and hundreds of evil aliens, what else could you be but some super bad ass?

I guess that's just one reason why games are like that.

This doesn't address the underlying issue: Why are so many games about killing hundreds and hundreds of (insert thing here)?

Why are there not more games like Myst, where killing was never a good option (nor was it available)? Or Mirror's Edge, where the goal to to run AWAY from tons of dudes? Or LIMBO, where the task is basically "Don't Die"?

 

[Godhead]

I can get 9 if you decide to let me count Dawn of War. (He never said anything about 'nids) Everything else is a blank slate or kill everything or being a whiny person who most likely doesn't want to be mostly robot and then doesn't kill anybody except for the horrible boss battles.

I do see what you're saying; however, this seems to me like it mainly happens in AAA games and less so in Indie games.

 

[Nomanslander]

Well I guess it's the same reason it's easier to program an NPC to try and kill you than ask you how your day has been. Let me explain since I know this might sound a bit off.

When you're playing as some super bad-ass, you're really only tasked with doing one thing. Killing waves and waves of bad guys till you reach the end. But when your character is a bit more flawed, the task of winning tends to be more difficult. Playing as a flawed character means a game is going to need to be more elaborate in its means of resolve than just simply shooting things dead.

The trait of being some super bad-ass just happens to compliment the simplicity of most games today.

Think of it like this. If you're playing a game where you're some space marine tasked with killing hundreds and hundreds of evil aliens, what else could you be but some super bad ass?

I guess that's just one reason why games are like that.

This doesn't address the underlying issue: Why are so many games about killing hundreds and hundreds of (insert thing here)?

Why are there not more games like Myst, where killing was never a good option (nor was it available)? Or Mirror's Edge, where the goal to to run AWAY from tons of dudes? Or LIMBO, where the task is basically "Don't Die"?

Developers today are lazy.

Ever noticed how even though graphically games have excelled in the past 10 years, you couldn't say the same about the AI?

For instance the best shooter I've seen even up till now when it comes to enemy AI still has to be the original Fear, and when you think about how many shooters have come out since then it really paints a picture of how badly the game industry has been negligent.

Fact is the general console gamer prefers dumber and prettier games than they do with games that demand a little bit more brain power to finish.

That's just where the industry is today.

 

[Mike Richards]

snip

While there are other games I can think of that tread farther away from the tropes you've brought up, there's one example that I've always thought serves as an excellent subversion of those tropes rather then simply averting them: Splinter Cell Conviction. Yes, Sam Fisher is an utter badass marching his way through what are probably some of the red-shirt-iest red-shirts I've ever seen. But what makes it fascinating is that the machinations of the requisite conspiracy aren't really the point, the focus here is on Sam.

It's all about his anger at the people that manipulate him, his regret about his daughter, and his deteriorating ability to handle both. The effect is subtle but it does a surprisingly good job exploring these emotions as well as displaying everything from his point of view. There are very effective presentation tricks it uses to really put the game inside his head, more so then probably anything else I've come across.

If you haven't played it I'd say it's worth checking out, if only to see what the archetype can look like when the devs really try to do it justice.

 

[lacktheknack]

Well I guess it's the same reason it's easier to program an NPC to try and kill you than ask you how your day has been. Let me explain since I know this might sound a bit off.

When you're playing as some super bad-ass, you're really only tasked with doing one thing. Killing waves and waves of bad guys till you reach the end. But when your character is a bit more flawed, the task of winning tends to be more difficult. Playing as a flawed character means a game is going to need to be more elaborate in its means of resolve than just simply shooting things dead.

The trait of being some super bad-ass just happens to compliment the simplicity of most games today.

Think of it like this. If you're playing a game where you're some space marine tasked with killing hundreds and hundreds of evil aliens, what else could you be but some super bad ass?

I guess that's just one reason why games are like that.

This doesn't address the underlying issue: Why are so many games about killing hundreds and hundreds of (insert thing here)?

Why are there not more games like Myst, where killing was never a good option (nor was it available)? Or Mirror's Edge, where the goal to to run AWAY from tons of dudes? Or LIMBO, where the task is basically "Don't Die"?

Developers today are lazy.

Ever noticed how even though graphically games have excelled in the past 10 years, you couldn't say the same about the AI?

For instance the best shooter I've seen even up till now when it comes to enemy AI still has to be the original Fear, and when you think about how many shooters have come out since then it really paints a picture of how badly the game industry has been negligent.

Fact is the general console gamer prefers dumber and prettier games than they do with games that demand a little bit more brain power to finish.

That's just where the industry is today.

This is why I stick with classics and indie for the most part.

 

[Calvar Draveir]

Your issue is with the standard "Hero Cycle", which has been a part of litarature since its beginning.

 

[Rheinmetall]

"personailty-deficient, heavily built, thirty-something white guy". I pictured in my mind Chris Redfield from RE 5... The guy from Gears of War is more like "haevily built with a cartoony way" lol

 

[Unsilenced]

I've kind of wanted to see a war game where "shit pants and run" is a viable strategy.

Objective added: JESUS FUCK SHIT ASS FUCK SHIT GODDAMN FUCK RUN FUCK SHIT RUN OH GOD RUN FUCK SHIT

 

[Indecipherable]

My soapbox about Arcanum is getting a bit lonely - you can finish the whole game (successfully, duh) without killing a single thing.

 

[Starik20X6]

I love the fact that while the stereotypical game protagonist is a meathead, by far the most successful and well known game protagonist is a short, overweight, blue-collar everyman with a moustache.

In all seriousness, I totally agree with the sentiment here. But I kinda get the feeling the problem isn't as bad as people think (that or I'm just playing lots of different games). I look at the pile of games next to my consoles and the protagonists I see are:

- The aforementioned chubby Italian
- Pointy-eared swordsman
- Color-changing blob
- Woman in a suit of power armour
- A rag doll
- Man made of voxels
- Electrically charged delivery boy
- A master thieving racoon
- A boy in a town full of animals
- A pink ball that doesn't stop eating
- An angel
- A gorilla
- A plastic superhero
- Young boy with horns

Cookies for those who can figure out what I'm playing.

 

[Casual Shinji]

A little bit of power fantasy isn't a horrible thing. But the direction of the industry creating things like God of War killing things randomly as if it is glorious, and then having a bunch of women fawn over him in bed, is becoming far too commonplace and feeds an unhealthy mentality. It normalizes something that should not be normalized.

Judging by the setting, what exactly is it that you are taking offense to? The fact that you're killing a meriad of mythological creatures, or the singular goofy sex mini game?

Because in either case it's not something that feels out of place for an ancient Greek setting.

 

[Smithburg]

Hmm doesn't realy fit with my collection. I have a lot of adventure, puzzle, RPG's, and Strategy games so it balances out the meat head missile launchers

 

[Vault101]

I dont mind a "power fantasy" as long as it makes sense in context

ok..Comander shepard is competant to almost inhuman levels...but in a way she/he was simply in the right place and the right time..and obviously the right person for what ever certian people needed (the Aliance, the illusive man)

Fallout New Vegas, aside from the fact that the courier can become insanly powerful both literally and in terms of influence over the mojave wasteland, I can I can sort of see how he/she can end up holding all the cards

Infamous.....the guy can shoot lightning out of his hands..nuff said

Oblivion and Skyrim are the "bad" examples I would use, you can go from nothing to not only the most powerful person in the land..but the god damn leader fo every faction AT THE SAME TIME

obviously this is because of the lack of actual definition for the charachter, a thing alot of people like about the series

its always been my grip...you dont feel like a characheter..but just a thing thats suposed to fill this big void in the game world

games that dont make you feel powerful I say are like Deadspace, Dark souls, hmm mabye others

 

[Brighton_Game_Trader]

This might turn out a bit rant-ish and I make no promises of comprehensibility. You've been warned.

The protagonist is either a blank slate or a badass (if the latter, then extra points if they're a personailty-deficient, heavily built, thirty-something white guy [http://doctorpus.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/marcus-fenix-gears21.jpg]). Progressing through the game involves killing or violently defeating large numbers of enemies. As you progress your protagonist gets increasingly powerful, usually through stat increases or the acquisition of equipment and weaponry.

Extra points if you get the girl and save the world.

The point I am laboriously trying to make here is that way too many games constitute little more than a juvenile power fantasy. An endless procession of burly, infallible badasses joylessly curb-stomping hundreds of unambiguously evil enemy redshirts. It's really getting old.

Great thread - video games seem to be stuck in the 1980s when it comes to their characters and storylines.

Big white blokes with giant weapons save a bunch of small useless women who (if they're really lucky) might be able to use a bow and arrow or some magic.

Worse that that is when they throw in a "token black guy" just like the 80s films did (bar those with Eddie Murphy - he was the dawg).

It's crude, generally tasteless and I can't wait until gaming grows up and cuts this shit out.

Thanks to you, Zhukov for getting people talking about this more.

 

[The Funslinger]

Because a lot of developers are in a sad state of shallow power fantasy pandering. Because apparently lots of guys still want to buy that. I sure as heck wouldn't want to be friends with such a guy.

Also, I hate to make this cultural, but this is mostly a Western thing. To expand on that, even more so a Western AAA company that makes a lot of money off of first person shooters like EA sort of thing.

I don't like such video games, so my wallet stays far, far away from them.

Might I use this as an opportunity to say how disgusting I think God of War is? It's a ridiculous power fantasy, known for things outside of the power fantasy, as women fawning over Kratos and a sex scene. What a pile of rubbish not much different that Duke Nukem.

Maybe there is good gameplay, but God if the theme doesn't suck.

Still, at least Duke Nukem was a satire.

 

[Bvenged]

Yeah, I'm with you on this one. My favourites the one where you play as a regular soldier/squad member who, at the moment of coming under your control, become some god-like fighting machine who saves the world. Though with games like CoD & BF3, one person is not enough so you shift focus between a few of them. It's not a bad concept, I'm not saying be gone with all of them, but there are far too many of them around and still coming out. So a little cut-back should be in order.

Why must every game revolve around making my balls feel big?

- Implying that they were tiny to begin with