Ryan,
Yes, the game performs much like Doom, and most other first-person [shooter] games for that matter, except gunplay is mostly replaced with acrobatics, like those seen in Casino Royale's chase scene.
Unlike most 1st person games of generations gone by, current gen hardware allows for realtime reflective surfaces. With the game taking place in a clean, pristine utopia (covering seedy government evil doings), the game features plenty of glass skyscrapers. When in real-time, the player can view themselves as Faith via reflections.
Outside of in-game action/cutscenes, the game also employs third-person animated cutscenes between gameplay chapters that take on a slight artistic deviation from the in-game vision, but retain most of the same qualities albeit stylistic cartoony CG.
But everyone's most common view of Faith came via EA's massive ad campaign. EA, now the second largest video game publisher in the world thanks to the Activision-Blizzard-Vivendi Universal merger, threw a great deal of money into the game's promotion hoping to create interest in the new IP (sidenote: EA gave much more promotion to Mirror's Edge than Dead Space, yet DS was a much larger commercial and critical success by far). Wanting to keep the game's unique premise (1st-person free running) under wraps until closer to the games release, many gamers' only connection to ME was promo art and in-game shots of Faith herself. Actual video from the 1st-person perspective wasn't released until May of this year, 2008. Pretty late to the game (reminds me of Nintendo).
For many gamers, Faith was Mirror's Edge. And the controversy started accordingly.
The controversy's roots are firmly established in video games general role of women as sex objects. Video games being stereotypically male FUBU (for us by us), female character designs have become increasingly err.... eyebrow raising to the point of absurdity. See: Here & Here. I enjoy boobs as much as the next guy, but it's reaching the point where I find myself near embarrassed to be a gamer. I'm not alone in my opinion, but most arguments about over-the-top, oversexed female design usually devolve into trolling with such rhetoric as "lol, ur gay".
Venturing into the "Oooh, shit! I shouldn't be here!" realm, there's a series of Nintendo DS games that have you investigating witchcraft at a school. In order to out the witches, you have to use the stylus to touch/rub the jail bait witches. I'll leave the areas to be "investigated" up to the imagination.
Really, it seems that a portion of gamers and video game designers/publishers have pushed female character design into palm face FetishLand. Worse, these games DO sell. Very well. With video games becoming much more expensive to develop, promote, and ship due to the massive expansion of the industry, many companies need a "sure hit" to survive and others just want to play it safe. Enter boobs. It sells.
Thankfully, not every company falls into this trend. Nintendo is typicallyconservative of its female characters (here & here), focusing more on game play/design, and their respective games still sell. Valve's Half Life 2 set a new standard for character depth with a female who was very attractive while still being down-to-Earth and normally proportioned. DICE deserves props as well for employing the use of a female that doesn't wrongfully distract from the game. Nod to EA for financing DICE's vision without pressure for change.
As for Mirror's Edge, the final retail product, I have not yet purchased it, though I am still intrigued. I downloaded a playable demo of it a while back and was left impressed. When the price dips, I'll probably take the blue pill.
[...and this is how I open 2009]
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
The Tifa-Aeris Debates show my age
Stirling,
What you're talking about reminds me of the Great Tifa-Aeris Debates of 1997-1998. Nominally, the issue there was, in a perfect world, who is more compatible with Cloud? The subtext of the debate, though, becomes clearer in retrospect, and it was this: who better confirms your vision of femininity, Tifa (busty, and in immodest attire, but also visibly childlike, and shy) or Aeris (slender, and dressed conservatively, but also outgoing and temperamentally childlike).
(I will note, Stirling, that along with you, I'm somewhat bothered by the fact that I find myself employing the word "childlike" to describe both characters).
But to return to your point, I'm not sure that what rankles me in your story is so much the specific differences between Eastern and Western men's tastes in women. What bothers me more is the assumption made by the fanartist and others that the game designer created a flawed product when he failed to account for their particular tastes in women. The implicit premise that those people rely on is that we ought to be lusting after the women of video games, and when we aren't, then we can blame the game designer for not making them attractive enough.
The idea that a video game heroine ought to be a wet dream is so deeply ingrained now that it passes without our notice. Frankly I'm glad that the game designer in this case ruffled a few feathers with his choices, and not necessarily because his vision of Faith incorporates my own ideas of physical perfection; rather, it's because it shows that the market for video games has broadened to the point where they don't all have to be about adolescent wish-fulfillment anymore.
I haven't played Mirror's Edge, but I think I remember seeing it advertised on TV. You refer to it as "an urban free-running game in first-person perspective." I assume that this means a literal, behind-the-eyes perspective, in which the heroine rarely appears on-screen. Sort of the way that the protagonist's face never appears in gameplay in Doom. Is that right? Because if so, doesn't it seem odd that all this hay should be made over what the girl on the box looks like?
What you're talking about reminds me of the Great Tifa-Aeris Debates of 1997-1998. Nominally, the issue there was, in a perfect world, who is more compatible with Cloud? The subtext of the debate, though, becomes clearer in retrospect, and it was this: who better confirms your vision of femininity, Tifa (busty, and in immodest attire, but also visibly childlike, and shy) or Aeris (slender, and dressed conservatively, but also outgoing and temperamentally childlike).
(I will note, Stirling, that along with you, I'm somewhat bothered by the fact that I find myself employing the word "childlike" to describe both characters).
But to return to your point, I'm not sure that what rankles me in your story is so much the specific differences between Eastern and Western men's tastes in women. What bothers me more is the assumption made by the fanartist and others that the game designer created a flawed product when he failed to account for their particular tastes in women. The implicit premise that those people rely on is that we ought to be lusting after the women of video games, and when we aren't, then we can blame the game designer for not making them attractive enough.
The idea that a video game heroine ought to be a wet dream is so deeply ingrained now that it passes without our notice. Frankly I'm glad that the game designer in this case ruffled a few feathers with his choices, and not necessarily because his vision of Faith incorporates my own ideas of physical perfection; rather, it's because it shows that the market for video games has broadened to the point where they don't all have to be about adolescent wish-fulfillment anymore.
I haven't played Mirror's Edge, but I think I remember seeing it advertised on TV. You refer to it as "an urban free-running game in first-person perspective." I assume that this means a literal, behind-the-eyes perspective, in which the heroine rarely appears on-screen. Sort of the way that the protagonist's face never appears in gameplay in Doom. Is that right? Because if so, doesn't it seem odd that all this hay should be made over what the girl on the box looks like?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Asian Women: East vs West
EA, in an attempt to move beyond their yearly sports offerings of football, baseball, skateboarding, etc., has used this year to bring new IPs under their banner, notably Dead Space (a mix of Event Horizon, Doom, and Resident Evil) and Mirror's Edge (an urban free-running game in first-person perspective). While Dead Space can be seen as "surprise of the year" (mainly for being a non-sport game from EA that didn't suck, though many would simply be surprised that EA released a quality game at all), Mirror's Edge was largely forgotten and ignored.
Developed by Sweden-based DICE, "Mirror's Edge introduces players to Faith, a "runner" in a world where communication channels are highly monitored and the movement of human traffic is closely watched. When Faith's sister gets framed for a murder she did not commit, Faith finds herself on the edge of the city, on the wrong side of the law.
Mirror's Edge delivers players straight into the shoes of this modern day heroine as she traverses the vertigo-inducing cityscape, engaging in intense combat, fast-paced chases and challenging puzzles. With a never-before-seen sense of movement and perspective, players are drawn into Faith's world."
In Faith, DICE created a female protagonist who wasn't a tits n' ass showcase. Slender and a bit rough around the edges, Faith appears to be a woman who could handle herself and has done so many times. Oh, and she's Asian!
And that's where the mini-internet-based controversy began.
At some point in the early fall, Faith fan art surfaced. The "fan art" is basically official promotional art of Faith except touched up to better suit the tastes of Asian males. The areas affected are the eyes (which are wider), the face (which is much rounder), and, most obviously, the boobs (which are quite larger).
Kotaku, a popular international gamer blog, published the fan art along with the artist's comments, restating the artist's opinion that the Western stereotypical view of Asian beauty does not reflect the standards of beauty from an Eastern perspective. The Kotaku blog post got 500 comments debating the East vs West Faith designs and got picked up by a Japanese game site.
The issue got another kick in the pants when a DICE producer went on record denouncing the touch up, saying Faith looked like "a 12-year-old with a boob job". He then defended his stance on Faith's design stating that she serves the purposes of the game and the goal's of the team.
From an American/Western perspective (mostly my own, but supported by many of Kotaku's comments), Faith's Western design gives off a strong presence and inner strength. In the Eastern design, Faith is certainly much more feminine, uncomfortably a bit too young, and lacking in presence. The Eastern Faith is designed as a sex object which makes things all the more awkward with Faith's decrease in age into jail bait territory. Looking back at Western Faith, I find her the more attractive version based solely on the characteristics/qualities one assumes about her character upon viewing. She has the Sarah Connor vibe going for her and who wouldn't do Sarah Connor?!
The Asian perspective is much more blunt, stating that Westerners (typically Americans) always go hotshit crazy for the ugliest of Asian women. The Western Faith is seen as an unsightly middle-aged woman with the assets of a 12 year old boy. The Eastern Faith, on the other hand, is more attractive with much to offer physically and lacking the stereotypical slanted eyes. As for the age issue, I don't see much of one on the Eastern front. Eastern Faith is hot. That's kinda where it ends.
Some comments have noted that Westerners seem to prefer the body of a 12 year old while Easterners prefer the face of a 12 year old.
I have seen attractive slender Asian women. I've seen attractive curvy Asian women. I've certainly seen attractive power women. Everyone has their own taste in women, but I find the "younging down" curve in Asian culture as a symbol of beauty to be a bit disconcerting.
Though the young curve prevalent in Japan, and other Asian nations, as well as their other puzzling sex issues could fill many posts.
Sidenote: How hard is it to find asian women wearing clothes on image google to use as examples in this post? Answer: Harder than one would think. I pretty much had to settle for the ones I used. Damn those sex-mongering Westerners! *raises fists*
Developed by Sweden-based DICE, "Mirror's Edge introduces players to Faith, a "runner" in a world where communication channels are highly monitored and the movement of human traffic is closely watched. When Faith's sister gets framed for a murder she did not commit, Faith finds herself on the edge of the city, on the wrong side of the law.
Mirror's Edge delivers players straight into the shoes of this modern day heroine as she traverses the vertigo-inducing cityscape, engaging in intense combat, fast-paced chases and challenging puzzles. With a never-before-seen sense of movement and perspective, players are drawn into Faith's world."
In Faith, DICE created a female protagonist who wasn't a tits n' ass showcase. Slender and a bit rough around the edges, Faith appears to be a woman who could handle herself and has done so many times. Oh, and she's Asian!
And that's where the mini-internet-based controversy began.
At some point in the early fall, Faith fan art surfaced. The "fan art" is basically official promotional art of Faith except touched up to better suit the tastes of Asian males. The areas affected are the eyes (which are wider), the face (which is much rounder), and, most obviously, the boobs (which are quite larger).
Kotaku, a popular international gamer blog, published the fan art along with the artist's comments, restating the artist's opinion that the Western stereotypical view of Asian beauty does not reflect the standards of beauty from an Eastern perspective. The Kotaku blog post got 500 comments debating the East vs West Faith designs and got picked up by a Japanese game site.
The issue got another kick in the pants when a DICE producer went on record denouncing the touch up, saying Faith looked like "a 12-year-old with a boob job". He then defended his stance on Faith's design stating that she serves the purposes of the game and the goal's of the team.
From an American/Western perspective (mostly my own, but supported by many of Kotaku's comments), Faith's Western design gives off a strong presence and inner strength. In the Eastern design, Faith is certainly much more feminine, uncomfortably a bit too young, and lacking in presence. The Eastern Faith is designed as a sex object which makes things all the more awkward with Faith's decrease in age into jail bait territory. Looking back at Western Faith, I find her the more attractive version based solely on the characteristics/qualities one assumes about her character upon viewing. She has the Sarah Connor vibe going for her and who wouldn't do Sarah Connor?!
The Asian perspective is much more blunt, stating that Westerners (typically Americans) always go hotshit crazy for the ugliest of Asian women. The Western Faith is seen as an unsightly middle-aged woman with the assets of a 12 year old boy. The Eastern Faith, on the other hand, is more attractive with much to offer physically and lacking the stereotypical slanted eyes. As for the age issue, I don't see much of one on the Eastern front. Eastern Faith is hot. That's kinda where it ends.
Some comments have noted that Westerners seem to prefer the body of a 12 year old while Easterners prefer the face of a 12 year old.
I have seen attractive slender Asian women. I've seen attractive curvy Asian women. I've certainly seen attractive power women. Everyone has their own taste in women, but I find the "younging down" curve in Asian culture as a symbol of beauty to be a bit disconcerting.
Though the young curve prevalent in Japan, and other Asian nations, as well as their other puzzling sex issues could fill many posts.
Sidenote: How hard is it to find asian women wearing clothes on image google to use as examples in this post? Answer: Harder than one would think. I pretty much had to settle for the ones I used. Damn those sex-mongering Westerners! *raises fists*
Let's go to the mall?
I read an interesting article today by one Chadwick Matlin, suggesting that it's time to shut down all the malls. What initally caught my eye about this article was the weird-to-bad job it does of encouraging readers to YouTube How I Met Your Mother's "Let's Go to the Mall" video. Other pop culture shout-outs are made therein to the films Dawn of the Dead and Mall Rats. It's an article that spends a lot of needless time searching for a hook it never finds, before making a less-than-compelling case for its conclusion.
Matlin discusses three justifications for the advent of the mall—why we needed them in the first place—and then explains how times have changed such that these justfications no longer apply:
1). Malls were justified because they saved time by allowing us to combine trips. But Wal-mart, Target, and Amazon.com now perform the same function.
2). Malls were justified because renting retail space in a mall was more cost-effective than purchasing retail space. But as property values decline, being your own landlord becomes less and less expensive.
3). Malls were justified because retail creates jobs for young and working class people. But getting rid of the mall doesn't mean getting rid of the stores; it just means that the stores move. Except for mall security and mall administration, the jobs created by the mall ought to remain even if the mall itself closes.
Argument (1) is pretty solid. The Wal-mart Supercenter and e-commerce are not passing fads, we can all agree; they are forever. But (2) and (3) don't seem quite so sturdy.
(2) is not so much a reason why I should favor closing the malls; it's a reason why, if true, they're already doomed.
(3) is even more flawed. It presumes that the stores will be just as profitable outside the mall as they were in it. Seriously? Do you know anybody who is responsible for his or her own transportation, who thinks that a drive across town to check out what's new at just Spencer's Gifts, or just Hot Topic, or just Claire's Boutique, is worth it? Would you stand in line for a Mrs. Fields cookie or an Orange Julius if the storefront didn't lie precisely on the footpath between points A and B?
My point is that a non-negligible portion of the job market is founded upon foot traffic, and if you take away the traffic, those jobs go with it.
In our area anyway, malls aren't going anywhere. They're just evolving into outdoor, pedestrian-friendly shopping spaces. Witness the new outdoor extension to the Mall of Louisiana, and the development at Perkins Rowe. In Bossier City they have the River Walk. The stores in all of these developments are somewhat higher-end than you'd expect from a mall, but the idea is the same. Stores that are too niche to make it on their own are able, with the aid of a pleasant atmosphere, to band together and forge a working eco-system of commerce. You can't just break up that eco-system and expect the constitutents to remain as functional as before.
Matlin discusses three justifications for the advent of the mall—why we needed them in the first place—and then explains how times have changed such that these justfications no longer apply:
1). Malls were justified because they saved time by allowing us to combine trips. But Wal-mart, Target, and Amazon.com now perform the same function.
2). Malls were justified because renting retail space in a mall was more cost-effective than purchasing retail space. But as property values decline, being your own landlord becomes less and less expensive.
3). Malls were justified because retail creates jobs for young and working class people. But getting rid of the mall doesn't mean getting rid of the stores; it just means that the stores move. Except for mall security and mall administration, the jobs created by the mall ought to remain even if the mall itself closes.
Argument (1) is pretty solid. The Wal-mart Supercenter and e-commerce are not passing fads, we can all agree; they are forever. But (2) and (3) don't seem quite so sturdy.
(2) is not so much a reason why I should favor closing the malls; it's a reason why, if true, they're already doomed.
(3) is even more flawed. It presumes that the stores will be just as profitable outside the mall as they were in it. Seriously? Do you know anybody who is responsible for his or her own transportation, who thinks that a drive across town to check out what's new at just Spencer's Gifts, or just Hot Topic, or just Claire's Boutique, is worth it? Would you stand in line for a Mrs. Fields cookie or an Orange Julius if the storefront didn't lie precisely on the footpath between points A and B?
My point is that a non-negligible portion of the job market is founded upon foot traffic, and if you take away the traffic, those jobs go with it.
In our area anyway, malls aren't going anywhere. They're just evolving into outdoor, pedestrian-friendly shopping spaces. Witness the new outdoor extension to the Mall of Louisiana, and the development at Perkins Rowe. In Bossier City they have the River Walk. The stores in all of these developments are somewhat higher-end than you'd expect from a mall, but the idea is the same. Stores that are too niche to make it on their own are able, with the aid of a pleasant atmosphere, to band together and forge a working eco-system of commerce. You can't just break up that eco-system and expect the constitutents to remain as functional as before.
Monday, December 29, 2008
John Chavis apparently in as Defensive Coordinator at LSU
ESPN is reporting that John Chavis, formerly defensive coordinator of the Tennessee Volunteers, is likely to take over as Defensive Coordinator for the LSU Tigers next season. So here's a question for you, Sean: how is it that we didn't come up with John Chavis's name when we were listing candidates for the open position?
The Tennessee fans appear to be split concerning whether he'll be a good hire for LSU. His reputation is that he's one of the best, but there's a persistent beef with him, that he prematurely deploys a prevent defense in close games, and Vols fans are blaming this tendency for a bunch of last minute losses.
The talent level at LSU should be better than it has been at Tennessee for the past several years. I just hope he can put the fear of God into some of the LSU defenders; maybe scare them into holding on to their tackles.
Another steady current of the comments to that ESPN story is this: that it was soooo professional of Les Miles to ensure that both LSU co-defensive coordinators had found other employment before the identity of their replacement was leaked. The idea is that his dilatoriness allowed each man to walk away with his dignity. I've heard this view espoused in casual conversations with other LSU fans as well. Maybe I could stand to be more sympathetic here, but based on the performance of the LSU defense this season, and the new jobs that these two men accepted, I'd have a hard time claiming that either walked away with his dignity intact. Peveto is moving on to a head coaching position at the greener pastures of Northwestern State University in Nachitoches, Louisiana ("The City of Lights!" proclaims its water tower). NSU went 7-5 this season, 4-2 in the Southland Conference of the FCS. Mallory is off for the University of New Mexico, one of several perennial doormats of the Mountain West, though by no means the most pathetic; it went 4-8 this season, 2-6 in conference.
What I will say is that, if you are willing to credit him with it, you might see some Machiavellian shrewdness in Les Miles' much-maligned decision to go with co-defensive coordinators in 2008. By refusing to fill the position, he created a situation that was sustainable for as long as he needed it to be in order to wait for a qualified candidate. Here's hoping that John Chavis was worth the wait.
The Tennessee fans appear to be split concerning whether he'll be a good hire for LSU. His reputation is that he's one of the best, but there's a persistent beef with him, that he prematurely deploys a prevent defense in close games, and Vols fans are blaming this tendency for a bunch of last minute losses.
The talent level at LSU should be better than it has been at Tennessee for the past several years. I just hope he can put the fear of God into some of the LSU defenders; maybe scare them into holding on to their tackles.
Another steady current of the comments to that ESPN story is this: that it was soooo professional of Les Miles to ensure that both LSU co-defensive coordinators had found other employment before the identity of their replacement was leaked. The idea is that his dilatoriness allowed each man to walk away with his dignity. I've heard this view espoused in casual conversations with other LSU fans as well. Maybe I could stand to be more sympathetic here, but based on the performance of the LSU defense this season, and the new jobs that these two men accepted, I'd have a hard time claiming that either walked away with his dignity intact. Peveto is moving on to a head coaching position at the greener pastures of Northwestern State University in Nachitoches, Louisiana ("The City of Lights!" proclaims its water tower). NSU went 7-5 this season, 4-2 in the Southland Conference of the FCS. Mallory is off for the University of New Mexico, one of several perennial doormats of the Mountain West, though by no means the most pathetic; it went 4-8 this season, 2-6 in conference.
What I will say is that, if you are willing to credit him with it, you might see some Machiavellian shrewdness in Les Miles' much-maligned decision to go with co-defensive coordinators in 2008. By refusing to fill the position, he created a situation that was sustainable for as long as he needed it to be in order to wait for a qualified candidate. Here's hoping that John Chavis was worth the wait.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)