V_K
Arcane
Unless you can bugger a hedgehog, that's not a fair trade.Unlikely, Grimoire beta doesn't have boobs.
who needs boobs when you can ride a turtle?
Unless you can bugger a hedgehog, that's not a fair trade.Unlikely, Grimoire beta doesn't have boobs.
who needs boobs when you can ride a turtle?
Can we make fun of his Rance review while he's still here?
Can we make fun of his Rance review while he's still here?
This right here encapsulates everything I can't stand about this site. No additional commentary, no context, just an implicit understanding that we should all laugh at the guy who didn't like a game about raping women.
And let's be clear: the game just isn't about "sort-of" rape. People tell me the sequels are, but I haven't played them. The one I reviewed is about actual rape. No, the victims don't "secretly like it"--they beg and cry and scream. Have we really gotten to the point where someone is an "SJW" because he's against rape?
So I wrote a negative review about that. In the review, I tried to analyze why rape is so much worse than violence, which players commit in almost every game. I also tried to put the rape part aside and discuss the game's merits as an RPG, as well as its non-rape humor.
But clearly I'm worthy of ridicule for writing about such things, because...why? I'm seriously asking. Don't just quote the last line. I agree, it's not great. I was looking for a way to wrap it up, and that's what I came up with. But what makes the totality of the review so risible? What would you have written about the game?
I really want to have a discussion about this. Don't just tag this post with "butthurt." Don't just offer some dismissive comment making fun of me. Discuss the issue with the same fervor you've put into "less" and "fewer." Help convince me that spending any more time on this site is worth my time.
You're like a guy that can't handle a racist joke. All art and humor must conform to your narrow ideological view that says we cannot make fun of/explore these things. It's almost impossible not to ridicule you.
Help convince me that spending any more time on this site is worth my time.
You're like a guy that can't handle a racist joke. All art and humor must conform to your narrow ideological view that says we cannot make fun of/explore these things. It's almost impossible not to ridicule you.
Not a lot of detail, but at least you're trying harder than the first guy. What I don't get about your argument is a) is "rape is bad" really ideological? If so, is it really "narrow"? b) I wasn't calling for the game to be banned by law, just describing my own reactions to it.
A racist joke is at least brief. Playing Rance is like deliberately buying and reading an entire book of racist jokes. I don't think I should have to apologize for condemning that.
crpgaddict said:...if the content doesn't offend you... please feel free not to comment on my blog.
Well, if you read that discussion closely, you'll see that there's not much going on other than fervor. Argumentation per se leaves something to be desired. So I wouldn't expect much other than name-calling.I really want to have a discussion about this. Don't just tag this post with "butthurt." Don't just offer some dismissive comment making fun of me. Discuss the issue with the same fervor you've put into "less" and "fewer."
There is not any real reason for moral outrage, because no one is saying this is how real life is supposed to be.
This is true and the point of the issue. However, I'd wish a clear explanation as to why rape is "wrong" but mass murder is "ok". Including thievery and many other morally wrong actions in crpgs. I mean, if you're going to be a moralfag, don't be selective about it, go all the way through.
I'd wish a clear explanation as to why rape is "wrong" but mass murder is "ok". Including thievery and many other morally wrong actions in crpgs. I mean, if you're going to be a moralfag, don't be selective about it, go all the way through.
From what I can tell, Rance advocates here belong to one of two categories: 1) Those who appreciate the mechanics of the game and don't care about subject matter
You're saying that rape is bad so we're not allowed to talk about it, joke about it, or make art around it.
You're saying that rape is bad so we're not allowed to talk about it, joke about it, or make art around it.
Perhaps the "feel free not to comment on my blog" comment was unwise. If you had suggested such a thing at the time I wrote it, I would have reacted with indignation that "don't make positive comments about a game that glorifies rape" was hardly an assault on constructive discourse. And I'm not sorry that my entry didn't fill up with comments in support of the game. But perhaps there's an argument to be made that any attempt to preemptively cut off discussion is a bad thing.
We'll have to disagree that Rance qualifies as "art." I see art as truly engaging a subject, raising questions, either attempting to deal with those questions or letting the consumer deal with them. It is possible to create art around rape, sure. The Accused does it. Lady Gaga's "Til It Happens to You" does it. Rance has no such aspirations. It's just pathetic and juvenile.
I'd wish a clear explanation as to why rape is "wrong" but mass murder is "ok". Including thievery and many other morally wrong actions in crpgs. I mean, if you're going to be a moralfag, don't be selective about it, go all the way through.
I addressed this in my entry. I struggled with it, too, and the best answer I could give is that murder and theft are both means of overcoming legitimate obstacles, whereas rape isn't. It's not a fully satisfactory answer, even to me, but the end result is the same: homicide and theft in RPGs don't repulse me, but rape did.
It's not that much different than films, television, and novels. We could all count dozens of characters who murder and steal and yet are the protagonists--heroes, even--of their respective works. It's far, far harder to think of a rapist with whom the audience is supposed to sympathize. The few exceptions I can think of have the character exhibit clear character development away from the sexual assault. So are we all deluded as a society? Is it a near-universal double-standard? Or is there something important and legitimate at the core of these reactions? Again, I don't claim to know, but I don't like being ridiculed for discussing the issue.
From what I can tell, Rance advocates here belong to one of two categories: 1) Those who appreciate the mechanics of the game and don't care about subject matter
There isn't a single person on this site who "appreciates the mechanics" of Rance. Again, I'm talking exclusively about the first game. If you do, you deserve a lot more ridicule than I do for thinking that Skyrim wasn't so bad.
You're saying that rape is bad so we're not allowed to talk about it, joke about it, or make art around it.
Perhaps the "feel free not to comment on my blog" comment was unwise. If you had suggested such a thing at the time I wrote it, I would have reacted with indignation that "don't make positive comments about a game that glorifies rape" was hardly an assault on constructive discourse. And I'm not sorry that my entry didn't fill up with comments in support of the game. But perhaps there's an argument to be made that any attempt to preemptively cut off discussion is a bad thing.
We'll have to disagree that Rance qualifies as "art." I see art as truly engaging a subject, raising questions, either attempting to deal with those questions or letting the consumer deal with them. It is possible to create art around rape, sure. The Accused does it. Lady Gaga's "Til It Happens to You" does it. Rance has no such aspirations. It's just pathetic and juvenile.
I'd wish a clear explanation as to why rape is "wrong" but mass murder is "ok". Including thievery and many other morally wrong actions in crpgs. I mean, if you're going to be a moralfag, don't be selective about it, go all the way through.
I addressed this in my entry. I struggled with it, too, and the best answer I could give is that murder and theft are both means of overcoming legitimate obstacles, whereas rape isn't. It's not a fully satisfactory answer, even to me, but the end result is the same: homicide and theft in RPGs don't repulse me, but rape did.
It's not that much different than films, television, and novels. We could all count dozens of characters who murder and steal and yet are the protagonists--heroes, even--of their respective works. It's far, far harder to think of a rapist with whom the audience is supposed to sympathize. The few exceptions I can think of have the character exhibit clear character development away from the sexual assault. So are we all deluded as a society? Is it a near-universal double-standard? Or is there something important and legitimate at the core of these reactions? Again, I don't claim to know, but I don't like being ridiculed for discussing the issue.
From what I can tell, Rance advocates here belong to one of two categories: 1) Those who appreciate the mechanics of the game and don't care about subject matter
There isn't a single person on this site who "appreciates the mechanics" of Rance. Again, I'm talking exclusively about the first game. If you do, you deserve a lot more ridicule than I do for thinking that Skyrim wasn't so bad.
You're saying that rape is bad so we're not allowed to talk about it, joke about it, or make art around it.
Perhaps the "feel free not to comment on my blog" comment was unwise. If you had suggested such a thing at the time I wrote it, I would have reacted with indignation that "don't make positive comments about a game that glorifies rape" was hardly an assault on constructive discourse. And I'm not sorry that my entry didn't fill up with comments in support of the game. But perhaps there's an argument to be made that any attempt to preemptively cut off discussion is a bad thing.
We'll have to disagree that Rance qualifies as "art." I see art as truly engaging a subject, raising questions, either attempting to deal with those questions or letting the consumer deal with them. It is possible to create art around rape, sure. The Accused does it. Lady Gaga's "Til It Happens to You" does it. Rance has no such aspirations. It's just pathetic and juvenile.
Dude you know how the developers who actually post here survive? They don't feed the trolls. Right now you're feeding the trolls. You said your piece so arguing with Rance bro's is not going to get you anywhere.
This gives us a subtotal of 45, which puts it fairly high on my existing list. I'm not sure how to feel about that. On the one hand, the game does so well mechanically that you absolutely have to recommend it. For 1991, it is a wonder to behold, and when I first started it, exploring Larvin and its environment, every hour I discovered some new nuance that led me to admire the developer even more. On the other hand, the inability of the developer to know when to quit seems like it ought to count more than a few points in the final GIMLET category. And it's especially bad for offering an ending that isn't worth reaching, and for hints and directions evaporating towards the game's end. In the end, comparing it to the other games on the list, I feel better knocking off 3 points and kicking it down to the level of Knights of Legend, which had similar problems, at a final score of 42.
But let's talk for a moment about the game-within-the-game: Fate: Quest of the Cavetrain. Not only does it not lose those 3 additional points, it gains 3 more in the "gameplay" category for not being too long, 1 more in the "quests" category for not being stupid yet, 2 more in the "economy" category for not having gone out of control, and 1 more in "character creation and development" for development being more significant, and 1 more in both "combat" and "encounters" for not yet becoming bland and rote. Fate: Quest of the Cavetrain is a solid 54-point game, 9th-highest on my blog so far, better than everything except titles that offer extensive side-quests and more detailed role-playing options, and an obvious candidate for 1991's "Game of the Year." Don't cheat yourself out of this excellent game. Just don't worry about where the Cavetrain leads.
I'd wish a clear explanation as to why rape is "wrong" but mass murder is "ok". Including thievery and many other morally wrong actions in crpgs. I mean, if you're going to be a moralfag, don't be selective about it, go all the way through.
I addressed this in my entry. I struggled with it, too, and the best answer I could give is that murder and theft are both means of overcoming legitimate obstacles, whereas rape isn't. It's not a fully satisfactory answer, even to me, but the end result is the same: homicide and theft in RPGs don't repulse me, but rape did.
It's not that much different than films, television, and novels. We could all count dozens of characters who murder and steal and yet are the protagonists--heroes, even--of their respective works. It's far, far harder to think of a rapist with whom the audience is supposed to sympathize. The few exceptions I can think of have the character exhibit clear character development away from the sexual assault. So are we all deluded as a society? Is it a near-universal double-standard? Or is there something important and legitimate at the core of these reactions? Again, I don't claim to know, but I don't like being ridiculed for discussing the issue.
From what I can tell, Rance advocates here belong to one of two categories: 1) Those who appreciate the mechanics of the game and don't care about subject matter
There isn't a single person on this site who "appreciates the mechanics" of Rance. Again, I'm talking exclusively about the first game. If you do, you deserve a lot more ridicule than I do for thinking that Skyrim wasn't so bad.
You're saying that rape is bad so we're not allowed to talk about it, joke about it, or make art around it.
Perhaps the "feel free not to comment on my blog" comment was unwise. If you had suggested such a thing at the time I wrote it, I would have reacted with indignation that "don't make positive comments about a game that glorifies rape" was hardly an assault on constructive discourse. And I'm not sorry that my entry didn't fill up with comments in support of the game. But perhaps there's an argument to be made that any attempt to preemptively cut off discussion is a bad thing.
We'll have to disagree that Rance qualifies as "art." I see art as truly engaging a subject, raising questions, either attempting to deal with those questions or letting the consumer deal with them. It is possible to create art around rape, sure. The Accused does it. Lady Gaga's "Til It Happens to You" does it. Rance has no such aspirations. It's just pathetic and juvenile.
Dude you know how the developers who actually post here survive? They don't feed the trolls. Right now you're feeding the trolls. You said your piece so arguing with Rance bro's is not going to get you anywhere.
There's also the crazy idea you don't HAVE to be a sjw douche whose panties are constantly in a knit and just enjoy playing/making/discussing games.
Of course if you criticize people's things they like on an ideological basis they won't like it, what an amazing shock.
I'd wish a clear explanation as to why rape is "wrong" but mass murder is "ok". Including thievery and many other morally wrong actions in crpgs. I mean, if you're going to be a moralfag, don't be selective about it, go all the way through.
I addressed this in my entry. I struggled with it, too, and the best answer I could give is that murder and theft are both means of overcoming legitimate obstacles, whereas rape isn't. It's not a fully satisfactory answer, even to me, but the end result is the same: homicide and theft in RPGs don't repulse me, but rape did.
It's not that much different than films, television, and novels. We could all count dozens of characters who murder and steal and yet are the protagonists--heroes, even--of their respective works. It's far, far harder to think of a rapist with whom the audience is supposed to sympathize. The few exceptions I can think of have the character exhibit clear character development away from the sexual assault. So are we all deluded as a society? Is it a near-universal double-standard? Or is there something important and legitimate at the core of these reactions? Again, I don't claim to know, but I don't like being ridiculed for discussing the issue.
From what I can tell, Rance advocates here belong to one of two categories: 1) Those who appreciate the mechanics of the game and don't care about subject matter
There isn't a single person on this site who "appreciates the mechanics" of Rance. Again, I'm talking exclusively about the first game. If you do, you deserve a lot more ridicule than I do for thinking that Skyrim wasn't so bad.
You're saying that rape is bad so we're not allowed to talk about it, joke about it, or make art around it.
Perhaps the "feel free not to comment on my blog" comment was unwise. If you had suggested such a thing at the time I wrote it, I would have reacted with indignation that "don't make positive comments about a game that glorifies rape" was hardly an assault on constructive discourse. And I'm not sorry that my entry didn't fill up with comments in support of the game. But perhaps there's an argument to be made that any attempt to preemptively cut off discussion is a bad thing.
We'll have to disagree that Rance qualifies as "art." I see art as truly engaging a subject, raising questions, either attempting to deal with those questions or letting the consumer deal with them. It is possible to create art around rape, sure. The Accused does it. Lady Gaga's "Til It Happens to You" does it. Rance has no such aspirations. It's just pathetic and juvenile.
It doesn't have to be Art to have a right to exist, it can be something as crude and simple as a Joke, or anything in between, and it doesn't require that it be done well, either.
You should stop engaging them about this
You said your piece so arguing with Rance bro's is not going to get you anywhere.
It doesn't have to be Art to have a right to exist, it can be something as crude and simple as a Joke, or anything in between, and it doesn't require that it be done well, either.
And if it's going to exist, whether it's done well or not, it is subjected to reviews and analysis, which is what I did. In turn, I'm happy to subject my own work to review and analysis, including disagreement. What I don't understand is mockey, especially prima facia mockery.
You should stop engaging them about thisYou said your piece so arguing with Rance bro's is not going to get you anywhere.
That's fine, but why else would I be here? I didn't wander into a Rance forum and pick a fight. This thread is titled "CRPGAddict." I've got commenters encouraging me to be a part of this site, to engage with its community. I don't need to be a part of this site. I have plenty of people to engage with on my own blog. Why would I engage with people who seem determined to hate me? People who, since they clearly aren't my fans, have subscribed to this forum solely to tear me down? Someone posts a quote from my blog--I don't even understand why they bother--and it gets ridiculed. I ask for a discussion of an issue, and my post gets tagged with "butthurt" and I get called "stupid" and a "SJW douche." At best, anyone who agrees with me is silent. If they say anything, it's simply "not to feed the trolls."
I don't like my name--even my pen-name--sullied by being part of the same thread where someone argues that "the whole point of SJWs is to disenfranchise whites and especially white males, cuck them and make them powerless." I don't particularly enjoy defending my work to a bunch of people that seem to think everything I write is automatically ridiculous without offering any qualitative discussion. I'd do it if there was some some benefit, but what's the benefit?
There are some good threads on the Codex, and I could see participating in them for various reasons, but I don't see any reason to keep coming back to this forum. Not because I "couldn't take it" or was "thin-skinned," but because there was no upside to taking a bunch of abuse from lunatics.
Not because I "couldn't take it" or was "thin-skinned," but because there was no upside to taking a bunch of abuse from lunatics.