As part of the small group of developers for the NES, what thoughts do you put towards diversity in your games?
Are there Only Six Black NES Characters in Existence?NES Female Protagonists----Continued from a previous thread...
dougeff wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
... (to darryl.revok)
Also, have you considered a different race/ethnicity/gender for your players? I think in 2016, correcting the dominance of white male protagonists in NES games should be taken into consideration.
I take issue with adding diversity merely for diversity sake. I feel like if I were playing a game made in ...let's say, Africa... and they added a 'whitey' character, merely as a marketing tactic, I would feel more offended than grateful.
I do agree that women protagonists are underrepresented, but merely slapping a last-minute... 'Oh, you can also play as the girl' feels kind of like a cheat. Especially in this genre.
Makes me think of an episode of Futurama, when they were watching a robot soap opera, and it had one token 'human' on the show.
Regardless, I don't feel that "main character" needs a compelling reason to not be a white male, nor do I feel that a person must be a member of an ethnic group to represent them in fiction. Just because you don't happen to be of a particular group, doesn't mean that persons of that group won't play your games.
Moreover, how does having a female soldier feel like
a cheat in a world where most modern countries permit women soldiers?
There's also a difference between adding a "whitey" character" and representing multiple ethnicities without stereotype.
Here's the futurama reference...
https://theinfosphere.org/Human_friendThey didn't even bother to give him a name, his character name is 'human friend'.
Characters not referred to by name in the body of a screenplay tend to be credited under something other than a name. For example, if
All My Circuits were real, it might officially credit "Calculon's Butler". Likewise, BK in
Kill Bill Vol. 1 was referred to only as "The Bride", except for a fleeting view of her real name on her ID that couldn't be easily perceived before the film's release on home video. (See
"No Name Given" on All The Tropes.)
Does anyone think the Power Rangers is racist? They made the Red ranger Native American, the Black ranger African American, the Yellow ranger is (a girl) from East Asia...
I'm surprised they didn't call the white guy the White ranger...after all, they made the other girl Pink...oh I get it Blue=boy, Pink=girl.
I feel like a well know Feminist blogger should do an episode about that. And don't correct me for clarity, mods, I write specifically obscurely...to not have my posts linked to by Google searches for a subject which I don't want to be attached to.
Speaking purely about Run and Gun, I don't think there's anything wrong with both characters being men in a game that is ostensibly a 80's male power fantasy. I also don't see fault with one or both of them being white since it draws a lot from Rambo.
As for games in general, I think that a well-rounded cast is a good idea in every situation that allows for it. Playing The Simpsons Hit and Run just yesterday it struck me as odd that all the characters that appear (with one exception) are the typical yellow (white) character. Granted, most of the characters in the show are yellow (white) but some are not and none of the extra actors in game reflected this. I wasn't exactly offended or anything but it did strike me as odd or even inappropriate.
But that's about as far as I think any diversity should be concerned. The gameplay drives the plot, the plot drives the setting, and the setting drives the character's biological identities. If I play a game set in modern day New York then I expect there to be a wide range of colors. If I play a game set in a fantasy world full of european architectue I expect fantasy-european characters. If a game is set in India, the majority of the cast should probably be Indian. Any aspect of the setting that stands out for no in-game reason is a failure no matter what politics are involved.
And of course it should go without saying that all of the above is my opinion and I don't expect the world to agree with me. You don't have to. We're all friends here.
dougeff wrote:
Does anyone think the Power Rangers is racist? They made the Red ranger Native American, the Black ranger African American, the Yellow ranger is (a girl) from East Asia...
That's a really interesting example. I've always been divided on that kind of stuff because it is definitely stereotyping, and that by itself is not a good practice I think but it also doesn't strike me as an atrocity. After all, I hear that Mexicans love Speedy Gonzales and Native Americans love Chief Thunder (especially the 90's design). I guess it comes down to whether it's a stereotype to celebrate a culture or a sterotype to put one down. As for whether it's racist or not... Can't say. All I can say is that it doesn't offend me much.
Okay the Blue=Boy thing gets me a little. But not much.
Quote:
I feel like a well know Feminist blogger should do an episode about that. And don't correct me for clarity, mods, I write specifically obscurely...to not have my posts linked to by Google searches for a subject which I don't want to be attached to.
It still makes me upset when people bring this up. I was involved in this movement at the very beginning back when it did what it said on the tin. That was the most exciting month of my life, feeling like I was doing something. Then people on my side started returning fire on shit-slingers and both sides lost any credibility as a whole. Another great thing derailed by petty insults. Then the freaking SVU episode came out and boy am I still sore. It pains me to no end that nothing good came of all that...
Guilty wrote:
If I play a game set in a fantasy world full of european architecture I expect fantasy-european characters.
But that begs the question. The fantasy-european setting is all-white because that's the established expectation of what fantasy-european means. But there were enough people of different visual appearances in the middle ages to justify them in a story. It's just been since largely erased by the Generic Fantasy Setting trope.
There's plenty of room to deconstruct and play with the tropes in an interesting way and not just make something that's a photocopy.
Quote:
Any aspect of the setting that stands out for no in-game reason is a failure no matter what politics are involved.
Just as a random idea to play around with: China has been lately building full-scale copies of historical european towns. What if ... you had a bunch of locals decide they wanted to do historical reënactments there?
Why does
this have to be justified, since the Generic Fantasy Setting trope isn't?
The character definitely needs to be designed for the darker skin tone from the beginning, because the skin tone sometimes needs to be the dark/outline color in the sprite's palette. If you want to use a simple palette swap to achieve light skin and dark skin, you're usually stuck using black as your darkest/outline color, and then only one accent color versus two.
If the NES had a higher fidelity palette, this would be much easier.
lidnariq wrote:
But that begs the question. The fantasy-european setting is all-white because that's the established expectation of what fantasy-european means. But there were enough people of different visual appearances in the middle ages to justify them in a story. It's just been since largely erased by the Generic Fantasy Setting trope.
I didn't say all the characters needed to be white, just fantasy-european. If there are made up ethnicities from nearby made up countries that are brown or even blue skinned, that's cool with me as long as it stays believable within the context of the world.
lidnariq wrote:
There's plenty of room to deconstruct and play with the tropes in an interesting way and not just make something that's a photocopy.
True, but I didn't get in to game development to play around with people's expectations for narrative or race. I'm here to make fun gameplay, and I assume many professional devs are the same way. I'm not interested in challenging any political norms.
Quote:
Just as a random idea to play around with: China has been lately building full-scale copies of historical european towns. What if ... you had a bunch of locals decide they wanted to do historical reënactments there?
...then... They do it? I mean it's pretty difficult to disguise yourself as a different ethnicity so I don't expect anyone to.
Quote:
Why does this have to be justified, since the Generic Fantasy Setting trope isn't?
In my game I'm very set on swordplay and shields for the core combat gameplay. That limits my possible settings to things that include the facilities and traditions that go along with my swords and shields. I can either go with a generic fantasy setting or I can research around about other cultures I might can work it in to. I'm interested in using a unique setting, but I also want the world to be consistent, so I'm probably going to end up picking the path of least resistance here. That's enough justification in my eyes.
Phew, these conversations are really hard to have. There are so many things that need to be said very carefully in a given political climate.
Drag wrote:
The character definitely needs to be designed for the darker skin tone from the beginning, because the skin tone sometimes needs to be the dark/outline color in the sprite's palette. If you want to use a simple palette swap to achieve light skin and dark skin, you're usually stuck using black as your darkest/outline color, and then only one accent color versus two.
If the NES had a higher fidelity palette, this would be much easier.
This, as I understand, was also an issue with depicted people of color in movies with older film types which did not have as wide of dynamic range. Shadow details would be lost meaning more detail of the actor than with a caucasian.
lidnariq wrote:
The fantasy-european setting is all-white because that's the established expectation of what fantasy-european means. But there were enough people of different visual appearances in the middle ages to justify them in a story. It's just been since largely erased by the Generic Fantasy Setting trope.
I'm for the sake of diversity where it fits as a natural extension of the story. For Run 'n' Gun, which started this discussion, I don't feel that it fits. However, with my main game which I'm taking a break from to make Run 'n' Gun, the protagonist is female, and it also takes place in an world which is a macrocosm, encompassing European and Asian influenced elements. It's a total work of fiction and a smaller world than our Earth, so I chose to just pick the elements I thought would work well in a game.
I feel like the concept is worth talking about to put into developers' minds that there are characters who can be portrayed who are not white male. However, I don't think anybody should be pressured to do so for a particular release if it's not what they are making. The last thing I think anybody wants to do is polarize the issue, and that's what often happens with debates on matters like these.
Is this just about race and sex, or also about sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability?
I would say 'all of the above'.
Believe it or not, I was considering doing a Metroid reveal at the end of my game, to show that the Ninja is secretly...some kind of minority, perhaps trans-gendered or gay or something, but I still feel it's a bit disingenuous.
Especially since the tone of my game is light-hearted, it might feel like I was mocking said groups.
dougeff wrote:
I would say 'all of the above'.
Believe it or not, I was considering doing a Metroid reveal at the end of my game, to show that the Ninja is secretly...some kind of minority, perhaps trans-gendered or gay or something, but I still feel it's a bit disingenuous.
Especially since the tone of my game is light-hearted, it might feel like I was mocking said groups.
I catch myself doing this same thing quite a lot. Part of me will feel very uncomfortable if I release a game with a large cast of human characters who are all the same race, but it's also hard to decide who's going to be what color.
I wish more of my close friends were non-white just so that I could get ideas from people I trust about where to go with the diversity thing. It's not exactly my first concern but I also don't want to make a game that makes someone feel bad about his or her self.
Unless they're just bad at the game itself because that's something I'll harp on endlessly.
dougeff wrote:
Believe it or not, I was considering doing a Metroid reveal at the end of my game, to show that the Ninja is secretly...some kind of minority, perhaps trans-gendered or gay or something, but I still feel it's a bit disingenuous.
What if he took off his ninja outfit and he was just a normal guy standing there and you couldn't tell anything until it flashed in bright rainbow letters "He's Gay!!!"
Also, I believe caucasian would probably be a minority for the ninja profession.
It was going to be more subtle...
The ninja is rescuing his 'girlfriend', if he took off his mask and revealed to really be a woman, I was going to leave it to the imagination what 'girlfriend' means.
dougeff wrote:
It was going to be more subtle...
The ninja is rescuing his 'girlfriend', if he took off his mask and revealed to really be a woman, I was going to leave it to the imagination what 'girlfriend' means.
I think that's often the best way to do it. Ambiguity leaves room for people not to be offended in any direction and still lets you show what you want to. One of my favorite things about Shovel Knight is the open-endedness of the player's relation to Shield Knight. Hell, you don't even know who Shovel Knight is under the armor.
...which is also why the gender swap mode was a really bad idea on Yacht Club's part.
Anyways, I find that most of the time the sexuality (sexual identity? gender identity? I'm not up to date here) of a given character in a given game doesn't ever come into question. If the sexuality is ever brought up unprovokedly it can leave a sour taste in the player's mouth whether he's bigoted or not. See Borderlands.
I'm glad this topic is being brokighet IP.
Here's a (IMO) good
article on skin colour and biased dynamic range. How do you think it compares the palette choices made for third/fourth gen consoles?
WheelInventor wrote:
I'm glad this topic is being brokighet IP.
Here's a (IMO) good
article on skin colour and biased dynamic range. How do you think it compares the palette choices made for third/fourth gen consoles?
The comments section on this article is hilarious. I have no idea how much I believe any of these people. Conversations about prejudice are so impossible.
Reminds me of a Star Trek anecdote re: the Orion girl in the pilot. Majel Barrett was used to test the makeup, and apparently the photo lab wasn't informed that she was supposed to be green, so the camera tests kept coming back colour-corrected. The studio assumed the makeup was the problem and kept making it greener, until finally someone thought to phone the lab and ask what the deal was...
oops, sorry for the foreign autocorrect in my previous post
Quote:
Believe it or not, I was considering doing a Metroid reveal at the end of my game, to show that the Ninja is secretly...some kind of minority, perhaps trans-gendered or gay or something, but I still feel it's a bit disingenuous.
Since I'm a transperson, i might be able to help you with an insider perspective and info if you decide to go for it. For starters, i'd say lightheartedness isn't wrong in itself (it's actually an in terms of representation pretty needed balance to all the tragic trans portraits, if done well), while uniformens use of trans identities as novelty often comes across badly, especially given the current conditions of everyday life for many of us. Is that what you feel hesitant about? I'd like to detail this but i should wait until i'm back at my computer. Can't realt speak for other minorities even though i'm in the lgbtq scene.
I wonder if the yellow slimes behind keyboards feel that they are underrepresented by green and blue slimes...
I understand the complaints about Race, and I'll get to that later, but about sexual identity... pardon me but this is fucking stupid. Even FIRST NAME is somewhat irrelevant for a good portion of NES protagonists. Who the hell cares if the guy from Contra is gay? What relevance does that have to a game where the amount of exposition given to the player is "You're a guy with Guns shooting bad guys and aliens up up down down left right left right B A select start gogogogogogo". It feels forced because it is. Maybe in an RPG but why should the sexual preference of the character be it's main personality feature?
About Race: an ok question to make, but it feels empty when you do it just to check boxes a la Power Rangers. This is even worse if you force it to a setting alien to the "race" of the character. Why not design something in the proper setting or make a creative new fantasy one where characters actually have a purpose to be?
Not only that but how do you represent proper Race representatives with so few resources? Maybe Lance from Contra is actually Armenian. Or Polish. Or even South African? Who knows. How do you make sure you don't offend anyone?
End of rant.
Samus could have been anyone until she took her helmet off.
dougeff wrote:
tepples wrote:
Is this just about race and sex, or also about sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability?
I would say 'all of the above'.
Then I guess that gives me a
leg up with this
Pygame tech demo.
(Oh wait, that might have been insensitive.)
Guilty wrote:
Anyways, I find that most of the time the sexuality (sexual identity? gender identity? I'm not up to date here) of a given character in a given game doesn't ever come into question.
"Gender identity" is the sex role with which you identify, especially if it is trans (not matching the gender assigned to you at birth). "Sexual orientation" is whether sex that you prefer as a romantic partner matches your own.
I guess it might take a gay writer to write a set of believable gay cutscenes if you want to keep it respectful and at the PG-13 level of
subtext, rather than the NC-17 level of
its anagram.
But seriously, on the NES, if you set brightness on a scale from 0 to 6, there's usually enough contrast if two adjacent colors are two units apart:
- 0: $0F
- 1: $01-$0C
- 2: $00, $2D, and $11-$1C
- 4: $10, $3D, and $21-$2C
- 5: $31-$3C
- 6: $20
So how would $0F outline, $17 skin, and $2x clothes look?
tepples wrote:
leg
Pffaaaahahhaha.
Puns aside you also bring up the subject of palettes, which gets me thinking as well; colors are a commodity on the NES. Balancing the available sprite palettes can be a tricky act if characters have multiple skin tones. Having a few villagers on screen at once could be a problem unless each one only uses three colors.
I am a fan of the art style seen on many gameboy color games; especially Capcom's Megaman Xtreme/2 and the Zelda Oracle games: Each character gets only three colors and they are all of the same hue. It may be monochromatic but something about it just appeals to me.
...but that kind of gets confusing when you try to apply ethnicity to it. I mean, when a character's skin is cherry red its more or less impossible to tell their family history. Given the resolution it's also difficult to tell whether or not they have ears. Neither of these are important to the game though, at least in the case of Zelda or Megaman. I can't think of any games where ethnicity
would come into play, unless the game is purposefully set in a social climate that it matters a lot. I think that video games aren't a great place to talk about race or genders/sexualities though. I mean, that seems like the kind of subject that doesn't lend well to interactive media... Maybe I'm narrow minded though.
rainwarrior wrote:
Samus could have been anyone until she took her helmet off.
...and then she stripped as a reward for the player. Although likely corrected in later entries, the original Metroid is a poor defending example of gender representation in games.
Also, I've frequently referenced the randomly generated player-mechanic of Lizard as inclusiveness done right... and the similar randomization in Super Russian Roulette (where everything except the character's complexion is randomized) as a blindly missed opportunity. That has a large part to do with why I backed Lizard and not the latter.
Punch wrote:
... Even FIRST NAME is somewhat irrelevant for a good portion of NES protagonists. Who the hell cares if the guy from Contra is gay? ...
I don't think anyone would make the argument to state the orientation of a character in a game like Contra, but in a game where romantic interest is overtly presented (even if it is the uninspired trope of "save girlfriend"), sexual orientation is often one of the small handful of traits implied about a protagonist.
Punch wrote:
This is even worse if you force it to a setting alien to the "race" of the character. Why not design something in the proper setting or make a creative new fantasy one where characters actually have a purpose to be?
Does there need to be
a purpose for race? How many settings are really
alien to even a moderate range of skin tones? What settings would you consider justify the white unless proven otherwise?
dougeff wrote:
... [Power Rangers] made the Red ranger Native American, the Black ranger African American, the Yellow ranger is (a girl) from East Asia ...
It most definitely was a problem, and is referenced pretty regularly. Key and Peele had a fairly entertaining skit about it as well. Also,the new movie changes everything you mentioned except the pink player being female. Using it as an example of "newly created fictional characters should default to white if the creator is white" is not really a valid argument though.
dougeff wrote:
The ninja is rescuing his 'girlfriend', if he took off his mask and revealed to really be a woman, I was going to leave it to the imagination what 'girlfriend' means.
Is the ninja's
girlfriend just a pink ninja? If so, giving the player the option of selecting the pink or purple ninja at the beginning, having the other one kidnapped, and never revealing gender of either would probably be the most interesting way to handle the subject, especially considering that purple has no implied gender association. You could take a step further and also use another gender-neutral color, such as yellow (pretending the NES actually had a yellow in its palette) for the second ninja.
Or, the player could play as the purple until the ending, where in the ending, the purple character is "kidnapped" and the player controls the previous hostage for 2nd quest (higher difficulty level, palette swap for character playthrough). This could actually be a rather interesting way to turn the trope on its head.
Attachment:
vnHeart.gif [ 3.75 KiB | Viewed 1393 times ]
M_Tee wrote:
Is the ninja's girlfriend just a pink ninja? If so, giving the player the option of selecting the pink or purple ninja at the beginning, having the other one kidnapped, and never revealing gender of either would probably be the most interesting way to handle the subject, especially considering that purple has no implied gender association. You could take a step further and also use another gender-neutral color, such as yellow (pretending the NES actually had a yellow in its palette) for the second ninja.
Love Story did some of that?
M_Tee wrote:
Or, the player could play as the purple until the ending, where in the ending, the purple character is "kidnapped" and the player controls the previous hostage for 2nd quest (higher difficulty level, palette swap for character playthrough). This could actually be a rather interesting way to turn the trope on its head.
Not a bad idea.
M_Tee wrote:
"newly created fictional characters should default to white if the creator is white"
There's kind of a
Morton's Fork here, between "only has creator-type" and "cultural appropriation"...and "properly" including a culture not the creator's costs time/money/influence, and may still bring cries of cultural appropriation, even if
M_Tee wrote:
Also, I've frequently referenced the randomly generated player-mechanic of Lizard as inclusiveness done right... and the similar randomization in Super Russian Roulette (where everything except the character's complexion is randomized) as a blindly missed opportunity. That has a large part to do with why I backed Lizard and not the latter.
Now consider if/when the generator spits out what amounts to
blackface, a result not very possible with the small, indistinct faces in Lizard.
WheelInventor wrote:
Here's a (IMO) good
article on skin colour and biased dynamic range. How do you think it compares the palette choices made for third/fourth gen consoles?
Well, I feel it was less of an issue for the fourth generation, but the limited palettes of the NES don't lend well to visual diversity in any way. The palette situation for the game I'm currently programming is very tight. I need a palette for skin tones, and two palettes for pants unless the players are going to be the same colors and nearly indistinguishable. So that's three palettes to which I'm permanently tied. If the characters varied in ethnicity, then that's four palettes for the entire game. As it is, even, three fixed palettes and one variable seems like it will be hard to manage. But I suppose Contra did it.
Another issue with NES palettes are that a black person, if drawn with an outline, would need to be outlined in black, or lack a color for shadow, as far as I can see. This would limit backgrounds to being non-black. A lot of NES games tend to use a lot of black in the backgrounds to hide details and seams.
I wouldn't imagine that anybody here is fundamentally opposed to including people of other races in their games. There are undoubtedly considerations from a development end worth discussing. Since this topic began I thought about doing some mockups of different ethnicities if someone doesn't beat me to it.
tepples wrote:
But seriously, on the NES, if you set brightness on a scale from 0 to 6, there's usually enough contrast if two adjacent colors are two units apart:
- 0: $0F
- 1: $01-$0C
- 2: $00, $2D, and $11-$1C
- 4: $10, $3D, and $21-$2C
- 5: $31-$3C
- 6: $20
So how would $0F outline, $17 skin, and $2x clothes look?
Out of curiosity, here are the possible results using the nestopia palette:
Attachment:
smb3SkinTones.gif [ 11.17 KiB | Viewed 1379 times ]
(Also, Mario's sprite is simply used as a commonly available example here. This is not an argument for changing Mario. I couldn't care one way or another about pre-existing characters. The discussion for the creation of new NES characters, which many of us are doing.)
Actually, #27 is dark enough that it can be interpreted a number of ways, save for any conflicting official box art. Lode Runner is a good example of this.
Attachment:
lrSkinTones.gif [ 2.19 KiB | Viewed 1379 times ]
In the above, the middle palette is what was used in LodeRunner. Either of the side palettes would be acceptable as well, IMO.
Below are some alternate palettes I would consider for Contra, the middle of which use #27 as a skin tone base, the bottom of which is likely what I would use if I had to make a call.
Attachment:
ContraPalettes.gif [ 5.87 KiB | Viewed 1379 times ]
I seem to recall reading an article (sometime around 2007~2009?) about designing playable characters with a vague ethnicity, so that the largest range of players can identify with them, and #27 seems to be that point on the NES.
I will do a proper reply once I get to an actual computer with keyboard but needless to say the sprite work you made is awesome, M_Tee. That really helps to visualize the topic at hand.
Myask wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
... having the other one kidnapped...
Love Story did some of that?
Yeah, it does.
Myask wrote:
There's kind of a
Morton's Fork here, between "only has creator-type" and "cultural appropriation"...and "properly" including a culture not the creator's costs time/money/influence, and may still bring cries of cultural appropriation
True, but when a character is something like "generic school kid", there's no risk in "generic dark/tan/light-skinned school boy/girl", and there's definitely no risk in giving the player a choice.
Myask wrote:
Now consider if/when the generator spits out what amounts to
blackface, a result not very possible with the small, indistinct faces in Lizard.
It seems to simply have 2-3 palettes predetermined for various skin tones, plus a few hairstyles. For it to make an offensive result, an offensive result would need to be programmed in there to begin with, so that's not an issue.
darryl.revok wrote:
The palette situation for the game I'm currently programming is very tight. I need a palette for skin tones, and two palettes for pants unless the players are going to be the same colors and nearly indistinguishable. So that's three palettes to which I'm permanently tied. If the characters varied in ethnicity, then that's four palettes for the entire game. As it is, even, three fixed palettes and one variable seems like it will be hard to manage. But I suppose Contra did it.
Another issue with NES palettes are that a black person, if drawn with an outline, would need to be outlined in black, or lack a color for shadow, as far as I can see. This would limit backgrounds to being non-black. A lot of NES games tend to use a lot of black in the backgrounds to hide details and seams.
I wouldn't imagine that anybody here is fundamentally opposed to including people of other races in their games. There are undoubtedly considerations from a development end worth discussing. Since this topic began I thought about doing some mockups of different ethnicities if someone doesn't beat me to it.
Sorry, didn't check this post before posting my last one.
Actually, Contra just had 2 for players because the red player uses the same palette for his pants and his torso.
If you devote a whole three, it opens up a word of possibilities. (Also, you can share the palettes with NPCs, so you can get a variety of range of enemies as well, once you bring in the fourth, if you let one of your skin tones share for bullets, which is totally reasonable)
M_Tee wrote:
rainwarrior wrote:
Samus could have been anyone until she took her helmet off.
...and then she stripped as a reward for the player. Although likely corrected in later entries, the original Metroid is a poor defending example of gender representation in games.
The suggestion was tongue-in-cheek, and for the record they
did not change the "reward" in later entries. Also the original manual refered to her as a man. (I think there's a lot of leeway to interpret Samus as trans, if you're inclined to.)
My point, though, was that you don't necessarily get to know all sorts of details about a character. If you show their skin, you can see its colour, perhaps. If you'd like it to be up to the reader, hiding it is an option. Of course, details about a character can make them interesting too.
I think a lot of game manuals had biographical information on their characters because they didn't feel confident that the fantasy could be fully realized in the sights and sounds of the game. The extra detail were there to help make it feel more real in your imagination. These days we usually expect a game to do this on its own; manuals aren't really part of the experience anymore, even when playing old games (that were clearly made without that expectation).
Most old manual writing was pretty bland, with bland characterizations. They weren't really trying to make a new and interesting character, they were trying to borrow one you already knew.
Rastan was deliberately using
Conan to fill in the gaps in their expression of the character.
In Rastan II the second player was black, by the way. I think it's mostly just practical (the player sprite is mostly skin, so it's the best thing to swap palette with), though it might have been inspired by Wilt Chamberlain's character in the second Conan movie.
Anyhow, the lack of diversity in characters is a self re-inforcing problem. Any time you're imitating previous work, you're reinforcing its biases. You have to
go out of your way, to get a different result.
My own feeling is that the most interesting thing you can do is to try and make the player think and interpret. Give them subtle details that hint about their past, but don't give them everything; a rich combination of hint and mystery. Give them something to ask questions about, and discuss with others. If a character is gay, for example, think about the ways that it has affected their past, or how it might inform their actions. Being a good writer in this way involves developing an understanding of people and psychology, and if that sounds like a lot of work that's probably because it is. Good writing is difficult. Blatant characterizations and borrowed tropes are a lot easier.
There's value in just giving explicit biography for characters too, though, especially in a game that has a lot of them. The difficult part is how to make use of them. Valkyria Chronicles, for example, had a lot of stats on each character that had biographical justification (penalty on grass if they have hayfever allergies, a lower aim stat justified by poor eyesight and glasses, various relationships with other characters affecting stats when they're near), and learning about each of them was to your advantage in gameplay.
M_Tee wrote:
Also, I've frequently referenced the randomly generated player-mechanic of Lizard as inclusiveness done right... and the similar randomization in Super Russian Roulette (where everything except the character's complexion is randomized) as a blindly missed opportunity. That has a large part to do with why I backed Lizard and not the latter.
Thanks. I have multiple reasons for doing this that I could go on at length about, but I'd like to leave it to interpretation.
Also, I'm a big fan of people who
take matters into their own hands.
Quote:
Is the ninja's girlfriend just a pink ninja? If so, giving the player the option of selecting the pink or purple ninja at the beginning, having the other one kidnapped, and never revealing gender of either would probably be the most interesting way to handle the subject, especially considering that purple has no implied gender association. You could take a step further and also use another gender-neutral color, such as yellow (pretending the NES actually had a yellow in its palette) for the second ninja.
Or, the player could play as the purple until the ending, where in the ending, the purple character is "kidnapped" and the player controls the previous hostage for 2nd quest (higher difficulty level, palette swap for character playthrough). This could actually be a rather interesting way to turn the trope on its head.
Interesting. Rescuing a kidnapped loved-one is such a trope, isn't it? I mean even for movies.
And, I like rainwarrior's comment about Samus could be anyone under the suit. I suppose any character whos skin tone is never revealed (wearing a costume/suit) should allow a user of any ethnicity imagine that the character could possibly match their own. Maybe it's better to NOT have a 'reveal' moment.
That's a great option!
I mean, gender identity or sexual orientation is a lot less visual than gendered appearances and skin tone. Ambiguity is perhaps even more useful than in the skin tone example.
In my game, since it's absolutely trivial to implement a palette swap, allowing variation in (honestly pretty ambiguous) cultural background is just such an obviously easy feature. Male and female characters are present. The characters are mostly faceless and pretty small, so I feel no need to give them explicit background information. If somebody sees PPU color $35 as the skin of a white person, an asian person, a middle-eastern person, or anything else, it's up to them as the player.
Guilty wrote:
If I play a game set in modern day New York then I expect there to be a wide range of colors. If I play a game set in a fantasy world full of European architecture I expect fantasy-European characters.
There are two issues I have with such a view:
The first is that Europe had exposure and interaction, including trade, with the Near East, the Far East, and Northern Africa starting long before the eras commonly used as source for Eurofantasy. These include, but are not limited to: The Silk Road, Alexander the Great, The Persian Conquests, The Roman Empire, sea trade, etc.
Simply put,
an entirely white Europe is a fantasy construct (Link,
Link,
Link) as is also evident in the fact that persons of color represented during these time periods have often been painted over or are frequently cropped. (
Link) On top of that, there is a wide range of appearance within any ethnicity. For example, Joan of Arc was a
short, dark, and stocky French girl. However, she is often romanticized as
frail,
pasty, and
blonde.
Second,
fantasy is fantasy. As creators of fiction, if we choose to depict a fantasy world populated with solely white characters or heroes, then the creation of that white-fantasy world is entirely on us. "Historical Accuracy" also completely loses its merit when a dragon walks into town. How can having a non-white character break one's suspension of disbelief when goblins, gremlins, goos, and magic don't?
Further reading (a fantastic round-table discussion from a diverse group of fantasy authors.)
rainwarrior wrote:
Anyhow, the lack of diversity in characters is a self re-inforcing problem. Any time you're imitating previous work, you're reinforcing its biases. You have to
go out of your way, to get a different result.
This is very true, and I'd say that in regards to the lack of diversity, probably 90% falls on the "well, I was just imitating previous games / genre material, etc." But, if we're not trying to better the work of the past, I see little reason to imitate it. And, as hobbyists, it's an uphill battle to improve upon the technical quality of the work created decades ago by teams of paid professionals, but inclusive content and increased cultural representation is an easy way to improve upon what has been offered before.
Also, unlike commercially-produced games, there is
no corporate pressure to conform. As part of only a handful of people actively developing NES games these days, I feel that we hold a larger share of responsibility in what we add to the already-limited NES library.
mikejmoffitt wrote:
... If somebody sees PPU color $35 as the skin of a white person, an asian person, a middle-eastern person, or anything else, it's up to them as the player.
Attachment:
nesSkinTones.gif [ 4.12 KiB | Viewed 1801 times ]
Forgive me, as I'm not sure if I've seen shots of your game, so I'm not aware of the exact circumstances. But, don't you think that, out of eleven reasonable skin tones, selecting the lightest, pinkest one, and stating that "it's up to the player to interpret race" feels like a bit of a cop out?EDIT: Just saw your game
here. The typical schoolgirl outfits show its influence in anime–which does get localized in a number of different regions. So, I'd say that although a full range couldn't be interpreted, a wider range than I had previously assumed could be. Game looks good, by the way.
I added some suggestions in your thread for it.
I don't think a mostly-light-skinned cast needs to be justified, and in fact, attempts to justify it are what leads developers into hot water in the first place.
Take my project for example, the players' skin tone is $27 (tangerine orange) because they already wear white and a lighter tone ($37 for example) wouldn't look good next to white. There's also a darker color, blue $12 or red $16 depending on which player it is, which is both an accent color and the outline color. That's all the thought that went into the skin tone. Any other explanation would likely be PR making something up in response to being under fire on social media, so it'd be untruthful and full of contradictions, and that's what gets devs in trouble.
M_Tee wrote:
mikejmoffitt wrote:
... If somebody sees PPU color $35 as the skin of a white person, an asian person, a middle-eastern person, or anything else, it's up to them as the player.
Attachment:
nesSkinTones.gif
Forgive me, as I'm not sure if I've seen shots of your game, so I'm not aware of the exact circumstances. But, don't you think that, out of eleven reasonable skin tones, selecting the lightest, pinkest one, and stating that "it's up to the player to interpret race" feels like a bit of a cop out?EDIT: Just saw your game
here. The typical schoolgirl outfits show its influence in anime–which does get localized in a number of different regions. So, I'd say that although a full range couldn't be interpreted, a wider range than I had previously assumed could be. Game looks good, by the way.
I added some suggestions in your thread for it.
Just to re-voice my clarifications - My post was pretty poorly written, it's not clear at all. I have full intentions to include many of the tones listed, I was rather trying to explain why I don't feel the need to be more specific about what $35 is supposed to refer to, and leave that to the discretion of the player.
I didn't read this whole thread, but my game will have a female protagonist.
Also there will not be a striptease at the end of the game where a better in-game accomplishments means more clothes taken off, this is not particularly gratifying for womens as a whole, despite having a female protagonist (hem hem.... Metroid ...)
In the linked article, I found a game incredibly similar to mine, which is incredible considering I didn't know about that game at all. Same genre, same mapper, and also a female protagonist. But the comparison stops here.
Can we have striptease with a male character please?
Espozo wrote:
Can we have striptease with a male character please?
It's going to be such a missed opportunity if they don't include a bare-chested solid snake or something like that as an extra model for the photoshoot mode, if Konami & co. decides to release a Metal Gear Solid remake someday.
edit: anyway, the practical palette examples in this thread changed my mind about the "race" issue, since I'm not really an artist I thought skin tones weren't really a forte of the NES' video hardware... turns out I'm wrong. I'll definitely keep in mind the "ambiguous skin tone" thing, since trying to do decent "race" portrayals always felt too much like a walking on eggshells kind of situation to me.
If you're making a game for yourself, I think you should represent whomever you want. Representing yourself (or people you know) might be important to you. There are sprite versions of myself in a few of my early game projects.
I wouldn't fault anyone for doing this in their homebrew project. It's a natural thing in fiction to draw on people you know to create your characters; this isn't just an indie thing. A lot of good writers will go out of their way to meet and learn about new people, because it improves their palette of experience to draw from.
You don't have to make only characters who have the same background as you-- of course you don't-- but if you feel you shouldn't it probably has a lot to do with your lack of experience with that background. Solve this problem by doing research, meeting people, reading, observing, thinking. And of course, try to recognize where your concept of something is based on movies and dumb stereotypes rather than an experience of real people.
If you don't have a strong idea about who your character is, though, it's worth thinking about what you ended up choosing, and whether it could be different. Is the character's race motivated by the setting, by their past, by a particular fantasy, by a desire to represent someone you know, someone you don't know, no-one, everyone at once, someone impossible, a play on common tropes, humour, or...? If you don't have a reason for it,
get one. There are good reasons to choose ambiguity too, I don't want to characterize that as the product of weak goals. I just want to stress that it's important to
have a goal, here.
"I don't want to make my character race/gender/etc. X because I fear social backlash."
The only thing I can say about this is don't let fear motivate you, and have enough thought about what you're doing that you care about why your character is who they are, so that you can stand up for it. If you expect backlash, is it because you think you're doing something wrong, or is the expected criticism intellectually bankrupt? If you actually feel guilty about what you're doing, it may be worth changing your plans. If you feel good about what you're doing then stick with it. If you don't know what you're doing and are worried that everything you choose is wrong, then you probably
should spend some more time trying to figure this out for yourself.
If you have goals that motivate your choices, it will help with this problem.
To be blunt, "diversity" is just about the last topic that comes to mind when I design a game. That said, my first game was about a cat, the second game about a white female elf. Games just...don't really touch on politics, for me. I know legions of insufferable people have made a big fat hairy deal about it, but in the words of Garfield:
Games are about childhood lightheartedness, not heavy grown up political joy killing nonsense.
Just my two cents!
Well, drag me out and shoot me, hoss. Ironically, I wouldn't be the first (or second) person in my family to be shot in a street.
I'll also have to add that to my mental note of Garfield's depth of character: hates Mondays, likes lasagna, takes naps, and is a Trump supporter, apparently.
Getting back to being insufferable: multiculturalism was a pillar of my undergraduate studies, has long been a vital issue in my occupation, and moreover, is ever-present in my day-to-day life as a member of a multicultural family. So, I've got some dogs in this fight, so to speak.
As creators of globally-spread media, like it or not, we have a responsibility in the material that we produce. We pretty much have three choices: intentionally spite that responsibility (those that do this are loud enough about it that I feel it doesn't even warrant further discussion), ignore it (default to white male, perpetuate tropes, etc.), or take it into consideration (and likely produce more inclusive, and more unique, products while doing so).
What I can't understand though, is why one would feel that it's "politics" to even consider this, or how you could respond to "Have you thought about depicting non-white people in your game?" with "Thinking about that is nonsense that would kill my joy and apparently result in a not-lighthearted game."
I've thought about it and I believe if I was a person of color who enjoys retro games, I'd probably be, not offended persay, but annoyed at the lack of representation in the medium. It's easier to imagine why things were this way during the production of commercial NES games. Hell, I don't even think it was common to see a mainstream film at the time with a black protagonist without an equally important white partner.
On the other hand, I think there's a flipside worth considering, and that's the difficulty in creating a game for the NES, and in writing characters and stories which are unique and good. To be fair, I've loved video games as long as I can remember, and I feel like a video game with a good plot is few and far between. Even the games with better plots, imagine taking the video game control out of it, and do you really think you would read that book? I can't think of many which I would. And I don't think this is a bad thing, because the fun in a video game is in playing it, and I think often times the most effective video game plots are solely made in service of gameplay. Contrast this with the modern gameplay trend of interactive movies where you get "games" like Heavy Rain wherein the gameplay consists of responding to button prompts to call your son's name. Give me a break.
So if someone makes a generic platform game that uses a lot of (potentially offensive) tropes like, a white male protagonist rescuing a damsel in distress, but the gameplay is solid, would I think they should be chastised? Definitely not. How many people try and fail at making a platformer and how many don't even try at all? This forum is about NES development, and I think the effort should be congratulated here. There are surely forums where a person could go to get chastised for not being politically correct if they wanted.
I think the topic is beneficial to bring up as a constructive comment of something to keep in mind. Even if the only personal validation you might have for including more diverse characters is potentially reaching a wider audience. What I wouldn't want to see is either side of this discussion putting up walls. I don't think it's helpful to deride someone's hard work if they don't necessary have diversity in their project. Also though, I don't think it's helpful to be offended at the suggestion of including more races/genders, as long as it's a suggestion. We're all here just to simply give one another suggestions on actualizing our own projects, not pressure one another in any way.
M_Tee wrote:
and is a Trump supporter, apparently.
What?
The only thing I have to say about character diversity is I hate when something is trying to be realistic, but it also unrealistically tries to include an equal number of males and females and tries to shoehorn in every ethnicity on the planet.
However, for fun, (these games often don't try to be realistic anyway) if I ever made a beat em up or a fighting game, I'd want to have some female characters that aren't the fast but weak type, and have a couple that are more well rounded, with possibly even a heavy character. Women can use steroids too.
Apparently, a new comment came in...
I just looked at Heavy Rain. God... And it got a 9.0 from IGN. I would have thought they'd criticize it for having "too much water."
Apparently, it's one of the dozens of PS3 games to games to get a "remaster" on the PS4. Funny thing is, I actually kind of like the look of the PS3 version better:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oADuwnGQBi8You know what I think is hilarious? Games seem to be less inclined to use pre rendered cut scenes, but newer games have so many QuickTime events that they could easily be made Dragon's Lair style. The games are big enough for Christ's sake.
What other things do you like, rainwarrior...?
Espozo wrote:
The games are big enough for Christ's sake.
They could be even bigger on one of these:
This has to be the pinnacle of gameplay though:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5GoDAsYMUsThere are reasons I still play NES games.
darryl.revok wrote:
This has to be the pinnacle of gameplay though:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5GoDAsYMUs
At least the Infinite Warfare trailer is still racking up dislikes. Don't forget to contribute.
Quote:
What I can't understand though, is why one would feel that it's "politics" to even consider this, or how you could respond to "Have you thought about depicting non-white people in your game?" with "Thinking about that is nonsense that would kill my joy and apparently result in a not-lighthearted game."
My sentiment exactly. Disney, as an example, and especially when Disney himself lived, often got vigourosly defended on the basis that critizising 'child culture' was political and joy-killing. However, disney products in itself is as political as it gets. There is no neutrality or special authenticy or sacredness to entertainment or cultural products designed for children, it just sometimes appears so because we see everything but the point from where we look. If that point of view happens to correspond with the bulk of popular-cultural production, that generates the perception of 'neutrality' or 'non-politics'. Entertainment is inherently not-neutral. Everything is a positioning, whether intentional or not. What is arbitrarily seen as 'political' shifts from time to time as the discourse moves around.
I'm agreeing that homebrewing should be personal, just as a rule of thumb in writing courses is to use one third of self-experienced material in your fictional work. But a good writer also thinks about the impact of the written word. Of course, we sometimes overcredit the content of a medium - people have a certain agency to act upon cultural artifacts and messages and make what they want with it - but that is also limited by discourse, reoccurence and hegemony and material or other structural relationships; what is readily and easily thinkable, and what requires more effort; and is thus structurally unfavoured compared to the established order of things for the time being.
An interesting case with skintone in NES era games is that it very well reflects the media landscape of the time. People with dark or black skintone are restrictively (and in the case of nes, i think, only) represented in athletic contexts, especially boxing, or as in the many street beat 'em up-styled games, are tied to a street gang cliché. The problem here is that these are the only canals of reprensentation in videogames of the time. This is a
schoolbook example of power through representation.
Another point i want to make even though it may seem obvious when spelled out: Skintone is not equal to ethnicity. That can be used to an advantage when designing characters.
On a half-related note, i train roller derby. It's really cool to see how that sport has evolved from the 70's era of tv showmanship to a true sport (ie not staged), mainly by women, for women, and with a healthy diy/punk ideal and strong focus on athletism, through the organization of
WFTDA. If anyone wants to make the first good NES game about roller derby (there are two, but one is plain bad and one is a beat em up rather than anything like the sport ever was), i have a note block with design ideas, on-track experience with the sport itself, and the will to draw graphics. As a member of a wftda league, it might even be possible to try and get it officially sanctioned, like
Jam City. Oh, and on the note of climbing out of the 'weak but fast' trope: Here's a poster of top skater
Suzy Hotrod (nsfw because of 'artistic nudity'). Strong like hell, balanced and fast. One look at that pic is all i need to up my training motivation. Edit: we've not only got
noms de guerre - we've got
war faces, too.
Edit 2: Some more elaboration on the concept of neutrality vs politics in nes era games.
I enjoyed strider and rush'n'attack as a kid, and still do. Today, i can see how they were fueled by and in themselves reinforcing an already unhealthy russophobia, but in the context and direct aftermath of the cold war, they must've seemed pretty harmless or neutral in comparison, especially as the ones targeted was a very distinct 'they' which the west-block didn't readily associate with. Kind of in reverse, the game 'guevara' was cencored to 'guerilla', even though gameplay made it pretty obvious it was about the cuban revolution. Likewise for contra -> probotector (even though aliens are behind everything). I know this is sometimes attributed to the german market, but you also need to weigh in that if the real-life contras caused controversy in the US, it had an even more bad ring to it in Europe. These are all examples of games using fresh political events as a backdrop (or in the case of contra, just a little), though. But i also think they show how fragile neutrality as a concept is.
I don't feel the need to participate in a reams-of-text-pissing contest as is so popular on forums like these, but I'll just say this:
I have in fact already thought about creating a video game about a black man. Was I thinking about diversity and how black people feel about their current representation in video games? No. It was because I grew up thinking this particular black man was really awesome, and would make a great video game character. Therefore, it was genuine. I didn't have to write reams of text thinking about the issue first as though it was the most important thing in the world. The idea that video games would have been about white male protagonists for all eternity unless we write reams of text about it until we're blue in the face is, itself, nonsense.
I acknowledge racism is a real problem in the world. But thinking about it, diversity and multiculturalism, for me personally, maybe not for you, doesn't have a place in video games. I've been able to preserve my childlike joy in playing and creating video games which is totally devoid of anything an adult would think about---and I intend to continue to do so. You're all quite welcome to take yourselves overly seriously and introduce volumes and volumes of text about things totally unrelated to video games if it makes you feel smart, accomplished and moral, however, more power to you.
M_Tee, I hadn't realized at first you were the artist working on Isolation. That game looks great---keep up the good work sir. Don't mind me and my opinions, I'm just one person and a very strange one at that. I don't fit in anywhere, maybe I should be the star of your game.
If you by 'reams of text pissing' mean my attempt to consolidate a few persistent lines of thought within the tradition of cultural studies, that's one thing. It's just a view on these matters, nothing else. And i think they have much to do with video games, since one of the objects of cultural studies is to approach popular culture and look at it at different angles. I don't think the joy of playing video games gets destroyed simply by testing video game phenomena against various thoughts. It wasn't meant as an attack on your or anybody's personal preference when making games.
Some may feel these things are important, some not. For me, the actual question isn't if it is, but what to do if you feel it is. What should be done is always trickier to answer than what can be done.
Thanks for the compliment. Perhaps in the future, not stating that someone should be murdered for starting a conversation that didn't particularly interest you could be a step in the right direction for introductions.
That said, I appreciate you taking the time to join the conversation. I'd love to pick your brain and find out why, exactly, the topic disgusts you so. I'm also sure that for a game you've been developing since childhood, that you have put more thought into character design than you're leading on. I'd be interested to hear that as well. But I don't know how to converse with somebody when their input boils down to "the topic shouldn't be discussed" and then insults the people discussing it for doing so.
I don't necessarily feel the need to justify my character choices with paragraphs of text, although I definitely do put paragraphs of thought into them. As I said, I'd feel it'd be irresponsible, and at least bad creator practice to do otherwise.
For example, many of us may default-to-white-dude when it comes time to design a character. Pyronaut is an example from myself. Optomon had pitched the idea that the character should be "a working joe, not predestined hero" and I really enjoyed that concept. My first design I pitched to him was a young-Ron-Howard-inspired goofy kid (early 20~something). In retrospect, I might have gone back and changed it, but he had expressed a particular affinity for it, so I stuck with it. I also still like it because in script, we make him very non-heroic, far out of his element by having to fight, and I think that turns enough tropes on their heads to justify it. I did, then, make sure the supporting NPC cast was racially diverse, and named them in a way that showed a cultural melting pot of a future, again, important to me personally, as when I have children, their names will reflect their varied parentage.
Also, you can ask Kevin to confirm, but everything I say is in reams of text. I have no idea how he sifts through it all
M_Tee wrote:
Thanks for the compliment. Perhaps in the future, not stating that someone should be murdered for starting a conversation that didn't particularly interest you could be a step in the right direction for introductions.
If his PMs are anything to go by, it's best to simply ignore Gradual Games. He's kind of an ass.
M_Tee wrote:
Also, you can ask Kevin to confirm, but everything I say is in reams of text. I have no idea how he sifts through it all
That's not surprising, creative types always have a lot more to say, to convey information to others. Their "artistic vision", so to say, even in a simple conversation. It's the same as body language, when speaking.
As for diversity in my games? It's generally quite minor. There's more cultural diversity as you would travel from country to country, with foreigners more likely to show up in or near the capital city of any given country. That's my rule of thumb for balancing this out. At least, in an RPG setting.
Most of my work has furry characters, so any human culture is much less relevant.
I do try to approximate which characters fit a given "culture", going by where the actual animals live in the real world. So that's a thing, too. Certain species also get variations based on each new culture I incorporate into the world, which is also fun to play around with.
For a human character, I'm less-likely to do this, just based on how the internet has been, lately.
Of course,
sexually on the other hand, my work is quite inclusive. Including a ton of gender, and sexual orientation differences, to appeal to a wider audience.
Espozo wrote:
Can we have striptease with a male character please?
Does a futanari character count?
If not, I've still got that covered in my own current project, with some male NPCs.
Drag wrote:
More crotch bulge plz.
Dude, I've totally got this covered! Un-cut, and uncensored!
Alp wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
Thanks for the compliment. Perhaps in the future, not stating that someone should be murdered for starting a conversation that didn't particularly interest you could be a step in the right direction for introductions.
If his PMs are anything to go by, it's best to simply ignore Gradual Games. He's kind of an ass.
Says someone who quit an entire community after someone complimented you on how cool your game is that it could be funded by kickstarter. You're ridiculous, and I was calling you out on that. I accept being called an ass when someone's as nuts as you are. I still greatly admire your work and hope you release it eventually.
I love when people put emojis at the end of insults, I guess to avoid being insulted back? Another anthropomorphic animal lover that isn't Khaz is also a fan of it.
Alp wrote:
Including a ton of gender, and sexual orientation differences, to appeal to a wider audience.
Alp wrote:
Does a futanari character count?
I'm not sure that's appealing to a wider audience.
Also, I've never had any problem with GradualGames.
perhaps appealing to a more varied audience. or an altogether new one, like blizzard did, which caused plenty of hate from people who thought they were/world be the target audience. Surprise: blizzard wanted to broaden its market.
M_Tee wrote:
What I can't understand though, is why one would feel that it's "politics" to even consider this, or how you could respond to "Have you thought about depicting non-white people in your game?" with "Thinking about that is nonsense that would kill my joy and apparently result in a not-lighthearted game."
This is "politics" because if you don't answer carefully, you're going to be labeled as a bigot. If this forum is
anything to go on, we programmers are bad at communication, and a stint of bad politics will unfairly taint someone's project despite not actually physically doing anything to the project. Is it any wonder why people would prefer to not discuss things like this, when there's an army of people out there looking for any reason to label you?
GradualGames wrote:
Says someone who quit an entire community after someone complimented you on how cool your game is that it could be funded by kickstarter. You're ridiculous, and I was calling you out on that. I accept being called an ass when someone's as nuts as you are. I still greatly admire your work and hope you release it eventually.
Excuse me? You were rather quick to point fingers before, with only half of the story, so I told you off.
You publicly apologized, before harassing me via PM in private, encouraging me to quit the homebrew scene.
I'll say it now, you're a two-faced asshole. Plain and simple.
...and no, before anybody asks, I'm not drudging things up from another forum, this all took place
here, on NesDev.
For your information GradualGames, I quit the NA community after some shit-for-brains decided to give out my personal information, and incite personal attacks, and the moderators did
nothing. Clearly, you missed that part.
My favorite part, was when they had the nerve to call me a "pedophile" for my artwork.
Espozo wrote:
I love when people put emojis at the end of insults, I guess to avoid being insulted back?
I did no such thing, It's called mockery.
You're telling me there's a difference between insulting someone and mocking someone?
Quote:
For your information GradualGames, I quit the NA community after some shit-for-brains decided to give out my personal information, and incite personal attacks, and the moderators did nothing. Clearly, you missed that part.
Well, why did they do it in the first place? How did this happen on NESDev? I thought it happened on NintendoAge.
Yes, as certainly as
I shit for Mortal Kombat. When you
mock the Mario, are you insulting Nintendo and DiC?
Alp wrote:
GradualGames wrote:
Says someone who quit an entire community after someone complimented you on how cool your game is that it could be funded by kickstarter. You're ridiculous, and I was calling you out on that. I accept being called an ass when someone's as nuts as you are. I still greatly admire your work and hope you release it eventually.
Excuse me? You were rather quick to point fingers before, with only half of the story, so I told you off.
You publicly apologized, before harassing me via PM in private, encouraging me to quit the homebrew scene.
I'll say it now, you're a two-faced asshole. Plain and simple.
...and no, before anybody asks, I'm not drudging things up from another forum, this all took place
here, on NesDev.
For your information GradualGames, I quit the NA community after some shit-for-brains decided to give out my personal information, and incite personal attacks, and the moderators did
nothing. Clearly, you missed that part.
My favorite part, was when they had the nerve to call me a "pedophile" for my artwork.
Espozo wrote:
I love when people put emojis at the end of insults, I guess to avoid being insulted back?
I did no such thing, It's called mockery.
I saw the whole NA thread... Everyone was being polite to you and complimentary. You flew into a rage and quit the community. I don't remember anybody calling you a pedo. If there really was something like that that I missed I certainly would owe you an apology.
Regardless. It doesn't matter. You're still a crazy person and you make great stuff. I'd love to see it finished.
And ...I never encouraged you to quit. On the contrary, I keep saying to stop being a drama queen and just finish your game. Nobody gives a shit about the drama.
I've only got three protagonists in my portfolio, each in her own unfinished game maker game on a stationary shoved in the closet and forgotten.
Itsy the spider, who's struggling with very perilous rain and bigger insects on her ascension to the top where she can find a mate to... mate with (tastefully shown as a heart), devour, and lay eggs. She's got a bobby haircut. It's just a silly jump and duck platformer about a spider from a children's song doing something a real spider might do.
Unnamed character who's a diplomat sent to a fringe world mine colony in deep space to solve what spacecorp thinks is a general strike, but of course it's alien bugs - they've dug to deep, everyone's a dead host to alien larvae, and help will take forever to arrive. You have to make do with inept skills and tools for the task and learn how to survive until you've gathered enough badass weaponry and learned your way sneaking through the complex. Then it's a lofi 2d-topdown doom massacre. Unfortunately, it leaks memory from every seam and i got tired of it. There's also a 'female' AI by means of speech synthesis. she/it is actually more fleshed out, the diplomat-turned-warrior you play is more of a vessel for your ride, like samus before other m and fusion, and she's got helmet and gloves which doesn't reveal her features.
The oldest dead project, which i hope to revive someday, is Rush'n'reverse, where you are Katyusha, and run and knife your way from right to left, seeking to destroy the enemy's secret weapon. I was planning for a jetpack fight with the mecha-statue of liberty. Graphic aspirations were too grand and if i'll give it a shot again, it'll be with lower resolution, someone who can program bosses, and a limited palette.
The learning outcome from those attempts is that it, at least for me, takes a team and clear restrictions. We were two on the middle one, but that wasn't enough given the scope.
As you can see, it's all sort of female characters - alternative two can be a bit ambigous/concealed if you want it to, but Ellen Ripley from alien undoubtedly was a strong influence. It's as much as a conscious choice as it comes naturally. It might not be a trend forever, but this is where i'm at. The only clear human ethnicity is in example three. Her only feature is really being a very skilled warrior who's been trained to prevail with as little as a combat knife if needed, even though you get the occasional gun, bazooka, and what not, just like in rush'n'attack/green beret.
Back in qbasic days, in the games i made, there were no characters. You were a car, or you were yourself in a text/picture based adventure, or whatever.
Late reply: I've been dreading catching up on this thread for fear that it might go downhill...
...which is already did. Some time ago.
Incoming broad opinions, please stop me from putting any words in anyone's mouth: If I misinterpret something you say, please don't think I'm trying to misrepresent you.
Anyways. I love this forum and the people here, but I'm seeing a lot of things that sadden me in this thread. I see a lot of insult and a lot of needlessly heated discussion. Honestly, I don't think there's anything to be gained by discussing the contents of this thread much further than they have been. I'm seeing a theme in the opinions of the people that call for change here; we are responsible for the way we represent people. I think that's a fair point. I'm seeing a few different themes in the opinions of the people that respond to those posts. I'll try to summarize:
1. Creators have the right to create as they see fit. I think Alp will agree with me the most fully here. When someone actually puts out the intense effort required to make these games, they earn the right to make these games the way they want to, no matter what anyone else thinks about it. The most an onlooker can hope for is for their opinion to be heard.
2. Creators don't want attention drawn to certain parts of their work. This is what I was trying to get at with my fantasy-european talk. If anything ever creates discord in a piece, it's going to draw attention. Discord between the culture show in a game and the ethnicity of the people within that culture is something that I feel we want to avoid for the most part, but I'm not certain that all of us will agree here. I do see Espozo bringing up a form of this when he mentions games that have 'every ethnicity crammed in'. If something sticks out in a piece that the creator didn't want to stick out, it is a failure.
3. This is an extremely dangerous situation. I have a lot of experience with this, having come from a forum that was almost completely destroyed by this exact same topic. I lost a lot of friends over this conversation, even though we were agreeing with each other. I think that while this conversation needs to be had, it also needs to be stopped once things turn south or we're all just going to end up causing damage to the community. As much as I hate singing and physical contact, I feel like a bit of group-hugging and Kumbayah is in order. There are things in this thread that offend me and I want very badly to call a few people out on it, but that will do no good. Whether I bear anyone ill will is not more important than the camaraderie of the forums.
Stop me if I am wrong, but I feel that we have all been heard. I think the thread got across the things that it needed to. There are many things to learn here.
I don't want to be selfish and hog the last word. Anyone that needs to say something will say it and I won't stop them. But, I'd like to ask something of the people here. This is a singular and honest request out of my love of the forum and my want to maintain or create a friendship or at least working relationship with any of you: Please stop talking about this. I fear it can only do more harm.
That's enough flowers out of my ass for one post. I'm going to try and leave this alone now.
This is nothing compared to the "Bible thread".
Also, about "friends" on these websites, my advice is don't get too close to anyone. There isn't enough you know about other people here. Hell, I don't even know anyone else's name. Mine's Drew Sebastino, which I'm telling anyone for the hell of it.
Actually, is there a "get to know each other" thread here? Well, the problem about these is the fact that no one is going to say anything bad about themselves.
Espozo wrote:
Also, about "friends" on these websites, my advice is don't get too close to anyone. There isn't enough you know about other people here.
I've met some people in the NESdev community that I'd consider friends. We haven't met in person yet but I intend to keep in touch so no reason that won't change.
This kinda makes me think of the 90s internet warnings. Don't go sharing information in chat rooms or internet forums!
Quote:
Hell, I don't even know anyone else's name.
Maybe you don't want to post your name is THIS thread. Just with search results and all. Just sayin'.
Quote:
Well, the problem about these is the fact that no one is going to say anything bad about themselves.
Hi! I'm darryl and I'm a fuckin' asshole! You want help? Screw you!
I love everyone in this thread. I have strong opinions, that does not change that I think you are all awesome.
darryl.revok wrote:
Hi! I'm darryl and I'm a fuckin' asshole! You want help? Screw you!
Yeah, I wasn't thinking too hard.
darryl.revok wrote:
I've met some people in the NESdev community that I'd consider friends. We haven't met in person yet but I intend to keep in touch so no reason that won't change.
I don't know, it's just that how much do you really know these people? You barely know someone in school, and they're not given time to think over what they say. You also know more personal information than a made up username and picture. On these kind of websites, you can pretend to be whoever you want. (If it will convince anyone is another story.) Well, that's how I feel about it anyway.
The person I know the best here is koitsu, because I've actually seen his face and how he reacts to frustrating situations. (It's from the HiROM conversion video.) I remember one of the first things I asked here was why the SNES didn't reserve more ram for colors, (I had no clue how it worked at the time) and he went on a whole thing about how the past is the past and you can't change how they designed the systems. I thought he was a real jerk at that moment, but I've come to accept that as true, and that I had been too judgy with him.
Anyway...
GradualGames wrote:
I think you are all awesome.
I'd have to say that the people on this website on average are nice, albeit a bit awkward, but I'm not one to talk. There are only a couple of people here I would prefer wouldn't be.
EDIT: I think I'm misguided on the topic but eh.
On the topic of character diversity on the NES: not surprising that a Japanese console doesn't have a lot of character diversity. As for America, it was 80's and 90's, so.
On the topic of character diversity now: not everyone has to be a PoC or LGBT+. The call for diversity is so crooked, people can't decide between "we need some diversity" and "why isn't this person a minority!?" Just let the designers have creative freedom. How they see characters is probably how they are to some extent.
I've yet to make a game with a real character so diversity in my games isn't really applicable to me.
Depending on the game you can decide by yourself to make it with or without whatever level of diversity you wish. More diversity might help to tell the character apart (although different kind of clothing could also do; depends what the author and artist likes!), but does not necessarily fit the game/story/whatever, so the author should do how they want to design it. If is open-source, modified version is also possible by anyone too. (And also depend on game, some may even be beyond human diversity to many kind of other species and/or whatever other parameters you want to adjust)
Guilty wrote:
...
1. Creators have the right to create as they see fit. I think Alp will agree with me the most fully here. When someone actually puts out the intense effort required to make these games, they earn the right to make these games the way they want to, no matter what anyone else thinks about it. The most an onlooker can hope for is for their opinion to be heard.
2. Creators don't want attention drawn to certain parts of their work. This is what I was trying to get at with my fantasy-european talk. If anything ever creates discord in a piece, it's going to draw attention. Discord between the culture show in a game and the ethnicity of the people within that culture is something that I feel we want to avoid for the most part, but I'm not certain that all of us will agree here. I do see Espozo bringing up a form of this when he mentions games that have 'every ethnicity crammed in'. If something sticks out in a piece that the creator didn't want to stick out, it is a failure.
...
I think that you are correct.
I try to put in diversity in my games simply because its a completely arbitrary choice anyway, so why not address a common criticism of games? The characters in the game really don't have genders or races, and it's a totally arbitrary decision, so why not?
There is a legend, of a man who wished to see an NES homebrew starring a female protagonist which also fit a litany of other criteria. After much exploration, to his dismay, he discovered that the game did not exist. However, all was not lost. While he could not, at that time, enjoy the game which he hoped to see, he knew the solution.
He would embark on a quest, to create this game himself! The journey would be long and perilous, but the potential reward great. For at the end, awaited the game of his dreams, fitting all of the criteria he could choose, and made so much sweeter from the satisfaction that it was crafted by his own hands.
The moral of the story? Give a man a fish, and you diversify his NES game for a day. Lead a horse to water, and it beats two birds in a bush.
thenewguy wrote:
I try to put in diversity in my games simply because its a completely arbitrary choice anyway, so why not address a common criticism of games? The characters in the game really don't have genders or races, and it's a totally arbitrary decision, so why not?
It's not arbitrary anymore once you have a reason. Addressing criticism
is a reason.
"I didn't give it any thought when I started, but now it's too much work to change" is also a reason. When you know what the reason is, you can think about whether it's a good one or not.
"I didn't give it any thought" is really a reflection that your subconscious bias made the choice for you. There's still a reason there, but you might not understand what it is. Your critic certainly doesn't understand what it is either; it's rather rude to
tell people what they were thinking, unless maybe you're their hired therapist.
Even if you did something like roll dice to generate a character, that's still a very deliberate choice of action.
If you know why you did something, you should be able to assert yourself against criticism. If you weren't thinking about what you're doing, then you're
vulnerable to it. Hiding behind the excuse that it's an arbitrary decision reveals the weakness in your craft. "It was arbitrary" means "it was a weak decision".
Of course, "I don't want to explain myself to you" is another way to answer the question. If someone asks a question, you're not obligated to answer them, but you can't hide from yourself. If you're ashamed of the answer, nobody can help you. Take pride in your work, and make deliberate choices that you can live with.
darryl.revok wrote:
For at the end, awaited the game of his dreams... ....crafted by his own hands.
This is never a great comparison.
You simply
can't enjoy a game you made in the same way you enjoy a game someone else made.
You know everything that went into it, and you laboured on it for days and days. You saw every terrible broken version of it that it took to get to the end. You saw every potential great thing you wanted it to be, and know it's living up to only a small fraction of that potential. (This feeling is greatly amplified in commercial development.)
The game of my dreams isn't made by me, it's made by someone else, so that I can experience it with with wonder and learning.
"Go make it yourself" is a great thing to encourage people to do, but it's really not the solution to their own problem. Being satisfied in a game that you made is a totally different experience than being satisfied by playing a
new game.
M_Tee wrote:
Thanks for the compliment. Perhaps in the future, not stating that someone should be murdered for starting a conversation that didn't particularly interest you could be a step in the right direction for introductions.
That said, I appreciate you taking the time to join the conversation. I'd love to pick your brain and find out why, exactly, the topic disgusts you so. I'm also sure that for a game you've been developing since childhood, that you have put more thought into character design than you're leading on. I'd be interested to hear that as well. But I don't know how to converse with somebody when their input boils down to "the topic shouldn't be discussed" and then insults the people discussing it for doing so.
I don't necessarily feel the need to justify my character choices with paragraphs of text, although I definitely do put paragraphs of thought into them. As I said, I'd feel it'd be irresponsible, and at least bad creator practice to do otherwise.
For example, many of us may default-to-white-dude when it comes time to design a character. Pyronaut is an example from myself. Optomon had pitched the idea that the character should be "a working joe, not predestined hero" and I really enjoyed that concept. My first design I pitched to him was a young-Ron-Howard-inspired goofy kid (early 20~something). In retrospect, I might have gone back and changed it, but he had expressed a particular affinity for it, so I stuck with it. I also still like it because in script, we make him very non-heroic, far out of his element by having to fight, and I think that turns enough tropes on their heads to justify it. I did, then, make sure the supporting NPC cast was racially diverse, and named them in a way that showed a cultural melting pot of a future, again, important to me personally, as when I have children, their names will reflect their varied parentage.
Also, you can ask Kevin to confirm, but everything I say is in reams of text. I have no idea how he sifts through it all
I had wanted to answer this but don't have access to nesdev except on my phone during the week, so all I could get out was "I love you all!" Haha. I'm actually sincere about that.
When I put up my garfield meme and spoke of insufferable people I was really talking about the legions of sneering little feminazi bitches on youtube talking about tropes and so on.
To me, talking about tropes and cliches all the time ruins the joy of video games. Why? For me, the enjoyment of video games is really a continuation of exactly how I felt as a kid: Just pure joy and wonder. I'm not trying to pick them apart. I'm not trying to analyze them. I'm not trying to make them boring for myself just because its a "save the princess" story. I'm not trying to introduce diversity for it's own sake (and as I mentioned, my ideas for games apparently already are inclusive without ever having expressly tried to do so). On top of all that, video games are often so fantastical as to have nothing whatsoever to do with diversity. Kirby is a pink blob, for example. Tetris is about blocks. I actually have never come up with a game idea about a white male, and I never once thought: "gee, I shouldn't do that because it has been done so much."
So with respect, I guess a lot of folks get a ton of enjoyment out of over analyzing games, their role in society, their impact on minorities and all these other things. For me personally, I actually *hate* doing that. I hate watching videos of people doing that (so I don't, anymore). It ruins the fun of it for me. It supplants that part of my brain that *JUST LOVES* the games.
And in addition, I think politics are very very important. Thinking about not encouraging society to be dicks to people who have rough lives (i.e. the point of diversity, I suppose) is an important thing. But...those things are all "heavy." They're all grown up. Politics can be depressing just look at the presidential race, no matter what your party is.
I would like to keep such things out of my video games. Absolutely all of it. Give me mario and the princess. Keep all that other shit AWAY.
GradualGames wrote:
Kirby is a pink blob
Not really all that related to anything, But I love whenever people try and give Kirby a gender. There are no other members of the "Kirby" species to compare it to, and there are (thank God) no visible genitalia.
GradualGames wrote:
legions of sneering little feminazi bitches
How have I managed to miss all of these people? I can't help but feel that people always talk about these "feminazis" because everyone else does, but I've never seen one. What exactly does a "feminazi" even do? Ask for equal pay? Ask to not be segregated from men at every corner, even if it's something that has nothing to do with sexuality? That's some scary shit...
I will agree though, the women who are voting for the female US presidential candidate (not even going to say it) just because she is a female and for no other reason, are the true sexists. Hopefully, I didn't just start anything too dangerous.
Espozo wrote:
How have I managed to miss all of these people? I can't help but feel that people always talk about these "feminazis" because everyone else does, but I've never seen one. What exactly does a "feminazi" even do? Ask for equal pay? Ask to not be segregated from men at every corner, even if it's something that has nothing to do with sexuality? That's some scary shit...
I, believe it or not, have a tumblr account. And I follow some very...interesting people.
A girl who's obsessed with screaming about white privilege but not explaining how white people can shut her up, a girl who's a communist and believes that stealing is okay (she's literally said that, I'm not alluding to socialism), a girl who thinks that non minorities owe her the right to insult them because of...oppression, I guess. The third one could be considered a real feminazi.
A feminazi would be someone who says "lol men are so [xxx]" but reserves the right to generalize because men aren't the oppressed ones apparently. Someone who forgot what the world is like outside the internet and believes not in gender equality but in female dominance. "If I fight fire with fire, the flames will go out!" Is kinda the ideology there and it really won't work.
You ever want to see how common feminazis (EDIT: Not necessarily feminazis but not smart people) can be? Look up "die cis scum tumblr" on google images. You'll probably find a bunch of tumblr posts berating cis people. Not really equality there. Not feminism either.
By the way, no, racism doesn't have to be institutionalized to be racism. It has to be racism to be racism. Just wanted to throw that in there as an example of a bad excuse for "reverse" oppression.
Espozo wrote:
GradualGames wrote:
Kirby is a pink blob
Not really all that related to anything, But I love whenever people try and give Kirby a gender. There are no other members of the "Kirby" species to compare it to, and there are (thank God) no visible genitalia.
Meta Knight is of Kirby's species if the
"Pinky" arc in Brawl in the Family is to be believed. Both are described as male in official materials.
Quote:
GradualGames wrote:
legions of sneering little feminazi bitches
How have I managed to miss all of these people? I can't help but feel that people always talk about these "feminazis" because everyone else does, but I've never seen one. What exactly does a "feminazi" even do?
"Feminazi" is a term that Clemson professor Thomas Hazlett and talk radio blowhard Rush Limbaugh have occasionally used to describe a small number of radical feminists,
about two dozen, who express views that appear
female supremacist.
Quote:
I will agree though, the women who are voting for the female US presidential candidate (not even going to say it) just because she is a female and for no other reason, are the true sexists.
I didn't vote for either of the two current front-runners. I voted with Winnie the Pooh, if the campaign sign above Pooh's front door is any indication.
A bear who feels the Bern
Espozo wrote:
I love whenever people try and give Kirby a gender. There are [...] (thank God) no visible genitalia.
Cannot unsee.
tepples wrote:
who express views that appear female supremacist.
So everyone complains about the female supremacist, but no one cares about the probably higher number of male supremacists? I hear it all the time where I live in the south: "Men are stronger, men are tougher", yet, these are the people who think they're hot stuff because they have jacked up pickup trucks and $300 Nike shoes and have never experienced any really tough physical activity in their lives.
Jedi QuestMaster wrote:
Cannot unsee.
I'm guessing you're looking at the seam at the bottom?
tepples wrote:
"Pinky" arc in Brawl in the Family
I wouldn't trust a web comic for that. I like how Samurai Goroh is there though.
Espozo wrote:
So everyone complains about the female supremacist, but no one cares about the probably higher number of male supremacists? I hear it all the time where I live in the south: "Men are stronger, men are tougher", yet, these are the people who think they're hot stuff because they have jacked up pickup trucks and $300 Nike shoes and have never experienced any really tough physical activity in their lives.
I am surprised to hear that the stereotype about Texas is so accurate. Nah, I absolutely can't stand those types of people, but I find the opposite extreme to be just as bad. Have you ever been to California? The social climate here is just as malicious, even though it doesn't claim to be. A lot of the women out here are exactly what you read about on the internet: they spout hate speech on men and white alike. The 'cis white scum' thing is very real and alive here. No one out here treats fellow human beings with any respect or decency.
EDIT: Probably the reason that people complain more about female supremacists, I think, is that liberal extremists take to the internet much more easily than the stereotypical conservative extremist (computer challenged). Squeaky wheels and all that.
Guilty wrote:
The social climate here is just as malicious, even though it doesn't claim to be.
It doesn't claim to be here either. Ever heard of "southern hospitality"? I like to call it southern hostility. The thing is, people here won't outright say they don't like you, they'll just hold a grudge against you to the grave. Often times, living here feels like walking on ice. That's maybe a bit exaggerated, but it still holds some truth.
I will say, I don't think I'm the only one who thinks that it's best to be somewhere between these two types of people. Out of all the places I've lived (New York, Virginia, and Texas) I feel the people in Virginia are the most level-headed people, I guess because it's the border between the two demographics we were talking about. Maybe some of this has to do with the fact that I was younger in Virginia and maybe hadn't grown up enough to see the bad in people, but I was even younger in New York (although I was born in Virginia, I moved to New York 3 weeks later) and I visit Virginia frequently to see family. Heck, I'm there right now.
But yeah, it's kind of funny, most people in Texas wish California would slide off into the ocean.
California isn't monolithic. They're the people who passed Prop 8 at the same time they elected the current president.
Can't have effective us-vs-them fear-based politics if people stop demonizing the 'them'.
lidnariq wrote:
California isn't monolithic. They're the people who passed Prop 8 at the same time they elected the current president.
That's odd... (I don't live there, so I don't know how it is.) I wish they had what had what/who they were supporting in those examples reversed.
I don't know why people act like you can only be far left or far right in regards to politics. I think the best is in the middle, which is why I'm not too thrilled with either presidential candidate (and many others).
Kind of irrelevant, but what really grinds my gears is that the same people who are talking about clean energy are against using nuclear power. Where do you think it's going to come from? Windmills and solar panels need to be able to store their energy when they're not being powered, and they don't generate a whole lot of power to begin with. Windmills also cost a lot of money to make and put up, and solar panels often need to be replaced, which also costs money and requires maintenance. I love the whole push for electric cars. They don't produce pollution, but the coal factories that power them sure as hell do. Coal is even more pollutant than gasoline.
lidnariq wrote:
Can't have effective us-vs-them fear-based politics if people stop demonizing the 'them'.
What? Are people starting to stop demonizing the term "them"? I don't think that's happening where I live, unless you're saying I'm the one demonizing the people in the same state I live in. They're not all bad, but I've lived in Texas for 7 years, and I'll tell you they're not all good either.
I like how this has turned into a political debate. Luckily, this is actually a debate, unlike any of the political debates I've seen on TV that are more like arguments than anything else. At least they make for some good YTP videos.
Espozo wrote:
what really grinds my gears is that the same people who are talking about clean energy are against using nuclear power. Where do you think it's going to come from? Windmills and solar panels need to be able to store their energy when they're not being powered
Those opposed to use of fossil or nuclear power propose several solutions:
- Insolation (and thus PV supply) peaks before air conditioning demand peaks. But the peaks and troughs of solar thermal are somewhat flatter.
- For storage longer than a day, use spare power to pump water into a reservoir, then run a generator to get power back out during calm nights.
- Biodiesel from algae oil. This is the route that the fictional universe of my video games has taken.
- Use less energy in the first place. Use sun instead of indoor lighting during daytime. Switch from power-gulping incandescent lights, Pentium 4 CPUs, and CRT monitors to power-sipping LED lights, Atom CPUs, and LED-lit LCD monitors.
- Use less energy for transport. Instead of cars, use bicycles and buses with bike racks, and compensate by designing cities to be more walkable. To accommodate workers who give up a car entirely, impose an energy security tax on employers that expect employees to commute when buses do not run, such as at night, on Sundays, and on major holidays.
Espozo wrote:
Windmills also cost a lot of money to make and put up, and solar panels often need to be replaced, which also costs money and requires maintenance.
The same is true of fossil fuel plants.
Espozo wrote:
I love the whole push for electric cars. They don't produce pollution, but the coal factories that power them sure as hell do. Coal is even more pollutant than gasoline.
Even when measured in emissions per mile/kilometre? Electric vehicles have at least two advantages over conventional fossil vehicles.
- The prime mover, the engine that burns fuel, doesn't need to move around with each vehicle. This allows making it more efficient for scale and moving the emissions out of the city where they can be scrubbed in one place.
- The drivetrain is much simpler. The wheels of a vehicle run at highly varying RPM, but fossil engines like to run at a fixed RPM. To make the two meet requires a mechanically complex transmission. Electric motors, on the other hand, can more efficiently vary their speed. That's why modern diesel locomotives use a fossil-electric transmission, where the fossil engine just feeds a generator. And both automobiles and locomotives have begun to incorporate energy storage in the middle to allow the engine to be made even simpler RPM-wise.
I think we have a social responsibility to represent alternative means of power generation in the games we make. The stigma against nuclear power, and obscurity of other clean forms of energy are a big problem to overcome, and it's not going to change itself if you allow yourself to just take the "default" choice dictated by your cultural biases. Have you consider putting a hydroelectric dam in your game? What if instead of that gas-pump cutscene there was a minigame to generate electricity with a pedal operated dynamo? We owe it to ourselves to try to overcome these issues when we're making the choices that go into our games.
tepples wrote:
The same is true of fossil fuel plants.
They generate a lot more electricity though. However, I'm not for fossil fuel plants.
Hydroelectric and geothermal plants seem to be good, (I don't know a whole lot about them) but you're kind of limited as to where you can put them...
tepples wrote:
For storage longer than a day, use spare power to pump water into a reservoir, then run a generator to get power back out during calm nights.
Do you know how much power you're getting back relative to how much power you're putting in?
I actually heard that the Fukushima power plant didn't really sustain any structural damage, but the generator that the turbine powers was flooded, and so were the backup generators that are diesel powered, so there was no energy to power the coolant pumps. Had they made the outer walls higher (I heard the power plant wasn't up to code) it could have kept the water out, as I don't think the walls actually broke, but were flooded over. I think I heard other power plants that were hit just as hard during the earthquake that caused the tsunami survived because they were up to code.
Espozo wrote:
Hydroelectric and geothermal plants seem to be good, (I don't know a whole lot about them) but you're kind of limited as to where you can put them...
I used to work in a hydroelectric dam. They're pretty cool, but I don't think it would be fair to not mention the ecological damage caused by their construction and the accompanying flooding. You're also entirely blocking off that waterway for marine life, which may depend on it for migration.
Like any source of electricity, this one is not without its downsides.
rainwarrior wrote:
I think we have a social responsibility to represent alternative means of power generation in the games we make.
Another approach which hasn't been mentioned here is to negatively depict things to which you are fundamentally opposed. Sometimes I feel this would be easier in a video game, since often times, everything that you see in a video game is something that you are supposed to destroy. A lot of video games don't have a chance in the story or gameplay to depict a positive or peaceful setting. A good example which comes to mind is Zen: Intergalactic Ninja, which is a lot like Captain Planet except that game sucks, and Zen is great.
Espozo wrote:
Windmills and solar panels need to be able to store their energy when they're not being powered
One interesting approach I've read about in the past few years is to use excess power to condense nitrogen or liquid air, which can be used to store energy long-term, and can be (partially) reclaimed by use of thermal expansion.
There are also nitrogen/liquid air cars being developed and a motor which uses this in combination with diesel to attain extremely high fuel mileage. Currently, liquid nitrogen is very cheap because it's created as a by-product in the production of liquid oxygen.
lidnariq wrote:
California isn't monolithic. They're the people who passed Prop 8 at the same time they elected the current president.
I don't think any area is truly monolithic in this regard and I don't think that it's fair to judge anyone based on their location without getting to know them. I actually really love the west coast for a few reasons, but I feel like I have observed some trends that are more prolific there. I feel like it's really common there to villainize southern america as a place of nothing but bigotry, but I'm sure we all know here that's not the case, and in doing so a person is stereotyping all people in a particular geographic location rather than focusing on an actual detestable problem. It's true that there is more racial tension in the south than in a lot of places in the country. It's funny though, I think, to contrast this to the pacific northwest where the general consensus is for tolerance, yet the vast majority of people are white. (At least that's how it was in Portland)
darryl.revok wrote:
rainwarrior wrote:
I think we have a social responsibility to represent...
... response ...
Erm, I was just making a joke about this strange digression, a satire of the original premise of the thread as if we've stumbled into an alternate universe.
Espozo wrote:
Do you know how much power you're getting back relative to how much power you're putting in?
On some level, the efficiency doesn't matter if it's just there to prevent the instant rates from becoming negative (as happens especially with wind power)... but even if that weren't true,
wikipedia says up to 87% round-trip efficiency.
I bet it's just an infrastructure thing, meaning that our shortsighted culture will refuse to spend money on it :/
darryl.revok wrote:
They're pretty cool, but I don't think it would be fair to not mention the ecological damage caused by their construction and the accompanying flooding. You're also entirely blocking off that waterway for marine life, which may depend on it for migration.
I'm really glad that the
Elwha undamming has turned out as well as it has.
rainwarrior wrote:
darryl.revok wrote:
rainwarrior wrote:
I think we have a social responsibility to represent...
... response ...
Erm, I was just making a joke about this strange digression, a satire of the original premise of the thread as if we've stumbled into an alternate universe.
Ah I almost thought it was a joke but I went ahead and gave a real response because I had some personal experience on the topic.
Of all times to post an actual serious reply!
Pretty funny though... how this topic has gone.
Edit: Rereading this though, it's pretty obvious now.
rainwarrior wrote:
We owe it to ourselves to try to overcome these issues when we're making the choices that go into our games.
lidnariq wrote:
wikipedia says up to 87% round-trip efficiency.
Wow... That's a lot better than I thought.
lidnariq wrote:
I bet it's just an infrastructure thing, meaning that our shortsighted culture will refuse to spend money on it :/
Just like nuclear power?
(And yes, I'm a bit bias, as my grandfather is a nuclear engineer who worked at Brookhaven lab, the birthplace of Tennis for Two.)
rainwarrior wrote:
Erm, I was just making a joke about this strange digression, a satire of the original premise of the thread as if we've stumbled into an alternate universe.
I'm perfectly fine with a thread changing focus if everyone is done with the old discussion, which seems to be the case.
It's pretty nice having an actually intelligent discussion with some of my favorite people on this website.
But I'm not done!
Even games with animals often tend to have the playable character being a furry counterpart to a white male. Scrooge McDuck in DuckTales, for instance, is male with white feathers. Chip, Dale, and Gadget in Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers have facial fur of a similar color to light human skin, and only the males are playable. Felix the Cat is obviously black though.
tepples wrote:
furry
Hell no. A furry is an anthropomorphic animal, like Scrooge McDuck, except often drawn sexually by untalented artists.
Such artistry:
Can we kindly leave the insults and sweeping generalizations out please?
Yes, the topic's been derailed at least twice, both started by ad hominem attacks.
If you have an opinion, one way or the other, on the topic of the conversation, then by all means, join it.
All of these completely unrelated, arbitrary attacks and thinly-veiled insults being flung about aren't doing anything other than trying to drown out an (otherwise serious attempt at) actual conversation. If the topic offends anyone so much that they feel the need to belittle the conversation, then I highly encourage them to express their disdain and the reasoning behind it logically.
Anyway,
back on topic, there seem to be three stances on this topic (in any field of creative work, as I've been a part of these conversations in regards to comics, film, literature, and art in general):
- Those that feel that they should actively attempt to respectfully represent a diverse range of characters (either for the benefit of the audience, or for the inherent betterment of their work).
- Those that hadn't really thought about it (and as such are just running on instinct, primarily imitating what had come before them)
- Those that oppose diversity of characters.
The primary purpose of this conversation being held is for the benefit of those in the "hadn't thought about it" category, and I think rainwarrior has made very valid points (and if I may be so bold as to paraphrase instead of quote), that if a creator wants to make a quality product, then they need to make each decision consciously and for a reason, whatever reason that may be.
To be honest, I'm not even sure as to what the original topic was trying to accomplish. I liked the energy discussion though.
If you liked it, feel free to start another General Stuff topic about how sustainable energy and other
environmental issues are portrayed in classic video games.
Espozo wrote:
To be honest, I'm not even sure as to what the original topic was trying to accomplish. I liked the energy discussion though.
Me neither, all I do to come up with game ideas is look to my childhood, and presto I have female heroes, black heroes (I have yet to build this, but it is in my backlog), cats, robots and other things. The degree to which there is a tendency these days to obsess over diversity is too extreme, goes too far, and really doesn't have a place in video games. I don't accept the idea we have a "responsibility" either, especially when it comes to retro video games since the very point of it is to re-live one's childhood. I could maybe understand these ideas a little better with modern games that are about real life, though. If every modern 3D first person shooter was a white guy killing black guys or something of that nature, I could understand people being very concerned. I also understand to some degree the concern over exceedingly common depiction of highly exaggerated female bodies, also in modern games. Being a man, I actually much prefer women who look like actual real women, I find the exaggerated proportions ridiculous and not really attractive. But thinking about these issues in the context of NES games? Come on.
GradualGames wrote:
I also understand to some degree the exceedingly common depiction of highly exaggerated female bodies, also in modern games.
There are also exaggerated man bodies, but I agree. I think about 40% of people who play games now are female, and they're probably not happy about it either, so maybe it will die down.
GradualGames wrote:
I find the exaggerated proportions ridiculous and not really attractive.
Not even this?
I don't think I've ever seen a game put abs on a woman...
I agree though. Not necessarily talking about the above picture, giant boobs on female characters are the worst (they gross me out). I'm not a big fan of extremely thin waists either, especially coupled with giant boobs that make many female characters look like their torso could snap in half from all the weight it's supporting.
All I know is, I had a huge crush on Marle from Chrono Trigger when I was about 13.
Beautiful and feminine, but totally badass.
GradualGames wrote:
Being a man, I actually much prefer women who look like actual real women, I find the exaggerated proportions ridiculous and not really attractive. But thinking about these issues in the context of NES games? Come on.
And especially when a lot of NES games use a
Graphics Induced Super Deformed style. In fact, exaggeration is seen as so integral to the style that
when it's not chibi, it's seen as "gritty".
Heck, for some character designs, redoing them in the style of
Peanuts would actually
reduce the exaggeration:
Aaron Neuwirth reports on a set of illustrations by @baronvongrant of over a dozen TV series with their main characters "Peanutized"Espozo wrote:
I'm not a big fan of extremely thin waists either, especially coupled with giant boobs that make many female characters look like their torso could snap in half from all the weight it's supporting.
You could say the same about some characters' necks.
M_Tee wrote:
if a creator wants to make a quality product, then they need to make each decision consciously and for a reason, whatever reason that may be.
Somewhat off the topic of diversity, but speaking for me personally, I don't think I've ever had a reason for any decision I've made in anything I've created. As a musician, I'm an improviser---so the music I write changes constantly. Is there a reason I went one direction or another? Used one chord or another? Nope. Some things might come off better than others, but analyzing precisely why doesn't really help me much---simply gaining experience with it is what seems to bring improvement. Pure intuition. Not that there's anything wrong with thinking a lot about what one creates---it's just not how I do it personally.
In terms of games, I rarely think there either--I just pick ideas from my childhood and run with them, much like improvising. There's never a reason. It's just how a child fantasizes---total nonsense, total joy, total fantasy.
Not saying that applies to everyone, at all! I'm quite the outlier in this regard---the vast majority of game development folks I've met do in fact seem to enjoy thinking a great deal about what they create, and more power to them!
GradualGames wrote:
All I know is, I had a huge crush on Marle from Chrono Trigger when I was about 13.
This is the sexiest girl of my childhood:
M_Tee wrote:
Those that oppose diversity of characters.
Is there somebody in this thread that opposes diversity? I haven't spotted a single post in here that opposes it. I only oppose obsessing over it as though it is important---especially when in my own case, diversity appeared of its own accord, just by sourcing my childhood. In my childhood, I had no political ideas whatsoever---and had black heroes and female heroes without anybody saying: "Derek, you are white and privileged. You'd better start thinking about these other groups." To me that's real diversity. The world is diverse just by being itself. No agenda needs to be advanced to make it happen.
GradualGames wrote:
Those that oppose diversity of characters.
You never heard that I was a Klan member?
Okay, being serious, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I think diversity will come naturally.
I don't believe I lean toward one side or the other in this debate on this topic. In fact, I don't know if the topic really should elicit a debate rather than a discussion. However, I believe I can understand why some people would take a defensive stance from the way it's been presented. This is a hobby for everyone here as far as I know. As such, people are working on actualizing their own visions and creating their own contribution. For better or worse, this gives the hobbyist creative autonomy over what choices go into their work. The suggestion that someone should introduce a certain decision making process into their creativity is a suggestion of removing a certain bit of that creative autonomy.
It may seem petty to be offended at the suggestion; that a person should shrug it off if they don't accept the suggestion, but I don't think that would be a particularly empathetic way of looking at it. I believe there are valid reasons a person might have that response. Especially if they've already put a lot of effort into their craft.
If the theory is that reiterating sexist stereotypes reinforces the suggestion that those are the appropriate norms, then I believe it would stand to reason that reiterating a position that one should introduce a certain thought process into their creativity would reinforce the image that a person should be doing these things in order to meet approval.
At that point a person would be making their game to satisfy external opinions rather than their own.
M_Tee wrote:
...if a creator wants to make a quality product, then they need to make each decision consciously and for a reason, whatever reason that may be.
(I've read through all of the posts as they've been made and skimmed through the whole thread a few times while writing and I'm not sure exactly what rainwarrior quote you're paraphrasing. I do tend to believe this reflects more of your personal opinion than an actual statement rainwarrior said but please correct me if I'm wrong.)
I like to attempt to avoid using statements that connote objectivity unless I truly believe the statement is not influenced by my own opinion. In this thread, it's been stated that at least one person does not like to put much conscious efforts into their creative choices. I'd also say that this person has released what appears to me, from previews, to be the most polished, professional looking, completed NES homebrew yet. (eagerly awaiting my copy) I'd also corroborate that I like to work heavily from intuition for nearly any creative process. Even coding. I take an approach where I like to apply analytical review later. Because I didn't think too hard about doing it the first time, sometimes I'll do something in a way contrary to conventions, and in the process, learn a new method. It's less constraining, I believe, to think less and have more fun when you're creating the bulk of a work, and naturally you'll analyze things more over the creative process as you review your work a million times.
Also, from my perspective, It's hard for me to find the emotional base for a work, my personal connection, the driving force behind anything I want to create, through a method other than intuition. My game concepts come more from nights spent on a couch with friends up all hours lit by the glow of the CRT with controllers in our hands, rather than from time spent applying a disciplined process to my ideas and considerations of their place in modern society. But that's solely my process. There are plenty of people who have a more organized approach than I, and most likely have more classical training.
I don't
think that my perspective on the matter of diversity in NES games and in general is
too different from yours, but I would have to make a lot of changes to make a statement like the one that I pasted. This is what I would say have to say personally, if this was my opinion:
example wrote:
...I believe that in order to create the strongest work possible, then an artist should be conscious of the reasoning behind all creative decisions made.
As this thread has progressed, language has escalated to make assertions that we have certain external responsibilities in the creation of our games.
M_Tee wrote:
As creators of globally-spread media, like it or not, we have a responsibility in the material that we produce. We pretty much have three choices: intentionally spite that responsibility (those that do this are loud enough about it that I feel it doesn't even warrant further discussion), ignore it (default to white male, perpetuate tropes, etc.), or take it into consideration (and likely produce more inclusive, and more unique, products while doing so).
I don't feel this statement is objective. Does a person doing a hobby for their own personal enjoyment have an actual external responsibility which must be fulfilled? The implication that they do denotes negative consequences for not fulfilling this responsibility. Also, it seems to me that you're saying that the perspectives of those who oppose your decision don't warrant discussion.
I don't feel that the topic is the issue but rather the way it's approached. If someone made a statement that as NES developers we have the responsibility to create games that meet some technical criteria, I would believe the statement would be met with equally oppositional sentiment. It is kind of insulting, I feel, to directly impose your own sense of moral responsibility upon others.
I feel I have a right to speak in this matter because I'm the only one who was specifically called out for not having diversity in my game project. In fact, one of my game decisions reflecting upon diversity was called, "uninspired for lack of a better word." There seemed to be an asserted sentiment that I am "copying" Contra, and that I had not considered making my game different from my inspiration. I never once used the words copy or clone in my posts. In fact, I said:
darryl.revok wrote:
The game is intended to take inspiration from, and parody Konami's Contra, while at the same time bringing its own approach to the genre.
so to receive in response to my decision not to modify my character to a different ethnicity, this:
M_Tee wrote:
As in, "Okay, I'm copying Contra, but how will mine be different? Why should people want to play mine instead of Contra?" could be valid thoughts to have during development.
was, in my opinion, not valid criticism. I'm a fan of your art, but that, and being called uninspired was, in my opinion, mildly insulting.
I posted earlier in the thread, an anecdote about a forum member who previously sought an NES game with a female protagonist, but quickly dismissed any existing games as not meeting his standards. So he then proceeded to develop this game and it is, as far as I can see, nearing completion. He didn't, as far as I know, seek to impose his vision or his criteria upon any existing projects. He set off to make the game himself.
I believe the most tactful way for a person to go about making this point, would be to begin a good game project which features diversity. Then post their work, and say that they made a lot of decisions to reflect diversity because this is important in our modern society. I don't see how anyone could take offense at a statement of diversity being important to the author. If others like and respect the work, they'll be consciously and subconsciously influenced in favor of diversity by the experience.
darryl.revok wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
...if a creator wants to make a quality product, then they need to make each decision consciously and for a reason, whatever reason that may be.
(I've read through all of the posts as they've been made and skimmed through the whole thread a few times while writing and I'm not sure exactly what rainwarrior quote you're paraphrasing. I do tend to believe this reflects more of your personal opinion than an actual statement rainwarrior said but please correct me if I'm wrong.)
It's a few steps away from what I was saying.
It's possible to produce good work without thinking about what you're doing. I wouldn't suggest that a thoughtless approach is the best approach, but I wouldn't categorize it as poor quality because of
that by itself. The subconscious can produce good work, you know? That wasn't my point.
The advice was really about how to be confident in your work, and to be able to deal with criticism. If you've acted without care, well, of course you might feel threatened by a question like "why did you do that?"
You don't owe anybody a response to that question, either, but that doesn't mean you won't answer it for yourself. If your answer is weak, that's how you're going to feel when you consider it. If you make public works, they will be talked about and criticized, and if you want to begin to cope with that it really helps if you've at least justified your actions to yourself.
GradualGames wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
Those that oppose diversity of characters.
Is there somebody in this thread that opposes diversity?
A poor choice of words, perhaps. "Those that don't see an issue with the current state of diversity within homebrew games." would have been significantly better phrasing on my end.
darryl.revok wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
...if a creator wants to make a quality product, then they need to make each decision consciously and for a reason, whatever reason that may be.
(I've read through all of the posts as they've been made and skimmed through the whole thread a few times while writing and I'm not sure exactly what rainwarrior quote you're paraphrasing. I do tend to believe this reflects more of your personal opinion than an actual statement rainwarrior said but please correct me if I'm wrong.)
The following quotes (pulled from separate posts) which emphasize having a reason behind creative decisions are what I was attempting to (and apparently failed to) paraphrase:
rainwarrior wrote:
...
If you don't have a strong idea about who your character is, though, it's worth thinking about what you ended up choosing, and whether it could be different.
...
If you don't have a reason for it, get one. There are good reasons to choose ambiguity too, I don't want to characterize that as the product of weak goals. I just want to stress that it's important to have a goal, here.
...
Hiding behind the excuse that it's an arbitrary decision reveals the weakness in your craft. "It was arbitrary" means "it was a weak decision".
EDIT (after seeing rw's response): Perhaps in the future, I'll take the time to quote instead.
darryl.revok wrote:
In fact, one of my game decisions reflecting upon diversity was called, "uninspired for lack of a better word." There seemed to be an asserted sentiment that I am "copying" Contra, and that I had not considered making my game different from my inspiration. I never once used the words copy or clone in my posts. In fact, I said:
darryl.revok wrote:
The game is intended to take inspiration from, and parody Konami's Contra, while at the same time bringing its own approach to the genre.
so to receive in response to my decision not to modify my character to a different ethnicity, this:
M_Tee wrote:
As in, "Okay, I'm copying Contra, but how will mine be different? Why should people want to play mine instead of Contra?" could be valid thoughts to have during development.
was, in my opinion, not valid criticism. I'm a fan of your art, but that, and being called uninspired was, in my opinion, mildly insulting.
No insult was intended for sure. I try to post my criticism in a manner that would be suitable for say, a peer review or a portfolio critique... and if I've failed in doing so, then so be it.
However, "How does what you're planning to make differ from what's already available?" and "Why would a player/viewer/reader/listener desire to play/watch/read/listen to the work?" both still seem like valid things to consider for any creator.
darryl.revok wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
As creators of globally-spread media, like it or not, we have a responsibility in the material that we produce. We pretty much have three choices: intentionally spite that responsibility (those that do this are loud enough about it that I feel it doesn't even warrant further discussion), ignore it (default to white male, perpetuate tropes, etc.), or take it into consideration (and likely produce more inclusive, and more unique, products while doing so).
I don't feel this statement is objective. Does a person doing a hobby for their own personal enjoyment have an actual external responsibility which must be fulfilled? The implication that they do
denotes negative consequences for not fulfilling this responsibility. Also, it seems to me that you're saying that the perspectives of those who oppose your decision don't warrant discussion.
In regards to objectivity, there's no need for me to
add qualifiers to my statements.
As for the consequences of our choices in representation, wheelinventor hit on the topic some here:
An interesting case with skintone in NES era games is that it very well reflects the media landscape of the time. People with dark or black skintone are restrictively (and in the case of nes, i think, only) represented in athletic contexts, especially boxing, or as in the many street beat 'em up-styled games, are tied to a street gang cliché. The problem here is that these are the only canals of reprensentation in videogames of the time. This is a schoolbook example of power through representation.
...and where those statements were made about negative representation of a group, I am applying them to a lack of representation as well.
Regardless, I enjoy the discussion, and although I am, as a creator, trying to incorporate issues that I feel are important to me work, I definitely don't believe that only creators are justified in criticism.
M_Tee wrote:
However, "How does what you're planning to make differ from what's already available?" and "Why would a player/viewer/reader/listener desire to play/watch/read/listen to the work?" both still seem like valid things to consider for any creator.
That's fine, but if you would have more carefully read what I had wrote before posting, I believe you would have seen that I have already considered this. Also to imply that my intentions are to "copy" Contra is putting words in my mouth. I never said copy or a synonym of it in describing my project.
M_Tee wrote:
In regards to objectivity, there's no need for me to add qualifiers to my statements.
That's fine if you feel that's bad writing. But in my opinion, when you start tossing around phrases like "we have a responsibility", objectively, it's bordering on coercion.
One has to look no further than the recent James Rolfe incident to see further consequences of stating an opinion which could even be misconstrued to stand in opposition to the current wave of aggressive diversification. Personal attacks and accusations of bigotry could come from sources not even connected to the original criticism of the comment.
I have more faith in the members here than to feel it necessary to weight them with a responsibility and consequences in order to consider the issue. Simply saying, "Anybody else think it would be cool to see more black people in NES homebrew?" Might open the topic in a more friendly way, leaving the implication of any social ramifications to the reader's mind. Not a single person here has said that they are opposed to seeing non-white characters in games, but rather that they are opposed to being pressured into placing them there, so who needs the guilt trip?
M_Tee wrote:
Regardless, I enjoy the discussion, and although I am, as a creator, trying to incorporate issues that I feel are important to me work, I definitely don't believe that only creators are justified in criticism.
Well I certainly didn't say that either. I said that the criticism was invalid because it was based upon assumptions about my game which, 1) I did not make, and 2) were false.
darryl.revok wrote:
That's fine, but if you would have more carefully read what I had wrote before posting, I believe you would have seen that I have already considered this. Also to imply that my intentions are to "copy" Contra is putting words in my mouth. I never said copy or a synonym of it in describing my project.
Okay, so there was clearly a miscommunication based upon my oversimplification of "take inspiration from and parody" to "copying." I didn't choose the word "copy" as a criticism or an insult. I could have simply said, "So you're making a game inspired by and parodying Contra, how will yours differ?" and it would have communicated my intention. Should I have? It seems so, so I'll attempt to phrase myself more specifically in future communication.
As for not reading more carefully, I had read the differences that you posted, which were either nuances of gameplay (such as jump mechanics, agility, number of objects on screen, and difficulty curve) or era-common tropes of the genre, mostly already present in Contra or similar games (guns, aliens, expolosions, smoking, etc.) They all sound great, but I was primarily asking in regards to thematic or visual differences, things that would be immediately and apparently different to a wider audience, not inherently familiar or critical of gameplay mechanics.
Regardless, when I made the comment including the word,
uninspired, I very specifically stated that I was talking about your decision to parody Schwarzeneggar and Stallone, (not based on the race or gender or any other factor in doing so). Schwarzenegger parodies are a dime a dozen. He's probably one of the top five most parodied celebrities in the last thirty years, and Stallone's not far behind. But, I'm not a successful comedian, and games like Broforce show that there's still a market for stuff like that, so take it with a grain of salt if you'd like.
darryl.revok wrote:
M_Tee wrote:
... I definitely don't believe that only creators are justified in criticism.
Well I certainly didn't say that either. I said that the criticism was invalid because it was based upon assumptions about my game which, 1) I did not make, and 2) were false.
As stated before, the first criticism of "copying" wasn't a criticism. It was a question of how it will differ, not an accusation of it not differing. Secondly, "uninspired" was a criticism of the specific choice of arnold and sly as inspiration, and I'd stand by that criticism now.
But, am I really that bad at understanding the intent of others' posts?
darryl.revok wrote:
I believe the most tactful way for a person to go about making this point, would be to begin a good game project which features diversity....
There is a legend, of a man who wished to see an NES homebrew starring a female protagonist ...
He would embark on a quest, to create this game himself!
...
...He didn't, as far as I know, seek to impose his vision or his criteria upon any existing projects. He set off to make the game himself.
Because there definitely seems to be more than a tinge of "instead of criticizing the creative work of others, make creative work yourself that addresses those criticisms" to those posts.
Anyway, in regards to the issues with me stating my opinion about creator responsibility, allow me to clarify my stance:
I believe thatA lack of representation in popular culture (1) can negatively impact those that identify with the underrepresented groups.
AND As persons (2) adding to popular culture through game development, (3) we have a responsibility to minimize negative social impact of our work.
SO, we have a responsibility to represent groups that are underrepresented.
If anyone disagrees with any of the three numbered points above or the logic behind the conclusion, they're definitely free to do so. I'm not imposing these views on anyone in particular (and your game merely tangentially initiated the conversation, which I took out of your thread, so as to make it clear that this wasn't specifically targeting you or anyone else in particular). I am merely stating an argument and allowing people to agree or disagree. If they disagree, and want to express why, I encourage them to do so. Perhaps I'm overstating the effects that NES homebrew has, considering its comparatively small reach. Perhaps there's some other fault with the argument. What better way to find out than discourse at nesdev, the heart of modern NES development.
M_Tee wrote:
Regardless, when I made the comment including the word, uninspired, I very specifically stated that I was talking about your decision to parody Schwarzeneggar and Stallone, (not based on the race or gender or any other factor in doing so). Schwarzenegger parodies are a dime a dozen. He's probably one of the top five most parodied celebrities in the last thirty years, and Stallone's not far behind. But, I'm not a successful comedian, and games like Broforce show that there's still a market for stuff like that, so take it with a grain of salt if you'd like.
That and the fact that the cover of
Contra already looks like a paintover of Arnold and Sly.
"Contra vs. Rambo and Predator" by bleedingmediaM_Tee wrote:
But, am I really that bad at understanding the intent of others' posts?
You may be, and I am occasionally.
It comes with the territory.
Quote:
Because there definitely seems to be more than a tinge of "instead of criticizing the creative work of others, make creative work yourself that addresses those criticisms" to those posts.
I tried this from mid-2006 through mid-2009, after which point my answer switched to "I would but I'd get sued because fair use and other statutory limits on exclusive rights under copyright are not always clearly sufficient."
Quote:
I believe that
A lack of representation in popular culture (1) can negatively impact those that identify with the underrepresented groups.
AND As persons (2) adding to popular culture through game development, (3) we have a responsibility to minimize negative social impact of our work.
SO, we have a responsibility to represent groups that are underrepresented.
If anyone disagrees with any of the three numbered points above or the logic behind the conclusion, they're definitely free to do so.
Perhaps the intended meaning is that an author making a profit from or imposing a paywall on his work has a greater reponsibility pursuant to (3). One may draw an analogy to the doctrine of
vicarious liability, which comes into effect once an alleged infringer seeks a profit.
Quote:
Perhaps I'm overstating the effects that NES homebrew has, considering its comparatively small reach.
Whether the game is cartridge exclusive or available as a ROM download without charge may be part of it.
darryl.revok wrote:
I have more faith in the members here than to feel it necessary to weight them with a responsibility and consequences in order to consider the issue. Simply saying, "Anybody else think it would be cool to see more black people in NES homebrew?" Might open the topic in a more friendly way, leaving the implication of any social ramifications to the reader's mind. Not a single person here has said that they are opposed to seeing non-white characters in games, but rather that they are opposed to being pressured into placing them there, so who needs the guilt trip?
I agree that, I am not opposed to such thing and am opposed to force to put in but if you make the game you can design according to how you like to do. (Many computer games I design and that I wanted to design, that others do not do, although not due to black people or whatever, is also because of something perhaps I have not seen elsewhere but I wanted to have. I am reminded also I read quotation of someone who said, if the book you want to read does not yet exist, then you must write it.)
In the specific case of skin colours on NES game (and other systems too), there would also be issue of what colours are available, and how many colours can be displayed at once (and in what kind of combinations, such as per tile and per sprites and so on). It is not necessarily a problem, but in some situations it might be; I don't draw the art so I wouldn't know.
M_Tee wrote:
I didn't choose the word "copy" as a criticism or an insult. I could have simply said, "So you're making a game inspired by and parodying Contra, how will yours differ?" and it would have communicated my intention. Should I have?
I don't know how other's feel but I do think that calling someone's game a "clone" or "copy" could be seen to have negative connotations.
In fact, it's funny that this was brought up. Not long ago, Streemerz was played on James and Mike Mondays where it was called a mod of bionic commando. There was a bit of discussion here on that topic:
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=13955I had planned to include a briefing scene which featured wording to the effect of, "but this ain't no hack or mod. This is an all new game with original assets sent to earth to kick butt."
M_Tee wrote:
They all sound great, but I was primarily asking in regards to thematic or visual differences, things that would be immediately and apparently different to a wider audience, not inherently familiar or critical of gameplay mechanics.
I feel like thematic differences would largely negate the possibility of parodying a source material which is largely devoid of plot, or of audience concern for plot. The "theme", if I was to pick one from Contra, seems to be overloading the player with action movie tropes. And that was obviously a successful formula.
Racial diversity, or lack of it, was definitely not a theme of Contra. Including such would be way too heavy-handed for this project. You mentioned a wider audience, but to me, the wider audience for an NES game are those who will draw connections from their childhood experiences. As such, I'd see making things apparently different as detracting from the potential "curb appeal" of my homebrew concept. Admittedly, the choice was made to reflect what I feel fans would want, but it was my creative decision to use that as the basis for my decision. Is it uninspired? Probably so. But is it the wrong decision for this project? I don't think so. And I stand by that.
M_Tee wrote:
Because there definitely seems to be more than a tinge of "instead of criticizing the creative work of others, make creative work yourself that addresses those criticisms" to those posts.
I would say only when it comes to the point of imposition.
I didn't disdainfully reply to your initial criticism. I also wouldn't review the history of an unfamiliar user to verify that they have made homebrews before considering their criticism.
I posted in the beginning of the thread that I was worried this issue could become polarized. The anecdote I posted, was done so after this discussion had pretty much hit a wall. I posted it in anecdotal form for readers to interpret as they wished. However, I will say that of all of the angles from which I considered my post, your perception was not one of them. I'll elaborate further.
This situation is different that a criticism upon someone's work. A criticism is to say, "I don't like this graphic," or "this seems uninspired." This is a situation where a person famously, (among the forum) and humorous, sought a game with a female protagonist. After being offered many, it became clear that his qualifications for the game he wanted were much more elaborate. There was something about every game which made it unsatisfactory. It wasn't a question of the validity of his criticisms but rather the impossibility to predict their nature that made satisfying his expectations impossible.
From one perspective, the person in this story is a metaphor for the expectations of the population as a whole. It truly is impossible to know what sort of things every audience member may wish to see from your game. If you work to serve a responsibility outside of your own morality, then satisfaction with your work will always hinge on the judgement of others.
From another perspective, you could analogize his inability to find a game matching his criteria to the opposition met in this thread. By extension of that, the meaning would be that when not receiving a unanimously positive response to an increase in diversity, that you could lead by example in showing the merits to your idea.
From the most simple perspective, I would think of it like this:
darryl.revok wrote:
There is a legend...
backstory involved. not necessary but helpful
darryl.revok wrote:
wished to see an NES homebrew starring a female protagonist
wished to see diversity presented in NES homebrew
darryl.revok wrote:
also fit a litany of other criteria.
needed to reflect a social responsibility and deep thought rather than coming as a natural extension of one's own support of diversity
darryl.revok wrote:
he discovered that the game did not exist.
NES games don't reflect enough diversity
darryl.revok wrote:
He would embark on a quest, to create this game himself!
it is definitely an option to make a game which does reflect diversity.
darryl.revok wrote:
For at the end, awaited the game of his dreams, fitting all of the criteria he could choose
he could apply deep analytical thought to the social ramifications of his game and include vast diversity if that was the process he enjoyed
darryl.revok wrote:
made so much sweeter from the satisfaction that it was crafted by his own hands.
personal satisfaction for doing so oneself would be greater than influencing someone else to modify their project or process to suit your preference
I also said that the most tactful way to make the point would be to do it yourself. That doesn't mean it's the only way. That doesn't mean that you don't have the choice to assert a moral responsibility upon the hobby, or to criticize my character choice as "uninspired" but suggest that a palette swap could alleviate this issue, but I don't think that makes it a more tactful option. Perhaps there's a middle ground between those which is more appropriate, and I wouldn't want anyone to feel they can't offer a suggestion if they see something which could be improved on my work. But all in all, the way this was handled; tactful? No.
M_Tee wrote:
Perhaps I'm overstating the effects that NES homebrew has, considering its comparatively small reach. Perhaps there's some other fault with the argument. What better way to find out than discourse at nesdev, the heart of modern NES development.
Maybe. I dunno.
Edit: Added names to all quotes for clarification. Changed wording to direct one sentence to general audience.
Quote:
I don't know how other's feel but I do think that calling someone's game a "clone" or "copy" could be seen to have negative connotations.
In fact, it's funny that this was brought up. Not long ago, Streemerz was played on James and Mike Mondays where it was called a mod of bionic commando. There was a bit of discussion here on that topic: viewtopic.php?f=30&t=13955
I had planned to include a briefing scene which featured wording to the effect of, "but this ain't no hack or mod. This is an all new game with original assets sent to earth to kick butt."
I absolutely love this. Also, it made me think about how copying is popularly seen as negative in discourses on authencity of european origin, where there has been a strong mythos the 'lone creative genius' (directly translated from swedish, i don't know what the exact english term for this is), in itself steming from a long tradition of theology where mankind only can achieve greater things, such as art, when in contact with God/the holy ghost, since the judeochristian god is the one with creative power, not humanity, or something like that. The older meaning of 'inspired' comes from this too, at least in swedish ethymology. Again, i don't know too much about the english language but in several other european languages, the word for breath and ghost/spirit is the one and the same. Is there a similirar case between inspire and spirit? Because that would make much sense).
Contrary to this scheme of thinking about artistry, there's a term in China; "shanzhai", which means "fake" but doesn't have the negative connotations, but rather implies a smartness or ingeniousness of sorts. I'd wish my language to have such a word. It helps to balance out the negative connotations of 'fake' without altering the word 'fake' itself. It's also because i'm a firm believer of creativity as a largely collective or interpersonal phenomenon. Which also ties into the question of autheurship and notions of responsibility, but i do not think i have clear thoughts on what it implies.
All this isn't to negate your statement; of course. I just find the subject of authencity and authorship interesting.
tl;dr in response specifically to concerns over originality above. Even if you make a fan game which greatly resembles the work of somebody else, it's still yours and will have your unique stamp on it. Don't let anybody tell you your ideas are unoriginal. I think maybe one of my greatest strengths in life is to revisit familiar things over and over again and have the feeling that they are new. One of my favorite styles of music is boogie woogie piano. You couldn't possibly find something that is more tied to clichés in all of art..... And yet I find new life in it each and every day...it is one of the most beautiful forms of music that there is. Legions and legions of fellow musicians can type their reams of text about originality for the next fifty years and l will still be listening to and playing Albert Ammons boogie woogie stomp.
Well, there's the other side to what I was saying too. I don't want to come across like I'm accusing anyone here of being thoughtless; my goal was to point out that being ruled by your subconscious makes you vulnerable. Toughen yourself up with conscious goals and self analysis.
I don't want to accuse someone of being thoughtless because their character is white or male or whatever; not my intent at all. I just want you to be able to say why, so that when someone asks it's a real conversation, or a real disagreement, and not just them picking at your weak spot.
Diversity of representation is something that's worth considering whenever coming up with character concepts, but there are a lot of other things worth considering, too. If you take it on as a goal, this puts constraints on your game's design (and nowhere is this more true than here in NES development). If you have too many constraints, they'll choke your game. For example: in
the post that spawned this thread, I thought it was pretty clear at face value that darryl.revok wants a strong homage to Contra. That's a pretty well formed goal. The suggestions being made were anything but arbitrary; they were proposals for new constraints!
There's a danger here of conflating corporate concerns with the homebrew developer's, and it's hard not to imply it when you start insisting on this kind of stuff. It's difficult to make suggestions like this without insulting someone by collateral association. There's a big difference between complaining about trends in aggregate, and getting in someone's face about a game that they're making for themselves.
I've worked on a game project where all sorts of ideas for the main character were proposed, and eventually it came down to the financial interests in the project saying that it must be a white male. "We think it's less risky, and we're paying for it." This happens, and it's shitty. It's worth screaming about, but you'll never get to meet the person making these decisions, though, and they don't care what you have to say either.
Homebrew developers aren't that, and you
can't paint them with the same brush. They're probably not expecting to make any profit from it; the decision making process is fundamentally different. They are also the one who's paying for it. They're not even taking a financial risk with it, they're literally just
paying for it, and the only thing they want out of it is to have their game
exist. Many of them are polite enough to listen to you, too. It's important to remember these differences.
rainwarrior wrote:
I don't want to come across like I'm accusing anyone here of being thoughtless; my goal was to point out that being ruled by your subconscious makes you vulnerable.
I didn't think you were making that accusation. What I saw more from your comments were that reflecting upon the decisions behind your choices would make your choices, and your faith in them stronger. That's why I felt like the paraphrasing of your words was very out of context.
I also think that it's quite possible to use a combination approach wherein you trust your intuition when it seems appropriate and thoughtfully review it later. I don't think that discounting either the conscious or intuitive portions of the creative process is the best choice. I think that both are important to making good art.
Another danger I'd say though in relying too heavily on intuition is that it would be easier to get frustrated when things don't come naturally. In these cases you have to be able to analytically work through the problem.
I mentioned before, something about doing the bulk of the work based on intuition. Well, to break this down though, (and these are more or less bullshit estimates, just off the top of my head. I don't clock my time or anything) I'd say it's something like, I do 90% of the work on intuition, but spend 90% of my time doing the remaining 10%. For example, if you've done it before, you can throw together a really rough game engine in about a week, sure. But is it ready? No way. The vast majority of making it prepared for your game is yet to come. And all of these little tweaks are what are going to take the most analytical review.
rainwarrior wrote:
I don't want to accuse someone of being thoughtless because their character is white or male or whatever; not my intent at all.
I didn't get the impression that you were. You also said:
Quote:
If you're making a game for yourself, I think you should represent whomever you want.
and further elaborated upon it, so I thought that was clear.
rainwarrior wrote:
It's difficult to make suggestions like this without insulting someone by collateral association. There's a big difference between complaining about trends in aggregate, and getting in someone's face about a game that they're making for themselves.
Absolutely. And when someone is suggested to make a change for the sake of "correcting the dominance of white male protagonists," then that could easily be interpreted to accuse my game project of promoting the dominance of white male protagonists. I would like to hope that isn't the criticism that the author was hoping to make. If it's not a criticism then it's an imposition of an agenda and I don't feel that has a place here.
If it's a criticism that I am perpetuating stereotypes, then that would suggest that my game is doing harm by existing. I think that's pretty rude to say to a hobbyist if their game isn't truly doing something extreme, like, promoting naziism.
In a sense, I suppose you could say that if someone in the macrocosm of this community will make that comment, then I should be prepared for it to happen upon the release of my game. I believe that correlates to some of the points you were making, rainwarrior. However, I surely think there are ways that it could be done without being rude.
Even so, would I have rather it not have been said? Absolutely. Now I have the stigma of perpetuating racist stereotypes attached to the first page of my progress thread. Even if I can argue that the comment is invalid, the James Rolfe incident should show us that makes no difference in the eyes of the "diversity swarm." Now I don't pretend that my game will get as popular as James Rolfe, but what if somebody sees something about the game and comes to my thread? Implications of heavy social issues and racism will be tied to the discussion. That's definitely not what I wanted the game to be about, and it's distracting from talk about gameplay mechanics, graphics, weapons, bosses, explosions, you know, the things that matter for something like this.
I've said before that I don't favor censorship so I guess all I can say is bring it on, but it will really cut into my progress if I have to keep defending myself.
Look, D.R., my intention on the suggestion of varying the characters was intended to be a criticism on the uniqueness of your character designs (graphics, which falls under the list of topics you mentioned as being appropriate to critique), intending to suggest that, parody or not, further differentiation could be beneficial. (You disagree with that, that's fine. No one's pushing otherwise. (The follow-up comment I made regarding the choice of Sly and Arnold was in absolutely no way associated to diversity, as I explained earlier.)
The comment about white male protagonists was intended as an aside. Rereading my post, I see that I definitely did not make that intention clear, and as such, should have rephrased it more specifically.
However, as soon as I realized that the conversation was at risk of going off-topic, I took it to its own thread about diversity in games in general, and despite quotes which gave foundation for the beginning of the discussion, the closest thing that came to mentioning your game at all was to use Contra sprites to illustrate a response to the technical limitations of displaying a range of skin tones. I could have probably used Double Dragon II sprites for the same effect (IIRC, it uses the same setup of player one using a different palette for pants while player two uses the same palette for shirt and pants, but I might be mistaken).
So, despite this conversation starting in your thread, this wasn't about you personally, and if you feel that your thread has been "tainted" by the questioning of your character designs, then a PM to request me to edit my posts would have been responded to much better than whatever this is.
But, if you really want to make this about criticism regarding representation in your game, I would like to point out that in justifying your choice to parody of Stallone and Arnold, you posted,
darryl.revok wrote:
But, Stallone and Schwarzenegger sound funny, and they have distinct voices which would sound particularly funny with (impersonated) death groans.
It didn't cross my mind until I went back to reread your thread just now, but, as you may or not be aware, Stallone's voice "which sounds particularly funny" is the result of
an injury caused at child birth due to malpractice, which has left a quadrant of his face paralyzed. So, as common as parodying Stallone is, I'd say that specifically parodying him because the result of his disability "sounds funny" is arguably insensitive.
But, do whatever you want, man. Your game, your call.
M_Tee wrote:
So, as common as parodying Stallone is, I'd say that specifically parodying him because the result of his disability "sounds funny" is arguably insensitive.
I'm pretty sure 90% of people had no clue about that, myself included. Most people I know who've seen Rocky couldn't sit through the whole thing because they couldn't understand a word that was said.
Was there any point in even bringing that up, other than trying to "get back" at him?
Quote:
But, do whatever you want, man. Your game, your call.
He probably already knew that, unlike the incident with Sylvester Stallone.
M_Tee wrote:
whatever this is.
How were you expecting this thread to turn out? I feel like all this thread did was bring people's attention to what you think is an issue that no one else even thinks exists, especially if we're talking only about modern NES games. I see no other way how this could have turned out.
Alright. Now I feel this has gotten ugly. This thread has been way out of hand and my name and project have been attached to it from the beginning. (See first post) It got to the point that you were attempting to silence the views of those who opposed your opinion and that's when I got to the point that I couldn't take the bullshit anymore. Those who said this mentality is killing the fun and that these types of agendas should be left out of the homebrew scene had very valid perspectives. I didn't want to ask you to change what you said, but I think a negative reflection of the effects of pushing the diversity agenda upon people is entirely valid.
M_Tee wrote:
Stallone's voice "which sounds particularly funny" is the result of an injury caused at child birth due to malpractice
Yes, I am aware of his injury. This is the reason that he can't move his part of his face. But that's only a small part of why his characters sound funny. It's also his accent, which is often played up in his characters. If I see him in an interview,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1LF5d7FT2w I honestly don't see anything humorous about his voice. But when you see him as a character,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5iAB4C8B9U4 he sounds funny. I appreciate that about the characters he plays. My friends and I (who watch a lot of films together) have a special appreciation for Stallone. We'll even seek out B-movies because he, or his brother, are in them.
He's also a famous hollywood actor. His appearance, his voice, and his film characters are the types of things that are valid to parody. I'm not making fun of his disability, I'm making fun of how incoherently his characters speak, which should be pretty evident from the links that this is a choice he makes.
This is the type of stuff that kills the fun. I would appreciate if you would stop compounding accusations.
Edit: 1) added "see first post" 2) minor typo change 3) added edit caption and name on quote
Espozo wrote:
I'm pretty sure 90% of people had no clue about that
darryl.revok wrote:
Yes, I am aware of his injury.
Oops...
Seems I let my frustration with the differences between what I was intending to communicate andwhat I was actually communicating get the better of me. Point made, Espozo. Will step away from this.
Espozo wrote:
what you think is an issue that no one else even thinks exists
Nonsense. Stereotype threat is a thing. Erasure is a thing. To deny that these are real things is disingenuous. To deny that we
can fix them is defeatist.
Whether we have
an obligation to fix them is a separate question. And where, I think, the argument really boils down. (But how better to avoid having that uncomfortable argument tha
n to deny that the problems exist in the first place?)
(edit: fix typo)I think that's where rainwarrior's point about acting deliberately comes in—if you made a conscious decision, you will be able to sleep with it, even if someone takes you to task for it.
This thread.
I didn't read all new posts, but to go from somewhat technical discussions about character representation to agenda police... that's quite the escalation. I think this thread has ran its course.
lidnariq wrote:
Nonsense.
Well, In the context of "modern NES games", I don't think so. I'm not ignoring it as a whole. Many homebrew NES games I've seen don't even have human protagonists.
lidnariq wrote:
Whether we have an obligation to fix them is a separate question.
You're right. That's mainly what I was thinking of, but didn't know how to phrase it. I don't think we, or anyone else, has the obligation to fix it. Video game companies (for the most part:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/vi ... s-Very-Low) give people what they want, like what rainwarrior said about how some business analysts find out that a white male is the most profitable. We're just the minority in that we don't seem to like it. If anything though, blame the people buying the games for that reason.
It seems like having a female protagonist would actually be more profitable at this point. I saw something that said that females make up 48% of video game players (how this was found is beyond me) and women like to be represented in these sorts of things, more than men seem to, because this is new for women. Look at where Hillary has gotten off this, of course, this isn't where all her support comes.
Espozo wrote:
...business analysts find out that a white male is the most profitable. We're just the minority in that we don't seem to like it.
They don't "find out" so much as presume based on past sales. The standard mentality is to copy the thing that is making the most money right now, and unfortunately that works well enough that they wouldn't see a reason to change.
If you take a look at the kind of content Netflix has been funding lately, it's not based on that old style of research, but on very intense profiling of people's movie watching tastes. This is a kind of data that was never available before in this kind of magnitude and detail. They don't have to take up shared space in theatres like a Hollywood film, and they can deliver niche content right to your home. It's a completely different ballgame and they're targeting groups that have been largely ignored until now. I've found it quite exciting to see such a rapid shift in media happening over the past couple of years.
Interesting article:
http://www.wired.com/2016/03/netflixs-g ... uer-world/Quote:
“There’s a mountain of data that we have at our disposal ... composed of two things. Garbage is 99 percent of that mountain. Gold is one percent… . Geography, age, and gender? We put that in the garbage heap. Where you live is not that important.” Stereotypes about what one region might like versus another are largely useless to Netflix.
It's not just Netflix, though, I was just using it as an example. There's a big global change going on across all media right now, and I find it fascinating.
lidnariq wrote:
Whether we have an obligation to fix them is a separate question. And where, I think, the argument really boils down.
When it comes to the matter of whether or not this issue is something of which we should have awareness, I wouldn't argue. Whether or not we have an obligation as content creators in general to address this issue is outside of the scope of this thread. As to whether or not there is an inherent responsibility in creating NES homebrew, to address these particular social issues, or any social issues at all, I would say absolutely not. That would imply that the act of creating a homebrew which doesn't address racial representation is creating harm, versus the alternative of not having a new NES game at all.
Espozo wrote:
It seems like having a female protagonist would actually be more profitable at this point.
I don't know about anybody else, but I tend to choose the female character when there's an option. For me, the choice is less of a reflection of which character I want to represent me, but rather of which I'd rather look at on the screen while I'm playing.
I noticed that there are a lot of people in this forum who are working on projects starring female protagonists. Without being asked, several of us independently sought to create games with strong women. I'd say that speaks well about the interest in diversity among NESdev as a group. I can't think of any homebrews in production starring a protagonist of a dark-skinned ethnicity, so I think the topic is worth bringing up. But anything involving obligations or responsibilities or consequences is too strong of wording for this hobby.
You know what I think is funny that I've noticed? In anything, you often see a white man, a white women, or a black man, but very rarely do you see a black woman unless she's the black man's husband.
darryl.revok wrote:
I don't know about anybody else, but I tend to choose the female character when there's an option.
For me, it depends on how they look/sound. If they make sexual noises upon being hit and have exaggerated female features, than no. Otherwise, maybe. I often like the hairstyles available to women more in games.
My own point of view is you do not need to have ability to select from multiple characters unless either gameplay is affected by the choice or if it is multi-players and it help to tell apart which player. (If you make the game yourself, of course it is up to you. Make the protagonist to whatever character you want, with or without ability of selection. Same with other characters in the game.)
Well, what you described is how most games handle it, although now thinking about it, there are plenty that don't although less.
Espozo wrote:
Well, what you described is how most games handle it, although now thinking about it, there are plenty that don't although less.
Well how about this. If you had two playable characters that didn't control differently, and had a palette swap for race, how would you choose (for an NES game)? Typically, if the characters are the same, they're assigned to player number. In this instance, one race would be unplayable for single player. Do you dedicate graphics and code (which may be limited) to a player selection screen? Would a player feel cheated to put in the extra effort of selection only to find that it makes no difference to the way the game is played?
darryl.revok wrote:
Would a player feel cheated to put in the extra effort of selection only to find that it makes no difference to the way the game is played?
Having an optional reskin is a reward in itself. If it's a meaningful gameplay difference too, that's a bonus, but a different appearance is a nice addition all on its own. (Why on earth wouldn't it be?)
WTF do you mean by "extra effort of selection"?
Once, I was so indecisive as to which character I wanted to choose in Super Monkey Ball that I stood there for 3 hours!!!
rainwarrior wrote:
WTF do you mean by "extra effort of selection"?
I didn't say anything about the quantity of effort, but if there's a screen that asks what character you want, and you pick one, that's making a decision. I'm just saying, don't you think that would lead to expectations of the characters having different mechanics? It's not common in the games I'm used to seeing to have different selectable "costumes". I'm not saying it doesn't happen, as Metroid obviously comes to mind, but it wasn't common. If you're picking out a Turtle, you're at least picking their weapon. With Mario 2, you've got jump height and speed and various mechanics.
Let's take the racial context out of it because that's not important. Let's just say you had to choose between two people with differently colored hats, and that was the only difference, do you think creating the choice would lead to expectations of it being more significant than it is?
The reason that I asked this is because it's a legitimate question that I asked myself long before the racial question even came up. I have two characters with different names and even a single varying head sprite. However, I don't want them to play any differently. I considered if I should make the character selectable, but considered that to be a waste of cart space, and my effort in adding that feature, only to present the character with a largely insignificant choice.
I was curious to see what answers you guys would suggest. (or just make fun of me
) I considered making the characters tied to controllers, yet allowing someone to play single player from the second controller. This seemed to solve all of the issues.
By this logic
Rampage having 3 characters instead of 1 was a mistake. ???
I don't really think this is an argument worth pursuing, honestly.
I've already stated my opinion on the matter, but to reiterate: even just reskins are generally good and appreciated by the player.
Espozo wrote:
Once, I was so indecisive as to which character I wanted to choose in Super Monkey Ball that I stood there for 3 hours!!!
I stole your quote for my signature.
rainwarrior wrote:
I don't really think this is an argument worth pursuing, honestly.
I really didn't think it was an argument. I just posed a question. The default for an NES game is to assign the second-billed character to the second player. I don't entirely understand the sentiment.
But I would like to retract the question. I'll agree it's definitely not worth an argument.
Maybe I didn't understand what you were trying to suggest. If the question was "would you find it bad if Run 'n' Gun had a character select instead of just locked to a controller", I'd say either decision has its merits. My instinct is that I'd probably leave it controller locked, but allow the game to be played solo using controller 2 if desired.
There are at least a few for NES that do reskin choice not tied to player-number.
Rattle or Roll?
Mick or Mack?
rainwarrior wrote:
If the question was ...Run 'n' Gun...
No. I don't really want to talk about my game. The question was simply about the decisions involved in designing player selection and whether or not these decisions are influenced when having varying race between the characters. I was hoping to steer the topic to the direction of productive NES development conversation, but ultimately, I don't really care.
Myask wrote:
There are at least a few for NES that do reskin choice not tied to player-number.
SCAT
If there's one thing this whole experience has taught me, it's that if something you're doing is important to you, don't talk about it publicly on the internet.
Punch wrote:
I stole your quote for my signature.
I'm here all night.
I did think of a run and gun game that isn't controller locked, and that's Metal Slug 2 and onward. I always found this kind of dumb though, like I care who I choose.
Some people probably do though... (I think you guys can handle it)
It's kind of funny though, in some games where the characters are supposedly the same, there's sometimes one who is favorited over the other for little reasons, like in Super Monkey Ball, I always choose Baby because he/she is the smallest, which gives you a better view of the floor and is virtually the only way to beat Master 9.
darryl.revok wrote:
If there's one thing this whole experience has taught me, it's that if something you're doing is important to you, don't talk about it publicly on the internet.
Oh please...
Espozo wrote:
Oh please...
Oh I'm not going to stop making my game, but I've had plenty enough public opinions on the matter.
I've got quite a bit of heavy shit that I deal with on a daily basis. This is a hobby that I do because I enjoy it, because it reconnects me with my childhood, because the challenge of coding and game design is difficult enough that it can block out some of those negative thoughts for a while and let me focus on something which I like.
There's no reason I can't enjoy the solitary process of game design. I used to enjoy talking about games, even debating issues on the topic. It's got to the point though, that doing so is an unpleasant experience which introduces negativity into my life.
If any one of you were accused of being a racist/sexist, I promise you it's going to take some of the childlike enjoyment out of your hobby. It's an intimidating thing today to be publicly pressured to modify your project, against your wishes, for the sake of diversity. Even if you don't think you've done anything wrong. Anyone who says it's not intimidating is full of shit.
Some mod, please lock this fucking thread. It should have been done pages ago.
So, I heard that they're making these new small nuclear reactors, called SMRs, that are said to be much safer in that they don't get hot enough to cause a nuclear meltdown. However, to create the same amount of electricity, you need more of them, but the security around them shouldn't be as severe.
Here you go (patches over "Contra (J).nes" from GoodNES)
Thread solved, now you guys can let darryl.revok be
Those black guys on the left are really oiled up.
Also, one of them should be a wheelchair-bound, deaf, transgender Asian woman. Can you handle that?
darryl.revok wrote:
There's no reason I can't enjoy the solitary process of game design. I used to enjoy talking about games, even debating issues on the topic. It's got to the point though, that doing so is an unpleasant experience which introduces negativity into my life.
Sorry it's been such a bummer for you.
Punch wrote:
I stole your quote for my signature.
Would you please take my name out of your signature? It's really not that funny.
darryl.revok wrote:
Punch wrote:
I stole your quote for my signature.
Would you please take my name out of your signature? It's really not that funny.
Sure.
Not that this addresses the problem of your name being in someone else's signature, but I think signatures are a stupid feature for forums to have, and just in case you feel the same but didn't realize, you can turn them off in your user control panel:
http://forums.nesdev.com/ucp.php?i=prefs&mode=viewdarryl.revok I've enjoyed your posts more than most, here, so I will miss them a bit, but also I understand the desire to work in tranquility. You might notice I almost never post work-in-progress stuff here, because I would rarely want to seek criticism here. If I want criticism I show it directly to people I trust whose opinions matter to me. I don't think a random collection of active NESDev posters has particularly good taste or useful opinions.
I
would come here to seek criticism on technical NES stuff, because we have a pool of experts here with a great wealth of experience.
So... mostly I just post my stuff here when it's done. It's also probably easier to shrug off unsolicited criticism on stuff that's done and you're not going to change anyway.
rainwarrior wrote:
I think signatures are a stupid feature for forums to have
I never understood their purpose, which is why I don't have one. I'm fine with other people having them though, but I understand why darryl.revok wouldn't want his name there. Sorry if I was being too big of a jerk.
rainwarrior wrote:
darryl.revok I've enjoyed your posts more than most, here, so I will miss them a bit, but also I understand the desire to work in tranquility.
I wasn't under the impression that he wouldn't post at all anymore.
rainwarrior wrote:
If I want criticism I show it directly to people I trust whose opinions matter to me.
You mean I'm not one of those people?
rainwarrior wrote:
the problem of your name being in someone else's signature
I changed my signature because it looked too large and broke the flow of text, because someone asked for it and maybe because it wasn't as funny as I thought. I could have my signature stay as it is though, posts are public and the poster's name is embedded in those messages anyway, plus having his username equal his real life name was his choice. That's a non-issue, especially in this case where it was just a dumb joke and nothing too serious. Anyway, it wasn't meant to offend anyone.
Since I kinda touched on the subject, I also recommend people not to use real names in their online profiles. I think darryl.revok should request an username change to the moderator team if he feels like having his name plastered in places where he doesn't want it to (like this discussion or my signature, for example) is a serious problem. I had my real name exposed on some forums and I either nuked my account or asked the mod team to change it. I feel like this community is benign enough, but you never know. Plus Nintendo might not like what we're doing (even though it is 100% legal) and might either try to sue people here or try to blacklist us from working on Nintendo platforms in the future (I always think about this possibility and that could definitely happen, see VBlank Entertainment and Grand Theftendo).
rainwarrior wrote:
Not that this addresses the problem of your name being in someone else's signature, but I think signatures are a stupid feature for forums to have
I don't mind when they're a link to someone's URL. Sometimes I'll click those to see more of someone's work, but anything bigger than that gets a bit annoying.
Quote:
You might notice I almost never post work-in-progress stuff here, because I would rarely want to seek criticism here.
Yeah, that's a more direct route to the issue. Sometimes it's really helpful to post something on which you specifically need assistance. If you've got a pretty clear-cut idea of what you want to do though, and just hope to get some interest, it seems like chances are pretty good you'll get more people trying to inject ideas than you'd really like.
Espozo wrote:
Sorry if I was being too big of a jerk.
Eh, normally I would have just laughed about it but I was still a bit heated from that debate and I wasn't sure if my meaning was being taken out of context. I was being pissy, so I'm sorry about that.
Quote:
I wasn't under the impression that he wouldn't post at all anymore.
Eh, once again I was being a bit pissy and wasn't entirely clear, and wasn't entirely sure myself. I just knew that I was pretty upset with the situation, and that thoughts and emotions I didn't want involved with my game development were now a part of it. I was seriously considering if I should just make my characters black and drop any attempts at humor to avoid any potential backlash. I know that might sound stupid, but any time something like this happens to a big corporation, you'll see they just give in to the pressure. It's easier and less risky than standing up for themselves.
I know the debate, or perhaps more accurately, argument, is over, but I'd like to say this much on the issue. This is the second time I've been in a fight with somebody here. The first time was on the issue of personal and professional courtesy to a completed work. In that case, I acted like as big of a dick as I thought that person was acting, and I think somehow managed to make my point because I haven't seen that kind of aggressive criticism again. At the end of the day, I apologized to that person for being a dick, and I wish them the best success with their game.
This situation is different. I don't believe I was out of line. As soon as I had suggestively accusatory language on my thread requesting I make changes for the sake of correcting white-male dominance, a whole rush of emotions went through me. This is definitely not the attention I wanted. This is definitely not the type of feedback I wanted. First thought is don't confront this situation or ask what he means, just get the topic changed and get this talk off my page now. This is a dangerous, dirty bomb that just dropped on my page.
So regardless of the extreme rudeness and inconsiderateness of the post, I tried to be cool about it and supportive of the mentality. I honestly do think it would be nice to see more dark-skinned ethnicities and if I didn't have a clearcut reason not to, I probably would alter my protagonist to be black, even if I was pissed about the way I was coerced into making the decision. So I rolled with the thread the best I could but posted a couple warnings that this could get very ugly. I feel the thread should have probably been locked at Guilty's "koombahyah" post. But how can a moderator come and lock a thread on diversity without being possibly considered racist? This is such a loaded issue.
So I sat back at let the thread run it's course until I thought the bullshit was self-evident. We had peoples' words being taken out of context, we had opposing views being silenced. The only middle in the conversation was largely represented by people who were dancing around similar topics and making points through jokes and those people were being told to shut up for derailing serious attempts at conversation, supposedly.
I thought it was time that a view of the negative effects of aggressively pushing diversity upon others should be shown, and that it was time that I could (hopefully) safely air my restrained frustrations for having been targeted in the matter. I thought it was pretty clear after doing so, that M_Tee had been inconsiderate, rude, and was in the wrong. I felt that he would admit fault, potentially apologize, and hopefully see that pressuring someone to change their hobby for the sake of diversity is rude, at the least. To avoid even being too confrontational in the first post, I didn't even get to the heart of the matter, being that it's intimidating, it's coercive, and in almost every case it's going to be at least suggestively accusatory to make these impositions upon someone. I just wanted this type of thing not to happen to anyone else.
But there was no apology, and no admission of fault. With every reply, M_Tee got more defensive, more snarky, and sought out more ways to find fault with my position, until he finally started digging up new topics on which to attack me. This is very different from the previous situation. I really don't think that I'm sharing part of the blame here, and I'm really really done with debating on the issue. M_Tee, if you do decide to reply here or in PM, I don't want to read ANYTHING other than, "I'm sorry", and even then I don't care. But if I have to defend myself against this shit again, my god, I'm gonna fucking lose it.
Punch wrote:
having his username equal his real life name was his choice
My username isn't my real name. Here's a new signature for you:
The point is that you were being an obnoxious asshole with a stupid giant signature I didn't want to be in.
Punch wrote:
I'm sorry.
Me too.
Guilty wrote:
Anyways. I love this forum and the people here, but I'm seeing a lot of things that sadden me in this thread. I see a lot of insult and a lot of needlessly heated discussion. Honestly, I don't think there's anything to be gained by discussing the contents of this thread much further than they have been.
Quote:
This is an extremely dangerous situation. I have a lot of experience with this, having come from a forum that was almost completely destroyed by this exact same topic. I lost a lot of friends over this conversation, even though we were agreeing with each other. I think that while this conversation needs to be had, it also needs to be stopped once things turn south or we're all just going to end up causing damage to the community. As much as I hate singing and physical contact, I feel like a bit of group-hugging and Kumbayah is in order.