By Kieron Gillen on August 30th, 2009 at 11:57 am.
Sundays are for doing a lot of work, avoiding that lot of work with games of Champions and compiling a list of the fascinating (primarily) games related reading from across the week while resisting linking to a genuinely stunning performance.
- Games Workshop are doing a new edition of the lovely PC-game inspiring boardgame Space Hulk. Over at Downtowntime, Rab writes about Space Hulk. It’s heart-on-sleeve gaming romanticism and my favourite piece of games writing of the week.
- In the week of its console release, The Reticule interviews famous writer Paul Dini about the aims behind the writing of Arkham Asylum. What I find most interesting about it is that Dini – the veteran of animation – clearly both loves and is highly aware of what they’re doing with the tone: “It threw a lot of the restrictions out of the window… The level of intensity was a little more extreme so we were able to include everything that we wanted to whilst keeping the fantasy element intact. I’d like to think there is something in the game for angry teenager in all of us.”
- Tom Jubert is a splendid freelancer writer who you’ll probably best know for his work no Penumbra. He republishes what was an internal document - a postmortem of the development of a character.
- Adorable RPS Work Experience Lackey Phill Cameron interviews Double Bear about the forthcoming ZRPG over at Game Set Watch.
- This is a little old now – I didn’t include it last week – but the uproar over Shadow Complex and the ethics of a boycott or not is interesting to think about, if only theoretically. Christian Nutt starts the ball rolling with an overview of the situation at Gamasutra, but it only really kicks off properly in the comments thread.
- Old housemate Dan Griddleoctopus does what every PC games journalist must do. That is, write a retrospective on Planescape Torment. Also, amusingly admits he still has Alec’s copy of Planescape stolen off him, the cad. Also, it made me go back and read EG’s original Planescape Review, which is a fascinating example of a basically correct review appearing ludicrous with the benefit of of hindsight.
- It does seem like Adventure Game Studios are coming of age right now. As well as Time Gentlemen, Please, there’s been a lot of hype around Horror Adventure Downfall. Its creators are interviewed over at Hardy Developer Journal.
- An Old Indie Game Advert. Ah-ha-ha.
- GamerPaper starts it comedy games thing. Here’s its new design for a mouse. I’d buy one.
- Insult Swordfighting picks apart Game Informer seemingly to say that everyone should give reviews better scores. To be honest, what they pick up on was just a shit closing paragraph which the writer didn’t really think through, but the wider interest intrigues.
- People who multitask are bad at at it. This got me thinking about a lot of stuff. At once.
- Henry Jenkins starts republishing an eight part white paper he worked on, on the subject of Memes and Viral Marketing. I haven’t read it fully yet, so this note is as much for me and you. It strikes me as good stuff.
- Garth Ennis recalls the joys of 2000AD. Mr Gurr drags out some of the panels.
- Simon Parkin introduced me to the wonder of three frames. Join me.
- Nextwave was a splendid Marvel Comic by Warren Ellis and Stuart Immonen. It was very silly. It ran for twelve issues. In the eleventh, they started taking the piss in a virtuoso fashion, by spending half the issue as six double page spreads of glorious ludicrousness. Comics Should Be Good publishes them all. They are your new desk tops, and Nextwave is available to buy in two fine trade paperbacks. You’re welcome.
- All of RPS are what we call Freelancers. Perhaps you are too. I suspect you too will recognise yourself in my old comrade’s Miss AMP’s old list of Tips For A Successful Freelancer Lifestyle. It’s been one of those weeks, y’know?
- Tom Ewing writes about the history of Pop music in the 00s. As in, proper pop music. I suspect this is the sort of thing which a lot of you haven’t paid attention to, so well worth reading.
- Everett True brought this to my attention. Ukraine Got’s Talent’s Sand Animator winner. Brought the RPS chat-room into agreement in a way which we haven’t been since World of Goo. Startling
Failed.
30/08/2009 at 12:16 Some Guy says:
these get longer every time
30/08/2009 at 12:26 Garg says:
That old Eurogamer Torment review had far too many ellipses and exclamation marks for my liking. You can understand the point of view for some of the points he’s making, but really how can you argue that death has no consequence being a bad thing when you have the ever present ability to load an earlier save if things get hard? If death were a negative, then you’d just load an earlier save and it wouldn’t matter.
30/08/2009 at 12:27 Lack_26 says:
Ohh, those 3 frames were interesting. And it’s good to see some more love for Space Hulk, I just wish they would do a version of Inquisitor, that would make for a great isometric X-com style game. And probably be fairly easy-ish to make to boot.
30/08/2009 at 12:31 Tom Armitage says:
Jesus, Gillen, don’t tell everybody else about the Space Hulk re-issue, now it’s going to sell out and everything. Gah.
30/08/2009 at 12:43 Dracko says:
Dini’s taking the piss: The writing in Arkham Asylum is amazingly lazy, its central plot absolutely awful even by his own standards and it all ends up with a game that leaves casual Batman fans in the dark and hardcore fans with retreads and at this point, total cliché as far as the use of the antagonists go.
Thankfully the execution fares better, but that’s really not to his credit.
The game is otherwise fun, but nowhere near 9/10, let alone Game of the Year material. Eidos seem pretty desperate to sell it, though.
30/08/2009 at 12:53 Jockie says:
I remember asking for Space Hulk one Christmas when I was quite small, I was gutted when I opened my big present to find this little castle thing instead, though I managed to keep my composure and say my thank yous. Fortunately my birthday is in February.
30/08/2009 at 12:58 Igor Hardy says:
Thanks for the link to our Downfall interview.
I can’t really say how the game’s storytelling compares to modern horror games because frankly I don’t play them (I suspect they don’t present the player with real choices), but fans of stuff like I Have No Mouth But I Must Scream and of Stephen King’s writings should definitely try it out.
30/08/2009 at 13:13 hatman says:
Games Workshop are doing a new edition of the lovely PC-game inspiring boardgame Space Hulk
OH GOD I HAVE NO MONEY BUT I WANT IT.
:’(
30/08/2009 at 13:27 c-Row says:
I spent some good money on eBay to get the original Space Hulk and its two expansions. And now I am gonna pay 80€ just to get me the updated version, which is sad, or at least some part of my brain tries to convince me to believe this. Meanwhile, the other part is all “Space Hulk WOOHOO!”
I hope the old floor tiles can be connected to the new tiles.
30/08/2009 at 13:30 Mort says:
“ohmygaad, no waaay!”
Anyway, dammit first article led to an hour long rummage through the Games Workshop store. Came away with Space Hulk. Nostalgia is expensive no? Although the fact that my eldest son is almost as old as I was when I first played it scares the shit out of me.
30/08/2009 at 13:45 Susan says:
Peter David: still a total douchebag.
30/08/2009 at 13:50 hatman says:
£58
What? When did this hobby get so expensive?
30/08/2009 at 13:58 radomaj says:
For people who can’t see the Kseniya video because of copyright restrictions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOhf3OvRXKg
30/08/2009 at 14:04 BrokenSymmetry says:
That Ukrainian Sand Animator video as amazing. Never seen anything even remotely like that.
30/08/2009 at 14:08 Shadrach says:
Agreed on the sand animation stuff, my eyes are still wet, damn you RPS :)
30/08/2009 at 14:11 Turin Turambar says:
Confirmed.
Sand > videogames.
30/08/2009 at 14:16 mcw says:
I found it pretty interesting that Downfall was rejected by Steam for content reasons, they have Manhunt after all.
30/08/2009 at 14:24 Taillefer says:
&Links everybody to the sand painting&
Man, that’s beautiful.
30/08/2009 at 14:26 Arathain says:
You know, I read your intro paragraph and thought “I wonder if he’s going to link to that Ukrainian thing.”
I did some rock drumming in school and Uni. I’m an OK drummer, but nothing special. I quickly realised that I’d know I was getting good when I could intuitively play the beats I hear in my head when I listen to music. I never imagined that sort of thing was possible with visual art- she moves her hands and flowers appear.
Brrr. What a performance.
30/08/2009 at 14:33 Arathain says:
That Space Hulk article is a great geek love story. Also, Lost Property is one of my favourite Divine Comedy songs.
30/08/2009 at 14:40 Xercies says:
Unfortunatly I’m not a Space Hulk person but just a bog standard W40k guy, but everything else about the nostalgia is pretty true…I remember the days when I had to put my Choas Space Marines in a Lunch Box…
@Hatman
Are you kidding Games Workshop has always been bloody expensive and the wrong kind of expensive as well where you pay more for points a miniture costs not actual materials used. I think it costs them pennies to make the plastic models and they sell them for £20.
Also the magazine thing isn’t new, I really wish scores could be gone altogether…really…music doesn’t need them from what I’ve seen glancing at a few music mags.
30/08/2009 at 14:41 Ian says:
When I got my laptop back off (er, make that “replaced by”) Acer I need totry and get Planescape: Torment running again. I wanted to do it using the various patches and UI upgrades and such but couldn’t get the damned things working.
30/08/2009 at 14:44 MrMud says:
That PST review is probably one of the worst reviews I have ever read.
30/08/2009 at 14:53 jarvoll says:
Couldn’t agree more: Holy cow that original Torment review was so hilariously wrong, while never getting a single actual fact incorrect. Talk about unappreciated in its own proverbial lifetime.
30/08/2009 at 14:53 Seol says:
And that re-release of Space Hulk is what I presume impeded the release of Teardown’s Space Hulk game. Although rumour has it that v1.1 can be acquired through shady means…
30/08/2009 at 14:58 mrrobsa says:
I guess It’s because of his proximity to the work but Peter David’s response to Christian Nutt’s piece is a little full-on. Had no plans to anyway, but now I definately wouldn’t buy based on Peter David’s rebuttal of Nutt’s piece as well as the ties to anti-gay lord Orson Scott Card.
Oh and Brandon Sheffield wins an internet for asking Peter David: “Would you buy something from a guy that outspokenly says “Peter David is a jerk” even if it was a compelling product?”
30/08/2009 at 15:07 bill says:
I’m really confused by what i learned about Orson Scott Card last week, cos his Ender novels seem to be about acceptance, and Ender seems to be a mostly liberal character. Weird.
On the plus side, i have the original Space Hulk *nyah nyah*
(plus somewhere i have the original Blood Bowl, Epic and Adeptus Titanicus boxes too. )
30/08/2009 at 15:12 Dracko says:
Have you actually read the Ender novels? Well, if you haven’t, don’t bother, they’re a turgid waste of time anyway.
30/08/2009 at 15:26 lumpi says:
Yarg! Why can’t I see the Ukrainian sand animator due to copyright restrictions? Do they seriously think I would buy a DVD of “Ukraine Got Talent” to see it?
30/08/2009 at 15:48 Gap Gen says:
On the point of boycotts, the author mentions the Whole Foods thing. Question is: why the hell did the owner of Whole Foods feel the need to piss off his client base for no apparent reason? Otherwise, I think that in general, causing businesses to act more ethically through your purchases is probably a good thing – even if they’re a megalithic corporation, they’re not pure evil, they just want to make money.
Ender’s Game was good. I felt no real need to read sequels, though.
30/08/2009 at 16:05 JKjoker says:
its nice knowing that there was actually a time the marketing guys knew what they were doing (/me looks at Dragon Age and sighs)
i would love a modern Space Hulk game but i doubt there is any chance it could avoid becoming consolized, turning into a gears of war clone and losing the control of the other troopers to “friendly” AI
30/08/2009 at 16:14 Justin says:
So, if one wanted to actually get Planescape: Torment because of all the times the usually-right Rock Paper Shotgun people talked about it, and also so that you could read past the areas that say “WARNING SPOILERS” in the linked retrospective here, where would you look?
It’s not on Steam, Direct2Drive, or gog.com, as far as I can tell.
30/08/2009 at 16:31 Mil says:
Interesting reading on the Shadow Complex boycott thread. I’m not sure which side I agree with.
On the one hand, I have a deep distrust of chilling effects as a method for enforcing social conformity. They ultimately lead to a Disneyification of discourse where anything that could cause offence is preemptively expunged. I tend to agree with Peter David’s comments on this subject.
Plus, I also believe that creative work in general can be valued and appreciated irrespective of its creator’s defects. Is “Ride of the Valkyries” somehow bad music because of Wagner’s antisemitism? Of course not.
On the other hand, ever since I found out some years ago how much of a wingnut Orson Scott Card is (not just about gay rights, by the way — he’s the complete package), I’ve found myself avoiding his books. Partially because the discovery more ore less completely ruined my ability to suspend my disbelief for his prose, but also because I hate him a bit now and I don’t want him to get any of my money.
So, would I still buy Shadow Complex? I guess so, but only if Card’s influence and style is not too evident. I can absolutely see why some people wouldn’t, though.
30/08/2009 at 16:37 Kieron Gillen says:
mrrobsa: “Would you buy something from a guy that outspokenly says “Peter David is a jerk” even if it was a compelling product?”.
I totally would. As in, buy something for someone who things I’m a jerk. I do that all the time. Christ, what sort dick cares about whether people who make their art likes them? I don’t pay them to be my friend.
(As a journalist/critic/whatever, I’ve had to learn to deal with not letting any personal feelings get into what I think of the work. I’m not important.)
A better comparison – which I haven’t seen if someone threw at Mr David, but someone mentioned elsewhere – would be “Would Peter David buy something from a writer who’s openly anti-semetic”. Because this isn’t about the personal. This is actually about something a bit more important than the personal.
EDIT: Worth noting, I wouldn’t take that as arguing for or against a Boycott. While understanding while people wouldn’t want to support it personally, I’m not exactly sure something as formal as a Boycott makes sense.
KG
30/08/2009 at 16:42 UK_John says:
Re: the Ukrainian Talent 2009 winner sand art video: Firstly, I was surprised how emotional it was and secondly it made me realise how little we see of the world…. What else is out there?!
30/08/2009 at 16:52 Mentalepsy says:
That Planescape review is hilarious. To be fair, though, that slowdown bug WAS pretty annoying. :p
30/08/2009 at 16:57 Sunjammer says:
The discontinuation of Space Hulk, alongside Necromunda/Gorkamorka, are some of the most confounding events of my gaming life. They are totally killer games, and everyone should be given the opportunity to play them.
30/08/2009 at 17:09 fuggles says:
wow that shadow complex article is crappy. Frankly I have no idea what the problem is with it, and despite an article discussing it, I’m still not concretely sure.
Way to go journalist, nothing like a brief and clear recap of the subject at hand to bring new people up to speed….and there was nothing like a brief and clear etc…
30/08/2009 at 17:11 fuggles says:
No I retract that…I just am crappy at reading journalism.
30/08/2009 at 17:15 Heliocentric says:
Necromunda/gorkamorka weren’t as economicaly demanding as most of the other games. £20 and you had all your starting models, £20 for extras and customs. Done, nothing like the hundreds for warhammer 40k.
30/08/2009 at 17:26 perilisk says:
Hmm… legally people can do what they want regarding the boycott, but ethically I think there is a world of difference between boycotting a business whose business practices are unethical, and boycotting a business to cause harm to someone who is a political opponent. You’re directly complicit if you give money to a company that dumps industrial byproducts into a river or uses slave labor. It’s the same rationale behind banning child pornography — even if the owner doesn’t directly abuse kids, he’s financing those that do by buying it.
Outspoken leftists should consider that if this rule was fairly and evenly applied, to the extent that they often end up on the side referred to, right or wrong, as “anti-business”, that none of them would have jobs. Business would just boycott the labor of those who supported all these laws that they viewed as harmful. And anyway, is it ethically all that different from the blacklist of alleged communist sympathizers in Hollywood back in the day?
30/08/2009 at 17:27 James G says:
@Bill
Yeah, OSC confuses me as well. I looked up his wikipedia page after enjoying Ender’s Game and Speaker, only to find the guy completely contrasted with some of the ideas I read into his books. Reading various opinion articles by him only serves to reinforce this. Frankly its destroyed any home of me reading further novels in the series, not so much a result of a boycott, so much as I know I’ll just spend half my time thinking what a edjit the author is. (Hadn’t realised that he actually sat on a board dedicated to opposing gay marriage though. Makes me tempted to use a stronger word than edjit.) Its a bit like my feelings when watching Cruise, its not only the dubious practices of Scientology which fill my mind, but also images of a clearly crazy guy jumping up and down on a sofa.
30/08/2009 at 17:28 aoanla says:
Hmm. Boycotting a game because of the views of one component of its production process is problematic, as the Gamasutra article notes. (It’s more straightforward with novels, for example; and my boycott of Neal Asher’s books is working pretty well at the moment – I just have to wait for them to turn up in second-hand bookstores so I can buy them without any money going to Asher himself.)
30/08/2009 at 17:42 Gap Gen says:
“And anyway, is it ethically all that different from the blacklist of alleged communist sympathizers in Hollywood back in the day?”
I think there is a difference. The whole witch hunt aspect of the communist scare (see “alleged” above) meant that even if someone didn’t wear their communism on their shirt, they’d still get hurt. Card is very open about his views on gay marriage.
30/08/2009 at 17:43 Lewis says:
Dracko: I thought the writing in B:AA was exquisite, and the game every bit 9 out of 10 material.
The central plot isn’t too inspiring, but its delivery is superb and really deftly paced. I like the game a hell of a lot. Most I’ve enjoyed an action game this year, I reckon.
30/08/2009 at 18:08 perilisk says:
“I think there is a difference. The whole witch hunt aspect of the communist scare (see “alleged” above) meant that even if someone didn’t wear their communism on their shirt, they’d still get hurt. Card is very open about his views on gay marriage”
While I take your point, I don’t know that it would be any more justifiable had it been limited to those that openly supported communism.
Personally, I tend to find celebrities insufferable about their political/religious/philosophical beliefs, even when I agree with them — but it’s never stopped me from seeing an otherwise good film. If the film itself was preachy and insufferable, that would be different. No way I’m paying ten bucks to sit through a sermon.
30/08/2009 at 18:10 Baylith says:
While I fully support the right to boycott a game,(or anything else, really) I have to disagree with this one wholeheartedly. Mr. Card had such little impact on the development of Shadow Complex, that to punish the developers seems to be quite a bit more distasteful than the association with Card itself. He didn’t write the game, he didn’t write for the game, and really the only thing the game shares with Card is a loose tie to one of his IPs. Furthermore, the argument that Card is a vision-less bigot seems to be largely unfounded. He disagrees with the idea of homosexuality, but describing homosexuals as “human beings with as complex a combination of good and evil in them as I find within myself” *hardly* seems like hate to me.
I have pretty strong feelings towards companies that employ substandard working conditions to manufacture items inexpensively. But does that mean I’m going to wish financial ruin on you because you’ve purchased an Adidas/Nike product throughout the course of your life? NO! Because the chances of the art you create, or the work you do embodying or reflecting those ideals is practically nonexistent!
30/08/2009 at 18:17 mrrobsa says:
@ KG: Oh I agree totally, I don’t think personal opinions are relevant unless it has spread to the body of work, I just had a gigglefit at Brandon’s blunt but topical response.
30/08/2009 at 18:23 Dan says:
I had Space Crusade as a boy, not Space Hulk, and loved it. Looked it up on Wikipedia today, and it seems it was essentially Space Hulk for retards.
Memories…tainted.
30/08/2009 at 18:40 Alex says:
Outspoken leftists should consider that if this rule was fairly and evenly applied, to the extent that they often end up on the side referred to, right or wrong, as “anti-business”, that none of them would have jobs. Business would just boycott the labor of those who supported all these laws that they viewed as harmful.
There’s a world of difference between boycotting a product/service and ‘boycotting’ employees. Namely that the second one tends to be illegal.
30/08/2009 at 18:43 Bhazor says:
Fine if no one else will lower the tone and state the obvious then I will. I would totally do the sand woman.
30/08/2009 at 18:49 bonuswavepilot says:
Lovely work from Ms Simonova. Did anyone else think it was odd that the music towards the end of the clip seems to be an orchestral arrangement of ‘Nothing Else Matters’ by Metallica?
30/08/2009 at 18:50 Gutter says:
You can pry Ender’s Game out of my cold dead hand if you want, I won’t say ill of Card, Mormon or not, gay bashing or not. It doesn’t help anyone when gamers get political.
As for Game Workshop, this move might explain why the Teardown team had so many problems getting their freeware game out, and renamed it Alien Assault (which doesn’t sound less copyrighty to me, but still)
30/08/2009 at 18:53 Weylund says:
Thank you for that incredibly depressing freelancer article. *Looks at calendar for next promised paycheck date.*
Also, wow, Card is a total nut? That sucks. Really enjoyed Ender’s Game, although the Speaker books got shitty real fast. Frickin’ sci-fi writers. Great ideas, butchered by a decision to write sequels about extensions of said ideas rather than continuing the stories that made them entertaining in the first place. (Dune, anyone?)
I suppose that’s the problem with having your first book tie things up pretty neatly.
30/08/2009 at 19:04 Vinraith says:
I’m sad to hear that about Card. I’m glad I already have my copies of Ender’s Game and the “Ender’s Shadow” series because it sounds like I won’t be buying any more novels of his.
As to the game, the missing piece of information here is what level of financial stake Card has in the game. I try to avoid funneling money to causes I find distasteful, when it’s practical to avoid it anyway, so it’d be helpful to know just how much of the Shadow Complex purchase price really ends up in the hands of the gay-bashing coalition.
For my part I’ll probably just avoid the game, less out of principle than because I don’t feel like hacking through the political jungle surrounding it. If I DID end up buying it, I think the “make a donation to an equal rights organization to offset the problem” angle is a reasonable one.
30/08/2009 at 19:06 Gutter says:
@ perelisk : “outspoken leftist”?
I can’t wait for the day that Americans start to compete with other countries instead of competing with the other side of the political spectrum within their own.
That polarization or everything is damn annoying. Here you are, on a web site made up of video game addicts that can’t feed their disease without the help of very (VERY) large corporations, and you accuse of being anti-corporations. How ridiculous…
30/08/2009 at 19:08 Vinraith says:
Oh, and that Planescape review was refreshing. Everything written about Planescape any more is uncritical adoration and praise, but the reality is that for all its narrative and design merits the underlying game was pretty flawed. On the other hand, the latter-day Planescape love-fest did fetch me nearly $100 when I sold my copy a year ago, so I suppose I shouldn’t complain.
30/08/2009 at 19:37 malkav11 says:
It sucks that Orson Scott Card is a bigot and a wingnut, and I won’t be reading Empire (the book that Shadow Complex is very loosely tied to) because as far as I can tell it casts American liberals as the key villains. But he has written some pretty good books that have little or nothing to do with his actual political opinions, and virtually nothing whatsoever to do with Shadow Complex, which is an awesome game. I’m sad for people who are depriving themselves of it because of that very loose association. Especially since it’s not going to be on disc to be bought used or rented ever.
30/08/2009 at 19:38 Sunjammer says:
I think, in terms of Planescape, that the mechanistic quality of the game is completely moot versus the quality of the narrative. All hyperbole aside, it is an astoundingly written game. I have never before or since had as much joy involved in clicking on a conversation tree alternative. The Brothel of Slating Intellectual Lusts is still one of the most interesting places i’ve been to in a game. Arguing over the gameplay aspects of it, in hindsight, where the gameplay is outdated by default, is utterly pointless. It sits right next to A Mind Forever Voyaging as a game that deserves to be played for its narrative alone regardless of gameplay.
30/08/2009 at 19:48 Helm says:
On the boycotting issue: I’m having trouble following why if one is in disagreement with some artist on a moral or political issue, they will boycott their art. Even if the art itself seems to carry the same ideology. Art is not ideology itself, it is fundamental expression. What are the obligations of art towards humanity: to shock, to rape, to destroy, which is to say, to fundamentally affect. It is not in my opinion an obligation to ‘teach’ anyone anything. Whatever influence a piece of art has on a human being is a positive one, because it helps them along becoming what they were always meant to be. So if one reads a Scott Orson Card novel and goes RRR HATE THEM GAYS, then that’s what he was supposed to be, the book was but a minor catalyst and you wouldnt’ve made the person any less this if you took the book away from them, in the long run.
So if someone pays Scott Orson Card indirectly for his work in Shadow Complex, he’s not paying him because he did a good job relaying an ideological message, he’s paying because he did a good job of elevating one’s spirit through art, right? If Scott Orson Card runs for mayor or something, then yes, don’t vote for him.
30/08/2009 at 19:50 Helm says:
Also sorry for double-post, I wanted to say that this is the sort of issue I’d like to see a separate post in RPS instead of lumping it in with the Sunday Papers. Is a reorganisation of how this works at hand?
30/08/2009 at 19:53 Vinraith says:
@Sunjammer
It’s a game, not a book. The quality of the gameplay is always relevant, and usually paramount. In a game like Planescape, where narrative is the reward for hacking through god-awful tedious combat and endless backtracking, someone that finds the game play sufficiently distasteful never SEES the bulk of the narrative, making it’s quality completely moot. Planescape might have been a great novel, but it was a pretty lousy game.
30/08/2009 at 19:57 Ignant says:
Yay for witch burning and lack of fact checking.
Card was, until recently, a member of the Democratic Party, only recently becoming an independent. He is, however, a devout Mormon, and his views on social matters are in accordance with his religion.
If you have issues with his religious beliefs, fine, but why bring up politics to disguise this?
30/08/2009 at 19:59 Vinraith says:
There’ no “disguise” involved. When people politicize their religious beliefs, the issue becomes political. I don’t care what a person believes personally, I certainly DO care when they form a lobbying group to advance those beliefs as a political agenda.
30/08/2009 at 20:02 sfury says:
Damn those three frames, I’m hypnotized!
30/08/2009 at 20:17 Bhazor says:
I always hear people defending their right to the freedom of religion but I’m more concerned about my right to freedom from religion.
Given what priests have been getting upto I really don’t see how they can dictate what others do using a campaign of fear. Prop 8 was supported by hilariously scary ads like this and was ultimately carried by a 52% majority of which around 80% said they regularly attend church.
30/08/2009 at 20:21 Dracko says:
Lewis: You’ll excuse me if I don’t give much credit to your position because, well, you have dire taste in pretty much anything. Exquisite? Really? We’re not talking David Simon or even Warren bloody Ellis level material here.
30/08/2009 at 20:37 Gap Gen says:
“Great ideas, butchered by a decision to write sequels about extensions of said ideas rather than continuing the stories that made them entertaining in the first place. (Dune, anyone?)”
The problem with the Dune sequels was that the Dune story was already finished by the end of Dune. The whole point of the novel was that it was a detailed and complex universe whose only purpose was to be unravelled by the events in Dune. That’s why it was so powerful. And that’s why the sequels were so meh.
30/08/2009 at 20:42 Sagan says:
I think I should replay Planescape Torment with a walkthrough. I played it for the first time last year, and I missed at least half of the stuff in there.
The old review of PST reminds me of where German games writing is at right now: Write a paragraph each about the story, the graphics, the AI, etc. and about each major gameplay system. Decide for each whether you like it or not, and in the end sum it all up. You will have succesfully written a review where you talk factually correct about the game and can back up your score, and if you didn’t completely fuck it up you will even be in an acceptable score range of the other reviews on Metacritic. But you won’t have said anything that matters about the game.
It’s really frustrating when the entire German games industry thinks that way. It’s impossible to find a single good review of World of Goo. While reading the texts I always want to hit the reviewers with a hammer over and over because they simply don’t get what’s good about the game, and only think of it in their formulaic ways. The number at the bottom still says 89 or something, but it has no meaning.
And when mentioning that on German forums, nobody gets it. They defend the reviewer by saying “but he did talk about the atmosphere in paragraph three” or “well he must have liked the game if he gave it 89/100,” and of course they are factually correct, only that you can simply not tell from the text what he liked. Just as the Planescape reviewer said “it’s still about as good as they come” at the end, basing it on nothing he said.
And when talking on the forums, everybody seems to like it that way, because they want to “make up their own opinion,” and thus the reviewer should stay as factual as possible. Reviewers often have a little box where they write down their personal opinion, in addition to the regular text. But they are so stuck in their formulaic ways of thinking about games that that is pretty much a repetition of the key points of the text, instead of anything you would consider an opinion.
And then you add to that that German media is the first to write paranoid articles about DRM, the missing LAN mode in Starcraft 2 or all other kind of stupid shit that proper media should be above. It’s just really really frustrating, and people seem to want more of it.
Thus I am ranting here, because I always have wanted to get that off of me, and nobody listens when I talk about it on German forums. Just imagine an entire nation where everybody talks about games the way that reviewer talks about Planescape Torment, and you will understand my frustration.
30/08/2009 at 20:42 Dracko says:
No, the whole idea behind Dune is that it was an epic tale of heroism – possibly pure propaganda at that – that the sequels progressively prove doesn’t guarantee leads to elysian fields or any other form of romanticised revolutionary ideal. That is their purpose and that is arguably when the series is at its most interesting and potent.
30/08/2009 at 20:52 Lewis says:
Dracko, I find it hugely impressive that you find my taste in everything to be so dire, given that I’m pretty sure all you’ll have read my opinions of are games.
I thought Batman was a brilliant game, thoroughly exciting, and one of my favourites of the year. To each his own, y’know? No need to have a dig.
30/08/2009 at 21:04 Dracko says:
I’m an impressive guy.
And bully for you. That wasn’t however the issue; The issue being that a game supposedly about trying and exploring Batman both physically and mentally on one of the worst nights of his life gave nothing more than a giant monster plot (Then again, Unreal Engine, Wildstorm character design, should have seen it coming, really) and retreads of its antagonists without actually truly using them. Exceptions being Scarecrow when his encounters weren’t a platformer and ironically Killer Croc, who was the most interesting while also being the most underutilised of the adversaries present in the game.
Oh, and the Riddler too, in a sense, when his ordeal became more than just an item hunt.
It was a good little game but consciously over-hyped and marketed. Chances are it would have been better if it wasn’t based on a licence, actually, because Rocksteady have proven themselves to be more than capable developers.
2 and a half out of 4. Writing was shit no matter how you cut it. Execution fared far better. And really, I’d rather have that than it having ended up being the other way round.
30/08/2009 at 21:05 Novotny says:
Garg, my dear fellow, I’m so glad to meet another who cannot abide the abuse of ellipses. So frequently used by idiots to imply some great intellectual worth to sentences which they cannot finish.
I recently received a disciplinary letter from my erstwhile employer, written in Comic Sans and without a coherent sentence not ending in ellipses.
I’ve left the company and fully intend to kill the author.
30/08/2009 at 21:05 Novotny says:
could not, dammnit
30/08/2009 at 21:13 aoanla says:
@Dracko: Well, arguably, Herbert’s point about heroes (and “living gods”) being bad for humanity was made happily by the third novel. The second trilogy is making a slightly different point (that, in a sense, the best thing for a hero/prophet to do is to position themselves as a thing for society to react against, and thus improve itself).
30/08/2009 at 21:13 Kanamit says:
@Ignant: I guess bigotry is a-okay then as long as religious fervor is behind it.
And OSC is a wingnut, through and through. He wrote a masturbatory novel about heroic heartland conservatives saving the day from urban latte liberal traitors (which Shadow Complex is supposedly based on).
30/08/2009 at 21:18 Weylund says:
@Dracko: Interesting and potent though they might have been, they failed utterly at being readable and entertaining.
“The Heart of the Matter” is interesting and potent… and also incredibly fun to read. Hitchhiker’s Guide, “All Quiet on the Western Front”, and “The Shipping News” and pretty much anything that Vonnegut or Hemingway wrote… all powerful in their own way, all perfectly capable of keeping you up reading and entertained.
You can be interesting and potent and not produce an utter shitfest of obfuscated writing, poor plotting, and incredible (in a bad way) characterization.
30/08/2009 at 21:20 Weylund says:
Speaking of ellipses. Enjoy.
30/08/2009 at 21:20 Dominic White says:
The Shadow Complex mess is kinda dumb. While I am against supporting OSC, because he is a bigoted asshole, I recall reading that the Empire setting is actually the creation of the games developers, Chair, and they lisenced it to Card to write books based on it.
Thus, the book turns out to be a borderline-neocon paranoid fantasy, and the game is basically a fractionally edgier version of GI Joe starring Nathan Drake from Uncharted.
I’m not 100% on this, but I don’t think OSC gets any royalties from sales of rhe game, so you can probably get it without directly supporting the guy.
On the subject of the game itself, it’s decent, but I thought it to be a little underwhelming in terms of gameplay. Production values are amazing for a $15/£10 game, but some things like the bosses are just poorly thought out. Some of them are just embarrasingly easy, dying just about when you’d expect the fight to begin properly.
Still, worth the money. But if you want solid gameplay, the newer Castlevania games on the DS are a better bet.
30/08/2009 at 21:24 We Fly Spitfires - MMORPG Blog says:
Paul Dini is a smart monkey and Arkham Asylum is an awesome game. I was just thinking about the style of it whilst playing today actually. They’ve managed to find the perfect blend of “Batman-yet-new” and being dark without being too nasty or gruesome.
30/08/2009 at 21:24 ShadowComplexion says:
OSC is a loon, but what is the point of the boycott mentioned in the Shadow Complex article? Why stop there?
Boycott anything Cthulhu related because, you know, that Lovecraft fellow was an anti-semite and racist.
Boycott Stardock games because of Brad Wardell’s hard conservative political views.
Boycott Will Wright’s games because he donated to the McCain/Palin campaign.
Etc., etc. Has anyone who played Shadow Complex confirm that OSC’s contribution to it changed their political views?
30/08/2009 at 21:31 Weylund says:
I boycott Lovecraft’s dream poetry.
30/08/2009 at 21:50 jalf says:
Srsly?
30/08/2009 at 22:06 rivalin says:
Right, so being a fairly traditional conservative makes you a “wingnut” or a “total nut” or a “bigot”, from what I could discern of Card’s views (on wikipedia admittedly) he has some moral convictions that he doesn’t force on others and he doesn’t call them names either, nor does he propose trying to harm them personally if he disagrees with them; doesn’t sound half as nasty and vindictive as most of those proposing doing him and the employees of the company he works with considerable damage.
I guess freedom of consience and tolerance only extend to those who have the “right” sort of views.
30/08/2009 at 22:11 Dominic White says:
The guy wants to oppress people because of their sexual preference. This is a bad thing, because he wants to do bad things to people for no reason other than he thinks they’re icky.
The liberal alternative is NOT doing bad things to people, and somehow (just somehow) this is considered the better choice by most good people.
30/08/2009 at 22:22 Kieron Gillen says:
Jalf: The Story.
KG
30/08/2009 at 22:28 Weylund says:
@rivalin: He actively works to deny people legal rights that he doesn’t feel they “need”, but which he enjoys. Forcing his views on others is exactly what he’s doing.
30/08/2009 at 22:40 Sonic Goo says:
Lesson learned from the OSC discussion: game publishers will pay hack* writers to put their name on the box, even if the game doesn’t have that much to do with them, so they can sell more. I wonder what the plus or minus effect on sales will be, though, considering this controversy.
*I liked Ender’s Game when I was twelve, but at heart it always just seemed to me a very simple adolescent fantasy; [SPOILER] “Dude, what if this game was REAL?” [/SPOILER]. Not to mention the sequels, I gave up half way through Xenocide…
30/08/2009 at 22:44 aoanla says:
@ShadowComplex:
In the case of Lovecraft, it’s a little late to boycott him, him being dead and all.
30/08/2009 at 22:53 Bhazor says:
Theres also the fact that homosexuals wishing to marry are a minority in the general populations. This means they are essentially unable to meaningfully vote and so their rights are dictated by the larger population. Or in other words the views of right wing god botherers (who dominated the Prop 8 vote) is forced on them.
Reply to Rivalin
No, he only believes and wishes they will burn for all eternity in hell. Alongside the Muslims and those other christians who think christ wore different sandals or something.
Also refusing someone equal rights just because you don’t much care for an aspect of them (be it skin colour or which consenting adult they choose to put their body parts inside) is pretty much bigotry.
30/08/2009 at 22:59 malkav11 says:
Orson Scott Card wrote Empire, and Shadow Complex is theoretically set in that world. The game itself is not written by OSC as far as I know, and the “Chair licensing stuff to OSC” bit is, iirc, that they made some alterations to the setting for Shadow Complex that he has decided to run with in the forthcoming sequel to Empire.
30/08/2009 at 23:13 Mil says:
@rivalin: If you don’t think Card is a wingnut, go to his website ornery.org, and read pretty much any of his articles.
30/08/2009 at 23:17 Gap Gen says:
Also, does a boycott promote partisan politics (which seems to be particularly virulent in America)? Does it help to engage directly with the ideas he promotes than to seek a combative stance towards anything associated with him, which could just be seen as divisive and not especially helpful?
30/08/2009 at 23:35 invisiblejesus says:
@rivalin
At the risk of getting more into this debate than I’d like to be, there’s a world of fucking difference between having a conservative view of marriage and outright stating your intent to overthrow any government that thinks otherwise. My state’s government recognizes same-sex marriage, and so do several other states. Stop and think for a minute about this: Orson Scott Card has, without irony, declared an intention to overthrow the governments of several American states. How is that not wingnutty? FFS, if a liberal group expressed intent to overthrow the government of several conservative states they’d be on a terror watch list. And perhaps rightly so, because they’d be nutters. You can’t seriously sit there and tell me that a guy who wants to bring down any government that doesn’t agree with him on this issue isn’t batshit crazy.
30/08/2009 at 23:56 Gap Gen says:
Hell, the US as a whole has brought down (some democratic) governments that it opposed on certain points. Civilisation was almost ended by the issue of who controls the economy (and, I’d wager, neither the USA nor the USSR truly embraced the intent of their philosophies, which were, to their proponents, designed to empower the common man).
I think if there’s something you view as being very important (though personally, I don’t give a shit about the issue of marriage as a whole) then you may view it as important to make sure that other people agree with you. So overthrowing governments that hold certain views that you oppose might seem natural to someone who doesn’t consider the practical implications of interventionism to be important.
31/08/2009 at 00:35 Novotny says:
Er, wasn’t that what the whole French revolution was about? I may be over-simplifying things, but surely at some point, when you’re ‘legally-appointed-overlords’ stop representing you, you should be able to dispose them?
Again, my knowledge of history/politics might trip me here, but wasn’t that one of the basic tenets of the American Constitution?
31/08/2009 at 00:44 Gap Gen says:
I think the overthrow of tyranny is subtly different to the overthrow of a democratic government that upholds the broad consensus of what represents the will of the people. It’d be hard to argue that the non-democratic removal of the government of a US state could be entirely benign.
31/08/2009 at 00:46 Novotny says:
I can help, Weyland. Your first use of ‘…’ was superfluous. Delete.
The second use only required either the word ‘was’ or ‘were’, depending on how one corrects the grammar of the preceding line.
If you must be a smart-arse, at least be smart.
31/08/2009 at 00:48 Novotny says:
fair enough, GG, I hadn’t really read into it enough :( my bad
31/08/2009 at 00:54 invisiblejesus says:
@Gap Gen:
“I think if there’s something you view as being very important (though personally, I don’t give a shit about the issue of marriage as a whole) then you may view it as important to make sure that other people agree with you. So overthrowing governments that hold certain views that you oppose might seem natural to someone who doesn’t consider the practical implications of interventionism to be important.”
Sure. If you view the consumption of human flesh as important, the murder and eating of your neighbors might seem natural too, but that doesn’t mean that you aren’t batshit crazy. I don’t give OSC or anyone else a free pass just because they were too stupid to consider the implications of their beliefs. I think it’s a sad thing that American culture seems to be willing to do so. We should hold ourselves to a higher standard.
31/08/2009 at 01:00 UK_John says:
There are so many minuscule debates, like the one about boycotting a game, and yet there are so few debates about the big things. When did you last see a debate about the difference between the ‘village’ mentality (knowing neighbours, being part of the community, empathy for others in the community, etc) and the ‘me’ society we have developed over the last 20 years, where we hardly know neighbours, we have less or even no empathy and we blame others for everything happening in our life. Where our societies are moving to in the West is hardly talked about.
Then we have technology: Retail stores close as we buy more on the web, but where is the debate about what this means for towns and cities with boarded up high streets, and huge empty shopping malls with every window broken, etc.
Where’s the debate about the fact that technology is driving down wages, with a secretary of 30 years ago earning more in real terms than the administrator of today sitting in front of their PC. And with jobs able to move around the world because of it, with call centres in India dealing with customer service in England,
Lastly, where is the debate about the specifics of climate change, like the fact that projections say that the American midwest will have ongoing desertification, destroying the ‘food basket of the world’,while at the same time Syberia will warm turning it into fertile growing land that will become the new ;food market of the world’ and what this means for the politicization of food.
Lastly, when did you last see a debate on the web or TV or anywhere about the fact we are running out of water?!
Debates about the boycotting of a game seem very small cheese, given what we have going on with our planet and the people on it today.
31/08/2009 at 01:07 Gap Gen says:
invisiblejesus: Well, it depends how serious it is. In Card’s case, yeah, it is a little worrying given how seriously he treats the subject. Tolerance is a difficult line to tread, but it’s important. America is founded on the kind of rationale that says “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
So I think it’s OK to hold views that oppose democracy as long as you don’t act on them or promote others to do so – otherwise, that would be treason and thus illegal.
31/08/2009 at 01:08 Vinraith says:
It’s a games blog, UK_John. Games, more than anything else, are about escapism. Why would you expect deep, meaningful debate about world-shattering civilization level problems here? That kind of discussion is terribly important, you’re entirely right, but there are many places for that and the Sunday Papers thread on Rock Paper Shotgun simply isn’t one of them.
31/08/2009 at 01:16 Mil says:
@Gap Gen:
So I think it’s OK to hold views that oppose democracy as long as you don’t act on them or promote others to do so
Do you mean legally OK or morally OK? They’re different things, you know.
31/08/2009 at 01:22 Mil says:
@UK_John:
There are children starving to death in Africa this very moment and yet here you are, writing comments in a PC gaming blog. For shame, sir, for shame.
31/08/2009 at 01:55 Novotny says:
I must agree. In the time that it took you to make that post, UK_John, you could have fashioned a poverty-ending donkey – or at the very least, invoked Bono.
I’m ashamed for him too.
31/08/2009 at 01:56 Novotny says:
if that’s Mil Millington, btw, I’m going to rub my monitor until the morning.
31/08/2009 at 02:08 merc says:
Boycotting people you disagree with is just stupid. Seriously, you don’t need to organise a campaign to shutdown and shut up anyone who says stuff you disagree with, even if you disagree with it vehemently. Rebutt him, insult him even if it makes you feel better, and then move on with your life.
31/08/2009 at 02:11 Dorian Cornelius Jasper says:
I already have the Nextwave trades. And you all should, too! Therefore you must go and buy them yesterday.
31/08/2009 at 02:15 Hierophant says:
Have to disagree with Peter David. I don’t have to tolerate certain beliefs/religions and so on, just like Card doesn’t have to. I don’t appreciate him signing me up to be the ‘bigger man.’ I’m not obligated to give everyone a ‘fair shake’ in regards to my personal opinion. I do so at my whim.
31/08/2009 at 02:16 Weylund says:
@novotny: I wasn’t being a smartass. I just realized after I’d written the comment that the ellipses were there and decided to comment on it first, which should have been obvious to anyone with half a sense of humor. If you’re going to be a jackass, at least be a jack, eh?
31/08/2009 at 02:17 merc says:
I mean you can be secure enough to just say “I think Card is bigotted and wrong and I disagree with him” or “I disagree with the CEO of Whole Food’s ideas about healthcare reform” without turning it into a fucking crusade against him personally and anyone and everything he’s ever worked with or created.
31/08/2009 at 02:33 Novotny says:
Fair point Weylund – I suspect it was me being the smartarse.
Still hate those bloody things though
Apologies.
31/08/2009 at 02:38 Novotny says:
On account of merc’s comments, I have no choice but to boycott him, his products and anyone and everything he’s ever worked with or created.
Unless he’s got a really good cereal. Something with sultanas
31/08/2009 at 02:43 The Innocent says:
@invisiblejesus
I know that to ask someone to cite a source on the internet is usually something of a fight-starter, but out of real curiosity, could you tell me where “Orson Scott Card has, without irony, declared an intention to overthrow the governments of several American states”? I’m not saying it doesn’t exist, I would just really like to see it. Thanks.
31/08/2009 at 02:56 Caiman says:
I think the Shadow Complex debate is a symptom of how overly sensitive we have become as a society. Some people will argue vehemently that sensitivity is a good thing, and if they want to live that way I’m not going to stop them or convince them otherwise. I think everyone has the right to act depending on their political views of course, but where do you draw the line? On the one hand you have the views of an artist who you don’t agree with and you can safely boycott their sole property. On the other hand you have properties created by literally thousands of people (movies, television shows, theatre productions, you name it) and I can guarantee you 100% that someone in there will have opinions to make your blood run cold. Do you boycott anything that they are associated with in any way, no matter how slight? If not, how many people does it take to dilute your impotent rage? How sensitive are you, really? But then today’s society is all about making oneself feel better.
31/08/2009 at 03:04 neems says:
Okay, this will probably get lost in the middle of all the wing-nuttery and ellipsing… but why would anybody boycott Neal Asher? Have I committed some terrible faux pas by reading “Line War”?
31/08/2009 at 03:10 MD says:
@ merc: the point is that in boycotting someone financially (i.e. not buying their products) you are avoiding lending support to their cause. It doesn’t have to be a ‘personal crusade’ against someone you disagree with, but simply voting with one’s dollars and making a deliberate effort to avoid indirectly financing a campaign one considers harmful or dangerous.
31/08/2009 at 03:14 MD says:
e.g. from what I’ve gathered, Orson Scott Card has not simply voiced his disapproval of gay marriage, but is actively running a campaign to oppose it and declare the illegitimacy of a state that allows it. So it doesn’t have to be a case of ‘fuck you, you hold a view I disagree with therefore I won’t buy your books’; rather, ‘I don’t want to lend financial support to your cause, even indirectly’.
31/08/2009 at 03:20 MD says:
Also, ‘boycott’ and ‘move on with your life’ are not mutually exclusive. You can participate in a boycott against a person or organisation simply by ignoring their products.
31/08/2009 at 03:35 Novotny says:
I hereby boycott transportation of the souls, hereto or otherwise considered, prior to or before the commencement of this thread, or indeed during it, and not witholding those products whose eventual production may have been inspired by, but not necessarily considered by, be that be by means created within or forthwith this thread, or without if considered to be within the emotional and or the intellectual scope, of my cat.
31/08/2009 at 03:40 Dante says:
MD does have it right, Card chairs an organization actively lobbying against gay marriage, which is slightly different from merely dissapproving of it.
31/08/2009 at 03:41 Novotny says:
Furthermore, though it may be considered just that the above-mentioned and waftily considered jueu-de-mon requires a consideration beyond mere piffle, or Meer paffle; I ask you, couldn’t a slightly damp lady of perhaps Southington Road give a better view?
31/08/2009 at 03:43 Novotny says:
What I’m trying to say is: you’re all full of piffle.
31/08/2009 at 04:19 merc says:
@MD Shadow Complex is not a “cause” or a “campaign one considers harmful or dangerous”. I haven’t seen any evidence Shadow Complex itself is anti-gay marriage, and neither are it’s profits directly financing any anti-gay marriage stuff. The closest it gets is that it’s derived from the fiction of Card and Card chairs an organisation that is actively anti gay marriage. If that tenuous third hand link to campaiging against gay marriage is sufficient for you to turn Shadow Complex into a political campaign, well, hypersensitive is the word that comes to mind.
31/08/2009 at 04:57 MD says:
@merc: The first part of your comment seems to be based on deliberate ignorance of what I actually said. I never stated or implied that SC is a ’cause’ or ‘campaign’ — I made it pretty clear that I was referring to an ‘indirect link’. Assuming Card’s finances are in some way affected by the sales of the game, though, the link exists and is hardly rendered ‘tenuous’ by being more complicated than a direct donation to his organisation. If he benefits financially from the success of the game, and he uses some of his money (and/or time that might otherwise be spent earning money, were he to lack other sources of income) to actively campaign against gay marriage, then by purchasing the game you are indirectly supporting his campaign.
If caring about this link seems ‘hypersensitive’ to you, that’s fine. Don’t bother turning up to the next election though, as it’s pretty hypersensitive of you to care about the tiny, drop-in-the-ocean impact of your single vote out of millions. The point being that if with a tiny bit of effort, or in this case NON-effort and actually saving some money rather than spending it (i.e., boycotting this game dies not require any significant use of time, energy or money that could be better directed), people want to make what may seem a token gesture but could have practical significance if done en masse, who are you to criticize them for it? You can disagree with and criticize their ultimate aim, sure, but sniping at them for being ‘hypersensitive’ just seems lazy and unhelpful. (“You guys care about things and are willing to take collective action even though you might not end up making much of a difference, what a bunch of chumps!”)
(If you’re correct in saying that “The closest it gets is that it’s derived from the fiction of Card and Card chairs an organisation that is actively anti gay marriage.”, i.e. he has no financial interest in the success of the game, then yes, that turns the issue into more of an emotional than a logical/practical one. So if you’ve got evidence for that, please provide it. (It’ll take some pretty strong evidence to prove that buying the game doesn’t financially support him in any way, though — even if he’s been paid purely up-front rather than having a stake in the game, its success or failure will probably affect his asking price/chance of success next time he wants to sell the rights to a work.))
31/08/2009 at 05:00 MD says:
For the record, I’m not trying to argue that the boycott is necessarily a good idea. I haven’t looked at the issue in detail, and it’s possible that there are good reasons not to stage a boycott, even for those who oppose Card’s campaign. Those reasons aren’t the ones you’ve put forward so far, though.
31/08/2009 at 05:24 Saul says:
The Ukrainian sand artist is incredible. 3 frames is pretty great too.
31/08/2009 at 05:31 Adventurous Putty says:
Just posting to say I thought Ender’s Game was a wonderful novel about growing up and the pain of being a smart child, and Card is full of sympathy for his fellow man and that leaks through all of his work. This coming from a social democrat and latte liberal who found “Empire” and the Bean series horribly unrealistic in their politics. SO, regardless of those views he has on homosexuals due to his upbringing, take note of how he portrays his homosexual characters and how he talks about them in real life before jumping to mad conclusions.
Oh and Dracko can suck a big one because Batman was AWESOME. We should all be thankful somebody finally got the feel of the character right, and I thought the presentation by Dini and company, if not the plot itself, were wonderfully on-mark and set the stage perfectly for a more ambitious sequel.
31/08/2009 at 06:10 merc says:
@MD
Yes, that is a tenous link. Let’s see: the money you pay for the game (not related to anti-SSM) will go to a company (not related to anti-SSM) who will pay some of it to someone for something (not related to anti-SSM) but that person campains against SSM. And you consider that game deserving of a boycott because it’s ‘financing’ something you disagree with.
You know, being against gay marriage is unfortunately quite common in the US, I bet you could find one person who donated money to campaigns against gay marriage in most large companies. Oh no, you might have financed them by buying a product from a company that payed them money! Boycott! Boycott!
That’s the biggest load of tenous, hypersensitive bullshit I’ve heard since, well, the Whole Foods boycott.
31/08/2009 at 07:39 Weylund says:
@Novotny: I owe you one as well, as my reply was rather more snarky than it needed to be. Using ellipses is a bad habit I’ve been trying to break. They’re so useful for indecisive people like myself, though.
31/08/2009 at 08:09 MD says:
“And you consider that game deserving of a boycott because it’s ‘financing’ something you disagree with. ”
I specifically said that I haven’t yet formed an opinion on whether a boycott is reasonable. Personally I won’t be doing any boycotting, and indeed won’t have a decision to make, as I was never a potential customer in the first place.
I think one key difference in our attitudes is in how big a deal something has to be before we consider a boycott reasonable. Personally I simply weigh up the ‘cost’ of boycotting vs. the estimated benefit.
In this case the estimated benefit (again, in calling it a ‘benefit’ I am assuming one is against Card’s campaign — this is about the question of whether boycotting is a logical course of action for those who want to oppose him, not whether one opposes him) is very small, but even by your logic is greater than 0.
The cost of boycotting is negative in monetary terms (money is saved), and negative in terms of time (time is freed up by not consuming the product, though this may be offset by those who choose to incite others to boycott, rather than only participating). The only significant positive cost is that the boycotter forfeits any value they would have received from the product. For most this will be pretty insignificant, but more importantly the value judgment of [personal enjoyment] vs. [(very small) contribution to (one's conception of) the public good] is one that can only be made by the individual. If they make a greater sacrifice than you would consider reasonable, that’s not necessarily a mistake on their part — it could simply be altruism, in that they place greater value on ‘the common good’ than their own narrowly-defined interests. You have no right to attack them for this. I get that you’re annoyed, you think the whole thing is a bit silly, etc. But that’s just an emotional reaction that is ultimately baseless.
(You could also argue that they are ‘hurting’ those caught in the crossfire by refusing to reward their hard work, but leaving aside the fact that those people have no inherent right to the consumer dollar, this is one way in which ‘boycotting a person’ can be effective — if people don’t want to be tarred with the same brush, they will choose not to work with the target of the boycott.)
And yeah, of course you’re not going to be able to avoid ever indirectly contributing to a cause you disagree with, at least not without letting those sorts of considerations run your life. You’ll never be able to cut your risk of being hit by a car to 0 without moving into the middle of nowhere, but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t look both ways when you cross the road. You’ll never be able to be completely safe from disesase without living your life in sterile isolation, but that doesn’t mean you go around kissing people with pig flu. You’ll never be able to take consumer democracy to its ideal extreme either (at least without going crazy), but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t care where your money ends up. It’s all about picking the low-hanging fruit, and for some people this boycott is an example of just that.
31/08/2009 at 09:21 Mil says:
@Novotny: I don’t know who or what Mil Millington is, and I’m not going to try to find out, in case I stop liking my nick.
@Adventurous Putty: Read some of his articles on ornery.org. Full of sympathy for his fellow man indeed.
31/08/2009 at 09:46 merc says:
@MD
“if people don’t want to be tarred with the same brush, they will choose not to employ the target of the boycott.”
Fixed that for you – and if think companies should be worried about vetting their employees based on whether they have political views that might get the company boycotted, then just imagine fundie Christian organisations organising boycotts against companys that employ individuals who hold pro-SSM or pro-choice views. You don’t think that there will be any harm done by that?
31/08/2009 at 09:57 Kommissar Nicko says:
@merc: Boycotting products and services has brought around all kinds of changes through “tenuous” links. Look up the effects of boycotting in the U.S. on ending apartheid in South Africa. In this particular case, students at my university (University of Colorado Denver) actually joined a nationwide boycott of Coca-Cola products because of the support Coca-Cola was giving to the South African government in the late 1970s. The eventual effect was that Coca-Cola withdrew their support of the South African government under consumer pressure to do so, and in that way, helped to place pressure on the government by reducing the flow of money.
It’s how politics work in a capitalist economy–all links are tenuous, but that doesn’t make them unimportant.
31/08/2009 at 10:12 MD says:
@merc: I wasn’t trying to argue that boycotting is objectively good or bad, but that it is a reasonable course of action from the perspective of the individual who wants to steer the world a tiny bit closer to their preferred path. I see politically-motivated consumer action as a tool that can be used for good or ill, just like all other forms of political action and participation. I’m actually fundamentally uncomfortable with the way ‘consumer democracy’ privileges the interests of those with the most money to spend (or withhold). But I still think that it’s a rational course of action in certain circumstances.
31/08/2009 at 10:21 MD says:
(Also, there is a significant difference between ‘public figure with a major symbolic and financial link to product X, who actively, publicly campaigns on issue Y and seems to be a relatively significant player in that debate’ and ‘minor employee at the company making X, who happens to hold an opinion on issue Y, and may or may not be politically active’)
31/08/2009 at 10:53 Gap Gen says:
Mil: Well, I’m not sure about the ethics of belief. Again, if someone believes something objectionable that has no ill effect on others, presumably that’s OK (and in Card’s case, his whole intent is to affect others, presumably either because he views certain rites as sacred or because he is an intolerant person, but this isn’t strictly what I’m talking about here). I know someone who believes/believed in the divine right of kings, which is openly undemocratic, but I get on with him fine.
Legally, of course you’re allowed to believe what you like – the law doesn’t legislate thought, as long as it doesn’t translate itself into an action that constitutes a crime.
31/08/2009 at 12:14 Kieron Gillen says:
Mil: Mil Millington is a genius.
KG
31/08/2009 at 13:30 aoanla says:
@neems: Read his blog. Last time I looked, he came across as the kind of guy who’d happily write fuming editorials for the Daily Mail about how wooly socialists were destroying Great Britain by accusing People Who Worked Hard And Thus Deserve to Have Money of causing Global Warming (when actually it’s a socialist conspiracy).
31/08/2009 at 16:23 Bhazor says:
KG
You would say that.
“Problematically, I was due to leave for Germany the next day, which rather inhibited my investing in a bandana and storming into the MoS’s offices with a heavy machine gun spraying lead justice. So, I contacted my chum J Nash. Truly, he is a man to have around in a crisis. In fact, you can usually contact J Nash anyway and he’ll bring his own crisis. We decided to draw the matter to the attention of The Panel.
Many of us on The Panel have worked together at some point, but that’s incidental. It exists as a fluid email group devoted to pessimism, dangerous gossip and, on Tuesdays, the destabilisation of various nation states. Its members include NTK’s Dave Green, Cam Winstanley (a former special effects technician, now of Total Film, who once advised me about dealing with a persistent burglary problem I was having with detailed instructions on how to make and lay homemade landmines), bed-hopping PC Gamer writer (and sometimes sinister The Register informer) Kieron Gillen and The Reverend Stuart Campbell, who kills people. “
31/08/2009 at 16:30 Kieron Gillen says:
What can I say? I befriend geniuses on principle.
KG