Drickmann, The Last of Us Part 2 Won’t Avoid ‘Personal Politics’. SW, are you okay with this?

@Zuluking187: hmmm I mean as long as we are running with the notion that video games aren't a good story telling medium to boot; then I guess no harm no foul.

Though I think it is short sighted to limit the mediums creative potential by not letting the creators express themselves on how they feel about different subject matters.

If someone is getting that worked up over the politics of a video game, methinks they may need to reevaluate their priorities.

I sense liberal bullshit on the way.

Was there even a political tone in the first game?

I've only noticed an emotional one at it's core.

I like how the reason GS gave it a lower review score is because the reviewer did not like Joel in the ending. What a testament to the art form of Drickmann's game. Even if you don't like the character's personality and choices in the game, the fact that it can elicit strong emotions from people means it is damn good art.

*Sense

Holy **** learn to spell.

Actually I have seen a few do maintain both positions. Sometimes even do both in the same breath...

Video game with politics they agree with: Video Games are art
Video games with politics they dont agree with: Muh artistic integrity ruined. Pandering to [insert audience I dont like here]

As long as it's not trying too hard to be edgy and everything is well balanced and executed well, I don't have any problem with it. Looking forward to seeing more about this game.

majority

the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total (opposed to minority )

grasping at straws

Fig. to depend on something that is useless; to make a futile attempt at something.

Fucking right?

@jagoff: Thanks spell police i didn't mean to trigger you. Should have checked the auto txt from the mobile.

@Jag85: I think you need to factor in the audience thats actually buying the game. When TloU 2 doesn't sell anywhere near what the original sold we will all know why.

Because of a tweet?

Where ever I go gamers seem to be fine with politics in games. Even on SW, in this thread.

@Jag85: The issue with Nathan Drake being beat up by a woman was because it was such a pathetic attempt at pandering that it became painfully obvious. It was really the only problem i had with the game. It wasn't that the boss was a black woman that was the issue it was the fact that despite making her a villian they didn't have the balls to show her lose. Even the boss battles were pointless because no matter what you do you still lose, you cant even land a punch on her.

If they want to make her a bad ass villian thats one thing but they have to understand bad ass villians eventually get beat by the hero. And thats not something they were willing to show.

Yep. Seems to be bloating up a strawman out of proportion for no reason. Which is exactly why people get defensive.

So if it doesn't sell it's due to political views? You realise how stupid that sounds? Correlation doesn't equal causation even if it's for a completely hypothetical scenario.

I think it is great to have artist and creators express their thoughts and views in their work. That's why they do their work! I don't want to some pop-garbage that was product-tested because some dipshit in a suit that doesn't even play games thinks I might like it because it's "cool".

With that said, I expect plenty of people to hate on it, saying the devs should "not express their opinions in video games" while at the same time appreciating how their commander-in-chief expresses his.

I greatly prefer this to Ubisoft's bullshit disclaimers that "we're a multicultural team and this game doesn't represent our views in any way".

There's nothing worse than artists being afraid to express their views.

@soulitane: Not necessarily its political views as much as the fact that playing most the game as Ellie will hurt its sales. Call it stupid all you want it is what it is.

It's political views depending on what they are ( im guessing some right wing politicians lack of concern for the environment causes the outbreak lmao). Does have the ability to alienate fans.

@Planeforger: Oh theres plenty worse actually, like turning a video game into a political lesson.

This is the problem with the delusional left. Their reasoning is simple, they just want to be heard. They want people to be aware of the issues and let people know where they stand and in that lies the problem.

Everybody knows how they feel. The vast majority of the main stream media leans left. The vast majority of Hollywood also leans left. So as if reporting the news from one perspective wasn't enough they want you to see it in your movies,music, comic books and now video games. So it takes people in the center and pushes them toward the right because you have a left wing agenda shoved in your face at all times. Even with something as simple as a fucking video game which its purpose is to entertain its turned into a political lesson to educate fans.

The statement is factually correct. White females are 32%. White males are 31%. White males are therefore a minority. Simple logic.

Nothing of what you said changes anything of what I said. Correlation doesn't equal causation. Unless you can prove any of those things cause these hypothetical low sales, it's a pointless argument.

He's an untrained brawler. She's a trained martial artist. You can't expect an untrained brawler to beat a trained martial artist.

I like how you conveniently ignored the first part of the definition you provided. The second part looked at its implementation in a binary case. In a situation with more than 2 subsets, the majority becomes whoever has the most in the group.

His point still stands. He specifically stated white males. Which are not the largest group in america. Just admit you made a mistake and move on.

Edit: And if you think that the white male criteria is grasping for straws. Had you asked me 2 years ago, I would have agreed with you. But following the "where is my white male" whining in regards to Star Wars: The Force Awakens... yeah. With whites being underrepresented in the film... because it is not enough for Ray to be white, she must also be male. Chances are, what Jag is doing is taking a jab at the people with this kind of mentality.

@Jag85: Maybe not but you can expect him to at least land a punch and not make the boss battles completely worthless. Especially when Sam joins in, its amazing how all of a sudden you cant counter in UC4 anymore. Again if you want to make your boss more diverse at least have the character adhere to the rules of being a boss as opposed to some unstoppable being brought in for QTE cutscenes. Also being a trained martial artist isnt going to allow you to take a sucker punch off the roof from 15 feet in the air and just get up like nothing hit you.

If one's personal politics helps in making it a better game, I value it. If a developer is just using a game as a platform to be able to shove their voice out there and it really has nothing to do what's going on, they can keep it to themselves.

@soulitane: I can't prove anything untill the games released and neither can you. If you want to wager it will sell wore then the first one i will gladly do so.

That's nowhere near as unrealistic as Nate taking on a whole army by himself.

What would be the point? Even if it sells less, you won't be able to back up what you said since it selling less doesn't mean it's due to politics. So unless you can somehow come up with an actually logical way to prove your point, there's no reason to make a bet. Even if you do, bets on a forum are utterly pointless.

Or Nate running and climbing after being shot. Nate surviving in the desert for days on end with no food or water and then running and jumping. There are numerous examples of the games not being realistic.

When did Ubisoft say this and in regard to what game?

Not arguing with you - just curious as to if this became an issue at any point.

Yeah, or hell some of the nonhuman enemies.

Uncharted was always meant to be fantastical adventures. But alas these right wing SJWs (same bullshit, different rationalization) will always look for reasons to get offended.

I recall one of the assassin's creed games saying as much.

Yes, but in what way and why, and what was the context?

They're both majority, you dunce.

You still didn't account for the extra 1% from your numbers.

You still didn't account for how it translates to videogame audiences.

Yeah, they're simply the second largest out of 4 presented, 1 (dubious) percent short of the first one.

Which means they're not a minority. Just like white women were never a minority at any point, even when white males were statistically a larger group.

Newsflash: the world doesn't work in absolutes and there can be multiple majorities.

What the **** are you even talking about? The problem with Ray is her being a fucking Mary Sue, not her gender or race. People sure love to discredit such criticisms with "u mad cuz she's not a white male".

Kylo also deservingly gets tons of shit, but no one jumps to his defence. But i digress.

Jag doesn't take a jab at anything, he parrots talking points from a website he appearantly reads, which incidently provides bogus statistics.

EDIT:

Assassin's Creed series.

It's mostly about them taking creative liberties with historical figures.

Sure, I'm perfectly fine with it..

....not that I would play that shit anyway.

You may want to learn what the minority means. Basically, it means any group that isnt the largest. You will see the difference in terminology quite often if you live in a country which does not employ a 2 party system. Even if the second party loses by 1%, they are still classified as a minority whereas the majority is the one that won by 1%.

That is the legimate criticism of of Ray. But oh boy there is more. There are ACTUAL people who disliked and boycotted the movie due to lack of white men as protagonists. Hell, there were a few on OT on this very site. There is a chance some of them were being Poes (no pun intended), but these clowns do exist. People making mountains out of molehills must be called out on every side, no matter who they are or whether or not you agree with them.

It's funny how you preface by conjuring a non-binary system and then proceed to "explain" from a binary system angle.

Yes, in a system with more than 2 parties there can be multiple majorities.

Imagine that.

You've just contradicted yourself:

I thought I wouldnt have to explain the follow ups because that could have been taken for granted.

31% team blue <-Majority
30% team green <-Minority
20% team yellow <-Minority
19% team red <-Minority

Should the 31% team blue be a plurality, not a majority?

Plurality is also known as a relative majority ;)

But really there are multiple forms of majorities. Simple majority being >50%, qualified majroity for reaching a certain threshold (which is arbitarily set), and relative majority which is when the subset is larger than any other. And based on what was stated, it to me seemed quite clear which one was being talked about.

Edit: The important thing is, the guy didnt break any mathematical laws. And that is good enough for me.

What politics the first TLOU had ? It was a pretty standart apocalypse/end of the world/zombi story. Nothing special.

I don't recall any overt politics being thrown around. Can someone refresh my memory?

What the hell is "personal politics" and what about the end of the game dealt with it

@Maroxad: @soulitane: Whats more amazing is the justification liberals give to everything as long as they agree with it. Obviously not everything is going to be realistic. But you dont see me whining about Laura Croft being able to take a bullet and keep on climbing do you?

No because thats how things happen within the context of the game. However to introduce a character in the UC series for the first time in its history where no matter what you do you still lose. Shes also the only UC villian in the history of the series not to die. Because she served a blatant purpose. ( look how bad ass i am). Imagine playing Zelda and not being able to beat Ganondorf. This is a perfect example of an agenda effecting gameplay in a negative way.

Are you acting as if that doesn't go both ways? Maybe you have missed the there isn't enough of this type of person, or why are they showing them in that manner, or the way I feel isn't represented, from the opposite side of who you are speaking. That's pretty disingenuous.

I can think of several stories where the villain doesnt exactly get beaten. or defeated.

I dont care for Uncharted, but what honestly... whining about Nathan Drake not being able to kill/defeat the villain in the story? This is actually more common in fiction than you would think.

My guess is that he's meaning morality by that, which would explain what he means by the end of the first game.

@Maroxad: Can you think of any game where you have two worthless boss battles where no matter what you do the results are the same? And i do care for UC4 hence the reason im mentioning it. It overall was a great game but im simply naming a perfect example where an agenda actually negatively effected gameplay. Dont make your boss a black female if you dont have the balls to show her getting punched by a white man. It would be like Crystal Dynamics making Laura Croft bullet proof.

+10000.