(spoliers?) a weirdly hypocritical little game

[ZigFreid]

(note: played the gog version in russian, so sorry for the mistakes)

people have already talked more than once about a very strange moment with "Akara thinks you're stupid" if a player thinks women are not opressed after showing him the whole parade of "strong female characters", from lawyers to the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ "antagonist" of the game.

there is also a very disturbing way in which the game treats you when you choose to change only some traits in humanity. i've been clinically depressed and had some suicadal thoughts - so sure, i think we gotta get rid of them. but then, murder? do we count an euthanasia as a murder? do we count an abortion? do we count letting one person die to save several? there are people for whom such cases are murder and cannot be forgiven, and there are people for whome it's a necessury evil, and they both have their right to think the way they do and not be judged for it. the philisophers' been cracking these questions since the dawn of time. so this is my first problem, how should i even choose something in this situation, imagining i'm fully immersed and embody Donovan in this very moment? should i choose what I consider to be right? sure, no problem - but why then the game calls me a hypocrit and berrates me for my choice like i'm in a church meeting or on ainvolutary psych evalution? come on, really?

and all this leads to an even bigger problem - i, for one, WANT the SPW to succeed and i'm really disappointed that the game doesn't treat the player as a capable human being who can decide for themselves. i decided to overlook hamfisted ideas shoved down my throat with little to no artistry because, i thought, it can be a character thing or, well, just a case of bad writing, and was used to make an argument so i could decide later on my own. i even breathed a sigh of relief when that last phone call in the office came - finally i could do what i actually think is right and stop this charade with "saving the world from the baddies" - only it turned out i couldn't, the game and the developers have decided for me not caring to give me that choice, and, once again, i, with my thoughts on the subject, can go ♥♥♥♥ myself for my own money and time spend on the game.

what a nice little game.

[Experiment]

she calls you a hypocrite if you choose to get rid of everything too. the point is that you're making decisions about anything at all, since the whole plot of the game is that you're trying to stop the thing (or at least are aligned with enough people that do).

it's a narrative game and it starts the narrative from a certain point. since when was it a requirement that games need to let you do every possible thing ever? clearly they're constrained by the general story.

the subtext is also that you CAN choose to let SPW be a thing, or whatever next version of it.. donovan's position is left up to you, and he can influence akara depending on your decisions.

[epic meow]

I for one don't think it makes sense for Donovan to be able to endorse SPW. He's supposed to be in love with emotions which is why it seems so out of character for him to be able to endorse it.
Nothing in the game shows us how Donovan might feel otherwise.

[ursahascutepaws]

Then why we had choices at all? Why all these slippery themes and questions?
If we get questions, then we should have got the ability to roleplay further. What if Donovan after all these questions changed his opinion?

[mujie]

The thing is, Donovan DOES want to stop the SWP. And HE'S saying he wants to control those things, and that makes HIM a hypocrite. If you agree with the SWP, and you chose to regulate that stuff, you're not a hypocrite.

[mujie]

Originally posted by Allah's Dabsona:

I for one don't think it makes sense for Donovan to be able to endorse SPW. He's supposed to be in love with emotions which is why it seems so out of character for him to be able to endorse it.
Nothing in the game shows us how Donovan might feel otherwise.

Of course, I think we should have emotions. But then when you're asked: "Do you think that we should stop suicide?"

That's a lot harder to answer. You can say you disagree with the SWP, but it's still extremely hard to say: "I want there to still be suicide."

[ursahascutepaws]

Because depression and suicide don't have anything in common with free will and ability to feel emotions.

That 's disease. If human wants to kill himself, it's not a result of his free will, he can't control himself. And long depression is desadaptive, so basically of we heal depression we help people feel again.

[Ashley]

I felt irritated when the characters refused to change their views despite my decisions.
I didn't treat them as individuals, but merely as pieces on the board that is this game.
Wouldn't you say it's similar to how Akara treats them within the game's universe?
Wouldn't you say we're one and the same?
Wouldn't judging her make you a hypocrite?

By allowing/preventing SPW, we are forcing our own views upon everybody.
We make that decision for other people, whether we want to, or not.
You can never not make a decision, because even the decision not to make a decision is a decision. Voting for it is a decision, voting against it is a decision, abstaining is a decision, not caring at all is a decision (some might argue the last one, but since you can choose to engage with it whenever you want, it's a decision).

Let me argue in favor of SPW (because I support it due to what I just said):
By allowing people to make decisions that will completely destroy someone's life, you are merely trying to pass on the responsibility. You think you don't have the right to make those decisions for them, so you make the decision to let them make those decisions themselves. But since you were in a position that would have let you prevent them from doing those life-altering decisions, you are partially responsible for what ends up happening.
For example, you allowed them to murder when it was obvious that the victim most likely didn't want to be murdered. You allowed them to practice sexual assault when the victim - by definition - did not want to be sexually assaulted.

That means that, no matter what you think or do, you are always having an influence, and you always carry some sort of responsibility for it. You are also always doing something somebody will disagree with, because there simply is no pleasing everybody.
The difference, when it comes to SPW, is the scale - and that's exactly what Akara tells you at the end of the game. Donovan and her are similar. They do similar things, but on different scales.

We've all indulged in making those decisions, working towards certain goals, and seeing things play out, but at the same time, we were being judgmental towards those that did the same, just with different views and ambitions.

That's why Donovan (and the player) is a hypocrite for trying to stop other people from having an influence on others. He is asking for the impossible, he just doesn't see it.

[mujie]

Originally posted by amarant42:

Because depression and suicide don't have anything in common with free will and ability to feel emotions.

That 's disease. If human wants to kill himself, it's not a result of his free will, he can't control himself. And long depression is desadaptive, so basically of we heal depression we help people feel again.

A psychological disorder. Caused by what? Pain, sadness, etc

[ZigFreid]

Originally posted by mujie:

Originally posted by amarant42:

Because depression and suicide don't have anything in common with free will and ability to feel emotions.

That 's disease. If human wants to kill himself, it's not a result of his free will, he can't control himself. And long depression is desadaptive, so basically of we heal depression we help people feel again.

A psychological disorder. Caused by what? Pain, sadness, etc

clinical depression has more to do with your phisiology and brain chemistry than with actual sadness. it's not just about "not feeling well", it systematicaly ruins you, from your ability to communicate to your sleep pattern to your digestive system. so yeah, getting rid if this has nothing to do with free will, and it's even better for your eemotional state as you only start FELLING emotions when you're out of your depressive episodes. until then it's just void.

and yeah, i understand that this is a "narrative experience", but so are books or movies. however, in a good book or a movie both sides of the conflict are usually presented equally well to make a case for a reader or a viewer, to make him think about the ideas and figure out where he is on that spectrum between two opposing ideas. here we have questions asked DIRECTLY to us. i don't know who this Donovan guy is, i don't know what he thinks, i have all the reasons to expect for him to change his views just like, you know, real people do sometimes. and moreover, it's still a video game we are talking about, so when you let a player control a character's decision, it's the basic semiotics of the media that the player BECOMES the character and some roleplaying ensues. otherwise i don't really see the point of letting me answer all these questions only to mock me for not being Donovan enough when i have my own thoughts on the subject and not taking them into account at all.

[Fulgent]

Originally posted by ZigFreid:

s still a video game we are talking about, so when you let a player control a character's decision, it's the basic semiotics of the media that the player BECOMES the character and some roleplaying ensues. otherwise i don't really see the point of letting me answer all these questions only to mock me for not being Donovan enough when i have my own thoughts on the subject and not taking them into account at all.

Its mocks you both ways to show variety of opinion. Sorry if you weren't self validated (I guess).

[ZigFreid]

Originally posted by WolvenMist:

Originally posted by ZigFreid:

s still a video game we are talking about, so when you let a player control a character's decision, it's the basic semiotics of the media that the player BECOMES the character and some roleplaying ensues. otherwise i don't really see the point of letting me answer all these questions only to mock me for not being Donovan enough when i have my own thoughts on the subject and not taking them into account at all.

Its mocks you both ways to show variety of opinion. Sorry if you weren't self validated (I guess).

my problem is not with self validation, though. my problem is exactly the fact that as far as the game path goes, there is no variety of opinion - or, at least, not that they matter. characters tell you, for example, that they believe SPW is a good thing, and you're given a choice to answer them - but you really aren't, not from your own point of view at least. there is no option to support them, and Donovan even throws the scientist from his bar when faced with the ideas that he doesn't agree with. and all this time me, a player, have to sit down and just think what the hell just happened, how should i root for these people or take them seriously?

it reminds me of the life is strange games, especially before the storm, where you have to basically play as an ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ edgy teenager and if you disagree but still want to play it at least because you paid for it - not even mentioning roleplaying (yeah, i know, another "story-driven game" with choice mechanics for some reasons) you just have to search for the least disgusting option to pick - when they even exist - and then your choices amount to nothing anyways.

one can argue that playing as a non-sympathetic (at least subjectively) character is part of the design, a way to really get into "variety of opinions", but such characters usually exist in a story that doesn't presupposes a player's choice and have an arc at the end of which they change in either way (Joel from The Last Of Us, for example). here, Brandeis is the one who comes close to anything like that with the phonecall in the end, but then he's told he's a "hero" and here we go again, enjoying the purest brand of ludonarrative dissonance of them all.

[Fulgent]

Originally posted by ZigFreid:

Originally posted by WolvenMist:

Its mocks you both ways to show variety of opinion. Sorry if you weren't self validated (I guess).

my problem is not with self validation, though. my problem is exactly the fact that as far as the game path goes, there is no variety of opinion - or, at least, not that they matter. characters tell you, for example, that they believe SPW is a good thing, and you're given a choice to answer them - but you really aren't, not from your own point of view at least. there is no option to support them, and Donovan even throws the scientist from his bar when faced with the ideas that he doesn't agree with. and all this time me, a player, have to sit down and just think what the hell just happened, how should i root for these people or take them seriously?

Yet you're given the option and you do. Either way it mocks you to provoke thought. There's no option to support them because its a single route game. That's it. You can argue all day which is better single route stories or one with different paths but that's subjective. The choices are there to provoke thought and highlight what you believe in. And since its a single route game all those things ur complaining about is actually good the characters have personality which make them more fleshed out it definetly made me like Donovan a lot more when he threw him out.

Edit: Have you reached the end? Your choices do actually technically make a small impact on the outcome. Depending on how you awnsered your questions (obvious spoiler) Akari will run the world in that way from now on.

[ZigFreid]

Originally posted by WolvenMist:

Originally posted by ZigFreid:

my problem is not with self validation, though. my problem is exactly the fact that as far as the game path goes, there is no variety of opinion - or, at least, not that they matter. characters tell you, for example, that they believe SPW is a good thing, and you're given a choice to answer them - but you really aren't, not from your own point of view at least. there is no option to support them, and Donovan even throws the scientist from his bar when faced with the ideas that he doesn't agree with. and all this time me, a player, have to sit down and just think what the hell just happened, how should i root for these people or take them seriously?

Yet you're given the option and you do. Either way it mocks you to provoke thought. There's no option to support them because its a single route game. That's it. You can argue all day which is better single route stories or one with different paths but that's subjective. The choices are there to provoke thought and highlight what you believe in. And since its a single route game all those things ur complaining about is actually good the characters have personality which make them more fleshed out it definetly made me like Donovan a lot more when he threw him out.

Edit: Have you reached the end? Your choices do actually technically make a small impact on the outcome. Depending on how you awnsered your questions (obvious spoiler) Akari will run the world in that way from now on.

yes, i did reach the end, and it's another pet peeve for me, but to argue about that would be completely useless as it's just a part of the overall design of the game. i don't like it, but it doesn't confuse and worry me as much as the other stuff. just not my cup of tea, or something.

as for the main topic, i still hold on to my opinion, as you probably do on to yours, so the further arguing would be just repeating the same points over and over again with no result. thank you for the discussion anyway. it's been nice.

[mujie]

Originally posted by ZigFreid:

Originally posted by mujie:

A psychological disorder. Caused by what? Pain, sadness, etc

clinical depression has more to do with your phisiology and brain chemistry than with actual sadness. it's not just about "not feeling well", it systematicaly ruins you, from your ability to communicate to your sleep pattern to your digestive system. so yeah, getting rid if this has nothing to do with free will, and it's even better for your eemotional state as you only start FELLING emotions when you're out of your depressive episodes. until then it's just void.

and yeah, i understand that this is a "narrative experience", but so are books or movies. however, in a good book or a movie both sides of the conflict are usually presented equally well to make a case for a reader or a viewer, to make him think about the ideas and figure out where he is on that spectrum between two opposing ideas. here we have questions asked DIRECTLY to us. i don't know who this Donovan guy is, i don't know what he thinks, i have all the reasons to expect for him to change his views just like, you know, real people do sometimes. and moreover, it's still a video game we are talking about, so when you let a player control a character's decision, it's the basic semiotics of the media that the player BECOMES the character and some roleplaying ensues. otherwise i don't really see the point of letting me answer all these questions only to mock me for not being Donovan enough when i have my own thoughts on the subject and not taking them into account at all.

There are still triggers though... I think.

[ursahascutepaws]

Mujie, there is so called Endogenous depression exists too. It starts without external trigger. Just your "neurons of happiness" stop working properly because of some biochemistry error in your brain.