Moving my blog to...

http://fifthazure.tumblr.com/

:D

Video Game Storytelling

Let's take a step back from social issues and politics... And look at a often forgotten art form- storytelling in video games. Video games single-players campaigns are basically movies which players can interact with the story, experiencing it, feeling that they made it happen, and is part of it. Its potential is HHHUUUGGGEEE. If a movie about risking it all to save another's man's life is so touching, video games can bring that further. And it has been brought further. Who didn't feel shock when the nuke went off in Call Of Duty 4 and you are left crawling on the ground, looking at the mushroom cloud and your doomed existence? It doesn't have to be shocking; the "fuck yeah!" moments of triumph when you stand on a mountain of corpses, accomplishing something vital to the story. For me,  Halo's (except Reach and Wars) endings has always been awe inspiring- the "fuck yeah" moment followed by the beautiful soundtrack of the game.

I am going to focus on FPS for this one, simply because I don't play enough RPGs to fully talk about it. But FPS are the equivalent of action movies, and its storytelling is important, too.

A good video game story does not only take place on the surface- there must be substantial canon to hold the universe (of the story) together. Halo has done this extraordinarily well, even though the execution of the campaigns in the video games has always been slightly weaker. Well, at least the earlier days, before Microsoft and Bungie retcon the shit out of it.

The Halo Universe is extraordinarily dark. Let me give you a synopsis if you have forgotten. In the 26th Century, Humanity has colonized deep space under the hegemony of the UN. However, with this hegemony, perpetual insurrection (read: Current state of Iraq/ Afghan wars) has been ongoing, and by the very best estimates, the rebels will overrun the UN in 30 years. The worse, 10.

Desperate times need desperate measures, and the UN abducted a few hundred kids for the only reason that their genes are compatible for argumentation. These kids were forced into strict military training at extremely young ages than turned into Super-humans, with extremely high fatality rates, while many others became crippled.

But before this Super-Soldiers can be used to fight rebels, an unknown alien empire bounded by religion suddenly attacks and declares a religious genocidal war against us, which we have no chance of winning.

It get much, much darker. Like orphans being turned into suicide warriors, and the religion of the aliens being to ascend to heaven by activating relics from an ancient species. Unknowingly to them, these are weapons used to wipe out life in the galaxy to starve a parasitic race called the "Flood" of hosts.

Of course, these were activated killing its creators because the flood overran them, the arguable master species.

The whole universe of Halo is dark, sad, desperate. There are no goods- and while people who don't read the books do not know about this, you can always feel the huge implications in the games. Its such a powerful backstory that even if the game's storyline sucks, this drags it along extremely well.


On the other extreme end, there is the type of storytelling in Call of Duty and most twitchy shooters in the market today. They are Michael Bay movies, in a nutshell. Paper thin plot devices carrying a player from 1 setpiece (ie. a dramatically epic battle scene).

When scrutinised, these stories just fall apart with glaring holes (Read this if you have played the campaign of Modern Warfare 2), but the huge explosions and OMFG battles make you not notice them, at all. I mean, who the hell questioned the humanitarian implications of the EMP in Modern Warfare 2? You just see planes falling from the sky!

Its bad, there is now way around it, but similarly to Michael Bay's movies, they make a fuckton of money as consumers don't care about the finer aspects of storytelling.

Now, I have neglected Role-playing games, because their storytelling is completely different. While in most FPS, you are just pawn being pushed through a predetermined story, RPGs custom tailor the story for you, with different endings. And this is where the true innovation really lies. The problem here, is RPGs has a niche market- most consumers are more interested in the OMFG setpieces previously mentioned. But games like Mass Effect (I want to play but still don't have the chance, so I can't really comment on it.. Sry) are trying to bring action into the genre, which is a great step forward. The problem? Typical RPG encounters don't need a huge amount of design. FPS/RTS battles need to be choreographed with X type A enemies coming from angle 1 while Y type B enemies coming from the right- very time intensive, and with alternative storylines, the creators do not have enough time and resources to make such a complicated game profitable. But its starting to change now, with better AI.

A typical script for a Triple A RPG release these days is 5 novels long- so you can see how intricate this aspect of video game design can be. A good story in any medium- be it movies, books, TV Shows or Video Games, make the player feel for the character feel for the characters- and video games are at that stage. The potential for interactive storytelling is limitless- and I have no doubts that video games will become the premier form of storytelling in the next 20 years.

Fun fact: The video game business is bigger than Hollywood.

Basically, summed up:

Frankly speaking: Gender equality/gay rights

No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.

-Constitution of Singapore

That phrase single handily sums up my reservations about this issue. All people, regardless of nothing, should have the legal right to strive for happiness in whatever way they see fit. However, there should be moderation by the law- provided the law is drafted if its scientifically proven to harm the user significantly. Period. Not by social or cultural taboos, or some religion.

So homosexuality. Does it cause harm to the body? No. The only thing people can even argue is the (rumored, I can't be bothered to check) higher rate of HIV/AIDS in homosexual males, but thats because the American taboo/prosecution of gays (promoted vigorously by various churches).

If we draft laws to social taboos, this country would be no better than Iran. Will this means gays should be able to get married and have legal sex? Yes. But does that eck you out? Me too. But that does not mean the law should be against them. This logic is called "discrimination".

The difference between "minority" and "prosecuted minority" is huge. In this society, the moment we allow this to slip, its going to spread to other minorities, like people of different race or socio-economic background.

Well, thats my stand. Agree or disagree, its based on the same values of harmony that this country has used for so long.

Than there is gender equality.

All I really have to say is...

Its not only this. There are so many different ways men are socially obliged under chivalry to be double standardized.

For one, men should be legally allowed to be raped. Singapore rape laws explicitly applies to women according to the women's charter and my understanding (correct me if I am wrong).

The above isn't my point, really. I do agree men should uphold chivalry where they can, but women should be expected to do their part in this dance and not just assume only men should be gentlemen.

Each are good at different things- Men are generally stronger, more gruff, but do stuff in a straightforward way while ladies are generally more dexterous, and care more about the details. Not only that, the cultural landscape have different roles for men and women. (ie. dress code, chivalry)

The law should be used to enforce equal opportunities for all regardless of gender or religion or society, and no affirmative action (ie. extra rights to compensate for a perceived lack of rights in the past) should be taken. Thats it. Equal rights. Not pro-women, or pro-men, as it is perceived.

Singapore has already abolished most of the old traditions which oppressed women, and now we need to ensure affirmative action is not carried out to too much of an extent. The old values in Confucius and Shria law regarding women has largely disappeared, but still lingers. But as my generation with generally more liberal ideas mature, I believe, this will disappear completely one day.

But until then, the law must strictly toe the line between bias against either one. Which we have not been doing very well.

Thats what I believe in, anyway

Fear and Stupidity in Singapore Politics

It's arguable if excessive power is a worthwhile traffics for progress, but it is undeniable the PAP held and used it's excessive power brutally for the last 50 years.

Like all systems with excessive power, fear was in the heart of it? Oppose them verbally? They will use ISA and lock you up. Trying to oppose them in parliament? You will be bankrupt with defamation lawsuits in no time.

All this happened. History has not been kind to the PAP in this regard, and anyone who denies this can't see a car if it was about to hit them. However, it's arguable if this excessive use of power is with it, with the growth of Singapore from a slum to our metropolitan city.

However, this fear is fading away. With the rise of he internet, people can comment on the government anonymously. They can now reach the Singapore populist without going through the censored Singapore press (which, by the way, is one of the more censored in the world). Anonymity has allowed voices to be heard, controversies to be fairly expanded upon, and opened the eyes of Singaporeans to the previous fear tactics and torture (yes, the PAP tortured ISA detainees. Torture.)


I am so enraged today not because of that. I am still undecided whether all that fear was worth it for modern Singapore. But instead, I became frustrated at the stupidity the PAP old guard to shut the fuck up. Case and point:

"[Presidential Election] showed strong support for PAP"

-Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts Yaacob Ibrahim

Wait... The one so clearly backed by PAP barely won it at ~30%. Woah?

 Pointing out that the combined vote share for Dr Tony Tan and Dr Tan Cheng Bock - both former PAP MPs - was about 70 per cent, Dr Yaacob said: "There's strong support for the party in that sense. But it's clear that there are people who are divided, as explained by the Prime Minister, (who) were basically having to decide between two very good candidates." 

WHAT THE FUCK? >.<


No, PAP. Do not fool yourself. You are on the loosing end. People do not want the close PAP relation to Tony Tan. Thus Tan Cheng Bock, who, ran as an independent, even trying to distance himself from his PAP MP past, championing when he spoked out rather when he agreed.


...As proven by foreign press with sensational and awesome headlines....

"Tantamount to a humiliation"

-The Economist

“There is currently a disconnect between the constitutional role of the president and what people would like to see it evolve to,” said Vishnu Varathan, an economist at Capital Economics (Asia) Pte in Singapore. At first, Tony Tan had looked like “a shoo-in, but the other candidates have come out strongly.”

-Bloomberg

A close presidential election confirms the growing rift between the ruling party and the public

-Wall Street Journal


The PAP old guard has been known to make plain retard statements (repentgate), but this shit has to stop. Don't get me wrong- they are efficient and flat out one of the most effective in the world, but if they continue to think they are in a comfortable political situation, we'll just have to find a new government.

I don't care if a government is good, if it do not have the support of its people, it is illegitimate and must be taken down. I want to clarify at this point I am not anti-PAP, but there must be sufficient opposition to make this democracy a legitimate one (ie. ABLE TO BLOCK BILLS.) before any alternatives can be heard.


If they really don't start implementing some populist measures instead of those aimed at blind growth, or stop making plainly wrong and offensive comments, they will lose more than a single minister in the next elections.