In response to "Back Story" from The Escapist Forum: This article reminds me of how I generally have conversations in my head for my characters in games where they don't speak. Where I have to put my own story in where one doesn't exist.
It also reminds me of how I end up getting attached to the individual units in a game. I might really try hard to create a squad of elite rangers in Generals or keep alive that one marine who got 7 kills. I think of the first as my elite go-to squad, or if I'm playing China, an elite sniping unit. The second becomes my promoted NCO who keeps peace in his squad, and makes them more effective. There are no gameplay mechanics to reasonably support either story. But I do it anyway.
- Tom Beraha
In response to "The Great Continue Screen in the Sky" from The Escapist Forum: I've often wondered how I've developed my view of the cosmos, and I'm sure my odd views (which align themselves closest with Buddhism) come from games like Zelda, as well as the old TV shows like Battle of the Planets and Monkey Magic.
In response to "The Great Continue Screen in the Sky" from The Escapist Forum: I kind of see the continue screen as having very capitalist overtones, the more money you have the more chances you have to finish the game , it's almost as if money can buy you anything - even life, I don't know if that makes home gaming communism though.
In response to "Bungie's Epic Achievement" from The Escapist Forum: Don't get me wrong, I really like videogames and I think that they can achieve "art" status. I also have nothing but total respect for Bungie (I was a Mac gamer for many years before Microsoft flashed too much money in front of Bungie's eyes), but I found the premise behind Halo more notable than the delivery of the story. Maybe I was merely distracted by the awesome gameplay and physics while a truly "epic" story was being presented to me, but I think this may be why some people might find it hard to draw comparisons between Halo and The Aeneid ... or at the very least, appreciate them.
In response to "Bungie's Epic Achievement" from The Escapist Forum: I think you will find that the people at Bungie are actually relatively intelligent and I know that some are certainly very well read. These similarities may be the result of conscious research and application of the idea that good stories are those that survive. If you want a good story you should look at those ones that have stood the test of time.
In response to "My Hindu Shooter" from The Escapist Forum: I've always thought it'd be cool if semi-realistic war games like Battlefield 2 and 2142 had non-fatal ways of dealing with enemies. And that these ways would net you bonus points for NOT killing your enemy. Basically, you could kill your enemy and score 1 point, or you could take the more difficult route of disabling and capturing him and score 2 points.
To me this is also a realistic method of warfare. Nowadays many militaries are trying to find more ways of dealing with enemies in non-fatal ways, because this can increase the public relations points of the war back home and within the country you're fighting with.
In response to "My Hindu Shooter" from The Escapist Forum: On that note, when I finished Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter on the 360 a week or so ago, I discovered that I'd massacred nearly 600 Mexican rebels. As the uplifting music played and the credits rolled, I felt very ambivalent about the moral framework espoused by the game. Yes, I prevented a secret weapon from falling into the hands of a notorious terrorist, but I had to perpetrate mass murder to do so, and the game did nothing but cheerlead my slaughter.
GR:AW was a very good game, but where's this generation's Shadow of the Colossus? I'd like some moral ambiguity with my murder, please.