176: Woman, Mother, Space Marine

[Hunde Des Krieg]

Cameron had the actors playing his marines read Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers before filming. It is a terrible book.

Actually, I think that statement unfair, and unreasonable. The fact that I disagree with the philosophical and/or moral arguments presented by an author in a book (or in any other medium) does not make that work "terrible". Bad spelling/grammar, incomprehensible plot, incredible* characters -- these are all arguments for calling a book "terrible". For all that I disagree with the societal structure Heinlein argues for in Starship Troopers, it is good, fun read, and he presents his viewpoint through compelling characters and well-written dialogue.

And after reading it, who didn't dream about what it would be like to be a member of the jumpsuit-clad, superhumanly-tough Mobile Infantry?

As controversial as its socio-political agenda might be, that book invented the futuristic warrior. Warhammer 40,000's Space Marines, Halo's Spartans, the marines in Aliens, and the Terran Marines of Starcraft: the list of sci-fi fighting forces inspired directly or indirectly by Heinlein's soldiers goes on.

* Incredible: impossible to believe in.

I concur, just because you disagree with the politics involved doesn't make it terrible. It is well thought out, well written and created an archetype of soldier that thrives today, and invented a conceptual type of armour that the military is still trying to get its mits on. Just more black and whitism.

 

[Novan Leon]

Truth is, young males play traditional console videogames more than any other demographic, so this is who the games are marketed to. You can change the target demographic like Nintendo has, but there is a risk associated with stepping into unknown territory like they did (with equally significant rewards for doing so).

Yes; I'm suggesting that game developers should take this risk, and Nintendo's success should suggest to them that this risk is worth the potential reward. Where's the controversy?

You said that "Games are made for boys, because boys make them.", which is completely false (using Nintendo as an example).

On a related note, I applaud Nintendo's move but you have to be blind not to see how they've alienated many dedicated gamers by making this move. Yes, some of Nintendo's games appeal to everyone, casual and dedicated gamer alike, but they essentially had to make a judgment call on which audience they wanted. It's the audience that dictated the type of games that were made.

Marketing cares very much what they sell and who they sell to, i.e. the largest demographic, hence the largest potential for profit.

Again, I'm suggesting that a demographic of all people is larger than half of all people.

A "demographic" of "all people" is an oxymoron. The reason marketing people use demographics is to identify a target audience precisely BECAUSE pleasing everyone is unfeasible. Saying that marketing doesn't care what they sell and who they sell it to is utter nonsense, since that's essentially what marketing is all about.

The problem with developing games with both girls and boys in mind is that it's impossible to please everyone, every time.

Now, that's a serious rejoinder. Except for all of the pink and blue stuff, which is borderline offensive.

I think it's hard to make games that appeal across gender, but that it's certainly possible to do so, but when your development team consists entirely of the Cliffy B. demographic, it's never going to happen.

Offensive? To whom?

So your argument is that a development team full of males between the ages of 18-55 can't make games that appeal to other demographics, females in particular? What male to female ratio do you think works in the development houses at Nintendo? How many women were involved in the development of the Rock Band and Guitar Hero series?

 

[JediMB]

On a related note, I applaud Nintendo's move but you have to be blind not to see how they've alienated many dedicated gamers by making this move.

It always bothers me when people go wailing about how Nintendo have alienated or betrayed them, when the Big N had put out a Zelda, a Metroid, a Super Mario, a WarioWare and a Super Smash Bros within the first year and a half from the Wii's release. And, of course, they're hard at work making yet more games, but as usual choose to not show anything off until they feel good about doing so.

Nintendo themselves clearly aren't making any less "hardcore" games than before, so what about the third party developers? Well, while most of them do seem to mostly spit out "casual" games and shovelware, the consumers likewise don't show much appreciation for games like Zack & Wiki.

 

[Tabloid Believer]

It seems a bit much to claim that Aliens is one of the greatest movies ever. The original Alien was really brilliant. I find that its sequel doesn't really draw me in emotionally like the unbearable suspense and technical virtuosity of the first does.

One of the greatest movies ever? No.

But a great movie? Yes.

 

[Novan Leon]

On a related note, I applaud Nintendo's move but you have to be blind not to see how they've alienated many dedicated gamers by making this move.

It always bothers me when people go wailing about how Nintendo have alienated or betrayed them, when the Big N had put out a Zelda, a Metroid, a Super Mario, a WarioWare and a Super Smash Bros within the first year and a half from the Wii's release. And, of course, they're hard at work making yet more games, but as usual choose to not show anything off until they feel good about doing so.

Nintendo themselves clearly aren't making any less "hardcore" games than before, so what about the third party developers? Well, while most of them do seem to mostly spit out "casual" games and shovelware, the consumers likewise don't show much appreciation for games like Zack & Wiki.

If you play any of these traditional Nintendo games for the Wii (with the possible exception of Mario Galaxy) in the context of Nintendo's prior games you'd see the obvious gameplay differences in the newer games. The new gameplay is generally more shallow and newbie friendly, leaving behind some of the more hardcore game mechanics in favor of mechanics that are less punishing and more appealing non-gamers.

Besides, it's not just the first party developers but the third party as well. Nintendo has made it clear that they're vying for the non-gamer crowd and the majority of third-party developers feel no need to re-invent the wheel, so they jump ship and focus on the X360 and PS3, restricting Wii development to greatly dumbed-down ports of games built for the other consoles.

 

[goodman528]

The difference between the soldiers and the mother Ripley is not in their sexuality or strength and weaknesses, or politics. But very simply:

Ripley, the mother is fighting to save something, the little girl. She gets her kicks from saving something that means the world to her. She is willing to die in exchange for someone else's life.

The space marines, were fighting to destroy something, the aliens (who are life as well). They get their kicks out of killing something that means nothing to them. They are willing to die in exchange for someone (aliens) else's death.

In every FPS you play as the latter, all of them are just Doom clones (PC), and Halo clones (consoles). I have yet to play a FPS (including CoD) that makes me feel like I'm fighting for something other than to kill the other guys. Whilst that is fun and entertaining, it is also mindless and shallow. How great would it be to play a FPS based on the former? So at the end of the game you think "Wow! I've not just wasted the last 10 hours of my life squeezing a virtual stress ball. No. I've really done something worthwhile and saved some real thing worth virtually dying for."

To make a "Hardboiled tough guy" video game protagonist you don't need a typical space marine who is: a macho, bullet munching, muscle popping superhuman; wearing complicated, shiny, futuristic armour; wielding a huge assult rifle with a grenade launcher and chain saw. NO. All you need is an average person, just like you and me, then put them in a setting that gives them something worth fighting for. It is much more thrilling to be an under armed and weak civilian in a town filled with zombies/aliens/terrorist/enemy soldiers; knowing you are fighting to save a little kid.

I always thought it wasn't the bullet dodging and Kungfu moves that makes a good action film great, but rather the ordinariness of the main characters fighting for survival, fighting for their families, fighting for justice. For example, I recently watched Denzel Washington's film "Man on Fire", which has a very low body count compared to action films I usually watch, but it was a cut above the rest because I was watching him fighting to save something, not fighting to kill something.

 

[ZenKai]

My only bummer about this article was the image they used for marketing it: Samas carrying a sign reading, "It's a Metroid, Not a Choice." I understand why you chose it. I see how it relates. The article was insightful and stimulating intellectually. But God, with something that f-ing funny, I wish that had come to play somehow.

On a side note, I hadn't realized Palin was dead. You just made my day! (I'm kidding, I know she's not, but a guy can dream.)

 

[Doug]

I have to wonder about the 'Space Marine' stereotype - is there another 'realistic' futuristic soldier? Really?

I mean, an armoured fighter who's armour makes him soldier and more mobile. Even the US army is looking into it for future tech.

But seriously, aside from the Power-armoured tank or the bio-warrior, can anyone see how a future combatant would seem like? Excluding stylisted approaches, heh. Even the commander sherpard from Mass Effect had body armour with at least power in it for the shield.

 

[JediMB]

If you play any of these traditional Nintendo games for the Wii (with the possible exception of Mario Galaxy) in the context of Nintendo's prior games you'd see the obvious gameplay differences in the newer games. The new gameplay is generally more shallow and newbie friendly, leaving behind some of the more hardcore game mechanics in favor of mechanics that are less punishing and more appealing non-gamers.

I'm not seeing it.

Twilight Princess added a lot of new battle techniques and tools in addition to the classic ones carried over from previous games, and it was easily harder than The Wind Waker. Whether it was harder than Ocarina of Time or not I can't say, since OoT was the (and my) first 3D Zelda, which means that I'm more experienced now than I was then. Regardless, there was much depth added to both the battle system and how the two parallell worlds worked when compared to previous games in the series.

Metroid Prime 3 also expanded a lot on what the previous games in the series had done. Things were changed around to be more intuitive, but nothing was dumbed down.

WarioWare was still WarioWare.

Super Smash Bros Brawl took the same formula as the previous two games, but just added more of everything.

What is it that's dumbed down and shallow again? (But, jeez, this totally isn't the right thread to continue this discussion. <.<)

My only bummer about this article was the image they used for marketing it: Samas carrying a sign reading, "It's a Metroid, Not a Choice." I understand why you chose it. I see how it relates. The article was insightful and stimulating intellectually. But God, with something that f-ing funny, I wish that had come to play somehow.

Actually, that picture's from the "Pixels and Picket Lines" article.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

...the self defeating irony that you wrote this article for a magazine called "The Escapist"...Escapism, not frustration. It is film and book we turn to for intellectual frustration

I think the Escapist is an ironic name: clearly, there's a lot of hard thinking about video games going on here. The whole magazine does precisely the opposite of escapism.

I disagree, too, that we turn to books and film for intellectual frustration. The biggest-selling books and movies are clearly not out to provoke thought.

But games always involve frustration. Play takes effort. They are not like movies, where you can simply watch the space marine kill the alien; you have to do it yourself. And if you're not good enough at the game to play through a part, then you don't get the satisfaction of winning it.

Escpasim is the act of removing oneself from the real world, you can have a great deal of active thought with it. Escapism isn't just shutting down, it's removing onesself from reality and typically, difficulty, for enjoyment.

If you count the smarmy bullshit books that sell well and point to them as proof that they are not intended to frustrate, I point to the safe male fantasy games you are deriding as proof that games are are not intended to frustrate. Lets face it, Twilight and Gears of War are literary equivilants.

can any male truely emphasize with a womans maternal instict? Can any woman truely emphasize with a mans emotional struggle to be without emotion?

Yes.

No.

Did I win?

 

[Ray Huling]

Escpasim is the act of removing oneself from the real world, you can have a great deal of active thought with it. Escapism isn't just shutting down, it's removing onesself from reality and typically, difficulty, for enjoyment.

Two problems here. First, I deny that playing a game means escaping reality. You're not denying anything about the world or pretending that you're in any world different from the one you're in. You're just doing something fun.

Second, games are usually difficult.

Lets face it, Twilight and Gears of War are literary equivilants.

No; they're not. The experience of reading is entirely different from the experience of playing a game. Games can frustrate us in a way that books simply cannot. There is no book that prevents us from turning a page if we haven't read it. All games do this.

No.

Did I win?

No; you just continue to ask a silly question. It's as if you're asking if humans can laugh at jokes or fall in love. People can empathise with other people. Even sociopaths understand that the phenomenon of empathy exists. If you want to deny a fundamental human experience, that's your prerogative, but I think it'll be a hard row to hoe. Good luck!

 

[Kaypidge]

Hm.. Not a terrible article, but unfortunately, your main point that Ripley-like maternal figures are unrepresented is rendered completely moot by a little game called Metal Gear Solid 3.

Underrespresented in games? Certainly? But MGS3's The Boss is an awesome enough mother figure to carry the entire industry's worth of maternalism, if you ask me.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Escpasim is the act of removing oneself from the real world, you can have a great deal of active thought with it. Escapism isn't just shutting down, it's removing onesself from reality and typically, difficulty, for enjoyment.

Two problems here. First, I deny that playing a game means escaping reality. You're not denying anything about the world or pretending that you're in any world different from the one you're in. You're just doing something fun.

Second, games are usually difficult.

Lets face it, Twilight and Gears of War are literary equivilants.

No; they're not. The experience of reading is entirely different from the experience of playing a game. Games can frustrate us in a way that books simply cannot. There is no book that prevents us from turning a page if we haven't read it. All games do this.

No.

Did I win?

No; you just continue to ask a silly question. It's as if you're asking if humans can laugh at jokes or fall in love. People can empathise with other people. Even sociopaths understand that the phenomenon of empathy exists. If you want to deny a fundamental human experience, that's your prerogative, but I think it'll be a hard row to hoe. Good luck!

There is no game that prevents us from just turning it off. I see what your trying to say but I don't inteirly agree- the whole POINT of movies is inspiring emotions, provoking thought, challenging us. At least, the classics- The Godfather, Alien, ETC. The same is of course true of some games.

Then there are blockbuster movies that just make you think WEEE EXPLOSION! And then, there are games that are the same. So perhaps the real truth of the matter is that movies and books and games are analogous- they convey thoughts in different manners, but in the end they grant us the same experiances.

I'm not denying the fundamentals of human existance either, but I think it's a bit silly to think you can REALLY understand what it's like to be a woman following a lifetime of social and biological conditioning that runs different to yours (and the counter is true for women). Men and Women are fundamentally different in this regaurd, and apparently MANY people have difficulty emphasizing if the divorce statistics are to be trusted.

A Man will NEVER really understand what it is for a woman to mother a child- either biologically or socially. Thats their thing- we can understand what it means to be a PARENT, or to have a child, these are things we share in common; but women are just bloody wired different.

All I said was "Hey, your a dude, why are you complaining about dudes complaining about your article written about women? Seems a little silly"

BUT I want to reitterate, so you don't think i'm trolling, I do like the idea of a Matron/mother soldier figure in videogames in leiu of the beefy testoster-ine. I did mention it would be hard to impliment... and maybe it would, especially if you wanted to do it without becoming a trope, but an angry mother is more badass then a man any day.

 

[kubinschu]

One thing - Why is Ripley as Mother the important aspect of her, rather than her strength of character as a person that happens to be female?

You say that it is the failure of the Father Figure Lieutenant and the rise of the Mother Ripley and say that a better lieutenant would not have helped. But you just replaced one parent with another - when really - what they do get is a better lieutenant in Ripley - one that is accepted as part of the chain of command because of her strengths and proven capabilities. It is she that takes command of the situation and rescues the survivors in the plant. Not as a mother but as a cool thinking, quick acting person.

Also on Heinlein

In the USA, if you are a convicted felon in some parts of the country (or all) you do not have the right to vote, and if you are under 18 you do not have the right to vote.

In Starship Troopers - if you do not serve the government for the two years it takes to become a franchised citizen, you do not get the right to vote.

In what way are these different restrictions on the right to vote different? I would hardly call the current USA fascist but what is different about Starship Troopers that makes it fascist?

Also - it is polemic against arms control - when the enemy is known to be lying about their own efforts to do the same.

He was angry because the USA signed a treaty halting tests, without the provision of foreign observers in each country. A treaty that the USSR immediately broke - resuming tests soon after - Proving Heinlein right.

 

[Novan Leon]

I'm not seeing it.

Twilight Princess added a lot of new battle techniques and tools in addition to the classic ones carried over from previous games, and it was easily harder than The Wind Waker. Whether it was harder than Ocarina of Time or not I can't say, since OoT was the (and my) first 3D Zelda, which means that I'm more experienced now than I was then. Regardless, there was much depth added to both the battle system and how the two parallel worlds worked when compared to previous games in the series.

Twilight Princess was originally in development for the Gamecube and was ported over at the last minute.

Brawl is slower paced than Smash and has an added element of randomness. Ask anyone who plays Brawl at a higher level and they'll tell you that even a new player has a fair chance of beating a good player in Brawl. This wasn't necessarily the case in Smash. It's the same with Mario Kart Wii. You are correct about Metroid 3 though, but if you look at the Wii library of games overall, I can probably count on one hand the number of games that would have the depth and challenge to appeal to a dedicated gamer.

But yeah, this topic was about the "mother" figure in games, right? I'm not sure how we got on this topic.

 

[Ray Huling]

But you just replaced one parent with another...It is she that takes command of the situation and rescues the survivors in the plant. Not as a mother but as a cool thinking, quick acting person.

She doesn't take command. She creates a consensus (well; except for Burke!). Everybody has an opportunity for input. She barks Hudson into line, but that doesn't make her his commander--just one member of the team pissed at another.

Her motivations are important, too. She is out to protect Newt at all costs, and, yes, she derives strength from this motivation. Ripley in Aliens is very different from Ripley in Alien. Experience is one reason why, but saving that little girl is another.

Also, I think it's important to keep in mind that the company colonizing the planet wanted to use the alien as a weapon--that's how this whole mess got started, back in the first film.

In what way are these different restrictions on the right to vote different? I would hardly call the current USA fascist but what is different about Starship Troopers that makes it fascist?

They're different because they're opposite: in the U.S. everyone has the right to vote, with exceptions; in ST, no one has the right to vote, with exceptions.

ST features diatribes against democracy; the U.S. is a democratic republic.

The other screeds in the book also set out a fascist ideology: the state above individual rights; not just service, but extensive indoctrination, before you can vote; a heavily militarized society.

Keep in mind, too, that the reason currently serving members of the military can't vote is because they might vote not to fight. Permanent war against a totally vilified enemy.

It's unclear how the economy works, but it's certainly neither capitalist-democratic, nor communist.

He was angry because the USA signed a treaty halting tests, without the provision of foreign observers in each country. A treaty that the USSR immediately broke - resuming tests soon after - Proving Heinlein right.

Everybody knew the Soviets would cheat. That wasn't the real argument, which was moral. The sheer immorality of nuclear weapons was the reason people were arguing for limitations on them.

And, in the end, it turned out Heinlein was wrong: we know today that our intelligence agencies vastly overestimated the Soviet arsenal, particularly in the late fifties and throughout the sixties.

Even further, Heinlein was arguing the moral point, not the mere practical one. ST says that military service is the most important service a person can undertake. Military strength is the supreme strength. The book has clean nukes. It argues that nuclear weapons are moral.

 

[JediMB]

Twilight Princess was originally in development for the Gamecube and was ported over at the last minute.

Brawl is slower paced than Smash and has an added element of randomness. Ask anyone who plays Brawl at a higher level and they'll tell you that even a new player has a fair chance of beating a good player in Brawl. This wasn't necessarily the case in Smash. It's the same with Mario Kart Wii. You are correct about Metroid 3 though, but if you look at the Wii library of games overall, I can probably count on one hand the number of games that would have the depth and challenge to appeal to a dedicated gamer.

But yeah, this topic was about the "mother" figure in games, right? I'm not sure how we got on this topic.

Not exactly "last minute", considering that it was in development for another year after they started working on the Wii version, and the motion controls do a great deal for the general feel and user-friendliness of the sword and shield techniques.

You know what? I had pretty much the same thought about Melee when it was released. It felt slower, more sluggish, and more random than the original N64 game, while also feeling a lot more crowded with the increase in graphical detail.

Mario Kart Wii was a big step up from the, in my opinion, much more casual-oriented and gimmicky Double Dash. Plus, it gave us the option to eternally play online without ever having to join a new game or search for new players. I will admit that its offline modes didn't come close to those of Mario Kart DS... which incidentally was also released in a platform appealing to casual players.

Zack & Wiki, Super Mario Galaxy, Zelda, MP3:C, RE4, RE: Umbrella Chronicles, Okami and Super Paper Mario alone would leave you with an eight-fingered hand, although I suppose that would depend on your definition of a "dedicated gamer".

Well, I always enjoy a good off-shoot discussion, but I think I'm gonna try to get a bit more involved in the main subject now.

 

[JediMB]

Her motivations are important, too. She is out to protect Newt at all costs, and, yes, she derives strength from this motivation. Ripley in Aliens is very different from Ripley in Alien. Experience is one reason why, but saving that little girl is another.

Keep in mind, though, that Ripley went through quite an ordeal to get her kitty Jones with her into the escape shuttle in Alien.

 

[Ray Huling]

Keep in mind, though, that Ripley went through quite an ordeal to get her kitty Jones with her into the escape shuttle in Alien.

Ha ha ha! You're right about that! One of the most fascinating aspects of Aliens is that it has a completely different tone from the original, but the plot structure is almost exactly the same.

 

[TsunamiWombat]

Keep in mind, though, that Ripley went through quite an ordeal to get her kitty Jones with her into the escape shuttle in Alien.

Ha ha ha! You're right about that! One of the most fascinating aspects of Aliens is that it has a completely different tone from the original, but the plot structure is almost exactly the same.

Different directors, I think. Aliens is an action movie, Alien is a suspense/horror movie. The plot structure IS exactly the same though, isn't it? I guess because they figured out it's a winning formula.