http://gameoverthinker.blogspot.com/2012/04/episode-69-aftermass.html?spref=tw
Oh god Bob, find something else to talk about...
I'm not going to talk about any opinions about Mass Effect, because even I'm tired of reading debates on that damned ending, and auteur theory, and the FTC, and blah blah blah.
But still, I can't help but feel like I needed to say something about this. So here are my points on this latest episode, again not disputing your arguments about the Re-Take movement.
1: The beginning Hyperbole:
Bob, when you go around calling people 'babies', and 'would be activists' it does not help the serious bits of your argument. Even if you then go on to state that your were making generalizations for comedy purposes, you've still said what you've just said. Not that 'Ivan' made much of a disclaimer anyway, what with the whole "are you going to try to sell me on E-trade" deal at the end. If this is supposed to be the vaguely serious games discussion part of the episode, separate from the just for fun storyline, then why are you doing that ad hominem stuff, especially if you're just going to say that you "didn't totally mean it" only a few second afterwards? If you didn't MEAN those generalizations, why put them in? Did you just get really angry when you originally recorded it and then figure that people might take it the wrong way, so you added in that Ivan bit in post?
2: Marketing
Well, yeah Bob, I think we've all had that feeling that we've been lied to by the marketing before, probably sometime during childhood.
I remember being vaguely disappointed in my first video game console when I wasn't literally sucked into an amazing fantasy world, but whatever...Damn it...
So, does the fact that misleading marketing exists make it ok? Are we taking the structural functionalist view of the world, wherein if it exists it does so for the benefit of society. Knowing your dislike of Classical Optimism a la Spinoza and Leibniz, this can not be the case.
By saying that someone shouldn't be surprised by disappointment, you do not make your argument any stronger. Again, this is pointless to your main argument.
3: Setting back the medium
Given how many debates have been sparked over this sentiment, ie. that players being able to demand a different ending is therefore threatening the artistic integrity of THE ENTIRE MEDIUM, can we REALLY say that it is "unquestionably" so? Your argument is being made much weaker by these sorts of statements that cannot be objectively proven. You can BELIEVE that the artistic integrity of the medium has been hurt, and you can have good reason to feel a such. But there is no metric with which to measure artistic integrity, and no way to scientifically test this hypothesis. Therefore, it is NOT unquestionable until we have the historical hindsight to look back at this event and then take in the sum of it's parts. As of now, it's still happening so we can't really make judgements about the after-effects with any real depth just yet.
4: the BBB
The fact that the BBB kind of/sort of agrees with the 'Retake' people's side of the argument DOES mean a whole lot. Most people aren't excited because they think that the BBB is a government organization, but rather because it is an IMPORTANT organization, being one of the most prominent consumer rights lobbying groups in the country. It is STILL a big deal, even though we'd all see it coming given the organization's history. Although, I'm actually more surprised that EA didn't just buy the BBB off, like so many other companies have.
5: Derision
No bob, as with point 3, since you cannot PROVE that this has set the industry back, this fact alone does not give you the right to simply disregard the movement with snarky derision 'for a little bit'. You still have that right, of course, but only because you are entitled to your opinions like everyone else is. Again, it is not invalid to criticize the sometimes overblown and over-dramatic Retake movement but the idea o 'having the right to do it BECAUSE they've done something stupid' doesn't play much of a role. You regard them as you do, because you are of the opinion that they are wrong and this is jut fine because you are backing it up with reasons, but don't go blaming 'them' for something that we don't really know that 'they've' done.
6: We just know...
Again, I don't want to start debating the validity of this Mass Effect 3 ending thing, I'm just talking about Bob's argument.
Anyway: HOW do we know that audiences were disappointed at the ending of the Godfather or with the revelation that Vader was Luke's father? I'm not saying that I don't think that certain members of the audience weren't disappointed, but you don't back this up at all.
Not with any news stories, or statements from the director/cast/producer etc, or even what critics were saying at the time though these sources likely exist. You just expect the viewer to assume that people would have been disappointed by the downer ending. While I can definitely see this happening, I can't just make the assumption that it did and then allow my future interpretation of your argument to be based on a historical precedent that has no solid evidence attached to it, even though it SEEMS likely.
7: No I don't
I don't see it because I can't see it. The only way you can prove that you've opened Pandora's box is if a whole bunch of people get sick with diseases that we don't already have names for, and the same goes for the potential damage to the concept gaming as an art form. The gaming community itself is ALWAYS debating whether it wants the greater popular culture to make games considered to be art in what has become known as the traditional sense, as the very definition of art is nebulous and impossible to pin down.
If the Escapist/Most Gaming forums were anything like a classroom, "Gaming as Art" would be the most written about thesis topic right behind DLC Controversies and Reviews of Bad NES Games. You did a whole episode on the very subject. Yes, I do see your point as to what precedent may have been established with this case, but this video doesn't make much of a good argument for it.
I'm not saying that your point isn't valid, but what I am saying however is that this argument is weak.
Why, if you're trying to be taken seriously here, would you do that hyperbole crap if you're just going to disclaim it? If I shouldn't take what you're saying seriously, then why should I listen in the first place?
What I get is that you reasonably believe that the Re-Take movement has blown the problem with the ending out of proportion and has therefore made the broader gaming culture look less serious. Fine, that's very easily demonstrable.
But consider this: By giving so much negative attention to them and making out what they're doing to be so very grievous, aren't you then supporting the idea that this is indeed a very big deal and therefore deserves the attention it's getting?
Doesn't that, therefore, validate a good portion of the outrage felt by 'Retake' if people like yourself are so offended that they make two full GO episodes about the issue, tweet about it constantly, write an article linking them to the Old Ones from in Cabin in the Woods, alongside everything else you've done about them so far.
Bob, I like your opinions (most of the time, but I can't say that about most people period so "Go you!") which is why I feel so cheated by this recent stuff of yours.
While you've been bothering way too much with this crap, Extra Credits has been talking about things like analyzing Skyrim's Opening, Western and Japanese RPGs, Games you might not have tried #3, the implications of Crowd-funding, and exploring the implications of Kinect style controls on the way games are made. I know that you don't have the same skill set or hands on experience with the industry that these guys do, but that's ok. People think that your opinion matters for a reason, Bob, and that's because you can get a conversation started. You are SUPPOSED to be the Game OVERthinker, not the Game Do-OVERthinker nor the Game ReThinker. When I started watching your show, as with many others, it was because you gave insightful and interesting perspective to issues that I had either never thought about or hadn't looked at too hard. The debates that I've had over your ideas have been some of the most scintillating and interesting I've ever had about gaming, and likely would not have happened if you didn't start doing videos.
This is why I cannot stand for stuff like this anymore.
Yea, I know that you say the next episode is going to be better or more fun somehow, but I can't take that risk anymore.
This is why I am official starting the Re-take Bob Chipman campaign!
With any luck, we're going to convince the Better Business Bureau to tie you down to a chair and force you to talk about...
Idunno, the implications of The Japanese Post-War Economic Boom to the mutation of originally Western cultural tropes and idioms alongside how they've effected game design or whatever. Yaknow, like how WE kind of invented the Stereotypical Indian with the feathers and whatnot, but then guys like that show up in Sunset Riders...
Maybe you could tie it in with a storyline where the Anti/Necro/Strawman's Third cousin twice removed/Whatever Thinker forces you to walk down Video Gaming's Trail of Tears a la The Sorrow's boss battle.
Just so long as you don't end up comparing Wounded Knee to the Mass Effect Ending debacle, or end up making a Retake strawman organization into some kind of A.I.M stand in (on a side note, A.I.M totally rocks).
Never the less, with my long ass petition and even longer ass blog/escapist postings, we will one day be able to annoy Bob Chimpman to the point where he FINALLY gives up and replaces all his old ME3 videos with new ones where he talks about Goth Chicks/Crap Movies/Film History/The Racist Origins of Bonk the Caveman/The Best Classic Transformers Episodes.
Yeah! Re Take Bob Chimpman!
(Wait, did I just spell his name as Bob CHIMPman? Hey, looks like I just created a new Moviebob character! Maybe he throws poo at sexism or something?)
Oh god Bob, find something else to talk about...
I'm not going to talk about any opinions about Mass Effect, because even I'm tired of reading debates on that damned ending, and auteur theory, and the FTC, and blah blah blah.
But still, I can't help but feel like I needed to say something about this. So here are my points on this latest episode, again not disputing your arguments about the Re-Take movement.
1: The beginning Hyperbole:
Bob, when you go around calling people 'babies', and 'would be activists' it does not help the serious bits of your argument. Even if you then go on to state that your were making generalizations for comedy purposes, you've still said what you've just said. Not that 'Ivan' made much of a disclaimer anyway, what with the whole "are you going to try to sell me on E-trade" deal at the end. If this is supposed to be the vaguely serious games discussion part of the episode, separate from the just for fun storyline, then why are you doing that ad hominem stuff, especially if you're just going to say that you "didn't totally mean it" only a few second afterwards? If you didn't MEAN those generalizations, why put them in? Did you just get really angry when you originally recorded it and then figure that people might take it the wrong way, so you added in that Ivan bit in post?
2: Marketing
Well, yeah Bob, I think we've all had that feeling that we've been lied to by the marketing before, probably sometime during childhood.
I remember being vaguely disappointed in my first video game console when I wasn't literally sucked into an amazing fantasy world, but whatever...Damn it...
So, does the fact that misleading marketing exists make it ok? Are we taking the structural functionalist view of the world, wherein if it exists it does so for the benefit of society. Knowing your dislike of Classical Optimism a la Spinoza and Leibniz, this can not be the case.
By saying that someone shouldn't be surprised by disappointment, you do not make your argument any stronger. Again, this is pointless to your main argument.
3: Setting back the medium
Given how many debates have been sparked over this sentiment, ie. that players being able to demand a different ending is therefore threatening the artistic integrity of THE ENTIRE MEDIUM, can we REALLY say that it is "unquestionably" so? Your argument is being made much weaker by these sorts of statements that cannot be objectively proven. You can BELIEVE that the artistic integrity of the medium has been hurt, and you can have good reason to feel a such. But there is no metric with which to measure artistic integrity, and no way to scientifically test this hypothesis. Therefore, it is NOT unquestionable until we have the historical hindsight to look back at this event and then take in the sum of it's parts. As of now, it's still happening so we can't really make judgements about the after-effects with any real depth just yet.
4: the BBB
The fact that the BBB kind of/sort of agrees with the 'Retake' people's side of the argument DOES mean a whole lot. Most people aren't excited because they think that the BBB is a government organization, but rather because it is an IMPORTANT organization, being one of the most prominent consumer rights lobbying groups in the country. It is STILL a big deal, even though we'd all see it coming given the organization's history. Although, I'm actually more surprised that EA didn't just buy the BBB off, like so many other companies have.
5: Derision
No bob, as with point 3, since you cannot PROVE that this has set the industry back, this fact alone does not give you the right to simply disregard the movement with snarky derision 'for a little bit'. You still have that right, of course, but only because you are entitled to your opinions like everyone else is. Again, it is not invalid to criticize the sometimes overblown and over-dramatic Retake movement but the idea o 'having the right to do it BECAUSE they've done something stupid' doesn't play much of a role. You regard them as you do, because you are of the opinion that they are wrong and this is jut fine because you are backing it up with reasons, but don't go blaming 'them' for something that we don't really know that 'they've' done.
6: We just know...
Again, I don't want to start debating the validity of this Mass Effect 3 ending thing, I'm just talking about Bob's argument.
Anyway: HOW do we know that audiences were disappointed at the ending of the Godfather or with the revelation that Vader was Luke's father? I'm not saying that I don't think that certain members of the audience weren't disappointed, but you don't back this up at all.
Not with any news stories, or statements from the director/cast/producer etc, or even what critics were saying at the time though these sources likely exist. You just expect the viewer to assume that people would have been disappointed by the downer ending. While I can definitely see this happening, I can't just make the assumption that it did and then allow my future interpretation of your argument to be based on a historical precedent that has no solid evidence attached to it, even though it SEEMS likely.
7: No I don't
I don't see it because I can't see it. The only way you can prove that you've opened Pandora's box is if a whole bunch of people get sick with diseases that we don't already have names for, and the same goes for the potential damage to the concept gaming as an art form. The gaming community itself is ALWAYS debating whether it wants the greater popular culture to make games considered to be art in what has become known as the traditional sense, as the very definition of art is nebulous and impossible to pin down.
If the Escapist/Most Gaming forums were anything like a classroom, "Gaming as Art" would be the most written about thesis topic right behind DLC Controversies and Reviews of Bad NES Games. You did a whole episode on the very subject. Yes, I do see your point as to what precedent may have been established with this case, but this video doesn't make much of a good argument for it.
I'm not saying that your point isn't valid, but what I am saying however is that this argument is weak.
Why, if you're trying to be taken seriously here, would you do that hyperbole crap if you're just going to disclaim it? If I shouldn't take what you're saying seriously, then why should I listen in the first place?
What I get is that you reasonably believe that the Re-Take movement has blown the problem with the ending out of proportion and has therefore made the broader gaming culture look less serious. Fine, that's very easily demonstrable.
But consider this: By giving so much negative attention to them and making out what they're doing to be so very grievous, aren't you then supporting the idea that this is indeed a very big deal and therefore deserves the attention it's getting?
Doesn't that, therefore, validate a good portion of the outrage felt by 'Retake' if people like yourself are so offended that they make two full GO episodes about the issue, tweet about it constantly, write an article linking them to the Old Ones from in Cabin in the Woods, alongside everything else you've done about them so far.
Bob, I like your opinions (most of the time, but I can't say that about most people period so "Go you!") which is why I feel so cheated by this recent stuff of yours.
While you've been bothering way too much with this crap, Extra Credits has been talking about things like analyzing Skyrim's Opening, Western and Japanese RPGs, Games you might not have tried #3, the implications of Crowd-funding, and exploring the implications of Kinect style controls on the way games are made. I know that you don't have the same skill set or hands on experience with the industry that these guys do, but that's ok. People think that your opinion matters for a reason, Bob, and that's because you can get a conversation started. You are SUPPOSED to be the Game OVERthinker, not the Game Do-OVERthinker nor the Game ReThinker. When I started watching your show, as with many others, it was because you gave insightful and interesting perspective to issues that I had either never thought about or hadn't looked at too hard. The debates that I've had over your ideas have been some of the most scintillating and interesting I've ever had about gaming, and likely would not have happened if you didn't start doing videos.
This is why I cannot stand for stuff like this anymore.
Yea, I know that you say the next episode is going to be better or more fun somehow, but I can't take that risk anymore.
This is why I am official starting the Re-take Bob Chipman campaign!
With any luck, we're going to convince the Better Business Bureau to tie you down to a chair and force you to talk about...
Idunno, the implications of The Japanese Post-War Economic Boom to the mutation of originally Western cultural tropes and idioms alongside how they've effected game design or whatever. Yaknow, like how WE kind of invented the Stereotypical Indian with the feathers and whatnot, but then guys like that show up in Sunset Riders...
Maybe you could tie it in with a storyline where the Anti/Necro/Strawman's Third cousin twice removed/Whatever Thinker forces you to walk down Video Gaming's Trail of Tears a la The Sorrow's boss battle.
Just so long as you don't end up comparing Wounded Knee to the Mass Effect Ending debacle, or end up making a Retake strawman organization into some kind of A.I.M stand in (on a side note, A.I.M totally rocks).
Never the less, with my long ass petition and even longer ass blog/escapist postings, we will one day be able to annoy Bob Chimpman to the point where he FINALLY gives up and replaces all his old ME3 videos with new ones where he talks about Goth Chicks/Crap Movies/Film History/The Racist Origins of Bonk the Caveman/The Best Classic Transformers Episodes.
Yeah! Re Take Bob Chimpman!
(Wait, did I just spell his name as Bob CHIMPman? Hey, looks like I just created a new Moviebob character! Maybe he throws poo at sexism or something?)
