Adventure Forums - View Single Post - Goodbye Fun Adventure Games, Hello Indoctrination.

ADan · 06-08-2011, 04:06 AM

I honestly think that the OP has no valid argument at all. He/she's merely fighting a straw man coming from a false premise:

He/she insinuates that

a) there are *several* games which deal with politically/socially/evolutionary relevant content

b) these games are *forced* upon the consumer to play and

c) these occurrences would somehow lead to a situation where *all* AGs are of this very type.

Answers:

a) I don't see an abundance of games of that type and I'm with several other posters on this thread that say "it's just a valid scenario in a Science Fiction story".
You'd have to dismiss *all* (good) Science Fiction Literature (and subsequently movies) as propagandistic if you call the onset of ANB (which obviously is the *one* game the OP's talking about) an attempt at brainwashing.

All SF-Literature (as opposed to Space Opera) deals with present day situations that are extrapolated into a future (as near as tomorrow and as distant as hundreds of billions of years) and a resulting scenario that highlights the responsibility of humankind in respect to decisions that are made in the present.

The OP is also mentioning movies. He/she seems to prefer that some "certain films" (no further explanations or examples) were not made. Why? I'd submit that the creative realm is infinite and there's room for each and every genre to compete for an audience which brings us to

b) If you don't like a certain genre of games/books/movies/plays/etc. it's fairly easy: Do not expose yourself to them. Don't judge others who do.

Nobody's forcing anyone to watch "artsy" European Films, nobody can make you read sophisticated hardcore SF (or SciFi), no one is dragging you to the theater to endure yet another modern interpretation of Shakespeare's "The Tempest".

c) As I said before: The creative realm is infinite. It's not that the occurrence of one game that has a more political/social/scientific - one could say *more relevant* - base scenario will somehow lead to an "infection" of a whole industry and all developers will fall like dominoes and start producing only and exclusively this type of game.

(Mind you, I explicitly laud Daedalic for going this rather risky and atypical path by choosing this approach and I do not see that there's any propaganda involved. It's just a SF-scenario that is very similar to the one in the movie "Twelve Monkeys" at the beginning. I'd also like to see more of this type of game).

When it comes down to it, the consumer decides which games will be made in the future and I doubt that there really is a mass market for games that are perceived as propagandistic by a majority of prospective buyers (which I don't think is even the case with ANB).

It would seem the OP doesn't believe that climate change is happening and that is merely the point he/she was trying to make. Nothing more. I would think this is simply the wrong forum for this type of discussion.

My two cents (or rather pennies),

Cheers, Dan.

06-08-2011, 04:06 AM	#26
ADan overall swell guy Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Scotland Posts: 111	I honestly think that the OP has no valid argument at all. He/she's merely fighting a straw man coming from a false premise: He/she insinuates that a) there are several games which deal with politically/socially/evolutionary relevant content b) these games are forced upon the consumer to play and c) these occurrences would somehow lead to a situation where all AGs are of this very type. Answers: a) I don't see an abundance of games of that type and I'm with several other posters on this thread that say "it's just a valid scenario in a Science Fiction story". You'd have to dismiss all (good) Science Fiction Literature (and subsequently movies) as propagandistic if you call the onset of ANB (which obviously is the one game the OP's talking about) an attempt at brainwashing. All SF-Literature (as opposed to Space Opera) deals with present day situations that are extrapolated into a future (as near as tomorrow and as distant as hundreds of billions of years) and a resulting scenario that highlights the responsibility of humankind in respect to decisions that are made in the present. The OP is also mentioning movies. He/she seems to prefer that some "certain films" (no further explanations or examples) were not made. Why? I'd submit that the creative realm is infinite and there's room for each and every genre to compete for an audience which brings us to b) If you don't like a certain genre of games/books/movies/plays/etc. it's fairly easy: Do not expose yourself to them. Don't judge others who do. Nobody's forcing anyone to watch "artsy" European Films, nobody can make you read sophisticated hardcore SF (or SciFi), no one is dragging you to the theater to endure yet another modern interpretation of Shakespeare's "The Tempest". c) As I said before: The creative realm is infinite. It's not that the occurrence of one game that has a more political/social/scientific - one could say more relevant - base scenario will somehow lead to an "infection" of a whole industry and all developers will fall like dominoes and start producing only and exclusively this type of game. (Mind you, I explicitly laud Daedalic for going this rather risky and atypical path by choosing this approach and I do not see that there's any propaganda involved. It's just a SF-scenario that is very similar to the one in the movie "Twelve Monkeys" at the beginning. I'd also like to see more of this type of game). When it comes down to it, the consumer decides which games will be made in the future and I doubt that there really is a mass market for games that are perceived as propagandistic by a majority of prospective buyers (which I don't think is even the case with ANB). It would seem the OP doesn't believe that climate change is happening and that is merely the point he/she was trying to make. Nothing more. I would think this is simply the wrong forum for this type of discussion. My two cents (or rather pennies), Cheers, Dan.