Digital Culture and the World
I feel that digital Culture is a double edged sword , especially for artists.
While it opens up venues for project and historical research in ways that connect related information via sub categorization and key wording that was unimaginable one a few decades ago, is can also overwhelm us in a deluge of unrelated or unwanted information that must be sifted through to find the wheat among the chaff.
The upside is we can within any give search find very personal and first hand accounts of an historical experience, through blogs, amateur videos, tweets, scanned journal pages, etc. the down side of this is we also have to fine tune our research to cut through the daily noise that is generated by a digital culture.
As artists we also have the added challenge of learning to use and apply the development of new technologies to not only our research but also our works of art as Lovejoy points out in “:ABC” and how that technology can influence the work rather than the work influencing the technologies and changing to meet our needs. Sometimes, as with Adobe products, one or both can happen in one update of a particular product.
I was also intrigued by the idea of the screen as a modern source of meditation and would like to discuss this further in class.
The screen as a meditation device is actually a thought that occurs to me whenever I’m having problems with my computer or internet connection. There’s an xkcd webcomic with a character describing computers in a very vague fashion. He states that he stares at his box of blinking lights and images all day, and then proceeds to get angry and exclaim that “today the pattern of lights is all wrong!” as his computer crashes. The screen is little more than a portal to other people’s thoughts and a device we use to consider their thoughts in relation to our own. Alternately, there’s an infinite amount of cat photos and porn.
In Lovejoy’s writing she describes the speed of progression through new technologies and art as an idea that, “while new technologies directly extend the possibilities for representation and tend to create new art forms, it is their influence, their palpable intrusion into every phase of cultural life, which releases a new dynamic whose force and direction is almost impossible to predict.” It feels like a constant scale being weighed. Is this better or worse for our world? Or does it “simply” require a new form of thought and or lifestyle. How do we hold onto the old and welcome the new with equal respect and examination.
Lovejoy goes on to comment that, “We now lack a convincing vision. Without a linear structure of historical process to build on, many are pessimistic. Utopian dreams are viewed cautiously today.” This made me think about the discussion we had on the first day of class as to what is the definition of history? We “concluded” that history is not simply linear and much can be left out. I agree with this statement, however I find it necessary to note how difficult thinking non linear can be when it comes to note taking. How do we describe in our language accurately the accounts we’ve witnessed the inventions one’s made and keep track of the continuous plunge forward. Who’s responsibility is it to focus on what? If freedom is found in America, who’s freedom is being used to document us in contemporary times?
I really didn’t enjoy this weeks readings. I found Lovejoys and Andersons readings not very interesting; Andersons in particular, I found to be far too heavy in examples to explain his points. Whilst I understand it is essential to include examples in your writing, I found myself just drowning in examples, and struggling to find his main points within his writing. What really bothered me in the reading titled ‘A History of Popular Culture: More of Everything, Faster and Brighter’ was how one sided the information provided was. It was entirely focused on the negative aspects of technology (mostly the waste, and by-products), there are absolutely no mentions of any of the positives of technologies. Technologies allow us to save lives (is this not worth SO much in its own right? To me, a human life, and a pain-free life, can be valued above anything in the world), become more efficient in energy usage, e.g. energy saving lightbulbs. I understand that my examples given here are perhaps not the best to demonstrate my point, but I hope it makes people understand how one sided the authors argument was; there are both negatives and positives to technology development, and I think it is important that we consider all sides of the argument, to ensure educated decisions are made regarding our environment.
I also found this negativity brought up in Lovejoys reading, although I found this reading more balanced overall. She states: “Because new tools are ever more complex … their use is no longer associated also with their inherent possibilities for good or evil, as is the use of all technology. There is no such thing as neutral technology.” pg 263. I find often problems in society are blamed on new technologies (for example, nearly all social problems amongst young people these days are blamed on technology in some way), which I find really disheartening. We can use technology to our advantage, to extend lives, to reduce pain, for enjoyment, etc., but at the end of the day we must all do it responsibly. I feel it is often the fact that a lot of new technologies are not fully understood (as not long term studies can be conducted on them, as the rate of turn over is so high) that finds them at the centre of the blame for many social problems. I understand that there, of course will be problems with technology, and its by-products, but think that there is often too much stigma attached to new technologies; I would be interested to know if there was stigma attached to invention of the television. I know that many current medical practices underwent a lot of scrutiny when they were first practiced (for example, IVF), but for now it seems as if they are long forgotten as ‘problems’.
A few teachers that have inspired me are a few that expected the most out of me. They set the bar high as if to say I could reach it, and even if I couldn’t they would push me to realize my potential and their having that expectation for me displayed their faith in my abilities and increased my faith in theirs. Two teachers who come to mind are Dr. Metz from this university and Dr. Kapur, also from this university. Dr. Metz gives lengthy exams and also substantial amounts of reading that seem to loom over your head in the thought of the impossible accomplishment, but this requirement pushes you to learn, which is what you’re supposed to be doing in school. As a teacher you have to have the right balance of discipline and understanding. You have to know when to take away points and when to give them back. Not everything’s black and white, so as a teacher one has to do the best they can to respect their students capabilities and their situations, while also remaining just to all. Dr. Kapur taught me that if at first you don’t succeed, try, try, try, try, and try till you produce something that was better than what you originally intended. I had to rewrite a paper that I failed in her class, which her T.A. graded, until finally I ended up with a revision that helped me achieve an award for that paper awarded from our cinema department. It was such an honor to receive the reward of knowing that even when it looks like one can’t accomplish what someone else has, within themselves there is the potential to create something beautiful with devotion, guidance, and discipline. For my classroom, I hope to have inherited wisdom of discretion and a continuing development of wisdom for how to diagnose where each of my students is at, coming from, and how to get them to where they are going. I never want to not believe in my students, because despite what they show in class, there is something special each individual has to offer each other individual in some way, shape, or form.
Lovejoy’s article caused me to consider the implications of living in this digital culture age and the implications of existing in such a world. It is certainly true that more people than ever have access to the digital form of art creation and that can mean several things. On the one hand, a much wider portion of the population has access to a massive collection of knowledge including information as well as artistic archives, however my fear is that this accessibility of knowledge renders the public complacent to the awesomeness such access should connote.
The same principle can apply to the accessibility and potential creation of media art. A vast portion of students from elementary school to all levels create media art through instagram and snapchat at a huge rate, but does the ease with which these creations are generated devalue the work? Does it engender in this generation an apathy as to the very great significance art creation?
The response to this age has drawbacks as well as obvious benefits and navigating this new art world will be the course all thinking artists and scholars will have to sojourn carefully.
Ease of creation may not directly devalue more time-consuming work, but it does make it more difficult to distinguish. Real journalists have YouTube channels, and those channels may receive more advertising and exposure, but they’re still just a needle in the haystack among millions of other channels with less carefully crafted content. I don’t think the current digital culture devalues anyone’s work, but it certainly adds new obstacles to marketing yourself.
Sense I forgot to discuss the movie last week I am going to do that right now. Cowboy Bebop: The Movie is outright fucking spectacular. One of the things that interested me was that it captures a sense or reality in away Disney films haven’t. While the constant motion going on Disney build life, in CB:M it is the cinematography. Its use of focus to do things like blur the background as a character walks, as well as bring something into focus, captures the illusion of an apparatus filming something. This gives it a sense of reality because it presents the idea that their is something to be filmed. This same feeling is given during the credits where we have the black and white film being played. I also like it because in an era after 9/11, it reminds one terrorism exists outside of the United State. This not to criticize the existing trauma of 9/11, just to state that is is interesting to explore the issue of terrorism from another nations perspective. The technology released in the air reminds one of the Sargi gas attack on the subway in Japan. Again, the epic sic-fi setting reminds one of Japan’s love for technology as an opportunity, but also there knowledge of its destructive capabilities. Biological terrorism and the destructive technology of war are wrapped in one.
Mark Wolf talks about the lack of scholarly study for the video gaming phenomena. I had never thought about the space of the screen in this way before. Thinking about the cinema space brings me out of the fantasy world and into this sort of studio space. The different aspects of video game space is interesting, all within a specific algorithm and design. The parameters which hold these worlds together are rapidly expanding as we know it.
Included within these spaces is also story and narrative. For one, take grand theft auto 3 for example. Not only in the space contained in a map form, but the player is free to navigate and explore this space in it’s entirety. Once the game is completed, in this case all the missions are fulfilled, the player is still allowed to navigate this space as much as they want. Furthermore the player can really do whatever they choose. Let it be drive around stealing cars or running from the police.
The Last Of Us is another game which challenges this idea of space. The story is told as the game takes place. Meaning, there is really no identification of cut scenes. They player is free to interact with the game as the cut scenes take place. It is a rather stunning game if you haven’t had the pleasure. South Park The Stick of Truth is also another fine example. The player is not only given access to the entire town or map the show takes place in but this world is filled with artifacts like songs and characters from the shows entire history catalog. If that wasn’t enough, the graphics of the space also blur the line between cut scene and full play. Most of the time the cut scenes happen in play. Further more the game responds to the player when time is a factor. All that’s left is a hologram world where controllers are obsolete like the Holodeck from Star Trek for instance.
Where to begin discussing this article by Wolf…Hmm
Well my first impression was that it was written by someone who had never in fact played a video game. She seems vaguely familiar with gaming and referenced such crappy consoles such as the Atari Jaguar and the Virtual Boy.
Also, I am not sure when this article was written but by the 2nd paragraph or so I could tell how dated it was. Text games were being discussed and while they are pretty much non-existent these days text still plays a vital role in games. Many RPGs use text either for fleshing out a story or providing clues to puzzles and treasures.
This article is just another example of academic trying to ruin something I enjoy. In this case video games. At one point early games are being compared to the films of Melies and I just rolled my eyes. Outside of this article I am confident no one has ever made this connection or cared about the connection for that matter. No one has ever said “Gosh, I love Centipede not so much for the gameplay but because it resembles the early style of film makers.”
Also, I don’t think it makes much sense to build your argument on something no one has ever heard of or had no influence on the industry because it’s existence was completely inconsequential. Specifically I am referring to the in depth analysis of the Spy Vs Spy computer game.
Schleiner’s article was a little more interesting but I still took umbrage over a couple of points.
The author seemed shocked at this: None of the players who responded to my survey were willing to admit to a cross-dressing relationship w/ Lara. My theory? Maybe they didn’t have one! I imagine the author was shocked to find out people played the game for reasons besides Lara having colossal hooters.
I did like the defense of Lara Croft as a role model though. Sure she doesn’t represent a realistic female but I’m sure out of 7 billion people on earth there are a handful of women who are brilliant and successful who do look like that.
Man, what a horrible downward spiral we are caught in, huh?
Mark Wolf’s article talked about video games’ “spaces,” or what is represented inside (“on-screen”) and or outside (“off-screen”) the visual field’s borders compared to spaces present in cinema and their significances/effects/examples etc. But he maintained a constant subtopic about the continuing evolution of the immersive abilities and replication of realism in games. Back in 1997. 17 years ago! Do you think he could’ve imagined what video games would be capable of now? I think he could, he seemed like a smart cookie. But back when “Doom” was his go-to example of realism and awesome bounds forward, I wouldn’t be surprised if he was surprised at how far video games have come. He might even be a little scared.
So I read that one and I was like “Cool! Humans rock! We are digital gods!” but then I read just the first line of Anne-Marie Schleiner’s article, “Post-industrial capitalist economies are developing into cultures of “play,” in which pervasive “play ethic” is superseding the work ethic.” Wait, what happened to the objective attitude that let me admire the awesome advances we were making in technology?? I could hear the negative tone in her voice when I read “This person is often called a “gamer.”” But she does have a point. In addition to the ubiquitous and time/life-consuming presence of video games in our society, it’s also hard to ignore their male-oriented nature. Even with the emergence of the “casual gamer” (not said distastefully, as I am one) and often aimed at girls and women who do not play as much as the fat, acne-riddled hardcore gamer boys in their lives, most games aimed at them include ones that involve taking care of pets, dressing up characters or cooking, rather than partaking in violent “boy games.” Even Tomb Raider, an extremely popular game amongst all walks with a female protagonist, was criticized heavily in this article. Yes, her proportions weren’t realistic, and yes, she is often viewed shallowly as a video game sex symbol. But I really hope Ms. Schleiner has played the 2013 Tomb Raider reboot, it might ease her mind a little (here’s where I tie together video game evolution and female representation together, in case you didn’t notice).
Why didn’t they just make a sequel? Maybe the developers thought Lara’s image needed a restart too. So they scrapped her old design completely and made her a very realistically proportioned, fit young girl. She has had significant breast-reduction surgery, and even put on a few pounds. Lara’s physique is not the only realistic update in the game, the environments, physics and cinematic cut scenes now more than ever blur the line between films and video games, and seamlessly blend the lines separating the on and off-screen worlds of the game. In other games where you might go to a separate screen to save the game, in Tomb Raider Lara builds a campfire to rest at, at which point a menu pops up from the fire allowing you to save, upgrade your weapons, etc. This feature, while simple, blurs those on/off-screen lines innately and effectively. Along with this strong, un-sexualized protagonist for all genders, maybe this downward spiral isn’t so horrible. Maybe Lara Croft can pull us out of that tomb.
1) First off, I really liked the lectures. It is interesting to see how adult animation has progressed over he years and through out the nations. In a way, wile Fritz the Cat was much more extreme, it feels like some grad return to pre-hayes code Betty Boop in that not only is sex explicit, but it is returning to the animal state (what with Betty Boop having been a poodle). Not sure that there is meaning there, but I can’t shake the feeling. This takes one of are earlier readings that said Disney animators were more allowed to show sexuality through animals to whole new extreme. And while I understand Fritz is supposed to be a commentary on racism (granted, from what I have heard it is problematic in its own right), it does utilize the radicalized black crows like in Dumbo. Then we move onto animation from other nations such as Persepolis and Waltz with Bashir, which use the medium both for its expressive purposes as well as to document reality. While I love both equally, this is particularly interesting for WWB being the protagonist is trying to decipher reality when what he remembers is a fabrication. 2) The video game lecture was pretty sweet too. It was really weird to hear Milton Bradley had made the first hand held game console (it was Milton Bradley right?). 3).Feminist Frequency was pretty dead on. I had seen Feminist Frequency a while ago, and remembered really liking it, but forgot just how repetitive some of the narrative damsel tropes are. They also got progressively more disturbing, going from trophy, to girl in refrigerator, to justified murder or assault of said damsel. Not to mention sexualized body shots while they are being held against there will or tortured. 4) Wolf delved into the various spatial differences in myriad video games and movies, as well as similarities. I remember once when seeing an alien disappearing in a Meiles film, that it did feel like something out of a video game. However, I never thought to compare video games to D.W. Griffith. The idea of each edge of a frame representing another frame to enter also applies to games like the early Resident Evil games, the original Legend of Zelda, and probably a ton of others I am not thinking of at the moment. I also started thinking more about how video games compare to other mediums. In some ways, initially, they feel more similar to comics and literature, in that you control the space. A movie or show progresses on its own without the say of the viewer. With video games, like comics and novels, when can move at are own pace, even backtrack. That being said they all have a sense of personal navigation film and TV shows do not This thought however becomes complicated when 1) The ages of VHS, DVD, Blu Ray, and the internet trump this by allowing us to rewind, pause, fast forward, take a break, binge watch, etc. This give the viewer controlled navigation. 2) Video games vary on the freedom they grant. Fallout 3 gives us an open world, while Super Mario Bros. keeps us on a linear path and places time constraints on us. While you can still move around, by the same principal, the viewers eyes have time to navigate a shot in the scene (granted, while any who can be visually navigated through, It can limit us to a visual that is important to the film, and something like Soviet Montage controls spatial movement for us). 4) Schleiner did an excellent job of looking at Lara Croft as a representation of women from multiple stand points. She is pretty clearly sexually objectified, and patches such as Nude Raider further reflect this. But at the same time, she is a good role model in that she is a capable female character that display athletic talent (combat) and intelligence (career and puzzle solving). I see the point about her allowing male gamer to perform outside there gender, though I feel sexual objectification heavily undermines this. Also while I agree and loved that they point out media can be safe place for us to explore outside are norms, as was pointed out in Feminist Frequency, media is not made in a vacuum. The very need of media for this exploration implies that the world outside can be less forgiving. I saw a documentary on Bronies, and man car with MLP merchandise on it was defaced, and he was threatened, not to mention the kids that are bullied over it in the news. This is not to discourage people from exploring outside gender noms by any means, I am completely for it, and think it can be a rewarding experience for other people as well as one of the keys to a more open, diverse, and understanding world. I say this merely build upon the less kind world outside the article touches upon.
You know i was very happy this week to learn a little more about the history of gaming and the work put into them. I fancy myself a gamer and the first system that I was able to play games on was the computer. So the article by Mark Wolf was very intriguing to me as i saw it as a lesson in how old gaming systems worked. The part in the article at the beginning where he talks about how pinball machines influenced the aesthetic look of gaming systems. In the beginning the systems were limited by the technology at the time, such as pixels and vector lines. The article goes on to state how whole narrative worlds had to be fit into this space for people to play. Video games had to take their spatial structure lessons from film, which would go on to influence games more, and learn how to control the screen for what the player had to see. The first use of space were text-based games, where everything you did was typed into the computer and the program would give you an outcome. The first time I played one of these games was not actually when I was a child but as a teen on the internet. It was a text based game for Oregon Trail that would give you situations and you would type out your answers. Needless to say most of my party died as they tend to do in Oregon Trail games. I liked the article for its knowledge of space within a video game and what it means to the player.
I don’t know what to really think about the Schleiner article. On the one hand I think that it makes an interesting point about Lara Croft becoming a female Frankenstein for the enjoyment and pleasure of young boys. But another part of me thinks of it as a bunch of psychological bull that the author makes to try and get an article published. I think it tries way to hard as to why people thought it was cool to play as Lara Croft and go on an adventure. You know the kinds that we totally can have in the Midwest of the United States. I mean if the author knows what video games are now, just what would they have to say about games as a whole now?
The animation that we learned about this week in class for adults is rather nice. I am a big fan of Persepolis, that was an animated film that i first saw that talked about something adult. Not in a crude humor way like most adult cartoons do, but discussing the issue of the Iranian revolution and the effects it had on its own people. Seeing this story through the eyes of a woman is even more engaging as we see her life become somewhat repressed. After class, later on in the week I watched Waltz with Bazir. I must say that the movie is very strong in its tone and view on the Lebanon War, which was one I knew very little of. I can see why it was nominated for an Academy Award. Also if anyone has any suggestions for me to watch an adult animated movie, please share!
It would have been nice to see the results of that old survey at the end of Schleiner’s article. I remember playing Tomb-Raider on Playstation and Sega Saturn many years ago. My sister owned the game and my brother and I made the joke that she only liked the game because it was a woman kicking ass. He and I only played it because we were brats and thought we were the ultimate gamers so we just wanted to make sure we beat any high score she had in any game. I don’t remember exactly hoe I felt controlling the character, but I do know that her movements were extreme. I didn’t quite get a super hero feel for the character, but more of a character who was just more athletic, stronger, and faster than most humans. This gave a feeling that a female could beat up or out perform a male. As a he/man young boy I chose to dislike the character and give my sister a hard time about it. Suppose I felt threatened by the female whether it was just a fictional character or not. The minor impact it had on me tells me the major impact the gaming, television, and film world had on me. It wasn’t right that she was rough and tough to me. Even with games I truly enjoyed that involved females, I wrote them off as lesser. Mortal Kombat had Sonya Blade, Kitana, Jade, and Mileena in the early games and movies. In the movies they all relied on the males to fight the big battles, unless it was woman on woman. The game however gave you a equal chance with any character to beat the game. The boss at the top of the towers, of course was a male.
Wolf’s article was rather lengthy for its context. The information was interesting at points however. Spacing and world map is what brought gaming to a whole new experience for me. My first system was the Nintendo with 2-D horizontal games like Mario and Contra. I then had the Super Nintendo and Sega which was the same with better graphics. An occasional football game or helicopter game that moved vertically and horizontally with an arial view. Where gaming really boomed for me is when game maps seemed endless. I got a Playstation and my sister got a N64 and two of the first games we received had open explore mapping. Donkey Kong 64 and Road Rash had maps that you explored and could venture off to areas that didn’t advance the game. The freedom of going to spaces in the game just because I chose to was mind blowing to me. To read some of the layer, text, spacing, and screen advancement was pretty interesting.
It’s really funny to read articles that were written 15-20 years ago about video gaming, graphics, computer animation, etc. Not in a hipster way that is laughing about how dumb they are just because the technology wasn’t as advanced as it is now, I just think it’s funny because of how much has changed since then. Talking about DOOM having 3-D graphics that change perspective in real time, when now we look at something like that and almost can’t believe it was legitimate at one point. Should this undermine the points they’re making in articles like these? No, not at all, just hard to read it as a timeless piece when it is dated so badly by default.
The Lara Croft article I found to be annoying though. Well, the parts about the male gaze and wanting to sexualize Lara Croft. I agree that doing that was part of my childhood, I was 9 when the game came out and I was curious about the feminine physique but it never became an obsession or thing that I was worried about. I actually played the games because I liked the puzzles and open environment. The controls were terrible and I don’t think I ever finished one of the games but whatever. I also remember looking up the code to make Lara Croft be naked. I was very interested in that idea. I think that it was less about the pornographic nature though and more about finding a hack and seeing something “inappropriate” in an otherwise safe game. This game wasn’t monitored by my parents because it was a harmless game for the most part but if I could unlock nudity then it was taboo. It was more a ghost story and I wanted to see if it was true.
I never did figure out how to get her clothes off and I didn’t really care, we had the interenet so if I had been interested in seeing nudity, that was at my fingertips but hunting for the codes became an easter egg hunt. Thrill of finding something unexpected.
I really liked the part when Wolf is going through all the types of screen space used by video games. I’d never really thought about how many different types there are and the ways that each one functions. I grew up a video game nerd and have since gotten out of it but I have played a game from every type and style that is described and never put much thought into what it means to have a wraparound screen or a single frame or even the idea of “off camera” and the way that the Spy Vs. Spy game works (which sucks really bad by the way). It felt infantile in that he was explaining the most simple concept I nthe world to me but I’d just never thought to think about it.
I really enjoyed both of these readings for the most part, just thought the feminism and Lara Croft stuff was a bit bizarre. I do like the idea of examining having a heterosexual male play as a strong female character but when she is sexualized it undercuts it a bit but there is definitely still a newness to that idea. 50 years ago unless a man dressed as a woman, he wasn’t going to ever have any feeling of being feminine. At this point, we can play video games and get something similar. With games like Perfect Dark, some Resident Evil games, Tomb Raider, fighting games, like Soul Calibur, Mortal Combat, there are strong females in each one and many other games. Of course, Resident Evil seems to be the only series that didn’t sexualize its leading lady although there were unlockable outfits that showed more skin and yes, my 8th grade self was excited to put them on her.
The Schleiner article was probably one of the most interesting I’ve read all semester. I always enjoy discussing the oddities of gender in video games and there were a few points raised in this article that I hadn’t come across previously. Specifically, the portion that discusses Sherry Turkle’s postulation that playing a video game as the opposite gender is some sort of an experiment with self-perception. It never really occurred to me before, but playing a game as the opposite gender does provide a different experience for me. Personally, my favorite games are open-world adventures such as Oblivion and Fallout 3, and these games offer the option to play as male or female, but your character’s gender and appearance are entirely irrelevant to the plot. Rarely having to reference yourself and just constantly experiencing the environment adds a level of immersion to the game not found in video games with preset characters and linear plotlines.
Getting back on topic, the game I’ve probably spent the most time playing as a female character is a GameCube version of Harvest Moon. Upon starting my first game, I misclicked and selected that my character would be female. Ordinarily, given the option, I select male because I’m male and it just makes sense. I mean, I barely understand women in reality, why would I want to try to inhabit one in virtual reality? So I just decided to roll with it and ended up playing a few hundred hours of this game as a girl character. My estate grew to be massive, my wealth and livestock were unmatched, and I began to see myself as the unstoppable empress of my tiny seaside village. Every time I’d sell a prize winning horse for a massive profit I would declare to myself “I am woman, hear me roar!” I may have totally missed the point of gender experimentation, but for me it was just another aspect of the game that was different from reality. And that’s why we play games, right? To experience a different reality. So, the more different, the better I suppose.
Addressing the issue of the more common stereotypical representations of women in video games, I think it’s a bit pointless to try and have any conversation on the topic without first addressing the Occam’s Razor wielding elephant in the room: it started as an industry made by men, for men. And not just “men”, lonely nerds. Let’s be honest, a huge portion of the video game market is still made up by sexually repressed man-children. Slapping a huge pair of tits on a hypersexualized protagonist is a great way to earn money. It’s by no means the only way to earn money, and I’m not endorsing it, I’m just saying it has worked and continues to work. Put females in your video games, don’t make them damsels in distress, but don’t make them hypermasculine. Then you’re just sort of left with ordinary people doing ordinary things, and while it’s not impossible to move that product, it’s not as common and therefore more difficult. Personally, I’ve been playing nothing but Pokemon, Fallout, and MineCraft for the past few years and your character couldn’t be any less relevant in those games. I’m totally fine with the video game industry because I don’t play the games being scrutinized as heavily, but if people are upset with the way things are being run, then maybe they should start making their own politically correct video games instead of waiting for someone else to do it first. I’m interested in the issue, but not really effected enough to subscribe to any newsletters.
Is this where the week 15 discussions go? I don’t see any other comments for this class.
You must be logged in to post a comment.