Stage Clear: The Movie XIII
Submitted by Perrin on Thu, 14/05/2009 - 15:55
This podcast was recorded in London, edited on a plane over mainland Europe and then (eventually) uploaded from a hotel room in Athens. Sadly all these international shenanigans haven't improved the quality at all.
This week we talk about film adaptations, specifically The Bourne Conspiracy, Wanted: Weapons of Fate, Godfather II, Riddick: Assault on Dark Athens and Wolverine Origins. There's a lot more but we've got a pool on the roof of the hotel so I'm not hanging around here to satisfy you guys.
Enhanced iTunes M4A version (27.0MB)
Normal MP3 Version (24.8MB)
Reader's Question: "What is the ideal game length for you? At what point is too short or too long?"
- Login to post comments
I'll assume this isnt
I'll assume this isnt counting multiplayer games and their ilk, as theres probably a limit on there set only by how much a a quitter you are.
I say that knowing all to well how much a fucking quitter I am.
RPGs should be shorter though. Streamline these fuckers a little would you people! I'm refering more to the story content as opposed to the grinding and actual gameplay inbetween. I'm sure you can have five hours worth of story telling spread across your gaming world and get all that extra guff out of the way.
Cutting out any angst would reduce game drag quite a bit, which is ideal for me as i have the patience of a five yearold and the gaming temprement of a lazy hobo. I wanna know if the butler did it, thats all!
A game I love severely and would play again and again is the platformer Jak 3, which I completed in one day of renting it. but I was more than happy to trundle back through previous levels and such, so the brevity of the game didnt compromise any fun whatsoever.
Although I'm biased with the jak games as they are silly, brightly coloured and like a saturday morning cartoon which shuts me up instantly.
So in general I'd say 1 days of gaming should be a fairly decent time frame for a game to aim at being entertaining.
Ideal game length? For myself
Ideal game length? For myself it would probably somewhere in and around the 10-16 hours bracket. But that is due to leisurely play more than aught else.
I can enjoy 50+ hour games such as Final Fantasy or Fallout 3, and I can be completely enthralled with 5-6 hour games such as ICO or MadWorld. Yet I have no real preconceptions as to how long a game has to be before I shall refuse to pay full price for it.
I know many refused to pay full price for MadWorld on principle(which apparently gamers have,) but if the experience is thoroughly entertaining: why is time such a big issue? Games were not parking meters, last time I checked.
As most of these comments are
As most of these comments are long I'm just going to say if I'm interested enough I'll pay full price and do my best to enjoy the time I spend in it no matter how long or short it is. PS: 2 of my many favourite games are Gun & Oblivion which shows I don't care about time much (I'll try and be more happy next time).
Length - FPS around the ten
Length -
FPS around the ten hour mark, anymore I get bored. In fact, not just FPS but pretty much all genre's that aren't RPGs. Saying that I did sink about 30 hours over the past few weeks into Mario Galaxy. Still can't get that last fucking star.
RPG's I feel cheated if I don't get at least 30 hours, Bethesda games I'd be pissed if I didn't get at least 100 hours out of.
I did sink 2.5k hours into WoW tho, and I sold my account a year after release, which was like, 5 years ago? And I probably sunk even more into Ultima Online before that.
Rape -
This Rapelay game 'controversy' has been going on for YEARS. Amazon, removing it from their listing and was reported widely about 6 months back. Yes, Japan loves their tentacle rape, and general subjugation of woman. I quite like my Bible Black and Milky productions tho and they can be pretty damn close to the edge sometimes so I probably shouldn't comment lol
Mentz
Utterly unconnected with
Utterly unconnected with anything, did anyone else feel like that last bottle of wine they had made watching Eurovision a little bit like playing Rez™?
In my mind I was shooting all the sparkles on that fat lady's dress and swooping in and out of that revolving cage thing.
SWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!
A perfect example of what I mean: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YeWxsRUJ7Y
Whenever the big screens descended it felt like a boss stage. That green one out of Blockbusters.
Every so often I would say "Area1Area2Area3Area2Area1- duh duh duh" in my head, like when you choose a level. It was brilliant.
Unfortunately the system tried to shut down, trapping me inside it, so I had to watch the whole thing.
I think it would be
I think it would be interesting to look at what Riddick did right and Halo did wrong when it comes to "re-using the same scenery", as this was one of the supposed major detractions from the original Halo.
I haven't played the new Riddick yet, but don't remember the old game much.
I'm assuming that the same area plays SIGNIFICANTLY differently with each time you go through it? Adventure, fist-fight, guard-fight, and a riot "cutscene"? That's very interesting... Whereas Halo mixed things up by having different enemies, and a different colour scheme between uses of the same environment, but you were still just "shootin' the dudes till they fall down" each time.
You've kind of already
You've kind of already covered all the discussion there is to be had. Yeah in Riddick the area was an adeventure, then a background cutscene and then a combat area and the last time it was all just emergency light giving new context to the same area. Where as making me fight again in the same areas in the first Halo felt cheap.
If you're going to re-use content you really need to come up with a new idea for that area, not just a variant on the same thing you've already done there. Or it's all still Pacman.
Game length? 12 hours can be
Game length? 12 hours can be a tipping point.
Look what I've done. Thank you for your response, Rob, and I owe you a better post than my first one.
To sum it up: Once again I apologise for incoherent nonsense; I'm not offended by your slagging, but I saw a bit of red with the serious part of the discussion.
I didn't think for a second that you tried to equate rape to homosexuality, it was just one of those unfortunate examples that could have been taken the wrong way. You're right to use it, in a way, because homosexuality is inexcusable from some perspectives. The difference in this instance being that rape would be universally inexcusable (except for racists, and some members of the BNP if rumours are true). Your intentions were pure though, there was just some room for misinterpretation.
I'm well aware that all the American bashing is in good spirit (I produced an awful web animation in '99 called "Why I fucking hate Americans, Parts 1, 2 & 3). I don't have a problem with anybody making jokes about anything, it was the matter you were being serious about that ignited me, and the jokes were just collateral damage. My point about Japan+rape didn't go anywhere, as you pointed out, I think that was just frustration on my part at this culture as a whole.
Nationality comes into it because the biggest gripe you both seemed to have was that this was an international matter. I don't think that's relevant. For a start, I can only make an educated guess the women's group is not part of the US governement, and they're approaching it as a human rights issue. The will have bigger fish to fry, but if someone brings that game to their attention, I'd say they don't have a choice but to kick up a stink. Your example about the civil partinerships jumps to conclusions - of course I'd be annoyed with the protestors, but not because they're from a different country. If I wanted to be pedantic, I'd point out that US and Japan have both joined the United Nations and as such have an interest in each other's progress. I feel that's another digression that can easily be shat on, though.
That's all by the by - you guys have always been spot on with your rants and BotW and other things, but with this one, you repeatedly decided not to discuss the morality of rape game, which I'll admit is a grey area, and instead tore a new arsehole to a group who wanted to ban a rape game, who I feel I can relate to a little more, whether we agree with them or not.
Look at it this way, it took you 13 episodes to piss me off. It's okay though, we can get through this. I gave you 5 stars on iTunes, I hope that goes a small way in building a bridge.
Assault on Dark Athens? lol!
Assault on Dark Athens? lol! I am quite enjoying the two Riddick games as I missed Butcher Bay when it first was released! I do agree with you that games that evolve the stories instead of just taking movie locations and fleshing them out into an 'instant replay' of the scene for the game.
Taking two months off to improve the podcast is a great idea, not doing any podcasts is pretty much the only way to improve this nonsense! HAHA! You just want 8 weeks to waste on EVE!
This weeks question, for me there are no ideal lengths, as long as it's not over in 5 minutes at a cost of £40 or out stays its welcome by being tediously drawn out, it doesn't matter so much to me. I find games good value for money if they are entertaining, whatever the length. 30 minutes of fun here and there on Streetfighter 4, a day spent playing and completing Call of Duty 5 or 50+ hours on Fallout 3, it's different for nearly every game I play. Games like Call of Duty 4 had me playing nearly every night of the week for about 8 months, where as Condemned kept me happy for a week until completion. Yadda yadda yadda, in conclusion: As long as I am having fun and it lasts long enough to feel worth the money, it's all good.
"What is the ideal length for
"What is the ideal length for you? At what point is too short or too long?"
No less than five inches and no more than seven.
Yes. A Cock joke.
Your fault.
I wanted to bring up Fight
I wanted to bring up Fight Club as an adaption discussion, but I haven't played it. It's different to many of the games you brought up because those were action films being made into action games. I'm trying to think of examples where games are made that completely miss the point - Fight Club was a movie about many things, such as materialism and male identity, but then the game blunders into the room and shouts "MEN FIGHTING". The Godfather games come into this a bit too.
What send me rushing to my keyboard was your Bollocks of the Week. I have a few issues with this section.
I'll not bring up the slight irony of Brits/Irish whinging about Americans whinging about Japanese, but that's dismissable. I'm even tempted to let you both away with the typical "Oh ho ho, those japs and their silly raping", since this is a fairly common view.
So, the story is that some Americans opposed the release of a rape simulator game. Apparently doing such a thing "raises much more horrible implications" than the twisted games that are being made.
Rob then does a great job by creating an example where he aligns homosexuality with rape. Let's forgive him that too, I'm sure he didn't realise what he was doing.
Since there was a bunch of generic insults against America, I assume this is the typical anti-American sentiment, which is fine because we all enjoy that, but at the same time I've had to put up with years of worship of glorious Nippon that sticks in my throat. You'll find plenty of flaws in the concept of Japanese society, and you criticise the fact that americans have guns (a scary yet arguable concept) but you don't have any desire to blame all of Japan for their rape games (which I don't think hold any worth, or enough positive aspects to counteract their negative ones).
I always think your BotW is well measured, I just think you misfired a bit here. Some women are opposed to rape as entertainment, not a shocker.
I love your podcast and I like you guys. I'm not storming off here, I just wanted to say my piece. Looking forward to abuse in the reader's comments section.
B
Hmm - this deserves a little
Hmm - this deserves a little more defence than simply accusing you of being dropped on your head as a child in the next podcast, or whatever happens to spring out of my mouth at the time.
Firstly, I think that it's fairly clear where we're being facetious and where we're not here. We're keenly aware of the whole Japanese rape-fantasy stereotype, and I don't see how it's unfair to take the piss out of that. You don't dwell on this point so I won't either, but I'm really not sure what the actual objection is.
Secondly, I genuinely resent the implication that I in any way equated homosexuality with rape. I used civil partnerships as an example of a moral position which Britain holds which is contrary to that of America (and many other countries). There are other valid comparisons; civil partnerships and gay rights happen to be a lot closer to my own heart, so I picked that example off the top of my head.
Bear in mind that we're not actually talking about rape. We're talking about a fictional depiction of rape, created by adults and sold to adults. You can have a moral stance on that, and speaking for myself, I think it's repugnant - although less fundamentally repugnant than censorship which prevented its existence would be. The fact remains, however, that it's a case of a transaction between consenting adults, which the laws and morality of that country allow, and in that much it's not a dissimilar situation to that with civil partnerships.
I think you're also firing a little blind by accusing us of anti-Americanism and rampant hail-Japan fanboyism. I dislike "moral crusader" busybodies of all stripes, although certainly it sticks in the craw a little more when it's coming from a nation which is so morally confused and internally hypocritical. Frankly, I even get deeply uncomfortable with the breed of British moral crusader presently trying to stick their nose into America's internal debate over gay marriage. I know where I stand; I also know that, except insofar as it affects the lives of my friends, it isn't my business.
As for Japan, well... We could have a long discussion on that front. Suffice it to say that I'm far from being a defender of the nation or its society in most regards. My first long-term partner was Japanese, and through him and through the experiences of other friends (mostly female), I've seen Japan's nasty underbelly. What I am a defender of, however, is freedom of expression - even expression which I personally find distasteful or disagree with. We could have the debate over guns, but at the end of the day, guns are tools for killing people. Games, no matter how nasty you think they are, don't kill or hurt anybody. I know which I'm happier having in my society.
I hope I made myself a bit clearer here than I evidently did in the podcast. I suspect that we have divergent views regardless, but I'd prefer to be able to agree to disagree on those views, rather than have you simply think that my moral compass is swinging wildly!
- Rob
I think the boys have made
I think the boys have made several self-defeating and barely coherent arguments since SC began.
I think if you get upset that a fat man with an odd accent can't formulate a reasonable argument for why something other than rape is like rape then you're probably going to be upset by a lot of the world.
A good equation for rape is mugging or killing in games. Games that encourage you to mug or kill imaginary people, they're a bit rum, aren't they? I don't know if they would ever provide the tipping point for someone who hasn't mugged or killed to actually 'follow through' with the idea. If someone has fantasies about mugging or killing someone then I assume that these games could stimulate that person, but would they feel more confident or compelled to do it, or would they feel sated and know that if they do fancy boshing someone over the head on the way home they can wait another 20 minutes and do it on the PlayStation without the fear of arrest from the real police?
I don't know, I'm nor a mugger or a murderer. It's not my hobby.
This then has an interesting comparison with games where people are encouraged to commit rape.
Does it make someone who has fantasies about raping more likely, less likely or have no impact what so ever.
I think that's probably an issue for behavioral scientists to work out, rather than place too much trust in the matter of a man who thinks chips need bread to make a meal and his slow, dull friend.
Personally I try to fit in
Personally I try to fit in three or four self-defeating and barely coherent arguments before breakfast*. Doesn't feel like the day's properly started otherwise.
What you're talking about is often referred to as sublimation - and in its simplest form, it's basically the process where you arrive home from work feeling like you want to break somebody's face, so you play Fight Night on the Xbox for a bit and no longer want to break a real face.
There's a huge body of research dedicated to working out how far this phenomenon goes, and whether it applies beyond simple Rat Race Rage and into realms like paedophilia and rape. There are all sorts of discomfiting papers you can read out there on various academic resources which talk about the incidence of rape fantasy or paedophile fantasy as against the actual incidence of those crimes in society, and whether the availability of pornographic or fantasy material helps people to sublimate those feelings, or can in the longer term actually escalate them.
It's a complex issue which deserves vast amounts of scientific study. It is, as you rightly say, unlikely to be solved by two fat blokes swearing into microphones in a living room in south London - but an acknowledgment that the debate exists, rather than a blanket "it depicts rape therefore it is evil" is a reasonable jumping off point for this kind of discussion, I think.
(* Breakfast does NOT consist of chips. Or chips in bread.)
It was an interesting piece.
It was an interesting piece. Maybe you could develop more researched discussion in a special. Although probably not about rape in games specifically, as it's not really suited to light hearted banter.
It would be interesting to hear someone properly mop the floor with a lot of the 'shit' that gets 'chatted' about video games. And for that someone to not necessarily have a fixed viewpoint for the entire segment. Like a moral maze.
You could use the theme to PacMan as a bed for it. That would be really fucking irritating.
Fuck me, the text on this
Fuck me, the text on this website is tiny.
Yeah. I've never tried to
Yeah. I've never tried to have an actual discussion on here before. Rubbish, isn't it? :/
Chip buttys all around! I am
Chip buttys all around!
I am interested to find out more about this sublimination research you speak of, vere are zee papers? Maybe if they are able to draw on some concrete conclusions, it might put an end to the media blaming games for school shootings and what not (or conversely prove them to be right.....lets hope they never prove the daily mail right!).
To be honest, it entirely
To be honest, it entirely rests on the type of game i want to play.
for example, for an RPG, taking grinding and super levelling into account, i'd say >30 is about right, enough for a good story, as well as time to do random things
..although i've got 100+ hours on disgaea *headdesk*
whereas for a game like tetris, i'm happy to play it for a few hours, leave it for a month and play it again for another couple of hours
platformers...i'd say inbetween, because simply I want to finish the game and be done with it, only to have another water level or a frigging timed map to take up time i could have enjoying the bloody thing.
Extra Note: I actually looked at some of my game saves, and on my rpgs and platformers, i average at about 50hours and thats leaving disgaea out of the picture :O Wtf man...seriously
And im not even going to disclose my WoW playtime ¬____¬;;;
I'm really not usually a
I'm really not usually a person for long games, my perfect game length is "3 days to a week", assuming I play each day for about 3 hours.
I know, 9-21 is a big difference, but usually the "21 hour" games are one with some sort of levelling up or unlock mechanic, therefore can keep me interested in investment, whereas the "9 hour" games are ones with a reasonably interesting story to tell, even if not an amazing one, so keep me interested for as long as that lasts, and it can't be too long.
The best ones are the ones with the interesting mechanics, AND the interesting story, but are rare.
Fallout 3 is one of those rarities, it's probably the longest I've played a game for a fair while without it being an MMO. It has a story, it has levelling up (and I've bought Broken Steel so there's more of that even before I complete the "original" campaign! No spoilers pls.), and the VATS system is a very interesting mechanic to someone who never played Fallout 1 or 2, and even tried them but was too used to new-age-gaming for them. At the moment I'm on a hiatus from Fallout as I need a bit of a break, but when that's over I'll get back on the Fallout Horse and ride it all the way to Enclave-destroying-ville (if the Broken Steel trailer is anything to go by).
...Megaton is still there.
And I'd totally pimp my commentary I did on it, but you'd just suggest that I was trying to spam-advertise to all of the 10 people who read these comments. :-p