I'm thinking of writing a few essays about Tactics in games. Specifically, the tactics of TF2, L4D2, and D&D. Of course, the tactics in these settings have some application to each other, and for any tactical situation in general.
If I were to summarize tactics for any given situation, I'd simply say, "focus on destroying the weakest target at any given time." It's like Jesus, in reverse. Of course, there's a lot of nuance to unpack in that seemingly simple sentence that I'll get to later.
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
Thursday, June 03, 2010
The Problem With Lost
The problem with Lost isn't the bad writing, silly drama, forced love triangle, or all the things designed just to waste time. The problem with Lost is that it's dishonest. Almost every moment of the show implies that there's some revelation that will explain all of this, some answer to all the questions.
Unfortunately, the majority of questions were red herrings, and the answers we do get are "a wizard did it, hundreds of years ago". This is not satisfactory.
One of my largest irritations with the show is the way the release of information is artificially regulated. All new characters are implied to have knowledge beyond our comprehension, only to reveal a few trivial facts before admitting that they, too, know nothing of any interest. Why does everyone act so unbelievably mysterious and secretive when they don't know anything worth hiding? Everyone new is implied to know about the island. They end up knowing that "it's magic". It turns out that that's all there is to know, but that isn't enough information to hide. In fact, it's not really information at all, since magic in Lost is the worst kind of magic, the kind that has no rules whatsoever, that inhibits some things and allows others, for no apparent reason. The sort of magic that gives endless red herrings, but never leads to any answers.*
Even worse than the regulation of information is the fact that no one actually had a reason to be secretive.** There's no conspiracy, no oath of silence, no reason for any of the major players, (Ben, Richard, Jacob, or Flock) to not walk out of the jungle the day of the crash and ask for assistance from our protagonists. The only reason they hid in the jungle all this time is because the show wouldn't be very dramatic if they didn't. I'm not saying drama is bad, I'm saying drama should be justified by the story. It's a standard event in Lost for characters to announce "we don't have time to explain [question X]", then walk through the jungle for hours, presumably unable to talk because they're walking so hard. Giving the show the benefit of the doubt, I always assumed characters didn't want to say anything because they were holding some secret. It turns out the show literally wants us to believe that characters didn't tell each other things for years because they didn't find the time***. They must do a lot of walking on that island.
Another issue is the way character takes a backseat to pointless conflict and forced plot progression. The most common way for a character to decide something is that it's "fate". Maybe it's just me, but "fate" is the most disingenuous way imaginable to justify something. There's no way a character can tell if something should or shouldn't be done using "fate". "Fate" may as well be replaced by "The writers needed to get to the next scene, but couldn't imagine a motive to do something so unreasonable or dangerous to get the characters there." It's funny the writers can't find time to justify anyone's actions, but there's plenty of time for characters to dodge questions about motive, and the increasingly obnoxious flash backs/forwards/sides.
The central lie of Lost is that it's a puzzle, one that can be pieced together by the astute viewer, and one that solves the problems. The Penny Arcade guys talked about this on their podcast, justifying their abandonment of the show. Basically, when the show gives you some data, there's no chance that it actually applies to any of the questions of the show until the last half of the last season. Everything that happens until then is just wandering around with characters who know only slightly more than us. If Lost is a puzzle, it's one where you get only a couple pieces, then it turns out the picture is just "IT WAS ALL MAGIC" in magenta letters. It's a stupid answer, and it's not one that justifies the time that the fans have put into it.
*There's also magic that works outside of the island, (The Numbers****, Walt****, Jacob, etc.) so it's not even clear how the island special in the sense of being magic, since magic is works away from the island too.
**Think about it, there's information people have that they are unwilling to give out at one point, then later they'll just offhandedly mention it because the audience already knows about it. (Recent example, Flocke blandly mentions that he used to be human, when he wasn't even asked in the second to last episode, when in earlier episodes he refused to even answer Jack directly asking "what are you?" There's no reason for him to not answer Jack then volunteer the information later...except the audience knows already.)
***Actually, it could be because in Lost, you're only allowed to ask a question once. I know it wouldn't be very dramatic if people just asked the same question all the time, but there should be a reason why people don't come back to asking the important questions other than dramatic necessity and keeping information from the audience.
**** Although it seems the writers forgot about these, so maybe they don't count.
Unfortunately, the majority of questions were red herrings, and the answers we do get are "a wizard did it, hundreds of years ago". This is not satisfactory.
One of my largest irritations with the show is the way the release of information is artificially regulated. All new characters are implied to have knowledge beyond our comprehension, only to reveal a few trivial facts before admitting that they, too, know nothing of any interest. Why does everyone act so unbelievably mysterious and secretive when they don't know anything worth hiding? Everyone new is implied to know about the island. They end up knowing that "it's magic". It turns out that that's all there is to know, but that isn't enough information to hide. In fact, it's not really information at all, since magic in Lost is the worst kind of magic, the kind that has no rules whatsoever, that inhibits some things and allows others, for no apparent reason. The sort of magic that gives endless red herrings, but never leads to any answers.*
Even worse than the regulation of information is the fact that no one actually had a reason to be secretive.** There's no conspiracy, no oath of silence, no reason for any of the major players, (Ben, Richard, Jacob, or Flock) to not walk out of the jungle the day of the crash and ask for assistance from our protagonists. The only reason they hid in the jungle all this time is because the show wouldn't be very dramatic if they didn't. I'm not saying drama is bad, I'm saying drama should be justified by the story. It's a standard event in Lost for characters to announce "we don't have time to explain [question X]", then walk through the jungle for hours, presumably unable to talk because they're walking so hard. Giving the show the benefit of the doubt, I always assumed characters didn't want to say anything because they were holding some secret. It turns out the show literally wants us to believe that characters didn't tell each other things for years because they didn't find the time***. They must do a lot of walking on that island.
Another issue is the way character takes a backseat to pointless conflict and forced plot progression. The most common way for a character to decide something is that it's "fate". Maybe it's just me, but "fate" is the most disingenuous way imaginable to justify something. There's no way a character can tell if something should or shouldn't be done using "fate". "Fate" may as well be replaced by "The writers needed to get to the next scene, but couldn't imagine a motive to do something so unreasonable or dangerous to get the characters there." It's funny the writers can't find time to justify anyone's actions, but there's plenty of time for characters to dodge questions about motive, and the increasingly obnoxious flash backs/forwards/sides.
The central lie of Lost is that it's a puzzle, one that can be pieced together by the astute viewer, and one that solves the problems. The Penny Arcade guys talked about this on their podcast, justifying their abandonment of the show. Basically, when the show gives you some data, there's no chance that it actually applies to any of the questions of the show until the last half of the last season. Everything that happens until then is just wandering around with characters who know only slightly more than us. If Lost is a puzzle, it's one where you get only a couple pieces, then it turns out the picture is just "IT WAS ALL MAGIC" in magenta letters. It's a stupid answer, and it's not one that justifies the time that the fans have put into it.
*There's also magic that works outside of the island, (The Numbers****, Walt****, Jacob, etc.) so it's not even clear how the island special in the sense of being magic, since magic is works away from the island too.
**Think about it, there's information people have that they are unwilling to give out at one point, then later they'll just offhandedly mention it because the audience already knows about it. (Recent example, Flocke blandly mentions that he used to be human, when he wasn't even asked in the second to last episode, when in earlier episodes he refused to even answer Jack directly asking "what are you?" There's no reason for him to not answer Jack then volunteer the information later...except the audience knows already.)
***Actually, it could be because in Lost, you're only allowed to ask a question once. I know it wouldn't be very dramatic if people just asked the same question all the time, but there should be a reason why people don't come back to asking the important questions other than dramatic necessity and keeping information from the audience.
**** Although it seems the writers forgot about these, so maybe they don't count.
Assassin's Creed II
Most sequels are a reaction to the original. They can come to that in a lot of different ways: many movie sequels see that the old movie made some money, therefore the new movie should be the same thing, but more. This tendency is often taken to pathetic extremes. (See, Night at the Museum II, where TWO monkeys slap Ben Stiller in the face, instead of one)
Assassin's Creed II isn't so much a reaction to Assassin's Creed, as a reaction to the criticism of Assassin's Creed. There are the "standard" complaints about AC, and ACII has fixed each and every one of them. You no longer have to wait for ten minutes of dialogue after an assassination, and there are much more assassinations to perform, both large and small.
Let's look at a standard complaint about AC: Lepers could grapple you in an attempt to beg money from you. The game left you little options to deal with them, and the grappling is rather incapacitating. My standard reaction was the ol' hidden knife, and the only other reasonable reaction is just running away. From a leper. Not very heroic.
So what did ACII do? There are still NPC's that do nothing but run up to you and bother you. This time they're minstrels carrying lutes. This time, although they obstruct your travel, they have a sense of personal space, and they give you a little room to operate in. More importantly, there are many more ways to interact with NPC's in a non-combat milieu. These minstrels just want some cash, and now you can just throw gold coins into the air, after which they'll leave you alone. If you're feeling mean, (Which I always am, to minstrels), then you can pickpocket them the instant they get near you. Naturally, after being robbed, they walk away. Problem solved.
Review wise, if you liked Assassin's Creed in general, but had a few complaints, ACII has probably solved them. If you don't like climbing, sneaking, and countering attacks, then it's still not going to be any fun. Simply, Assassin's Creed II is the cleaner version of Assassin's Creed.
Assassin's Creed II isn't so much a reaction to Assassin's Creed, as a reaction to the criticism of Assassin's Creed. There are the "standard" complaints about AC, and ACII has fixed each and every one of them. You no longer have to wait for ten minutes of dialogue after an assassination, and there are much more assassinations to perform, both large and small.
Let's look at a standard complaint about AC: Lepers could grapple you in an attempt to beg money from you. The game left you little options to deal with them, and the grappling is rather incapacitating. My standard reaction was the ol' hidden knife, and the only other reasonable reaction is just running away. From a leper. Not very heroic.
So what did ACII do? There are still NPC's that do nothing but run up to you and bother you. This time they're minstrels carrying lutes. This time, although they obstruct your travel, they have a sense of personal space, and they give you a little room to operate in. More importantly, there are many more ways to interact with NPC's in a non-combat milieu. These minstrels just want some cash, and now you can just throw gold coins into the air, after which they'll leave you alone. If you're feeling mean, (Which I always am, to minstrels), then you can pickpocket them the instant they get near you. Naturally, after being robbed, they walk away. Problem solved.
Review wise, if you liked Assassin's Creed in general, but had a few complaints, ACII has probably solved them. If you don't like climbing, sneaking, and countering attacks, then it's still not going to be any fun. Simply, Assassin's Creed II is the cleaner version of Assassin's Creed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)