Malik
(7/23/04)
I'm afraid that
this week has required a shorted issue of Malik's Bitchings.
While I have many things to bitch about, I like to keep this on
track, and most of my bitchable subjects for this week are not in
the geek realm. So, today I bring you the awful truth about
the most asinine of all geeks; the fanboy.
Well, It's No FFX...
So, I just got my
latest issue of Game Informer a couple days ago, and I saw something
that can only be described as shameful and tragic...I should mention
that I only get this poor excuse for a magazine because I signed up
at Gamestop for their membership thing since I like to save some
money on used games and with how many I get a year, this membership
dealio is a pretty good thing.
So, when I flipped
to the review of Star Ocean 3, it started with one of their head
editor guys (Reiner or something like that is his name) completely
messing up what should be an unbiased review. He begins by saying
Star Ocean 3 has some big shoes to fill...while this is true, his
reasoning quickly becomes lost in a see of FFX worship. What he says
is that with other SquareEnix titles, like FFX (of course), and
other sci-fi themed RPGs, like Xenosaga, that SO3 has a lot of work
ahead of it to try to please it's target audience. Well, let's start
in the right direction with this;
While FFX is a
highly regarded (yet very, very crappy) RPG, and it is from
SquareEnix, it is not, at the same time, from the same company. What
I mean by this is that the SO series originally came about from Enix
back in the days that Enix and Square were rivals, not the same
entity. So, it is not right to start off a review with a biased
approach of saying they are from the exact same source. It's like
comparing a (we're going to pretend for a second) new entity in the
King's Quest series (I wouldn't mind a new KQ...I miss that
series...so much nostalgia) with StarCraft...just because Blizzard
and Sierra being part of the same conglomerate. I mean if you're so
hooked on FF games, that's good and all, but it doesn't mean you
should bias a review for a different title just because of your
personal bias.
Secondly, while
Xenosaga and SO3 are both Sci-Fi, the same could be said in
comparing a new Star Wars film with a classic episode of Star Trek.
They may both be sci-fi, but it's a different breed of sci-fi and
they should never be compared. In the same way, Xenosaga is a more introverted
tale of character development while SO games are usually more
extroverted and deal with a larger image of the worlds involved than
just the characters who are involved.
So, my beef is
that a review should always be unbiased and deal with the material
at hand...at least when the review is initiated. In the end, you can
say that (after describing the pros and cons of SO3, for example)
something in FFX is better (in your crappy opinion that is full of
shit...FFX was a sad excuse for a mass marketed RPG), but not at the
onset of the review unless you want to completely bias the entire
review.
The only big shoes
SO3 has to fill, in the US, is the shoes that were first worn by
SO2. Also, the target audience of SO3 (in my rather insightful
opinion) is the same people who played SO 1&2 (of which, in the
US, that would only be SO2 since we missed out on the great SO
series beginning). This has been done far too often lately. It has
especially become painful after the release of FFX.
A review of a game
should be designed to be insightful and not biased. In other words,
a game must be weighed on it's own merit before it is compared to
anything else in the same genre. A review is meant to help a geek
determine if they would want a game, but I for one would never had
pre-ordered SO3 if I went off of Reiner's reviews of SO3. I mean if
they can only be compared with FFX as cheap knockoffs, then I would
definitely stay away from these games. However, if these titles were
reviewed on their own merits, I would buy/pre-order both of them.
Thank goodness I actually do my own research into future releases
and don't just go off of the bias of GI...for anyone who does only
go off the bias of GI...well, I feel sorry for you.
Ironically, if a
game is like FFX, instead of being called a great title, it would be
called un-innovative and a cheap ripoff of the SquareEnix
license...yet if it's not like FFX, then it's called a cheap
wannabe. Is this hypocrisy even logical?
Solution
Every game on the
market (especially the different releases of the FF series) is it's
own unique creature, and as this it must be reviewed and handled
separately. Any reviewer who wants to bundle a title with any
previous release in a review is only valid in doing so if the title
being review is a DIRECT sequel of the previous release it is
compared to. These two games, FFX and SO3, are as different as a
piece of fillet mignon and a piece of shit (FFX being the piece of
shit and Star Ocean just being the shit).
Not to sound
immodest, but this is why I strive to write long and detailed
reviews (and why I release so few at a time). All games are unique
in and of themselves and thus need to be handled with care and
effort. If you want to call yourself a professional and yet you
start all reviews of RPGs by comparing it to your beloved piece of
shit...I mean FFX...then you have as much right calling yourself a
professional as I do calling myself a computer programmer because
I've designed some retarded BASIC programs as a child.
The
Standard...AKA, The One Game
So, on the same
sort of theme, I have to ask to myself one important question every time
I read these BS RPG reviews; why is FFX and FFX-2 the standard to
judge all other RPGs by?
I mean, we often
hear about how video games are over taking TV and movies as the most
profitable form of digital entertainment. However, if we saw the
themes from FFX or FFX-2 as TV shows, the same audience that made
these games so dominant would not give a shit. I can't think of the
last time that we had a show on TV or a movie about a whiney loser
who is obsessed with his past neglect by his father or a similar
theme actually survive for more than a handful of episodes. I
personally like my movies, TV shows, games, books, and other forms
of entertainment to have a similar theme, and that theme never
includes a whiney obsessive idiot who cannot see the world around
him due to his compulsive behavior towards his neglectful childhood
or a simple-minded obsession with a woman (with an equal amount of
baggage). Or there's FFX-2, with it's J-Pop video that's been
extended for a whopping 50 or so hours...if it wasn't for FFX-2, I
don't think a story of one hell of a girls-month-out could actually
capture the attention spans of anyone who matters. These would just
not make interesting stories for anything...especially a 60 hour
video game. Yet, these characters have compelled millions of geeks
and fanboys to worship the almighty Square.
I personally like
to think the the real issue is a little deeper. While many people
will blindly say that FFX and FFX-2 are the best examples of
story-telling and character development in an RPG, games like ToS
are discarded as cheap imitations...WTF? I think the answer is
really found in peoples' loyalty. If a game like FFX was made by a
company that no one had ever heard of, people would have simply said
it was a ripoff of the style used in FF7. Plain and simple, it's the
fact that Square and the FF series have the largest number of
fanboys for any series or company that makes unbiased geeks feel
bitchy when reviews about new games always contain the phrase,
"imitation of FFX", even when the supposed imitation is
not in any way tangible.
I think the issue
at hand is not as much of different games being unjustly compared to
a series that it has nothing in common with, but rather that fanboys
are making their presence felt in far more areas than just message
boards. The worst case being the (supposedly) professional
journalists who are so stuck in their own little obsession that they
cannot see the rest of the spectrum...let alone being able to see
what their beloved FF series has actually become. I mean when was
the last time you heard someone actually say that, for not being
direct sequels, all FF games that came after 7 have been cheap
imitations...I mean they all may have some unique, and usually
crappy, method to introduce an innovative game mechanism. However,
they all have the same cast of characters; I mean the moody and disturbed,
but psychologically unstable main hero (Tidus, Cloud, Squall) with
the same levels of neurosis, the same heroine who cares too much
about the world to be stuck in some sort of relationship with the
main hero that she is obsessed with, despite her own intentions (Yuna,
Aeris, Rinoa). The only exception to this rule, at all, was FFIX,
which many fanboys of the recent FF games have dismissed as a crappy
game that didn't deserve the FF name (despite how it was the last
truly original FF game that still remained true to the series). How
can people call ToS a cheap imitation when these non-related FF
games are all cheap imitations of the story and characters first
seen in FF7? There is no way to describe it short of saying that
fanboys need to realize that there is more to their world than their
obsession...I, in many ways, am as close to being a fanboy of
Xenogears as possible, yet I'm still able to see the other great
RPGs out there, so I know it's possible.
Of course, there's
also the graphics...I mean with the detailed cut scenes of a FF
game, Square cannot lose. I mean who needs substance when they
can get some nice looking, but hollow cut scenes? I do!
I for one would rather have a cut scene ala ToS or Xenogears; a cut
scene or two that are detailed CGI stuff is nice, but if some of the
cut scenes are done with the in game engine, I sure wont complain,
as long as the plot is king and the cut scene is not just there to
showcase a new graphical technique.
Solution
If someone wants
to strive to be a professional journalist, bias is the most
important thing to throw out. Especially people who professionally
review games. While I know enough to discount most reviews that
begin with something about the wonders of FFX and FFX-2, not many
people do. Therefore, a reviewer needs to realize that their words
may have an affect of the lesser geeks, and thus they should either
throw out or profess their obsession prior to trying to influence
someone in their buying habits. I mean, a review for SO3 should
focus on the game itself and not serve as an advertisement for FFX...morally
and journalistically, this type of action is just wrong.
Also, all fanboys
who cannot let go of their obsession long enough to be social to
non-fanboys of the same game/series/company should fornicate
themselves with an iron rod.
Conclusion
I think this was a
bit more on the short side than I'd prefer for the week, and also
was a little more on the side of rambling than I try to aim for, but
considering I have to put up with a day job and all that, I can only
do what I have the time and energy to do...plus, I bring you all
this stuff with no pop-ups or other annoyances. Anyway, if you
think I need to lay off FFX and that it is really the best game ever
made...well, then you're a damned fanboy and you know my feelings
about fornicating yourself with a metal object. Anyway, if you
feel my fanboy...I mean Square bashing...no, it's fanboy
bashing...is out of line, you can contact me,
or you can hit the forums.
Malik
|