Editorials and Features

Forum for Editorials and other News Features

Sunday Conversation: Like That Game? Read This Book!

  • HalidocHalidoc1,318,132
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 01:46
    Shinnizle said:
    Halidoc said:
    Some of the responses have been, for all intents and purposes, "Ignorance is bliss." I, personally, have trouble taking that stance, and it mildly perturbs me when people do. I wrote this as a response to Shinnizle, but take for example: Using his actor angle take Mel Gibson for instance. He has made anti-Semitic comments in the past and even he has acknowledged that he made those comments, but as of this time has apologized for it and asked the public for forgiveness. With that knowledge in mind do you watch his movies happily knowing that he was a formerly known anti-Semite? Or do you watch his movies wearily knowing that while he may make enjoyable movies he is not the most outstanding person on the planet?
    I don't personally care for Mel Gibson much in the first place. But if he were to star in/write/direct/produce a movie I deemed "deserving" of my attention, and for the sake of the argument, became one of my favorite movies, the fact that Mel Gibson had a hand in it wouldn't change my view of the movie in the slightest. Hell, the actors' personal lives and/or views don't even cross my mind when I watch their movies.
    As stated, it was meant as an example, not a specific instance. What I meant for you to take from it was: Actor/Actress has made prior statements/taken stances denigrating a specific group of people they dislike. Do you continue to happily support them knowing this, or do you pause for a moment and put thought into what they did before contributing money to them?

    And since you didn't directly answer my question I have to assume you take the stance of "you watch his movies happily knowing that he was a formerly known anti-Semite." Which is the point I was trying to make and the thing I have an issue with, if that is the answer you chose.

    Shinnizle said:
    It goes the other way around too. If I were to see a movie star walking in the street, you wouldn't see me fanboying all over them, asking for their autograph, shaking hands, taking pictures... I generally don't give a flying fuck about them off camera laugh
    Never said you had to blindly follow them, and I never referenced that in any way, so I don't quite understand the point you are trying to make.

    alklein92201 said:
    Personally, neither. You know what doesn't even come to mind when I watch The Patriot? What Mel Gibson thinks or thought about a certain group of people. The reason being, you know what has nothing to do with the movie and it's quality at all? What Mel Gibson thinks or thought about a certain group of people.
    Once again, it was meant as an example, not meant to be a specific instance. And you are just reinforcing my statements about supporting Orson Scott Card. Blindly supporting someone, giving money to someone who makes homophobic remarks and not thinking twice about it is an awful thing. Blindly supporting someone, giving money to someone who has made anti-Semitic remarks and not thinking twice about it is an awful thing. Especially if you are against that sort of thing.

    I was going to go off on a tangent about how it is fine with Free Speech and supporting who who want if they align with your views, even and especially if I disagree with them. But that doesn't free you from the consequences of taking that action. But this already long enough and I have quite a bit more to type.

    I guess we are all just going to blindly follow the entertainment producers of today and not give regard to what they may represent when off screen/not writing books/etc. Because what they do in their spare time doesn't effect their personal work in the slightest and we have no issues favoring people with unsavory views that don't align with our own. /s

    I do mean that sarcastically but the fact that so many people do this makes me sick to my stomach. You don't have to follow the paparazzi or the tabloids because I certainly don't, but when you do hear about it, when you do see it, don't you question someone just a tad when it is brought up that they say some unsavory stuff off screen? Unless, as previously stated, you do support that sort of thing. Then this whole thing is moot.

    Let me make an extreme example and let you decide where you stand. Once again, this is an example since people are using my prior example as a specific instance: Your favorite actor/actress/writer/singer/musician comes out as a Neo-Nazi/Ku Klux Klan memeber/take your pick of extremist group. Do you continue to blindly support them because, and I paraphrase, "The reason being, you know what has nothing to do with the movie/book/song and it's quality at all? What actor/actress/writer/singer/musician thinks or thought about a certain group of people."? Do you?

    Think about who you give your money to before you do, entertainment-wise, because you are supporting whatever views they have, whether you like it or not.

    Sorry to get so far off track, but this kind of mentality makes me so angry.
  • ShinnizleShinnizle1,340,134
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 02:02
    You are dissecting my answer into so many complicated composite ideas, when what I'm saying is very simple. So I'm gonna try it again, in a simpler, blunter way.

    The ONLY thing I care about someone whose job is to entertain me, is simply enough, how well they DO entertain me. Orson Scott Card could be a member of Al-Qaeda for all I care, as long as he writes fantastic novels, I'll keep reading them.
    Broke is a state of wallet. Poverty is a state of mind.
  • HalidocHalidoc1,318,132
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 02:16
    Shinnizle said:
    You are dissecting my answer into so many complicated composite ideas, when what I'm saying is very simple. So I'm gonna try it again, in a simpler, blunter way.

    The ONLY thing I care about someone whose job is to entertain me, is simply enough, how well they DO entertain me. Orson Scott Card could be a member of Al-Qaeda for all I care, as long as he writes fantastic novels, I'll keep reading them.
    Oh, I understood quite well what you meant. And if that were the case, that you give money to someone who actively supports a group that promotes the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians you are totally entitled to that. Realize it makes you a terrible person because you only care about the end product and whether you like it or not you are promoting the the indiscriminate killing of innocent civilians.

    As long as you realize that then my point is made.
  • AhayzoAhayzo1,165,669
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 02:18, Edited on 26 July 16 at 02:28 by Ahayzo
    Shinnizle said:
    The ONLY thing I care about someone whose job is to entertain me, is simply enough, how well they DO entertain me. Orson Scott Card could be a member of Al-Qaeda for all I care, as long as he writes fantastic novels, I'll keep reading them.
    Exactly. If the media they produce actively supports something terrible, that's one thing, but it's not blindly supporting them to not care when it comes to their work. I'll pay for a good book by a *insert group* sympathizer. I won't pay for a *insert group* recruitment book. It's called being able to separate their work from their actions. It's not supporting their views, it's supporting their general method of production and more specifically that exact product you paid for. Massive difference. By buying a book by Card, I'm not saying "I support your views on X topic", I'm saying "Hey, you write good books. I'll pay you so I can read them, and hope you make more."

    That's my part before we go too OT
  • C64 MatC64 Mat1,358,086
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 08:10
    Halidoc said:
    x Mataeus x said:
    For anyone enjoying the stellar depths of Elite: Dangerous, Peter F Hamilton's Nights Dawn trilogy is absolutely fucking ridiculously outstanding.

    3,600 pages of space opera, with a genre slide into horror, and amazing detail from the furthest planets to the smallest human thought. The trilogy has everything from space trading to Satanic sacrifice, and covers millions of years of history - human or otherwise.

    It's brutal, beautiful, sexual, horrific and completely unequivocally brilliant.
    I have always had my eye on this series but was always weary because it involves the souls of the dead coming back and possessing people. I am just wondering if it is actually explained in a reasonable manner or if it is through so-called "space magic." I prefer my sci-fi more rooted in reality or from a reasonable and plausible standpoint, which is why I enjoyed Revelation Space so much. It seems like a more fantasy thing to be bringing souls back from the dead. Not that fantasy and sci-fi can't mesh mind you, but my personal reading experience is I prefer them divided.

    Also, question to all of you singing all this praise for Ender's Game and Orson Scott Card, what are your thoughts on his documented anti-gay remarks and homophobia?:

    http://www.wired.com/2013/10/enders-game/

    http://www.verbicidemagazine.com/2013/11/07/homophobia-quote...

    This has been the main reason I have not read one of his books. I refuse to give any money to him in any way to further his agenda. I was gifted a copy of Ender's Game a while ago, but my hatred of his stance on the LGBT community has prevented me from reading it thus far. I know he does not use his books as a platform for pushing this agenda, but still does nothing to take away the comments he has made. And reading this article this has not helped me want to read his book any more so:

    http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/02/21/1619481/an-ethica...
    Don't worry about that - it's not fantasy nonsense, not 'magic'. Everything is explained in detail. The way it evolves over the three books is blended with the science fiction universe so well, it never feels out of place or oddly fitting.
    ~~~Vae Victis!~~~
  • planting42planting421,818,511
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 21:04
    Fragments of Him anyone?
    http://www.trueachievements.com/gtasc-2016.htm
  • AllgorhythmAllgorhythm512,264
    Posted on 26 July 16 at 22:28
    planting42 said:
    Fragments of Him anyone?
    Good point. Very profound and thought provoking game.
  • Posted on 01 August 16 at 18:17
    One book not yet mentioned is Bedlam, by Christopher Brookmyre - anyone who has ever played doom/quake/unreal/half-life will get the references to the archetypal FPS and I do like his snarky sense of humour.

    Another that may be of interest is Halting State, by Charles Stross. Looking at how AR and MMO intersect, this 2007 novel has gained an unintended irony since Brexit ...
  • BeanpotterBeanpotter1,355,630
    Posted on 02 August 16 at 08:08
    unequalized joe said:
    I definitely have to recommend Ernest Cline's "Ready Player One" to anyone interested in eighties gaming (arcade, home computer, home console).
    Ordered it, read it, loved it! Thanks for the recommendation.
    Mame Tobikomi!
  • FaSCoRPFaSCoRP522,664
    Posted on 01 March 20 at 21:09
    Regarding the Metro series, this is my experience:
    I played both games on 360 but not managed to finish them.
    However, I bought the book, Metro 2033 and it was fantastic. For example, the chapter when Artyom has to go to the library is magnificent and full with tension and, in the game, it is just a chapter that you can end in 10 minutes. It was kind of dissapointing.
    I strongly suggest to read the books, then play the games, just to feel familiar about what is happening and you will probably know more and be more aware of what is going on, and what will happen.
    https://casivg.wordpress.com
Want to join in the discussion? Please log in or Register For Free to comment.