Many Video Games set out to achieve something, be that to tell a story, show a different perspective OR, in this particular case, change a person’s views on a particular topic. This week, I am talking about an article by Gina Roussos on Psychology Today from back in 2015 (found here). It talks about how a piece of media can actually end up doing changing a person’s mind to think the exact OPPOSITE of what was intended.
The focus of the article is an online game intended to change a person’s thoughts on people in poverty. The game is called ‘Spent’ and tries to put the player into the shoes of a person below the poverty line, it intends to show the player the difficult decisions one in such a situation faces on a day to day basis. It does this while challenging the player to make it through a month (30 Days), starting off with only $1000. If you’re interested you can find it online here: http://playspent.org/
The Job Selection Screen, 3 selections, each just as bad as the others.
The article on Psychology Today goes through a study that was undertaken by the article’s author, Gina Roussos, to find if the game would have it’s desired effect. After a test involving 54 American Undergraduates and a Control Game called ‘Garbage Dreams‘, Roussos eventually found that the game actually had a negative impact on people’s views on the subject.
Roussos suggests that this is due to the fact that by putting a person into the driver’s seat of these situations it shows them that theses are decision that THEY have control over and any short-comings that then occur are due to their own bad decisions. This feeling of control over one’s outcomes is called “Personal Agency”. It is this feeling that draws people to believe that poverty is personally controllable, and again, is only the result of a person’s decisions.
The example Roussos gives is as follows: “When I’m playing a game, I feel like I have complete control over my outcomes. I click on Door A instead of Door B, and I find a treasure chest full of jewels. I found that treasure because I choose Door A.” The above showcases the choice that YOU, the player, picked Door A. Door A happened to contain a treasure chest. But had you picked Door B then you would never have found said treasure.
The End Screen for ‘Spent’, showing how much you made it through the month with but also makes sure you know that Rent is due tomorrow.
This then provides the inherent problem with the game itself. It pushes the player to make the decisions on the spot without any prior knowledge of the event in question. Then you instantly see the ramifications of your decision, pushing the idea being in poverty is a result of a person’s bad decisions. Henceforth proving that the Game’s intentions are very much different to it’s actual effect.
Roussos then goes on to do another study with 227 U.S. Adults to verify these results. Although apparently when people watched a recording of someone playing the game they reacted in more of a way that the Developers intended. The people viewing the game being played second hand showed a more empathetic view towards people in Poverty than the people actually playing it.
After playing the Game myself for 10-15 minutes I find the game itself to be kind of unreasonable to it’s events and does indeed instil a feeling the opposite of what was intended. I felt like the game was punishing me simply because of the decisions I made NOT because of the situation I was in as a character.
But as for the article it was a very good insight into the intentions of the Game and it’s actual effect on people. It’s also a good insight into the repercussions of not testing out your Game’s effect when it’s effect is the desired outcome.
But that’s it for this week, thanks for reading everyone! I’ll be back next week with a review of ‘Dwarf Fortress’ by Bay12.
Diegesis in Video Games refers to the Narrative elements within the game itself. There are then Intra-Diegetic and Extra-Diegetic. Intra-Diegetic refers to elements of the game that belong to the game’s world, examples of this are the Characters themselves, the environment and items, these are things that can be perceived by the Game’s Characters. Whereas Extra-Diegetic refers to the elements of the game that don’t belong to the world itself, such as menus, music and the HUD, these are things that can NOT be perceived by the Game’s Characters. These elements do not always stick within these boundaries though.
I stumbled across an article by Gregory Weir on Gamasutra.com from November 2008 exploring the Diegesis of the LucasArts’ game Grim Fandango, the article itself can be found here. This week I’ll be posting a response to said article.
Weir begins the article by mentioning the split in the world inhabited by a Game’s Characters and the world that is shown to the player. The way this is shown is by using Intra-Diegetic and Extra-Diegetic elements. Weir explains the term Diegesis within a Film context by mentioning Music specifically. If a character directly plays a certain song, be that via instrument or player of some sort, then that is Diegetic music. Whereas if it is moreso background music then that would be non-diegetic.
Weir goes on to mention how Diegesis works in Video Games. As I previously stated there are many different attributes of Games that can be shown as Diegetic. It is these attributes that contribute to, or take away from, the immersion that any developer may be trying to achieve.
Many games use Diegesis to add to this immersion factor. The ‘Fallout Series’ features an item known as a ‘Pip Boy’ a device in the game used to manage inventory and character traits, now this is only Diegetic because the character raises their arm when the player presses the Inventory button. It is this acknowledgement that makes the action Diegetic. Much like in ‘Goldeneye’ for the N64, Bond raises his arm to look at his watch which then acts as a pause menu among other things. Both of theses are examples of Diegetic attributes.
Pip Boy Usage in ‘Fallout 4’ by the Player Character
Another example is within the Blizzard game ‘Overwatch’. Characters that use guns sometimes have visual markers on their guns that show their current ammo count. While this isn’t a necessary addition due to the game’s HUD also having a more traditional ammo count featured in the bottom right hand corner, it goes to show the character’s personalities more than otherwise shown. With ‘Overwatch’ being an FPS game the player does not see much of the character they are playing besides their hands and their weapon for the most part. An example can be seen below with Sombra’s weapon. Most skins feature a hexadecimal counter that represents her current ammo count, this plays into her character trait being a hacker of sorts.
The “3C” at the top of the gun means 60 as a Hexadecimal
The “28” at the top of the gun means 40 as a Hexadecimal
Screenshots of Sombra’s Cyberspace Skin Showing the usage of Hexadecimals to show ammo count and Character Personality.
In the case of LucasArts’ ‘Grim Fandango’, the main example of Diegetic usage is the inventory. Weir writes that the player character, Manny, will individually pull any given item out of his coat as the player goes through the inventory. Manny will put each one away as well before pulling out the next. This is a great example of Diegetic techniques as it involves the player character in an event that normally only involves the player.
Grim Fandango Inventory example, Manny pulling out his Scythe that he “Likes to keep where his heart was”
Diegesis is not always a constant plus in Video Games. To stick with Grim Fandango for a minute, the inventory system that is present isn’t the most user friendly. Weir also touches on the fact that during some parts of the game Manny’s inventory may be packed to the brim with items so having to sort through every single one individually is awfully time consuming and is not very ergonomic for the player. It is also more than likely working against it’s intended purpose of bringing the player into the Game’s World and is instead pushing them away somewhat.
Another example of Diegesis working against the player is in the most recent ‘Animal Crossing’ release. ‘Animal Crossing: New Horizons” features both an inventory and crafting system. At maximum the player can have 40 different items in their inventory and any number of items in their house storage. But when it comes to crafting the player MUST have the required items in their inventory to craft anything. This, again, works against the player if they are crafting within their own home. It just makes sense from a gameplay point of view for a crafting area within the same place as the storage to be able to interact with said storage. This would remove the middle man, this being the player action of removing things from storage to craft, completely, allowing for a more streamlined experience.
As I mentioned earlier, Diegesis is a method of bringing the player closer to the game, to immerse the player in the game’s world. To bring the player into that “Magic Circle”. Weir speaks about how the developer can remove non-Diegetic elements to “make it easier for the player to lose herself in the game”. That being said, Weir also prods into the idea that there can be high-level immersion and player investment in a game that is mostly non-Diegetic.
In the case of ‘Grim Fandango’, the game definitely would have been more player-friendly had it utilised a more conventional inventory system. Weir can be quoted saying “In this case, immersion would probably be restored by using an easier but less Diegetic inventory system. This would undermine Grim Fandango’s goal of creating a cinematic experience, but it would make the game less frustrating and easier to use.”.
Diegesis is an important thing for Developers to consider when it comes to creating a Game as a user experience. Especially the thought of when it is best to use it, should this attribute be Diegetic or non-Diegetic? That is a question that the Developer should be thinking about.
That’s it for this article, thank you once again for reading! I’ll be back soon with another article about Procedural Generation in Video Games.
This week I have been looking into the development cycle of video games, auteurs and production in general. In that vein I have found a neat series on YouTube titled “Devs Play” by DoubleFineProd. Double Fine Productions is a Video Game developer based in San Francisco and owned by Xbox Game Studios as of 2019.
The series itself involves the CEO of DoubleFineProd, Tim Schafer, sitting down and playing Video Games with fellow Game Developers, my episode of choice for this article is titled “Devs Play S2E08 · “Jak and Daxter” with Jason Rubin and Tim Schafer”. This involves Tim Schafer chatting with Naughty Dog co-founder Jason Rubin about his Playstation 2 Classic, ‘Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy’.
Devs Play S2E08 by DoubleFineProd
The ‘Jak and Daxter’ series is one of my all time favourites. ‘Jak II: Renegade’ was the first game I owned on my Playstation 2 back in 2005 and has definitely helped shape me into the person and gamer I am today. I would soon enough go on to try the sequel ‘Jak 3’ and the prior instalment, and the featured game for this post, ‘Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy’. I adore the series and have played all the games (yes including ‘Jak and Daxter: The Lost Frontier’). But enough about me.
Firstly, a bit of a run down of Naughty Dog’s repertoire prior to the development of ‘Jak and Daxter’. Avid programmers, Jason Rubin and Andy Gavin, having played around with C++ and Lisp and founded JAM Software (which stood for “Jason and Andy’s Magic Software”) in 1984. After several releases through Publisher such as Baudville and Electronic Arts Jason and Andy renamed the studio to ‘Naughty Dog’ in 1989. Between then and 2001 when ‘Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy’ was released, Naughty Dog developed the following titles while under Universal Interactive Studios;
‘Way of the Warrior’ for the 3DO
‘Crash Bandicoot’ for the Playstation
‘Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex Strikes Back’ for the Playstation
‘Crash Bandicoot 3: Warped’ also for the Playstation
‘Way of the Warrior’ Cover Art for the 3DO Console
Between the release of ‘Crash Bandicoot 3: Warped’ and ‘Jak and Daxter’, Naughty Dog also released ‘Crash Team Racing’ for the Playstation, which was published by Sony Entertainment. During the game’s 8 month and 6 day development cycle, Naughty Dog spoke to Sony and managed get them to not only get the rights to the Crash Bandicoot IP from Universal (who owned the rights due to the prior deal with Naughty Dog) but also straight out bought Naughty Dog as a whole later in 2001.
Then came the fateful day ‘Jak and Daxter’ released to the public. December 3rd 2001.
The game was being developed over a 3 year period, the engine for which began development back during the development of ‘Crash Team Racing’. With co-founder Andy Gavin and fellow programmers, Steven White and Mark Cerny taking the helm on the project.
Naughty Dog had the vision to create a Character Driven, Open World, Action Adventure Game. After Sony saw the game they told Naughty Dog that they didn’t want it to be like ‘Crash Bandicoot’. They wanted something that they didn’t have to license for any number of titles, they wanted something that wouldn’t eventually show up on a competitor’s platform. Most importantly, they wanted something that would remain a permanent member of the Sony Universe.
The Naughty Dog team itself had grown from an 8 man Team during the development of Crash Bandicoot to a Team of roughly 40 that developed ‘Jak and Daxter’. Another part of growth of Naughty Dog between these two games is that ‘Jak and Daxter’ used actual animators, while the animations for Crash himself in the original title were done by co-founder Jason Rubin. On that note, ‘Crash Bandicoot’ featured a unique animation for almost every single death that could happen to the player, and Crash. Likewise, ‘Jak and Daxter’ featured a vast array of quips by the side-kick of the series, Daxter.
Since Naughty Dog had hired a group of actual animators for the development of ‘Jak and Daxter’, Jason was relegated from animator to developing Particle Systems with half of his time, and managerial tasks with the other half.
The Protagonist of the Series: Jak
As for the design of the main character, Jak, Naughty Dog took a more committee based approach. While developing ‘Crash Bandicoot’ Naughty Dog had cartoonists Charles Zembillas and Joe Pearson develop the character, creating a firm vision of who the character Crash is. Whereas when creating Jak’s character Naughty Dog took advantage of Focus Groups to get ideas and references from different regions. This meant that Jak’s design went through 4 different groups. Naughty Dog themselves, Sony America, Sony Japan and Sony Europe. This caused a lot of confusion and while Jason does go on to say that Jak is a solid character (and I love the character myself) but he definitely could have benefited from a clearer vision.
Two aspect’s of Jak’s design that came from the committee are his face and ears as a whole. They were made to look more ‘cartoonish’ to be more ‘Japanese friendly’.
The Side-kick of the Series: Daxter
Daxter on the other hand was developed with a single vision, Jason states that he thinks that Daxter is a stronger character because of that fact. Daxter himself was included in the game as a sort of comic relief and also someone that can do whatever he wishes. This separates Jak and Daxter as Jak himself is a mute in the first game. Jason mentions “…having the main character talk would distance you from the main character. ‘I’m not that character, he cracked a bad joke or said something I wouldn’t have necessarily said in that position’.”. So the player is meant to find themselves linked to Jak in a different kind of way to most Video Game Protagonists, especially at the time. This also allows for the Main Character to be likeable as he can’t do or say anything that the player wouldn’t do otherwise. Having your Main Character be likeable is a big step in the right direction.
The dynamic between Jak and Daxter was more intense during development, the game originally allowed the player to kick Daxter to “shut him up”, but this was removed before release. The two would grow to be more equal on the talking and character front in future releases as Jak would begin talking at the beginning of the sequel; ‘Jak II: Renegade’.
Naughty Dog itself has a bit of a reputation for…odd, naming philosophies. Crash Bandicoot 1-3 go by the following names:
‘Crash Bandicoot’
‘Crash Bandicoot 2: Cortex Strikes Back’
‘Crash Bandicoot 3: Warped’
Crash Bandicoot PS1 Cover Art
Crash Bandicoot 2 PS1 Cover Art
Crash Bandicoot 3 PS1 Cover Art
As shown in the Box Art and names listed above, Naughty Dog like mixing it up with naming their games. This is no different for the ‘Jak and Daxter’ Series, of which there is the following:
‘Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy’
‘Jak II: Renegade’
‘Jak 3’
‘Jak X: Combat Racing’
‘Jak 2: Renegade’ PS2 Cover Art
‘Jak 3’ PS2 Cover Art
‘Jak X: Combat Racing’ PS2 Cover Art
‘Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy’ PS2 Cover Art
As shown, once more, by the Box Art and names listed, there is even more variation in naming philosophies. ‘Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy’ and ‘Jak II: Renegade’ both utilise a subtitle (1 – ‘The Precursor Legacy’ and 2 – ‘ Renegade’), while ‘Jak 3’ drops the subtitle and even uses a number “3” in the title while ditching the roman numerals used in ‘Jak II: Renegade’. While they change their minds again in ‘Jak X: Combat Racing’ or just ‘Jak X’ in Eurpoe and Australia.
That’s it for this week, I hope you enjoyed the read. I’ll be posting again soon! If you want to watch the featured video then feel free to check out the video below!
I’m sure we all look to Game reviews or criticisms when we’re thinking about picking up a new game, be that through official avenues such as Kotaku or IGN, or places like Steam User Reviews. Heck even asking someone at your local Games store. We all do it from time to time. I personally see these articles as Subjective rather than Objective, as a review/criticism is something that is suppose to tell others about an experience with a game itself as a whole. Criticism, on the other hand, is usually VERY Objective. This is because criticism is largely thought to not take into account a person’s experience with a game and only what the game has to offer should matter.
I disagree with that and I will tell you why.
The Player Character (Right) fighting the Game’s first boss, Cleric Beast with an NPC Summon Eileen The Crow (Left)
Firstly we must talk about the most important thing that comes to gaming, or any media in general really, the player’s experience. The experiences that the player both brings to the game and those that the player has while inside the game.
Each person’s experience will wildly differ therefore each person’s experience will be different. This leads to reviews/criticism being severely individualized, which in my point of view is a good thing. Subjective reviews/criticism allow for players to understand a person’s mindset and their own comprehension of a game. Although this does mean that a certain article mightn’t conform to any given person, but this allows that the sheer abundance of reviews/criticisms that exist in this day and age will surely cater to someone’s viewpoint.
Going into more what subjectivity is, people have different life experiences and mindsets that affect their play experience and style. Any given person can fit into one or more of the following psychological categories:
Killers
Achievers
Explorers
Socializers
Killers are people who play games that look to cause mayhem and havoc among a given game. They’ll go through a server destroying their opponents through either legitimate or illegitimate means.
Achievers are the people that look to do everything and everything in a game. This goes from completing the achievements for the game, finishing all the side-quests or even just completing self-imposed challenges. They seek a challenge of any sort.
Explorers will go far and wide to see everything a game has to offer. See every nook and cranny of a game world, see every line of dialogue an NPC has to say, even understanding the finer details of the game’s mechanics themselves.
Socializers are the extroverts of gaming so to speak. They go into a game and look to communicate and make relationships with other players in the game more so than playing the game itself. This can be through in-game methods (e.g. Guilds or Friend lists) or fan communities (e.g. Subreddits or Facebook groups).
Image from the 2019 Overwatch League Finals between the San Francisco Shock and the Vancouver Titans. These players are an example of both Killers and Achievers.
The type of player alone will contribute to a given review/criticism if subjectivity is involved. A review/criticism from a player who is more of a killer while playing a game, is not necessarily going to engage a player that is more of an explorer.
But this is exactly why Subjectivity is needed in games. A person’s experience with a game is directly influenced by their play-style. This is important to a review/criticism as a person can really get a feel for what a game is.
With Objective reviews/criticism, the game is broken down to simply narrative, gameplay and visuals for the most part. This gives the reader a sense for what the game looks like and plays like to an extent. But NOT to the extent a Subjective review/criticism would do.
Take Rainbow Six: Siege for example, I have played an immense amount since early 2017, just before the release of it’s Velvet Shell expansion. I currently have around 850 hours played on Steam and love it to death, sure I have my gripes with it but it is truly a fantastic game.
However, if I were to give a review on it Objectively I couldn’t truly show what the game feels like to play. I would mention that the gun play and mechanics are spectacular, the feel of almost every gun is great and the ability to out skill an opponent (or out luck an opponent) and kill them with a ‘one-shot headshot’ is super satisfying each and every time. The breaching and rappelling mechanics were new to me and definitely took some getting used to but I love the uniqueness of it and the amount of versatility added to the game utilizing these mechanics.
If I were to give a Subjective review though, I would mention that dominating people is the single most satisfying bit in the game. Somehow clutching a 1-5 is a moment of pure hype and excitement among the whole team (be these people you know or not). But the game’s players can lean into the Killer category a lot. You see, R6: Siege has a friendly-fire mechanic, this means that teammates can damage each other. This leads to a lot of toxicity if a person gets annoyed with another. Over the time I’ve played I couldn’t count the amount of times I’ve been team-killed for seemingly no reason on both my hands and feet. It certainly ruins the experience sometimes.
A Team killing scenario with a box asking if it was intentional. If the player reports it as intentional the killer receives a penalty.
That is the difference between the two types of reviews/criticism. albeit to a smaller extent. Someone could read my Subjective review and be enticed to play the game more so than they otherwise would be, the possibility to just murder teammates that are annoying definitely talks to some people. In that same vein, it might very well turn some people off the game entirely.
This is why Subjective reviews/criticism are needed. They give a reader a more comprehensive feel for what the game is like to play and therefore can make a more informed decision .
Another reason we need Subjectivity in game’s reviews/criticism is because it gives a voice to the people that need it. In an Objective look at a game it doesn’t matter who you are, you are just a piece of meat tapping keys and talking about a game. Whereas a Subjective look brings your personality into account and really brings forward who YOU are. To relate to another post of mine (Diversity of LGBTQIA+ Characters in Video Games), I for one would love to point out the sexual orientation of the characters I encountered on my journey throughout a game. This mightn’t matter to some people but it does to me and a lot of other people.
All in all, I believe we need Subjectivity because it shows the game for what it truly is. An experience for the player. The player plays the game for the experience, be that as a Killer, Achiever, Explorer, Socializer or a mixture of the lot.
The player’s experience is moulded by their entire being, who they are, what they find important and how they play. Subjective criticism and reviews show this in a brighter light than an Objective view could ever.
Hello again! For this week’s first post I will be taking a look at a fellow blogger and colleague Mahalah or MoshiBoi (here’s a link to their Blog) and their response to an article titled “Revisiting Animal Crossing: New Leaf was a Mistake” by Kotaku writer ‘Narelle Ho Sang‘ , the original article can be found here.
I myself have never played an Animal Crossing game (a sin I know) but I have played a similar title in Stardew Valley and I am certainly looking forward to Animal Crossing: New Horizons‘ release in the coming weeks. I mention this as I need to state that I am not familiar with the game itself an it’s intricacies.
Animal Crossing: New Leaf Cover Art
Animal Crossing: New Horizons Cover Art
During my read of the MoshiBoi’s blog post, the title of the original article was quoted being about why Animal Crossing: New Leaf was a mistake. So my opinion on reading the blog was shaped by this misunderstanding and so I myself felt the article was a waste of time. I felt like the article more heavily talked about the problems with why returning to the game was a hard time due to NPC interactions heavily berating the player for leaving their beloved town.
After reading the original article for myself however, I now see that it is a talk about the problems with revisiting the game itself after putting it down for a long period of time. As Narelle stated “The hours and calendar days pass in real-time. The seasons change…”, the whole time they weren’t playing the Town continued to grow and NPCs grew tired of missing the player, who is the Mayor in this game.
Animal Crossing: New Leaf NPC – Purrl stating how long the player has put the game down
Going back to Moshiboi’s post, they go on to mention that the writer was immersed and clearly had fun while playing the game originally. While some of their planning and decorative decisions might be hard to look at, they at the time still enjoyed the game and did what they wanted to.
Both Blog and Article mention NPCs putting the player down for not playing the game for a while, Narelle stating “Each (NPC) laying on the guilt with emotional surgical preciseness—cutting me deep.” This goes to show the player’s attachment to these characters and the town they had made. This is the reason the NPCs talk in this way, to make the player feel bad and to get them to come back for a bit longer. Moshiboi, however, paints this as a severe and inappropriate “Guilt Trip” stating “I think getting guilt tripped by an NPC for not playing the game in a while is a bit much”. This is a fair statement as honestly these NPCs don’t know about the player’s attachment to the game or do they know about real-life events that might prevent play.
Moshiboi goes to say that since the game is mostly targeted at Children that a child hearing these statements from NPCs would make them want to come back even more so. This is because of the blurred line between Reality and Fiction that children are unable to discern.
Screenshot of gameplay of Animal Crossing: New Horizons from the E3 2019 Nintendo Treehouse
My take away from both the Article and Blog is that you can look back at your past self’s decisions and either love it or hate it, but you can’t neglect the fact that people change. As both authors stated, they have spent hours upon hours making their town into their own vision. Placing things where they want and doing what they want at any given time, this lends itself to the notion that while immersed in such a free game they enter the ‘Magic Circle’. This term refers to the zone a player can fall into when deeply immersed in a game’s world. It seems both of these players did at one point or another. Simply put, originally, the players loved what they were doing.
Another thing is that people’s style and tastes change over time. What was appealing to you 5 years ago might not necessarily appeal to you now. As someone who played soccer for 16 years of his life I can tell you that now having not played for 2 years now I have little to no interest in the sport. People Change.
People change but they had fun originally!
That’s it for this post, again you can find the original article and Moshiboi’s response here:
The 2010’s really saw an explosion of LGBTQIA+ characters in Entertainment Media, especially Video Games. While this trend is still building upwards, it is sometimes important to look back and see what we have gotten.
Ashly Burch is well known across Gaming and Television as a phenomenal Voice Actor, playing roles in Television such as Sasha Braus from Attack on Titan or Mayuri Shiina from Stein’s Gate. On the Video Game Side of things, Burch has done a plethora of roles such as Chloe Price from Life is Strange, Aloy from Horizon Zero Dawn and Tiny Tina from the Borderlands Series.
Ashly Burch
During her career, Burch has coincidentally been cast as LGBTQIA+ charcters, sometimes without even knowing until a few sessions in. Burch herself saying “I don’t know if it’s sort of a wonderful coincidence, or if I’m being cast with that in mind. But I think the majority of the characters I play at this point are LGBTQIA+.”. I think it’s a little crazy how prominent these characters can be in our society and exposure to media. The fact that Burch mightn’t even know that they are Queer goes to show that these characters don’t have their sexuality as their defining traits, and that they are both deep and interesting to not have to rely on that fact.
Burch goes on to say “these characters can all be funny or sweet or tough on the surface level, but they have deep and complex personal lives that really make them feel like living, breathing people.”. This gives these characters a real way to connect to any given person if they share traits or relate to personal struggles. As a Bisexual man myself I can relate to a lot characters of this sexuality such as Jacob Frye from Assassin’s Creed: Syndicate or Burch’s own character of Tiny Tina from the Borderlands Series. But as stated, it is not their sexuality alone that makes these characters appealing to me.
Tiny Tina Intro Card (Borderlands 2)
Tiny Tina Intro Card (Borderlands 3)
Speaking strictly about Tiny Tina for a moment, her sexuality is not explicitly stated in Borderlands 2, only hinted at by a writer from the series. She is portrayed as a crazy, explosives obsessed 13 year old, fitting of the series and setting, she is even described by another important character as a “Demolition Expert”. She has faced a multitude of struggles, particularly with losing her biological family at a young age and finding a way to survive in the harsh wasteland the game is set upon. As a 13 year old, she is just at the age to be starting to explore and question her sexuality (not that it’s anywhere near the forefront of her mind).
As for her appearance in Borderlands 3, Tina has made it to 20, age-wise, and is labelled as Bisexual strictly via in game dialogue during side quests, at times mentioning both an ex-boyfriend and an ex-girlfriend. One of which you get to murder for stealing Tina’s pet. But once again, while definitely more at the forefront, Tina’s sexuality is not the defining factor of her character. Her character progression hardly touches this subject in game and is much more focused on her struggle of survival and finding her own Family in recurring Characters, Brick and Mordecai.
Speaking of which, Burch says in the interview with Gayming Magazine that the trope of finding a family of your own is one of her favourites. This is expressed through her character Sam from Afterparty, where Sam struggles to find a home and family for herself amongst her blood family that is in compete tatters.
Sam Character Description (Afterparty)
Parvati Asexuality Quote (The Outer Worlds)
Burch also loved playing Parvati in The Outer Worlds, an Asexual woman who finds love due to their interactions with the player and embraces her sexuality. While finding happiness is somewhat rare for Queer characters, Burch portrays characters that shine a light on the hope that exists for a happy ending. This makes her, and more specifically these characters, a huge draw for Queer people, or more specifically, Queer women.
It is this diverse line-up of LGBTQIA+ characters in forms of media these days that give people of this nature, someone to look up to and relate to, sometimes even forming a special connection with a character. In recent years exposure to Queer characters has exploded and not all of them have been played by Ashly Burch (surprisingly). Some notable mentions include:
– Tracer (Lena Oxton), a Lesbian/Gay Character from Overwatch – Sir Hammerlocke, a Gay Character from the Borderlands Series – Korra, a Bisexual Character from The Legend of Korra – Trevor Phillips, a Bisexual Character from Grand Theft Auto V – Birdo, a Transgender Character from the Mario Franchise
Tracer (aka Lena Oxton), a Lesbian Character from Overwatch
Korra and Asami, two Bisexual Characters from The Legend of Korra
Birdo, a Transgender Character from the Mario Series
The creation and exposure to Queer Characters is growing, and it doesn’t look like it’s going to stop any time soon. Audiences are growing more accustom to and more accepting of these characters. It also seems like Voice Actors themselves are becoming more diverse, with Burch stating “There is an increasing amount of audition sides that have asked specifically for non-binary actors.”, stating that things are certainly changing, and for the better.
Burch also would love to see more diversity in games as a whole. While her role in Horizon Zero Dawn as Aloy was a fantastic one, in both character and performance, she would love to see a similar outing with a Pre-Determined Protagonist being a Person of Colour. Only enhancing the inclusiveness and diversity to these forms of media.
As for me, I certainly won’t complain at more diversity in Video Games and I certainly wouldn’t complain at more characters and stories to be latched onto. I can’t wait for the day where things like this are common place and no longer segregated. I think the world will be a better place at that point.
But that’s it from me for this week, if you want to read the original article featuring the interview with Ashly Burch, you can find it here:
I want to say a quick thank you to Gayming Magazine and Aimee Hart for publishing this article and getting my mind thinking on the matter. Thanks for reading this weeks post! I look forward to next week.
I am Nathan Hibbert, a 22 year old Game Design student at JMC Academy. I’ve been an avid consumer of Video Games since a very young age, often using it as an escape from my day to day life. I mostly play RPGs, Tactical FPS’ and Story driven Games.
As young as 3 I was playing Video Games, I would often play the Fighting Game Tekken on my old Playstation 1. This eventually led to me being gifted a Playstation 2 at age 9 and being immersed in the worlds of the Action Platformers in the Jak and Daxter Series, the Ratchet and Clank Series, the Tekken Series and even the Racing Games of the Need for Speed Series.
I would eventually go out to own a Playstation 3, Playstation 4, Nintendo 3DS, Nintendo Switch and playing extensively on PC.
Ratchet & Clank 3: Up Your Arsenal Aus Cover Art
Jak 2 Renegade Cover Art
What in Game Design Interests Me?
As young as the age of 8 or 9 I would always take time to write out my own stories and characters. I thoroughly enjoyed creating worlds with their own lore and characters with their own backstories and creating an attachment to them. This interest stemmed from the Video Games I played, such as the Jak and Daxter series, as well as the Films, such as Star Wars, and Books, such as Skulduggery Pleasant, that I exposed myself to.
I would write stories involving many different genres and many different characters. I dabbled in Fantasy, Horror and even Romance stories, always taking inspiration from some form of media that I was currently invested in.
I would love to create my own worlds and characters so that many other people can get the same enjoyment I do in getting lost in a world and story. To me, there is almost nothing more satisfying.
What do I Care for in a Game?
When I’m looking to purchase a game I look for both an interesting Game Play Loop (GPL) as well as a story I can get well invested in. Depending on what I’m craving at the time I can even be looking for something that lets me play with other people, I have always loved playing multiplayer games with both people I know and people I don’t. In the last few years games that have ticked all, or some of, the aforementioned boxes include:
– The Dark Souls Series – Rainbow Six: Siege – Overwatch – Stardew Valley – God of War PS4 – Pokemon – The Borderlands Series
Another thing I look for in a game, specifically in Competitive Multiplayer games, is an eSports scene. After picking up Overwatch in 2016 I became invested in it’s Professional scene, even more so after the launch of the Overwatch League (OWL) in 2018. I currently follow the Los Angeles Valiant, Dallas Fuel and the Toronto Defiant in OWL. Another game I am somewhat invested in eSports wise is Rainbow Six: Siege.
OWL 2018 Opening Match Dallas Fuel vs Seoul Dynasty (left) Rainbow Six: Siege Season 10 Finals (Right)
What is my Favourite Game?
Asking someone what their favourite game is is like asking someone what their favourite food or drink is, there are just so many amazing options that it’s sometimes hard to pin down an answer. Despite that I do have a clear winner as my Favourite Game. That being, Dark Souls.
Dark Souls
Dark Souls is a Dark Fantasy RPG game from Japanese developer, FromSoftware. It tells the story of a replaceable character somehow defeating dangerous creatures and areas, and attaining amazing feats. Dark Souls has a Game Play Loop that is reminiscent of old Playstation 1 games, minimal save points, tough enemies and rewarding progression. As the player you have immense choice in how you attack any given problem, an outstanding amount of weaponry and equipment to choose from and plenty of mechanics that allow, or disallow, certain play styles.
The Story of Dark Souls is very…Convoluted. You play as a human that has been stricken by the Curse of the Undead. This curse forces a person to come back to life at a Bonfire upon death, this will occur infinitely until said person goes insane and will attack anyone and everything it sees. As the player you must go around and defeat monstrous enemies and bosses to change the world for better, or worse, your choice. The story itself is not told through conventional methods, such as cut-scenes and dialogue dumps. It is instead told through small amounts of these things and mostly told through Item Descriptions on weapons and equipment. These descriptions develop the world in a way usual methods would not, it shows the world’s history and characters in less obvious way. You could play and finish the entire game without knowing what you did or why you did it. This is why I LOVE Dark Souls, what is explicitly told is very vague and allows for the player to come to their own conclusions on events and reasoning’s, this allows each player to possibly have their own interpretation and experience with the game.
Dark Souls also has an extensive multiplayer factor as well. The player can summon other players to help them with tough areas or drop helpful items, this, once again, gives each player a unique experience and gives struggling players the help they need to defeat strong bosses. On the other hand it also has an invasion system, where a player can invade another player’s world and hunt them down for their own spoils. This can be frustrating at times, but also very rewarding and fun at others.
If that isn’t enough to get you interested here is two reviews that may help you better understand Dark Souls and even might get you to play one of the most rewarding games I have ever played:
Dark Souls was released October 4th 2011 for PS3, Xbox 360 and was released for PC August 23rd 2012 A remaster named Dark Souls: Remastered was released May 24th 2018 for PS4, Xbox One and PC. It was also released for Nintendo Switch on October 19th 2018.
That’s it Folks!
Thanks for reading my first blog post and I hope you know more about me and my relationship with Video Games. I will be updating this at least weekly with plenty of other Gaming related content.
Thanks again!
– Nathan “Naff” Hibbert
Nathan Hibbert (Left) and a friend at the Overwatch World Cup 2017 in Sydney, Aus.
Naff's Gaming Blog 