The Escapist, Issue 29: Extra!

[Evil Avatar]

The weekend edition of The Escapist (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29) is now online, with two new articles taking a philisophical look at gaming.

Khurram Ahmed: Making the Sacrifice (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29/19)
Religion is always a touchy subject to approach, in any art form, but there's no denying it has a profound impact on all of them. Khurram Ahmed discusses religion and videogames.

Shannon Drake: Striding the Wasteland (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29/26)
"This hero strides a wasteland, a strange world where a teenager or a government commando is the only person with a brain or willpower, and where the entire world is against him." Shannon Drake rails against the lack of compelling protagonists.

[captainstrombosis]

Finished reading "making the sacrifice" article.

While I agree with many points, this was just stating the obvious. Religion is a touchy subject in real life. Causing many conflicts and fights, it is overly evident why video game developers and publishers would want to stay as far away from it as possible.

With that said. The religious landscape in videogames is far from as bleak as he makes it out to be.

[Kelegacy]

Evil is a mole for The Escapist, I just know it.

:)

[DaXIthR]

It is evident why video game developers and publishers would want to stay as far away from {religion} as possible.

The religious landscape in videogames is far from as bleak as he makes it out to be.

Mr. Strombosis:

Firstly, please resolve these two sentences for me.

Secondly, are you saying the article didn't say anything beyond he obvious? Did you ever notice that god games are never set in the modern day?

[RMan]

Although I agree with the point he’s making, I do think that more credit should be given to the difficulty of making better protagonists. I think most people likely compare books and movies protagonists to game protagonists and find game ones lacking, and quite frankly they always will. Games have much more to worry about during design phases (like game mechanics), and have less control over the overall story/environment and especially the protagonist. Although I think games could generally do better, it’s not the easily fixable problem that many seem to think it is.

(I guess I should make it clear that was for the second article :)).

[Mason]

While I agree with many points, this was just stating the obvious. Religion is a touchy subject in real life. Causing many conflicts and fights, it is overly evident why video game developers and publishers would want to stay as far away from it as possible.

He missed some huge stuff. He brought up Shadow of the Colossus, but didn't mention its zillions of biblical/Babylonian references. The Castlevania series is replete with Christian iconography, including the throwing of holy water that he found so patently absurd a notion in DOOM. And what about Painkiller? Writing off Christianity in the Diablo series is another gaff, has he even played those games?

And most RPGs have some form of a holy person, particularly those of D&D descent. The fact that the divine favor of their respective gods is as deterministic as the will-based powers of a magic user can't completely disqualify them.

God games like Black & White or Dungeon Keeper let your subjects pray to you at temples. The author was flat-out wrong on that point.

Final Fantasy games make reference to many different mythological systems.

In short, his view of religion in games is very weak and spotty. He overlooks and ignores enough significant examples that I really question his honesty. One can make the case that few games are gnostic in nature, but that's just in keeping with both modern American and Japanese cultures.

I mean, how would a modern god game work, anyways? Occasionally doodling on potato chips and water stains? Killing off Supreme Court justices at Pat Robertson's behest? Silently weeping as your followers slaughter each other? Sounds like a winner, it's criminal no one has made such a game.

[H.Bogard]

I mean, how would a modern god game work, anyways? Occasionally doodling on potato chips and water stains? Killing off Supreme Court justices at Pat Robertson's behest? Silently weep as your followers slaughter each other? Sounds like a winner, it's criminal no one has made such a game.

Bruce almighty - the official game of the movie...

[DaXIthR]

I mean, how would a modern god game work, anyways? Occasionally doodling on potato chips and water stains? Killing off Supreme Court justices at Pat Robertson's behest? Silently weeping as your followers slaughter each other? Sounds like a winner, it's criminal no one has made such a game.

The article wasn't meant to be an encyclopedia on the subject. It's not fair to say it was in complete analysis because such an analysis can never be comprehensive.

Shadow of the Colossus' influences are never made as clear as they are in many other games, like God of War, for example. The author mentioned that in itself was noteworthy.

Castlevania's crucifixes and holy water are marginal elements borrowed from occult literature, not as developed as God of War. The Belmonts rarely every pray, though they do kneel on occasion. The iconography is thrown in, and not developed.

The author concedes that god games like Black and White have a mythology involving temples and worship, but its thrown in and not developed.

I wonder if you even read the whole article.

The omission of Diablo and D&D is your most valid criticism. But again, some game was always bound to missing.

And finally, regarding the boxed quote...that's just puerile. You don't think wars happened in the worlds current god games are set in? You don't think people on both sides died? You don't think people thought spirits possesses virtually everything - animate and inanimate?

It really makes me question everything you've said.

And what's with attacking the author's honesty? What does he have to be dishonest about?

Regards,
The Author

[Mason]

The article wasn't meant to be an encyclopedia on the subject. It's not fair to say it was in complete analysis because such an analysis can never be comprehensive.

When the thesis has to do with the absence of religion in games, failing to make note of lots of instances of religion in games is pretty damning.

Shadow of the Colossus' influences are never made as clear as they are in many other games, like God of War, for example. The author mentioned that in itself was noteworthy.

If you played through SotC and didn't get the many Old Testament references, I've got to say you're really in no position to discuss religious symbolism.

And of course you're way off-base in praising God of War's references to mythology, since they were all confused and mixed up. Pandora's Box does what now? I liked the game, but it'd make Edith Hamilton spin in her grave.

Castlevania's crucifixes and holy water are marginal elements borrowed from occult literature, not as developed as God of War. The Belmonts rarely every pray, though they do kneel on occasion. The iconography is thrown in, and not developed.

The article cites fighting with holy water as a significantly Christian addition to DOOM. But fighting with holy water in Castlevania is meaningless? Gotcha.

The author concedes that god games like Black and White have a mythology involving temples and worship, but its thrown in and not developed.
Despite the obvious place temples and cathedrals would have in a god game, they are ignored. They are removed from the context by unerringly giving the player control over gangs of hunters and gatherers.
If you've played Black & White, you'd know that temples and worship are central to your godhood. What did you expect beyond this?
The omission of Diablo and D&D is your most valid criticism. But again, some game was always bound to missing.

The thesis was that religion is conspicuously absent in games. Waving away numerous examples of places in which religion is present is kind of pathetic.

And finally, regarding the boxed quote...that's just puerile. You don't think wars happened in the worlds current god games are set in? You don't think people on both sides died? You don't think people thought spirits possesses virtually everything - animate and inanimate?

My point with that quote was that religion in the modern day world is not exactly a barrel of monkeys, and would be a pretty damn depressing thing to make a game about, if anyone was brave enough to suffer the political attacks that would accompany such a game. Maybe you didn't get the jokes involved, let me know if I should explain anything.

It really makes me question everything you've said.

And what's with attacking the author's honesty? What does he have to be dishonest about?

Regards,
The Author
The article tends to focus on how absent religion is from games. When I can rattle off a bunch of games with significant religious or mythological components that the author either doesn't bring up or mentions dismissively, it's fair to then question whether those works were completely unknown or if they were excluded because they ran contrary to the thesis.

Like Diablo, a game with many overt Christian components, was brought up, but only to mention that the evil in the game resides in the church. Stellar.

[Mason]

Other points: SimCity doesn't let you build churches, as you're playing as the mayor, and in America separation of church and state prevents the state from founding churches. Churches do appear on their own in residentially-zoned regions.

Racing games: Perhaps you know better, but I'd wager good money that they don't include churches simply to keep religious groups from getting upset that people can crash their cars into churches or (in GTA) kill people of a particular religion. No reason to read a sinister motive into their absence.

You mention RE4 because of its violence, but ignore its take on religion. But then nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

Religion in FF7 could fill a master's thesis. Lots has been written on the topic.

Second Life is full of player-made content. And yup, religion is there (http://www.virtualworldsreview.com/there/screenshots/there_063004_jesus1.jpg).

[Draft]

I'm not going to read it because reading sucks but I hope he mentions actraiser.

When I pray, it's to a blue and yellow knight that kicks ass.

[Mason]

I'm not going to read it because reading sucks but I hope he mentions actraiser.

When I pray, it's to a blue and yellow knight that kicks ass.
Good call, the first Actraiser was awesome. Hmm...

*slinks off to a ROM site*

[Draft]

It is shocking to me that there are not 3 dozen actraiser clones floating around.

[SMES]

I had started to type something to provoke a deeper perspective on religious morality and lessons versus simple symbolism, but I'm in a hurry right now.

Instead I'll just say that I really enjoy the Escapist. I said it before, but the Escapist and Next Gen online need to combine their efforts toword a print magazine. I miss having a quality print magazine.

[Mason]

It is shocking to me that there are not 3 dozen actraiser clones floating around.
I don't know how popular it was at the time, although it was certainly one of the best looking early SNES titles. It isn't easy to fuse two distinct gametypes, though, so its coolness might've been hard to copy.

[TrackZero]

Instead I'll just say that I really enjoy the Escapist. I said it before, but the Escapist and Next Gen online need to combine their efforts toword a print magazine. I miss having a quality print magazine.

I enjoy some of the Escapists articles. Lately though some of them are seeming to go out of their way to make a point. Ah well, it's still an enjoyable read. I just think they shouldn't take themselves so seriously. ;)

[DaXIthR]

When the thesis has to do with the absence of religion in games, failing to make note of lots of instances of religion in games is pretty damning.

Man, the thesis appears to you that way because that's what you're reading for. Obviously, religion is dealt with by ignoring it. Tetris and Pac-man don't offer any religious framework.

Funny how no one says the bit on Katamari Damacy was ridiculous and misplaced.

Vampirism and the root of Castlevania is born from occult writings. DOOM finds a portal to the centre of eternal damnnation, and then ignores the religious implications. The games begin from very different origins.

The source material for Castlevania is Nosferatu and Bram Stoker. The source material for DOOM is the Divine Comedy and the Bible. See?

And please don't quote my article by pulling out an arbitrary sentence, and considering those around it.

You can't write a masters thesis on FF7's mythology.

Why is RE4's take on religion important? What would mentioning it have contributed?

Oh yeah, I recant my earlier comment on the mistake I made by omitting D&D. It's not as significant to the discussion because of its roots in pen and paper, and not being an original property.

I could go on...but I could just as well bang my head against a wall. The latter sounds more soothing at this point.

[TrackZero]

Man, the thesis appears to you that way because that's what you're reading for. Obviously, religion is dealt with by ignoring it. Tetris and Pac-man don't offer any religious framework.


Um....those games have nothing to do with religion. Now all titles are supposed to?

[Balthasar]

You can't write a masters thesis on FF7's mythology.
I thought that was kind of funny myself. I mean, I love FF VII, but a majority of the religious references in the game amount to superficial naming/name-dropping. If you've ever writen a paper beyond 10 pages, you'd see how daunting it would be to take what was in FF7 and turn it into a 40 page paper.

I thought the article on video game protagonists was interesting. I guess I'm not the only one that doesn't think video games offer the most complex of stories out there.

[IIArchonII]

I dunno about that article... for me at least, the Villian is a lot more important than the hero.

Crono in Chrono Trigger says nothing the whole game, I thought he was a fine hero.

The Nameless One and his group was probably the best hero group ever though.

[captainstrombosis]

Balthasar don't be stupid and drag that debate over here please. He still says he likes some :)

Pac-Man and tetris don't have religious frame work...because it would add nothing to the game. Not that they are avoiding it. The word avoid means you have to intentionally stay away from something.

[nein89]

Man, the thesis appears to you that way because that's what you're reading for.

So help him out. What, precisely, was your point?

I can certainly see how, for someone whose religion is a central part of their life, it would be annoying not to have any decent games incorporate this. Most gamers, however, I can't imagine really care all that much when they play a game and don't find any real world religious iconography playing a central role. There's a market present, and if I had a bunch of money I wanted to spend to make more money or worked in marketing, that would be an interesting point. As is...not so much.

The second article was somewhat more interesting, but still sort of...misguided, I'd say. Dead on about the ineffectiveness of tying ethical considerations to gameplay rewards (this is one of the things that killed Jade Empire for me), but this isn't about making the protagonist more interesting as a character. It's about involving the player. Personal opinion; what we need is not more morality in games, it's reasonable consequences in response to a player's actions. When a situation is written into a game with the intent of letting the player be good or evil, it tends to come across as simplistic and tedious. When a situation is written with the intent of letting the player make any of a variety of sensible choices with sensible consequences, we get something interesting. This is why Fallout is still better than anything Bioware's made since Black Isle closed.

[Mason]

Maybe stop banging your head and actually think about these points.

You claimed that Simcity, Second Life, and various racing/GTA games conspicuously lacked churches. I showed why that wasn't reasonable.

Have you played RE4? It equates the spread of religion with infection by a parasite that makes you hostile to those without the parasite, and the setting and clothing both invoke the Spanish Inquisition in which over 100k people were tried for heresy. So that has no relevance to religion at all? It was, according to many publications, the biggest game of 2005, and it had religion all over it, so it seems reasonable to expect it to come up in a survey of religion in games.

Yeah, I remember a lot of bloody pentagrams in the works of Dante. DOOM comes from cheap horror films.

Not only have you made your whole point indistinct, but you've also raised the bar regarding "significant" discussion of religion in games to silly levels. Iconography doesn't count (Castlevania). Allegory doesn't count (SotC). So other than Jesus shooting you a thumbs-up after every boss, what could possibly count?

[Mason]

I thought that was kind of funny myself. I mean, I love FF VII, but a majority of the religious references in the game amount to superficial naming/name-dropping. If you've ever writen a paper beyond 10 pages, you'd see how daunting it would be to take what was in FF7 and turn it into a 40 page paper.
Gnostic vs agnostic theism in FF7. Easy.

[Mason]

The second article was somewhat more interesting, but still sort of...misguided, I'd say. Dead on about the ineffectiveness of tying ethical considerations to gameplay rewards (this is one of the things that killed Jade Empire for me), but this isn't about making the protagonist more interesting as a character. It's about involving the player. Personal opinion; what we need is not more morality in games, it's reasonable consequences in response to a player's actions. When a situation is written into a game with the intent of letting the player be good or evil, it tends to come across as simplistic and tedious. When a situation is written with the intent of letting the player make any of a variety of sensible choices with sensible consequences, we get something interesting. This is why Fallout is still better than anything Bioware's made since Black Isle closed.
I agree, I've railed against the Lionhead and Bioware morality RPGs many a time. It's just boring and meaningless. It only makes any sense in a Star Wars setting, but even then they could have a more complex system.

The Fallout games aren't perfect examples, though, as you frequently have the option to do the "right" thing and have it cost you something material but reward you with experience. Usually experience was in short supply but a crafty player could amass riches, so it was more a question of cost/benefit than anything else. But then the Fallout games had more complex sections that let players develop their place in the world, too, so they're definitely better than most anything else out there.

The problem is one of will and agency, though. If nothing else in the world is depicted as animating except in response to your actions, morality and character become pointless.

[Balthasar]

Gnostic vs agnostic theism in FF7. Easy.
You'll be lucky if you can stretch what is in FF7 to 10 pages. Coming up with a theme is not the same as coming up with a full outline. There is simply not enough material there.

[Balthasar]

Balthasar don't be stupid and drag that debate over here please. He still says he likes some :)
Doesn't change the overall thrust of the article. I'm not the one that wrote it anyway, or created the thread.

[Mason]

You'll be lucky if you can stretch what is in FF7 to 10 pages. Coming up with a theme is not the same as coming up with a full outline. There is simply not enough material there.
1) You're presuming you have a firm grasp of everything I was referring to in FF7. I think I can safely claim that you don't get it all, but at the end of that pissing contest lies you challenging me to write a 40 page paper just to appease some random forum guy. Which I'll preemptively say won't happen.
2) Can you name another video game which could entail a more detailed analysis, on religion or any other topic?

[Balthasar]

1) You're presuming you have a firm grasp of everything I was referring to in FF7. I think I can safely claim that you don't get it all, but at the end of that pissing contest lies you challenging me to write a 40 page paper just to appease some random forum guy. Which I'll preemptively say won't happen.
I'm not challenging you to anything. It is simply my opinion, based on the amount of time playing that game and the amount of time spent writing exhaustive academic papers on works with more intertextual content to refer to, that it would be a mightly big task to make what is in FF7 into the focus of a 40 page thesis paper. If you want to do one, go right ahead. I'd certainly love to read it (unless it's terrible). But you don't have to prove anything.

2) Can you name another video game which could entail a more detailed analysis, on religion or any other topic?
Honestly? I would imagine (without having actually tried, of course) that Xenogears would have much more to sink your teeth into. Have you ever played it?

[Banacek]

Can someone give Mason a column already? I really enjoy reading all of his posts.

I could go on...but I could just as well bang my head against a wall. The latter sounds more soothing at this point.

This is how you respond to honest critism? I don't think you're going to make it on the internets...

[Mason]

Honestly? I would imagine (without having actually tried, of course) that Xenogears would have much more to sink your teeth into. Have you ever played it?
Good call with Xenogears, you could certainly make a good case for that one. It's really sad how far Square has fallen.

[Mason]

Can someone give Mason a column already? I really enjoy reading all of his posts.
But then I'd only have myself to argue with. And I hate myself.
This is how you respond to honest critism? I don't think you're going to make it on the internets...
Eh, he could've gotten away with it just fine if he'd told me "It's an Escapist piece, it's supposed to be filled with portentous-sounding game-related cultural discussions, but a crystal-clear intent or academic stringency is purely optional." I get that, and it's a worthwhile piece so long as it sparks discussion on the topic, which it obviously succeeded at.

But suggesting the conspicuous absence of religion from many games without following it up with any research (try asking Will Wright why Sims can't pray?), or even defining what should count as the presence of religion in games? That's playing it a little fast and loose.

[Balthasar]

Good call with Xenogears, you could certainly make a good case for that one. It's really sad how far Square has fallen.
If you like Gnosticism, most of that game is centered around ideas from that religion. I'm still of the opinion that Xenogears, as flawed as it was, represents the peak of their game development. I'll be very curious how FF XII comes out, but with how long it has been delayed, it's making me very nervous. I still haven't gotten DQ VIII yet, so I haven't played that demo.

Anyway, Xenogears had heavy religious overtones, but in (slight) defense of the article, it was held back from the U.S. because of some fears that it would offend. Or something.

[TrackZero]

So other than Jesus shooting you a thumbs-up after every boss, what could possibly count?

Mmmmm, so quotable.

[TrackZero]

Can someone give Mason a column already? I really enjoy reading all of his posts.


Here here. I've noticed I now go out of my way to read any thread he's commenting in, because it's usually some good stuff.

[Mason]

If you like Gnosticism, most of that game is centered around ideas from that religion. I'm still of the opinion that Xenogears, as flawed as it was, represents the peak of their game development. I'll be very curious how FF XII comes out, but with how long it has been delayed, it's making me very nervous. I still haven't gotten DQ VIII yet, so I haven't played that demo.

Anyway, Xenogears had heavy religious overtones, but in (slight) defense of the article, it was held back from the U.S. because of some fears that it would offend. Or something.
No, I was referring to little-g gnosticism, in a conceptual sense. Big-G Gnosticism gets into a lot of specifically hermetic wackiness.

I've played the demo, FFXII will be at best alright. It comes from the fellow behind FFTA, which I found a very weak successor. That combat seemed a lot like .hack, which isn't a flattering comparison. My expectations are low, I'll certainly be reading a lot of reviews before considering it.

[Mason]

Here here. I've noticed I now go out of my way to read any thread he's commenting in, because it's usually some good stuff.
Heh, well we'll it seemed that Khurram didn't share your opinion. :(

[captainstrombosis]

Anygame where you kill god is definatly gonna offend SOMEONE :P

[EternalGamer]

The thing that I've noticed about Mason's posts is that he always takes the time to fully develop his thoughts before he shares them. This is even more rare because its the type of thing the immediacy of the internet seems to discourage. I know my initial reactions get the best of me on a regular basis, and it's often not until several posts (or edits) later that I start to develop something resembling a coherant thought that anywhere close to being worth sharing. I am not sure how he always resists the urge to jump the gun, but kudos to him on the quality control. Now if you'll all excuse me, I have a date to play Quake 3 against Rman's dog. :)

Dan