Blogging the experience of gameplayhttps://www.gamelog.cl/gamers/GamerPage.php?idgamer=1548https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4997So now I’m in hell -- literally. At this point I have settled to a point of frustration and disbelief that the designers would actually go this far with the medium. I definitely have to affirm that I am abused at this point, to the point of frustration – I’ve spent most of my own time playing this game hoping that I can gain some kind of meaningful insight through a thoughtful narrative, but instead I was given a repetitive scenario where I have to go through the combat system over and over again just to progress, right after I was tired of making a conscious effort to actually kill the students. There’s no way I’m going to play for beyond this session. I personally believe it’s the designer’s responsibility to treat the game as a “documentative” medium, while at the same time making it accessible for people who are more interested in the story rather than the gameplay, simply because the gameplay had gotten really boring at this point. I guess I’ll take some time now to reflect about the game’s significance. I do think it is significant, in that it proves games that it can be a storytelling medium, especially for real-world events in this case. I don’t think it was insulting to portray the characters in the game as 16-bit characters because this was thoughtfully designed with a narrative perspective in mind. In other words, the killers eventually transformed their worldviews similar to that of what is expressed in Super Columbine RPG. I feel that is valid. But at the same, this can be really misunderstood. One would say choosing to use the 16-bit graphic and making the situation a parody of a JRPG is insulting and desensitizing to the reality of the actual shootings. It’s because this game can be misunderstood as an offense to the victims and the school that the game is not accessible. I feel the designers had a responsibility to make this accessible not only to gamers and non-gamers, but to the victims (and families of the victims) who were involved in the massacre. Otherwise this makes a great documentary since it represents an interpretation of two emergent motivations based on an assembly of arguments made from collective evidence related to the shootings… at least until the two protagonists reached hell. (This entry has been edited2 times. It was last edited on Tue, 29 May 2012 15:07:24.)Tue, 29 May 2012 15:03:11 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4997&iddiary=9258https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4997Prewritten: 5/27 So I reach inside the school, and I start killing these teenagers. But no namedrops here – rather, they were given names of high school stereotypes such as “jock type,” “nerdy girl,” “church girl,” “church boy,” “janitor,” “English teacher,” just to name a few. There was an interesting scenario where the characters spare the life of one kid for actually addressing them by name – here I was, thinking I was going to kill everyone at the school. Well, at first I wanted to kill everyone in the school and see if that was possible. According to what I’ve heard, Eric and Dylan weren’t able to actually do that. But I guess by giving the player the option to kill everyone they were trying to communicate that in reality, they COULD’VE done that if they knew what they were getting into. My game experience was different, however. In fact, it was so different that I think it caused the game to communicate a very inconsistent message: I was getting tired of killing. I mean, this really would’ve been a different story if this were a Quake-mod since I’d at least have the thrill of aiming and shooting, but getting into combat and repeating the same commands over and over again diluted the meaningfulness of the gameplay. Sure, I was gaining combat experience points, but I just didn’t care anymore. I wanted the plot to go on. But now that I think of it, since the designers decided to name this game Super Columbine Massacre RPG as a nod to the SNES games made then, it implies that I can only expect the same kind of depth of play that I would find in an SNES game that has “Super” in it. In other words, gameplay would be more emphasized than the storyline, or I guess gameplay would consume most of my time than the storyline would. If that’s the case, then Super Columbine Massacre RPG can be a parody of those games, too. But does that detract from the message that ought to be conveyed, which is to narrate the perspective of the boys? To a point, it didn’t. I understand from the messages of “NBK” that they were supposed to be emotionless killers and from introducing “Doom” that they treated their experience like a game. But if I get tired of killing, it communicates an inconsistent emotion about the killers, implying that they indeed had enough killing and decided to give up. I guess the designers did anticipate this because by the time I entered the library and activated the police shooting event there, I was asked if I wanted to keep killing people or just end it there, and much to my satisfaction, I chose the latter. Okay, so this time around the designers were thoughtful. I think what was really interesting was that they didn’t show Eric and Dylan actually committing suicide. Sure, they showed photos of them, but at first I thought someone had shot them by then. Maybe the designers were trying to avoid arrest for promoting suicide? Either way, it wouldn’t have been ethical for them to show a scene of suicide, despite having the player participate in an activity of innocent bloodshed. Actually, I would argue that the creation of the game itself wasn't ethical because I don't think the developers had the direct consent of the school or the victims. I do believe that the creators are entitled to the first amendment, however there is an emotional cost of making this game, and that is the emotions of the victims and the people who empathize with them. I think the designers could have done a better job with the game by communicating the perspective of the killers as if they were telling the story to the victims as well, and not just to an outsider of the situation. (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Tue, 29 May 2012 14:47:25.)Tue, 29 May 2012 05:29:52 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4997&iddiary=9251https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4997Prewritten: 5/26 Before actually playing this game, I was already expecting a J-RPG portrayal style, with an interesting narrative possibly overpowering the somewhat tedious turn-based gameplay. And yes, my expectations were correct – but not to the degree that I had expected. By placing a lot of tidbits here and there such as the Doom game, the Marilyn Manson CD, the Denver Water toilet, and “NBK” played on their television set, there was a very interesting documentary-styled aspect to the game which I figured the designers were probably inspired from Squaresoft’s work with Chrono Trigger, who very much did the same for its own characters. It’s like picking up these “hidden items” were like Easter Eggs that weren’t necessary for the plot to progress, but definitely helped better understand the characters and what fueled their motivations. Yet at the same time, gameplay in terms of the combat system was kept simple so that the players can focus on the narrative. I personally wouldn’t think it would’ve been fair to create a hardcore, complex combat system in a game like this, since the purpose was to tell a story, not to give players a challenge. I was very disappointed when I found that the designers did not do a consistent job of guiding players to where they want them to. When I was at the parking lot for the first time, I forgot to bring the bombs and wandered into the cafeteria, wondering what I was supposed to be doing. They could’ve made my partner remind me about the bombs – why do I need to go through the effort of picking up the bags when an automated cinematic could’ve done that for me? At the very least, I could’ve been reminded before I enter the school. Then after a few events, I was supposed to go to this hill and press the confirm button in a certain area to let the events progress. There’s a problem regarding accessibility here – how was I supposed to know where to press the confirm button? Sure, the readme told me to press the confirm button when in doubt, but honestly, an event collision could have easily been made then. At this point, I was feeling a little abused for participating in the game, trying to figure out what the designers want me to do for the game to progress. Since it’s a story-driven game, I think it should be as nearly as accessible as a visual novel. Only this kind of novel would have a simple combat system. As a result of this inaccessibility however, more than an hour of gameplay had already passed, and I haven’t even killed anyone inside the school yet (though I did kill some in the parking lot). All this time wasted when I could have been told a substantial story already! (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Tue, 29 May 2012 04:47:11.)Tue, 29 May 2012 04:44:28 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4997&iddiary=9250https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4975I'm on the 4th Chapter now, and I just want to comment on a few things. - Ranged attacks are seriously OP for this game, especially for knights. I haven't played many sRPGs or tabletop games but the ranged attacks at this point are close to ridiculous. Ken is a spear-wielding PLDN right now and he is leveling up faster than anyone else because of his 2-unit range and incredibly fast speed compared to everyone else's. Not to mention the difference between the two major bosses I've faced - one was a Marionette and the other a General who uses a sword. I had a way tougher time with the Marionette simply because her (his?) spells were AoE spells that could take out anyone with one hit, whereas the General can be gangbanged by surrounding him Go-style with 8 or more units, and he can only fight back by attacking 1 unit with much less damage. ...and what was incredibly unfair was that I had to face the Marionette first. - How this compares to modern tactics games... in a way, not so much. I remember playing FFTactics and relying on Lancers and Holy Knights to inflict damage from afar as a way to kind of hit-and-run enemies. The only difference is that they're not as accessible as they were in Shining Force. The enemy obviously gets tough if their attacks affect multiple party members. The final bosses and enemies of this game really exploit this. -I honestly don't know. Maybe there's this hidden desire lingering about that wishes to at least damage scale these AoE/ranged attacks. And maybe I just have a problem with game balances that allows grinding and leveling up statistics. (This entry has been edited2 times. It was last edited on Thu, 03 May 2012 13:00:09.)Thu, 03 May 2012 12:53:36 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4975&iddiary=9220https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4975Tried to find a good strategy RPG to play, and my blessings were found - Shining Force! I never played the game before, but it reminds me of when I played Landstalker due to the look and feel of the UI. I haven't played Fire Emblem yet so I can't make a comparison to anything else except for FF: Tactics, but this sure beats the GBA version of it (no referees... yay!). Really don't like how most battles have to be restarted if the opposition's too tough to sort of "grind" through the game. It's a very weird cycle, and after going through it once, makes the game less meaningful after going a few rounds. I guess I'll go through the entire game and hope that the endgame is actually really neat and customizable. But am I putting hopeless faith onto an old-school game? EDIT: One thing I have to add though. The music! Reminds me of good ol' Warcraft, with the marching snare drums and all. Visually, the colors were so sharp though, they easily make me dizzy while playing on the go. (This entry has been edited3 times. It was last edited on Tue, 24 Apr 2012 01:04:31.)Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:57:52 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4975&iddiary=9212https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4971This time around, eventually after going through some missions, I was finally given a lowrider of my own to customize. Actually, I grew rather attached to it because it was astonishingly interactive - the suspenders can bounce in certain directions to any beat or tempo that I wanted! And to top it off, I was jamming to “Poison” by Bell Div Devoe on the radio. Yeah, that's the old school jam that I headbanged to when I was 3! I finally had that faint pleasure of cruising around in a lowrider with the music turned on real loud - just as it happened around my neighborhood when I was a child - except it would be really loud salsa music. It was even more interesting that I had a lowrider now since I actually wanted to keep the car nice looking with no dents or anything - I followed the rules of the road! Or at least whatever rules I can follow, which was limited to the yellow linings on the street and the stoplights. Consequently, it was less likely for me to run over people or get caught by the police. Plus, I had to take really good care of driving around rival gang members, otherwise my beautiful car will get shot at and explode. Heck, I don’t even have to follow the theme of the game anymore! I’ll just grab my lowrider. I find it humorous that my attachment to a material object actually caused me to commit less crimes. It made me think about poverty in the real world though and how everyone else doesn’t get to have that kind of experience. I figured, if everyone was given alowrider or crime-safe hobby to concentrate on, there’d be less harmful crimes going on. At least that’s what I naturally concluded from the consequences of having a lowrider in this game.Thu, 19 Apr 2012 15:01:39 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4971&iddiary=9210https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4971Prewritten: 4/13/11 I’ll take some time now to reflect more on the narrative of the game. To what I can recall, CJ is working for some police officer and now has to regain the respect of his neighborhood homeboys. I can imagine respect is important for the context of this game, seeing as how San Andreas is a very violent area filled with gang wars and whatnot. With an area so tense, just ticking off one gang member is enough to get killed by countless others. That’s what this game communicated to me when I attempted to beat up one of the members dressed in purple - if I had betrayed my green comrades, I’d expect the same to happen. In this manner, I think GTA makes valid commentary about social comraderie when respect is emphasized as a driving variable for success. Still, I wasn’t very interested in the game’s narrative. What I ended up doing for the next 30 minutes was really playing around with the game like an open sandbox. I figured since the game was so open it deserved to be explored, and I went out as farthest as I could as I was driving in a stolen firetruck. This is the general foundation of my ethical experience of the game. I didn’t care if I ran people over because there were no real negative consequences surrounding that, and all I really wanted to do was explore. If I ran someone over and the police killed me, I restart at the hospital. If some gang member wanted to shoot me down, I’d simply shoot back. So I kept on exploring. Eventually I ended up on some island, where I guess the police headquarters were, and they decided to shoot me down just for intruding. (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:50:50.)Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:49:05 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4971&iddiary=9209https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4971Prewritten: 4/12/11 After taking some time to configure the controls to my liking and actually getting CJ to ride a bike properly and semi-realistically, I finally handled the basics of the game. It was odd though - having heard of this game quite a few years ago, I was surrounded by friends who literally had fantasies like these back in elementary school when all we listened to was rap music and play basketball. I was surprised how much this game hit home for me - at least, the overall atmosphere. I’ll take some time now to go over the driving mechanics of the game - just the driving itself. Driving in this game is nothing like how it was when I played Need For Speed: Most Wanted for the Playstation 2, since GTA isn’t all about racing. Yet, while I’m driving, there are stoplights that NPC-controlled cars would follow, and no street signs in San Andreas. I wondered why the developers chose to do that. Was it to remind us, the players, that Grand Theft Auto is no a perfect reflection of reality? Or was it to impose a worldview in the view of the vice that occurs in San Andreas? It’s most likely the latter. I would imagine the way San Andreas is presented is the way as CJ sees it - no street signs, and police officers would be very lenient about following the rules of the road until they see that I’ve run over a person. Looking at these conditions, there are a lot of behaviors that I can get away with in the game. As long as a police officer or gang member from another area can’t see what I’m doing, I’m free to beat up or run over any person or steal any car to my advantage without losing anything. Of course, I can always choose not to in my own ethical experience, but nothing in the narrative of the game or the mechanics of the game is making me feel guilty about it. I mean, sure there’s blood when I really do beat a person up, but an ambulance comes in later and saves them. What’s there to feel guilty about? I think this is what the game designers were trying to communicate with this game - to simulate the worldview of the characters in their city and what they would have to do for sustenance. (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:50:33.)Thu, 19 Apr 2012 14:32:47 CDThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=4971&iddiary=9207