64 thoughts on “>japanese game: Enemy is the church/god”

  1. Good video games don’t stop for a cinematic or literary storytelling just like ballet dancers don’t stop to read a script out loud. Games that are actually artistic tell their stories through gameplay, and those stories can be pretty damn complex and unique.

    Reply
  2. >white
    >chud
    Pick one. Also, games aren’t movies or books. They’re games. They have more in common with sports or chess. If you play a game for the story, you’re what’s wrong with gaming and should yeet yourself out of life. You’re why gatekeeping and bullying are required.

    Reply
    • >They have more in common with sports or chess.
      They clearly don’t. Do you even play video games? Why do you brainlets always act like the "video" part in video games doesn’t exist?

      Reply
      • >Do you even play video games?
        Yeah. Do you, homosexual? Fuck off with your pretentious bullshit, Siskel and Ebert were right – video games aren’t art.

        Reply
  3. Plenty of Japanese games have the church as a good entity, or god as an ally.
    More often than not the enemy is a demon or other fantasy beast because they took a lot of their conventions in media from stuff like DnD.

    Reply
  4. >as some basic Gankererature
    There’s plenty of that. You seem you think books are automatically a higher form of art but guess what? Anyone can get a book published. There is a FUCKLOAD of shitty books out there.

    Reply
      • >>japanese game: Enemy is the church/god
        >>western game: Enemy is a crazy white chudcel and/or a ru/br/middle east dictator
        Wow. I actually don’t know what games you’re even referring to. Do I not play video games anymore or something?

        Is the King in Yellow actually supposed to be about something or a metaphor for something?
        How do you feel about the constant retcons in the Oz books, even within a single book?
        Do you think Humbert Humber is meant to be an unreliable narrator or is that a modern interpretation made by pearl-clutchers who refuse to believe a child could ever be in the wrong and there’s nothing sympathetic about pedophiles?

        Reply
        • The King in Yellow is clearly a literal play within the context of the books; you could read it as an allegory for some other force of societal decay but nothing really maps onto a verbatim metaphor.
          Oz is written to be fantastical bordering on nonsensical from the start and the point of the stories is usually just an Alice in Wonderland-style road trip instead of anything supposed to be wholly coherent, the retcons are fine when they keep pushing the fantasy forward.
          Pedophiles are gay.

          Reply
          • >The King in Yellow is clearly a literal play within the context of the books
            Yeah, but it only comes up in like 3 or 4 of the stories, IIRC. It goes from "there’s a screenplay that is maybe driving people crazy" to "cosmic horrors are maybe distorting space and time" to "artists will fuck anything but me."
            >the retcons are fine when they keep pushing the fantasy forward
            I don’t think they do, though. The Tin Woodman originally states his motivation for getting a heart being that he loves a Munchkin girl and hopes she hasn’t forgotten about him, but at the end of the first book, with everyone else splitting up, he shrugs his shoulders and goes to rule over the Winkies. He never mentions this girl again, it’s like Baum forgot about her within a single book. The second book says the Wizard of Oz was chased out of Oz for being a humbug, but that’s not true, which at first sounds like Tip getting the story wrong, but Scarecrow later confirms it. In the third book, they tell Dorothy the events of the second book, saying Ozma was enchanted by a wicked witch (Mombi) and was then cured by a kind sorceress, and after being reverted back to a girl, later found out she was also a princess. That’s wrong, almost backwards. Mombi did turn Ozma into Tip, but she’s ALSO the one who reversed it, and Ozma didn’t turn back into a girl and later find out she’s also a princess, they were LOOKING FOR the princess and realized she was Tip. Did Baum proofread his own stories?
            >Pedophiles are gay
            Well, he does lose her because he tore her butthole open, so maybe.

        • > Do you think Humbert Humber is meant to be an unreliable narrator or is that a modern interpretation made by pearl-clutchers who refuse to believe a child could ever be in the wrong and there’s nothing sympathetic about pedophiles?
          A post about books has never made me seethe this much.

          Reply

Add to the conversation