Jump to content

Hawkwing

Member
  • Content Count

    982
  • Joined

  • Last visited

3 Followers

About Hawkwing

  • Rank
    Forum Ninja That Really Needs To Take A Typing Class
  • Birthday May 17

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Thinking and philosophizing. Reading and Video-games. Really, if it makes me think, it'll probably interest me.
  • Location
    Juggling Around A Dozen Games At Once.

Previous Fields

  • Favorite Fire Emblem Game
    Shadows of Valentia

Member Badge

  • Members
    Kellam

Allegiance

  • I fight for...
    Archanea

Recent Profile Visitors

3875 profile views
  1. The RNG fails you when you create a tactically sound and reliable strategy. I replace all the horses with motorcycles.
  2. I agree. Forcing change will be met with opposition, while letting it be gradual means there will be troubles in the meantime. I don't really know a way to comment on combating subconscious thoughts without repeating what you said, so lets just say you took the words out of my mouth. I said earlier that any side can generalize another one. I would have originally said that the only difference was that one group had a choice and the other didn't, but one can legally change their nationality and there are ways to medically alter ones gender, and didn't want to deal with the arguments that came from that. I don't really have much to add that you haven't said already, aside from republicans and police not being the only groups that have power that they have used and abused. And that one can be a part of a group without agreeing with every idea they supposedly represent. I see what you are getting at. I don't entirely agree, as there are people who know themselves well enough to state their virtues and vices just as there are people who believe they are nobler than they truly are. Of course, this depends heavily on the individual, and it is not obvious to determine this at first glance. That is more or less my question. There are criticisms about white privilege all throughout this thread, yet few propositions on what the the people supposedly benefiting from these systems should be doing about it... ...aside from this. I know this is how such systems are combated, but my question is what do you believe people who are supposedly part of these systems in the meantime should do with their "privileges" that don't fall into "protest"? Not surprised you were confused. In hindsight, I focused a bit more on the "there can be factors outside of a creators control that affect the accuracy of a project" part than the "history is often twisted to suit whatever groups ends, no matter who does it" one. I could also point out how certain several strategy games have an almost obsessive focus with mechanically inserting the tactics, politics, weapon statistics, and more used in historical battles, but that is neither here nor there. I mentioned earlier that things that sound like weak excuses in one field can be legitimate issues in a different one. Robin Walker mentioned it an interview that there was an idea to make some of the cast females, but the team wasn't happy with the compromise, as the felt there was a "right way" to go about with the idea, yet in the end other aspects of development took priority. The memory issues and having to account for all the updates the game received over the years is likely the reason female versions of the characters haven't been added The main point is that adding diversity isn't always as easy as it sounds when every factor of game creation is taken into account. It should definitely be a goal, but no product can do everything they set out to do. Defeatist if politics is the be all, end all of change. It isn't to me. Small, everyday actions create ripples that have far reaching impacts. It does not happen overnight, and their effects are not immediately noticeable, yet they can cause change, whether for good or ill. Hey, I said it would be quick thoughts provided in a general manner. I was in no mood to write an essay, especially given most of the ones I write on this site end up being wastes of time. My mistake for commenting on that point, I suppose.
  3. Politely request they drink elsewhere, as alcohol and intelligent debates don't go hand in hand.
  4. The rebels in the next game have a slightly better excuse to rebel now. I try to convince IS to make Battle of Revolution a full-fledged game.
  5. The one that whispers bad ideas all the time. No one said I had to actually use them, and they could be good for a laugh every now and again. WYR be a one-man band or be the only one playing a unique instrument in an orchestra?
  6. Fire Emblem WOD is the only place I managed to find an actual translation, and it is in Spanish. Despite how warped Google Translate can be, there are some interesting tidbits: - It takes place near the end of the Edo period. - The land of Valentia is suffering from famine and destruction in several places, and its isolation has attracted foreign countries to its shores. - It seems that Celica is the leader of Zofia, and visits Valbar to request his aid. - There are people who support the Shogunate (the ruling military power) and those that want them gone. People all across the country feel strongly about the issue and aren't afraid to use violence to prove it. - Valbar and Celica gather allies, and when Valbar learns of the conspiracies behind the Shogunate, "his heart will hesitate. In the end, who really knows what they will believe?" - The destination of the final battle is called "The White Feather". -The game supposedly has a deep history, sub-episodes that show a characters past, and additional sub missions. - There is a Hanafuda Card System (essentially card Amiibo. Remember those?) that may or may not affect permadeath, and the game has amazing battle animations. - Unless it's a joke by the website, Chapter 1 is called "Blooming Flowers" and Chapter 2 is "Between Water and Fish". There also exists a magic system, supports, classes, and DLC. Character Descriptions: Valbar AKA Violent Steed: Although he is a native peasant, he is naturally kind and has a sincere personality, which led to him becoming the guard of "White Wind" (Zofia). His laughter always reaches the next village, and he is concerned about his "recent thirties-old belly". Leon AKA Love Man: A ninja who fled from Iga. He longs to ride for Valbar (who is also known as the Violent Steed... make of that what you will), even enlisting for him. Leon changes his red eyeliner daily, is dandy and skilled with their hands, which draws the attention of young women. May or may not be occasionally mistaken for a female himself. Kamui AKA Warrior Bear: A samurai without a teacher. He once brandished his sword against Valbar, which lead to him joining the "White Wind". Kamui hates being dominated, and despite his careless lifestyle is an expert with the blade. He is struck by a girl from a store, though he does not speak to her. Marth AKA Prince Blue Runner: A young runner from Archanea, a domain next to Valentia. In a strange twist of fate, he ends up becoming the sovereign of Archenea with his heroic runs and races. A free DLC character. These seem to be the (well, a) translations of the screenshots: Again, it's google translate, so there is some weird phrasing, but it sounds like a pretty solid idea for a Fire Emblem game if I am being honest.
  7. Is wondering why two different webcomics have "Reach for the Sky" as a comic title.
  8. Started on Lunatic Classic yesterday, though I switched to casual the first chance I got. I'll likely still play the same as classic, but I'd rather not have to deal with starting a map from the beginning or loosing a good unit thanks to screwing up at the last second. I remember it taking a few playthroughs of Awakening before I was comfortable with ironmanning that game, and both the Fates games remind me enough of the thirteenth installment that I'll likely start doing challenge runs after I've completed them enough times to get familiar with what to expect. I managed to get to the first map after the route split and did Mozo's chapter before calling it a day, and I have to say that the difficulty of Lunatic caught me off guard, but in a good way. I ended up resetting several times on every map after chapter 2 and before the split thanks to the difficulty, and while there was some trail and error, it was the fun kind. It wasn't trying and retrying a level just to find the correct way to proceed, but rather adjusting my tactics to continue with what worked and tweak what didn't. It never seemed impossible, but rather that I needed to approach an encounter from a different angle. It did make me wish Fates had some kind of turnwheel function (albeit a heavily limited one) to help same on time, though. I may not have spent a ton of time on Birthright yet, but something I noticed immediately was that a lot of your units did come off as weaker compared to the soldiers you get in Conquest. Rinkah started at E-rank, Hana and Subaki could be killed in two battles, and Sakura didn't impress me as much as Elise did, though that could just be the lack of a horse. Yet, in a way, I find it rather clever that the units that start out in the "peaceful" kingdom aren't as immediately competent as the ones in the "warlike" one. Similar case with it being easier to gather money and experience in the prosperous nation while gold and exp is a precious resource throughout Conquest. The writing may have fallen flat on the worldbuilding, but I do have to compliment how it was implemented in gameplay. Also, I am really looking forward to using the exotic weapons and classes that you constantly fought against in Conquest and only had the barest ability to use on your side. They were interesting to combat and looked fun to use. I am also curious how many battles there will be that feature Hoshidan classes as opponents. I know Conquest had its fair share of fights against Nohrian classes (almost too many; it barely felt like there was a war with Hoshido at points) so I am curious if Birthright does the same.
  9. Yes. Blame the sweeping generalizations both sides have made about the other and the difficulty of finding a middle ground for that. Especially when I've seen how off most of said generalizations are with my own eyes. So you are basically saying "Everyone is prejudiced, lives in a prejudiced system, and it is unavoidable to be prejudiced no matter what"? Perhaps as human beings it is unavoidable not to notice another skin color, but we also have the ability to choose for that not to influence our decisions. The thoughts may pop to our head without us wanting to, but nothing forces us to listen to it. Also, what do you propose the common citizen to do to avoid benefiting from these "racist" systems? Would a white person get anywhere by asking their professor or teacher to take the exact same test as the black person? Or to request during a job interview not consider their race? We don't get to choose the circumstances we are born with, but we can choose what to do with the resources we are given. Some use these opportunities prudently, others squander it, yet we can always decided how to react to whatever life throws our way. I agree that these systems should be changed to make the playing field even. Yet while the common citizen can advocate for a change, it ultimately it is up to law makers to create the laws. Even then, enforcement of said laws won't always be fair, as mentioned a few times on this thread. I doubt anyone chooses to be part of a supposedly unequal system, yet that does not prevent people from being able to treat others equally and respectfully, regardless of race and position. It's also common for history to be twisted so that certain groups and people look less or more villainous or heroic, and to exaggerate or downplay certain actions that took place. Sometimes this done because there is only so much you can put into a product in the case of things such as movies, video games, and books, as well as studios having to account for the age rating. Even then, they aren't except from from doing what anyone can do; twist the past to fit their own views for their own ends. Any side can do it. It is why critical thinking, awareness, and research as so vital when discussing history. What came to mind in when writing that section of my post was why Value didn't add female versions of the mercenaries in Team Fortress 2, as it is a good example of how a company can have plans to add diversity but other factors result in the idea getting cut. I was going to link the video originally, but decided against it since while the research and facts are sound, the presentation rather informal for this kind of topic. Anyway, memory was the main problem Valve faced with inserting the idea, as having multiple models for a single class would lead to performance issues, which is one of the last things you want in a fast paced multiplayer game. This issue was compounded by the production costs of creating distinctive designs for the new characters, building the models and the animations for them, hiring voice actors (keep in mind that the game has over 4,000 voice clips just for 9 characters), and how the work required to update the game with new items would be doubled with the addition of a female cast. On the competitive side of things, the different models might have different hitboxes, meaning that players would likely pick the gender model that is harder to hit over the one they like, and making both models exactly the same to prevent this issue would defeat the purpose of having two different characters. Robin Walker, one of the developers of the game, has stated in a few interviews that while adding female characters is not impossible, it is unlikely to happen due to the potential costs in game performance and production, and the development team never found a satisfactory compromise they were happy with in their attempts to implement the idea. This is far from a universal reason as to why certain videogames don't have more diverse casts, but it is a good example of how a developer may have wanted to implement one but other factors prevented the idea from coming to fruition. This point I can agree with. The characters, well, character matters most at the end of the day, yet there is nothing to loose from having greater diversity. Or my original post was pointing out how Disney has always been embarrassed about Song of the South and how refurnishing a ride would bee seen as a standard business practice if the timing of the announcement weren't so suspect. That, and how different news sources are saying different things about certain aspects of these protests to push their own agendas, and how this is nothing new. Doesn't help that most of the issues I care about won't be solved by politics, but rather the attitude of the larger culture and society, and I don't expect those things to align with everything I believe in anytime soon. It's why I believe the greatest impact anyone can have is treating everyone we meet, whether neighbors, family, coworkers, or random people we don't know with respect and focusing upon inward characteristics over outward ones. Some points that came to mind on the positive side of things (speaking generally): - It throws the idea out there, which in turn the allows people to ignore, praise, criticize, dissect, analyze, apply or reject it. It can have an influence on others and can provide encouragement for others to present their own ideas and views on the matter. - Even a flawed execution can still raise awareness and, perhaps unintentionally, encourage people to research something to get a more informed view. - It takes time, but the more commonplace an ideal is, the more accepted it tends to become. On the Negative: - Intentions can change quickly, and it is easy to drop support of something if another group offers a better deal. It's even possible to play both sides if it is profitable. - People fight back against being strong-armed into showing support for an ideal they don't agree with. There are a multitude of positive examples of people standing firm in their own believes despite the danger and strength of the opposition, even if it costs them their life, just as there are destructive cases where people do as much in their power to hamper growth and hang on to their old ideals for as long as they can. Both of these send strong messages, whether encouraging or destructive. - A flawed execution of an idea can be just as dangerous as it can be helpful. It can encourage research, yes, but if someone doesn't put in the effort, it give them a warped perspective of a situation (especially if they don't do anything to combat it), which in several cases can build up over time and lead to taking actions based upon a biased or flawed viewpoint. Again, I am speaking generally, and this is more giving some quick thoughts than writing an essay.
×
×
  • Create New...