Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
Is Gone Home a Game?
Is "Gone Home" a Game?
PAX Australia
Rym presented "Losing" at PAX Australia 2014. This is an excerpt from that lecture concerning the definition of the word game. Particularly, I consider "Gome Home" and the widespread "debate" over whether or not it is a game. (Spoilers: Gone Home is a game).
Comments
*I mostly lifted this from Mark Rolands "Tennis with Plato"
The additional granularity provided by the "idio-" and "ortho-" prefixes is great.
I find context smooths out the rough edges :P
At least I hope it does. I might accidentally had had some pretty embarrassing conversations otherwise.
That's the entire "single player game" segment.
(Also did you miss the bit where the game addresses child abuse with a male victim? There's a lot going on in there...)
Of course if Sam was a man the story would be different! It's a game centered around queer issues! There is this thing called context, you mighta heard about it.
If Lonnie was a man, probably not. Most of the story beats would have to be rewritten, queer stories in games are rare, especially ones that are put together so well.
You're basically saying "Why is there something wrong with me for wanting to discuss the idea that 1+1 = 3 ?"
There's nothing to discuss. It's 2. You're flat out wrong. You're just too ignorant to realize it and unwilling to change your mind. It's not our job to educate you. We have our own lives to live. You're not worth our time.
Normally someone would feel pity for someone so ignorant that they can't even understand basic arithmetic. That's because someone being so bad at math is only a harm to themselves.
The difference here is that you aren't wrong about something that is only a harm to yourself. You're wrong about things in such a way that you are harmful to society. The way you think and the things you believe makes the world a worse place to live in. Thus, people who want to make the world a better place are going to fight against you. Just like we would fight against a climate change denier, a cultist, or a racist. The world would be a better place if people did not think the ideas you think. That makes you a bad person.
Also, I thought it was about ethics in game journalism, why are you saying misogynist things like "I always wondered if Lonnie was a man would the response to the game have been the same."?
Oh, right, because you're a misogynist.
But we're not morons. You don't want to have a discussion, you just can't tell the difference between attacking a thing and discussing the issues within it. You perceive people using a critical eye as an attack on stuff you like, and thus am to attack this darling of progressive critics by emulating the form factor of critical discussion. It's blatantly transparent, and it won't fly in this particular ivory tower.
One of the stories involve the younger sister experiencing her first intimate relationships, which are homosexual in nature.
However, you guys should just play it. It is relatively cheap and very good. Or you could just go to Wikipedia and read the plot summary, but I think you would rob yourself of a pretty good experience.
Here's a good quote from the discussion on the Escapist: That's what I want to argue, is Lonnie and Sam's first time consensual or not?
Well, alright, you've never played the game, so I really shouldn't even engage but...
On the note in question, a note which, it must be said, is hidden from view after a few seconds so you don't even get to read it during normal play, listed immediately after the events, which you really gotta reach to interpret as rape, is a goddamn pro-con list that Sam has written about where her and her girlfriend can fuck without getting noticed. Yeah, she sounds really shaken up by the experience.
But, whatever, you don't actually care. You're just looking to stir up shit.
I have watched multiple playthroughs of the game. That should be good enough in a game where you physically have no control over the events. For whatever reason you judge me for having differing opinions that yours, without knowing anything about me. What have I done to make you assume I'm a horrible person who wants to harm things you like?
Dude here doesn't agree with us about gamergate. That does not give you a mandate to go shouting the dude down or hurling insults when he's asking a legitimate question.
If you can't answer the question, then say so, don't just flip out and start screaming like a child. If you can answer the question, then answer it, or at least say why you won't.
What, you think you're clever, and you know better? Then bloody well teach him, don't just act like indignant shits. Lift someone up, rather than punching down. Sketch, that's super offensive to boot and you should bloody well know better. It's like a backwards-talking version of "It's not rape if she enjoyed it." Rape victims are not required to conform to your notion of what a rape victim should be like. Nor do rapists need to conform to your idea of what they're like, either.
In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the makers of Gone home were trying to touch on a serious issue there - according to the 2005 CALCASA report, one in three lesbians have been sexually assaulted by other women, and that's just looking at reported cases - Female-on-Female sexual violence is far more likely to go unreported than Male-on-Female.
But even if you go all death of the author, I still think its hella reaching to look at that note and think "Welp, that's a depiction of rape." Could it be? I mean, I guess, sure. It's probably not a great depiction of consent, we can even break out the word "problematic." Still, I think throwing "rape" at it is reaching, I think the context around it is intended to come off as sweet instead of sinister.
And, yeah, I probably overreacted; that probably is a discussion reasonable people can have. I mean, we're having it right now because you know exactly how to guilt me into having it. :P But I've had enough of these kinds of discussions with Gambergat people as to not really want to humour it. It's not about seriously discussing consent in a queer framework or what the game is advocating, it's just a gotcha argument, and its miserable to deal with.
To be clear, I'm not taking a position on what it may or may not be - just that I wouldn't be surprised(and why), not that I think that's what's going on. I see where you're coming from on that. Honestly pretty bloody sick of it myself.
But I'll give Hex a bit of credit, I think he's shown so far that he's not the type for that whole leading question/gotcha argument thing. I certainly might be wrong, but benefit of the doubt and looking at what we've seen of him so far, I think that he's being genuine in asking the questions and wanting to know, both what we all think and about the overall situation.
Sure, he might have a funny way of asking, but maybe he doesn't have the same experience with discussing these matters as we do. We all have to start somewhere.
And for the record, I've rarely seen any serious discussion of this being a rape outside of discussions about feminism and feminists by people who usually appear to have a bone to pick...
In fact, the line of reasoning that amounts to questioning whether the game would have gotten the same attention if the character was a man is basically ALWAYS the first thing they bring up when they bring this bit up. They're always brought up by the same person at the same time, usually not in any direct context to the game itself, and almost always in an attempt to lead the discussion toward the "double standard" of feminism or some other bollocks.
The original poster usually tries to bait someone else into saying it wasn't rape, or that a situation like that is fine even if it is rape or something like that. Then screenshots and a giant flamewar.
"blah blah blah, but the game has a RAPE! Would the game be as popular (among women) if that character was a man? TALK ABOUT YOUR DOUBLE STANDARD"
My friend explained a similar event in Young Avengers where a they introduced a male couple and then explained it away as a magical curse later.
The other problem is Lonnie's running away from the military. People had this debate for real around the time the game came out. There was an argument if women are to emotional for combat. Lonnie is one of the only female members of the US armed services in a video game and she runs away because of a romance.
You can't just settle for any form of representation just because it's representation. Gone Home as a queer story, is a bit like Sonic Boom as Sonic game. You run, you jump, and you platform but it doesn't fulfill my Sonic relate needs and it's got issues. Gone Home has issues.
That's a bit of an exaggerated comparison but I hope that makes sense.
they eventually had a very happy sexual relationship after this. It's still a disturbing way to start a relationship.