Joe C

In addition to my comment above, just wanted to say fantastic article.

Although I prefer the original KoTOR, KoTOR 2 really perfected the ambiguous morality system for me. Whilst your main moral ‘guide’ from the beginning of the game is ostensibly evil, so much of what she advises is cloaked in equivocating language and the adoption of seldom-considered yet compelling perspectives. That has always been the gift of KoTOR though; to both represent the morally grey and shine a light on the moral ambiguity of even the most ‘good’ and ‘bad’ decisions and intentions.

Furthermore, another thing that both KoTORs did well was judging the character without judging the player. If you played a Darkside character (which I genuinely find difficult to do at the worst of times) events transpire very matter-of-factly; there are benefits to playing an evil character. You are encouraged and scolded alike by your NPC companions, regardless of your persuasion; the games are a constant tug-of-war about the centre line. In essence, morality is not imposed. A much better system, in my opinion, if we consider that morality is subjective, not objective.

Very nice article, and relevant in the wake of Laurie Penny’s article in New Statesman (http://www.newstatesman.com/lifestyle/2013/06/i-was-manic-pixie-dream-girl), which has been making some well-deserved waves.

I don’t fully agree on all of your examples, but the majority of them do peel away those superficial layers to reveal characters, rather than mere functions.

Your number one pick is almost perfect; practically a direct satire of the MPDG trope. I couldn’t think of a better demonstration of how damaging it can be when life imitates art, which it invariably does, and we invariably do.

It’s an important trope to identify, because not only is it plain lazy writing, it is also (like most tropes about women, or even gender tropes in general) culturally damaging. The unfortunate fact is that for every wonderful, three-dimensional Annie Hall, there are a thousand two-dimensional Trinities, which exist only to motivate the male protagonist. It’s important to keep calling this BS out, because that’s the only way we can hope to make a change.

Of course, like Microsoft, I may end up doing some back-tracking on this, heh.

I was hopeful that Microsoft would adapt to the initial criticisms of the Xbone, but instead they have committed to digging deeper and deeper holes for themselves. It has been a fantastic display of corporate stubbornness, the likes of which you would not expect from the company that produced such a triumphant platform as the 360.

Microsoft has truly emphasised its interest in money with its outrageously restrictive policies; if choosing PS4 over Xbone is the only meaningful protest I can make, you can be sure that I’ll make it.

I’ve just gone way beyond disappointment to being staunchly against Microsoft’s console – at least in its current form. There isn’t an exclusive or control pad in the world that could make up for what they’re attempting to do with this generation, as far as I’m concerned.

A new KoTOR would be fantastic, but we must consider that Bioware (at the time) and Obsidian were perfect fits for development, whereas EA DICE certainly wouldn’t be my first choice to lead a new foray into the old republic. I don’t want to seem negative though; the truth is that if any of the games in this list are announced I will be instantly giddy with anticipation, and I don’t giddy easily.

Of course, I’m reinstalling KoTOR and X-wing vs. TIE Fighter right now because of this. Cheers =)

I was umming and ahhing about including it. I think it has a new developer, which could be a blow; I might be wrong though.

It’s only been a couple of months since it was announced and quite a lot of information has been doing the rounds in that short space of time (pretty sure there was a trailer at the end of last month?), so I wasn’t sure if it would be kicking up much of a storm. Needless to say, I’d love to be proven wrong.

Having very recently studied The Great Gatsby, watching this adaptation was a conflicted experience. On the one hand, it works adequately as a film in its own right; stunning visuals, great actors (all perfect in their respective roles), and an engaging story.

On the other, I felt as though some aspects of the novel had simply been shoe-horned in; superficial attempts to placate those of us who might otherwise deem it vacuous in comparison to its source material. The dialogue written specifically for the film felt positively awkward at some points, contrasted against the original utterances of Fitzgerald’s measured characters.

I think the real problem is this: I can’t unread the book. Had I approached this without any prior knowledge I think I would have enjoyed it more, though perhaps understood less. Luhrmann should have concentrated on making the film, not making the film of the book. The story can carry itself, and actually lends itself quite well to this kind of adaptation, and that’s what he should have focused on (in my opinion). By trying to please everyone he has created an very divisive film.