Some things that piss me the fuck off

[trinityvixen]

Time for a good old-fashioned gripe. Here's what's annoying me this week!

1. People who pronounce things wrong.I don't mean people who don't speak English well or have accents. They are lovely and allowed to speak with accents all their life for all I care, especially if they are British. (Or Australian. Or Kiwi. Or even South African, though I

Comments

[edgehopper]

Meme Roth : Fat Acceptance :: Glenn Beck : Liberalism. That is, she's the most offensive, ridiculous, awful person opposing the group, but for some inexplicable reason she's considered the spokesperson (presumably because she's the head of her one person organization that sounds authoritative?) Every time something like this happens, she pops out of the woodwork to say something nutty. If journalists included an obligatory, "Meme Roth got birthday celebration cupcakes banned at her kids' school as part of her crusade," people would have the appropriate reaction to her insanity.

Airline seats are always a concern, because they're designed to only be comfortable for people under 5'4" and under about 120 lbs., and then people are quite happy to yell about the fat person invading their space on the airplane. At least on Airtran, the cheap business class upgrades offer a decent compromise. Southwest in particular is infamous for mistreating fat people; I won't fly it if I have a choice.

Re: AC2 - Battle of Forli's been getting bad reviews, but Bonfire of the Vanities has been getting better buzz. So I'll end up having to buy it, as much as I hate their marketing strategy.

[trinityvixen]

MeMe Roth...how was it phrased? Some blog pointed out that calling yourself "MeMe" is as sure a sign of narcissism as anything. She's sick. I am mad at her, and I loathe her tactics, but I don't hate her, really. I pity her. Because she is obviously less healthy than the obese people she targets. She's clinically unwell and needs help, not attention.

Southwest has been getting--deserved--flack from all sides. They're the ones who booted a woman off a flight because they didn't think she was dressed appropriately. I mean, what? Unless she's violating decency laws, which she wasn't, why should that even matter to you? And the problem with the "no fatties" rule is not that the people involved are actually fat, are actually breaking Southwest's own stupid rules about fatness. It's that someone, at some stop, threw a power-mad fit about their nonconformity to slenderness. Both Smith and another guy who was removed from a flight for the same reason are frequent Southwest fliers. Smith was, previously, willing to buy two seats, as much for the ability to put other people slightly further away from him (him being famous and all) as for his weight, I'm sure. He and the other guy both were not allowed to use proof of the fact they fit in the damned seat to fly. That's BS. That's what the story should be about--it should be about Southwest booting passengers arbitrarily and targeting heavier people because they know that no one will stand up for them.

Point is, Southwest a solvent carrier, a rare thing these days, and because they've got a decent client base and are making money, they are prone to being just as dickish as any company that starts to edge out its competition.

As for Bonfire of the Vanities, I'll wait for reviews. I really did love Ezio's story. It was much more robust than Altair's. I felt like Altair was a cipher. He's already in the sooper-sekret organization, and the plot revolves around a thing he did wrong that one time. Not that you understand, right off, why it was so wrong. With Ezio, you're watching a character mature, in every sense of the word. I loved that, at the end, he'd been fighting for so long, he was exhausted with it and aware that his revenge had really not brought him any closure or measure of happiness. That's a very real sort of response, not at all what you'd expect from a presumably tireless player character of from your average tale of revenge.

So, I'm all for more of Ezio's story. I just would prefer to leave him be than to keep trying to wring more out of what should be a closed book. I liked the story so much that I really don't want them to ruin it, even if it means you don't get any more of his character. And on top of that, the last DLC wasn't supposed to be good. It makes me unhappy to see something good raked over for money.

Also, much as I do like Ezio, I'm really hoping that this doesn't distract Ubisoft from making a third title without him. I think they've done something amazing with this series, really built up and layered the mythologies of the present and past, and I want pay-off on those stories. I also want new stories. I'd really like to see anything of Desmond's life (new or old), or of some other ancestor. I mean, that's the attraction of the game and the smart marketing of it all ties into how they give you the familiar--to make your purchasing it more likely--along with something new--to challenge you to be involved with more than just the same-old, same-old. Personally, I'm hoping for a female assassin. Just because, why not? Also, there were rumors they were thinking about feudal or Edo-period Japan, which, hey, female ninja! And female ninjas, according to feiran to whom I defer on this issue, were worth more than a score of male ninjas. Because no one expected them. That would be AWESOME.

[edgehopper]

It seems like the next one should be the future scenario, where Desmond finally becomes the main character--he should have learned all he can about assassin techniques by the end of AC2.

If not that...I'm skeptical of Japan, because Japanese history doesn't have as much appeal the the Americans and Europeans who are AC's main audience (sure, ninjas are cool, but the rest...) Given the focus on early 20th century industrialists in the AC2 files, I'd like to see something involving the 1900-1930 era. Make Tesla a major secondary character, filling Da Vinci's role in AC2. Assassinate presidents, posit some huge conspiracy behind Archduke Ferdinand's assassination and WWI, that sort of thing.

[trinityvixen]

It seems like the next one should be the future scenario, where Desmond finally becomes the main character--he should have learned all he can about assassin techniques by the end of AC2.

If I were Ubisoft, I'd save that for a fourth game :)

I mean, you're absolutely right, that is the next logical place to take the game, especially with Desmond being all leveled up in the present. And because they will, eventually, run out of things to add to the overarching mythos that connects Desmond to what his ancestors discovered, they should probably jump on having Desmond actually explore this thread that he didn't really realize connected everything until just now. However, from a purely capitalistic point of view, it's in Ubisoft's best interest to hold back that conclusion--because, really, what could come after that resolution?--as long as they think they can without losing too many gamers. Given the depth they've got in this series, I'd say they could take it to five games, though that might be pushing it.

If not that...I'm skeptical of Japan, because Japanese history doesn't have as much appeal the the Americans and Europeans who are AC's main audience

See, that's just the thing: I wouldn't have said that the first game was a time all that many people were interested in, from among the core demographic I mean, either. And Renaissance Italy? I couldn't think of a less likely place to stage a video game. While you're right that Japanese history has less of a cultural impact on modern gamers in those areas, I wouldn't say that they are automatically less interested. I think the thoughtful gamers who enjoyed the locations of the first two games are the sort who will follow the trail wherever it goes, so long as the game continues to be interesting about it.

Regardless, you're right, there's a definite Euro-centric bias in a lot of ways. I'd like to see more done with, and more acknowledgment of, other cultures to whom Western society is indebted, but they skirted that when they didn't really go into the Saracen motivations (I don't think they did, I may be misremembering) in Altair's story. The contributions of, say, China, to the West is a great, under-told story, and I could see much being made of that. But probably it won't happen.

What I worry about is how far forward in time they will jump the story. Specifically, I'm worried about them doing what you suggest, and moving into the 20th century. I just...it's like my complaints about The Deadliest Warrior: once you bring guns into it, it stops being intimate and becomes about bein in ur city, shootin ur dudes. Ezio got close to that with his pistol, though it had limitations enough to make me prefer other weapons beyond my prejudice against guns. While I admit that most gamers won't have a problem with it becoming another run-and-gun franchise, I just find that so boring and so counter to what I've come to love about the series, which is its emphasis on thinking cleverly and overcoming limitations that you just won't have with a sniper rifle, you know?

I also find that WWI, WWII, and the time between them is just done as far as video games are concerned. We've got all the WWII we can support now, thanks very much. I'd be more interested to see some other time I didn't know could be as freshly realized in a video games as Ubisoft has delivered in the first two games.

[edgehopper]

I wouldn't have said that the first game was a time all that many people were interested in, from among the core demographic I mean, either. And Renaissance Italy? I couldn't think of a less likely place to stage a video game.

The first game takes place in the Holy Land, which everyone with any knowledge of religion should have some interest in (there's a reason I put AC1 on my "Best real-life locations in video games" list for that year for its 10th century Jerusalem). Renaissance Italy wouldn't have been that expected before "The Da Vinci Code" came out, but there's a bit more interest in it now.

Japan is actually a bit overrepresented in video gaming due to all those Japanese publishers; I don't see Ubisoft's French offices trying to go out of their Eurozone to use it. China's underrepresented, but it's very tough to work with.

I actually like using the 20th century, because it's the area of technique Desmond wouldn't have yet from Altair and Ezio, and one he'd need to properly take on the future Templars. There's a lot of room for an assassination game with guns, as opposed to a shooter, and WWI is severely underdone (which is why I suggest 1900-1930--the introduction of electricity, diesel, air travel, cars...) I can think of one recent game with some WWI setting (Days of Darkness? The one with the time traveller.) It shouldn't be a run-and-gun franchise, but you can do assassination with guns, and you'll have to if Desmond's going to do a plausible game in the near future where everyone has guns. It's also an era with, well, lots of assassins.

[trinityvixen]

I wouldn't want Ubisoft not to play to their strengths, obviously, but people who have an interest in the holy land as some religious obligation/connection is hardly "I love reading about the Crusades, make that a video game." I'm just saying that for all that we have major cultures ready to blow themselves to bits over that scrap of land, most people don't really find the historical site as interesting for it being a living city. They're interested in a spiritual or geo-political value. That's just my impression. Also, no more arguments using the Da Vinci Code, please? I mean, it's the equivalent of saying, "Many people are idiots, ergo they like this thing." It's kind of a dig, not a praise, at Ubisoft for their accomplishment. The only thing the Dan Brown brigade care about is plucking things out of their time and pointing to it as proof. Ubisoft actually brought those things back to their creation and found as much interesting to say in the least of the alleyrats as they did in the voices of Popes and princes.

Another problem with moving the series forward in time just occurred to me: move it too much closer, and you're going to run into people Desmond knows, or would have some record of himself, wouldn't you? I mean, it's all well and good to visit some relatives more than a half-a-millennium removed; they've got thousands of descendants, not just Desmond. But WWI would be Desmond's great-grandparents, at furthest remove. That's too close, I think, for him not to have some idea about them surely? Or am I missing something? It's been a while since Assassin's Creed...

[edgehopper]

But WWI would be Desmond's great-grandparents, at furthest remove. That's too close, I think, for him not to have some idea about them surely? Or am I missing something? It's been a while since Assassin's Creed...

Desmond is approximately our age, I think, and the game takes place in 2012. I have little to no idea about my relatives who were adults in 1900-1920--the most we know is about one line of the family we could trace to Belarus that came over in that era. Easy plotline possibility, probably more thorough justification than Ubisoft would actually use: Desmond's great-great-grandmother came to the United States in 1905 in that massive wave of immigration, and left his great-great-grandfather behind in the old country; he planned to follow, but family legend is that he died before he arrived. The truth turns out to be that he stayed behind for his work as an assassin, which is (insert plot here).

[trinityvixen]

I guess. I'm just digging in my heels because I like the older stuff better. Recent history is still too recent to really do it for me in the same way. I dunno, being stubborn I guess. I'm sure they will do fine, no matter what, but if I had any say, the closest they'd get to the 20th century is the 18th :P