Archive for January, 2010

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0499549/

Dir. James Cameron

I’ve been debating what I’d like to say about Avatar. It’s a cinematic event that’s bringing criticism and praise in almost equal measure and I feel that stepping forward with my opinion puts me in an odd position of apparent naivety. I have nothing deep or meaningful to say about the story and I’ve no personally observed analysis of symbolic elements or thoughts on the implications raised by many critics.

This is partly a wilful position, borne from my original viewing of the film. I watched it expecting a predictable sci-fi action romp with cheesy dialogue and fantastic effects, which is what the film was. It’s got a wealth of narrative issues thanks to its simplistic story and broad characterisations but despite these obvious flaws I was drawn in and ended up thoroughly enjoying the film. This initial enjoyment and immersion puts me in a position of feeling unwilling to look deeper into the implications raised by many people. I didn’t feel or think of them while watching, never seeing a racist or malicious intent, but that doesn’t mean these views are invalid. It’s an issue I personally don’t feel qualified, for this film, to insightfully comment on. So for now I’m happier to enjoy it as a simple story and as a tantalising production. This may make me irresponsible as a viewer and a filmmaker, but without feeling and thinking on these points carefully anything I could say would be mired in ignorance.

Much has been made of its technological production elements, it’s well known that Cameron waited till he felt the film could be achieved, and in this regard the film is without peer. The motion capture systems, the digital production systems and the compositing of CGI and live action footage are the most advanced, and convincing, ever seen. The film is a grand spectacle and has quickly become a massive success that looks, as I write this, likely to overtake Cameron’s own Titanic in success. I can happily admit to being taken in by the story for the duration of the film, but I know that I had a deeper enjoyment thanks to its high level of production. It’s a fantastic visual feast, but what it represents is much greater, it’s an advancement of CGI effects and digital acting to an entirely new level. I can feel the weight of a world of ideas that will, as this technology becomes cheaper and more accessible, finally be realised. It’s an exciting prospect, even if we’re only in the early stages.

What didn’t work for the film is well documented, and for me personally it was mostly in the lacklustre story and cheesy dialogue. Yet I enjoyed it, I saw it twice, and I know that I will likely enjoy it all over again despite the objectively correct view that it is a mediocre film. Am I just a sucker for special effects? It’s probable. There is also likely some residual love left for Cameron that I have thanks to Terminator 2, my personal pick for the best action movie of all time. I like to think though that as an aspiring filmmaker, I’m allowed these indulgences of technology.

This is a quick apology for the grammar issues in a couple of my articles. Some of these are written on my home PC, where I tend to have more time to read over them before posting and others are written at university, where I’m having to move a lot faster so everyone can have decent access to the computers.

I’m trying to go back through and knock out the grammar problems as I see them but if I miss some, I apologise.

http://www.redfaction.com/

Developer. Volition

My second foray into storyline and narrative in video games takes place in another open-world game from developers Volition. Red Faction: Guerrilla is the third game in the Red Faction series, it was released in 2009 after a seven year gap from the second game. I was drawn to play this by the fun I’d had in Saints Row 2 and because I’ve developed somewhat of an addiction to openworld games since picking up Bully for the Wii. I have to thank my friend Jamster for getting me this as a gift during the Steam thanksgiving sale!

The original games were built around a piece of technology known as Geo-Mod which allowed for realtime deformation of the environment. It was an impressive piece of tech, allowing the player a degree of freedom in their path through the levels, but due to the constraints of both the hardware (Sony’s Playstation 2 console) and the needs of a linear storyline progression the areas you could destroy were often quite limited.

Red Faction: Guerrilla is, again, built around technology, Geo-Mod 2.0 in this case, but this new tech works entirely on the realistic destruction of buildings and structures, rather than the environment. It’s highly impressive to watch in action, with buildings collapsing under the correct kind of stresses and spreading large amounts of physics-enable debris (this basically means that it moves correctly and can damage everything around it). It’s a satisfying piece of technology and provides a level of interaction that allows for many entertaining emergent scenarios. It does present challenges though, with the storyline having to be structured around a world with a variety of destructive approaches.

In Red Faction: Guerrilla you play Alec Mason; a man drawn into a political rebellion by the oppressed miners of Mars. In the original games you play a similar role, revolting against the mining company in charge of Mars, but by the time the events in Guerrilla are occurring the original rebellious force (the EDF) has grown corrupt and become a mirror of what they originally hated. It’s a strong premise for a game that could have allowed for an interesting examination of the corruption of ideals and antagonistic forces in video games, unfortunately it ends up as little more than a piece of background fluff.

The story begins with Alec arriving on Mars to work as a miner with his brother Dan, only to discover that the EDF are a horrible dictatorship and Dan is a member of the resistance and needs Alec’s help. Alec is initially against joining the rebels, but changes his mind roughly three minutes later when his brother is shot by an EDF plane. It’s hard to convey just how fast these opening events occur. There are a few quick pre-rendered cutscenes, a moment of gameplay and then you’re suddenly thrust into the role of the saviour of Mars. It’s a shame because since the release of Half Life (with its seminal tram-ride opening) more developers have realised the importance of establishing their world and story. While not every game needs a lengthy introduction, RF:G feels underwhelming and needlessly short when it had a much larger potential to explore the oppressive world Alec has come to.

The brief introduction sets the tone for how the storyline unfolds throughout the entire game. What is already a trite tale of one man saving the planet single-handedly is made worse by being rushed and incompetently told. The motivation for Alec never evolves, he’s never seen to gain any empathy for the plight of the citizens of Mars or to actually care about their rebellion, and so he’s only ever really fighting to avenge the death of his brother. This alone wouldn’t be a major issue, except Alec is literally the only person in the rebellion doing any work! He takes on ludicrously dangerous assignments, is regularly sent on suicide missions and basically destroys the entire occupying force by himself.

I know it’s common in games for the player to be the main effective force upon the world, it makes your actions feel grand and satisfying, but there is a level at which this becomes unbelievable, especially when the story is being told has a deadly serious tone. It makes Alec some kind of godlike figure to a rebellion filled with people incapable of farting without a command.

Another major issue with the progression of the story is the way in which plot threads are started without ever evolving. There is a mission, about a quarter of the way into the game, in which Alec is tasked with recovering a nanoforge from some ruins. While searching these ruins a strange, inhuman voice speaks to Alec, referring to him as Parker (the hero of the original game) and alludes to past, and possible future, events. It’s a creepy, atmospheric moment and feels like the beginning of an interesting plot… except it isn’t, it’s never mentioned or referred to again throughout the entire game and so feels like a total waste of time. The same is true of the presence and possible implications of the marauders, a seemingly indigenous people, who are given mythical qualities but who are never really explored.

Finally one of the stranger issues with the story is that the force you’re fighting against, the EDF, never feel as desperately evil as your rebellion leader implies. You’re tasked with murdering hundreds of them, stomping through bases and cracking their skulls in with a sledgehammer at every possible opportunity, but I was never quite convinced I should have been. The Red Faction felt ill-managed and naïve which left me wondering if I would discover some greater evil at work within my own ranks. This would have been an interesting angle, given the corruption of power premise, but unfortunately came down to an error of presentation. I was supposed to be on their side the entire time.

What is difficult in the games industry is that the issues I’ve raised here do not significantly affect the mechanics of the gameplay. The destruction is satisfying, the combat adequate, the driving fun and the general tasks are decently entertaining even without a better context in which to play them. Story is a secondary concern in a game, yet all that was right with gameplay would have been enhanced with deeper, more involving story. It would lend a greater context, a greater meaning to the character and would keep people going through any issues that presented themselves in the gameplay (which do exist, primarily in the order and frequency that you receive items and abilities). What is a fun game could have been much more, and as a whole your immersion and actions are lessened.