Sony hate thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
The Last Stand said:
Her outfits lack nuance. It's skimpy. The art design of her character reminds me too much of over-sexualized anime. It's just not for me.
Click to expand...
That's because South Koreans are largely basically cribbing from Japanese cultural output while swapping in their own societal issues.

Their webtoon/manhwa industry is an extremely blatant example.
 
Overpriced Gaming Chair said:
Old news/missing source, but allegedly the original "Last of Us" was only good (or at least commercially successful) because there was two other people to tard wrangle Druckman in the writing room (George Lucas style, you could say.)

Then those two people were fired, and Druckman was made the Creative Director of Naughty Dog.
Click to expand...
It was two people but for two different games. For Uncharted 4, it was Amy Hennig, who among other things, was the main writer for the Uncharted series. I don't know much of the details but apparently Uncharted 4 was suppose to be very different but Neil forced her out and then made a bunch of changes. Sam and Rafe were supposedly very different characters and the Nadine character was an addition made by Neil. So there's a framework of Amy's writing there somewhere but he wrote over a lot of it apparently.

For TLOU1, it was Bruce Straley (Bruce and Neil were co-directors on TLOU1). The way it was described was that Neil would throw out like 5 ideas but only 1 was good while the other 4 were completely retarded. Bruce tard wrangled him hard and managed to filter his schizo vomit into making a good product. He eventually forced Bruce out of the company and supposedly a lot of the concepts and ideas from TLOU2 were his ideas that Bruce rejected for TLOU1 but he reworked them to fit with the sequel. For example, the original story for TLOU1 involved Joel betraying Tess and she would hunt him across the country and Bruce rejected it because it made no sense for someone to do that in an ultra dangerous post-apocalyptic world. Of course Neil couldn't help himself and he reworked it for TLOU2.

In the sequel he has no one to tard wrangle him and he's forcing his ideas that he was explicitly told were stupid because he's still seething about that shit. This is very apparent when you notice the references to himself in TLOU2 where he describes himself as a genius and someone with an ego that huge doesn't like being told some of their ideas are stupid. It's why the writing in TLOU2 has a hate boner for the TLOU1 characters, he doesn't see them as his characters and he lashes out because of it. Bruce is also missing from the credits from the tv show despite it being the norm to mention the creators of the original work you're adapting.
 
You could change some stuff there and it could also be applied to Hideo Kojima. But at least he had some hits under his belt in the form of Policenauts and Snatcher. Cuckman? I don't even know where he came from before TloU.
 
Edgy But Dull said:
It was two people but for two different games. For Uncharted 4, it was Amy Hennig, who among other things, was the main writer for the Uncharted series. I don't know much of the details but apparently Uncharted 4 was suppose to be very different but Neil forced her out and then made a bunch of changes. Sam and Rafe were supposedly very different characters and the Nadine character was an addition made by Neil. So there's a framework of Amy's writing there somewhere but he wrote over a lot of it apparently.
Click to expand...
Don't quote me on this but I think Hennig's original plot had a son in the epilogue that was replaced by a daughter by Cuckmann. Imagine how much better that ending could have been if it were a son; they could have used the Young Nate model and had you slowly realize by exploring the house that you're not Nate but his son.
 
Pepe Cortisona said:
I don't even know where he came from before TloU.
Click to expand...

At least according to the shithole known as Wikipedia:

In around May 2004, Druckmann joined Naughty Dog as a programming intern.[8] He began working on localization tools and gameplay programming on Jak 3 (2004). During this time, he would also offer assistance with additional design tasks. By the end of the internship in August, he was offered a full-time position by Wells and Stephen White, then co-presidents.[10]: He received credit for the second year of his master's degree through his work at Naughty Dog,[10]:  earning the degree in 2005.[8]

Going from a damn intern to Ackshully The Real Lead of one of the games commonly cited by consolefags as the best game ever in less than five years explains his outsized ego (other than him being a Jew).

~~~

He programmed the menu screens on Jak X: Combat Racing (2005), which he considered one of the most difficult tasks of his career.[10]: He continued to assist with smaller design tasks where possible.[10]

Also explains why he got pushed to management.
 
Asian tech support said:
It sounds like they want to continue making shitty movies.
Click to expand...
I find it ironic, because Sony Pictures exists, and that alone has movies and TV (you know, memorable for things like Breaking Bad or the Spiderman movies), yet Sony still wants its Playstation division to ride the coattails of its own movie studio, except Playstation should've been about games. Y'know, something that was considered the point about Playstation during the mid-90s through early-to-2000s?
 
TVB said:
I find it ironic, because Sony Pictures exists, and that alone has movies and TV (you know, memorable for things like Breaking Bad or the Spiderman movies), yet Sony still wants its Playstation division to ride the coattails of its own movie studio, except Playstation should've been about games. Y'know, something that was considered the point about Playstation during the mid-90s through early-to-2000s?
Click to expand...
They do not consider games an art form. Which is why they want games to be more like the things they consider art forms like movies. They see no legitimacy in a purely gaming experience being an art masterpiece and thus make it into a movie completely ignoring how much more immersive gaming can be as a medium by using terms such as "cinematic" to imply great immersion.
 
The Demon Pimp of Razgriz said:
Those outfits aren't even that skimpy.
Click to expand...
People freaking out about Eve reminds me of the absolute fucking meltdown from internet feminists about Quiet to the point where I assumed she was naked with a tailplug or something and then I saw the actual game and my sister wears skimpier swimsuits to the beach.

You guys know 30 years ago we advertised everything from hamburgers to auto parts with boobs right?
 
Last edited:
Incecticyder said:
They do not consider games an art form. Which is why they want games to be more like the things they consider art forms like movies. They see no legitimacy in a purely gaming experience being an art masterpiece and thus make it into a movie completely ignoring how much more immersive gaming can be as a medium by using terms such as "cinematic" to imply great immersion.
Click to expand...
Nobody considers games as an art form. They're just nonsensical pieces of fun and entertainment just to have fun. But yet nowadays, ever since the recession, something as niche as video games, and the entirety of nerd culture, have ended up becoming serious business, trying to use them as art or political statements, so of course big corpos such as Sony and Microsoft would consider vidya as "art form"
 
TVB said:
Nobody considers games as an art form. They're just nonsensical pieces of fun and entertainment just to have fun. But yet nowadays, ever since the recession, something as niche as video games, and the entirety of nerd culture, have ended up becoming serious business, trying to use them as art or political statements, so of course big corpos such as Sony and Microsoft would consider vidya as "art form"
Click to expand...
Yes, they are art. Yes, they can be used for political messages but that can be said about all art mediums. Propaganda in books, poems, songs, radio, movies, tv shows, comics, paintings, sculptures and now video games. All had political messages in them but even they made propaganda look good. Game companies care about having a message even if they shove it with as little subtlety as possible. Effective art propaganda is good art first and propaganda second. Good propaganda is about making the audience come to your way of thinking on their own after consuming it rather than be hit over the head with it. Companies think of games as propaganda tools but not as art otherwise they would make them good.
 
Incecticyder said:
Yes, they are art. Yes, they can be used for political messages but that can be said about all art mediums. Propaganda in books, poems, songs, radio, movies, tv shows, comics, paintings, sculptures and now video games. All had political messages in them but even they made propaganda look good. Game companies care about having a message even if they shove it with as little subtlety as possible. Effective art propaganda is good art first and propaganda second. Good propaganda is about making the audience come to your way of thinking on their own after consuming it rather than be hit over the head with it. Companies think of games as propaganda tools but not as art otherwise they would make them good.
Click to expand...
No they're not and the art question is fucking stupid. The art status is simply a means to deflect criticism. Most of the time, companies don't even have to drop the art shield themselves as buck broken fanboys will do it for free.
 
Asian tech support said:
No they're not and the art question is fucking stupid. The art status is simply a means to deflect criticism. Most of the time, companies don't even have to drop the art shield themselves as buck broken fanboys will do it for free.
Click to expand...
Art can and should be criticized. The game industry is certainly not lacking in pretension. When a company drops the AAA video game equivalent of Sonichu, they should line up to be pelted with rotten produce. Product = art and art = product. The medium of video games has its Leonardo da Vincis and its Chris Chans and the latters existence does not take away the value of the former 's.
 
Incecticyder said:
Art can and should be criticized. The game industry is certainly not lacking in pretension. When a company drops the AAA video game equivalent of Sonichu, they should line up to be pelted with rotten produce. Product = art and art = product. The medium of video games has its Leonardo da Vincis and its Chris Chans and the latters existence does not take away the value of the former 's.
Click to expand...
What you said and therefore elaborated to us sounds like nothing but bullshit
 
TVB said:
What you said and therefore elaborated to us sounds like nothing but bullshit
Click to expand...
he's not wrong. if an artist paints a picture just to sell it (a product), is that product suddenly not art?

the problem is that both are right, games can be art, and publishers also use this as a form of deflection because apparently they think "art" can't be criticized for some reason (but it's ok to secretly melt down robert e. lee's statue). "see guys, it's art, this means it's good, don't you wanna buy it now?!?"

people jerk off that roger ebert comment, which is literally someone talking out of it's ass about something he has no clue about.
 
Last edited:
TVB said:
What you said and therefore elaborated to us sounds like nothing but bullshit
Click to expand...
What is art and what is not has been debated for thousands of years and a little site on the internet will propably not solve this question. Perhaps I did not explain my opinions well enough, perhaps they do not have merit but if you do choose to just dismiss me without providing justification for your point of view as to why mine is wrong, then your opinion is just as dismissable as mine was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom