Remove ads

Detroit: Become Human

Reader mode
ZerbanDaGreat said:


Just gonna leave this here. For later.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well "almost raped"can go several ways, since apparently the robot are basically sentient, but are barely restrain by programming, seriously the ammount of creepy sexual scenario with the premise are high

Stillted dialogue, nothing really encouraging so far.

It defintiively has a bit hype of going for it, but people have wisen up about David Cage

Misleading Demo...well duh

"But police don't work that way" well we have the robocop character

Daddy Issue...presumably confirm by our most recent trailer
 
I just hope it has a good soundtrack. Heavy Rain had a phenomenal score, just one way it was superior to Beyond.

Beyond's OST had its moments, though. Pretty much my favorite part also had my favorite song


It's never enough, Jodie. I'm pretty sure everyone on Earth who played that game not only kept torturing the kids, they did their absolute best to kill them.

Probably says something about me as a person but who cares. This song was really nice, too.


Also maybe I should finally get Indigo Prophecy. I wanted a new video game for November and taht might be it now I finally remembered to get it when I have money.
 
I Don't Trust David Cage to Tackle Domestic Violence in 'Detroit'

At one point in that interview, Cage asks: "Would you ask this question to a film director, or to a writer?" It comes off as defensive, and it suggests a view of art where being an artist means being subject to less criticism; a view where film directors or novelists are not interrogated like he's being interrogated, because they're taken seriously. Cage seems desperate for games to be taken seriously. What he's experiencing in that interview is video games being taken seriously.

Being an artist is the opposite of a free pass. To be taken seriously means to be interrogated. To be taken seriously means that what we do as game developers and writers can and should be put under a microscope. You can't grow up without accepting responsibilities, and video games are long out of their infancy. Being given that responsibility, being subjected to that interrogation, is what allows us to move forward with the medium. You can't iterate, in your own game, without passing judgment on what you did earlier in the process. The medium as a whole can't iterate without that component of judgment.

Maybe Cage has thought about this scene deeply enough. Maybe in its final release,Detroit will stick the landing. But it's hard to reserve judgment when what we've seen suggests it absolutely won't; when Sony chose to show us something that does the opposite of what would be a good treatment of the subject matter. And when, in response to being pressed on the issue, Cage responded in a defensive and tone-deaf way that doesn't inspire confidence either.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This is lining up with what I thought of the trailer overall.
 
There are ways to handle domestic abuse. You can, perhaps, portray the effect it has on people. You can portray how it can damage a person's life, perhaps even permanently. You can portray how difficult it is to get out, how the abuser can distort the victim's perception. How the victim can justify staying in an abusive relationship. How a victim can be gaslighted into believing lies, made to doubt their own reality by the abuser. You can portray a little bit of self-awareness, followed soon by fear and self-loathing for giving into the fear.

David Cage does none of these things, and is instead turning it into another le ebil ting because hoomans are bad. It's to reinforce a point that doesn't exist and has been handled better elsewhere. It's on the same level as fanfiction. Instant drama, just add abuse.

TL;DR - The way he is portraying it is actually fucking offensive and makes me want to projectile vomit. Fuck you, Cage.
 
I don't think that's really the point Cage was actually making. Like no one actually would ask that question of an author or director. There are fifteen billion novels and movies dealing with domestic abuse. The interviewer says they'd ask that question regardless, but be real. They wouldn't. They might, after the fact, discuss a book or movie, but they'd give it the benefit of the doubt.

It's fine to ask the question of David Cage, because he's not very good. But his comment doesn't suggest to me an aversion to critique, but rather an exasperation at the medium being considered incapable dealing with heavy themes.

It doesn't especially bother me that Detroit contains this material. It doesn't even bother me that Cage is writing it. We can't exactly unmake it.

What bothers me is the response 'you need to see it in context'. If you're going to load your trailer up with controversial material, you should not respond with 'you need to see it in context'. You're the ones taking it out of its context. What did you expect?

The important thing to take away from this, in conjunction with The Last of Us 2 trailer at PGW, is how weird it is that we use this kind of violent material to sell our games.
 
Ford Prefect said:
I don't think that's really the point Cage was actually making. Like no one actually would ask that question of an author or director. There are fifteen billion novels and movies dealing with domestic abuse. The interviewer says they'd ask that question regardless, but be real. They wouldn't. They might, after the fact, discuss a book or movie, but they'd give it the benefit of the doubt.

It's fine to ask the question of David Cage, because he's not very good. But his comment doesn't suggest to me an aversion to critique, but rather an exasperation at the medium being considered incapable dealing with heavy themes.

It doesn't especially bother me that Detroit contains this material. It doesn't even bother me that Cage is writing it. We can't exactly unmake it.

What bothers me is the response 'you need to see it in context'. If you're going to load your trailer up with controversial material, you should not respond with 'you need to see it in context'. You're the ones taking it out of its context. What did you expect?

The important thing to take away from this, in conjunction with The Last of Us 2 trailer at PGW, is how weird it is that we use this kind of violent material to sell our games.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, we know the context, don't we? This is a world where AI is mistreated. We are seeing how this mistreatment manifests in relatively mundane and minor ways. We see how the assholes of the world can use a system where sapient lifeforms are considered disposable subhuman trash as an outlet for their aggression and sadism. In the shitty world of DBH, every ugly aspect of society takes on a twisted but familiar form thanks to the presence of these robots.

This is just what I took away from the trailer. He's trying to show us a humdrum, everyday life or event in this horrible world and horrible system. As long as things remain as they are, shit like this will happen again and again and again.

The other trailer was a huge contrast, big, revolutionary message and stuff, ya know? All grand and whatever. This was considerably more low key yet far more powerful or...perhaps memorable is the better word, even if it's memorable for unpleasant reasons. I dunno, I just think that what Cage was attempting at least is showing a more banal form of evil. There are no gulags for these robots (as far as e know) or death factories or other big displays of EVIL. It's just one piece of shit being a piece of shit because of how shitty this world is.

I know a lot of people don't like Cage and that's fine. This is just my interpretation of the trailer's intent, even if it wasn't executed well.
 
Ford Prefect said:
The important thing to take away from this, in conjunction with The Last of Us 2 trailer at PGW, is how weird it is that we use this kind of violent material to sell our games.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Because if it's edgy people remember it and talk about it, and if people get pissed about it being pointlessly edgy they talk about it even more.

Which reminds me, I should get around to looking at the recent trailers from that other, far more mature Sony property. Y'know, God of War.
 
Ford Prefect said:
I don't think that's really the point Cage was actually making. Like no one actually would ask that question of an author or director. There are fifteen billion novels and movies dealing with domestic abuse. The interviewer says they'd ask that question regardless, but be real. They wouldn't. They might, after the fact, discuss a book or movie, but they'd give it the benefit of the doubt.

It's fine to ask the question of David Cage, because he's not very good. But his comment doesn't suggest to me an aversion to critique, but rather an exasperation at the medium being considered incapable dealing with heavy themes.

It doesn't especially bother me that Detroit contains this material. It doesn't even bother me that Cage is writing it. We can't exactly unmake it.

What bothers me is the response 'you need to see it in context'. If you're going to load your trailer up with controversial material, you should not respond with 'you need to see it in context'. You're the ones taking it out of its context. What did you expect?

The important thing to take away from this, in conjunction with The Last of Us 2 trailer at PGW, is how weird it is that we use this kind of violent material to sell our games.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
My main takeaway was from a different article, written by a Mr. Jim Sterling, and his insight on it was essentially "I grew up in an abusive household, and what's in this trailer is a ludicrous caricature of the real thing that no self-respecting creator should consider a worthy portrayal of a tough subject". His guess was that Cage is aware that movies can be 'mature', believes that games should be able to do the same thing, but then tries to do so by sloppily pasting in things he's seen in movies for his games instead of actually trying to make a game that discusses those things.
 
Ford Prefect said:
I don't think that's really the point Cage was actually making. Like no one actually would ask that question of an author or director. There are fifteen billion novels and movies dealing with domestic abuse. The interviewer says they'd ask that question regardless, but be real. They wouldn't. They might, after the fact, discuss a book or movie, but they'd give it the benefit of the doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Except they do, and I have read it in quite a few interviews with said directors/developers, and they even mention a couple of interviews they did where they talked about those things.

David Cage's problem is that he wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to do games with all of these heavy themes, but he wants to impart no grand message. He wants to be a grand auteur, but he lacks any creativity in the field and so just copy and pastes the works of better people into his games. He is not interested in narratives, but in momentary "feels", which work in short films but fail in a narrative game.
 
serra2 said:
Except they do, and I have read it in quite a few interviews with said directors/developers, and they even mention a couple of interviews they did where they talked about those things.

David Cage's problem is that he wants to have his cake and eat it too. He wants to do games with all of these heavy themes, but he wants to impart no grand message. He wants to be a grand auteur, but he lacks any creativity in the field and so just copy and pastes the works of better people into his games. He is not interested in narratives, but in momentary "feels", which work in short films but fail in a narrative game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Jace911 said:
IMO David Cage's main problem stems from his desperately reaching into the pit for meaning and coming back up with shit. He just picks a thematic direction and goes for it without a real goal in mind other than "it worked for someone else!"

Look at the absolute blender of ideas Indigo Prophecy turned into. Look at how Heavy Rain wrote giant checks early on and then failed to cash them later. Look at the disjointed mess of Beyond Two Souls' central plot.

"Planning" is antithetical to Cage's entire artistic method. He sees tools in use and understands that you need hammers to build a house, but not what they're actually specifically for. Do I paint with them? Do I use them to prop things up? He doesn't know, so he waves them around until they fly out of his hands and break someone's window (Or skull).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
 
Unless the androids are meant to be completly subservient to their owner, I'm suprise a robot maid/nanny don't have some sort of protocol for abusive relationship, presumably one could record evidence of the abuse and call the police.
 
Redem said:
Unless the androids are meant to be completly subservient to their owner, I'm suprise a robot maid/nanny don't have some sort of protocol for abusive relationship, presumably one could record evidence of the abuse and call the police.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The other writers probably only narrowly convinced Cage not to have the robo meido say "masser" so that's hardly a surprise.
 
Redem said:
Unless the androids are meant to be completly subservient to their owner, I'm suprise a robot maid/nanny don't have some sort of protocol for abusive relationship, presumably one could record evidence of the abuse and call the police.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Assuming the robots are supposed to be non-sapient property. Why wouldn't they be totally subservient?

Edit : I mean, I think it would be wise for us to treat anything that looks convincingly like another human with basic civility, but must people don't really want their dish washing machine snapping back at them.
 
Last edited:
Triggerhappy said:
Assuming the robots are supposed to be non-sapient property. Why wouldn't they be totally subservient?

Edit : I mean, I think it would be wise for us to treat anything that looks convincingly like another human with basic civility, but must people don't really want their dish washing machine snapping back at them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The argument here would be "hey, this person already chose to put a walking surveillance system inside their home, why not take advantage of it to help deal with domestic abuse or other horrific crimes committed behind closed doors?"

In other words, I think that "totally subservient" was a poor choice of words, and probably should have been something like "intended for the owner's rights to supercede state or federal rights, even in matters of crime prevention" instead.

Meanwhile I'm sitting here thinking "y'know, in Humans, a show about android servants that started at least a year ago, they had the idea of 'public option' droids that come with the caveat of being loyal to their designated function and not necessarily to you, so how did Cage not rip that off?"
 
ZerbanDaGreat said:
Because if it's edgy people remember it and talk about it, and if people get pissed about it being pointlessly edgy they talk about it even more.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's not really what I meant. Obviously anything that generates publicity is seen as beneficial. But it's still weird. Like how our hobby is enormously violent in general.

serra2 said:
Except they do, and I have read it in quite a few interviews with said directors/developers, and they even mention a couple of interviews they did where they talked about those things.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I don't agree with you at all. There is no norm in film or literature journalism to question whether someone should be writing on any particular topic. These kinds of discussions in the public sphere are a very recent phenomenon, as well. And Martin Robinson didn't mention interviews where he had asked the same question, just that he would ask the question. And while he might, it's certainly not what happens in general. It's just accepted that books and films can have that kind of material. You have to go pretty far before people start questioning you before the fact.

Part of that is that books and films do not generally invite the discussion. Books don't have trailers, and the film industry is very practiced at courting and avoiding controversy when it comes to marketing. While they do get it wrong from time to time, I feel confident in saying that the average or even below average Hollywood marketing team wouldn't sit down and edit together a trailer like this one. While video game marketing is different in some ways (full price video games are much longer than films so they lend themselves to showing entire 'scenes'), nothing in it requires this. I'm not convinced that it will actually work or be meaningful in context, but it isn't going to come off better by being entirely divorced from Kara's wider journey.
 
GardenerBriareus said:
In other words, I think that "totally subservient" was a poor choice of words, and probably should have been something like "intended for the owner's rights to supercede state or federal rights, even in matters of crime prevention" instead.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yeah that's what I meant

GardenerBriareus said:
Meanwhile I'm sitting here thinking "y'know, in Humans, a show about android servants that started at least a year ago, they had the idea of 'public option' droids that come with the caveat of being loyal to their designated function and not necessarily to you, so how did Cage not rip that off?"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Hell, the show humans based off came out 5 years ago
 
So there is a gameplay video



Which is oddly enough based off there trailer, it look very heavy rain-esque with Sherlock mixed in

Also an android cost around 9000$ and that's a new model!
 
Last edited:
Redem said:
So there is a gameplay video



Which is oddly enough based off there trailer, it look very heavy rain-esque with Sherlock mixed in

Also an android cost around 9000$ and that's a new model!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...


Looks pretty good, like a new generation of ARI that doesn't kill you.

Sad ending but of course n obvious ending. I always hate this kind of stuff because I don't like lying to people. I'd be a terrible negotiator or undercover cop or whatever because it just feels so wrong to me.

But Connor at least has no real moral compass. I dunno if that makes it better or worse in the overall scheme of things.

Oh and I really dig the music. Voice-acting is nice, too. That was, for me, HR's biggest failing and Beyond's biggest improvement. Looks like they're carrying on with that improvement here.
 
Last edited:
Nikkolas said:
Sad ending but of course n obvious ending. I always hate this kind of stuff because I don't like lying to people. I'd be a terrible negotiator or undercover cop or whatever because it just feels so wrong to me.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I wonder how much agencyyou are have there cause I'm pretty sure the outcome stay about the same regardless of what you know
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top