GayGamer.net

Preview: Flame War

2012-05-24T14:30:00Z

Recently I was contacted by, Fun to 11, the company responsible for Miskatonic School for Girls regarding another Kickstarter project he had set up: Flame War. The basic premise is that you are in control of threads on a forum (or a comment section--it's pretty open-ended in that regard), and looking to have the most engagement without things getting ugly.

The measure of success, or how you win, is by accumulating the most interaction: the most single cards in a thread?

How does that happen? In a fairly simple and straightforward manner, you start a thread with any card, and then anyone can post to that thread with a card whose numeric value is equal or greater to the current top card; they likely will, since you can put down two cards every turn. The goal is to close three threads and have the most cards by the end of the game.

If it sounds fairly simple, it's because it is.

]]> The history behind the game is that this was designed by Andy Chambers as a sort of back-pocket game. A simple card game you have on hand whenever you have 10-20 minutes to spare, and want something that'll move fast. Chambers's design credentials include Warhammer 40K: Second Edition and being the creative director of Starcraft 2. Therefore, he has some chops.

Back to the game, however.

In terms of play, it becomes slightly more complex the more players you have. The deck of cards is more likely to run out, for instance, and you are potentially facing attacks from two sides, as well as needing to put a stop to those fronts from winning.

Players may close any of their own threads before they place cards, which creates an interesting strategy, because they cannot close a thread that currently has a flame on top of its stack, and you can't place two cards on your own thread to then close it. The strategy becomes one of almost obfuscation and redirection: pointing out other threats so that you may be left alone either due to people focusing their powerful cards somewhere else.

Mechanically simple, and thematically amusing. With cards such as Brony, Sexbait, and Banhammer, the deck includes flavor text for each comment/post that occurs, and you are essentially dealing with points, counterpoints, and that ever infamous Thread Jack. Which means your job, as a forum moderator/community manager, is to encourage as lively a discussion as possible, making sure it has a valid point and counterpoint, and then closing it when it's run its course. The longer a thread goes on, the more likely it is to have a flame war attempt at some point, and the question is how you deal with that.

Dealing with flames involves either posting a higher-numbered card, or using a few special abilities cards have, such as moving a post or delivering the banhammer. The design is such that you cannot close a thread on someone being nasty: you must address it. It's a good general rule in life, even if it is just removing that person.

Its appeal is largely as a quick game to play with a handful of friends while going somewhere and wanting something to do. However, for those of us who frequent a number of forums and comment sections, and have ever moderated them, there is also the novel appeal of seeing played out the discussions we have all seen out and about. At the same time, unless your sensibilities are very, very sensitive, it's quite inoffensive. The goal is not to show actual, head-bangingly frustrating flames, as to get the general point across.

The Kickstarter has already met its goal, and still has ten days to go. If you'd like to help it reach stretch goals, and become a backer, here's the link. Otherwise, I'm sure it will be for sale later, much like Miskatonic

A copy of this game was provided by Fun to 11. It has been played with two, three, and one player emulating multiple players for testing things.

Let's Chat: Diablo 3 Online & Future Review

2012-05-22T14:30:00Z

In the past week, while battling demons in Sanctuary, I've flitted in and out of groups with Bauske and EccentricTomboy (hoping to catch Dryden at some point or another), and am still working on a review. In fact, much like the Sonic 4: Episode 2 review yesterday, I am thinking of asking our other writers to proffer some opinions as well, so we get a range for you to select.

We don't do scores here at GayGamer anymore. Partly because we're not aggregated by any sources, so it doesn't matter if we do. Partly because we do still offer a conclusion paragraph that tends to tell you what you want to know if you want to quickly ascertain whether a game is for you or not. It also means we can theoretically have more fun with what we post about games.

Now, about that always-online thing for Diablo 3. Beyond the first day, I haven't had much problem with it, to be honest. A few lag hiccups here and there that make me nervous to ever run a hardcore character, but otherwise it's been fairly smooth sailing. My first day in the game was actually in a four-person group with EccentricTomboy, Bauske, and one other. We didn't get much of the plot: a four-person brawl on screen tends to mean lots of colors, bashing, and fun, but doesn't give much time to actually stay awhile and listen. That may be okay, though.

I've also tried public games, to have people join, sit there, and not respond to me, nor actually play the game. It's worrisome. Anyone who has played has surely heard all the rumors and speculation about hacking through achievements? Or replicating your login session so that they can get into your account without needing your password (thereby ignoring authenticators as well)? Blizzard has released a statement about what to do, but hasn't actually detailed anything.

Which makes sense: why give potential griefers more ammunition?

I'm just not joining public games again until something is cleared up (and maybe not even then--I'm a fan of exchanging Battletags and talking with people I know). So, what about you?

Has your Diablo experience been wrought with lag, disconnects, or being hacked? Is this pretty firmly cementing all the reasons an always-online experience for a game which can still theoretically be played single-player is a disaster? Vent! Let us know.

QFG's Successor

2012-05-21T16:30:00Z

Over on Joystiq this past Friday, Rowan Kaiser wrote up what makes the Quest for Glory franchise so amazing. Which led me to further thinking on the game series, and how it has influenced other games. Which is to say, in my opinion, I can see influences in a lot of places (particularly in BioWare titles). That is the topic for another post, however, as today I am more interested in figuring out what games have come closest to this particular RPG and adventure hybrid.

Recently I have been trying my hand at writing using ChoiceScript, which is used to make those lovely Choice Of games (Dragons, Vampires, and Zombies, oh my!). In reading up on how they handled choice and advancement, I came across this page, which describes their use of stats.

While the Choice of Games folk want you to make meaningful decisions, they came up with a method that seeks not to have them creating a labyrinthine novel with which you interact. Which is very similar to the QFG style: use stats to deterine a pass/fail option. What that means is your decisions matter in that they determine how your stats will increase, which in turn affects what you will succeed or fail at in future endeavors.

]]> Despite my liberal arts degree, I am a chap enamored with numbers. If you give them to me in a game, I am likely to stare at them lovingly and obsess about increasing or decreasing them as the situation merits (like the fact that my Nightmare-Act 2-running Witch Doctor is currently sitting around 1200 damage). The one downside to QFG that does not invade on my nostalgia is the ennui that would develop while grinding for my stats to be the absolute maximum to import into the next game. This was particularly wearisome in the second game, where you have a time limit that is much more stringent than the other games.

The wonderful aspect of the Choice games is that while I know those stats exist, and I will consult them while making decisions (though sometimes I am not opposed to failing, particularly in the titles where it does not end the game, but adds curious consequences), but I do not obsess over them, how to game them, and what it all means. This entire method reminds me a lot of the QFG series, whose choices were entirely limited by what you could do based on ability (which is opposed by the BioWare method).

In fact, it's the early tropes of adventure games that holds QFG back in the regard of having an outcome failing and then not being able to continue. Which is what makes the lack of plentiful of titles that more closely emulate the series somewhat disheartening. Had the fifth entry been more successful, and not been weighed down by the shenanigans that were happening at Sierra at the time, I wonder if we would have seen this hybrid model succeed more in the 3D game realm. Ah well, perhaps it's just wishful thinking.

Jackie Jumps Over The Candlestick

2012-05-15T14:45:00Z

Reading over Rob Zacny's excellent piece on The Darkness II, You Don't Know Jackie, I realized I had never actually written what I wanted about the game; particularly since I rather enjoyed the first one and felt it has been an under appreciated game. I don't necessarily disagree with Zacny, about the tiring aspects of the arcade point shoot-em-up qualities, or the fact that the centuries old brotherhood you're fighting doesn't really propel the plot in an interesting fashion. However, what I took from the game was its thematic concerns with what reality is.

The first game's brilliance came in how it questioned free will, particularly in a videogame. Whenever I am asked about moments in gaming that truly affected me, my mind jumps back to that moment where the titular Darkness stops me from interacting with a cutscene. It is a cutscene: I'm not supposed to be interacting with it, but the fact that the game went out of its way to make sure I understood why, was particularly brilliant. The rest of the game blurs in that fashion, but it was such a defining moment that it had me wonder what exactly Jackie had control over.

The answer was: whatever I could control, and nothing more. Jackie had no free will. He was a puppet not only to the Darkness that lived inside him and controlled him forcibly at times, but my controller, which dictated how he even fought, which powers he learned, and moved him about as a doll in particularly dark set pieces.

Given such, I am less interested in the small pieces that make up an Aristotelian plot diagram for our anti-hero Jackie Estacado, and more interested in what the game tries to push in terms of philosophical questions.

There be spoilers ahead!

]]> In The Darkness II, this happens to be reality.

Between sections of accruing points from impaling, slicing, and shooting enemies, there are segments where Jackie ends up in an asylum. The premise is that Jackie may well be delusional and crazy: the same cast of characters he deals with in the other world (mostly consisting of his mob companions and his antagonist) are there -- including his dead girlfriend Jenny. The doctors treat his visions about the Darkness and stories he tells as a dangerous episode. It's certainly not a new storytelling technique, but it hasn't quite worn out its welcome, particularly when dealing with demonically possessed mob bosses.

All of this is fine and dandy until you reach a crucial point in the game: do you accept the asylum's reality and stay with Jenny? Do you instead deny this reality, reject the asylum, and jump to your death?

The former option sees you dancing with Jenny, the game over. It ends with you dancing with Jenny, as you have in a former portion of the game (an actual illusion, no matter which way you slice it), which begs the question of why she is being so chummy to Jackie. Either she had connections to Jackie before, and he is not a crazed stalker with a fixation on one of his mental health care workers, she just happens to have had that profession, or this is the false reality.

Of course, what constitutes a false reality in games is difficult to say: is Jackie happy? In this ending, he is no longer shown to be harming anyone, and at peace.

The other ending sends Jackie to hell, to find he has awoken the Angelus, which has taken Jenny's form. He has no peace and is stuck in Hell.

Neither ending is ideal, and the question of which is 'real' largely becomes which we prefer. It is difficult to say either is the 'real' ending, particularly as I like the thought of ending Jackie's torment, even if that might be because he is stuck in a fabricated world where he is a prisoner in a mental asylum. In that world he is no longer necessarily cursed with the Darkness, and caught in a neverending cycle of violence as he visits it upon people, to have it come back on him, and then seek to revenge himself.

Much like the comics on which they are based, I'm not particularly interested in the finer bits of The Darkness mythos. It reads as pulp that isn't to my taste (I actually picked up one of the comics, regretting it once I read through the pamphlet in my hand). However, it would be great if the game universe kept pushing questions such as this, with the minimally amusing gameplay, and managed to downplay dead girlfriends coming back as angelic figures in a cliffhanger ending.

Perhaps in another reality, they have that game.

ClosetShep

2012-05-14T16:15:00Z

The last time I had a piece on Kotaku I was a bit smarmy/angry. It happens sometimes.

This time, I wrote about my experiences with the closetShep playthrough I had of the Mass Effect series. It only reflects my experience, and given other peoples' coming out stories (they are quite individual in most cases), I figured I would provide the link here for those of you who might want to read through it. A quick snippet:

As someone who did enjoy the series, I wanted to lovingly mock it while pointing out its parallels to the thinking behind such policies as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." But before I could do that, those points became irrelevant: "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is no longer in effect, and there are now options for players to allow Shepard to experience two male same-sex romances.

If any of you attempted a similar run, I'd be delighted to hear your thoughts!

Samus Supports Same-Sex Marriage

2012-05-11T16:45:00Z

McSweeney's can often be visited for a quick chuckle and guffaw. Thanks to my friends Regina and Alex, I found this particular piece, from the perspective of Samus Aran.

Which is to say she supports same-sex marriage because she herself is a lesbian.

The entire read is worthwhile, but here's a little snippet to grab your attention.

Why have I kept this a secret for so long? That's hard for me to say. The nature of my work forces me to silence. Working as mercenary, it's far better to let my arm-cannon do the talking. Plus, the way I chose to express myself tended towards the unorthodox. I wrote a book of poems entitled Morphing Inside My Varia Suit, which failed to find a publisher. I would flit between one relationship and another, hopping inside my gunship and speeding off to the next planet before things got too serious. Then the Mother Brain decided to outlaw same-sex marriage on planet SR-388. Planets Tallon IV, Aether and my birth planet K-2L followed suit. What year are we living in? Earth Year 2009? It's time for the universe to redefine its narrow concept of marriage.

Either Kickstarter doesn't exist in Ms. Aran's universe, or she needs to get on using it as a way to publish her book of poetry. Who knows, she might give Sappho a run for her money.

Also, I am now looking at that arm-cannon in an entirely new light.

Monkeying Around

2012-05-11T16:25:00Z

A few months back I finally gave Enslaved: Odyssey to the West a go, and found myself enjoying it, with caveats. What really made the game for me, though, was imagining Monkey, one of the protagonists, and the one you control, as a gay man.

There wasn't any one thing in particular that made me think this, and I don't see it as demonstrably provable--it's just that the game never dispelled me of that notion either. Given his exaggerated hip swagger, it recalled nights in various clubs, or walking down Halsted during Market Days in Chicago. Which is to say, it had that certain male sexuality that people like Calvin Klein have worked to bring into the mainstream; which is not to say it is exclusively homosexual in nature, but it is from where I was coming when approaching this particular game.

So how did the game actually play out?

Well, what amused me is that there seemed some vague plotline about how Monkey and Trip were actually developing something. I say vague because I know in the tradition of these things, I am supposed to believe that the obviously dripping feelings they were exchanging were indicative of a possible romance.

I saw it more as a close friendship, as I have had with many friends, regardless of their sex.
]]> Which meant that the concern Monkey shows allowed for a friendship that was endearing in how he interacted with Trip. It began to read more as if I was a big brother to Trip (at least in size), and she was an antagonistic sibling who was a bit forceful in her way of getting me to help her.

Now, this is all without having played the DLC, so I am not sure if anything is codified in that particular piece of narrative. Even with the race against Pig, it felt like I was protecting a woman I figured would not be interested in his advances (even if only because she was a bit more focused on her family right then, and didn't want that distraction).

So, did that change the game? As ever, the answer is yes and no.

For me, it did change how I saw Monkey, because many of his motivations had a different appeal, particularly in regards to Trip. I could just have easily seen those had I decided that he was any shade of sexuality on the spectrum and a romance was not budding. It was just the shorthand that worked in my particular instance.

On the other hand, while the game does not dispel this notion, it doesn't wholly support it either. There is something to be said about symbols and what they can mean. Of course, this can be the particular appeal of this medium, right? It's interactive, and if there is nothing to dispel the notion that a given person is gay or bisexual (after all, just because you're in an opposite-sex pairing at some point, doesn't mean you're exclusively straight), I can imagine that world. Unless the game is authored to the point where I have absolutely no say, or no role to play, and can only advance the story in the proper motivations, I do get to imagine what is going on. Why am I doing these things? What are the boundaries of a particular friendship?

Which is not to say I plan on being content just applying this to all future playthroughs: it's just as important as ever that scripted experiences that acknowledge sexuality outright can be made. Now to be really interested, let's see how such interactions actually affect the gameplay in some way.

Quest For Happiness

2012-05-10T17:50:00Z

In case you do not understand both my pseudonym and little avatar down there (real name is Denis, for the curious), I am an unabashed fan of the Quest for Glory series. Today, GOG has finally put the series up for purchase and download.

My love for the series started when I was around nine, and my mother had installed the games for me to play, thinking I would enjoy them more than just the traditional adventure games I had already played. There were a few reasons for that. First, there was my love of puns and language, and being able to find all these cultural references and then educate myself on them (these games served as my entry-point into both Monty Python and the Marx Brothers).

Then there was the fact that in terms of adventure games, it wasn't as rigid. This was a game of choice! Not choice as in choosing an outcome for a morally ambiguous question, as in with BioWare's latest, but more akin to what we see in the Choice Of games: choices based on your skill. Many puzzles had at least three different ways to approach them: as a stealthy thief, a cunning wizard, or a brute fighter. Just choosing one of those (or later becoming a paladin) did not block off the other choices, though.

Which ties into the third reason: the RPG elements. There was combat, sure. However, there were stats, and instead of leveling up, if you wanted to become better at a stat, you used it. Wanted to be more intelligent? Cast spells. Want to be better at throwing? Throw things. Dodging? Avoid the cheetaur claws!

So, the game is now available for download for the first time, at $9.99. It comes with all five games. The first game comes with both the EGA and VGA versions (former is parser and typing based, the latter point-and-click). If parsers are not your thing, and you want to go through the second game, there is also the AGDI fan remake to give a try.

Have fun!

P.S. In the fifth game, Andre the fisherman just so happens to be queer. Give him some flowers and watch as he mentions a jealous boyfriend.

Video: Classic SNES Games In Real Life

2012-05-09T18:15:00Z

Sent in as a tip by reader Steve J., the above video mixes certain nostalgic charm, for those of us who recall the SNES as a most lovable platform, with what appear to be varying doses of photography and Google Maps-esque images. Personally, I would be rather amused to see pixelated street fighters roaming about.

If you happen to enjoy the music, you can thank Triplefox. The album, Level Up! OST is available for free download (with some Creative Commons licenses for the songs) right here.

Teens

2012-05-09T16:00:00Z

Over the past several weeks I have had the opportunity to engage with a group of people with whom I rarely interact: teenagers. From ages twelve to seventeen. As someone who is too young to have friends with children that are teenagers, it had completely slipped my mind that there was an entire spectrum of people who rarely made an appearance in my life. To both groups I was introduced as someone who writes about games online. As I am sure would have happened when I was growing up, their ears almost instantly perked up, and conversation was had.

What I observed was fairly simple and confirmed what I, and I believe many others, think about gaming in general, and in youth. Of course, this is not a full-on study with the proper controls and such, so it should all be taken with a grain of salt. As in, this is likely not wholly representative.

First? Almost every single person gamed. Whether it was on their iPads, phones, through browsers, or what the media tends to think of as more 'traditional' gaming. Everybody, young men and women both. While some young women talked about various fashion designing games they played, I really did not see it absolutely different than the group of boys who discussed their love of Minecraft. Creating things can be a lot of fun, particularly when in the confines of a structured ruleset.

Second? For a good portion of them, motion gaming and iDevices are just not cutting it long-term, though they do enjoy gaming-on-the-go. Motion gaming has largely failed to give them the experience they desire: either a narrative or a game with a more complex set of goals and strategies. Whereas iDevices? Cited as having too few games that really engross them, instead providing more games that are played between classes for a quick distraction. I do imagine more will change in these avenues, especially as many remarked on enjoying being able to give voice commands through the Kinect.

The last observation? Kickstarter has yet to have any real appeal for them. Which is great, in many ways, as they are not yet with tons of disposable income. When discussing games that were available, they saw large success stories, and found it was largely by designers and properties that had no real sway on the games they played, or with which they grew up. Right now, at least in games, Kickstarter seems to have a real appeal to nostalgia and a desire to bring back portions of gaming we seem to have lost through either an evolution of the genre, or a fade into obscurity.

So, there you are, my non-scientific study of what I learned about teenagers. I am sure there are some of you who have more experience with them on either a weekly or daily basis (or even are teenagers yourselves, hi!), so please let me know if any of these observations seem out of place. Largely, though? Outside of the Kickstarter thing? Is it that surprising to find teenagers largely have similar opinions to everyone else playing? This is what I get for only reading about the supposed effects of gaming on them, or studies on them, rather than just talking to them. Mea culpa.

BioWare Interviews Writers Patrick Weekes & Dusty Everman

2012-05-07T20:15:00Z

Being late to the party, I only finished Mass Effect 3 this past weekend. While I was pleased as pie that there was an exclusively homosexual romance in the game, it was not the one I pursued with Sebastian Shepard, for a number of reasons. However, this morning I was pleased to find that BioWare's blog had up an interview with the two writers responsible for both the male and female exclusively homosexual romances: Patrick Weekes and Dusty Everman.

Which is to say: this is not about the ending. Nor is it spoiler-free (in terms of game plot, yes, but not in terms of things that happen during the romances themselves). Spoilers will be below that handy dandy cut, contained in quotations I found particularly worthy of attention. Which is not to say this has always been how BioWare has presented itself, but hopefully is something that indicates future thought processes.

I still recall the Dragon Age forums having official posts concerning the fact that having a purely homosexual romance of any sort could be seen as a waste of resources: these are choices that would not be selected often enough to justify the cost, or the time spent away from other portions of the game.

What's changed? This is purely supposition, but I imagine it has a lot to do with budget, the growth of the series, and numbers. After all, in the day of internet connections, achievements, and our save-files having markers that tell who we played, what we did, and whom we romanced, they have quite a bit of data on how many people are engaging in these romances. When refuting the privileged straight male gamer, Gaider made note that the numbers they have are not insignificant.

Which makes sense to me, as someone who rarely roleplays himself in an RPG. I do still like to see same-sex romances when I can, though. Or perhaps same-sex flings. Depends on the character. However, it seems I am constantly reading reports of straight men who play as a female Shepard, and romancing Garrus, or going for one of the female companions in their crew. Funny how that works.

But, to the quotations!
]]> How did you approach writing a gay character in Mass Effect 3?
Patrick Weekes: Liara's relationship in Lair of the Shadow Broker can be with players of either gender, so I was familiar with writing dialog that needed to work for a same-sex romance. Nevertheless, I'm a straight white male - pretty much the living embodiment of the Patriarchy - and I really wanted to avoid writing something that people saw and went, "That's a straight guy writing lesbians for other straight guys to look at."

I also really wanted the romance with Traynor to be positive. One of my gay friends has this kind of sad hobby in which she watches every lesbian movie she can find, trying to find ones that actually end up with the women not either dying or breaking up. I think the most positive one she's found is "D.E.B.S." I wanted to avoid any kind of tragic heartbreak, to make this a fundamentally life-affirming relationship... at least, as much as possible within Mass Effect 3′s grim war story.

Dusty Everman: I shared the concerns Patrick had about writing something that felt real. I've never been romantic with another guy, so I couldn't write from personal experience. Also, there seemed to be extra pitfalls associated with a male same-sex romance. Some players have concerns over being "ninja romanced" - where a relationship shifts from friendly to romantic to the player's surprise - and those concerns seem greater for same-sex romances.

Then, further along, Everman notes the following:

I believe that by the 22nd century, declaring your gender preference will be about as profound as saying, "I like blondes." It will just be an accepted part of who we are. So I tried to write a meaningful human relationship that just happens to be between two men.

They both note that they would love feedback on either Traynor or Cortez, so if you played through them, please feel free to leave your opinions in the comments, and I'll make sure that they manage to see this.

Video: RuPaul's Glamazon

2012-04-11T13:30:00Z

It is not often I get to mix my love of games and with my love for RuPaul's Drag Race. So far I have only had one opportunity, which was interviewing Pandora Boxx after noticing her frequent talk of mowing through zombies and jumping around platforms that are not on her feet.

Then came the video that was released yesterday for RuPaul's Glamazon. Now, I am keeping this below that handy-dandy cut so that you can avoid spoilers, in case you have not seen the last episode, and don't know who the final three are.

Suffice to say, however, the video itself may be my favorite of the ones released yet, and not just because it makes plenty of references to men in dresses channeling Godzilla realness in what looks to be a version of Rampage with drag queens instead of the furrier and scalier monsters to which we're accustomed. Personally, this appeals to me much more than the thought of Ru's head being misappropriated and placed on the body of Darth Vader (which is not nearly fabulous enough for her, no sir).

So, if you want to see the video brand-spanking-new for the finale episode in two weeks, or are not caught up yet, this is the last reminder to not make that jump. Meanwhile, I will dream of a possible future that includes drag cosplay challenges.
]]>
Get More: Watch Reality TV, Video and Movies, Logo TV

Video: DmC Captivate Trailer (NSFW)

2012-04-10T16:15:00Z

Despite being a fan of both Ninja Theory and Devil May Cry, I have largely stayed neutral on my opinion of the game thus far. This is because, for me, the game will be sold on how it presents Dante and how it controls, and the former was the only metric I had previously experienced in any form. After the first few trailers, I felt neither here nor there fully, so I was rather pleased to see this.

Dante is overly sexualized and in ridiculous ways. This may have been my issue with Kratos, whose burly physique just didn't do it for me (though I imagine he did for a number of people), and whose sexualization was so straightforward. This trailer? It gives me hope that Ninja Theory understands I want ridiculous, almost campy, Dante sex appeal.

Also, if he's available for sexual deviancy, I wouldn't mind helping him with that. Preferably without the baseball bat. Any man who can flip off some socially conservative talking head gets a few points in my book, though.

Creed: It's A Man's World

2012-03-28T19:00:00Z

Assassin's Creed III will feature a Native American hero, which is detailed a bit further in terms of how that fits into the narrative being spun by Ubisoft in this interview on Kotaku. During the interview, creative director Alex Hutchinson made mention of why the game didn't go with a female assassin:

It's always up in the air. I think lots of people want it, [but] in this period it's been a bit of a pain. The history of the American Revolution is the history of men. ... There are a few people, like John Adams' wife, [Abigail]--they tried very hard in the TV series to not make it look like a bunch of dudes, but it really is a bunch of dudes. It felt like, if you had all these men in every scene and you're secretly, stealthily in crowds of dudes [as a female assassin], it starts to feel kind of wrong. People would stop believing it.

What confuses me is trying to think of periods of history where what we learn isn't all about men. It's a very true statement on the front of it, and it makes specific mention of certain facts around history. At the same time, historically, women have tended not to be involved in the military very often. They generally have not had many rights.

If this is an excuse used, I wonder in what setting it would then be appropriate to use a woman? Does this excuse mean we can use very few settings? Because even when we have female rulers, we still don't tend to have outright female liberation happening in most countries. Amunet, whose statue is pictured with this article, was the one to supposedly kill Cleopatra, after all.

Now, the series has already made strides in some areas, such as even mentioning Leonardo DaVinci's probable sexual leanings in previous games. Considering its sci-fi elements, and bending of historical fact, I wonder why this couldn't be seen as a challenge to overcome, rather than just an outright, "Nah, it's a bunch of dudes."

Guess I'll go back for longing to go to Ancient Egypt with the Amunet, whose statue we see in the crypts of Assassin's Creed 2.

I am glad to note that the inclusion of a Native American protagonist is so as to provide some distance from a game that is purely about jingoism, which would be very easy to fall into considering the era in which this game takes place.

Review: Miskatonic School For Girls

2012-03-27T19:15:00Z

Among the successful Kickstarter campaigns within the last year has been Fun to 11's Miskatonic School for Girls, a deck building game focused on a young all-girls school which happens to be run by all manner of Lovecraftian monsters, the goal is to be the one to survive the attacks on your sanity. As my roommate had supported the project, I have been able to play the game over two weeks, so I figured I would share my thoughts.

First, the game is quite gorgeously put together, with artwork that balances well between the cute and school-girlish and the more horrifying and frankly punny takes on Lovecraft's villains and elder beings. Among the noteworthy is Lunch Lady Lulu, who brings to life all the stereotypes of a lunch lady with Cthulhian grotesquery.

The players also all get mats which resemble paddles, harking back to days of yore, and thankfully excluding any overt sexual intent (among my primary concerns when dealing with school girls and tentacles in any way, shape, or form). The cards themselves are of a wonderful stock that makes shuffling a dream, with their contents all displaying various puns on the Lovecraft mythos. If I had a complaint? The paddles also have a track to note where you are on sanity, and the pebble used can move about if you're not careful--which largely becomes an issue during the classroom battles, where you are moving around cards on the center of the board (though you can choose to enact that elsewhere).

As to the game itself? It will not be everyone's cup of tea.
]]> There is a high degree of chance involved in the game. Never quite enough to make you feel like your input is worthless, but enough that the game can quickly veer against you. The two buying tracks are constantly cycling in and out, and your opponent is the one who starts building part of your deck, putting various faculty members in it, whom you'll have to fight once you use them during the resource phase. When fighting faculty? You draw randomly from your deck and use the stats of the girl you selected to off a faculty member or defend against their attack. Draw another faculty member? Great! They go to an opponent's discard pile, but the attack is undefended.

You are dealing with two different resources, and are presented with new options every time, instead of the traditional deck building tactic whereby you purchase from a set pile, there is a chance that you will never quite get what you want, and must make do with what you have at hand and in front of you. Likewise, when entering battles, the girls, on average, are far more likely to be underpowered against the designs of Lovecraft's mind. Given the cutesy veneer, it is a mistake to think this is a game with a happy ending.

Given long enough, all the girls from the various houses will go insane. The aim of the game is to make you lose--to win is to be the last house standing against the onslaught. What isn't asked is how much longer that house will survive. This can lead to a certain amount of frustration, depending on how much control the players want. On the spectrum of games where pure tactics can win versus a random roll of the dice, this game veers slightly more toward the latter; though, again, not enough to mean your input is worthless.

However, there have been games where my purchases against an opponent mixed with a poor draw of the cards has meant he took a sanity hit of ten points in one round. You are designed to lose, no matter what. If you are a gamer who wants absolute control over the situation at all times, this is not the game for you. Then again, if you are such a gamer, I would probably recommend against going near anything with the hint of a smell of Lovecraft's universe. Your control of the situation is typically strongest at the start of the game, but as more cards get added to your deck and the probability of drawing what you need diminishes, you increasingly slide down the path of losing everything.

So, as a product for gamers who eschew ever losing control of a situation, this is not one I would recommend, particularly given the probability that exists in the use of the cards. On the other hand, for those who are a fan of the Lovecraft oeuvre, and rather enjoy reenacting the scenarios of doom and despair that so riddled his works, this is a perfect display that given enough time, we will all succumb to terror and insanity. Given the fact that it can be a relatively quick game (my play times have been anywhere from 30 to 45 minutes), this is easily one that can be played multiple times in a row, or among a plethora of games in an evening.

This game was acquired through the Kickstarter campaign, and has been played over the course of the past two weeks. It is available for purchase at Fun to 11's own store for $45 with domestic shipping, or $54 with international shipping.