Dude let's throw in as much random garbage as possible that will make it mysterious!

So, haters, do you hate the game because it has a Black women protagonist or do you hate the game for other reasons?

Have you even played the game before hating on it?

the black thing, we hate blacks here
blacks and nu-males

It didn't even matter in the slightest what gender and race the protagonists were. The problems are the gameplay and pretentious story.

We do not hate black people. That's a meme. Stop spewing memes like a 15 yo trying to impress a cute girl in the classroom.

we still hate nu-males tho?

I watched a Let's Play of this

Some of you people like to throw around the word "movie" a lot here, sometimes it's ridiculous, other times it's fair enough, but Viginia fucking takes the cake as the literal definition of movie game. Even when you pause the game it says "resume feature". I don't even remember if there was even any puzzles or anything, at least other walking simulators will try to include those to give you something to do. In Virginia i'm almost certain you just hold forward and press A a few times. And it's not even a good movie either, it just tries so hard to be artsy fartsy. I'm fucking sick of these "journalists" giving so much undeserved acclaim to these pieces of shit.

I don't think a game has ever made me this mad before. Anyone who calls something like Uncharted a movie after this fucking thing exists should be ashamed of themselves

>We
Do you also talk about Cred Forums IRL and refer to us as "your friends" every time you retell something you read here? I've met a couple of you insufferable faggots, it's beyond pathetic.

I haven't heard of it before today. Looked it up and saw it was just a walking simulator without exploration or interactivity. It's reallly just "Walk in a Line: The Game". Might have a cool story or something, but if I wanted just a good story I'd read a book or watch a movie.

I legitimately hate niggers

A cuck like yourself doesn't speak for me

dude surrealism lol

I don't say my friends but I'll say a friend told me instead of saying I read it on Cred Forums

Video games offer a better possibility of a story than a movie or book.

kek'd

The story is pretentious as fuck and you know it

No it's only Cred Forumstard here on Cred Forums they're butthurt because sjws are ruining everything they like. what bunch of babies

> implying any gaymur knows anything about story and characterization

>yfw remembering years, years, YEARS ago, hollywood played around with the idea of interactive movies, allowing audience members to dictate what happens in the film through console voting
>yfw game developers took that idea, tweaked it and now try to pass it off as vidya

I'm contemplating watching the Jim Sterling video but im almost certain I won't make it to the end because I just know vidya "journalists" are EATING THIS SHIT UP.

If she's in Virginia, then why the fuck is the steering wheel on the wrong side of the car?

>hating FSnR

Go fuck yourself

It's Virgina, Ireland

>Virginia
>right hand drive

I think the picture got mirrored because it's not like that in game.

variablestate.com/press/virginia/images/Stakeout.png
I would say "good job, [insert developer here]", but to be fair I can't see the mirrored picture on their site. Did somebody else make it?

I just grabbed the picture from Google. In the game the wheel is definitely on the other side.

True, but without interactivity you're essentially ripping that potential away.

But the game is interactive. You do solve crimes and ect, it's just not deeply interactive. It's more than a visual novel, but it's less than something like LA Noire.

I just watched it (trust me I struggled, I fucking hate that cunt), he doesn't even talk about the game, he just talks about the people complaining it's "SJW"

Do people really care that the main character is a Black Woman? Because that's the LEAST of this games fucking problems

Some racist people do, then some trolls use it just to get noticed.

He do not talk about the game because he already did a review on it. (he gave it a 7.5)
thejimquisition.com/virginia-review/

The point of the video was not the game, it was the backlash the game got from a minority of people, most likely trolls doing it for the lulz.

Can you fail at solving a crime? Can you fail at anything? How much involvement is there in doing this?
If it's basic interactivity there's no point. A movie would get the same point across. Even a visual novel has choice and consequence, players interacting directly with the world and characters to change the story. Is that even possible in this?

The only good vidya stories are emergent narratives as a result of interactions between multiple systems.

I still don't understand how dollyshots works

blows my fucking mind

Failing does not make a game. Even the smallest amount of interactivity make a game more effective at story telling than a movie.

A movie is passive interactions while a game is active. You cant finish the game without playing it and understand it.

Technically, the fail state of the game is not finishing it.

It's just a combination of zooming and moving.

Nu-males and feminist devs can't do game play for shit.

Most people dont know how it work either. Hillary clintons conspiracy theorist thought she was CGI because they used a zoom method that made background look much closer to her than it was.

>even small amount of interaction makes games more effective at telling a story than a movie

Something tells me you have no idea what you're talking about

Having to interact with a game make the story hit you a lot more than if it was passive. Having to interact with a dying person is a lot more touching than watching a guy do it.

>interactivity makes for superior storytelling
You are an idiot. How did I never realize Goosebumps choose your own adventure was the height of literary brilliance?

Choose your own adventure books are not the same, and you know it. That would be a visual novel, not a walking simulator. If you tried to do the same exact thing as a movie, it would be worst than if you played it.

You aren't actually interacting though, unless you actually believe that pushing a button is the same as being there physically. Films can deliver the same impact by building up the character.

I can see your argument being true if, say, the game let you completely make your own character from scratch and then the story all built up from there, but in most cases you are playing a character that is believed to have existed before the events of the game itself, so you are not actually the character but just actively controlling them, which doesn't make much of a difference in terms of storytelling in this case because you can reasonably see and know how the character will act anyway, you know that if it were "real" even if you didn't push the a button your character would save whatever character because of their relationship, but the game makes you push a because it has to be interactive, unless it's just a cutscene.

Movies create the same experience with nothing more than visual and aural stimulation and can give you the same emotional experiences without telling you to push anything.

Your argument is so broad it's absolute nonsense, but even if we assume it was right Virginia is just about the absolute minimum amount of interactivity a game can possibly have so everything else would be better.

>game
More like "game" or 'interactive experience', aka walking simulator that doesn't even has decent story to keep 'player' interested, nor interesting characters.

You are indeed interacting. You make choices on how you involve yourself in the story. Nobody will have the same input as anybody else and this lead to a new experience. For example in Metro Last Light, you hear a woman being raped. Do you interact with that or not? That's meaningless and has no change in the story itself, but it change your story of the game experience.

Movies are great, but video games involve the player. Anybody can put a movie and watch it. A puppy could watch the Dark Knight and feel nothing about it. Because he's a dog.

Video games make you have to make choices, even if it's as small as "do I look at this lamp or not". It change the feeling of the game. If you rush through a game or if you actually try to experience all the of the assets or cut somewhere in the middle, your experience of the game will be altered.

A movie is different. It's static and passive. You only see a "playthrough" from some director that wanted you to see it. It's more polished and more directed, but it's a single experience.

Worked for Deadly Premonition

Gone Home for example is pretty light in interaction. You open doors, look at stuff and discover the story in a 2.5 hours worth of "tension" while you walk around in your old dark house. But it's still great at revealing a story.

They are games. You not liking them, does not make them less of a video game.

>a puppy could watch the dark knight and feel nothing

A puppy can also sit in front of a videogame and feel nothing

Exactly. Because he cant activate most games. But if you made a video game that was made to work with puppies, he would feel something. For example, cats have Ipad games that make them play and chase and experience something.

Maybe if puzzles weren't piss easy then I would call it game. They way it is, it isn't.
Mobage aren't games either.

Too bad Virginia doesn't live up to that potential at all.

It is. It factually is.

Sure, it might not, but that does not devalue it as a game. For example, some people loved the Blair Witch Project. My mother on the other hand watched the whole thing and though the movie would start right before the credits started.
She hated it.

We all have our own perception on mediums. Some people see a white painting and see nothing, some see a reflection of humanity.

>puzzles

What puzzles?

Virginia's entire gameplay is walking straight ahead and clicking on the things right in front of you. If you take too long, it skips to the next scene for you.

>the fail state of a movie is not watching it

There, I broke your logic

kys my dude

No. If you start a movie, it will end without you needing to do anything. If you start a game, you cant finish it.

That's the difference. If you cant understand that, there is no hope.

Just because it's interactive in a shallow way doesn't make a big difference to a movie or book. If it had meaning via failing or alternate paths it would be unique, kinda like Heavy Rain although that has a shit plot. Otherwise it's pretty identical to a movie save for the awful story writing and dialogue because most game devs suck at this

If you think a semantic technicality of the word "interactive" is enough to make Virginia a game, I almost hope the industry undergoes a paradigm shift to produce only these proto-games so you can wallow in a dead medium for the rest of its existence, never knowing what it really means for a game to be a game.

Almost.

There's no point arguing over whether a film has a 'fail state' because films aren't games.

Games must have a win state, or a fail state, or both, in order to be considered a game. Films don't need win states or fail states.

Two different media.

It's not. With a movie you cant look at what you want to look. You cant do what you want to do. Look at a game like Stanley Parable where your choices in the path that you choose change the whole game.
And yet you can only use WASD and the mouse to move around.

Movies differ vastly too. You have movies with deep and complicated plots that you have to watch deeply and multiple time to catch the whole story. And then you also have games like Batman where you can watch it once while cooking without losing any of the story elements.

Exactly. And all video games have at least one or the other. I cant think of a single video game where you cant lose or win.

>"watching" a game while cooking
I see what you're doing here and I don't like it

Books are more interactive than Virginia because you have to turn pages.

I watched all three Nolan Batman films at the same time, audio for one film, subtitles for the other two, all on 1.5 speed. It was worth it, I can't imagine spending ~7 hours on that shit.

You're right (because you agree with me), just clarifying the point; I'm not just talking about vidya, I'm talking about -all- games, electronic or otherwise.

Meant movie obviously. I'm tired, I had to wake up before the sun was down.

>Waking up
I haven't slept for three days. Where my alcoholic NEET bros at? I had no idea if it was day or night til I just opened my curtains.

Stanley is a good example because there are choices as a player that you make. Virginia and many other walking-sims aren't. and it doesn't matter at what you look when the story progression is the same with no consequence. thats not what makes a game a game

That feel
youtube.com/watch?v=dybCYC0C7oM

Is this a game about my state? Why?

But that is true for most games. In most games you progress to the next level without any consequences on your actions for the last level. Some levels might have secret endings but you still just go to the next.

A game is something that is entertaining with a win or fail state. Throwing a ball against a wall is a game. It has no end until you miss or stop playing. It might not be Tennis, but it's still a game that you experienced and learned a new experience that will shape other experiences.

Take Firewatch for example. Another walking simulator but it still have horror elements and you feel stuff. Even if you cant derail away from the trail, it's still a great and different experience depending on how you play it.

Because it's less boring than Ohio but less interesting than Oregon.

>hate the game because it has a Black women protagonist or
Never heard of it, but it looks like the shit I flushed 10 minutes ago. Only with less personality.

no you don't get it.. oh well, i tried.

Refer to the image from the message you quoted.

I rarely hope for misery upon a person, but Jimmy-boy I hope gets struck by a Mack truck. I don't want him dead mind, I want him to know the misery in physical form that he inflicts upon everyone else with his idiocy.

A game is not simply about finishing it. Anybody can play through a game of tennis. It's what you do in the game itself that matter. What you learned.

>implying you aren't me

>even killscreen gave it 3/10

whoa

IMO, anything is a game as long as there is a 'win state' to get to. Gone homo is a game because you have to not be completely retarded and figure out how to get to the credit sequence.

That said gone homo, this game, and all other walking simulators ARE SHITTY GAMES, because they barely justify the medium's strength of player interactivity and might as well be movies and books, BUT they are games.

win state or lose state. Some games make you play until you lose, and not until you win.

Like Tetris.

Win state, or lose state, or both.

Also Tetris B-mode has a win state. But that's neither here nor there. You're still right.

What a beatiful woman

OK!
where's my copy of interstate 76?!

Cred Forums literally can't help but leak out of their containment board and sperg all over every possible topic that triggers them.
It's why they had to make a rule for when the spam gets really out of hand.

>Even the smallest amount of interactivity make a game more effective at story telling than a movie
LOL

>because they barely justify the medium's strength of player interactivity and might as well be movies and books, BUT they are games.
They realised, they lack a talent to write and story is simply too weak to be made into book or movie, so they went with game, while adding black womyn and saying their 'art' is being oppressed for breaking habits, rather for being shit.

So Grim-fandango level graphics in 2016 are okay cause it's artsy and deep?

Yes.

You shut your fucking mouth

Grim Fandango actually looks good.

Read a book nigga

Watching a movie in VR would make it better than watching it without VR.

Currently reading the compendium of HP Lovecraft work.

Are these the new Nintendo NX Miis?

>thread 100xxx complaining about walking simulator 100xxx

>Watching a movie in VR would make it better than watching it without VR.
Come on m8 that's like saying playing a game with motion controls is better than without. Shit just detracts from the experience

Not really. Motion control would be pretty great.

And VR would allow for a lot more interaction. Being able to see a scene from any point on the "set". Full immersion and 360 degree rotations. It would create a great amount of replayability to a movie. You could follow the movement of each characters directly. You would become your own movie director.

>game has investigators and some super natural elements
>"GOSH THIS REMINDS ME SO MUCH OF DAVID LYNCH"

No, it's an original design

>game

>I'm fucking sick of these "journalists" giving so much undeserved acclaim to these pieces of shit.

This. If they want people to call it a game, then they should review it like one.

>it looks like shit and there's no gameplay
>but graphics don't matter, it's the story!
>why did you make it a visual interactive medium and not a book

Because their shitty scribbles wouldn't pass as a book other than a $2 ebook on amazon, that's why

>paying for ebooks

If you're a person who legitimately hates on a game solely because the protagonist is a black woman then you are the exact same as some feminist cunt who hates on a game because it has a white male as the protagonist and you should get your fucking brain checked.

Here's my working theory so far:

-The story is actually about self discovery, not actually about the case, and not actually about Maria.
-Anne, the main character, is an older woman, judging by her graying hair, and her older deceased father.
-The game takes place in the 90s.
-Anne suffers from hallucinations.
-Anne takes a hit of acid at the end of the game and goes on a trip.

OK... So basically, Anne is an old hippie. Think about it. About 25 years ago, is when the hippie movement takes place in the 60s. Anne is already an older woman when she becomes an FBI agent. What took her so long? Well, it's likely that she was this anti-establishment drug using type back in the day. However, getting older and wanting to make her dad proud, she reformed and worked her way into the FBI. All the hallucinations she experiences are residual effects of drug use. Which can happen if you do frequent doses of acid. Her familiarity with the drug, is why she was compelled to steal a tab for herself in that envelope.

The canary, is obviously a reference to a canary in a coal mine.(google it) Which I think reflects Anne's relationship with the FBI. She wants the bird to live, because that would mean she's doing the right thing. But seeing the bird die, means she's doing the wrong thing.

At first, Anne reluctantly goes along with keeping tabs on Maria. But as their relationship grows, she becomes even more doubtful of her actions. But before she can decide on her own to quit what she's doing, Maria finds out. When they both get detained, Anne imagines what her future would be like, if she actually aided in snitching on Maria and subsequently her other co-workers. After a long period of reflection, she's freaked out. And with nothing to guide her, she takes the acid for a bit of inner searching.

1/2

That's when you get the extended confusing sequence of events. Where basically, Anne puts herself in other people's shoes. Sees things from their perspective, and feels what they feel. And she realizes that all these people are dealing with their own problems. Problems they would like to go away, but they can't handle by their own. That's what the cult-ish imagery is about. Maria feels like she's been indoctrinated into this cult, where she's the one having to solve this problem for everyone. This problem represented by a buffalo. The buffalo is like that saying "no one wants to address the elephant in the room." But exchange the elephant with the buffalo. Here, you have this big problem everyone is skirting around, that needs to be taken care of.

The mask is a pretty clear parallel to Anne's professional face she needs to put on to do her job. As depicted by her putting on her makeup. Which is also called putting on one's face. She puts her face on, in order to be a part of the cult. Removing the mask was showing that she no could no longer keep up the facade. The canary was dead, because her relationship with the FBI went horribly wrong, as she was being forced to make everyone's problem go away, symbolized by killing the buffalo.

In the end, she and Maria quit. Because they both found out that following in their parent's footsteps wasn't what they wanted to do. And that's when they see Lucas, the missing boy, walking on the side of the road. He wasn't lost, he never wanted to be found. After finding out about his father's affair, he became disillusioned of his parents happy little religious home, and ran away to do what he wanted to do.

2/2

Why did you have to tell me Jim Sterling made a video on it and make me curious
That's 10 minutes' worth of brain cells and minutes of my life I'll never get back.

You dont review Drama movies the same way you review an action movie.

this

at this point I would consider it a new medium entirely

...

You can play the game just by sitting back and watching a commentary-less let's play on youtube. You don't even have to use the steam refund option!

sorry, is this quality bait?