Shame, Sexuality and Video Games: A personal account

Recently, I have been both looking forward to and dreading Vanillaware’s upcoming Dragon’s Crown. Vanillaware have developed one of my favourite Wii games, Muramasa: The Demon Blade. So when I found out they were developing a game for the PS3, I began to salivate. Those familiar with Vanillaware’s games know that they are absolutely gorgeous. The thought of seeing amazing 2D artwork in HD and having a fun game underneath thrilled me to no end.

Then I saw the game…

It definitely is a gorgeous game, with beautiful environments and creature design, and amazingly smooth animation. I did, however, find myself deeply uncomfortable when I saw the player character art. The character design pays homage to the artwork that adorns low fantasy novels; muscular men and barely dressed women representing the pinacle of “masculine” and “feminine” virtue (from a certain perspective). Impossibly sculpted bodies one would expect of some deity and not a mortal. These physiques were representative of an ideal. It was not an ideal I really subscribed to, but it was nevertheless an ideal of some sort.

If you have a look at the character art for Dragon’s Crown, however, it appears the pulp covers of low fantasy were but a starting point. The end result being grotesquely exaggerated caricatures of an idealised human body that is at times disturbing and at others strangely fascinating. It is something that has already attracted commentary from both detractors and supporters and it is not my aim to parrot opinions in this piece.

What I want to do is work through having a game that I want to play because the gameplay looks genuinely fun to me, and a game that makes me feel uncomfortable due to its representation of the human form.

Through various events and thought experiments, a realisation has been dawning on me: I have an aversion to things related to sex and sexuality and I am confused and ashamed of the fact I am a sexual creature.

I have been confused about my sexuality for the past couple of years. Prior to this confusion, I had untreated depression and anxiety and so my libido was effectively suppressed. Life was easy and I could ignore any issues that may have cropped up.

However, after getting treatment, I must say I am feeling a lot happier more frequently, and for the most part, my anxiety is manageable. This has also come with an increase in my libido and a confusion about being attracted to people both romantically and sexually. I guess you could say I am dealing with teenage sexual identity issues in my mid 20s.

Having not really dealt with my libido much before this time, it feels alien and unnatural for me to feel any sort of sexual attraction to anyone, and the mere recognition that certain things can be viewed through the lens of sexuality makes me uncomfortable. I just haven’t had the time to work through these issues and I find myself on the back foot. I have been too embarrassed to raise these issues and concerns with my parents and my mental health professional, and I think I am beginning to view sex related topics as something to be embarrassed by and ashamed of.

I find I play as a female character in most games that allow me to customise my character or play as a pre-made female character. I have been jokingly asked if I do this so I can stare at the character’s ass while I play (something that seems both silly and counterproductive to me). I am also pretty sure that it’d be pretty hard to do so in a first person game =P

Anyway, ogling is not why I play female characters, in case that wasn’t clear.

I’ve finished Mass Effect 2 only once though I have attempted two playthroughs of it. The first run through, I played as Male Shepard and I did not feel at all connected to my character. However, playing through as Female Shepard allowed me to invest much more into the game. I felt more attached to my Shepard, and I wanted to see her story through to the end. Any moment where my Shepard was taunted or insulted, I felt personally insulted and any moment of triumph was similarly personal. I got none of this with the Male Shepard.

I’ve been wondering why I feel uncomfortable being around men in real life and why I dislike being reminded of my male-ness. I’ve cringed in the past at being called a man by a friend, yet my pronouns are still He/Him/His. It feels like I am cheating a little, but I’ve concluded that I’d rather be seen (by myself at least) as a genderless, or at the very least, not male entity. In video games, the easiest way to be non-male is to be female. I feel much more comfortable playing as a female character because I am not reminded all the time that I am male. In virtual spaces, a female avatar is what I feel most comfortable representing myself as, even though I don’t feel like I am female myself.

The gaming landscape is a strange place that handles sexual identity and gender identity in a number of ways, whether intentionally or not. The “everyone is bi” of Mass Effect, the homoerotic undertones of the Metal Gear Solid franchise, the male default of Minecraft’s Steve or the power fantasy that is Duke Nukem.

As a person confused, intimidated and ashamed by my own sexual identity, gender identity and by sexuality in media, it can make things more complex when choosing what to engage with. Coming back to Dragon’s Crown, if I were to ever pick up the game, I would play as the Elf. She is the least stylised of the female characters, a fact that has been co-opted by users of the internet to ridicule those who took offense at the portrail of women in the game (something that many feel strongly about given the prevalence of sexism in the industry. Use google if you need reading material). “She exposes her ears! Strumpet!” ring the cries o those who mock the offended. Insinuations of homosexuality sprout forth from the character designer. “You do not like exaggerated women? Then you must like these exaggerated men I drew in response to your (admittedly, not completely defensible) article! Ha!”

And everyone who wanted to have a discussion about the role of sex, sexuality and gender in games is reminded that for the most part, they won’t be able to find one.

And I am reminded that not only will I have to deal with personal anxieties and shame related to the subject when picking up a game such as Dragon’s Crown, but I will also be drowned in an ocean of writhing, wailing bodies unable to back down from their stance if I ever attempt to seek clarity or opinion online.


I thought I should put this here. It is a description of myself through the way I behave in an attempt to strip labels away. I seem to have only succeeded by the very end of it:

if we go by what we do, I am a cat-like self hating Indian man that is a biromantic heterosexual and kind of feels more comfortable not thinking of himself as male and if possible, representing himself as female in virtual spaces, because there doesn’t really seem to be a sex/gender-less avatar in most virtual spaces


I am a Criticiser, not a Critic, and I matter.

Come with me on a little journey. It was a lazy night spent procrastinating in front of the computer. My anxiety was getting the better of me, and instead of working on my assignments, I took to twitter to bury myself in a sea of Jurassic Park rerelease buzz. You see, Jurassic Park has a special place in my heart. It has a special place in the hearts of many people who were 5 years old in 1993. It’s just the way things work

It was during this browsing that I came across an article on, superficially about Jurassic Park. I read it and realised I was tricked into something much more interesting than an article discussing the flaws in Jurassic Park, that clever writer…

And it was this article that got me thinking about why I do not consider myself a critic, even when my friends have told me otherwise. No, I am not a critic. I do not have nearly enough of a knowledge to actually critique works of cinema, discuss the social, political and cultural significance of the pieces, or talk in depth about any problems they have on a thematic level. At times I wish I did, but I do not have the capability or the will to absorb a library’s worth of information.

What I can do is criticise cinema. I can point out more technical flaws. I can discuss things that dragged me out of the experience. I can talk about things that reminded me that I was still a man sitting in the dark of a theatre, surrounded by other people watching a dance of light and sound for 90 minutes and up.

This is everything wrong with modern film critique, I agree. It is not everything wrong with modern film criticism. The ability to differentiate between the two, I believe would serve to only benefit consumers and those interested in the world of cinema.

A film is not its themes and its cultural identity in a vacuum. It is a product of technique, or lack thereof. Having a discussion of the more thematic side of cinema can only serve to enrich our culture and promote intelligent analysis and discourse about art and its importance.

Having a discussion about the flaws of a film can serve on a more consumerist level. Perhaps I am taking a leaf from games reviewing, where a discussion of the mechanics and technical accomplishments of the game seem to take precedence over discussion of the narrative, both textual and interactive that the game affords. It is a very consumer-centric approach, treating the game as a product, and not as a work of art. It informs potential customers, the layperson, whether a product is worth their money or not. It is a service that is not without its merit.

Let’s look at two cases.

Jurassic Park.

Jurassic Park is a film with some (at times severe) flaws. The assault of the T-Rex on the cars at night comes to mind. You will find numerous explanations for the sudden appearance of the cliff on fansites across the web. Their dedication to resolving this issue makes me look like a person with a passing interest in the film. It is also a film in which I can overlook these flaws, because it is otherwise so well crafted, provides such a sense of wonder and terror with such a deft hand, that I find myself swept up in the experience. I have seen this film at least 40 times since its release, and I am actually craving another watching right now.

Could it have been the masterful score? The amazing sound design? The visual effects that still stand up today? The wonderful performances by its actors? The witty dialogue? The wonderful handling of both the light hearted moments and those meant to terrify? I think it’s a perfect storm of all these elements that make Jurassic Park a film that holds up after 20 years.

Prometheus, on the other hand, was a film with ambition. It was a film that tried to seem intelligent. It was a film with incredible flaws to match its incredible cinematography. It was a glorious mess of a film. It was wonderful to look at, yet did not offer anything in particular that stood out visually. It had interesting art direction, but many of the curiosities it offered were discarded quickly in favour of the next pretty/grotesque thing to look at. It had a sweeping score, that felt out of place with the rest of the film. It attempted to ask questions and prompt a discourse of some incredible and deep concepts with the audience, but ended up only hinting at the existence of these concepts. It was also a film with some uneven performances, quite horrible dialogue, and a not so wonderful sense of time.

These are all flaws, yes, and they stood out more to me in prometheus than the massive flaws in Jurassic Park did.

Yes, Prometheus had some interesting talking points, more so than Jurassic Park, but I really could not afford to engage with them because the film dropped most of them as quickly as they were raised. The score, the dialogue and the narrative of the film kept dragging me out of the moment, reminding me that I was a man in a cinema, watching a show of light and sound desperately trying to be more than the sum of its parts, and failing.

Its thematic weight was artifice as flimsy as the world it took place in. It did not allow me an opportunity to ponder its more interesting aspects because its flaws kept coming hard and fast. They were loud, louder than what the film was trying to achieve.

In fact, I enjoyed Mr Scott’s interviews about the film’s themes much more than the film itself. They were stimulating and provocative, and made me sad that the film did not live up to this.

I believe my take on the film, as a film, a product to be consumed as a whole, is valid. I believe that discussions of how the film’s flaws overshadowed the film’s positives is valid. I believe my opinion that the film could have been much more if it weren’t for its shortcomings, and that the film may disappoint people because of this, is important.

And I believe it is just as valuable as an after the fact dissection of the film in the context of its promotional material, the thoughts of its director, and its relevance to greater themes of spirituality, religion, and science in society at large.

Because a film is more than a statement, it is also a product.


I apologise for being away from this place for a while, I’ve been focusing on my game development studies and such. Assignments take away from free time and all.

However, I have come across something that I just felt needed to be discussed.

TRIGGER WARNING: Sexual harassment and Violence Against Women will now be discussed.

It’s something that seems endemic to the geek/gamer culture. We have seen it in the Fake Geek Girl scare that has (had?) swept the internet, the Cross Assault Sexual Harassment incident, in which Fighting Game Community (FGC) member Aris Bakhtanians defended harassment of a female colleague because (paraphrasing here) “removing sexual harassment from the FGC is removing the FGC from the FGC”, and we have seen it in the many pieces of evidence posted up for all to ridicule on sites such as Fat, Ugly or Slutty. The culture appears to be exclusionary of women.

Anita Sarkeesian’s Tropes vs Women in Video Games series started life with a gigantic hate campaign via youtube, and (I hesitate to say) culminated in the creation of a game in which you punch Anita in the face. I hope people can see that whether or not you agree with her thesis or the strength of her argument, this is not an appropriate thing to do.

It is not being politically correct to call out attacks on a person’s character and their likeness because of the fact they are viewed as an outsider to your culture, especially if what qualifies them for outsider status is their sex or their gender.

The exclusionary stance against women is something that needs to change. Games and Geek culture are things that should be inclusive of everyone. There should be no self appointed Gatekeepers tasked with keeping those deemed of “inferior stock” from our ranks. It is a sad state of affairs when I am more accepted than someone else by virtue of the fact I possess a penis and they do not.

That it is coming from the community itself goes some way toward reinforcing the notion that geeks and gamers are immature men getting lost in “inferior” product of little consequence because it allows them to engage in juvenile power fantasies in which they are “better” than they could ever hope to be in real life.

We are more than that, and our preferred media and products deserve recognition beyond what the mainstream give them. Our attitude towards women or others is not going to help this.

It would be one thing if this were an issue at the community level, where introspection, soul searching and some frank and open discussions about the way we treat outsiders could help us to be more inclusive and nurturing to those who want to enter the fold.

This is why it is with some degree of sadness, though without any real surprise, I stumbled across this site:

With all seriousness, a scroll at the top of the page states:

The Greatest Sites Known to Men.
The Greatest Sites Known to Gamers.
The Greatest Sites Known to Influencers.

“So what?” you may think. “I see nothing directly insulting to women, right?” Well, this is where things get ugly. IGN is no small thing. Ziff Davis recently purchased IGN and related sites for an undisclosed amount, though News Corp were asking for USD $100 million for the bundle. IGN is a big thing indeed. After the purchase, sites in the bundle were shut down with Ziff Davis wishing to focus on flagship sites IGN and IGN has for the past 12 months (February 2012, to February 2013) boasted over 4 million unique visitors per month.

So it is a big site, worth a lot of money that gathers a large amount of unique page views. And?

Going back to the scroll at the top of corp.ign, everything is framed in terms of men. Men are gamers, they are influencers, they are MMORPG players. Never is it suggested that women partake in any of those activities. This language is exclusionary. It implies that women do not matter as it is men who are the gamers, MMORPGers and the influencers. Why would you care about women?

But wait, there’s more: Yes, this is real.

“BRO-VERLOAD!” The page reads:

“With a male composition index pushing one and a half times the online average and heaps of traffic, our original properties together reach 1 in 4 men online in the 18-34 age range. Simply put, we do a better job of applying your media dollar directly to the young male demographic you need to reach. Matched by our breakthrough creative and guy acumen, our pitch adds up to integrated, targeted campaigns with room to scale: it could only be better if our rate cards were printed on crisp bacon.”

Mmm, crisp bacon, the manliest of all meats. All kidding aside, the page goes on like that, talking about how IGN properties bring in the men, men that you, the advertiser have to target because women do not matter to you.

1 in 4 gamers, all men, women don't count.

1 in 4 gamers, all men, women don’t count.

It is a clear institutional and systemic exclusionary approach taken by games media that feeds into gamer culture’s exclusionary approach. It is not fair to blame only the gamer without taking into account the companies and outlets that feed them, and until we do, we will only be having a temporary effect.

The rise of independent game development tools, such that I have mentioned in a previous post, have enabled people of all sorts to share themselves through the medium of video games. Having mass media supposedly for gamers choosing to target the male demographic is setting our chosen medium back. We cannot progress if the audience is kept blinkered as to the possibilities of what can be done and expressed with games, and by whom.

I cannot offer a solution just yet, other than look elsewhere for your games related news. Perhaps Gamasutra and its sister sites will help in that regard. Pixel Prospector is a pretty decent source for independent games, with an abundance of tutorials and links to resources, and the TIGForums provide a community for independent developers.

The next thing you could do is make yourself known and felt within these communities. Make it known that women exist and matter and are part of the face of the gaming and game development communities.


Need I say this attitude is damaging to men as well? I wonder how many men out there are “bros”, or have a fondness for crisp bacon, or fall for all the pandering sites like IGN employ. How many men out there are the kind of man IGN says men should be?

How many men are better off believing that their culture is for men alone and that anything that deviates from this expectation is dangerous to the foundations of the culture?

We the Giants

“In everyday things the law of sacrifice takes the form of positive duty.”

– James Anthony Froude

We the Giants is a simple flash game that will not take much of your time, but I highly recommend you play it.

In fact, go play it now before reading on.

Last time I talked about how the independent scene was producing games that represented different narratives to that of the Straight White Male power fantasy. We the Giants is a really interesting example of such a game.

“A man must be sacrificed now and again To provide for the next generation of men.”

– Amy Lowell

In the game you play as a rectangular cyclops. You can move using the arrow keys and pressing the shift key affords you a view of the entire map.

So far so standard. You are asked to carry out three rituals, the first two being movement and viewing the entire level. The third is something profound.

You are asked to sacrifice yourself and leave a helping of wisdom, in the form of a short message, to provide a foundation to future generations of giants. Once you have sacrificed yourself, you can never play the game again. You can only watch the progress of future generations of players as they too sacrifice themselves in the name of progress.

This simple game speaks to something very deep within the human experience, the drive to sacrifice for the benefit of others. It may be as simple as a parent devoting their life to raising and supporting a child, or it may be a soldier sacrificing their life for the stability of their country and way of life.

It is something that even games like rogue-likes, with their permadeath, cannot touch. After all, you are still allowed to play those games, just as a new character and starting from scratch.

The power is in our hands to create games that speak to the experiences we face in daily life, or the thought experiments that we wish to bring to life. If you want to make a more “traditional” game in line with Triple A games, that is fine, too. But with the ability to have your voice published for others to experience, you can do much more if you choose.

An off white narrative

I am not white and I will never be.

It may be something that does not come across the minds of people I have only met online, most knowing me either by a handle or by my first name. It has, however, got me thinking about an article I read a while back called Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is. The article got me thinking that Straight White Male is also the default difficulty setting and the default narrative path through the game of life. Perhaps the game analogy falls down a little, but when people do not know much about you other than words on a screen, what do they picture you as? A Straight White Male or an, albeit, Straight Indian Male?

Looking to media and I can see a lot of Straight White Men being the protagonist and very few characters of differing skin colour, ethnicity, sex, gender, and any other distinction that I may have left out due to ignorance on my part. The Bechdel Test, something already much covered by much more qualified writers highlights a problem of representation in media. It is a little sad, really.

I recently picked up a copy of Anna Anthropy’s book Rise of the Videogame Zinesters: How Freaks, Normals, Amateurs, Artists, Dreamers, Drop-outs, Queers, Housewives, and People Like You Are Taking Back an Art Form, available here for Kindle, and was enthralled by the idea of video game as zine, self-published chronicles of whatever the author wishes to share with their readership. That Triple A Video Games (A quality video game expected to sell well, typically with a higher budget than budget software) cost so much to make and represent such a narrow viewpoint is disconcerting to say the least. In Hollywood you get the big blockbuster action movies, but you also get the comedies, the romance films, the dramas, and there are healthy scenes for film outside of the mainstream. Distribution may still be difficult to come by, but many films do get to see an audience.

In the Video Game space, there seems to be a rise in the popularity of indie games. Indie Game: The Movie came out last year and served as an, at times, heart rending primer on the indie development scene. Its reach was necessarily small in order to adequately profile the stories it chose to tell, but there is only so much one film can do.

In addition, sites such as Pixel Prospector,,, and others, shine a spotlight on the indie game scene. Indie game developers are becoming Rock Stars in their own right. Jonathan Blow’s charming platformer, Braid was wildly successful. Hotline Miami, as of 12/12/2012, has sold 130, 000 copies, and is a favourite among some of the staff over at Gamespot, among other video game publications. (Hell, I bought three copies of the game myself).

The success of the indie scene is a wonderful thing to see. And branching off from this success, it would be even more amazing to see games that chronicle additional experiences to become more known to the public. We, as people other than Straight White Men (and I have nothing against Straight White Men), have something to say to the world, and the medium of video games has become increasingly open to outside perspectives. Software such as Game Maker and Constuct 2 allow those of us who are code-illiterate to create video games without the hassle of learning code.

For those of us who do know how to program, there are a multitude of solutions out there to suit our needs, from Unity to LOVE2D, UDK to even CryEngine 3 allow individuals and teams to realise their visions and release them for general consumption.

I have no idea which solution is best for me as I cannot code or script to save my life. I am currently learning Lua and Python, and am planning to experiment with LOVE2D and Pygame at some point in the future.

I have a story that I wish to tell, a view of the world that I need to allow others to see. I will no longer be content to remain silent in an age that democratises media creation.

The basic idea is of a boy of Indian origin being troubled by being the odd one out in his surroundings, wishing he were more white, and dealing with alienation and the nightmare that is early high school. It will be based on things I have experienced, though necessarily abstracted to allow for ludic engagement. It is something that bothers me to this day. Every time I gaze at myself in the mirror or in a photograph, I catch myself saying “Damnit, I am still Indian”. I am scared of getting to know people, or even attempting to find a mate because I rationalise that no one would want to know me, for I am Indian.

I forget what I am from time to time, and those are my happiest moments. I am no longer human, I am no longer male, and more importantly, I no longer have a body with a skin tone that used to make me stand out from the crowd. I am nobody, I am nothing.

It may not be healthy to feel that way, and I am hoping that this project will help me work through this issue as well as bring an experience, and maybe some understanding, to others who may not have considered what it would be like.

I may have to collaborate with someone more knowledgeable than I, but that is a necessary evil in a quest to bring about a greater good.

So far, this article may end up depressing people more than it gives them insight into the fact that someone can take up the challenge to make their voice heard. What happened to me in my past has defined how I interact with people and how I live my life, and I want to share with anyone willing to listen that even the most insignificant of actions can have far reaching consequences.

Now I could recommend that you read Anna Anthropy’s book (it is an interesting read), but that costs money, and money is not something all of us have in abundance. I’d like to suggest you pick up a free version of Stencyl or Game Maker and have your voices be heard.

We may be lost in a sea of bombastic advertising and big budget launch events, but we will be content in the knowledge that someone out there will have the option of listening to our stories if they so choose. The world will be a worse place for our inaction.

Act of Valor and Crossing the Line

So I was going to write this review for Act of Valor yesterday, but then it completely slipped my mind due to reasons.

Let us begin O:

So Act of Valor is a movie about Navy SEALs tasked with rescuing a captured CIA agent, which leads them to discover a deadly terrorist plot. Naturally, they are the ones who are sent in to stop said plot from occurring on US soil.

It started off life as part of the US Navy’s recruitment initiative, but then grew into a feature length production.

If you were witness to the film’s advertising, you are probably aware of its one draw card. The film stars active duty SEALs using actual military hardware, firing live ammunition, and carrying out actual battlefield tactics.

In that regard, the film acts as a peek into the life of a SEAL. There is a standout moment near the beginning of the film in which the SEALs infiltrate a terrorist installation. It’s quite interesting stuff seeing how SEALs would carry out a stealthy infiltration. Moments like these aren’t really seen in other films. As an Ask Men article charitably put it, other films are pretenders.

It is a shame then that the action is let down by an overuse of shaky cam and quick cuts. It can be argued that shaky cam can create a cinéma vérité, documentary, or “you are there” feel to a film (see Saving Private Ryan for a successful example), however, an overuse of handheld camera work can annoy or confuse a viewer. Your mileage may vary on this, by the way. But an almost constantly shaking camera with quick cuts between subjects without care for considering the geography of the scene can leave the viewer confused as to who is doing the shooting and who is getting shot. A particular instance I can bring to mind is a car chase early in the film where the scene cuts from the inside of one car to a 1 second shot of the outside of another car to the inside of that car and someone being shot in the head. Having the camera focus on the backlit backs of characters’ heads also added to the confusion of the scene, something a few more seconds of film footage showing the outside of the second car would have reduced.

There were also a few tracking shots in which the camera was merrily bouncing around.

I state again that this was a shame because the film presents you with something you rarely get to see in a work of fiction; active duty SEALs using the tactics they would use in the field and firing live ammunition. It seems like a missed opportunity to more clearly portray how these highly trained men do their work.

Onto the story side of things. It honestly seems like the plot was a bit of an afterthought. It is a fairly standard hunt for the terrorists movie. There is no character development beyond the one SEAL who wants to spend more time with his family increasing the number of times he mentions his family as the film goes on. The villains aren’t dwelled upon long enough to understand their reasons for wanting to attack America. They just want to attack America due to some nebulous and all consuming hatred for the country. It feels like their characterisation was ripped from post 9/11 headlines, while the body of the articles were discarded.

One can be excused for not feeling attached to the SEALs. They sure are active duty SEALs, and with that comes an expected lack of acting talent. Line delivery during most of the movie is what one can expect from non-actors. The villains fair better with the line delivery, however, leading to an awkward situation where they seem more real and relatable than the good guys. The SEALs really come into their own during the film’s numerous action sequences, as can be expected.

The plot of the movie is strung together by scenes of exposition, and every transition into another portion of the world has a map overlay that makes it feel like the loading screens from the Call of Duty: Modern Warfare trilogy. Generally, the entire narrative structure of the movie feels like a generic military shooter. It pains me to compare the narrative of a film to a video game to highlight its shortcomings, but that really is the tone of the film. Adding further to the video game allusions are the numerous first person perspective shots where the audience gets to see what the SEAL sees. I do not recall any first person kills, but the resemblance was uncanny.

Oh, a positive to note, the film had quite wonderful sound design. Well, as far as the bullets whizzing past and the gun reports go. I did find myself getting sick of the repeated squelching sounds of the many, many headshots in the film. Seriously, there were a lot of headshots. One would think they stumbled into a zombie movie part way through.

I would say watch it just to see how SEALs actually operate. Do not, however, expect a good film, or even an okay film.

I wonder if the FPS allusions were deliberate on the part of the filmmakers. Act of Valor, while on the surface level being a tribute to the SEALs who have fallen in service to their country, is part of a Navy recruitment initiative. What better way to increase interest in the Navy amongst the new generation than by tapping into the video game zeitgeist? Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 earned a mind numbing $400 million in the US and UK in its first 24 hours alone, with Call of Duty: Black Ops (developed by the much derided Treyarch) making a cool $360 million in first day sales. That is big money and a large potential audience for a film of this kind.

There is big money in the macho, testosterone fuelled and highly fetishised portrayal of war, and it seems like that is all that big media will cater to. It is a safe investment and it makes people feel like they too can be a hero. We are a generation of armchair Operators. Soldiers on the digital front.

With that said, let us segue into the second part of this entry.

So last night I played Spec Ops: The Line, hence why this review wasn’t posted then. It got me thinking, here is a military shooter that uses all the game play elements seen in popular third person shooters (A cover system, two weapon limit, regenerating health, turret sections, an “A380” section for lack of a better term) and subverts them to drive a knife into the player’s conscience and twist. It is a game that hates you for wanting to enjoy war. It is a game that punishes you for wanting to be the hero. It is also a game that raises interesting questions about obsession, morality, and choice on the battlefield.

Spec Ops: The Line has one of the most interesting and horrifying stories I have seen in any game and it stands on the polar opposite of Act of Valor.

Spec Ops pushes the message that war is a hell of our own making and that the road to war, though paved with good intentions, is a road leading straight to hell. It reduces Delta Operators to fallible and corruptible. It brings into question whether men can truly even understand the truth of what they are witnessing, and foresee the consequences of their actions.

Act of Valor is a film that glamorises the Navy SEALs and military intervention. It is hero worship with the aim to pay tribute to servicemen with one hand, and draw in fresh blood with the other.

It is really encouraging seeing the ever demonised video game medium pushing an anti-violence, anti-hero worship message. I would like to explore more sides of war than the one that makes it look like a good idea enacted by just and honourable men.

Djent or What makes a Subgenre? or Hubris on my part

So, as some of you may know, there is a new Meshuggah album on the horizon. This would seem like an opportune time to talk about Djent.

Just what is Djent? It is one of the many subgenres of heavy metal music. What does Djent have to do with Meshuggah? Well, they coined it. Why Djent?

The onomatopoeia of a heavily palm muted distorted guitar chord which is usually played as but not limited to a 4 string double octave powerchord, and as a result sounds much more metallic and sonically present than a ‘chug’ ‘chugga’ or ‘djun’ per se…

Djent bands tend to use 7 or 8 string guitars, allowing them to populate their songs with an abundance of bassy sounding and groovy riffs. Songs may employ polyrhythms, or sound polyrhythmic. Here are some examples:

Whether or not Djent is actually a subgenre of heavy metal music is a matter of some debate and some controversy. While I believe having a term for music that sounds vaguely Meshuggah-ish is useful, others think the idea silly.

Maybe we should start calling doom metal ‘DUNNN’.

Post-metal band Rosetta has said. Let us for the moment overlook that post-metal itself is a subgenre that causes some confusion amongst metalheads.

There is no such thing as ‘djent,’ it’s not a genre.

Randy Blythe, vocalist of Lamb of God.

Understandable that musicians take issue to the fact that Djent is a subgenre that seems like it almost exclusively categorises music on the basis of the sound of a palm muted power chord. I hope you can see from the above videos that there are other stylistic similarities, however.

Unlike, say Gothenburg sound, the Djent scene doesn’t have a particular geographic centre. Gothenburg metal did go on to influence bands from other locations (think of the number of metalcore bands that use Gothenburg style riffs), Djent has really had a more global emergence.

Tesseract are a British band, Periphery are American, Textures hail from the Netherlands, SikTh are another UK based band, Coprofago are from Chile (and their name means feces eating), and of course Meshuggah are from Sweden.

But should we hold this against Djent? The age of the internet has really brought the world closer together allowing ideas to be disseminated much more rapidly than before. Technology has reached a point where for very little money, people can produce music in their own home. The power of the internet in creating a global base for a genre can be demonstrated by the fact that Bandcamp has a tag for Djent.

If a subgenre could be said to be a selection of musical output that shares specific, identifiable characteristics that can then be represented in a market as a separate entity from other flavours of the parent genre, then I’d say Djent may just be a subgenre.

In my infinite wisdom, I decided to play “journalist” (nb, I am in no way a real journalist) and interview a friend about what he thought constituted a subgenre. His criterion was as follows:

fan speciation

The presence of an entire community dedicated to Djent would satisfy this criterion.

Edit: He did concede that subgenres being a way to index and market specific flavours of a parent genre sounds more applicable and less recursive than fan speciation. I just really liked the term =P Told you I wasn’t a Journalist.

I do not see why a lack of geographic centre could possibly invalidate a subgenre of music, especially in today’s highly connected world. It may not have the culture of Black Metal or the immediate geographic recognisability of Gothenburg Sound, but it certainly has a recognisable aesthetic.

The main problem I see for Djent as a subgenre is that bands that exhibit Djent stylings have in most cases already been claimed by other subgenres. If, say Coprofago are a technical death metal band, why should they also be seen as a Djent band? Is there room for Djent? If Coprofago can reach more people through the Technical Death Metal label, is there a need for them to be recognised as Djent, even though they do have Djent elements in their music? Similarly, Periphery is easily subsumed by Metalcore and Mathcore. The Djent style can be applied on top of other subgenres, making the whole thing messier.

The beauty of music is having ideas bleed into and influence other ideas. Jazz influenced Hip Hop is a beautiful thing to my ears, where the majority of the non-Jazz influenced stuff isn’t to my liking, but that is neither here nor there. This bleed and cross pollination, however, makes indexing a pain in the backside of anyone who tries to go about it. I do remember reading reviews of Blackwater Park that stated Opeth were a Black Metal band. True, they had Black Metal leanings in their previous works, but by Blackwater Park, they were truly something entirely unlike Black Metal. In metal I find the cross pollination of subgenres to be a particular problem. The days of listening to a band and being able to clearly identify them as a Thrash band or a Death Metal band or an NWOBHM band are long gone.

So then is Djent better thought of as a series of characteristics to be slotted on top of preexisting subgenres? That is yet to be seen as the Djent movement is still in its infancy.

It’s a rather tricky thing in the end. I shall continue to use Djent among a community that identifies music as Djent because it is sure to lead me to music I will likely find interesting. To me that is the point of subgenre labels, not cultural wankery.