New Review Posted: Ninja Gaiden

[Dale Weir]

Scott Jones reviews Ninja Gaiden

"Of all the hideous monsters and hellspawn that haunt Tecmo's third-person action game Ninja Gaiden—mace-weilding zombies, giant fire-breathing worms, faceless samurai—nothing frightened me more than demon hunter Rachel's ridiculously oversized breasts."

http://www.gamecritics.com/review/ninjagaiden/main.php

[Nicato]

The only reason why I read this review was because it was written by one of the most bold critics on staff, Scott Jones.

When Jones spends three paragraphs talking about breast and how juvenile gaming is, I find it contradicting that he not hold other aspects of the gameplay up to the same standard.

Ninja Gaiden is a game that features graphic violence. Yet, from what I percieve (read: how Jones describes it), there is no purpose for the violence.

So, if sex for sex' sake is bad, how then is violence for violences' sake good?

[technomancy]

Would it be wrong of me to bring up the reviewer's ruminations about the Ninja Gaiden's difficulty and the parallels between his *other* reviews?

I'm so not going there.

[Nicato]

Yeah, I feel ya.

Or the sense of discovering new combos that certain other fighting games might have.

But, yeah, let's not go there.

[chaostrophy]

So, if sex for sex' sake is bad, how then is violence for violences' sake good?

The game is an action game- it's all about combat. The blood, decapitations, etc. in the game never seem excessive because they go along with the main focus of the game and enhance it. It's easy to tell when playing Ninja Gaiden that a huge amount of effort went into designing and animating Ryu's moves, making them look and feel fluid and powerful. Showing their effects on enemies in a graphic manner is an extension of that, not just gore for its own sake.

Rachel's breasts though, are irrelevant to the rest of the game, as romance and sex isn't the point of the game. And even if it were, Rachel's breasts are so cartoonish and distorted-looking they don't add to her sex appeal, they diminish it.

[Nicato]

Originally posted by chaostrophy


The game is an action game- it's all about combat. The blood, decapitations, etc. in the game never seem excessive because they go along with the main focus of the game and enhance it. It's easy to tell when playing Ninja Gaiden that a huge amount of effort went into designing and animating Ryu's moves, making them look and feel fluid and powerful. Showing their effects on enemies in a graphic manner is an extension of that, not just gore for its own sake.

Rachel's breasts though, are irrelevant to the rest of the game, as romance and sex isn't the point of the game. And even if it were, Rachel's breasts are so cartoonish and distorted-looking they don't add to her sex appeal, they diminish it.

So chopping off heads for no apperant reason is OK, but we draw the line at oversized breast.

EDIT: I do not have a problem with violence, but from how I read the review, I find it telling how Jones is so outraged over tities but had no problem playing a game with graphic violence that even he admits has little purpose (or at least a pathetic attempt at building motive).

Jones did little to justify the violence in the game. And "because it's an action game" will not cut it (pun intended) for me.

[GC_Thom]

Nic, I think you're confusing the context of the complaint (which was mostly tongue-in-cheek). There's violence in the game because it's a ninja game and more specifically, it's a further installment in a series where ninjas chop people with swords. Show somebody Ninja Gaiden and ask them if people gonna die, and they are going to say 'yes'.

Show them Ninja Gaiden and ask them if gigantic overswollen bouncing mammaries are going to be in the game and they'll say 'I don't know'. (Unless they're familiar with Team Ninja's M.O., in which case they are not actually reacting to the game - they know that if Team Ninja did a farming simulator, large breasts would feature prominently).

The point with Rachel is that she has nothing to do with the premise of the game, let alone the plot. You can object to violence and make a pretty good case about it, but conflating your objection regarding violence to Scott's objections to Rachel doesn't hold water.

[Nicato]

Originally posted by Moron Lite
I dunno, man. I mean, you ARE a ninja.

Of course you play a ninja in the game and of course ninjas are assasians.

Nic, I think you're confusing the context of the complaint (which was mostly tongue-in-cheek). There's violence in the game because it's a ninja game and more specifically, it's a further installment in a series where ninjas chop people with swords. Show somebody Ninja Gaiden and ask them if people gonna die, and they are going to say 'yes'.

I'm tired of these weak justifications for violence in games. And we, as gamers, keep dodging this issue with exuses like "it's an action game" or "he is a ninja"; not good enough. Call me conservative, but I'd like a better reason to realistically kill another being because frankly I don't feel comfortable with myself getting pleasure from killing people (or whatever) in that manner unless there is a good enough reason.

Violence is often used as an umbrella in games. With Manhunt, the "protagonist" was a convited murderer, the "bad guys" where some Nazi knock-offs. Can't anyone see through that paper-thin justification? It's the most consequence-free way to squeeze all the excess in the game. Had there been innocent civilians getting tortured, or women or children...

GameCritics.com is suppose to hold games to a higher standard. Oversized juggs cross the line in decency, in fact, it's proof that gaming is juvenile. But a hack-fest, that's good entertainment(?).

I get that the tits have nothing to do with the game. And hopefully, I've made it apperant with this post that I am now talking about about a bigger issue. That's it.

[GC_Thom]

Originally posted by Nicato
I get that the tits have nothing to do with the game. And hopefully, I've made it apperant with this post that I am now talking about about a bigger issue. That's it.

You didn't seem to 'get' it before, and yes, you've made it apparent now, but that was definitely not your original stance, which is what I was objecting to, *not* your opinion regarding violence, which is why I'm not 'making excuses' for violence. I haven't said anything about the role and questionable nature of violence in videogames in this thread and implying otherwise is putting words in my mouth.

If you want to read a GC review that does confront the attitudes and ritual of violence in videogames, you should read Chi's Dynasty Warriors 3 review.

[Nicato]

Originally posted by GC_Thom

You didn't seem to 'get' it before, and yes, you've made it apparent now, but that was definitely not your original stance

OK, that was my original stance, Thom.

You didn't understand it or I didn't make it clear enough, either way, I've attempted to only make one point and I don't like your implications. The last sentence in my first post on this thread was the very foundation for my previous one.

Anyway, it is all in the clear now, so let's move forward.

[exitsmiling]

Nic, you got served.

[Doug Troy]

Originally posted by Nicato
With Manhunt, the "protagonist" was a convited murderer, the "bad guys" where some Nazi knock-offs. Can't anyone see through that paper-thin justification?

So, you've never played Manhunt, I take it.

[Ice Honkey]

I'm trying to imagine Manhunt with big breasted women reviewed by Scott...

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

[drunken_fist]

Originally posted by exitsmiling
Nic, you got served.

LOL! really nick if youre going to be accusing games of featuring excessive violence ninja gaiden is not the place to start.

but if you really feel like most violence in games is unwarranted or have 'weak justifications' then i would like to know what you would consider a good justification for violence. arent we, as videogame dorks, supposed to know that violence is only a last resort in any real life situation?

[chaostrophy]

I'm tired of these weak justifications for violence in games. And we, as gamers, keep dodging this issue with exuses like "it's an action game" or "he is a ninja"; not good enough. Call me conservative, but I'd like a better reason to realistically kill another being because frankly I don't feel comfortable with myself getting pleasure from killing people (or whatever) in that manner unless there is a good enough reason.

If that's your viewpoint, Ninja Gaiden is obviously not meant for you. I do agree that it would be nice to see more games use violence in an emotionally mature manner. But I don't see violence in games as something that always needs to be justified with narrative maturity. If you think that kind of justification is necessary, it's perfectly understandable- I don't think it's wrong for you to choose the games you buy or like that way.

Where I think you're wrong is your implication that the gaming community at large, or the staff of this site, should adopt the "higher standard" of your personal ethics and sensitivities. There are plenty of nonviolent adults, myself included, that believe a hackfest like Ninja Gaiden can indeed be good entertainment, and I'll be damned if I'm going to be ashamed of my tastes.

Oversized juggs cross the line in decency, in fact, it's proof that gaming is juvenile.

If I were writing the review, I wouldn't have mentioned decency or proof of gaming's immaturity when talking about the breasts. I would have just criticized them from an aesthetic standpoint.