A GAME BASED ON HISTORICAL PERSON OR TIME PERIOD

Posts

Pages: first prev 12 last
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=Dyhalto
There's no valid reason to ever put him in a positive light.
Nobody is all good or all bad, and stories based around viewing a person who does bad things in a positive light make up an entire class of fiction called "the antihero." Even the worst people in human history - Adolf Hitler, Ghengis Khan, Mao Zedong, Ivan the Terrible, Osama bin Laden, Joseph Stalin, Justin Bieber - were trying to do the right thing. You can absolutely paint any of them as heroes without being incorrect at all. It's simply a matter of having the dramatic music at the right times, of showing the relevant events with the right framing. I think showing someone like that as the hero of a JRPG story, and leaving the player to figure out on their own that the only thing making them seem heroic is the way the story is told, creates a very powerful metanarrative about the nature of right and wrong.

However, tracing Jackson's descent from hero to villain in a tragedy, like the story of Macbeth, would probably be a more interesting approach to me, just because of how unusual it would be. It's almost impossible under normal circumstances to create a video game with a story that is a classic tragedy. Because in a video game, the player has to win, right? They have to overcome challenges, that's what games are, and if they don't overcome them then they try again until they do. Then they have to be rewarded for their actions with victory music and good feeling, so they know they did it right. But if it's a true historical narrative, one where the player goes in knowing from the beginning that the main character is not a hero and never succeeds, then I think you can get away with subverting that. You might have to establish a different kind of "win condition" for your game, like "bring this battle to its historically accurate conclusion" instead of "win this battle," since the game will end with Jackson's death. Presumably his death will be caused by the player, rather than simply a cut scene, because the last thing you want to do in a game's ending is make the satisfying conclusion of your game's primary conflict be something that happens outside of the player's control. And if that's how your game's climax works, then that's how the rest of it should work too, building up to it. It's an issue that you'll have to deal with very differently from normal RPGs due to your game's historical nature, but I think that will let you create a game that really stands out.

...Why isn't this in the game design subforum? We're talking about the design of a game.
If you're going to argue that it's for the art, man, then I've got nothing. That's one of the things art is used for.

But what you're talking about isn't relevant to Andrew Jackson. You might be able to classify him as a hero at some point for his military achievements, but as a statesman, he was a calamity from start to finish. One of the worst Presidents in the history of the US, right up there with Woodrow Wilson who brought in the Fed and foisted the US into WW1, and it's not something you can sugarcoat because his reasons were all nothing but populist demagogy.

It's currently fashionable that Trump is the worst president ever but, to his one credit, he hasn't actually done anything, and thank goodness because all of his and his associates' ideas are terrible.
author=Dyhalto
If you're going to argue that it's for the art, man, then I've got nothing. That's one of the things art is used for.

But what you're talking about isn't relevant to Andrew Jackson. You might be able to classify him as a hero at some point for his military achievements, but as a statesman, he was a calamity from start to finish. One of the worst Presidents in the history of the US, right up there with Woodrow Wilson who brought in the Fed and foisted the US into WW1, and it's not something you can sugarcoat because his reasons were all nothing but populist demagogy.

It's currently fashionable that Trump is the worst president ever but, to his one credit, he hasn't actually done anything, and thank goodness because all of his and his associates' ideas are terrible.

I'm still researching it and on the biographical and he's about to get into the first Seminole War. From what I recall about my US government class and my American civ class. Which are combined eight months ago some little rusty. So where should I begin he was one of the founding members of the democratic party it's actually where they get the jackass from as thier emblem. He was the first official to get any type of inclusiveness done. Which is ironic for so many reasons I can't even go into it. Through his constituency he literally did represent them. He did balance the budget. He was actually incredibly skilled at getting his agenda through Congress and enforcing the executive. And one of his Plus to his presidency is how him and clay both are able to team up and stop to nullification crisis.

Jackson's I daresay Public Image downfall. What is utter devotion to his country and in turn the people he felt he represented and the national interest. All that during the early 19th century. Which today would not always be the most political correct thing to say the least. At least as I see men with during his generalship and he didn't really do so much their combat, but during negotiations being one of the most active actors or should release agents of America expansion.. through his treatise to pacify the South and to remove the tribes and hit the encouragement of settlement. Which she genuinely believed was a good thing the tribes either move away and preserved our nation and culture where they get 650 acres of land and become American citizens. And you seen in his actions personally he adopted two indigenous children. He did not want to see the tribes destroyed at least as a people he wanted them assimilated. Because it both neutralize the enemy that he grew up wrestling with along with his countrymen. It allowed for peaceful coexistence of them as a people. Mind you the results have varied and it deserves all the Contemporary criticism it garnishes.

But this is the 19th century perspective of not just Jackson but many of Americans during that time period. And that aggressive dedication to America interests and it would be in his view the nation safety and need for prosperity. Is what made him villainous.

author=LockeZ
author=Dyhalto
There's no valid reason to ever put him in a positive light.
Nobody is all good or all bad, and stories based around viewing a person who does bad things in a positive light make up an entire class of fiction called "the antihero." Even the worst people in human history - Adolf Hitler, Ghengis Khan, Mao Zedong, Ivan the Terrible, Osama bin Laden, Joseph Stalin, Justin Bieber - were trying to do the right thing. You can absolutely paint any of them as heroes without being incorrect at all. It's simply a matter of having the dramatic music at the right times, of showing the relevant events with the right framing. I think showing someone like that as the hero of a JRPG story, and leaving the player to figure out on their own that the only thing making them seem heroic is the way the story is told, creates a very powerful metanarrative about the nature of right and wrong.

However, tracing Jackson's descent from hero to villain in a tragedy, like the story of Macbeth, would probably be a more interesting approach to me, just because of how unusual it would be. It's almost impossible under normal circumstances to create a video game with a story that is a classic tragedy. Because in a video game, the player has to win, right? They have to overcome challenges, that's what games are, and if they don't overcome them then they try again until they do. Then they have to be rewarded for their actions with victory music and good feeling, so they know they did it right. But if it's a true historical narrative, one where the player goes in knowing from the beginning that the main character is not a hero and never succeeds, then I think you can get away with subverting that. You might have to establish a different kind of "win condition" for your game, like "bring this battle to its historically accurate conclusion" instead of "win this battle," since the game will end with Jackson's death. Presumably his death will be caused by the player, rather than simply a cut scene, because the last thing you want to do in a game's ending is make the satisfying conclusion of your game's primary conflict be something that happens outside of the player's control. And if that's how your game's climax works, then that's how the rest of it should work too, building up to it. It's an issue that you'll have to deal with very differently from normal RPGs due to your game's historical nature, but I think that will let you create a game that really stands out.

...Why isn't this in the game design subforum? We're talking about the design of a game.

Literally one hundred percent agree with you. Koei loves making games about the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, Nobunaga or even in the earlier. Like Genghis Khan. when you least if you look at the fatality of their actions well their own Darkness they've done far worse. Koeu handle that by simply ignoring the darker sides over there character they are letting us play as. For example look at Genghis Khan, a man that had a literal rape culture against his enemies. And would cause countless Innocents to die for the sins of view. At the same time detergent for that I would judge him for what actual positives net positives of the Mongol Empire.
Or look at nobunaga's successor and the tragedy they cause to their enemies and their families enemies.

And surprisingly stark contrast Jackson with all his vanity could easily let go power because the only hold on to it for Duty's sake
And every action he did as a general or as a president he felt and specially more so as a president he did on popular mandate or for National Defense. I made this is a guy that literally almost died before they were a teenager for the idea of this country. They're going to be zealous about it.

We need to get the player into mindset of what would you do in this position from the background and how do you reinforce it in gameplay.
Pages: first prev 12 last