Showing posts with label Satan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Satan. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 11, 2015

Board Game Cleanup 2: 7 Wonders

Two years ago, my oldest son asked for a certain game for Christmas that he had seen on sale at Target. At the time, he and his brother were learning about the seven wonders of the ancient world, such as the Colossus of Rhodes, the Library at Alexandria, and the Pyramids of Giza. Initially, I knew little of the game, but I started reading reviews about it and was somewhat intrigued, but not entirely enthusiastic. Anyway, I proceeded to watch a playthrough done by Rodney Smith at Watch It Played and found the game to be acceptable from a gameplay and content standpoint, so my wife and I purchased it. Needless to say, my son was happy to receive it.

As some of you gamers out there may have guessed even before seeing the images I inserted in this entry, the game was 7 Wonders. Like many board games and card games out there, 7 Wonders is a turn-based card game, but it is divided into three distinct periods of technological development called "ages." During each age, players can deploy resource-generating cards and (with the correct resources) build structures through a kind of drafting component: each turn, you choose a card from a hand and then pass the hand to the person on your left (during Ages 1 and 3) or your right (during Age 2). As you establish your resource base and build structures and technologies, you can also choose to develop your Wonder, which is one of the seven wonders (or others, if you purchase the expansions). Without going too much into the rules, the object of the game is to score the most points (no surprise), but each turn is fast-paced because there is no down time waiting for someone to decide what to build; everyone decides at the same time.

In any case, there are numerous reviews and playthroughs out there. Needless to say, 7 Wonders is exceptionally fun and a favorite game of my family, but (as with Eminent Domain) I discovered two cards that were somewhat questionable with their art: Baths and Altar. In the Baths card, we see a depiction of the backs of two nude women preparing to bathe; in Roman times (or probably in Japanese onsens), I'm sure that it was commonplace for only women to bathe without clothing in the women's bath. In the Altar card, there is a priestess in a gossamer-thin frock sacrificing something to a deity; the garment suggests that there is nothing else under that garment.

Baths: an Age I card
Both cards depicts situations that may have happened in certain historical periods, but, as a father in an oversexed world, I don't understand why such art would be necessary to convey the concepts of baths or altars. In my opinion, even relatively sterile images of a bath or an altar in isolation would be suitable. Instead, the game producers saw fit to feature scantily-clad women (if clad at all). If anything, such images could send a young boy's imagination racing, and these games are played by boys and men (as well as some girls and women). What were the game illustrators thinking? What were they really trying to convey? Honestly, I'm not sure and it really doesn't matter what was intended; I just know that I'm not comfortable with those images in a family game.

With that in mind, I did what I've done with my other games: I found replacement art that I cropped in Photoshop and pasted over the original art. I don't have the image files of my replacement art, but I can say that the image I used for the Baths was a modern-day photograph of a Roman bath with a grainy filter to give it a textured look. For the Altar cards, I chose the image of an Israelite high priest with an ephod standing before an altar. Taking some care to crop the images to fit, I pasted the images to the cards and placed the cards into sleeves. With decks of sleeved cards, any modified card blends into the other cards. However, I did make the mistake of not adding indicative numbers to the pasted images, which show for what numbers of players cards should be used (for example, cards marked "6+" are to be included in six-player games, as well as all cards marked with lesser numbers).

Altar: an Age I card
As you may have gathered, my immediate reaction to finding those cards wasn't to throw away or sell the entire game. Instead, I thought about how significant the cards were. Because the images were on four cards that were only small parts of the gameplay, I felt that image alteration would be sufficient. I try to be judicious in purchasing games for myself and my family; if a game has strategic or tactical elements that are personally off-putting or morally offensive, I don't buy the game. Likewise, if I know that the game has some visual elements that are somewhat racy or inappropriate, I won't buy the game. Would I have purchased 7 Wonders, though, if I had known those images were in the game? Perhaps, especially if I had a plan for cleaning the game of those images.

Let me conclude with my opinion of sexuality in games: I don't see the need for it, whether it's suggestive imagery or some tactic that involves sexual attraction or seduction. I also don't see the need for scantily-clad women (or men, to some extent); having such images in games trains boys to look at women as objects. What I'm saying seems like a blanket statement (I have spent much time pondering this issue and could write at length about it, but I won't write on end for brevity's sake), but I think that our world has a major issue with objectifying women and yet holding women to impossible physical standards. Why have images of near-naked women in a board game? My advice: be wary and be prepared to reduce or eliminate anything untoward lest our children be shaped by the influences of the world at-large.

Thursday, April 10, 2014

Castlevania: 1HN Self-Sufficient Devil Hunter

Right after I got my NES, one of the first games I received as a gift was Castlevania. I don't remember why I got that game: did I ask for it? Did Mom think it would be a game that I'd like? Did another family member give it to me? I'm not sure, but I do remember that it was one of the first games I had.

What more can be said about Castlevania? For those who are not familiar, Castlevania is a side-scrolling platformer that was one of Konami's flagship titles. In the game, you play Simon Belmont, a whip-wielding nobleman who enter's Dracula's castle with no other mission but to destroy Dracula and break his curse. Along the way, you encounter every cliched horror monster conceived: bats, mummies, zombies, creatures from the Blue Lagoon, dead knights, Frankenstein, and Igor... Or, at least, a bunch of leaping hunchbacks. All the while, you whip candles and walls to get upgrades to your whip (which ultimately becomes a rather elastic ball-and-chain morning-star-like weapon), special weapons like holy water, cross-shaped boomerangs, axes, and daggers, as well as hearts for ammunition, pork chops for health, and treasures for extra points.

As with many NES games, each level of Castlevania is capped with an end boss, whom you must fight to proceed to the next level. After traversing the first level of the castle, you encounter a giant bat who swoops down at you repeatedly. It is defeated somewhat easily, but then an entire castle awaits with more levels and bosses. At the end of the game, you are challenged by Dracula, but he's not the last boss; after you behead Dracula, an immense leaping rock monster attacks you, knocking you around as your life meter decreases to a dangerously low point...

...and, then, you die. At least, that's what always happened to me because I was never able to beat Castlevania -- not as a teenager and not in recent history.

Castlevania is a game about which I used to be quite conflicted. On the one hand, all of the horror film and literature conventions are in the game: ghouls, monsters, Dracula, torches, skeletons (both animated and as piles of bones), holy water, crosses that clear away the undead, and the like. My Christian radar often blipped at every demonic image on the screen I  encountered when I played recently. I thought about what kind of influence this game would have on my boys: would they develop an interest in horror films? Would they pursue knowledge of the occult? Would they pretend to be Simon Belmont or Dracula?! All of the stereotypically Christian concerns crossed my mind as I considered the implications of a horror-themed video game. On the other hand, you are Simon Belmont, who was sent to vanquish evil, armed with holy water and crosses. These are Catholic elements to be sure, but one cannot deny even a slight Christian influence on the protagonists of some horror movies and themes. After all, who is a more frightening adversary than Satan and his minions? In that sense, Castlevania is spiritual warfare played out on-screen: it's good versus evil presented in a blatant and obvious way. In addition, Castlevania is an excellent platformer with fine graphics, a memorable soundtrack, and gameplay that challenges you and gives you some freedom of movement. Except for some cheesy villains, Castlevania plays rather smoothly for an NES game and has replayability, even after you defeat Dracula and his winged beast.

Despite how well-crafted the game is, I sold Castlevania and Castlevania II as a bundle on eBay, along with their original retail boxes and instructions for the first Castlevania. Once again, a personal conviction led me to rid myself of something I didn't think would be a positive influence on my boys. As a teenager, I didn't live a life pursuing Christ, so I did what I wanted to do. At the time, Castlevania seemed harmless to me, but I looked at the game with renewed eyes and determined that it was games like Castlevania that did affect me as a younger person. If anything, like magic, I may have looked at horror themes and demons as entertaining and fun. Even though demons and supernatural monsters were villains, there was always an implied coolness to them; today, with the proliferation of zombie and vampire TV shows, that seems to be Hollywood's opinion. However, I see things differently: in most, if not all horror-influenced TV shows and movies, God rarely plays the role of vanquisher; instead, it is often through human ingenuity and perseverance that supernatural evil is defeated. In this way, what I find as a negative influence in horror-themed entertainment is not the imagery or storylines as much as the insidious idea that we don't need God to vanquish evil; we'll just do it fine on our own, thank you very much. "We don't need Jesus; we just need each other." It's a perspective that infects the mind, convincing us that we are better than we think we are.

Thus, is playing or owning Castlevania a sin? I don't think so, but it's one of those things that plants a seed of doubt in one's mind. For an adult, it may not be so dangerous, but to plant such a seed in the mind of a child could be spiritually damaging. Not everyone else is the same when it comes to the effects of horror themes in entertainment, but when it comes to my boys, since I'm accountable to God for them I shouldn't risk exposing them to the idea that we can conquer Satan and his demons just fine on our own.