Still with me? Good. I am done with spoilers. I don't mean that I no longer want people to spoil things for me, I mean that I'm done with spoilers as a concept. I'm increasingly convinced that fear of spoilers is a roadblock to meaningful discussion, especially when we're talking about games and gaming. It's also my firm belief that fear of spoilers has increasingly given writers permission to tell the same hackneyed stories again and again.
On a recent episode of Nation of Gamers, a promising discussion about Heavy Rain started, and then was immediately put down due to the fact that it might cause a spoiler. The idea was then floated that we'd do something similar to what they do on the Gamers With Jobs Conference Call, and have a discussion later that would be released under a spoiler alert headline. This is frustrating for me as a commentator on a number of levels; primarily, I don't see it as my job to prevent spoilers from reaching your ears. Rather, it's my job to do the best I can in providing entertaining discussion about games. If you don't want to have a game spoiled and we start talking about said game, the burden is with you to overcome your morbid curiosity and stop listening, not with me to stop talking about it. Maybe you should come back after you've finished the game? The show will still be there.
Excessive spoiler awareness isn't fair to the people that have finished a game and want to have that discussion, and self censoring to prevent spoilers makes our show less interesting. Will we ever go back and talk about Heavy Rain? Maybe, maybe not. Even if we do, it won't be as fresh in our minds as it would had we talked about it shortly after we completed it. There will be points forgotten, and the entire conversation will take on the tone of, "Oh yeah! I remember that!" I'm all for pleasant reminiscing, but it is no substitute for substantive discussion.
Quick! Which was better, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, or Call of Duty, Modern Warfare 2? The vast majority of you would say the that the first game was superior, and not only because of the public relations missteps of publisher Activision. One of the major problems with the second game was that it relied on the same plot devices as the first. Like, exactly the same devices. The shock of dying as one of the main characters in MW was substantially greater than when the same occurred in MW2, and all the spoiler police in the world wouldn't have made it any better. If instead of cheap shocks Infinity Ward had developed a compelling plot that made any logical sense, our collective reaction would have been much different.
However, it's the current zeitgeist among entertainment makers to rely heavily on the, "You won't believe what happens next!" model of storytelling, and we're letting them get away with it. The nanny culture surrounding media only reinforces the notion that we don't care about engaging stories, interesting characters, or good gameplay. It tells writers and producers everywhere that we'll accept bland storytelling if only they string us along at the right pace.
I'm not against surprising twists, far from it. I am against mysterious circumstances and shocking developments being a sideshow used to distract from lame storytelling. If something is great, truly great, then knowing how it ends won't "spoil" anything. I can still play Final Fantasy IV and thoroughly enjoy it, even knowing as I do that Golbez is Cecil's brother. I know that Joker is going to turn himself into a monster at the end of Batman: Arkham Asylum and the game is still a ton of fun. And for my money, knowing from the beginning of Heavy Rain that Scott is the Origami Killer would have made for a more interesting game. Conversely, knowing that Alistair was going to die wouldn't have made Tomb Raider: Underworld's story any less dumb.
This doesn't mean I'm going to go out of my way to ruin things for people. However, the next time someone freaks out when I start talking about something that they haven't experienced, I'm going to ask them to remove themselves from the conversation rather than censor myself.
So, what do you think? Would you rather we leave your ears pristine, clean of any spoilers? Or would you prefer a more substantive discussion, even knowing that some surprises may be lost?
Spencer Williams
