Follow TV Tropes
There is a disagreement between me and Pezt. The situation is that when you first meet Dr Vahlen, she will ask you to choose what to research next. Whichever you choose to research first she will say: "I agree. That does seem to be the most pressing of our current research options." Later she will not hesitate to (politely and diplomatically, but clearly) point out her view and disagree with others. The question is whether this is enough to qualify for the yes-man trope.
The disagreement, the way I understand it, is not about the behaviour. Saying you agree with whatever the boss says is yes-man behaviour. The question is if the trope should be interpreted narrowly or widely. If interpreted narrowly the trope does not apply unless yes-man behaviour is the most obvious, most characteristic, most defining trait of a character. If so the trope does not apply since yes-man behaviour is not the most obvious trait of Dr Vahlen, as a matter of fact you might not notice it at all. If the trope is interpreted widely all clear yes-man behaviour applies even when it is not a character's defining characteristic.
I have read the yes-man trope text and I think it is a moot point how it should be defined. I can live with both version of the trope. However, if we do choose the narrow interpretation we need to state that in the text for the yes-man trope and some examples of the trope might need to be removed.
Kindly state your opinions. I have posted this on the discussion on the yes-man trope as well.
No, both because Yes-Man is not the trope meant to describe the point in question, and because you're wrong.
Yes-Man describes a pattern of behavior. Agreeing that the player's decision is the right one no matter what it is is, at a stretch, Schrödinger's Gun.
Dr. Vahlen agrees with the player's decision no matter what because it's the tutorial and the devs want to make you feel a bit better after that disastrous first mission. It does not, and was never meant to, reflect on Vahlen's character.
So you think Yes-Man is not meant to describe behaviour but personality/pattern of behaviour. Fair enough, I can see your point even though I do not necessarily agree.
The second part of your argument does not make sense to me at all, though. You seem to be saying something to the effect that Vahlen's concurring with whatever the player chooses it does not count because it is the tutorial and she is just a mouthpiece for the developers (who at this point want to cheer up the player), thus it cannot be used to characterize Dr Vahlen. However the characters in the story are always mouthpieces of their creator's stories. They can only say what their creators want them to say. We still use it to characterize them. As for it being part of the tutorial I do not know of any convention that says that it is normal and expected that people act out of character in the tutorial. If there is such a convenion I would be happy to be told where I can read more about it.
Anyway, thank you for your input.
Agreed with Spectral Time. The Yes-Man trope is the wrong trope to use here.
Yes-Man describes a type of personality and consistent behavior. One scripted action that is consistently contradicted by how Vahlen acts later makes the usage of this trope not fit.
Vahlen does not agree with whatever the Commander says as a Yes-Man does. Proof: Keep shooting Outsiders when you're supposed to capture them. See what happens. Don't recruit scientists. See what happens. Play with too many rockets and grenades. See what happens. If Vahlen is a Yes-Man there wouldn't even be a need for a special option in EW to make her stop nagging The Commander about the use of explosives in field ops.
The described incident where she comments on whichever option in the first research project is more likely due to Early Installment Weirdness in the tutorial. In addition to that, every option given to research right at the beginning is actually important based on what strategy you choose pursue, so it makes sense that whichever option you choose she will agree it should be given priority.
"Agreed with Spectral Time. The Yes-Man trope is the wrong trope to use here.
Yes-Man describes a type of personality and consistent behavior."
You opinion is duly noted.
"Vahlen does not agree with whatever the Commander says as a Yes-Man does. Proof: Keep shooting Outsiders when you're supposed to capture them. See what happens. Don't recruit scientists. See what happens. Play with too many rockets and grenades. See what happens. If Vahlen is a Yes-Man there wouldn't even be a need for a special option in EW to make her stop nagging The Commander about the use of explosives in field ops. "
I honestly do not understand who you are arguing against. No one is saying that yes-man behaviour is Dr Vahlens' most prominent characteristic. The text I wrote expressly says the behaves differently later. The question is whether the trope applies to behaviour or patterns of behaviour/personality. Incidentally I have never hired scientists or built an extra lab (I have built a lot of workshops) and Dr Vahlens has never complained about that. That is beside the point, but I thought I should point out the descrepancy between your game experience and mine anyway.
"The described incident where she comments on whichever option in the first research project is more likely due to Early Installment Weirdness in the tutorial. In addition to that, every option given to research right at the beginning is actually important based on what strategy you choose pursue, so it makes sense that whichever option you choose she will agree it should be given priority."
She says that it is the "most pressing of our research options". All three options cannot be the most pressing of the options.
Your "early installment weirdness" explanation only work if you assume that her dialogue in the tutorial was written before the rest of the dialogue at a time they were not certain what her character should be like. That might be the case, or it might not. I do not know anything about the development process of this particular game nor do I know much about computer game development in general. I have been under the impression that the tutorial was usually one of the last things you did when developing a computer game, though.
Thank you for your input. If the next person expressing an opinion on this matter agrees with you I shall concede the point and remove the text in "Videogame: UFO Enemy Unknown" as well as make some clarification to the text describing yes-man trope.
Yes-Man is a characterization trope. If Doctor Vahlen was agreeing with every possible decision that the Commander made, and was outright sucking up to her boss, then it would count, because that would be a consistent element of her characterization. Instead, we have her agreeing with the Commander's decision regardless, in one single instance.
A comparison would be, for example, a character is shown in one scene to be drinking, and using that as a basis to call him The Alcoholic. That trope goes way beyond just a character having a drink. I think that the Yes-Man interpretation in this case is far too broad to really apply.
"If the next person expressing an opinion on this matter agrees with you I shall concede the point and remove the text"
Since three different people have agreed that use of the trope Yes-Man is not appropriate at this point, please remove the Yes-Man text from the entry, thank you.
Thank you for your input Zaptech.
I have removed the yes-man text from the Videogame: X-com Enemy unknown. I have, however, not done the additions to the yes-man trope page. I would like a little more time to consider how to express the difference between behaviour and pattern of behaviour/personality in the most pedagogic way. If any of you would like to do that please go ahead without waiting for me.
I have now edited the yes man text to clarify that it refers to general behaviour, not single instances of behaviour.
Is there a trope for "style over substance" or "form over function" id est focusing on looking good at the expense of functionality. Bradford expressly accuses EXALT of this when you raid their headquarters. It fits. The troopers have neckties with their uniforms and the headquarters look like a modern version of a renaissance palace complete with very expensive art.
Just wondering, are we allowed to talk about the Long War?
The Game Mod Long War? Nah, game mods (unless they are Ascended Fanon) aren't the original work and don't get troped on its page. You may want to make a page VideoGame.Long War for the mod, though.
Long War is definitely deserving of its own page by now, with the additional voice packs and such. It is to XCOM:EW, as PARADOX was going to be to Command & Conquer:RA 3.
Sure. You can take How to Create a Works Page as a help guide.
Long War is ascended fanon in XCOM 2 as that was the simulation the Commander was in for 20 years.
I was wondering, could we consider the usual behaviour of some players, always blaming the RNG wherever something goes south (Especially in Classic) a player case of Never My Fault ?
You can check it out in gamefaqs, Steam or other places, people saying the RNG is rigged, what has been denied for harder difficulties (actually the RNG is rigged towards the player in normal and easy), and pretty much stating that their only reason for losing is because the AI gets an unfair help in battle, not because they used half cover, or didn't bothered using better positions, or retreating to negate enemy advantages.
I tend not to retrest, but in Classic+ the use of half cover is suicide. Which I tend to use to my advantage, sticking weaker rookies in half cover so that the aliens shoot them instead of the guys I'm trying to level up.
I do tend to get a bit angry when 90+% shots miss, but my general attitude was learning to not have to take 90% shots. I guess you do kind of have a point, though.
About the point of no return entry, it states that the assault will be a day before completing the psi labs. But I didn't even got started on building the labs (Though I took down the alien base around around a couple of weeks before, so it would give barely time to make it)
Until there is a more solid statement about the trigger to the assault, I left it to "around two weeks after taking down the alien base" if anyone knows more than me about the trigger, please, feel free to change the point.
So I'm not the only one seeing a visual similarity between the Exalt guys and the protagonist of The Bureau XCOM Declassified right? Button down, slacks, wrist-thingy, it's totally there.
@Whoever requested the custom wikiword to say "X-COM": You are wrong. The game's title is explicitly "XCOM" without a dash, to differentiate it from the original X-COM series (with a dash) from the 90ies. I am going to revert it.
Can we get the Main namespace for this page unlocked, if only to put a redirect to the Video Game namespace? As it stands, it's awkward whenever you navigate to any of the other namespaces, because there's nothing to click at the top of the screen to go back to the primary page. It would make things a bit easier.
No. New main redirects are a wiki policy violation. They're working on adding video game tab and icon, however.
Is the "Second Wave" really DLC? The content was released as a free patch through Steam, not a separate download (for the PC, anyway).
It was always referred to as free DLC in all the media, even if it was technically more like an update.
Just suddenly realized why the 2012 was there...
Nonetheless the original game was UFO: Enemy Unknown, so I dunno...
In the US it was called XCOM: UFO Defense.
Either way, there was no need for a disambiguation since there wasn't another work called XCOM: Enemy Unknown.
Would a 'character' page for the various classes and alien races be a smart idea in the future?
There's a rather hilarious Shout-Out in the situation room chatter, where Bradford mentions a 'weirdo named Straker' going on about 'Shadow agents'. Obviously a shout-out to the 1970 Gerry Anderson series UFO (which partly inspired the original X Com).
Problem is, I can't get that quote to play again and I don't remember the exact wording. Can anybody help out there so we can add it in?
Rule of Cool: Pump-action lasers.
I'd say yes.
Also add LASER MINIGUN!!
What with Fake Nationality being Not A Trope, is there any way to point out the hilariously bad attempt at german Dr. Vahlen's english VA makes in the tutorial?
Read the Banner at the top of Fake Nationality:
I meant if it would fit under any of the accent-based tropes :P. Doesn't look like it though.
Gratuitous Foreign Language maybe? Although not all conditions of it are statisfied. The German line by Dr. Vahlen in the intro might be bad and awkward. But it's certainly not thrown in for flavor, as it makes sense in that situation to try to communicate in German. (By the way: I am a native German speaker. After I heard that line in the tutorial, I thought she was French)
Translation Trainwreck, "Blind Idiot" Translation depending on if they fit. I don't speak German, so I don't know in what way is her german bad.
Well, she speaks english with a definite german accent and german with a definite english one (or at least whatever her native language is, it obviously doesn't have the 'Ö' or 'CH' sounds). Meh, don't really think it's worthy of the main page, but it definitely did amuse me, may be a kind of YMMV regarding linguistics :P.
@CobraPrime: It's not a Translation Trainwreck or a "Blind Idiot" Translation. The sentence is grammatically correct and makes sense in the context (she asks "We came to help, can you hear me?"). Just the pronunciation is way off.
Community Showcase More
How well does it match the trope?