Why I Won't Just 'Get Over' Trump's Presidency (And Why You Shouldn't Either)

So this is sort of a follow up to my blog post from November where I talked about what we could expect from Trump's presidency. Well I'm on the verge of flat out deleting that post because I was wrong. I was horribly wrong. There is no way at this point to dissuade me of the idea that these 4 years will be anything but rocky. I originally thought that because the GOP had disowned Trump, his policies wouldn't receive backing. Well it turns out that the GOP and Trump are all buddies again. Isn't that wonderful? 

But what REALLY gets me is peers telling me to just "get over it". I keep seeing this everywhere the second someone expresses negative thoughts about Trump. Not only is it everywhere, but it's highly insensitive to those with mental trauma over the fact that someone who represent racists and sexists is now running things. Firstly, you can't just "get over" an election result. Presidents have 2 4 year terms, and 4 years is far too much for Trump. Hell, even being in the runnings was too much. You can't afford to treat the election like a small paper cut. As much as I'd like it to happen, Trump isn't just gonna go away if you ignore him long enough. He'll announce himself every chance he gets, and his followers will do the same. 

And don't be surprised at the comparisons between Trump and Hitler because they are very much alike. All that's needed are internment camps where Muslims and Mexicans are shipped off to die (I pray to the stars above that won't happen). Trump voters should've known very well from the beginning that we would have a problem with this. You don't just elect a racist, sexist despot and just expect it to go over smoothly. And the worst part about this is that they didn't care. It's obvious they didn't care because if they did, Trump would be in his tower sucking from a pacifier and whining that no one sought him to be a leader of the country. But nope, we gotta keep them pesky womynz from even suggesting some sort of national decision. 

Which brings me to my next point. Apparently everyone cares about corrupt politicians when women are the ones with a dirt sheet. The 44 men who came before Hillary? Nah, they were all pristine model citizens. I guarantee you if it was Bill, no one would care as much. Another thing that annoys me is that people say social justice is to blame for Trump's victory. That's like saying the Jews are to blame for the Nazis ruling Germany. No, you know who's to blame for this? Racists and sexists. They were given that platform and came out in droves to grasp their opportunity to have their behaviour condoned again. You remember how they were pissing about Obama harshly penalising crimes against women and people of colour. They've been conditioned to believe that being criticised or judged for your inflammatory behaviour is oppressive when that's not how it works at all. 

And since it's relevant, I think I should bring up the Trump protests and rioters. I don't entirely hold any acrimony against them. I don't agree with their methods, but I can understand why they'd feel that way. Of course though, the privileged white dudes living in gated communities all rejoice at the reinstatement of their stock image lives. That is, less of them darker skinned fellows. Also I absolutely love the whiners going about "property damages" and how "these darn leftist crybabies are destroying everything because they didn't get what they want". It's funny cuz the rightists are up in the US government destroying lives systematically with the laws they pass. Anyone can destroy something with their hands or weapons. But the one who carefully plots the downfall of a society with nonviolent tactics is a true villain to fear. I'd be much more fearful of someone who brings me to tears with just their words than someone who just beats me up with their hands. 

There is no comparison to the far right and the far left. One holds all the power and one doesn't. The right still have a massive advantage over the left, and that advantage has been used to constantly hold down people with lives and families. White people are afraid that police will slap them with a hefty fine for doing something mildly illegal. Black people are afraid of getting shot just for being outside late at night. Men are afraid that their phone will die whilst they're out partying. Women are afraid that they'll be raped, killed, or both whilst out partying. Straight people are afraid of, well, I'll get back to you on that. LGBT people are afraid of being beaten on the side of the road for not being "normal". The left has different priorities and different concerns. Concerns that deserve and require a limelight of their own. These are human beings we're talking about here. I'd be kinda remiss if I didn't remind everyone about the tremendous amounts of racism and protest that Obama got when he was elected. Which brings me to protesting a voted election. Did you know that this is totally valid? No seriously, there is nothing paradoxical about protesting a fair election (leaving aside how it was most likely rigged). Saying the protesters are bitching that they didn't get what they want is a gross oversimplification. It's one thing to lose the election. Giving a position of political power to someone who stands for racism, sexism, heteronormativity, and a bunch of other things I can't name off the top of my head is a whole new ballpark. If your new boss was a guy who went around sticking dildos on your chair for you to sit on, would you honestly just go with the idea of "put up or shut up"? Yeah, didn't think so. 

Before I close things here, I must bring up the fact that the idea of the president not having as much power as we think is pretty much null and void. Congress is loaded with republicans, and checks and balances mean nothing if everyone is in complete agreement. If Hitler had a congressional board, I doubt the other Nazis in office would reject his propositions. At this point, all we can hope is that most of what he said during his campaign was mere jargon. But again, hope can only get us so far. These 4 years will be hard, no doubt. But maybe 2020 will be our light at the end of the tunnel. Just maybe. 

Watch Dogs 2 Review (Spoiler free)

If I had to choose a poster child for one of the most disappointingly slapdash video games to come out of 2016, I'm pretty sure Watch Dogs 2 would be a runner-up for first place. And it really pains me to say that. I think its no secret that 2016 was a terrible year for video games. Only like 2 games that came from last year were anything good, those being The Division and Uncharted 4. Everything else was substandard rubbish. ReCore is boring, No Man's Sky is pretty much the equivalent of selling hard rock albums to 80 year old people, and Final Fantasy 15 is just flashy generic edgy white boy game #42,958. But Watch Dogs 2? Oh boy do I have quite the bone to pick with this. 

Let me just be clear here, I was actually looking forward to this game. I thought it'd be the improvement that the expected series would need. Around the time Bad Blood was released for the first Watch Dogs game, I was a bit on edge about the direction the series was going in. But not only was Watch Dogs 2 the unnecessary sequel that many were thinking it would be; it might've just been worse. Watch Dogs 2 is repetitive, unfinished, and one of the most horribly unfocused games I've seen in quite a while.

Remember how all of Watch Dogs' detractors were going on and on about how it's just a pale imitation of Grand Theft Auto? Well it seems that Ubisoft took that a bit too seriously because Watch Dogs 2 is literally just GTA 5 with a Watch Dogs skin slapped on it. Sure, Watch Dogs 2 takes us to the beautiful vista of San Francisco, but that's about as far as visual aesthetics go. The textures look like an early 7th generation console game and it all just complements the cartoony atmosphere in a negative way. The game tries so desperately to deviate from the original's dark tone so much to a point where it feels like some sort of wacky sitcom from the mid-90's. 

Now let's talk about the story and characters for a bit. The game follows Marcus Holloway, aka obnoxious token black kid. He's kind of a centre of criticism for me because of how badly written he is. I wouldn't mind too much except the fact that this is Ubisoft we're talking here. These guys made the fucking Assassin's Creed games, where many of the protagonists are foreign people. How did they suddenly fuck up writing a black character? Seriously the whole game his mannerisms just scream "I'M BLACK CAN'T YOU TELL?" and it's rather disappointing given the racial diversity message this game was aiming at. But instead of a black man, Marcus feels more like what a white guy thinks black men are like when they're not being painted as thugs and hoodlums. His story is that he was framed for a crime he never committed, except not really because he was guilty of a crime when he was 11 but the ctOS system is retrying him for it. So it's up to him and his friends, who are way better characters btw, to help clear his name. Oh did I mention that's only like a fifth of the story? No really, the rest of the game is just spend doxxing and wrongly attributing other people that Marcus doesn't like because I guess hypocrisy is fun now. 

And the gameplay, my god the gameplay. Watch Dogs 2 is legit a duck and cover shooter. Not a good one either. First, the actual story can be completed in 8 hours. I'm not joking there. In 8 hours, you're done. The first game took at least a week and a half to beat. Instead of doing what The Division did in terms of making the missions challenging, Watch Dogs 2 thinks it can try and pull a fast one by "letting you play your own way", which is a total lie because the game punishes you for doing anything other than what it secretly wants you to do. Oh look at all these ways I can do the mission! Except why would I choose any method other than the one that actually is effective? The stealth mechanics? They're not much better. If you're spotted, everyone in the bloody area automatically knows your location, even if you're in a giant building. You can say it's because of their tech, but given how the only way to lose enemies is to leave the AO, that's not stealth, that's cat and mouse. Back to the shooting. This time around, Marcus is a fucking pincushion in contrast to Aiden being a bullet sponge. There's no balance here. If a bunch of enemies are raining down on you, you're pretty much forced behind cover otherwise you're dead in seconds. 

The hacking elements are a slight step up from the last game, but even then it's still the same old "push a button to fuck around" routine. You have more options this time and can select up to 3 things to do with a hackable item. Unfortunately, most of the options are inconsequential. Drive a car forward? Why would I need to do that? Which leads me to the driving. It's slightly better but the vehicles are still incredibly hard to control and are barely durable. They still don't allow you to shoot from your car, which is a shame since that's one thing that would've definitely been a good addition. 

And since this is a feminist blog, I think it's time we talked about the women in this game. One criticism against the first game was the poor representation of the female characters. Only 2 types of woman existed: the damsel in distress, and the strong character that gets killed like a punk. Watch Dogs 2 gave us Sitara, and holy fuck did we get cheated. She mostly takes a back seat and just plays music for Marcus when she's capable of so much more. I was thinking to myself, why wasn't SHE the protagonist? That aside, Watch Dogs 2 introduces female enemies like security guards and police officers, which is kinda cool. That is until I came to the realisation that I'm just gunning these women down or bashing their skulls in with an 8 ball. That was, discomforting, to say the least. 

Speaking of that, one thing I honestly did not care for was their advertisement of moral choices. The first game had these already, and it made sense in the narrative because you were playing as a vigilante. Why are they bigging this up now? Will there be more than what we were given in Watch Dogs 1? Lol nope, it's the same thing. The only "choice" you have is to use take downs instead of guns, and that makes no sense since non lethal take downs still involve the enemy being hit with moves that would kill them. Why am I being told that I have moral choices when the only options I have are to be a complete cyber terrorist or a sleuthing batterer? 

Then there's the online, which was a huge letdown. Watch Dogs 1 had a terrible online component, so them saying Watch Dogs 2's online component would be an improvement made me a bit giddy. But instead of doing what GTA 5 did, all they gave us was the ability to dress Marcus a different way and do game modes like Team Deathmatch or kill each other on the street in the open world. How am I supposed to feel like my individual self if all my fellow players are the same guy? That's like if Metal Gear Online made everyone play as Snake with absolutely no individuality. You might as well just fuck around in the single player because there's nothing worth doing in the online mode. 

Watch Dogs 1 had a pretty deep story that was complemented by adequate gameplay. Here we have mediocre gameplay with a story that barely tries, and that's not what an open world video game is a supposed to be like. Watch Dogs 1 left an influx of emotions through every player, with all of them hoping to see what was next for them, and to see it followed up with this is so disheartening. This is one of the most disappointing games I've played since Duke Nukem Forever, and I'm not even exaggerating. I may be in the minority here, but truth is, when Ubisoft announces a third game in the Watch Dogs series, the one thing I'll be thinking to myself is "at least it can't be as bad as Watch Dogs 2".