- Sep 13, 2012
That sounds interesting, I'll have to give it a look. The 'morality paragraph' sounds helpful too. If other reviewers could keep their tumblresque complaints to a little avoidable paragraph at the end then I don't think I'd really have that much of a problem.tilmoph said:While it definitely is not major by any stretch of the term, I think ChristCenteredGamer might actually fit the bill content wise. Hold on, I know it sounds crazy, but hear me out.
The reviews themselves are focused 99% on the game's content; world building, graphical quality, mechanics, and execution and glitches. The whole christ-centered aspect comes in in 2 forms. First, at the end of the review, the reviewer will have a one paragraph overview covering things like level of mandatory drug-use, how the game treats sins like murder and theft (good, neutral, or evil acts), the kinds of things concerned parents and conservative christian types might care about. Secondly, the reviews have two sideboxes, one, called highlights, has strong points and weak points, which are focused solely on the game, and morality warnings, which are things of specific interest to the prior mentioned groups. The second is the keeping of two separate scores; the first is, again, the game score using a percent score, based on x/50. x Is the total of the subscores; gameplay (rated 0-20) graphics, sound (both 0-10) stability, and controls (0-5). The morality score, which again is separate and has no bearing on the game score, is again percent of x/50, and is made of violence, language, sexual content, occult, and ethical/moral, all having up to ten points.
The reviews themselves are detailed and well-written, and do a good job of conveying the in game experience of the reviewer, which, as noted, and in spite of the name, don't go into conservative/christian moral perspectives until the end "morality paragraph", otherwise being solely focused on the game itself. I think this might be up your alley, regardless of your beliefs, since the site does an impeccable job of separating moral and cultural arguments about a game from discussion and overview of the quality of the game as a game.
Well if the only negative thing mentioned in a review is the sexism then I'd assume that yeah, it got a point docked because of it.MarsAtlas said:Does it though?
Carolyn Petit gave GTA V a 9/10, mentioning feeling uncomfortable as a woman for about 4% of the video review. Would you ever think twice about somebody giving GTA V a score 9/10 if they hadn't said that? Is somebody giving a score of 9/10 to GTA V something that you cannot wrap your mind around in that you must conclude that the score was hurt by this perceived hostility on the part of the reviewer?
Am I supposed to consider what others might want when looking for things for myself?MiracleOfSound said:This is you right now:
I'm not telling people what they can and cannot believe. I know I have no choice over that, but I do have a choice on whether or not I should listen to them... and if they are the kind of person who thinks that sexism is a valid reason to dock points from a game then they are not someone I want to listen to.renegade7 said:Part of the process of growing up is realizing that no one is ever going to align perfectly with your beliefs and that your beliefs aren't relevant to every damn thing. Just because a feminist wrote a review does not mean the review drew entirely, or even at all, on feminist ideology. In life, there are going to be people who are religious, or atheists, liberals, conservatives, moon landing deniers, and whatever else including feminists, and you're not going to have a choice about what the people around you believe, and if that's your attitude then you're going to be a miserable and lonely person indeed. People aren't defined solely by what causes they identify with. It's really shallow to think "this person believes differently than me, therefore I can't respect his opinion on anything regardless of its relation to the subject on which we disagree."
I'm... not? I'm asking for somewhere that does cater to my interests. If people want to read about how games promote rape then more power to them, I'm not going to stop them. I just don't want to read that stuff, and would prefer to give my patronage to a place that doesn't consider such discussions important.Sure, but that wouldn't mean that it's pointless to everyone. If the Escapist was a music-related news site, then there would no doubt be some metal stuff discussed. It might seem trivial to you, but you're not the only person the Escapist serves. Some people actually are interested in the place of video games within society and that means we can't ignore the social influences of games and the social influences that effect how they are made. You don't have to read them if you're not interested, but don't come into such a large platform as the Escapist and then complain that it doesn't cater only to your interests.
Not to say the Escapist is like that. As a whole, the Escapist is pretty much great for me as long as I avoid Movie Bob. I'm inquiring about new sites as the current layoffs from the Escapist has me worried that it might not be around much longer.
Incredibly petty.IceForce said:So, if a game gets 0.5 (or even less) points taken off at the end for something you "don't care" about and view to be "unimportant", you require another reviewer or review site altogether?
How petty are you?
I'm not demanding for my tastes to be catered to. I'm asking if anyone knows a place where my tastes are already catered to.That would be like me saying I don't care about graphics and believe them to be "unimportant", so I refuse to consume any reviews where points are docked because the reviewer didn't like the graphics.
Oh, and I also demand a site/reviewer cater to my specific tastes on graphics.
They're just tone policing me :'(Solaire of Astora said:The issue is not his question, but his tone.