Help me understand Critics

[jacobschndr]

From Yahtzee to MovieBob, from Ebert to Penn and Teller, from Bill O' Reilly to Bill Mahr...ok maybe not the last two those are more like political pungnents. But they all have one thing in common their all critics of some sort or another.

What is their job specifically? Are they here to tell me what to avoid? What is good? What is Bad? Should I see, get, or take whatever it is their talking about. They all have some kind of chip on their shoulders too. Like how Yahtzee despises QTE's or how MovieBob portrays Michael Bay as the Anti-Christ of movies (as he reminds us all in every fucking video).

My point is this should we really need crtics? My answer is no. Like Yahtzee said, if theres something you like and someone else dislikes then it won't matter because their opinions shouldn't get to you because it's your own opinion right? But I guess from a certain viewpoint we as people and consumers feel comforting in a way knowing that someone out there has taken the time to test something out for us all and then grade upon it. But what's wrong with testing it out yourself? If you like it great, if you don't, better luck next time.

Bottom line, all I'm saying is I watch ZP and movie review videos for entertainment purposes only. Do I agree with them, sometimes yes, sometimes no, i.e., I think QTE's are fine I see why the industry uses them, I still like Transformers 1 & 2. And although ZP and everyone else are fun to listen to, I don't take them seriously.

So what are your thoughts on Critics in general?

 

[newguy77]

Form your own opinion on whatever information you can gather. Sometimes I go to review sites and read the three highest scoring reviews and the three lowest scoring reviews, and that usually tells me if I'll like whatever it is or not.

 

[Dudemeister]

Well some critics (Yahtzee, Nostalgia Critic) are more for entertainment...

 

[EscapeGoat_v1legacy]

In general, I don't mind critics. They're just another form of reviewer, after all, and so offer a point of view on something.

Me, I can make up my own mind about what's good and what isn't, but I guess some people find it easier to have other people's opinions to consider before making their choice, so yes, I'd say we might as well have critics.

 

[Pandalisk]

They review things, they are reviewers, they give us their opinions and we choose to take their opinions or not, others do it for entertainment, others like to troll.

 

[Redliph]

Any thread that compares Yahtzee to Bill O'Reilly is sure to be gold, I can already see it.

In all seriousness, though, I have always seen critics as labor saving devices. Walking three miles to work and back again is hard so you take the train to work. In the same way, not everyone has the time to rent every game and watch every movie. Thus, we turn to critics, finding one we like who thinks like we do. If you love Portal and Silent Hill 2 and agree with a few of the critiques that Yahtzee has pumped out then you turn to Yahtzee for advice on what you should or shouldn't buy. If you view the past as a golden era and are generally strong willed with a morally objective approach to the world, Bill O'Reilly is your man. If you are upset at the direction the western world or America is heading and feel that conservatism is holding the world back from greatness, you like Mahar. That is how I look at it, anyways.

 

[SatansBestBuddy]

Well, it's assumed that people can't afford to go to every single movie or play every single game ever released, so critics are people who do, and give us their honest opinions on how such-and-such movie/game stacks up to the rest of them and which one would be best worth your time and money.

Yes, it is a better idea to get first hand experience with material than to listen to somebody else sum it up for you, but that implies that it's something you already own, and thus, don't need anybody to tell you about it cause you already have your own take on the matter.

 

[Casual Shinji]

They're just critics.

 

[ArcWinter]

Entertainment value... Hey, someone should be the Critic Critic, who critiques other critics critically!

No, but seriously, someone has to do that.

 

[Valiance]

People just need shit to ***** about.

Most of them are frustrated that the 'masses' (ie: anyone that wouldn't watch their video, listen to them, or agree with them) are buying/supporting/being-convinced-of something that is sub-par.

Maybe they think they can help or advance the human race by educating people who don't know any better but to just go buy what other people buy, you know?

 

[ThePirateMan]

I can sadly not take many reviewers seriously since the day I had actualy played a game that ZP reviewed and then noticed that he complained about completly unleginemate points and basicly sounded like he sucked at it.

So I tend to ask friends or simply a larger crowd of people instead of looking for reviews.

 

[nova18]

If someone calls you a horse, punch them in the mouth.
If someone else calls you a horse, you insult their mother.
If a third person calls you a horse, its time to buy a saddle.


I think that nicely sums up my view on critics.

 

[Break]

You're looking at it from the wrong angle - I look to critics to provide an experienced, alternative viewpoint. Regardless of how you personally reacted to something, finding out how another person took it is a good way of increasing your understanding of both the item itself, and the surrounding industry. Like discussing it with your friends, or reading an informative article.

Moreover, critics are exceptionally useful for saving time and money. You read enough reviews, you get a better idea of how likely you are going to enjoy something, and you can decide whether or not you're going to invest in it based on more than just trailers and word of mouth. Even if you don't agree with the reviews themselves, you can usually factor it into your decision in some way, if you think about the context of the criticism, and the bias of the reviewer.