How to Talk About Games #3

[SonicWaffle]

"Learn to Fly Noob" shall become something I say on a regular basis now. I just know it. Thanks!

"Hey man, this sounds familiar. Is this Foo Fighters? Which song?"

Remember when Critical Miss was about funny comics, not sounding condescending and elitist all the time? Yeah.

Not sure how it's elitist to ask people to back up their argument, unless you're saying that it's prejudiced against idiots who couldn't argue their way out of a wet paper bag.

Regardless, while I did quite enjoy todays comic, I've got to say I preferred when there were storyline strips.

Remember when gaming was about enjoying a passtime rather than whining about everything that isn't to one's precise liking? Yeah.

Um...no?

I read the comic.

I laughed at multiple jokes in it.

Therefore, as far as I can see, it's still funny.

And he has a Dresden avatar. You can't argue with that.

 

[jurnag12]

I'd say that you're undermining your own point, because any game that allows you to box against a giant scorpion wearing boxing gloves defies any need for further arguments about it's quality.

 

[IceForce]

So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong?

Of course it can be wrong.

Hitler's opinion of the Jews was wrong, for instance. (Yes I did just drop a Godwin's Law bomb on this thread.)

 

[WouldYouKindly]

I am having a hard time learning the lesson because I am laughing too much.

Specially with the coke cats.

Also, I still don't know if Carter hates Evangelion or is just self depreciating.

Baiting Eva fanboys has become a tradition. Which is fine. It's an important anime in the development of the medium, but it's far from flawless. People who can't accept criticism of what they like deserve to be baited as much as possible.

 

[Rakschas]

dear lord, this "#how to talk about games" series is so awesome, please continue!

 

[Tahaneira]

Not bad. However. I disagree on one small point. there is one opinion which is almost never wrong: whether or not I enjoyed the game. Oh sure, the details why fall under this, but I can't wait to see people try to belittle my enjoyment using this.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

I don't get the last bit. So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong? That sounds like one of those douchebags who says "I can objectively prove that this game/band/movie is bad". No you can't.

Allow me with an absolute turd of a game.

Too Human is a third person game with very shitty camera controls. There, that's the end of it. You want more? Fine. Levels are entirely too long, enemies that inflict status effects are too difficult to distinguish from normal enemies, lack of enemy variety does not keep the combat fresh(most are just pallet swaps), the story is blatantly ripped off of Norse mythology, but that's actually fine. What is not fine is that stupid fucking death scene being unskippable.

Too Human is a BAD game. Not mediocre, BAD. That is pretty much a fact. Now you can still enjoy a bad game, because your enjoyment is your opinion. But you like a bad game.

 

[PapstJL4U]

So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong?

Of course it can be wrong.

Hitler's opinion of the Jews was wrong, for instance. (Yes I did just drop a Godwin's Law bomb on this thread.)

Well, the comic did it before, so you are free to go.

@topic: nice idee. i like the eva punch

plc hawkeye some games for us :>

 

[Mike Fang]

Opinions are subjective and therefore never wrong, eh?

By that logic, they're also never right, they just...exist.

Personally I'd say while you may not be able to define an opinion as right or wrong, you can evaluate its quality and maybe even its legitimacy by how much factual grounding it has and exactly what facts its based on.

 

[lacktheknack]

Also, I still don't know if Carter hates Evangelion or is just self depreciating.

At this point, I'm pretty sure it's both.

OT: The first three panels are pretty much the best thing ever.

I also really like the last point.

Also, further proof that complex =/= deep: Dwarf Fortress. The history (up to a thousand years of it) is randomly generated and it's Dwarf Freaking Fortress, so of course it's complex (most complex game in history, probably), but it has no story beyond what you make yourself.

 

[Rip Van Rabbit]

Colossal Douche-Titan?

Has someone been watching Attack on Titan lately?

 

[burningdragoon]

I don't get the last bit. So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong? That sounds like one of those 'people' who says "I can objectively prove that this game/band/movie is bad". No you can't.

Saying "it's just my opinion" is not a Get Out of Challenge Free Card for that opinion.

 

[Ishal]

Why is the game fun? Because it features cats snorting cocaine, that's why!

Get that shit up on Kickstarter NOW! We'll fund the piss out of it! (not endorsing drugs)

OT: I particularly like the FUN part, since it Swiss cheeses nearly every argument put forth by the so called Nintendo defense force. Just because games have intuitive design and gameplay and are thus "fun" does not mean they are entertaining or fulfilling. They don't get a free pass just because they are more gamey than other narrative heavy games. Other games are free to focus their attention elsewhere if they want to tell a story like the Bioshock titles or a Naughty Dog game. Likewise if indie devs feel like there is too much story and not enough "game" in modern titles, they can go the opposite way, just don't expect it to entertain everyone.

edit: another eva dig... don't stop, don't ever stop. Ever.

 

[lacktheknack]

I don't get the last bit. So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong? That sounds like one of those douchebags who says "I can objectively prove that this game/band/movie is bad". No you can't.

Allow me with an absolute turd of a game.

Too Human is a third person game with very shitty camera controls. There, that's the end of it. You want more? Fine. Levels are entirely too long, enemies that inflict status effects are too difficult to distinguish from normal enemies, lack of enemy variety does not keep the combat fresh(most are just pallet swaps), the story is blatantly ripped off of Norse mythology, but that's actually fine. What is not fine is that stupid fucking death scene being unskippable.

Too Human is a BAD game. Not mediocre, BAD. That is pretty much a fact. Now you can still enjoy a bad game, because your enjoyment is your opinion. But you like a bad game.

You're falling for the conclusions problem again.

WHY are the camera controls bad?

BY WHICH STANDARD are the levels too long?

HOW does this overcome the good parts of the game?

WHAT is the ratio of bad to good?

(The allcaps are not yelling, just emphasis on the important part of the question.)

 

[Ishal]

Also, those panels were hilarious. I loved Erin hanging onto the plane. Learn 2 fly nub... all you needed was a "hue hue hue" and I would have busted into my hyena laugh.

 

[Callate]

So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong?

Of course it can be wrong.

Hitler's opinion of the Jews was wrong, for instance. (Yes I did just drop a Godwin's Law bomb on this thread.)

That's totally relevant when talking games.

Although not everything Hitler said about Jews was a matter of opinion.

All right, how about this:

If one were to say "Road to Hell: Retribution" is the best game ever made, because it's the only video game they've ever played, I would say they were wrong.

It could be argued that it was shorthand for "Their lack of experience makes their shallow and unconsidered opinion a worthless reed in the windstorm among the forest of mighty oaks that is the wise and nuanced opinions known as the collected perceptions of their fellow gamers", but saying that repeatedly grows tiresome without a macro.

Or to phrase it another way, not all opinions are of equal value.

If in considering which game to buy, someone accepted the opinion of the hypothetical "played only 'Road to Hell:Retribution' person" as having equal weight with that of the collected opinions of every game critic and virtually every person on game-related message boards, I would think less of their intelligence.

If their reply to my thinking less of their intelligence was to say that was only my opinion, I would feel safe in disregarding anything further they might have to say.

 

[burningdragoon]

I don't get the last bit. So you're saying that a subjective opinion can be wrong? That sounds like one of those 'people' who says "I can objectively prove that this game/band/movie is bad". No you can't.

Saying "it's just my opinion" is not a Get Out of Challenge Free Card for that opinion.

When talking about whether a piece of art or media is good or bad how can you challenge that opinion.

...by having a discussion about how and why you've come to the conclusion that [THING] is [YOUR OPINION OF THING]. Kinda what the current miniseries has been getting at.

 

[DrOswald]

So when I say that I like Metro Last Light I need to explain why I find the atmosphere deep and complex instead of just saying "lol my opinion"?......*Pulls pants down* Nope.

Not exactly. What is said here is that unless you give evidence your opinion is completely baseless. Never try to prove to someone that a game is good because you like it.

Look at it this way. Lets say there is a thread that said Metro Last Light was a terrible game. You like Metro so you decide to defend the game. Your post starts like this:

"You are incorrect, Metro Last Light is a good game."

At this point you are claiming objectivity. You are claiming that your conclusion is more correct than the other conclusion. And any time you claim objectivity you should be prepared to back up your statement with evidence. In this specific case you are pretty much required to provide evidence or be a jerk that no one likes.

There are, however, 2 perfectly fine things to say where in you do not have to present evidence to satisfy the demands of not being a moron. (Note that the verbiage does not need to be exact. Just make sure there is no room for misinterpretation.)

1. "I think Metro Last Light is objectively a good game but I am unable to give evidence to this point."

In this case you are claiming objectivity but fully admitting that you have no evidence. This is polite because it is pretty much tantamount to telling everyone to ignore you. But it does get your voice heard. It may seem like this hurts the discussion but it can actually contribute to it greatly. A person who thinks the same but has their reasons more clearly thought out may decide to respond to your post. On the other hand, someone on the opposite side may decide to see what you think about their reasons for not liking the game.


2. "I Like Metro Last Light but I claim no objectivity on the matter."

Again, this only acceptable because it is basically asking everyone to ignore you for purposes of the discussion. So long as you are not claiming your opinion is better than anyone else's (and you are not annoying) you are perfectly fine expressing an opinion.

 

[UltraDeth]

"We essentially use it synonymously with "entertaining" or "engaging," but the word carries negative connotations. It implies the experience is shallow and lacking in intellectual fulfilment."

I believe I learned something new

[small] Yes I have directly quoted from the comic, but I never imagined the word "Fun" being a negative. [/small]

 

[Farther than stars]

Remember when Critical Miss was about funny comics, not sounding condescending and elitist all the time? Yeah.

And exactly how are they being condescending? Is it wrong to warn people about using logical fallacies? If anything, this should help make the debate about gaming better and more fruitful. And it's not like they are being unfunny about it. Besides, it's pretty obvious that they'll go back to their regular format soon; a week, at most, is my guess.