How to Talk About Games #3

[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.

 

[Falseprophet]

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

No, because gamers have always been like that. But before the web, you almost never heard the opinions of gamers in the next city/state/province/country over, let alone the other hemisphere.

 

[Amir Kondori]

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

Well that is your opinion and opinions can never be wrong.. so yeah..

 

[Amir Kondori]

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.

When you are debating the moment you fall back on "well its my opinion and opinions aren't wrong" is the moment you've admitted you don't have any evidence to back up your opinion.

An opinion is great. If you think The Room was a wonderful movie no one can take that away from you.

But if you are going to claim that The Room was a wonderful movie and try to prove it to someone you better have something better to say than "its my opinion"

 

[DrOswald]

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.

And don't tell me that 'oh it has shitty controls' or something like that because then we're back to square one with 'bad is subjective'.

The problem here is that we often misunderstand what we are saying. We have often been told that opinions cannot be wrong. This is true (though they can be stupid, but that is a discussion for another day.) However, we often claim this shield when we are not stating an opinion because we often misunderstand what an opinion is.

"The controls are bad." is not an opinion. It is a conclusion and therefore claims at least some measure of objectivity. This demands evidence to back it up and it can be incorrect. And there are plenty of ways to measure "bad" in tons of different cases. Using the case of "The controls are bad" you can talk about inefficient button mapping, difficulty of use, failure to conform to accepted practices, and much more. You may claim that they are bad from a certain perspective, or give specific examples of control failure that could have been averted.

"I did not like the controls." Is an opinion. It claims no objectivity and therefore requires no defense but also cannot be defended. Stating an opinion is essentially telling everyone interested in debate to ignore you because you are not prepared to defend your position. This does not mean that you are not contributing to a discussion. Often the search for evidence starts by attempting to backup an opinion. On the other hand, simply comparing opinions can help people broaden their perspective of a work.

In conclusion, words have meanings. If you intend to express an opinion then make good and sure you are using words that indicate opinion rather than objective statement.

 

[MowDownJoe]

Nice to see the satirizing stick broken out again.

 

[DataSnake]

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

And honestly, what more do you need? Except maybe ninjas, am I right?

There are 57 of them in that panel.

 

[Erttheking]

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.

You do know that I was making a joke right? I was deliberately acting like the guy in the last panel for the sake of comedic effect.

 

[Foolery]

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

Whoah, whoah, hold up. It was never funny. Until crack cats and the last panel, that is. Anyway, I enjoyed the comic today. Just for that. The rest I ignored. Like I usually do.

 

[Smertnik]

Your comics start to remind me of Winston Rowntree.

 

[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.

You do know that I was making a joke right? I was deliberately acting like the guy in the last panel for the sake of comedic effect.

Nope. I did not catch that. The problem with satire or sarcasm through text is that unless you specifically label it as such it is almost impossible to distinguish from sincerity because there is almost always someone crazy enough to say the thing sincerely. This is known as Poe's Law which states satire is difficult or impossible to distinguish from extremism. And what you said wasn't exactly an extreme thing to say. Plenty of people on the internet think that way. And the obvious (and successful) attempt at a joke is not sufficient evidence of satire. Lots of people like to express sincere opinions in a comedic manner.

In any case, even though you were being sarcastic or satirical I am sure there are plenty of people in internet land who would benefit from having all of this explained. Maybe one of them will read it.

(If you would like some evidence that Poe's Law is a real thing feel free to ask. I left it out for the sake of brevity.)

 

[Reynaert]

Best of this series so far (I don't know how many more will appear). The Holocoaster drawing is magnificent. I think a lot of work (and love) went into this, and it shows.