How to Talk About Games #3

[gjkbgt]

Writer 1: Hi I notice that a lot of gamers are presenting opinions as fact in game discussion, as well a generally putting across a bad presentation of themselves
Writer 2: We should do something about that
Writer 1: I agree but the difference between fact and opinion is very hard to define, especially when taking about entreatment. It would be very complex and wordy
Writer 2: no need to worry we'll just present our incredibly simplified opinions as facts and fill it with drawings ridiculing anyone how disagrees
Writer 1: Genius

 

[Draconalis]

I still say opinions can be wrong.

 

[Lonewolfm16]

you cannot convince someone that they didn't, or shouldn't have, enjoyed something they enjoyed.

That's (mostly) correct. That's also not what these comics have been advocating.

Arguing over whether a game is good or not just seems a little silly. If I played it and did/didn't enjoy it, there is my answer of whether or not it was good.

 

[burningdragoon]

Arguing over whether a game is good...

... is not the aim of the comics. (Don't be fooled by the use of the word "argument" from a previous entry. Swap it for "reason" if you're having trouble)

If I played it and did/didn't enjoy it, there is my answer of whether or not it was good.

That would lead to some pretty dull discussion/conversation if that's all you want to say about it.

 

[Bostur]

That was a lot of conclusions without arguments. I think thats fine by the way, especially considering the medium.

 

[JimB]

I intend to make "as fun as snorting coke off a giggling kitten's belly" into a part of my daily conversation from now on.

 

[Machine Man 1992]

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

Back up your argument, or it doesn't count!

/sarcasm

 

[LetalisK]

Likewise, "Fun" can be limiting in its own way. We essentially use it synonymously with "entertaining" or "engaging," but the word caries some negative connotations. It implies the experience is shallow and lacking in intellecutual fulfillment.

I disagree with this. It implies that only if the person saying it primarily experiences fun in a shallow and intellectually deficient way. Because this is not something you may know due to the medium of the internet, that's where confusion may come in.

 

[Bostur]

Likewise, "Fun" can be limiting in its own way. We essentially use it synonymously with "entertaining" or "engaging," but the word caries some negative connotations. It implies the experience is shallow and lacking in intellecutual fulfillment.

I disagree with this. It implies that only if the person saying it primarily experiences fun in a shallow and intellectually deficient way. Because this is not something you may know due to the medium of the internet, that's where confusion may come in.

I may be completely overanalyzing it, but I have that sneaking suspicion that it's deliberate.

Use the word if you want, but don't demand all games subscribe to your one definition of it.

And in the same context using only a single definition of 'fun'.


The last part seems even more obvious. Paraphrased because I'm not good at making ascii drawings:

Never state your opinion without an argument. Because If you do that I think it's equivalent of pulling down your pants in public.

Notice the lack of an argument in the last picture?

Theres also the part where complexity does not equal depth. With a picture of complexity resulting in a plane crashing into the deep ocean.


The reason I have the feeling that I may be overanalyzing is because the page seems a little inconsistent, sometimes it seems serious and sometimes not. But it may be because there are details I missed.

 

[LetalisK]

The last part seems even more obvious. Paraphrased because I'm not good at making ascii drawings:

Never state your opinion without an argument. Because If you do that I think it's equivalent of pulling down your pants in public.

Notice the lack of an argument in the last picture?

I thought the picture was more about people being pompous about their opinions rather than saying you can't state an opinion without providing an argument(which I'd disagree with too).

 

[Darth_Payn]

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.

I wonder when he'll switch targets to another anime series, and how harsh the ensuing shitstorm will be.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

While of course saying one audience is better than another is not the right way to go, I think saying one audience is irrelevant accomplishes the same goal and is actually a valid point.


Some audiences' views on things they have no interest or relevance to SHOULD carry less weight. Yes the baby doesn't matter when it comes to tasting beer but weather or not a baby likes a type of beer has absolutely no baring on the beer being good or bad at the same time. The baby's not "lesser" just "irrelevant".


You may say that defining audiences as irrelevant is a way of alienating people or shutting the doors of the clubhouse but if you're actually correct, you're merely agreeing with THEIR choice to be irrelevant in the first place. If someone comes up and decides to participate then deeming them irrelevant is of course counter-productive but someone who clearly has no interest in ever having an interest in games isn't someone best suited to opining about them.


"I never had a pizza but I think this pizza is good" is a useless comment. It should carry no weight and if you use it to design pizzas you'd be equally as likely in succeeding as someone who rolled dice to decide what to put on one.

 

[Mahoshonen]

One point of criticism on the comic itself: choosing a guy dressed as a Nazi soldier to run the "Holocaust Memorial Roller-Coaster" wouldn't be the choice I'd go with. Instead, I have the ride attendant look like an emaciated deathcamp survivor.

 

[PunkRex]

I very muched agree with the 'it might not be your thing' section. Their's alot to be said about looking at something and saying 'eh, not for me.'

 

[Evil Smurf]

That why you haven't been in the Lady Bit's chat for a while? ;D

Do you know the trouble I need to go to, to post dick pics?

 

[Alar]

The air plane panels were absolutely fantastic. XD

 

[The Wooster]

One point of criticism on the comic itself: choosing a guy dressed as a Nazi soldier to run the "Holocaust Memorial Roller-Coaster" wouldn't be the choice I'd go with. Instead, I have the ride attendant look like an emaciated deathcamp survivor.

In my original panel description it was like a haunted house ride, with skeletons popping out of ovens. We decided against that one.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

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.

Depends what you mean by opinion. I don't like the subjective/objective divide but I suppose we have to use it here.

Objective opinion: Jews are causing the downfall of the German nation.

Can that be wrong? Yes, of course.

Subjective opinion: I don't like Jews.

How can that be wrong?

 

[lacktheknack]

One point of criticism on the comic itself: choosing a guy dressed as a Nazi soldier to run the "Holocaust Memorial Roller-Coaster" wouldn't be the choice I'd go with. Instead, I have the ride attendant look like an emaciated deathcamp survivor.

In my original panel description it was like a haunted house ride, with skeletons popping out of ovens. We decided against that one.

Dammit, Grey! I'm going to hell for laughing now! D: