I hate how the word 'pretentious' is used.

[Dragonlayer]

I hate how the phrase "Art game" even exists. It's slow and boring and has a narrative that's not interesting in the least. But that's okay, we put symbolism that people can read into in it.

And that's all it takes, apparently. Every day the same dream, dear esther, gone home. What do none of these things have? A story you can interact with like most people play video games to do. What do they all have? Abstract symbolism so that the creators can then suggest that the way you REALLY interact with the game is by thinking about the symbolism. In other words, there is literally nothing stopping me from looking at some still images of flowers or a statue or something and doing the same thing, but wait, you get to walk in these games. That's why they're called games, because you can walk in them.

Well, if these really are going to be considered games, fine. But they are the worst games I have ever played. Well, I haven't played gone home or dear esther, but every day the same dream had all the fun of watching paint dry. I don't give two shits about how much symbolism they have, they're still shit to me.

Good God, this post is horrible

Dismissing an entire post without offering a single reason why?

Now *that's* pretentious.

OT

Eh, "Pretentious" is a good buzzword for gaming discussion, much like "AAA" or "Sexism". These words are used willy-nilly to spark conversations and like any word, they can be used equally for actual discussion or as simple attack terms for something you don't like.

 

[anthony87]

I've more than likely used the word wrong plenty of times but that's just because it doesn't sound as rude as calling someone a stuck up dickhead.

 

[Geo Da Sponge]

I hate how the phrase "Art game" even exists. It's slow and boring and has a narrative that's not interesting in the least. But that's okay, we put symbolism that people can read into in it.

And that's all it takes, apparently. Every day the same dream, dear esther, gone home. What do none of these things have? A story you can interact with like most people play video games to do. What do they all have? Abstract symbolism so that the creators can then suggest that the way you REALLY interact with the game is by thinking about the symbolism. In other words, there is literally nothing stopping me from looking at some still images of flowers or a statue or something and doing the same thing, but wait, you get to walk in these games. That's why they're called games, because you can walk in them.

Well, if these really are going to be considered games, fine. But they are the worst games I have ever played. Well, I haven't played gone home or dear esther, but every day the same dream had all the fun of watching paint dry. I don't give two shits about how much symbolism they have, they're still shit to me.

Ummm... Gone Home has absolutely zero abstract imagery in it. It's actually a pretty straightforward story, which is nice in an industry that will happily pump out smart-arse meta-narratives like Hotline Miami and Bioshock Infinite when they can barely string a coherent story together.

Plus the entire point of Gone Home is that the story is based around your interaction, as in it's entirely discovered by what you find around the environment you're in while you explore. It's possible to miss details, entire sub-plots even by not looking into things enough. No, you can't actually change the path of the plot based on your actions, but if that's the criticism you're going for it can be applied to 99% of media ever and most video games unless you include "Game over" as a change in the story.

EDIT:

I've more than likely used the word wrong plenty of times but that's just because it doesn't sound as rude as calling someone a stuck up dickhead.

Yeah, only one of those gets you in trouble on these forums, even when someone is definitely being a stuck-up dickhead.

 

[Uriel_Hayabusa]

All I can say is get used to it. This habit of using words to mean what people want them to just so they can convince themselves that they sound smarter or actually have a point isn't new and doesn't seem to be slowing down. Pretentious is just one word in a long line including misogyny and literally to fall into this category of being misused so often by so many people that they have become a glorified catch phrase rather that a word with meaning.

I completely agree, and while I'm here I'll add "hipster", "weeaboo", "campy", "whimsical", "poetic", "soul" and "pacing" to the list. All of these can also be filed under the category "words that basically mean whatever the person using it wants it to mean".

 

[Gankytim]

Pretentious, to me, seems like a draw card fools use when they've the inability to argue a point put forward to them. It's becoming more and more a buzzword with each passing argument, like "Nazi" or "Misogynist".

Want to make fun of TLoU or BS:I? The fans are pretentious fuckwits who think a needlessly convoluted story is deep. Want to defend either? Anyone who hates them is a pretentious fuckwit who thinks hating things that are popular makes him superior.

It's a literal *****-out from any argument you can think of. It's a word that's losing meaning each time it's said, take any argument people throw around the word pretentious and look, are they actually saying anything? Is the word pretentious even adding to their arguments?

 

[Aramis Night]

I like when I see the word pretentious being thrown my way. The moment people choose to start attacking the messenger rather than the message is the point when they admit they have nothing of value to use to discredit the message itself. It's the idiot's way of outing themselves since conceding a point is outside their ability and they lack the ability to have a discussion that isn't a reflection on themselves personally or a willingness to change a point of view to incorporate new, possibly more relevant, information.

 

[Ryallen]

People called him pretentious because the fact that this video is his opinion is not made obvious. I saw the video and disagreed with several of his opinions, but pretentious is not the word I'd have used to describe it. To me, pretentious means that one thinks that one is better than one actually is in some fashion, the most common factor(s) of superiority being intelligence or importance. Do I think that he managed to present his opinions in an articulate manner and brought up legitimate reasons about why he does not like the game? Of course I do. He was right about certain things. But his other arguments were, admittedly, more like things that he had against the game personally that he could not overcome. For instance, his main argument was that the game was too slow. I never grew up with the game, mind you, so there should be little nostalgic influence here, but I do not agree with him. The game certainly isn't fast, but slow is the wrong word to describe it. His own impatience, which I have observed in his Game Grumps videos, certainly was a factor in his calling this game slow. Another thing that he didn't like that I disagree with is how linear he believes the game to be. This is another result of his impatience, and unwillingness to read dialogue, which can once again be demonstrated in Game Grumps, in his utter disregard for any sort of instruction given in a game. But not what I would call "pretentious".

Wow, that quickly turned into a rant. I apologize for that. But, in case my point wasn't clear, as I'm sure it wasn't amidst my ramblings, is that while I personally do not consider him to be pretentious, his opinions make it seem so, as some of his problems with the game are more personal than others and people call him pretentious because of it.

 

[Something Amyss]

Being pretentious means you talk about something with the pretense (see, there it is) of knowing something you do not actually understand.

You've chosen a single application of a word and disregarded any other. You can define it that way, but it's not completely correct. One can inflate the depth and/or importance of something and be pretentious, and this is the meaning people are applying to folks like Extra Credits. And it's certainly accurate there. They try and shoehorn in so much depth to virtually every nook and cranny in gaming I'm surprised they haven't compromised the structural integrity.

I can't speak specifically this EgoRaptor video, but it sounds like the accusation is the same. And he does have this tendency to bloviate.

What you're offering in defense is rather like saying "but according to the dictionary, 'retarded' means 'slowed,' so I wasn't insulting you."

In this case, it's more "I'm excluding your use of the word as invalid because...."

Actually, I haven't got there yet. I'm at a bit of a loss as to why you're being arbitrarily exclusive.

I'd be interested in actual reasons why this YouTuber is or isn't pretentious, but selectively citing the dictionary isn't that. It's not even honest.

Back on track: does "pretentious" get overused? Probably. But it's amazing how simply being overused is enough to trigger outrage even when potentially aptly used.

 

[TheMigrantSoldier]

Wow, that quickly turned into a rant. I apologize for that. But, in case my point wasn't clear, as I'm sure it wasn't amidst my ramblings, is that while I personally do not consider him to be pretentious, his opinions make it seem so, as some of his problems with the game are more personal than others and people call him pretentious because of it.

The point of Sequelitis (supposedly) isn't to argue which game style is superior but how much things change and how it works from the perspective of an old fan. He isn't trying to change your mind so much as have you see it through his lens. Heck, he evens encourages people to express their disagreements in youtube "debates". What doesn't help, though, is that he uses terms like bad game design or fun frequently without an "in my opinion" added. Some of his points are hypocritical, even.

 

[Ryallen]

Wow, that quickly turned into a rant. I apologize for that. But, in case my point wasn't clear, as I'm sure it wasn't amidst my ramblings, is that while I personally do not consider him to be pretentious, his opinions make it seem so, as some of his problems with the game are more personal than others and people call him pretentious because of it.

The point of Sequelitis (supposedly) isn't to argue which game style is superior but how much things change and how it works from the perspective of an old fan. He isn't trying to change your mind so much as have you see it through his lens. Heck, he evens encourages people to express their disagreements in youtube "debates". What doesn't help, though, is that he uses terms like bad game design or fun frequently without an "in my opinion" added. Some of his points are hypocritical, even.

And yet all he did was talk about what he personally didn't like about the game and never once saying "Hey, this is MY opinion", or at least I didn't hear him say that. And, to me personally because I haven't liked him as a person in a while, he said that we can post our arguments because he isn't going to read any of the comments. What really aggravated me, though, was that he bashed the Z-targeting system without even offering an alternative. He said that OoT going 3D was the next natural step, but did nothing but talk about how much worse the game was because of it.

 

[LAGG]

I don't have much a problem with the word "pretentions" as I have with "meaningful". Pretty much, using the term "meaningful" when talking about games is the very definition of "pretentious".