Jimquisition: Dragon's Frown

[gargantual]

Its obvious why forum posts like this'll and other discussions of VG themes will rage about the conflict of male fantasy needing to be transcended for equality and further art to take place in the digital realm. A lot of guys have a hard time dealing with women in reality or 80 hrs plus coding a character, itd better be something you like making. The vixen is an easy motivator, while some have more serious heartfelt overall msg they want to get out.

But look at this way. The standard of real representation and real character depiction in books and film never put the porn or smut market into obscurity. They just got narrowly defined outside of the realm of respectable media, and explicit tantalization just has to become more so a niche, just like military fantasy FPS's will have to after CoD's success. That's not to say that devs and writers and artists can't blend mediums but the best way forward is to either establish acceptable levels of context and dimensionality to smart players and viewers when making super sexualized characters i.e. (you could be just as fearful of the character as attracted to, or perphaps an in game gold digger that will take 3/4ths of your exp because she has children to feed...etc), or file things off into the niche bin if the intent of the game is simple attraction.

Now maybe a hypothetical future where there's a sudden booming 'porn' or 'pulp' game genre. while premiere praised titles are more emotional, utilitarian and reflective of modern values could present a whole new line of controversies but at least there won't be this fighting over homogenous reviews.

After all, there are creative folks who don't give a rats ass about getting a pulitzer or an Oscar either. They make what pleases em. But its largely up to the indies to define narrative in gaming now, because we see how cynical the big heads are. With this self publish biz, they're just waiting for the artists to fill in the blanks so they can make money.

 

[Rebel_Raven]

I can't count how many games I played and enjoyed that didn't get good scores, nevermind didn't get 9s and 10s.

I gotta say I still want Dragon's Crown despite the controvercy. I'm willing to spend money to see if it offends me. It might considering some of the women that aren't playable from what I saw. Others don't have to want the game, or be willing to do the same as me.

Also, it felt like G4 was trolling the hell out of me when they spoke ill of Dynasty Warriors fairly often. I love Koei games a lot.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

snip.

Understandable. No issues with wanting things to be of higher quality.
That said, aren't you perhaps asking a bit much of a 5-10 video? One that has a limited time to be made and released after one has done "research"(played the game). That and to pick up on all the things you would yourself first have to be familiar with them, and of course you would have to know that there are things to look for. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but perhaps not in the time that these reviews have to be made.

Plus, that isn't the main goal of the review. The goal is to find out if they can tell you if you should buy the game. As for the things Jim, Bob, and others have made, yes they aren't perfect as intellectual pieces, but that's because they also have to be entertainment too. So they will have some flaws. That said, while they aren't the best, I think there is something to having someone take a serious issue, keep it still mostly serious, but still have it be entertaining to watch.

However, I have seen more analytical works in other places(and here on the escapist even) that look deeper into gaming.
Errant Signal, EmceeProphIt, and Rob Rath of Critical Intel to name just a few.

Also, while other content may not be as in-depth, or detailed. I still think interesting ideas can come from such things, and that they do have value.

I get that they're trying to be entertaining, but I think that the way they do so, often taking pot shots at a perceived opposition, frequently does more to undermine than to stimulate reasoned, productive debate. I know it isn't possible to exhaust these topics in a five minute video, but it is possible to present a more nuanced and accurate take on the issues involved and provide a better starting point for discussion than are currently being given, and it is certainly possible to inject an element of humor into one's work without being needlessly aggressive, which causes others to stop listening and lash out, rather than engage and consider.

I can understand not wanting such aggression in the content. Bob and Jim do sometimes get a bit antagonistic.
Granted, can ya really fault people for giving sexist/racist/bigots/trolls a few pokes? Not that those are the only targets ever, but I don't really recall them going after fans of a game(who were not behaving a bit "inappropriately").

Even if ya can find a work that hasn't got the emotional elements, that doesn't guaranty you won't have dramatic and even a bit violent verbal feedback. Take for example the Tropes vs. Women series. Even those who like them(me included) have said that Anita's show is quite dry in the presentation at times, and inoffensive to the point you question if she's being a bit to basic. Until you see SOME people talking about the show.

Heck even before it was being released or even assured for production there were death threats, rape threats, and even someone who took time to make a flash game where you beat her up.

Lets cut through some bullcrap. Two major reasons this review is getting such(negative) attention, is because like Jim has said a few times in his career, people have gotten to use to just using scores to give reviews value, and have gotten to the point where people say "8/10? More like Hate/10" but actually mean it.

The other reason involves one of the reasons why the game got it's score. One of the reasons. And that is that it mentions that the way the game displays women is kind of sexist. I've read the read and seen the review. Waited a bit because everyone was talking it up as this "big doom fest of crazy feminism!"
x( As an example of that, I have to say I'm not impressed. Heck, it actually sounds a lot like the review here on the escapist, really.

And in the end it actually sounds about as positive, too. I'm still happy to play the game soon, and still dreading all the needless titillation.

As for wanting a more in-depth analysis of games? I still wholeheartedly recommend the ones in the list I gave ya, and I can tell ya that there are even more out there. Likely some that I haven't even seen yet.

Got to sleep. Goodnight, and may the rest of your week be even better!

 

[zerabp]

I don't know if someone else mentioned this but my problem with the review was that it didn't critique just the game but it flat out insulted anyone who might enjoy the game. In other words the reviewer attacked gamers themselves. I wouldn't have cared if the gamer had kept her opinion relegated to the game but nothing in Dragon's crown justifies attacking the players who enjoy it.

 

[Grabehn]

So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?

This is why numerical quantification of a subjective opinion is useless.

This started happening a while ago really, the most I know about was the IGN scale that was pretty much like "10= Call of Duty, 9.0 to 9-5 = good but not CoD, 7.0 to 7.5 = average, 6,0 to 6,5 = disgusting vomit-inducing piece of shit, made worse by the fact that it's not CoD" And all jokes aside, back when I used to read that site, most reviews were like this, and if I remember correctly, one 9s review did say something like "not CoD".

 

[Chatboy 91]

This whole thing sounds very reminiscent of the 8.8 controversy that exploded over Twilight Princess. I was flabbergasted when I found out how butthurt people were getting over it. An 8.8 is still a great score, and this whole thing with Dragon's Crown seems to be just another retread of the same sentiments. Aside from having an awesome side character (Midna) TP felt like a slow retread of previous titles. The reviewer at Polygon didn't like the art style and how bombastic Dragon's Crown is. Different tastes lead to different observations, and in turn a better learning experience for the people who made the product. We need to stop getting so angry every time someone disagree's with our perspective.

Great episode as usual Jim, thank god for you.

 

[tardcore]

I'm just so fucking amused at the sheer amount of white noise over this title. Atlus's advertising department couldn't have gotten the name of their new game on the lips of so many people if they'd tried.

I'm not a console or handheld gamer so I have zero interest in this game, or any console exclusive games for that matter, yet for about the past three months not one day has gone by that someone in the gaming online community hasn't brought the game to my attention in some form or another. These guys must be laughing all the way to the fucking bank.

Congratulations to the army of people who have expressed their outrage over what they perceived was morally wrong about this title. You have helped this company achieve far more fame than they ever could have done on their own, not to mention far more than I feel their game title deserves.

 

[m19]

I assume Jim that while you have a problem with these people you don't have a problem with posters and journalists saying that since they don't like the art style it needs to stop because it is "designed by teenage boys" and hence shall not pass.

 

[rbstewart7263]

Glad you liked it jim I cant wait to play it! Ill have to get a vita or a ps3(or dare I say....Steam release!)

 

[Zannkimaru]

You know I have to wonder, am I the only person who just plays what I like and enjoy and just does not simply care what anybody else says?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion but I'm not going to let that stop me playing a game I enjoy. I've truly enjoyed games that have gotten absolutely awful reviews and scores, yet at the same time not really cared about some of the "Game Of The Year" titles.

 

[MrBaskerville]

I think it all boils down to the overall quality of review. See, first and foremost it's a 2D RPG/beat-em-up. In case of that review reviewer but a lot of stock into particular art style quirks which are highly, highly subjective. See, all reviews are subjective but what differentiates a good reviewer is ability to determine which parts are most important. That depiction of women ties very neatly into medieval fantasy theme. A good reviewer would evaluate gameplay, RPG elements, story and such first and stuff like huge boobs second. That review reads like a whiny blog and that's the issue.
It would be all fine and good if they scored the game low based on core elements like leveling system. But on basis on some highly subjective and arguably stupid elements of art?
See Jim, the point being it's not a professional review. It's a whiny blog. If we don't stomp such "reviewers" now next thing will be Dynasty Warriors getting 1 and 2 scores because of lack of proper beard on certain characters.

Have you never played a game where you despised the atmosphere and the way it looked despite everything being well made? I think it's possible to hate something like Dragons Crown based on it's artstyle, and therefore a valid point to criticise it in a review.

It's stuff like this that has caused me to ignore the gaming world for the most part, these days i only really read news, i don't care about reviews and angry comments spewing deaththreats because they believe some random game deserved a higher score. I play the things i want to play and that's that, that gives me time for more movie reviews instead.

 

[Something Amyss]

Well is there really so much of a difference between a 6.5 and a 3/5=(6/10)?

half a point out of ten is still one twentieth of a point. Not the MOST significant of numbers, but enough.

As much as import can be found in somewhat arbitrary numbers to begin with. I mean, hell, when I write a review I use 3/5 as a starting point for "good." I'd throw off the curve if I was working professionally for a publication. I also save five stars for things I ABSOLUTELY adore. It's hard to judge any given person's criteria or scoring system unless it's explicitly explained.

Then again all this number malarkey is hogwash. ;p The review on the escapist marked Dragon's Crown down because of reasons other than just the titillation, and as you said, the one from Polygon(Who sadly have only one emotions) had other reasons for the score too. The game has a few issues. But the overall review(at the Escapist at least) was still pretty positive.

And both look to be fair assessments and well-argued. It's not like anyone gave it a 2/10 and said "boobies" were the sole reason. Though looking at the arguments over the game, you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise. Then again, this is tandard fare.

People saying people are hating on the game just because of the titillation are about as right in the head(or at least as informed) as the people who call 8/10 Hate/10(un-ironically).

Fanaticism runs strong in people, unfortunately. A lot of our self-worth is tied up in other people liking what we like, so we tend to grasp at anything to justify our hatred of dissent.
Unfortunately, that kindles both the "bad score" reaction when a game gets a pretty good score ("only" eight or nine)

 

[nevarran]

I was sure you'll show up wearing a pair of enormous fake jiggly boobs, to attract some horny teenage viewers, hm... for... hmm, for art's sake, I mean. Pure artistic vision, that is.

 

[Mr_Terrific]

I'm not a game critic/reviewer, but if I was and was asked to or wanted to review it I would. Going into the game disliking the way they turned every female character into walking (or chained), barely clothed fanservice doesn't mean that I couldn't review it. That's a perspective, and differing perspectives are valuable when reviewing a game. If twenty other people barely acknowledged that the female designs might be off putting for a sizable number of people, one or two people who outright say that that was the case and their enjoyment was lessened by it is good for the people who feel the same way.

There's also the fact that, prior to these reviews, I was only aware of the designs of the Sorceress and the Amazon as being kind of offensive, whereas the game is filled with female characters with similar or even worse (that is, more offensive). So, reviews that point this out certainly have a purpose, as otherwise I would still be talking about the Sorceress' stripper pose and the Amazon's chainmail bikini.

Oh, I don't doubt that Polygon is funded by Microsoft, it's just that that doesn't really have any relevance unless you're pushing some conspiracy theory where some agent of Microsoft has actually told Polygon to rate PS exclusives lower than what they should be. As for their reviews, "horrible" seems a bit subjective and harsh, and giving TLoU a less than perfect score doesn't make it so.

So basically what you're saying is, if a person doesn't like horror games, that person is still capable of objectively reviewing that game? Just because you are incapable of looking beyond the cosmetics of a game does not mean your viewers are the same. It's not preference or perspective, it's bias and reviews need a lot less of that.

Also, the game is not filled with half dressed female characters. There's the Amazon, Elf, and Sorceress. If you're bothered by 2 of those characters, play the elf. Much like the two ladies that reviewed DC, you are ignoring the fully dressed Elf in favor of bitching about tits and ass. Or what of the shirtless dwarf that woman seemingly have no issue with. Or impossibly proportioned Fighter? Nope... Both the Amazon and Sorceress dress and proportions fit within the context of the game. The game goes overboard with everything and I find it ridiculous and petty to pick apart a game simply because of your own insecurities.

As for the Polygon's reviews being horrible, who are you to tell me I'm being harsh when you just lectured me about perspective? Did I mention a score? If you've played TLoU and have read the Polygon review of it, which I'm sure you haven't, you'd know that the review is filled with inaccuracies and is actually very close to what we're discussing with the Dragon's Crown review. If a game is not your cup of tea, don't review it. The whole MS angle simply makes it a better story. That is why people are critical of Polygon and the DC review. Again, I'm not pushing any conspiracies. That's a conversation you've been having with yourself. I'm merely suggesting that Jim should talk about it instead of focusing on fans who are upset with one critic's bias.

 

[s0osleepie]

Escapist doesn't have a page describing their ratings...

Snip.

I should have clarified that I think 6.5 is a very borderline score between 'mediocre' and 'good'.

So... the game scored 6.5/10, or 65%, in one review. It scored more than half marks. And this is a *bad* thing?...

Snip.

Since there seems to be a debate / confusion over how our star based review score system should be interpreted, I would love to help clarify with what each star rating currently means since we last published them:

[rating=5]
Five stars. This is as good as gaming currently gets, the crème de la crème. This doesn't imply perfection, merely that the experience you'll have will be exceptionally enjoyable.

[rating=4]
Four stars. An outstanding gaming experience marred by just a few flaws.

[rating=3]
Three stars. An average game experience. You'll play it and probably enjoy it. A month from now, you'll likely have forgotten all about it.

[rating=2]
Two stars. Die-hard fans of the genre will find something to like, but anyone else will be hard-pressed to enjoy games of this quality.

[rating=1]
One star. So broken as to be unplayable. Not even worth picking up in the bargain bin.

 

[Sir. Jasper Colinwell]

I once again LOVE the analogy Jim uses with Dynasty Warriors.