Jimquisition: Dragon's Frown

[wulf3n]

However, I can completely agree that the issue of one "bad" review, has indeed gone a bit overboard. Not so much because of the media, but rather the people who consume it.
:/ Which I guess technically includes us now......Huh...

Haha true, the joys of infotainment.

 

[Anomynous 167]

I skimmed through 5 pages just to make sure no one else has made this point.
Anyone complaining about the rediculous chest sizes of two out of three women in Dragon's Crown is oversexualising, must remember that an equal proportion of male characters has chests bigger than their heads.

No one else mentioned it because Jim already did an episode about why it's a stupid thing to say http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7290-Objectification-And-Men?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=videos

You can say the oversexualising issue is equal for both genders when this http://fucknovideogames.tumblr.com/post/57454571665/coelasquid-hokuto-ju-no-ken is in the game as well.

I tend not to read comment sections of the escapist videos because they often air at 2 am in the middle of the night, leaving large comment pools that I can't help to dive in. So I give up without reading or posting in them.
I haven't played Dragons Crown, and I am only making my judgements from concept art of the playable characters. People tended to only object to ONE ASPECT of the female character designs (the chest sizes) that an equal proportion of the male characters shared apon.
Besides which, you seemed to have completely ignored my objections/light analasys of the faces. And that makes me very );

 

[Imp_Emissary]

However, I can completely agree that the issue of one "bad" review, has indeed gone a bit overboard. Not so much because of the media, but rather the people who consume it.
:/ Which I guess technically includes us now......Huh...

Haha true, the joys of infotainment.

Well, at least I first got to hear about it from Jim, so I at least got a few laughs.

I didn't even read any of the scores (I never do), but I'm very mad at every reviewer who looked at Dragon's Crown, including the one at Polygon. I'm mad at them because they write like shit and spend all their time talking about the art, but don't know enough about art or art criticism to notice, let alone comment on all the amazing things going on in that game's art design (hint: not much to do with breasts, more to do with elaborate homages to classic works of art).

Funny that you mention that. The review on the Escapist did talk a lot about the art, and mentioned a few of the cool things they do with it in the game.

"The outside world is revealed to you as series of sequential two-dimensional levels, each one its own hyperbolic variation of a magical trope like the mad scientist's laboratory or the castle of the dead. Sometimes it'll feel cliché, but the scenery is absolutely stunning anyway. It's particularly striking watching the picturesque landscape rotate around the mage's tower as you run up it. Even the mounts look legendary. Like the best kind of 80's power metal song, this game will have you riding velociraptors around and spitting a hail of fireballs into the faces of your foes."

That said, a lot of people focused more on this;(or rather, some of this quote)
"If the game's questionable portrayal of women and lackluster storyline aren't enough to put you off, though, there's still plenty left to enjoy about it."

Even though Lashani did say this first;

"Where the notable exaggeration remains appropriate to the subject it does really work. The genie's muscular arms and the old beggar's wrinkled skin bring out their essential qualities of strength and weakness respectively. It even makes sense for the Sorceress, a class that's traditionally charismatic, to have sexually suggestive garb. However, in the case of the nun with her legs spread it feels at best lazy and at worst downright regressive."

The review overall was very positive, but still admitted that the game has some flaws. Seems fair to me.

That review was better than most, but still didn't touch on what I'm talking about. Dragon's Crown is littered with specific homages to everything from renaissance tapestries and paintings to Ray Harryhausen and Walt Disney, and I have yet to see a single critic pick up on any of that in their discussion of the art design. It's one of the things that first got me interested in the game, and I would expect paid professionals to be capable of at least recognizing that those elements are present.

I have absolutely no problem with discussing gender issues and representation in a game review. What I take issue with is the sheer incompetence of self-appointed experts in dealing with these issues. Remember when Jim's best effort at real discourse was comparing a picture of the men from Gears of War to one of the women from Dead or Alive Beach Volleyball, and then mocking everyone who disagreed with him in a funny voice for 4 minutes? Remember when Bob Chipman brought up a really interesting racial question, and then ruined his whole point by not knowing the difference between 'lost civilization' and 'lost white tribe,' completely failing to do basic research into the history of anthropology, and wasting half the video belittling anyone who might disagree? Real critics would laugh at these people. They talk about objectification without ever once mentioning subjectivity and almost invariably define it in purely sexual terms. I don't believe these people have even read the type of feminist criticism they endeavor to emulate. Game critics should be bringing all of these points to the table, but time and again they show themselves incapable of doing so.

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.

 

[Agayek]

Dragon's Frown

Oh yes, it's another video about reviews and things. Not quite the usual flavor, but certainly something that cannot be repeated enough.

Watch Video

I've gotta ask, what's the music you used in this video when showing pics of the review and the whole facehugger bit?

It reminds me a hell of a lot of FFVII, but I can't find the exact song and it's driving me crazy.

 

[Darklupus]

It doesn't really matter in the long run if one game gets a higher score than another. Why? Could it be because one reviewer does not know all that there is to know about one subject, the way the reviewer perceived the game, worked on the review, submitted it, but left plenty of holes in their logic to review the game, or is it the game's fault for providing such a "throw the bone" spiel to intentionally or unintentionally make the gamer(s) do more quests? Most likely both reasons are the reasons why one game is "better" relatively than another.

 

[Mr_Terrific]

Video kinda ignores 2 of the main reasons why people took issue with the Polygon review. And I feel like it's a much larger issue that the usual fans being mad at a random low score.

The two low scores are both from women offended by the art style and depiction of woman.

One of the scores is from a site funded by MS.

Both issues are worthy of a mention but instead we rag on fans of the game who want to see talented developers get the credit they deserve, and not lowballed for hits or politics...

So your first "reason" for taking issue with the review is that it was from a woman's perspective, and that her perspective happened to be offended by the game that has every female character being reduced to hypersexualized fanservice. So, if it was a man who was offended by the art style and hypersexualized depiction of every women in the game, would it be more valid to you, or is it just that being offended by sexist depictions of women shouldn't count?

As for the other one, really? You think they're going to give it a low score because they're funded by MS? Since I'm not familiar with the site, do they make a habit of giving PS exclusives noticeably lower scores than what's to be expected? Because a fictitious conspiracy against Sony isn't a valid reason if the only evidence you have is that one PS game got a low score.

And we "rag on fans" because we have differing views on what the developers deserves for their game and because they are constantly whining about even the slightest criticism or mention of sexism.

I don't dislike Dragon's Crown because I'm a woman, or because I've been paid off by someone, or because I want extra attention; I dislike it because it's depictions of women make me feel uncomfortable that someone out there thinks that this is what I want to look at, and it makes me irritated to see an entire gender reduced to being tits, asses, and sexy poses.

These are not "my" reasons, only observations. It does stand out that the only to people to give the game a low score happen to be woman. I think it's worth discussing why these depictions of woman bothered these two critics enough to hand out a lower score. If it were a man handing out a lower score due to some perceived slight against women, I would be just as interested in finding out why 3 optional characters ruined the entire game.

So you say you don't want to play a game that makes you uncomfortable...so would you review Dragon's Crown knowing you already have an opinion before you've played the game. If you don't like the art style, no amount of amazing gameplay in the world would change your mind about it, so the question remains...why would you review something when you're already predisposed to not liking? Don't you think that that personal bias would interfere with the review process? That is what I'd like Jim to discuss. Not fan reactions. Of course, he's guilty of doing the same thing with David Cage games so of course he won't bring it up.

As for Polygon. A simple google search of the keywords "polygon", "funded", "Microsoft" should fill you in. Now, I don't think they have some agenda but people have been making that claim, so again, it might be worth a look. I don't know if there is some conspiracy but I do know that their critics write horrible reviews and they've succeeded in getting the name "polygon" out there with their TLoU review...

 

[RobfromtheGulag]

I believe this issue is dated, nonetheless the presentation was humorous and pointed. I liked the syncing of the Shinra theme with the score display.

 

[OtherSideofSky]

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.

 

[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)