It's funny you mention that. It is that distinction that leads me to disagree with Jim. "However" says that the argument to follow is not diminished by an aforementioned belief or principle. At the same time, it doesn?t necessarily mean that the latter argument diminishes the former one. "But" is used when the argument to follow conflicts with the aforementioned principle, as a rebuttal.thaluikhain said:Most definitely agree about not sticking the "however..." on, though I think the cliche is "but...".
I'd like to hope people are demanding better from their games journalism, and aren't satisfied with the low quality that we have now.Kohen Keesing said:
I personally don't trust reviews in the least. Not because they're of "Low Quality" - which by the way is the kind of subjectivity you seem to be shunning, coughdetectinghypocrisycough - but simply because they're someone else's opinion about a very subjective and personalized medium like games. The only time I refer to a review is when I honestly don't know what to think about a game or am "unable to acquire some play time" in order to make my own assessments of a game.Thanatos2k said:I'd like to hope people are demanding better from their games journalism, and aren't satisfied with the low quality that we have now.Kohen Keesing said:
Oh goodness me. A reviewer is trying to FORCE PEOPLE to not play a game, are they? Barging into their homes and snapping the disc in half, is he?DragonDai said:So I think the point of this overlong rambling is that, Jim, you need to realize that not all opinions are equal, some opinions are wrong, and it's not okay for a reviewer to try to force people to not play a game because they have a moral or societal objection to the game. Not ever.
Umm.... I'm just going to point out that that sentence sound REALLY DODGY if you say it out loud, around other peopleDragonDai said:So I think the point of this overlong rambling is that, Jim, you need to realize that not all opinions are equal, some opinions are wrong
I agree with your point, but I wanted to say that the above would make a horrible game. Well potentially, I guess the Sims gets away with it and I have even played and enjoyed the sims, but ... "Bayonetta does Chores" probably wouldn't sell.Silentpony said:We don't see Bayonetta renting movies and having a relaxing night at home with some popcorn. We don't see Bayonetta filing up her car with gas, or doing her taxes or washing her clothes.
Yeah and how well the mechanics handle take up, what, 10% of the review? Because let me tell you that there are plenty of mechanically sounds bug free games out there that are still boring as sin and just bad games.(Gears of War, Kane and Lynch, Dead Space 3, the Mountain, Gone Home) If you just focus on mechanics, you miss the soul of a game. Destiny's shooting mechanics work just fine. That doesn't make it any less repetitive.neonit said:Yes, luckily there are also things that are objective, like, for example performance, amount of bugs, fluidity of controls. In fact, every game genre has a set of their own genre-specific qualities.erttheking said:Oh you mean subjective like whether the game is bad or good? Because that's kind subjective. And it's what reviews are talking about.neonit said:I cant be the only one thinking that lowering game score for something that is quite obvious and subjective is stupid.
If you think that professional reviews are 100% subjective opinions, then you haven't really been paying attention.... or you've been reading low-quality reviews.
SOMEONE SAID ITGrampy_bone said:I love Bayonetta. The controls are perfect. So fast, responsive, tight; easy to pull off with loads of depth. Building the combat around the dodging mechanic is Hideki Kamiya's brilliance at its finest. So many cool weapons, the enemies are always fun to fight and the level design is quite creative. Plus, the over-the-top epic moments, like riding a motorcyle up a series of rockets into space in order to punch a giant god into the sun... how can anyone not absolutely love that? Bayonetta 2 has persuaded me to buy a Wii U.
...oh, wait, what, you're not talking about the gameplay, you're all just obsessed with what she's wearing?! What are you all, sexist???
You dislike them because almost every professional review is of the "This is what I liked and didn't like" format. So naturally they're not valuable to you.Kohen Keesing said:I personally don't trust reviews in the least. Not because they're of "Low Quality" - which by the way is the kind of subjectivity you seem to be shunning, coughdetectinghypocrisycough - but simply because they're someone else's opinion about a very subjective and personalized medium like games. The only time I refer to a review is when I honestly don't know what to think about a game or am "unable to acquire some play time" in order to make my own assessments of a game.Thanatos2k said:I'd like to hope people are demanding better from their games journalism, and aren't satisfied with the low quality that we have now.Kohen Keesing said:
It seems, though, that what you're looking for in a videogame review is some inhuman and bias-free collation of game concepts like controls, story flow, or AI complexity that can objectively tell you whether you're going to like a game before you even play it yourself.
This is something I would suggest is, actually, not possible: the fact there is a human doing the reviewing makes it impossible. Reviews are inherently subjective things: bugs and glitches may be found by one reviewer and not another and will likely colour their review; One person's definition of 'sticky' or 'clunky' controls might be another reviewer's definition of 'intuitive' or 'smooth'; where one person finds a combat or interface system like E.Y.E's to be tedious and hard to navigate, someone else might find it to be presented perfectly for them.
The same reason I take next-to-no stock in game reviews is the same reason I don't listen to people judging, say, Films or Music, because I can't form a 'review' of it myself until I've experienced it myself.
To be honest, anyone who thinks that way over one review needs to take a step back and relax. Not every review is a grand political statement, heck I'm half sure the guy from Polygon didn't even think his review was that big of a deal, I imagine it was just him giving his opinion. Personally I would feel rather insulted if anyone insisted feeling uncomfortable around an overabundance of boobs was a sign of immaturity. Some people are uncomfortable with sex. nothing wrong with that.Ulquiorra4sama said:I was just saying that's how it could very well be received, and from discussions i've seen where the Polygon review has been mentioned that seems to have been the general interpretation. Either that or people have just joked about how immature or unsure someone has to be of their own sexuality to feel uncomfortable or disgusted by the sexual elements of the game. In any case there's always some who will argue that the intention of a message isn't as important as its interpretation and that a good message misunderstood as a bad one can be highly detrimental to that message as a result. Whether you agree with that or not? Well i imagine that's not something that needs to be discussed here.erttheking said:And no there isn't any implication that there's something wrong with you, because the man just has a different opinion, that's all. You shouldn't feel threatened by that.
And to be perfectly honest i don't care what reviewers have said. As i stated in my original post; it's a character action game from Platinum. I'll buy it, play it, enjoy it, and i couldn't care less what other people think (EDIT: About the ethics of it).
As for review formats: I don't feel like derailing this, and also i have a feeling my opinion won't do much to sway anyone else's opinion. That's kinda the thing about internet opinions. Nobody ever fucking changes their opinion.
Just tabulating reviews? what about all the people who didn't write reviews but still have opinions? Obviously the only REAL way to review a game would be to poll the entire population of the human race(unless they're feminists) and then average it out. As long as critics follow you're corrupt model of criticism games journalism will continue to be a hive of SJWs and political correctness.Caostotale said:Agreed, and if a person wants to indulge in the pipe dream of 'objective criticism', they should stop begging to be nannied by the system and instead go over to Amazon, Gamespot, Bestbuy, every single gaming site, etc... and start tabulating and averaging every single user review and, after the 2-3 years it takes to produce a cogent 'x/10'-format score within a reasonable range of statistical uncertainty, then they'll have something that...well, still isn't objective, but might be close enough to have kept them safe from all of that dangerous SJW/Illuminati bias. Meanwhile, the rest of the consumer world will be blissfully enjoying Bayonetta 5, but those people are all just being used by corrupt game journalism, so their spending power counts for nothing in a real 'gamers' market.Cronenberg1 said:Reviews aren't journalism, they are the reviewers personal opinions. 100% objective criticism is boring and impossible. If a reviewer has a problem with the depiction of a character in a piece of media then they should be able to include it in the review without fear of ridicule.Thanatos2k said:There is a difference between saying "I have personal problems with Bayonetta as a character" and "Everyone should have personal problems with Bayonetta as a character, I'm docking the score to show this to you and to punish the developers, and if you think otherwise I'm deleting your comments."
And this is why game journalism needs to be reformed.