Respecting "opinions," frustration, and media influence?

[CaitSeith]

snip

So your complain is that people base their opinions solely on opinions from people they trust to have valid ones, isn't it? Not everybody has the time to play every game that it's criticized on the Internet. If they want to participate in a discussion, they'll have to use the opinions from people they respect as their arguments. It's your choice to take those people's opinions as worthy of respect or not; but personally I think that it's better to ignore those which you don't respect than berate, and it's better to focus on those which you consider worthy of your time.

PS: Well, Jim made a good rant against Dungeon's Keeper Mobile, and I still played it (after 60 hours of gameplay I confirm it's designed to be a cash-grab).

 

[Thaluikhain]

PS: Well, Jim made a good rant against Dungeon's Keeper Mobile, and I still played it (after 60 hours of gameplay I confirm it's designed to be a cash-grab).

60? That seems like a lot of time. Was it still enjoyable enough to spend ages on despite being a cash grab?

 

[K12]

I don't understand why people get so irritated by the opinion vs. fact thing.

To me it is always obvious when someone is stating an opinion or a fact without them having to tell me. Even one someone states something is a fact when it's just a widely accepted opinion (i.e. Dungeon Keeper mobile is shit... fact) it doesn't bother me because the point they get across is still obvious.

I think getting uppity over negative reviews and other peoples "opinions" (scare quotes essential) comes from people who are big fans of niche games who fear they'll stop being made (or worse made "Mainstream" [more scare quotes]) if reviewers don't praise their bollocks off.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion anyone but everyone is also entitled to not give a shit what that opinion is. If you think a reviewer is uninformative and not entertaining then why do you care about them?

Also, it's totally reasonable to say that you don't like something without having played it. No one has the time to play everything in the world so you have to estimate based on other factors (i.e. reviewers who generally share your opinions on things you have played, the way the game is marketed and previous games in the series/ by the same developer). You will sometimes be wrong and miss out on a game you would have liked but for every time this happens you will have successful avoided 50 games that you wouldn't have liked.

 

[CaitSeith]

PS: Well, Jim made a good rant against Dungeon's Keeper Mobile, and I still played it (after 60 hours of gameplay I confirm it's designed to be a cash-grab).

60? That seems like a lot of time. Was it still enjoyable enough to spend ages on despite being a cash grab?

The enjoyable part was the challenge of what I could do without expending a dollar, and what benefits theoretically I would had got if I had payed. At the end, the monetary costs needed to have the gameplay itself enjoyable since the beginning was $20 in gems; but only in promotion time and if you knew how to expend them (in imps, everything else is a trap with much lesser long term benefit).

 

[SOCIALCONSTRUCT]

snip

Those two reviewers probably tend towards the negative because roasting a game can be funny and entertaining. Ditto for any other product. Red Letter Media's Plinkett reviews are probably the best example of this in film.

As far as a game or whatever getting treated unfairly, I wouldn't worry about it too much. For one, there is nothing that you can do about it. For another, if something is really good, a few harsh reviews won't make much difference anyways.

As far as people getting second hand opinions about media that they have never personally consumed, it is, if nothing else, a useful necessity. Modern societies produce an enormous amount of media output. We're living in a continuous tsunami of entertainment and journalism. As a practical matter, you can only skim off the tiniest portion of that and have time to live your life. So a lot of filtering is necessary.

 

[TheWanderingFish]

If I may generalize this away from game reviews, or indeed reviews of anything, the amount an opinion matters is really up to you. Of course each and every person is entitled to have an opinion amount thing X - even those who have no experience with it whatsoever. It is up to you, however, to weight those opinions accordingly.

If someone leaves a comment on a video that simply says "this sucks" (a word with which I have a whole host of problems with for a description of opinion) without elaboration, then I am going to almost immediately dismiss it. If instead the comment says "this sucks because of A, B, and C" I am going to value it more heavily. I may not agree, but I will at least understand why the thing is disliked, and where that individual is coming from, and it will factor more into my personal feelings towards the video.

Unfortunately, it seems to be the prevailing view, in the general public at least, that ALL opinions are equally valuable on all matters. This is where the issues start to crop up. Suppose the government is looking to further develop technology Y, and wants feedback on whether to pursue it or not. If I am a scholar with years of experience with Y and am well versed in its development, possible benefits, and downsides, my opinion should be weighted much more heavily than that of the average person who may only known about Y from news reports. This is not the case.

Of course, this idea can be furthered to the idea that people are then not all equal, which is wrong. We are all fundamentally equals. We do not, however, have a hive-mind of shared knowledge and experience from which to base our decisions. As such, the people with the most understanding should have a more significant say in that area.

 

[Dr. Crawver]

My main question is just how can people come to a firm conclusion on the quality of something, without any experience on it; what's more, they parrot the words of someone who HAS experienced it, simply because the person is of high influence.

The suggestions seem to just be to not pay attention to this sort of thing, so I guess I will follow on this.

Late reply but I've seen this asked before so I'll give the reasoning.

Trust.

The person in question has an opinion we take because they've built up a level of trust in us.

You seem to really dislike Jim, but I for one am a massive fan of his, and rarely do I find myself disagreeing with him. Even when I do, I more than understand his reasons.

Using the FFXIII point you made. I played that game, completed it twice, did everything that game had to offer (even made every weapon and accessory in the game for the achievement) so I feel my opinion on that game is pretty backed up. I enjoyed it, but there was nothing Jim said about it that was untrue. I hated the characters, the writing, the plot, the gameplay, all of it. I disagree with him in that he didn't enjoy it but I did (somehow), but his opinion I still respect and agree with a lot.

And it's because his opinions on a lot of games I've played line up with ones he has, when he says he doesn't like a game for certain reasons, it's not a far cry to believe that I won't like that game for the same ones.