Should Any Aspect of Gaming Be Off-Limits to Discussion?

[Shamus Young]

Should Any Aspect of Gaming Be Off-Limits to Discussion?

All fandom suffers from heavy strains of anti-criticism, where opinions that are overly or insufficiently critical are denounced. But gaming criticism seems to suffer from this more than other mediums.

Read Full Article

 

[dangoball]

If it'll make anyone feel any better, I actually really appreciated those two columns on Shadow of Mordor. Seeing all the praise it got 'round these parts was encouraging, but without constructive criticism present some might buy the game and then feel underwhelmed due to all the hype.

Constructive criticism, I feel, is at the heart of the issue discussed in this column. Without it no artistic medium would ever move forward. Any budding writer/photographer/game dev/whatever can tell you that feedback like "yeah, it's quite nice" or "I really like it!", while encouraging, is ultimately useless in the grand schemes of things. I would even dare call it more useless than the rude and generally uncalled for "this is utter shit!" from the common internet stranger. Nondescript praise uplifts the spirit, but offer no grounds for improvement, while vague criticism is still at least an incentive to get better.

One problem is that a lot of people don't know how to provide constructive criticism. You like it? Ok, why? Did you like the composition? The story, the characters, the language used etc.? You didn't like it? Ok, while that makes me somewhat sad, can you tell me what I did wrong? Was it the composition? The story, the characters, the language used etc.? Or did it just make you feel something you didn't like? Did it disgust you? In what way? Because it might have been my intent to evoke disgust, but just in one particular way.

The other side of the problem is that a lot of people also don't know how to take criticism, constructive or not. Creators can't help creating a bond to their creation and any criticism hurts, but to improve, we have to move past this hurt and look for the reason and the logic behind the criticism. No one is immune from criticism, not even G.R.R. Martin, J.K. Rowling or even J.R.R. Tolkien. There is always something that can be improved and I consider it a creator's moral imperative to strive for improvement. Then again there will always be someone who will dislike your work, even if it's nigh perfect, simply because it doesn't suit a particular taste. One can't please everyone.

 

[Something Amyss]

Shamus, in talking about games in a way different than I wish, it has become very clear that you lack ethics and are teh bias.

....Okay, that's out of my system.

One of the things that interested me in those articles was the fact that you didn't seem to like it or had problems with it, whereas most of the reviews I'd seen had been anywhere between mildly positive and "effin AWSUM!" albeit, admittely on the lower end of that spectrum. And honestly, I like critical opinions. I like to know what doesn't work as well as what works. And when I see a bunch of people all praising a game, I get suspicious.

Most importantly, I want to know why someone likes or doesn't like something, and I thought the Mordor articles expressed thought-out opinions. And I respect and appreciate that.

And honestly, as games mean multiple things to multiple people, it's only fitting that multiple people talk about games in multiple ways. And I'm always amazed at the outrage this seems to engender.

 

[Retsam19]

The other side of the problem is that a lot of people also don't know how to take criticism, constructive or not. Creators can't help creating a bond to their creation and any criticism hurts, but to improve, we have to move past this hurt and look for the reason and the logic behind the criticism.

Though, Shamus isn't talking about about the creators here. I promise you, the SoM developers didn't contact Shamus after his last column saying "Y'know, we were a little hurt that you didn't enjoy our story and our gameplay".

What's interesting (and to me, most concerning) is the level to which consumers of any piece of entertainment don't seem to know how to take criticism of things they like. For a lot of people who really like X, someone saying "here's the problem's I had with X" is interpreted as an attack on them as a person, and so they have a kneejerk, "let me tell you how your opinion is wrong" reaction.

 

[RJ Dalton]

To be honest, your discussions of Shadow of Mordor actually made me reconsider buying it. I could tell the story was cliche garbage (Dead family baggage is the most over-used cliche in fiction, I think), but what I was hearing about the nemesis system and the Arkham style gameplay seemed like it might be enough to for me to overlook it. After all, the Arkham games' stories are pretty unimpressive but the gameplay made them incredibly enjoyable.
But then you talk about the fine details and those are the kind of details that actually do annoy me as I play games. Details like all the lore just being collectables and not really having anything to do with the plot, except as a hide-and-seek thing. Or how, even as it mimics Arkham, it looses the critical aspect that drives you to perfect its gameplay. And now you say the nemesis system isn't very well-implemented, so it seems like I have no reason to get the game. Some awesome ideas (or at least one, anyway), but not properly implemented. The effect is that the story actually would grate on me more because the gameplay isn't good enough to take my focus away from it.

So, yeah, the critical analysis is good and I appreciate it because it may have just saved me $60. Because the way I get into games, the little things do often get to me. If something isn't done in an outstanding way, I do get hung up on all the little annoyances. And, in the end, this sort of criticism, if taken to heart, can influence things to improve. So, yeah, go ahead and do your analysis all you want. It does me good. And people who can't take a little criticism aren't important enough to be bothered with.

 

[RandV80]

Only opinion I've ever had on this topic is if you're running a larger review site that looks at wide variety of games, then as we all have different tastes & preferences for genres if you're going to put up a review that represents your site get someone who's preferences align with that genre.

For example if I like RPG's & strategy games, and I'm looking at your review to help get an opinion on it, it doesn't help me one bit if it's coming from a guy who prefers and mostly plays fast pace FPS's. Similarly, if you're into shooters, having a guy like Movie Bob review the latest Call of Duty isn't going to do anyone good.

Objective criticism is great, but if you reach out of your comfort zones you're it's hard not to start 'objectively criticizing' fundamental genre mechanics that work just fine for the target audience but not for you.

 

[Grampy_bone]

This feels like a strawman argument. I don't think anyone was saying "You're not allowed to say X about a game," people were just disagreeing with his analysis. Of course all criticism is permitted, including criticism of criticism.

When you make strong statements about a game in a public forum people are going to disagree with you. I mean, duh.

 

[Derfpace]

I think one of the reason people don't tend to handle criticism of something they like very well, is that people think that their personal values are also being criticized, which leads to people getting aggressively defensive, and at that point you just have go "Whoop, there it is," and now you have an angry internet argument.

 

[thanatos388]

The best thing to do when criticizing a game is to ignore the fans. They usually don't care about the more in depth aspects of a game and care so much for it that any detractor gets seen as an attacker. Many make those games and franchises as part of their identity. So when someone yells at you for criticising a game with such intensity, be safe in the knowledge that nothing but a groveling praise towards it would have made them feel good towards you.

Another common problem as you mentioned is that most critics of games can't really criticize well. It's high school level at best and on occasion short rant at worst. Going beyond whether it "feels good" is somewhere only a few like this column and matthewmatosis are capable of going.

Shamus, in talking about games in a way different than I wish, it has become very clear that you lack ethics and are teh bias.

....Okay, that's out of my system.

You're like those people who keep going on about Anita no matter what. In a article that is neither a review nor is it about that controversy. It managed to keep it out of the conversation.

If your insults towards gamergate had a font it would be comic sans.

 

[Kameburger]

[edit] In light of some users pointing out to me that the original headline of the Mordor article was edited after the fact and likely not by Shamus, I really would like to apologize for a lot of the comment below. But I really hope that in light of that, I would really hope that the Escapist look at the role it played in this. I could barely read the Mordor article without the spiteful tone of the headline infecting every sentence.

To Shamus: I am deeply sorry for making the rather aggressive comment below without knowing all the facts. These facts were pointed out to me later. I really value your viewpoint, but that headline was kind of like the torso statue from the dead island box, in that it colored my image of the content before I even dove into the content, and colored my opinion from the outset. I will be more careful in the future to not get so caught up in the headlines.

*** Original Comment***
You published an article with an aggressive click baity title calling the game infintile revenge porn. I didn't read this just because in itself it was a bit distasteful. But if you're going to turn around and accuse all the people you nearly intentionally provoked of silencing you I have little sympathy. You write really interesting pieces most of the time with a unique incite into the industry which I think sets you apart in this industry. But while I understand the need for clicks and this is one way to get it sure but if this is how it's going to be; this cycle of angry click baity rants then blaming your audience for not showering you with praise is disapointing. This is not why I became a regular reader of your articles but it might be why I stop.

 

[Hyrist]

Shamus I would like to express an apology for overlooking your articles for so long. This is excellent writing and points, and it inspires discussion rather than isolation. In the end, it's the kind of opinion pieces I like to read.

You've got yourself a new subscriber.

On the subject itself, I do believe the greater discourse of what is, and is not described is less about the subject and more about the tone taken, if we're assuming this article is talking about recent trends and hot topics in the gaming community.

A lot of what's turned off me personally in my readership about the Women in Video Games topic is the conversational tone is most often (But not always) destructive and inflammatory in nature. I find myself wondering why we are citing all these games that do ill by the chosen political stance and not more highlighting the games that do well in the Journalist's eyes. After all, encouraging the games that you approve of can assist their success and therefore continue more games along that vein.

Gaming community are nothing if not hypersensitive to being exploited. We've seen this in protests against over-use of booth-babes, and the implementation of the Zero suit. We saw it in the transparent political stunts of Dante's Inferno.

So when the subject of feminism collided with Video Games, the instinct against exploitation and the already uncomfortable subject of sexuality was like a match to dry tinder. Many people, and to some degree myself as well, feel as if some representatives of the feminist debate are being disingenuous to their own cause, by exploiting that cause for self gain - thus the familiar term of 'click bait' is being thrown around. Given the already rifting relations between gaming communities and gaming journalism was forming, all this happening at once is causing quite a giant stir that I strongly feel should just be toned down and referred to just the topics themselves - which, to my applause, you have attempted to do here.


I do feel that no subject should ever be taboo to discuss when it comes to criticism, but I maintain a mantra of 'tact in all things serious', and recent discussions have gotten quite serious. We are a growing and changing community, after all, and we are now too large for a single voice to call our own. But I do feel all of those voices should be civil, regardless, lest we fall into the same horrid rifts as other medias have.

 

[Theminimanx]

You published an article with an aggressive click baity title calling the game infintile revenge porn. I didn't read this just because in itself it was a bit distasteful. But if you're going to turn around and accuse all the people you nearly intentionally provoked of silencing you I have little sympathy. You write really interesting pieces most of the time with a unique incite into the industry which I think sets you apart in this industry. But while I understand the need for clicks and this is one way to get it sure but if this is how it's going to be; this cycle of angry click baity rants then blaming your audience for not showering you with praise is disapointing. This is not why I became a regular reader of your articles but it might be why I stop.

Fun fact: The escapist is responsible for making the titles more click-baity. The original title was 'Shadow of Mordor is Tawdry Tolkien Fanfiction' and is still visible in the URL.

Spoiler: Source

From his blog:

Yes, the headline is awkward. The url contains the title I originally gave the article. This is the first time I?ve been disappointed in the change they made. I might talk it over with the escapist and have them run title changes by me in the future. I don't mind them making titles more click-bait-y, but this one kind of strays from what I was saying.

Anyway, more on-topic.

I don't think anyone was saying "You're not allowed to say X about a game," people were just disagreeing with his analysis.

Okay, they weren't saying it in those exact words, but by saying 'you should talk about one part of a game (Nemesis) instead of another (the story)', you're saying that there is a wrong way of talking about the game.

 

[MiskWisk]

You published an article with an aggressive click baity title calling the game infintile revenge porn.

^This. I just want to say that I 100% agree with this quote. Deliberately inflammatory titles will, by their very nature, provoke aggressive responses. Even if you did admit that you were using a different definition to the commonly used one, it still doesn't change the fact that it was a problem.

Other than the complaint at the start, I actually liked this article though. The points were, as a whole, well thought out and had some interesting discussion value.

I will note though, a quick scan through the forums of those two pieces (I refuse to look at the facebook comments for my own sanity) leaves me wondering whether this article had been in the works for a while and you were more after a reason to post it and took the first chance you could. There were very few comments that disagreed with you and they were mostly quite well written and polite and, although there were a couple more comments about how you were wrong, the comments were quite respectful when it came to showing the personal interpretation of the writer. I will note I spotted one wall of text that was a bit much, but certainly not anything that would show that people (on this site anyway, I do not know if other sites and forums picked this up) were against your criticism on a large scale.

 

[Kameburger]

You published an article with an aggressive click baity title calling the game infintile revenge porn. I didn't read this just because in itself it was a bit distasteful. But if you're going to turn around and accuse all the people you nearly intentionally provoked of silencing you I have little sympathy. You write really interesting pieces most of the time with a unique incite into the industry which I think sets you apart in this industry. But while I understand the need for clicks and this is one way to get it sure but if this is how it's going to be; this cycle of angry click baity rants then blaming your audience for not showering you with praise is disapointing. This is not why I became a regular reader of your articles but it might be why I stop.

Fun fact: The escapist is responsible for making the titles more click-baity. The original title was 'Shadow of Mordor is Tawdry Tolkien Fanfiction' and is still visible in the URL.

Spoiler: Source

From his blog:

Yes, the headline is awkward. The url contains the title I originally gave the article. This is the first time I?ve been disappointed in the change they made. I might talk it over with the escapist and have them run title changes by me in the future. I don't mind them making titles more click-bait-y, but this one kind of strays from what I was saying.

This changes a lot for me... If it is the case that the Escapist changed the name of the article then I would say shame on them for escalating this kind of tension. I'm going to ad my apology in the comment. Thank you for pointing that out.

 

[jamail77]

But if you're going to turn around and accuse all the people you nearly intentionally provoked of silencing you I have little sympathy. [snip] this cycle of angry click baity rants then blaming your audience for not showering you with praise is disapointing. This is not why I became a regular reader of your articles but it might be why I stop.

Even ignoring what user Theminimax pointed out, how Shamus didn't actually like the title and The Escapist itself is responsible for the title, your critique of Shamus' points seems ironically juvenile to me considering you are accusing him of being juvenile. Nowhere did he say he was expecting praise. He was pointing out he got a lot of pushback he personally thought was uncalled for and I think he is right. I saw a bit of irrational criticism trying to invalidate him because they fell way too in love with the game and couldn't handle fair, SUBJECTIVE criticism of it. There was far more rational criticism of his critique, but the irrational criticism was plain as day. Shamus has mentioned in the past he doesn't mind criticism; it's how many of his critics came out and acted irrational about it. He might even be talking generally here rather than about criticism about what he said about Mordor. If you're a regular reader of him I would think you'd realize this, especially The Escapist oversight since it has strengthened over time [footnote]Notice all those hypens/dashes adding unnecessary clarifications to titles of videos? I doubt every video content creator asked for those, but now they're everywhere among all the video content creators on this site.[/footnote]

EDIT: Whoops. I just saw your follow up post. You must have posted while I was still writing this. Forget what I said. I come off kind of unfair and harsh in retrospect. Sorry. Damn, I wish I could delete this. Whatever, adds to the discussion I guess.

 

[Odoylerules360]

So a critic gets annoyed when people criticize his criticism? Isn't there a word for that?

 

[Kameburger]

But if you're going to turn around and accuse all the people you nearly intentionally provoked of silencing you I have little sympathy. [snip] this cycle of angry click baity rants then blaming your audience for not showering you with praise is disapointing. This is not why I became a regular reader of your articles but it might be why I stop.

Even ignoring what user Theminimax pointed out, how Shamus didn't actually like the title and The Escapist itself is responsible for the title, your critique of Shamus' points seems ironically juvenile to me considering you are accusing him of being juvenile. Nowhere did he say he was expecting praise. He was pointing out he got a lot of pushback he personally thought was uncalled for and I think he is right. I saw a bit of irrational criticism trying to invalidate him because they fell way too in love with the game and couldn't handle fair, SUBJECTIVE criticism of it. There was far more rational criticism of his critique, but the irrational criticism was plain as day. Shamus has mentioned in the past he doesn't mind criticism; it's how many of his critics came out and acted irrational about it. He might even be talking generally here rather than about criticism about what he said about Mordor. If you're a regular reader of him I would think you'd realize this, especially The Escapist oversight since it has strengthened over time [footnote]Notice all those hypens/dashes adding unnecessary clarifications to titles of videos? I doubt every video content creator asked for those, but now they're everywhere among all the video content creators on this site.[/footnote]

EDIT: Whoops. I just saw your follow up post. You must have posted while I was still writing this. Forget what I said. I come off kind of unfair and harsh in retrospect. Sorry. Damn, I wish I could delete this. Whatever, adds to the discussion I guess.

Lol no worries, it was fair enough, as my original comment was a bit harsh. To be honest with you, last week when that article about Mordor appeared, the title particularly stood out to me. Even as I was trying to read the article I couldn't get that title out of my head. To Shamus' credit, his writing doesn't really match these inflammatory headlines. But once I had seen that title, the points in his article were colored by my expectations from the headline. I wonder if under the original title I would have had a different experience, but all I remember thinking at the time was "wow, why is Shamus so worked up about this game?"

I want to say I should no better and that it should be apparent to me that the Escapist decided to ad their own flavor to get clicks, but The Escapist honestly has had a reputation of having a pretty hands-off management style with their three big names always saying that the Escapist pretty much lets them do what they want.

I really hope that he does take it up with the Escapist, because now I feel like a dick. But as is the two headlines next to each created this image. "Mordor is infantile, and that's my opinion so stop being babies."

Anyway, always feel free to call me out if you think I've gotten out of hand. Legitimately I did not know all the facts here, and those facts had a big impact on my opinion here.

 

[LaoJim]

If it'll make anyone feel any better, I actually really appreciated those two columns on Shadow of Mordor.

Me too, I'm still going to buy it (eventually) but both pieces seemed to be well thought out, alternate opinions to what was a generally well received game. Although I haven't played SoM yet, I thought his analysis of the Batman combat was spot on and so the comparisions he made with SoM seemed believable.

Constructive criticism, I feel, is at the heart of the issue discussed in this column. Without it no artistic medium would ever move forward. Any budding writer/photographer/game dev/whatever can tell you that feedback like "yeah, it's quite nice" or "I really like it!", while encouraging, is ultimately useless in the grand schemes of things. I would even dare call it more useless than the rude and generally uncalled for "this is utter shit!" from the common internet stranger. Nondescript praise uplifts the spirit, but offer no grounds for improvement, while vague criticism is still at least an incentive to get better.

As Shamus seems to be suggesting, criticism is especially important for video games as a developing medium and the better a game is the more it needs a critical eye cast over it. It is more interesting and important to analyse the (far better than average) story of Bioshock Infinite than say the generic story of CoD say, since Bioshock is good but arguable not nearly as good as the best sci-fi novels or movies. One of the things I like about Zero Punctuation is that, even with the best of games, Yahtzee still finds a lot of issues to highlight and provides some relief from the incessant praise that the top titles get.

So a critic gets annoyed when people criticize his criticism? Isn't there a word for that?

I read the original thread and there were some thoughtful responses to it, explaining why SoM's combat wasn't trying to be like Batman and giving good reasons for why they enjoyed SoM's combat more. There was also a lot of people making comments like "Two articles attacking SoM? For shame" and a lot saying (as Shamus points out) that the story doesn't matter because the gameplay's good etc. From that perspective I think Shamus is not being in any way hypocritical by addressing these posters. That said a couple of paragraphs acknowledging the positive feedback from the two articles might have been a nice idea.

 

[Something Amyss]

You're like those people who keep going on about Anita no matter what.

Weird you say that.

When, you know, you just brought her up.

Methinks you doeth protest too much.

By the way, what I didn't bring up was Gamergate. What I did bring up were complaints germane to Shamus' column.

Again, protesting too much.

But since Gamergate was brought up, if people spent as much time actually working towards their pretend goals as they did defending Gamergate itself, mountains would have been moved by now.