laikenf said:
Well said. But you have to understand that a lot of people (me included) go to review sites to get informed on games we consider to purchase, so while it's nice to read reviewers that inject a sense of humor and some sarcasm to their articles (believe me, Yahtzee is not the only one) the bottom line is that WE WANT INFORMATION, unbaised, legit information; and that's something that Mr. Yahtzee should dedicate a little more time to because when you look past the jokes and the sarcasm you're left with a very uncumfortable sounding human being that seems to be bothered by EVERYTHING ANY game throws at him, and very little information (proper info) about the game at hand; that, as I said in a previous post, could be VERY MISLEADING.
Thanks for considering my point.
I suppose my rebuttal would be that the very idea of a review being objective is a flawed one. We shouldn't treat games like we do new species - to be picked apart and examined, then to describe in a dry, soulless, complete manner.
A full-length commercial title would demand several pages of text for a full, fair picture to be obtained - that is, for the reader to completely understand everything the game has to offer without actually playing it himself.
Am I alone in thinking that this lofty goal is not only unreasonable, but disturbing? The established art forms understood a long time ago that description only goes so far. As does entertainment. A personal impression is not a bad way to go about things, and neither is it the only way, but it is A way, and one that brings something to the table that the opposite side of the spectrum desperately lacks and needs.
Think about it this way: if your reaction to this review is "I loved this game and can't believe that Yahtzee is misrepresenting it so!", then for a minute imagine the reasons that Yahtzee has provided. Obviously you would have a rebuttal to each of them, but I think it's absolutely fair to say that many people would not, and would in fact line up much more with Yahtzee's line of thinking than yours or mine. Now imagine that you're that person. Hasn't this been a helpful experience?
Personally, I have yet to play The Witcher, but I think this review has informed me just as competently as to the content of the game as any of the lengthy previews I previously checked out. With both bits of information in hand, I feel like I know what The Witcher is about. I feel intrigued. Not convinced, but I'd certainly like to play the game. I don't agree with Yahtzee all of the time - just like I don't agree with my favorite film reviewer, Roger Ebert (le gasp!) all of the time) - but I do understand his position, and it informs my choice, and entertains at the same time.
Asking game reviewers to be robotic summarization machines is born from a deep misunderstanding of what games are all about, in my opinion. That's all.
