magus
Full Member
Posts: 110
|
Post by magus on Jun 9, 2016 5:24:34 GMT -5
The discourse is kind of poisoned by the misogynist asshats. You need to realize that when you bring those sorts of subjects up. I have no idea what the numbers are, but they're the loudest voices, and a lot of people who suddenly found out about this game and started complaining about it rarely did it with actual personal thoughts or criticisms, but parroted points from lunatics. That's basically big topic nerd discourse 101 at this point. I've been genuinely impressed by a lot of the talk here because it's worlds more mature than the angry shouting I've seen elsewhere. I think enough time has past that the crazies have gone onto another target (thank god). Ghostbusters is still a new thing, so it's waaaaaaaay more difficult to talk about even-handedly because the loonies are still screaming up a storm. oh boy first the article with trigger warning (which are inside the article and not the headline because it really needed that stupidly pretentious headline instead) , now this stupid bullshit about "misogynist asshats", this is a good site about retrogaming, why do you editor want it desperately turn this site into another political polygon-like shitshow? i'm so pissed about it and the worst part of all is that this will be dismissed as trolling or "wanting to pick a fight" because it's a much better thing to do than take the criticism at the heart (which i'm supposed to do elsewhere despite the fact that there is no elsewhere to do it) and then it will happen again the next time HG101, covers another one of these sort of games and discoalucard will huff and puff away at the "trolls", that's it, if someone doesn't start going about how "problematic" a game is for daring to have digital boobs in it or why something getting censored was "the moral correct thing to do", i'm seriously, seriously disappointed i should just stop coming here alltogether if you guys just can't stick to talking about videogames in the first place
|
|
|
Post by JDarkside on Jun 9, 2016 5:26:45 GMT -5
Okay, bye.
|
|
magus
Full Member
Posts: 110
|
Post by magus on Jun 9, 2016 5:34:58 GMT -5
exactly the sort of mature reply i expected from someone using words such as "misogynist asshats" and "lunatic"
|
|
|
Post by JDarkside on Jun 9, 2016 5:44:24 GMT -5
exactly the sort of mature reply i expected from someone using words such as "misogynist asshats" and "lunatic" Didn't you say you were leaving? Nobody's stopping you.
|
|
|
Post by Snarboo on Jun 9, 2016 6:44:47 GMT -5
Of all the games to inspire rage in gamers, why is it a game with spooky house lesbians?
|
|
|
Post by JDarkside on Jun 9, 2016 6:58:06 GMT -5
Of all the games to inspire rage in gamers, why is it a game with spooky house lesbians? I brought it up earlier. First bigots get mad, then they convince non-bigots to be mad via poorly made arguments meant to smokescreen the homophobia. I am seeing actual arguments and thoughts on this thread, at least.
|
|
|
Post by elektrolurch on Jun 9, 2016 7:47:21 GMT -5
Of all the games to inspire rage in gamers, why is it a game with spooky house lesbians? Well, with this one you could argue that it is at least mechanically removed from what "gamers" think "games" should be like, so I kind of get it. With the outrage about the Baldurs Gate II add on with the transgender NPC that says like 2 lines or 3, I DO NOT GET IT......that is transphobia!
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Jun 9, 2016 7:55:36 GMT -5
Of all the games to inspire rage in gamers, why is it a game with spooky house lesbians? That, my friend, is an excellent question.
|
|
|
Post by Weasel on Jun 9, 2016 10:47:04 GMT -5
oh boy first the article with trigger warning (which are inside the article and not the headline because it really needed that stupidly pretentious headline instead) , now this stupid bullshit about "misogynist asshats", this is a good site about retrogaming, why do you editor want it desperately turn this site into another political polygon-like shitshow? i'm so pissed about it and the worst part of all is that this will be dismissed as trolling or "wanting to pick a fight" because it's a much better thing to do than take the criticism at the heart (which i'm supposed to do elsewhere despite the fact that there is no elsewhere to do it) and then it will happen again the next time HG101, covers another one of these sort of games and discoalucard will huff and puff away at the "trolls", that's it, if someone doesn't start going about how "problematic" a game is for daring to have digital boobs in it or why something getting censored was "the moral correct thing to do", i'm seriously, seriously disappointed i should just stop coming here alltogether if you guys just can't stick to talking about videogames in the first place If you are no longer interested in what the site has to offer, nothing is stopping you from leaving. But I would prefer if you did so without leaving this message, because this is just plain rude.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2016 11:27:50 GMT -5
Well.... as you pointed out earlier, a critic should form an "informed opinion". Yes. And that's the thing, complaining about something you are not informed about is missing the point. and complaining for a game which is designed to have no traditional gameplay to complain about it is missing the point. I'm not thinking about my own viewpoint, I'm thinking about professional journalism. That's why I took the food critic example. Personally not liking spicy food is legit, but publically criticizing traditional spicy food for being spicy is not. Aigan, it's fine if you as a person don't like scary movies. But as a critic, complaining about a new horror movie for being too scary is bullcr*p.... I think this is the mistake far too many gamers make when it comes to reading game reviews. Reviews are written by human beings, and no person, no matter how intelligent or passionate, can be completely knowledgeable about every single aspect of every single game of every single genre. Reviews are written on deadlines by people who have families, medical issues, bills to pay, and every now and then, outside hobbies to engage in. I'm not going to get offended because someone writes a review about a walking simulator and complains about it having no traditional gameplay. It's a valid criticism. If someone were to play an RPG and get upset at all of the random encounters, I'd consider that to be a fair thing to say, as well. The audience doesn't have to put the same level of emphasis on each point of a review as the person who wrote the review. As an example, Jeremy Parish wrote a review for Stranger of Sword City where he said the game was too disrespectful to the player's time to really be his cup of tea. I can totally get that, but it isn't a deal breaker for me because the core game is surprisingly solid. Then again, I'm not nearly as busy as he is, so I can see how something like that would have more weight in his mind. So many people seem to get upset over what amount to rather trivial things. If you don't like one reviewer's point of view, just don't read that person's reviews. It costs you nothing either way. To me, a review should reflect the writer's honest opinion about something, whether I agree with it or not.
|
|
|
Post by Maciej Miszczyk on Jun 9, 2016 11:55:17 GMT -5
what's wrong with complaining about random encounters in RPGs anyway? I love RPGs but random encounters are usually mindless filler
|
|
|
Post by Weasel on Jun 9, 2016 11:59:31 GMT -5
what's wrong with complaining about random encounters in RPGs anyway? I love RPGs but random encounters are usually mindless filler All my favorite RPGs are ones where random encounters are visible. I can't stand the games that see fit to startle the player, or in worst cases, give you an encounter every two steps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 9, 2016 11:59:51 GMT -5
Exactly! If it bugs a reviewer, they should mention it. Just because something is an established trope of a genre, that doesn't mean it NEEDS to exist. Even if it does, that doesn't mean every single person will like it.
|
|
|
Post by Maciej Miszczyk on Jun 9, 2016 12:07:04 GMT -5
maybe aside from dungeon crawlers, most of the games that don't have visible encounters would be better if they had them. and aside from traditional roguelikes, most RPGs that have randomized battles would be better if they were predesigned. one of the few good examples of random encounters that happen when you walk on the map is Darklands because each of them is a small text-based event, but then again there's so little of them they're going to be as repetitive as the normal trashmobs after a few hours.
by the same measure, most walking simulators would be better if they had more gameplay. not necessarily Gone Home though as its realistic setting would not benefit from Myst-style puzzles. Chinese Room games on the other hand could use some.
|
|
|
Post by Scylla on Jun 9, 2016 12:12:58 GMT -5
I think this is the mistake far too many gamers make when it comes to reading game reviews. Reviews are written by human beings, and no person, no matter how intelligent or passionate, can be completely knowledgeable about every single aspect of every single game of every single genre. Reviews are written on deadlines by people who have families, medical issues, bills to pay, and every now and then, outside hobbies to engage in. I'm not going to get offended because someone writes a review about a walking simulator and complains about it having no traditional gameplay. It's a valid criticism. If someone were to play an RPG and get upset at all of the random encounters, I'd consider that to be a fair thing to say, as well. The audience doesn't have to put the same level of emphasis on each point of a review as the person who wrote the review. As an example, Jeremy Parish wrote a review for Stranger of Sword City where he said the game was too disrespectful to the player's time to really be his cup of tea. I can totally get that, but it isn't a deal breaker for me because the core game is surprisingly solid. Then again, I'm not nearly as busy as he is, so I can see how something like that would have more weight in his mind. So many people seem to get upset over what amount to rather trivial things. If you don't like one reviewer's point of view, just don't read that person's reviews. It costs you nothing either way. To me, a review should reflect the writer's honest opinion about something, whether I agree with it or not. You're comparing apples and oranges. An RPG can be an RPG without random battles. A long game that drags on and moves at a slow pace can be made shorter and more tightly paced without changing what it is. A "walking simulator", by definition, has minimal gameplay. Complaining about the lack of gameplay is akin to saying "I want this to be in an entirely different genre". For an applicable comparison to RPGs, it'd be like reviewing an RPG and saying you don't want it to have any battles or dungeons or stat growth. We're talking about changing the very nature of the genre and what the game is intended to be. If you DID add more gameplay to a story-focused game like a walking simulator or visual novel, it would be a genre hybrid at the least, or completely cease to be a walking simulator/visual novel/etc. at the most. I mean, there are plenty of games that have cutscenes in the style of visual novels (portraits layered over a piece of 2D background art). It's all the other content in those games that defines what genre they're in and results in the visual novel-style portions being mere cutscenes. If you stripped out all the other gameplay and kept JUST the cutscenes, then you'd have an actual visual novel. So, again, no, complaining that a walking simulator has no traditional gameplay is not a valid criticism. Standing up for that is standing up for shitty, shoddy journalism, where the reviewer is merely stating their genre preferences and not analyzing the actual game at hand.
|
|