Two things I've noticed about a lot of the articles in HG101 is that 1. they have this incredibly inconsistent tone, and that 2. they always have to make a really big deal about a very minor issue that they typically don't understand very well. These minor issues are always talked about as fatal flaws, which is something that you can typically only figure out by studying a game for months or years. Never mind the incredibly casual way that 99% of the games on this site are played, never mind that at all. Some of the writeups in this article are a perfect example of excelling at being so terrible. I'm sure they all would reveal themselves, if I read them.
Post by Discoalucard on Sept 21, 2016 15:41:18 GMT -5
I dunno, first I'd need to check his credentials to make sure that he has the doctorate specifically for the game he's writing about. I've also re-read the Maui Mallard article and it's pretty clear what the complaints are regarding the controls, whereas I've read Startling's post several times and I'm still not entirely sure what their issue is, beyond "lol casuals".
Post by Startling on Sept 21, 2016 15:56:33 GMT -5
Real cute. You know full and well what I'm talking about, and you don't think it's a problem. Whoever wrote this clearly didn't want to actually play the game, and this is being seen as a clear win for the reviewer. The vast majority of articles on this site are written by people who used every trick in the book to avoid playing whatever game they wrote about. They credit-fed and save-stated their way through a very quick "tour" of the game, then threw the ROM in the trash.
Now you're trying to tell me that this particular game has "numerous other issues" that the writeup doesn't even begin to talk about. Where does it end? All I've ever seen about Maui Mallard is people taking issue with what can only be described as Wonder Boy-style jumping. That's it! That's all that's actually happening here. That's all that usually ends up happening; some mixture of double standards and of not wanting to actually learn to play a video game ("I shouldn't have to"). Someone perceives it as "unfair", so it must be "unfair", even though all that's happening is that this someone's very narrow expectations aren't being perfectly met.
Wonder Boy-style jumping is not a fundamental issue, so it is no reason to completely write off a game. All I hear about this game is the same slop people throw at Castlevania; Castlevania-style jumping has never been a fundamental issue, so to write that game off and call it fundamentally flawed simply because of it is disingenuous at best. To determine whether anything is actually wrong with Wonder Boy-style jumping, you'd have to actually play the game seriously and study the level design.
I was trying to be nice and include games that are played for more than simply beating them, such as shmups, which typically do take months to years to figure out whether some detail is a flaw or not. Maybe simply beating a platformer isn't going to take so long, but it will take a lot longer than a single playthrough. It's going to take not spamming continues and savestates, because that's the point when you stop actually playing the game and start "touring" it.
This is considered some kind of good, and somehow illustrates flaws in the game, except they're somehow just opinion, even though they somehow clearly show poor judgement on the developer's part. It's insanity. People making strange claims about the judgement of the developers, especially when they've barely played the game, is not special-snowflake untouchable opinion. It's ignorance, and ignorance is supposed to be challenged instead of worshiped.
But the worst part about all of this, the absolute worst part, is that you think this is just about some Donald Duck game, because that happens to be the catalyst for today. You'll make your little jokes, you'll claim that you "don't understand" what I'm trying to say, and you'll try your best to perpetuate the idea that actually taking video games seriously is "the opposite of fun", or "missing the point", or "unnecessary and time-consuming", or whatever other ridiculous phrasing you want to use.
Last Edit: Sept 21, 2016 16:08:07 GMT -5 by Startling
Post by Discoalucard on Sept 21, 2016 17:39:58 GMT -5
You've got us! We hate playing games here. I haven't even played half the games I've written about, just peered at a screenshot and tapped out 1000 words about whatever. It's only taken 13 years for you, a fine, cogent poster, who definitely does not have trouble understanding what an opinion is, and has still struggled to make a point about what they're complaining about, to see through our ruse.
Post by Bobinator on Sept 21, 2016 20:05:36 GMT -5
All right, I'm going to be honest. Thing number one, your tone is way out of line. If you'd be willing to explain yourself without basically saying that everybody on the site is a talentless hack with no clue what they're talking about, you more than likely wouldn't be getting this response right now. An opinion is one thing, and honestly, I suppose I could allow that not every article on the site is on the same level. There's even more than one of mine that nowadays, I'm really not happy with at all. That said, the way you're presenting yourself is making you look incredibly agressive and more than a little smug, and given the context, that's entirely undeserved. If you were nicer, maybe we could figure out what your deal is.
That said, what exactly do you feel is writing on this site that meets your particular standards? I mean, it sounds like you're basically wanting somebody who's stat and down and played the game over and over again to figure out every bit of its design. And that could lead to interesting parts of the game in question, to be sure, but let's be honest, that's not really very practical, in terms of writing. Again, we're going to need a concrete example of what exactly you think our standard should be.
Last Edit: Sept 21, 2016 20:07:22 GMT -5 by Bobinator
Well, either someone would get on my case about editing my post months later, or get on my case about bumping this months old mess, so here goes.
As usual, people are more concerned with tone policing than with any actual message, so here comes all this nonsense about me being an internet tough guy (for... trying to get at the truth...), or me being a martyr (for trying to be informative?), or being this smug asshole in an ivory tower (even though I'm not the forum tone police), or some other strange claim that... starts to sound an awful lot like projection from the exact person saying it. People aren't reading and don't want to, it's as simple as that. You guys know full and well that there are a lot of groups out there that take issue with your site, and have tried their best to do something about it only to fail, so none of what I say should be new to anyone. I know you'd even agree with half of this any other day of the week, because I'm mostly just saying the same stuff we've all been saying for the past decade.
I've tried being nice about this stuff over the years, it simply doesn't work. It doesn't seem to work for anyone else either! Yet because my now completely necessary tone is apparently such a huge issue to people, everything I could possibly say somehow takes on the opposite meaning. And of course, despite me begging people not to localize the problem, there's always this talk of whatever my (totally irrelevant) personal opinion is supposed to be and some "all this over a silly video game" taunting at the end of it all. It amazes me that these things are even possible, and that they are possible time and time again.
I'm asking you to stop acting like the stereotypical video game reviewer who plays a video game for five minutes and then vomits out a half-baked article for a paycheck, and start acting like the actual name of your site. I'm not asking anyone to be this peerless scholar on every game all the time, I'm asking people to stop accusing other human beings of strange failings without actually understanding any of those supposed failings. If you're going to mock a game developer for not coding some minor detail to your specific tastes, maybe you need to first figure out if how the developer did it is actually busted.
I'm asking you to stop acting like the stereotypical video game reviewer who plays a video game for five minutes and then vomits out a half-baked article for a paycheck, and start acting like the actual name of your site.
Since all of your posts seem to be how we "don't understand" gaming, I'd like to point out this particular bit of bullshit. This article was written before the site started paying any significant amount, which means that the author did it, because he loved the subject. Even now, the site is only funded via a mishmash of crowd funding and ad revenue, and the rates aren't as high as professional sites, because we don't have the money to do it.
None of the stuff written here is do it for the money, if that was the case, no one would be writing about retro game stuff ever. It's monumentally condescending that we spend hours putting these things together, and then for you to come in with half-assed whining about some criticism you don't agree with.