Hory
Erudite
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2003
- Messages
- 3,002
You're a die-hard subjectivist, we get it. Now stop rambling in all of the god-damned objectivist arguments. Jesus...Naked Ninja said:
You're a die-hard subjectivist, we get it. Now stop rambling in all of the god-damned objectivist arguments. Jesus...Naked Ninja said:
Naked Ninja said:But I don't believe games are art man. I believe they should be rated and scored based on how much the individual playing them enjoys the experience. Not how complex it is, not the history, the fun. The gameplay. I happen to find complexity enjoyable, but that does not make the two equivalent.
Naked Ninja said:(..snip)
I don't believe this statement particularly valid, either. If I go off and play soccer instead of chess, is it because I don't want to commit the energy to the mental effort? Not at all. I have different tastes, different things I enjoy, and I seek to satisfy those tastes. Chess is different from soccer and although some chess players might not like soccer, considering it a brute physical sport or something, they are both great games and valid of praise. Saying someone likes soccer because they don't want to commit the mental energy to chess is just as nonsensical a statement. They are simply satisfying different tastes. Saying otherwise is snobbery.(snip...)
Naked Ninja said:But I don't believe games are art man
Naked Ninja said:But here's the thing, there seems to be this assumption that the reviewer is ignorant of older, better RPGs, because that's the only way they could consider a game the Codex doesn't like great?
Naked Ninja said:But if they say "I really liked aspects of Oblivion, and those aspects made it a fantastic overall experience for me", you don't really have a right to point at them and say "You just think you liked it because you aren't thinking about it deeply enough/ haven't played any older games which I consider better".
Naked Ninja said:That's a rather arrogant stance to take, it denies people even the right to form their own opinions because there is this implicit assumption that if they aren't agreeing with your view it must be from stupidity, ignorance, lack of critical analysis or simply not having played any of the games you think is better.
But here's the nagging bit, the "why is NN completely wrong"-swing of the thing, what is the function of reviews if they only serve to affirm a decision based on ignorance?
Astromarine said:translation: "I like smart people. I don't understand them, and I'm not like them, but I like them. Except that one over there. He doesn't like the smart people I like, so I dislike him. Oh but damn, I'm not smart enough to disagreewith him. I know, I'll just call him a poopyhead. Maybe then the smart people will like me.
Please?"
Naked Ninja said:Lol.
Nerd Rage, does your child suffer from it? Call your doctor if he displays any of the warning signs.
And so the fuck what?Naked Ninja said:They are simply satisfying different tastes. Saying otherwise is snobbery.
You can have opinion, nobody is saying you can't. Everybody has opinions on a million different things. But not everybody can give serious criticism in more than a few fields. I think that's what you fail to understand, criticism is different than opinion because it involves skill and knowledge and therefore is more valuable. It doesn't make opinions irrelevant but averaging out a lot of opinions is not a substitute to listening or reading someone who knows something about the subject.No. I don't. Can you give me a reason why I should? I play games for fun. If it's not fun the rest doesn't matter. I enjoy certain things, other people enjoy other things. My girlfriend likes romantic comedies and romance dramas. This does not make her opinion ignorant, just different. I personally don't see any place for snobby critics telling me I or she like these movies because we are ignorant/common/uninformed. In fact, if anyone told me that to my face...we'd have strong words, yes? Wink
dagorkan said:If the score of a game magazine review is simply some random dude's opinion optionally averaged out according to some arbitrary formula with 'popularity' then I seriously don't see the pointing in reading any of them or buying your stupid magazine. If I want to read uninformed opinions and judge popularity I can go to the Amazon.com page for the product and read hundreds of them with a variety of biases, and all of them for FREE!
dagorkan said:ElPresidente, please explain if anyone can write a review what exactly are we paying for? What do you think of your job? Apart from simply being a liar you make a living off selling uninformed and ignorant lies to gullible people... many people are not going to buy Age of Decadence because of YOU. People who saved up money for a while hoping to buy a good game (or kids who just get one game a year for Christmas) bought Oblivion because they trusted your colleagues. You together with your friends are a major factor in preventing good RPGs being made.
Are you proud of yourself?
Castanova said:Also: dagorkan wins the internet.
Naked Ninja said:seems not to leave any room for the possibility of someone validly believing Oblivion to be great.
Methinks you're getting a bit paranoid, NN.
Do you even know what criticism is? It's unbelievable, it seems like some of you have never been asked to write serious criticism of anything in your lives. At school I had to review, analyze and critique various kinds of texts, factual prose, fiction, verse etc every week. A thousand words or so in which my personal tastes, feelings and value judgments were completely irrelevant.
If you tried at any point to introduce your opinion without regard to method and without research you'd be called a dumbfuck by the teacher in front of everybody
As the medium becomes more and more mature, the basic attribute of "entertainment" value becomes less and less important to the professional critic. How the game fits into the medium historically now and how the game will fit in the coming years becomes really the leading measure of how good the game is.
I also decide some things based on my uninformed opinions, what I don't do is lie and arrogantly pass off my opinions as important and sell those lies for a living.
Naked Ninja said:Am I? Do I need to quote the entirety of S8's post back to you guys? Or Edward_R_Murrow? Seriously, a lot of these posts seem to be built around the inherent assumption that IF someone rated Oblivion highly it can ONLY be because they lack intelligence/are ignorant of past games/catering to the console market.
ElPresidente said:Couple of things:
* I did not write the AoD piece.
But the world - wow. The world was compelling, and I don't just mean graphically. It felt explorable. There was interesting stuff to find all over the place, and the bajillion subquests were often very entertaining and had some nice twists. And since I felt like I could go for the final end-game stuff at any time (pretty much guaranteed with the lame auto-scaling factor), it never felt like it went too long, even at over 100 hours in.
And say what you will about Oblivion's hand-holding to get you to your quests, but due to a grown-up schedule and occasional crunch-modes at work (not to mention Rampant Games stuff...), I find myself not playing for a couple of weeks. So a game that can re-engage my interest quickly and gently point me where I need to go next is welcome.
When someone claims that Oblivion is a weak game it's only a claim. If someone disagrees with a claim then they ask for a clarification or throw their own arguments. That's the way it works everywhere when we are debating something.
Naked Ninja said:That's my point. You guys seem to want to debate the person rather than the arguments the person puts forth. You're attempting to create a situation where the only people who have valid opinions are the people whose opinions align with your own. If they don't, well they are deficient in some way. Stupid, lacking knowledge, mainstream pandering weasels, something which allows you to disqualify their opinion.