Vault Dweller said:
Ismaul said:
Vault Dweller said:
The issue in question here is not the criticism but its quality (or lack thereof).
All that is of quality has been said and done.
I've heard this argument before. It was used to explain why the lulz are teh future - everything of quality has been said before. I disagreed then and disagree now. We exposed Bethesda's lies and attempts to mislead and misinform not to score cool points and come up with great one-liners but to inform the gaming public that Bethesda is not a trustworthy developer and that anything they say should be taken with a bucket of salt. Judging by the results we've greatly succeeded there and all the Codex needs to do is to continue its campaign. Going overboad though reduces the effect of the campaign and in the end defeats the original purpose.
I mostly agree with you. I meant that our criticism is reactive to what is presented to us. And on that side, we have pretty much beaten the proverbial dead horse, until another abomination comes up and we are inspired to beat it once again. I understand the value of debunking lies, criticising stupidity and spreading information. But we here who have made the Codex our home are "enlightened". We recognize the lie, the reccuring patterns of truth embelishment and evasion, and laugh or cry in unison at the retardation. We wade through this shit like a knife through butter. We are not the ones that need to be informed or shown the path, for we are the believers in this cult of the critical mind. And this is why this continued criticism eventually feels repetitive to us.
This is why we spice it up with hyperbole or lulz to keep it fresh. And those, as wierd as it may be, are the tools that reaffirm our continued fervor. Else, the repetition would kill us with boredom, and eventually lead to letting go of our ideological fight to crimes against roleplaying and reason. And this is incompatible with our very own beliefs, so we move forward using the tools we can.
Understand that the Codex is not, in its current nature, entirely devoted to the militant idea that we are to provide the needed equilibrium and reason to all the wrong that is present in gaming journalism, development, PR and publishing. That said, I'm not against the idea of a militant and active Codex, and actually believe that we don't go far enough. But there are people that come here not with the intention to change things or be informed of the sad state of the industry. Some want only to participate in discussion with like-minded individuals on those very subjects. It is people like them that have this certain way of expressing and maintaining their belief in this ideology of ours. I don't see in what way those people that clearly share common ideas hurt the Codex as a whole, especially if their antics are prevented from taking over the serious discussion.
Now, about this militant Codex. This, I think, should be the front of the Codex, with informing as its primary mission. But up to now, we have been doing that in a reactive manner, and I can see how to the militant people this is not enough. We have next to no tangible impact outside of this site's boundaries. To do so, we would need to start to act instead of reacting. Editorials on roleplaying, bad journalism and mass-catering game developpment. A team of highly motivated people. But this somewhat shifts the focus of the site, or rather expands it logically. I'm all for it. But to have stronger credibility, the front page would need a serious overhaul, and the news higher standards of presentation with the same critical comments.
This can be done. But I have yet to see how a Codex that takes itself more seriously is hurt by the people that are less involved but share beliefs and keep them alive with occasionnal hyperbole or lulz. Both can coexsit, as they are somewhat separate. The serious front is mainly the front page and the editorials. The non serious stuff is contained in the forums alone, hidden from the casual browser, and we can make sure that it doesn't take over certain forum sections that are by nature more serious. Also, if the Codex starts having critical articles aside from reviews, this will bring along serious discussions and kill the repetitiveness of typical news criticism.
