On the subject of game reviews

[Astromarine]

I just found a quote that I would like people here to discuss. I think it has relevance both to the issue of game reviews on sites, and also on the discussions between partisan gamers in forums like this one. It talks about books, but the relevance is all there. Any analisys from me will have to wait, since it's 7:30 here and I haven't slept at all all night.

"I often have the feeling that even at the best of times literary criticism is fraudulent, since in the absence of any accepted standards whatever—any external reference which can give meaning to the statement that such and such a book is “good” or “bad”—every literary judgement consists in trumping up a set of rules to justify an instinctive preference. One’s real reaction to a book, when one has a reaction at all, is usually “I like this book” or “I don’t like it”, and what follows is a rationalisation. But “I like this book” is not, I think, a non-literary reaction; the non-literary reaction is “This book is on my side, and therefore I must discover merits in it”

--George Orwell

 

[Rosh]

The problem that lies within that judgement also comes from the issue of The Eye of Argon. it is unarguably technically pathetic compared to Asimov's works. Hey, lack of effort or inability to That also conveys to the game industry, in how a game can be poorly implemented.

Sure, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but you don't need to peel the squish off your boot to understand that you just stepped in dog shit. About the only parallel would be when discussing the story, as the technical aspects have their own considerations.

 

[BethesdaLove]

product rating and ad close by just as they should be