- Joined
- May 29, 2010
- Messages
- 35,653
I agree with your overall sentiment but at the same time I think I've finally nailed down what defines the Rogueyism. It's these oddly specific, out-of-context comparisons that elevate peripheral points to the status of central arguments.
Like, I in many cases prefer hub-based games because they free up developer resources and mean you don't have to take the open world into account which unloads a WHOOOOOLE lot of design tension. But... is that really the reason why people like Bloodlines and dislike The Outer Worlds? In fact, is it even *a* reason? Or does that have much more to do with all the stuff Bloodlines does brilliantly despite its flaws while The Outer Worlds doesn't do really much of anything that well?
It's like... if a Roxorism is identifying all the flaws and qualities of something and then letting whether he likes that thing govern whether flaws should be blown out of proportion and qualities understated - or vice versa - a Rogueyism is using hyperspecific comparisons to argue something regardless of whether these hyperspecific examples are all that relevant in the broader scope of why something is true (or not).
TOW is what immediately came to mind, but overall I believe the fixation on having constant dopamine hits in games (as mentioned here in TOW's case) is a trade-off of getting short-term highs for long-term malaise, resulting in a less-satisfactory experience overall.