GarfunkeL said:
Good interview VOD. It's a sad state of gaming journalism that an interview not filled with sloppy blowjob sounds is now declared to be "hostile".
Sorry, but no. I don't think it was a good interview to be perfectly honest. You see, there are blowjobs in so called gaming journalism. We hate them all - not only because they are pathetic, but also much because they obscure the information we want to receive. The questions they asks are very biased in favour of the interviewee, they enquire about things the dev will have ready answer for, hence all the slurping, derping and idiocy.
I think Ventilator went to the other side of the spectrum completely. It seems to me his questions are quite spot on, but the tone of enquiry is embarassingly hostile - biased against the interviewee. It appears as if the interviewer wanted to corner his interlocutor and gut the truth out of him. It is very sensational, aimed to please the audience. It may be very effective... in tabloid press, or Fox News - not in prestigious magazine.
Let us analyze this specimen:
I suppose there will be a lot of combat in The Witcher 2, so let's talk about the combat system. In The Witcher it was all about clicking every X seconds to chain attacks into combos. That wasn't too exciting but at the very least it didn't require mad mouse & keyboard skills. Now I've read that with The Witcher 2 you're going the button-mashing route. Is that true? So, how do I have to imagine combat in The Witcher 2 - maybe in comparison to some other game it draws inspiration from - and what changes have been made?
1)
In The Witcher it was all about clicking every X seconds to chain attacks into combos.
Was it really
all about clicking every X seconds to chain attacks into combos? For each and every encounter? And even if it was like that do you think the dev will share this sentiment? Maybe he thought that positioning was also important. Maybe the spells were also of use? Ventilator generalised, about it - certainly showed that he played the game, but also that he considered other features as unimportant off the bat, without even mentioning them. Not only that you suggest just like that that the whole idea of
clicking every X seconds was not only bad - it was retarded. Again, even if you feel that way, the dev who was himself invested in the project is unlikely to share your view. To him it was simple, to Ventilator simplistic. With his tone Ventilator is sending him the message 'you were idiots if you thought for a moment it was good idea.'
That one sentence could have been saved by saying
In The Witcher the combat was mostly/mainly about clicking in set intervals to chain attacks into combos. The sentence has now completely different air to it.
2)
That wasn't too exciting but at the very least it didn't require mad mouse & keyboard skills.
Just at the start of the sentence with his
That wasn't too exciting, off the bat Ventilator's saying -
In my view, that was bloody boring. Ventilator is the only speaker here. Nothing indicates that anyone shares his view. Immediately Ventilator reveals his bias against the subject in question. As a result he loses much of his credibility. He is not impartial anymore.
Alternatively, this sentence could also mean
That wasn't too exciting -
Everyone thought it was boring. In that case it is extreme overgeneralisation. The dev knows that there are people out there who liked the system in the first game. Consequently, the interviewer comes across as an ignorant.
Also, I don't like it here that the sentence implies that requiring
mad mouse & keyboard skills is necessary a bad thing. This negative carries on to the two next sentences.
In contrast with the previous chunk, here a slight generalisation would have saved the grace:
There are those who argue that the system wasn't very exciting, but at least it did not require mad mouse & keyboard skills.
3)
Now I've read that with The Witcher 2 you're going the button-mashing route. Is that true?
From urban-dictionary
Urban dictionary said:
Button masher
1. A person who isn't perticularly good at video games, so they just mash random buttons on the controler, hoping that they do something right. A tactic that works best in fighting games.
2. A game which requires little more than mindless button mashing to win.
Button-mashing
The act of randomly and erratically pressing buttons (with barely a clue as to what is happening) when playing a game (esp. fighting game).
In this one sentence Ventilator lost whatever vestiges of impartiality and professionalism he had. Just like that he attributed very pejorative expression ESPECIALLY in the context of RPGs to a game that wasn't even released. How on earth, did he expect Gop to answer that question?
Yes, we made the Witcher 2 a bloody mindless button-masher?? Of course, he went on to explain how the game is not as brainless as you expect it to be - EVEN if Twitcher 2 was a fighting game to begin with. But from the tone of entire query it seems like the interviewer has already made up his mind about what the combat will be.
So, how do I have to imagine combat in The Witcher 2 - maybe in comparison to some other game it draws inspiration from - and what changes have been made?
Did we really have to go through all that hate talk for this question to be asked? It is a good inquiry, I give you that. It is pretty spot on. But from all the implied hostility it seems Ventilator is not interested in the answer at all - at least not in the content. In effect the question fails to elicit meaningful response, other than the dev getting all defensive about the project he was invested in.
And that was only one query!
In conclusion, where this interview fails miserably at is the maintenance of unbiased, impartial voice. VentilatoofDoom strikes as being bent on ridiculing his speaker, or at least driving him into the state where he unwittingly might spit out some info about the game. The writer did not remove himself from the community of gamers to simply report about the product and its quality. Rather, he allowed for his personal views to influence the article.
It is painfully obvious that the interview was created with specific audience in mind - us Codexers - the uncompromising, merciless, cynical bastards, overpassionate about our favourite pastime. We love when our articles to be ironic, grimdark and edgy. Unfortunately, the dev didn't have to know that.
Also, precisely because the article is sensational, tailored towards us it can be accused of untrustworthiness not so much different than that from so called 'blow job' journalists.
I doubt we will get anyone from CDProjekt Red for an interview anytime soon. :/
))
