|
tap my mountain posted:MGS3 is often regarded as the best one in the series but it's also the least fun, at least for me after the excellent controls and smoothness of MGSV I find it somewhat excruciating to play MGS3, which I still love but it starts to show its age in a lot of ways now. Subsistence at least let you have camera control, i have no idea how I played through that game the first time without that.
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:You should laugh at them, those are pretty useless critiques. It still doesn't mean that Doom or UnderTale are "objectively good games". Doom's a technical masterpiece with solid controls and fantastic audio and art direction. "Objectively good" refers mainly to production values, and it's actually a really good idea to split that out from "how much did I like it". I like this system. My recent hot takes: Resident Evil 5: G3/F5 - Lots of questionable design decisions but overall a solidly built game with good controls. It really shines in co-op, even with the considerable amounts of jank and the dumb story I would gladly re-play this again a few times. DLC is bad, but mercifully short. Resident Evil 6: G2/F3 - Not nearly as well put together as the last one. Great visuals, but the sound direction and writing are basically total garbo. Controls and UI are also kind of meh, with some random changes to the menus making them hard to parse. Neat idea, but very poorly implemented. It's fun in co-op, but has a lot more sections in it that I would rather just not do again, and I don't feel much inclination to replay it, especially the Sherry plotline. Shadow of Mordor: The Bright Lord DLC: G2/F2 - Basically just hard mode DLC with some crappy challenges and next to no new actual content. The new remote branding ability is pretty neat, but the missions are too much of a pain in the rear end to really be fun. Even the beast hunt DLC had more new things to do than this, and that wasn't all that great either compared to the main game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:40
|
|
|
Oh, the other thing about my problem with the idea of "objective reviews" is that it makes it difficult to understand how two reviewers might disagree. If you're out there looking for purely objective game reviews, disagreement in review scores must mean that one of those reviewers is either wrong or dishonest. It's why I hate the words "objective" and "subjective" when it comes to art or entertainment. I think there are inherently good and inherently bad works in any medium, but I also think that critics and general audiences can disagree on what makes a work in that medium good or bad without either being wrong, dishonest, or less objective.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
I wonder what game might earn a G1/F5 or vice versa.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:49
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:I wonder what game might earn a G1/F5 or vice versa. What's the video game equivalent of The Room?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:I wonder what game might earn a G1/F5 or vice versa. G1F5: Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing G5F1: Probably some artsy-fartsy indie game or something
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
Dewgy posted:Doom's a technical masterpiece with solid controls and fantastic audio and art direction. "Objectively good" refers mainly to production values, and it's actually a really good idea to split that out from "how much did I like it". No it isn't. It's absolutely worthless. Most people aren't dazzled by high production values, otherwise Killzone: Shadowfall would be as beloved as Doom. The "fantastic audio and art direction" are fantastic, btw, because of the way they interact with the gameplay. It's not like they are fantastic on their own. Doom's soundtrack did not become a pop culture sensation on its own merits. Jettison the idea of an "Objectively Good Game" and just tell us what worked for you, and how it did. Don't try to guess how other people will feel about it, which is what this ultimately boils down to. It's an appeal to popularity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:53
|
|
|
Leroy Dennui posted:G1F5: Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing I was thinking about Big Rigs but it's not a fun game past the first five minutes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
Jay Rust posted:I wonder what game might earn a G1/F5 or vice versa. G1/F5 - the South Park N64 game to 8 year old me G5/F1 - That's a tough one. My girlfriend's brother plays Hearts of Iron and a lot of similar strategy games that I'm glad he enjoys a ton but I just couldn't see myself getting into.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:55
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:What's the video game equivalent of The Room? I can't say for sure because I haven't played any of them but some of the goofy games Corn in the Bible posts videos of every now and again seem like they might get there
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Most people aren't dazzled by high production values Lol if you think that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:What's the video game equivalent of The Room? I can't play House of the Dead 2 without cracking up at the voice acting and all the incredibly stupid poo poo. But it's also really rad light gun shooter so it's certainly not a G1/F5.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Picross 3D Round 2 is G5F5 the perfect game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:No it isn't. It's absolutely worthless. Most people aren't dazzled by high production values, otherwise Killzone: Shadowfall would be as beloved as Doom. But I think with enough experience and critical thought, you can make the leap in your review from "what works for me" to "what works." That's what I mean. Again, I wouldn't call it "objective" or any game "objectively good" because I think the word "objective" carries connotations that aren't useful for a review. But there are things that work in game design, aesthetic design, writing, gamefeel, mechanics, world design, all of that, and things that don't, and I think those can be separated from "Do I, personally, enjoy this game?" EDIT: I should also clarify that I don't think the average player has any responsibility to think of games like that. For most people who play games, "am I enjoying this?" is the only question that matters. I'm just talking about professional reviews. Harrow fucked around with this message at 20:01 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:57
|
|
|
Mario Kart 8 is a textbook G5/F5
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
G5/F5 = games I like G1/F1 = games I don't like
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
Harrow posted:But there are things that work in game design, aesthetic design, writing, gamefeel, mechanics, world design, all of that, and things that don't, and I think those can be separated from "Do I, personally, enjoy this game?" Whether all of the things that you just listed "work" are subjective. Edit: ok you edited it, and here's my response: I don't want professional reviewers (who are almost universally sheltered doughy white guys) making assumptions about what I'll enjoy. Just write about what they experienced. These are not vacuums or microwaves, you can't just rattle off the stats and the price vs. industry average and say "good buy" or "bad buy"
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:Surely there is a piece of media which you enjoy but do not consider "good" and would not recommend to your friends or strangers on the internet. Dawn of Mana is a very pretty game that I could recommend to precisely nobody because it's very repetitive, filled with physics puzzles, and is basically a slower and less flashy Kingdom Hearts. But god drat it, you fight a Thanatos-possessed Treant while he hurls insults and seeds at you while this music plays: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgYnagO_Rts
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
Earth Table posted:I can't play House of the Dead 2 without cracking up at the voice acting and all the incredibly stupid poo poo. Yeah, that game hits you with it RIGHT from the word go. Just in case someone hasn't experienced it (doubtful): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-vE5vbx04E
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
I feel like objective analysis had more of a place in the NES/pre-NES era where you had games that just kind of... didn't work every once in a while. "Controls like utter dogshit" "glitchier'n a motherfucker" "You literally cannot complete the game; it is broken" "Action 52-style scam" Like this stuff still happens but much less. More the realm of sketchy Steam Greenlight stuff and crappy F2P smartphone games now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Whether all of the things that you just listed "work" are subjective. you seem to be stuck on "i think this is good" when other people are moving toward "i think this is good and here's why"
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:06
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:Surely there is a piece of media which you enjoy but do not consider "good" and would not recommend to your friends or strangers on the internet. Internalizing shame that deep is probably not very healthy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
oddium posted:the objectively perfect game is mgs3. thank you for reading Was about to post this, cheers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:07
|
|
|
"Are you having fun?" is a really important question to ask but it's impossible to have a critical discussion without moving further from that point.precision posted:Internalizing shame that deep is probably not very healthy. It's about recognizing that you enjoyed a thoroughly flawed work, and there's nothing wrong with that, but maybe your friends wouldn't appreciate it as much as you did. Thanks for the therapy session, though. Dr Cheeto fucked around with this message at 20:10 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:08
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Whether all of the things that you just listed "work" are subjective. When how is it that I, and a lot of other people, can look at some art or entertainment that I don't enjoy on a personal level but recognize it as being well-made and good? If game design and aesthetics are purely "subjective," then that should be impossible. I mean, maybe you think I'm lying (to myself, if not you)? That if there's a thing I think is very good but I don't personally enjoy, what's actually happening is that I enjoy it but for some reason won't admit it? Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Edit: ok you edited it, and here's my response: I don't want professional reviewers (who are almost universally sheltered doughy white guys) making assumptions about what I'll enjoy. Just write about what they experienced. These are not vacuums or microwaves, you can't just rattle off the stats and the price vs. industry average and say "good buy" or "bad buy" Well, that's not what I'm saying either. Like, I appreciate folks like Digital Foundry who do point-by-point breakdowns of a game's technical aspects, but I don't consider those reviews or all that useful in buying decisions. Where we disagree is that I think it's possible to go beyond "what I experienced" and look at things in a wider context and determine if a thing is good or not. (And at the same time, I think it's possible for honest, "objective" reviewers to disagree on what makes a game good or bad without either being a) uselessly subjective or b) wrong or dishonest.) Harrow fucked around with this message at 20:11 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:09
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:No it isn't. It's absolutely worthless. Most people aren't dazzled by high production values, otherwise Killzone: Shadowfall would be as beloved as Doom. Speaking of absolutely worthless, I somehow forgot I was replying to megaman's jockstrap.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:11
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Whether all of the things that you just listed "work" are subjective. okay for real are you suggesting legitimate criticism isn't possible
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
can a game be bad and fun at the same time... [camera casually and unrelatedly pans, and refocuses, on botw over my shoulder] who's to say haha
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:It's about recognizing that you enjoyed a thoroughly flawed work, and there's nothing wrong with that, but maybe your friends wouldn't appreciate it as much as you did. Thanks for the therapy session, though. It sounded more like you were taking the "guilty pleasure" approach, which is a concept I've always found bizarre, because it directly implies that it's possible to feel bad about liking a piece of art because of some arbitrary criteria (it's pop music, it's a national bestseller, it's a Mass Effect game, etc)
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:16
|
|
|
Maybe the leads on Andromeda all suffer from undiagnosed cases of face blindness and this is a cry for help?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
precision posted:It sounded more like you were taking the "guilty pleasure" approach, which is a concept I've always found bizarre, because it directly implies that it's possible to feel bad about liking a piece of art because of some arbitrary criteria (it's pop music, it's a national bestseller, it's a Mass Effect game, etc) Ah, yeah, that is a weirdly popular idea, but not really what I was trying to express. It's good to read pulpy novels and listen to pop music sometimes!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Phantasium posted:Dawn of Mana is a very pretty game that I could recommend to precisely nobody because it's very repetitive, filled with physics puzzles, and is basically a slower and less flashy Kingdom Hearts. And then at one point there is a stage where you're just climbing a tower for a good 20 or 30 minutes and when you get to the top, it triggers a fight with a magic swordsman who you have to fling poo poo at to hit while every attack you or he does organically destroys the tower like the Raging Raven fight in MGS4, all set to this music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpUusaENTIQ
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
precision posted:It sounded more like you were taking the "guilty pleasure" approach, which is a concept I've always found bizarre, because it directly implies that it's possible to feel bad about liking a piece of art because of some arbitrary criteria (it's pop music, it's a national bestseller, it's a Mass Effect game, etc) I really like Battlefield Earth, but it's definitely not a good movie by any definition. Good lighting and set design, terrible everything else, and it's wonderfully stupid. There's something about it that just tickles me, and I know it's in no way what the creators intended. I don't really see how that's bizarre. The Bad Rats example is pretty much perfect, it's something that works on an individual level despite everything that actually went into the project conspiring against it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
I guess one thing I should point out about what I'm arguing is that while I think it's possible to have good, legitimate criticism of games that goes beyond the purely subjective and also isn't just a list of a game's technical aspects with some numbers by them. At the same time, I don't think there are very many critics out there who are doing that. I think there are many who try and fail, but very few who succeed. What I'm talking about is the idea of legitimate media criticism, not necessarily defending the honor of the generally crappy group of games critics working today.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Harrow posted:One problem with numerical review scores is that they project the sort of "objectivity" that I think a lot of video game nerds (honestly, I can't think of a better word for the kind of person I'm talking about) think that a review must have. It's why people see Breath of the Wild getting 10/10 scores and go, "But it's clearly not perfect, so that score is dishonest!" Hey! ... OK fine...
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
Dewgy posted:Speaking of absolutely worthless, I somehow forgot I was replying to megaman's jockstrap. It's always really amazing and a little shocking to me when I find out that some online stranger nurses a grudge toward lil ole me. Get well soon. Looper posted:okay for real are you suggesting legitimate criticism isn't possible "Legitimate criticism" probably means different things to each of us, so let's just agree to disagree.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
if you really enjoy a game then I think you should say it's a good game if you don't enjoy a game it isn't necessarily a bad game - I don't enjoy eating fish but I don't tell everyone it is bad food and they shouldn't bother eating it
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:22
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Maybe the leads on Andromeda all suffer from undiagnosed cases of face blindness and this is a cry for help? Bethesda actually has a similar problem, hence "Bethesda Potato Face Syndrome." See also: Akira Toriyama, the people who work on generic anime trash games for the Vita and Steam, some 3D anime games, Rob Liefeld comics... bloodychill fucked around with this message at 20:26 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:24
|
|
|
bloodychill posted:Hey! ... OK fine... Hah poo poo, I didn't even mean you, whoops. I was just (stupidly) wading into comments and tweets about the Jim Sterling BotW shitstorm and came across a lot of people very stubbornly arguing that a 10/10 should be impossible and therefore anyone who gave BotW a 10/10 must be dishonest, paid off, and/or have low standards. Like if Jim Sterling used Eurogamer's review scale of Essential > Recommended > no recommendation > Avoid, his review would've fallen square into "Recommended" and I bet nobody would've even noticed. And if Polygon used that scale, their 10/10 review would've fallen under "Essential," and I think there'd be a lot less room for those people to say "clearly a paid review because the game isn't perfect!" because "Essential" doesn't say "perfect." (That said it clearly isn't true for everyone--there are still people arguing in Eurogamer's BotW review comments that it isn't "Essential" material because of the FPS drops.) Harrow fucked around with this message at 20:27 on Mar 16, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 23:07 |
|
|
Didn't some magazines use to have like, three reviewers to a game? I feel like having three numbers on a review helps remove that sense of objectivity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2017 20:25
|
|
