Starker on 14/6/2019 at 05:18
Quote Posted by catbarf
I don't see how the existence of regressive gamers refutes Eva's point about journalists not being immune to personal bias. Personally, I don't trust just Steam reviews, or just social media, or just critics. They each have their problems. Better to read into multiple viewpoints and draw your own conclusions.
So, what, a "game journalist" writing about what they think of a new game should not say what they think, then?
This supposed outrage is by large overblown and made up anyway. Just look at what happened with the Doom "controversy":
[video=youtube;l63nY0AYebI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l63nY0AYebI[/video]
catbarf on 14/6/2019 at 17:30
Quote Posted by Starker
So, what, a "game journalist" writing about what they think of a new game should not say what they think, then?
I'm at a loss as to how you got that from my post. Anyone is free to say what they think, but nobody's perfectly objective, so consider reviews in aggregate to get a well-rounded impression. I'm not buying this false dichotomy where the choices are somehow either 'critics are never affected by personal bias' or 'critics shouldn't say what they think'.
For what it's worth, I don't think moral outrage affecting reviews is a pervasive problem among game critics. I've seen plenty of reviews where the reviewer's commentary is informed by their personal leanings, but only a handful where it seemed to meaningfully factor into the final score, and the common perpetrators are easy to ignore. Still, with critics not all having the same skill levels, genre experience, or familiarity with a series, there are other reasons to seek non-traditional review sources as well. Sometimes those hyperbolic THIS IS THE WORST GAME EVAR user reviews can reflect legitimate issues that the critics don't mention, like unfair monetization schemes, ongoing post-release changes, or compatibility problems.
Starker on 14/6/2019 at 21:03
Well, I wasn't getting it from your post, but that's the gist of the criticism aimed at the so called journalists (who in most cases are really just game reviewers, let's be honest). I was asking a rhetorical question. And nobody has claimed that critics are never affected by personal bias, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. There is no false dichotomy like you describe, just the ridiculous moral outrage aimed at people who are talking about certain issues in games.
The more important point, though, is that there is no moral panic such as Eva describes. It's all manufactured and made up by sites like One Angry Gamer and the cottage industry of anti-SJWs, as the video in my previous post shows.
It's like the supposed free speech problem in American colleges. When you actually look at it, it's just a few isolated cases blown way out of proportion and it even affects liberals more than the conservatives who are making a big deal out of this (though with such small numbers that's likely just a fluke).
catbarf on 14/6/2019 at 21:41
Quote Posted by Starker
And nobody has claimed that critics are never affected by personal bias, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from.
I was about to post Tomi's quote on the first page about game reviewers 'not letting emotions and zeal cloud their judgment', when I realized I had missed the key phrase 'this much'. Oops. That does rather characterize the conversation in a way I'd missed, so I apologize for that.
I think you're right about the moral panic not being a real issue, although I would say that there are occasional actual controversies, not just manufactured ones. Right now there's one going on over Cyberpunk 2077, but I doubt by the time the game comes out it will have had any real impact.
If anything I'm generally more skeptical of game journalists on account of many being journalists first and gamers second. If I'm looking to buy a modern retro-shooter, I'd rather read a review written by someone who knows Quake inside and out than by (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yYp8ZeQ-I8) this guy. IMO the development of community-driven review platforms, first on Youtube and now on Steam, is one of the best things to happen to PC gaming in the last decade, as while there may be a lot of utter crap to wade through, it gives a voice to actual players, and in particular the ones who are real 'power users' in their genres.
Starker on 14/6/2019 at 22:31
You can certainly find poorly written reviews by professional reviewers (professional in the sense they are paid to do this, not in the sense they are good at this). It's generally a good idea to take anything by a gaming publication with a grain of salt. And as you say, these days it's not nearly as big of a problem as it was back in the gaming magazine days, because there is much more information about the game out there than before and you can see the game played on day one (often before that), without any bullshots or bias masking the game's problems.
But I don't think this state of affairs is without any issues either. You can have ideologically motivated gamers review bombing a game for whatever reason. An example of this is what happened to Battletech when they included an option (meaning you had to go out of your way to select this) to be able to select a gender neutral pronoun in the text in addition to "he" and "she". This was a choice that clearly added to the game, if you wanted to have a character whose gender was not clearly defined (for example, an android), and it was fitting of a sci-fi setting to boot. Yet the usual culprits made such a big deal out of this that it even overshadowed legitimate criticisms about the game.
And of course it's all very subjective in the first place. I don't think Daikatana is one of the worst games out there and I don't think that Bioshock is one of the the best games out there, but there clearly is a sizeable majority that disagrees with me.
demagogue on 15/6/2019 at 03:34
That's why I don't trust the numbers. I'll just read user reviews on their own terms.
And of those, I trust user reviews more than professional ones. First just for statistical reasons. Any single review can be clouded by some personal idisyncrasity. But when you have dozens or 100s of them, that kind of averages out, and user reviews are were you get that. But also for what catbarf said. Professional reviewers don't review as gamers for gamers; they review as journalists for readers. The users review as gamers for gamers.
But back to why one shouldn't trust the numbers and should read reviews on their own terms, often it's clear when a reviewer just has an axe to grind versus when they're really trying to be objective about it... Well it might not be clear at first, but after looking at dozens of them the general picture starts the emerge. One reason you shouldn't go by the numbers is that, when a group of them have an axe to grind, they'll spam review more than the ones trying to be objective. Sometimes the axe they have to grind is the same axe you have to grind too though, like the trend to gut core gameplay out and stick it into DLC; even if you still buy it, a review is a valid way to complain about it.
Starker on 15/6/2019 at 03:55
Quote Posted by demagogue
Professional reviewers don't review as gamers for gamers; they review as journalists for readers.
I don't think this is a negative, though. Professional reviewers can often go deeper in their criticisms or approach the game from a different angle than the usual consumer point of view. In fact, I'd go as far as to say we need more professional critics and reviewers, not less. We need more people taking jabs at games like Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw and we need more people taking a more thoughtful look at games like Christopher "Errant Signal" Franklin.
demagogue on 15/6/2019 at 04:17
I'd put it this way. The reviews that are really useful IMO when you're debating whether or not to buy a game are often coming from other gamers. That's because they're usually boiling it right down to the core mechanics and is this a game you're going to have fun or get into playing or not. At that stage I actually want to avoid too much opinion that might bias me going into a game; I just want to know at that stage is it worth putting down $15 and 10 hours, and I trust the general trend of them to answer that question.
Then there are reviews, at least for me, that I want to read after I've played a game when I want to think more deeply about what I've just gone through. For that, the good professional reviewers do a good job of putting things into that wider perspective. So I'd even agree with your point, but just to say different reviewers are better fits for different purposes.
Pyrian on 15/6/2019 at 04:52
I look at the scores. When I'm debating whether to get a game, I already know I'm interested in the mechanics. I just want to know if they stuffed it up.
Starker on 15/6/2019 at 04:54
I sometimes want to play games for reasons that go beyond "is it fun to play" and "do the mechanics work properly", though. Like for example games that do something novel or have something interesting to say despite not being the most fun to play or not working properly. So even for purely consumerist purposes I see value in critics that look at the game in more depth and more critically. And it's not like gamers are free of bias either and it's not like initial impressions are necessarily the most accurate. I do want to know, for example, whether a game that looks pretty and is praised endlessly turns out to be an empty vacuous experience for me like it happened with Bioshock Infinite. But that's not something I can find out from user reviews. If I go to Steam right now, what I see is:
Quote:
The game is pretty short ( finished it in 6h playing normaly ) but worth every minute of it. A real masterpiece. The graphics are really good and the story outsounding.
Quote:
Bioshock Infinite is an excellent game and is worthy of multiple playthroughs.
Quote:
The game is definitely a masterpiece. One of the best games I've played.
and even negative reviews don't tell me what I want to know:
Quote:
This is not a Bioshock game. Bioshock is underwater, this is not. Its a disgrace against the franchise... Get the first 2 games, this one is really confusing with time travel and garbage. If you want simplicity dont get this game.
...so you have endless praise on one hand and people who don't like the game because it's different on the other.
On the other hand, this single video told me more about the games problems (and even its strong points) than I could have found out even browsing hundreds of suggestions from regular gamers:
[video=youtube;GJ2cSKBFBDQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ2cSKBFBDQ[/video]
