But more importantly it’s prompted by the endless needling I get from Various Parties when I fail to like things. Or if I don’t like them enough. Or for the right reasons.
“It’s your own fault you’re bad at the game.”
Which doesn’t change that fact that some people really want to know how demanding a game is, and how punishing it is.
“It’s your own fault for not knowing the lore.”
Actually, it’s the storytellers job to make the story interesting for the audience. In any case, “This story is bad for newcomers” is valuable information for newcomers.
“You shouldn’t have played the game if you don’t like QTEs / morality systems / romance subplots / grinding.”
So what parts of the game is the critic allowed to critique? Using this logic, a game can only be reviewed by people who are already fans of it, and are only consumed by people who already know what they’re getting. Which means the fanboy is using reviews as as way of reinforcing their opinions, and basically declaring artistic reviews and consumer advice as invalid. Moreover, if I was supposed to know better than to play a game with [feature], how am I supposed to find out about [feature]? You’ve already said it’s wrong for critics to bring it up!
This is all a waste of time, of course. Fans will be fans. In fact, I predict reflexive defense of RE4 in response to my article about how reflexively defending things is terrible. There’s no cure.
Still, I can always hope to make a few converts.
Crash Dot Com
Back in 1999, I rode the dot-com bubble. Got rich. Worked hard. Went crazy. Turned poor. It was fun.
The true story of three strange days in 1989, when the last months of my adolescence ran out and the first few sparks of adulthood appeared.
The Truth About Piracy
What are publishers doing to fight piracy and why is it all wrong?
Batman: Arkham Origins
A breakdown of how this game faltered when the franchise was given to a different studio.
Push the Button!
Scenes from Half-Life 2:Episode 2, showing Gordon Freeman being a jerk.