D.Final
Banned
I agree with your sentiment, but the problem is deeper. Quantifying an experience on a linear scale of bad-good is idiotic. There is no room for nuance, challenging experiences, subversion, etc.
In Slavoj Zizek's new book Sex And The Absolute, he makes the observation that, it's in the gap we see between the flaws and the ideal that perfection exists - and it's the only place it can exist.
Should something 'correct' it flaws, it only becomes ordinary.
Xenoblade Chronicles X, for example, is a deeply flawed game. It's easy to point out where it fails, and easy to knock points. Yet, the experience is transcendent. If it corrected for all it's warts and idiosyncracies, it'd be Horizon: Zero Dawn, or something equally 'good' - and utterly mediocre. As it is, we can see the most rich and ambitious open world game ever made buried underneath the flaws, and in that sense, we grasp perfection, if only in moments.
In fact, in the end, it's all subjective.
But I decided to express what seemed to me to be a predominant aspect of the "condition" in which the players find themselves in today's society.
For example:
what would you say, on a purely media level, if games like The Last of Us Part 2, the new Zelda Breath of the wild 2 (or Breath of the Darkness) or even Death Stranding, if they received an average of Metacritic and Opencritic score much less than 90?
For example:
The Last of Us Part 2 - 82 Metacritic and 81 Opencritic
Zelda BoTW 2 - 78 Metacritic and 79 Opencritic
Death Stranding - 70 Metacritic and 74 Opencritic
At the very least there would be a collapse of gigantic proportions at the media and visual level for anyone who produces and distributes these games.
But, secondly, as well as fans of the aforementioned games, one would ask oneself: "why are they considered worse than other previous games".
By exponentially reducing their importance meter.
But considering them anyway, for a part of those who have played them, however, good games.
Last edited: