Why not re read the post properly and make sure you fully understand it? I am explicitly differentiating between valid criticism and shitting.It's suspicious to me that you began with the premise that there is "something wrong" with people who "crap" on well-reviewed games. According to you, they all have some kind of psychological deficiency -- they are console warriors, perfectionists, or trolls, basically. I would suggest that this typology suggests a deficiency in you -- that you do not understand that some people criticize a game fairly, because of its actual deficiencies (at least in their opinion). That does not mean there is something wrong with them. Maybe it means that they wanted something different than what the game offers. Maybe it means that their expectations, although not "perfectionistic" as you label them, were not met. Maybe it means they see things wrong with the game that many reviewers (who are often bought and paid for) did not highlight. It can be many other things besides some personal deficiency. In fact, saying that it's a personal deficiency is simply ad hominem. Why not take the criticisms for what they are, rather than dismiss them with ad hominem typologies?
I can shit all over FF16s boooooooooooooooooooooooooring and redundant side quests. And it can still be a valid criticism.Why not re read the post properly and make sure you fully understand it? I am explicitly differentiating between valid criticism and shitting.
Your armchair psychoanalysis of an OP on a videogame forum is darn funny though...I'll give you that.
Why not re read the post properly and make sure you fully understand it? I am explicitly differentiating between valid criticism and shitting.
So that's my hypothesis. Three different types worthy of criticism with their own motivations and another that is not about videogames themselves that you can only shake your head at.
Personally the third one is the worst since it just seeks to destroy- and creating is super hard and risky. And we shouldn't shit on the act of creation for our own entertainment. And the ego trip is pretty unbearable too.
The first is understandable as a well established part of human behaviour that has been put to the wrong use ( follow a sports team if you want to relive tribes - not products you can enjoy without restrictions between them).
The second is worthy of some sympathy. If someone is so affected by a product, then that suggests there are larger personal issues at play and the person needs support not vitriol thrown back at them.
So what do you think? Makes sense.? Something missing or need a different framing? Which one do you hate most?
This man is a terrorist, mods. Apprehend him!I have a duty to my nation
Is that you Jim Ryan?Please Phil stop making alts.
lol! projecting much? thats the whole premise of your "article"Your armchair psychoanalysis of an OP on a videogame forum is darn funny though...I'll give you that.
This. =/Some fanboys/shills are trying their hardest to turn this place into an echo chamber like that purple hell hole.
Streamers and critics: 10/10 best game ever best space exploration 100000000000000000000 planets!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Actual real people playing the game:
No its not...the category for having a different opinion isnt even in the poll.I can shit all over FF16s boooooooooooooooooooooooooring and redundant side quests. And it can still be a valid criticism.
Your premise for this thread seems pretty clearly to be "there is something wrong w people who have differing opinions on highly reviewed games" and you seem hellbent on finding ways to label such people to devalue their opinion.
This. =/
lol! projecting much? thats the whole premise of your "article"
Guy, what are you talking about? Very little is objective in art. So, how you "feel" about things makes them true FOR YOU, no matter what sort of corny ass labels you wanna put on people for disagreeing w you or the majority. So FF16 boring af side quests is a valid criticism FOR ME and anyone else who feels the same. Thats how this works.No its not...the category for having a different opinion isnt even in the poll.
Just because you "feel" something doesn't make it true. Just because I am criticising the extreme of something doesnt mean i am criticising it's moderate counterpart.
You can have all the fun you like turning "why do people shit on games people praise?" Into " this a-hole says I am not allowed to have a differing opion to the mainstream" but it's pretty obvious that you're doing a dishonest strawman.
Why are you doing it? Maybe you're a shitter trying to cover their shit, maybe you just want to argue...who knows? But it's pretty transparent what you're up to....
Your post made it sound like OP made the implication that reviews have no bias or agendas and are impartial.What aspect of what I said needs further elaboration? The implication I'm attributing to the OP?
It's quite self evident the subtext, basically that there's something odd about gamers criticizing a game, specifically because it's well reviewed.
It requires that either:
a) Gamers don't often criticize games in general independently of the reviews (which is not true)
or
b) That there is something inherently wrong about criticizing a game if some kind of gaming outlet review consensus is generally positive
This is self evident, otherwise it wouldn't have the thread and even more the attempt to minimize the criticism by criticizing the critics (ironically enough) of being somewhat not genuine in their feelings.
This isn’t a Xbox problem. This holds true for any exclusive, regardless of platform.Maybe because it was hyped as the GOTG and biggest Microsoft game since Halo.
The biggest hype about the game was exploration which turned out to be a dud.
Game wouldn’t even be 87 if it wasn’t for all the Xbox review sites giving it almost perfect scores.
Shitting and criticising are not the same thing. One is making a valid assessment the other has a dishonest agenda to bring things down that the mainstream likes.Guy, what are you talking about? Very little is objective in art. So, how you "feel" about things makes them true FOR YOU, no matter what sort of corny ass labels you wanna put on people for disagreeing w you or the majority. So FF16 boring af side quests is a valid criticism FOR ME and anyone else who feels the same. Thats how this works.
A dishonest strawman? How so? The enter premise of this thread is labelling people who "shit" on well reviewed games. I see it as you going through a big struggle understanding people can have differing opinions on art like my FF16 example. Nothing dishonest, pretty straight forward.
As I explained before, using the reviews by those outlets as some kind of shield to protect the game from criticism is my objection to the premise. It's kind of in the title of the thread, just look at it.Your post made it sound like OP made the implication that reviews have no bias or agendas and are impartial.
The confusion stems from whether you disagree and if so do you have an examples of that.
Shitting and criticising are not the same thing. One is making a valid assessment the other has a dishonest agenda to bring things down that the mainstream likes.
Take a look at this video of Siskel and Ebert defending Star Wars from another jaded critic. You can tell the critic is shitting because he sees no redeeming quality in the film. And Siskel and Ebert are also not calling it the greatest movie of all time either- legit criticism is nuanced and thoughtful. Shitting is not.
Only problem with that, is when "own opinions" are uninformed because they haven't played through the game yet. At that point people look through media and cherry pick alleged issues that align with their own pre-conceived notions.Idk…maybe because some people actually have their own opinions of games that contradict the review score
I think we are ultimately in agreement.As I explained before, using the reviews by those outlets as some kind of shield to protect the game from criticism is my objection to the premise. It's kind of in the title of the thread, just look at it.
"Why do people shit on well reviewed games?"
Why wouldn't they?
If there was no implication that there's somehow something wrong with the criticism, this thread just wouldn't exist at all
Watching Starfield have detractor backlash a la TOTK has made me want to really tease out what is driving this phenomenon of people shitting on well reviewed games. I'm going to postulate some typologies. See what you think:
1. The tribalist: dudes that identify with a rival company and feel it is their duty to attack the competition and take them down a peg. Their aim is to dampen enthusiasm but for what purpose? To reduce sales, to undermine the competition's creative achievement in the public discourse, to ensure their tribe's pedestal is not breached? All of these?
2. The scorned perfectionist: folk with elevated expectations that are not met. ( See Starfield failing to crack 90+ MC). In their case it's betrayal that drives them to seek revenge of sorts by turning against the product. They may hold an existing grudge and this enflames the open wound. Does this really happen tho? Probably easiest seen in multiplats...
3.The Rabble Rouser of Chaos. Like the Joker, these guys are driven by shits and giggles. They do it because they can and because it's fun to try to piss on the success of others. Like the Joker there is also an ego trip in getting noticed and getting reactions from people- the more passionate and offended the better.
Edit: With thanks to @Elysium44 @Dick Jones :
4. The Taste Differentiator. As hard as it is to accept, some people just don't like what the majority likes. Not to be contrarian but because their taste is different for a given game type. And that should be OK so I am not counting them in the poll. Although if they take a nasty approach to airing their opinion, they are treading into Rabble Rouser territory.
Edit2: just seeing some of the replies and looks like there is yet another:
5. The "Mainstream Outrager": folk who view the mainstream opinion as having an objectionable non gaming agenda and believing they have to take a stand. Paradoxically of course, by focusing on the agenda they are perpetuating the act of not discussing a game on its merits. Don't know what to do with these folk except to say they risk turning themselves into the thing they claim to hate.
So that's my hypothesis. Three different types worthy of criticism with their own motivations and another that is not about videogames themselves that you can only shake your head at.
Personally the third one is the worst since it just seeks to destroy- and creating is super hard and risky. And we shouldn't shit on the act of creation for our own entertainment. And the ego trip is pretty unbearable too.
The first is understandable as a well established part of human behaviour that has been put to the wrong use ( follow a sports team if you want to relive tribes - not products you can enjoy without restrictions between them).
The second is worthy of some sympathy. If someone is so affected by a product, then that suggests there are larger personal issues at play and the person needs support not vitriol thrown back at them.
So what do you think? Makes sense.? Something missing or need a different framing? Which one do you hate most?
Over to you.
You are well within your rights to call something boring and redundant. But you should explain why you think so....otherwise its just driveby throwaway shitting.I literally already showed you how they can be the same thing. So let me repeat it for you. I can say FF16 side quests are booooooooooooooooooring and redundant. You can interpret that as "shitting", yet myself and possibly/probably some other can see it as valid criticism.
Not sure if you mean the person you're replying to or in genereal but I think the person you replied to agrees with you. His/her point was that GAF is a place where people share their opinions freely without having to conform or fear getting banned but some certain members are trying hard to make some opinions taboo here too like some other places.This. Is bullshit.
Similar to capitalism, GAF generally shares the free market - but not of industry, of opinions. No one here gets banned for opinions. No one gets banned for not hoisting the party flag, or for dismissing nuclear threats, or for junior accounts. If this place is an echo chamber, then that's because a proportionally large number of users here ARE here because they want a forum where you can actually discuss things rather than reiterating the first two posts because that's the only opinion you're allowed to have by the ToS.
If you have an issue with the makeup of GAF members, get some like minded friends to join. Nothing is stopping you or others from sharing your point of view. Not bans or moderation. If you feel like you can't share your opinion because you won't get any ass pats and GG from a room of rainbow hair colored peers, well then....that might speak more to the actual substance of your arguments and less to the mean, mean people with their totalitarian pass time of...speaking their mind on a discussion forum.
This I agree with! I would never actually bash a game opposite of review scores unless I personally played the game.Only problem with that, is when "own opinions" are uninformed because they haven't played through the game yet. At that point people look through media and cherry pick alleged issues that align with their own pre-conceived notions.
That's why I'll question a review, and then play the game and see if I agree with something they say, or not. If I'm not interested in playing the game in the first place, I'll not stick my nose up in the game's business to begin with.
Tribalism is a part of human nature.Tribalism is what gets most people banned from this place. Not natural at all.
So are a lot of other negative things that aren't accepted in society or communities.Tribalism is a part of human nature.
Today I learned that tribalism isn't accepted in society or communities.So are a lot of other negative things that aren't accepted in society or communities.
Today I learned that tribalism isn't accepted in society or communities.
"Right kind of tribalism" isn't tribalism,Don't worry, there's a lot of people who feel that way.
....