Humm, that made me think of this: "Even in the false needs of a human being there lives a bit of freedom. It is expressed in what economic theory once called the “use value” as opposed to the “exchange value.” Hence there are those to whom legitimate architecture [or, as it were, good games] appears as an enemy; it withholds from them that which they, by their very nature, want and even need."
Minotauros, I'm sorry, but I'm not smart enough to understand that quote (or the language in that link). Any chance you could explain what it means?
I agree with lots of your post, Greyling, but here you're being a bit soft on game creators, I think. Sure, they put a lot of effort, made compromises, worked their hineys off to make as good a game as they can. But if the result is just bad, it's the critic's job to say so, with little regard for courtesy. I'm not defending whining masses of players who have nothing to say except "s0xx", but reviewers et al who work to further the medium by discussing the actual flaws and merits of different games. If you can't bear to get negative reviews, you really shouldn't be in a creative job. Moreover, akeley was making a point how executives tend to evoke the image of the struggling artists/content creators when actually furthering their own interests, thus using the creators as a human shield of sorts. And that certainly is a valid point.
As always,
Minotauros
As someone who would like to one day make a game, negativity towards people who make games really scares me. I feel like Vanguard is just waiting to tell me that whatever I produce is terrible, because it doesn't meet her/his extremely high standards. It's very intimidating. And I know there are a zillion other people who feel the same way as her/him.
I do think it's important for reviewers to discuss the merits of games. And I do definitely want candid feedback from everyone regarding the ideas I put them forth on this forum. And I want it from everyone, Including Vanguard. In fact, I highly value her/his opinion, because I know her/his views are so different from mine.
But, Vanguard, because you seem to have such a tendency to dislike games, it’s hard to know how to take what you say. I honestly don’t know if I can put forth any ideas that you would embrace which weren’t the same as the ideas you already have. I mean, at a certain point, I don’t know if you are critical of my ideas because they need improvement, or because they’re not *your* ideas.
Also, why did the idea that you were “nostaligic” about some of the games you mentioned upset you? I’m nostalgic about a lot of games. I don’t think that’s something to be ashamed of. Maybe it’s not the reason that you like any of the games you like, and I’m sorry I ever used that word, but I just don’t see how it can be construed to have a pejorative meaning.
I think that “good” games engrain themselves into our brains during our developmental stages in a way that shapes how we see the medium. And I think that’s really cool. I would be honored to make a games that people were “nostalgic” about, whether they were critically acclaimed at the time of release or not (like earthbound).
Is the point that you want to be so coldly objective about assessing games that you are immune from “nostaligia”? Why? That sure doesn’t sound like much fun.
Also, it really scares me how easy it is for us, as human beings, to clump people we dislike into easy to hate groups, like “business suits”. I really, really, really think life is more complicated than that.
I urge you guys to remember that everyone is just a person trying to survive in this world. It’s so easy to judge other people, either by their career, or by the quality of the games they make, but ultimately, I just don’t think that’s the point of human interaction.