This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Why do so many people have trouble looking at a game objectively?

#1Shadow CloudPosted 4/2/2013 10:30:15 AM
It seems like on GameFAQs there isn't much of a middle-ground. It's a love it or hate it ordeal. Why can't there be more people who see a game objectively and say something along the lines of, "I can see that X game is well made, but it doesn't appeal to me because of my preferences." Even better, how about someone who can admit that they're wrong (too many gamers have egos) in pre-hating a game for absurd reasons before even playing it.

For instance, I don't like Skullgirls. I recognize it's a competent fighting game with great depth and fluid animations, but none of the characters appeal to me.

Then there's Journey, I played the demo and went "this is what people have been raving on about?" then I took a chance with buying and playing through the whole game; I ended up loving it and realized that the demo doesn't do it justice.
#2PHEEliNUXPosted 4/2/2013 10:32:19 AM
Because people here are dumb
---
PSN:PHEEliNUX
"Lesser Demon is less than a Demon, But more than an Imp"
#3theatrical_catPosted 4/2/2013 10:32:37 AM
Because it's impossible to be objective about anything. That's part of the human condition; we're all hopelessly and irreversibly biased.
---
In 1984, I was hospitalized for approaching perfection.
#4GradyHooverPosted 4/2/2013 10:33:35 AM
Well, for starters, aren't all opinions in the world of games, music, movies, whatever - all completely subjective?

Shadow Cloud posted...

Then there's Journey, I played the demo and went "this is what people have been raving on about?" then I took a chance with buying and playing through the whole game; I ended up loving it and realized that the demo doesn't do it justice.


And I personally found Journey overrated; I didn't think it did anything as interesting and new as TGC's previous two titles.

But it's certainly competent. It does some interesting things with wordless design, and it's very pretty.
---
backlogger.tumblr.com - The Backlogger, where I wade through an ever-expanding backlog of video games
#5deadmarvPosted 4/2/2013 10:38:59 AM
Shadow Cloud posted...
It seems like on THE INTERNET there isn't much of a middle-ground. It's a love it or hate it ordeal. Why can't there be more people who see a game objectively and say something along the lines of, "I can see that X game is well made, but it doesn't appeal to me because of my preferences." Even better, how about someone who can admit that they're wrong (too many gamers have egos) in pre-hating a game for absurd reasons before even playing it.

For instance, I don't like Skullgirls. I recognize it's a competent fighting game with great depth and fluid animations, but none of the characters appeal to me.

Then there's Journey, I played the demo and went "this is what people have been raving on about?" then I took a chance with buying and playing through the whole game; I ended up loving it and realized that the demo doesn't do it justice.


Fixed.
---
All PS3 owners should boycott Bethesda.
#6SuperShadowAcePosted 4/2/2013 10:40:08 AM
People are dumb and they act dumber when what they say isn't tied to their real name. Also gaming forums are filled with 13-year olds.
---
http://ofnoobsandmen.com/ <----Good comic
Game contact information in profile.
#7ChaoticKnucklesPosted 4/2/2013 10:40:29 AM
theatrical_cat posted...
Because it's impossible to be objective about anything. That's part of the human condition; we're all hopelessly and irreversibly biased.


That may be true but people let their bias cloud their vision. They think that because they hate the graphics or story of a particular game that the whole game sucks. Or because they suck at an aspect of the game that the game sucks instead of them just needing to get a little better.

I can look at a game like Gran Turismo (which I can't get into at all) and still see that it's a quality game. There are certain things about games that can be objectively good regardless of whether or not you personally care for the game. Are the controls tight and responsive? Just because someone doesn't personally like the control scheme doesn't make the controls objectively bad. Are the graphics crisp and clear? Just because someone doesn't like the visual look of cell shading doesn't mean that every game with cell shading is objectively bad. It shouldn't be hard to say that a game is good, just not your thing.
---
I boosted some of my trophies. Please, judge me about it.
#8kel25Posted 4/2/2013 10:41:12 AM
Because people really don't have much to say about games that fall into the middle ground. They are not bad but they are not good. What else can you really say about these types of games? When it comes to games that people love or hate they will have a lot more to say on the subject.

This is why it seems like every game here is loved or hated.
---
Sony PS4 Conference = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5SVJw4ZcJY
#9Shadow Cloud(Topic Creator)Posted 4/2/2013 10:44:35 AM
GradyHoover posted...
Well, for starters, aren't all opinions in the world of games, music, movies, whatever - all completely subjective?

Shadow Cloud posted...

Then there's Journey, I played the demo and went "this is what people have been raving on about?" then I took a chance with buying and playing through the whole game; I ended up loving it and realized that the demo doesn't do it justice.


And I personally found Journey overrated; I didn't think it did anything as interesting and new as TGC's previous two titles.

But it's certainly competent. It does some interesting things with wordless design, and it's very pretty.


Regardless of how you feel about Journey, at least you're still able to see the whole picture and articulate what you like and didn't like about it instead of simply going "it sucks" and then say the game does nothing right.

I suppose that opinions on entertainment medium can be quite subjective, but still there is some objectivity. Glitches and bugs that prevent a game from functioning properly are bad regardless, right? So if you take a game like Big Rigs Over the Road Racing, which is filled to the brim of game breaking glitches; you can't objectively say it's a good game based on its technical merits alone.
#10theatrical_catPosted 4/2/2013 10:50:33 AM
Shadow Cloud posted...
GradyHoover posted...
Well, for starters, aren't all opinions in the world of games, music, movies, whatever - all completely subjective?

Shadow Cloud posted...

Then there's Journey, I played the demo and went "this is what people have been raving on about?" then I took a chance with buying and playing through the whole game; I ended up loving it and realized that the demo doesn't do it justice.


And I personally found Journey overrated; I didn't think it did anything as interesting and new as TGC's previous two titles.

But it's certainly competent. It does some interesting things with wordless design, and it's very pretty.


Regardless of how you feel about Journey, at least you're still able to see the whole picture and articulate what you like and didn't like about it instead of simply going "it sucks" and then say the game does nothing right.

I suppose that opinions on entertainment medium can be quite subjective, but still there is some objectivity. Glitches and bugs that prevent a game from functioning properly are bad regardless, right? So if you take a game like Big Rigs Over the Road Racing, which is filled to the brim of game breaking glitches; you can't objectively say it's a good game based on its technical merits alone.


That's a different subject altogether; glitches and bugs usually are random and affect people differently.

For instance, Assassin;s Creed 3: I found a plethora of bugs and glitches, most harmless (NPCs moving weird in cutscenes, Achilles's cane randomly appearing throughout the world) but a few painful ones. Some people never see those glitches. Some (look up motdef on YouTube) get nothing but those glitches.

Summary: technical merits are subjective, too.
---
In 1984, I was hospitalized for approaching perfection.