diffusionx
Gold Member
No it's not. Reviews are subjective opinions, if the art style lowers the reviewer's opinion they have the obligation to note that in their reviews.
Dragon's Crown Reviews
- Thread starter ponpo
- Start date
- Status
No it's not. Reviews are subjective opinions, if the art style lowers the reviewer's opinion they have the obligation to note that in their reviews.
You have that backwards, sweetie.
Classy. I wish all gamers would adhere to this sort of logic. It's OK of someone doesn't like something you do.
It is. It really, really is.
Really good reviews. The last Vanillaware game I played was Odin's Sphere and I wasn't really into the combat, but I'll probably check this out. Want to play this co-op.
The targeting of this game for its portrayal of women is so misguided, it'd be hilarious if it wasn't incredibly sad.
The targeting of this game for its portrayal of women is so misguided, it'd be hilarious if it wasn't incredibly sad.
Rodney McKay
Member
Very professional response. Nothing I hate more than seeing developers throw a hissy fit because of a bad review.
RealityPales
Member
I got banned from Polygon for asking if paychecks from Microsoft are cause for their apparent bias in review scores. After all, their start-up was funded by Internet Explorer and they are currently covered in Xbox One ads.
First Ni no Kuni, then The Last of Us and now Dragon's Crown giving further credence to my theories.
First Ni no Kuni, then The Last of Us and now Dragon's Crown giving further credence to my theories.
SolidSnakex
Member
They're known by a small portion of gamers, but the artstyle and the response that some have had to it has lead to it receiving far more attention than any other Vanillaware game. People that have never heard of them or likely seen their games have noticed this because of those articles. So that's why this will be the game that really puts them on the radar for many gamers.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Absolutely spot on, SIR (or Madam)
Deserved.
Deified Data
Banned
I don't think this is the case. I don't think the mainstream is even aware of this game, and those who do buy it are going to buy it because its a niche side-scrolling beat-'em-up. So sick of hearing about the manufactured controversy around one character. I'm distressed that so many reviews list the art of the game as a negative when it's easily the game's biggest positive.
They're still pretty niche.
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Who wrote the Polygon review? I can't give them clicks,
I never imagined there would be a website that was so much against my tastes in gaming like Polygon. That and some of the journalists they have working for them. More like one specific journalist but whatever... Doesnt matter. I am so happy people are showing some love to the game, I honestly want it to succeed and I cant wait to experience it myself.
Vanillaware has a reputation for making very pretty, very shallow games.
People still say this shit? Unironically?
wait, Ni no Kuni has big boobs?
Mauricio_Magus
Banned
Oh, I just don't like the tone of the review when it comes to the sexaulization, but yeah to each their own.
Maybe they feel differently about the art than you do? I 'unno
a very cute dog
Member
I agree with this. Any pretense of "objectivity" game reviews is pointless, and in this case, regardless of whether or not you agree with certain reviewers about the art style, there's nothing wrong with folding an informed opinion of it into the review-- it's still part of the game, and not something that necessarily has to be ignored because of some misguided attempt to be "objective."
ElRenoRaven
Member
Polygon video review
Yea your social views and shit should be kept out of a game review. People look for reviews to really see if a game is fun and plays well and isn't a total piece of shit. Not you hear someone shove their views down their throats.
Yea your social views and shit should be kept out of a game review. People look for reviews to really see if a game is fun and plays well and isn't a total piece of shit. Not you hear someone shove their views down their throats.
Delusibeta
Banned
I believe that makes it 221 crap reviews in a row by Polygon.
This is already their best selling game right?
RealityPales
Member
Yea, I get that a lot. But are we not entitled to ask if the words we read are influenced by paychecks? I should be able to voice that concern without getting banned, right?
It happened with Kane and Lynch at Gamespot, so is it too far-fetched to assume it could happen again?
Karsticles
Member
It's not about whether the reviewer liked the game, it's whether she actually reviewed the game. Quoting myself from the other thread:
And quoting TheSpoiler for an apt description of these kinds of reviews:
These aren't social blogs, they're game reviews. Supposedly. The vast majority of the focus should be on the quality of the game: its gameplay, mechanics, enjoyability, etc. Something that can be summarized as "this offends me" belongs in a diary entry, not a professional game review. Now, if Polygon wants to do an article complaining about the art style, more power to them. It's a dumb thing to complain about, but at least it's the appropriate medium.
Whereas you go out of your way to talk it down!
How much are they allowed to like it?
lol "could"!
What?
You like Newcastle a little too much.
BLACK AMERICAN PSYCHO
Junior Member
lol fuck polygon
Neuromancer
Member
Very classy.
SolidSnakex
Member
Yeah, I think their previous high seller in Japan was around low 100k range. So it's already close to 200k after week one at retail. And Vanillaware's twitter has noted that the digital sales are strong as well.
I guess you need to word it right. It just invites an avalanche of shit in most cases.
I would give Ni No Kuni a 6.5 too. Strong in the beginning, but its pacing falls apart after the first few hours, and the combat was eh. Fantastic presentation though, but that's Level 5's speciality.
Art style can either make or break a game for me. So, I can understand why the final score was altered so heavily due to the reviewer's major distaste to the female characters.
How is the game then? It sounds like you played it, otherwise your comment is quite silly.
BurnOutBrighter
Banned
As with his God of War: Ascension review, Gies once again lets his hypersensitivity to political correctness taint his outlook on what is considered a high-quality and enjoyable game by the majority of reviewers.
Really disappointing, again.
Edit: LOL it's not even Gies. Does he have a protege now?
Really disappointing, again.
Edit: LOL it's not even Gies. Does he have a protege now?
A classy comment, on my internet?
Thats great to hear,should be over 200k by now.
D
Deleted member 125677
Unconfirmed Member
idk man
I don't know which of these are the amazon, but if it's the one on top right I think they are. too a large extent. actually for the one on the left as well, lol
chrominance
Member
I expect this will not be a popular post, but:
I feel like I've read a lot of pieces about what role game reviewers have to play in the industry. Should they treat reviews as Consumer Reports-style writeups, i.e. "graphics on level 3 could use tightening up but the anti-aliasing makes it a solid 8.65 out of 10!" or should reviewers treat games less like products and more like pieces of art or literature? Based on all the vitriol sites like IGN get for ridiculously precise review scores and the appreciation for sites like Giant Bomb, where each individual's likes and dislikes are well-known and accepted for the most part, I assumed the trend was towards reviews as opinion piece.
But here's a review where someone gives their opinion on a game--that the grindiness of the game and the depiction of the female characters made the game less enjoyable--and both the reviewer and the site that posted it gets shit upon. Of course you're allowed to disagree with her; maybe you don't think the game is pure adolescent fantasy, or maybe you think she's right but that's totally fine with you. But to basically say her opinion is invalid, or that her review is an outrage ploy to collect clicks is just... man.
"But she had a political/moral/feminist agenda!" I see people write in this thread. Well, guess what? People have political and moral opinions; it's just you tend to notice them more when those opinions disagree with yours. Increasingly people are put off at the number of first-person shooters where you kill indiscriminately; Bioshock Infinite got a lot of flak for this very thing. And I very much disagreed with some of that criticism (mainly that the game's difficulty got in the way of enjoying the story, but also just generally that Bioshock Infinite would've been a better game without any of the violence). But nowhere in that conversation did I see people suggest that the anti-violence discussion wasn't worth having, that clearly it was driven by a political agenda that had no place in games. But that's ridiculous; of COURSE it speaks to a moral stance, that violence is not only unnecessary in games but excessive.
Even when it comes to sexual depictions, people are frustratingly inconsistent. On this very forum, people call out all sorts of Japanese games as stuff they won't ever play because "omg too moe" or "god Japan with its stupid big-boobed anime" or "fuck, I'm not a pedophile, why would I ever play that lolicon bait." But god forbid a reviewer call this out and say, "I did not like this game nearly as much because giant boobs and sexualization," because that would be beyond the pale. It's not even sexualization that's off limits in reviews any more; it's specific types of sexualization that's clearly driven by a moral agenda because it happens to match what appeals to "gamers," as opposed to sexualization that's okay to criticize because most gamers don't like anime chicks or whatever.
(And yes, I'm well aware that Dragon's Crown is a Japanese game, just to get that out of the way.)
I guess I'm not surprised that the Polygon review should be so controversial, but I'm also incredibly disappointed.
I feel like I've read a lot of pieces about what role game reviewers have to play in the industry. Should they treat reviews as Consumer Reports-style writeups, i.e. "graphics on level 3 could use tightening up but the anti-aliasing makes it a solid 8.65 out of 10!" or should reviewers treat games less like products and more like pieces of art or literature? Based on all the vitriol sites like IGN get for ridiculously precise review scores and the appreciation for sites like Giant Bomb, where each individual's likes and dislikes are well-known and accepted for the most part, I assumed the trend was towards reviews as opinion piece.
But here's a review where someone gives their opinion on a game--that the grindiness of the game and the depiction of the female characters made the game less enjoyable--and both the reviewer and the site that posted it gets shit upon. Of course you're allowed to disagree with her; maybe you don't think the game is pure adolescent fantasy, or maybe you think she's right but that's totally fine with you. But to basically say her opinion is invalid, or that her review is an outrage ploy to collect clicks is just... man.
"But she had a political/moral/feminist agenda!" I see people write in this thread. Well, guess what? People have political and moral opinions; it's just you tend to notice them more when those opinions disagree with yours. Increasingly people are put off at the number of first-person shooters where you kill indiscriminately; Bioshock Infinite got a lot of flak for this very thing. And I very much disagreed with some of that criticism (mainly that the game's difficulty got in the way of enjoying the story, but also just generally that Bioshock Infinite would've been a better game without any of the violence). But nowhere in that conversation did I see people suggest that the anti-violence discussion wasn't worth having, that clearly it was driven by a political agenda that had no place in games. But that's ridiculous; of COURSE it speaks to a moral stance, that violence is not only unnecessary in games but excessive.
Even when it comes to sexual depictions, people are frustratingly inconsistent. On this very forum, people call out all sorts of Japanese games as stuff they won't ever play because "omg too moe" or "god Japan with its stupid big-boobed anime" or "fuck, I'm not a pedophile, why would I ever play that lolicon bait." But god forbid a reviewer call this out and say, "I did not like this game nearly as much because giant boobs and sexualization," because that would be beyond the pale. It's not even sexualization that's off limits in reviews any more; it's specific types of sexualization that's clearly driven by a moral agenda because it happens to match what appeals to "gamers," as opposed to sexualization that's okay to criticize because most gamers don't like anime chicks or whatever.
(And yes, I'm well aware that Dragon's Crown is a Japanese game, just to get that out of the way.)
I guess I'm not surprised that the Polygon review should be so controversial, but I'm also incredibly disappointed.
- Status
Similar threads
- Featured