Jimquisition: Dragon's Frown
- Thread starter dmr87
- Start date
Spirit of Jazz
Banned
You're giving me shit about not seeing underlying tones when you think there's literally no underlying sexual tones in this image:
I wish I could find the animated version of it but maybe you should stop worrying about underlying tones until you get a better grasp of the overtones.
Also I never even mentioned Gies, I mentioned your need to make up subtexts whilst flat out ignoring what Atlus PR and Danielle say in order to make things fit with your own views.
Ya, those reviews are just as bad. That's my point.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
even then, people make mistakes, don't let it boil your blood.
I think this is due to the oft negative connotations that comes with it.
For some reasons, liking "sexual" content makes you a perverted basement dwelling nerd and no one wants to be that guy (well I don't...). So admitting that something one likes is sexual is like admitting that you are a pervert. Or in this case sexist and objectify women. Thus the defense is super strong because it is taken as an attack on their character.
it's actually ironic in a sense that both sides are aguing for the integrity of their hobby...but against each other. One side derides these games because it makes it seem immature and the other side defends it because to them it's not immature but creative and shows the best of the industry.
it would be awesome if stuff was just accepted but in western culture (I'm an expert) sex is seen as this dirty thing for whatever reason and if you are into it then you are a weirdo loser.
it sucks
njean777
Member
I dont have the context of the image as I haven't played the game, when you can show me the context then you have an argument.
Doctor Ninja
Sphincter Speaker
okay the intro when the Vita turned into a face-hugger made me chuckle XD.
I think the review was trying to be a social commentary editorial as much as a review of the game, and I don't see a problem with personally discounting it as a review.
It sucks that there were Youtube-level trash comments. Sucks that they happened at all, and because they are just feeding into Gies and his smug click-baiting as he spews self-satisfied tweets.
I don't see anything wrong with this video, though. It doesn't seem like he's saying not to criticize the review at all. Just don't be a hateful jackass about it, and don't flip out just because the number was lower than the other numbers.
It sucks that there were Youtube-level trash comments. Sucks that they happened at all, and because they are just feeding into Gies and his smug click-baiting as he spews self-satisfied tweets.
I don't see anything wrong with this video, though. It doesn't seem like he's saying not to criticize the review at all. Just don't be a hateful jackass about it, and don't flip out just because the number was lower than the other numbers.
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
So, why exactly isn't it okay for a reviewer to mark a game down for what they view as sexist shit?
Relaxed Muscle
Member
I hope when MGS5 releases it gets a 6 because of female getting tortured and being barely clothed or because you can take sexy photos of them before they die or something.
Character design should factor in a review if its feature so prominently and serves as a distraction. I personally didn't care but no one is wrong for stating as such. It's when it becomes a "political" issue that I have a problem with.
That's a very good point. It'd be healthier for everyone to get rid of certain puritanism. The mag I mentioned earlier, Heavy Metal, is a pretty European phenomenon. It's basically a collection of all sorts of indie fantasy/horror/scifi stories with cheesecake covers and some pretty porny comics, but it still has some great artists and good stories in it. Other comic examples would be people like Manara who are appreciated as comic culture makers even they're basically pornographers. Again, it's USA vs Euro values.
Exactly, the review was in no way saying the game was awful. People need to stop thinking games "deserve" certain scores before they come out.
A review is meant to cover all parts of a game, not just the gameplay. Games are more complex than arcade games now, gameplay isn't the sole factor that makes games bad or good. A reviewer is supposed to give their opinion on the subjective things, and if you disagree with one reviewer, find another one that likes the same sort of things you like. Don't get mad at them for not loving a game because you think they should.
Is Dragon's Crown a hentai? Or is it video game? Some will have you think its the former with this faux outrage that's spread so virally.
The game had flirtatious sexuality. A reasonable minded person isn't gonna deny it nor convince himself why it couldn't bother someone else. But Why the hell is this a problem to US game media? Why was Bayonetta given a pass? DoA?
And if we wanna raise a conversation in games that's actually worth a damn... why is glorified violence okay while sexualization is crucified?
If there was no choice in the matter, id let my young son look at a pair of boobs before having him see someone get gunned down effortlessly
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
Can we post that terrible nun art some more? I'd like it on each page at least twice.
Jathaine
Member
If Dragon's Crown had the legacy of MGS, I doubt anything like this would even happen... even if was the exact same game that it is today.
I doubt that will happen.
airmangataosenai
Member
This video reminds me of Ebert's defense of Armond White. As all critics are subject to unfair criticism in expressing unpopular opinions it's natural for them to want to come to one another's defense even in cases where the one being defended has an agenda behind their reviews. For what it's worth once people pointed to White's history Ebert was able to admit that he jumped the gun in coming to his defense.
This Jim guy doesn't seem to know much about the website other than that a few reviews have been posted that go against the grain.
This Jim guy doesn't seem to know much about the website other than that a few reviews have been posted that go against the grain.
Enable realGAF(TM) mode of 100 posts per page, and it's already happening.
famousmortimer
Banned
More people should be like -COOLIO-
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
there's a lot of making up arguments from the opposition going on in this thread. Or at least, I haven't read anything like this in this thread, or in the original review thread, or in the original sorceress boob scandal thread.
thanks, friend.
Uh...they aren't? DOA at least isn't.
It's probably the number one cited game in terms of bad female representation (despite Kasumi being Ninja Princess Jesus).
and IIRC Bayonetta got a lot of shit for its cheesecake.
Also this really has only became a hot topic issue recently.
I can't say I disagree with the overall message of Jimquisition's video. Reviews are by design, subjective. So I see no need to get bent out of shape over one review, especially if it doesn't follow the general consensus on metacritic and happens to be the minority opinion. In fact a lot of times these offer interesting insight that others might have glossed over or even completely ignored.
Having stated that, perhaps a bit off-topic but, isn't Polygon already kind of considered to give scores on the slightly lower end of the spectrum? It seems to come into the limelight more with the more recent games (The Last of Us comes to mind) where they go very much against the grain. And not that a single review matters significantly, but if it's par for the course for them, then the impact becomes less relevant. The sad thing is, I really like The Verge, so when Polygon was launching, I was excited about having another avenue of insight/information. But I have found that, regardless of whether or not their reviews and articles in general align with my thoughts/opinions/interests, their information and/or insight to be completely underwhelming. So I pretty much never read their articles.
I find this information to be a good metric to be aware of, since some seem to think that something below a 9 means a game is unworthy of being played.
Having stated that, perhaps a bit off-topic but, isn't Polygon already kind of considered to give scores on the slightly lower end of the spectrum? It seems to come into the limelight more with the more recent games (The Last of Us comes to mind) where they go very much against the grain. And not that a single review matters significantly, but if it's par for the course for them, then the impact becomes less relevant. The sad thing is, I really like The Verge, so when Polygon was launching, I was excited about having another avenue of insight/information. But I have found that, regardless of whether or not their reviews and articles in general align with my thoughts/opinions/interests, their information and/or insight to be completely underwhelming. So I pretty much never read their articles.
I find this information to be a good metric to be aware of, since some seem to think that something below a 9 means a game is unworthy of being played.
Relaxed Muscle
Member
She is not covering a part of the game, is not about the art, the asthetics is about a bad representation of females and how everyone who plays this game is a pervert teen. Something totally subjective and barely a factor in 99% of games before this one. I'm not even mad about the review itself, but mad at the hipocresy of the whole review and the game journalism at is whole.
base shagohod
Member
Haha, that's the Internet for ya.
Stone Ocean
Member
Something that is absolutely, 100% of the time subjective should not ever factor in a review.
I love brunettes, should I give Dragon's Crown a lower score because none of the playable female characters has brown hair? Same for the character's proportions, that's for the player to figure out, you can't come out and say "Hey these characters will gross some people out so I'll take some points from the presentation score" when it's not your job to know what people want but to tell them what the game is for them to judge for themselves.
I love the character designs, if I wrote a review praising them would I be taken as seriously as if I said otherwise or would I just bait insults from people worrying about female portrayal in videogames?
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
I bet Jim is enjoying the fact that this thread just became another thread of people debating the validity of that review.
Bitch please, don't talke to me like I'm some lowly junior! Of course I'm on 100 posts per page.
Bitch please, don't talke to me like I'm some lowly junior! Of course I'm on 100 posts per page.
RoninChaos
Member
Agreed.
I love co op games. I wanted to support this game so I got it for both the Vita and the PS3. I figured I could play it in my spare time on Vita and play it coop with my friends and my wife. I knew the sexualized nature of the characters from seeing random pieces of art, but after seeing stuff like that nun, and even the amazon's jump animation that has her sticking her ass out at the screen... this shit is going back to Amazon. I wanted to support Vanillaware but I feel like buying products like this are a big reason why women in general don't get a fair shake in this medium. It's great that Vanillaware made a game that looks this good but I feel like the character art is going to be a detractor for people like me and a lot of others. I read the interview where the artist was really nonchalant about the art, and that's his prerogative but now that's two lost sales just because they couldn't go out of their way to NOT put the most sexualized women in their games possible. I'm all for exaggerated art, but god DAMN. This kind of moves into different territory.
I'm not saying this is true.
i'm just saying that's how "some" of those defending the game may feel or take the "this game is perverted or sexual" comments.
and that is the reason for their heavy defense.
personally, yeah it's perverted and silly. I don't give a fuck. I play videogames. That in itself is rather silly lol
njean777
Member
Yeah I probably should have laid off, I regret taking this thread that way. Sorry guys.
Hero_of_the_Day
Member
^
Haha, we all did it. Not your fault.
Haha, we all did it. Not your fault.
michaelius
Banned
Wait someone takes Polygon reviews seriosuly ?
inpHilltr8r
Member
TIL the price of integrity. SMH
RoninChaos
Member
I'd argue that games have hit the wall with glorified violence as well. Jeremy Parish and some other 1up staffers came away pretty appalled from e3 last year, particularly that guy taking a shot gun blast to the face point blank in the last of us, and ripping up that cylcops' lips in GoW:Ascension.
DoA I don't think was ever given a pass. Bayonetta wasn't either.
I'm with you that I'd rather my son see some tits than someone taking a shotgun point blank in the face, but given the choice I'd rather he see neither.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
ah, gotchya, but the vast majority of us masturbate to sexually explicit material so it need not be a worry of defenders that others might perceive them to be deviants. In fact, i don't think most people have a problem with people who like or dislike the art style, the bad part of all this comes from harping on a reviewer who cited their distaste for the art direction as being one of her problems with the game. whether any of us like or dislike the art style is mostly irrelevant.
ChosenPredator
Banned
It really is, this place is pretty bad when it comes to that stuff as well.
How is it not part of the game? The artist drew the characters and the designers made them act in certain ways. It's all part of the game, and all of it should be considered in a review.
RoninChaos
Member
... what is a review if not subjective 100% of the time?
Further, you liking blondes or brunettes isn't the same as having completely unrealistically proportioned women contorting themselves in sexualized poses throughout an entire game. You're kind of comparing apples to wallpaper here.
Stone Ocean
Member
I'm just pushing it the extreme, but you get my point. Designs are completely subjective, it's not something you can review. I have many friends that pretty much refused to play Bayonetta because they thought she looked ridiculous, are they in the wrong? Of course not, but that's a conclusion they came to based on their own tastes and not shoved down by a review.
I'm not denying Dragon's Crown is oversexualized or anything - quite the opposite, obviously-, but it's not the reviewer's job to push that down as being a bad or good thing.
-COOLIO-
The Everyman
nearly everything reviewable about a game is subjective. The only reviews that would satisfy that criteria are ones like:
- is 2 player
- takes 0-100 hours to complete
- has 4 classes
- story elements detected
Is this sarcasm or what? Because as an art student, for all you who do not know. You can make things sexy and sensual with clothes on.
I know you might be being sarcastic , but there are some people who actually believe that clothing eliminates all allegations of something being sexualized, which it does not. That is just silly.
Not taking sides whether this is good or bad, ( I think its kind of stupid ) just saying .
Just watched the video and read through this thread. I find some of the replies baffling, as if some didn't even watch the entire video (specifically the conclusion where Jim says disagreeing and criticizing a review IS healthy).
His video is very sensible. The only thing I can see debating him on is whether the negative focus on negative reviews is such a big thing it overtakes the good press. But other than that, all his points are sound.
His video is very sensible. The only thing I can see debating him on is whether the negative focus on negative reviews is such a big thing it overtakes the good press. But other than that, all his points are sound.
faceless007
Member
Now I'm even more confused. Why is your friends not liking a game because of the art style any more valid than this reviewer not liking a game because of the art style? They're both ultimately incorporating it into their own opinions, which is perfectly valid.
As Jim says, if we can praise a game for having an interesting and appealing visual style, then we can also criticize a game for having a distracting or bad one.
ItWasMeantToBe19
Banned
I'm pretty sure that Arthur Gies (of Polygon) said that he didn't really care much about Dead Space 3 and wasn't really moved by it but gave it a 9.5/10 because of some elements that he thought were objectively good.
Not like thing art style and design in a game is a valid criticism. Like not liking an art style and design in a painting. If detracts from the experience so much to which it decreases their enjoyment it is a valid criticism. However, you as a viewer have no obligation to agree.
Also almost if not all reviews are subjective... so....
Robert at Zeboyd Games
Banned
Any review that talks about quality is by its very nature subjective. The only way you'd be able to get an objective review is if the review was just a list of facts about a game. "10 playable characters, 57 monsters, 1 hour of music, etc."
Whether you agree or disagree with the Polygon review, I'd argue that it's a well written review as it clearly and succinctly sums up the reviewer's feelings towards the game. After reading the review, you know exactly what the reviewer liked and disliked about the game. With that knowledge, you can then make a decision as to how close your own opinion is likely to coincide with the reviewer's.
Whether you agree or disagree with the Polygon review, I'd argue that it's a well written review as it clearly and succinctly sums up the reviewer's feelings towards the game. After reading the review, you know exactly what the reviewer liked and disliked about the game. With that knowledge, you can then make a decision as to how close your own opinion is likely to coincide with the reviewer's.
Giving a game a low score solely because you don't like the artstyle is more than criticizing a game.
"But I found its over-exaggerated art style alienating and gross" - The last of Us - 6,5