Support NeoGAF

[Divvy]

If you disagree so fervently with a review, then maybe instead of drawing so much attention to it by raising such a shitstorm, you should just ignore it and move on.

The worst thing that can happen to a piece of writing isn't to be criticized, it's to be not read.

 

[Karsticles]

Give me a quote from the video where he said that.

I'm just making fun of Jim since he's bad at reviewing games, too.

He did completely miss the point, though. It's not about the low score, it's about the things said in the review, and the basis of that low score. It's really unfortunate that he didn't even take the time to research why people are upset before rambling on about it in a video. You also have to be a complete moron to think that reviews don't affect fans of games.

 

[Marmaladefire]

While I think the polygon review was..Suspicious, people have been particularly precious and defensive about this game for a while. Were they expecting 9.0's and GOTY awards because the art director stood up for right to use female sexualization in a niche Japanese beat em up? I don't know.

Gamers and game "journalists" have a very biased, antagonistic relationship, when in fact it should be people dedicated to delivering information giving that information to people who are not inherently intensely distrustful of their agenda. What is the point of making or reading a game review if you can't accept that the reviewer might find that the game is lacking in someways and adjust your expectations? (I'm speaking generally here. The words in that specific Polygon review and the score do not seem to match up) On the other hand a lot of reviewers do not seem equipped to review these sorts of games. They are a different monster and the audience is expecting a different experience than the AAA titles that routinely dominate the game press.

None of the reviews I've seen are holding the sexed up otaku fantasy part against DC so much as the fact that it is repetitive, which as someone who is interested in purchasing the game is an important thing to know and account for.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

I'm just making fun of Jim since he's bad at reviewing games, too.

He did completely miss the point, though. It's not about the low score, it's about the things said in the review, and the basis of that low score. It's really unfortunate that he didn't even take the time to research why people are upset before rambling on about it in a video. You also have to be a complete moron to think that reviews don't affect fans of games.

I would argue at least that reviews shouldn't emotionally affect fans of games.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Drawing women in suggesting clothing and poses with the only reason to bring sexual arousal.

If that is the case, the issue becomes you(as in George Kamitani) intentionally brought in a divisive element to fulfill his own personal fetish.

2nd edit: I also got the PS3 version on pre-order, so I know I will play the shit out of it.

Wait a minute, what? If you find the art perverted (which is applying a personal definition of perverse, I feel), why are you supporting it?

 

[Dio]

I would argue at least that reviews shouldn't emotionally affect fans of games.

But they do, because like anything people are personally invested in and center their emotional stability around, things related to their favorite videogame matter! Especially if it affects potential 'fans' that could be their friend and turns them off of it.

 

[MogCakes]

It's pretty balanced between talking about the positives and the negatives, as I summarized above. If it's really as repetitive as the review says, I'm sure they won't be the only one to give it the terrible score of 6.5/10.

We'll see when it releases. The opinions I've seen so far don't paint it that way.

 

[Midou]

It's really unfortunate that he didn't even take the time to research why people are upset before rambling on about it in a video. You also have to be a complete moron to think that reviews don't affect fans of games.

Ultimately he is correct as far as I see it though, there will always be people reviewing it who are offended by different things or find one negative to be worse than others. A 'floaty jump' might be game killing to some, and a minor annoyance to others for example.

You certainly have to have some weird emotional tie to a game to be affected by a negative review. Every form of entertainment has negative reviews for highly anticipated and otherwise well reviewed products.

I guess for some people they may think 'oh shit, this guy hated it, gave it a 6, but everyone else gave it a 8 or 9 out of 10, what if I don't like it and have a similar experience to them'. Well the fact of the matter is, they do. Some people will highly anticipate a game, have it get high reviews, then actually not like it. There will always be people like this, so having reviews like this gives representation and variety.

 

[Tripon]

Look at this to see some of the references of classic and modern art:

http://www.realsg.com/2013/08/theres-more-to-dragonscrown-than-boobs.html

I read a similar article to that one. While its clear that the art in Dragon Crown is generally referencing Renaissance style era art, there's some specific female NPC's artwork that helped caused the lower screw with Polygon.


I was referring more to this particular image, since Polygon in particular used it as part of their argument of objectifying female NPCs.

And I would like to know what exactly which artwork this image is referencing or Kamitani just made it up.

Again, I would like to see the reference, and I will probably look in my free time if there is a ready reference on the internet for these two, for a lack of a better word, 'poses'.

 

[GamerTime]

Gamers are strange, because it's all about the negative in game reviews. If you only discuss that part no matter how small it is (1 bad review) it does a great disservice to the game.

So people come into a thread for a game they may be interested in, and they read nothing but negative, the developers read a bunch of negative, everyone reads/hears negative... That can only hurt the sales, and can even put a black mark on a quality game that does a lot more good than bad.

 

[PirateKing]

Yeah, I get that. I think the game's way less offensive about it than some others, and I see where you're coming from. It just really sticks out with, like, that boss dragon and him moving his head around and spewing flames or other background/enemy stuff in general, less so the actual character movement which was refined enough for me to not mind as much.

I also don't like 3D animation. People don't see the beauty in 2D the way I see it. Why I like these guys is, even though their games can be similar to each other, their art and animation always changes in each game. Another reason why I prefer Blazblue's animation and character art than Street Fighter 4's 3D look. Although Guilty Gear is going into 3D but they're achieving an awesome 3D/2D hybrid that I actually found myself excited about.

 

[Tripon]

Wait a minute, what? If you find the art perverted (which is applying a personal definition of perverse, I feel), why are you supporting it?

Because I can find fault with an aspect of a product yet still feel that the product overall is worth purchasing.

 

[Spirit of Jazz]

My two cents. When you give a review score that is seen as differentiation as the norm, you need to clearly state your case why it is so. I have personally read the written review on Polygon, and the video review on Polygon's youtube channel. And in particular, the video review states the negatives to be that of how the women are portrayed in this game, and the main adjective used was 'gross'.

Is there any reason you're ignoring everything else in the review? Her positives for the game are the quality of the artwork and that whilst the combats simple the enemy variety makes up for it, however the negatives she lists directly contrast with these positives. She finds the character artwork alienating, specifically not limited to the npcs which is obviously a huge detractor for the beautiful environmental art. On top of that she mentions there's only 9 dungeons which you need to grind your way through multiple times, then once you finish the game and move onto the next difficulty you do the same thing again however the enemies do more damage/have more health. When the variety of enemies is a strength of the combat, having to repeatedly fight the same ones seems like a pretty glaring weakness to me.

I think that given what she saw as the games strengths were undone by bigger weaknesses her review makes perfect sense. If anything it makes me more suspect of the reviewers that are giving the game high scores despite the huge focus on grinding and shallow combat, especially at a time where a game as bad as Skyrim (in my opinion) can garner nigh' universal praise.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

I'm just making fun of Jim since he's bad at reviewing games, too.

He did completely miss the point, though. It's not about the low score, it's about the things said in the review, and the basis of that low score. It's really unfortunate that he didn't even take the time to research why people are upset before rambling on about it in a video. You also have to be a complete moron to think that reviews don't affect fans of games.

So, you're saying it's not okay to give a game the "low" (actually more mediocre than low) score of 6.5 for not liking their depiction of women, repetitive gameplay, and generic themes? Why?

Also, he didn't say to not discuss the negative reviews, or let them "affect" you. His moral was that you shouldn't let them dictate the discussion, and that doing so could be detrimental.

 

[BRocknRolla]

My thoughts on this whole thing:

1.) I don't like Polygon. The website is visually and organizationally bad, members of the writing staff are of questionable talent, several the the staff members have personalities that I often find irritating, and they bring nothing novel (good-novel anyway) to the whole system of games journalism despite the manner in which they professed they would do so.

but...

2.) The reviewer of the game at Polygon has a right to their score and opinion as long as they sufficiently explain themselves.

3.) Knocking a game for the art style is an entirely valid criticism, like any other criticism. (It is a subjective judgement, like most criticism.)

4.) Jim Sterling continues to do great pieces. And as for a variety of comments so far on this thread...

I just knew someone would accuse him of that too... Shame that people are too busy readying themselves to lash out that they don't actually pay attention to the argument being made.

 

[PirateKing]

Gamers are strange, because it's all about the negative in game reviews. If you only discuss that part no matter how small it is (1 bad review) it does a great disservice to the game.

So people come into a thread for a game they may be interested in, and they read nothing but negative, the developers read a bunch of negative, everyone reads/hears negative... That can only hurt the sales, and can even put a black mark on a quality game that does a lot more good than bad.

There is a scientific reason behind this. Now put yourself in this position, 50 people today were awesome and treated you nicely but suddenly a jerk just flips you off for no reason, honks and leaves. Your brain will be thinking about that jerk flipping off the entire day. This is also the reason why we can remember more bad times and less happy times we had.

 

[Dio]

I also don't like 3D animation. People don't see the beauty in 2D the way I see it. Why I like these guys is, even though their games can be similar to each other, their art and animation always changes in each game. Another reason why I prefer Blazblue's animation and character art than Street Fighter 4's 3D look. Although Guilty Gear is going into 3D but they're achieving an awesome 3D/2D hybrid that I actually found myself excited about.

Funny story, I find myself loving smoother/more frames but lower resolution fighting game animation over the Blazblue style, which is high res but feels kind of stilted and lacking frames/animation principles/like there's fluidity missing. BB sprites look cool in stills but I prefer Melty's sprites over BB/P4A sprites. That Yatagarasu kickstarter is a good example of what I mean when it comes to lower-res but really fluid fighting games. A commonly cited example is 3S but that shit's really expensive to make.

 

[Weltall Zero]

IAnd I would like to know what exactly which artwork this image is referencing or Kamitani just made it up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_maja_desnuda

Being Spanish, of course, it's not exactly like this is not common knowledge to us; probably not so much for Americans?

I would like to point out that nobody in their right mind in Spain would question that this is one of our most famous works of art. The sensuality in it should be obvious to anyone, would you contest it's art because of that intent?

 

[Infinite]

Just play the game guys and if you like it enjoy it. I see no reason to harp over review scores or other peoples opinions. Why give a shit? Grow up

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Because I can find fault with an aspect of a product yet still feel that the product overall is worth purchasing.

But you said that you felt Kamitani should be mocked for his perversion, at least if he wasn't referencing some preexisting art. How are you using "pervert?"

Also, what would make that preexisting art not perverse, if Kamitani were in fact referencing it?

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

Drawing women in suggesting clothing and poses with the only reason to bring sexual arousal.

If that is the case, the issue becomes you(as in George Kamitani) intentionally brought in a divisive element to fulfill his own personal fetish.

And that's fine, since this is his game, and his vision, but that also means that his decisions should stand the scrutiny of criticism, and why he let his own personal desires effect Dragon Crown to this extent.

Again, I'm not saying he actually did that, I would like to see if the art in question is referencing something else, or is just Kamitani's being Kamitani.

2nd edit: I also got the PS3 version on pre-order, so I know I will play the shit out of it.

I don't see how this is any different from calling someone a pervert for having any kind of suggestiveness at all. How would you know whether he drew something for the purpose of sexual arousal only or because it fit within his game? I don't see how it can be divisive when his personal desires equals the game. As in the game itself and all that it is is his personal desire that he's wanted to make for years as stated in interviews.

If I'm understanding the last part of your post right if something is referencing something else it cannot be perverted because it's based on a reference? Does that mean the author of the reference is perverted since they didn't use a reference to create it?

I'm just not a fan of shaming people for being interested in or creating sexual things. Especially when words like "perverted" are used where it can mean anything from showing ankle to the most graphic intercourse imaginable.

 

[Dio]

I'm just not a fan of shaming people for being interested in or creating sexual things. Especially when words like "perverted" are used where it can mean anything from showing ankle to the most graphic intercourse imaginable.

America's always been really funny about that. It's far more acceptable to be into firing a submachine gun into a pack of animals than to show mild interest in anything erotic and reveal that to anyone else in society.

 

[PirateKing]

Funny story, I find myself loving smoother/more frames but lower resolution fighting game animation over the Blazblue style, which is high res but feels kind of stilted and lacking frames/animation principles/like there's fluidity missing. BB sprites look cool in stills but I prefer Melty's sprites over BB/P4A sprites. That Yatagarasu kickstarter is a good example of what I mean when it comes to lower-res but really fluid fighting games. A commonly cited example is 3S but that shit's really expensive to make.

Have you played Skullgirls? I thought in terms of 2D fighting games, that had the best looking moves and fluidity animation I've seen. I need to mention that I only played the demo though but if you're a fan of animation and like fighting games, try the demo for yourself.

 

[Dio]

Have you played Skullgirls? I thought in terms of 2D fighting games, that had the best looking moves and fluidity animation I've seen. I need to mention that I only played the demo though but if you're a fan of animation and like fighting games, try the demo for yourself.

Yeah, I know plenty about that game. I've been following it for a very long time, since there are people I know involved with it.

 

[Weltall Zero]

I don't know. I tend to think that reviewers can critique a game any way they want. If a reviewer doesn't like New Super Mario Bros. because it's not enough like Gears of War, that's fine. It's fine for me to say they're fucking nuts for it, as well.

Isn't that exactly what people have been doing, though? Or am I missing something?

 

[Tripon]

Is there any reason you're ignoring everything else in the review? Her positives for the game are the quality of the artwork and that whilst the combats simple the enemy variety makes up for it, however the negatives she lists directly contrast with these positives. She finds the character artwork alienating, specifically not limited to the npcs which is obviously a huge detractor for the beautiful environmental art. On top of that she mentions there's only 9 dungeons which you need to grind your way through multiple times, then once you finish the game and move onto the next difficulty you do the same thing again however the enemies do more damage/have more health. When the variety of enemies is a strength of the combat, having to repeatedly fight the same ones seems like a pretty glaring weakness to me.

I think that given what she saw as the games strengths were undone by bigger weaknesses her review makes perfect sense. If anything it makes me more suspect of the reviewers that are giving the game high scores despite the huge focus on grinding and shallow combat, especially at a time where a game as bad as Sky Rim (in my opinion) can garner nigh' universal praise.

I think I mentioned how Danielle Riendeau views the artwork, and I pointed that while she had her issues with the female player characters, the agency that those characters had far outweigh whatever issues she had with them. If they didn't, she would have picked a different character than the Amazon.

As for how grindy, and the same enemies in the game, that's pretty much a staple of the Beat-em Up genre. I expect stuff like that to be in these type of games, frankly. Its not as if this is an open world game with potentially thousands of hours of new quests and content. It's essentially a remake of Capcom's Dungeon and Dragon's: Chronicles of Mystara series.

And personally, I wanted to focus on the part where Riendeau made a subjective viewpoint, because ultimately that's what I took out of it.

 

[BRocknRolla]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_maja_desnuda

Being Spanish, of course, it's not exactly like this is not common knowledge to us; probably not so much for Americans?

I thought of this same image when I saw the "bound spirit." Goya is pretty well known world round I would think. The "lying sprawled out on a couch" pose isn't exactly uncommon though either, so I'd imagine it looks somewhat familiar to most people.

I certainly wouldn't jump to defend the image of the monk though. I can see why people would find that offensive. I'd be very surprised if there was any historic source material for that.

 

[Karsticles]

So, you're saying it's not okay to give a game the "low" (actually more mediocre than low) score of 6.5 for not liking their depiction of women, repetitive gameplay, and generic themes? Why?

The last two don't apply to Dragon's Crown.

No, a game should not be reviewed low for its depiction of women. These are reviews about the quality of a game. Should a game get bonus points for depicting women well? What if a game went out of its way to add a multicultural, multigender cast, including transgender, unisex, and asexual individuals. +3 to the review score for being so wonderfully inclusive of everyone? Keep politics out of the game as much as possible. If it bothers you to such a degree that you can't handle reviewing the game without docking its points, then the review should be given to someone else. Example: I happen to find the Grand Theft Auto games reprehensible for their themes (killing hookers, police, etc.); I would never review one of these games because I don't think I could get beyond that to honestly judge the game on its merits. The flavor of the game bothers me. Games should always be reviewed by people who actually appreciate the genre and style being presented, because the feedback only makes sense in that context.

Any stylistic reviews about a game should be reviewed within the context of its target audience. Dragon's Crown is clearly aiming for people who like a certain kind of character and art style (grotesque). To say "I don't like grotesque art, so -1 point to this game" is just as ridiculous as saying "I don't like FPS games, so -1 point to this game". You review the game based on what it is trying to accomplish, and how well it does that. This is it could make sense to give Nintendogs a 10/10 while giving Call of Duty a 9/10.

Ultimately he is correct as far as I see it though, there will always be people reviewing it who are offended by different things or find one negative to be worse than others. A 'floaty jump' might be game killing to some, and a minor annoyance to others for example.

You certainly have to have some weird emotional tie to a game to be affected by a negative review. Every form of entertainment has negative reviews for highly anticipated and otherwise well reviewed products.

I guess for some people they may think 'oh shit, this guy hated it, gave it a 6, but everyone else gave it a 8 or 9 out of 10, what if I don't like it and have a similar experience to them'. Well the fact of the matter is, they do. Some people will highly anticipate a game, have it get high reviews, then actually not like it. There will always be people like this, so having reviews like this gives representation and variety.

Holy shit, it's not about the score. This is why Jim is so irritating. It's not about the score, it's the reasons for the score, and the ridiculously offensive things that were said in the review. Any member would get banned here for calling Dragon's Crown what that reviewer said about it, and rightfully so. It's just disrespectful to a large number of people.

I would argue at least that reviews shouldn't emotionally affect fans of games.

There's no such thing as emotional neutrality unless you are completely indifferent to the thing. Objectivity is a myth.

 

[njean777]

Rich Grisham, who writes for Gamesradar and other sites doing reviews... and also is in Operation Sport's "Press Row Podcast" said something to me that has been stuck in my head ever since because I think he so brilliantly narrowed down why we have a problem with "games journalism."

He said, paraphrasing here, that the problem is that other than a few people the vast majority of people working in "games journalism" aren't journalists in the least... they are writers.

Back in the magical 1990s I went to school for English with a focus on creative writing. I had to take a few journalism classes as part of that (2, if I remember correctly) and the differences in style and tone are stark compared to creative writing. A good journalist shouldn't be biased in the slightest. A good journalist should look at both sides of every story. A good journalist should be well sourced. A good journalist doesn't partake in tricky word play to look cute, the writing style is about substance - not style.

All of this is the complete opposite of the gaming media. What we have are a bunch of writers. When I was taught creative writing, or hell, even essay writing, it was about style, it was about taking sides and arguing points, it was about colorful language and imaginative descriptions. There aren't rules in creative writing.

Most of the journalists today are writers, they aren't journalists... and nor do they even try to be. Until that changes... games journalism will remain a joke. I think the same goes for reviewers... these people weren't trained in criticism, they are just writers and their reviews come across as such.

Huh, never thought about it that way before.

 

[McBradders]

I recall when Conan got a better score than a Ratchet and Clank game and the Ratchet fans made the Conan OT a complete clusterfuck. Completely worthless. Which is sad because the game was pretty good in all fairness and worthy of discussion of its merits. However any and all discussion was drowned out but disgruntled Ratchet fans who simply could not believe that Conan was considered, by a single outlet I believe, to be the better game.

The disparity in scores was not even worthy of a moments discussion or even acknowledgment, but there you go. It's presence on GAF ruined because hey videogames, man.

Now I think about it... it might have even been the same score. I forget.

Anyway, that's the most notable example I can remember where certain elements simply can't be content to, you know, just let shit fucking lie. As consumers are we that invested in Metacritic scores? I mean really? One lower than average score and, even in this thread, people just completely warping things out of all reasonable perspective. And for what? And now someone calls them out on it in a video... torches and pitchforks at the ready because, gosh darn it, somebody on the internet thinks I'm wrong and that simply won't stand.

 

[APF]

Again, I'm not saying he actually did that, I would like to see if the art in question is referencing something else, or is just Kamitani's being Kamitani.

Here's the gallery on their site (NSFW) http://vanillaware.co.jp/gallery.htm

 

[PirateKing]

Yeah, I know plenty about that game. I've been following it for a very long time, since there are people I know involved with it.

Vita version! For the love of all that is there tell them to release the Vita soon. I'll buy it day 1. Don't forget to mention about PAL version as well

 

[GuitarAtomik]

Haven't had a chance to watch Jim's video but this thread did make me go read the Polygon review. It's odd. The text seems to suggest a 7-7.5ish game until you get to the paragraph about the art which makes it obvious it lost a point or half just for that. That's fair though.

I did find it interesting that she didn't mention at all how the exaggerated proportions are applied to the males and literally everything else in the world as well though. I'm sure she has a valid point about the female sexualization but it's hard for me to judge it all in context without playing it (which I will). It's pretty obvious Kamitani was going for an extreme exaggeration of all tropes so it doesn't bother me. Maybe that will change after I play it though.

I also found it a bit annoying to suggest the art style is juvenile or only for teenage boys. Her point would have been at least somewhat better received had she not pretty much insulted people who enjoy the aesthetics. Otherwise, there's nothing really that bad about the review beyond that. Nothing to get too worked up about even though it definitely deserves a little criticism.

 

[Gbraga]

Wow, this is really really good. I'm not a fan of this guy's (girl's?) artstyle, but this picture in particular is really well drawn.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

Isn't that exactly what people have been doing, though? Or am I missing something?

Sure. I'm repeating this a billion times, but Jim's point is just that you shouldn't focus on it and let it control the conversation around the game.

Why would you want/let the negative to be the dominant factor being discussed? This game has an aweomse score of 83 on metacritic, but the main conversation is about a negative review. That's not really a good thing for word of mouth.

 

[Massive Duck. C.M.]

Wow, this is really really good. I'm not a fan of this guy's (girl's?) artstyle, but this picture in particular is really well drawn.

It's George Kamitani, he's a guy. But apparently that picture is crystallized perversion for some people...

 

[Relaxed Muscle]

I read a similar article to that one. While its clear that the art in Dragon Crown is generally referencing Renaissance style era art, there's some specific female NPC's artwork that helped caused the lower screw with Polygon.


I was referring more to this particular image, since Polygon in particular used it as part of their argument of objectifying female NPCs.

Not exactly Renaissance, but that pose used in the article is quite similar to several classic art pieces:

(Linked in case are considered NSFW)

http://i.imgur.com/fmHxaAd.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/4z6aiG1.jpg

Also like they said la maja desnuda/vestida which has a similar pose too.

 

[Tripon]

I don't see how this is any different from calling someone a pervert for having any kind of suggestiveness at all. How would you know whether he drew something for the purpose of sexual arousal only or because it fit within his game? I don't see how it can be divisive when his personal desires equals the game. As in the game itself and all that it is is his personal desire that he's wanted to make for years as stated in interviews.

If I'm understanding the last part of your post right if something is referencing something else it cannot be perverted because it's based on a reference? Does that mean the author of the reference is perverted since they didn't use a reference to create it?

I'm just not a fan of shaming people for being interested in or creating sexual things. Especially when words like "perverted" are used where it can mean anything from showing ankle to the most graphic intercourse imaginable.

No, what I'm saying that if he used a reference or not to help create his artwork and in particular, there is a reason why two of the female NPCs are waifing about, I can better understand his mindset on the reasons why the art direction turned out on such.

And if I wasn't clear before, the mocking for being perverted is not actually mocking for being perverted, its to mock for making a dumb decision. I'm a full blooded guy, I like boobs and pussy just as much as the next person, and I can still joke about the fact that just about every series on HBO will have at least one boob, and one vag shown on screen, and that there really is a 'CEO of Tits' at HBO. Or when M. Night Shyamalan releases a new movie with a TWIST for no reason, he should be mocked for it. People who clearly let their own desires to influence their work in a negative way.

To that end, if Kamitani allowed his perversions to make a worse game, we as people who sample his products should mock him, or criticize him for allowing such a thing to happen.

Again, this is my personal opinion and it relies on a series of qualifiers.

Basically, the question I'm asking, "Is there a reason for all of this?"

 

[Tripon]

Not exactly Renaissance, but that pose used in the article is quite similar to several classic art pieces:

(Linked in case are considered NSFW)

http://i.imgur.com/fmHxaAd.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/4z6aiG1.jpg

Also like they said la maja desnuda/vestida which has a similar pose too.

Hmm, okay. That's the kinda stuff I was looking for. Thanks for posting it.

 

[MisterSamMan]

Once again, Jim Sterling nails the point.

I love Deadly Premonition. Why should I care what IGN thinks about it? If they didn't like it so what I got better things to do with my time then to get angry. I'd much rather praise Jim Sterling review of Deadly Premonition than continuously draw attention to the IGN review. Websites make money off of page views and ad clicks so why should I spend my time directing people to a terrible review.

 

[LordJim]

Once again, Jim Sterling nails the point.

I love Deadly Premonition. Why should I care what IGN thinks about it? If they didn't like it so what I got better things to do with my time then to get angry. I'd much rather praise Jim Sterling review of Deadly Premonition than continuously draw attention to the IGN review. Websites make money off of page views and ad clicks so why should I spend my time directing people to a terrible review.

Rather than the scores itself, one should also question the standards by which said score is decided.

Imagine if every game that is hard to get into got points subtracted for example. Some people will go 'WTF'.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

The last two don't apply to Dragon's Crown.

Opinion, and I assume from someone who hasn't beaten the game since it's not out until tomorrow.

No, a game should not be reviewed low for its depiction of women. These are reviews about the quality of a game. Should a game get bonus points for depicting women well? What if a game went out of its way to add a multicultural, multigender cast, including transgender, unisex, and asexual individuals. +3 to the review score for being so wonderfully inclusive of everyone? Keep politics out of the game as much as possible. If it bothers you to such a degree that you can't handle reviewing the game without docking its points, then the review should be given to someone else. Example: I happen to find the Grand Theft Auto games reprehensible for their themes (killing hookers, police, etc.); I would never review one of these games because I don't think I could get beyond that to honestly judge the game on its merits. The flavor of the game bothers me. Games should always be reviewed by people who actually appreciate the genre and style being presented, because the feedback only makes sense in that context.

Any stylistic reviews about a game should be reviewed within the context of its target audience. Dragon's Crown is clearly aiming for people who like a certain kind of character and art style (grotesque). To say "I don't like grotesque art, so -1 point to this game" is just as ridiculous as saying "I don't like FPS games, so -1 point to this game". You review the game based on what it is trying to accomplish, and how well it does that. This is it could make sense to give Nintendogs a 10/10 while giving Call of Duty a 9/10.

Again, opinion. Mine is that's it's fine for a reviewer to base their review on anything they want. If I don't give a fuck about part of their criteria, I'll move on and not care about their review. But, making rules for what a reviewer should and should not critique is crazy.

It's fine that she was offended by some of what she saw in the game, and showed it in her review. And it's fine if you disagree and don't find any of it offensive.

Again, she didn't give it a bad review or score. There were a ton of things she liked about it. There were a few she didn't. In the end she gave it an okay score of 6.5.

The real truth of the matter is that there are a lot of gamers out there right now that are pissed at all the talk of late about there being a lot of sexism in games. That's why this is getting focused on.

 

[SolidSnakex]

I really don't see what's insulting about it. That was the impression I got when I first saw the game.

Unapologetic adolescent fantasies are fun sometimes. I suppose in context it could be taken in a disparaging way, but near as I can tell, it's a pretty accurate description of what DC is.

Those comments are really in the same ballpark as Kotaku's "14 year old" comments about Kamitani's art. In both situations you've got people who've gone a step beyond simply talking about how they personally don't like the art. There really isn't much anyone can say if someone just doesn't like a games artwork. But there's a lot that can be said when you start making cracks about immaturity and age when it comes to those that may like that art or those that were responsible for it.

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

No, what I'm saying that if he used a reference or not to help create his artwork and in particular, there is a reason why two of the female NPCs are waifing about, I can better understand his mindset on the reasons why the art direction turned out on such.

And if I wasn't clear before, the mocking for being perverted is not actually mocking for being perverted, its to mock for making a dumb decision. I'm a full blooded guy, I like boobs and pussy just as much as the next person, and I can still joke about the fact that just about every series on HBO will have at least one boob, and one vag shown on screen, and that there really is a 'CEO of Tits' at HBO. Or when M. Night Shyamalan releases a new movie with a TWIST for no reason, he should be mocked for it. People who clearly let their own desires to influence their work in a negative way.

To that end, if Kamitani allowed his perversions to make a worse game, we as people who sample his products should mock him, or criticize him for allowing such a thing to happen.

Again, this is my personal opinion and it relies on a series of qualifiers.

Basically, the question I'm asking, "Is there a reason for all of this?"

What constitutes perversion? Looking at the dictionary definition the only way it seems it can even makes any sense to me in the context people are using the word in is if Kamitani somehow obtains sexual gratification from putting art into the game. I find it hard to believe that Kamitani can only obtain sexual relief from his involvement in million dollar projects.

Like I said before, since the word is seemingly used as based on a sliding scale. Having women uncovered in any fashion could be regarded as perversion. It doesn't seem sensible to me to use the word in this context. Also this clarity of the effect of debatable negative decisions also seems to be pretty subjective. I also don't understand how any inclusion of art could effect the game since the people who usually design game mechanics are different from those who create assets. Even if it's the same person working on two aspects, I don't see how that would affect the game itself unless you mean they are worse as a designer or coder as a result of spending more time on refining art skills or creating art that you find to be negative.

 

[Wensih]

Polygon's review is reasonable. She states the game is good and she even defends the witch and amazon to a point stating they are strong portrayals of women despite their busts; however, she had a problem with those weird fetishy touching minigame that in my opinion look like something from a sexy beach game. It just doesn't seem to provide anything in terms of gameplay. Sure some will argue that you can touch men so its equality; however my issue is that the entire minigame is just extremely weird and off putting and doesn't fit with the rest of the game.

I might not have given it as low of a score but its silly to think her opinion isn't valid. The game isn't even out yet. This happens every time a game forums are hyping doesn't get the score they want. People just want to whine even if they eventually end up agreeing with the score in a couple months. It happened with uncharted 3, it happened with skyward sword, it happened with ni no kuni. I'm sure once people actually play this game real opinion can actually begin to form on forums rather than the idea that the game is amazing because you liked vanillaware's past games.

 

[deli2000]

The last two don't apply to Dragon's Crown.

In the very same post

Objectivity is a myth.

Wow.

Well, I don't know. Maybe subjectively she didn't enjoy the gameplay as much as you did. Dragon's Crown is not for everyone.

And criticizing the art style of a game is a perfectly valid criticism. Like criticizing the cinematography in a movie.

 

[famousmortimer]

It's funny that in thread about a video in which the vast majority of us seem to agree with about not giving too much attention to negative reviews... we are all talking about Polygon's review.

I would call it irony but I don't think it is.

 

[Giolon]

What's the deal with the touching? Can't you touch all NPCs the same way? I'm pretty sure I've seen a video where they were touching the big barbarian dude exactly the same, or the goblin cook.

 

[Htown]

My two cents. When you give a review score that is seen as differentiation as the norm, you need to clearly state your case why it is so.

So reviewers need to check the metacritic for a game before they give it a score?

 

[VanillaCakeIsBurning]

What's the deal with the touching? Can't you touch all NPCs the same way? I'm pretty sure I've seen a video where they were touching the big barbarian dude exactly the same, or the goblin cook.

Yeah you can touch the barbarian as well.

I imagine some people may be leaving it out to construct a narrative more beneficial to their argument.