Social media has been abuzz about the picture of a rather hideous dress. When shown this picture and asked, "What do you see?" I reply, "An ugly dress."
But the raging debate about the color of the dress made me realize something very fundamental. Some people see a black and blue dress. Some people see a gold and white dress. And some people can see both. But it doesn't matter what colors you see, because it is all about perspective.
And it is perspective that makes me wonder if reviews of any media should be done at all because we don't all see things from the same perspective.
There is a great study about the Himba in Africa and how their language affects how they see color ( http://www1.icsi.berkeley.e... It is worth looking into in order to understand what I am proposing.
It has occurred to me that the reviews that bashed the Order 1886, Ryse, and others are, in actuality, based on a perception that is hindered because of language. Game journalists exists in a world that is insular. They talk video games, they eat video games, and they breathe video games. Wherever they go, video games are part of their daily life.
When they talk about what they want out of a game, their wants and reactions are reified by feedback from their fellow journalists. This tends to further isolate and insulate them from the mainstream gaming community. And that insulation only continues to validate their perceptions of gaming as a culture. They are immersed in a negative feedback loop* that repeats their own beliefs back at them and bolsters their assertions. As a result, they don't understand the vehemence and vitriol that is aimed at them when they give, what they think, is a valid review. (*negative because the results of such isolation rarely result in positive outcomes. Though, arguably, there are places that produce a positive feedback loop and I am not arguing that some journalists are only stuck in the negative. On the contrary, sometimes they are stuck in a positive feedback loop also. Neither really addresses the major concern: that either negative or positive, the journalist is consistently reinforcing his/her views based on an insular experience. Ergo, they are not privy to a more mainstream viewpoint when looking at games. i.e. They see games through a journalist's lens, not through a gamer's lens.) E.G. Anti vaccination mothers in America belong to the same social groups, both online and in public and they reinforce their own misguided viewpoints. These viewpoints have led to death and the spread of preventable diseases. (Yes, I think that is apropos as it shows how an insular community functions.)
The gamer (the person that enjoys this hobby, has his/her own wants and needs, but lives outside of this "gamer journalist society") is not stuck in one of these communities. The gamer is not stuck in these negative feedback loops, and when negative reviews or press are printed about a game, their reaction is one of rejection ("I don't see the dress as THAT color!!! I see it as the other color!!!")
Or one of dismissal ("Boy that is an ugly dress.") or the ability to see the journalists concerns (I see it as THAT color at first, now I see it as the OTHER color).
Now, hopefully, you are following me through the dress analogy and my analysis of journalist culture. The fact is, games like Ryse, Watch Dogs, The Order, Destiny, are enjoyable to the gamer (as is evidenced by sales, online presence, and their responses to the game) these games seem unsuitable, uninspired, (and if I may) underwhelming to those who live solely in a world where video games and the rhetoric about video games is all these journalists know.
The gamer appears to ignore review scores as sales of these games have skyrocketed. Why? Because gamers want to play games that they are passionate about. They play games that are fun to them. I reviewed the Order: 1886 and gave it a great score because I loved the game and I knew exactly what I was getting. But then, I have a life outside of video games. I do other things, take vacations, have a career that doesn't involve gaming in any way. Since I am not isolated in the gaming culture, playing a game is a pastime to me, a mini 2 hour vacation.
This explains why some reviews trash what is considered a good game. It also explains why reviews shouldn't be trusted. I have written before that journalists that write reviews should only do so for their favorite genres, thus they can garner a following and become an expert on the genre, but it appears that I was wrong.
You see, it doesn't matter how the reviewer sees the game. It is a matter of perception. They may see a 4/10, but I see a wonderful game that is fully worth the price of admission. And, as I have read the comments here on N4G, I believe many gamers would agree with my assessment of the game (maybe not to the high score).
What it really comes down to, is that, our language, our immersion (or lack thereof), our insulation into gaming culture, affects our perceptions and we are only seeing "the dress" (if you'll pardon the analogy) in one way. Some of us will see it as the exact opposite because we have a different perspective and some of us will be able to see it both ways.
This perceptive study renders the very idea of reviews moot, not because we can't agree on them, not because some reviews make us angry, but because we are looking at the exact same thing and our eyes and brains are not perceiving it the exact same way.
"Back in the innocent 1990s, Jaleco released a trilogy of Super NES beat 'em ups in the Rushing Beat series. Well, in Japan, they were part of that series. In international markets, Jaleco renamed each game and censored it to pieces. Nowadays, however, a fourth game called RUSHING BEAT X: Return of the Brawl Brothers is in the works for Steam and Switch 2 from City Connection and Clear River Games. Like its predecessors, Rushing Beat X will support 2-player local co-op, and it's extremely promising," says Co-Optimus.
Digital Foundry : Doom: The Dark Ages is now receiving its path tracing upgrade on PC, so Alex and John tested it versus the standard RT graphics - and found some surprises.
The PC version is still on schedule but the console versions have been delayed.
I'm enjoying my time with the order and personally, i can't fathom some of the review scores.
Seems like in the eyes of critics, story driven games should remian the domain of indie devs.
A game like the Order is always going to be divisive. I'm sure I'd have fun with it, but I don't agree with the (hinted at) idea that to give it a low score you'd have to be some sort of no-life game bubble shut-in. A lot of people with a lot of experience of the wider gaming world and a totally healthy relationship with games and other humans - will hate it. It's just that sort of game! Unavoidable. Same applies to Quantic Dreams' titles.
That just stinks of "I'm right, you're wrong" type silliness. It doesn't really matter if a lot of people dislike, or even hate what the Order is, or any other game. It's not objectively good or bad. Unlike the dress, which somehow - in real life - is - without a doubt - proven to be a blue and black dress even though I can only really see it as a white and gold one.
Stupid dress, lol.
Reading through most of your blog, I think you could have summed it up better by simply saying that game reviewers don't know how to do a proper review.
It wasn't a bad blog, and I think you were trying to insult reviewers instead of trying to defend them. What I see from reviews is that they look at games from their own perspective, instead of from the perspective of the people who may want to play this game. It makes the review more about the author instead of the actual game, because their opinion becomes more important than giving the reader the information that they need to make an informed decision on what the game will be like.
On the dress...I hadn't heard of it until Sony's tweet with the controller, and MS subsequent fail response to it, but when reading about it all I could wonder was how the heck did this become such a big thing? Social media never ceases to amaze me.
The dress is gold and white btw
Interesting read, here's my view on some of the things you bought up;
- As with your dress analogy, people can have differing views depending on context, perception, experience, etc. And they can be wildly differing, but none of them necessarily need to be wrong.
Different people will have different criteria of what makes a good game or not. For example, some may overlook gameplay flaws if the story is compelling, and for others, if the frame rate isn't up to snuff, the game is garbage. Neither opinion is objectively better than the other, but one may have a greater value, and be more relevant to you.
So, for The Order, you may read the reviews (i.e. read and not just look at the number) as 'this is a good game, let down by some gameplay elements and length'.It's up to you to decide whether that's enough of a factor to you.
That's all reviews are, oppurtunities for people who have played the game to give you their impression of it. There's no law to say you have to buy any game that scores 9 or 10, and none saying you can't buy one which doesn't acheive at least a certain score.