/pgg/ - /pol/ GamerGate

Videogames are both tecnology and art at the same time.
The most close thing we have from the past was hartisanship: object that had a "use" (like videogames) but can also be made pretty and appealing.
So I'm always for a combination of tech/feeling review.

When videogames magazines with CD were a thing there were tons of good review made this way.

>>287
Oh, those were the times.

I haven't even bothered with reviews since "Let's Play" became common.
I get a whole lot more from watching 10 minutes of gameplay than even the most in-depth written review.

Games media is shifting formats and becoming more decentralized; I think the best strategy is to point people away from reviews and towards youtube.
There will always be a niche for deep and/or formal analysis of games, but most people just want to know if they'd like a game before they spend $60.

(You should already know who's behind pre-ordering (especially if only based on pre-release reviews), so I'm taking it as a given no one here does it.)

There are two ways to do critique of art

1 - What was the artist trying to do and did he/she achieve this?

2 - What does this mean in the context of society - how was it created and to what effect/end.

Most people like to do #2 as this is based in critical theory.

The point I would like to make about this, is that although it relies upon subjective interpretation, in order for the critique to have merit, it must be persuasively argued

That is to say, "This is sexist because the boobs made me feel gross" is not a successful use of critical theory.

Context, in this case, is everything.

Is the game supposed to be campy?
Is the character aware of their own sexuality?
Is the sexuality itself a commentary on society, or the narrative of the game?

I'm sure you can follow where I am going with this.

Go and read the shitty Bayonetta 2 review that was done at Polygon and look at it with this eye. You'll see that almost no argumentation is made to evidence claims except for "feelings".

This is pretty much a C- or a D if someone turned this in as a college assignment.

That's the level of idiocy we're dealing with. Educate yourself and then call them on their shitty work.

>>365
The first rule of art critique should be don't try to define what art is.

The second should be art is used as a vehicle for self-expression, what is the artist trying to express.
Video game is unique in this aspect that it allows both the artist and the audience to express themselves. Thus a critic needs to understand how the game allows the players to express themselves.

>>278
You forgot:

- Is the game fun? (not 'is the game sexist?')
- Does the game present a valuable storyline with character development? (not 'does it objectify women?')

>>454
Fuck my name was on that. Topkek. Whatever.

>>455
Solved.