We can't give you love and rhetoric without the blood.
February 9, 2015 8:37 PM Subscribe
Coming off a successful Kickstarter campaign, Innuendo Studios has released a really interesting piece of video game criticism, that is somewhat about Call of Duty, but also about the problems with reviewing video games; and it gets better as it goes on. Previously by Innuendo (and enjoyed by MeFi), an engaging meditation on Phil Fish, and the problems of internet fame.
Some of the game criticism that the author is wishing for exists, and it's fantastic. For example, Austin Walker's treatment of "The Crew" is fascinating and spot on.
posted by hellojed at 9:53 PM on February 9, 2015
posted by hellojed at 9:53 PM on February 9, 2015
That was excellent. Reminded me of The Pervert's Guide to Ideology a little bit.
posted by Doleful Creature at 12:40 AM on February 10, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Doleful Creature at 12:40 AM on February 10, 2015 [1 favorite]
I truly enjoyed that.
"Love and Rhetoric without the Blood"... what would that be? Some kind of motion-detecting-camera dance game with an immersive plot about being the Pied Piper that leads the world into the One Giant Rave That Will Finally PLUR The World?
posted by hippybear at 2:59 AM on February 10, 2015
"Love and Rhetoric without the Blood"... what would that be? Some kind of motion-detecting-camera dance game with an immersive plot about being the Pied Piper that leads the world into the One Giant Rave That Will Finally PLUR The World?
posted by hippybear at 2:59 AM on February 10, 2015
"Love and Rhetoric without the Blood"... what would that be?
Katamari Damacy.
posted by sparkletone at 4:18 AM on February 10, 2015 [4 favorites]
Katamari Damacy.
posted by sparkletone at 4:18 AM on February 10, 2015 [4 favorites]
I really enjoyed watching that (this from someone who Will. Not. Watch. Videos), and the ending was simply perfection.
posted by 73pctGeek at 5:27 AM on February 10, 2015
posted by 73pctGeek at 5:27 AM on February 10, 2015
this was good. Very well created: As it went along, it kept me thinking about my own perceptions of gaming reviews. I landed on the idea that AAA game reviewing businesses have attached themselves to the industry (somehow) and now make their money (somehow - by generating controversy? that's popular these days) and what they absolutely must not do is poke the industry with a stick. They are required to not write a bad review: because either the fans will hate them for it, or the dev will cut them off. And so they write the drek.
I really loved the analogy of "a taste-maker telling them something they already like is good." How often do I do this? Particularly when the thing I already like is a thing I like due to heavy marketing?
posted by rebent at 5:27 AM on February 10, 2015 [2 favorites]
I really loved the analogy of "a taste-maker telling them something they already like is good." How often do I do this? Particularly when the thing I already like is a thing I like due to heavy marketing?
posted by rebent at 5:27 AM on February 10, 2015 [2 favorites]
+1 for RHPS reference
posted by Reverend John at 6:41 AM on February 10, 2015 [1 favorite]
posted by Reverend John at 6:41 AM on February 10, 2015 [1 favorite]
That was pretty good. It points out one of the major ironies of the GamerGators, which is that "video game journalism" has a very real problem (some might say ethical), but that their conception of it is ass backwards. So ass backwards that in pursuing their imagined conspiracies (the laughable idea that the small percentage of women who choose and are able to be somewhat prominent in the games industry somehow use their sexuality to sway reviewers for small indie games) they're actually reifying the problem that does indeed exist (a massive unyielding prominence of the same fucking game over and over).
It reminds me of Brietbart's efforts to uncover "voter fraud" that (if it exists at all) is a small half a percent of every vote cast in America. All the while they ignore the institutionalized voter fraud of disenfranchisement through voter ID laws and redistricting. Millions of people have their right to vote complicated by the republican machine, but they're investigating the infinitesimal number of times that a fraudulent for a Democrat are cast each year.
The end effect of both being that the real problem is camouflaged by delusional conspiracy theories that allow people to feel good about their tribal identities as marginalized groups while the moneyed interests don't have to do anything to change the actual problem.
posted by codacorolla at 7:41 AM on February 10, 2015 [2 favorites]
It reminds me of Brietbart's efforts to uncover "voter fraud" that (if it exists at all) is a small half a percent of every vote cast in America. All the while they ignore the institutionalized voter fraud of disenfranchisement through voter ID laws and redistricting. Millions of people have their right to vote complicated by the republican machine, but they're investigating the infinitesimal number of times that a fraudulent for a Democrat are cast each year.
The end effect of both being that the real problem is camouflaged by delusional conspiracy theories that allow people to feel good about their tribal identities as marginalized groups while the moneyed interests don't have to do anything to change the actual problem.
posted by codacorolla at 7:41 AM on February 10, 2015 [2 favorites]
In the comments on Youtube (yes, I know) there's a discussion about how his videos are very difficult to summarize into coherent themes. And whether that's good or bad.
In an odd way I find it refreshing. As in, he can talk about things that he's been considering but he can't solidify. But it doesn't contain a lot of wasted speech that you'd get if he were just rambling.
The "porn story" tangent and how a majority of players only play multi-player. Team Fortress 2 doesn't bother with a single-player campaign. If you like to play paintball or chess, is it going to bother you that there's no story behind these games? So is the single-player campaign in COD primarily about marketing?
He says 4 out of 5 players ignore it, but the stats he shows are for players who never finished the single-player campaign, but is that the same as ignoring it? I guess you can take that as a sign they weren't invested in the story. That's what you'd say for anyone who started but didn't finish a book or movie. So what are players doing? Are they treating it like a tutorial, where they can try out the new weapons and vehicles before using them in multi-player?
He mentions that it gives the reviewers something to talk about. I could see how stuff like how it's more vertical or feels more like Halo or whatever could be too abstract or theoretical to a lot of people if they're not already drenched in the discussion of multi-player games. ("Feels kind of like Halo" might seem straight-forward, but talking about why does it feel like Halo or in what way is it similar to Halo can get tricky.)
posted by RobotHero at 9:07 AM on February 10, 2015
In an odd way I find it refreshing. As in, he can talk about things that he's been considering but he can't solidify. But it doesn't contain a lot of wasted speech that you'd get if he were just rambling.
The "porn story" tangent and how a majority of players only play multi-player. Team Fortress 2 doesn't bother with a single-player campaign. If you like to play paintball or chess, is it going to bother you that there's no story behind these games? So is the single-player campaign in COD primarily about marketing?
He says 4 out of 5 players ignore it, but the stats he shows are for players who never finished the single-player campaign, but is that the same as ignoring it? I guess you can take that as a sign they weren't invested in the story. That's what you'd say for anyone who started but didn't finish a book or movie. So what are players doing? Are they treating it like a tutorial, where they can try out the new weapons and vehicles before using them in multi-player?
He mentions that it gives the reviewers something to talk about. I could see how stuff like how it's more vertical or feels more like Halo or whatever could be too abstract or theoretical to a lot of people if they're not already drenched in the discussion of multi-player games. ("Feels kind of like Halo" might seem straight-forward, but talking about why does it feel like Halo or in what way is it similar to Halo can get tricky.)
posted by RobotHero at 9:07 AM on February 10, 2015
Are they treating it like a tutorial, where they can try out the new weapons and vehicles before using them in multi-player?
I can definitely say that's not the case, because MW uses completely different engines for single- and multi-player gameplay. The former is essentially auto-aim on-rails AI assisted nonsense. The latter is actually very realistically modeled and complex. I think different teams develop each.
posted by cthuljew at 10:02 AM on February 10, 2015
I can definitely say that's not the case, because MW uses completely different engines for single- and multi-player gameplay. The former is essentially auto-aim on-rails AI assisted nonsense. The latter is actually very realistically modeled and complex. I think different teams develop each.
posted by cthuljew at 10:02 AM on February 10, 2015
cthuljew: "completely different engines for single- and multi-player gameplay."
Whaaaaaaat?
It'll still be the same basic control scheme, though, right? You'll still practice stuff like right trigger to shoot, tap A to enter a vehicle, things like that, even if it's much more forgiving about aiming in the general direction of what you want to hit. Am I wrong?
posted by RobotHero at 11:05 AM on February 10, 2015
Whaaaaaaat?
It'll still be the same basic control scheme, though, right? You'll still practice stuff like right trigger to shoot, tap A to enter a vehicle, things like that, even if it's much more forgiving about aiming in the general direction of what you want to hit. Am I wrong?
posted by RobotHero at 11:05 AM on February 10, 2015
Also, it's an aside, but comparing Kevin Spacey's performance to House of Cards rather than any of the 10+ years old roles he lists, feels in-character for video game reviews too. If there's a 15-year-old reading your review, he wasn't even born when The Usual Suspects came out, is he going to care who Verbal Kint is?
And some of that narrow view vs. considering a broader history is tied in with game reviews as "do I want to buy this or not?" vs. deeper writing about games.
posted by RobotHero at 11:34 AM on February 10, 2015
And some of that narrow view vs. considering a broader history is tied in with game reviews as "do I want to buy this or not?" vs. deeper writing about games.
posted by RobotHero at 11:34 AM on February 10, 2015
rebent: "this was good. Very well created: As it went along, it kept me thinking about my own perceptions of gaming reviews. I landed on the idea that AAA game reviewing businesses have attached themselves to the industry (somehow) and now make their money (somehow - by generating controversy? that's popular these days)"
If I told you that producers on games have their bonuses tied to metacritic scores, how do you think that would influence the review ecosystem?
posted by pwnguin at 8:41 PM on February 11, 2015
If I told you that producers on games have their bonuses tied to metacritic scores, how do you think that would influence the review ecosystem?
posted by pwnguin at 8:41 PM on February 11, 2015
« Older big ass changes, y'all, big ass changes | Stripped of tenure for a blog post Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by feckless fecal fear mongering at 9:39 PM on February 9, 2015 [4 favorites]