It seems to me that these folks often have to bend over backwards trying to explain that although they feel deep affection for a game, they still recognize that it is, of course, bad, as we can all recognize just by looking at it. It is objectively bad.
-
-
Show this thread
-
IMO: If a game is fun, or if you like it for whatever reason, if you find it strangely beautiful or captivating or whatever, it's good, no matter how janky it is. If it's "polished" but dull, it's bad, no matter how refined it is.
Show this thread -
A broken game can feel alive and revelatory and beautiful. A "well-programmed" (ugh) game can feel suffocating and sterile. I really wish we could abandon altogether these "objective" notions of video game quality and trust our own individual, deeply subjective tastes.
Show this thread -
Of course, the reason this matters as much to me as it does is that I feel this kind of thinking also impacts our collective expectations from game criticism, as I've written about before.https://medium.com/@carolynpetit/ruthless-individuality-criticisms-past-and-hopefully-its-future-d1ffbf3bb2c8 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
-
-
But people usually say that in conversation with people who haven't watched a thing or so as a kind of asterisk like saying "hey this is me fully on my bs rn" like a recommendation with caveats. Not every game can universally perfect like iceborn.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.