I routinely hear ppl say things like "this game is bad but I like it" & "this game is bad but fun" & though I know this way of thinking is so deeply ingrained as to be nigh unchangeable I philosophically object to it & the underlying notion of game quality as something objective.
-
-
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 -
-
-
The only way I could see this remotely making sense is if the gameplay was fun but the story or setup was morally questionable. Though I doubt that's what they mean.
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.