Something went wrong. Try again later

gamer_152

<3

15041 74588 79 709
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Mutual Co-Operation: Some Thoughts on Criticism

This is the kind of thing that some readers are going to find a bit basic, but I think is worth talking about: I see at lot of people, especially recently, discussing media critics and media creators as though they’re in some kind of adversarial competition with each other. Some common forms of this:

  1. When critics express a negative opinion about a piece of media and that piece of media then goes on to be popular or highly profitable, it’s often framed as the creators or the media triumphing over the criticism or critics. It may also be framed as the critics being somehow “proven wrong”.
  2. When critics express that an element of a piece of media might be problematic and the creator doesn’t change their media in response or even doubles down on that element, they’re seen by some as fighting back against an oppressive force.
  3. When a critic makes a statement about a piece of media someone disagrees with, that person will sometimes defend that piece of media in a way that treats the criticism as an outside threat to it.

In these situations it’s implicitly suggested that the goal of the critic/s was to somehow damage the success of the piece of media or prevent media getting into the hands of an audience that might be enthusiastic for it. However, despite people making these statements a lot, few ever seem to make an argument for a predator-prey relationship between these groups as a real part of the creative landscape. There’s rarely even a supposed logic on which this idea of the destructive critic is built and evidence presented for it is often only from fringe sociopolitical groups vastly stretching the truth.

Critics do affect audience habits, but critics also know that writing negatively about media isn’t going to make it vanish in a puff of smoke. In addition, the people in criticism are largely there because they have a passion for and love of the medium they’re critiquing. For these and other reasons, just trying to delete media from the world is almost never what they’re trying to do. In fact, if everything is working properly, creators and critics can form a co-operative and positive relationship.

There is frequent middle-ground that many creators and critics are trying to push media towards: Both creators and critics often want to get worthwhile media into peoples' hands. This of course does not apply to every creator and every critic of them: The goals of critics and the goals of creators change from person to person, and there’s often more than one thing that people in these roles are trying to achieve. Additionally, critics and creators disagree all the time about what makes worthwhile media. Still, that doesn’t mean there cannot be and is not a large area of overlap where creators and critics benefit from a mutual exchange of media and feedback on that media.

Despite this portrait of the artists and the critics staging some epic cultural battle, a lot of the artists I know and see around me are people who are very eager for feedback, especially feedback from particularly informed individuals. If you want to work your way “up” a creative field that kind of criticism becomes invaluable. It’s why indie game devs are keen on getting games into peoples’ hands and why game studios bring in QA teams. You can also see plenty of people and companies out there who see criticism as an important form of publicity for their product, even when that criticism may highlight considerable flaws in what they’ve made. Heck, just look at the relationship Giant Bomb has with game developers.

No matter the critic’s goals, constructive feedback can and is used as a vital tool in sculpting art or entertainment people want to engage with. Likewise, even if the creator feels subjectively different about their own work than the critic does, they can still see the criticism as representing outside opinions in a valuable way. What’s more, even if they don’t agree with the criticism as a whole, that doesn’t mean there can’t be elements in what the critics are saying which will help creators think constructively about what they make as they go forward.

This is of course scratching the surface of critic-artist relationships, and a lot of controversies over critical opinions also have a lot to do with people feeling that criticism of things they like is a personal attack on them, people being confused about the difference between disliking something and criticising it, and many more issues. The critics aren’t always right and the critics won’t always agree with us, but that doesn’t mean that artists need “defending” from criticism or that critics are in competition with artists. Seeing conflict as unavoidable and people you disagree with as the enemy is an easy but dangerous way out. One of the best things we can do for any medium is see instances of and opportunities for co-operation. Thanks for reading.

4 Comments

4 Comments

Avatar image for thatpinguino
thatpinguino

2988

Forum Posts

602

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

As a writer, I can't tell you how much better my work has gotten via criticism (otherwise known as "editing"). Before I was exposed to larger criticism, my work was pretty terrible. The more intense the scrutiny, the more I've grown from it.

I think the adversarial relationship is largely the result of the jealous, neurotic love of fandom and how fragile it can be. To be fully engaged as a fan is to dive deep into an irrational, one sided-ed, and ridiculous love. In that sort of exposed and logic-free relationship, people can get very defensive without stopping to think about why.

Avatar image for gamer_152
gamer_152

15041

Forum Posts

74588

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 71

User Lists: 6

gamer_152  Moderator

@thatpinguino: I think it only makes sense, and in all honesty, I think it's impossible for art or entertainment not to be shaped by criticism in some form. Even if you get no feedback yourself, you're still going to be making your work influenced by other, better-known work swhich criticism will have had a hand in shaping somewhere along the line.

I think you are right about that obsessive fandom, although I think these negative feelings about criticism can also come out of not having any proximity to it. I see a lot of people in the general public who may not be hardcore into games or films, but still see critic-creator relationships as a battle.

Avatar image for shivermetimbers
shivermetimbers

1740

Forum Posts

102

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 2

Edited By shivermetimbers

@gamer_152 said:

@thatpinguino: I think it only makes sense, and in all honesty, I think it's impossible for art or entertainment not to be shaped by criticism in some form. Even if you get no feedback yourself, you're still going to be making your work influenced by other, better-known work swhich criticism will have had a hand in shaping somewhere along the line.

I think you are right about that obsessive fandom, although I think these negative feelings about criticism can also come out of not having any proximity to it. I see a lot of people in the general public who may not be hardcore into games or films, but still see critic-creator relationships as a battle.

Criticism is often viewed as an act of defiance, but I see it as an act of love. Love isn't an unconditional affair, it's a bond in which one gets an enriching experience out of person/video game/movie/book/etc. and part of that process is through sharing knowledge. In this case, game fandom, we love video games and want to see them be better (hopefully). And game devs want to see their work improve (again, hopefully).

If we're just blindly accepting of what games do without criticizing them because it avoids unpleasantness, then there's no love. To me it all comes down to communication. If we can communicate in a way that isn't harsh and create a bond between players, developers, and critics so that any misconception could be quelled, I think we'll all be better off. I don't know how to begin there, as all three actors (players, devs, critics) all have different wants and such, but we should try.

The internet age basically created a place where people are talking to nobody and everybody at the same time and actions are often misconstrued as being defiant against something, when really we all just want our games to be better (hopefully). Fandoms often consist of 'defenders' of the thing they love unconditionally and to be perfectly honest, there really is no communicating with them. Those who feel entitled are probably too stubborn to create bonds with, at least until they change themselves. However, those who still have this mindset of devs and critics at war with each other and are not entitled (or in fact are outside the fandom) probably see all the backlash that occurs between players and critics and takes that as a basis that critics are making good games fail due to the fact that some vocal majority is making it appear that way. It's just a theory.

We need better communication over the internet and I think we're slowly getting there. If we make a place where the entitled and vitriolic don't have as much power as those who wish to criticize games in a civil manner, I think we'll be better off. No idea how to do it, but I think we should try and make the internet as welcoming as possible and have it be an environment for civil discourse and learning.

We then have controversies like the one 3 years ago where critic-dev relationships were questioned. I think that was more of a wake up call to this notion of needing better communication. Critics should be able to communicate with devs and players should have their say in too; again, we need a way to bring all three parties to a mutual understanding and have the ability to talk to one another constructively. Then we won't have as many issues of players thinking critics are speaking for them and giving their favorite games a 'bad image' as everyone will have a say to a degree. While it won't be perfect, it should be something we should achieve in the future.

Hopefully this made sense (or at least is more legible than what I wrote in your Lollipop Chainsaw blog). Of course, there are going to be disagreements and not everyone will be 100% happy with everything. I think we as a community should accept that not everything will be 100% to our liking, however. Good read. :3

Avatar image for gamer_152
gamer_152

15041

Forum Posts

74588

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 71

User Lists: 6

gamer_152  Moderator

@shivermetimbers: Thank you. I don't think that everyone criticises every piece of media they do out of love. When people were criticising Ride to Hell: Retribution for example, it certainly wasn't because they loved that game. But I think you're right that it almost always comes out of a wider care for or belief in the potential of the medium. We have this odd thing now where some people are accusing those who are the most critical of games of hating video games and I think this idea of the person who spends tens or hundreds of hours playing and talking about video games but not liking them is a virtual myth. There are going to be very few people who are that unhappy to spend that much time doing something they hate and that takes a lot of effort.

I would say there are times to be harsh in criticism. I wouldn't for example want to stifle the voice of women and minorities talking passionately about racism or sexism in games, but I think you are generally right that we need to pay very close attention to whether our criticism is civil and constructive, and that a lot of dismissal of criticism happens because it's easy to avoid conflict. One of the things that particularly bothers me right is the normalisation of certain problems with video games. For example, a very common response to criticising narrative in games is that on a relative scale the one narrative you're criticising might be better than other game narratives, or that video game stories have always been bad. We need to set the bar higher than that. In fact, we need better criticism in general and I think if we're to build towards something really constructive, then we need a larger portion of criticism that is not just writing cursory product guides and dives a little deeper with games. It would also help a lot if more video game communities were better about moderating out harassers and people who are just there to make inflammatory statements.