@milkman: Me, Kael, Nietzsche, Shinji Mikami etc.
Icemael's forum posts
It's absolutely true that racial, cultural and gender diversity has no value in itself and should never be added just for the sake of it. It must be repeated again and again: games are for pleasure and not for moralizing. Every design choice that's made for "justice" or "equality" and not to make the game more interesting and enjoyable is a corrupt, pathetic, degenerate design choice. And the same goes for criticism.
Excerpts from Pauline Kael's excellent "Trash, Art and the Movies" written in 1969:
We generally become interested in movies because we enjoy them and what we enjoy them for has little to do with what we think of as art. The movies we respond to, even in childhood, don’t have the same values as the official culture supported at school and in the middle-class home. At the movies we get low life and high life, while David Susskind and the moralistic reviewers chastise us for not patronizing what they think we should, “realistic” movies that would be good for us—like “A Raisin in the Sun,” where we could learn the lesson that a Negro family can be as dreary as a white family. Movie audiences will take a lot of garbage, but it’s pretty hard to make us queue up for pedagogy.
I’m not sure most movie reviewers consider what they honestly enjoy as being central to criticism. Some at least appear to think that that would be relying too much on their own tastes, being too personal instead of being “objective” -— relying on the ready-made terms of cultural respectability and on consensus judgment (which, to a rather shocking degree, can be arranged by publicists creating a climate of importance around a movie). Just as movie directors, as they age, hunger for what was meant by respectability in their youth, and aspire to prestigious cultural properties, so, too, the movie press longs to be elevated in terms of the cultural values of their old high schools. And so they, along with the industry, applaud ghastly “tour-de-force” performances, movies based on “distinguished” stage successes or prize-winning novels, or movies that are “worthwhile,” that make a “contribution” -— “serious” messagy movies. This often involves praise of bad movies, of dull movies, or even the praise in good movies of what was worst in them.
It applies to game criticism today just as much as it applied to movie criticism 45 years ago.
He's right, it's way worse. But the original isn't all that great to begin with.
Also, what's this talk about her spine? The pose she is pulling off is perfectly possible for any person with normal flexibility. "230 degrees", what image are you even looking at?
Three of the game's bosses: http://www.4gamer.net/games/249/G024999/20140606005/
There are thousands of game developers (not to speak of artists in general) that are more creative, passionate and talented than Phil Fish and also not melodramatic, pretentious man-children.
At one point George Kamitani personally borrowed upwards of $200000 so he could keep making 2D games with eleven other guys at Vanillaware. Remember when he bitched and moaned and publicly said he might kill himself? Remember when he threw a fit and quit being a game developer because people were criticizing Dragon's Crown? I don't either.
Maybe I'm using big swings to hit multiple enemies at once and one of them dies before the others?
Most of what's in the game is meaningless if you play perfectly to begin with.
"Why would you care about Estus flask shards, your HP stat, the differences in defense between the various armours, enemy damage output, or learning which boss attacks are unblockable? It's all meaningless, because you should never get hit if you play intelligently to begin with. Git gud son."
The point isn't that ideas can't be communicated through means other than writing, the point is that writing is the best way (and, if the ideas are complex enough, the only real option).
As for Socrates, he is only remembered precisely because Plato wrote his words down.