@Slag said:
That is a little different than what I was thinking your beef was, if they directly condescended you or talked down to you personally, than yeah you have every right to be pissed.
But if they were just writing their piece on ME3 (not directed at you personally) and happened to do a crappy job at that, well then I think you just have to shrug that off as the journo/blogger doing a crappy job on this particular story. And possibly remember that when choosing whose work to read the next time. Even pros have bad days.
I guess to boil my personal philosophy on things like this is basically this, don't take things online opinions personal that aren't personal in nature. Know what I mean?
fwiw I steered well clear of the ME3 discussion for the reasons you stated.
Have a read of this article by Arthur Gies that was ostensibly supposed to be a 'round table' discussion about the (original) ending of Mass Effect 3.
http://www.polygon.com/2012/10/5/3461080/reviewers-talk-mass-effect-3-the-ending-the-narrative-the-controversy
The entire article is a case of whitewashing and diminishment. It's not about gamer's hating the ending because it made no sense, or finding certain aspects illogical or narratively flawed. The uproar is portrayed simply as a case that a 'vocal minority' wanted a 'happy ending' and not getting it apparently.
Arthur: Do they dislike it because it didn't give them the Frodo laying in bed with all the hobbits jumping up and down on it ending? And I don't say that to be dismissive, but that's an ending to an epic trilogy in recent memory. This is the most successful trilogy narratively that I maybe have ever seen.
The whole thing reads like a bunch of Fox News 'Analysts' sitting around speculating on whether Obama was in fact going to build 'Death Camps' or some such. There's no sense of any real research into the subject in depth as to why gamer's were unhappy with the ending by any of the participants and there's no dissenting voices. Surely if you're going to have a round table you get in a few people who have different opinions no?
Really up to Brad openly recoiling at the paucity of the original ending and the BS nature of the choices in the podcast there's been little if anyone in the gaming press actually taking a contrary stance to the attitude of Gies and his cohorts in truth, which frankly has been rather frustrating. This whole denial that there was anything wrong or questionable with the ending felt like a case of the gaming press blatantly defending the absurdly high scores the game had been awarded. Right now ME3 has a metacritic of 93/100 making it one of the highest rated games ever, which is ludicrous given it's problems (and I'm not just talking about the ending here). Compare and contrast with Prometheus a film which although superbly constructed and shot from a highly regarded director also suffers from thematic problems and a risible ending. Metacritic average is 65/100. What is it that film critics are doing that game critics aren't?
Log in to comment