By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

One of the biggest issues with gaming criticism is that it has little or no philosophic or intellectual basis to fall back on. Which is to say, movie critics who prefer serious, intellectually sophisticated films over action/comedy (which tends to be a fair assessment for many reviewers) can justify their position by stating that intellectually or emotionally sophisticated material is inherently more valuable. Whether you agree with that or not (I do), that's a defensible position.

I'm not entirely sure what foundation game criticism is built on, because it obviously isn't emotional or intellectual sophistication. Is it how hard the games are? Then obviously multiplayer games would be the natural evolution of gaming, as playing against skilled and experienced humans will almost always be more challenging than facing AI. Is it simply creating bug free code? That seems like a facile definition. I'd be interested to see what others believe the foundation for games criticism is, because to me, it's foundation is noticably shakier than the criticism of Film or Literature. 



http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a324/Arkives/Disccopy.jpg%5B/IMG%5D">