| AngryLittleAlchemist said: Well usually when I criticize an argument, I mean to criticize just the argument and not the person. So maybe my wording was a bit offensive, but I really wasn't talking about you in particular. 1) Not really, I'm just saying that I think there's a bit of a disconnect when you just act like some minor issue is no biggie when there's a lot of people that seem to care about it. Maybe that's a round about way of appealing to popularity through ideas, I hope not because I usually don't like appeals to popularity but in any case I'm not saying that the criticism is more valid because a lot of people care about it, just that shrugging it off seems odd when such is the case. Also, isn't it a bit ironic to say there's a blade for everyone when a lot of people seem to be criticizing the blades? That kind of just proves the point that yes, for a lot of people criticisms are valid even if it's for optional content. 2) I think the bigger problem is that having the 'blade for everyone' argument makes it sound like you just get whatever blade you want and go from there, when obviously there's roadblocks to getting blades. You could have to go through the entirety of the game without liking a single blade until the end. And even then it might not have the stats or weapon you want. There's no such thing really as a "blade for everyone", that much is true, and so there's always going to be limitations to how much diversity can work for an argument's favor. But at least in a game like Pokemon or Halo Reach this argument would be stronger than in Xenoblade. 3) Honestly it's funny how much I talk about subjectivity vs. objectivity on this site, in this case it was purely an accident, so I won't really go into that. That being said, this is one of the bigger problems I have with the use of "objectivity". It really just drives discussion away from what's being discussed. For instance people often use the word "objective" to try and see who's argument is right. "Well my argument is objectively right because it's a fact!" Well the entire point of arguments is to see who's opinion comes out on top ... so ... what's even the point of using the word objective in that scenario? I think people should realize that just because something is an opinion doesn't mean it can't be argued, even if opinions aren't factual you can try to convince someone of yours. Which is part of the reason why I'm fine with using flawed but decent words like "overrated". What you are describing has nothing to do with objectivity really, it's called being human and being able to see the viewpoints of other people. Perhaps being "fair" is a better word? Or "reasonable"? "but a good critic can see past their own biases and understand the merit of things they don't personally like." 4) See the problem with this though is that there is merit in just about anything. Anyone can subjectively like something, even a game considered to be horrible, so should we always end our statements in "but I can also see [insert 'objective rant']" or what? You can always see someone elses perspective but that doesn't mean much for the final part of an argument. I don't see game mechanics or stories as more objective or subjective either. The reason why you don't see many people criticizing the gameplay is that those people who do probably don't care about Xenoblade or don't comment on it. The reason why you see a ton of people criticizing or defending character designs is because those people are often already invested in the game. So it's not really about subjectivity this or objectivity that, I know I went on a rant just to say it's not about objectivity or subjectivity, but oh well lol. Although, it does tend to be the case that there's a wider array of opinions on character designs and music than other elements.
5) After writting all of that, all I can really say for the first time in VGChartz history is : I guess we just can't agree? Lol. What you're saying isn't inherently wrong, it's just a point of view , but some of it feels a bit much to me. After you've explained it more I can see some validity to what you've said. But I still have my own viewpoint anyways. I can't believe how aggressive my OC sounds in comparison to this conclusion |
But oh well people can always improve.Numbering added into your post to make it easier to address everything.
1) I think we are caught in a bit of a whirlwind right now. Most people commenting on the situations haven't played the game (including me), so the context has been condensed, amplifying its perceived relevance. Something that may occupy 30seconds of a 200hour play time can be screenshotted and made into a big deal
2) Again, I haven't played the game so I don't know exactly how often you get blades, but at worst you have the unique blade for each character which I think are pretty much all pretty generally acceptable. Some people don't like Pyra, but you are going to have to live with her no matter what (and I don't think her design lacks merit). From what I can tell, the game seems to make it so you can do just fine with just the uniques. If drop rate does become an issue, I think that the ideal fix would be to increase the drop rate instead of making all the characters more universally appealing (You know, "If you try to cater to everyone, you end up pleasing no one" and whatnot).
3) I think subjectivity is incredibly important on a personal scale, but if you turn a debate into two purely subjective arguments (which isn't the case in most discussions imo), you are more judging to see who is a better debater than who's opinion is stronger. I think part of moving away from the subjectivity of debating is moving beyond "this is good/bad" into more detailed positions to explain the "why" behind things (which is often made more difficult when lacking the proper context).
4) To some extent, I agree. That is why I am largely against review scores. A review should explain the aspects of a game and leave the judgements of "good" or "bad" up to the reader. That said, just because someone likes something that is bad, doesn't make it less bad. Again, this brings up the "objectivity" of criticism. I do think that a good critic can discuss with some degree of objectivity whether a combat system is repetitive or unintuitive or whether it works in the context it is applied. How much that matters to different people takes on a high degree of subjectivity, but there is a base level of objectivity to it (imo). That is why "merit" shouldn't be seen on the same level as how much enjoyment a person gets out of it.
But character designs, I don't see too much room for objectivity. I think there is a line that can be crossed at some point, but I'm not really sure where that point is. I think it largely comes down to "does the design service the character" and I guess to that point "does the character service the overall product" (for example, dropping a comedic relief character into the middle of Schindler's List might be a bad idea, even if the character works out of context). I think it could be argued that the "Hold my beer" character's design doesn't service the character. The overall body design is extremely simple and the big babbos draw attention away from what seems to be her defining characteristic in her weird hairy arms. Her face is entirely nondescript and I'm not sure how the ice theming ties into her character. The one good thing seems to be the hair which serves as a replacement for big floppy bunny ears, but that is assuming that it is supposed to look like big floppy bunny ears. I think there is a point to be made there. However, again that is one blade. I think I've seen almost 40 others, none of which I'd argue lack merit, and as Xenoblade 2 is designed to "go wide" having a very eclectic cast makes sense.
5) Glad we could at least reach an amicable point in this discussion. Having gotten into the habit of discussing politics, this is a nice change of pace xD
