By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Intrinsic on 12 April 2018
Edit Thread
AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Intrinsic said:

Oh I am aware about those. Eg, like the tank controls I mentioned, or using a bow and arrow in KCD. Or being able to use Pauls deathfist in Tekken......

Some could look at stuff like that and call it broken (wrongly if I may add) simoly because it doesnt worl for them oe they cant wrap their heads around it but thats just wrong because they aren't broken.

But the examples I gave are clear examples of broken gameplay...... and those arent subjective. Because they are broken. Something about the gameplay either prevents progression or makes progression too easy or at least easier than designed. Things like that usually gets patched out of the game if the devs have a choice.

Here's the thing. I do not think there is any such thing as "objective" criticism. The moment you decide whether something is good, bad, positive, negative, or somewhere in between ... you are judging it by your reception. Because of this, reviews ARE 100% subjective. They just reference things that might be objectively provable. But they are still receiving it through their biased mind. 

 

You are right, but you are also looking at it wrong.

No matter what, the individuality of human nature will make any opinion subjective. However' said subjectivuty is pulled from generally objective facts. 

This is the very reason why every major decision making role in human society is based on averages from a pool of people as opposed to the voice of a single person.

MC does just that for game reviews, if a game scores 95 on metacritic, it means a greater average of its reviewers scored it above 9. The majority of reviewers.

In that case, the one or two people that score it a 5 simply cant be taken seriously. Mind you, this goes both ways. If the majority of reviewers rate a game a 5, then one person that gives it a 10 has to be ignored.

Its flat out folly when looking at a generally independent data set to then somehow give more credence or value to the single number that deviates from the majority.