setsunatenshi said:
guiduc said:
''An argument from authority, also called an appeal to authority, is a form of defeasible[4] argument in which a claimed authority's support is used as evidence for an argument's conclusion. It is well known as a fallacy, though if all parties agrees on the reliability of an authority in the given context it forms a valid inductive argument.''
A score isn't objective in itself. Though, it is a legitimate force in argumentation when an aggregate score is used in order to make a point. That way, no matter if the reliability of a source is questioned, you can't question the relevance of all critics.
So yeah, it's the closest thing you can have to objectivity.
|
I would suggest the reason why the argument from authority fallacy still stands is because none of the people reviewing those games are an actual authority on videogames.
As it was mentioned by other users, metacritic is a measured average of scores. Not all reviewers are given the same weight. A big website like IGN or Gamespot will have their score weight a lot more than other smaller/less known websites.
So we go back to the main point i was trying to make... a videogame review is by its own nature subjective. Scores are even more subjective (as in, they depend on the subject's own value judgement).
So he's right that zelda is a pretty good game, but he has no objective leg to stand on claiming it's better or worse than horizon.
Even more ridiculous is asserting that the new mario game, that wasnt even released yet, is also objectively better than game x or y that is out now. That is just absurd and funny enough makes quite transparent how biased his opinion is on this subject.
|
It's hard to people to distinct between "I preffer A to B" against "A is objectivelly better than B". Even if 100 people gives the grammy of music to some brazilian singer that doesn't mean he is better than all the others at the time.
Cumulative opinions isn't truth.
Was Pele better than Maradona? Quite possibly, critics and numbers agree, but since they would have direct competitions. Is Federer better than Sampras/Agassi? Possibly, numbers are in Federer and he is more complete. But that also have more than 20 years of sport evolution to buff him. So would they when fighting of at their prime be similar or one would be better? You have that in every single sport. The only part of sport you can have some discussion is the numbers (it is impossible to deny Bolt have the record on 100m, but would any of the previous record holders beat him with same technology and knowledge? maybe).
Even on the most "objective" comparison subjectivism still show, but them some people try to make subjectivism look objective only for discussion sake.
Goodnightmoon said:
DonFerrari said:
There may be a bias.
But the main reason isn't really "cartoony games can't be GOTY" it's more like "we will review this game differently (not as strict on IQ or graphical prowess department) because it's cartoony" in a way that even if it get a higher score it really isn't better than a game that got a smaller score.
Similar to animation, the criterea for evaluation is different, so perhaps one or another animation one day will receive the oscar as the best movie, maybe a foreign movie will also make it one day.
|
I don't think the criteria for evaluation is different at all, if the game is good then is good, but when it comes to give a "serious" prize some might be concerned with the fact that people may not take them seriously if they give a prize for what the general public sees as a game for kids, even if the game is made for all ages. Just an exemple, Princess Mononoke was selected by Japan to be in the Oscars, the Oscars judges didn't even think about it, despite the excellent reviews everywhere it got zero nominations, what would have happened if that movie won? A japanese animation movie about spirits and stuff winning the Oscar over some serious american drama with famous actors? Nobody would have take that seriously, nobody, but now that movie is widely considered one of the best ever made by tons of serious critics.
|
BOPE-Tropa de Elite, a Brazilian movie was regarded by many as one of the best movies of the year in about all aspects (WW), yet it didn't win any Oscar (it didn't tried the foreign category because that would take it out of all the others). Does that mean it was prejudice against a Brazilian movie? Possibly, but there is no way to prove it, same with your example. And sorry, I watched Pricess Mononoke and other Ghibli work and even though they are fantastic there is no way to say they deserved the best movie of the year beyond all resonable doubt.
