Runa216 said:
ArchangelMadzz said:
People not liking a game is fine, people not liking decisions that were made is fine.
I've never understood hate trains. I didn't like RDR2 played 10 or so hours of it, just couldn't get into it and that was it. I didn't scream from the rooftops that it's 'TRaSh' or dm the developers or whatever. People need better outlets for their energy man. |
RDR2 was trash becuase there was a black person in it who didn't get lynched or called the n-word. It's trash because that's not historically accurate and any REAL historical game would include nasty language like that and Rockstar are just pushing SJW agendas by not including extreme racism in their game. I only get upset when games are critical of my kind, it's okay to change history when it makes me feel good, but it's bad when they do it in a way that's just SJW pandering. Yep, 100%.
In case you hadn't noticed, that was satire.
I, for example, can't stand The Last of Us. I didn't like the gameplay myself, but I'm not stupid enough to say it's a terrible game. I don't think I'd like The Last of Us part 2 becuase I get the impression it sounds like 20+ hours of misery for the sake of misery. There's artistic merit in that, for sure, but it's not for me. that's the difference between my criticism of the game and the criticism it's getting from others like the ones depicted in this thread. I don't like it and it doesn't sound like it's for me, but that doesn't mean it's devoid of all merit and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean anyone deserved to be harassed.
I mean, I write kinky fantasy smut for a living. That shit is NOT for everyone. Some people hate it when I put actual plot in my porn stories, but that's my artistic license. ND has every right to tell the story they want to play. Critics loved it, MOST gamers are loving it, the overwhelming consensus among fans and the gaming media is that the game is an absolute masterpiece of storytelling and world building that doesn't adhere to traditional hero narratives. some people like that. some people don't. but the people who aren't whiny manchildren (and it's almost always men) who have an agenda agree that the game is good and artistically rich. There are plenty of popular games that get hate and criticism, but what we're seeing here is above and beyond. IT's acid. It's venom. It's poison. It's toxic.
There's a world of difference between "I don't like where they went with the story" and "They're terrible for doing this to the story and they should feel bad and I'm angry about it." Even the 'good' criticism of the game tends to come across as toxic and destructive instead of constructive or subjective.
|
Yep, it is important to separate the "I don't like this type of game" from "this type of game is bad" or anything similar to it. Artistic merict, objective measurement, etc is all over the top in greatness. But sure one may not like how it plays and that is totally fair (hating though is something strong and strange to feel about a game).
Also yes not liking how the game was done, or some elements of the story is also fine, but to not understand it and claim it is terrible and hate the story is also wrong. on RDR2 being historically correct or not I really don't know, but I would rather it was as precise as possible (of course except battle since that would break most games) even if it cause repulsion.
