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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - My review of Final Fantasy IV on the DS

Words Of Wisdom on 12 March 2009
Khuutra said:
Words Of Wisdom said:
Khuutra said:

Reviews are not tools for consumers nearly so much as they are vehicles for discourse.

Ideally, I mean.

Eh, ideally to me use defines purpose so the two are always aligned.  Reality is we get things with purpose but no use or things used but not for their inteded purpose.

I'm sorry

What?

Ideally:

A:  "I write the review to help you decide whether or not to buy it."
B:  "I read the review to help me decide whether or not to buy it."

A:  "I write the review to give information about the game."
B:  "I read the review to gain information about the game."


Reality:

A:  "I write the review to give information about the game."
B:  "I read the review to help me decide whether or not to buy it."

A:  "I write the review to help you decide whether or not to buy it."
B:  "I read the review to gain information about the game."

Your perceived ideal | My perceived reality



Around the Network
Khuutra on 12 March 2009

There's no particular reason that one can't read it for both reasons. I mean, in reading what little I said about the Augment system, one may both start a discourse about the implications of it (and how it may reflect on certain trends blah blah) and decide whether or not that changes the experience.

I thihnk that the point of reviews is to get people to talk about the ideas discussed therein, with the decision to buy or not being a side-effect of that discourse.



Words Of Wisdom on 12 March 2009
Khuutra said:
There's no particular reason that one can't read it for both reasons. I mean, in reading what little I said about the Augment system, one may both start a discourse about the implications of it (and how it may reflect on certain trends blah blah) and decide whether or not that changes the experience.

Eh, don't nitpick phrases I chose in the less than 5 minutes it took to write that post.

As for the point of reviews, it's to convey information.  That's the point it has always been though now making money, generating hits, and more have come to the fore.  Any discussion around a review was tangential.



Khuutra on 12 March 2009
Words Of Wisdom said:
Khuutra said:
There's no particular reason that one can't read it for both reasons. I mean, in reading what little I said about the Augment system, one may both start a discourse about the implications of it (and how it may reflect on certain trends blah blah) and decide whether or not that changes the experience.

Eh, don't nitpick phrases I chose in the less than 5 minutes it took to write that post.

As for the point of reviews, it's to convey information.  That's the point it has always been though now making money, generating hits, and more have come to the fore.  Any discussion around a review was tangential.

The "blah blah blah" was poking fun at my own tendency to over-explain this tired academic rhetoric, I apologize if I offnded you. It was not intentional.

And no, I don't think "information" is what's being conveyed here. Meaning isn't intrinsic to information.



Words Of Wisdom on 12 March 2009
Khuutra said:
Words Of Wisdom said:
Khuutra said:
There's no particular reason that one can't read it for both reasons. I mean, in reading what little I said about the Augment system, one may both start a discourse about the implications of it (and how it may reflect on certain trends blah blah) and decide whether or not that changes the experience.

Eh, don't nitpick phrases I chose in the less than 5 minutes it took to write that post.

As for the point of reviews, it's to convey information.  That's the point it has always been though now making money, generating hits, and more have come to the fore.  Any discussion around a review was tangential.

The "blah blah blah" was poking fun at my own tendency to over-explain this tired academic rhetoric, I apologize if I offnded you. It was not intentional.

And no, I don't think "information" is what's being conveyed here. Meaning isn't intrinsic to information.

Meaning is intrinsic to the reader, but when enough readers provide the same meaning it becomes generally accepted.



Around the Network
Khuutra on 12 March 2009
Words Of Wisdom said:
Khuutra said:

The "blah blah blah" was poking fun at my own tendency to over-explain this tired academic rhetoric, I apologize if I offnded you. It was not intentional.

And no, I don't think "information" is what's being conveyed here. Meaning isn't intrinsic to information.

Meaning is intrinsic to the reader, but when enough readers provide the same meaning it becomes generally accepted.

There are a lot of schools of critical thought, and many of them suggest that meaning isn't intrinsic to anything except for the dialogue surrounding a work. It's intrinsic to the reader in the sense that the reader is the progrenitor of the dialogue, but as the reader's own perception of meaning changes and he dialogue changes even more the idea has always been trouble some to me.

Look, Kain kicks ass is what I am trying to say.