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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Best Description of Critics -- Ever

mike_intellivision on 13 January 2010

In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.

 

For those who do not recognized this, the above words are the beginning of the speech by Anton Ego (food critic) in the Pixar-Disney film Ratatouille.  

But I also thought it was a great statement in general on the self-importance and lack of real importance of critics. This seems to be especially relevant to game reviews this generation.  

Thoughts?

Personally, I feel it provides perspective to the philosophy that  reviewers define AAA games (where the term's generally-accepted origin was the emphasis the developer/studio placed on the game).

Mike from Morgantown

 

 



      


I am Mario.


I like to jump around, and would lead a fairly serene and aimless existence if it weren't for my friends always getting into trouble. I love to help out, even when it puts me at risk. I seem to make friends with people who just can't stay out of trouble.

Wii Friend Code: 1624 6601 1126 1492

NNID: Mike_INTV
Around the Network
mrjuju on 13 January 2010

Oooooooh, I like it! I've watched that movie a few times and I've never thought of how well that line is written until I actually read it, but that really is a wonderful string of words.



Proud member of the Mega Mario Movement

Check out my daily drawings here and help keep me on task!

SaviorX on 13 January 2010

Somehow, reviewers got to thinking their word is gospel.

A little more modesty and attempts to RELATE to their readers would go a long way.



Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. "  thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."

SmokedHostage on 13 January 2010
mrjuju said:
Oooooooh, I like it! I've watched that movie a few times and I've never thought of how well that line is written until I actually read it, but that really is a wonderful string of words.

I fully agree with this man.



Pixel Art can be fun.

kopstudent89 on 13 January 2010

yeah i remember this, it is true. Good one



Around the Network
Desroko on 13 January 2010
mike_intellivision said:

In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.

 

For those who do not recognized this, the above words are the beginning of the speech by Anton Ego (food critic) in the Pixar-Disney film Ratatouille.  

But I also thought it was a great statement in general on the self-importance and lack of real importance of critics. This seems to be especially relevant to game reviews this generation.  

Thoughts?

Personally, I feel it provides perspective to the philosophy that  reviewers define AAA games (where the term's generally-accepted origin was the emphasis the developer/studio placed on the game).

Mike from Morgantown

 

 

I think there's a difference between a critic who attempts to qualify a work, and a reviewer, who merely seeks to quantify it. The best critics can incisively analyze a work, pull apart its themes, pick apart its details, and put them back together in such a way that that the reader can follow and achieve a greater understanding, as if they'd had a window into the artist's mind at the time of creation

A reviewer watches or plays a movie or game and assigns a number based on whether it was "bad-ass," "awesome," "okay," "boring," or "gay."

The videogame industry, from what I've seen, has no critics. It has a ton of reviewers, who sustain on themsevles on blind loyalty/hostility to a given system, schwag, and a rather pathetic sort of pride that comes from the towering achevement of their lives - getting their games website listed on Metacritic.



Vetteman94 on 13 January 2010
Desroko said:
mike_intellivision said:

In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.

 

For those who do not recognized this, the above words are the beginning of the speech by Anton Ego (food critic) in the Pixar-Disney film Ratatouille.  

But I also thought it was a great statement in general on the self-importance and lack of real importance of critics. This seems to be especially relevant to game reviews this generation.  

Thoughts?

Personally, I feel it provides perspective to the philosophy that  reviewers define AAA games (where the term's generally-accepted origin was the emphasis the developer/studio placed on the game).

Mike from Morgantown

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think there's a difference between a critic who attempts to qualify a work, and a reviewer, who merely seeks to quantify it. The best critics can incisively analyze a work, pull apart its themes, pick apart its details, and put them back together in such a way that that the reader can follow and achieve a greater understanding, as if they'd had a window into the artist's mind at the time of creation

A reviewer watches or plays a movie or game and assigns a number based on whether it was "bad-ass," "awesome," "okay," "boring," or "gay."

The videogame industry, from what I've seen, has no critics. It has a ton of reviewers, who sustain on themsevles on blind loyalty/hostility to a given system, schwag, and a rather pathetic sort of pride that comes from the towering achevement of their lives - getting their games website listed on Metacritic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/critic

Interesting what the first word that they have under synonyms is.



Desroko on 13 January 2010
Vetteman94 said:
Desroko said:
mike_intellivision said:

In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.

 

For those who do not recognized this, the above words are the beginning of the speech by Anton Ego (food critic) in the Pixar-Disney film Ratatouille.  

But I also thought it was a great statement in general on the self-importance and lack of real importance of critics. This seems to be especially relevant to game reviews this generation.  

Thoughts?

Personally, I feel it provides perspective to the philosophy that  reviewers define AAA games (where the term's generally-accepted origin was the emphasis the developer/studio placed on the game).

Mike from Morgantown

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think there's a difference between a critic who attempts to qualify a work, and a reviewer, who merely seeks to quantify it. The best critics can incisively analyze a work, pull apart its themes, pick apart its details, and put them back together in such a way that that the reader can follow and achieve a greater understanding, as if they'd had a window into the artist's mind at the time of creation

A reviewer watches or plays a movie or game and assigns a number based on whether it was "bad-ass," "awesome," "okay," "boring," or "gay."

The videogame industry, from what I've seen, has no critics. It has a ton of reviewers, who sustain on themsevles on blind loyalty/hostility to a given system, schwag, and a rather pathetic sort of pride that comes from the towering achevement of their lives - getting their games website listed on Metacritic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/critic

Interesting what the first word that they have under synonyms is.

While you're at that site, view the dictionary entry for "synonym." It does not mean what you apparently think it means.

If you look up "artist," for example, you will find the synonym "artisan." But anyone who thinks these are two words for the same thing, or even nearly the same thing, must re-acquaint himself with the English language before lecturing others on its proper use.



Vetteman94 on 13 January 2010
Desroko said:
Vetteman94 said:
Desroko said:
mike_intellivision said:

In many ways, the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so.

 

For those who do not recognized this, the above words are the beginning of the speech by Anton Ego (food critic) in the Pixar-Disney film Ratatouille.  

But I also thought it was a great statement in general on the self-importance and lack of real importance of critics. This seems to be especially relevant to game reviews this generation.  

Thoughts?

Personally, I feel it provides perspective to the philosophy that  reviewers define AAA games (where the term's generally-accepted origin was the emphasis the developer/studio placed on the game).

Mike from Morgantown

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think there's a difference between a critic who attempts to qualify a work, and a reviewer, who merely seeks to quantify it. The best critics can incisively analyze a work, pull apart its themes, pick apart its details, and put them back together in such a way that that the reader can follow and achieve a greater understanding, as if they'd had a window into the artist's mind at the time of creation

A reviewer watches or plays a movie or game and assigns a number based on whether it was "bad-ass," "awesome," "okay," "boring," or "gay."

The videogame industry, from what I've seen, has no critics. It has a ton of reviewers, who sustain on themsevles on blind loyalty/hostility to a given system, schwag, and a rather pathetic sort of pride that comes from the towering achevement of their lives - getting their games website listed on Metacritic.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/critic

Interesting what the first word that they have under synonyms is.

While you're at that site, view the dictionary entry for "synonym." It does not mean what you apparently think it means.

If you look up "artist," for example, you will find the synonym "artisan." But anyone who thinks these are two words for the same thing, or even nearly the same thing, must re-acquaint himself with the English language before lecturing others on its proper use.

So insulting someone is todays way of arguing a point?   I see........but it still doesnt remove the fact that reviewer and critic are basically identical. Its just semantics.

As for you Artist/Artisan comparison, they have extremely similar definitions. So I dont know what dictionary you are looking at, but maybe it is not I who should re-acquaint themselves with the english language.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/artist

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/artisan

 



Desroko on 13 January 2010

Another way of saying "semantics" is "Using the right word for the right thing, instead of a word that kind of almost means sort of the same thing."

The reason why actual writers don't have dictionary.com is bookmarked is because actual writers are aware that words that have somewhat similar meanings may have very different connotations. Ask a painter living in a Brooklyn loft, selling her works to galleries, if she considers herself an "artisan." If she's like any of the painters I've known, she'll slap you in the face. Now ask the weaver working in the factory churning out rugs by the yard whether she is an "artist." She'll laugh at you.

Artist : Artisan :: Critic : Reviewer