Giving Resident Evil 3 a high score would be unforgivably insensitive towards all the people out there affected by the zombiefying t-virus out there right now. You have been warned, game journalists.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Do you think the current pandemic should affect how reviewers rate Resident Evil 3?
- Thread starter SofNascimento
- Start date
Lot of replies in here got me questioning if Era is as cool a place as I thought it was. Lottttt of people getting really defensive and dangerously close to 2015-esque "OBJECTIVE game reviews" takes. Yikes.
As a few others have said, reviews are subjective. Art is a reflection of the world around it and we in turn reflect that art back on the world. Doesn't matter if the original came out 20 years ago, this one is coming out in 2020, in the midst of a pandemic. It would be way weirder if reviewers didn't address how it feels to play in this context. Whether that is enough to affect the score (which is pointless to begin with) is up to the individual reviewer, and it doesn't make them any less "professional" for doing so.
It's their review of their own experience. It's absurd to expect some kind of vacuum-tube "what if I was playing this game, but on a space station, alone, and I've never interacted with another human being" review.
As a few others have said, reviews are subjective. Art is a reflection of the world around it and we in turn reflect that art back on the world. Doesn't matter if the original came out 20 years ago, this one is coming out in 2020, in the midst of a pandemic. It would be way weirder if reviewers didn't address how it feels to play in this context. Whether that is enough to affect the score (which is pointless to begin with) is up to the individual reviewer, and it doesn't make them any less "professional" for doing so.
It's their review of their own experience. It's absurd to expect some kind of vacuum-tube "what if I was playing this game, but on a space station, alone, and I've never interacted with another human being" review.
People take reviews way too seriously, and I find it pretty harmful to the hobby as a whole.
We live in the information age, you've got oodles of ways to find out if a game is good or not... a review is a drop in the ocean.
Now if all you care about is the "metascore" then all I gotta ask is.... Why? Unless you're on the dev team and bonuses are decided by your game's metascore, what exactly are you getting out of a game getting a 96 over a 94?
We live in the information age, you've got oodles of ways to find out if a game is good or not... a review is a drop in the ocean.
Now if all you care about is the "metascore" then all I gotta ask is.... Why? Unless you're on the dev team and bonuses are decided by your game's metascore, what exactly are you getting out of a game getting a 96 over a 94?
I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case. If someone wants to give it a lower score because of whats happening, then thats their choice, even though I don't think it's fair to those that worked on the game, especially so because they have no control of whats going on.
Don't sweat the people attacking you. ;)
Another thing to consider is that these reviews will be ridiculously dated if reviewed through a covid lens
A year from now:
"Hey I'm considering picking up RE3 on sale, is it good"
"Go read some reviews and see if you'll like it"
"Uhh these reviewers spend half the review talking about coronavirus and playing in quarantine and gave the game a 5 because it came off as 'insensitive'..."
A year from now:
"Hey I'm considering picking up RE3 on sale, is it good"
"Go read some reviews and see if you'll like it"
"Uhh these reviewers spend half the review talking about coronavirus and playing in quarantine and gave the game a 5 because it came off as 'insensitive'..."
That's up to each reviewer. Reviews are just opinions, and they can come at it from whatever perspective they want.
us gamer is terribleThe editor in chief at US Gamer thinks the current pandemic should be part of their review and supports the GamesBeat Half Life Alyx review.
Kat Bailey on Twitter
“@MannyCalavera12 @USgamernet @capcom Oh yeah, I’m just gonna pretend that the pandemic has absolutely no bearing on how people might read the game 🙄”twitter.com
I find it more interesting the people who seem against mentioning the news at all because it's entertainment. I haven't read spoilers, but maybe in the games there's some documents about how Umbrella or Racoon City's government handled the initial crisis, that reminds the writers of organisations in the news, and I don't see any problems with some commentary on that in a review. It's just an example IDK.
I haven't seen anyone against that.
If you want to write a paragraph about how the game relates to a post COVID-19 world go ahead. There's definitely value in that.
But if you reduce the score of a game, or have an overall more negative opinion due to COVID-19, I just have 0 respect for you as a reviewer.
But Nemesis is clearly emblematic of someone with poor social distancing practices.
I don't get it. A lot of reviews for Animal Crossing mentioned how the current global crisis affected how they view a calm, socially-driven game like that one. Everyone seemed to have identified with those feelings when that game came out, but now people are reeling back for RE3 according to this poll?
Why would RE3 be any different in this regard? Even if it doesn't affect the scores, I'm really not sure if it's possible to completely separate what's going on in life right now to how someone experiences a game, at least for everyone.
Why would RE3 be any different in this regard? Even if it doesn't affect the scores, I'm really not sure if it's possible to completely separate what's going on in life right now to how someone experiences a game, at least for everyone.
This. If a reviewer wants to bring it up in how it relates to their experience with the game, and can articulate that, more power to them. If another doesn't, that's cool too. There doesn't have to be rules to this shit. They are just opinions. People can like or not like a thing for any number of reasons. You guys over think and overstate the importance of reviews to an insane degree sometimes.
Im giving this game a poor score because it happened to come out at the same time we had this pandemic
This outbreak is a very real and very serious thing that by no means should be taken lightly. But this out break is not a zombie apocalypse. No parallels should be drawn between this real world crisis and a zombie game
If the reviewer feels like that the experience has been affected by the pandemic in some way and thus his opinion of the game and what make him feel, of course they should.
I think it's when they write, to paraphrase "it's entertainment... so we need to get away from the news more than ever" so on. I don't agree with that, it's on the reviewer.
I remember all the satire in George Romeo zombie's work. I think reviewers can make parallels if they see any. It's the same with FFVII remake and any parallels to Trump and Climate change. It may be hurtful to bring it up with it being current is, but I think that's the writer's privilege.
I think some reviews will mention it (it's on everyone's mind, so to just ignore it seems strange too), but I don't think it will affect their scores in any material/substantial way. Related, while I look at Animal Crossing as a nice distraction and escape from the world right now, I don't think it is a better or worse game because of that reality. It'd be a fun, cozy, well-made, and wholesomely cute game to me no matter what.
Uhm no? They should rate the quality of the video game because you know that's their job. If they can't review a game fairly just because of the current situation, they shouldn't be reviewing games period.
Yup, these are the exact vibes I'm getting from this. People arbitrarily prescribing which merits a game deserve to be judged on and which don't pass the threshold (how about politics?). Literally all review threads are an utter embarrassment, whether here or anywhere else, so it's not like my expectations were high in the first place.
Stop gamifying my politicals capcoms.
It's only gonna be an issue if the game specifically mentions this current on-going crisis.
It's only gonna be an issue if the game specifically mentions this current on-going crisis.
once, again, as I stated in the other similarly ridiculous thread - You should've made the poll votes public lol.
Wait is this another troll, weird, misguided thread made so people on 4chan and gaf shit on ERA? How the fuck isnt this locked.
That's what they want you to think!
But seriously: yeah, I find it a bit morbid to compare RE3 situation with our real world problems.
Reviews are subjective and should always represent someone's experience with a game, but if someone comes out and says something like "Resident Evil 3 is now a bad game because there is a real outbreak of a virus going on", then yeah that's kind of a bizarre review
Up to the reviewer. If the outside world affects their enjoyment, they should state that.
Reviews aren't just a buyer's guide, they can also be critiques on cultural art and if you go that way, you have to take the circumstances around a game's release into account. Neither are wrong approaches, and I won't tell a reviewer off for going in either direction, despite my preference for something a bit more meaty than 'here is game mechanic A, it is good'.
Reviews aren't just a buyer's guide, they can also be critiques on cultural art and if you go that way, you have to take the circumstances around a game's release into account. Neither are wrong approaches, and I won't tell a reviewer off for going in either direction, despite my preference for something a bit more meaty than 'here is game mechanic A, it is good'.
Yea but in this case it's not even that. Re3 is a bio terror attack with a tentacle monster with a rocket chasing you and there isn't really any subtext to it. Res evil in general isn't subtle.
Only if recovered covid-19 patients become zombies.
Seriously though. No.
And the same goes for The Last of Us part 2.
It's no doubt an unfortunate situation to launch a virus outbreak related game during a worldwide virus outbreak, but reviews shouldn't be affected, not even if it's re-reviewed when it's all over. A game has one shot to punch through the noise, don't take that away because of ongoing out-of-gaming related things.
Seriously though. No.
And the same goes for The Last of Us part 2.
It's no doubt an unfortunate situation to launch a virus outbreak related game during a worldwide virus outbreak, but reviews shouldn't be affected, not even if it's re-reviewed when it's all over. A game has one shot to punch through the noise, don't take that away because of ongoing out-of-gaming related things.
I don't think this is a fair comparison. I'd be quite interested how somebody who has directly experienced war would review/emotionally respond to a war game.
Yet I would not be interested how someone felt Resident Evil 3 reflected/triggered their current experiences of the Corona Virus, I'd find it very self-absorbed and out-of-touch.
I think days gone would be a little more comparable because the game is mostly about people living and getting about in the day to day world, slave camps, etc. Re3 is one specific city and a bio terror attack.
I think that's a different thing though. The parallels in 7 where written on purpose. Even though they didn't have the same data as we do now during the original release we still knew that these large plants where having an impact on the environment. That topic is even more relevant today than it was then. But the only thing that RE3 and corona have in common is that there's a virus involved.
OP
OP
I think it's plausible if the reviewers finds some documents in Racoon City from one of the fictional organisations, that reminds them of how some organisations are handling the pandemic and to make commentary on it.
I'm not even going to cast a vote.
They need to open the world up again, just so so people will have less time to ask silly questions like this one.
They need to open the world up again, just so so people will have less time to ask silly questions like this one.
No, we've had this once already with a Half Life review. A lot of people thought that review was fine, a stark contrast to this thread even though it went beyond just subjective opinions, but became an objective narrative of how all gamers will lose out playing the game during the pandemic.
It's just never a good idea. At most put it as a little note or passing remark, but don't let it influence the review and certainly don't tell your entire audience that they will have a worse time playing the game because of it's similiar themes.
It's just never a good idea. At most put it as a little note or passing remark, but don't let it influence the review and certainly don't tell your entire audience that they will have a worse time playing the game because of it's similiar themes.
If I had to guess, they're worried it'll affect the game's Metacritic score negatively, as opposed to Animal Crossing, where the experience was universally positive.
Because reviews aren't just about telling people what's good about a game. They can also be a critique of cultural art, and context can be very important depending in the games subject. Movie reviews tend to follow this way if thinking.
People worry too much about a game's scores, just read the text and if you don't like what's being said, move on. Whether a review drops the overall score by 1 point on MC means literally nothing.