Do you think the current pandemic should affect how reviewers rate Resident Evil 3?

What do yuo think?

  • Yes, they should relate their personal experience with the game.

    Votes: 101 6.0%
  • No, they should judge the game by its own merits.

    Votes: 1,569 93.9%

  • Total voters
    1,671

KingM

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,360
Of course they should. Real life experiences shape how we experience fictional situations. It's why certain works, like the film Contagion for example, are having a resurgence. That's life, done see why R3make would be exempt.
 

doodlewhizz

Member
Jan 9, 2019
1,730
It's a conditional statement. If people were to tank the reviews because "it's a bad time to come out," That would harm their credibility to many. There's no denying that. People want to know if a game is good when they read a game review. Their experience is important, but it shouldn't be used as a launching point for something that's very loosely related (and couldn't sustain itself for much of the discussion without serious gymnastics), nor should real world events have a tremendous impact on the score.
Like many others seem to, you're worrying way too much about score. A review isn't just a number, and that number is pretty meaningless in the wider context of things.

Different people read different reviews for different reasons. I generally don't care for buyer's guide style reviews, it's the experience ones that interest me more.

It's an example score, and I did say frightened beyond belief. There will be people that if given the ability to review, would score lower for the same reason, and others that score higher.

Saying life isn't fair when it's entirely controllable by review standards isn't really a good argument.

Suppose this feeds into indie games all of a sudden? Now those sales start to get severely damaged if the reviews drop considerably for the same reasons. Indies rely on reviews more than AAAs for their sales.
Saying life isn't fair isn't an argument, it's a fact. Games and films have been pulled from release because of real world events. I'm not saying Resi 3 should be pulled, but they have to expect that releasing a game, the subject of which is a virus outbreak, might not go down well with some people during a real-life virus outbreak (admittedly milder, but still not exactly safe).

Them's the breaks. If this affects an indie title then it's a big shame but again, that's the risk you take.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
Do you read fantasy novels to experience real life? People use fiction as escapism to escape. It's in the word.
the movie Contagion is suddenly shooting up the steaming movie charts. Do you think it’s because those people are looking to escape? If you asked those people their opinion of that movie do you think it wouldn’t be colored by the current, real life crisis?

people come to entertainment for all sorts of different reasons. If you are looking for escape, cool. That’s not right or wrong. Find one of the dozens of reviews for RE3 that will certainly share that same experience and expectation. That doesn’t make someone who comes to the game with a different experience, or experiences it differently because of how the COVID19 crisis has impacted their perspective, wrong.

Purporting that everyone is looking for the same thing out of a piece of entertainment, and worse, that you know what everyone is looking out of a piece of entertainment, is way more ridiculous than anything asserted in the OP of this thread.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,322
Probably the part where it says "You're all going to be forced into a worse time."

I've seen zero fan feedback so far that fits that narrative.
That sentence makes it a bad review? Okay, cool, that's how they felt about it. The fact is if it was higher than an 8 it wouldn't have garnered hardly any controversy, but we can all act like the majority wasn't upset it didn't get at least a 9.
 

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,313
Saying life isn't fair isn't an argument, it's a fact. Games and films have been pulled from release because of real world events. I'm not saying Resi 3 should be pulled, but they have to expect that releasing a game, the subject of which is a virus outbreak, might not go down well with some people during a real-life virus outbreak. Them's the breaks. If this affects an indie title then it's a big shame but again, that's the risk you take.
Exactly this. Games, movies, etc don’t exist in a vacuum and current social/cultural times will influence how works are perceived and absorbed.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
Like many others seem to, you're worrying way too much about score. A review isn't just a number, and that number is pretty meaningless in the wider context of things.

Different people read different reviews for different reasons. I generally don't care for buyer's guide style reviews, it's the experience ones that interest me more.


Saying life isn't fair isn't an argument, it's a fact. Games and films have been pulled from release because of real world events. I'm not saying Resi 3 should be pulled, but they have to expect that releasing a game, the subject of which is a virus outbreak, might not go down well with people during a real-life virus outbreak. Them's the breaks. If this affects an indie title then it's a big shame but again, that's the risk you take.
Life isn't fair isn't applicable to every facet of life in a major way. This is why standards are agreed upon.

Saying "That's the risk you take" to an indie developer who would be making a living out of this just because "Life isn't fair" when that fairness is based on reviews that can be completely mitigated via a simple disclaimer or personal remark of current events is a misrepresentation of how to handle the situation.

Reviewers can review a game for its merits unhindered by current events and then say something off on the side without degrading a game and potentially it's sales.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
That sentence makes it a bad review? Okay, cool, that's how they felt about it. The fact is if it was higher than an 8 it wouldn't have garnered hardly any controversy, but we can all act like the majority wasn't upset it didn't get at least a 9.
If you can't understand a very simple fact that making objective statements about how a pandemic will make X game worse for 100% of everyone who plays is is bad, then you are a lost cause. That is by definition, bad writing.

I shouldn't have to explain this. It's very simple stuff.
 

empo

Member
Jan 27, 2018
649
What if reviews didn't have these things called opinions and maybe you could just rate graphics/sound/value/gameplay individually and then add up everything for a final score?
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
Life isn't fair isn't applicable to every facet of life in a major way. This is why standards are agreed upon.

Saying "That's the risk you take" to an indie developer who would be making a living out of this just because "Life isn't fair" when that fairness is based on reviews that can be completely mitigated via a simple disclaimer or personal remark of current events is a misrepresentation of how to handle the situation.

Reviewers can review a game for i's merits unhindered by current events and then say something off on the side without degrading a game and potentially it's sales.
So a critics review should not be colored by real life events, some of which could be impacting them personally, but should let their review be colored by how it will affect a games sales, or developer bonuses due to meta critic scores. Yeah makes much more sense.
 

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,313
Life isn't fair isn't applicable to every facet of life in a major way. This is why standards are agreed upon.

Saying "That's the risk you take" to an indie developer who would be making a living out of this just because "Life isn't fair" when that fairness is based on reviews that can be completely mitigated via a simple disclaimer or personal remark of current events is a misrepresentation of how to handle the situation.

Reviewers can review a game for i's merits unhindered by current events and then say something off on the side without degrading a game and potentially it's sales.
Sales don’t matter to a review, and examining a game in its current time isn’t “degrading” the game. Do you think that reviewers who drew parallels between Invasion of the Body Snatchers and McCarthyism or War of the Worlds, 9/11, and the War on Terror were degrading those movies?
 

doodlewhizz

Member
Jan 9, 2019
1,730
Life isn't fair isn't applicable to every facet of life in a major way. This is why standards are agreed upon.

Saying "That's the risk you take" to an indie developer who would be making a living out of this just because "Life isn't fair" when that fairness is based on reviews that can be completely mitigated via a simple disclaimer or personal remark of current events is a misrepresentation of how to handle the situation.

Reviewers can review a game for i's merits unhindered by current events and then say something off on the side without degrading a game and potentially it's sales.
You don't seem to understand that not all reviews are there as a buyer's guide.

Other than giving out factually incorrect information, there's no wrong way to review something. A cultural critique style review (or even one that incorporates elements of this) is no less worthy than one that only goes through every mechanic and rates it good or bad. Neither are wrong approaches, both are valuable to different people.
 

ViewtifulJC

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,071
What if reviews didn't have these things called opinions and maybe you could just rate graphics/sound/value/gameplay individually and then add up everything for a final score?
I think that’s what people are looking for. 100% objective reviews.

“Resident Evil 3 is a Video game. It contains guns and also zombies. It is available for purchase on Steam. You can interact with by using a controller or perhaps even a keyboard

Rating: yes/10”
 

KingM

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,360
If you can't understand a very simple fact that making objective statements about how a pandemic will make X game worse for 100% of everyone who plays is is bad, then you are a lost cause. That is by definition, bad writing.

I shouldn't have to explain this. It's very simple stuff.
There are very few objective statements in a review as they are inherently a subjective form of writing. There's nothing bad about that as facts can change the enjoyment of a work for many people.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
So a critics review should not be colored by real life events, some of which could be impacting them personally, but should let their review be colored by how it will affect a games sales, or developer bonuses due to meta critic scores. Yeah makes much more sense.
No, this is about one domino affecting another. You give a fair review of the game based on it's own merits because that's what fair means. This then has the side effect of ensuring the game's sales/rating is fairly judged based on the reviewers subjective take of the game's merits rather than its merits + whatever is going on with that person in real life.

Again, a passing remark or off-comment is fine.
 

Kafkaa

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,351
The concern trolling around the Coronavirus pandemic is getting out of hand. Jesus fucking Christ.
 

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,313
You should absolutely expect that Last of Us 2 and future zombie/pandemic movies will absolutely be viewed through the prism of this current situation.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
There are very few objective statements in a review as they are inherently a subjective form of writing. There's nothing bad about that as facts can change the enjoyment of a work for many people.
So if a reviewer says "You're all going to have a bad day today because I had a bad day today" you'd agree?

I hope not, because that's nonsense. Are you instead just saying that this issue does exist, but that it's a minor issue because most of the comments made in a review are subjective?

Obviously the pandemic affects us all, but you can have someone delve into escapism for a whole day or get it out of their mind, and easily have a good day, which means that it is fundamentally impossible for them to pass off their subjective statement as objective, which is precisely what the reviewer did.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
No, this is about one domino affecting another. You give a fair review of the game based on it's own merits because that's what fair means. This then has the side effect of ensuring the game's sales/rating is fairly judged based on the reviewers subjective take of the game's merits rather than its merits + whatever is going on with that person in real life.

Again, a passing remark or off-comment is fine.
Including your own perspective into a review is fair. And you don’t get to decide what is and isn’t allowed to shape a persons perspective of a game (or a book, or a movie, or whatever) in that point in time. That’s all review are. Snapshots. If the current global climate affected how a person experienced a game, why do they need to put that “off to the side”? To protect metacritic? To protect sales? Because people on a message board can’t wrap their brains around the idea of subjectivity or fair criticism?
 

KingM

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,360
No, this is about one domino affecting another. You give a fair review of the game based on it's own merits because that's what fair means. This then has the side effect of ensuring the game's sales/rating is fairly judged based on the reviewers subjective take of the game's merits rather than its merits + whatever is going on with that person in real life.

Again, a passing remark or off-comment is fine.
In the case of a games own merits that is a meaningless thing if we are to review it in a vacuum. The idea of something being enjoyable, worthwhile or even just fun cannot exist without drawing on the critic's personal experiences. Aside from a game flatout not working reviewing a game in a perfect vacuum would make the idea of a review pointless.
 
OP
OP
SofNascimento

SofNascimento

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,411
In terms of scores and final thoughts, no, that's pretty silly and just dates a review to a specific time and place (even more so than usual)

But I think it's more than fine for a reviewer to mention "given recent events, some players may feel uncomfortable seeing the pandemic unfold in-game". Arguing against that isn't too far removed from getting mad a youtube video has content warnings.
That's what I think.

Some of the responses in this thread highlight the issue with how people, a lot on this site, view reviews. We are, for the most part, informed enthusiasts. We probably shouldn’t be the target audience for a lot of these reviews, especially for these big AAA type games like RE3 where so many people already have their minds made up and are going to get a game day 1. Reviews here (and review threads in general) exist for the purposes of hype (why else would review threads be open like a week before any reviews even hit?), for ammunition in fanboy/console wars, meta critic circle jerks, and to validate their own preconceived opinions. When reviews are viewed through that lens and perspective, it’s what gives you some of the warped opinions you see in this thread and on this site about how reviews should he objective, or what personal experiences reviewers are or aren’t allowed to inject into their opinion of a game, or how disagreeing with a review means the reviewer is wrong or didn’t do their job correctly.
There is much truth here. At the same time, I feel that reviews are more than that as well. I remember recently Control's director or producer being really happy with the game's opencritic score. Surely he didn't do that because of any of the reasons you stated, which are all true for a lot of people (myself included in parts) but because it matters to the success of the game.

Reviews are seens as judgement of a game's quality, not simply an impression. There are many problems with that concept which are not worth to bring up now, but this is how they are perceived. That's why I mentioned it is possible to strive to be objective. Not because you can be, you can't, but you can at least try in some level. And when you are literally going to give a number that will be representative of the game quality, that's not irrelevant.
 

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,313
No, this is about one domino affecting another. You give a fair review of the game based on it's own merits because that's what fair means. This then has the side effect of ensuring the game's sales/rating is fairly judged based on the reviewers subjective take of the game's merits rather than its merits + whatever is going on with that person in real life.

Again, a passing remark or off-comment is fine.
Why are you so concerned that reviewers should be cautious about impacting a game‘s sales?
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
I think that’s what people are looking for. 100% objective reviews.

“Resident Evil 3 is a Video game. It contains guns and also zombies. It is available for purchase on Steam. You can interact with by using a controller or perhaps even a keyboard

Rating: yes/10”

what people on this site are looking for is validation for their incessant review “hype” and something that possibly gets them closer to being right about their “meta critic” score prediction. “CMON 92 LETS GO GETHYPE!”
 

TaterTots

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,490
I don't know why people are acting like this is impossible. There was a review for Hl:Alyx where there was a discussion about how the game came along at the wrong time due to the pandemic etc. Still gave it a good score, but I wouldn't be surprised at all if real life influences someones opinion of a game.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
Including your own perspective into a review is fair. And you don’t get to decide what is and isn’t allowed to shape a persons perspective of a game (or a book, or a movie, or whatever) in that point in time. That’s all review are. Snapshots. If the current global climate affected how a person experienced a game, why do they need to put that “off to the side”? To protect metacritic? To protect sales? Because people on a message board can’t wrap their brains around the idea of subjectivity or fair criticism?
Your own perspective if it relates to the game, yes. Every playthrough of a game is subjective, and should be reviewed as such from the eye's of a game player, but bringing a complete real world pandemic into the mix and have that actually affect a review, no. That just isn't a fair take on a review.

What happens if we have a flat-earther play Universal Sandbox and then degrade the game because "I was taught for half my life that the earth is flat, so this game doesn't resonate with me" that's just.. absurd.
 

ViewtifulJC

Member
Oct 25, 2017
16,071
People want games to be seen as art and respectable but as soon as a subjective perspective comes in, the kind that every single kind of art has from movies to books to music, that goes against their preconceived notion of a game they haven’t even played yet, then shit goes out the window.

they don’t see video games as an art form, or criticism as personal. They see video games as tech, and they want technical reviews. Like checking Amazon to make sure what this blender does, how many options it has, the color, the noise. as close to objective as possible. Nothing personalable.
 

John Kowalski

Member
Oct 27, 2017
9,187
It will, inevitably, have a read like that. Probably not on reviews, but in other pieces that will inevitably be much more valuable than reviews anyway.
 

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,313
Your own perspective if it relates to the game, yes. Every playthrough of a game is subjective, and should be reviewed as such from the eye's of a game player, but bringing a complete real world pandemic into the mix and have that actually affect a review, no. That just isn't a fair take on a review.

What happens if we have a flat-earther play Universal Sandbox and then degrade the game because "I was taught for half my life that the earth is flat, so this game doesn't resonate with me" that's just.. absurd.
That would certainly be an interesting review

Why do you keep using “degrade the game” as if those impressions are somehow literally ruining the game itself?
 

doodlewhizz

Member
Jan 9, 2019
1,730
Your own perspective if it relates to the game, yes. Every playthrough of a game is subjective, and should be reviewed as such from the eye's of a game player, but bringing a complete real world pandemic into the mix and have that actually affect a review, no. That just isn't a fair take on a review.

What happens if we have a flat-earther play Universal Sandbox and then degrade the game because "I was taught for half my life that the earth is flat, so this game doesn't resonate with me" that's just.. absurd.
Well, they'd be called out for being stupid as they're a flat-earther...

This is comparing apples and hobgoblins.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
That's what I think.



There is much truth here. At the same time, I feel that reviews are more than that as well. I remember recently Control's director or producer being really happy with the game's opencritic score. Surely he didn't do that because of any of the reasons you stated, which are all true for a lot of people (myself included in parts) but because it matters to the success of the game.

Reviews are seens as judgement of a game's quality, not simply an impression. There are many problems with that concept which are not worth to bring up now, but this is how they are perceived. That's why I mentioned it is possible to strive to be objective. Not because you can be, you can't, but you can at least try in some level. And when you are literally going to give a number that will be representative of the game quality, that's not irrelevant.
critics should not “strive to be objective”. As long as they are open, and transparent about what went in to their judgement of a game, there is nothing wrong with that. It’s an informed opinion of a game, and no more or less valid than anybody else’s, even if for you, it might not be as valuable. That’s an important distinction. i do not anticipate that the COVID19 pandemic will have any impact in my experience with RE3. That doesn’t mean their opinions are wrong. That doesn’t mean they are wrong for including that in their subjective view of the game. If anything not bringing that up would be more disingenuous.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
That would certainly be an interesting review

Why do you keep using “degrade the game” as if those impressions are somehow literally ruining the game itself?
Degrading means to affect something negatively, to take away from it. That doesn't mean it literally ruins the game entirely, but it might worsen the game''s values.
 

TheClaw7667

Member
Oct 25, 2017
716
That sentence makes it a bad review? Okay, cool, that's how they felt about it. The fact is if it was higher than an 8 it wouldn't have garnered hardly any controversy, but we can all act like the majority wasn't upset it didn't get at least a 9.
I wouldn't say it's a bad review but I also think people shouldn't be forced to review a game they aren't in the mood for as that will inevitably affect their enjoyment of the game overall. The review opens up with the reviewer flat out saying he wished he didn't have to play the game in this particular moment.

Of course, if Metacritic wasn't a thing no one would care about that review but I also think a reviewer that goes into a review dreading having to play the game they are reviewing is something that should be avoided as much as possible.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
Your own perspective if it relates to the game, yes. Every playthrough of a game is subjective, and should be reviewed as such from the eye's of a game player, but bringing a complete real world pandemic into the mix and have that actually affect a review, no. That just isn't a fair take on a review.

What happens if we have a flat-earther play Universal Sandbox and then degrade the game because "I was taught for half my life that the earth is flat, so this game doesn't resonate with me" that's just.. absurd.
That’s not for you to decide. Telling people what views and experiences they are or aren’t allowed to bring into their perspective with a game they played through is absolute lunacy. You are allowed to disagree with that review. You are allowed to not find value in that review or that persons opinion. That doesn’t mean their opinion is wrong or invalid or worse, shouldn’t be allowed to exist or be voiced.
 

More_Badass

Member
Oct 25, 2017
18,313
Degrading means to affect something negatively, to take away from it. That doesn't mean it literally ruins the game entirely, but it might worsen the game''s values.
How so? The game remains unchanged. This is like saying that those absolutely savage reception of The Thing that called it trash and schlock somehow took away from or tarnished that film’s merits

A decade later, many of those same reviewers considered it a genre masterpiece

The Thing didn’t change between the summer of 1982 and today, but the cinematic landscape and context surrounding how the movie was perceived did.

Games are no different.
 
OP
OP
SofNascimento

SofNascimento

Member
Oct 28, 2017
7,411
critics should not “strive to be objective”. As long as they are open, and transparent about what went in to their judgement of a game, there is nothing wrong with that. It’s an informed opinion of a game, and no more or less valid than anybody else’s, even if for you, it might not be as valuable. That’s an important distinction. i do not anticipate that the COVID19 pandemic will have any impact in my experience with RE3. That doesn’t mean their opinions are wrong. That doesn’t mean they are wrong for including that in their subjective view of the game. If anything not bringing that up would be more disingenuous.
I don't fully agree with this, but at the same time I'm not fully convinced of the reasons that make me disagree with some parts. When we talk about opinions and judgment of any kind of artistic work it gets messy.
 

DarthBuzzard

Member
Jul 17, 2018
2,864
That’s not for you to decide. Telling people what views and experiences they are or aren’t allowed to bring into their perspective with a game they played through is absolute lunacy. You are allowed to disagree with that review. You are allowed to not find value in that review or that persons opinion. That doesn’t mean their opinion is wrong or invalid or worse, shouldn’t be allowed to exist or be voiced.
As a general statement, opinions can be wrong and invalid. That's why they are opinions, not facts. Hence the opinion given in the Alyx view being invalid because it was passed off as objective which you can't do.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,709
As a general statement, opinions can be wrong and invalid. That's why they are opinions, not facts. Hence the opinion given in the Alyx view being invalid because it was passed off as objective which you can't do.
An informed opinion, a review of a game from a person who has actually Played it, is not invalid. You can disagree with it based on your own experiences and perspectives, but that doesn’t make it wrong.
 

balgajo

Member
Oct 27, 2017
936
That’s not for you to decide. Telling people what views and experiences they are or aren’t allowed to bring into their perspective with a game they played through is absolute lunacy. You are allowed to disagree with that review. You are allowed to not find value in that review or that persons opinion. That doesn’t mean their opinion is wrong or invalid or worse, shouldn’t be allowed to exist or be voiced.
Yep. Take for instance Girlfriend Reviews. The point of view of someone that watches other people playing a game is a super valid one and targets an audience that do the same. Sometimes a game that feels really good for playing is boring to watch and the reviewer can talk about that and rate accordingly. It's fine not being the target audience of a review.
 

♡♪!?

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,933
As a general statement, opinions can be wrong and invalid. That's why they are opinions, not facts. Hence the opinion given in the Alyx view being invalid because it was passed off as objective which you can't do.
Facts can be wrong but opinions can't be.

(I mean some opinions are morally repugnant and factually ruin lives but that's a different topic...)