My Amnesia Review Article!

[Bridge]

True, but if you are really so hung up on these "flaws", how is it you suspend your disbelief when experiencing anything artistic? The overwhelming majority of movies and books are nothing but stuff that doesn't make sense in real life but works in their respective medium, although it's usually a more sophisticated form of retardation. Nobody claims that health kits in exploding barrels is good game design design, but if it works as a way to tell a story and provide an enjoyable experience, should it be considered a flaw?

More importantly, why should someone who "recognizes" these things as flaws have the more objective opinion? People learning a foreign language are often confused, and perhaps contemptuous, of the way it is spoken and the nature of the grammar and vocabulary at first, but as fluency in it develops one starts to appreciate the nuances and what is good about the language, not what is illogical or awkward.

[rtjhbfvsrry]

Whoa, strawman out the wazoo. None of that responded to something I actually said. I have never claimed they have more objective opinions and you're the one that's getting into semantics about what does or does not constitute as a flaw. What I am saying is that a non-gamers perspective is a valuable perspective simply by nature of it being different than the common perspective - they will pick out what most game critics whose views are based on experience will gloss over as part of the medium. Because a non-gamer's perspective is rare (who writes about something they don't spend a lot of time on?) this perspective is more valuable than most game critics' is simply a matter of supply and demand.

[Bridge]

Whoa, strawman out the wazoo. None of that responded to something I actually said. I have never claimed they have more objective opinions and you're the one that's getting into semantics about what does or does not constitute as a flaw. What I am saying is that a non-gamers perspective is a valuable perspective simply by nature of it being different than the common perspective - they will pick out what most game critics whose views are based on experience will gloss over as part of the medium. Because a non-gamer's perspective is rare (who writes about something they don't spend a lot of time on?) this perspective is more valuable than most game critics' is simply a matter of supply and demand.

And I disagree for the reasons specified in my post. I also think I am addressing exactly the points you brought up. Tell me: why are somebody's thoughts on completely irrelevant means to an end valuable? Just because they "notice" it? I think the opinion of people who have internalized it to the point where they can see the big picture, what all of it actually means, should be more valuable. Are you seriously saying non-gamers' opinions are more valuable simply because they are in more "demand"? Please, explain to me how that makes sense. I'm not saying the opinion of non-gamers is worthless, but it is certainly not more informed.

[rtjhbfvsrry]

Opinion =/= perspective, and I hardly think design non-sequiters are irrelevant as they have held back gaming and game design as a whole and respected medium for all audiences for decades. As for supply and demand, I can go out and read a hundred reviews by gamers and they will all say the same thing and none of it is something that I cannot see myself. The opinions of gamers are a dime a dozen. Gamers are remarkably uniform.

As someone who has done QA testing for games, I can objectively state that gamers have the worst perspective of gaming on the planet - they accept terrible designs just because they've learned how to deal with them through years of experience. They get stuck in a skinner box grind and they keep going for 90 levels without caring if they're actually having fun, as long as they get to hear the "ding" at the end of the leveling bar.

As for informed opinion, I find that informed opinion is important when dealing with facts. It's for politics and science. This is subjective matter. Art and entertainment should stand on it's own feet, not be propped up by "oh, well, I accept this as part of the genre/medium/whatever". Being informed may color your perspective but it does not make your opinions more important. In short, if the song sucks it'll suck whether or not you can appreciate the guitarist's technical skill.

[Bridge]

Opinion =/= perspective, and I hardly think design non-sequiters are irrelevant as they have held back gaming and game design as a whole and respected medium for all audiences for decades. As for supply and demand, I can go out and read a hundred reviews by gamers and they will all say the same thing and none of it is something that I cannot see myself. The opinions of gamers are a dime a dozen. Gamers are remarkably uniform.

As someone who has done QA testing for games, I can objectively state that gamers have the worst perspective of gaming on the planet - they accept terrible designs just because they've learned how to deal with them through years of experience. They get stuck in a skinner box grind and they keep going for 90 levels without caring if they're actually having fun, as long as they get to hear the "ding" at the end of the leveling bar.

As for informed opinion, I find that informed opinion is important when dealing with facts. It's for politics and science. This is subjective matter. Art and entertainment should stand on it's own feet, not be propped up by "oh, well, I accept this as part of the genre/medium/whatever". Being informed may color your perspective but it does not make your opinions more important. In short, if the song sucks it'll suck whether or not you can appreciate the guitarist's technical skill.

Absolutely not, and I have said no such thing. Anyway, I find your post to be full of sweeping statements with no basis in fact. Can you prove that gamers are more accepting of "flaws" and more uniform than other people? Because it seems to me like most people have uninteresting opinions - I do not see how gamers are any different.

Also, I simply disagree with your insinuations that how informed you are about the history of a certain genre or artform is somehow irrelevant. As I said before: The only way to truly appreciate how good something is is to be familiar with the parameters.

I've played a lot of games and I absolutely despise transparent game mechanics and the bad design that has indeed plagued video games from the beginning. Does that mean I stoically accept them as inevitable and play on waiting for the ding at the end of the level? No, on the contrary actually. I realize in what ways these design choices are flaws because I've played games that do it wrong and games that do it right, so now when a truly great game comes along I can recognize it as great. A novice may enjoy it, but will he notice all of its good qualities?

EDIT: Also, "opinion" and "perspective" overlap in several ways. In this case, I would say they mean essentially the same thing.

[failedALIAS]

As someone who has done QA testing for games, I can objectively state that gamers have the worst perspective of gaming on the planet - they accept terrible designs just because they've learned how to deal with them through years of experience. They get stuck in a skinner box grind and they keep going for 90 levels without caring if they're actually having fun, as long as they get to hear the "ding" at the end of the leveling bar.

I think you're preaching to the wrong choir. While that may be true for other areas of gaming, it certainly isn't in this case. We aren't talking about a game with tiers or unlocking new guns. We're talking about Amnesia. Also, just because there is a large number of people who'll do anything if it results in heightened Gamerscore, doesn't mean that everyone, or even most, who play games are like that. Yes we have to judge quality based on mechanics. That isn't the only thing we take into consideration, but it is a part of it. Why? Because it affects the experience of the gamer.
So know what I can say about that bad song with the good guitar? That it's a bad song with a good guitar. If I were a reviewer who understood these things(gamer), then I could specifically address why everything in the song sucked but the guitar.
If I were a reviewer who didn't understand these things(not gamer), then I may say, "Nope, I didn't like it. That thing with the strings, you know? That you strum? That was kinda cool."

[pinkribbonscars]

Glad you enjoyed it ^^ I'm guessing you're excited for A Machine For Pigs now? =P