Quote:
Originally Posted by Charkles
The art still gets made, and you should be enjoying it whether or not it's hyped. So stfu and diaf. 'Taste' in itself is completely subjective. We can take your TF2 crit example for this, too. Some people like crits because it adds a sense of randomness to the game. Does it fit within the theme of TF2? Depends on how you interpret what the theme is.
Now I'm going to butt rape you:
Yes.
Nor does it detract from it. In my opinion.
Multiplayer games like TF2 are about shooting shit. Valve, in my opinion, are poor at making their multiplayer-only games atmospheric. They're stylistic, sure, but they don't suck you in. Does it really matter? Not at all. They can be entertaining without being deep or atmospheric, and that's why people buy it. Not everyone looks for a really deep storyline and an atmosphere that sucks you in (like your mum has done to me on multiple occasions). Are they at fault? No. It's just the way people are, always have and always will be. Am I fond of Bach? Not particularly. Good as he is, he's not what I'm looking for when I listen to music. It's all to do with taste. Is Bach better than Snoop Dogg? In terms of musical capabilities, yes. In terms of emotion and meaning, well it depends on the background of the recipient. Are his beats phat? No. Do some people find phat beats more interesting than musical capabilities? Evidently. That doesn't necessarily mean that the people who prefer them are at fault.
Again, people are looking for a good time. There are plenty of games out there that cater to people with a tactical mind, just as there are plenty that don't. If you like tactical games, play them more, and don't expect Valve to cater for your every need when you play a game. This is why reviews are a pile of hairy chimpanzee poo, because unless the game is absolutely shoddy to the eye of absolutely everyone ever, the stuff written in the review is going to be subjective. People always compare shit. It's the same in game reviews, music reviews, literature reviews... very rarely do I see a review that is judging something by itself rather than comparing it to, say, Iron Maiden or Halo.
IS THAT BAD? Only if you don't like subjective opinions. I don't like them. I have a shit-ton of them, and if people care about them, then hey, why would you not write subjective reviews? For those that don't, why would you be reading a review in the first place? [/tangent]
See above.
So there you have it. Shit is always subjective. If you disagree with me, you're fucking wrong, and can go fuck a badger. But hey, that's just my opinion. ;-)
|
There is absolutely no information or coherency in this post, but you're a dumb cunt so that's all you can produce anyway, I mean, good gods, you wrote an entire paragraph around a misinterpretation of the word tactical. Tactical implies strategy, if a game is more tactical it means you will do better with a plan, it has nothing to do with some wierd image you have in your mind of TACTUCAL GAMES THEIS IS LIKE STARCRAFTS RITE? Counterstrike? You don't really need a plan. Dystopia? Yes you do. Dystopia is therefore more tactical. But of course, look at pub servers, just because Dys is more tactical than CS doesn't mean it can't be equally clusterfucky.
Your argument is essentially BRING ON THE SEQUELS. Enjoy inhaling Halo 13 in between poker nights, faggot.
Now, Charkles is one of the aforementioned people in my above post who don't know how to do anything but just inhale whatever's thrown at them. You see in the quoted post, when things like taste are mentioned, they start babbling and getting defencive, violently proclaiming YOU ARE WRONG EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE THIS MEANS MY OPINIONS ARE ALWAYS RIGHT AND I ALSO DONT HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH ANYONE HAHAHAHAHA RAD. The problem here is that they don't even think about their proclamations, scum like him will Literally proclaim that this world war 2 novel about ROGUH TOUGH GERNALS RICHARDSON AND CREW OF DESERT SOLDIERS is absolutely just as good as something like MacBeth "because its my opinion". Obviously, this allows them to eschew using their brain in any fashion, MacBeth obviously requires a lot more interpretation and reflection than random literary vomit (No I'm not counting the obscurity of the language used in that particular piece). These people, unfortunately, have just as much money as the rest of us, it's an extension of the problem with democracy in that people don't know how the fuck to govern themselves. They merely want to be entertained, they just don't care how, as I believe Charkles himself stated. So fine, let them be entertained, But let's not let them have the remote control, shall we?