I'm not sure determining something's worth by whether or not people who dislike/disagree it find it a waste of time is a very good metric. In terms of something like criticism, or even ART...which has no concrete substance...you don't eat it, you don't fuck it, it doesn't help you with any of your a-priori needs...everything is going to ultimately be subjective. I'm not sure I agree with any argument based on the principle of "It's subjective, therefore useless".MoeMints said:My argument isn't "this critique is worthless because I don't like it", its "this critique is worthless because it wastes everyone's time that wasn't going to agree with it."
I can certainly understand favoring "expert" critique over bystander critique, especially if that critique is expressed better, or offers more interesting insight, but going too far down that road is argumentum ad auctoritatem. I'm interested in any well expressed criticism, regardless of whether or not it aligns with my preferences. Sometimes, in the case of things I cherish, unforseen and insightful criticism can be hard to hear, but I'm open to it. Not because I'm some spectacularly broad-minded individual. It's probably just because I'm wishy washy and prone to excessive neutrality. =P
You can criticize an element of a game without criticizing the game entire. For example, I go could on for HOURS about flaws with, say, Skyrim, without it changing my general opinion that the game is excellent based on its merits. A game could hypothetically be RAMPANTLY sexist, and still have excellent game play, or an astonishing plot twist. Criticism doesn't have to boil down to binary good/bad judgments.MoeMints said:Such like the most cherrypicked games I see, I have definitely seen many a person not shown any attempt at understanding the core of the game and fanbase, rather doing reactionary claims that are just white noise after the 20th time we've been over this.
I get that, and I suspect it's because it's not an issue for you. Think of it as...let's see. Think of being, say, a black man in 1950's America...and issues of race are very important to you. And let's say a show comes along, and it has a black character, and he's a moron and a buffoon, and is illustrative of many of the ways in which you feel your race is unfairly portrayed in the media. The show is also an excellent comedy. Can you criticize the show for what you perceive as racism, despite the fact it's irrelevant to the show's quality as a comedy? Would that not be a legitimate, rational, or valid criticism? Could you not have that discussion, without insinuating that every show going forward would need to significantly alter itself to cater to a minority opinion?runic knight said:When I see people trying to criticize a video game because it doesn't fit in with their idea of feminism or morality or whatever else, it feels like someone is judging a tv commercial because it didn't hold up to the quality of the book they had sitting on the coffee table on the set next to the coffee the commercial was actually trying to sell you. I don't mean that to invalidate the criticism per say or undermine the ideologies themselves, but ask the point of doing so. No, the commercial is not going to stand up to the same quality standard because it was never made to do so from the start, and even if it does reference the story (for a split second), trying to use that to judge the whole by that standard seems so far removed from something with a point. I suppose that itself is just opinion though, so again, hard to word right here.