@Willy105: As for your comment on whether the reviewer would be an arbiter, I would argue a trans person is an appropriate arbiter of what is considered offensive to trans people, since the offense would be taken by them. If they have taken offense, then a reviewer commenting on those subjects would be fair to mention that those things. It's nothing new, much like how there where white allies during the civil rights movement, there are allies of trans communities now. And being an expert has never been necessary, you don't need to be an expert in Chinese culture to understand that the racist joke in the Monster Hunter movie that got it banned in China...was racist.
Is this reviewer trans?
I'm fairly severely chronically ill, and I can't tell you have many hurtful things have been expressed to me over the years stemming from ignorance of the kind-hearted who believe they are marching in my interests. Even if she were trans, it's no guarantee of anything. Being an ally or even a member of a certain group doesn't automatically absolve you of responsibility towards the cause for which you stand.
"The incorporation of different cultures and backgrounds is wildly inconsistent, from good to inaccurate to downright offensive".
What qualifies her to claim it's "wildly inconsistent"? The above is making a statement on collective cultural norms and backgrounds held in contrast to one another. In saying such, yes, she does need to be somewhat qualified above the layman's ability to recognize a racist joke.
And as you mentioned, the reviewer has indeed played more of the game than you, so even if you found their impressions to be presumptuous, it should be reasonable that you wouldn't be upset at the idea of those moral issues would affect someone's enjoyment of the game, because it did.
Sure, and she can be offended. Just don't presume that that's going to affect my enjoyment as if it's a blanket objective detriment of the work and mark it down for it. Different people find different things offense, and to differing degrees.
I do take issue with this statement of yours: "I would be unfair to the game (and to those I was reviewing it for) to let my subjectivity skew my final judgement." I would argue that is the entire point of a critic. The subjectivity is what a reviewer is paid to provide; otherwise a game review would indeed be a checkmark of game features...like a spec blurb for a microwave or a printer. There would be no benefit for reading a review if it is simply an extended back-of-the-game marketing copy.
A good reviewer is able to mitigate their own personal biases towards a subject while critiquing it. Movie reviewers don't go, "this movie sucks because the character is a whiny little child, and I disagree with their behavior and choices!". No, instead they say something like, "the character's behavior and choice are consistent/inconsistent with what's been previously established in their development to this point", or "the plot leaves something to be desired in pacing and its ignoring and dismissal of various plot holes".
See the difference? The former is imposing their own worldview in their criticism, whereas the latter is attempting to examine it on a basis on what it does and how well it does it while restraining them. Simply saying, "this is an offensive portrayal!" tells me absolutely nothing about the game, it tells me about the reviewer, and I'm not reading it for that reason. I care about their ability to critique the quality and execution of something while keeping their personal feelings about its content to themselves. A review is always subjective, but they should strive to keep themselves out of the picture as much as they are able.
All in all, I think your actual issue with all this is what you outlined in your 3rd paragraph. Other people got upset at something you wanted, which got you upset. You were offended, and you want to hate those hurt by the flaws of the game, because they pointed out a flaw of the game that you probably wanted to buy. Stereotypes were never good to poke fun at, but you probably grew up watching and consuming content (and living in an environment) where there was no one from the group those stereotypes made fun of to tell you that perhaps hey...that was not ok.
This is rife with incorrect assumptions.
2077 is a game that's been on my radar, but not one that I'm not all that invested in. I'm keeping my eye on it and will eventually pick it up in six months when all the kinks have been ironed out. Secondly, I didn't take offense, I felt dubious towards her critique given the line quoted and the current proclivity for journalists to use their trade as a platform to vent political grievance, furthered by the controversy that has surrounded CDPR as of late.
And no, stereotypes are immense fun to laugh at because they typically hold a semblance of truth to them......that's why they're stereotypes. We have to be able to laugh at each other, humor is healthy, it disarms, and the usage of it isn't indicative of underlying bigotry and hate. And contrary to your (again mistaken) belief, I grew up (just like many) surrounded by people who fit stereotypes. I was no exception to this, and was the target of laughter due to it as much as I was the giver of it.
People need to grow a thicker skin, understand the world doesn't revolve around them or owe them anything, and learn that they need to start taking responsibility for their own feelings and not come to the belief that the world has to cater to them. This doesn't mean I don't believe their shouldn't be anti-hate or harassment laws out there nor cease the advocation towards civil rights, just that this increasing moral crusade to take little one-offs, to search people's twitter five/ten years back to find the slightest hint of impropriety and then blow it up into a cancel culture mob mentality, including doxing and going after their livelihood and reputations, is beyond pathetic and needs to stop. People are often ignorant, they're often assholes, but unless they are making a concerted effort to attack someone, the responsibility for dealing with them should lay on the shoulders of individuals. It's a line to walk, but it needs to exist.
As the game industry grows in popularity and size, expanding to audiences that aren't just middle class males, you will see more people join the conversation and you will see stuff that you never saw anyone be upset over before suddenly have lots of critics. Those critics didn't come from no where, it just came from a perspective you never had access to before.
That doesn't make you evil or bad just because you didn't know about it before. Everybody learns something new they didn't know before. Instead of getting offended and upset by it, you can learn from it. You can still enjoy the game, but it's even better to know that the world is bigger than what the game provides for.
Well, at least you said "middle class males" instead of "straight, white, privileged males", although I'm unsure if you are making the distinction.
Please don't patronize to me in the mistaken assumption I've been unexposed to particular elements in life which is why I hold the view I do. I'm not sheltered nor naïve, and that's fairly nervy of you to act as if you are the enlightened and condescend to me. I understand people have varying perspectives, which is precisely why I'm arguing that reviewers should accord that consideration into their works in keeping their own out of it to material not pertinent to topic.
Log in to comment