@GOGOHeadray But if someone believes an element of that satire failed to be satirical, giving supporting evidence, that's a valid opinion and can affect a score given. People don't need to agree with the opinion, definitely, but surely people need to understand that what was said in the review is a completely valid argument.
It's supposed to be "closer to reality than you are letting on", that's what makes the game satirical. However, it is still perfectly valid for a reviewer to put into question the effectiveness any element of that said satire. That's how it works when reviewing any other media format, and it should be in video games as well.
All reviews are personal viewpoints. When a game is trying to be satirical and a reviewer doesn't believe an element of that satire was pulled off, it can (and should) affect the reviewer's score. That's how it works in every other media and as it should in video games.
@buffaloblitz85 That doesn't mean it can't be questioned. In fact, what does that say about our society if we DO just let it go because, you know, "it is what it is".
@chaosexile Not necessarily, as he said, if GTA is supposed to be a satirical look at the American lifestyle, it's perfectly acceptable for a reviewer to question how well a single element of that satire was pulled off (or how it failed to do so).
He didn't insult the entire user base, he tried to make it clear that this was a select group this was targeted at. I can't see this as "stooping to their level" just because he is addressing the controversy and making a rebuttal.
Reviews can never be simply "objective". Unless we talk purely technical specs of the game, a review is subjective. Surprising as it may be, there are people out there who don't like GTA and would give GTA 5 a low score, using supporting evidence, which is what makes it a review.
McDog3's comments