@ignis_sulphur @taco_paco Yeah, I put the reviewers against a higher standard than the ragers. The review is biased for the effect of making a political statement, and that's just plain manipulation. There may have been some valid points here, but Carolyn wouldn't have given the game such a high score if she had truly been evaluating the moral representation of the game.
@Shag84 @taco_paco And the men are portrayed as what, something to aspire to? Everything in this game is damaged on purpose. I'm quite sure that the game developers intentionally want to inflate every aspect of this game, including male chauvinism. I don't even like this game, to be honest, on the more substantial grounds that it requires you to play as someone with no moral compass. But what I hate more is when people use someone's else's hard work as a stepping stone for their personal rhetoric.
And you might then exclaim, "Reviews are personal rhetoric!" You're right. Carolyn has every right here to express that - I am only stating that her logic is flawed based on her reviewing premises. Other mediums are sometimes rated with political bias too, but that doesn't exclude them from being at fault like you suggest. It's good, if anything, that there are a variety of opinions, but they should at least be logically sound. If they aren't, well, you see what can happen.
The major issue here, though, is not that the reviewer has a bit of bias. Really, that's to be expected of anyone. It's the shocking fact that gamers feel as if they are being personally attacked by one review that doesn't exclaim GTA to be perfect. Read the last line of my main post. Both the reviewer and the gamer are at fault for this.
Since when were art forms supposed to be politically correct? If the reviewer was really going that route, it still doesn't eliminate the personal bias she has against a game that has no political brain whatsoever. Think about it this way: in GTA V, you assume the role of murderers, theives, gangsters, and work with pretty much the same dynamic with a few variances in psychopathy. It is a take on something we see more commonly in movies, but requires active participation and passive acquiescence on the gamer's part. In essence, you are playing a criminal and loving it. Since when are the worlds of bad guys not misogynistic? They are thugs, backwards-thinking outcasts that do not think like progressivists.
Now, is that politically correct? Of course not. What Gamespot and other reviewers should be asking is: how well does this game accomplish it's mission. Does everything come together in a believable way, within the framework of the game's own logic? Is it fun? Is it balanced? Is it fair? Is the story good and suck you in?
The message itself is a form of artwork and by Gamespot's own logic, it was a success in these ways. You cannot criticize it for the same thing for which it is praised.
That being said, Gamespot has every right to mark it the way that they do (although I disagree with the logic). They interpreted this and explained why they marked it down. Why do people rage on about this if they don't agree with the reviewer? If you are one of these trolls, go to another site that more closely aligns to your beliefs rather than berate a reviewer who has every right to hold her own opinion. Personal attacks have no place in a hobby such as this and it's pathetic to see how rampant it is these days.
Maybe it goes to show you that games have a not-so-subtle effect on people who take them too seriously (i.e. GTA V).
@Tohirun They did at least mention that their review is outdated, but that is about as far as they go. I'm not really privy to either of these games, but it does seem a bit more commercial than it should be. One just gets advertisement over another that might be better only by a small margin and based on preference. Both LoL and Dota have their strengths, but the difference of overall quality is not 9.0 to 6.0.
@king0ffspring Dota2 is a standalone from the original mod, therefore, this game is much younger. Also, your spelling and grammar prove that my point is valid far more than my own words.
@Phrosnite No, because those games have remained the same at their core. If you look at the reasons for why LoL was rated so low, you'll see that it's based mainly on the premise that it doesn't offer enough as a complete game. For the last 2-3 years, the game has been updated more than any other game I know of and has become more popular than any other game of its type worldwide. So a 6.5 review is highly misleading, whereas an older review of about 8 to 8.5 for a game like Team Fortress 2 is still about right.
Why hasn't LoL been re-reviewed? It got a 6.5 way back when and now a game like this appears on paper to have an unquestionable advantage to people who have never played either.
taco_paco's comments