inherit
1033
0
31,376
colfoley
16,649
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Sept 9, 2019 20:00:04 GMT
Ah FONV a game that is enormously frustrating to play. A great game is there but its buried under a kilometer of glitches and Bethasdaisms.
|
|
inherit
98
0
Feb 18, 2020 17:11:03 GMT
3,042
Steelcan
2,078
August 2016
steelcan
|
Post by Steelcan on Sept 9, 2019 20:19:22 GMT
Wasn't it just a standard relativist move? "Better" means that the thing in question has higher ratings among some particular reference community, and nothing more. Pick a different reference group, get different rankings. It's pretty easy to come up with lists of creative works which were despised on creation, only to become recognized as masterworks later. Or works whose reputation went the other way. Like New Vegas. Anyone who thinks Andromeda or Fallout 76 are one day going to be spoken of the same way as New Vegas are just kidding themselves. While it is true that we won't know what reception will be like in 10yrs or however far out you want to imagine, Andromeda for example doesn't have anything going for it like New Vegas did. Its characters are retreads of better trilogy characters, its story is a sluggish retelling of every single pre-cursor sci-fi story, and its side missions lack variety, depth, or character expression.
|
|
inherit
1033
0
31,376
colfoley
16,649
Aug 17, 2016 10:19:37 GMT
August 2016
colfoley
|
Post by colfoley on Sept 9, 2019 20:49:33 GMT
I wonder what it says that the people most critical of Andromeda tend to believe in 'objective opinions' and rely on the sandcastle authority of popular opinions to justify their opinions.
|
|
inherit
98
0
Feb 18, 2020 17:11:03 GMT
3,042
Steelcan
2,078
August 2016
steelcan
|
Post by Steelcan on Sept 9, 2019 20:51:48 GMT
I wonder what it says that the people most critical of Andromeda tend to believe in 'objective opinions' and rely on the sandcastle authority of popular opinions to justify their opinions. The critical consensus surrounding Andromeda was hardly far more positive than the opinions expressed by players
|
|
inherit
3439
0
May 18, 2024 22:11:21 GMT
9,211
alanc9
Old Scientist Contrarian
7,843
February 2017
alanc9
|
Post by alanc9 on Sept 9, 2019 21:50:49 GMT
Weird how we had a fight over whether to include user reviews if they're actually the same.
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Sept 10, 2019 4:31:12 GMT
I wonder what it says that the people most critical of Andromeda tend to believe in 'objective opinions' and rely on the sandcastle authority of popular opinions to justify their opinions. The critical consensus surrounding Andromeda was hardly far more positive than the opinions expressed by players The same can be argued for new Vegas though. Let's be honest, it pales in comparison to the impact of fallout 3 and skyrim, as far as Bethesda-style RPGs are concerned in the grand scheme of things of general opinion. Doesn't mean its undeserving of the reputation, new Vegas is the best fallout game ever made after all. But its not a memorable one compared to what its sandwiched between.
|
|
Blaze
N3
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
Posts: 893 Likes: 952
inherit
1150
0
Mar 26, 2023 11:03:39 GMT
952
Blaze
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
893
Aug 23, 2016 12:15:31 GMT
August 2016
blaze
|
Post by Blaze on Sept 10, 2019 7:17:40 GMT
Thrash TO YOU. Do you understand that it's YOUR OPINION that it is thrash. Just because YOU don't like a game doesn't mean it's thrash or that people see what you say. If anyone is foolish is you who keeps insisting that your subjective opinion is truth. What would you consider an objective opinion? isn't opinion by definition is subjective? as opposed to fact? the very definition of objective is something that is based on facts and not influenced by opionion or personal feelings. for example, objectively dragon age inquisition was voted game of the year, that is a fact, it was considered the best game this year. however, whether or not it deserve that title is subjective. another example, objectively the titanic is a high praised movie, it is well loved and won 10 oscars; i however, thought that the plot was meh, the romance was cheesy (i especially cringe at "i can fly jack!") and it's only redeeming quality is the music. Objectivity in subjective measurements of quality is not actually possible, despite the critic industry thriving on that lie. Really? So there can be no such thing as an objective critic? How about an objective trial? well, considering i rarely agree with critics, i'd say, no there isn't. No such thing as an objective critic. As for a trial: no, and that’s why the language for proving someone guilty gets progressively more difficult as the severity of the punishment rises. The fact of subjective bias is built into our court system in order to mitigate its damage as much as possible. So someone saying that The Room is a better movie than Citizen Kane is true, because of subjectivity. it is true for them, even if for most people citizen kane is a better movie, it doesn't change the fact that for that person the room is better, because they liked it more. i'll bring another example for subjective vs objective: objectively, citizen kane is more high praised than the room; subjectively, some liked the room more. There is no “truth” there. It is not objectively true that either movie is better than the other. So all movies are the same? of course not, and they didn't say they are. but how they are rated is different between individual. different people like different things, and hae different opinions, based on their outlook in life, their belives and what they like (among other things). sure, some movies are more popular than others, but it's still subjective, becauses vertain people would consider a popular movie to be bad. at the end of the day there is no "one truth to rule them all".
|
|
Blaze
N3
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
Posts: 893 Likes: 952
inherit
1150
0
Mar 26, 2023 11:03:39 GMT
952
Blaze
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
893
Aug 23, 2016 12:15:31 GMT
August 2016
blaze
|
Post by Blaze on Sept 10, 2019 7:30:20 GMT
lmao, the apologists right there gang banging the personel. oh i do love it when people who disagree with me calling me an "apologist" in an attempt to dismiss my opinion xD i don't apologize for anyone, i didn't say "dragon age 2, in it's own way, was as good as origins" to defend bioware, i didn't say "andromeda is a fun game with a good story" to defend bioware. i said those things because i believe them, i don't feel like defending bioware, i like what i like and i stand by it, if you disagree, by all means. but calling me an apologist for stating my opinion is silly.
|
|
inherit
Elvis Has Left The Building
7794
0
Oct 31, 2020 23:57:02 GMT
8,068
pessimistpanda
3,804
Apr 18, 2017 15:57:34 GMT
April 2017
pessimistpanda
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by pessimistpanda on Sept 10, 2019 7:39:50 GMT
Guys, if you're old enough to use the internet unsupervised, then you already know by now that not everyone likes the same things as you.
|
|
Masque
N2
Holy Sigmar, bless this ravaged body!
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
Posts: 132 Likes: 524
inherit
274
0
524
Masque
Holy Sigmar, bless this ravaged body!
132
August 2016
masque
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by Masque on Sept 10, 2019 8:02:53 GMT
Anyway, to get the thread back on track.. Can DA4 compete with today's quality of games? Absolutely. Will it? Remains to be seen.
The one thing that gives me hope is that the devs seem to have acknowledged some of the lackluster aspects of DAI. For example, I think it may have been Laidlaw, conceded that the DAI open world felt rather empty - possibly after seeing how vibrant and populated the cities and villages of TW3 were. Granted, Laidlaw is no longer with BioWare, but hopefully his observation was shared with the rest of the team.
Something that concerns me a tad bit regarding the reboot is that DAI suffered some issues when they shifted from a human only protag to adding multiple races, ie: A Dalish Inquisitor asking "Who is Mythal?". Granted, it's a small error in the grand scheme of things, but it's also so glaringly obvious that it made me question how thoroughly the game was QA'd. Other things seemed to be overlooked during QA as well, like a human model being used for the Well of Sorrows spirit (I think a dev stated it wasn't supposed to be so clearly seen?) and a possible Blood Mage Hawke denouncing all Blood Magic. So my hope is that whatever scraps of Joplin they've kept is gone over with a fine-toothed comb to insure it actually melds with the newer additions, and the testing overall is thorough.
That all being said, with enough development time and a large enough budget, I believe BioWare is still quite capable of producing excellent games. Sure, MEA and Anthem were not up to par for various reasons, but I'm not ready to dismiss the devs completely.
**Edited to add that it's entirely possible that QA on DAI was thorough, but perhaps for reasons beyond their control (budget, crunch time, etc) the issues I've mentioned weren't properly addressed. Whatever the reasons, I hope that DA4 doesn't suffer the same problems.
|
|
inherit
9583
0
Nov 27, 2017 14:40:55 GMT
803
warden
1,158
Nov 25, 2017 22:12:36 GMT
November 2017
warden
https://images4.alphacoders.com/101/thumb-1920-1010967.png
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by warden on Sept 10, 2019 10:00:00 GMT
lmao, the apologists right there gang banging the personel. oh i do love it when people who disagree with me calling me an "apologist" in an attempt to dismiss my opinion xD i don't apologize for anyone, i didn't say "dragon age 2, in it's own way, was as good as origins" to defend bioware, i didn't say "andromeda is a fun game with a good story" to defend bioware. i said those things because i believe them, i don't feel like defending bioware, i like what i like and i stand by it, if you disagree, by all means. but calling me an apologist for stating my opinion is silly. And you quote me for what exactly? I haven't mentioned you anywhere, you simply self invited to the party. lmao.
|
|
Blaze
N3
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
Posts: 893 Likes: 952
inherit
1150
0
Mar 26, 2023 11:03:39 GMT
952
Blaze
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
893
Aug 23, 2016 12:15:31 GMT
August 2016
blaze
|
Post by Blaze on Sept 10, 2019 11:35:34 GMT
oh i do love it when people who disagree with me calling me an "apologist" in an attempt to dismiss my opinion xD i don't apologize for anyone, i didn't say "dragon age 2, in it's own way, was as good as origins" to defend bioware, i didn't say "andromeda is a fun game with a good story" to defend bioware. i said those things because i believe them, i don't feel like defending bioware, i like what i like and i stand by it, if you disagree, by all means. but calling me an apologist for stating my opinion is silly. And you quote me for what exactly? I haven't mentioned you anywhere, you simply self invited to the party. lmao. who are the "apologists" you mentioned, are they not the people who doesn't believe bioware is gonna fail or claim they like andromeda? unless i misunderstood you, i am one of those people.
|
|
inherit
9583
0
Nov 27, 2017 14:40:55 GMT
803
warden
1,158
Nov 25, 2017 22:12:36 GMT
November 2017
warden
https://images4.alphacoders.com/101/thumb-1920-1010967.png
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Mass Effect Andromeda, SWTOR
|
Post by warden on Sept 10, 2019 12:06:50 GMT
And you quote me for what exactly? I haven't mentioned you anywhere, you simply self invited to the party. lmao. who are the "apologists" you mentioned, are they not the people who doesn't believe bioware is gonna fail or claim they like andromeda? unless i misunderstood you, i am one of those people. Apologists are people that no matter what and regardless of what, believe that BioWare is the best of the best, have no flaws, and well basically nothing, they are just perfect and that's it. I don't think liking a particular game or believing in something in particular about a company gets you classified as an apologists, so to me it's just sounds like you want attention and you are feeling alluded because you want to.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Sept 10, 2019 12:23:25 GMT
isn't opinion by definition is subjective? as opposed to fact? the very definition of objective is something that is based on facts and not influenced by opionion or personal feelings Compare this, then To this And tell me, tell anyone that liking Pacino's performance better is subjective and justify it. I want you to explain to me why Tommy Wisseau's performance is on par with Pacino's and why preferring one over the other is subjective. Because if there is no objective standard of quality, then there is no performance, no production, no script that is better than any other. it was considered the best game this year. however, whether or not it deserve that title is subjective. another example, objectively the titanic is a high praised movie, it is well loved and won 10 oscars; i however, thought that the plot was meh, the romance was cheesy (i especially cringe at "i can fly jack!") and it's only redeeming quality is the music. For that, you have to consider a wide array of things, starting with the competition. What did the game have to offer? Does it do it better than the competition? Does the competition even try? Does Geoff Keighley's reaction upon announcing it at the VGAs mean anything? Personally, I don't think Inquisition earned that award, but I have to trust the judges/committee/critics that they were objective enough to come to that conclusion. Because objectivity doesn't always line up with personal taste. And that's a good thing. That is irrelevant. If a person got stabbed 18 times and the stabber said the victim fell on his knife 18 times, whether that is true for him is irrelevant. The truth is you stabbed him 18 times. even if for most people citizen kane is a better movie, it doesn't change the fact that for that person the room is better, because they liked it more Personal preference is not a quality standard. i'll bring another example for subjective vs objective: objectively, citizen kane is more high praised than the room; subjectively, some liked the room more So you just proved subjectivity is an unreliable metric and shouldn't be taken into account. of course not, and they didn't say they are. but how they are rated is different between individual Indeed. Which is why, if you have a critic that your opinions coincide, you can go see a bad movie that they recommended, because you will have fun with it. That doesn't mean it is a good movie. I had fun watching Dracula 3000. Yes, the movie with Vampire Coolio. I would not call it a good movie. Fun does not equate good. If that were so, cocaine would be the best thing ever. at the end of the day there is no "one truth to rule them all". But there is. You mentioned the Titanic above. And while you may not like the story it tells, you have to acknowledge the effort behind the production, the effects, the direction, cinematography, photography direction, sound etc. It was a ground breaking film for its time and by that right a great film in itself. Whether we liked it is irrelevant. That David Warner, though.
|
|
Blaze
N3
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
Posts: 893 Likes: 952
inherit
1150
0
Mar 26, 2023 11:03:39 GMT
952
Blaze
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
893
Aug 23, 2016 12:15:31 GMT
August 2016
blaze
|
Post by Blaze on Sept 10, 2019 12:39:11 GMT
who are the "apologists" you mentioned, are they not the people who doesn't believe bioware is gonna fail or claim they like andromeda? unless i misunderstood you, i am one of those people. Apologists are people that no matter what and regardless of what, believe that BioWare is the best of the best, have no flaws, and well basically nothing, they are just perfect and that's it. well, so far, haven't seen any of those here, so not sure who you were referring to. i agree, but it didn't stopped people from accusing me as well as others of just that, purely because didn't agree with them. hmm... okay?
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Sept 10, 2019 12:47:01 GMT
isn't opinion by definition is subjective? as opposed to fact? the very definition of objective is something that is based on facts and not influenced by opionion or personal feelings Compare this, then To this And tell me, tell anyone that liking Pacino's performance better is subjective and justify it. I want you to explain to me why Tommy Wisseau's performance is on par with Pacino's and why preferring one over the other is subjective. Because if there is no objective standard of quality, then there is no performance, no production, no script that is better. Can you point to an objective standard of quality in the performances between Pacino and wiseau that should be viewed as a universal truth for acting? Honestly, it's a bit difficult to really point to an objective standard in pop culture mostly because of how subjective tastes are. Since we all evaluate things with preconceived notions, bias and emotions, finding objective truth in something inherently subjective in nature is kind of fruitless. Not because there is no difference, but because objective quality or categorization doesn't matter in pop culture. Not to mention philosophers and scientists like Newton have pointed out few things to be fully objective in the world anyway as a standard of universal truth.id argue most of our interactions and personal preferences are relative to taste, emotion and belief. So, yeah, no script, performance, or camera work is better or worse than any other. We however add bbn personal preference in top to claim it is. The more that claim it, the more truthful it sounds, even if it is not objectively true but subjectively relative. I think it was Hume who thought of that.
|
|
inherit
265
0
May 16, 2024 20:57:41 GMT
11,980
Pounce de León
Praise the Justicat!
7,910
August 2016
catastrophy
caustic_agent
|
Post by Pounce de León on Sept 10, 2019 13:26:31 GMT
Compare this, then To this And tell me, tell anyone that liking Pacino's performance better is subjective and justify it. I want you to explain to me why Tommy Wisseau's performance is on par with Pacino's and why preferring one over the other is subjective. Because if there is no objective standard of quality, then there is no performance, no production, no script that is better. Can you point to an objective standard of quality in the performances between Pacino and wiseau that should be viewed as a universal truth for acting? Honestly, it's a bit difficult to really point to an objective standard in pop culture mostly because of how subjective tastes are. Since we all evaluate things with preconceived notions, bias and emotions, finding objective truth in something inherently subjective in nature is kind of fruitless. Not because there is no difference, but because objective quality or categorization doesn't matter in pop culture. Not to mention philosophers and scientists like Newton have pointed out few things to be fully objective in the world anyway as a standard of universal truth.id argue most of our interactions and personal preferences are relative to taste, emotion and belief. So, yeah, no script, performance, or camera work is better or worse than any other. We however add bbn personal preference in top to claim it is. The more that claim it, the more truthful it sounds, even if it is not objectively true but subjectively relative. I think it was Hume who thought of that. Ed Wood likes this.
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Sept 10, 2019 13:42:50 GMT
Can you point to an objective standard of quality in the performances between Pacino and wiseau that should be viewed as a universal truth for acting? Honestly, it's a bit difficult to really point to an objective standard in pop culture mostly because of how subjective tastes are. Since we all evaluate things with preconceived notions, bias and emotions, finding objective truth in something inherently subjective in nature is kind of fruitless. Not because there is no difference, but because objective quality or categorization doesn't matter in pop culture. Not to mention philosophers and scientists like Newton have pointed out few things to be fully objective in the world anyway as a standard of universal truth.id argue most of our interactions and personal preferences are relative to taste, emotion and belief. So, yeah, no script, performance, or camera work is better or worse than any other. We however add bbn personal preference in top to claim it is. The more that claim it, the more truthful it sounds, even if it is not objectively true but subjectively relative. I think it was Hume who thought of that. Ed Wood likes this. He would. Though ed wood I find personally overrated.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Sept 10, 2019 13:55:31 GMT
Can you point to an objective standard of quality in the performances between Pacino and wiseau that should be viewed as a universal truth for acting? Do you mean a pinpoint of performance that gets the acting pass? There is no physical meter. And not every scene requires the same intensity from an actor. Requirements are, in a sense, fluid. But a serious, emotional scene making you laugh, or making people question the humanity of their performer, as in no person would actually behave like this, is not something that should be considered good subjectively. At least not for the right reasons. Jeremy Irons in Dungeons & Dragons, for example is a terrible performance, but I like it because it makes me laugh. But I do realize it is terrible. Especially coming from someone like Jeremy Irons. So that is a standard: believable performance per scene requirement. Honestly, it's a bit difficult to really point to an objective standard in pop culture mostly because of how subjectively relative tastes are Which is why, should one hope to critique something, should put personal preferences aside and evaluate it based on what it does and how well it executes it. If you cannot, then don't. For example, quick paced/high refresh rate FPS make me queasy. Does that mean all high refresh rate FPS are shit? No. However, if the problem is common enough among the player, that means there is a problem with the game engine, to some extent, that makes the game nearly universally unplayable. And that is objectively bad, because even if it doesn't bother you specifically, it severely drains the pool of available players, therefore the longevity and success of the title. Not to mention philosophers and scientists like Newton have pointed out few things to be fully objective in the world anyway as a standard of universal truth.id argue most of our interactions and personal preferences are relative to taste, emotion and belief. You can, however, through examination and discussion with peers that have the mindset to be objective toward something, to reach an conclusion that, while not absolute, be adequate enough to fulfill that standard. For a more relevant example, Andromeda was rated, across a wide range of reviewers, to be, on average, a 74% title, if you sum them up per system, over at Metacritic. That may not be an absolute, but whether Andromeda is actually a 77% or a 72% game, that 74% should be adequately close enough for that disparity.
|
|
inherit
98
0
Feb 18, 2020 17:11:03 GMT
3,042
Steelcan
2,078
August 2016
steelcan
|
Post by Steelcan on Sept 10, 2019 14:28:14 GMT
The fact that people here are defending the Room on the idea that all performance and "art" is subjective and thus of equal quality to defend the frankly bad games that BioWare has been putting out since 2016 is honestly just kind of mind boggling. You're allowed to like shitty things, it's ok, just acknowledge that they're shittyx it's not hard. Andromeda doesnt have to be as good as the OT for you to enjoy it.
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Sept 10, 2019 14:41:36 GMT
The fact that people here are defending the Room on the idea that all performance and "art" is subjective and thus of equal quality to defend the frankly bad games that BioWare has been putting out since 2016 is honestly just kind of mind boggling. You're allowed to like shitty things, it's ok, just acknowledge that they're shittyx it's not hard. Andromeda doesnt have to be as good as the OT for you to enjoy it. I don't think anyone is really defending the quality of the room as it is a shitty movie. Honestly I'm pointing out why it doesn't matter its shitty from a philosophical viewpoint.
|
|
Blaze
N3
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
Posts: 893 Likes: 952
inherit
1150
0
Mar 26, 2023 11:03:39 GMT
952
Blaze
Everyone seem normal till you get to know them
893
Aug 23, 2016 12:15:31 GMT
August 2016
blaze
|
Post by Blaze on Sept 10, 2019 14:48:17 GMT
isn't opinion by definition is subjective? as opposed to fact? the very definition of objective is something that is based on facts and not influenced by opionion or personal feelings Compare this, then To this And tell me, tell anyone that liking Pacino's performance better is subjective and justify it. I want you to explain to me why Tommy Wisseau's performance is on par with Pacino's and why preferring one over the other is subjective. well you successfully managed to miss the point i was making, good job! but you know what? sure, i'll humor you: because people might like something you don't have and a different preference. how do i justify it? simple, by saying it's okay to think differently, because it makes the world more interesting. that doesn't make any sense. art is not based on standard, it's based on vision, on ideas. some like it some don't, but it's still art! the performance, writing, production, all there, all exist. even if the work of art end up unpopular, even if it end up really popular. the value of the work not going to diminish if you put an impossible standard on it, and "objective standard" is an impossible one, because you can never make something that everyone likes or everyone hate, it will never be 100%. why? because as i tried and failed (and i recognize it as my failure) to explain, different people have different standards and different definition of what quality is, so objective standard is impossible. whether or not it deserved the title doesn't matter to our discussion, it was an example on the difference between subjective and objective; so again, good job on missing the point. how is that refute the argument that opinion is subjective? saying a person "fell on a knife" after you stabbed him, it's not an opinion it's a lie. big difference there... what is? xD get three different people to define "quality" movie, you'll likely get different answers. PS: popularity isn't a quality standard either (well, not for me anyway). a. i have to do nothing of the sort. b. i always recognize the effort made behind art (hint: even movies that failed at the box office have a lot of effort behind their productions), doesn't mean i have to consider the end result good. you can put a lot of effort into making something good and still fail miserably at it (which for me, the titanic did). putting an effort into something and even managing to get it popular, doesn't gonna make it objectively good. because what makes something "good" is based on opinion and objective is something that is not based on opinion. Guys, if you're old enough to use the internet unsupervised, then you already know by now that not everyone likes the same things as you. you'd think so, right? xD
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Sept 10, 2019 15:08:08 GMT
I'm pointing out why it doesn't matter its shitty from a philosophical viewpoint I don't see the practical benefits of that, though. I mean, if a studio makes a game that gets reviewed badly, or mixed and as a result doesn't sell, causing the studio to fold, would you tell the developer that from a philosophical viewpoint it doesn't matter than he's out of a job? Subjectivity and philosophical viewpoints don't put food on the table. And last time I checked, that's why, ultimately, people get up to go to work every day.
|
|
inherit
9459
0
Nov 24, 2021 20:18:46 GMT
5,622
SirSourpuss
7,694
Oct 16, 2017 16:19:07 GMT
October 2017
sirpetrakus
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, SWTOR
|
Post by SirSourpuss on Sept 10, 2019 16:17:57 GMT
well you successfully managed to miss the point i was making, good job! but you know what? sure, i'll humor you: because people might like something you don't have and a different preference. how do i justify it? simple, by saying it's okay to think differently, because it makes the world more interesting. But liking something is not an indication of quality, standard, production value and influence. Nobody is forbidding anyone from liking someone or something, just because of a disagreement in personal preference. That is not what is being discussed, or at least what I am asking you to examine. that doesn't make any sense. art is not based on standard, it's based on vision, on ideas. some like it some don't, but it's still art! the performance, writing, production, all there, all exist. even if the work of art end up unpopular, even if it end up really popular. the value of the work not going to diminish if you put an impossible standard on it, and "objective standard" is an impossible one, because you can never make something that everyone likes or everyone hate, it will never be 100%. why? because as i tried and failed (and i recognize it as my failure) to explain, different people have different standards and different definition of what quality is, so objective standard is impossible. All this is, also, entirely irrelevant. Nobody is arguing the state of what art is or the idea/vision behind a work of art. We are not even examining the popularity of it. None of this is a metric of quality, nor a reason why that quality should be viewed on an entirely subjective basis. whether or not it deserved the title doesn't matter to our discussion, it was an example on the difference between subjective and objective; so again, good job on missing the point. Isn't it? I consider it highly relevant to out discussion. It makes a point by being the pinnacle of its time. Whether it became outdated and outclassed later by other titles does not and should not diminish what it achieved in its time, but it was also criticized for its short comings. how is that refute the argument that opinion is subjective? saying a person "fell on a knife" after you stabbed him, it's not an opinion it's a lie. big difference there... It's not a lie when it's "your truth", according to the definition you gave earlier. Unless there is, indeed, one truth. what is? xD get three different people to define "quality" movie, you'll likely get different answers. PS: popularity isn't a quality standard either (well, not for me anyway). Yes, but let three people examine something, with each pointing out the merits and flaws and out of their three opinions, the clashes and missmatches of them, you come to the true conclusion. a. i have to do nothing of the sort. Then you don't care and there is no reason to continue this conversation. b. i always recognize the effort made behind art (hint: even movies that failed at the box office have a lot of effort behind their productions), doesn't mean i have to consider the end result good. you can put a lot of effort into making something good and still fail miserably at it (which for me, the titanic did). Whether you like the end result is also irrelevant. If your saying had any power in the film industry, then the breakthroughs in effects that the Titanic enjoyed would have been ignored and as such, that part of the industry would have been left many years behind, simple because you did not like it. putting an effort into something and even managing to get it popular, doesn't gonna make it objectively good. because what makes something "good" is based on opinion and objective is something that is not based on opinion. As explained, popularity is not a measure of quality, but leaving it to subjective opinion can be more damaging, than beneficial.
|
|
linksocarina
N5
Always teacher, sometimes writer
Teaching Mode Activated
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
PSN: LinksOcarina
Posts: 3,179 Likes: 4,063
inherit
Always teacher, sometimes writer
370
0
4,063
linksocarina
Teaching Mode Activated
3,179
August 2016
linksocarina
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
LinksOcarina
|
Post by linksocarina on Sept 10, 2019 16:53:11 GMT
I'm pointing out why it doesn't matter its shitty from a philosophical viewpoint I don't see the practical benefits of that, though. I mean, if a studio makes a game that gets reviewed badly, or mixed and as a result doesn't sell, causing the studio to fold, would you tell the developer that from a philosophical viewpoint it doesn't matter than he's out of a job? Subjectivity and philosophical viewpoints don't put food on the table. And last time I checked, that's why, ultimately, people get up to go to work every day. The same can be said about objective quality of a product, a good game may be worthless to those who care about making their day. Your looking for a practical meaning or worth of a product, but it is all interpretative at best.
|
|