-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Do you think the current pandemic should affect how reviewers rate Resident Evil 3?
- Thread starter SofNascimento
- Start date
Out of curiosity; what objective, yet qualitative, things can you say about a game like Resident Evil 3?
If such extreme situtation happened I'm sure they would give some other reviewer within outlet to review it.
Thats big if you are holding here. dont worry
How come a review has to come down to simply whether or not a game is good or bad? If that were all a review should be there'd be no need for review scales beyond "yes or no". The moment you expand the scale, you're inviting room for nuance that goes beyond a simple value judgment of good or bad
How about you read the rest of my post beyond the first line:
OP
OP
Yes, it is. That's why a review will never be objective. But you think the current context should affect the review score?
There's no true objectivity but I'd also expect a reviewer to be aware of their personal perspective. Like if a reviewer would hate the game because Jill resembles his ex-girlfriend that cheated on him I'd consider that pretty unprofessional
Considering it's a remake of a preexisting game, and everyone knows what they are getting, and the game is not influenced by the current pandemic or commenting on it .... the answer is no.
If the game were touching on this current event deliberately, maybe. But otherwise, it's a Resident Evil game and people play it to enjoy that experience.
However, people playing the game might definitely connect or think about the virus. But I don't think it's one of those things that will affect how the game is reviewed. I don't think it will be the same as the whole 'ludonarrative dissonance" thing that came up a few years ago.
If the game were touching on this current event deliberately, maybe. But otherwise, it's a Resident Evil game and people play it to enjoy that experience.
However, people playing the game might definitely connect or think about the virus. But I don't think it's one of those things that will affect how the game is reviewed. I don't think it will be the same as the whole 'ludonarrative dissonance" thing that came up a few years ago.
Last edited:
I think it might.
I think it's justified.
The only thing a reviewer should do is not lie about his/her own experience.
Because nobody else knows the ex-girlfriend. They do know the virus. Or Trump, or whatever else might leave a bad taste in the mouth and is shared among the readers.
An ex-girlfriend isn't the same as a once-per-century global catastrophe affecting billions of lives.
Taste shifts incredibly quickly and can mean a society's "threshold" for what is acceptable or tasteful can quickly change, wiping certain topics out.
NB: I have no idea what's in R3make, so perhaps there's nothing of any "risk" at all here. It might review just fine. But what I'm saying that I imagine every single review is gonna mention COVID19 (even if just in passing in the intro) and that many reviewers will have been personally affected by the outbreak - and that it is impossible to remove subconscious bias from your work.
Maybe it just made their mood a bit down on the game while playing it. Maybe it made them roll their eyes when some typical Resi jargon technobabble about viruses came up. Maybe there's a hospital scene somewhere with lots of infected, and it'll feel inappropriate.
Or maybe there'll be none of these things. It's on a reviewer-by-reviewer basis.
My point here is just that it will, absolutely have an impact.
OP
OP
I have a question. Do you think the question in the OP is stupid and I'm out of my mind for simply asking it?
Who cares? Does it matter what the reviews say if the game is good?
Wanting "objective" game reviews, is a clear sign of not understanding what reviews are...
Wanting "objective" game reviews, is a clear sign of not understanding what reviews are...
No way. You're not out of your mind for asking it and it's not stupid. It's an important and interesting topic.
My argument here is simply: much of what we're discussing here is unconscious bias which a reviewer will not be aware of whatsoever. Their experience/work reviewing the game might range into conscious bias, but probably won't. The COVID10 outbreak might impact them in ways they are not aware of at all, tweaking their opinions or changing their expectations, as their brain is already processing things on a deep level that the reviewer won't be consciously aware of.
So there's no "should a reviewer strive for objectivity" because their brain straight up isn't an objective organism and most of its processing is subconscious.
No. The question is not stupid but it's very leading. You ask us whether every reviewer should do X, which leads to an obvious no answer, because we don't know what kind of prior experiences every single reviewer takes into the review, or what they gain from playing the game. If you phrase it like "if the reviewer's enjoyment is negatively influenced by the current pandemic, should that affect the review score", I think you'll get very different results.
When? There is always war going on somewhere, and even if some of the games have tried a more critical and serious approach, in the end its still about making war fun to play.
If a game is based on a real-life scenario, like a period of world history or a specific tragic event, then yes it should be judged in the context of how that event actually took place and whether it shows due respect etc.
However, this is a zombie game based on an old zombie game that had probably practically gone gold before Japan reported their first case. It shouldn't be affected in the slightest.
EDIT: Now if I choose to start making a game today about the spread of a terrible virus, and it drops before the end of 2020, then yes, I'd expect some pretty severe blowback.
However, this is a zombie game based on an old zombie game that had probably practically gone gold before Japan reported their first case. It shouldn't be affected in the slightest.
EDIT: Now if I choose to start making a game today about the spread of a terrible virus, and it drops before the end of 2020, then yes, I'd expect some pretty severe blowback.
... why would it change anything? The game has existed since the 90s, this is a remake of said game. A zombie action game that has absolutely nothing to do with covid19.
It's not insensitive, it's not problematic, it's not anything else besides a zombie action game.
jesus christ this forum sometimes.
It's not insensitive, it's not problematic, it's not anything else besides a zombie action game.
jesus christ this forum sometimes.
Video games are an art, and art review is always going to be subjective. If a reviewer decides they think the world around them impacts how the game is perceived, it's their right to comment on that.
That said, "rate"? Probably no, the score wouldn't change. But if I were reviewing it in a long form kind of way, I would absolutely consider commenting on such a thing in the copy at some point.
That said, "rate"? Probably no, the score wouldn't change. But if I were reviewing it in a long form kind of way, I would absolutely consider commenting on such a thing in the copy at some point.
Why is everyone so SENSITIVE these days? This makes no sense! It's a video game and should be reviewed as such, regardless of what's going on in the real world.
reviews manage how they review a game based on the games merits. You as a customer manage if you think you want to play a game about a virus.
that is where it should be. So no, I do not think reviewers should take sars-cov-2 as a possible impact of review score.
that is where it should be. So no, I do not think reviewers should take sars-cov-2 as a possible impact of review score.
Should it affect the score itself? No.
Should it be mentioned in light of the historical event we are currently experiencing? Yes.
Games are contextual. When they come out matters, even if it wasn't exactly Capcom's intent here. Relating personal experiences to the game is something that will likely happen whether they want it to or not given the current situation. I don't think it should affect the score as the current situation doesn't directly affect the quality of the game, it simply means that personal experiences may or may not play a factor in your enjoyment of the game based on when it is coming out/when you are playing it.
Should it be mentioned in light of the historical event we are currently experiencing? Yes.
Games are contextual. When they come out matters, even if it wasn't exactly Capcom's intent here. Relating personal experiences to the game is something that will likely happen whether they want it to or not given the current situation. I don't think it should affect the score as the current situation doesn't directly affect the quality of the game, it simply means that personal experiences may or may not play a factor in your enjoyment of the game based on when it is coming out/when you are playing it.
just so when everybody is still in quarantine during thanksgiving, they can enjoy a nice game of The last of us 2
So, I've been locked in my house for a week since getting furloughed. How bad is it out there!?
OP
OP
But would it be unconscious? In that case we would be talking about something we are not even aware of. But playing a game and thinking "if this was another time I would have enjoyed it more/less" isn't exactly unconscious.
I didn't try to hide my answer. And I thought that saying a reviewer should relate their personal experience didn't have any negative connotation that would make people less likely to vote for it. So I think no matter how I worded it, the results, and people reaction to the question, would be the same.
Well, no to be fair. Does Call Of Duty get negative reviews for glamorizing wars? No... So, there you go. We are being a bit selective in inferring that RE3 should get a harsher review for depicting a pandemic. Also, people have been consuming a lot more content related to pandemics (fiction and non-fiction).
If you all are that fragile that it bothers you when someone relates real world issues to a media they are consuming then that's more on you than the reviewer. People whining about that Half Life Alyx review because it got an 8 is embarrassing.
This big fucking thing keeps chasing me and calling me stars. It's a madhouse.
The Division 1/2 needs a re review because the founding lore of that game mirrors our current situation almost exactly.
OP
OP
You know, I don't think this thread was a hot take in any way. And there are at least a few people who seems to agree with that.
Now this is a hot take: people who are attacking me for asking this question are not far from people who would go on twitter to attack a reviewer for giving a low score to a game. Particularly a slight lower score to RE3 because of the corona virus.
Now this is a hot take: people who are attacking me for asking this question are not far from people who would go on twitter to attack a reviewer for giving a low score to a game. Particularly a slight lower score to RE3 because of the corona virus.
Why is it a bad review? Because it mentions the pandemic or because it gave it an 8? Be honest.