Can reviews be objective?

[Flutterz]

2 hours ago, TexasDice said:

They can be. And should.

http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml

Edit: oh god, now it looks like I started this ~.~

[TexasDice]

I want people to pursue objectivity and look at things from different perspectives = I WANT 100% TOTALLY FACTUAL HIGH IMPACT OBJECTIVE VIOLENCE

[Darklord Rooke]

1 hour ago, TexasDice said:

They can be. And should.

No actually, they shouldn't. Ever.

A review is a summary of a person's experiences of that game filtered through their own preconceptions, preferences, and biases. Get used to that fact, because that's how they've always been, that's how they are presently, and that's how they always will be. And that's why I watched 2 film critics give the exact same film 1/5 and 4/5 respectively the other day.

[TexasDice]

1 hour ago, Rooke said:

No actually, they shouldn't. Ever.

A review is a summary of a person's experiences of that game filtered through their own preconceptions, preferences, and biases. Get used to that fact, because that's how they've always been, that's how they are presently, and that's how they always will be. And that's why I watched 2 film critics give the exact same film 1/5 and 4/5 respectively the other day.

- >

2 hours ago, TexasDice said:

I want people to pursue objectivity and look at things from different perspectives = I WANT 100% TOTALLY FACTUAL HIGH IMPACT OBJECTIVE VIOLENCE

It's not too much to ask for a reviewer to step back and ask themselves "I didn't like this at all, but is there anyone I would recommend this to and why?" or "I really love this, but is there an audience who wouldn't?" in order to ensure that as many people as possible can take something away from the critique?

When people as for objective reviews, they don't mean to ask for a machine typing factual words, they just want the author to consider other perspectives, rather than stubbornly hang onto their own throughout the entire thing.

 

So everyone who doesn't understand that, can go fuck themselves. Go and continue to read shitty and biased reviews that are only written for the reviewer and have no worth to readers coming from an outside opinion. See if I care.

EDIT: Feel free to hide this post, cause off-topic. I'm done anyway.

[Decay]

7 minutes ago, TexasDice said:

- >

It's not too much to ask for a reviewer to step back and ask themselves "I didn't like this at all, but is there anyone I would recommend this to and why?" or "I really love this, but is there an audience who wouldn't?" in order to ensure that as many people as possible can take something away from the critique?

When people as for objective reviews, they don't mean to ask for a machine typing factual words, they just want the author to consider other perspectives, rather than stubbornly hang onto their own throughout the entire thing.

 

So everyone who doesn't understand that, can go fuck themselves. Go and continue to read shitty and biased reviews that are only written for the reviewer and have no worth to readers coming from an outside opinion. See if I care.

The reviewer should be able to dissect and critique every aspect of the game, while still relating their subjective experiences with it. It's up to the readers to determine if their personal tastes apply. If you are not part of a particular audience or niche, I am of the firm belief that you are not capable of objectively judging a game based on their standards. That you can't tell them whether or not they'd like the game. And a reviewer who tries ends up looking foolish more often than not.

[Zakamutt]

26 minutes ago, TexasDice said:

<opinions>

You know, the phrase you're looking for is not "objective" - it's "more objective". If you revise your terminology I'm sure you'll get shat on less.

[Darklord Rooke]

5 hours ago, Decay said:

The reviewer should be able to dissect and critique every aspect of the game, while still relating their subjective experiences with it. It's up to the readers to determine if their personal tastes apply. If you are not part of a particular audience of niche, I am of the firm belief that you are not capable of objectively judging a game based on their standards. That you can't tell them whether or not they'd like the game. And a reviewer who tries ends up looking foolish more often than not.

And if you're going to analyse every thing in a game based on the different possible standards or tastes people could have, you'll end up with a 10 page fricken review with 25 different scores (each for a different section of the fanbase.) I have never come across an objective review in any medium, they all apply their own standards of what's 'good' and will measure the film/book/game accordingly.

 

Objective review attempt #1: The scoring! This is what it'll look like, folks, in all its glory.

Hard core RPG fans will consider MGQ game a 1/10, but people interested in defeat rape might consider it a 7/10 game, people interested in both RPGs and defeat rape, well, you might consider it a 5/10 game, whereas people who just want a good story will consider it a 2/10 game until you get to number 3, in which case you might consider it a 6/10 game, but people who want both RPG goodness AND a good story will consider it a 3/10 game until you get to number 3 where you’re opinion will change and you’ll consider it a 5/10 game, but people who like RPGs and defeat rape and a good story will probably consider it a 4/10 game.

People easily grossed out will not have a happy time here. -2/10 for you folk. You got that right, it's a negative, not a dash.

People with morals and are easily offended … stay away. -2/10 for you folk.

And monsters masquerading as humans in the audience? Man, you’ll fucking love this game, 10/10 for you guys. Keep defeating those humans over and over and over again.

[starlessn1ght]

3 minutes ago, Down said:

Do you guys want me to split some posts in here into a topic about (non)objective reviews? I think batman is eating is keyboard atm.

Please, no. Do not turn Fuwa into MAL. Nobody wants to see that.

Objectivity just means one thing: people think their opinion is superior to everyone else's.

[Down]

3 minutes ago, starlessn1ght said:

Please, no. Do not turn Fuwa into MAL. Nobody wants to see that.

I did anyway

[TexasDice]

17 minutes ago, Rooke said:

Objective review attempt #1: The scoring! This is what it'll look like, folks, in all its glory.

Hard core RPG fans will consider MGQ game a 1/10, but people interested in defeat rape might consider it a 7/10 game, people interested in both RPGs and defeat rape, well, you might consider it a 5/10 game, whereas people who just want a good story will consider it a 2/10 game until you get to number 3, in which case you might consider it a 6/10 game, but people who want both RPG goodness AND a good story will consider it a 3/10 game until you get to number 3 where you’re opinion will change and you’ll consider it a 5/10 game, but people who like RPGs and defeat rape and a good story will probably consider it a 4/10 game.

People easily grossed out will not have a happy time here. -2/10 for you folk. You got that right, it's a negative, not a dash.

People with morals and are easily offended … stay away. -2/10 for you folk.

And monsters masquerading as humans in the audience? Man, you’ll fucking love this game, 10/10 for you guys. Keep defeating those humans over and over and over again.

OR, you could just write something like this: (extremely shortened and not factually accurate or too detailed for obvious reasons)

Quote

Monster Girl Quest is an Adventure Nukige about a Shota Protagonist being raped by Monster girls, while he travels the land with his snake-woman sidekick. Throughout the three parts, the story develops from a classical "hentai-porn"-plot into an engaging story with strong character development.

I would not recommend MGQ to people who are bothered by the nukige elements of it; There are high amounts of unavoidable sexual content and being raped  -and in the worst case - devoured alive by anthropomorphic monsters isn't everyone's cup of tea. The art being inconsistent thanks to three different artists working on it with different art-styles might also scare some of you away. 

However, if you are able to get past all of that, you'll be rewarded with a surpsingly well written and thought out fanstasy story, as well as incredibly understandable and developed characters.

You don't need to consider every viewpoint possibly imaginable, but simply adding contrast to your personal feeling can improve the review by a lot and helps a variety of people who are reading your review, while not taking away anything from the main point.

But thanks for only thinking in absolutes and immediately dismissing everything I say. You should write reviews. :]

[Darklord Rooke]

4 minutes ago, TexasDice said:

OR, you could just write something like this: (extremely shortened and not factually accurate or too detailed for obvious reasons)

You don't need to consider every viewpoint possibly imaginable, but simply adding contrast to your personal feeling can improve the review by a lot and helps a variety of people who are reading your review, while not taking away anything from the main point.

But thanks for only thinking in absolutes and immediately dismissing everything I say. You should write reviews. :]

I disagree with your review. The story is trash. And guess what the problem is? The qualities I hold for storytelling are different to the qualities you hold for storytelling - that is, you're saying the story is good when compared with standards you think are good, and I'm saying it's trash because I'm comparing it to standards I think are good. And I'm not just saying it to make a point, I've often said the story is trash on Fuwa and others have disagreed with me. There are NO set of objective standards for 'good writing', people who think there are don't know what they're talking about.

Which comes back to the point that an objective review is impossible, unless you represent every single alternate variation for what people could conceivably think is 'good'. And that's absurd.

[starlessn1ght]

5 hours ago, TexasDice said:

- >

It's not too much to ask for a reviewer to step back and ask themselves "I didn't like this at all, but is there anyone I would recommend this to and why?" or "I really love this, but is there an audience who wouldn't?" in order to ensure that as many people as possible can take something away from the critique?

When people as for objective reviews, they don't mean to ask for a machine typing factual words, they just want the author to consider other perspectives, rather than stubbornly hang onto their own throughout the entire thing.

While this seems reasonable to ask, it is not in practice. Take my thoughts in SAO anime for example. I absolutely love it, especially the Aincrad arc. And I honestly cannot see why someone would dislike Aincrad, and yet tons of people do. I've asked myself a lot of times why people dislike it when it is, in my opinion, the recipe for making an awesome anime. The most reasonable conclusion I got from reading reviews is that people did not actually get the anime. I'm not gonna bother trying to explain it, but as it is, I simply cannot name a group of people that would dislike SAO. I think it varies too much from person to person, nothing that can be grouped categorically. 

 

4 hours ago, TexasDice said:

Throughout the three parts, the story develops from a classical "hentai-porn"-plot into an engaging story with strong character development.

You are not being objective here at all. What constitutes an 'engaging' story is very very relative and so is 'strong' character development. 

Actually, most of the times you use an adjective on a review, you're being subjective.

[Kaguya]

>Didntreadanythinglol 

They can't because they're dealing with works of fiction and you can't be objective with fiction in the first place. 

[Darklord Rooke]

1 minute ago, starlessn1ght said:

You are not being objective here at all. What constitutes an 'engaging' story is very very relative and so is 'strong' character development. 

Actually, most of the times you use an adjective on a review, you're being subjective.

There was hardly any character development, imo. Also the RPG system was pointless and ended up being a gimmick purely to set up 'defeat rape'. But that's an opinion coming from a hardcore RPG fan.

I went to VNDB and saw MGQ as the top ranking "RPG". Man was I thoroughly disappointed ...

[Nimbus]

Ultimately a review is the subjective opinion of the person reviewing it. However, certain elements of that review can be objective. For example; saying the micro-transactions are invasive and in your face when reminders of them show up all the time in the pause menu can be something everyone agree i an objective statement. this could also apply to more subjective areas such as story, like saying the ending of the game is pure sequel-baiting and doesn't conclude the story. 

[TexasDice]

The objective part was not the praise, but the non-recommendation that I mentioned in the middle. (also, did you guys expect me to make a well-formulated review in a three-sentence text-box?)

 

Can you guys finally get it into your brain?

THE PURSUIT OF OBJECTIVITY = / = BEING OBJECTIVE

 

All I want, is that the author of a review considers a viewpoint that is different from their own. I am not asking anyone to censor their own opinion, all I want is people to throw in a few words for the people who wouldn't agree with you in addition to your subjective opinion. Because it makes it more valuable and gives the reader more insight.

[Vorathiel]

2 hours ago, Flutterz said:

http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml

Edit: oh god, now it looks like I started this ~.~

I laughed. 

[Darklord Rooke]

2 hours ago, Flutterz said:

Edit: oh god, now it looks like I started this ~.~

But you did. I recall, vividly I might add, you creating this thread. Therefore, Flutterz must be held responsible for all these negative 'feels' being flung about.

[Nimbus]

9 minutes ago, Rooke said:

But you did. I recall, vividly I might add, you creating this thread. Therefore, Flutterz must be held responsible for all these negative 'feels' being flung about.

#BanFlutterz

[starlessn1ght]

26 minutes ago, TexasDice said:

All I want, is that the author of a review considers a viewpoint that is different from their own. I am not asking anyone to censor their own opinion, all I want is people to throw in a few words for the people who wouldn't agree with you in addition to your subjective opinion. Because it makes it more valuable and gives the reader more insight.

What you ask seems fine, I just wouldn't call that objective or trying to be objective. Also, that is very hard to do, because one can't simply see through the tastes of other people. You can't recommend a space opera to anyone who likes space operas, as even those have specific tastes when it comes to that. 

For example, I hate satires. If I watched a satire anime, I would dislike it. However, I can't simply say 'this anime is good for people who like satires', because satire fans have specific tastes I do not know on what constitutes a good satire. I, for once, hate Grisaia comedy, but tons of people love it. I cant just recommend it to anyone who likes comedy because lots of those people also do not like Grisaia's comedy.

That's why I think the reader should decide if the reviewer's points were legit and if he would like the work or not. It's easier that way.

[Soulless Watcher]

28 minutes ago, TexasDice said:

All I want, is that the author of a review considers a viewpoint that is different from their own. I am not asking anyone to censor their own opinion, all I want is people to throw in a few words for the people who wouldn't agree with you in addition to your subjective opinion. Because it makes it more valuable and gives the reader more insight.

What is the point? The only result you have is two opinions that are not your own, actually it would be worse than that. All you would have is one subjective opinion and a subjective opinion on how another persons' subjective opinion would view the item in question. If you wish to learn if a game is right for you, take a look at a positive review and a negative review. Compare and contrast the two and decide if it is something you might enjoy. 

It is just kinda lazy on the part of the reader to demand that a reviewer write a positive and negative review on a game and baffling to demand it regardless of the opinion of the reviewer.

[Jibril]

Since we're all about using words that mean things, and "Objective" means "not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts." Reviews are by nature subjective. News should be objective, but not reviews.

Reviews require an opinion, and opinions are not objective. A review can say, "The music is too creepy," without justification. On the other hand, news are to determine if something was objective. When writing news, writers would ask themselves, could someone else disagree? If yes, rewrite. Could someone else say the music is not too creepy? Of course, but it's fine because it's a review. If someone says an outfit is sexual or objectifying, could someone else disagree? Sure. But that is also fine, it's a review. In a review, an opinion and a point of view are not just allowed, they are REQUIRED.

[Fred the Barber]

Watching this thread is like watching a train wreck, so naturally, I want in on that action.

The fact that one person can't actually know exactly what another person would think about any given stimulus isn't especially relevant to the discussion, because pragmatically speaking, people actually do communicate effectively about their tastes and preferences. You probably know someone who has tastes similar to you. And much more interestingly, you probably know people who have tastes different from you, and you can predict (with some degree of accuracy, obviously not 100%) how they will react to certain stimuli. This is powered by empathy and sympathy.

These fundamental human faculties can, when put to good use, make that judgement on behalf of other people fairly effective, especially when helped by broad categorizations like genre, theme, etc., (e.g., "While I'm not a nakige fan, people who are able to emotionally invest themselves in that formula will probably get a lot out of this"). But obviously one opinion is never going to be exactly the same, or exactly accurate, as that of another person. While not "objective" in a strict sense, this is still potentially useful information to provide to others, and is frankly extremely common in reviews.

[TexasDice]

"When people ask for objective reviews, they are not asking asking for 100% objectivity, they are asking for the pursuit of objectivity. You can never 100% achieve objectivity with a review, but you can pursue it to the best of your ability. And that means attempting, where relevant, to either disclose or put aside your personal biases.

That does not mean, that you can't express your opinion, far from it. What it does mean, is that you should attempt to contrast your opinion with those of others and put yourself in the shoes of other people.

 

When you're writing a review, obviously your personal experiences and own opinions are going to be a huge factor there. But as far as I'm concerned, you need to make a decent effort to look in from outside, to look through the window. Put yourself in the shoes of others, because your ultimate goal is to serve the consumer. - In my opinion.

I've built my entire business on this very idea, that everything I create is not for me, it's for the consumer. And I need to try and detach myself from my personal opinions from time to time. I could still use them heavily - and I do - but if I have biases, those are the things I should be disclosing to my audience, so that those, who are watching my critiques, are made aware in advance of the kind of biases that I'm going to be holding. 

 

I probably won't be able to do it perfectly, because I'm going to be able to explain a point of view that I hold much better than one I do not, but you should be giving it a try, frankly."

- TotalBiscuit 

This copy&paste is basically exactly where I stand. 

 

38 minutes ago, starlessn1ght said:

For example, I hate satires. If I watched a satire anime, I would dislike it. However, I can't simply say 'this anime is good for people who like satires', because satire fans have specific tastes I do not know on what constitutes a good satire. I, for once, hate Grisaia comedy, but tons of people love it. I cant just recommend it to anyone who likes comedy because lots of those people also do not like Grisaia's comedy.

If you didn't like a certain aspect of your reviewed piece of art (like the comedy), but don't have enough knowledge about that to ascertain whether or not fans of that aspect would enjoy it, make sure to make your readers know that you don't like this particular part due to your personal biases/preference.

If you can't set aside your bias, at least explain it.

[Darklord Rooke]

3 minutes ago, TexasDice said:

"When people ask for objective reviews, they are not asking asking for 100% objectivity, they are asking for the pursuit of objectivity. You can never 100% achieve objectivity with a review, but you can pursue it to the best of your ability. And that means attempting, where relevant, to either disclose or put aside your personal biases.

That does not mean, that you can't express your opinion, far from it. What it does mean, is that you should attempt to contrast your opinion with those of others and put yourself in the shoes of other people.

 

When you're writing a review, obviously your personal experiences and own opinions are going to be a huge factor there. But as far as I'm concerned, you need to make a decent effort to look in from outside, to look through the window. Put yourself in the shoes of others, because your ultimate goal is to serve the consumer. - In my opinion.

I've built my entire business on this very idea, that everything I create is not for me, it's for the consumer. And I need to try and detach myself from my personal opinions from time to time. I could still use them heavily - and I do - but if I have biases, those are the things I should be disclosing to my audience, so that those, who are watching my critiques, are made aware in advance of the kind of biases that I'm going to be holding. 

 

I probably won't be able to do it perfectly, because I'm going to be able to explain a point of view that I hold much better than one I do not, but you should be giving it a try, frankly."

- TotalBiscuit 

You are not ‘pursuing’ objectivity by throwing a bone to the ‘one of hundreds’ different alternative viewpoints out there. That’s called ‘including a gimmick because the real thing is too hard or impossible, and so I want to be viewed as doing something even though I’m not doing it, because impressions are so very important.’

Which is where we differ. You seem to think throwing a meaningless one liner in the review marks a ‘decent effort to look in from the outside’, whereas I regard it as a cop out.

So I disagree with Total Biscuit and very much believe he has no clue what he’s talking about. I don’t give a toss who he is.