KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Some are less subjective, more informed, studied, analytical and consistent than others.
I am not fond of this false dichotomy of 100% objective vs 100% subjective, where more often than not it's in between and the goal to strive for is on the left.
I think the term you are looking for is intersubjectivity or shared subjectivity which is not the same thing as objectivity. There's no dichotomy...objectivity (by the strict definition) isn't even possible when discussing standards that come from people, either as individuals or a group.
Trying to define standards that most people agree on is one thing, but that doesn't make them objective because most people agree to them.
KnightofPhoenix wrote...
Objective standards depending on how they define an RPG, which then allows them to nominate DA2 and Deus Ex (very different games), and not TW2. Their definition of an RPG might be subjective, but they can be objective when judging games according to that definition.
That's intersubjectivity. These rules and definitions are subject to change with time/culture/etc. so they cannot be objective in the purest sense of the word (i.e., independent of contingencies).
I think it's going to be nearly impossible to get most video game players and reviewers to agree on one set of standards to measure a game and then more defined standards for measuring specific parts of the game (combat, story, etc.). What makes for good combat? What makes for an interesting political story? These answers will depend on the reviewer. Some think the DA2 political story was good...you don't. It's subjective.





Retour en haut






