The Necessity of Donning a Critical Lens or Why Being “Profoundly Misogynistic” is a Point that Needs to be Addressed

You may also like...

2 Responses

  1. Jordan H. says:

    Kotaku covered the idea of women in GTA in far greater detail.

  2. Bernard M. says:

    Honestly the reviews I’ve read over the years barely touch upon a social criticism aspect beyond a mild acknowledgement if a game is already notorious. Reviews featuring social criticism seem new to me and as the audience of reviews I have mixed feelings on it. When I read a review I want to know how the gameplay is and if the story is at least decent with a payoff. Maybe how multiplayer is balanced and what new features are present.

    Social readings are already done in blogs and social criticism of a game I haven’t played yet feels similar to a spoiler. I want to play with an open mind and see if I notice anything meaningful on my own. To play GTA or even Tomb Raider after all the controversy and debate changed how I entered the game and I was scanning for anything that either definitively proved or disproved the varying assertions involved. A fresh pair of eyes holds a lot more insight than a choir already preached to.

    The overreactions of some gamers are absurd and Carolyn Petit has every right to review how she chooses. Time will tell if her style review catches on but at least we can all agree it touched a nerve for some people.

    Who a reviewer is and who the intended audience is has a lot more impact than people realize. I have a handful of go-tos that I follow for reviews and I know enough about their opinions to discern what I need to. But not everyone is expecting social criticism in a game review. Game reviews are so commercialized that it comes as a bit of a shock IMO. Perhaps the game industry is growing up along with the medium? How much longer until the so called gamer does the same?

    TLDR: what is the purpose of a game review? What does a gamer think it is?