spidoman

Great podcast! The discussion about Dragon's Crown, and more generally subjectivity in playing and critiquing games got me thinking a lot. As a disclaimer I didn't buy Dragon's Crown specifically because of the sexist (Is that the right word? I don't mean to say the artist is, but that the art is) anyway, I didn't buy it because I don't want to support those kinds of ridiculous stereotypical teenage male fantasies that are so common in the video game medium. But I was a little disappointed how one sided the discussion was (despite agreeing with everyone on the podcast,) all while saying "It's important to look at things from the other side." I consider myself a progressive person who is always looking to become more progressive, but will often times catch myself looking down on less progressive people, instead of empathizing with them. I'm not writing this to "play devil's advocate" I'm doing this to try and develop empathy for people who I don't understand, or respect very much. If you were to review an american television broadcast of an NFL game you could focus on so many things. First, the game of football. Was it enjoyable to watch? Was it exciting, and well produced? Do you focus on the quality of play, or the violence of the action? Or do you focus on the homo-erotic subtext, the sexism of cheerleaders, or glorification of alcohol and party culture? While all are valid things to discuss and review, in the end, it can make two reviews not even be about the same thing, despite them being about the same thing. I think it's the same with video games. What if every video game featuring violence was scored lower because of the violence present in the game? Even games where violence is treated and as a serious and regrettable action, the violence is still presented to the player as a gameplay challenge to overcome, and thus be part of the entertainment that is the game. I guess the point I'm getting at, (terribly, I apologize I'm not as good of a write as other people on this site,) is that we all have blinders. For many in the video game community those blinders are for sexism, others it is foul language, violence, animal cruelty, or even the general moods of contention, negativity, or general unhappiness present in most games. When someone doesn't have the same blinders as us I think we have two options. We can use it as an opportunity to enforce our choice in blinders (the easiest option,) or we can use it as an opportunity to question why we focus on some things, but not others. Anyway, just some thoughts. It's a weird rabbit hole to go down. Am I "better" because I don't like sexism in games? Would I be even "more better" if I disliked violence in games? What about games that stress me out and make me frustrated after playing them? If I was the best person I could be, would I really enjoy any video games? Honestly, the only ones I could think of that would be "okay" would be Journey, Flower, and maybe Gone Home? EDIT: Don't mean this as a "Where do the PC police end?" Argument. More of an introspective "How much do I want my opinions and beliefs influencing my enjoyment of games? When is/isn't it appropriate to ignore my opinions and beliefs when playing a video game?"