Page 4 of 5

Re: Erik Twice | TF2: Incompetence in an ideological era

Posted: Thu Aug 23, 2018 9:13 am
by Erik_Twice
TF2.Incompetence.3.MannBrothers.jpg
TF2.Incompetence.3.MannBrothers.jpg (122.1 KiB) Viewed 5649 times


I bring back one of my most popular articles: An analysis of the themes of Team Fortress 2 and how they act as a metaphor of gaming itself. It's practically a full rewrite and I took the chance to add much better pictures. Hope you enjoy it! :)


Team Fortress 2: The incompetence of an ideological era

Re: Erik Twice | F-Zero ★★★

Posted: Mon Oct 15, 2018 6:14 am
by Erik_Twice
FZero.1.Fire Field.jpg
FZero.1.Fire Field.jpg (112.54 KiB) Viewed 5375 times


I reviewed F-Zero many years ago but I felt the game deserved a much better article. This is my new review, much more detailed and interesting than my old one and with better pictures! I think the game is solid, but too simple and humble to be truly great. I haven't played the sequels enough to really say but they really improve the basic game as shown here. I wonder if I can get F-Zero X running on my Wii...

Anyways, my review is here! :D

F-Zero ★★★

Re: Erik Twice | BS F-Zero Grand Prix (for the Satellaview)

Posted: Fri Nov 02, 2018 4:19 pm
by Erik_Twice
BS-F-Zero-Grand-Prix.1.Mute-City-IV.jpg
BS-F-Zero-Grand-Prix.1.Mute-City-IV.jpg (111.06 KiB) Viewed 4554 times


F-Zero had a series of "sequels" released only for the Satellaview, a fairly unknown add-on for the Super Famicom, which connected the console to a radio satellite. They are great for those of us that wanted to spend a little more time with the original game or that wanted a few more circuits so I decided to write about them and explain their fairly confusing history a bit

BS F-Zero Grand Prix 2 -Practive ver.- ★★★

Re: Erik Twice | Do critics enjoy negative criticism?

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 4:18 pm
by Erik_Twice
Prueba1Ego.jpg
Prueba1Ego.jpg (316.59 KiB) Viewed 3152 times


It’s often said that critics enjoy writing negative reviews. At least, it’s a common stereotype of critics in media, which are often depicted as tearing up the protagonist’s work and enjoying every minute of it.

Of course, that’s a clear exaggeration. But still many people believe that critics have a particular liking for giving bad reviews or dishing out a rhetorical beating, perhaps because they are incapable of creating themselves or because they feel superior to the creators whose work they are reviewing. I discuss this belief in my last article: Do critics enjoy negative criticism?

Do critics enjoy negative criticism?

--

I really think this is an interesting topic and I think it turned out great. I asked a few people before publishing it and they all liked it far more than I thought they would. Let me know what you think :D

Re: Erik Twice | Do critics enjoy negative criticism?

Posted: Fri Jan 11, 2019 5:48 pm
by marurun
Some additional grist for the mill... Criticism isn't just about analysis and making recommendations; it's also about entertainment. A more entertaining review is going to draw more eyes than a bland review, regardless the actual criticism contained in the review. Thus critics must skirt a line between meaningful analysis and description of a game and ensuring that the reader is engaged with the presentation. And it's easier, I think, to generate entertainment in a negative review. You can make jokes at a game's expense and lash out without feeling too bad about it, and going low, as it were, is considered the easier road to entertainment, especially comedy. Another factor in play might be that bad games are often not enjoyable to play. A critic's review of a bad game is a chance for them to exorcise their demons, so to speak. It's an attempt to shake out the boredom and frustration of having to put hours into a bad experience. Who knows, there might even be a temptation to get a bit of personal revenge on a bad game.

Re: Erik Twice | Do critics enjoy negative criticism?

Posted: Sat Jan 12, 2019 8:49 pm
by Erik_Twice
marurun wrote:Some additional grist for the mill... Criticism isn't just about analysis and making recommendations; it's also about entertainment. A more entertaining review is going to draw more eyes than a bland review, regardless the actual criticism contained in the review. Thus critics must skirt a line between meaningful analysis and description of a game and ensuring that the reader is engaged with the presentation.

Thanks for chiming in! And I agree, I think one must strike a balance between what we could call "being right" and actually providing an enjoyable read. It is easy to go on a long overly detailed tirade to talk about a detail that nobody actually cares about. In fact, it's one of the things I feel I've improved the most on.

And it's easier, I think, to generate entertainment in a negative review. You can make jokes at a game's expense and lash out without feeling too bad about it, and going low, as it were, is considered the easier road to entertainment, especially comedy.

While it may be easier to make jokes about a bad games, I also think you don't need to make that many jokes to keep an article engaging if the game you are talking about is interesting on its own. So that evens out, IMHO.

Another factor in play might be that bad games are often not enjoyable to play. A critic's review of a bad game is a chance for them to exorcise their demons, so to speak. It's an attempt to shake out the boredom and frustration of having to put hours into a bad experience. Who knows, there might even be a temptation to get a bit of personal revenge on a bad game.

There are critics who are more emotional or provide more of a personal experience, that's for sure. I've actually gotten much colder in that sense but I do appreciate critics who resonate or communicate on an emotional level.

Re: Erik Twice | Pokémon: Battle against Red

Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2019 8:11 pm
by Erik_Twice
Pokemon.Battle.Red.2.Fight.jpg
Pokemon.Battle.Red.2.Fight.jpg (107.11 KiB) Viewed 2427 times


The battle against Red is one of the most important and epic fights of the Pokemon franchise. But why is it so memorable? I analyze and discuss this scene in my next article. I analyze its context, the way it ties into the larger themes of the game and even how it relates to the personal experience of its creator, Satoshi Tajiri.

I've wanted to write about this scene since I started writing. It's a truly great scene with lots of things you can discuss but that aren't actually talked about very often. And I think it deserves better.

Pokémon: Battle against Red

Re: Erik Twice | Why I stopped loving JRPGs

Posted: Sun Mar 10, 2019 12:31 pm
by Erik_Twice
WhyStoppedLovingJPRGs.2.ChronoTrigger.jpg
WhyStoppedLovingJPRGs.2.ChronoTrigger.jpg (73.97 KiB) Viewed 1321 times


As you might know, I used to love JRPGs. They were my favourite genre and I played all the games I could get my hands of: Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy, Shin Megami Tensei...But one day, I stopped loving them. In this article, I explain why.

Why I stopped loving JRPGs

Re: Erik Twice | Why I stopped loving JRPGs

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2019 12:52 am
by nightrnr
I like this article. It echoes back reasons why I don't get into RPG's much anymore; especially the part about how the genre didn't need to be that way...or rather need to stay that way. It's like most rpg's stagnated because it's what gamemakers thought it's what we wanted (and maybe we did).

Anyways, I still like RPG's, just don't play them much. Action is often more satisfying. But whether I play Doom, Castlevaia, Zelda, or Final Fantasy (heck even Mario and Mega Man), they all have the one element at their core that I will always love: exploration. Let me explore a world, find treasure, and manage my resources. For me, that quality will never get old.

I haven't played my last RPG...

Re: Erik Twice | Why I stopped loving JRPGs

Posted: Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:43 am
by Ack
I think the most interesting part is that you bring up Wizardry as an example of how to nail the combat. Have your opinions on WRPGs changed in relation to your declining view of JRPGs?