This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It occurs to me that at least (1) and (2) are testable: your present self can go watch some old movies & play some old games that you missed at the time. Maybe throw in some stuff from before your era (there's lots of goodies on the NES) to calibrate it further. Possibly with a partner to pick out a good sample of good/bad/middling offerings without biasing you by knowing their review scores.
I think (3) is mostly explained by (4), at least in video games. There was indeed a fragmentation, along mass market vs hobbyist lines. The defining feature is that hobbyists (defined in an interview that I can't currently locate as 'people who own 10 or more games') both have different tastes than the mass market and are hopelessly outnumbered by them, to the point of becoming a rounding error in the last decade. Both the AAA games industry and the big gaming journalism outlets live or die entirely by mass appeal - a few tens of thousands of units moved or clicks harvested aren't going to keep the lights on.
(As an aside, I think the decline of ink & paper gaming magazines had a big role to play - those viable even back in the day when only hobbyists were interested, while gaming websites have been able to attract wider attention) For their part, a good chunk of the hobbyist crowd has become openly hostile due to this marginalization, which does little to endear them to the big players that could be making an effort to include them.
This wouldn't really be visible in critic/user review score deviation, as critics would be expected to be 100% mass market and user reviewers would be an unpredictable mix of both. That said, I personally already use a system to 'correct' Metacritic scores to be more predictive for my own (hobbyist) tastes:
(average of User Score and Critic Score)+(user score)-(critic score)
I'll definitely try that formula! I just plugged it into Terminator: Resistance (a game that I've been massively enjoying of late, but which got mediocre reviews) and it came out at 91%, which matches my experience.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link