Apparently you haven't been to Japan.
I suggest people actually spend the time to develop an expertise on a culture before they start forming moral judgements on it.
That doesn't mean taking a holiday there. That means living there, learning the language, and integrating with the people.
Then - and only then - after years of experience in Japan, if you come back to the west and would like to make such a statement, then - and only t...
I don't give a toss about AAA games. I mean, it's great you enjoy them and all, but to me indie, Arthouse, Japanese and unique games are far more important, and provide me with far more enjoyment, and it's a statement of fact that the PS4 has a good library of those games.
What is interesting is that you are so completely intolerant of anyone enjoying things that you don't that you turn to aggressive and condescending language in a bid to discredit anyone who ...
And your expertise in localising games is... what exactly?
It's not as easy as you're making it out to be. There are entire textbooks on localising games, and chapters within those books on how localisations affect design.
Expertise counts.
Already addressed that in the final paragraph of the article. When you're buying art you're not paying for time. You're paying for a completed work. It's irrelevant whether the completed work lasts for 5 hours or 50. What's relevant is how high quality that time is.
Did you read the article? That's exactly the point I was making in it.
You might want to go back to school and learn what "art" means, buddy. You seem to think it's a measurement of quality, that something can be superior to it.
There's no definition of art that would support such a statement.
Haven't you learned yet that there's no rational argument that can break through American indoctrination?
Killer education system they've got there that produces so many Borg-likes. ;-)
A game critic can be as subjective as he or she can support through informed debate and defensible argument. This is what I meant when I wrote this article.
If you have an issue with a game review it's not because it was "biased" or "subjective" or whatever word you want to use. It was because you don't agree with the thesis and argument. Now perhaps the critic didn't do a good job defending their argument. Perhaps you simply don't agree o...
Combining two culturally similar countries, and comparing to the North American market which.. oh wow, has two culturally similar countries in it.
And if you had have read the article you would notice that it's APAC, which is dominated by 2, not 20, markets, that is the biggest market for games now.
No, *China* is known for free-to-play games. Japan and Korea have robust retail business models. Japan contributes significantly to the APAC numbers, and China's retail business is only going to grow now that consoles are legally allowed in there.
Source?
Actually, the American culture is *very* different to most of the rest of the world.
I didn't think it sucked at all.
And "Square Enix tax?" The game is like $20. Just how entitled do you have to be to complain about $20 for a game that lasts like 80 hours, and is almost endlessly replayable because it is just that good?
Just like there are people that don't realise that Dark Souls and especially Dark Souls 2 are, compared to King's Field, casual games designed to appeal to the masses, rather than the pure vision of the original games.
The manufacturer is meant to support the third parties, though. So, you know, they don't go elsewhere.
It's always so easy to tell when someone hasn't read beyond the headline.
I wonder how many major development studios this author has run, to understand how business at major development studios works, how pricing works, and so on and so forth?
I suspect none. In fact, I would bet my house on the answer being "none"
Anyone want to bet against me? Didn't think so.
@mochachino
"It *devalues* video games to call them something as *simple* as art. They are *much much more* than that."
Your words, not mine. You're the one prescribing a value to the word "art," and then assuming some objective truth that your preferences and tastes alone are what determines what is "mere" art and what is something so special to be "more than art."
It's a childish argument born...
@MRMagoo123 the popular entertainment of the period has always been used for propaganda.
The Soviets used film to further their socialist propaganda.
The Kings of England used Shakespeare to further their propaganda. Shakespeare literally wrote some of his plays as pieces of propaganda.
So, yes, games can be used as propaganda. To suggest otherwise is to make an Ebert argument that games are not art (or popular entertainment).