All I want to know is, how are people surprised by this review? Dunkey is incredibly consistent in his opinions on games and though I don't agree with him on many of his verdicts, his opinion is a baromater for the quality of a game based on the context of who he is as a reviewer.
Dunkey self-proclaims that when he gets a game he wants to push a button, and start the game. Again and again he lauds fast-paced platformers and creative side-scrollers with minute-to-minute challenge and intensity. Death Stranding could not be further from his type of game, so it's no surprise he doesn't like it. However, other gamers see the medium and the game itself very differently, myself included. But the strength of a critical audience is in leveraging a critic's biases against your own. The danger in following a critic as a fan is the possibility of taking their opinion as the definitive verdict of approval or disapproval, rather than an expression of refined and thought-out personal taste.
I do feel as if Dunk "missed" the things that made Death Stranding great for players like me, and I vehemently disagree with him on the value of the game as a whole. But the key phrase here is "players like me". He missed those points like a person speaking English misses a great French joke. It's not his language.
And that's okay.
Dunkey really thought through his arguments and critiques of this game, and though I think he misstepped by not aknolowging that this game could be great for someone with different tastes, that is not his responsibility as a critic. I can't force Dunk to see Death Stranding the way I do, just like he couldn't force me to see Sonic Mania, for instance, as he did. But that doesn't make either game less valuable.
EDIT: I have the high score on Norman Reedus' big fetus burrito so yeah I win good game 5/5.
No comments:
Post a Comment