Reviews VideoGame / Pokemon Sword And Shield

I'm glad you enjoyed the game and yes, opinions are opinions. That said, this reads like a massive overcompensation. It's not even about this game(s), but Pokemon is general. You know it wont have the best graphics, you know it's gonna have a simplistic, by the numbers plot where you see every twist and reveal from a mile away, you know it'll just dip it's toe in a slightly mature theme, etc. All that's ok, but you sound like a parent saying your 6 yrs old's finger painting can rival Michelangelo's The Creation of Adam. It might be an good painting, but yeah, dial it back.

... That\'s a ridiculous complaint, man. Why should honest praise be \"dialled back\"? This review is fine.

Because this is a review and overating or exaggeration have been valid criticism since forever? What do you think the comment section is for? cheer bubbles?

I\'ve heard a lot of people not only bashing Sword and Shield, but also bashing those who try to defend it. I\'m not all that interested in Pokémon, since I\'ve only played Red and Blue, but I find the backlash to be fairly excessive.

As for the review, it\'s fairly well written, since it evaluates the game on several key aspects, so I don\'t think that it needs to be \"dial(ed) back.\"

The review does feel like it\'s trying very hard to like the game. Like, on the graphics, the models having individual fingers is listed as a positive, as though the game was on the PS1 and not the Switch. The section on the plot is praising the direction it took, not it\'s execution. I just have a very hard time taking Kibchi\'s opinion here seriously

I do sort of get the overcompensation angle, but, at the same time... reviews don\'t take place in a vacuum either. I often find an intense climate of anger and hostility has me hardening tepid, vague positivity into much-firmer good feelings too. I can\'t judge.

If he likes it, and he inflates the numbers a bit \'cause he\'s sick of hearing people complain that their favorite pokemon or move got put on the chopping block, that\'s his opinion. He\'s not exactly subtle about it, so it\'s not like he\'s being deceptive or failing to give his audience the tools to understand where he\'s coming from.

Well, I personally think the graphics are stylized. It\'s an anime monster collecting game. I\'m not concerned about the trees looking realistic.

It\'s the \"knows its audience\" part that makes me dismissive of the review.

I resent the idea that something has to have widespread appeal to be \"good.\"

It's just that, well, the controversy sort of proves GF does not know their audience. That's my one gripe with this— just because you found the game appealing doesn't mean the general Pokemon audience did.

Otherwise, hey, more power to ya for liking the game. Seriously, I'm glad you do.

@Spectral Time

But isn\'t that the issue in itself. That one should try to be objective (emphasis on try) when writing reviews instead of used as a venting tool. In the same way Hype-Backlash reviews tend to fair negatively as well.

I\'m not concerned about the trees looking realistic.

and that just gives more fuel to the issue of you using this more to vent. No one has talked about the trees, that is a outside point that irked you that you have brought back here.

It was the most pressing example of a flaw in the graphics I could think of. Also, a good portion of the controversy was manufactured- the stream where the guy hacked and made it run terrible, for instance. Thus I don\'t think the controversy existing is a sign they don\'t know their audience. They might not know how to market it, but they clearly designed this to appeal to the competitive crowd.

The "objective" review is a stupid myth perpetrated by people who are instead angry that subjective reviews aren't subjective in the way they personally lean.

A review should talk about what you, the reviewer, liked or didn't like and why. And if anything, it should be as transparent as possible with your tastes so that readers can understand if your review is useful to them, personally.

That's why Rotten Tomatoes is not a useful resource compared to finding a critic or two you mostly agree with, who like the things you like for the reasons you like them and dislike the things you dislike for the reasons you dislike them, and listening to them.

This person did just that. I'm not sure I weight the things he weights the way he weights them, but you certainly shouldn't fault him for being honest and open, instead of claiming to be "objective."

Reviewing is an art form in and of itself. Critics that try too hard to be excessively formal and \"objective\" inevitably don\'t do as well as the ones with at least a smidge of palpable personality or pizzazz. A critic can reel off why a media work did x, y and z well all day but they need to provide a sense of how the work made them feel just as importantly. And in the same way as a good novel should challenge the reader to think critically about what\'s being written, a good review ought to do the same.

So this review uses a bit of hyperbolic language. Not a big deal mayne.

Of course reviews aren\'t gonna be 100% objective (or it\'ll look like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1BiLrOGfpM ) but again you should at least \"try\" to be objective where you can. I don\'t understand how this is a controversial view when it seems (IMO) that everyone in the comments agrees it is rather exagerated. If that\'s the case then the same should ring true for the opposite, Backlash negative reviews and it would be down-right hypocritical to critisize them for it. Then all your left is discussions on the small pool of reviews that contained something factually false.

No, as I said, a review should go into detail about what you liked and what you didn\'t and why. I\'ll allow that someone should probably make room for admitting that something might be good but not to their tastes, like my own weak stomache for slasher horror movies, but that\'s not being objective either, that\'s just being open with and owning your own subjectivity.

Ninety percent of the time, maybe even ninety-nine, cries for \"objectivity\" are actually complaints that the reviewer wasn\'t subjective in the same way as the people reading the review. That they didn\'t mash skip through all the story cutscenes because you don\'t give a shit and only want more gameplay, or that they did watch the cutscenes and found the digital and voice acting cheesy and cringeworthy while you enjoy that kind of thing.

I\'ll allow that big outlets assigning people antipathetic to the genre is probably a bad look, but fuck that noise both ways. If the reviewer is open about what they like and don\'t like, then you can find a critic who instead agrees with you. Trying to be objective will instead result in a worse review where resentment seeps through bland assessments.

Ninety percent of the time, maybe even ninety-nine

That seems, ironically, too much of a hyperbole. I've seen you enough around here to doubt you actually think that, with how many reviews, mostly negative ones, are I'm mad from another place of the internet so I came to vent out my frustrations out on here, with the easiest tell being complaining more about the people that like it than the piece itself.

This is not helped by the OP bringing complains that no one has actually used here, which again, brings about the issue of venting by overcompensation.

• I'm not concerned about the trees looking realistic.
• a good portion of the controversy was manufactured- the stream where the guy hacked and made it run terrible, for instance

I am making that statement about people complaining that reviews aren’t “objective“ and not about reviews in general. And the problem with that situation is, ironically, that the reviewers aren’t honest and open enough about the fact that they’re just venting about something that isn’t to their taste and opinions, but instead feel the need to wrap a shoddy cloak of objectivity around themselves and couch their glorified forum rant as a review.

What’s wrong with that statement? He doesn’t say that you shouldn’t be concerned about it, he is plain, clear, and open about what he isn’t concerned about. Pokémon is a game with very cartoony visuals and always has been. Going for a stylized look over “realism” is an eminently defensible position.

I don’t actually have a dog in the race of this game, and some of the stuff I’ve heard about it does make it sound like there were many missteps made, but I keep finding myself defending its supporters reflexively as an absolute avalanche of bad takes keep stumbling out of the mouth of its detractors.

And “your review should be more objective!” is a bad take I sincerely thought had been dead for years now.

I am with Spectral here, reviews cannot be \"objective\" because all points in a review end up having to do with personal opinion (a.k.a subjectivity). How good or bad the soundtrack of a game is? It ends up being nothing more than a personal opinion. How about the quality of the graphics, the story of the game or the complexity of the characters? Again, a matter of taste. Even the gameplay delves into being nothing more than taste, some like complex games when others prefer games that are easier to master. No opinion is wrong here. So this review isn\'t wrong, it is just his opinion and you have to accept it.

And “your review should be more objective!” is a bad take I sincerely thought had been dead for years now.

Except, and this is the important thing here...I'm not. You seem to have carried over that baggage from before onto me. Like I said since the start and I quote: That one should try to be objective (emphasis on try). There is a minimum basic consideration when reviewing something, like actually playing/watching/hearing/reading/using/etc. the thing in question and trying to be self aware enough about your circumstances, like complaining about Undertale while never feeling any form of empathy to a fictional character in general, or as I said before overcompensating/overvillifying something based on related but outside experiences (aka Hatedom and Fan Dumbs).

It's ironic you talk about defending the game when I never really complained about it here, all I said was that it felt like it was "overcompensating" in it's reaction (for example as Hylard pointed out, the finger thing). The issue with the graphics was not that it was a bad point, but that no one brought it up, just like it would had been to reponse with: "{insert new pokemon} is a nice addition to the roster and doesn't look like a Digimon, GF hasn't run out of ideas". Good points, but that would be venting over an argument you carried over from elsewhere.

@ megagutsman

I never said his opinion was wrong. That is one of the most baseline fallacies of the internet (Irrelevant Thesis) of course it's their opinion, everything is, like I pointed out if that was the course of action, then the comment section would have absolutely no purpose other than pointing out the rare factual falsehood. Or I guess it can also serve as a circle jerk, I heard a third party tell me something similar last month, is Tv Tropes being taken over by Tmblr?

Well then, while I still think that \"Reviews should be objective!\" is a bad take that is, at best, naive and foolish, and at worst willfully ignorant (neither of those examples are even remotely failures of objectivity, for instance), I guess I\'ll just agree to disagree, because yeah, this review absolutely has a bit of a persecuted tone I don\'t appreciate and none of those points are necessarily wrong.

It\'s not in a vacuum either; there\'s been an ongoing internet shitstorm around this game for months and I unfortunately understand being reflexively defensive, but it\'s not necessarily useful to the average reader either.

You ain\'t right for the right reasons, but you\'re right about that part.

That said, ignoring all our actual arguments about a dead cause that\'s been left on the dustbin of the discourse for very good reasons for years and trying to reframe this conversation as you being persecuted by SJ Ws (and no, you didn\'t say it flat out, you just dogwhistled it really, really hard and I ain\'t dumb) is officially the point at which I peace out and stop talking to ya. Have a nice day.

@marcellX Then what are you trying to accomplish here? Because if you aren\'t saying that his opinion is wrong then I don\'t see why you would criticize his review? What, is because he wasn\'t as objective as you would want him to be? What\'s the problem with that? Why would there be a problem with him doing a review with the point of view of somebody annoyed with all the negativity that is going around? If anything it is a breath of fresh air to see some positivity.

@megagutsman

If you\'re asking that then that shows you didn\'t read what I have said then or at the very least gloseed over. I said the review feels like it\'s overcompensating, that\'s all, constructive criticism is a thing, whether you agree with mine or not is another matter, but the point is that it\'s not such a white and black thing that I\'m saying his opinion is wrong.

Why would there be a problem with him doing a review with the point of view of somebody annoyed with all the negativity that is going around?

Again, because then it would be hypocritical of us to complain about a review with the point of view of someone annoyed with all the positivity aka hype something gets (Hype Backlash, or as I pointed out, overating and exageration has been a valid criticism since, well, forever. So the ball is on your court now, why is it being their opion relevant exactly? what else would it be?

@Spectral Time

trying to reframe this conversation as you being persecuted by SJ Ws

I responded to Gutsman\'s Irrelevant Thesis, that had nothing to do with our discussion and even then I generalized the situation and didn\'t specified it to me (aka persecusion) so I don\'t apretiate you accussing me of such a thing.

You ain\'t right for the right reasons

You know what sure, whatever: \"I don\'t understand how this is a controversial view when it seems (IMO) that everyone in the comments agrees it is rather exagerated.\"

@ marcellX

"because then it would be hypocritical of us to complain about a review with the point of view of someone annoyed with all the positivity aka hype something gets (Hype Backlash, or as I pointed out, overating and exageration has been a valid criticism since, well, forever."

Believe it or not, I do consider all of those that bash a product simply because is popular wrong. I have never understood why Hype Backlash is a valid criticism. The judgement of a product shouldn't be positively or negatively impacted by the actions of its fanbase. I have always considered those two things separated.

"So the ball is on your court now, why is it being their opion relevant exactly?"

Because is his review, ergo, his own experiences and opinions will matter the most. And if he thinks that he needs to give a positive opinion thanks to all the negativity that has been going around (and you cannot deny there's way more negativity than it was warranted) then that's his decision to make and I still cannot see why it should be a problem that he "overcompensates".

@megagutsman

I don't get it, dind't you contraict yourself?

• The judgement of a product shouldn't be positively or negatively impacted by the actions of its fanbase.
• if he thinks that he needs to give a positive opinion thanks to all the negativity that has been going around

So which one is it? Also, and I can't believe I have to explain this. That's a fallacy: This one probably occurs in a supermajority of all arguments on the Internet. Perhaps the most common is to dismiss an opponent's claim with "well, that's just your opinion." This has the unstated assumption that all opinions are precisely equal no matter what their underlying logic, but it's also irrelevant; of course it's your opinion, who else's would it be?. This are reviews and comments about it, pretty much everything is an opinion. Once the OP post a public review, they're putting their voice out there, to restrict criticism is akin to saying "only my voice matter", which I don't think it's what the author wanted.

I still cannot see why it should be a problem that he "overcompensates".

Again, for the same reason as Hype Backlash. That's why I talked about Tmblr, all views are treated fairly on Tv Tropes, it would be hypocritical for only negative views to be subjected to criticism. Which is what I don't understand, you agree with me that one shouldn't be swayed by outside sources (fanbase, hatedom, etc.) but at the same time that overcompensating shouldn't be an issue?

@marcellX

Thing is, I still don\'t think the \"constructive criticism\" was even required. I re-read everything again and failed to notice how he\'s really \"venting\" in this review. Yeah, one small reference to the controversy here and there, but it never is part of the main argument he\'s trying to make.

Fully subjective reviews are as useful (or maybe even more useful) than objective one because we can hear (read in this case) the true feelings of the reviewer (an objective one tends to be more prepared and what the reviewer will say is practiced prior).

\"So which one is it?\"

Basically both. The first one is a personal rule of mine but I wont fault anybody that breaks it goes for the later.

\"Perhaps the most common is to dismiss an opponent\'s claim with \"well, that\'s just your opinion.\"\"

Problem is that we are talking about his opinion, there\'s no two-ways to put it. We have no right to say that it is either right or wrong.

\"to restrict criticism is akin to saying \"only my voice matter\", which I don\'t think it\'s what the author wanted.\"

Thing is that (at least to me) your criticism amounts to nothing more than a nitpick.

\"Which is what I don\'t understand, you agree with me that one shouldn\'t be swayed by outside sources (fanbase, hatedom, etc.) but at the same time that overcompensating shouldn\'t be an issue?\"

I don\'t agree that overcompensating is an issue for two reasons:

1.-) As I said prior that\'s just a personal rule of mine that I can let other break because I don\'t find it as important of a rule to uphold.

2.-) I simply couldn\'t see the \"overcompensating\" you are talking about. I noticed with when I re-read his review but it was barely noticeable, ergo, why I said that your criticism barely amounts to a nitpick.

Just to clarify, everything bolded was not my opinion, that is the description/example/explanation. I used the Tv Tropes one as it is simple, but you can look it up yourself. Irrelevant thesis also known as irrelevant conclusion or ignoratio elenchi is a fallacy.

We have no right to say that it is either right or wrong.

Again, not that I ever said his opinion was wrong (seriously, please pay attention this time) but this is a discussion. Saying it's their opinion, don't judge is hypocritical and fallacious, as you're in turn doing to me what you're calling me out for doing to Kibchi, criticism "my opinion" that they're overcompensating.

your criticism amounts to nothing more than a nitpick.

It is, I thought I made it clear since the begginin. That's not really here nor there, I don't exactly see what you thought you were going with this.

I don't agree that

So again, you don't agree with my view, you're criticism it but at the same time saying I shouldn't do the same to the OP's view. Again, that's highly hypocritical and fallacious, aside from that being the whole point of the comments, otherwise it would be a circle jerk.

As I said prior that's just a personal rule of mine that I can let other break

erm...but this isn't about you. That's rather self centered of you. We're talking about general behavior, guidelines and actions and here you're adding to the fallacies with basically, it's ok for me to do it or based on my personal rules this doesn't count the same.

ps. This has become too far removed from the topic, so I suggest you PM instead unless you plan to add anything more apropiate.

Okay, let me end it here with the following statement:

I don't agree with the nitpick, is very minor and wouldn't have improved the review in a significant way.

If you wanna reply then I agree that we should do so through P Ms.

Regarding the review, itself. I kinda agree that the game was made with the competitive audience in mind, possibly down to the decision of not allowing every Pokemon to be used (the comparison to fighting games had been made in the forums). I kinda also disagree with that in that I feel like there is more to the franchise and fanbase than just the competitive-focused folk.

With that said, I feel like the franchise's greatest strength and its greatest weakness is its consistency. the tone, core mechanics and quality had stayed at a consistent pace, which does leave people feeling like its getting stale. With that said it does appear that GF is taking steps to rectify this, but the attempts seem to had tepid reception at best. And as for the quality bit, there is the matter in that while the games and story are consistency good, some people always get the feeling that they could still be improved, that something is missing (besides the obvious), that it could had been a great games rather than merely a good one (which had also happened with Gen VI where Kalos not only felt underdeveloped, but one of the legendary pokemon didn't really get a sense of closure if you catch my drift).

Regardless, your review is still a great review by most metrics.

@Morning Star 1337 When I said it \"knows its audience-\" I meant there\'s a specific group they\'re appealing to within the fandom- the competitive part. While there\'s other parts, that\'s the part it\'s designed to be liked by.

^ Yeah, that's more accurate. It does leave me disappointed though, since the fandom is huge and varied and everyone is into different things (the actual story, shiny hunting, nuzlockes, breeding, silly self-imposed challenges, even people who want to complete the game 100%), so only a portion (an admittedly large portion, but still just a portion) is left fully satisfied. If the competitive people were their intended audience, they did alright; if the entire fandom was their audience, they didn't do so hot.

That's not even me shitting on the games- it's just kind of a fact that a lot of people don't enjoy these games, despite being big fans of the franchise. These games were not made for them. And that's okay... but you could understand how the other fans are feeling left out or neglected.