Automoderated users, Autopatrolled users, Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, Confirmed users, Moderators, Rollbackers, Administrators
213,737
edits
Overshadowed by Controversy: Difference between revisions
m
removed Category:Pages with Wikipedia-style footnotes using HotCat
(Undo revision 2001818 by Blakegripling ph (talk) Aside from how badly written this is, the books and recent game weren't at all "overshadowed" (if anything, this has gotten the game very high levels of success, occupying 4 for the top 5 best sellers) Tag: Undo |
m (removed Category:Pages with Wikipedia-style footnotes using HotCat) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 131:
* On top of recent entries in the ''[[NBA 2K]]'' series being peppered with increasingly pervasive monetization schemes like [[Loot Boxes]], ''NBA 2K20'' was condemned and ridiculed by gaming circles for its blatant and tasteless use of casino gambling mechanics in a game rated for players ''as young as three years old''. The [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46MQ1ZMZ-l4 pre-release trailer] was savaged for its in-your-face promotion of gambling towards youths, and doubts were thus cast towards the integrity of ratings organisations ESRB and PEGI for giving such a dubiously low age rating, as well as video game journalists whose praise of the game was seen as questionable and myopic. Alongside the likes of ''[[Star Wars: Battlefront (series)|Star Wars Battlefront II]]'', ''2K20'' and many others was seen as representative of the unabashed greed and avarice by corporate video game developers as well as ''laissez-faire'' capitalism in general.
* ''[[Star Wars: Battlefront (series)|Star Wars Battlefront II]]'' garnered the attention of legislators over its use of loot box mechanics and prompted ''Star Wars'' series owner [[Disney]] to force EA into toning down the use of microtransactions by removing the lootbox mechanic in favour of paid cosmetic items.
* Speaking of controversies on journalistic integrity and ethics, ''[[Driver 3]]'' aka ''DRIV3R'' became embroiled in a review scandal called "[[Scandalgate|DRIV3Rgate]]" where two outlets operated by Future plc, ''PSM2'' and ''Xbox World'', gave the game 9/10 scores despite it especially the PC version having been saddled with numerous technical issues, leading to accusations of bribery and corruption through review-fixing on part of Atari and Future plc. Rubbing salt in the wound was that of a controversial thread on the GamesRadar forums, also owned by Future, being filled to the brim with posts critical of the dubious reviews. Posts defending ''DRIV3R'' and Future followed suit, but this was later outed as a desperate act of [[
* Despite receiving critical acclaim from mainstream gaming press, ''[[The Last of Us Part II]]'' was [[Critical Dissonance|savaged]] by a number of gaming circles for its inclusion of LGBTQ+ content and themes, branding it a "[[Rule of Cautious Editing Judgement|social justice warrior]]" or a "woke" game as some perceive it as [[Anvilicious|pervasive agenda-pushing]] not unlike films featuring female, LGBT and racially diverse cast members. Kotaku's Riley MacLeod saw the controversy as a weak point with Metacritic's aggregation system, where he stated that the site "fails to take into account the diverse critical opinions of the game", instead focusing on the overall scores and seemingly padding it out to make the game appear better than it is, than the actual content of the review and provide a more even assessment of the game's critical both in the eyes of the press and the gaming public. It also didn't help that, like what happened with the ''[[Ghostbusters]]'' remake, the game's cast members were unfairly harassed and trolled by self-styled "edgelords" who take offense at anything remotely "diverse" or "feminist". Considering the disconcertingly divisive sociopolitical atmosphere in the United States in this day and age, the homophobic and anti-feminist sentiment thrown at ''The Last of Us Part II'' is unsurprising.
** The other part of the controversy was due to leaks of the game revealing that one of the main characters of the first game got [[Dropped a Bridge on Him|a very ignominious death at the hands of the new playable character]], while the other remaining characters received extreme [[Character Derailment]] compared with their previous characterization (and the actual release of the game revealing that the game has a bleak [[Shoot the Shaggy Dog]] story–with a lot of [[Shoot the Dog|figurative and literal dog shooting]]–with a [[Bittersweet Ending]] very high in the bitter that gave little emotional resolution). The leaks forced a definite release date of the game after some years in [[Development Hell]], and the ensuing takedowns of leaks and early critics only irritated gamers that were already angry with both Sony and Naughty Dog. The above was not helped by the heads of the project responding to their harassment by calling any critics that didn't like the game "regressive" and "misogynists", [[Rule of Cautious Editing Judgement|whenever they actually were or not]] due to lumping the people criticizing the game for their narrative choices with the misogynistic trolls mentioned above.
Line 196:
[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]
[[Category:Audience Reactions]]
| |||