The purpose of criticism
For many, the purpose of criticism is to have your opinion broadcasted, or simply jump headlong onto the popularity bandwagon. I feel that there is more to criticism than this, something more selfless, less self-centered than broadcasting one’s opinioin, or re-establishing financial reports. Here are my two major criteria for criticism:
- To further the artform by rewarding works that bring innovation and precision to a craft and criticizing works that take from the artform, play it safe and offer nothing to the industy in return.
- To further progess human culture not revert it. That is works that exploit humanity with out progressing it should be highly criticized, while works that do progress culture should be revered.
These two points illustrate what I feel a good artist’s (game developer’s) goals should be, to progress the industry (otherwise you are participating in industrial suicide) and to progress humanity (otherwise you are participating in cultural suicide). Works that accomplish these two goals are remembered in legend and studied far into the future. A critic should be able to identify such works and canonized them.
I feel the current approach to criticism is plain egocentric as it puts the indiviuals taste above the craft (and other individual’s taste as well). The craft should be nurtured and protected (by the critics) or else it will dwindle and cheapen. Especially nowadays when development contracts are based on average review scores, these reviewers should at least be more than just opinion-driven (millions of dollars are at stake!). Why do publishers give credentialess reviewers so much power is beyond me… but i digress…
