- bg3: wins most awards in 2023 and continues to win awards in 2024
- lazy critic: this game is so bad, every aspect is bad, except for (some aspect) that’s kind of decent

(not all critics are lazy, but the ones who are are annoying me)

If you write a criticism claiming that a game is bad and that game won a huge number of awards for many different aspects of it, you have to explain the awesome success of that game.

Otherwise your criticism lacks substance.

I’ve read many criticisms in these forums now, some of them just destructive negativism, and I’m annoyed by how many of those didn’t take this most basic step to make their criticism plausible. Reading them just wasted my time.

If you don’t like a game and you think your dislike can be generalized, it’s on you to explain why that game is still one of the most revered games of its time. If you successfully do that, then reading your criticism is a good use of the time of people interested in criticism. It might then actually make this game or the next game better. Which is the constructive value in criticism.

Last edited by ArneBab; 27/03/24 04:51 PM.