Sorry for the delay the past few...months, augh, in posting new art. I so wanted to post more often this year, but it's been tough to get full projects done for a variety of reasons. And, as usual, the weird thing is that I am working every week on art, yet never quite reach a satisfying conclusion to most of the projects. Anyways, I will have two new pics to post in relatively quick succession soon and should have more time for art during the winter. But some folks have told me that they watched me for my essays, so here is one of those for now:

As I see game reviews start to come in for GTA V, I notice that many of them note that the game has flaws, but the reviewer is giving the game five stars anyway. Some of those flaws being listed are, what do you know, very similar to some of the gameplay and narrative flaws found in previous games in the series. I almost wonder if reviewers are afraid to give an honest star rating due to the torrents of abuse and accusations from fans that move could inspire, or if they really are just automatically in awe of the game's admittedly obvious technical qualities and adult storytelling. This pattern reminds me a lot of what happened the last few times some Rockstar games were released. Only from gamers themselves did I hear complaints about those games, while the reviewers were too busy showering them with praise to be even remotely critical.

Either way, this kind of grade inflation seems increasingly automatic for major releases by major developers or, for that matter, certain directors lately in movie reviews. I recall how fans attacked less than ecstatic reviews for Inception when it first came out. Yet only months later, even the more geeky among movie fans were increasingly willing to admit that the film was less than perfect, after the excitement and hype had settled down.

I have not played GTA V yet, so it may indeed be worth all those perfect score reviews for all I know. But when I read reviews that list a catalog of flaws in the game, and still give a perfect score noting just that the graphics and world building are impressive yet again in a GTA game, it reminds me an awful lot of what happened the last few times this developer released games that were reviewed pretty much the same way. Yes, I get it, the graphics are nice. I kinda expect that though for a game that cost a hundred million to make.

Before I'm accused of just being a hater, I should mention that I have a lot of appreciation for many of these media products. But reviewers need to be allowed to do an honest and detailed job without the fanboy or fangirl attacks being a reason to hold back, and without feeling pressure for rubber stamping approval for triple A titles in loved series. As some of you may have noticed, I love critical analysis, especially of the things I enjoy. So an Internet where merely mentioning a more nuanced view of a media product always provokes an instant and crude personal attack is a disappointment. Can't adults get beyond this?

I also recall the fiasco of many game reviewers telling the gamers how wrong they were to not automatically embrace the online requirements and dumbed down skill trees of Diablo 3. Everyone was wrong and we should all just stop whining and serve Blizzard's bottom line without question. I even recall one reviewer suggesting it was wrong of another new game to not handle skill trees the same way it had been done in Diablo 3, as that was the "trend the industry is currently headed in"...as if they were reviewing smartphone variations and not new games. What's next? Game reviews based on company stock fluctuations?

All this in game and movie reviews lately is a pattern that I am not alone in noticing. An article in Now Gamer sums up the problem very well and goes into detail on a specific recent example. I suggest reading it, I have provided a link below:
http://www.nowgamer.com/features/19.....calm_down.html

Rave