April 2013

I finally played BioShock Infinite, and I CANNOT BELIEVE this is what everyone’s been talking about.

Why do many of the very smart critiques of Infinite still handle it with kid gloves and give it this respect it does not deserve?

Infinite fails in every way: as a shooter, as a story, as a world. And morally. The critiques of its racism are exactly right.

Infinite doesn’t just draw a sickening equivalence between the oppressors and the oppressed and then make you shoot the latter.

It throws all of that aside in the end out of concern for the multiple realities of a mass murderer. This is a coward’s move.

While we were waiting for our Citizen Kane, BioShock Infinite went and gave us the Birth of a Nation of videogames.

 

May 2013

We have praised terrible games. We have kept our expectations low and defended our kingdom. We deserve the videogames we get.

 

July 2013

in the mood to burn bridges

 

October 2013

My essay on videogame reviews (and the worst game of the year): http://tevisthompson.com/on-videogame-reviews/

 

January 2014

Regarding the recent discussions about anger and criticism, my plan for this year is: ESCALATION

 

May 2014

ICYMI, my @IndieCade talk on independent, experimental, personal criticism: http://tevisthompson.com/indie-criticism/

 

July 2014

Actually, I am coming for your games.

 

August 2014

I wanted my Ground Zeroes review to be focused on the grotesque sexual violence that most reviewers ignored. But to be clear…

Ground Zeroes is sneaking and choking and shooting and hiding. Bullshit military ninja dreams. We’ve done this for years. It’s nothing.

Story and character matter in Metal Gear. There’s no way to ignore them and just ‘talk about the gameplay’. Not without failing as a critic.

Ground Zeroes’ political critique is basic. It’s easy. And it’s at odds with its attempted pleasures.

This is to say: a sandbox playground set in a brutal military prison base is a BAD PREMISE.

Btw, the short length of Ground Zeroes does not figure into its badness. The discussions obsessed with that were asinine.

There is a complete tonal failure in Ground Zeroes. But to be clear, there is no tone that would justify the bomb in Paz’s vagina.

The bomb speaks for itself. It is a grotesque idea, monstrously executed.

It does not need to be explained. It just needs to be repeated. Until gamers get it through their thick fucking skulls.

To review Ground Zeroes without mentioning its grotesque sexual violence is a failure of the reviewer and their publication.

There were some reviewers who discussed it, like Lucy O’Brien (IGN), Kirk Hamilton (Kotaku), & Tim Martin (The Telegraph). But most did not.

In @guardian’s review, Rich Stanton did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @DigitalChumpsE3’s review, Nathaniel Stevens did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @thedigitalfix’s review, Luciano Howard did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @DigitallyDownld’s review, Sam M did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @edgeonline’s review, the Edge staff did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @GodisaGeek’s review, Dan Naylor did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @PSUdotcom’s review, Michael Harradence did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @GameTrailers’s review, Ben Moore did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @PSXExtreme’s review, Ben Dutka did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @darkzerouk’s review, Dominic Sheard did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @Darkstation_com’s review, Adam Schedler did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @Game_Revolution’s review, Blake Peterson did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @VideoGamerCom’s review, Steven Burns did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @Dtoid’s review, Chris Carter did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @OPM_UK’s review, David Meikleham did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @gamespot’s review, Peter Brown did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @ZTGD’s review, Ken McKown did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @LazygamerNet’s review, Geoffrey Tim did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @PSLifeStyle’s review, Chandler Wood did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @gamesTMmag’s review, the unnamed reviewer did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @NowGamer_Feed’s review, Adam Barnes did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @MetroUK’s review, the unnamed reviewer did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @pushsquare’s review, Ben Potter did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @TheSixthAxis’s review, Stefan L did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @GamingTrend’s review, Jay Malone did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @_Thunderbolt’s review, Simon Holmes did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @EGMNOW’s review, Andrew Fitch did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @impulsegamer’s review, the ‘admin’ did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @ausgamers’s review, Steve Farrelly did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @XONE_Magazine’s review, the unnamed reviewer did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @Slant_Magazine’s review, Aaron Riccio called Paz’s vivisection the “coolest sequence” in Ground Zeroes.

In @OXMUK’s review, the staff mentioned Paz like this: “Paz gets padded out – in more ways than one (you’ll see!)”

In @TheEscapistMag’s review, Jim Sterling did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

In @Polygon’s review, Russ Frushtick did not mention the grotesque sexual violence in Ground Zeroes.

Of 53 reviews I read in English, nearly 2/3rds did not mention Ground Zeroes’ sexual violence at all.

And I set a very low bar for what counted as “mentioning”.

Most who did mention it said little more than that something ‘disturbing’ happens at the end. But at least they registered it.

Grotesque sexual violence is just not worth mentioning to most videogame reviewers. It doesn’t matter to them. They just don’t care.

 

February 2015

Complaining about the existence of scores as if they’re the problem with reviews so misses the point.

Go ahead, remove the scores. All the real problems will still be there: low expectations, fan/tech/gamer values, shallowness, the WORDS.

Portrait of a player, portrait of a year in 50 game reviews: http://tevisthompson.com/game-review-drabbles/

 

April 2015

Whatever yr take on Bloodborne, it’s not a ‘universal’ game. 77 reviews at 90+ and 0 negative/mixed is preposterous.

The real danger of consensus is not wasted time/money for ill-advised consumers but impoverished thought for everyone.

Without meaningful dissent, we get boring conversations, safe conclusions, and self-censorship.

Complaining about loading times is not dissent. It’s not even criticism.

 

August 2015

This is my new videogame essay, “The Existential Art”: http://tevisthompson.com/the-existential-art/

 

April 2016

How can we happily play something that was so singular & awe-inspiring a few years ago but is now treated like any other game franchise?

If you’re new to the Souls games, I understand. There’s nothing like your first time. Maybe even your second time too.

But for Souls veterans, how are you not tired of doing the same thing again & again? There have been 5 of these games in the last 6 ½ years!

Dark Souls 3 addressing these endless cycles thematically does nothing. It still embraces and perpetuates its own Souls brand of clichés.

It’s a honed but tired bit of recycled risk-averse greatest hits fan service. And fan service is against the entire spirit of Dark Souls.

Have we just accepted all of this as ‘videogames’? Isn’t it sad? Will we even let ourselves be sad about videogames?

 

November 2016

I spoke with @JosiahRenaudin about gaming’s timid, unambitious, comforting criticism: https://soundcloud.com/the1099/episode-68-tevis-thompson-on-whats-wrong-with-games-criticism

 

April 2018

Which kind of Far Cry 5 criticism do you prefer?

– Bad story/good gameplay

– Bad politics/good gameplay

– No politics/good gameplay

– Useless handwringing

– But I still enjoyed it

– I’m just being honest

– What more can I do?

– Toothless eloquence from the Editor-in-Chief

 

Never the most obvious truth: Far Cry 5 is fucking stupid and the continued enjoyment of this series is pathetic.

Clearing out another outpost? Dumb. Shooting your 10,000th cult dude? Embarrassing. All that emergent chaos and local color? Please. What year do you think this is? What makes you think any of this is ‘good gameplay’?

There’s nothing cool or fun or good in Far Cry 5 because its stupidity is so pervasive. It ruins everything. No moment in the woods, no moment on the road, no character, no joke, no big idea, no tiny detail isn’t ruined by FC5’s all-encompassing, world-devouring stupidity.

But most videogame critics are just playing the game. The game of being a game critic. The game of being a professional writer on the internet. The game of groveling before your audience/industry/fandom/peers.

Being honest is not even enough. It’s only the beginning, the precondition for everything else. It’s not a free pass to issue more feeble apologetics for a bullshit shooter. Interrogate your enjoyment. Use your platform better. Improve your truth. FFS do your job as a critic.