As a result of this podcast project we’ve been doing these last few months, I’ve been thinking a lot about criticism…
As a result of this podcast project we’ve been doing these last few months, I’ve been thinking a lot about criticism and its role in the hobby.
Something we struggle with a lot on the podcast is this question of “Who the fuck are we to say what is good and what is bad?” None of us have designed a role playing game, much less published one. Very few of us participate in gaming communities outside of The Gauntlet. And Dan and I are almost stridently opposed to gaming at conventions, meaning we have very few opportunities to interact with the gaming community outside of our little tower.
This may strike many of you as odd, but I don’t even consider myself a gamer.
And yet our community plays lots of different games. Is that enough to justify a critical approach to the hobby? Maybe. It would certainly be easier if we were playing trad games, because those are products that have hundreds of paws on them, and are published by huge, faceless companies. But indie games are different. They are often the work of a single person, and therefore a little closer to something like art. Are we being unfair when we level criticism at something that someone labored over for a lot of hours, and that probably doesn’t stand to make the author much money? Should our perspective change when we consider the games of people like Jason Morningstar or Fred Hicks, who have found a lot of success in the indie game scene?
Yesterday, after Black Stars Rise, we were pondering the podcast and its role in the hobby. We kind of landed on “Who the fuck are we?” and that’s a little depressing.