Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    Thursday, January 08, 2009

    Ridiculous Statements Masquerading As Games Journalism: Fallout 3


    Strap your arms to your sides before you read this, or you may gouge your eyes from your skull before the paragraph’s out:

    “It’s hard to pin down the problem, but there is a reason why, however intelligent we may be, we mostly read Henning Mankell ahead of Tolstoy and watch Woody Allen instead of Bergman. There comes a point in the evolution of any art form – and releases like this make any quibbling over games’ claims to such status laughable – when the supposed masters of it leave the mass audience behind. It’s probably inevitable, by no means a bad thing and mostly explainable in terms of mostly finite consumer qualities. In other words, the amount of effort, time or brains that you can bring to the table will play a large part in determining how deeply you can appreciate an artwork’s quality. If you’re not convinced by the thesis, have a look at Ulysses.”

    The Daily Mail’s James O’Brien’s Fallout 3 review… sorry, thesis.

    6 comments:

    1. sinister agent12:05 am

      So Fallout 3 is Ulysses? Fucking hell, I heard it was bad, but I had no idea it was THAT bad.

      ReplyDelete
    2. That doesn't even make sense!!

      ReplyDelete
    3. dan de la peche1:43 am

      Ahhh, The Daily Mail, that beacon of journalism.

      "In Fallout, there are no gypsies, which is good, or immigrants, which is also good. THE LAND IS SAFE."

      ReplyDelete
    4. What a load of old bollocks. My fucking eyeballs starting drying 3 seconds into that plate of brackish splashback.

      ReplyDelete
    5. Jesus, you can just about make out the semen stains in that review.

      A lot of pumping, sorry effort, went into that literary piece.

      wv (sorry, i do this on UK:R): opric - description of the Daily Mail cunt writing the above crap.

      ReplyDelete
    6. Anonymous11:16 pm

      I don't recommend anyone play Fallout 3 or read Ulysses. Both are very much over-rated. The prior much more so than the latter, though.

      ReplyDelete