Topic: Morgan Webb bashes Super Mario Galaxy 2 for being "cartoony".

It can't be deflecting criticism if there is nothing to criticize, which there isn't: she's stating a personal opinion, not bashing it (bashing being as it's defined in the dictionary, not how you've redefined it to cast her in a negative light). However, making an analogy to the everyday racist implies there is something to criticize, which is why it's a bad analogy. Why bring up racism at all? Is there no better analogy, and was an analogy even necessary for so simple a point? Racism is a touchy subject that shouldn't be tossed around as lightly as it tends to be on the internet.

If I told you that I could understand why some people like to eat salads since they're healthy but I personally don't because they aren't tasty, and then you made the racist analogy, would that make any sense? No, it'd be purposelessly drawing a very negative comparison for a harmless comment, now get me a burger.

The analogy is still right though, with racism as an extreme example and I as I pointed out it's closer to the 'No offense but...' example and even with your example the comparison would be apt if someone was discussing the merits of salad and you said that and then someone tried arguing against you and you used the fact that you acknowledged positive aspects to avoid the argument which is exactly what it is.

...and what's bashing defined as in the dictionary then? because as I've seen the phrase used it's the indicate the negative qualities of something. When someone bashed something they merely point out it's flaws(whether right or wrong).

...and it's not about making her seem negative at all because if you didn't notice I did exactly what I'm talking about when I brought the point up by acknowledging she's allowed her own opinion.

All I was saying is that just because she acknowledged that there are positive aspects doesn't mean she's not 'bashing' the game and it also doesn't mean people aren't allowed to disagree with her.

Dictionary.com is your friend. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bash
Note: The British slang usage is probably not pertinent.

If someone bashes a game, he's doing so either scornfully or baselessly, probably both. Her concerns are legitimate (if a bit silly) and politely deferential. Bashing is a synonym for attacking. It'd be a gigantic stretch to claim she's attacking the game. It's precisely this sort of negligence of shade of meaning that, when coupled with the poor comparison of Mario and racism, that made the earlier comment seem overly negative.

The "No offense but" comparison is certainly less heavy-handed, but still not really accurate. No one has any right to be offended, and she isn't trying to argue with anyone, just as I would never try to "argue" with someone that salads aren't good. I don't understand why you can't accept that someone can honestly, truthfully believe that her opinion is solely that, an opinion, and not an argument for the general qualities of a thing, whether that be a game or a tasty food.

If I said I don't like Barney because it's too childish, but I can understand why children like it, would there be a problem with that? That's certainly not deflecting criticism because there is no criticism to begin with, merely a statement of opinion in contrast with other opinions. It's pointing out the blatantly obvious and undeniable truth: My opinion is not reflective of others' opinions or the general quality of the program.

Well I always just thought bashing meant pointing out the negative stuff but even so she said the graphics were DS graphics, which may have been about the art style but then they mentioned Mario and Luigi which have a different art style... and then even when she aknowledges that the gameplay is great she's dismissive of it.(although that may well be deceptive editing)

...She was arguing it though, they were discussing the game so her view is an argument and she wasn't just keeping it as her opinion like when they brought up the big purple Luma and she said no one wants to talk to him and that they should of got rid of all of the story. She's not just saying it's not for her at those points she's arguing that those are negative aspects of it.

You do have a point with your Barney comparison but I think it comes down to semantics again, the word 'childish' has inherent negative connotations and I don't think many would describe Barney as childish, even though it is targetted at children. Also Mario's demographic isn't just children like Barney, Miyamoto said as much. She's free to think he failed at that but calling it childish does have those negative connotations.

Of course Barney is childish. Childish isn't negative in the context of a children's television program. And I certainly didn't say Mario was childish, either.

It was a roundtable discussion. When she is saying something like "they should have done this," it's obvious in context that she would have preferred to skip the whole story and Luma. I certainly would have, too. Doesn't mean I'm deflecting criticism; just means that I'm qualifying my statement as a personal opinion and not an argument. There is substance to such a statement. You can't just assume it's purely rhetorical when there is good reason to use such a statement: ironically, to avoid such misunderstandings as your own.

Edit: Also, just as you pointed out there is editing working against her, that is probably misleading you to assuming her comment of "I understand why people like it" applies to the entire discussion. Maybe she does mean to make an argument about the story and the Luma, but that was from a different cut. That statement was only directly connected to the "cartoony" comment, and that's actually where it makes the most sense and is most necessary. I think you've hit the nail on the head there with the editing comment.

I think the problem is that she represents 1/5th of that gaming discussion group, while she does not represent anywhere close to 1/5th of the gaming populace.
Also, refusing to like things because they're cute is a pretty ridiculous and incredibly childish stance.
Refusing to like SMG2, Monsters, Inc., or kittens because you're not 4 years old anymore (and yes, she did say "I'm not four!") is just... stupid.

Not bothering to read these huge walls of text... but cartoony isn't negative in the context of a cartoony game either. Don't watch a comedy if you're craving horror.

Uh, NEG, they aren't representatives in some sort of gaming republic. Their views represent their own, not some specific gaming districts. People have different tastes. You can not like cartoons if you want to. You can leave your friends behind. And if your friends like cartoons, then they're no friends of hers.

And Pix, she works in gaming journalism. She has to play it. It's not like you're talking about some random commenter who picked SMG2 off a shelf for her own personal enjoyment and was shocked and dismayed to for some reason find that the game looks exactly like it looks on the cover and in every screenshot ever.

So she was the reviewer? I saw a bunch of people in there, and I don't see why they would have chosen a person who doesn't like cartoony to review a cartoony game. But whatevs. It's her opinion, the sky doesn't look any lower today, so I'm good.

I don't see any evidence that she was a reviewer. From all appearances, I'd assume it's just a normal round table discussion, people talking about a game. The guy with blondish hair seemed to be the most in charge, if anyone, as he tended to direct discussion a few times. This video was edited to highlight her opinions, so of course everyone is overreacting as if this were some scathing editorial of hers instead of a few offhand comments about her own predilections.

Ahh okay. So she probably just played the review copy and didn't like it.

...big deal?

That's kind of what I've been saying, haha.

blights of the roundtable

With the comment about the Luma though she wasn't talking about her personal experience, she was addressing it with other people because the other guy pointed out that other players might need direction which she dismissed. That was actually actually an argument about the quality of the game.

I do think the editing will be manipulative but from my limited exposure to her(that sounds so weird...) she seems anti-Wii. She did bash the Wii and Motion Controls when they were revealed(and I actually mean she bashed them) but I don't really pay much attention to her so I don't know how she feels about it now(or how she feels about Move and Natal).

Fa sho, I agree 100% Anyway, I don't mind what a game looks like. Also, I'm surprised this topic hasn't been closed because of some insults... good job Morgan Webb, thats you're opinion on the air. If I was I tv, I might have an opinion too*.

EDIT: a more "special" opinion anyway.

This whole "Either you're with us or you're against us" stance fanboys have is perplexing. Does it matter if she likes the Wii the least (if that were the case)? It's not like they're her children and she has to pretend to love them all the same. That wouldn't translate to the games getting a strike against them come review time.

Oh, and many people bashed the Wii when it was announced (rightly so in some regards in the first year of its existence).

Actually, it isn't anything like that at all, but I see that you're argument has already been picked apart, so I'll just stop here.

Why is this topic so popular? I mean somebody bashed Mario Galaxy 2. Big deal. I didn't think the first Galaxy was as good as everyone said and other people also didn't like it. This looks better but that's not the point. Just chillax guys.

Regarding the Luma: She had a point. It was annoying. You don't need direction to get from one level to the next. If they had simply taken him, the story, and starship Mario out, everyone with common sense would have known how to use the map. And like I think we've both acknowledged now, this has nothing to do with the comment in question "I understand why others would like it," since it's from another cut, so I see no problem with it.

Geeze, whenever someone even suggests they might like Nintendo on this site they get labelled a fanboy! OH sorry, I hate Nintendo and all their games are crap and everyone is justified in everything they say about Nintendo. Is that better?

Oh and it's funny how I'm apparently a fanboy which means I'll defend Nintendo no matter what but oh no there's no possibility she could be a hater, no she's 100% unbiased no matter what. Enjoyment of a console and a game on that console only correlate if you're a fanboy!

Oh and other people hate on the Wii so it's cool anyway!

Gimme a break
EDIT:

She may well have a point but it's clear she was talking about the quality of the title not just her personal enjoyment in which case people are free to disagree, no? Even if it is divorced from the other comment.

EDIT2: And doesn't that mean the suggestion that because she aknowledges how other people might enjoy mean that people shouldn't disagree is void anyway?