What is the Point in having High Standards?

[Kreekakon]

Hey there everyone! Another thread in which you can throw around your two cents about a subject matter.

This time the question I want to ask you is: What is the point in having high standards?

Something I've heard many gamers, or entertainment enthusiasts in general complain about is that they think standards in media have been declining recently (Whether, or not it really is is for another topic entirely). They think that the "average consumer" is easily satisfied by something they deem to be lacking in quality, and not fulfilling their own high standards.

However, take a step back, and think this: Even if, EVEN IF it's true, and standards are lower nowadays with people being more easily pleased is there really anything wrong with that? Is there really anything wrong with lower standards? Like playing a game with lower standards will mean that you'll more likely have a good time with it, and not pick the entire thing apart, and deem it lackluster.

Also, if it would you to enjoy a title more by lowering your standards, and not take it as seriously, what's stopping us? What is there to gain by standing by our own higher standards? Is it so that when truly exceptional titles that surpass these higher standards come along we appreciate them all the more? Is it just in our nature to pursue excellence, and improvement, and be upset when it doesn't come by? Or perhaps something else?

Also, is it even possible to lower your standards even if you tried? Might it just for some people result in false grins playing a game going "Yeah this is really fun!" with a tear trailing down their face?

Answer the poll, and feel free to comment what you think below! As always, there isn't necessarily a definite correct answer for this!

[Ghieri]

Also, is it even possible to lower your standards even if you tried? Might it just for some people result in false grins playing a game going "Yeah this is really fun!" with a tear trailing down their face?

Nope. Then again I've never tried, because fuck Crysis 2.


It's a human progress thing, we're supposed to be getting better and moving forward, usually lackluster games are made that way by producers who don't care about progress, just the bottom line.

Maybe it's because I spoiled myself on some top-notch games that anything less just doesn't give me the same level of enjoyment.

[Bridge]

The people with high standards are generally speaking more passionate than those with low ones. They spend a great deal of time on whatever the artform in question is and the criteria by which they judge have been refined by tons of experience and knowledge. Art means a lot to them and they wish to see the ways in which it can be improved upon and expanded. Therefore they seek out the very best movies/games/whatever there are and remain optimistic for whatever the future may bring. It's not possible for people like that to lower their standards.

[OriginalUsername]

It all depends. Sometimes I like to look around and just look at the amount of detail in the game. (Or the lack of it) Other times (Most of the time my first playthrough) I just go and enjoy the game. Of course, it also depends if you like the game or not. If you're playing a game you already know it's bad or mediocre you'll pay more attention to mistakes and that stuff. When you already know the game is good, you won't pay as much attention to mistakes as in other (Worse) games.
I usually just play and enjoy the game..

[FlawlessHappiness]

If we're talking games, I don't think there is a "standard".

With me, I need to get hyped about a game before I buy it. Nothing with standards.
It's all about how it works. The concept.
Look at the Portal series. I'd never seen that concept before, and I got so hyped that I bought the number 2 right away... Or when my dad helped me buy it, cause I had no creditcard back then...

Mirrors Edge.
I didn't see anything about this game though, but as soon as I tried the first level I knew it was a good thing that I bought it. This game has great graphics but is from 2008. Talk about high and low standards as much as you want. I just want really enjoy the concept of being a runner.

Minecraft was also a great simple concept, but completed to the fullest. This could be low standards, but I bet it's the concept that pulled most of the people towards it.

[Kreekakon]

Thanks for the replies everyone!

The people with high standards are generally speaking more passionate than those with low ones. They spend a great deal of time on whatever the artform in question is and the criteria by which they judge have been refined by tons of experience and knowledge. Art means a lot to them and they wish to see the ways in which it can be improved upon and expanded. Therefore they seek out the very best movies/games/whatever there are and remain optimistic for whatever the future may bring. It's not possible for people like that to lower their standards.

What about in the case of "adjusting standards" to suit a piece of work depending on what it was aiming for then? Do you think what you said still applies here if a artwork was shooting towards a more unconventional level of standard to be properly appreciated?

To use one of my own recent experiences as an example: Pacific Rim. When I watched that movie if you were to judge it from a normal film story standpoint, you can easily see that it is extremely stupid in terms of its plot, and logic. However it was very evident that the filmmakers were not focusing on making an intelligent story, and perhaps even making it stupid on purpose to further glorify its self-aware "super fun dumb action movie" status (I think Del Toro said it was on purpose somewhere).

In this case I discovered that my entire appreciation of the film could be drastically different depending on if I chose to be bothered by the obviously-intended dumb plot, or not (I was even able to change this mindset on-the-fly during viewing of the movie). In the former I would find the film's story to be bullcrap, while in the latter I would just be having too much fun with the visuals to care.

What do you make of this? Anyone else who has thoughts too is welcome to answer!

If we're talking games, I don't think there is a "standard".

With me, I need to get hyped about a game before I buy it. Nothing with standards.
It's all about how it works. The concept.
Look at the Portal series. I'd never seen that concept before, and I got so hyped that I bought the number 2 right away... Or when my dad helped me buy it, cause I had no creditcard back then...

Mirrors Edge.
I didn't see anything about this game though, but as soon as I tried the first level I knew it was a good thing that I bought it. This game has great graphics but is from 2008. Talk about high and low standards as much as you want. I just want really enjoy the concept of being a runner.

Minecraft was also a great simple concept, but completed to the fullest. This could be low standards, but I bet it's the concept that pulled most of the people towards it.

I think your mindset of liking a "concept" is still very much to be dictated by standards whether you realize it, or not. You have an interesting concept which can draw you in, yes, but then arises the issue of whether the concept in question was executed any good.

Succeed, and you'll have a strong game mechanic; Fail, and you'll likely have a gimmick at best. How do you decide which is which? By having standards.

[Adrianis]

It's all in the context for me. I mean, standards are personal right? I could say I have high or low standards, but that has no meaning to any of you until i define the terms of what meets that high standard.

I'm happy to say I don't think I have any sort of solid definition of standards, I judge things on their appeal to me at the time. In games, by far the most memorable and important experiences have come from interesting, creative, art-y games like Passage, Proteus, Dear Esther and just recently Gone Home. I judge these games to a high standard of creative appeal & artistic intent vs execution & their potential impact on the industry as a whole, which all sounds terribly high-brow and intellectual, so when a game tries to do something similar and fails, I think it's bad.

Then probably once a month or so I load up Call of Duty: Man Ops 5: Terrorist Slayer 3: Black Apocalypse and shoot some dudes, because its trashy bullshit fun, and I don't judge it on artistic intent because it has none - I judge it on the enjoyment of the mechanics

But then there's more context too - I know I can play that trashy bullshit and not in any way be pulled into the unquestioning pro-military line that they constantly try shoving down your throat, in fact I find it funny in an ironic way. BUT that's only because I do have high standards for socio-political issues, and I despair for the people that have low enough standards that they would lap it up without thinking.

Normally I wouldn't ever dream of imposing standards on other people, insisting that they conform to higher ideals in some batshit campaign for enlightenment, and hate the people that do. BUT what happens when those low standards are likely to lead indirectly to a situation where they will be getting misinformed on important issues, absorbing ignorant stereotypes from terrible TV shows or games where the only contact with people other than themselves and their immediate countrymen is via the barrel of a gun?

Context man... context is everything


EDIT: I also take issue with the phrasing of the first poll option, there's nothing irrational about pursuing more of something you find fun. If your intent is to do things you enjoy, and you know that you enjoy a thing, what could be more rational than doing the thing that you enjoy?

[Kreekakon]

EDIT: I also take issue with the phrasing of the first poll option, there's nothing irrational about pursuing more of something you find fun. If your intent is to do things you enjoy, and you know that you enjoy a thing, what could be more rational than doing the thing that you enjoy?

I think that one of the key phrases here would be "guilty pleasure". It means that despite all of your higher-end brain functions telling you that there are very glaring issues with a piece of work, you still find it in yourself to enjoy it despite you knowing perfectly well that it may very well not be good at all. Sometimes this may require conscious shut-down of what bothers you with the movie, and just have fun with it. It's not possible with everything though.

Now to use another one of my personal experiences as an example here (Will contain pony so sorry in advance): the film Equestria Girls.

You can find my review of the movie here: http://www.frictionalgames.com/forum/thr...#pid240244

And updated after-thoughts after 2nd, and 3rd viewing:
http://www.frictionalgames.com/forum/thr...#pid240677

After several viewings of the movie I concluded that it is extremely stupid, and no matter how I looked at it I couldn't change that. However as you can see in my afterthought post, I mention that the movie, despite its blatant stupidity, can still be fun. This would require me to shut off all the logical reasons I disliked the movie, and just go with all the potential the movie offers to be plain fun just to enjoy it, hence "irrational".

[Prelauncher]

A lot of smart and good points have been made in this thread. I'd also like to raise the point that isn't peoples high standards one of the main driving forces behind development and improvement? If everyone would lower their standards and stop criticizing then game makers, movie makers, writers, musicians etc. would have no goal to strive for. A few of them would still keep improving and progressing because of their artistic spirit but whatever they made better would be pointless since no one would notice it. There would be no one to call them out and say that they could have done a better job. So I say that high standards are an important part in every medium in order for it to keep evolving and improving.

[Kreekakon]

I think I'll try to bring this thread back to life a bit, since I don't think it's exactly quite done yet.

A lot of smart and good points have been made in this thread. I'd also like to raise the point that isn't peoples high standards one of the main driving forces behind development and improvement? If everyone would lower their standards and stop criticizing then game makers, movie makers, writers, musicians etc. would have no goal to strive for. A few of them would still keep improving and progressing because of their artistic spirit but whatever they made better would be pointless since no one would notice it. There would be no one to call them out and say that they could have done a better job. So I say that high standards are an important part in every medium in order for it to keep evolving and improving.

That's a very good point, and I don't think it's possible to argue against it.

Now I think we'll shift the topic a bit (You can still comment on high standards in general if you want!): If you have a high standard do you think it alright to turn off your "highly critical mode" to go into pure brainless entertainment mode? Is it still sometimes like what Bridge said, "impossible" to go into this state even if you know you have potential to be serious, but are just doing it just to enjoy yourself?

What I think is that some forms of media are actually designed to require you to do this, to alter your standards accordingly. For instance if a work doesn't take itself seriously then you don't need to take it seriously to enjoy it, and saying that you didn't like it because you were in "serious" mode the whole time I'd say means you were really just looking at the piece of work the wrong way.

For some other works, depending on how redeeming some of its other factors are, like Equestria Girls, I can still find it in myself to enjoy it even if I know I really disliked the movie.