i still review games very occasionally. i focus on titles i think are incredible, interesting, or inventive.
i also avoid talking about games i hate these days. those videos got plenty of views, more than any time i've ever been positive. yet it was hollow, ad-blocked 'engagement' begetting comments wishing me nothing but the worst.
i'm more proud of the videos where i'm happy, constructively critical, or accurately diagnosing my disdain to external factors (crunch, gamepass, etc.) my hardspace shipbreaker and half-life 2 vids are criticizing games i overall like, but to love something is to want to help it improve and flourish, no?
and then there's the games i liked well enough, but had massive issues that ultimately stopped me from reviewing them. ion fury was a good boomer-shooter time from professional hole diggers.
(side note: the devs donated 10k to the trevor project after the controversy, fulfilling the corp's purpose as a reputation laundry machine)
i had a review key for ion fury. i streamed it for like, four hours? it was a well realized experience! i had criticisms about the sorta "role-reversal duke nukem" approach lending itself to skizzy dudes' primary endearment being wanking off to the pretty cop lady, but those were the same dudes making the damn game in the first place.
and yet reviewing it would have just made me an antagonist in that narrative, another queer creator outraged over what is seen as a "dumb joke", instead of a consistent pattern of gross behavior.
the game itself has issues separate from its developers (pacing, seizure-pace flickering lights), but to criticize those without addressing the kind of studio responsible would be disingenuous. i decided it was better to not review it at all, not give any oxygen to it over a better boomer shooter.
colt canyon had me hooked for a couple hours, satisfying lil rougelight combat gameloop where i felt like i learned a new mechanic or interaction with the environment every playthrough. it was great!
eventually i unlocked more characters, though. "'Makya 'Eagle' May", the indigenous warrior character who is "crazy agile" bumped me as... strange, but was so surface-level it didn't really get a chance to offend beyond the world's most first-thought name and visage.
then i got to "Pedro 'Taco' Pepe", the mexican character. his description reads "his tacos aren't the ONLY thing with an explosive effect" cuz he throws dynamite and mexican food haha get it do you GET IT
i felt kinda bad just no-contacting the devs but, honestly, the worms can have that can. i didn't feel comfortable ignoring the issue if i was going to review it, but then, was i gonna have to be the person to call this out?
am i, whiter than the sugar in white bread, the best person to drag an indie dev in front of an audience for offensive stereotypes of peoples i am not? i'm only like 10% mi'kmaq i'm not about to elizabeth warren myself
i wound up talking about ion fury on streams to address the controversy considering it was hateful 'jokes' targeted at queer folks, but stayed clear away from colt canyon- it would only become a story if i brought it up, and the game wasn't really popular enough on its own for this to be an issue that permeated the zeitgeist.
a bad review of an indie game can hurt a developer more than is fair. they only have so many people reviewing their game in the first place, and the smaller a game the more likely a potential buyer is to consult more opinionated reviews. major pubs either give the game a too-quick score or ignore it altogether.
let's wrap this out with a game i didn't care for much but did review in the end, hellbound. serious sam meets doom meets quake meets the most nothing ad campaign about 'BRINGING VIOLENCE BACK TO SCREENS' or whatever
the game was fine. had some interesting takes on classic doom-style mechanics. the story is barely there but to many that's a selling point. yet overall the entire experience felt like trying to recreate something fleeting, something modern games do better. i think it's pointless to compare its price and experience to doom eternal directly, as most interested clientele would be in a situation to buy both or buy the cheaper one.
my video review was one of the first to launch. yet in saying the game is just 'fine' and not wholeheartedly recommending it, i'm at worst a detractor and at best a spite-buy; people'll pick up the game just to prove that they like all the things i don't in it; check the comments on the hellbound video!
hate vids with no hope for something better drain the life out of me. critical videos that will come off as simple hatred or ignorance due to being one of the only videos about the game lead to discourse and hurting developers i don't necessarily think deserve that kind of hurt, or if so from someone smarter and more personally staked
so i only review games i overall love, now. ones that go underloved, or have love scratching at their surface not realizing the deep passion underneath if you were willing to push
i don't review small games i think are just okay, because i'd be hurting the devs. what a fucked up system that is, eh?
