|
There's only nothing political in your review because a)the game is blockbuster/b-movie cinema referential and b)it doesn't say anything to your personal beliefs. If it did have something to say, or cause a reaction in you I would expect you to talk about that and not deny it.
I don't know why a reviewer should attempt to write towards an approximation of the mainstream audience because that's dishonest, and that person doesn't exist. I think it's a sign of your biases that you think military storylines and games warrant discussion, but other things don't. Many people have many things to say, different values, and different things that matter to them. We all have biases. Your opinion is also understandable and not irregular, but not absolute by any means.
Why shouldn't a player, a reviewer, challenge the artist with something they didn't intend? Are artists supposed to be omniscent? What about the Death of the Author? What about all the unintended consequence of art? They are intrinsic to creative works. Why should the reviewer surpress themselves, and lie? We're supposed to be chasing honesty here. If someone forms an opinion of the art as is, others may feel the same way, they should not lie about their experience. If they try to surpress and ignore it, they will likely fail anyway.
We have your personal perspectives and biases, and I've tried to highlight yours in that post. Where I think you've gone wrong is the easy and classical mistake that you take so much of your perspective for granted and then assume that to be the objective. You are as subjective as anyone else. I can read your review with an assessment of you, the things you're into, the things you've played, and that all forms part of my impression. Do not forget the most important part, we are all humans here.
|