>>48873742Since you’re in desperate need of someone to help your zoomer retardation here’s a pro tip:
Saying there’s one standard objective way of defining love would be really silly right?
Almost like everyone views love differently right? So yeah, you’re right, love is subjective, because no one can tell another person what to love or how to love.
Saying something like
“This game is objectively bad” is really dumb because there’s absolutely no objective standard to judge art. Some people LOVE open world games, and to them Breath of the Wild is awesome. Some people find them ridiculous, and say the game is a shallow Zelda game to boot. Do you see the discrepancy between two opinions? Do you see why it would be subjective? Do you see why you can’t TELL people what’s good and what’s bad? Why reviews are only opinions you can ignore?
>Round is a fact>"Colosseum has less content than Game Freak's games" is also a fact.The games have varying levels of “content”. The gameboy games can fit into a thousandth of the space in the Switch games, does that make SwSh objectively better? Maybe in your own SUBJECTIVE views based on your own SUBJECTIVE standard, but to me Colosseum is awesome and really fun. It has “content” the other games don’t, like stealing Pokémon and a uniquely dingy region. This is my OPINION, nowhere am I saying the game is OBJECTIVELY good because I can’t. It’s not possible.
To try and be objective about art is to try to be weirdly authoritarian on it, instead of just letting people like what they like.
