D&D 5E (2024) Here's The New 2024 Player's Handbook Wizard Art

 

[mamba]

"Criticism" I think of as meaning either (i) negative remarks about something/someone, or (ii) analysis of the sort that a (food, art, literary, etc) critic engages in. In the second sense, criticism need not be negative.

the second one is what ‘critique’ is for

 

[pemerton]

the second one is what ‘critique’ is for

Well, as I said, I call it criticism. As Oxford Languages via Google puts it, "the analysis and judgement of the merits and faults of a literary or artistic work".

Cf critique: "a detailed analysis and assessment of something, especially a literary, philosophical, or political theory." Or, as a verb, to "evaluate (a theory or practice) in a detailed and analytical way."

 

[Fifth Element]

the second one is what ‘critique’ is for

Cool. But that ain't how language works. The dictionary does not dictate how people use words.

 

[mamba]

Some people seem to think that because something is "only" an opinion, then it doesn't matter. Pretty much all human decision making, kindest acts, the worst atrocities, is based upon opinions. Facts rarely have anything to do with it.

of course opinions matter, but frequently they are just that, opinions, not facts. Heck, even when there are actual facts, many opinions ignore them and are contradicted by them.

Here, there is no actual fact to push back against, it is all opinion / personal taste.

Just like you can like music I would not voluntarily listen to, I can find the picture to fall into superhero imagery rather than fantasy, want it to be grittier, or do not think she should wear glasses. To me these are all valid options, some of which I agree with. They are just as valid as liking the art for whatever reason you give.

The difference, as @ezo said, is that the criticisms got a lot of back and forth while the ones who liked it were accepted and did not get pushback, despite both being equally valid and acceptable.

It is fine to say you disagree with someone’s opinion, I reserve the right to do the same. I don’t think we needed 100 pages of back and forth about glasses though, and as far as I can tell, not a single opinion was changed (which is not surprising, it is hard enough to do that when there are objective facts involved…)

 

[mamba]

Cool. But that ain't how language works. The dictionary does not dictate how people use words.

it kinda does, it mostly documents it more than comes up with the rules, but if you use words in ways that others do not, then people will misunderstand you

 

[Hussar]

To me these are all valid options

But are they all valid opinions?

And, sorry, but, an opinion that is just someone saying random stuff without any actual factual basis is largely worthless.

I mean, if you don't like someone's music, that's fine. But, telling them that their music is the worst music ever, or comparing it to something else, and then wondering why these comparisons get so much push back is largely the textbook definition of sea lioning.

If you insist on a specific criticism, yet refuse to actual back up that criticism with anything like a fact, then it's worhtless.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

If you insist on a specific criticism, yet refuse to actual back up that criticism with anything like a fact, then it's worhtless.

Worthless for the discussion.

Sometime you just don't like something but cannot pinpoint what exactly is off for you. So for a certain person, not liking something without explaining it is fine.

 

[Fifth Element]

it kinda does, it mostly documents it more than comes up with the rules, but if you use words in ways that others do not, then people will misunderstand you

It doesn't "mostly" document. It's purely documentary. It's why they have to be updated as language evolves.

And given that the dictionary quoted included both definitions in this case, saying that only one is the proper one to use is silly. People DO use it in both ways. If you assume they are using it in only one way, then that's on you. Understanding is a two-way street.

 

[Hussar]

Worthless for the discussion.

Sometime you just don't like something but cannot pinpoint what exactly is off for you. So for a certain person, not liking something without explaining it is fine.

Again, that's not the issue.

It's the REPEATED statement that you don't like it, for a STATED reason, then insisting that just because it's an "opinion" everyone has to accept it and never ask any questions. As if somehow making something an opinion confers some special status that makes it immune to discussion.

What's the point of stating an opinion on a discussion board, then repeatedly doubling down on the opinion, but then refusing to actually discuss the opinion? I'm sorry, but, if you state that X is "the worst Y ever", that's going to need a bit more than, "well it's just my opinion, why can't you accept that?"

I mean, if I stated, "In my opinion, Advanced Dungeons and Dragons isn't actually a roleplaying game. It's a wargame pretending to be a roleplaying game and it's not until we get to 3rd edition D&D that we actually started having a real roleplaying game." I would likely get a fair bit of push back. And rightfully so. That's an statement that's going to need some clarification and expanding. Yet, apparently, sticking IMO on the front of that means no one can ever disagree with me? That everyone must just accept my opinion?

Bugger that.

 

[mamba]

And, sorry, but, an opinion that is just someone saying random stuff without any actual factual basis is largely worthless.

and yet you were advocating for doing just that to avoid pushback just a few posts ago, or did I misunderstand that?

If you insist on a specific criticism, yet refuse to actual back up that criticism with anything like a fact, then it's worhtless.

taste does not have many facts to back it up. I can tell you why to me this is a superhero pose and image, that does not mean you have to agree, this is all subjective and pretending it is not is just weird…