I feel that a good version of this review would have focused entirely on the game???s merits and monetisation system, without the needless paragraph where the author vomited forth his opinion on whether the game was politically appropriate. As well as being entirely subjective and irrelevant to the review, this paragraph also seems extremely distasteful in an era where Apple feels that it is appropriate to mass censor all games which might cause offence to anyone who isn???t firmlyon the left of centre political demographic
While the author is obviously welcome to his views, I really don???t understand what the political paragraph added to the review. It reads like a very clear case of virtue signalling (???of course we have to tiptoe around this issue in the current day and age but I feel this particular game is acceptable???) and really isn???t what I exptect from a site like pockettacrics where the gameplay is meant to be the primary object of review.
I understand that this seems like a small thing in isolation, but left wing politics seems to be firmly embede d in modern game review culture to the point where Apple is now actively censoring games (including many that PT has precisely reviewed highly. Personally I hoped that pockettacrics was above engaging in this nonsense. Should a review of a board game like Puerto Rico have a paragraph discussing whether the game is politically sensitive to colonialism? Should a review of Sushi Go veer off into a discussion of the morality of meat eating versus vegetarianism? If so then fine, there are plenty of other sites that I can read instead.