terry goodkind!?!

[kid_prufrock]

The New Yorker's fantasy recommendations: My faith in that magazine about anything of importance just went down about 40%. Sorry, Seymour Hersh! 'Till next time, David Remnick! Rest in peace, William Shawn

Comments

[carnap]

Maybe next time some guy will ask his accountant buddy about video games or something and write THAT up. Then the modern cultural establishment will know to play Final Fantasy VII!
You've really got me confused here. I thought you were implicating in the post title that the problem with this list is that Goodkind is bad. But here you seem to be implicating that the problem with the Goodkind selection is that he's passé-so 1997-and the New Yorker should have picked someone more contemporary. In which case it seems odd to pick on Goodkind since he's more contemporary than a lot of that list.

Alternatively, the basis of the implicature could be a shared background assumption that FFVII is really bad. This also confuses me, since I though FFVII was supposed to be good. So I'm very puzzled by what you're trying to convey.

(Disclaimer: I have never played FFVII, read anything by Terry Goodkind, or trusted the New Yorker about anything of importance.)

[mumbly_joe]

FFVII was okay. I mean, it's no FFVI. Or FFIX. Those were both much better.

Incidentally, I'd say exactly the same thing about Goodkind's writing.

[sildra]

Well, whether or not FF7 is any good, it's no FF6, because FF6 was my childhood.

[mumbly_joe]

Basically what you said, except I was also trying to say that both FFIX, and, despite all the Woolseyisms, FFVI, have better writing than Goodkind's stuff.

[kid_prufrock]

Basically, Arthur and Greg got it right: FFVII is an absolute mess of a game that nonetheless has a huge, devoted following that mainly consists of people with pretty immature tastes. It's also high-profile enough that someone who knows just a bit about video games could reasonably recommend it.