As in, what do you remember particularly agreeing or disagreeing with on what he's said about the games industry, its audience, practices, production model and so on.
To me one statement still hovers above all else he's said, from his Ninja Gaiden II review from way back in 2008:
I only recently realized that the sentiment I quoted earlier was what influenced this stance. No, I don't need to be treated like I'm some 14-year old juvenile, horny shut-in gorehound to make me want to buy games. If you want to call and rate your game "mature", have it reflect that. Hence, whenever I see sex used as a shameless games marketing tactic (or hell, any shitty, juvenile marketing tactic like the Dead Space 2 "Your mom's gonna hate it" ads) or completely gratuitous boobage or similar content (this is part why the marketing of Dragon Age Origins felt rather immature to me), I just roll my eyes and think "Is this really the best you could think of?" Yeah, I know, sex sells, but there's a time and a place for everything. I wouldn't want to see, say, the next Elder Scrolls game market itself with some buxom Nord wench holding a copy of the game when there's so much more the game can market itself with. This is why Dante's Inferno (and I think a lot of you can agree with me) feels incredibly gratuitous in its nudity and shock value to me, and ends up being almost embarrassing to play at points.
Anyway, that's my one Yahtzee thought that's stuck with me. What's yours?
To me one statement still hovers above all else he's said, from his Ninja Gaiden II review from way back in 2008:
The bolded part is what's stuck with me for years, and I didn't even realize it until recently. I hate to kick this dead and long buried horse, but when we had that stupid kerfuffle over the Dead Island Riptide special edition statue, it got a particular rise out of me. Not because I necessarily thought it was offensive to women (though I see how someone would think that), but because it was plain offensive to gamers period. To me the idea that the developers who made a mature rated game would think their audience was immature enough that featuring a bloody, dismembered and decapitated torso as a special edition bonus would actually make them want to buy the game more spoke IMO of an unbelievably low opinion of their audience.Yahtzee said:But on the other hand the bugs and gameplay issues make it seem unfinished and its immature obsession with blood and titties make me almost insulted to be the target audience.
I only recently realized that the sentiment I quoted earlier was what influenced this stance. No, I don't need to be treated like I'm some 14-year old juvenile, horny shut-in gorehound to make me want to buy games. If you want to call and rate your game "mature", have it reflect that. Hence, whenever I see sex used as a shameless games marketing tactic (or hell, any shitty, juvenile marketing tactic like the Dead Space 2 "Your mom's gonna hate it" ads) or completely gratuitous boobage or similar content (this is part why the marketing of Dragon Age Origins felt rather immature to me), I just roll my eyes and think "Is this really the best you could think of?" Yeah, I know, sex sells, but there's a time and a place for everything. I wouldn't want to see, say, the next Elder Scrolls game market itself with some buxom Nord wench holding a copy of the game when there's so much more the game can market itself with. This is why Dante's Inferno (and I think a lot of you can agree with me) feels incredibly gratuitous in its nudity and shock value to me, and ends up being almost embarrassing to play at points.
Anyway, that's my one Yahtzee thought that's stuck with me. What's yours?