Jim Sterling reviewed Zelda BOTW today, then angry comments exploded, site down multiple times...

[shrekfan246]

ITT: People immediately blaming ?fans' when a rather big game critic releases a critique of a game that is heavily marketed. Instead of, you know, the most logical issue being server overload due to too much traffic. Or as most call it, the website servers can't handle the influx of people wanting to read his critique. Nah, must be the fault of the ?fans'.

And yet, the hatedom is brushed under the rug. So tell me folks, what makes you believe it was ?fans' that were magically DDosing the site instead of members of the hatedom doing this?

What "hatedom"? Jim's? As has been mentioned, if it was just the traffic from some nebulous "hatedom" coming to brigade Jim's site, it would be a fairly regular occurrence. And it has happened in the past; whenever Jim reviewed some high-profile, extremely hyped video game and didn't have opinions that were lock-in-step with the rest of the reviewer pack.

Also, it's pretty obvious when you, you know, look at the comments on Jim's site and on other sites which are discussing his review. There is an embarrassing number [http://www.strawpoll.me/12519109] of people who are incredibly salty over the fact that he liked it, but not enough. (Though the number of "no" responses on that is heartening.)

pretty silly that 79/81 reviews can all be a mixture of 10/10 and 9.5/10 scores and how they can all suddenly be undermined by 2 measly reviews to bring the score down a point.
that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.



also this gives a clear explanation on the scores LOL

Slant Magazine even gave No Man's Sky a 4.5/5 stars review. funny that. XD

http://www.slantmagazine.com/games/review/no-mans-sky

I don't get why people are still trying to draw this conspiracy that because Jim liked Horizon, that explains everything/brings into question why he didn't like Zelda as much. They're different games, with different mechanics and different things that are going to be different bugbears for different people. How hard is it to understand that shitty weapon degradation and limiting stamina systems in addition to uncontrollable game mechanics that actively hinder the player's attempts at exploration are really obnoxious for some people?

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

It's not like he didn't clickbait fans on Destructoid with lulz worthy review scores before.

Sure. He wrote a THREE THOUSAND WORD review on a site that doesn't have ads, all for clickbait.

Please stop.

 

[maninahat]

It's not like he didn't clickbait fans on Destructoid with lulz worthy review scores before.

Clickbait should only refer to when a writer produces an attention grabbing title at the expense of honesty, clarity or dignity. If a reviewer says they didn't like something, where exactly is the dishonesty? Or do you think Jim secretly loves the games he gives the slightly lower scores to?

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

It's not like he didn't clickbait fans on Destructoid with lulz worthy review scores before.

Sure. He wrote a THREE THOUSAND WORD review on a site that doesn't have ads, all for clickbait.

Please stop.

Jim is a lot of things, but a clickbaiter is not one of them.

 

[Imre Csete]

Clickbait should only refer to when a writer produces an attention grabbing title at the expense of honesty, clarity or dignity. If a reviewer says they didn't like something, where exactly is the dishonesty? Or do you think Jim secretly loves the games he gives the slightly lower scores to?

He has a history of provoking reactions for his own amusement, all I'm saying.

I wouldn't be surprised if he knew what was coming. He was harping on Nintendo for a while because of the youtube policy dickery anyways.

 

[babinro]

There's something wrong with many nintendo fans. They take a cult mentality to the whole thing.

This is NOT limited to Nintendo fans. If Jim gave Skyrim a 6/10 then his site would go down for it. Jim's site ALREADY went down as a result of his Last Guardian review. I'm less familiar with Xbox games but I'm sure if gave a very negative review to one of those exclusives the site would go down too.

This is a problem with a small minority of gamers.
I seriously doubt its limited to 'low' scores either. I bet if Jim gave Mighty#9 a 10/10 his site would go down for it as well.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

well im not surprised really. but i don't get why nintendo fanboys care what Jim says. i mean the guy really doesn't like nintendo, even if the game was perfect and worth 10 out of 10 he wouldn't give it that.

Jim has said in the past, even while bagging on Nintendo, that he didn't want the Switch to fail and that he wanted it to have great games and do well because that's just good for the industry overall. If he thought Breath of the Wild deserved a 10/10 that's exactly what he would have given it, regardless of his feelings towards Nintendo.

 

[CaitSeith]

pretty silly that 79/81 reviews can all be a mixture of 10/10 and 9.5/10 scores and how they can all suddenly be undermined by 2 measly reviews to bring the score down a point.
that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.



also this gives a clear explanation on the scores LOL

Slant Magazine even gave No Man's Sky a 4.5/5 stars review. funny that. XD

http://www.slantmagazine.com/games/review/no-mans-sky

Does anyone know if Slant Magazine is still up?

 

[Kajin]

I don't agree with a lot of Jim's complaints and think they're heavily exaggerated, but for fucks sake the response is just childish. Let the guy have his opinion.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

It seems unreal to me that the world's biggest Youtuber can get slapped by the FTC for running glorified game commercials and gamers don't say word one about that (except to defend him), but a game critic can't give a freakin' Zelda game an SEVEN score without having a crazed mod assail his objectivity and DDoS his site.

 

[elvor0]

Clickbait should only refer to when a writer produces an attention grabbing title at the expense of honesty, clarity or dignity. If a reviewer says they didn't like something, where exactly is the dishonesty? Or do you think Jim secretly loves the games he gives the slightly lower scores to?

He has a history of provoking reactions for his own amusement, all I'm saying.

I wouldn't be surprised if he knew what was coming. He was harping on Nintendo for a while because of the youtube policy dickery anyways.

He does. But writing an honest review isn't provoking people, it's writing an honest review. If he didn't like elements of a game then it's his right to say so and should publish them because that's his job. He hasn't written an antagonistic review, he's written a review that praises the game quite well while still pointing out flaws because no game is flawless or elements that he feels are unenjoyable (such as weapon durability and sub par frame rates).

Yeah he probably did know it was coming, because people are lunatics. That doesn't make it right and nor should he change or tone his opinion down just because he suspects that giving a game a 7/10 will invoke the "wrath" of lunatics.

 

[WeepingAngels]

Shit like this is one of the reasons I can't stand hype. People get fuckin' stupid.

 

[CaitSeith]

Same thing happened with No Man's sky if I remember correctly

Yeah, but the circumstances were different. That time he was the first review to appear in Metacritic, before any of the others confirmed how disappointing it really was.

This? Everyone else has already been throwing praises left and right. There is no rational justification for this!

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

It seems unreal to me that the world's biggest Youtuber can get slapped by the FTC for running glorified game commercials and gamers don't say word one about that (except to defend him), but a game critic can't give a freakin' Zelda game an SEVEN score without having a crazed mod assail his objectivity and DDoS his site.

This interests a curious woodland friend of mine, what is the story you talk of? I...Uhh, I mean my friend is not sure whether they have read about it yet.

Edit: oh wait, nevermind. A search has yielded results!
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-09-02-machinima-deceived-consumers-with-xbox-one-youtube-videos-ftc-says
https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2016/07/12/ftc-say-warner-bros-paid-youtubers-for-positive-middle-earth-shadow-of-mordor-videos/

 

[CaitSeith]

There's something wrong with many nintendo fans. They take a cult mentality to the whole thing.

And No Man's Sky fans, and The Last Guardian fans, etc...

 

[Fox12]

"Nintendo doesn't just make games for babies."

Hm.

 

[Silentpony_v1legacy]

Same thing happened with No Man's sky if I remember correctly

Yeah, but the circumstances were different. That time he was the first review to appear in Metacritic, before any of the others confirmed how disappointing it really was.

This? Everyone else has already been throwing praises left and right. There is no rational justification for this!

To be fair people who take personal, nay spiritual offense to a review of a God damned video game that doesn't meet their transcendental love for said game are not rational people.

Personally I don't care about any reviews because it doesn't look like the type of game I'd enjoy and I don't want a switch. But if people like it, great for them! If they don't, hey, great for them!

 

[EbonBehelit]

There's something wrong with many nintendo fans. They take a cult mentality to the whole thing.

To be fair, there's zealots in every fandom. The word 'fan' is derived from 'fanatic', after all.

That being said, this doesn't surprise me one bit. People tend to get attached to what they like, and seeing others enjoying the same things brings a sort of vicarious pleasure, but also validation: some people are so uncertain of their own feelings that they need others to reaffirm them. After all, if the thing you like is beloved by all, that must mean you have good taste, right?

This seems to create an environment where the dissenting voice needs to be either brought into disrepute or 'enlightened', so as to further validate the zealot's opinion as being correct.

So yeah, in short it IS very cultish.

 

[CaitSeith]

Jim could have given it a 9.999 and there are people who would have bitched about it.

Slightly unrelated, but I remember Adam Sessler once commenting on how stupid he found those types of scores, partly because he would see people argue that a game that got a 9.8 was better than one that got a 9.6 like those fractions of points mean anything.

By 2009 or so, I realized how pointless professional review scores can be. Granted, it did not take much; what with whatever bullcrap IGN, GameSpot, Game Spy, and certain other sites were pulling off over the mid 2000s. Though Sessler is guilty of practicing the point difference in his early career. Back before X-Play, the show was called GameSpot TV (and then Extended Play before dropping it to just X) and they did scores on a 10 point scale. There reviews frequently had stuff with .5, .75, or .25. They eventually dropped the decimals when the show became X-play, because Adam and Morrigan (Kate Batello was long gone by that point) realized how stupid this was. That said, they were known for giving low scores over decent or good games for petty reasons when it was X-Play. Adam himself had problems with certain games and lowering scores, because of "content", or him not being able to beat one section due to being "too hard". Basically, his God of War Ascension review. And I don't even like God of War, and felt he was too harsh on the game, and was blaming it on his inadequacies. Plus there was the tirade of him and almost every other "professional" reviewer bitching about the Bros Before Hoes achievement. All I had to say was "*****, where was this 'morality' back when God of War first started, or all the praising you gave to the GTA series". I lost a lot of respect for him after that. Sorry for getting a bit off topic there

I feel like scores on AAA hyped games are pretty pointless. Maybe in more obscure games may be worth it; but unless the games are overflowing with flaws, hyped people will get their AAA titles, and review scores only serve as confirmation bias (instead of buyer's guide).

 

[Jandau]

Wow, it's almost like you're not allowed to like a game nowadays, at least unless it's a game that's been sanctioned for mandatory hating. Let me ask you this, have you never disliked a popular game? A game that tons of people adore? Maybe not even disliked it (as Jim didn't dislike BotW), rather just felt it was alright, while everyone around you lost their shit over it?

The hilarious part here is that Jim actually liked the game. The review was mostly positive and the score was fine. So he liked Horizon and Nioh more. So what? In general, shouldn't you be looking for reviewers whose tastes align with yours? So if Jim has different taste in games than you do, why are you so upset about it?

Also, the notion of Jim clickbaiting is a bit laughable. The man doesn't run ads on his site. He doesn't give two shits about your clicks...