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

[Johnny Novgorod]

Yahtzee really is brilliant. His own review sounded like an 8 or a 7, but because he doesn't asign numerical scores, he saves himself this sort of bullshit controversy. Nintendo fans can cover their ears and go la-la-la over the negatives and that's good enough, because there's no 7/10 at the end of the video.

Personally, I don't think the game is a 10. I would give it a 9 if I were reviewing it because it does so much right that the small flaws it has are quite noticable (repetitive shrines, frame-rate issues, small dungeons etc.) so there is room for improvement but they made one hell of a great overworld and they reward exploration with many surprises! Jim complained a lot about the weapon-breaking system but it really is a non-issue. You're never really without a weapon to back yourself up. Hell, I ignore heaps of weapons because I know they are inferior to the ones I have already.

You did not read the review.

Jim doesn't complain about being weaponless, he complains about the chore of having to be constantly swapping, using shitty weapons in order to save the better ones, how item-dropping doesn't scale accordingly and what's probably worst of all, how exploration is rendered pointless whenever you're rewarded with another weapon that will break in just a few hits (as opposed to something useful that will make for a good investment).

I don't particularly like Jim. I can't stand his voice, not even the sight of him, and I don't like the personality cult, never mind how tongue-in-cheek it's supposed to be. But fair is fair. He has legitimate criticism for and against the game. That Nintendo fanboys have to gang up and attack his website on the bullshit notion that "he had it coming" is beyond immature.

 

[Rangaman]

OH NO! Instead of a 98 on Metacritic, now it only has a 97! SOUND THE ALARMS, GENTLEMEN! IT'S TIME TO GO TO WAR!

Alright, being serious now: for fucks sake, really? I like this game a lot, I really do. But that's my...y'know...opinion. And this is obviously Jim's...y'know...OPINION.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

In any case, 7 is pretty bad in the current climate of reviewing where CoD games get higher grades from most publishers so you can't really blame the public when the journalists have made it seem that anything under a 9 means the game is not worth your money.

I'm highly critical of overinflated scoring systems. The most abysmal are the ones with 100 scale.
Now it might make sense if you are an aggregator like Metacritic because you are not actually making a recommendation but collecting data.
But it makes no sense for a review score in of itself. I doubt anyone can explain the difference between an 86 and 87 for example. There are few scores there that actually make a difference for example: 79. Why 79? Because apparently the game was not good enough for the 80 which is considered the spot for good game these days. So withholding one point said probably more about the game than the 79 points that were given. Which I think is kind of absurd.
A scale of 10 is IMO also already too detailed as the scores from 0 to 4 hardly get used so why have them? It becomes even worse when fractions become involved which I think is true of a scale of 5 as well. If you have a scale of 5 with fractions why not make it a scale of ten already?
Personally I think scoreboards with a scale as small as possible are the best. They cut to the chase. If you want details read the text.
There is of course some merit to some degree of details in the score. That's why I prefer a scale from 0 to 5 with no fractions:

0 = Scams:
The creators did not even try to make an enjoyable game or a game at all but extort money from the uninformed e.g. repacked asset games or games with really absurd business practices e.g. Dungeon Keeper mobile.

1 = Bad Game:
The creators did try to make a game but lacked ideas and created mostly dysfunctional game mechanics and/or technology e.g. Superman64 or E.T.

2 = Poor Game:
The game has some good ideas but they are rather poorly executed. Fans of the subject matter might still get something out of it.

3 = Decent/okay game:
The game has good ideas that are competently executed but lack a bit of refinement. It?s a bit rough round the edges but overall enjoyable.

4 = Good game:
Good ideas that are well executed.

5 = Excellent Game:
A good game that on top might have an influence on the genre or video games in general.
Everyone should at least have a look at it.

The big issue with metacritic is that they take the much more sensical 0-5 point scores that some sites DO use and if something has 3 stars they turn that into a 60 point score which, which is actually completely inaccurate. It makes sense mathematically but qualitative grading is not mathematical and a 3 star would be something like a 75 grade imo when we look at the 100 point scales.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

OH NO! Instead of a 98 on Metacritic, now it only has a 97! SOUND THE ALARMS, GENTLEMEN! IT'S TIME TO GO TO WAR!

Alright, being serious now: for fucks sake, really? I like this game a lot, I really do. But that's my...y'know...opinion. And this is obviously Jim's...y'know...OPINION.

It's shocking to think that with some popular YouTubers making Jew jokes and lamenting the "demographic suicide" of the U.S. at the hands of non-[white] European immigrants, the guy who is seemingly taking the most shit from gamers is the YouTuber who gave the new Zelda game a 7.

 

[Weaver]

that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.

Wait, it's only a 97 now?

Well, that means it's officially, demonstrably, objectively worse than Grand theft Auto 4.

Rockstar beats Nintendo forever! It's official! Metacritic says so!

No wonder Jim's review has the Nintendo fanboys tearfully howling with impotent rage.

GTA4 got a 98? Wow I hated that game, and before it I was a pretty huge GTA fan lol.

Edit: I'm surprised Jim liked Horizon: Zero Dawn so much. I much prefer BotW.

 

[Exley97_v1legacy]

Pewdiepie: "The Jews found another way to fuck Jesus over."

JonTron: "Wealthy blacks also commit more crime than poor whites."

Jim Sterling: "[Breath of the Wild is] GOOD, 7/10."

 

[CaitSeith]

Pewdiepie: "The Jews found another way to fuck Jesus over."

JonTron: "Wealthy blacks also commit more crime than poor whites."

Jim Sterling: "[Breath of the Wild is] GOOD, 7/10."

But unlike Zelda scores, those statements have no relevance or effect in people's life. /s

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Pewdiepie: "The Jews found another way to fuck Jesus over."

JonTron: "Wealthy blacks also commit more crime than poor whites."

Jim Sterling: "[Breath of the Wild is] GOOD, 7/10."

It's probably worth pointing out that before the site went down completely (it still is I believe), a lot of the more negative comments were faithfully using the usual anti-SJW terms one would expect to see in certain areas of the web. So there does appear to be a consistency to the detachment of reality maintained.

Edit: also what is going on with these forums? I thought maintenance would just affect access, not throw us all into a weird time-bending vortex. Brings back strange memories of tranquiliser abuse.

 

[Terminal Blue]

But unlike Zelda scores, those statements have no relevance or effect in people's life. /s

Exactly, only a Commulist would think they did..

Oppression test: If you can buy Zelda: BOTW from Amazon while not wearing hijab, then Jim Sterling didn't actually give it a mediocre review score.

 

[Cap'nPipsqueak]

mad screeching

Oh yes; obviously anything Jim does is on purpose, just to piss off the fanboys.

Given that the fanboys are currently DDoSing his site, exactly who has the moral high ground here?

And the average was brought down a whole point on Metacritic? WOW.

 

[CaitSeith]

But unlike Zelda scores, those statements have no relevance or effect in people's life. /s

Exactly, only a Commulist would think they did..

Oppression test: If you can buy Zelda: BOTW from Amazon while not wearing hijab, then Jim Sterling didn't actually give it a mediocre review score.

I was making fun of how people consider Zelda scores such a big deal. Commulist? [https://devpost.com/software/commulist]

 

[Callate]

I suspect what it comes down to is that many people aren't seeing this as a review of the game itself in seclusion, but tying into the prospects of the Switch itself- not entirely unreasonably, given that many people have labeled the new Zelda as "the" reason to own a Nintendo Switch. (Despite it also being released for the Wii-U.)

I don't think Sterling's review was unreasonable, nor do I think it's likely to have a significant impact on the over-all critical reception of Breath of the Wild or the Switch. But I also don't think that this response was particularly surprising (which is not the same as saying it's acceptable or condoned, thank you). It may be that some fuses were blown between this and his "advocating" the stealing of Nintendo software (though said piece was tongue-in-cheek).

 

[CritialGaming]

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

Yeah it did.

I will openly admit, Zelda as a series at least has a legit reason to have such rabid fans. No Man's Sky had fans for no fucking reason, which makes the outrage towards that game's reviews really bizzare. Funny how NMS because the most refunded game in fucking history though. So much for fans sticking to their guns.

Jim Sterling has kind of built his rep on this shit though. His whole business model sort of relies on breaking down the fanboy illusion. Sadly it makes him one of the most honest critics out there, because he has no strings to any company bullshit. The Zelda reviews from official channels are not real reviews. Nintendo is known for their strange White/Black listing of review sites and Youtube people, unless those people suck the dick of everything Nintendo releases. Sterling on the other hand has no ties to that, and as a result he gives honest reviews (to his personal tastes which is fine) and agree or not, you have to admit it is nice to know that he was in no way paid off for whatever review.

 

[Worgen]

that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.

Wait, it's only a 97 now?

Well, that means it's officially, demonstrably, objectively worse than Grand theft Auto 4.

Rockstar beats Nintendo forever! It's official! Metacritic says so!

No wonder Jim's review has the Nintendo fanboys tearfully howling with impotent rage.

Keep in mind the one guy who gave toy story 3 a review that showed up as negative on rotten tomatoes got death threats. People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

Keep in mind the one guy who gave toy story 3 a review that showed up as negative on rotten tomatoes got death threats. People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom.

If I remember right that was Armond White, who legitimately has earned a reputation as a toxic contrarian and pariah. Nowadays people just don't even talk about him.

 

[Worgen]

Keep in mind the one guy who gave toy story 3 a review that showed up as negative on rotten tomatoes got death threats. People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom.

If I remember right that was Armond White, who legitimately has earned a reputation as a toxic contrarian and pariah. Nowadays people just don't even talk about him.

Toy Story 3 wasn't even that good, I dont get why people love it so.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.

Wait, it's only a 97 now?

Well, that means it's officially, demonstrably, objectively worse than Grand theft Auto 4.

Rockstar beats Nintendo forever! It's official! Metacritic says so!

No wonder Jim's review has the Nintendo fanboys tearfully howling with impotent rage.

Keep in mind the one guy who gave toy story 3 a review that showed up as negative on rotten tomatoes got death threats. People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom.

I never liked this argument. "It can happen to anybody". "It can happen anywhere".
Crime can happen anywhere, to anybody, but some areas have a higher density than others.

 

[Worgen]

that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.

Wait, it's only a 97 now?

Well, that means it's officially, demonstrably, objectively worse than Grand theft Auto 4.

Rockstar beats Nintendo forever! It's official! Metacritic says so!

No wonder Jim's review has the Nintendo fanboys tearfully howling with impotent rage.

Keep in mind the one guy who gave toy story 3 a review that showed up as negative on rotten tomatoes got death threats. People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom.

I never liked this argument. "It can happen to anybody". "It can happen anywhere".
Crime can happen anywhere, to anybody, but some areas have a higher density than others.

What are you talking about?

 

[Terminal Blue]

Commulist?

During a livestream with Sargon of Akkad, Jontron described the "new left" (meaning, in this case, the people who enforce the rules on Twitter) as "fucking Commulists (sic)".

Basically, I'm taking the piss out of the fact that the guy is too dumb to say the word "Communists" properly. We're on the same page re: review scores.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

that said 97/100 is still an incredible score to have on metacritic. Nintendo should be proud regardless.

Wait, it's only a 97 now?

Well, that means it's officially, demonstrably, objectively worse than Grand theft Auto 4.

Rockstar beats Nintendo forever! It's official! Metacritic says so!

No wonder Jim's review has the Nintendo fanboys tearfully howling with impotent rage.

Keep in mind the one guy who gave toy story 3 a review that showed up as negative on rotten tomatoes got death threats. People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom.

I never liked this argument. "It can happen to anybody". "It can happen anywhere".
Crime can happen anywhere, to anybody, but some areas have a higher density than others.

What are you talking about?

People will go way overboard with any kinda overly serious fandom

Sounds a lot like: "Boys will be boys".
Really translates to: "Any fandom can have this kind of reaction".

Reply: No, some produce worse reactions than others. And the fact that somebody somewhere got death threats over a review 7 years ago doesn't excuse or normalize Nintendo fans and the DDoS (as well as the death threats). I don't think it's normal, expected or appropriate of every fanbase. I don't look at it and go "Yeah, that'll happen with fandoms". No, that happens with only a few of them. And Nintendo - or Zelda, for that matter - is centerfold.