Jimquisition: Better Does Not Mean Good

[johnnnny guitar]

Hmmmm I see your argument Jim with prices (I live in Australia) but the way we can all fix that is to have the Good Old Games pricing where it's American currency and the dollar of your country is what affects the amount you pay but of course Steam,Xbox live, PSN and Origin would never do that cause they are fucking greedy (well except for steam the prices are set buy the publisher or something).

 

[ryo02]

Aww, sounds like someone had their feelings hurt that they were losing to EC.

Pfft. I'm too busy winning hearts to be winning polls!

well I think the Jimquisition and Extra credits should get together and make a baby ... hell throw some game overthinker in there too.

 

[Something Amyss]

So I've been known to fall to the whole "It could be worse, right?" mentality, but I also know that opposing this approach doesn't necessarily warrant some of the shit pulled off by the Mass Effect zealots, for instance. We have a right to ask for nice things, but we have to ask for these nice things in a reasonable and civil manner.

I'm sorry, who were the extremists here? What did they do?

 

[Custard_Angel]

Well I'm going to get on my high horse and complain that when Jim was talking about Australia ad posted an image of "starving children" he actually posted an Oxfam Australia ad for "Closing the gap" an Australian movement to "close the gap" in the education disparity between white indigenous Australians. Starvation is less of a concern here, and instead concerns like alcoholism, drug abuse, homelessness, poor health, no job prospects and widespread abuse of children (more of a problem in isolated communities) take precedence. So yeah... get told?

Also, Australians do have a right to complain about game prices because here a AAA title retails for ~$120. That includes no DLC, no special edition, no included bonuses. A stock standard vanilla game for $120. For no reason.

There is no possible way that a $60 game can accrue a further $60 of taxes and shipping costs. Especially in this day and age of mass transport and digital distribution. The Australian dollar is even outperforming the American dollar so exchange rates cant possibly affect anything.

Modern Warfare 3 is priced at $99AUD (~$103USD) on steam. That's $43 higher than US for a digital download. There is no excuse for that. Australia is just a gaming dead zone as far as the industry is concerned.

 

[mfeff]

Perhaps the thought process pervading some of the audience to this media, is that game sites, which sponsor journalism, have elements of bias and contamination pertaining the the financial aspect of the business. It's part n' parcel to the garbage business practices of some of the larger publishers. It's a business not a charity.

We look at Jim here, who states he wanted to do an episode with Konami... of course they shit in his face. He doesn't have a whole helluva' lot of material to work with here, other than... those douche-bags? They shit in my face. So that is what we get. Man has to make a living ffs, even if it is going to be just another opinion piece. Hell' I would like to see Jim interview people in publishing and development... ahhh wish in one hand...

As once said, "wars long done... where all just folk now", and in that we all by degrees have to dance to tunes that may not be or have been in our best interest or cater to our perception of integrity. That's life.

The EC Vs. Jim, really? They are both opinion leveraged series. Though, speaking for myself... I would treat Jim to a round and wouldn't piss on EC'n crew if they were on fire.

Jim makes me laugh (to spite myself sometimes), EC makes me face palm... because of spite... there IS a difference.

 

[Vault101]

jimquisition VS EC thread?

whooooaaaaa..breaking the 4th wall

 

[Something Amyss]

jimquisition VS EC thread?

whooooaaaaa..breaking the 4th wall

I think there has to BE a fourth wall before you can break it.

 

[Vault101]

Well I'm going to get on my high horse and complain that when Jim was talking about Australia ad posted an image of "starving children" he actually posted an Oxfam Australia ad for "Closing the gap" an Australian movement to "close the gap" in the education disparity between white indigenous Australians. Starvation is less of a concern here, and instead concerns like alcoholism, drug abuse, homelessness, poor health, no job prospects and widespread abuse of children (more of a problem in isolated communities) take precedence. So yeah... get told?

.

yeah..I found that odd..those kids arnt africans

the situation with the indigenous people is.....bad to say the least, its clear though all the handouts just don't work

 

[James Ennever]

What I want to know is if Jim just went out and bought that box of Raisin Bran to feature in the video, or if he really starts his days with two scoops of shriveled grapey goodness.

Same and no branston pickle, for shame.

thanks for mentioning my forum thread jim

 

[IamLEAM1983]

So I've been known to fall to the whole "It could be worse, right?" mentality, but I also know that opposing this approach doesn't necessarily warrant some of the shit pulled off by the Mass Effect zealots, for instance. We have a right to ask for nice things, but we have to ask for these nice things in a reasonable and civil manner.

I'm sorry, who were the extremists here? What did they do?

I was mostly referring to the FTC comaplaints and the whole cupcakes thing.

Granted, that's a personal opinion and I've talked at length about how I feel towards the whole Retake Mass Effect subject, but I really don't want to anger anyone else again. Also, I'm more than a little sick of the whole ending kerfuffle.

Trolling the devs or more or less counting on the opinion of a figure of authority who may or may not understand how game pitches are structured to prove that BioWare made false claims doesn't change the fact the property remains in EA and BioWare's hands, and that they alone have the power to choose how to handle the series' ending.

We all know where that ended, we all know what's coming this summer. A little DLC patch intended to clarify a few issues, and nothing else. That's it.

Also, I didn't exactly refer to "extremists". This was much more a case of people investing far too much time and effort into something that's ultimately trivial.

This isn't me trying to hijack the thread, this isn't me wanting to start a flame war. It's just my very personal and ultimately meaningless opinion. Seeing as this thread wasn't about Mass Effect 3, I'd appreciate it if any comments directed at me but unrelated to the video were limited to PMs.

 

[CaptOfSerenity]

I don't believe Jim is corrupt. However, there are concerns that have been raised that people are not necessarily wrong for thinking corruption would be a possibility. Schmoozing with industry people, free swag/games, insulting viewers/readers, scores being far from the average, reviewed games not being played to completion, handling pretty much all the reviews on Destructoid when there are many talented writers on staff, articles written with blatant trolling attempts... And there is probably more.

Jim is a good writer. I genuinely enjoy most of his reviews. I just feel like there is a disconnect in there somewhere.

Scores being far from the average:

Wow, funny how opinions work. It's almost like sometimes, one person's opinion doesn't line up with others.

Free swag/games:

Journalists always get pissed at this because it implies that they can be bought with free fucking gift bags and a game. They have more integrity than that. That's why they're journalists.

Reviews editor:

He's the reviews editor. That's his job.

Trolling attempts:

Every time I read a "troll" article by Sterling, he's trolling dumbass, knee-jerk fanboys.

Schmoozing with industry people:

It's called interacting. It happens

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Better Does Not Mean Good

Things in the game industry could be worst. We could all be living in the 80s, or we could be in Australia, beset by high prices and restricted ratings. We could also have no arms. We could have porcelain eyes. We could be killed by a Terminator to stop our children leading a revolution against a genocidal artificial intelligence.

Things could always be worse, but saying that to counter an argument about the North American videogame industry doesn't really prove a bloody thing.

Watch Video

I'm actually curious about people's claims of corruption? What games did they say you seemed like you were advertising? because it seems completely unfounded to me.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Did love Jim's shout-out to the Jimquisition vs. Extra Credits thread, complete with his usual brand of 'seriousness'.

But, of course, he brings up a good point as usual, a point that actually reminded me of something I heard a long while back and I firmly believe in:

Comparing anything, ANYTHING to the past is absolutely and completely stupid, because, in the end, that stuff was in the PAST, and there's a better chance of you winning the lottery than there is of the stuff in the past ever, ever coming back. If we should be comparing what we have right now to anything, it's comparing what we have right now to alternatives that we could have instead, and I can think of a couple of things that would be far more preferable to the system we have now.

Is the system better than it was before in the past? Yes, probably. I don't care, though, because the system by which we're charged for (and receive content for) games is still not AS good as it could be, therefore I am still going to have a problem with it. We can stop caring and stop complaining and say that something is completely, utterly GOOD and say it can be worse when there is no way that that something can become better.

 

[Something Amyss]

I was mostly referring to the FTC comaplaints and the whole cupcakes thing.

You mean a formal complaint is extremism? It's one of the most civil things you can do.

And you know what? I'm just gonna say it. Maybe more gamers should file complaints with the FTC and BBB. The gaming industry is really ridiculous sometimes, and it needs to be reigned in. But perhaps that's another discussion for another time. So let's just stick with what's going on here.

The gamers had every right to feel lied to, and the BBB (while non-government)has validated that. Based on what they felt was false marketing, they contacted a government outlet that specialises in just this sort of thing. So basically, you're saying going to the group that regulates and/or investigates exactly what was alleged is extremism?

I hate to see what else false into your view of extremism.

Right or wrong, if you feel wrong it is your right to approach the authorities to investigate.

And the cupcakes thing was pretty clever and definitely civil. It got the point across in an original but non-threatening way.

Trolling the devs or more or less counting on the opinion of a figure of authority who may or may not understand how game pitches are structured to prove that BioWare made false claims doesn't change the fact the property remains in EA and BioWare's hands, and that they alone have the power to choose how to handle the series' ending.

You have a very loose definition of "trolling."

The fact that the property remains in their hands does not give them the right to lie. Please don't try and distort the problem people are having. It's not that they can choose to do what they want with the property, it's that they deliberately misled people.

Also, I didn't exactly refer to "extremists". This was much more a case of people investing far too much time and effort into something that's ultimately trivial.

Right, you referred to people and contrasted them in terms of being "uncivil." That does of semantics aside, you're taking some of the most civil forms of protest and treating them AS extremists.

Call it trivial if you want. Consumer rights have been eroded by people saying that same thing over just this sort of thing.

You know what? I'm gonna amend this, too. A friend of mine had a good point. If you've been playing the series, you've probably spent 180 bucks on it, bare minimum. Some of the content that is "optional" is really vital, so you may have spent even more. But let's just go with the basics. 180 bucks. Each game tends to run into the 30 hour playtime range, according to just about everyone online.

Almost 100 hours. That's over four days of your life, stacked together.

A few minutes to order cupcakes compared to 100 hours and 180 bucks.

Yeah, this is really a disproportionate amount of effort.

 

[GonzoGamer]

I must be pregnant, I have the strange urge for shrimp with two scoops of raisins.

I think what Jim is overlooking is that for many gamers money just isn't an issue either because they or their parents have (always had) lots of money and don't really care how much is charged because it's always in their budget. And that's fine until someone comes along and says that they're being taken advantage of. So they need to defend their purchases so they can continue to buy whatever they like without feeling like they've been taken advantage of.
It's the same reason some consumers defend the obscene used game prices at gamestop.

The problem is that when people try too hard not to look like suckers, they end up really looking like big suckers.

 

[jovack22]

Extra Credits became a total drag after a while... and I do not miss them at all.

They often became patronizing and just spoke a lot without saying much in the end -- stroking their own ego essentially.

Jimquisition has good ideas, and does it tongue in cheek.

 

[J.d. Scott]

I've had a lot of talks on this with my brother on the fact that I thought if Game Companies/Developers/Publishers (or just the Sellers of Games, I guess) just reduce the price for their games that they would get far more people to buy those games, because the "bar to entry" would be lower in terms of trying to get those games. Sure, you aren't getting something like $60 dollars per game, but for each person who would have bought the game for $60, you instead get something like 5 customers if the game was priced at $20, wouldn't that pay off in the end? It just seems to make some good business sense to me, at least from my perspective.

Unfortunately, it seems like the collective Sellers of Video Games seem to rather want as much money from people as they can and I get the feeling that a lot of people seem to be okay with it, which isn't a bad thing for them. There are probably people out there who could pay for the price of these games as they are no problem because they have jobs and are probably able to manage their money well to buy the games they want. It's very hard for me to find a reason to blame these people then as obviously, the price of the game isn't an issue with them.

However, as I was saying about the "bar to entry" as before, there are still a lot of people who probably would like to buy games but the price is just too high at the moment. While I guess a lot of people who pirate games are real people who just don't want to pay a dime for anything, I think it is equally possible that a lot of the pirates are people who would have bought the game if they could have. To me, it just seems like lower the price for games anywhere would help the Sellers of video games a lot more than it might hurt them.

It's because of this that I am curious as to the breakdown of what the $60 dollars might be for each video game, or perhaps a dynamic pie-graph of some kind that can be applied to all games. I'm just curious in where that money for that $60 dollar game or whatever that is just coming out and exactly where it might be going to pay for the game. I know some of it has to go into the production cost of the game, but I just wonder what else is to that price that might prevent the Sellers from reducing the price to games and make things nicer for all; besides just general greed.

Here's the thing - there's a point where the consumer's demand and the profits hit the rubber. They have determined based on sales, that $60 is the price point the US market will bear. And realize, while super games make a lot of money, a great deal of other games, while critically acclaimed and good ideas fail to sell. Not ever game makes money, so the bigger titles provide revenue for the publisher.

 

[J.d. Scott]

Extra Credits became a total drag after a while... and I do not miss them at all.

They often became patronizing and just spoke a lot without saying much in the end -- stroking their own ego essentially.

Jimquisition has good ideas, and does it tongue in cheek.

I think they're two different things. Extra Credits is a teacher at DigiPen offering stripped down, user-friendly versions of some topical lectures that entry level game programming students would receive for free. Of course it's sort of patronizing - it's a teacher lecturing students. It also takes the position of being knowledgeable about the industry. James Portnoy is trying to educate you. Some of the episodes are more informative then others, but that's the general goal, aside from occasional forays into some opinion based commentary, and mailbags.

Jim's a populist. He's snarky, self-effacing, and rarely diverts from the opinions of gamers who consult gaming media - what one would call in wrestling, a "smart mark". He presents opinions on hot-button topics, as well as his own personal things, but rarely presents a nuanced opinion, or even one buoyed by facts. It's a confident opinion based on mostly conjecture. He can be mostly right, and sometimes he mentions things you do not know, or may not have formed a complete opinion on, so the show can be educational, but that's not the point. It's basically snarking at the industry for it's perceived slights in a way that caters to the niche audience provided by the Escapist. Jim Sterling is offering commentary.

 

[Sovereignty]

Great episode. Sometimes I have no idea what you're thinking, then you drop a bomb like this one, and make me glad I watch this series weekly.

Thanks.