Jimquisition: Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
 

Roocifer

New member
Nov 18, 2009
41
0
0
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
I like how Jim is outright flaming his haters on the site.

Also while i had no problems with Metacritic to begin with or even now its nice that i have another, realatively well argued reason to dislike Activision.
 

Dogstile

New member
Jan 17, 2009
5,093
0
0
Three posts in and two of them are flaming, you're really picking up here Jim.

You make sense of course, meta-critic itself doesn't choose what reviews it hosts on its site, it just hosts. Nothing wrong with that.
 

shadowmagus

New member
Feb 2, 2011
435
0
0
Still don't like Jim's delivery style. That said, kudos for saying what needs to be said. Some people get a little thick when it comes to game scores, because obviously if it scored low, it's a shitty game. /sarcasm
 
May 29, 2011
150
0
0
Publishers, If your game scored low it means it S.H.I.T. not that reviewers are running some sort of underground cult too undermine *insert publishers name here* it just means you should try harder next time and stop being fuck bags.
 

Ne1butme

New member
Nov 16, 2009
491
0
0
Was that a reference to today's supreme court decision? if so, kudos on the speedy response. If not, kudos on predicting the future.
 

Cleariously

New member
Mar 25, 2011
66
0
0
It is really sad that publishers are stupid enough to treat their employees they way they do whenever there's a low score, it's ridiculous.

I'm surprised there was no mention of the 7-10 scoring system, especially since you write for Dtoid.

I'm not *quite* as surprised that some people still aren't getting the humour. (blame ganondorf)
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."

OT: I agree, and its why I maintain that scores are useful. If I had something to criticise metacritic for though, it would be its intepreting of some sites scores - if its not marking out of a 100% or decimals, just leave it.

Beyond that, I find it useful in cases when I'm desperate to know how a game's getting on but don't want anything spoiled. Also helps to be able to see why reviewer X felt mechanic Z was not a problem, whilst reviewer Y thought it was and how that gave a lower score.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
I suppose this is a good place to talk about one of your earlier videos where you were ranting at the people for comparing your reviews to metacritic.

I'm going to play devil's advocate for this paragraph. Metacritic is, generally, an average score that represents what a large majority of the people think. When a reviewer is compared to this score, it doesn't imply that every reviewer needs to be the same, it is to represent how well their score matches a large majority of the public. After all, that's who you're talking to.

But being measured on this point is, in my humble opinion, inefficient because it leads to something I like to call "Objective reviewing."

For anyone who doesn't know, this is bad. Objective reviewing often leads to more safe aspects of games getting better reception from reviewers than more daring aspects. For example, in Journey there is a rather interesting aspect of the game. In that the camera is controlled by the sixaxis rather than the right analogue stick. In fact, you don't touch the right analogue stick at all. I personally think this is brilliant and goes with the style that the game is going for perfectly. And I hate it when games try to shove in sixaxis controls. But the press member admittedly said that if he were objectively reviewing, he would have wrote off the idea as inefficient because the right analogue stick goes completely unused. But within the context of the game, it is great. It allows you to keep your thumbs where they belong and still control the camera in a leisurely, "flow" like manner.

So I say that we need reviewing to be more based on the experience given to the reviewer rather than judging the mechanics as they are told. And people who still compare reviews to metacritic are still idiots.

Metacritic should be used as a compilation of many different viewpoints and experiences from many different critics. There aren't any "wrong" experiences unless they weren't playing the game to begin with.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
May 1, 2020
12,010
0
0
Country
United States
This is probably the strongest point you've made since you started on the Escapist. I completely agree. I didn't even know this was an issue pervading the industry until the whole DA2 debacle. The interviews I read with DA2's project lead were pretty unsettling... he kept going on and on about how they couldn't compete with ME2's "amazing" Metacritic score. Its all about numbers to those people.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
gigastar said:
I like how Jim is outright flaming his haters on the site.

Also while i had no problems with Metacritic to begin with or even now its nice that i have another, realatively well argued reason to dislike Activision.
After they attempted to sue tim schafer i don't think we have an excuse to NOT dislike Activision but yes obsession with 80-90 reveiws score and seeing below that being some kind of insult is the mindset that most publishers seem to have.

The real problem here is the pervasive reveiw obsession in the world of gaming, especially when it comes to pretty arbritrary reveiw scores. But once again Jim fails to realise that better people have discussed this at length before. and once again all jim is doing here is touching on some low-hanging fruit topic and using 60% of the video to insult everyone. Its like extra credits but if you had a 10th of the content and stopped ever 3 seconds to get cock-slapped in the face.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Jimbo, I really enjoy your videos here on this website, and I sincerely hope that you continue flaunting your massive ego at all the haters and continue unscathed, because it would be a shame if we were deprived of a relatively informative and funny series just because a bunch of people who just don't get the humor think they know better.


Good episode, what was that bit about the violent video game thing? Was that a reference to an earlier discussion on one of your videos or to the supreme court's decision today?
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
I didn't expect there're so many retarded people (that want to BAN Metacritic) that it would actually make for a jimquisition video.
 

rembrandtqeinstein

New member
Sep 4, 2009
2,173
0
0
I like this guy, he drinks your hate like sweet Arizona Iced Tea.

Seriously though the problem is with the developers. If they sign a contract that predicates a payment on a certain metacritic score they deserve what they get. If I was a developer I would tell the publisher to stick that contract up his ass because I have 0 control over what critics say. And double that considering 90% of the BAD things about games come from publishers constraining development time.
 

kurupt87

Fuhuhzucking hellcocks I'm good
Mar 17, 2010
1,438
0
0
Apart from the useless resolution of the random trailers he insists on putting in the vids this show is great.

Big arse grin on my face start to end, only Feed Dump can do that too. Bonus points for being right too of course.
 

erbkaiser

Romanorum Imperator
Jun 20, 2009
1,137
0
0
Some good points made here, but unfortunately a lot too much arrogance for me to actually like this video.
A little less ego and a little more depth on exactly why the misuse of Metacritic is harmful, and here I mean that in videogame reviews for some insane reason a '70' means mediocre and a '60' means horrible, and the video would have been much better.
 

Pr0

New member
Feb 20, 2008
373
0
0
Thanks for the warning, I'll keep in mind that only site contributors are allowed to insult people from now on! I shall move back to my life of being a sad little cretin.
 

Valate_v1legacy

New member
Sep 16, 2009
1,273
0
0
Nice video. Good point, and I'm pretty sure that your image of Bobby Kotick is more accurate than any other out there.
 

Mangue Surfer

New member
May 29, 2010
364
0
0
A substancial part of the gamers and reviewers are rednecks that don't know how to count. For this peoples, in a scale from 1 to 10, 8 is in the middle. This is the real problem.
 

freaper

snuggere mongool
Apr 3, 2010
1,198
0
0
Yes! Shine forth your scorching light of unsealing truth Jim, and let your enemies be struck by your lightning of undiluted humour! *victoriously shakes fist*

Loved it, and you know, haters gonna hate.

<img src=http://www.google.com/recaptcha/api/image?c=03AHJ_VuvizGxQD_BUxRFIq5M7MirSEgWAyNHjTF0opTd6WftbztvmP3dEaAjW5qKTBejcpGR8kOXys_vVibXKlNLkCHjflpOARS-ixHSz5rHCr2QdFKv4toMsLTn60Kxk8yp--XrtrryaDxoQLG6jzw1FsnetOP_aGw>

(apparently Captcha now provides words that are upside down)
 

Zom-B

New member
Feb 8, 2011
379
0
0
He's essentially right. And furthermore, you don't hear anyone complaining about how RottenTomatoes.com is ruining the movie industry.

As usual, a whiny minority seeks to change/ruin something for everyone else because they got their knickers in a twist of a perceived slighting.
 

Roofstone

New member
May 13, 2010
1,642
0
0
I feel sorry for the guys who dont really have any criticism, they just *****, or complain about Jim's obvious big bones.

But anyway, as always. And as you surely know Jim.

Thank god, for you.
 

Seventh Actuality

New member
Apr 23, 2010
551
0
0
'Kay Jim, you've kind of won me over. Still don't see why this was commissioned in the first place, but now that it's here I'm starting to really enjoy it. One thing though...why keep up the live-action segments? The audio quality nosedives, they're always worse than and disconnected from the recorded bits and they're visually boring (don't get like that, they would be even if you were prettier). Like most reviewers, you're a lot better at talking into a microphone than trying to ham it up on camera.
 

ManupBatman

New member
Jun 23, 2011
91
0
0
Easy fix, just don't take metacritic seriously. Find a few reviewers who share your views and trust their judgement, or rent the game and trust your own.

This industry takes itself too seriously.
 

Imp_Emissary

Mages Rule, and Dragons Fly!
Legacy
Aug 9, 2020
2,315
1
3
Country
United States
Don't worry Jim. When you die, us loyal fans will just turn you into a zombie, or at least find a person who sounds like you and can use you as a corpse puppet. :)

Also, it is said that the people working on the games are all getting affected by some meaningless number. (I only talk about the number because somehow I doubt the people making this dumb decision are actually reading the whole review.)
 

Juuel

New member
Jun 2, 2011
27
0
0
I love Jimquisition's arrogant style, people seem to be taking him too seriously. I don't get all the hate he's getting.
 

electric_warrior

New member
Oct 5, 2008
1,721
0
0
I like the bits where its just a voice over, the rest is deeply irritating. I personally like Metacritic and use it as a handy guide to games I should or shouldn't buy. It's better than wading through dozens of long reviews and its often fairly accurate in terms of representing the quality of a game. Fable 3 and Dragon Age 2 both got 79(ish) which shows their relative merits but also their mediocrity when compared with expectations. L.A. Noire got 89, which, again, shows us that its a great game but not one without its flaws, and Oblivion got 94, which just shows its awesomness. There are sometimes mistakes (GTA IV) but that isn't its fault, it just averages numbers, its the fault of the people providing those numbers if a score isn't truly representative.

Jim, I don't dislike you because of your weight, but because of your style of delivery. Stick to the voice overs, they seem to be less theatrical and dickish.
 

MrFunsockz

New member
Oct 15, 2010
4
0
0
Awesome, great video Jim, and I have to agree. I use metacritic all the time to peruse reviews of a game I want to purchase in one easy to examine database. It's when I hear Molyneux, Kotick, or others speak about how they are need a "90s metacritic game" that I get frustrated, because essentially it just feels like they are playing a simulation. Finish a game, check the score of the game, restructure based off of said score, repeat. It's diluting games by basing it solely off of the final numbers not what went into the game, or what people got out of it.

I always enjoy your stuff Jim, keep it up.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
Mr. Chaplain.Senet Studious.

Twise nightly screening in trenches exelent idea. Stop. But must ensist E. Blackadder be projectionist.Stop.

P.S. Don't let him ever.Stop.
 

ThatDaveDude1

New member
Feb 7, 2011
310
0
0
I dislike Metacritic because I dislike the idea of numbers on a scale being used to quantify a game. Since there is no "perfect" game, then the score of a game in relation to a "perfect" score is useless. Since all Metacritic does is collect scores, it too is useless.

I'm much more interested in specific opinions reguarding what is wrong with a game, not "how many numbers out of 100" are wrong with it. Numbers are fucking useless to me, and I don't think anybody should make purchasing decisions based on it.

This is why I think "Metacritic is bad, and should go away."

Not because of "the negative impact Metacritic has, unfortunately and accidentally, had on various aspects of this industry," as Jim suggests. I agree with him on his stance reguarding that.
 

BlueInkAlchemist

Ridiculously Awesome
Jun 4, 2008
2,231
0
0
Let's say I get a message in the mail, like this, from Jim or a similar observer of popular culture.

The contents of the message could be poignant, topical, relevant and completely on the nose from my subjective point of view.

But if the envelope is covered in slanderous messages about my obvious lack of intelligence (since I'm not Jim) and disparaging remarks about my mom's performance in bed, written in human feces (because that's always funny), I'm not going to open the envelope.

Call me crazy.
 

MowDownJoe

New member
Apr 8, 2009
464
0
0
The thing I don't get about Metacritic is this: that Metacritic uses a different scoring scale for games than it does for other media. And as such, the scale it uses warps reviews because of how they appear on Metacritic. Big example: Joystiq. When they launched their current design, they started adding scores to their reviews, in the form of 5-star ratings. They had their own scale that made perfect sense (5-stars is a must-buy, 3 is "buy if you like the genre", 1 is "avoid"). Then they started to notice that their 3-star reviews (again, "buy if you like the genre") were apprearing on Metacritic as "60", which was a bad review according to Metacritic. So, they had to introduce half-stars into their grading system to work around Metacritic.

Maybe to hit the point a little closer to home for Jim, I should point out this: Metacritic's scale is kinda bent around how IGN and Gamespot grade, i.e. not using the full 10-point scale. What does Destructoid pride itself in doing? Using the full 10-point scale. [http://www.destructoid.com/the-official-destructoid-review-guide-2011-203909.phtml] So, again, a game that Destructoid grades as "average" would get a failing grade on Metacritic.

Honestly, when it comes to movie review aggregates, I prefer Rotten Tomatoes to Metacritic. Why? Because of how they do their aggregation. They don't look at the score, yank that, run it through an algorithm to get an adjusted score, find a pithy quote that fits that adjusted score, then average those adjusted scores. They look at the review, judge if the review was positive or negative, find a good quote that sums it up, then they display the percentage of reviews that were positive. I honestly want a site like Rotten Tomatoes for games. I don't want my review aggregates trying to show an average adjusted score. I want my aggregates to tell me what percentage of critics liked it or not. After all, so many different sites grade on different scale, and trying to find a universal scale will just ruin it for everyone involved.
 

Vault boy Eddie

New member
Feb 18, 2009
1,800
0
0
Last episode was good, this one was more in the line of Captain Obvious, like the other episodes. The gist of it was people are assholes and ruin everything. The whole Portal thing was a prime example.
 

Alar

The Stormbringer
Dec 1, 2009
1,356
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
Just enlighten me, but... why do you bother watching his show if you despise him so much? Just... ignore him. Ignore him and he cannot hurt you.

I'd have to agree that it's likely publishers will overreact to review scores. They should be paying more attention to the profits they make, and the things that the fans tell them they like (and dislike).

Yes, reviewers can often have important points for publishers and game developers to pay attention to, but that doesn't mean they need to freak out if some of them give them a bad score.
 

MrFunsockz

New member
Oct 15, 2010
4
0
0
ThatDaveDude1 said:
I dislike Metacritic because I dislike the idea of numbers on a scale being used to quantify a game. Since there is no "perfect" game, then the score of a game in relation to a "perfect" score is useless. Since all Metacritic does is collect scores, it too is useless.
While I agree whole heartedly that quantifying a game with a score is pretty useless, I still like metacritic for checking on a game. At the very least, it lets me quickly and easily find the highest and lowest reviews for a game out there, open them in another tab, and read each of them, so I can quickly get the most positive and negative opinions on a game quickly and easily.

The idea of basing a purchase off of the number however is a joke to me. Everyone out there has a game they may love, that critics hated. I personally love Raw Danger, even if it is a horribly, horribly flawed game, and at the same time, I personally can't get into Assassins Creed, a critically acclaimed game.

It's always best to read reviews to get an idea about how the game works before buying it, not just look at a score and be like "Welp, that was below 80, guess I'm not getting that"
 

Jim Grim

New member
Jun 6, 2009
964
0
0
I don't care what people say, I bust out laughing at "...You prick." You tickle my funny bone.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
Awesome comment- cant remember what i wanted to say now. hee hee.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
BlueInkAlchemist said:
Let's say I get a message in the mail, like this, from Jim or a similar observer of popular culture.

The contents of the message could be poignant, topical, relevant and completely on the nose from my subjective point of view.

But if the envelope is covered in slanderous messages about my obvious lack of intelligence (since I'm not Jim) and disparaging remarks about my mom's performance in bed, written in human feces (because that's always funny), I'm not going to open the envelope.

Call me crazy.
That analogy would work if you were able to recognise the remarks about your Mum and intelligence are accompanied by a joking wink, and that the shit is actually just a brown felt-tip with a funny smell.
 

Dastardly

Imaginary Friend
Apr 19, 2010
2,420
0
0
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
By and large, I agree with what you're saying. I'd even go so far as to say your knife simile is inaccurate. This isn't like blaming knife makers for stabbings. This is like blaming a hammer maker when someone tries to use the hammer as a shovel.

But I also think that MetaCritic, recognizing the potential hazard of the tool they've created, could choose to do things a bit differently to mitigate those ill effects. Even gun manufacturers put "safeties" on their products, don't they? Taking responsibility for a solution isn't the same as taking blame for the problem.

You rightly noted that MetaCritic could use some more transparency. Letting people see a bit further into the process might allow them to make a more informed interpretation of the result. Otherwise, it's giving people an answer without really telling them what the question was. They'll create their own questions, and apply them in whatever way best suits their desires at the moment.

Of course, this also requires scoring reviewers to be more transparent about what their numerical or letter scores actually mean. For one reviewer, a 7/10 might be a near-failing score (like a D in school). For another, a 7/10 might be phenomenal, as a 10 represents some perfect super-game that hasn't been created yet, and 70% of that ain't bad.

For many reviewers, the difference between each "step" on the scale decreases as you move up it. This is especially true of scales of 10 points or larger. Others, usually those that employ "five stars" or so, try to make each step a bit closer to symmetrical. That makes comparing and "normalizing" different scores a lot harder. I'm sure some of the folks behind a MetaCritic score are trying to take this into account, but a bit more openness on both sides would help us as consumers decide a bit better.

Of course, ultimately, the problem does rest with publishers themselves. The reason we weigh game reviews so differently from movies and music is simple: games are far more expensive. I can see a movie for $9, in its entirety. From that, I can also decide if it's worth the $20 to get it on DVD, or maybe $30 for some added features. That means, for any given movie, I can try the complete product and then purchase it, if I so choose, for half the price of a video game.

With a game, "trying" means "buying." More than with movies, we rely on others to "try" the game for us. And for the prices being asked, anything less than a glowing review is going to be seen as a "wait and buy it used" recommendation (and by the time that's feasible, the game has usually been forgotten in the hubbub of some other shiny new release). Until publishers can be swayed from the $60 price tower, that's not going to change.

Consumers are wholly justified in the weight they put on reviews. Publishers are justified in the weight they give to reviews as well, but they are not justified in their response to that assessment.

Reviewers (and MetaCritic) are intended to serve as a go-between. They are meant to communicate the merits (or faults) of a product to the consumer so that we can make good decisions, and so that both reviewers and consumers can communicate a message about our expectations to the publishers.

Consumers can only communicate via numbers (dollars and copies), which is about as fine-tunable as a game of "Marco Polo." Reviewers can communicate via narrative... but instead, we're allowing that narrative to be boiled down into just numbers, with no real context.

When communication breaks down, it doesn't matter whose fault it is. The sender has the responsibility to adjust the message until it is received clearly. MetaCritic might be distilling the message down a bit too much, to the point that the message is being sent louder, but not any clearer.

As a teacher, I know full well that sometimes students don't learn a concept because they're lazy or not trying hard enough, and sometimes it's because I didn't express it as clearly as I should. But in both cases, the responsibility is on me to be the one that says it differently or changes the stimulus until I get the result I want. So, yeah, the publishers are using it in the wrong way. They're reading the message the wrong way. Their receiving feedback in the wrong way. But they're not going to change first.

TL;DR: MetaCritic is being misused, and it's not their fault. However, knowing that they're being misused gives them a certain amount of responsibility to help change that. So while it's unwise to throw the baby out with the bathwater, it's equally unwise to just leave the baby in the bathwater. It's not unreasonable to ask MetaCritic to change how they do things.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Publishers want to make money. Reviewers will critique the game and say if its good or not. A crap review can lead to crap sales so publishers hate it. All fairly obvious. Maybe publishers should take critisim as a good thing to make their next game awesome and then they will hit those million sales targets with ease.

On a side note, as much as i can listen to his comments, i hate all the condensending action he does. If he dies, no one would care apart from Mrs Jim and the Jimettes. Hate that. It spoils his videos and makes him sound like an arsehole.
 

a_swe_mayt_hink

New member
May 13, 2011
11
0
0
i've never used metacritic...im guessing its somewhat like imdb for games/other media sources? because you'll find that most people will make their own mind up about these sort of things. Reviewers have very little power over consumer consumption...

p.s. i think if i have to watch another stupid transformers 3 advert on this website, i'm going to have to implode.
 

RedEyesBlackGamer

The Killjoy Detective returns!
Jan 23, 2011
4,701
0
0
I agree. I love Metacritic for what it is: a place that pools reviews together so consumers don't have to search for them. The Metacritic "score" is meaningless for the most part. I'm also loving the flame bait.
 

Hybridwolf

New member
Aug 14, 2009
701
0
0
One of the more intresting shows on the escapist now but it still isn't that funny. I'd rather Jim went for breaking down the problems in gaming we face, or stopped. As although the humor is clever, it feels incredibly forced at the best at times, that violent video games joke for one. Have to admit though it has come a long way from constant MSpaint doddles and very poor material. End of the day, good show, much better then it has been and bravo for using Father Ted.

And Escapist, I appricate that you need money to survive, but I'm getting sick of this adverts which pop up and show EA games I'd have long since played if I'd wanted to. Espically the Dragon Age 2 one. I don't care about the adverts before videos, but these adverts are more then frustrating.
 

constantcompile

New member
Sep 9, 2010
61
0
0
This was painful to watch.

Even when Jim brings up a valid counterpoint, which is that focus on aggregate scoring is more a side-effect of the real problem - a broken scoring system, and those who focus on it - than the actual cause of so many other problems in the gaming industry, he's simply painful to listen to.
"You've just been served in Jim's kitchen, prick!"
When is this an appropriate response to anyone? I actually felt sympathetic to the author of the email he received - when I paused and read it, it seemed quite professional and well-written (inasmuch as an email asking someone to withhold their opinions can be). Having heard both opinions I'd rather see a video series from the author on The Escapist, instead of Jim.

Assuming Jim is a reviewer, one who sees his stances as "divisive," he himself is contributing to the problem - a good review (not a critique, a review) should take stock of the good and the bad, and if a final number score is to be given (because many people prefer a quick reference of quality), it should give a number that everyone can agree is fair; divisive or controversial reviews, almost by nature, arrive at a number that is far more distanced from popular opinion.

If an assessment of a game is overly divisive or critical, it is better termed a critique - not meant to give the reader any idea of the media's contents or quality, only the critic's opinion of them. Critics, or reviewers who consider themselves very critical, choosing to abstain from giving a number score is a good remedy for the current problem - the problem being that so much attention is paid to number scores in the first place, particularly by the gaming industry.

Assuming we can't fix the gaming industry - and it's a fair bet that we can't - and assuming we can't fix the scoring system itself - it's a known problem and is being talked about - the only thing well-meaning supporters of their favorite games can do is to ask excessively critical number scorers to remove their score from the final equation.

This is fair. So long as someone is politely asking you to do something, even if you refuse or even if you take offense to their request, using this line:
"You've just been served in Jim's kitchen, prick!"
Is completely unjustified.

On a final note, to the good people at the Escapist: Please don't think my taking the time to type this is any positive indicator as to the quality of this series. Even if the goal is to get people riled up and cause controversy, there are better, more tasteful, more mature ways to go about it than the annoying character in Jimquisition. I decided to give it another chance after deliberately avoiding the series, and immediately regretted my decision. I'll do my best not to make that mistake again.
 

Cousin_IT

New member
Feb 6, 2008
1,822
0
0
Nerds like numbers. Nerds like making & playing computer games. Metacritic is full of numbers about computer games. Therefore nerds like metacritics numbers about computer games. Mystery solved.

Also: am a little bored of how The Escapists two main games "critics" both rely on coarse humour to make their point, as if the audience is incapable of understanding a discussion without a dick joke attached. Hard to shake the image of games being for children when the most public discussion around them rarely extends beyond school yard levels of eloquence.
 

briunj04

New member
Apr 9, 2011
160
0
0
freaper said:
<img src=http://www.google.com/recaptcha/api/image?c=03AHJ_VuvizGxQD_BUxRFIq5M7MirSEgWAyNHjTF0opTd6WftbztvmP3dEaAjW5qKTBejcpGR8kOXys_vVibXKlNLkCHjflpOARS-ixHSz5rHCr2QdFKv4toMsLTn60Kxk8yp--XrtrryaDxoQLG6jzw1FsnetOP_aGw>

(apparently Captcha now provides words that are upside down)
Heck, I got a Kanji symbol before! Whoever designed Captcha is crazy (-_-)
 

EvilestDeath

New member
Nov 4, 2009
115
0
0
Why does he keep bringing up god? I don't have a problem with it I am just wondering if it is an attempt to antagonize those who would jump all over that subject or if he is more genuine about it. I think it is humorous but I also don't want to take that statement in the wrong manner. Since his tone of voice and usage of the term seems like he is trying to get some negative responses. The broken yet common phrase "Not sure if troll" seems to apply here as my general statement.
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,368
0
0
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
If you want to be taken a little more seriously, might I suggest you get your hands on a camera with better quality. I think half the haters will shut up if these videos were much less grainy.

You do have a have point with Medacritic, it is not to blame for anything just as a gun maker isn't at fault for a shooting, your video's are just irritating to look at compared to the "cleaner" looking ZP or EC.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?

OT: Great Jim. I just love your sense of humor. Or how you keep being sarcastic. I honestly hope you start by saying "Preps, stop flammin' the story"
 

erbkaiser

Romanorum Imperator
Jun 20, 2009
1,137
0
0
briunj04 said:
freaper said:
<img src=http://www.google.com/recaptcha/api/image?c=03AHJ_VuvizGxQD_BUxRFIq5M7MirSEgWAyNHjTF0opTd6WftbztvmP3dEaAjW5qKTBejcpGR8kOXys_vVibXKlNLkCHjflpOARS-ixHSz5rHCr2QdFKv4toMsLTn60Kxk8yp--XrtrryaDxoQLG6jzw1FsnetOP_aGw>

(apparently Captcha now provides words that are upside down)
Heck, I got a Kanji symbol before! Whoever designed Captcha is crazy (-_-)
You know what it stands for, right?
_C_ompletelty _A_nnoying _P_rogram _T_hat _C_auses _H_orrible _A_gony.
 

cynicalsaint1

Salvation a la Mode
Apr 1, 2010
545
0
0
Really Metacritic's biggest problem is this:

You can't simply equate one site's review score with another's. IGN really only uses the top of its 10 point scale for example, other sites use the whole range. The Escapist's system also doesn't convert over to the 100 point scale very well either.

I find trying to average all these scores that may mean different things in the context of their own system a bit disingenuous.

I do however find Metacritic useful for seeing how a game is doing in general, not by looking at its Metascore but through it giving me a quick look at the various reviews its collected. From there I'll usually look at a couple of the best and worst reviews and use that to figure out whether or not I'll go for the game.
 

Patton662

New member
Apr 4, 2010
289
0
0
The hate you get is hilarious.
I agree, metacritic is an example of how the games industry is using metrics wrong.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
Well, there's one thing I agree with this week: too many people put way too much stock in scores. I still think scores should just go away from all reviews though. They're too vague to tell me if a game is something I would enjoy or not; the full review is always needed. Either I check the score first and go "Well shit, that didn't tell me anything. Guess I'd better read the review.", or I read the review first and then get to the score and say "What do I need this for? I already know about the game after reading the review."

I don't know why both gamers and the industry focus on scores so damn much. It seems like the only real use for them is to make sure your reviews can get on Metacritic which gets you more attention from readers and publishers. That and keeping the stupid people who rely on scores too much happy, but as I'm not responsible for making sure a website gets enough traffic to stay in business, I'm more inclined to say let them suffer without scores.

In the end, ignoring review scores is easy, but ignoring all the idiots who constantly whine and piss and moan and cry about the score a game got (Duke Nukem Forever for example, or if anyone else remembers a few years back when GameSpot gave Twilight Princes an 8.8 and from the reaction you would have thought the world was going to end) is really hard. Maybe there needs to be some add-on for browsers that auto-scans forums and video content and if it's someone whining about a game's review score, it gets auto-hidden. Ah, what a wonderful internet that would be.

Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
For the love of all things, this. This is the 9th video of the series as far as its run on The Escapist goes. If you don't like it yet, you aren't going to, so quit watching every week just to flame the show and Jim in the comments. Go find something better to do with your time.

CM156 said:
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?
As stated, this is the 9th video. People should have learned weeks ago that they don't like it and thus they shouldn't watch anymore. I think it's fair to tell the remaining people who watch knowing full well they won't like it and then come on here just to insult Jim to shut it and go do something else. Constructive criticism I have no problem with, but come on, is it necessary to watch and comment "I hate this I wish Escapist would remove it" every week? If they really want it to go away they should just stop watching entirely anyway, because not enough views is what kills a show, not people watching it and bitching about it.
 

Lullabye

New member
Oct 23, 2008
4,426
0
0
I've never even been on meta critic before. Is it really that big a deal? Do publishers really think that they will sink or swim if they don't get a decent score on the site? I can say that as a consumer, reviews. especially teh 1-10/10 kind don't mean crap to me and do not affect my purchases.
 

Birthe

New member
Apr 26, 2010
73
0
0
Have to say part of the fun of watching this is reading some of the comments later on by people hating it so much, so great comment on this early in the video.

Some great comments in the video, from this one and some other things said on here especially also by yahtzee you can really get the feeling that publishers are lately the main thing that seems to be wrong with the gaming industry.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?
Its 9 in videos in; there's been plenty of time to whine and complain. People won't like everything on the site - they don't venture in hordes onto the other stuff to write comments that aren't even critical of the actual piece, but simply the show's existence.
 

mjc0961

YOU'RE a pie chart.
Nov 30, 2009
3,847
0
0
Lullabye said:
I've never even been on meta critic before. Is it really that big a deal? Do publishers really think that they will sink or swim if they don't get a decent score on the site? I can say that as a consumer, reviews. especially teh 1-10/10 kind don't mean crap to me and do not affect my purchases.
Yes they do, because unlike you, me, and other people, some gamers won't buy a game if the Metascore is "too low."

And usually their idea of "too low" is something insane like 89 or under.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Woodsey said:
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?
Its 9 in videos in; there's been plenty of time to whine and complain. People won't like everything on the site - they don't venture in hordes onto the other stuff to write comments that aren't even critical of the actual piece, but simply the show's existence.
But that still begs the question of why you at all care? Really, if people leave negative comments, even if they are ill informed, how do they affect/bother you?
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
BlueInkAlchemist said:
Let's say I get a message in the mail, like this, from Jim or a similar observer of popular culture.

The contents of the message could be poignant, topical, relevant and completely on the nose from my subjective point of view.

But if the envelope is covered in slanderous messages about my obvious lack of intelligence (since I'm not Jim) and disparaging remarks about my mom's performance in bed, written in human feces (because that's always funny), I'm not going to open the envelope.

Call me crazy.
Pretty much this. I know it's kinf of Jim's 'Gimmick' to do this but it is really off-putting most of the time and does not lend it's self to actually getting a point across to the vewier.
 

klasbo

New member
Nov 17, 2009
217
0
0
It seems that not all of us are blessed with the ability to detect satire.

This show is just a wonderful mish-mash of serious content and flippant smack-talk, all wrapped in a sarcastically arrogant presentation. A brilliant juxtaposition of the thought-provoking and frivolous.

Is this the genre called Jarnalizm?
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?
Its 9 in videos in; there's been plenty of time to whine and complain. People won't like everything on the site - they don't venture in hordes onto the other stuff to write comments that aren't even critical of the actual piece, but simply the show's existence.
But that still begs the question of why you at all care? Really, if people leave negative comments, even if they are ill informed, how do they affect/bother you?
I dunno, why do they bother suspending people who leave "First!" comments on videos before watching them? Probably because its irritating and the rest of us don't want to have to read a bunch of shit before we can find something worthwhile to respond too.
 

CM156_v1legacy

Revelation 9:6
Mar 23, 2011
3,997
0
0
Woodsey said:
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?
Its 9 in videos in; there's been plenty of time to whine and complain. People won't like everything on the site - they don't venture in hordes onto the other stuff to write comments that aren't even critical of the actual piece, but simply the show's existence.
But that still begs the question of why you at all care? Really, if people leave negative comments, even if they are ill informed, how do they affect/bother you?
I dunno, why do they bother suspending people who leave "First!" comments on videos before watching them? Probably because its irritating and the rest of us don't want to have to read a bunch of shit before we can find something worthwhile to respond too.
Not everyone is going to like everything. And that's alright. If people want to express reasons why the don't like a show, such as problems they see with it, the first response shouldn't be "Don't like it; don't watch it". The show's existance to them causes as much harm as their comments do to you.
 

Irradiated Tiger

New member
Feb 8, 2010
159
0
0
While his opinions are something that I mostly I agree with, I do not like his style of delivery. I realize that it's all an act because no man alive can have a personality so grating and obnoxious but really, if Jim toned it down I think more people would watch his show.
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
See, I've never watched a video by this person. The logo design for it has done its job in making him into the character he's trying to be: Loud and self-important (note the color choice and the way he's standing). That just doesn't interest me.
Then, reading the tag line, "Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you," makes my skin crawl. I don't understand why this man feels he needs to constantly insult his viewers. I can honestly say I'll never watch a video of his because of trash talk like this.
 

Krion_Vark

New member
Mar 25, 2010
1,700
0
0
Woodsey said:
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
I haven't watched a Jimquisition episode since the CoD ep with the short bit on art. And with that being said I HAVEN'T had to watch it seeing as how unlike the other shows here on the escapist you can get the jist of what he said from the title and what people say in the thread that follows. I get that he has opinions on things but also touting himself as gamings biggest douche and acting like it too is what turns A LOT of people off.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
CM156 said:
Woodsey said:
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
Beggin' your pardon, but I have a question.

Are you saying that people (unlike the person you were responding to) who don't like the show have any less of a right to say what they don't like? I mean, to be fair, Jim IS a critic, isn't he? Turnabout is fair play and all that.

Besides, what do you care if people comment that they hate it?
Its 9 in videos in; there's been plenty of time to whine and complain. People won't like everything on the site - they don't venture in hordes onto the other stuff to write comments that aren't even critical of the actual piece, but simply the show's existence.
But that still begs the question of why you at all care? Really, if people leave negative comments, even if they are ill informed, how do they affect/bother you?
I dunno, why do they bother suspending people who leave "First!" comments on videos before watching them? Probably because its irritating and the rest of us don't want to have to read a bunch of shit before we can find something worthwhile to respond too.
Not everyone is going to like everything. And that's alright. If people want to express reasons why the don't like a show, such as problems they see with it, the first response shouldn't be "Don't like it; don't watch it". The show's existance to them causes as much harm as their comments do to you.
Eugh, I smell a Neutral.

Its not about the comment being negative. This comment can be seen to be negative:

Vault boy Eddie said:
Last episode was good, this one was more in the line of Captain Obvious, like the other episodes. The gist of it was people are assholes and ruin everything. The whole Portal thing was a prime example.
It also has the virtue of not being gloriously irrelevant.

These people are like those who continuously watch TV shows they don't like/disagree with just so they can keep writing in complaints to the fucking broadcaster, when all they have to do is not watch.

Do you know what I don't like? A decent portion of the written content on the site. It doesn't speak to me, and so I don't read it. I don't spend forever calling it out as boring/pretentious/unfunny/whatever (I'm not saying it is any of those things, incidentally, I just don't have any interest in reading it).

Krion_Vark said:
Woodsey said:
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
An old saying comes to mind... now what was it? Oh yes: "don't like it, shut the fuck up and watch something else."
I haven't watched a Jimquisition episode since the CoD ep with the short bit on art. And with that being said I HAVEN'T had to watch it seeing as how unlike the other shows here on the escapist you can get the jist of what he said from the title and what people say in the thread that follows. I get that he has opinions on things but also touting himself as gamings biggest douche and acting like it too is what turns A LOT of people off.
Yeah, and that's fine. So don't fucking watch (as you haven't been). I didn't realise the site consisted of a bunch of psychological masochists who like forcing themselves through things they don't like.
 

Atheist.

Overmind
Sep 12, 2008
631
0
0
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
Hey Jim. Thanks for insulting everyone who reads your post. Could you please treat the people that essentially pay you with a bit respect? Being blatantly offensive only promotes more of it. Also, why can you get away with insulting hundreds/thousands of people on this forum and we can't get away with insulting one member?

Sometimes the Escapist baffles me with their logic.
 

KhakiHat

New member
Dec 28, 2008
116
0
0
I like your "vengeful critic" style better when your playing off a character whose ideals and principals are being violated, causing him to take on the persona of an angry fascist games reviewer who vows to solve all our problems when he takes over the world. Otherwise, you just come off as a douche who needs to have his stupid wallpaper stuffed down his throat.

Also, nice commentary on Wooah. I hate Christan mags, they always seem to be filled with stories about cuddlely kittens and nothing meaningful in any way.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Atheist. said:
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
Hey Jim. Thanks for insulting everyone who reads your post. Could you please treat the people that essentially pay you with a bit respect? Being blatantly offensive only promotes more of it. Also, why can you get away with insulting hundreds/thousands of people on this forum and we can't get away with insulting one member?

Sometimes the Escapist baffles me with their logic.
It... its not fucking serious! What is wrong with you people?! Has the ability to infer things become a hidden art?!

*head explodes*
 

SoopaSte123

New member
Jul 1, 2010
464
0
0
Kind of a "well, duh" topic in my opinion, but on the plus side: your "Thank God for me" persona is getting better. The ending made me laugh a little. Keep improving it!
 

ewhac

Digital Spellweaver
Legacy
Escapist +
May 12, 2020
575
0
1
San Francisco Peninsula
Country
USA
Congratulations, Mr. Sterling, I've watched more of your installments here than I have Lisa Foiles. You may now experience pride.

Leaving aside Mr. Sterling's arrogant thank-${GOD}-for-me turd-in-your-face style, his overall point is nevertheless correct, and he summarizes the issue well. MetaCritic isn't the problem; idiots mis-conceptualizing and misusing MetaCritic are the problem.

However, there may be an argument to be made that MetaCritic should nevertheless make some changes. Too often it happens that what the artist/creator intended is not what is perceived by the audience. MetaCritic may have been conceived as a convenient aggregator by its creators, but the game publishers and, to some extent, the public now see it as something different. From that standpoint, MetaCritic may want to thoughtfully reconsider what it's become, and adjust appropriately.
 

Atheist.

Overmind
Sep 12, 2008
631
0
0
Woodsey said:
Atheist. said:
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
Hey Jim. Thanks for insulting everyone who reads your post. Could you please treat the people that essentially pay you with a bit respect? Being blatantly offensive only promotes more of it. Also, why can you get away with insulting hundreds/thousands of people on this forum and we can't get away with insulting one member?

Sometimes the Escapist baffles me with their logic.
It... its not fucking serious! What is wrong with you people?! Has the ability to infer things become a hidden art?!

*head explodes*
Mr.Fanboy Woodsey. It doesn't matter if it's not serious. If I punch you in the face and then yell "JK NOT SERIUZ!!" it doesn't make a difference to me, you still did it. If I don't know you, you don't get the right to jokingly insult me. It does not work that way. If I acknowledge him as a comedian, he can get away with telling such jokes. The thing is, he's not. He's supposed to be (Or at least doesn't seem to be) a critic, yet he tells offensive and arrogant "jokes."

I don't think he should be on this website. I don't care if you think he does because he's "jokingly offensive" or whatever you want to call it. Pretend to be an asshole for long enough and you'll become one.

Also, insulting other people's intelligence is a fairly poor argument. I can indeed "infer" things. You're just being ignorant in the sense that you cannot realize this show is offense to many people. If I ended this comment saying you're a troll (I'm not saying that), would you realize whether or not I was serious?
 

archabaddon

New member
Jan 8, 2007
210
0
0
IMPO, this series keeps getting better. Jim a little more self-flagellating, pointing out the hur-durs and the hypocrisy, and making a good point on how people can abuse tools for their own selfish ends.
 

Eabus

Poker of Badgers
Apr 15, 2009
24
0
0
There is nothing quite like hypocrisy soup is there. This certainly is an inquisition because that was one tortured analogy. But a good overall point that a tool like Metacritic is intended to inform consumers and not to dictate the paychecks of the people who made a particular game.
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
Ive never been on Metacritic but ive heard of it. I didnt know publishers took it so seriously. Nice argument Mr. Sterling, just keep on pushing past the haters.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
The problem I have with metacritic is that it tries to standardize something that is not standard (neither it should). Numeric representations of a review varies from 5 values, . A 3/5 stars in any site is a decent, yet a 60 in metacritic is a bad game (Duke Nukem Forever has a 50 in metacritic, a mere 10% difference with a 3/5 stars (decent) game. That means the difference between Duke Nukem and Brutal Legend is not bigger than the difference between Portal 2 and Dragon Age: Origins).

Metacritic is not to be blamed for bad reviews and publishers and consumers actions because of them, but it can and should be blamed for taking a statistically flawed method to determine the mean of non-comparative measures. If their aggregation method fails at that, then there something seriously wrong or overly simplified with their model...
 

RJ Dalton

New member
Aug 13, 2009
2,285
0
0
I've never once looked at Metacritic. I don't place much value on any particular game reviewer group or company and I see their works as largely uninsightful, unartistic pieces of tripe. When it gets right down to it, I go by the words of close friends whom I trust when I make a decision about whether or not I will buy a game.
So yeah, Metacritic hasn't hurt me in any way.
 

Hristo Tzonkov

New member
Apr 5, 2010
422
0
0
Jim,your haters are also hypocrites because they suddenly like you like something changed in this show.

Also I've been reading your reviews over at Destructoid lately and I saw the FEAR3 review.While I personally loved it I only played the SP and I like challenges so the difficulty didn't bother me.And I have to agree that while the game pretty much perfected what FEAR2 set out to do,the story is no longer scary sadly and it was in large part a story driven bizarre scary shooter.There were a few fright moments but they weren't all that scary.What I did enjoy was that it was all in all unnerving,which is good.I really think they should've incorporated some of the MP modes into the game.That would work quite well.Anyway what I was trying to say is that it so gracefully hit every good point that it missed a lot of others making it both the best and worst game in the series.You gave it a 6/10 and I understand where the score stems from but I also know how it hits that metacritic score everyone is so worried about.What's bad is that publisher pine their hopes(lol at kotick pic xD) in the reviews but the average user doesn't read a lot of reviews,he usually looks up metacritic for that % to see if it's good or not.He doesn't know what makes it good or bad and whether he'd like it enough to overlook flaws it might have like I did with FEAR despite all the points that made me cringe teeth.Which is where the system is misused and fails.I believe it should be a lot more for people's reference and as a sort of documentation of the whole thing.

Bugger that's a chunk of text.Hope you're reading this xD
 

Thunderhorse31

New member
Apr 22, 2009
1,818
0
0
A big "thank you" Jim, I've grown tired of defending aggregate review sites like Metacritic against whiny fanboys and people who can't seem to make their own decisions regardless of numbers on a screen.

Metacritic is not inherently evil; even if it didn't exist at all, the general consensus of a game's merit will still exist. Some people just can't handle it if the consensus is different from their own.

Plus now I have a new name for these people too: "Retard fuck-puppets."

Brilliant.
 

Citizen Box

New member
Feb 24, 2011
30
0
0
Atheist. said:
Mr.Fanboy Woodsey
Brilliant thinking you have there. Anyone who disagrees with you is a fanboy eh? Hilarious. Also, I am not even getting into the whole "we pay for you to be here" comment.

One thing I noticed in the comments though is, sadly, most people don't understand the concept of satire, which is a shame, because that was something I learned in grade school or is it just the misplaced entitlement people have on free media or the concept of higher brain functions? Who knows, but some people have problems.

OT: Good show like always, the fact that anyone uses Meta Critic as a standard of anything instead of the take away from the reviews listed like the positives and the negatives (which is what they should really focus on), is pretty bad.
 

Geeky Anomaly

New member
Feb 19, 2011
223
0
0
You can sometimes see the metacritic phenomenon occuring on other sites, such as IMDB. The system "breaks" when people rate something an abnormally high or low rating based on whether or not they liked a game or movie. It's the people who don't stop and think carefully about their reviews and just slap on 1s for hating the game and 10s for loving it. Hardly any games deserve a 1, on the same token, hardly any games deserve a 10. A game can be bad, but it can still be a 3 or 4. A game can be great, but only be a 7 or 8. It's the people that only think in 1s and 10s that are the ones who break the score.
 

Aureliano

New member
Mar 5, 2009
604
0
0
Fair enough. You present a reasonable criticism of metacritic's critics (how meta!), but it seems that hoping the video would be entertaining as well was just asking too much.

As a start to making your videos more funny, I sadly have to take a page either from Yahtzee or at a more basic level from The League. To make a creative swear word: combine the root words 'cock'/'dick' or 'tard' with things they do not normally attach to. Most basic form: cocktard. Classic: 'dickface' or more contemporary variant 'cockface'. Or even the ever-popular 'fucktard'. Now you can make your own!
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
I never really liked Jim's style and avoided his videos, but decided I'd give it another chance since the issue here interests me. But what do I read first and foremost?

Jim Sterling said:
Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.
Yep. Still trying to be Yahtzee. Minus the funny bit.

I'll be off now.
 

Penguin_Factory

New member
Sep 13, 2010
197
0
0
I've found that video game fans in general seem to obsess over scores way more so than film fans. I think that's why I've always liked Kotaku's reviews.

Does anyone know what the horror game that we saw in this video is called?
 

ECasThat

New member
Nov 14, 2009
229
0
0
jeretik said:
I read Jim's review of DNF. He lied about what's in the game. He's a douche. Didn't watch the video. And never will.
But you did take the time to post this?
Why post it here if it is the DNF review you don't like?
Can't you comment on the review itself?
I'm sure that a comment there saying "Hey Jim, I don't like that you lied in this review about x y z. Don't do that again" would help more then this one ever will. -_-
 

Atheist.

Overmind
Sep 12, 2008
631
0
0
Citizen Box said:
Atheist. said:
Mr.Fanboy Woodsey
Brilliant thinking you have there. Anyone who disagrees with you is a fanboy eh? Hilarious. Also, I am not even getting into the whole "we pay for you to be here" comment.

One thing I noticed in the comments though is, sadly, most people don't understand the concept of satire, which is a shame, because that was something I learned in grade school or is it just the misplaced entitlement people have on free media or the concept of higher brain functions? Who knows, but some people have problems.

OT: Good show like always, the fact that anyone uses Meta Critic as a standard of anything instead of the take away from the reviews listed like the positives and the negatives (which is what they should really focus on), is pretty bad.
Hah, definitely not. But someone who religiously responds to criticism of said show is indeed a fanboy, sorry to ruin your parade. Also, I pay the Escapist, which in turn pays Jim. Granted it is not a lot of money, but I still pay to use this site.

Satire and asshole are different things to me. Stephen Colbert of the Colbert report is satire. I love that show. Again, as the other person I responded to, insulting people's intelligence is juvenile. I don't know why people bother with intellectual insults, I'm pretty sure most people here aren't actually stupid. It's more the case that many fail to see the whole picture, like yourself.

Pretty much nothing is "free media." Someone pays for it, be it a random company, an individual, or government. Using the Escapist as an example, it's a combination of companies paying for advertisements, or the users paying directly. It's not charity media, my friend.

Edit: Also, why do people take fanboy as in insult. It simply means you're a dedicated fan. Don't take it to mean anything else.
 

Kahunaburger

New member
May 6, 2011
4,141
0
0
Hristo Tzonkov said:
Jim,your haters are also hypocrites because they suddenly like you like something changed in this show.
As one of the "Jimquisition haters," I actually think the show has kinda gone downhill, impossible as it may seem. Addressing the "metacritic controversy" as if it were an actual thing vs. a very small number of people whining on a very small number of message boards is kind of silly. The really strange thing is that he's frequently a good writer, so it's unclear what part of his writing doesn't translate well to video.
 

Yopaz

Sarcastic overlord
Jun 3, 2009
6,092
0
0
I do really like these videos now. I started liking them on number 3. They're hilarious and insightful and I love how he's clearly aware of the hate he's getting and just making fun of himself AND the haters in the same sentence at times. Also my main issue with Metacritics is that games with lower scores than 75 is considered mediocre while a movie is considered good all the way down to 60 or 65. Also the user reviews where those who don't think it's very good give it 0, while those who like it give 8-10 and few vote inbetween.
 

ZeroAE

New member
Jun 7, 2010
126
0
0
A world without Jim?!
Those thoughts are gonna torture me while I sleep.
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Atheist. said:
Woodsey said:
Atheist. said:
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
Hey Jim. Thanks for insulting everyone who reads your post. Could you please treat the people that essentially pay you with a bit respect? Being blatantly offensive only promotes more of it. Also, why can you get away with insulting hundreds/thousands of people on this forum and we can't get away with insulting one member?

Sometimes the Escapist baffles me with their logic.
It... its not fucking serious! What is wrong with you people?! Has the ability to infer things become a hidden art?!

*head explodes*
Mr.Fanboy Woodsey. It doesn't matter if it's not serious. If I punch you in the face and then yell "JK NOT SERIUZ!!" it doesn't make a difference to me, you still did it. If I don't know you, you don't get the right to jokingly insult me. It does not work that way. If I acknowledge him as a comedian, he can get away with telling such jokes. The thing is, he's not. He's supposed to be (Or at least doesn't seem to be) a critic, yet he tells offensive and arrogant "jokes."

I don't think he should be on this website. I don't care if you think he does because he's "jokingly offensive" or whatever you want to call it. Pretend to be an asshole for long enough and you'll become one.

Also, insulting other people's intelligence is a fairly poor argument. I can indeed "infer" things. You're just being ignorant in the sense that you cannot realize this show is offense to many people. If I ended this comment saying you're a troll (I'm not saying that), would you realize whether or not I was serious?
"It doesn't matter if it's not serious."

Yes it does. Quite considerably in fact. Calling someone an idiot, and calling someone an idiot to emphasise a persona (well, I assume a persona) that results in the mocking of the person throwing out the insults is quite different. The punching analogy doesn't work because its too extreme. If my friend did it and didn't knock my teeth out I'd probably find it quite funny - not a stranger. This, on the other hand, is not insulting - it won't linger on your mind for more than a few moments, or until this conversation is done.

"Pretend to be an asshole for long enough and you'll become one."

The whole thing is played so self-aware that this doesn't work.

"Also, insulting other people's intelligence is a fairly poor argument. I can indeed "infer" things. You're just being ignorant in the sense that you cannot realize this show is offense to many people. If I ended this comment saying you're a troll (I'm not saying that), would you realize whether or not I was serious?"

Well, no. At the very least, you couldn't in this situation. You took a couple of lines that were soaked in sarcasm and took them completely seriously and acted as if someone had slapped your mother. And as I've helpfully pointed out, if you find it offensive, its 9 episodes in, you know what you're in for, so you don't have to watch it.

A comedy show was on over here a few years ago called Little Britain. In it, there were two old ladies, one of whom would be given something to eat by the other one (a cake or whatever). She would say, "oh these are lovely - you're an excellent cook!" (not the exact line obviously), and then the other person would reveal that it was actually made by a black woman, or an old Chinese guy, or whatever, and the old woman would proceed to throw up everywhere.

Some people said this was racist, and that they were offended by it. These people were wrong. They missed the joke. The joke was not on the black woman or the old chinese guy, it was on the blindingly racist old woman. Do not assume that because you feign offense (and I don't doubt that the vast majority are faking it) that you automatically have a right to be. If you don't get it, that's your problem. If you don't find it funny, then fair enough. If you find it offensive, then that's another matter.

"If I ended this comment saying you're a troll (I'm not saying that), would you realize whether or not I was serious?"

Pretty much sums up exactly how you don't get this thing. Context, and the way it is written, is everything. If you signed that comment off with "You're just a troll", then duh, I would take it as being serious, given the "debate" we are having and how its written. Then again, I wouldn't go to all the effort of pretending I care.

Atheist. said:
Citizen Box said:
Atheist. said:
Mr.Fanboy Woodsey
Brilliant thinking you have there. Anyone who disagrees with you is a fanboy eh? Hilarious. Also, I am not even getting into the whole "we pay for you to be here" comment.

One thing I noticed in the comments though is, sadly, most people don't understand the concept of satire, which is a shame, because that was something I learned in grade school or is it just the misplaced entitlement people have on free media or the concept of higher brain functions? Who knows, but some people have problems.

OT: Good show like always, the fact that anyone uses Meta Critic as a standard of anything instead of the take away from the reviews listed like the positives and the negatives (which is what they should really focus on), is pretty bad.
Hah, definitely not. But someone who religiously responds to criticism of said show is indeed a fanboy, sorry to ruin your parade.
I haven't responded religiously. I picked up the first comment, and then yours. That's two. My other comments were a quite normal discussion on when negative criticism becomes tedious "you suck trolololol" comments.
 

maddawg IAJI

I prefer the term "Zomguard"
Feb 12, 2009
7,840
0
0
Pr0 said:
Thanks for the warning, I'll keep in mind that only site contributors are allowed to insult people from now on! I shall move back to my life of being a sad little cretin.
If your post is nothing more then one long winded way of calling the man fat, then ya you will get a warning.
 

RA92

New member
Jan 1, 2011
3,079
0
0
Citizen Box said:
One thing I noticed in the comments though is, sadly, most people don't understand the concept of satire, which is a shame, because that was something I learned in grade school or is it just the misplaced entitlement people have on free media or the concept of higher brain functions? Who knows, but some people have problems.
No, I would say you don't understand the concept of satire. Satirical pieces are witty and they imply one thing while saying the other. I don't see any of the subtlety here.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
Well, I think the bottom line is that the gaming industry is generally immature and has not learned how to take a loss with dignity. With millions upon millions of dollars being spent on games, the producers/publishers get rather anxious about making their money back. They don't care if they produce a turd, they want that turd to at least break even, and this means they want nothing negative about even the worst product to be out there at all. Metacritic represents a factor that they can't control directly, because even if they buy up a lot of big name reviewers, the lesser ones who are considered for part of it are treated equally for the purposes of compiling those ratings... a simple fact that contributes to why so many people will look at a Metacritic rating and give it such weight, above and beyond that of any specific reviewer usually.


Now, the basic issue of wanting to see a return on an investment, even one that produces crap, is not something that is unique to the gaming industry. It's shared by pretty much all businesses. When it comes to the media however, things like movies, music, and even TV shows have more avenues to try and recover the initial investment... largely because they are bigger, better established industries. Even a failed movie can turn a profit in the long term through discount disc sales, rentals, and similar things. With video games you have a smaller audience, as well as a smaller industry that has spent so much time trying to limit and control their own media where really their options are fairly limited, they pretty much have that one big initial sales period, and then a slow trickle. The gaming industry doesn't generally plan to support old products the same way that movie companies do, with even an old stinker of a movie getting tossed through budget bins for decades if the need arises. As a result other industries might QQ a bit, but are generally more willing to just accept taking a hit now and again.

I think the gaming industry's greed is also part of it, the gaming industry has the potential to be bigger than either movies or music. Heck, it could be the equivilent of Hollywood AND Pro-sports franchises put together. The thing is that it's not there yet, but a lot of the people involved in the industry, or at least the production end, insist on acting like it is, and by trying to act like big-wigs without an industry on that level, they set themselves up for failure. Bobby Kotick for example has his own private jet, there was an article a while back about how he got into a sex scandal with his personal stewardess. This is the kind of thing you expect from major label music and movie producers, his industry is however not on that level and yet he insists on trying to pretend that it is. This kind of behavior (I use Bobby as an example because he's a known quantity) within the gaming industry contributes to exactly why things like a Metacritic rating can be such a big crisis. After all if you have executives flying around on private jets like rock stars, at the end of the day they need to pay for that, and have enough money to finance their next games. I'm not saying these guys should live like paupers, but I sort of feel that with the current position the industry is in, a comparitivly more humble lifestyle and presentation might provide a bit more breathing room and prevent people from bursting blood vessels trying to contrive ways to control things like metacritic.

That's my thoughts at any rate.
 

vxicepickxv

Slayer of Bothan Spies
Sep 28, 2008
3,126
0
0
ZeroAE said:
A world without Jim?!
Those thoughts are gonna torture me while I sleep.
Well, enjoy that then.


The reason I like Zero Punctuation's reviews are because there are no numbers, only brutal honesty, and hyperbole.
 

Citizen Box

New member
Feb 24, 2011
30
0
0
Raiyan 1.0 said:
Citizen Box said:
One thing I noticed in the comments though is, sadly, most people don't understand the concept of satire, which is a shame, because that was something I learned in grade school or is it just the misplaced entitlement people have on free media or the concept of higher brain functions? Who knows, but some people have problems.
No, I would say you don't understand the concept of satire. Satirical pieces are witty and they imply one thing while saying the other. I don't see any of the subtlety here.
Possible. But, I would then say to look again, satire is or contains irony, sarcasm, parody, exaggeration, among other things. As far as being witty, sure, but its subjective really.

I am not saying the show itself is completely satire but if you think that the persona Jim has is serious then, well, in Jim's words "You must be fucking stupid".
 

Lt. Vinciti

New member
Nov 5, 2009
1,285
0
0
Whats a Metacritic and why does it bother people so much?


Im not trolling I just dont get the fuss...
 

Atheist.

Overmind
Sep 12, 2008
631
0
0
Woodsey said:
Atheist. said:
Woodsey said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

snip
snip
"It doesn't matter if it's not serious."

Yes it does. Quite considerably in fact. Calling someone an idiot, and calling someone an idiot to emphasise a persona (well, I assume a persona) that results in the mocking of the person throwing out the insults is quite different. The punching analogy doesn't work because its too extreme. If my friend did it and didn't knock my teeth out I'd probably find it quite funny - not a stranger. This, on the other hand, is not insulting - it won't linger on your mind for more than a few moments, or until this conversation is done.

"Pretend to be an asshole for long enough and you'll become one."

The whole thing is played so self-aware that this doesn't work.

"Also, insulting other people's intelligence is a fairly poor argument. I can indeed "infer" things. You're just being ignorant in the sense that you cannot realize this show is offense to many people. If I ended this comment saying you're a troll (I'm not saying that), would you realize whether or not I was serious?"

Well, no. At the very least, you couldn't in this situation. You took a couple of lines that were soaked in sarcasm and took them completely seriously and acted as if someone had slapped your mother. And as I've helpfully pointed out, if you find it offensive, its 9 episodes in, you know what you're in for, so you don't have to watch it.

A comedy show was on over here a few years ago called Little Britain. In it, there were two old ladies, one of whom would be given something to eat by the other one (a cake or whatever). She would say, "oh these are lovely - you're an excellent cook!" (not the exact line obviously), and then the other person would reveal that it was actually made by a black woman, or an old Chinese guy, or whatever, and the old woman would proceed to throw up everywhere.

Some people said this was racist, and that they were offended by it. These people were wrong. They missed the joke. The joke was not on the black woman or the old chinese guy, it was on the blindingly racist old woman. Do not assume that because you feign offense (and I don't doubt that the vast majority are faking it) that you automatically have a right to be. If you don't get it, that's your problem. If you don't find it funny, then fair enough. If you find it offensive, then that's another matter.

"If I ended this comment saying you're a troll (I'm not saying that), would you realize whether or not I was serious?"

Pretty much sums up exactly how you don't get this thing. Context, and the way it is written, is everything. If you signed that comment off with "You're just a troll", then duh, I would take it as being serious, given the "debate" we are having and how its written. Then again, I wouldn't go to all the effort of pretending I care.
My issue is calling everyone an idiot versus someone. It's a bad persona in my opinion. Also, while I agree is a persona, assuming so is a poor decision. I know people who I previously thought were joking about being a dick, actually being one.

I'll give you the punch in the face being a bit much. Lets change it to tripping someone. If my friend did it, I'd laugh. If some random person did, I'd probably physically assault them, if I knew it was intentional.



"Pretend to be an asshole for long enough and you'll become one."

The whole thing is played so self-aware that this doesn't work.


I actually completely disagree with this. I believe if you play a role long enough and constantly enough, you will be affected by it. You're also making the assumption he's self aware, and not actually an asshole, which may or may not be true.

Honestly, I didn't watch much of the video. I didn't really take any specific lines, but I've seen the previous episodes. I'm doing this based on the whole. That to me seems to be an arrogant jerk. I'm taking the average of the context, as well as the tone in the overall episode. Not nitpicking any lines specifically.

Of course I don't have to watch the show, the point is that a company I support has content I dislike. Content that could otherwise be filled with something I enjoy. I'm not saying my vote is worth more than others, I just want my opinion to be out there.

In your old lady example, as weird as it sounds, it was normal back then to be racist. Of course it is no longer socially acceptable to be so. It isn't socially acceptable, for the most part, to be an arrogant jerk that insults people that read their posts idiots.

Also, please don't call me a liar by implying I'm faking offense. I'm as offended by this person as I am the scent of sewage. I just wish it would go away.

Responding to the last part, have you never observed someone write a lengthy comment only to finish it calling the other person a troll? Occasionally people do respond to trolls, granted it is foolish. But from what I gather you take me to be foolish anyways, so I wouldn't put it past you.

At least I know you care. That's what is important.

Anyways, lets all be friends. While we offer dissenting opinions, we aren't enemies. After all, we must share quite a bit in common given we frequent the same site.

Edit : Corrected some spelling errors that effect the content.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
- Your job is to rank movies from good to excellent.
- What if I don't like them?
- That's what's good for.

OT: I find little to no fun in this series, I like the subjects he takes, I agreed with some of his perspectives, but the way he delivers it, it's really annoying. Reminds me of that image with the special olympics on arguing on the internet. Which is a pity, because the subjects are interesting, like I said before.
 

mysecondlife

New member
Feb 24, 2011
2,142
0
0
Jim, if all of us are going to be saddened by your death, maybe we have the right to call you out on your weight. >:D

Not a regular viewer but this video was quite nice. good follow up to ExtraCredits me thinks.
 

rutger5000

New member
Oct 19, 2010
1,052
0
0
Jim you need not to worry about us when you go. We'll all go with you of course, we'll all gladly commit suicide knowing you're on the other side.
 

mikespoff

New member
Oct 29, 2009
758
0
0
I'm trying, like really trying to give this series another chance, you know? The subject looks interesting, I'll see if his style has improved over the past month or so (haven't watched since the third one).

But this is not a good start:
Jim Sterling said:
Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.
...and I couldn't sit through the whole review. Sounded like he might have had some interesting ideas waiting to come out, but after two minutes I just couldn't take it any more.
 

Keslen

I don't care about titles.
Jan 23, 2010
48
0
0
It's unfortunate that this topic was covered in the Jimquisition. I'd like to see it discussed in a video that wasn't mundane and boring and didn't insult my intelligence.

Maybe Extra Credits will discuss it in the near future?
 

itsmeyouidiot

New member
Dec 22, 2008
425
0
0
I still want to see Jim's review scores from Metacritic for one reason only: Sonic Colors.

The only reason it doesn't have a score higher than the DS version is because of Jim's bullshit review.

Just accept the fact that your review are terrible, Jim. Hell, I want to see him kicked off of the Escapist along with Yahtzee for his general asshattery.
 

ProjectTrinity

New member
Apr 29, 2010
311
0
0
People are still trying to complain Jim off of The Escapist? I must clap towards the weeks you all spent doing that. It seems to be working wonderfully...

Also, for the person wondering about him and his use of "God". I'd surmise that he just wants to emphasize how important he is, not insult those of faith.

And finally, I use review scores~ Say what you want about them, but very, very, *very* few games outside of the 80-100 range stand up to the actual games that have those high scores. Maybe you yourself may have "more fun than I had with this popular game", but once you add in the technical aspects and the solid gameplay most of the higher games have, your "okay game" doesn't look too appealing. There's no need to justify your purchase, nor convince yourself you're playing a better game than the ones playing the popular and high rated games.

Not that I like Call of Duty: Modern Gameplay 77 or hate Drakengard: Incest-Related-Suicides, but review scores from reliable sites tend to do a great job at explaining their score and why I should pay attention to a game I otherwise snuffed at. I like Drakengard more than I could ever like CoD, but I would never rate it higher than than the recent CoD games. I just don't have that kind of bias, especially since people rely on me for a fair assessment of a game their interested in.

Of course, if a gamer is coming to me for which one has the original story or characters~ Now excuse me as I reach out for this rage-shield. ~_~
 

itsmeyouidiot

New member
Dec 22, 2008
425
0
0
I know my complaining isn't going to get me anywhere, really, but it certainly beats doing nothing.
 

Lvl 64 Klutz

Crowsplosion!
Apr 8, 2008
2,338
0
0
Great discussion. Terrible video. What on Earth did any of that game footage have to do with anything!? It's nice to see someone filling out their video with something other than stock photos and their own poorly designed clip art, but it should also be contextual.
 

twm1709

New member
Nov 19, 2009
477
0
0
I still don't think Jim works as good on camera as he does in "paper" but I'm becoming more and more fond of him.
Recently I started visiting Destructoid and I'm actually anxious to read his articles about games and news.

EDIT: Am I the only one who gets an "inspector gadget" vibe from the music in the background?
 

Faux Furry

New member
Apr 19, 2011
282
0
0
Any game whose PR reps so much as tacitly implies black-listing of any kind should be subject to boycott.
Yes, as a matter of fact, two wrongs do make a right sometimes(not that there is anything wrong with boycotting someone for using such underhanded tactics against anyone issuing an unfavorable review)!

Alright, that's just a further excuse for those who don't want to buy Duke Nukem Forever to continue doing so while feeling as if they are taking a stand against bullies trying to push around critics and pull the wool over the consumer public's eyes.

Does this mean that Meta-Critic gets Jim Sterling's approval or at least acceptance?
So....does that mean Meta-Critic gets about a 6 out of 10 or what?
 

bootz

New member
Feb 28, 2011
366
0
0
I dont know maybe if certain reviewers didnt bomb game scores for attention then I think it would be fixed
 

plainlake

New member
Jan 20, 2010
110
0
0
Wait, so metacritic WAS to blame? I dont think he got the message through even after 5 minutes of you saying it again and again. The worst thing is agreeing with him from the start. Please take on more issues than one or expand on it next time, please.
 

camazotz

New member
Jul 23, 2009
480
0
0
It's a dirty job but only a crazy bastard like Jim can do it. Thumbs up!





Note to people who freak out over Jim's Persona: turn on FM radio sometime and listen to any number of chat shows; that'll put Jim's style and "webcam personality" all into perspective.
 

Braedan

New member
Sep 14, 2010
697
0
0
Jim seems like he really hates doing these videos. Obviously he's trying to play the "thank god for me" bits for laughs, and maybe it's just me... but that's the attitude I'm getting.
 

The Lugz

New member
Apr 23, 2011
1,371
0
0
well, this one was better jim
but it's still not life as we know it

it is of coarse, impossible to argue that a review / average score site is to blame for crummy game review scores

it's clearly just developers making terrible games and reviewers ripping the crap out of them publicly instead of people being mildly aggravated by a game mechanic, or whatever now they just skip the game entirely

seems a bit harsh, but that's life these days seems if you aren't exceptional your nobody, i blame the Americans and their pop idol attitude to life oozing over into the rest of popular media
 

Awexsome

Were it so easy
Mar 25, 2009
1,549
0
0
This was the first Jimquisition episode I watched and... well...

While I thought the argument was solid (if a bit too easy) and agreeable... I gotta say I'm not a fan of the over exaggerated ego character Jim goes with.
 

Russian_Assassin

New member
Apr 24, 2008
1,849
0
0
I love this guy! I also watched his youtube videos and I'm really glad he is on board the escapist boat! I just hope the haters don't force the "Bosses" to kick him off the site. I feel like he belongs in the escapist family, one that is home to critics that deliver valid points of views, each in his unique way (though I am fairly certain that Mr. Croshaw is the source of inspiration for many of them and not only on the escapist :p).

Long live Yahtzee, Moviebob, James, Daniel, Allison, Jim and every other content provider! You guys are awesome :D
 

Sonic Doctor

Time Lord / Whack-A-Newbie!
Jan 9, 2010
3,042
0
0
Jim Sterling said:
Metacritic Isn't the Problem

Oh you poor, sad little cretins. You are all so wrong. Always. Forever. Jim Sterling illuminates your path, but what good does that do when you refuse to open your eyes? Oh, he's so much better than you.

Watch Video
Very good points.

Though I see it as only a very small bit like 20% that is the fault of publishers on this subject , I see it as 70% a problem created by as you said it OCD Fanboys. These people don't understand how to give a review and a reasonable review score for the situation.

Dragon Age 2 is a good example. In my opinion, the only flaw was the repeat dungeons, so I only take a point off for that, so I gave it 9 out of 10.

Now, all the things that people were bad mouthing the game for(other than the repeat dungeons), the slight change in the inventory system, the overhaul of the skills system, the dialogue wheel that just makes dialogue clearer so that people don't have to guess what will happen when they say something, and the slight change in combat(seriously, the only thing they changed was that they gave the player control over their normal attack instead of making it automated, oh and the player can actually run and move instead of walking at a snails pace), in reality are things that only effect gameplay slightly. The game still runs and the graphics are a good bit better, and if one plays every piece of content out for the game, it is easily a 50 to 60 hour game.

But these fanboys of the first game, instead of looking at any of the possible good points that they don't mention and they must have been good since they didn't bad mouth them, they just state what they didn't like about the game and then give it a zero.

A zero? A zero to two is for a game that is so bad that it can't be completed/beat because it is incredibly glitched up. Whether the game gets a zero, one, or two depends on how far the player was able to get in said glitched game. Three to five is for a game a player that didn't like a game but it still functioned. Six to Seven is for mediocre to okay, and eight to ten is for good to great.

One reason that the fanboys give the zeros is because they pathetically think that the developer will think that they made a big mistake somewhere and change the game back to what the first installment use to be, though any smart developer will just laugh at the whiner that doesn't give a reasonable score because said whiner is just crying for attention, "Boohoo, I wasn't able to customize my character right down to the shape and color of his toenails!"

Lastly I do lay 10% of fault on Metacritic. They could easily remove problem reviews that abuse the system because the reviewers weren't being rational. They could also remove the "professional" reviews that don't actually take a professional stance and act just as like those OCD fanboys and throw temper-tantrums like two year-olds and throw undeserved bottom scores. The reason I think this is import is because these reviews do influence people(though people that don't look closely). My example goes back to DA2, and a fellow Escapist user that went sometime without buying it because they saw the user review scores were so bad on Metacritic, when he finally tried the game, he found it was really great and wished he hadn't waited so long to get it. So such user reviews and unprofessional "professional" reviews are harmful, and Metacritic should take that into account and at least do some regulation on what get's put up and added to the review total.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
I'm only here to respond to your awesome Blackadder reference. I have no intention of subjecting myself through more of Jim's shit.
 

ManInRed

New member
May 16, 2010
240
0
0
I agree placing the real blame where it lies, and when people insult Meta Critic I think they are in fact insulting these groups, the dumb believers of Meta Critic. If we all shout that we hate Meta Critic enough, maybe the idiots that believe in it will stop.

Still, that isn't to say you can't hate Meta Critic for what it is. Using the same analogy of blaming a Knife Manufacturer for people getting stab, a company can create a product that makes it more dangerous than it needs to be.

Meta Critic claims to be able to sum up scores of all critics, and that's a dangerous thing to get people to believe in. Meta Critic avoids taking responsibility for the results of a system they designed. Meta Critic avoid building an archive of old famous games to use as an example or test to validate their scoring system.

A lot of nice well intention people work together to take a small part in creating an utter disaster. They can do it be cause they think their blame less. No rain drop thinks it's the blame for the flood. But they do play a part in this, and there are things they could do to make things better. The fact that they don't is why its so easy for everyone to pile on the blame on them.
 

Sonic Doctor

Time Lord / Whack-A-Newbie!
Jan 9, 2010
3,042
0
0
Lt. Vinciti said:
Whats a Metacritic and why does it bother people so much?


Im not trolling I just dont get the fuss...
This is Metacritic:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-360/dragon-age-ii/user-reviews?dist=negative

This is also an example of why people don't like it, because people when they don't like a game instead of giving a reasoned review and score, they just give the game a zero and move on, which actually hurts how prospective buyers make their purchases and hurts the sales of the game. With Dragon Age 2, if you remove all the unreasonable no thought given zero scores the user score would be around 7.5 instead of 4.4. It really should make a viewer wonder why the professional review average is a 79 out of 100(basically a 7.9). Of course people wrongfully make up stories that reviewers are bribed(while it happens, it probably only effects 1 out of every 100 professional reviews). So the only thing the gap can mean is that the professionals were reviewing the game professionally, while 90% of all the low score user reviews were unreasonable and should be taken down because they add nothing to situation and artificially lower a game's score.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
It's not metacritic's fault that people use their scores in ways never intended, yes.

It is metacritic's fault that the way which scores are chosen and how they're weighted and retabulated- on both the critic- and consumer-review sides- is non-transparent and possibly ill-suited to the task of providing accurate critical consensus.

And I do think that perhaps Metacritic has to take its share of lumps in this idea that every game has to have a score within a handsbreadth of 80; they don't have to put everything into traffic-light coloring systems, and even Rotten Tomatoes does a better job of illuminating what's actually behind the "average" critical response.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
You're working under the assumption that critics know what they're talking about.

Metacritic is a flawed idea in that it collects peoples opinions and gives it a scale.

Why exactly do we need it? What do I care that some turd gave a game I like a 5 or something. So if we're not supposed to care what a collection of people, who don't know as much as they think they do, have to say about a game, why should it exist?

It's a pointless site and really doesn't serve any purpose apart from giving people who buy a reviewers spiel a place to buy a whole host of reviewers spiel.

As far as I'm concerned we can get rid of it.

It has no good application but potential for plenty of bad.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
bootz said:
I dont know maybe if certain reviewers didnt bomb game scores for attention then I think it would be fixed
Amen, brother.

I wonder if said reviewers' defense of metacritic comes from the fact that they need it as their trolling platform.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
ECasThat said:
But you did take the time to post this?
Why post it here if it is the DNF review you don't like?
Can't you comment on the review itself?
I'm sure that a comment there saying "Hey Jim, I don't like that you lied in this review about x y z. Don't do that again" would help more then this one ever will. -_-
Erm, it won't help with the type of person (douche capable of bringing down the sales of a product) that is Jim. I happened to be here in search for news and commented on the way.
 

Swifteye

New member
Apr 15, 2010
1,079
0
0
erbkaiser said:
Some good points made here, but unfortunately a lot too much arrogance for me to actually like this video.
A little less ego and a little more depth on exactly why the misuse of Metacritic is harmful, and here I mean that in videogame reviews for some insane reason a '70' means mediocre and a '60' means horrible, and the video would have been much better.
Your in trouble. Ego IS his hook you might as well ask yahtzee to stop being cynical or movie bob to stop being a nerd.
 

gritch

Tastes like Science!
Feb 21, 2011
567
0
0
I think this will be the last of Jim's video's I attempt to watch. What's frustrating is he might genuinely have interesting insight but the persona he's chosen to embrace for the videos I find unbearable. I had to stop once he got the the "Jim's kitchen of truth". I know it's all an act - there's no way someone could really be that full of themselves - but I simply find it obnoxious.
 

Metalrocks

New member
Jan 15, 2009
2,406
0
0
i never really believe these reviews. i do read them at times when i am interested in a game and want to get some infos but at times i dont agree with what i read or hear. most of the times you can believe comments as long they really cover the points properly.
otherwise i just get the game my self and make up my own mind.

you remember yahtzees review of bulletstorm? he complained about the controls and other things but the comments pretty much stated otherwise. i also played the game and i enjoyed it a lot. dint had any issues with the controls(PC)and hardly spend behind cover.

shadow harvest got from metacritic a 37%. i think this rate is really low. yes, the game has flaws and is by far not perfect, but i do enjoy the game a lot and some others too. the gameplay was fine, i dint had any issues with the controls as some reviews state, so as other problems the reviews said.

the reviews for me are informative but it never really told me to buy a game or not.
 

MB202

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,157
0
0
Metacritic does the same basic thing as GameRankings and Rotten Tomatoes, right? No one seems to complain about the, so what makes Metacritic so special?
 

MrDefo

New member
Jun 7, 2010
27
0
0
I was not aware that Metacritic was such a big issue until now, but I think I have a pretty good idea why people put so much weight on the numbers for a game review, more so than any other genre.

Unlike film and music, there isn't a cheap way to enjoy a game outside of out and out piracy. There's no dollar theatre for video games, people aren't playing games on a radio, and video game rental is just not as simple as it once was. Games are priced so high that players are demanding a certain level of "excellence" out of them to justify the $60 purchase price. I can't imagine impulse buying a game over $20. Impulse buying a $20 DVD, well they're all about $20 now, aren't they? If the developers would look at their model, spend less time worrying about pushing the technological envelope now that that's pretty much over and done with, and use that cost cutting measure to release a series of cheaper games, I think people will have fewer qualms with playing a mediocre game. Tons of people play Angry Birds, and what is that? Bare bones gameplay, and a price point to match it.
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
Why are you trying to be annoying Jim, you know most people are too sensitive.

Anyway, I never pay too much attention to scores and percentages on Metacritic anyway, it's always opinion based and there is never a breakdown of all the aspects of the game, so you just read what each reviewer wants you to read.

This website has a much better reviewing system, even if it is only one person reviewing the games. (It doesn't matter if it's for Xbox games)
 

Kenji_03

New member
May 12, 2007
134
0
0
Ya know, I think Jim finally has figured out his tone. "Everyone here hates me, and I like it that way". I'm starting to like Jim now, didn't think I'd say that at the start.
 

Eri

The Light of Dawn
Feb 21, 2009
3,626
0
0
For people that hate his show, they sure keep watching it. Lol
 

Sabinfrost

New member
Mar 2, 2011
174
0
0
I think Jim hit the nail on the head, even though he certainly wasn't the first. The industry needs to get over aggregates, point in case, Homefront dev losing the franchise over mediocre review scores (not outright terrible ones) despite the game having massive sales success. Now, I'm not a Homefront fan, but if a game sells in numbers the dev should have the opportunity to look at whatever went wrong, and fix it. Not have it taken away from them because some aggregate site scared the big bad publisher.
 

Fearzone

Boyz! Boyz! Boyz!
Dec 3, 2008
1,241
0
0
I LOL'd in this one.

"You've just been served in Jim Sterling's truth kitchen."

That was prime.

Rock on dude.
 

KCL

New member
Jan 12, 2010
44
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
I opened this thread curious to see who actually watches this guy's videos. Good to know that a fair number of replies are from people who don't.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Well if he isn't the most annoying person to listen to I can think of right now, he does have a point.

A point.

A single point that he goes over 3 or 4 times with endless pointless analogies without expanding on it that "Hey, Publishers are being the idiots with Metacritic".

Other areas he could have gone into if he didn't feel the need to pad the already short episode:
-WHY the publishers are idiots with metacritic
-problems with critic's scoring
-how the "progress" of games might inherently scews scores ahead of expectations
-why publishers aren't the only ones, why is a score aggregate so desired by all gamers.

Just compare and contrast Extra Credits with Jim Sterling with the most recent episodes covering pretty much the same subject yet the former is able to concisely cover far more points - convincingly - in the same amount of time. Also without recycling the same "thank god for me" gag.

Next episode could someone write the cliff-notes of his episode on a post-it note. Because I sure don't tune in for his charming personality.
 

Doom-Slayer

Ooooh...I has custom title.
Jul 18, 2009
630
0
0
Videos are growing on me. The man however is not. Seriously if I could cut all of the "I'm great, you all suck" bits out of his videos, then just carry on lsitening to them, not watching of course, it would all be fantastic.
 

Adultism

Karma Haunts You
Jan 5, 2011
977
0
0
Hate hate hate, Its so obvious that people are just mad that someone has an opinion that differs from their own. Keep making entertaining and deep videos.
 

JoelChenFA

Play Minecraft. Watch Top Gear.
Nov 24, 2010
129
0
0
There is a thin line between parodying a fat pompous douchebag and being one. I think a lot of people gravitate towards Jim being one and thus hating his (fat) guts. This is also why Yahtzee > Jim. Because we all know yahtzee is sweet like honey and just playing an arse.

It also doesn't help that the points he brings up do not feel as unique as they should be, or that his jokes are based around him playing a fat pompous douchebag (he's not one really otherwise there are no jokes)
 

Kuhkren

New member
Apr 22, 2009
152
0
0
When I use metacritic I also read the good, bad, and mediocre review scores to see the reasoning behind their scoring. It seems like an effective website if people read and judge the quality and relevance of the reviews.
 

JoelChenFA

Play Minecraft. Watch Top Gear.
Nov 24, 2010
129
0
0
Kenji_03 said:
Ya know, I think Jim finally has figured out his tone. "Everyone here hates me, and I like it that way". I'm starting to like Jim now, didn't think I'd say that at the start.
They say they like it. They say it. But do they feel it?

We don't want to see you hang yourself Jim. Its okay to admit that you don't like such comments. Escapist will be more happy to ban anyone who calls you names.

Like they do if we commented on your boobs.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
JoelChenFA said:
Rotten tomatoes works. SO should metacritic.
Doesn't rotten tomatoes work on a like-dislike system with equal voting of all users? A very different system that I don't think has been applied to games before.

It's not perfect as if something with very niche appeal is not targeted well then it will get panned.

Another problem is that it can discourage risk taking, like adding an element that could turn people from liking it to LOVING it, though it risks alienating many to change from a like rating to dislike.

No system is perfect because at the end of the day people have different tastes, if a film has niche appeal then it can get popularly panned:

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/kung-pow-enter-the-fist

A modern classic like Kung Pow panned with a 14% score.
 

JoelChenFA

Play Minecraft. Watch Top Gear.
Nov 24, 2010
129
0
0
Swifteye said:
erbkaiser said:
Some good points made here, but unfortunately a lot too much arrogance for me to actually like this video.
A little less ego and a little more depth on exactly why the misuse of Metacritic is harmful, and here I mean that in videogame reviews for some insane reason a '70' means mediocre and a '60' means horrible, and the video would have been much better.
Your in trouble. Ego IS his hook you might as well ask yahtzee to stop being cynical or movie bob to stop being a nerd.
Its a really straight hook.
 

skullduggery

New member
Jun 6, 2011
16
0
0
Wow, I actually really liked this jimquisition. If you had cut the "After I die..." part, it would have been a phenomenal episode.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Fearzone said:
I LOL'd in this one.

"You've just been served in Jim Sterling's truth kitchen."

That was prime.

Rock on dude.
What did he actually serve? that:

"publishers mistreating metascores is the same as blaming video games for crime"

His put down was pretty cool, but it would have been better saved for something much more poignant and profound that his poorly explained comparison that is spurious at best.
 

Swifteye

New member
Apr 15, 2010
1,079
0
0
JoelChenFA said:
Swifteye said:
erbkaiser said:
Some good points made here, but unfortunately a lot too much arrogance for me to actually like this video.
A little less ego and a little more depth on exactly why the misuse of Metacritic is harmful, and here I mean that in videogame reviews for some insane reason a '70' means mediocre and a '60' means horrible, and the video would have been much better.
Your in trouble. Ego IS his hook you might as well ask yahtzee to stop being cynical or movie bob to stop being a nerd.
Its a really straight hook.
It isn't very hard to be a jerk on the internet is it? Personally I would be above such things but even though it's very cliche and easy to be mean it still draws a crowd.....
 

Beautiful End

New member
Feb 15, 2011
1,755
0
0
Jim kinda rubs me off the wrong way at times. But I gotta admit he's got the balls to do what I would probably want to do to trolls. So yeah, he's alright.

As far as Metacritic, I've never heard of it (Yeah, surprise!), but it sounds like just another internet site that reviews stuff, like Jim said. If they have an unique way to review stuff, well, that's their style. Can't tell them they suck or that they're wrong just because people disagree.
It's the internet, people! Don't take it so seriously. At the end of the day, we all log off.
 

Icehearted

New member
Jul 14, 2009
2,081
0
0
I just wish these publishers that are setting fire to gaming would pay more attention to videos like this and Extra Credits; so many valid points for consideration, so many things to take away.
 

incal11

New member
Oct 24, 2008
517
0
0
Pr0 said:
Thanks for the warning, I'll keep in mind that only site contributors are allowed to insult people from now on! I shall move back to my life of being a sad little cretin.
How true, my experience: call one person a jackass for,well, being a jackass and get a warning. Call the majority of your show's viewers pricks and get fame. (sigh)
I like this show btw, some truth well told. Though I'm afraid not in a way most of those concerned will be willing to listen to.
 

Still Life

New member
Sep 22, 2010
1,137
0
0
Zom-B said:
He's essentially right. And furthermore, you don't hear anyone complaining about how RottenTomatoes.com is ruining the movie industry.

As usual, a whiny minority seeks to change/ruin something for everyone else because they got their knickers in a twist of a perceived slighting.
Minority groups can be a good thing and can provide unique perspectives on matters. I would argue that the industry need super-hardcore fans, because quite often they're in tune with the essence of a game/series and can provide great feedback to developers. Bioware Social is a great example of a hardcore fanbase which contributes to the development process of Bioware games in a positive way. I frequently loiter around the Mass Effect forums and the developers have taken ques from community requests.

I feel that you've kinda missed the point, as it's not so much those OCD gamers who moan over score inconsistencies, but that it is ultimately the industry itself which has created a phenomena that works against the production of more innovative and risk-taking games. Sure, there's a small and vocal minority of people out there -- just like there is here on the Escapist -- who take issue with every detail in reviews and at the end of the day: it's their burden.

When will people learn that a 60, or a 70 does not necessarily equate to a bad game?

Love your videos, Jim! Make 'em angry :)
 

unacomn

New member
Mar 3, 2008
974
0
0
Dear Jim, you missed the part where not everyone has a 0-10 review scale, in which case, Metacritic puts just about anything they want there, index review written with no clue about the actual product, ignore balanced sources and, what was the other thing, oh yes, THOUGHT FOR MORE THAN A SECOND THAT SCORING HUMAN BEINGS BASED ON REVIEWS OF THEIR GAMES WAS A GOOD IDEA.
 

Snowy Rainbow

New member
Jun 13, 2011
676
0
0
Why is the Escapist still posting these videos? Jim and his show are nothing but a self-referential rant on the obvious, using foul language and hollow faux sexism to fill in the gaps. I don't see how to improve the videos or why you would want to; everything said has been put forward many times before on this site and in much, much better terms.
 

Snowy Rainbow

New member
Jun 13, 2011
676
0
0
BlueInkAlchemist said:
Let's say I get a message in the mail, like this, from Jim or a similar observer of popular culture.

The contents of the message could be poignant, topical, relevant and completely on the nose from my subjective point of view.

But if the envelope is covered in slanderous messages about my obvious lack of intelligence (since I'm not Jim) and disparaging remarks about my mom's performance in bed, written in human feces (because that's always funny), I'm not going to open the envelope.

Call me crazy.
Exactly.

Pointing out that your only joking about being a wanker and a sexist ass doesn't make it any more funny. I feel like Jim has nothing to say beyond what's already been said, so to hide it he makes the video self-referential as to allow the "you're just taking it too serious" excuse.

Not funny. Not smart.

Shallow. Predictable.
 

notimeforlulz

New member
Mar 18, 2011
183
0
0
Shouldn't bonuses be sales based? That would make sense right? Well sure for a developers point of view, but the stuff that sells well in some cases doesn't make the publisher look good in the eyes of gamers. So making the publisher look good is the bonus for devers with metacritic.
 

uberhippy

New member
Apr 28, 2011
61
0
0
Great Video,
& kudos Jim on the Father Ted plug!

'down with this sort of thing', 'careful now'
>.<
 

Thammuz

New member
Nov 21, 2010
45
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
For once, just once, i would love to see somebody who actually takes the time to rebut to some of the points instead of just focusing on the delivery as if that was important.

Because that's not the only problem you have, I hope.

Because if the case is that you just don't like his persona, I assure you, WE GOT IT. It's been nine videos (eight if you don't count the E3 video), he clearly isn't going to change it and the escapist clearly wants to keep him, so kindly shut your traps and start considering, i don't know, WATCHING SOMETHING ELSE. Something you like, preferrably, to spare another audience your FUCKING WHINING.

Nobody is going to stop liking him because you say so and the site isn't going to spiral down into obscurity because of one person you don't like. Especially considering that that one person is competent enough to be a reviews editor, which makes his opinion worth listening to, if anything to get an idea of what someone who works in that particular field might think about various issues.

And besides, it baffles me that a site that has Yahtzee weekly destroying pretty much every game he comes across, would have such a fucking sensitive fanbase. It's not a seniority thing because Jim has been doing this for a while too, and it's not the fact that Yahtzee's opinion is clearer because lots of people have trouble understanding whether he likes a game or not, so what's the fucking deal here? Why are two perfectly valid opinions presented in an unhortodox fashion being treated so differently?
 

Omgsarge

New member
May 11, 2009
78
0
0
I never looked at metacritic in my life. Too many haters and fanboys out there. I'd rather depend on non score based reviews.
Honestly, I don't like Jim, as a persona. Being aloft and acting like you are better than everybody is not creative, appealing or funny and wears out its novelty after 3 videos. You do have some valid points and discussion going on in your videos. Why degrade them with that side stuff that is not funny nor interesting.(IMO, remember that)
He can stay for all I care, but I don't think I'm going to watch more videos from him.
 

Kenji_03

New member
May 12, 2007
134
0
0
skullduggery said:
Wow, I actually really liked this jimquisition. If you had cut the "After I die..." part, it would have been a phenomenal episode.
Remember that Jim acting like he's amazing is now a confirmed parody (as mentioned in his earlier episodes). Just like MovieBob being a "I'm a geek and I'm proud of it" is part of Bob's persona and Yantzee's "I'm really witty and can talk fast" is part of Ben's persona, Jim playing up the "I am great" is his *ahem* /unique/ way of selling his series.

I agree that it doesn't work, but he's far too into it now to set up a new persona and him presenting himself as unlikable makes it easier for him to play devil's advocate since it's clear he isn't here to please anyone.
 

Kapol

Watch the spinning tails...
May 2, 2010
1,431
0
0
I decided to pause the video and check out that thing written asking Jim to remove his review, and it seemed really rude. It seems to be saying "Hey, you're not a real reviewer, so you really shouldn't say you. That way you don't effect the magical score that's supposed to reflect reviewer's opinions. After all, bad reviews are bad for everyone." That's my take on it anyways. I will admit it's well written, with the main points bolded so they jump out. The thing about Yahtzee really gets me as well. Just because he doesn't give a worthless (well, not worthless, but really silly) number at the end of his rant makes his opinion any less valuable? Especially when so many people pay attention... Bleh, I suppose it doesn't matter. I just think that metacritic isn't the case in terms of the letter, just that that person seems to like making 'video game reviewers' out to be better then other people with less worthy opinions, and that Jim somehow isn't in that golden gate of reviewing.

Anyways, I enjoy these videos. Keep it up Jim.
 

Prince Regent

New member
Dec 9, 2007
811
0
0
Tough I certainly agree, was this worth an entire episode? First you made your point, then you made your point, then you boosted your ego a little (wich I liked) and then you made your point again.
 

Terminally Chill

New member
Jun 21, 2011
73
0
0
Good stuff, Jim. Been a fan of your work on Dtoid for a while, so I'm personally glad to see your stuff here.

The concern with review scores in this industry, at least in the fanbases, is just absurd. In any unfortunate time that I've ventured into the Gamespot forums, I always seem to spot a few threads like "loolz [game title, likely misspelled] only got 8.5 it suczxx heaps!! HUGE FAEL" or what have you. In music publications giving five star ratings, a four star album is considered great, and a three star album is usually still worth checking out. But if a game gets an 8 or a 6, it's apparently a failure to a lot of people.
 

iron skirt

New member
Oct 24, 2009
35
0
0
scores aren't all yow know... I thinck video game scores should go f*** right off... you can't just lock at a game that hase 5 stars out of 5 and say i will licke this game! it could be a tipe of game you sempley don't licke... so I say just pay atention to what the rest of the review is sayng and ignore the score!
 

Tax_Document

New member
Mar 13, 2011
390
0
0
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
My Lord, you made my day Sir, made my day!
 

The Cheshire

New member
May 10, 2011
110
0
0
When I started watching Jimquisition, I thought it was a cheap attempt at provocation. Didn't provoke me, although it seems quite effective to annoy some people in this site. I was just "bleh". But I saw the potential, I'm glad I continued watching, I have quite enjoyed this last episodes, you make good points, not like the absurd "sexualize everything" in the second episode.

Also, I love your megalomania. I thank God for you.
 

messy

New member
Dec 3, 2008
2,057
0
0
I'll be honest, this was funny. You still irritate the hell out of me at time but when you do these more "serious ones" I can't help but agree with you. And even if I didn't you at least get you're point across quite well in recent episodes.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
My problem with metacritic it is not the low reviews, it's the low reviews when compared to the ones with high reviews, check GTA IV, it has 98% that has to be a joke.
 

NKnight

New member
Jul 31, 2010
90
0
0
""""Leigh Alexander recently wrote a columm asking me to remove my reviews from Metacritic. Since I'm well know for a ratter divisive writing style, and my reviews don't always march in line with common thinking""""

I hate Jim for his lack of dualism. His own (usually distorted) perspetive is king. And the rest is considered non existent. I'm sure what Leigh Alexander critiqued in her column is NOT his "divisive writing style" and his tendendence to "go against common thinking". Way to look the hero, Jim. Serioulsy, that's just my opinion (probably not just mine), but this is ridiculous.
 

Michael826

New member
Aug 17, 2009
269
0
0
Juuel said:
I love Jimquisition's arrogant style, people seem to be taking him too seriously. I don't get all the hate he's getting.
You sir, speak the truth.

I love Jim Sterling's style, and It amuses me when people swallow his flame-bait hook, line and sinker. All that can really be said is "U mad?!".

I agree with the sentiment in the review. Metacritic is just hosting reviews, not writing them. It would provide a more accurate reflection of a game's quality if more people took the time to review it properly. And if people didn't blatantly exploit the aggregate system. Damnit.

Although, as some people have pointed out, Metacritic does use a different system. I don't know enough about how that works to really comment on it.
 

Jimothy Sterling

New member
Apr 18, 2011
5,976
0
0
NKnight said:
""""Leigh Alexander recently wrote a columm asking me to remove my reviews from Metacritic. Since I'm well know for a ratter divisive writing style, and my reviews don't always march in line with common thinking""""

I hate Jim for his lack of dualism. His own (usually distorted) perspetive is king. And the rest is considered non existent. I'm sure what Leigh Alexander critiqued in her column is NOT his "divisive writing style" and his tendendence to "go against common thinking". Way to look the hero, Jim. Serioulsy, that's just my opinion (probably not just mine), but this is ridiculous.
Actually it basically was.

http://sexyvideogameland.blogspot.com/

Lack of dualism? You just assumed Jim was wrong because you don't like him without even reading the blog in question.
 

jklinders

New member
Sep 21, 2010
945
0
0
I still find Jim's delivery irritating but at least he made a point this time. It really is a shame he did not elaborate on it quite enough though. The point that Metacritic on it's own is mostly harmless is an obvious one. Equally obvious is the point that how game publishers are using it is the problem, not the site itself.

What would have been far better is to go into some detail about what industry mechanics there are different between movies music and games that allow the former to largely ignore these review aggregates and the latter to to look at them as if their continued existence hinged on treating them like the undiluted word of God. I don't have an answer to this question and obviously Jim doesn't either or he would not have made a troll video expounding on the obvious and instead would have provided some actual honest to God new insight.

Without truly understanding what is making the publishers behave in this way, we as the consumers have very little chance of influencing future games through our wallets. That's what we need a video on. Not this condescending trolling piece I saw instead.
 

thatcanadianguy

New member
Feb 15, 2009
137
0
0
your first 2 episodes i dodnt much care for. however. since 'defending COD' i now enjoy this series and look foward to my weekly dosage of the jimquisition. perhaps you should do a show about parents decrying violent games as damageing to the youth, whilst adamantly ignoreing th fact that the little shits cant even BUY the game.

also. can you people [you know who you are[ PLEASE stop bitching about the show? escapist isnt going to pull the plug on jim anytime soon, and the rest of us enjoy his shows. your sad little whinings only serve to amuse us who enjoy the show. go watch something else if oyu dont like the jimquisition.


as for metacritic.. meh. i only put very littl stock into a written review, because all reviews are subjective. i prefere video reviews or walkthroughs to tell me if i'll like a game or not.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Thammuz said:
Roocifer said:
Telegram from Capt. E. Blackadder.

Dear Mr Chaplain. Stop. Have discovered only person in the world less funny than you. Stop. Name Jimquisition. Stop. Oh and one more thing, please please please. Stop.
For once, just once, i would love to see somebody who actually takes the time to rebut to some of the points instead of just focusing on the delivery as if that was important.

Because that's not the only problem you have, I hope.

Because if the case is that you just don't like his persona, I assure you, WE GOT IT. It's been nine videos (eight if you don't count the E3 video), he clearly isn't going to change it and the escapist clearly wants to keep him, so kindly shut your traps and start considering, i don't know, WATCHING SOMETHING ELSE. Something you like, preferrably, to spare another audience your FUCKING WHINING.

Nobody is going to stop liking him because you say so and the site isn't going to spiral down into obscurity because of one person you don't like. Especially considering that that one person is competent enough to be a reviews editor, which makes his opinion worth listening to, if anything to get an idea of what someone who works in that particular field might think about various issues.

And besides, it baffles me that a site that has Yahtzee weekly destroying pretty much every game he comes across, would have such a fucking sensitive fanbase. It's not a seniority thing because Jim has been doing this for a while too, and it's not the fact that Yahtzee's opinion is clearer because lots of people have trouble understanding whether he likes a game or not, so what's the fucking deal here? Why are two perfectly valid opinions presented in an unhortodox fashion being treated so differently?
Ever consider that he may have a point but still be an unbearable bore?

That's why people tune in, for his insight but they have to suffer him recycling the same overwrought "jokes" over and over again.

He's like that drunk uncle at christmas who every half an hour tells the same inappropriate joke to the same group of people. It was somewhat amusing the first time but definitely not after that. We wonder if he is thick and forgot the joke h already told, or he is just arrogant enough to think we are all too thick to remember he told the same joke 30 minutes ago.

Yahtzee's self-depreciating humour is charming and kinetic. Jim's "self-depreciation" comes across as disingenuous and padding. You really can't compare the two as they are far too different as while Yahtzee is irreverent Jim is confrontational. Where Jim directly hurls abusive insults at the audience who dare not "get" his "joke", Yahtzee makes a passive insinuating observation. He is just a massive Troll, what the hell is it with his quasai-fascist theme? It's not a one off thing, his only reference to it is to insult anyone who takes it seriously under tha apparent "It' just a joke, shut up Idiot". I don't see what joke or satirical point he is making, Charlie Chaplin's "Great Dictator" satire this is not.

He really is just using it the same way the fascists did, by intimidation and confrontation. I mean when Eric Cartman does this he is made the buttmonkey and suffers for his nasty ways, but Jim in his own little world seem to want to 'eat his cake and still have it afterwards'. He wants the fun of acting like a fascist dick then at the same time "Shutup, it's all just a joke" a joke only he seems to find funny.

My opinion: Jim Sterling should stay behind camera, behind the scenes as an editor. His attitude is sure to make life hell for the staff but he's likely to inject some liveliness into things. He's like J Jonah Jameson, he's a harsh motivator but not someone the audience would actually like to hear directly from except to see ridiculed.
 

Custard_Angel

New member
Aug 6, 2009
1,236
0
0
The only thing that bothers me about Jim is his... well... being...

If this was an intolerably smug article I'd be all over it, but by being an intolerably smug video it just bothers me so much more.

However there is always fun to be had. Half the enjoyment of these videos involves looking through the comments and seeing how many people just don't fucking get it after all this time...

Jim want's everyone to ***** and moan about him. It's what he's aiming for. You're just making him win...
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Well why are games given a percentage score anyway? Most films have a 4-5 star rating, or (2)thumb-up/down system and music has as far as I know never had any numerical scoring.

I think the critics predisposition to numerical scoring is related to technology, there more measurable technology there is the more tempting it is to try to quantify it.

In games this is especially easy as all the elements can be viewed separately and can vary hugely. How where the graphics, the sound, the plot. But is it really right that graphics and story be treated separately? Surely they should work together as one for a great comprehensive experience. It is accepted in cinema that the story IS the sum of the writing and cinematography and all the other elements.

So many review sites do this "Sub-aggregate" scoring, using a sum of categories to give a final game score. Gametrailers.com does this with Story-design-gameplay-presentation so goes Famitsu. This can lead to publishers and PR people getting into such fights as think about it.

They made an INVESTMENT in getting a game the best graphics. They hire the best writers. They build on well established and loved gameplay. They did every element right at huge expense they reasonably feel entitled to a high score by their own review criteria.

The problem is the sub-categories are a sham. What really matters to the critics is the intangible, the way all the elements fit together and in ways they never thought of nor could have written categories for. You can spend $20 million making a game with superb graphics with top quality writing and voice work but what REALLY matters when it comes time to post is all the little things. Like controls, pacing, challenge and novelty, also the integration and relevance of the story to the gameplay rather than jsut the story as a separate movie.

Famitsu's continued focus on "Story as separate category" I think has held a lot of Japanese games back that value that publication's opinion. In MGS4 there is a huge gulf between the game and the plot as they are long movie segments that completely separate from gameplay with no meaningful sense of interaction. Compare and contrast with Half Life that keeps you in perspective and makes the story much more involving even if technically far more simplistic.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Custard_Angel said:
The only thing that bothers me about Jim is his... well... being...

If this was an intolerably smug article I'd be all over it, but by being an intolerably smug video it just bothers me so much more.

However there is always fun to be had. Half the enjoyment of these videos involves looking through the comments and seeing how many people just don't fucking get it after all this time...

Jim want's everyone to ***** and moan about him. It's what he's aiming for. You're just making him win...
So he's a Troll?

Because that is what The Escapist needs.

Actually, think of all the web-traffic looking at ads, that's exactly what The Escapist needs but unlike Extra Credits or Zero Punctuation is a gimmick that won't last for long.
 

MeTheMe

New member
Jun 13, 2008
136
0
0
It's true that the publisher's and industry are much at fault here for MetaCritic's power over game sales and the like, but MetaCritic's scoring method has seen some skeptism from me. I was watching a reviewer talk about MetaCritic, and their biggest complaint was that ina score out of 5, a 3 was around 50/100. They wanted MetaCritic to know that a 3 actually meant a score of about 75, an average game. That's pretty much why I don't use it much, but it's true that it's not as bad as some make it out to be.
 

Electric Yemeth

New member
Jun 8, 2010
18
0
0
Jim, keep up the good work. I don't get how anyone can hate you. You are provoking reactions, but in a good way, you keep your viewers in a state of open mindedness, or at least me. Also you use logic, that's always nice.
 

DanDeFool

New member
Aug 19, 2009
1,891
0
0
Apparently, Jim Steriling is trying to be the official devil's advocate of The Escapist, and I, for one, support him.
 

Ledan

New member
Apr 15, 2009
798
0
0
Nicely done jim. You're getting better with the style, but the internet will be the internet so.... flamers wil always flame.
Good point though, don't blame metacritic for the idiots who use it.
 

Tom Hill

New member
Jun 28, 2010
26
0
0
I do have a problem with metacritic though! If it took reviews from only business related sites that would be fine, but because it can take any fools reviews it makes it an invalid test.

p.s. I do not like this man.

Even his theme tune puts my back up, i want him to go far, far away.
 

Lord_Gremlin

New member
Apr 10, 2009
744
0
0
Thank god for him. Too bad he didn't mention the hypocrisy of most reviews, you knwo, the ones that suppose that anything below 7 is shit. Which is retarded.
And lead to many cases when game, which deserves 3 or 6 gets 7.
 

DeaDRabbiT

New member
Sep 25, 2010
139
0
0
Juuel said:
I love Jimquisition's arrogant style, people seem to be taking him too seriously. I don't get all the hate he's getting.
Search Jim out on Youtube, he's a fucking asshole.

If the topic this week seeks to bring anything to light, it's that I seriously use metacritic to check the watermark, and get the fuck out. I don't read reviews unless it's straight from the sites I frequent, who's content I enjoy (ala Joystiq, GiantBomb, The Escapist)

The reality is, is that if you are going to dictate your own buying/playing policy with the reviews of others, then you should try to take in information from people you deem to have similar interests as yourself. Metacritic "seems" to offer nothing more than a general consensus, laid out by those allowed to submit their opinions. I wonder if there is a categorical shift in personality in people that review films on RT versus those that review games on MC.

As scattered as these thoughts are, the one thing that remains clear is I've ALWAYS found RT to be more accurate of my like/dislike barometer, than MC ever was.

EDIT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBdXq13sN1I

A hapless clown surrounded by guffawing minions...

EDIT 2: Folding the rubber cocks back into your videos I see Jim.
 

Eomega123

New member
Jan 4, 2011
367
0
0
Once again, nicely done. Whatever people say about him, he makes good points.
Thank god for Jim.
 

Moonlight Butterfly

Be the Leaf
Mar 16, 2011
6,157
0
0
I enjoyed this one although it got a bit blathery towards the middle. He's right a review site isn't evil in itself. It's just how people use and interepret the reviews. The biggest irony is that metacritic reviews are from anyone so surely we should be looking to ourselves and our own action an inaction to have an effect on the industry. Personally I'm not sure metacritic is a good idea as it can be abused but in most cases as in Dragon Age 2 this is pretty obvious (although DA2 did suck badly)

I found it a little strange that the woman wanted Jim to remove his reviews from the site? Surely one persons view isn't going to disrupt the things badly and even then he's got a right to his own opinion surely?

I also found the images and vids used in this one to be a little distracting from the discourse but at least its more upmarket than the previous attempts.

As for those who are against him, I'm not his biggest fan but I think it's good that he is attempting to change his tone and presentation a little for The Escapist. He's obviously capable of intelligent thought behind that arrogant exterior.
 

Macrobstar

New member
Apr 28, 2010
896
0
0
Pr0 said:
Thanks for the warning, I'll keep in mind that only site contributors are allowed to insult people from now on! I shall move back to my life of being a sad little cretin.
Good, make it easier for us to enjoy these great videos in peace
 

Zom-B

New member
Feb 8, 2011
379
0
0
Still Life said:
Zom-B said:
He's essentially right. And furthermore, you don't hear anyone complaining about how RottenTomatoes.com is ruining the movie industry.

As usual, a whiny minority seeks to change/ruin something for everyone else because they got their knickers in a twist of a perceived slighting.
Minority groups can be a good thing and can provide unique perspectives on matters. I would argue that the industry need super-hardcore fans, because quite often they're in tune with the essence of a game/series and can provide great feedback to developers. Bioware Social is a great example of a hardcore fanbase which contributes to the development process of Bioware games in a positive way. I frequently loiter around the Mass Effect forums and the developers have taken ques from community requests.

I feel that you've kinda missed the point, as it's not so much those OCD gamers who moan over score inconsistencies, but that it is ultimately the industry itself which has created a phenomena that works against the production of more innovative and risk-taking games. Sure, there's a small and vocal minority of people out there -- just like there is here on the Escapist -- who take issue with every detail in reviews and at the end of the day: it's their burden.

When will people learn that a 60, or a 70 does not necessarily equate to a bad game?

Love your videos, Jim! Make 'em angry :)
First of all, I'd like to point out that there's a difference between a "whiny minority" and a "minority group". Perhaps it wasn't your intention to equate the people who I was referring to- the whiny people who think Metacritic is bad or ruining something- to a minority group along ethnic or religious lines, for example.

I think you sort of missed the point. It's not about OCD gamers moaning over score inconsistencies. It's about a vocal minority who think a tool that can be abused by it's user base is necessarily a bad thing. And in contrasting it to a website like RottenTomatoes, it shows that it really is just a vocal minority who don't understand what an aggregate tool is and how it's both used and abused.

The public user base certainly abuses Metacritic. Regardless of whether or not a "professional" review is viewed as genuine, there's enough variety on a site like Metacritic to generally ensure that critic reviews are a good general indicator of a game's quality. It should not be the be all, end all tool that people make decisions on.

I agree that the video game industry has created a phenomena that is harming some developers, but putting too much stock in Metacritic scores. Not only is it foolish of the industry, but it's short sighted as well. Taking a handful of reviews, a tiny percentage of people that have played/reviewed a given game, and making business decisions is massively foolish. The industry has shot itself in the foot by listening to a vocal group of players/reveiwers, which is why we get more sequels and less new IPs. They've decided based on the most vocal of gamers to give all gamers the same products.

Metacritic is not the problem. Abuse of the system and an industry frightened of failure is the problem.
 

StrixMaxima

New member
Sep 8, 2008
298
0
0
While the general gist of the piece is agreeable, I think the analysis presented here is overly simplistic and bland. No popular site is "only a site". There are trends and behaviors going on in them that deserve to be studied and understood. Flattening the comments of those who disagree with you is, at best, dishonest and hypocritical.

My biggest issue, however, is this obnoxious, totally unfun and unlikable persona. The text is not witty enough to warrant such arrogance and finger-pointing. It is, by far, my least-liked feature on Escapist, specially side by side with Zero Punctuation and Extra Credits, which are exquisitely written and delivered.
 

NKnight

New member
Jul 31, 2010
90
0
0
Spot1990 said:
NKnight said:
""""Leigh Alexander recently wrote a columm asking me to remove my reviews from Metacritic. Since I'm well know for a ratter divisive writing style, and my reviews don't always march in line with common thinking""""

I hate Jim for his lack of dualism. His own (usually distorted) perspetive is king. And the rest is considered non existent. I'm sure what Leigh Alexander critiqued in her column is NOT his "divisive writing style" and his tendendence to "go against common thinking". Way to look the hero, Jim. Serioulsy, that's just my opinion (probably not just mine), but this is ridiculous.
Actually it basically was.

http://sexyvideogameland.blogspot.com/

Lack of dualism? You just assumed Jim was wrong because you don't like him without even reading the blog in question.
Stop pointing fingers. Even if I do lack sense of dualism it doesn't excuse other people of doing so, especially if they are reviewers. "2 wrongs doesn't make one right". Secondly, I did read her column, and I don't remember seen any reference to his "lack of common sense" or "divisive writing style", that's just a distorted interpretation of the text. It's a 2500 words text filled with criticism (good and mainly bad) that Jim resumes as complains about his "lack of common sense" and "divisive writing style". It's basically about how popular silly reviews damages professional ones and the industry as a hole. So I'm sorry, but I disagree with the all powerful and blessed Jim.
 

Toraylin2

New member
May 6, 2011
9
0
0
Honestly, I really doubt this guy is like all self absorbed in real life. Otherwise I doubt he'd be on here in the first place. I like his material personally. A lot of it is funny.
 

Grabbin Keelz

New member
Jun 3, 2009
1,039
0
0
Bob needs to take some tips from you, he's always trying to appease his haters.

I always liked Metacritic and I always knew what it was for, a compilation of all the critic reviews onto one final score. Usually there might be some problems with it (I remember Portal 2 got a 100) but so far it's done a pretty good job.

Also, anyone notice that the metacritic score for Duke Nukem Forever seems to be constantly going down? It's at like 50 now, which I find hilarious.
 

mandaforever

New member
Feb 16, 2011
164
0
0
ManupBatman said:
Easy fix, just don't take metacritic seriously. Find a few reviewers who share your views and trust their judgement, or rent the game and trust your own.

This industry takes itself too seriously.
As someone trying to get employed in this industry, I COMPLETELY agree.
 

mandaforever

New member
Feb 16, 2011
164
0
0
Toraylin2 said:
Honestly, I really doubt this guy is like all self absorbed in real life. Otherwise I doubt he'd be on here in the first place. I like his material personally. A lot of it is funny.
Pretty sure the whole thing is just a "character", that's part of the humor.
 

Atmos Duality

New member
Mar 3, 2010
8,473
0
0
Glad to see Jimquisition still hasn't lost his touch of projecting his contempt of his audience with the intention of creating ironic humor. Of course, it's not even funny or insulting at this point; it's just trite. Oh wells. You can't all be Yahtzee or the AVGN.

So I skipped over the requisite trolling this time to see if there was a point...
...And amazingly, there was. Oh snap!

So...Metacritic. Yeah, I actually haven't commented on this yet.
Jim broke it down to 3-parties in his video, so I'll do the same.

It's fairly obvious why Publishers have started using Metacritic as a paycheck barometer; they find it convenient when they remove themselves (but not their initial mandates) so far from the game creation process in the first place. Besides, policies like those give them an excuse to shunt all the blame onto the developer if the game bombs, and keep the extra cash in their pockets if the game sells well anyway.

On the reviewer side...well, it's impossible to definitively argue for or against the reviewers simply because they aren't all from the same source material (unlike Associated Press content, in comparison).
Most of the current popular review sites have such amazing bias and lack of objectivity that they are certainly being slipped money under the table by the publishers...but not at all times and certainly not for all games.

Of course, that's the beauty of Metacritic; you have an active archive of a variety of reviews. So when you're done watching Big Name Review Site X hype Game Y beyond believability, you can flip to more moderate or even negative reviews.
This is really the only thing that the pre-aggregate review score is good for; sorting everything from the All-Hype (often bought) reviews to the Jaded Dude who had to buy the game out of their own pocket.

A pure "review" of a game should consist of the Heart Review and the Head Review; Objectivity and Subjectivity; and it should be clear which is which at all times.
However, in the interest of money we have a growing trend in the gaming journalism world which is hurting the objective value of a review in the first place: "Rant-views", or raving blindly during a review for the sake of being entertaining.
Here we have an objective-oriented task about procuring new entertainment (checking reviews for a game you are interested in, but unsure of) that is being turned more and more into entertainment itself!

Look at Zero Punctuation. It's an immensely popular show (and probably the main reason most of the users here are even on the forums) that has lost just about all of its objective credibility over the years in favor of showcasing Yahtzee's contempt of the world as entertainment. You can find the same story with most of the Blistered Thumbs episodes or AVGN clones out there too.

So how is this relevant to Metacritic?
1) An "Entertainment" review is going to be less overtly objective, but more popular to watch which brings in the ad-hits that pay the bills (good thing Yahtzee doesn't provide scores). As a result, this reviewing style is becoming increasingly popular in the game gaming press.
2) Said reviews that get added to Metacritic will have their score (if any is given) added to the aggregate. This means that these less/non-objective reviews will still produce an objective score.
3) Then we have these Publishers making ludicrous payment policies based on these scores.

Honestly, nobody important in the business actually listens to the rants of fanboys. Many of these are individualized or isolated, and business/marketing cares more about what common ground they can find or create in their audience [sub](ever notice how RPG elements keep creeping into shooters even when they ultimately serve no purpose other than to add grind to a game? That's no accident.)[sub] unless its unilateral, consistent, and objective in nature (like changing/removing a feature; remember when everyone bitched about the Mako in Mass Effect 1? It's just gone in Mass Effect 2); Most fanboy braying has none of that.
 

Sonicron

Do the buttwalk!
Mar 11, 2009
5,134
0
0
... Ehhh. I heartily approve of the message Jim conveys here, but the presentation still makes me cringe. I'm fine with the dub parts (aside, perhaps, from the resolution of the videos), but those bits with him in front of the camera need to go. Badly. Aside from the fact that the 'acting' makes my eyes and ears bleed, this guy needs to adjust his wardrobe. Casual works; suit and tie works; suit and tie plus coat works; coat plus t-shirt... yeah, not so much.
 

Gunjester

New member
Mar 31, 2010
249
0
0
"....You prick.."
I fell off my chair.
Well Done sir, the series is getting better every episode.
For those who hate, calm down for a second and maybe, I don't know...stop watching instead? maybe? hm?
 

Rabish Bini

New member
Jun 11, 2011
489
0
0
I find it interesting how people that have stated they do not like the show, keep watching the videos then come back and insult Jim once again.

Please Jim, don't ever change.
 

Ryan Lietzenmayer

New member
May 10, 2011
2
0
0
He didn't once comment on how bonkers it is that people take the 8.5 to 9.5 scoring so seriously. He also didn't mention how silly it is to give something as rock solid, concrete, and standardized as the quality of a game a rating from 0 to 100.

That's the real problem, Jim. Not your strawman of publishers or the exaggeration of fanboys. It's how seriously people take these ratings, and how little value these ratings have in the first place.
 

dietpeachsnapple

New member
May 27, 2009
1,273
0
0
I enjoyed this episode moderately more than I enjoyed prior episodes. It felt more directed and organized. Attacking his critics will only last for so long though. I am also uncertain if there is room for two or three separate shows that give poignant commentary to gaming issues. I would rate Extra Credits, followed by Yahtzee, and finally Jim.