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.
Jimquisition: Metacritic Isn't the Problem
- Thread starter Jimothy Sterling
- Start date
Recommended Videos
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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)
They say they like it. They say it. But do they feel it?Kenji_03 said:
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.
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.JoelChenFA said:
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.