Jimquisition: Metacritic Isn't the Problem

[Noremac60]

I completely agree Jim. Hating Metacritic is an idiotic waste of time.

 

[RJ Dalton]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[NinjaTigerXIII]

Indeed, thank God for the Jimquisition, but more importantly Thank God for The Escapist.

 

[Geeky Anomaly]

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]

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]

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?

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]

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]

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. -_-

 

[cardinalwiggles]

it seems to me like an aggressive extra credits lol not that that's a bad one

 

[Atheist.]

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]

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]

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]

A world without Jim?!
Those thoughts are gonna torture me while I sleep.

 

[Woodsey]

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.

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]

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]

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.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Which is why I don't care for what review scores say.