Jimquisition: Metacritic Isn't the Problem

[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.

 

[Therumancer]

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]

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]

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]

Whats a Metacritic and why does it bother people so much?


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

 

[Atheist.]

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]

- 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]

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. >

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

 

[rutger5000]

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.