Oh please, get over yourself. We all got the joke. However, unlike you, we also got that there was a fundamental disconnect between the comic and the text. We also realized that, given Grey's previously established stance on the subject matter as well as the people in question, it was a joke made in bad faith, not meant to entertain but to demonstrate. To undermine.lacktheknack said:Then explain why I'm one of five people who gets the joke.
Oh, the "established stance" defined by fan speculation, deliberately ignoring the use of puns and word-clinging?MatsVS said:Oh please, get over yourself. We all got the joke. However, unlike you, we also got that there was a fundamental disconnect between the comic and the text. We also realized that, given Grey's previously established stance on the subject matter as well as the people in question, it was a joke made in bad faith, not meant to entertain but to demonstrate. To undermine.lacktheknack said:Then explain why I'm one of five people who gets the joke.
Yeah. Subtle.
It's retardedly obvious. And that makes me worry about some of the people commenting.Knight Templar said:Subtle, I like it.
By subtle I mean obvious.
The worst part of this, and the biggest flame starter is that this person is incredibly smug and condescending. I would say that this turns me off from the comic, however that would mean very little as I know that the enjoyment of the art will improve once this whole Mass Effect debate ends.Grey Carter said:You're so close to getting it. Keep thinking!Lord_Gremlin said:Duh, not really mad but sad... Escapist suddenly dropped to kotaku level here.
I've noticed this same thing. Many "journalists" have taken a stance supporting Bioware where as the vast majority of non journalists and fans are heavily protesting the ending. I think the journalists are in the wrong on this issue. Not only that but you seem to lauding over the belief that these "journalists" opinions are somehow more valid than non journalists. These are the SAME people who rated the game so highly despite its many flaws that caused huge controversy among consumers. Game journalists themselves admit that they often don't have much time to even play through a game completely. Are you sure their limited time gives a better representation compared to a player who spends hundreds of hours exploring a game? Who really understands the game better?Grey Carter said:The vast majority? Really? I've seen maybe 20-30 full-fledged journalists take a negative stance on the issue, maybe half of which were insulting. I take more personal insults than that from readers on a daily basis, just for doing my job. The female journos I know take maybe twice that. Journalists should remain professional, of course, hence today's strip. But that's because I care about journalistic standards, not readers' hurt feelings.Seventh Actuality said:Commenting solely on the failings of one side when the disproportionately vast majority of the uncivility, immaturity and 'intellectual dishonesty' is coming from the other is pretty retarded, yes.Grey Carter said:Suggesting people be civil to keep from sabotaging their own arguments is retarded?
I think there's a problem here, in that you might be confusing "Not looking at both sides of the argument" with "disagreeing with my opinion". Possibly because you possess the belief that no one who considered your argument could disagree, possibly because you don't see that that these people may have looked at both sides, just that they haven't PUBLISHED their looking at both sides. Usual journalists can't just come out with an opinion about games, they have to show how they got there, because it isn't their medium, they don't have the confidence to just throw a judgement about it when they have no expert knowledge. Gaming journalists do not suffer this problem. Is Mathew Paris going to bother explaining his thought process behind his view that Neo-Conservative interventionism is a bad idea? Of course not, he doesn't need to, anyone with an understand of what he's on about is already going to know what he means. Does Jeremy Paxman need to explain WHY he thinks that the Home Secretary needs to know what the National Insurance rate is? Of course not, anyone with a rudimentary understanding of British politics will know why.Sparrow said:Gotta' agree with this. Sarcasm or not, this strip reminded me that gaming journalists have handled this horribly. Instead of "let's look at both sides of this" it's devolved into "well, I didn't see anything wrong with the ending so you guys are just entitled asswipes." On the other hand, a shitload of non-gaming journalists have handled this with the tact expected of them. They looked into the technical details, identified how the situation could be "fixed", if it should be fixed or not and so on.Patrick Anderson said:Fans point out plot holes and inconsistencies with the ending and how it doesn't fit in the story
Game journalists and their websites that are plauged with EA ads call us entitled
Real journalists from Forbes, BBC News, CNN, NY Times, NY Daily news, etc... say the fans have a point and point out all the quotes Bioware said about the ending and how it ended up being lies.
Yeah, and you wonder why no one takes game journalists seriously anymore. I bet most of you game journalists cringe seeing more credible sources like Forbes rip you apart while you have nothing but petty comments to respond with.
So, yeah. Not bothered about gamers being entitled or not, I'm more bothered about the piss poor excuses we have for gaming journalists nowadays. Oh, and Escapist, I'm talking about you too.
Are you serious? You don't even know my opinion on the subject and you've opened up with "well, your opinion is wrong." You're either a troll or narrow minded. I can't believe you have the audacity to tell me my opinion (which you don't know at this point) is wrong and therefore you must be right based on zero evidence.Immsys said:I think there's a problem here, in that you might be confusing "Not looking at both sides of the argument" with "disagreeing with my opinion". Possibly because you possess the belief that no one who considered your argument could disagree, possibly because you don't see that that these people may have looked at both sides, just that they haven't PUBLISHED their looking at both sides. Usual journalists can't just come out with an opinion about games, they have to show how they got there, because it isn't their medium, they don't have the confidence to just throw a judgement about it when they have no expert knowledge. Gaming journalists do not suffer this problem. Is Mathew Paris going to bother explaining his thought process behind his view that Neo-Conservative interventionism is a bad idea? Of course not, he doesn't need to, anyone with an understand of what he's on about is already going to know what he means. Does Jeremy Paxman need to explain WHY he thinks that the Home Secretary needs to know what the National Insurance rate is? Of course not, anyone with a rudimentary understanding of British politics will know why.
Also, I would advise you to look at what the journalists of other mediums (literature, film etc) said about the movement, it may be a much more informed opinion. Oh and you know your argument is falling foul when you appeal to people with a more limited understanding of the subject just because they agree with you.
EDIT: A very well done to the Cory and Grey, though I think this thread is proof enough that "the idiot trap" was very successful. It seems very refreshing to find that comic strip writers are willing to express their opinions undeterred by the moaning that inevitably ensues.
Really? One of the best science fiction stories EVER? In the entire of history? You must be quite the science fiction aficionado to claim to know what the best science fiction stories ever are, I mean even to be able to name one of the best science fiction stories of all time would make you an absolute master of the medium! Not to mention how you must have overcome all that business about there being no such thing as a "best" anything, because to think that something is "better" is an opinion while claiming that something is "best" would be a fact, but I'm sure you know that representing an opinion as a fact is incredibly short sighted.Dr.Nick said:" Every time a journalist defends the ending of Mass Effect it makes them look like an idiot. It ruined one of the best science fiction stories ever.
So, just to be clear: you are denying the existence of so called "gamer entitlement" while two sentences later claiming that you, as a gamer, have some entitlement? Jesus lord in heaven.Dr.Nick said:Then to make matters worse you have journalists that all seem to be jumping on the band wagon of bashing gamers for this made up thing called "gamer entitlement.".We spend hundred of hours and hundreds dollars on these games. We put huge investment into these games. I think we deserve some say.
Again, you seem to be claiming some entitlement. I mean really, come on now. I really can't be the first one to tell you this, but just in case:Dr.Nick said:Times have changed with consumer feedback in games just as they have in journalism. We have a direct line of communication with game publishers and developers via electronic means. We can make our voice heard instead of just being a blind crash test dummy who just sits there after a game comes out whether it was good or bad. We can let the developer know whether the made a great game or screwed up and we can do it in force.