Poll: Do you take Yahtzee's reviews seriously?

[TheHappySquid]

I usually just watch them for comedy, of if I'm already going to buy a game, to watch it for reference. I take no heed if he dislikes a game, just watching for fun.

If he reccomends a game, I may take notice though, as some of the games he likes are some of my favourite games (Shadow of the Colossus, Prince of Persia TSOT, The Thief Series).

So yeah, sort of, but only when he likes games I guess

 

[KAPTAINmORGANnWo4life]

I know the kind of games he likes, and place an appropriate filter over what little there is in his reviews that isn't nitpicking for comedic effect.

 

[Rusty pumpkin]

Kinda. If he truly raves against a game, tearing it apart at the seams, then it probably is a bad game. If its standard mocking, than its probably an average game. Anything hes given his praise to is usually a great game.

 

[Xanadu84]

A good review by Yahtzee will perk my interest in a game. But a bad review is little more then entertainment.

 

[maninahat]

I take any review with a grain of salt because it is simply someone else's opinion on the game. It may or may not be close to how I feel about it. ZP has a very cynical and satirical approach of reviewing games, and so, if you keep that in mind while watching, you can take it seriously. Just remember what kind of opinion the person has when watching the review.

I think you hit the nail on the head there. I don't expect a reviewer to uphold arbitrary standards of "balance and objectivity" in what is essentially an entirely subjective medium. I'm certainly not objective in my tastes, so what good is a reviewer that pretends to be? As long as I know why they like or dislike something and I am familair enough with their tastes, then that reviewer is useful. I may not always agree with ZP, and I often disagree with MovieBob, but because I know their personas well enough to know which genres they favour, I have the correct perspective with which to value their advice.

 

[an874]

I don't always agree with his attitude towards a game, but he's rarely wrong in reporting what's in the game, I find his viewpoint insightful and interesting, and I'm always entertained by his reviews which was the reason I started watching them in the first place.

 

[Sariteiya]

Yeah, I take them with a grain of salt. They're more comedy than anything, although they have opened my eyes to certain recurring drawbacks and failures in games, which has helped me be a bit more game-savvy. Mostly though, I buy what I like no matter what he says.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

I usually like to see what he says, but at the same time I disagree a lot.

 

[inFAMOUSCowZ]

I always thought of his reviews a joke reviews. Sure he makes some good points, but sometimes he rips on a good game for a few minor flaws.

 

[Llamaboy01]

*>__< Head Desk*

No cause hes a critic, not a reviewer

 

[Malrock]

I love Zero Punctuation. It is the reason I found out about the escapist, and it is the reason I became a community member.

I watch the reviews from the angle by which I believe they are intended; for entertainment purposes. On a few occasions and upon further research, I have found that the reviews have highlighted flaws in a game that would have made them total deal breakers for me, but it is important to realise that the style of critisism is intentionally exaggerated.

I keep this in mind and watch accordingly. They can be informative if one is attuned to see through the (hilarious) hyperbole.

So in direct response to the OP: ZP's critique alone would not deter me from purchasing a title, but if the critisisms detailed aline with my own opinions on what can ruin a game, then I will do further research into it. So a bit of both I reckon. I've never seen a ZP that hasn't made me chuckle, but equally it has alerted me to potential issues on more than a few occasions.

I also read 'Extra Punctuation' which can be taken more seriously.

 

[King Toasty]

They're funny, but it's a persona he uses. It's not what he actually thinks about a game. I trust the Escapist Reviews for that.

 

[fingerbang143]

I watch as entertainment but upon occasion he'll say something that makes a game look worse in my eyes. If he does nothing but hate on a game i'll likely not get it as well.

 

[tyriless]

He actually is one of the few reviewers that actually pays attention to the writing of the game for which I care about a great deal. If the story or characterizations aren't any good there is far less of a chance I will bother finishing the game. For example, his review of Infamous 2 has me intrigued where, previously, I was going to overlook the game. I want to know what got Yahtzee to well up in the end... I mean do squat thrusts while grunting in a manly fashion.

 

[King Toasty]

They're funny, but it's a persona he uses. It's not what he actually thinks about a game. I trust the Escapist Reviews for that.

It's not a persona. He's just quick to make fun of a game in his reviews. If he enjoys a game, he'll make that clear.

No, it's definitely a persona. I'm pretty sure he's clarified this at some point, in Extra Punctuation, where he puts his real reviews. Sure, if he doesn't like a game too much, he'll say it in the videos. But he overemphasizes everything for comedic effect, ignores or downtones good parts, and insults people who disagree with him.

Don't get me wrong, I find him hilarious. But it's a persona he uses, not his actual opinions.

 

[Gamer_152]

No, Yahtzee's "reviews" don't sway me at all. They're laden with ridiculous hyperbole and Yahtzee knows it. Yahtzee's reviews often point out legitimate flaws he sees in games but I see him far more as an entertainer than anything else and am always a little shocked when I see people try to debate with his obviously comically overblown opinions.

 

[Richardplex]

to paraphrase him "by the way, if there's anything I don't mention it's probably good". I'm fairly certain (someone will twitch at that) he's said something to that effect in a review, so anything he doesn't mention I take to be good. Anything he does mention is generally true from my experiences too. Generally. Portal 2 and his thing with Mass Effect 'acting' I didn't have any problems with.

 

[tyriless]

I take the points he says with a large pinch of salt, but always remember:

> He is a critic, not a reviewer

> He is paid to find the tiniest flaws and rag on them in a hilarious manner. Example: the beggars in Assassins Creed. Sure, they were as annoying as hell. But I only came into 1 scenario in the whole game in which they actually impeded me; the rest of the time I just ran across the rooftops.

I watch his shows for fun. Then if possible I play a demo, then I read peer reviews to see if the flaws he mentions get in the way of the good stuff to a level that makes a game unplayable later on. I have only ever made one decision on his words: Psychonauts, and that was a game he reviewed rather than critiqued. I have bought dozens of games he has flat out hated, and enjoyed every minute of them despite the problems.

Wait, please explain the difference between a reviewer and a critic as both critique their medium.

 

[Jonesy911]

I never take anything seriously

 

[thom_cat_]

This thread is so common. I'm getting really sick of seeing it.

His reviews aren't serious but contain seriousness within them. You just need to read past his jokes. But no, it's all humorous so I don't. But as I say, the truth is in there.