Poll: Does anyone else feel like "Extra Credits" is full of shit?

Tiamattt

New member
Jul 15, 2011
557
0
0
Always confuses me why people would take the time to make major rants about videoes like EC. It's not like they're a bad movie or a defective product that wasted money or hell even a sucky F2P game that kept 95% of it's content behind $$$ locks, they're short free videos that aren't even on this site anymore. You literally have to go to their doorstep plus sit through a ad to listen to them. Don't like EC, think they suck? That's a perfectly valid opinion that you're free to have. But to take the effort making a short essay about them when there's nothing forcing you to watch them? That's just childishly petty and a pretty crappy waste of everyone's time.
 

Tiamattt

New member
Jul 15, 2011
557
0
0
oops, double posted. If a mod would please delete the extras it would most appreciated.
 

elvor0

New member
Sep 8, 2008
2,320
0
0
Meatspinner said:
Somewhere between them saying Fallout:NV has a bad amnesia plot (it didn't have one) and telling us the need for creativity yet at the same time saying that we must adhere to "The Hero's Journey" lest we be cast in the fire, I stopped taking them seriously.
Yes the later backpedaled on those statements (like so many others), but that doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.
Actually, that episode with the heroes journey wasn't really saying YOU MUST CONFORM TO THIS, it was about showing how even though the heroes journey is a cliched trope, if you can apply it well, it still works well, as in journey. (Not that I can exactly argue, having not played Journey, but they made a reasonably sound argument to me).

OT: I dunno, different strokes for different people, if you're not in to looking at concepts and theory behind things, then yes you will think they're full of crap, but that doesn't mean they are. If you just say "derp this is rubbish" then you come off as a bit...narrow minded to be honest, as if you're saying that nothing has any deeper concepts or theory behind it and just exists through the realm of magic and wizards. Games are odd, because they're a science AND an art form at the same time, so you have to look at them in a specific way.

I mean people have been doing this for years, there are more to things than just what is shown at face value, people do it with films, books, comics, TV shows etc etc. It's about trying to discern deeper meaning from what is offered, or looking at effective ways of presenting certain things.

They're talking about the philosophy of game design and the stuff that goes with it, so no, I don't think they're pretentious or condescending, if that's not your thing, then fine, but don't write it off as a load of crap just because it's not your thing, it's difficult to cram a hugely complex point into 7 minutes, when they usually talk about a lot of stuff in one episode, to me it's a "hey look at this, you might not've thought about this in a game, here's how I feel it speaks to me or gamers in general". Egoraptors famous Megaman X video is pretty much the same sort of idea, (if a little crass), it's just talking about games in a deeper level than just reviewing what you get. If you want a review, read a review, that's not what EC is supposed to be.

Adam Jensen said:
A bunch of pretentious idiots yapping about art all the time. They even took Bioware's side on the whole Mass Effect 3 issue. After that there is no redemption for them in my eyes.

Here's a bunch of people who actually think that Bioware made an artistic choice when they made that abomination of an ending. That's how retarded they can be.
Adam Jensen said:
A bunch of pretentious idiots yapping about art all the time. They even took Bioware's side on the whole Mass Effect 3 issue. After that there is no redemption for them in my eyes.

Here's a bunch of people who actually think that Bioware made an artistic choice when they made that abomination of an ending. That's how retarded they can be.
And you were on the Bioware development team were you? Enlighten us all on what happened when you were there. What all the devs said, what the writer came up with, all those board meetings you attended during its development? Ah no, didn't think so. You cannot presume to speak for bioware, because you had nothing to do with the development. Any and all insight on the ending is pure speculation on the part of people commenting, unless they were directly involved in the development. You don't /know/ you're right, and neither to people on the opposing side, you are both merely saying what you think to be the case.

I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the ending, as I haven't played it, and was never a massive fan of Mass Effect (just wasn't my thing), but you sound just as bad as the people white knighting it, you do know that right?

Now arguing over whether the ending was good or not, that's an acceptable point, and is entirely up for debate.
 

Stabby Joe

New member
Jul 30, 2008
1,545
0
0
They have been wrong at times, for example there was the New Vegas episode where they made false statements regarding the plot.
 

AgentLampshade

New member
Nov 9, 2009
468
0
0
To each their own. I enjoy the show tremendously, I don't always agree with them but they certainly raise another viewpoint. Given their schedules (they often have to hire different artists as Alison is so busy and James is a game designer/lecturer and Dan is...Dan) of course they're going to skirt around some issues, because they don't have the time to dive all-in. People gotta eat after all.
 

Roroshi14

New member
Dec 3, 2009
193
0
0
They might be pretentious, but as am I. So I don't see it as a bad thing. I feel if they weren't so busy with their real jobs they would have a much longer show probably going into deep detail. I personally love everything they do. To me they are smart, and gives me the same kind of insight I would see if I was in the industry myself. But to everyone that hates there are those that love.
 

KRbertsproduck5

New member
May 29, 2010
147
0
0
I stopped liking them when the surgery thing happened. They were like "hey donate so we can keep making videos for you!" Then like 2 episodes they left Escapist. Thats just kind of shitty in my opinion.
 

Knight Captain Kerr

New member
May 27, 2011
1,283
0
0
They did an episode that had Fallout: New Vegas and it pissed me off so much at how stupid they were. They had it about amnesia in games, you see in New Vegas you don't have amnesia. However they didn't do research and didn't know that. So instead no olny were tehy wrong but also misinformed.

So sometimes they are really good and other times they are really, really bad.
 

Eddie the head

New member
Feb 22, 2012
2,327
0
0
It can be ok, but mostly it's sunshine and rainbows about how happy games can be. They can be alright but I don't tend to watch them that much.
 

Eternal_Lament

New member
Sep 23, 2010
559
0
0
I think they still have some interesting things to say, but it can be often clouded by some pretentiousness. Yesterday's episode for example seemed a little muddled, all things considered. I was expecting perhaps more of a look at what AAA games may have used mechanics as metaphor and have worked or even where mechanics as metaphor have gone wrong. Instead it seemed more of a "what if" scenario without actually talking about what the end result would be. It all seemed to be "Wouldn't it be awesome if games had meaning in them down to their mechanics" while at the same time not actually saying why games today aren't like that.

I also think they perhaps put too much in regards to referencing indie games because they're indie games. Again, on yesterday's show with mechanics as metaphor they clearly say that there are games out in the market that are well known that happen to do this well, but before that they talk about some small indie game that, as well as being not very good, no one knew about, but at the same time the discussion didn't need people to know the game in order to understand. It's not that indie games shouldn't be part of the discussion, and in fact in some cases indie games can be good in starting off a discussion, but it isn't always needed, especially if we have more well known and better games that also do the subject better. It sometimes seems less like they choose certain games because of their actual ability to convey an idea better than similar AAA games and more to represent that they have "indie cred". Whether that's a problem with them or the need to attract audiences is unclear, and if it works it works, still it would be nice to have more sparse mentions of indie games, that way when they do mention them it will seem like a nice treat or surprise rather than an ad for games I really couldn't care less about.
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
I'd say they're doing a fine job, overall. Yes, some of the topics they discuss can seem a little obscure or useless to the average gamer who's only really interested in picking up the damn controller, but to anyone who's ever wondered about how games can communicate things beyond your average metrics, they're offering a gold mine of examples.

Their schtick isn't to slam bad games or to review them. They don't exactly go over corporate hypocrisy or just plan PR-related douchebaggery like Jim Sterling does. Their set of topics is focused on the *language* of games, if you will, on the mechanics behind them.

It's really a question of taste. Plenty of friends of mine can't fucking stand highbrow literary theory and tell me to shut the Hell up when I start tossing words like "semiotics" or "narratology" in the middle of a games, comics or books-related discussion. Some folks like it straight dope - this or that book or game is good, and here's why.

Others, like me, like to go deeper if and when it's possible. If the game's good and we know why, can we understand how the elements that cause it to be good are put in place? How does the story mesh with gameplay, or does the gameplay reveal some sort of context or narrative as the player goes along? These are the kinds of questions I like to ask while playing a game.

I don't really believe in pretension. I believe more in the case of someone who gets so passionate about something that he forgets to vulgarize it. Considering how James delivers lectures in a Game Design class, the obtuse, highbrow feeling some folks are having problems with is probably a professional deformation. It's just James nerding about something he cares about, in the assumption that we're all in the right mindset to follow along. Unfortunately for him and for anyone who's ever had to deliver an oral presentation or who's ever given a class - I have, and realizing that is fucking annoying - that's not always the case.

Oh, I'm dreadfully sorry, but the poll options just reminded me of one of Troy Wagner's sillier videos...

<youtube=9S5F2YBA54s>

"Grapefruits are bullshit!
- YOU'RE BULLSHIT!"
 

Mr.Mattress

Level 2 Lumberjack
Jul 17, 2009
3,645
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
They've done some good stuff. I was actually quite enjoying them right up until that astonishingly ill advised gaming addiction segment where James mumbles at the camera for 25 minutes, sharing utterly pointless and zero impact anecdotes about how gaming totally made him miss a movie with friends one night, or something. It has this wildly overdone air of forced gravitas which is completely at odds with the power of the material...you're on pins and needles expecting the guy to tell you he has bodies stacked in his cellar like cordwood, and absolutely nothing happened. I don't know if it was a scripted misfire, or a case of James taking himself entirely too seriously and having zero perspective, or a case of this actually being a meaningful experience for him and he's just mis-reading the impact it will have on others. Like trying to tell someone about a dream you had.

Anyway, yeah. I have a hard time watching them after that. The whole thing is just faintly embarrassing now.
This so much. My goodness man, The episode before, the main guy was trying to persuade you that you can't be addicted to games, that it was something different from addiction, and then BAM! He talks about being Addicted to games. That's some huge Hippocracy right there.

Still, I think they're okay, but they do act condescending. I stopped watching them after the James and Game Addiction episode though.
 

Ickorus

New member
Mar 9, 2009
2,887
0
0
I used to really like their stuff but I found myself watching their shows less and less until I simply stopped, it seemed like every show they got a little bit more pretentious until it reached an unbearable level for me.
 

Dansen

Master Lurker
Mar 24, 2010
932
39
33
I dont find them pretentious at all, and they come off as preachy because they are trying to engage the audience. I've learned about a ton of cool ideas from them. Its a good show and while it has its problems, its better than most videos on this site...
 

Lucem712

*Chirp*
Jul 14, 2011
1,472
0
0
Binnsyboy said:
Lucem712 said:
I like that they are bit more optimistic and try to be informative. Sure, the whole gaming is the future can get a bit old, but it's better than everyone complaining.

As far as I know they are setting up a publisher (with the extra money, and might plan to do more Kickstarters to fund projects) but it's a bit a long process and they do have to make sure their projects are capable of success.

So, it's nice to see some action and not just talk.
And isn't the lead writer of the series a dev team member by career or something?
Uuuuuh, I think he's a game consultant or something of that sort. (Though, judging from the series, he's worked multiple jobs in the industry)

Though, take that with a grain of salt