Poll: Jim sterling VS Extra credits

[Dark Link]

I get the feeling that some people are still butthurting over the EC/Escapist split. It happened, guys. Regardless of what side you're on, move on.

That said, there's a place for both. Both shows make good points and explore them pretty thoroughly. Jim seems to come at it from a consumer/gamer perspective, while EC seems to go for the designer angle. Each approach will appeal to different people: Jim's more palatable to a mass audience, while EC tends to go for a more cerebral approach because holy shit you guys, game design is complicated.

 

[Sprinal]

To me a few of the responces are a matter of tl;dr.
SO what I say may have already been said but:

I personally think they serve different rolls
Jim plays the roll of the gamer and his opinions on things as a gamer.

Where in comparison EC explain the Dev's decisions and the like. Giving an insight into why and not just the how and what.

So I think both are worthy of being listened to

 

[hazabaza1]

I have my reasons.
Basically, they over-analyse, patronise, have practically insulted people for liking certain games, and give a large "Holier than thou" impression.

I've never gotten the sense that they've insulted people. Hell, they're one of the few groups I can think of that actually avoids using ad hominem arguments, which is something I can't say for Jim or a large chunk of internet dwellers. Further more, how exactly do they over analyze things? Can you give any examples of them coming to a conclusion that isn't well supported by the evidence? I hear it said as gospel, but I don't see anyone trying to support it.

I forget what the name of the video was, but it was about the new Call of Juarez video and racism. From what I can remember, they essentially said that anybody who enjoyed it was wrong, and potentially racist.
In terms of over-analysing things, just go watch their Missile command video on "Morality". They look at a game where you try to get the highest score and start gushing over "HNNNG IT'S SUCH DEEP AND HIDDEN MORALITY"
[sub][sub]This post may contain some hyperbole.[/sub][/sub]

If you listened to the videos, it talked about how the game maker of missile command had nightmares of the towns he lived by getting nuked in the same way the towns in missile command's towns got bombed, and how he was emotionally traumatized for a long time.

And with call of Juarez, he said that some small percent of the people will probably think what the game said was true, even a small percentage of gamers thinking that mexicans are stealing american woman is a bad thing.

I don't get how somebody having nightmares about nukes shows "deep and subtle morality".
And I hate to be insulting to anyone who believes this, but if somebody is honestly going to take on board the idea that "DEM MEXICANS AM STEELIN' ARE WOMANS" from a video game known for its awful writing... well, who gives a shit about the stupids? Or is it just me seeing this?
[sub][sub][sub][sub][sub][sub][sub][sub][sub]Yes people, that was a joke,(at least partly) don't go all fuckin' tits up at me or whatever.[/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub][/sub]

 

[Eric Morales]

Let's put it this way, Jim Sterling is one of those people who should be "auto muted"

 

[PrinceOfShapeir]

I watched one episode of Extra Credits and while I found their points to be more or less valid, there were two problems.

1: Fucking boring.

2: The speaker (James, i think)'s voice is fucking annoying.

That, and I think they were a bunch of twats in the Kickstarter debacle. So yeah, not sad to see them gone from the Escapist. I'm not a huge Jimquisition fan or of Jim Sterling in general, but the guy at least gets me to chuckle occasionally.

 

[Folji]

Never really liked either. Extra Credit struck me as too "nice" and correctly speaking, with the kind of tone I'd expect from someone teaching a kid to separate right from wrong. Jimquisition, on the other hand, gratingly rings of "listen to me talk as I make myself sound ironically pretentious, you prick". (See what I did there? You know, Jim's British and all? ... Right? ... Anyone?)


Excuse me while I go snuggle with my life-sized Yahtzee pillow.

 

[Squidbulb]

Never watched EC before, but I just watched a few episodes and it was okay. The newest one in particular was pretty good. The worst part about online games are the people talking on them. I've literally never heard anything good while playing online.

 

[RastaBadger]

I think they are both good but both have very different views. Jim has a more "everyone is a dick and that isn't going to change view" while ECs view is more of an Idealized view on what could happen if people would stop being dicks. Also I think most of the writing and thinking is done by one person. Of the other two one does the narration and the other does the art but most of the writing and ideas come from James.
They both have their merits and their problems and I think they are equal, just that they fill different holes.

Edit: Actually in my opinion comparing these two is kind of like comparing Star Wars and Star Trek. They look similar on the surface but when you actually inspect them closely they are very different.

 

[Exterminas]

I like Jim more, since he tends to make very clear and well-rounded points.

While Extra Credits usually start off idealistic and preachy, keep on talking and talking, without ever making some sort of exact point.

But I guess this is just a question of taste, really

 

[Vkmies]

Booooth!

Love them both, I could write a book about both of them right now, but I choose not to, because it is late. Or at least that is my excuse.

Extra Credits on the other hand? Fuck EC. Thats all I am saying.

At least Jim isn't pretentious as all fuck.

The guys at EC are so far up their own asses it's unbelievable. Their "gaming is the wave of the future!" attitude grates on my nerves.

Did I miss the part where EC decided to start stealing people's lunch money? There are definitely reasons to dislike Extra Credits, but does it warrant such hostility?

Yes. Yes it does. Extra Credits is more than a show you dislike. Extra Credits its one of those things. Their pretentious, artsy bullshit gets on every bodies nerves. Well, almost every body. Those few people who sit their screaming "B-b-but video games will never be taken seriously! Wahhh!" love them.

Another thing: Jim Sterling is a gamer first, journalist second. (There, I edited it, can you annoying folks leave me alone now? Find someone else to spam.) Extra Credits are games journalists. Big difference.

Nobody "Deserves" hostility. When did The Escapist turn into a place filled with trolls and "It's the internet, so everyone is an asshole"-people?

You used the words "Everybody" in a very immature way, pretty much implying that normal people would hate it. You are directly making fun and attacking people who like a thing. Thought this place was more mature than that.

Why cannot you just simply go:
"I feel that Extra Credits is a bit preachy for my tastes, and most of their views differ from mine. I feel Jim being more close to me as a gamer and a person"

What is so hard about a simple statement? Why are people assholes now? Did I miss some kind of asspocalypse?

Oh, and I have to point out, that NONE of the Extra Credits crew are journalists. On board is a Game Designer, and Artist and an Animator. At least Jim's job at Destructoid would be technically considered journalism.

I love them both, don't get me wrong. Just saying you should AT LEAST do your research about the things you bash. Because ignorant bashing is the worst kind of bashing.

 

[hermes]

At least Jim isn't pretentious as all fuck.

I guess you missed the "thank the world for me" part.

Yeah, yeah, its a joke line, but it state perfectly what the Sterling character is about. He is pretentious, he is hostile, confronting and demagogue. Its not a surprise many people consider him a gamer first, because he is closer to what some consider offensive behavior in XBLA, but with a bigger audience. He may have some good points, but I have never heard him make a statement without addressing it as an attack to someone.

The extra credit crew can be condescending, but they are not pretentious (at least, no more than Sterling). And it is refreshing to see someone being a intelligent gamer and not being cynical about it. To find someone that actually has hope for the medium and don't see it as a constant "its them versus us" is so rare I am getting tired of Sterling and characters like him.

The reason why I think people hate them so much now is because they don't side with consumers by default, but tend to treat the other side with some fairness (be it designers, corporations, producers, etc). For the audience, the idea of someone saying "you know, I don't think ME 3 ending was that bad" or "maybe call of duty would benefit with a paid service" is betrayal worst than personally kicking their balls.

 

[hazabaza1]

At least Jim isn't pretentious as all fuck.

I guess you missed the "thank the world for me" part.

Yeah, yeah, its a joke line, but it state perfectly what the Sterling character is about. He is pretentious, he is hostile, confronting and demagogue. Its not a surprise many people consider him a gamer first, because he is closer to what some consider offensive behavior in XBLA, but with a bigger audience. He may have some good points, but I have never heard him make a statement without addressing it as an attack to someone.

The extra credit crew can be condescending, but they are not pretentious (at least, no more than Sterling). And it is refreshing to see someone being a intelligent gamer and not being cynical about it. To find someone that actually has hope for the medium and don't see it as a constant "its them versus us" is so rare I am getting tired of Sterling and characters like him.

The reason why I think people hate them so much now is because they don't side with consumers by default, but tend to treat the other side with some fairness (be it designers, corporations, producers, etc). For the audience, the idea of someone saying "you know, I don't think ME 3 ending was that bad" or "maybe call of duty would benefit with a paid service" is betrayal worst than personally kicking their balls.

That's not being pretentious, that's just being a ****.
And like you said, it's his character. Everything the EC crew say is their actual opinion, and I'm far too lazy to repeat everything, so go look for my old post or something.

 

[Toilet]

The Extra Credits guys often miss the point completely and end up floundering on stuff that was already established with incredible pretentiousness. Jim Sterling however is a brutally honest character who knows what he is talking about, his pretentiousness is pulled off as self parody and despite his slow start he has improved massively and I often look forward to his videos. He obviously loves videogames and you can see it in his writing and videos and the "Thank God for me" skits is obviously self parody.

When I watch Extra Credits now I usually cringe at how their artsy pretentiousness is played straight and they actually take what they say seriously. Also James oversells himself, he is the "CEO" of Rainmaker Games which is pretty much a title that lets him gallivant all over the place advising, talking and writing about videogame development of which he has little to nil experience. The dude is a sleazy conman who only seems to want to stroke his own ego.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Extra Credits sided with Bioware and their bullshit "artistic integrity" line. So much for their integrity. I never liked Extra Credits anyway. They were always on the verge of becoming complete hipsters. And now they've done it. Well done I guess.

 

[cwmdulais]

EC all the way

if i wanted to watch a fat man in a suit get worked into a sweaty rage i would watch Penn Jillete

 

[hermes]

At least Jim isn't pretentious as all fuck.

I guess you missed the "thank the world for me" part.

Yeah, yeah, its a joke line, but it state perfectly what the Sterling character is about. He is pretentious, he is hostile, confronting and demagogue. Its not a surprise many people consider him a gamer first, because he is closer to what some consider offensive behavior in XBLA, but with a bigger audience. He may have some good points, but I have never heard him make a statement without addressing it as an attack to someone.

The extra credit crew can be condescending, but they are not pretentious (at least, no more than Sterling). And it is refreshing to see someone being a intelligent gamer and not being cynical about it. To find someone that actually has hope for the medium and don't see it as a constant "its them versus us" is so rare I am getting tired of Sterling and characters like him.

The reason why I think people hate them so much now is because they don't side with consumers by default, but tend to treat the other side with some fairness (be it designers, corporations, producers, etc). For the audience, the idea of someone saying "you know, I don't think ME 3 ending was that bad" or "maybe call of duty would benefit with a paid service" is betrayal worst than personally kicking their balls.

That's not being pretentious, that's just being a ****.
And like you said, it's his character. Everything the EC crew say is their actual opinion, and I'm far too lazy to repeat everything, so go look for my old post or something.

Is it now? A problem I often have is that his character is so "consistent" and present in everything I read from him, that I am not even sure he is making it for the lulz. I think that is his opinion and his personality. Of course, I can't be sure since I don't know him personally, but using his real name doesn't help.

Extra Credits sided with Bioware and their bullshit "artistic integrity" line. So much for their integrity.

Really? That does makes me like them even more.

 

[White-Death]

I really like both, I almost never disagree with Jim, but with EC...Well,too much pretentious artsy bullshit, especially them licking 'Dear Esther''s balls clean, Just because it's ART does not mean you can make a shitty, boring, quick game/Game ending(Me3) Like everyone else, ECs Artsy bullshit gets on my nerves badly, still a good show,though.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

Today I turned coats and ventured into PA to wach the weekly Extra credits, and there I realised something. That Jim sterling Knows more about the online gaming scene than the three of them combined.

Yes sexism in Xbox live is unacceptable and yes verbal jousting does cross the line, But If we followed the suggestions they say, it would be the death of free speech. Where is the line between sexism, racism and bullying and at what point does it leave the realms of hate speech and into just having a different opinion?

Jim sterling?s theory of immaturity being a good way to deal with unlikable people is what happens online 60% of the time. Here is an example of how jims logic works.

In the end, you both have the ability to silence each other through the use of mute, and fragging them is always the best option. Every time I hear A racist 12 year old from Indonesia, I (1) mute them (2) frag them (3) unmute them to see if they will act civil now(4) if not mute then warn my teammates, no need to ban anyone just ignore them or If they are to young to be playing the game mock them about there age and how they should ?really get of their mom?s computer? ??.simple

Edit 1
I like EC it is just that yesterdays episode contridivted jims earlier video.

EC is not "pretentous" It is sometimes biased but not uninteligable.

Right, maybe this has been addressed in the subsequent 6 pages, but I felt like I should make a note of something:

EC did not, nor has it ever, challenged the notion of Free Speech. They advocate it, if anything. The recent episode wanted to get one thing out there, and that is FREE SPEECH does not mean NO LIABILITY. The consequence of free speech (or freedom in general) is culpability. Speaking your mind is all well and good, but expecting no consequence is naieve and ultimately foolish in the real world. Why should public gaming be any different?

Even when you speak with the best interest of others in mind, you must take on the consequences of your words, especially if there is an opposition to them. Words have power, and, to be cliched, with power comes responsibility. Unfortunatey some people don't think this applies to them. I think that needs to be corrected. What EC is putting forward, is some sort of structured "punishment" for ignorants and shit talkers, not free thinkers (hopefully), adding an unbiased platform for consequence and culpability to an enviroment that lacks it.

What they suggest is very similar to The Escapists forum health bar. Do you feel repressed because you can't regurgitate bile onto the page, or advocate your most debased fetish, or promote criminal activity? Do you feel repressed because people expect common courtesy and politeness from others? No, because you're a level headed, polite and civil person... or at least you should be, when stepping into a social enviroment.

Death of free speech? No. The concept of "DEATH TO FREE SPEEH" is ridiculous... how can you kill the freedom to speak your mind? You can't, but as I said above words have power, power requires responsibility and responsibility means liability. ECs idea adds penalties to actions taken by people who don't think before they shit out their mouth (or fail at empathy, either will do).

I like both EC and Jim. They both offer a different view AND alternate solutions to the same problems. Unfortunately Jims solution to this relies on personal initiative and even skill to address abusive problems, rather then punishing the culprits. Why should I have to endure shit talkers in the first place? Shouldn't they be held accountable for their actions, be put on record or flagged like people who act like this in the real world? I mean, do you think a person who delibirately offends people in a public place, like a restaraunt or a pub, should be allowed to do it and not suffer penalties for it?

Should we form posses or vigilante groups to tackle the scum of the net? We can, but a CIVIL and FAIR system needs to be in place, one that doesn't let personal bias sway it's decisions. A system as suggested by EC, imposed by the services WE PAY FOR/INVEST IN, is what's needed... not half arsed moderation, or blunt banhammmering. Something consistant.

EDIT: The thing you should concerned about is not freedom of speech, but freedom of information and the transparency of that information. That's where our futures balls lie, and that is what is being tugged at for that last few years. They will have it by the balls soon enough, if we let them. Anyway, a comment for another post altogether. Move along.

 

[Ishigami]

I like both shows and I watch both shows.
For the matter at hand however (abuse of voice chats, text messages, forum etc.) I would go with EC suggestions because they present possible real solutions.

 

[Spongebobdickpants]

At least Jim isn't pretentious as all fuck.

I guess you missed the "thank the world for me" part.

Yeah, yeah, its a joke line, but it state perfectly what the Sterling character is about. He is pretentious, he is hostile, confronting and demagogue. Its not a surprise many people consider him a gamer first, because he is closer to what some consider offensive behavior in XBLA, but with a bigger audience. He may have some good points, but I have never heard him make a statement without addressing it as an attack to someone.

The extra credit crew can be condescending, but they are not pretentious (at least, no more than Sterling). And it is refreshing to see someone being a intelligent gamer and not being cynical about it. To find someone that actually has hope for the medium and don't see it as a constant "its them versus us" is so rare I am getting tired of Sterling and characters like him.

The reason why I think people hate them so much now is because they don't side with consumers by default, but tend to treat the other side with some fairness (be it designers, corporations, producers, etc). For the audience, the idea of someone saying "you know, I don't think ME 3 ending was that bad" or "maybe call of duty would benefit with a paid service" is betrayal worst than personally kicking their balls.

When jim says thank god for me. He is joking. When he says that he thinks space invaders is a feminist propaganda game. He is joking

When Extra Credit say that western developers develop FPS's because of the deep historical significance of the gun and its meaning as a liberation tool. They expect us to take this shit seriously. Hence they are pretentious. Maybe western developers produce shooters because they are...popular and profitable?

Virgilio armandio is a parody of EC and their ilk. That is the difference