The New York Times Slams Game of Thrones Viewers
- Thread starter Mike Kayatta
- Start date
there are seasons of indeterminate length? WTF? That is a METAPHOR dammit!(mostly, maybe there is an ice age somewhere, but mostly metaphor) This Reviewer has lost all credibility. Hopefully next time they get it slightly less wrong, it is too far gone for me to hope for them getting their points across in a non offensive, non appalling manner.
This kind of thing is happening more and more often.
If 'professional' reviewers and critics cannot even be professional, what is the point in them? There are thousands of very talented amateurs who work for free for their favourite forums and websites, who manage to write enjoyable reviews without resorting to childish insults of people they do not know.
I think people are starting to see that for the most part, 'professionals' in this line of work just cannot be trusted. If they are not being paid off directly, they are being pressured from everybody around them.
If 'professional' reviewers and critics cannot even be professional, what is the point in them? There are thousands of very talented amateurs who work for free for their favourite forums and websites, who manage to write enjoyable reviews without resorting to childish insults of people they do not know.
I think people are starting to see that for the most part, 'professionals' in this line of work just cannot be trusted. If they are not being paid off directly, they are being pressured from everybody around them.
Well NYT has completely missed the point of the tv adaptation of Game of Thrones. It actually bridges the gap between said D&D viewers and, say, people who really enjoyed The Tudors or Rome. It's its distinct lack of fantasy elements which raises it above the supposed catering to a D&D audience. It's why I have many friends who have read A Song of Ice and Fire, but wouldn't go anywhere near the Hobbit. Honestly, how on earth did they miss that?!
I am an avid pen and paper role player... and I DON'T like game of thrones.
What will NYT say to that!?
What will NYT say to that!?
If you think this is bad, try reading their occasional game reviews. It quickly becomes clear that their reviewers had never held a game controller before getting the assignment. I don't mind people having a negative opinion about something I like or having a positive view of something I don't, however, to attempt to speak with authority when you clearly have no understanding of something, well, it's sad.
I'm a lady and a D&D player and I've only tangentially experienced the series. By the NYT token I should be drawn to it like a moth to a flame, right? Well, I don't read papers to be told what entertainment I'd like to consume anyways. (Pretty much the only paper I read are the free ones I pick up at the college I go to 
) I hope the NYT enjoys never getting a dime of my money.
) I hope the NYT enjoys never getting a dime of my money.
You are like one of three people in the comments that are worth to be read. Salute to you. Comments like this need more exposure and not your "I don't like D&D but GoT or vice versa so the review (as presented by the escapists who did a terrible job at that) of NYT is total BULLSHITT *fanrage*!!!111"Noelveiga said:
So yes I repeat myself: the author of this "news" did a terrible job depending on a quote of a quote.
The reviewer's critique is valid saying if you want to start watching the show because it is the season's start it is too confusing to just jump right in and needs incredible time investment. This is a valid point because what you usually see with popular Tv shows is they are easy to get into because they at most require some idea of the premise of the show. The rest will explain itself on the way. The review was aimed at normal people who just wanted to know they can watch the show from this season's start, it was not aimed at people who watched the first season know all the characters and want to keep watching. Reading the original review I can safly assume the reviewer is not familiar with the source material as he wants the plot to move on to the hinted danger of the winter and invasion from the north. That again reenforces me claiming he is reviewing for the everyman who did not read the books nor had previous exposure to the material of Game of Thrones. He is one of them. I would say you do not need to be one who did read the books to give the Tv show a fair chance to be judged. The Tv show is supposed to stand on its own two feets and entertain people, not because they enjoyed the books.
He is underwhelmed with the season's start even though he did watch the previous season. He has an advantage over average Joe who goes in blind and gives him a consumer advice. But here we are and reading how wrong he is with his opinion because "we do like the show not because of its sex scenes" or "we do like the show not because we like D&D". I do notwant to say the users are stupid but ignorant because of the unfair reporting presented to us on this website about this review which was realy just clickbait.
EDIT: I actually went and read the whole article...it's not as bad in context. *shrug* Just sounds like a frustrated, grumpy guy who finds the show gratuitous. I guess he's entitled to his opinion...still, it could have been more eloquently worded. -_-Panda Mania said:
EDIT: dang. clicked "quote" instead of "edit"...