The Real Deal on Zero Punctuation

[ShadowsofHope]

-Snip-

You do realize you are essentially preaching to the choir on this one, correct? Yahtzee and most of the Escapist community are already well aware of the relationship between ZP and more.. professional reviewing.

Also, which review did he nip at your ankle with, eh?

 

[Erttheking]

Translation "You're making complaints about him? uh...uh...uh...uh...YOU'RE JUST BUTT HURT!"

Oh you poor thing, didn't uncle Yahtzee like your game?

See, I can be insufferable smug too, it's not hard. If you wish to contribute something, do it.

Oh so what, Yahtzee can complain about games all he wants acting like the most trival flaws are massive issues and his opinion is viewed as valid and reasonable, but the second someone complains about him it's "Oh look, an idiot fanboy" Hypocritial much?

 

[Exile714]

Most game reviewers play nice with big developers because they want pre-release games so they can churn out early reviews. THEY should not be taken seriously.

But, one can glean an understanding of the successes and faults of a game by reading into reviews. Bad plot? Impressive visuals at the expense of enjoyment? Flawed but highly enjoyable nonetheless?

Yahtzee provides another piece of the puzzle. I know what he likes, what he doesn't, and he gives an entertaining summation of his gripes about the games he reviews. Yes, reviews. A review doesn't have to be a pro's and con's list, it simply has to inform. He informs, he reviews.

You shouldn't judge a game by his TONE, that's part of the show. Just like you shouldn't judge a game by its metacritic score, or by the 10 point reviewer scale where 7 is reserved for the worst of the worst.

Being informed isn't just about picking sources and ignoring others. It's about collecting information from many sources to create a tapestry of information which should then assist you in making a decision. Yahtzee is a piece of that tapestry for me.

 

[mightybozz]

Best part of Wednesdays: New ZP.

Worst part of Wednesdays: someone starting a thread debating whether or not yahtzee is to be taken seriously.

My perspective: he presents opinions on videogames. I don't see the difference in function between a critic and a reviewer. A reviewer is supposed to review a game to tell you if it's good. A critic is supposed to criticise a game to tell you if it's good. This is part consumer advice and part artistic commentary on the games in question.

Yahtzee (as he has said himself) uses humour to get his points across. I'm grateful he exists, because he has a style which is completely in contrast to most reviewers. It's no secret that games journalism is pretty crap overall, and susceptible to hype. Enter Yahtzee, a cynic who refuses to buy into hype and doesn't give a damn what anyone else thinks.

Yahtzee is the only reviewer I find consistently trustworthy. I may not agree with him on everything, but his points are usually clear, coherent and valid. Even other reviewers on the escapist are sometimes guilty of buying into hype (the dragon age 2 review, for instance).Tbh, I wish he'd stop reviewing the same games over and over again (battlefield, uncharted, assassin's creed, gears of war, modern warfare) etc. and just do some more weird indy reviews. Fingers crossed for the one he hinted at in this week's extra punctuation!

ZP is opinion. Rather eloquently and satisfyingly expressed opinion, with a depth of insight lacking in most games journalism. That's all review and critique is. Opinion. He certainly can't be dismissed as not serious.

 

[rsvp42]

For me, the problem is people agreeing with him too readily. His Extra Punctuation column seems to me like his chance to drop the fast-talking, snarky persona of his videos and get real about what he thinks and that's where I tend to disagree with him, if I disagree at all. I think those articles are as good a time as any to call him out on his reasoning, but it seems that users are a little too quick to agree with him. I think we should all just laugh at his videos and take from them what we will, but when he elaborates later on, we should take him to task over it if we disagree because at that point, he opening himself up for it. Those articles don't have the same "humorous critic" defense that you can make for his videos.

 

[Cecilthedarkknight_234]

I personally like the guy, even though I don't agree with opinion's on some genres of games "jrpgs or vn's" however I do agree that survival horror games and fps have just fallen to the wayside, i try to review things myself but hell I don't think I can pull it off the way he does.
http://cecilsanimevisualnovelreview.blogspot.com/2011/06/what-did-i-just-play.html

 

[blushmoe]

I wasn't aware this was news.

 

[kwydjebo]

I like Yahtzee.
He's entertaining, his opinions are similar to mine at times, and when they are not, well I guess I'm just not "l33t" enough to really care. I'm a comic book fan, so when he took shots at me and my ilk (Batman games, DCUO) I neither took offense or cried foul, I laughed it off, because it was funny (And sadly true in some cases).

As for games, I actually use his reviews as additional info when trying to form opinions, especially if I know little about the game. He may be critical, but he also gives insight into the game, and that is sometimes useful in making a desicion.
His Saints Row 2 review lead to my buying the game for a friend's birthday, and he enjoyed it.
I liked his Batman Reviews (Arkham City and the previous Asylum) but I owned both games when the reviews came out.
I was on the fence about Fallout 3, and his descriptions put me over, and I thank him for that.
I was equally on the fence about Mafia 2, and his (and other reviews) lead me to wait since I concluded that it was not worth the initial $60 price.

He provides an interesting viewpoint (at times) that is presented in an entertaining way that can get me to think about aspects I hadn't considered. And at the end of it all, its just his opinion so if I find I really disagree with what he said, well that's life! I enjoyed Borderlands, which he savaged, yet I still tune in.

Of course his videos, like the games themselves, are subject to the viewer's opinion as to whether they are entertaining or not. If you enjoy them, great, if you find them stupid, well no one is forcing you to keep tuning in.

And as Yahtzee himself said (In the Arkham Asylum video) you don't tune in to see him be nice so he'll pick whatever nits he can find, while admitting that he did actually enjoy a game, or that it was done well, for the most part.

 

[keideki]

This thread reeks of doom and flame wars. Either way ZP may not be a review show, but it certainly can be used to gauge whether or not the flaws that appear in certain titles would be enough to put you off the game. More than once I have been primed to buy a title during the launch week or soon there after, then watched a ZP episode about it and realized that the flaws that are pointed out would make it harder to enjoy the game, and thus I usually wait for the title to go down to a price point that makes up for those flaws.

 

[EvilPicnic]

This I agree with 100%:

Can helpful and informative things be gleaned from ZP? Of course. That is, if you look past the exaggerated comic effect, ZP does provide some helpful information on games. Is it possible to tell by Yahtzee's opinion whether or not you'll like a game? Sure. That is, if you have a good understanding of how Yahtzee's taste compares to your own.

I would argue that most people with decent critical faculties and a working knowledge of satire (i.e. those of us who aren't 12-year old reactionary fucktards) can extract the cogent information from a Zero Punctuation review and appreciate it for what it is: an amusing mix of on-the-ball criticisms and funny hyperbole.

Some of the earlier stuff in the OP I take issue with though.

I'm getting tired of the internet truism that 'reviewer' and 'critic' are completely separate things. They're not. A critic is just a fancy word for someone who makes value judgements, and a review is the expression of those judgements. A reviewer is someone who writes reviews, therefore reviewer = critic in any useful sense.

You also throw out the character assassination of 'he is a jaded, cynical, misanthrope' like it's some sort of valid criticism. It (or similar) could also be applied to MovieBob, or Roger Ebert, or Mark Kermode, or any other critic who has a personality or persona that comes through in a review. I don't see anything wrong with critics attempting to entertain whilst criticising, even more so when it's obviously put-on and the distinction between accurate criticism and comic hyperbole is more apparent.

I also disagree with the OP in that I don't think yahtzee saying:

"I don't believe in scores because I don't believe a complex opinion can be represented numerically. You like numbers? How about four? As in four-k you! Do you really need someone in authority giving you a simple yay or nay before you buy anything? Why don't you roll over so they can stamp on the other side of your face?"

translates to "don't listen to my opinion because all outside opinions are invalid" which is what the OP seems to imply. You're quoting out of context.

Anyway, this has gone on longer than anticipated and all I meant to say is that the statement: 'Yahtzee is absolutely factually correct about everything he says' is obviously false, but also 'Yahtzee is merely an entertainer, his opinion has no merit' is equally false.

And... I'm pretty sure that's the point the OP was making anyway. Huh. maybe I was taking 'there's not a ton of discussion value' as a challenge...

 

[Treblaine]

He is a "critic," and he goes out of his way to call himself a "critic," not a "reviewer," and there is a subtle, yet distinct, difference there. He doesn't see his job as reviewing a game and giving an overall opinion, good and bad. He sees his job as criticizing a game, pointing out its flaws and ragging on them, even if they are petty and nit-picky criticisms.

... Critic...

Pro-tip: someone who reviews things is a critic.

"reviewer" is not a distinct term from "critic". A criticism can be positive OR negative. A restaurant Critic can recommend the restaurant or pan it. Yahtzee does - like all critics - talk about the positives but really that should be a given. He is giving fair warning to the bad aspect so people know what they are getting into if they get the game.

PS: Yahtzee has made many positive reviews before but NOTHING is perfect, so nothing should go without some negative assessment. Yahtzee is valued because he gives the good with the bad, he doesn't talk in absolutes of "worst game ever" or "perfect game".

 

[BehattedWanderer]

He doesn't review, he critiques. Comically. Quickly. Cynically. And often without breath. If he finds something distasteful, he will describe which particular brand of terrible it is. You only take it seriously as far as you agree, and find it equally distasteful, or at least bothersome. Tired of hiding behind walls in a gun fight? Annoyed at cheap deaths? Couldn't make sense of the plot without reading the piecewise unpublished book that is the Wiki page? He'll have a gripe for that.

 

[Iwata]

I look forward to ZP the same way I look forward for any weekly comedy show, and I certainly don't look at it as a serious review series. It's comedy, and every so often, it may raise an occasional good point. But I certainly don't rely on it to help me decide which games to buy or not.

 

[guitarsniper]

interesting thing to note about ZP, and to a lesser extent, Escape to the Movies: I don't necessarily always agree or disagree with them when they say something's bad, but most of the things they've said are good that i've played/watched i have enjoyed. The two examples that spring to mind right now for Yahtzee are CoD4 and Arkham Asylum.

 

[loc978]

Spoiler: snip

I know that this comes up all the time, and I know that there's not a ton of discussion value, but I had to get this out there because it's been bugging me.

Some people take Yahtzee too seriously. Again, yes, I know, it's been said many times, but I'd like to use this post to remind us all that there are some key things about Yahtzee that people regularly seem to forget:

(These are all things that HE HAS SAID ABOUT HIMSELF, I'm not making my own assertions.)

He is a "critic," and he goes out of his way to call himself a "critic," not a "reviewer," and there is a subtle, yet distinct, difference there. He doesn't see his job as reviewing a game and giving an overall opinion, good and bad. He sees his job as criticizing a game, pointing out its flaws and ragging on them, even if they are petty and nit-picky criticisms.

He ENJOYS taking the piss out of something and ruining other people's enjoyment of something.

He is a jaded, cynical, misanthrope.

He doesn't believe that people should actually listen to his opinion! His own words: "Do you really need someone in 'authority' giving you a simple 'yay' or 'nay' before you buy something?!"

= = = = =

Spoiler: snip

Emply basic observation and critical thinking skills it becomes quite clear: Zero Punctutation is NOT meant to be taken seriously. It a sense, it's NOT a even a review show. Generally speaking, the point of a review is to enlighten potential consumers of the product being reviewed, helping them decide whether or not they want to buy it. Yahtzee himself has stated that this is not his purpose in ZP. Therefore, it can be easily argued that ZP isn't a review show.

I would argue that ZP a roast, a foul-mouthed writer expousing foul analogies for the things he doesn't like about video games, whether he likes the overall game or not. I'd even argue that ZP may be a satire of video game reviewing, and if anything is designed NOT to be taken seriously, it's satire.

So yeah. Watch it. Enjoy it. Laugh. But don't take it seriously. Please.

EDIT: When I said "don't take it seriously" I meant "don't take what he says as gospel truth."

Spoiler: snip

Can helpful and informative things be gleaned from ZP? Of course. That is, if you look past the exaggerated comic effect, ZP does provide some helpful information on games. Is it possible to tell by Yahtzee's opinion whether or not you'll like a game? Sure. That is, if you have a good understanding of how Yahtzee's taste compares to your own.

I'm just asking that people use a little pattern recognition and critical thinking before they let Yahtzee's opinion have any effect on their purchasing decisions.

SECOND EDIT: Okay. I apologize. I probably shouldn't have made this thread. I wrote this up in a reactionary moment and the main point that I was trying to make overall got mostly lost in my words. Can we just let this one die out quickly?

As another jaded, cynical misanthrope I'd like to point out that anyone who takes anything another person says or writes as "gospel truth" (to include the trope namer there) is deserving of your derision... and more than likely will not accept your help. To answer Yahtzee, "yes, the people that this applies to do have a psychological need for someone in authority giving them a simple 'yay' or 'nay'. Modern first-world societies train frightened followers more than any other type of person."

 

[Sixcess]

The only thing I dislike about Zero Punctuation is the side effect that some things he says will start being quoted and rehashed ad nauseum in the forums. Prior to his Portal 2 review a fair number of people complained about the memes being overdone, but noone phrased it as an attack on the fans of the game. After the Portal 2 review...

(Extra Credits used to have the same effect. Possibly moreso.)

I don't think his reviews have much influence on me personally. Sometimes he will say good things about games I like, but other times... well I've never quite understood his fascination with Painkiller. Yeah, it's fun(ish) but it's not even close to being a successor, spiritual or otherwise, to Doom.

Anyway, my favourites of his reviews tend to be games I haven't played, or are ever likely to, like God of War 3.

 

[DirgeNovak]

Ah, for fuck's sake. CRITIC and REVIEWER are synonyms. Roger Ebert is a film critic. Does that mean he never gives positive reviews? Of course not! And Yahtzee also gives positive reviews. If you actually listen to what he says, he very clearly says it when he enjoys a game.

There is a difference between writing a positive review and writing a fanboy dithyramb. And that difference is the main reason why I respect Yahtzee and Jim Sterling way more than other game critics. If there is a flaw in a game they like/love, they point it out instead of ignoring it like IGN's Greg Miller.

 

[jaketaz]

I'm just asking that people use a little pattern recognition and critical thinking before they let Yahtzee's opinion have any effect on their purchasing decisions.

I think that's kind of the whole point of the series. My favorite thing about ZP is that it challenges accepted truths. When he examines a trend in gaming and points out how ridiculous it is, it reminds me that I have to do the same - to examine accepted standards and ask myself "just because this is accepted, does that mean it's good? Or even acceptable?" Plus it's funny. I know it's not serious, but sometimes a humorous take on things can make you think more about an issue - if it was just angry and dismissive only trolls would watch it.

On another note, I don't know why instead of asking "can we just let this one die out quickly?" you don't just take down the post. As with gaming, there are accepted modes of behavior on the internet that merit re-examining.

 

[Lunar Templar]

Which of your favorite games did he not like this time?

hehe, i could give you that list if you want.


but really why is this even a discussion? who the hell cares want some guy in another country thinks of a game. not like its hard to do a bit of research to figure out if said game is your thing or not

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Can helpful and informative things be gleaned from ZP? Of course. That is, if you look past the exaggerated comic effect, ZP does provide some helpful information on games. Is it possible to tell by Yahtzee's opinion whether or not you'll like a game? Sure. That is, if you have a good understanding of how Yahtzee's taste compares to your own.

I'm just asking that people use a little pattern recognition and critical thinking before they let Yahtzee's opinion have any effect on their purchasing decisions.

SECOND EDIT: Okay. I apologize. I probably shouldn't have made this thread. I wrote this up in a reactionary moment and the main point that I was trying to make overall got mostly lost in my words. Can we just let this one die out quickly?

To the second edit, apparently not.

To the first - what is that, if not a review?

For game reviews, I don't use any source BUT Yahtzee (not even Jim Sterling, even though I greatly respect his opinions as well).

Yahtzee is very good at analysis. He breaks things down and explains how they work, or how they don't work. That is what I'm looking for in a game review. I don't give a crap how much anyone else enjoyed the game, or how awesome any part of it was - screw that, I don't care. What I want to know is how the bloody game works, and what precisely those elements are. And for that, Yahtzee is an excellent reviewer.

His opinions have nothing to do with it. I don't want (or need) a score, or even a positive or negative opinion. I've bought games that Yahtzee hated, because the reasons he hated the game were things I liked. I've bought other games that he liked because the things he liked were things I also liked. His opinion didn't matter to the equation - his analysis of the game is what I care about.

I'm patiently awaiting his review of Skyrim before I decide if I want to put it on my Solstice list or not.