Trophy Shelf

[Blazing Hero]

Well in all fairness I would probably want to show off my game collection in front of other gamers if I was on Youtube. It is kind of a sense of pride thing and opens up topics because they can see what I play. Still I agree it is a tad bit silly and comes off as trying to hard. Then again I am the one who spent so much time setting up my own video game library and nobody aside myself really cares about it at home. After all that work I wouldn't be able to contain myself from showing it off. =)

 

[IOwnTheSpire]

So is Erin crying or laughing?

 

[vallorn]

I'd rather have an alter in the background to the holy gaming trinity of Gabe Newell, the Titan X Quad SLI, and a FUCKING INTERNET CONNECTION THAT ISN'T SO UNSTABLE THAT IT MAKES THE VAC SERVERS THROW UP AND STOP CONNECTING...

Sorry it's been a rough week with regards to phantom lag with no discernible cause in TF2.

 

[Darth_Payn]

make a bunch of people mad.

Not the nice folks who sign your paychecks, I hope.

But anyway, is Erin going for a unique, special voice as a video game ranter, or is she trying to be like "everybody else"?

 

[PunkRex]

This is something that's always bugged me, I understand you need something interesting for your audience to look at and grabbing what ever crazy crap you have lying around is one way to do this but why not draw something, design a logo, animate it (at a time-consuming push), just something that actually takes effort.

 

[The Bucket]

This is something that's always bugged me, I understand you need something interesting for your audience to look at and grabbing what ever crazy crap you have lying around is one way to do this but why not draw something, design a logo, animate it (at a time-consuming push), just something that actually takes effort.

To be fair, I think i'd rather have a wall of tat to look at than some looping gif of his own name a guy with no graphic art experience made. More effort doesn't always equal more quality.

I dont really have anything against the wall of crap approach to set design. Its a cliche sure, but most Youtubers of that type will be filming in front of some shelves in their cramped apartment either way

 

[PunkRex]

This is something that's always bugged me, I understand you need something interesting for your audience to look at and grabbing what ever crazy crap you have lying around is one way to do this but why not draw something, design a logo, animate it (at a time-consuming push), just something that actually takes effort.

To be fair, I think i'd rather have a wall of tat to look at than some looping gif of his own name a guy with no graphic art experience made. More effort doesn't always equal more quality.

I dont really have anything against the wall of crap approach to set design. Its a cliche sure, but most Youtubers of that type will be filming in front of some shelves in their cramped apartment either way

That's true, I understand it's more a limit of resources than anything to do with laziness, I just think it gives off the impression of someones dedication directly correlating to their wallet, which is weird considering the first part of the sentence... maybe I'm just a butt who's looking to much into it.

Captcha: 'as you wish'

Alright, I get it, you're the boss.

 

[Rattja]

You know, this reminds me of people having shelves filled with books in order to seem educated. Sometimes there are just a ton of books they never even read, or old lexicons or something. Hell I've even seen someone green screen in a bookshelf in the background.

 

[The Wooster]

"Egoraptor" and "critic" in the same sentence?

His breakdown of Megaman X is one of the most insightful pieces of game criticism in years.
Erin also forgot the landslide of SNES cartridges.[/quote]

"Egoraptor" and "critic" in the same sentence?

XD

His Sequelitis stuff is pretty insightful, but yeah that's as far as it goes. And putting TotalBiscuit as "more recently" instead of Jim Sterling? Hah!

Jim was writing reviews for Destructoid and IGN back before Bain had even started his Warcraft video series. He's been around far longer.

 

[Something Amyss]

Shots fired!

The text below this comic is just about the opposite of my opinion. I can't stand the personality cults of new media - it puts all focus on the person doing the writing, rather than the merits of the writing itself. It shouldn't matter who says what, only what's being said in the first place. That said, I'm probably guilty of putting too much focus on the sender myself - since I tend to actively avoid anything produced by youtube personalities and the like, due to my dislike of the phenomenon.

This is also exactly why they are the future. It doesn't matter what's being said so much as who said it.

Interestingly, I interpret the comic itself as being in support of my view, rather than the one being presented in the text, since it criticizes the "form over function" trend.

Most people do exactly this.

His Sequelitis stuff is pretty insightful, but yeah that's as far as it goes. And putting TotalBiscuit as "more recently" instead of Jim Sterling? Hah!

Sequelitis reminds me of basically every stoner I knew in college who would rationalise the hell out of a topic. I mean, if you can get an audience and get paid for that, great. But it's not so much insight as post-hoc rationalisation.

It's better than that fucking youtube MRA guy who has the skull and beverages every time he's on camera. There is a fine line between idiosyncrasy and affectation.

In fairness, Davis Aurini has now showed up several times looking like the Marlboro Man instead.

I want to do parody videos, but I don't want to shave my head.

[small]Fifteen-thousand dollars.[/small]

And he still wants more money.

But anyway, is Erin going for a unique, special voice as a video game ranter, or is she trying to be like "everybody else"?

I imagine Erin's content will look sort of like those AVGN videos where some console or cart or similar comes to life and attacks him, only with live ammunition.

 

[Skatologist]

Anita Sarkeesian

I see you're trying to start another flamewar over one of your strips, Grey. Would you like help with that? Why not drop something about gun control and organized religion while you're at it?

He did also say this in the article

Anyway, yeah, thought I'd get that off my chest before I start this arc and make a bunch of people mad.

Spoiler: I've already prepared my popcorn

It's better than that fucking youtube MRA guy who has the skull and beverages every time he's on camera. There is a fine line between idiosyncrasy and affectation.

Funny thing, if you notice, that shelf has a tiny skull at the top.

 

[Revolutionary]

Putting TB, Angry Joe, Egoraptor and Sarkeesian all lumped together kind of speaks volumes as to why you would make a strip to this. Just saying.

 

[Nomad]

Shots fired!

The text below this comic is just about the opposite of my opinion. I can't stand the personality cults of new media - it puts all focus on the person doing the writing, rather than the merits of the writing itself. It shouldn't matter who says what, only what's being said in the first place. That said, I'm probably guilty of putting too much focus on the sender myself - since I tend to actively avoid anything produced by youtube personalities and the like, due to my dislike of the phenomenon.

This is also exactly why they are the future. It doesn't matter what's being said so much as who said it.

Interestingly, I interpret the comic itself as being in support of my view, rather than the one being presented in the text, since it criticizes the "form over function" trend.

Most people do exactly this.

As for your first statement, I get that, but the text I responded to also highlighted that as something positive - saying the opposite (comparatively anonymous senders) produces "infuriatingly bland work". That's the part I disagree with, as I believe the basic difference between the two is that the "personality-driven" work just hides the blandness behind the smoke and mirrors of branding.

If anything, I find personality-driven series to be more bland, as the personalities in question are frequently one-trick ponies. It's the same social mechanism that makes Bruce Willis bleed gallons of blood and Sean Bean to die in every movie they appear in - Bruce Willis is the guy who bleeds, and Sean Bean is the guy who dies. It's their respective brands. In the same way, Pewdiepie is the guy who screams and Yahtzee is the guy who doesn't like things. Hell, sometimes the trick even makes it into the pony's name - i.e. Angry Video Game Nerd. Branding may help with hiding product blandness, but it also generates it, as the brand creates a mold that must be continually filled and reinforced by new work in order to be maintained.

As for your second statement, I'm not sure I got that. "This" could refer to any number of things - do you mean skewing the interpretation of source material to make it fit your own viewpoint? If so, I really don't feel like that's what I'm doing. The comic blatantly criticizes form over function - the actual joke says that content is irrelevant, while presentation is key to credibility. The text below the comic actually seems to support that state. It literally says that downplaying individual writers almost always produces bland work, regardless of writer skill. I.e. this review [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/moviesandtv/reviews/cinemarter/14353-Pixels-Review] automatically becomes worse if the sender is "The Escapist" rather than "CineMarter" or "Matthew Parkinson" or whatever.

If by "this" you actually mean "make self-contradictions", then yeah, I guess - on occasion. I find it to be more rare in published material, though.

 

[Something Amyss]

"This" could refer to any number of things

Which could reasonably be narrowed down to the specific, quoted text used there. I understand some grounds for confusion, but it's fairly uncommon to quote specific text and not refer to it.

Like here. I could be talking about your first or eighth sentence, but it's not very likely since I chose to quote this specific portion of a sentence. Distinct quoting is a common mechanism used to highlight a specific portion of text relevant. If you were trying to make a point, you probably should have at least relegated it to segment of quoted text relevant.

If you were legitimately seeking clarification, keep the above in mind the next time you do so.

Funny thing, if you notice, that shelf has a tiny skull at the top.

I think there are a couple of actual "gamers" who have skulls in their displays. Plus, the skull doesn't follow Erin around, so it can't be relevant.

 

[Sigmund Av Volsung]

"Egoraptor" and "critic" in the same sentence?

His breakdown of Megaman X is one of the most insightful pieces of game criticism in years.
Erin also forgot the landslide of SNES cartridges.

Don't know how I feel about that. Sure, it's quite informative, but for insight? Super BunnyHop's Critical Close Up series of Metal Gear Solid 1-3 and Dark Souls trumps that anytime.

I mean, he makes MGS 2 interesting enough to consider to play.

 

[Nomad]

"This" could refer to any number of things

Which could reasonably be narrowed down to the specific, quoted text used there. I understand some grounds for confusion, but it's fairly uncommon to quote specific text and not refer to it.

Like here. I could be talking about your first or eighth sentence, but it's not very likely since I chose to quote this specific portion of a sentence. Distinct quoting is a common mechanism used to highlight a specific portion of text relevant. If you were trying to make a point, you probably should have at least relegated it to segment of quoted text relevant.

If you were legitimately seeking clarification, keep the above in mind the next time you do so.

I don't think this was ever a point of contention - just as your "this" can safely be assumed to refer to the quoted text, my "any number of things" can safely be assumed to refer to various possible interpretations of your reference. I supplied replies to two such interpretations, both of which were related to the snippet you quoted. I can think of several other possible interpretations off the top of my head, but chose to limit myself to the two I deemed most likely. If I missed the mark with both of these, then a clarification might be in order.

Were you at all interested in the discussion as such? If so, I'd be happy to hear your thoughts on the actual points I raised.

 

[Something Amyss]

-snip-

I'm really not sure what the point was, then. If you were legitimately confused, it'd be one thing. As it is, it appears that you have made unreasonable leaps and assumptions to try and make the point that I was unclear outside of the context in which the response occurred.

Either way, with that piece clarified I have pretty much lost all interest in this line of conversation. It was one thing if you were perhaps confused and seeking clarification, but now it just looks like I was misrepresented for the sake of an argument.

 

[Nomad]

-snip-

I'm really not sure what the point was, then. If you were legitimately confused, it'd be one thing. As it is, it appears that you have made unreasonable leaps and assumptions to try and make the point that I was unclear outside of the context in which the response occurred.

Either way, with that piece clarified I have pretty much lost all interest in this line of conversation. It was one thing if you were perhaps confused and seeking clarification, but now it just looks like I was misrepresented for the sake of an argument.

I honestly don't know where this is coming from - if you think I've made "unreasonable leaps and assumptions" and misrepresented your argument, then apparently I did miss the mark, and would (as stated) be glad if you pointed me in the right direction.

In case you interpreted the passus you quoted in post 36 as confrontative, then that was certainly not the intention. I just wanted to communicate that I didn't quite understand what you were referring to, and had to take a guess. Hence why I asked if my interpretation was correct, rather than just assuming that it was.

 

[Something Amyss]

I honestly don't know where this is coming from

You don't know where the things I've explained are coming from.

Okay, this is a rare one. I don't even know how to address that. So I'm just going to ignore any further responses.