Why do you say that Extra Credits is preachy?

[boholikeu]

Because some people are under the mistaken impression that simply having an opinion = preachy.

Same with people that think talking about the artistic/political qualities of something = pretentious.

Because there's two methods of imposing one's opinion. In terms of Escapist, you have the "Yahtzee" method in which you loudly exclaim that X is wrong and if you don't think so there is something wrong with you. Then you have the "Floyd" method that involves cajoling people with the idea that Y is 100% right, therefore X is wrong because it is the opposite of Y, so you should really think the way I do, here have a trophy.

If you don't believe Extra Credits is preachy, go back and watch a few episodes. Floyd is at a pulpit and telling gamers on esc how to think, he doesn't give anyone else the benefit of the doubt. In fact he personally chided me in the comments for pointing out flaws in his arguments in the gaming diversity episode. Maybe it's not linguistically correct to say he's preaching, but that's only because he's not talking about god.(yet) As I see it, Floyd is another guy belting out opinions, and I and everyone else are expected to accept those opinions because he gets a salary for them.

Hey, Mr. Pitts! I have lots of strong opinions and can make shitty drawings too. Can I have a show?

Re-read the post where he "chided" you. He was actually agreeing with your original point that games shouldn't shoehorn in diversity. I still don't see why you think he was mocking you.

He certainly didn't make that clear, did he. Especially since I felt his arguments were questionable and he quoted someone else to say he agreed with them who said I was wrong.

I was that other person.

You said his arguments were questionable because we shouldn't "shoehorn" in diversity. I said that EC basically said the same thing at the end of their episode. Then, the guy from EC jumped in to say that I was right, meaning that they basically agreed with your original point.

The only thing they said you were "wrong" about was that your post and the EC episode were saying different things. They weren't. That was my point.

 

[viperxvii]

OT:
I think the word "preachy" means different things to different people.

That's exactly what I began thinking after reading these comments. I don't think "Preachy" means the same to many people here. Some are seeing it as "They're introducing revelations" which some interpret as "things we didn't realize, or realized but never fully articulated" and enjoy it as intelligent expressions...and others interpret as "condescending pretentiousness as if claiming they're the first to realize these things." The later seeming like the viewer's own personal insecurity or defensiveness.

Others are interpreting the "Preachy" as though they're saying "how things SHOULD be" or "This is my opinion and you must believe it!" which again, seems a viewer's misinterpretation and desire to jump to conclusions, likely after seeing many forums of people actually doin the "This is my opinion, WORSHIP IT" thing. Is it absolutely necessary to say "in my opinion" after everything we say to avoid being labeled as pretentious?

What I can't understand is when people claim that someone is being condescending, patronizing, or insulting ...and the person who's the cause of their perceived indignation apologizes and says it's not their intent...why can't the self-proclaimed victim accept that? If they don't intend to talk down to you, then they're simply making sure everyone's on the same level before continuing the topic, which is simply a good thing to do when trying to express a message to a large group of people. If you get offended by that, that's more of a personal problem you need to overcome.

 

[Halo Fanboy]

Patronizing and preachy? Perhaps it's because all the information they give is a common sense truism that they use to smuggle in their constant moralizing and regurgitating of social reform values at every oppurtunity. And orders like " don't let freinds buy bad games," when the only games they ever talk about are narative focused pieces of shit and "artsy" indie garbage.

I can't believe so many people learned anything from their show, no actual specialized knowledge is ever demonstated. I'm certain I've watched most of their show and have yet to see one mechanic in video games anylized in any capacity. They should devote themselves to an article that demonstrates actual technical knowledge (like Seth Killian's Domination series) if they want my respect. But I'm sure their to busy trying to please the people who want hear about art, storytelling and mediums.

 

[Fensfield]

I wouldn't call it preachy but.. perhaps a little bit too definitive. Strangely, looking at the creators' Youtube channel from before The Escapist absorbed them, this wasn't so much the case. Very even-handed, fairly informative .. that's still true, but now .. I dunno. Only thing leaps to mind was that recent one about women in games bashing on female characters I seem to remember being half-decently written.

Meh, oh well, suffice to say I'm becoming slightly uncertain about how 'this is how things must be'-ish Extra Credits gets at times, especially while attempting to make clear games are an artistic medium (which in itself undermines claims things ought be a certain way).

Oh well, at least it's not ZP's endless Eastern-product bashing.

 

[vato_loco]

I don't think I've ever thought of them as "preachy". They're people that know what they're talking about, give a message in a very mature and interesting way, and inform me -and many others- of some things that I enjoy learning about.

I agree that you can't EVER make everyone happy, so some people would rant about them being preachy just because of their own insecurities or something.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Soo, yeah, seeing how this topic's still out there, I decided I should re-watch the "Gamer" episode to figure out if I still find it preachy. And, I do. Incredibly so. In fact, it's the preachiest video I've seen in a while, and somehow I have a feeling that's what they're going for.

1) Not exactly about the episode, but about the series - look at Floyd's avatar. You noticed what he's doing, where he's standing? Well, he's standing on a platform, with a microphone, clearly giving a speech, the political type of speech, that does not necessarily warrant discussion. Yeah, it's a nitpick, but I figured I should ask why there is a platform.

2) So, about 2 minutes 45 seconds in, after describing the gamer stereotype, Daniel suddenly says that it's our responsibility to change it - which is not only a demand, basically, but a misadressed one, seeing how I doubt that people who would ever watch Extra Credits would then go on the crouch on bodies in Halo.

3) At 4:05, he says "we can't let it continue". Not that I disagree, but if that's not preaching, then nothing is.

I could go on, but the video continues to be like that for the end. "We should", "We have got to", "Can we please start being better than this?".

And the crown jewel is "don't settle for second-rate titles, and don't let your friends settle for them either". Yeeeah... That doesn't sound too open for discussion, does it?

Preaching? Absolutely.

 

[thespis721]

I think that it is the perspective you bring into the video. Essentially, Extra Credits is offering their opinion on the game industry. A lot of times people construe opinion with preachy because, well technically, you're preaching your opinion. Extra Credits uses fact to back their opinions but their desires and ideas of changing the industry is a preachy endeavor because it's their opinion.

Is that a bad thing? No. Not at all. They don't try to shove it down your throat and they aren't judging people if they just like the standard game. If you like the hardcore, action, boob-spectacular that a lot of games are, you're going to find Extra Credits preachy because Extra Credits, on numerous occasions, calls for a reduction of this kind of content to grow the industry into something respectable. They are, technically, preaching their opinion in that regard. But they aren't judging you, so it's all right in my book.

 

[Sam Ronin]

Well now... where to begin with such a topic. I can well see where some would feel patronised or preached at by the videos. I do not share that view, but I can understand it.

As I recall from the first Youtube video was it not made for a University lecture/presentation? So that would make it a lecturn he is stood at, making a presentaion out to those watching... rather then a sermon pit or political stand.

In the infamous Gamer episode he does make good points. At no point in it is he saying that we should not have games aimed at purely being fun. But asks where is the really AAA genre defining stuff that you could point to when someone gets hodtile with you for liking games.

Take the chaos over Medal Of Honor. What could we use as our Band Of Brothers or Saving Private Ryan to those people? Something they might look up and be surprised by when it counters their view. (If they were to look it up obviously)

And when he is saying not to let friends buy Shovelware... he is not saying go tell them how to think. Have you not been in a shop with a friend or even seen a stranger looking at something terrible and said something to them? Or offered a better alternative title that they would enjoy?

You know they like the Indie scene for what it can produce from their other episode so such talk is not saying do away with all simple games or stuff that does not have a "High Art" mentality. Just lets try to weed out the stuff which has been made simply to cash in on a trend or brand.

And they delve into what is the general view/stereotype of a gamer, and how that typically very bad view can be altered to public at large. By cutting out the stupid/offensive behaviour on places like Xbox Live and so on. Not quite as far as MovieBob went with telling people to get out more etc. Although that cant hurt... and yes I am just as at fault for being a shut in gamer when not at work.
Shigeru Miyamoto once said how he creates games based around stuff he does in real life... So as hard as it is to believe he actually does snowboard etc which helped form 1080 snowboarding on the N64 and the likes.

TLR They are giving a lecture on something that bugs them and they have been thinking about. It is their opinion and they want to open discussion with others. You may agree, you may not. But if you think on what they say then that is their goal.

 

[For.I.Am.Mad]

I actually find it too preachy. The guy has a pretty narrow perspective and he hammers away on it too hard. It's like, "why can't we all get along, we would all get along if everyone all thought the exact same way as me." I guess that if you find him convincing and don't know that much about the alternatives to what he is saying then it would just seem informative. I stopped watching it.

Exactly, that's why I can't stand him. It's this insincerity in his dialouge that boils my blood. 'Everything will be fine as long as you do exactly what I say. Don't question me, EVER.'

Like the Indie Game episode, 'Hand over all the rights to your game......' Wait a minute, why should they listen to you? What gurantee do you have that this will work? The games industry is not the movie industry. Imagine if the dude who made Minecraft did that.

 

[guntotingtomcat]

See, for someone like me who knows fuck all about the games industry beyond 'I just spent £x on this game', I find them really informative. They simplify it in such a way that isn't boring and encourages you to look up anything extra yourself, if you want to.

Also, they never preach. If they have an opinion, they say so but they also say 'this is only our opinion and some of you might disagree etc'

 

[More Fun To Compute]

Like the Indie Game episode, 'Hand over all the rights to your game......' Wait a minute, why should they listen to you? What gurantee do you have that this will work? The games industry is not the movie industry. Imagine if the dude who made Minecraft did that.

Yes, in his world Minecraft and Mount&Blade are missed opportunities because they didn't take the wonderful life opportunity of working in a back office at EA making their games with a wonderful Hollywood narrative and higher production values.

 

[guntotingtomcat]

Soo, yeah, seeing how this topic's still out there, I decided I should re-watch the "Gamer" episode to figure out if I still find it preachy. And, I do. Incredibly so. In fact, it's the preachiest video I've seen in a while, and somehow I have a feeling that's what they're going for.

1) Not exactly about the episode, but about the series - look at Floyd's avatar. You noticed what he's doing, where he's standing? Well, he's standing on a platform, with a microphone, clearly giving a speech, the political type of speech, that does not necessarily warrant discussion. Yeah, it's a nitpick, but I figured I should ask why there is a platform.

2) So, about 2 minutes 45 seconds in, after describing the gamer stereotype, Daniel suddenly says that it's our responsibility to change it - which is not only a demand, basically, but a misadressed one, seeing how I doubt that people who would ever watch Extra Credits would then go on the crouch on bodies in Halo.

3) At 4:05, he says "we can't let it continue". Not that I disagree, but if that's not preaching, then nothing is.

I could go on, but the video continues to be like that for the end. "We should", "We have got to", "Can we please start being better than this?".

And the crown jewel is "don't settle for second-rate titles, and don't let your friends settle for them either". Yeeeah... That doesn't sound too open for discussion, does it?

Preaching? Absolutely.

His first youtube video was a lecture for his class, which is why he has a podium. And what's wrong with saying we shouldn't support bad games?

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

His first youtube video was a lecture for his class, which is why he has a podium. And what's wrong with saying we shouldn't support bad games?

Oh, right. I just remembered that.

Disregard then.

Also, not to overuse a common phrase, a game's quality is "in the eyes of the beholder". He cited Blacksite as a second-rate game, yet there are people who enjoy it. According to Daniel, they are settling for less and hurting the industry.

Let's make up an example. I like Modern Warfare 2. Hypothetically, my friends don't and think it's a bad influence for the industry in many different ways. Should they try to stop me from buying it then?

I think Daniel misses a point here. Yes, we all want games to be "art" or in the very least, complete projects, but that doesn't matter one bit if it's not fun. And if a person finds an objectively second-rate title fun, who the hell am I to judge him?

 

[guntotingtomcat]

His first youtube video was a lecture for his class, which is why he has a podium. And what's wrong with saying we shouldn't support bad games?

Oh, right. I just remembered that.

Disregard then.

Also, not to overuse a common phrase, a game's quality is "in the eyes of the beholder". He cited Blacksite as a second-rate game, yet there are people who enjoy it. According to Daniel, they are settling for less and hurting the industry.

Let's make up an example. I like Modern Warfare 2. Hypothetically, my friends don't and think it's a bad influence for the industry in many different ways. Should they try to stop me from buying it then?

I think Daniel misses a point here. Yes, we all want games to be "art" or in the very least, complete projects, but that doesn't matter one bit if it's not fun. And if a person finds an objectively second-rate title fun, who the hell am I to judge him?

I see where your coming from. That would be a little extreme of your friends.

 

[Adijia]

I love the extra credit series. I mean watching british people swear at game developers is fun and all, but after an episode of extra credits I fell like I learned somthing about gaming. All I've learned from ZP is new fun ways to swear at people. (Don't get me wrong I still love it, but still...)

 

[loremazd]

Because there's two methods of imposing one's opinion. In terms of Escapist, you have the "Yahtzee" method in which you loudly exclaim that X is wrong and if you don't think so there is something wrong with you. Then you have the "Floyd" method that involves cajoling people with the idea that Y is 100% right, therefore X is wrong because it is the opposite of Y, so you should really think the way I do, here have a trophy.

If you don't believe Extra Credits is preachy, go back and watch a few episodes. Floyd is at a pulpit and telling gamers on esc how to think, he doesn't give anyone else the benefit of the doubt. In fact he personally chided me in the comments for pointing out flaws in his arguments in the gaming diversity episode. Maybe it's not linguistically correct to say he's preaching, but that's only because he's not talking about god.(yet) As I see it, Floyd is another guy belting out opinions, and I and everyone else are expected to accept those opinions because he gets a salary for them.

Hey, Mr. Pitts! I have lots of strong opinions and can make shitty drawings too. Can I have a show?

This is likely the main point as to why.

People tend to hold to their ideas very strongly, and when a counter point is thoroughly and neatly explained they tend to react in a resentful manner. Because of the calm, simplified, point by point way they do their videos it is seen as cajoling by other people.

Another point is simply the calm, simplified, point by point way of expressing oneself brings to mind the same tones as how we talk to children. Breaking down an idea to be easily understandable tends to recall the emotions of ones childhood and thus indignation at being "talked down to" comes to mind.

Extra Credits is absolutely no different than a college lecture in a business ethics course, or philosophy, or government. It's basically 3 folks with some experience in the industry giving their thoughts on common questions and topic that people wonder about. If their opinion resonates with you, you'll likely adopt that opinion, if it does not, you rage against the "sheeple" and tend to get irritated. It's human nature.

In response to Sir John: They dont get paid for their opinions, they get paid for the way they express their opinions. In other words, they get paid for their skill in writing and how they deliver it, as well as how interesting the topics are to people. When you are able to produce something using your skills that people watch, then yes, you can get paid for it.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

I see where your coming from. That would be a little extreme of your friends.

It would be. However, it's exactly what Floyd has suggested. Probably not what he mean, but exactly how it came up.

 

[loremazd]

I see where your coming from. That would be a little extreme of your friends.

It would be. However, it's exactly what Floyd has suggested. Probably not what he mean, but exactly how it came up.

Wasn't the exact quote "friends dont let their friends buy shovelware?"

However I think that really needs to be taken with a dose of common sense.

What is more likely here, that he's suggesting you physically bar them from purchasing it? That you berate them or tell them they're an awful person for getting it?

I don't really think so, I think it's a call for people to express why they think a game is awful to their friends. You read into it what you will though. I'm not saying he should be free from criticism by taking intent into mind.

Essentially the point is rather simple, If you think the industry is shoveling out games of lower quality and discouraging innovation, then you should encourage the innovation and discourage the sale of the lower quality. Even if it is in the eye of the beholder. Essentially "For x to occur, y must happen, here's what you can do as an individual to make y happen."

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

Wasn't the exact quote "friends dont let their friends buy shovelware?"

One of them. The other one was "Don't settle for second-rate titles. Don't let your friends settle for them either."

There's no common sense in this phrase. Daniel should have at the very least phrased it better. "Don't let" is not "Maybe you should think that one over" or "I don't advise you to do that". "Don't let" is "Don't let".

 

[loremazd]

Wasn't the exact quote "friends dont let their friends buy shovelware?"

One of them. The other one was "Don't settle for second-rate titles. Don't let your friends settle for them either."

There's no common sense in this phrase. Daniel should have at the very least phrased it better. "Don't let" is not "Maybe you should think that one over" or "I don't advise you to do that". "Don't let" is "Don't let".

Sure there is, when taken in context with the topic. That and the assumption that he doesn't expect us to be gibbering douchebags, which is the common sense I was talking about. Express yourself to your friends if you want x to happen. It's very simple. Sure you do eventually have to give up if their mind is settled, but I see nothing wrong with saying "ehh, dont waste your money because x,y, and z about this game.

And that's not to mention the meaning of the word "settle". It means your friends didn't really want it in the first place. They're just getting it because there's nothing else and they're bored.

You basically seem to be for the literal meaning, as in do everything in your power to physically stop them from making the purchase.