13CBS said:
FYI, Daniel Floyd seems to be getting concerned about the possibility of being arrogant and preachy as well:
Daniel Floyd said:
CitySquirrel said:
I wish there had been more examples of how these specific ideas has been used. For example, how does pyramid head represent those things?
HotFezz8 said:
my god there is almost a choking arrogance here. am i weird to have quit that video half way through thinking "you can stop talking down to me you ****, im not so stupid i don't understand."
I'm not trying to attack you here, I'm just wondering what parts made you feel talked down to?
I'd actually like to know too. Not because I want to attack you or anything, but so I can be mindful in future episodes. "Condescension" is not the vibe we're going for at Extra Credits.
Hey, sorry for the delay in responding to this particular thread, if the creator (or main speaker at least) is actually willing to respond to your comment, he deserves the respect of a reply.
Firstly, it needs to be said I re-read my comment with a degree of embarrassment, as all things said in haste, it was unnecessarily "troll-ee". However, I do stand by the notion this show is preachy.
Secondly, this is my opinion, and it?s worth pointing out a lot (and I mean over three quarters) of the responses to it have been negative. However, before I crack on with pointing out what I see as flaws, I want to mis-quote James Arthur Baldwin badly and say I generally like Extra Credits, which is why I insist on criticising it perpetually.
In my mind the reason the smug vibe is broadcast for two reasons.
One, because you are discussing your views, not proven facts. The important thing is that there are two distinct ways of discussing these things (telling facts, as opposed to suggesting views).
This can be linked to my own bias (I?m a student working on a dissertation, differentiating between opinions and statements is one of the things I most often get drilled into me) but the fact you never once say something along the lines of "in our view" or "it varies from person to person" or even "as said by".
This isn't such an issue in many videos, the best example I was able to find of this was in the "survival horror" video, and where you (quite bravely) tell people what horror is. That the best example I can find of a perfect place for any of those comments; "fraud said...", "now it varies from person to person but...? this would have come across slightly less ?explain-it-to-Mr.-slow-here? in my view.
The second thing that gets to me is the use (or over use) of metaphors, whilst I struggled to find an example which clearly marks this, (most of the information and discussions in these videos are interesting, obviously) a very good example is the discussion of "the uncanny" in the latest video "symbolism". Stretching from 4 minutes 5 seconds to past 5 minutes 5 seconds its 60 seconds you can cut down on. It?s fun to have you bring it back to games at the end of that tangent, but it did seem to drag on. I found myself saying "yes... yes... I understand... you can move on...?