wowthisnamesucks said:
Allow me to preface by saying that calling me a "zOmGz NINTENDRONE FANBOY" automatically makes you a Yahtzee fanboy. Please come up with a valid argument or don't reply.
False dichotomy and ad hominem in one attack. I'm afraid that you've already invalidated your argument.
The reason most people were angry at the SSBB review is that Yahtzee made no legitimate points.
Okay, here's your claim. Now, what points were illegitimate? Were every single one illegitimate? And most people? I think it's been claimed that the "Yahtzee fanbois" outnumbered the SSBB fanbois on this forum. He played the game and said what he didn't like about it.
Establishment of ethos. Got it.
I know that not every game is for everyone. Some people don't like SSBB, some people don't like Halo, some people don't like the color orange, European literature, or cucumbers. If he had said Brawl sucked because of repetative gameplay, imbalanced items, bad online support, or even something as simple as "I didn't like it because I didn't like it," it would have only gotten nasty comments and emails from the stupidest of the viewers and the genuine fanboys.
Ahh, I'm starting to see it now...
But he didn't. He did nothing but make up crap and presented it as fact.
Well, he did mention the repetitiveness of the single-player, something you said he didn't claim. And speaking of claims, here's another one. What did he "make up"? You're calling him out on that. So, point out what he made up. Address each point, and don't resort to ad hominems, false dichotomies, and other tactics of bad arguments. Such fallacies rank right up there with the "No it isn't!" aspect of the Argument Clinic from the Monty Python skit.
There is a huge competitive following for SSBB, with indisputably massive gaps between the best and the worst players. Anyone who's played it for more than 10 minutes can say it isn't a "mindless button masher."
I played the game for four hours at least. I beat plenty of my opponent by randomly mashing buttons. Maybe a poll to find out how long people have played the game, and their opinoin of whether or not it is just a "button masher" would be best needed to back up this claim. In
my personal experience, the game is a "button master". This is the conclusion I came to after my 4+ hours of playing it on my nephew's Wii. If I came to that conclusion, I don't think I can fault others for coming to the same. I will state this as a personal opinion, and one that is shared by others who have played the game. Do I think this is a valid argument? Nope. And neither is the claim that "anyone who has played it more than ten minutes can say..." that you make.
There are no long button sequences that require memorization in order to play. Again, the problem with the review isn't that Yahtzee said he hated brawl, the problem is that he pulled the reasons for hating it out of his ass.
Again, details would be nicer. It would show that you did more than just give it a cursory glance. Take each one of Yahtzee's claims and back it up. Give us points that we can look out for when we go back and watch the video again. This is what fosters debate. It encourages the exchange of information.
I'd be angry if he said that Turok was a bad game because it didn't have guns, or No More Heroes was good because it had an interactive overworld. This is the kind of crap you'd expect to see on some stupid YouTube channel or private website, Yahtzee's getting PAID for this.
Yahtzee is getting paid to entertain people. Part of that entertainment is that he is at least required to play the game and give an opinion. It's what he likes and doesn't like. Now, let's take this a bit further.
He's being paid, which means he has an employer. His employer would be the one to review his work and make the decision on whether or not Yahtzee is "doing his job". If the deemed his work detrimental to their bottom line, would not Yahtzee be unemployed now? After all, he's providing a marketable entertainment. Let the market do its job. And while he may be paid, are we paying to view his stuff? Wait, no... we're not...
And then here, he just picks out the worst of the worst, with cut n' paste "arguments" that were so poorly written that they could have been taken out of ANY idiots angry letter, and then implies guilt by association- fanboys like Brawl, therefore, if you like Brawl, you must be a fanboy.
Going back, he says that he's "sampling a few of the hate mails", and even even offers to respond to some of the more valid arguments. Doesn't seem like he's making any kind of association there. That's within the first 27 seconds of the mailbag review. Nowhere does he say that people who like SSBB are fanboys. I've just gone back and watched it twice, looking for the points you make. He says he's only reviewing the hate-mail, and responding to them. He doesn't say "This is why people who like SSBB are fanboys." Hell, he never implies it. What he is saying that those who took the time to write hate mail over a review of a game they liked are fanboys. The fanboys are the ones who wrote those letters with atrocious spelling errors and insults and flawed logic.
Granted, he himself commits the logical fallacy of "two wrongs". He responds to the immature posts with biting insults. In a professional atmosphere, he'd be castigated. However, since he is in th entertainment industry, is he held to that standard?
Now, keep in mind that throughout this response, I've never claimed you were a fanboy, and I addressed your claims directly. I make a claim at the end, and I show a little more evidence that I watched the video. If you wish to further the discussion and prove you have a side, be more specific and clear without all the condescension.
