Yes you are. Saying that doesn't cancel out the rest of your rant.NewClassic said:I'd like to point out here that I'm not calling this video series bad.
Yes you are. Saying that doesn't cancel out the rest of your rant.NewClassic said:I'd like to point out here that I'm not calling this video series bad.
Compared to the strategy of doing a quick post to ensure a similarly high spot in the posts and then editing. The Escapist is not really a humour site (I say that because I see more and more pandering to dull witted comedy for traffic).danebot said:ZP is fairly entertaining, but I don't understand why everything else on the escapist seems so unbearably unfunny.
EDIT: Are you kidding me up there with that copy-pasted text wall?
You have something you desperately want people to read, and yet you say nothing. You perched like a sniper waiting for the video to be released so you could soapbox in the first few posts on a site that is full of peple who enjoy the videos. The worst part is, you think it's worth reading, and that you're brillant! Thanks for your comments, but next time I want that kind of counter-opinion in my house I'll just invite a Jehova's witness in for coffee.
Your kidding me right? Firstly, It's a fair review article, let's be fair, Yahzee made his "girls with big boobies nerds don't have sex" thing for over half the review, which he has done before. Secondly, with almost 2000 Posts to his name, an escapist contributor, and not being a ZP tard post the chances of banning are nil. Don'tbe dumb, you don't get banned for expressing intelligent (if contrary) opinions on this site. Maybe if he posted something like "ZP is teh suxorz" 30 seconds after the movie was posted then your assesment would make sense.whyarecarrots said:Ahh at last, a truly moronic post deserving of a ban; something we can be truly and unamobiuosly satisfied with and not bod down the thread with discussions of why he was banned.
What's amusing is you clearly haven't read my post properly, or at least you didn't take any time to consider what I had to say. I know perfectly well what New Classic was saying, and what I did with my post was underline (and undermine) the incorrect assumption his entire post is built on.Baby Tea said:You know what the problem is with SYSTEM-J's post? It's that he tries to sum up Nuke's post with: 'I no longer find him funny'. Which is wrong.
Did anyone actually read his post, or just the first line and assumed they knew it all?
Nuke is saying that the show has changed. It's not the same as it once was, from the subtle things (like the intro music) to the big things (Like everything else), it's no longer about reviewing games.
I was talking about the post that someone did get banned for, which simply said 'first'. The rant/article didn't exist when I posted.mark_n_b said:Your kidding me right? Firstly, It's a fair review article, let's be fair, Yahzee made his "girls with big boobies nerds don't have sex" thing for over half the review, which he has done before. Secondly, with almost 2000 Posts to his name, an escapist contributor, and not being a ZP tard post the chances of banning are nil. Don'tbe dumb, you don't get banned for expressing intelligent (if contrary) opinions on this site. Maybe if he posted something like "ZP is teh suxorz" 30 seconds after the movie was posted then your assesment would make sensewhyarecarrots said:Ahh at last, a truly moronic post deserving of a ban; something we can be truly and unamobiuosly satisfied with and not bod down the thread with discussions of why he was banned.
Oy. No he isn't. He's saying it's changed. Just read a bit farther then what you quoted, and you'd see he said that himself.Top Dollar said:Yes you are. Saying that doesn't cancel out the rest of your rant.NewClassic said:I'd like to point out here that I'm not calling this video series bad.
It IS a review show with jokes! You said yourself that it's comedy within the framework of a review! You know what that means? That it's comedy WITHIN a review! Well shucks darn, that's what I've been saying. You didn't outline any difference, you merely stated: It's not a review with comedy! It's comedy in a review!SYSTEM-J said:The point I'm making, and which you've neatly ignored, is that New Classic obviously got ZP wrong in the first instance by mistaking it for a review show with jokes. It's never been that. It's comedy put within the framework of a review. There's an important difference. Saying "it's changed!" is meaningless because of the ambivalent attitude towards change I outlined above, and New Classic got the meaningful part wrong.
I'd have thought the difference would be clear, but apparently not. The difference is what the emphasis is on. If it's a review show with jokes, the emphasis is on the review. People should tune in to watch essentially fair, informative pieces of consumer journalism that are intended primarily to help them with their purchasing decisions. Since Yahtzee quite deliberately avoids being fair, informative or even making journalism, this clearly isn't the case.Baby Tea said:It IS a review show with jokes! You said yourself that it's comedy within the framework of a review! You know what that means? That it's comedy WITHIN a review! Well shucks darn, that's what I've been saying. You didn't outline any difference, you merely stated: It's not a review with comedy! It's comedy in a review!
TLRNewClassic said:Snip
This man, ladies and gentlemen, has it right. Yahtzee isn't out to make a review. He doesn't give scores, he doesn't do the things that EVERY SINGLE REVIEWER on the planet does. No. He uses a video game review as a platform for comedy and that's something he pulls off really well.SYSTEM-J said:I'd have thought the difference would be clear, but apparently not. The difference is what the emphasis is on. If it's a review show with jokes, the emphasis is on the review. People should tune in to watch essentially fair, informative pieces of consumer journalism that are intended primarily to help them with their purchasing decisions. Since Yahtzee quite deliberately avoids being fair, informative or even making journalism, this clearly isn't the case.Baby Tea said:It IS a review show with jokes! You said yourself that it's comedy within the framework of a review! You know what that means? That it's comedy WITHIN a review! Well shucks darn, that's what I've been saying. You didn't outline any difference, you merely stated: It's not a review with comedy! It's comedy in a review!
By contrast, if it's a comedy using the framework of a review, the emphasis is not on any of the criteria a proper review should consider but rather about making people laugh. In the latest episode, Yahtzee references Top Gear and Top Gear is a classic example of a show that uses the review format to generate laughs. In a recent episode, Clarkson did a "proper review" of a car after someone complained (just like you and your chum "Nuke" are) that Top Gear don't do proper reviews anymore. The sequence was broken up into different areas of analysis, but within the conventional motoring purchase criteria were questions like "Will it help me escape from baddies in a shopping centre?" The whole section was a joke, quite deliberately, and whoever wrote in had quite clearly Missed The Point.
That's the difference. If you really need it spelling out so clearly I can only assume two things:
1. You aren't really getting ZP in the first place, which throws into severe scrutiny your criticisms of the show.
2. You have little idea of what constitutes a good review, which undermines any praise you may have for ZP as a review show even if it was one.
danebot said:ZP is fairly entertaining, but I don't understand why everything else on the escapist seems so unbearably unfunny.
EDIT: Are you kidding me up there with that copy-pasted text wall?
You have something you desperately want people to read, and yet you say nothing. You perched like a sniper waiting for the video to be released so you could soapbox in the first few posts on a site that is full of peple who enjoy the videos. The worst part is, you think it's worth reading, and that you're brillant! Thanks for your comments, but next time I want that kind of counter-opinion in my house I'll just invite a Jehova's witness in for coffee.