Shamanic Rhythm said:
Speaking as a card-carrying Yahtzee fanboy,I happen to think the whole "but saying bad things in what he does" defence is a load of tosh. ZP's entertainment value, in my eyes at least, lies in sharp assessments on foolish or ridiculous elements of a game supported by wonderful, colourful language. If the man is spending too long skewering a minor or irrelevant point* for the sake of negativity, it's like watching a master boxer fight a weeble doll - faintly amusing, but not as impressive or joyous. If his criticism is factually wrong, then what is the point in bringing it to light. And being positive is not necessarily dull, if it represents genuine enthusiasm. Look at the Prototype review for a good example, which single-handedly sold me a game I enjoyed very much.
I agree people should be a little less sensitive about a guy who is honest about a guy who is not even pretending to be anything but rampantly opinionated (thank god "objective judgement" of entertainment is a dodgy idea at best) but pretending Yahtzee never makes mistakes or should give up on conveying his impressions "cuz its funnier" is equally silly.
*Incidentally, I didn't really feel the TL review was unrepresentative. The AC2 was the best/worst example - dissecting superfluous and pointless amounts of cash, a flaw of every game ever made ever, in reviewing a game that was supposedly enjoyable was surely a mis-step.