By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
pokoko on 02 April 2017
Edit Thread
KLAMarine said:
pokoko said:

Like I said, I'm not a fan of Sterling's style at all.  We disliked each other when he was at Destructoid.  However, he's pretty consistent in that he writes for humor and he writes the way he wants.  That's why he become famous in the first place.  He's not someone to read if you're easily offended, especially not over video-games.  Some people take certain franchises far too seriously and he doesn't coddle them at all.

I also don't buy all those claiming Sterling was just trying to get attention.  They're just trying to discredit him as best they can think of because he was mean to a game they liked and it bruised their ego.  If anything, Sterling is probably one of the most honest reviewers.  He most likely gave Zelda a 7 or whatever because that's how much he liked it.  Simple as that, really.  He doesn't try to figure out what it "deserves" or worry about fanboy reactions, he just gives it whatever he's feeling.  Like giving Deadly Premonition at 10 because it was quirky.  

Of course, in my experience (though from years ago at Destructoid), he also doesn't care that much about getting his facts right, so who knows.

Don't keep it to yourself, there.

Small stuff, mostly.  Complaining about not being able to do something in a game but then the comments are instantly full of people saying you can.  That can happen to anyone but most people would try to make sure that what they write is actually true.  I get the impression that he doesn't take the time to do that since it seems to happen to him a lot.  

I've seen it happen with big stuff, too.  He once wrote an article attacking Sony for copying Nintendo because he read the PSP2 was going to have two view-screens like the DS.  His source was an obscure blog that misunderstood the main article they quoted.  His defense was always that he was "a blogger, not a journalist" so he didn't have to fact-check.  

This is from a defense piece he wrote back then:

"Unlike journalists, who strive to be objective and must generally be impersonal with their writing, bloggers will project themselves onto the work they do. They will never be shy about adding in their own opinions to the news they write about, and give the world a piece of their mind. Blogs are full to the brim with personality, and the news often comes flavored with a big chunk of bias."  https://www.destructoid.com/screw-your-journalism-why-games-blogging-is-nothing-to-be-ashamed-of-68336.phtml

Also this:

"The question that comes to mind however is this -- do blogs compromise information in the projection of their personality? Sometimes, I have to confess, yes. Yes we do. Tommy Tallarico himself accused the blogs of rushing so quickly to be cynical, to appeal with negativity to the crowd of jaded gamers that make up their readership, that they will not only downplay, but even eschew the facts in favor of whipping up a storm of anger.

I'm big enough to admit that I have, at times, lost grasp of the facts in a desperate rush to get my voice out there. Bloggers will do that. When I first started writing, I was terrible at it, and even now, with several months under my belt, I admit I am not the best writer I can be. I am still learning, but that's another great thing about blogging -- we have that freedom to evolve. We are able to learn from our mistakes. I fully understand that most magazines would have fired me by now, for either mouthing off one too many times or accidentally announcing that the next Elder Scrolls would be an MMO. I have screwed up in the past, big time, and while I strive to be as professional as I can be, I am not a journalist and I do not claim to have "journalistic integrity." I only have my honest opinions, be they cynical or naive. "

That's pretty much Jim Sterling and why I call him a tabloid writer.  He wants to be an "internet personality," not a journalist.  That's why I don't care anything about his work.  However, at least he is open about it, instead of trying to hide behind a shield of objectivity while doing what is best for business behind the scenes.  I personally believe a lot of scores from the big publishers are of the "tell readers what they want to hear" variety.  I've grown really cynical about 10s being handed out like candy, for example.

In a nutshell, Sterling doesn't analyse the data and subtract the cons from the pros in order to get his scores.  He just marks down a number that represents how much he liked the game.  I can understand the argument that such a method doesn't fit with Metacritic but the idea that he's "wrong" about how much he enjoyed his time playing is absurd.