Jim sterling gives Mario Kart 8 Deluxe a 9/10.

[pokoko]

Goodnightmoon said:

pokoko said:

Not naming any names but some people have the attitude that all of gaming revolves around their own personal favorite console manufacturer.  You're either Lawful Good and like the same pieces of hardware and software or you're Chaotic Evil and like other, more evil pieces of software and hardware.  They're only able to see the world as Luke vs. Vader in a Tables match.

I mean, obviously, if someone's personal opinion about a game doesn't match up with my own personal opinion about a game then they MUST have some hidden agenda and they were probably trained by the CIA.  

At the end of the day, Sterling giving Mario Kart a high score is solid proof that he hates Nintendo.

And some people has the attitude of remaining completely blind when they are interested. Keep convincing yourself nothing strange happened with that Zelda review, but it only defines you more, since you have always questioned the objectivity of Jim and said he only looks for attention, however now that we talk about Zelda you question those who question Jim just as you have been doing for a long time now... there's an adjective for that.

It defines me?  Sure it does ... it defines me to you inside your pretend world where everything is filtered by an association to a corporation.  You define yourself by your fandom and that's just the way you think.  Trust me, I'm not worried about your obsessive associations.  The world isn't really ordered by a system of how much people like or dislike a videogame company--that's just your lopsided and unrealistic perspective.  Your obsession is coloring the rest of the world an unrealistic shade of fanboy inside your head.  Either get over it or stop dragging other people into your reindeer games.

As for Sterling, I can't stand him and have no doubt that he's a sensationalist, but I have no reason to think his scores are dishonest.  Just because you want to believe that doesn't mean it's true.  Do you understand that?  

His scores have always reflected how much he enjoys a game, not what he thinks a game deserves based on an objective scale.  This is a pattern that I've seen for years, going back to when I was a regular at Destructoid, where Sterling got his start.  He's not worried about "deserves".  Do I think that kind of system should be on Metacritic?  I don't, but I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over it.  Do I think his scores have any meaning relative to me?  Not at all--the fact that they're entirely subjective mean they only have relevance to him or those with the exact same tastes.

At the end of the day, it's just someone else's opinion about something you had no part in creating and it doesn't hurt you at all.  Call his review terrible, say he's awful at his job, that's all perfectly fine if you can back it up, but you're just trying to invalidate a numbered score because it hurts your ego.

You should honestly stop this.  Take a step back.  It's just not that important.