By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Jim Sterling’s site under attack after Zelda: BotW review

golfgt170 said:

As you can see, we are a bit torn between critics and gamers. a whopping 21% differnce surely is not something to go by. Sure 7.6 is still great (hence 7/10 from sterling), but to go up to 97%. And for a zelda game when previous entries where so close in scores? Too much to go by... 

I hope you understand that a lot of these notes are just plain and simple trolling, tens and zeros included.

Overall, can't believe there's this much buzz just because the game dropped one point in Metacritic. Jim's review is decent and seems honest (and I agree with him on some points, there's a reason why I haven't truly enjoyed 30 of 35 hours in this game).



My bet with The_Liquid_Laser: I think the Switch won't surpass the PS2 as the best selling system of all time. If it does, I'll play a game of a list that The_Liquid_Laser will provide, I will have to play it for 50 hours or complete it, whatever comes first. 

Around the Network
Metallox said:
golfgt170 said:

As you can see, we are a bit torn between critics and gamers. a whopping 21% differnce surely is not something to go by. Sure 7.6 is still great (hence 7/10 from sterling), but to go up to 97%. And for a zelda game when previous entries where so close in scores? Too much to go by... 

I hope you understand that a lot of these notes are just plain and simple trolling, tens and zeros included.

Overall, can't believe there's this much buzz just because the game dropped one point in Metacritic. Jim's review is decent and seems honest (and I agree with him on some points, there's a reason why I haven't truly enjoyed 30 of 35 hours in this game).

Already answered: ALL games in metacritic user score, get troll 0%. No exceptions there. What i meant is that this zelda is way to low compared to the 97% it got even when compared to the other zelda games



archer9234 said:

Those upgrades don't require a person to stop and start momvement. You are stuck at a certain speed. That is what causes the hate. If they had no Stamnia bar. And just let you upgrade Link's speed. No one would really care. As it is. It's causing people to run, slow, run slow, run slow. People like holding forward, and that's it.

The basic movement speed (without sprinting) is the same as previous games, so the only thing new is now you can go faster than in previous games for a certain period of time. 

In Elder Scrolls games you are limited in sprinting as well, by guess what, a stamina bar. 



golfgt170 said:

Same goes for all the games in metacritic user score. For exampe TLOU has 550 reviews in red category...

The frequency of these types of reviews have increased with each generation. Nintendo games have been mostly immune from them too, so previous Zelda's never had this problem. 



Pavolink said:

Indeed. To bad those clicks costed him showing how bad is him as a professional. It would have been better to just say he don't liked rather than pretend his "issues" are real.

Jim is very good at what he does. The backlash helps him, it doesn't hurt him.

He lives and dies on hot takes, loud opinions, and conflict. It's what his audience pays him for. 

Which is fine. It isn't my cup of tea, but some people out there like it obviously. 

An hour ago he posted a new video titled, "Weapon Durability and Fanbase Fragility". He knows what he's doing. 



Around the Network
golfgt170 said:

I went and made this nice collage of games that scored the highly praised 94+%. Not only loved by critics, but from users aswell. Not something to argue i think. I beleieve we all (DESPITE our gaming prefernces) love these games, or believe that they worth all the praise they got:

As you can see, critic scores are somewhat familiar with the scores that gamers gave, 4,5 points max diference.

And then we have the critically aclaimed Zelda BotW that ravaged critic scores with a whopping 97% so far. But what about the users?

As you can see, we are a bit torn between critics and gamers. a whopping 21% differnce surely is not something to go by. Sure 7.6 is still great (hence 7/10 from sterling), but to go up to 97%. And for a zelda game when previous entries where so close in scores? Too much to go by... 

Go to the user score section, last page sorted by score. Look at the dates of the reviews. A majority of the quite numerous zeroes clearly did not play the game.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

sc94597 said:
archer9234 said:

Those upgrades don't require a person to stop and start momvement. You are stuck at a certain speed. That is what causes the hate. If they had no Stamnia bar. And just let you upgrade Link's speed. No one would really care. As it is. It's causing people to run, slow, run slow, run slow. People like holding forward, and that's it.

The basic movement speed (without sprinting) is the same as previous games, so the only thing new is now you can go faster than in previous games for a certain period of time. 

People want proper realism. Not hampered gameplay. Why can't Link run for 30-60 seconds. Like a real person. Either do realism right. Or don't bother. Link can jump down a 2 foot ledge, no problem. But his horse can't jump down a 2 foot ledge? How does that make sense.



archer9234 said:
sc94597 said:

The basic movement speed (without sprinting) is the same as previous games, so the only thing new is now you can go faster than in previous games for a certain period of time. 

People want proper realism. Not hampered gameplay. Why can't Link run for 30-60 seconds. Like a real person. Either do realism right. Or don't bother.

Link can run as long as you want to. It's sprinting that is restricted.



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

archer9234 said:
sc94597 said:

The basic movement speed (without sprinting) is the same as previous games, so the only thing new is now you can go faster than in previous games for a certain period of time. 

People want proper realism. Not hampered gameplay. Why can't Link run for a full minute. Like a real person. Either do realism right. Or don't bother.

Different people can sprint for different lengths. Not everyone has the same amount of stamina. Link's increases with training, just like a real person's would. 


I doubt you can sprint for a full minute at your full speed by the way. That is much harder to do than you think, as a minute is much longer than you think. Plus an ingame minute is a second in our time. There is a balance between full realisism and game logic to be had here. Having only one or the other would make the game bad. 

For how much time can a normal sprint at full speed before running out of breath? 

"It depends on what you mean by “running out of breath.”

An elite sprinter can only run 6 to 8 seconds at maximum effort before starting to slow down. In a 100 meter race, the runners are already slowing down before the finish because it is impossible to maintain maximum effort that long. Full, maximum speed only occurs for a couple seconds, after the runner has accelerated to as fast as they can go, and before fatigue causes them to start to slow.

While a 400 meter race is considered a “sprint” it is not and cannot be run a full speed. Even Olympic 400m runners pace it so they run at less than maximum speed the entire race.

If you define “out of breath” in physiological terms, it get more complicated. In simple terms, aerobic running is done at a pace slow enough that you are able to bring in enough oxygen to maintain that speed - although you will experience fatigue and eventually need to slow for other reasons. Anaerobic running is done at a speed fast enough that you burn more oxygen than you can bring in. How quickly you run out of oxygen is dependent on how much faster you are running than the speed where you can bring in enough oxygen to replace what you use. A full explanation of what really happens physiologically is beyond what I can cover here, but if you really want to know look up alactic metabolism and lactate metabolism. But in short, simple terms, when “sprinting at full speed” as you say, even elite athletes literally are partially suffocating within the first 10 seconds.

When not running “at full speed” in a distance race (say a local 5K) runners will still “run out of breath” near the end of the race if they have paced it correctly. When racing for time even a long distance runner will reach maximum effort at the finish, and have very labored breathing."



sc94597 said:
potato_hamster said:


Of course. Because reloading your gun (something that's found in practically all shooters) is totally the same as a tedious, arbitrary stamina system that has plenty of work arounds that renders it more annoying than it does to offer a challnege. Nice false equivalence.


So in The Elder Scrolls Morrowind when you start by walking like a snail, but later in the game you can run faster than the screens load was that a bad gameplay device?

The whole point of stamina is to limit your ability to efficiently travel until you upgrade it, no different from Acrobatics or Speed in an Elder Scrolls game. The point is that by actually working for it, your character feels better. It is hard to grasp when games today make you feel like a god an hour in until the end, but yes character progression and constraints make games fun, and it is a reward for your effort to be able to unlock more. The system is hardly arbitrary. 

I never played Morrowind, so I can't comment on that.

This is such a horse shit argument. It doesn't "limit your ability to efficiently travel until you upgrade it", it just limits your ability to efficiently travel. Period. Even when fully upgraded, it still limits your ability to efficently travel. During the entire course of the game you are hampered by the stamina system regardless of how much it's upgraded. It just becomes less bad.

"See we have this annoying system that gets more tolerable as the game goes on. and this is great because it gives you a sense your character has grown because at the end of the game it's less shitty than it was before". 

Nope. Not buying it.