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

sc94597 on 16 March 2017
Nem said:

Your examples are insane.

First you are linking 7/10's, wich are beyond the scope of metabombing and relations to other games aswell. That is not what he is talking about.

Also, are those fakes or are those people who took them down after he named them? Hm? The desperation continues.

All this cause he made a justified 7/10 review hm? How terrible he is and how self-righteous Zelda fans are! This is beyond ridiculous.

When the person hasn't played the game, it is not beyond the scope of metabombing. Read their reviews. A 7/10 still bombs the score when it is below the average and the people giving it have not played the game. Only people who play the game should be reviewing it. As for whether or not the accounts were banned/reviews deleted? Um, couldn't the same thing have happened with BOTW's scores? You addressed nothing else I mentioned. Figures. As if you don't have your own bias here. You already mentioned your silly conspiracy theories of how people are going to suddently dislike the game in a week or so.  



Around the Network
sc94597 on 16 March 2017
golfgt170 said:
Suddenly metaritic user score is relevant while a few posts back then, some ppl told me to avoid it as cancer... meh

Two different discussions buddy. If you can't see that, I don't know what to tell ya. 



Turkish on 17 March 2017
sc94597 said:
Nem said:

So, presented with evidence you attack the one presenting you the evidence? For shame!

Also, he didnt say it was the zelda fans that bombed Horizon's score. But that there were more that did it than the other way around.

See, thing about Jim is, he isn't attacking the game. He is attacking the fans (who attacked him first). And i applaud him for that. These reactions are shameful and we should be above them.

When presented with cherry-picked "evidence", certainly. Notice how he has to categorize the reviews by their score, as if a 0 is any worse than a 1 when neither reviewer played the game. Furthermore, he makes the assumption that none of the people who voted a zero for BoTW and did not vote anything for Horizon are Horizon (or Sony fans.) A positive review entails more work than a negative review, because you are actually reviewing the game and not pretending to. For most of the voters, the 0 for BOTW is their only review, likely newly created accounts for that sole purpose. You also can find plenty of people who gave 10's to Nioh, Bloodborne, Demon's Souls, etc are the ones doing the 0's in BoTW comments, and since you can't see all of their reviews/ratings on their page (only the most recently voted high one) , you don't know if they also voted 10 for Horizon or not. 

"There were more that did it than the other way around." How can he make that conclusion from his cherry-picked examples?  Here are a dozen links, including many Jim somehow skimmed over in his "investigation."  And there are also the points I brought up about not all reviews are shown on a profile, yet they still affect the score. There are >7000 BOTW user reviews, but only a hundred or so show up on the Metacritic page. 


http://www.metacritic.com/user/Caramelo

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skilly225

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Ytrerio

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Hunter2020

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Lampiaobr

http://www.metacritic.com/user/AmazedBunion

http://www.metacritic.com/user/GamingTV

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Kayno1 (Reviewed Mar 4th)

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Razv (Reviewed Mar 3rd)

http://www.metacritic.com/user/GK0

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Inanis

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Juhiz

Three of the links in Jim's article for Nintendo fans either have no reviews or there is no account, so he even inflated his "evidence" with false examples, but I am sure you didn't check that. 

http://www.metacritic.com/user/JimmyRustle22

http://www.metacritic.com/user/ivand88

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skysayrain

What is  "for shame" is that you didn't look into it yourself. 

 

Alkibiádēs said:
sc94597 said:

When presented with cherry-picked "evidence", certainly. Notice how he has to categorize the reviews by their score, as if a 0 is any worse than a 1 when neither reviewer played the game. Furthermore, he makes the assumption that none of the people who voted a zero for BoTW and did not vote anything for Horizon are Horizon (or Sony fans.) A positive review entails more work than a negative review, because you are actually reviewing the game and not pretending to. For most of the voters, the 0 for BOTW is their only review, likely newly created accounts for that sole purpose. You also can find plenty of people who gave 10's to Nioh, Bloodborne, Demon's Souls, etc are the ones doing the 0's in BoTW comments, and since you can't see all of their reviews on their page (only the most recently voted high one) , you don't know if they also voted 10 for Horizon or not. 

"There were more that did it than the other way around." How can he make that conclusion from his cherry-picked examples?  Here are a dozen links, including many Jim somehow skimmed over in his "investigation."  And there are also the points I brought up about not all reviews are shown on a profile, yet they still affect the score. There are >7000 BOTW user reviews, but only a hundred or so show up on the Metacritic page. 


http://www.metacritic.com/user/Caramelo

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skilly225

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Ytrerio

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Hunter2020

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Lampiaobr

http://www.metacritic.com/user/AmazedBunion

http://www.metacritic.com/user/GamingTV

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Kayno1 (Reviewed Mar 4th)

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Razv (Reviewed Mar 3rd)

http://www.metacritic.com/user/GK0

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Inanis

http://www.metacritic.com/user/Juhiz

Three of the links in Jim's article for Nintendo fans either have no reviews or there is no account, so he even inflated his "evidence" with false examples, but I am sure you didn't check that. 

http://www.metacritic.com/user/JimmyRustle22

http://www.metacritic.com/user/ivand88

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skysayrain

What is  "for shame" is that you didn't look into it yourself. 

Lol, Jim just got exposed as a desperate fraud. 

Are you guys for real? Jim isn't at fault here, it's the Nintendo fans who Ddos'd his site just for a fucking 7/10. Of course he will try and make the butthurt people even more salty now, that's what he does and always did. He also did Uncharted 4, but that fanbase wasn't childish enough to ddos his site. Nintendo isn't a special company that needs protection from da evil Jim Sterling.

And those reviews were absolutely fucking real, I read the article a few hours after it got up and these users

http://www.metacritic.com/user/JimmyRustle22

http://www.metacritic.com/user/ivand88

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skysayrain

all had reviews in them. Also lol at you for including users who give Zeruda a 7/10, only further proving Jim's point.

And yeah he's right when he says Zeruda fans are targeting Horizon. With posts like these what do you expect

To sum up:

-Jim has every right to give it a 7/10

-You need to respect his score and opinion, he thinks it's a good game but not perfect

-You have no right to ddos people for their opinion and for bringing da 98 to a 97, holy shit



sc94597 on 17 March 2017
Turkish said:

And those reviews were absolutely fucking real, I read the article a few hours after it got up and these users

http://www.metacritic.com/user/JimmyRustle22

http://www.metacritic.com/user/ivand88

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skysayrain

all had reviews in them. Also lol at you for including users who give Zeruda a 7/10, only further proving Jim's point.

And yeah he's right when he says Zeruda fans are targeting Horizon. With posts like these what do you expect

To sum up:

-Jim has every right to give it a 7/10

-You need to respect his score and opinion, he thinks it's a good game but not perfect

-You have no right to ddos people for their opinion and for bringing da 98 to a 97, holy shit

Isn't it magical how somehow those reviews are real, yet no longer exist, whilst the Zelda reviews are still up? In the image you shared, Horizon was only mentioned once, and it certainly didn't seem like the person was calling the game bad, just criticizing Jim for a lack of consistency. 

To sum up: 

- Nobody here is saying he doesn't have a right to give the game a 7/10. 

- No I don't. I criticize opinions based on faulty premises, misfacts, and which show inconsistencies in the opinion holder's credibility. There is no inherent reason to respect opinions just because they are opinons.

- Nobody here ddos'd him, so I don't know why you are even bringing that up. 



Turkish on 17 March 2017
sc94597 said:
Turkish said:

And those reviews were absolutely fucking real, I read the article a few hours after it got up and these users

http://www.metacritic.com/user/JimmyRustle22

http://www.metacritic.com/user/ivand88

http://www.metacritic.com/user/skysayrain

all had reviews in them. Also lol at you for including users who give Zeruda a 7/10, only further proving Jim's point.

And yeah he's right when he says Zeruda fans are targeting Horizon. With posts like these what do you expect

To sum up:

-Jim has every right to give it a 7/10

-You need to respect his score and opinion, he thinks it's a good game but not perfect

-You have no right to ddos people for their opinion and for bringing da 98 to a 97, holy shit

Isn't it magical how somehow those reviews are real, yet no longer exist, whilst the Zelda reviews are still up? In the image you shared, Horizon was only mentioned once, and it certainly didn't seem like the person was calling the game bad, just criticizing Jim for a lack of consistency. 

To sum up: 

- Nobody here is saying he doesn't have a right to give the game a 7/10. 

- No I don't. I criticize opinions based on faulty premises, misfacts, and which show inconsistencies in the opinion holder's credibility. There is no inherent reason to respect opinions just because they are opinons.

- Nobody here ddos'd him, so I don't know why you are even bringing that up. 

"Isn't it magical"

No it's not, maybe they deleted their reviews after being featured on Jim's article, or maybe da Meta deleted their reviews, they delete a bunch of troll reviews every now and then, but not always and not all of them.

"and it certainly didn't seem like the person was calling the game bad"

What the hell do you understand with "a poor man's Botw"?

"I criticize opinions based on faulty premises, misfacts"

Weapons break often in Zeruda and Jim hates it apparently, that's not a faulty premise or misfact. You have no right to say he doesn't have to right to dislike that.

"Nobody here ddos'd him"

How do you know? Maybe there are people here who participated in the Ddos campaign. Hell it could be you, we have no evidence but what we do know is that Zeruda fans in general Ddos'd him for a fucking 7/10. And I'm bringing it up because this thread is about that, read the thread title.



Around the Network
sc94597 on 17 March 2017
Turkish said:

 

No it's not, maybe they deleted their reviews after being featured on Jim's article, or maybe da Meta deleted their reviews, they delete a bunch of troll reviews every now and then, but not always and not all of them.

But why wouldn't the BOTW trolls who were in Jim's article delete their reviews? It just seems like too much of a coincidence that the three ones missing were all on the Horizon page. 

"What the hell do you understand with "a poor man's Botw"?"

I misread that as something entirely different. The poster certainly is up to par on their grammar skills. 

"Weapons break often in Zeruda and Jim hates it apparently, that's not a faulty premise or misfact. You have no right to say he doesn't have to right to dislike that."

That isn't the only complaint he had in his review. I've already gone over this to be honest. Not going to have this discussion again. There are certain aspects of his review which are just flat out hyperbole or even counterfactual. If you are interested go look at my posts earlier in this thread, here. 

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8338278

How do you know? Maybe there are people here who participated in the Ddos campaign. Hell it could be you, we have no evidence but what we do know is that Zeruda fans in general Ddos'd him for a fucking 7/10. And I'm bringing it up because this thread is about that, read the thread title.

@Bolded, exactly. So there is no reason to suspect such. 



Nem on 18 March 2017
sc94597 said:
Nem said:

Your examples are insane.

First you are linking 7/10's, wich are beyond the scope of metabombing and relations to other games aswell. That is not what he is talking about.

Also, are those fakes or are those people who took them down after he named them? Hm? The desperation continues.

All this cause he made a justified 7/10 review hm? How terrible he is and how self-righteous Zelda fans are! This is beyond ridiculous.

When the person hasn't played the game, it is not beyond the scope of metabombing. Read their reviews. A 7/10 still bombs the score when it is below the average and the people giving it have not played the game. Only people who play the game should be reviewing it. As for whether or not the accounts were banned/reviews deleted? Um, couldn't the same thing have happened with BOTW's scores? You addressed nothing else I mentioned. Figures. As if you don't have your own bias here. You already mentioned your silly conspiracy theories of how people are going to suddently dislike the game in a week or so.  

I have no bias. I got the game and i don't hate it, though there are aspects i dislike. I don't think it's the best game ever or anything. It's just a good game.Though i admit the reaction of the fandom to any and all criticism does sap my will to play the game just out of disgust.

I'm sure there are cases of people giving it 10 without playing it either. Just chill. This isn't worth it. It's just a game and everyone has the right to their opinion.