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

Forums - Gaming - Weapon Durability, Fanbase Fragility (The Jimquisition)

thismeintiel on 13 March 2017
Cloudman said:
Hahaa~ totally called it. I knew he was going to bring it up as soon as the attacks on him happened.

Back to the topic, I do think Jim's points have merits, but I don't agree that some of them are as bad as he claims. Sometimes I just have issue with the way he presents his points. He over exaggerates them to the point of being somewhat comical, and speaks in a way as if he's correct and it's absolute. Sure, sometimes it may be tied to his character, or for humor, but they're the same reason why sometimes I don't fully take his opinion.

Also, I find it funny that now 7 seems to be a fine score when sometimes in the past it was seen as above average, and well, I think Zelda: BotW is more than that.

A 7 means good.  For some reason last gen, many reviewers were handing out 9s and 10s like candy.  Even if the game had technical issues or were just average/above average, in terms of graphics/gameplay.  The scoring system got all out of skew and it basically reverted to school grading.  Where 10 was perfect (or damn near it), 9 was an A, or excellent, 8 was B, or above average, and 7 was a C, or average.  A 69 and lower were seen as completely shitty games, no matter what.  That messes things up because you only have a 21 percentile range where people thought a game was worth buying leaving the other 79% to mean basically the same thing, not worth your time, regardless if a game may still be fun, but flawed.

This gen has seen some reviewers actually try to get back to the old format.  Of course, some readers are still screwed up by last gen, so they still think 7 is just an average game, or some may just say 7 and below are shitty.  But, here's the real ratings.

1/10 - Unplayable Mess
2/10 - Nearly Unplayable
3/10 - Poor
4/10 - Below Average
5/10 - Average
6/10 - Above Average
7/10 - Good
8/10 - Very Good/Great
9/ 10 - Excellent
10/10 - Perfect (Or Damn Near It)



 

Around the Network
JWeinCom on 13 March 2017
thismeintiel said:
JWeinCom said:

"So, EVERY person should play EVERY game before voicing an opinion about it.  "

Since you like strawmen so much, I put up a picture of one for you.  Not going to waste time defending things I never said.  All I'll say is that different opinions require a different amount of evidence to be justified.

A reviewer has to play the game to have a valid opinion of it.  You do not have to play the game to validly hold that same opinion (to agree).  You'll have to explain how that works to me.  

Listen, I'm going to respond to you one last time, because this just doesn't seem to be sinking in for you.  I don't like easily broken weapons in ANY game.  Let me repeat that.  IN ANY GAME.  So, therefore, I WILL NOT LIKE THEM IN ZELDA.  Which, yes, would mean I agree with Jim.

You're perfectly free to speculate that you won't like them in this game, and to make purchasing decisions accordingly.  You're not free to make any claims about how it actually works in practice.  You're not free to claim that a particular score is justified because of this system, and to imply that anyone who disagrees with the review is doing so because of bias.  

You're basically the kid writing a book report after reading the cliff notes and getting upset when he gets a bad grade.

And you are the one who brought up the ridiculous "need to play a game to have an opinion about it" standard.  One that no one uses, nor will they ever.  We would have no need for reviewers if that was the case.  Or Let's Players wouldn't be as popular as they are.  People are not dumb.  They can tell by gameplay footage, or well written review, if they are going to like or not like certain things about a game.  If the dislike becomes too much, they know they will not like the game overall.  Or maybe they'll find it average.

Why did you put quotes around something I never said? That's not how quotation marks work.  That's the opposite of how they work.  I never made this argument, so I'm not going to defend it.  Have another strawman.


If people are going to get butthurt over someone not liking a game based on that criteria or over a game getting a good, but not perfect, score, then so be it.  I am not one of those people.

TL:DR version.  

Anyone can have an opinion about anything for any reason.  But if you don't have adequete knowledge on the subject, then your opinion is not valid or justified, and should be treated accordingly.



potato_hamster on 13 March 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

Biased against Nintendo? Never. Biased against Nintendo fans? That's a totally different story.

Thought so. But at least we moved one step forward today. The rest is going to come in time.

I don't know why I ever bother to converse with you.



JWeinCom on 13 March 2017
potato_hamster said:
JWeinCom said:

That's kind of his thing.  People are acting like getting this kind of reaction is completely unintended or that it's bad for him.  But it's really not.  He probably had this follow up piece in mind before he wrote the first one.  

With these kinds of guys (Yahtzee or AVGN) you have to take it for the entertainment value.   Once you know their style, you can glean some information that would actually be useful in deciding to purchase the game or not, but you shouldn't take it at face value.  The problem is that when he's doing reviews essentially in character (unless he's legitimately this insufferable in real life) it really shouldn't be included in metacritic.  But I doubt Nintendo's going to lose any sleep about their game having a 97 instead of a 98 rating.

You (supposedly) had information that other people had no access to and no way to verify, and you're upset that they didn't believe you?  

Whether you were right or wrong, or if you're being truthful or not, they didn't yet have any reason to believe you.  

I did have that information. Again, I don't care if you or anyone else believes me. I've offered the moderators plenty of opportunity to verify my status as a video game developer and they never took the opportunity. I didn't mind that they were skeptical (you should take everything you read on the internet with a degree of skepticism), I did mind the hate that I recieved though. The two are very different things.

They probably didn't want to verify it for the same reason I'm not going to ask you to do it.  Because they probably don't care.  

If they disagreed in a way that was hateful, then obviously that's not cool.  But please don't pretend that this is a Nintendo-fan specific phenomena.  



JWeinCom on 13 March 2017
Mar1217 said:
Yet another comical, well-thoughtout,critical and predictable Jim Sterling's video.

But I'm not going to waste my time on this one. Reading this topic already got me a good grip on what he's trying to argue. I disagree with his opinions. I would still give him a point for the ''I don't want to waste my good stuff on scrubs'' though. But in my case, it forces me to use ingenuity on how I will approach this situation differently than others to not waste my good weapons cuz there's infinite means to attain my goal.

And plz Jim, use your D-pad to change your weapons lol. It's fast and easy.

Did he really go to the pause menu everytime he wanted to change an item O_o..?



Around the Network
potato_hamster on 13 March 2017
JWeinCom said:
potato_hamster said:

I did have that information. Again, I don't care if you or anyone else believes me. I've offered the moderators plenty of opportunity to verify my status as a video game developer and they never took the opportunity. I didn't mind that they were skeptical (you should take everything you read on the internet with a degree of skepticism), I did mind the hate that I recieved though. The two are very different things.

They probably didn't want to verify it for the same reason I'm not going to ask you to do it.  Because they probably don't care.  

If they disagreed in a way that was hateful, then obviously that's not cool.  But please don't pretend that this is a Nintendo-fan specific phenomena.  

I addressed that in my previous post. Sure it's not a Nintendo-specific phenomena, but it's far, far more predominant amongst Nintendo fans.



potato_hamster on 13 March 2017
RolStoppable said:
potato_hamster said:

I don't know why I ever bother to converse with you.

We've done a behavioral analysis of you and could conclude that you are driven by hatred for Nintendo fans. You have no choice but to converse with me, because that's who and how you are.

Swing and a miss. Hate's a strong word that doesn't describe me. Have a good one.



JWeinCom on 13 March 2017
potato_hamster said:
JWeinCom said:

They probably didn't want to verify it for the same reason I'm not going to ask you to do it.  Because they probably don't care.  

If they disagreed in a way that was hateful, then obviously that's not cool.  But please don't pretend that this is a Nintendo-fan specific phenomena.  

I addressed that in my previous post. Sure it's not a Nintendo-specific phenomena, but it's far, far more predominant amongst Nintendo fans.

As a Nintendo fan I find it more prevalent among Sony fans.  But that's probably because I'm predisposed to have a favorable opinion towards Nintendo fans, and a less favorable one towards Sony fans.  That's how confirmation bias works.  And noone is above it.

Unless you've done some kind of actual analysis that shows that it's more prevalent among Nintendo fans.



potato_hamster on 13 March 2017
JWeinCom said:
potato_hamster said:

I addressed that in my previous post. Sure it's not a Nintendo-specific phenomena, but it's far, far more predominant amongst Nintendo fans.

As a Nintendo fan I find it more prevalent among Sony fans.  But that's probably because I'm predisposed to have a favorable opinion towards Nintendo fans, and a less favorable one towards Sony fans.  That's how confirmation bias works.  And noone is above it.

Unless you've done some kind of actual analysis that shows that it's more prevalent among Nintendo fans.

All I can say is that it's amazing what kind of market analysis game development companies do.



sc94597 on 13 March 2017
Hiku said:
sc94597 said:

Embedded for you. 

 


The video actually shows that Jim's complaint about the game being difficult because enemies hit hard is unfounded. That person fought the Lynel with less than two hearts. 

I don't have an opinion on the game's difficulty as I haven't played it, but that video does not do what you claim it does.
How many times did this person practice this fight beforehand? How much wiggleroom is there for making mistakes? Etc. Context like that is relevant when evaluating the difficulty of that particular fight. Let alone the overall game.

When playing Nioh, I've come up against bosses that wrecked me over and over again. Some times even instanteneously. (Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FR2RAr4Rkl4 ) But by continuing to learn from my mistakes, I get better at fighting them, little by little. Eventually I've dispatched some bosses without even taking a single hit. If I upload such a video, is that evidence that Nioh isn't a difficult game? No, of course not. Nioh is a very difficult game.

My claim was not that BOTW is not a difficult game. My claim was that it is not difficult solely because enemies have strong attacks and can just one shot you. That one has to practice in order to beat this enemy shows that the difficulty is not just tied to health as Jim Sterling claimed, but how you go about battles and reading the enemy's teleprompted attacks. If you just run into battle unprepared, without any skills when it comes to dodging, parrying, etc then you will lose this battle because the enemy does hit hard. But that does not mean it is unfair or difficult in the way where enemies oneshot you and you have no way to avoid it. The video shows that there is a way to avoid it by becoming better.