That said, I want to know if he's ever played Persona 3 and/or 4, and what his thoughts on them were. I guess he really just can't be bothered to play them, given his apparently busy schedule.
Chrono Trigger, Earthbound, all the Mario RPGs, and the SNES Final Fantasy games (IV needs waaaay more love) are JRPGs that are (for the most part) universally enjoyable. Persona 4 (I'm working on 3) is an absolutely amazing game, but it is definitely not universally so. It's basically a medium-splice between visual novels and dungeon crawlers (a fantastic visual novel and a fantastic dungeon crawler, mind you) and I can see a ton of people really not digging having their (awesome) dungeon crawling mixed up with an (awesome) thirty-hour audio book with sparse visuals. Persona can only be enjoyed in the right mindset, and it comes with a huuuuge time commitment at that, so I don't see Yahtzee ever playing them, despite them avoiding almost all of the flaws that plague the modern JRPG.
This is one of my favorite Extra Punctuation articles, and if you replace "Final Fantasy VII" with "Final Fantasy VIII" and remove the sentence about Chrono Trigger having tedious boss battles (no clue what he's talking about here, none of the fights even get close to a half-hour long), then I completely agree with him.
Aside from Final Fantasy IX, I completely agree with Yahtzee's view of FF. I see we have the same tastes in RPGs too. Chrono Trigger! :D
I wonder if Yahtzee has ever played Terranigma... or Secret of Mana, Illusion of Gaia, or Secret of Evermore... I adore them.
Take a look at all the opinions he puts forward in there, and tell me that they are not designed to influence the reader.
The difference is that he provides a lot of information before he giving his opinion. The information allows the reader to make his own opinion.
It's impossible not to provide ANY kind of opinion, but as long as opinion is lining for information, then it's not a blatant effort to shape a reader's opinion.
There's a world of difference with Yatzhees, that provides ONLY opinion (and biased opinion to boot), and really no factual information at all. This, of course, not to mention when he actually provides false of misleading information or blatant omissions in order to avoid spoiling "the lulz", and it happens quite often.
"Biased opinion" = "I am extremely butt =hurt over this man not liking a game I liked enough to sit through 15 more boring hours of it."
It is accurate to an extent, sure. Recounting the lack of fun during a certain part (in this case small fraction) of a total product is something anyone with an opinion should mention. However, when you are paid to discuss a game, you should do just that: discuss the entire game.
A game like X3, you're looking 300+ hours of playing before you've seen every bit of content and done everything there is to do.
How do you imagine people can review games under those conditions?
I think it's enough to play it enough to see where it's headed. And if a game has been taking you for a ride more than it lets you play since the start, and you're halfway through, I think it's safe to say there won't be a sudden 180 degree turn in the way of the storytelling.