Dan Takahashi of Venture Beat incompetently plays Cuphead for almost half an hour

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Ogoid:

Not really. He plays like someone who just picked up a joystick for the first time in their life... which wouldn't really be a big problem if it wasn't for the fact this is supposed to be his job

...So I've got a couple of friends. Avid gamers. Final Fantasy 14, Skyrim, big into fighting games, much better than I will likely ever be.

It took them 15 and 20 minutes respectively to beat stages 1-1and 1-2 of Splatoon 2's single player campaign. The former can wall-juggle and guard-cancel my ass into oblivion and the latter can do the same and was the one who introduced me to Destiny.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
I'm surprised about the amount of people defending this guy here. If you're being paid to review/criticise games you should at least be able to pass a tutorial without struggling this much, it's pathetic. Should I take some game journalist seriously when it looks like they haven't picked up a controller in their entire life? I might as well ask my mom what she thinks about the games I'm interested in.

Maybe you should ask your mom, a change in perspective could be valuable.

My mom, and grandma for that matter, can, will, and did continually kick my ass up and down the street with regards to things like Tetris and Yoshi's Cookie and any number of puzzle games, and they wouldn't have got through that tutorial without help. My roommate and co-host, who's apparently on a quest to acquire every game console created by man and released in the US, gets continually lost in Destiny and other games despite the mini-map, directional finders, and arrows on the reticle telling him where to go.

If the dude straight up didn't notice the air dash bit on the tutorial or didn't put two and two together, "small jump gets over the small block, held jump should get over the big block" is a perfectly valid assumption.

CaitSeith:

The only place where he is remotely authoritative is in your head. No one is telling you to heed his opinions (much less to take them as gospel).

No kidding. Game reviews are the most ignorable media on the planet.

The only thing it makes me think is how desperate is the OP's confirmation bias. If we follow his train of thought, then his own opinions are utterly invalid as he hasn't ever finished the game's tutorial himself. At this point, Dean is objectively more experienced on the game in question than anyone in this thread (and that's a fact).

erttheking:

Dreiko:
I think even people terrible at games deserve to have opinions about them. They just should carry weight that is proportional to their skill, because how much of an expert you are at something affects how much credibility you have when talking about it in all other facets of life so it's about time it started doing that here too.

I don't even care about the gamergate stuff, what's most disturbing here is that people even care what this guy who needs 3 minutes to jump and airdash mid air to get over a block has to say about gaming, when I know moderately smart 4 year olds who could figure this out sooner. And no, expecting basic game literacy and competence isn't elitism. You are not an elite by being competent on a basic level, you're just average, so at best it's averagism.

So my opinion of Persona 3 matters more than that of those who couldn't beat the ultra difficult The Anwser epilogue?

Bit of a gap between that, and being able to beat a frigging tutorial. Literal four year olds can do that, and this dip plays games for a living.

He had the directions written out for him and he still couldn't manage. This is like getting a sports commentator for American Football who doesn't even know the rules to the game.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:

erttheking:

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
Snip

You're dodging the points I'm making just so you can rail on people who can't play games very well. Please answer the question I asked. The position Drieko proposed, the one I was criticizing and the criticism you replied to, was that your opinion holds more weight if you're better at a game. He didn't say "to some extent." There's no cut off point. So is my opinion of Persona 3 more important because I can beat The Answer?

He said that skill carries weight and affects your credibility, which they do. That you should take it into consideration when you read someone's opinion about a game, if no one did there wouldn't be such a ruckus about that video or polygons video about Doom.

I can't really answer that question because I know nothing about Persona, but to me it wouldn't be much more important just because you beat a boss. On the other hand, I'd rather listen to what a professional CSGO player has to say about CSGO than some guy who only plays matchmaking.

Yeah, if you don't play video games that much, or aren't as good at them, your opinion is less valid. For some reason. Hey, I'm not super great at XCOM 2 and savescum a lot, how invalid if my opinion on what's considered balanced in that game?

If it's not more important just because I beat a boss (which is not how The Answer works at all, but whatever), then what exactly does one need to do to have an opinion worth listening to? Where is the invisible line that somehow makes your opinion more valuable than that of the common player? Particularly in games that don't have MLG scenes?

I'm sorry, I'm trying to follow the line of logic that justifies this, and it feels like elitism. Like the same people who get mad at this guy (who people hate because reasons I still don't get) probably have some overlap with the people who are angry at there being smart streering in Mario Kart.

Metalix Knightmare:

erttheking:

Dreiko:
I think even people terrible at games deserve to have opinions about them. They just should carry weight that is proportional to their skill, because how much of an expert you are at something affects how much credibility you have when talking about it in all other facets of life so it's about time it started doing that here too.

I don't even care about the gamergate stuff, what's most disturbing here is that people even care what this guy who needs 3 minutes to jump and airdash mid air to get over a block has to say about gaming, when I know moderately smart 4 year olds who could figure this out sooner. And no, expecting basic game literacy and competence isn't elitism. You are not an elite by being competent on a basic level, you're just average, so at best it's averagism.

So my opinion of Persona 3 matters more than that of those who couldn't beat the ultra difficult The Anwser epilogue?

Bit of a gap between that, and being able to beat a frigging tutorial. Literal four year olds can do that, and this dip plays games for a living.

He had the directions written out for him and he still couldn't manage. This is like getting a sports commentator for American Football who doesn't even know the rules to the game.

So is anyone actually going give me a yes or no answer to the simple yes or no question I asked? Because the post I made was focusing on the gamer skills = more important opinion aspect of his post. Mainly because I really don't give a rat's ass about what this "proves" about anti GG, nor do I care about this guy in the slightest.

erttheking:

Metalix Knightmare:

erttheking:

So my opinion of Persona 3 matters more than that of those who couldn't beat the ultra difficult The Anwser epilogue?

Bit of a gap between that, and being able to beat a frigging tutorial. Literal four year olds can do that, and this dip plays games for a living.

He had the directions written out for him and he still couldn't manage. This is like getting a sports commentator for American Football who doesn't even know the rules to the game.

So is anyone actually going give me a yes or no answer to the simple yes or no question I asked? Because the post I made was focusing on the gamer skills = more important opinion aspect of his post. Mainly because I really don't give a rat's ass about what this "proves" about anti GG.

Alright then. In terms of what you would think of the gameplay mechanics I would actually say yes, because you've clearly shown that you know how the game works and how to make it work to your advantage.

That said though, you don't NEED to be an uber haxx0r gamer in order to have your opinions on it recognized, but when you can't even get past the tutorial for a game that, mechanically speaking, could've been released twenty years ago then your thoughts and opinions are most likely going to be of limited value if only because you've shown you don't even know how to play a game when the directions are literally written out for you.

Just look at Dark Side Phil for what I'm talking about here. Guy sucks at games, but he never admits that, oh no. It's all "unfair designs" or "glitches" or whatever excuse he's using that second.

TLDR: You don't need to be great, but when playing games for a living you should at least be COMPETENT. You can't take any gripes about a game seriously when the person making them can't clear the level meant to teach you how the game works if only because you'll constantly be wondering "is it a problem with the game, or does he just suck?".

Metalix Knightmare:

erttheking:

Metalix Knightmare:

Bit of a gap between that, and being able to beat a frigging tutorial. Literal four year olds can do that, and this dip plays games for a living.

He had the directions written out for him and he still couldn't manage. This is like getting a sports commentator for American Football who doesn't even know the rules to the game.

So is anyone actually going give me a yes or no answer to the simple yes or no question I asked? Because the post I made was focusing on the gamer skills = more important opinion aspect of his post. Mainly because I really don't give a rat's ass about what this "proves" about anti GG.

Alright then. In terms of what you would think of the gameplay mechanics I would actually say yes, because you've clearly shown that you know how the game works and how to make it work to your advantage.

That said though, you don't NEED to be an uber haxx0r gamer in order to have your opinions on it recognized, but when you can't even get past the tutorial for a game that, mechanically speaking, could've been released twenty years ago then your thoughts and opinions are most likely going to be of limited value if only because you've shown you don't even know how to play a game when the directions are literally written out for you.

Just look at Dark Side Phil for what I'm talking about here. Guy sucks at games, but he never admits that, oh no. It's all "unfair designs" or "glitches" or whatever excuse he's using that second.

TLDR: You don't need to be great, but when playing games for a living you should at least be COMPETENT. You can't take any gripes about a game seriously when the person making them can't clear the level meant to teach you how the game works if only because you'll constantly be wondering "is it a problem with the game, or does he just suck?".

So, I have to ask, how comptent are you personally (and all of those spousing this argument) in all of the following games (all which are videogames, even if they are adaptations), and with a definition of competent for that specific game, if you may.

Go?
Airbone Assault:Conquest of Aegan?
Dwarf Fortress?
Eve Online?
Aurora?
Steel Division?
Street Fighter 3?
Super Meat Boy?
Jigsaw puzzles?

If you say you aren't competent (I personally would say average or above, usually and with a firm understanding of the rules and strategies and mechanismsin any of those, but you may have a different definition of competent) then by that metric you can't critize any of those games, or therefore have any of your opinions on the subject of videogames (about the game itself or as a medium) taken seriously, because that is the extrapolation that this thread is heavily implying (as the thread was opened to critize the opnions of an specific individual based on a single video of his "skills" on a specific game).

That is the logic being thronw around here.

Metalix Knightmare:
Snip

So I guess that's a no on me getting a yes or no answer to the question "does my opinion matter more than the people who haven't beaten The Answer." Dude, reply to what I actually say or don't bother. I'm not a sound board.

Saelune:

gyrobot:

Saelune:
It makes me think, sure. But about how trivial this is as a criticism of someone.

I mean really... "He is bad at a random game and thats why his opinions are invalid"?

He cant even do the basic gameplay mechanics right. Plus VB was part of the media blitz directed at Gamergate so that is another strike made against him.

I was too busy not caring about a lover's spat to pay attention to who is on what side of a lover's spat that somehow got painted under gaming.

Same.

OT: Funny, someone mentioned the Polygon/DOOM thing today...

There are general skill sets in video games. This guy lacks this particular one. Maybe he wants to learn it, maybe not - it's easier to do when you're growing up anyway. The video is hilarious.

erttheking:

Metalix Knightmare:
Snip

So I guess that's a no on me getting a yes or no answer to the question "does my opinion matter more than the people who haven't beaten The Answer." Dude, reply to what I actually say or don't bother. I'm not a sound board.

My man, they've put the goalposts on jetpacks.

Notice he hasnt' even TRIED to address the OP's core point that anti-Gamergaters all suck at games...

I have no idea what Venture Beat even is or that they did game reviews so depending on how long they've been around I guess that makes me either too old or too young to get it. I have no idea who this guy is or why I should give two shits about him, yet more GG whining bores me.

What does interest me is the question of reviewing, streaming, and skill, one of the things I've noticed with people that play video games in the public eye is that tutorial messages get missed and really basic mistakes happen, I notice shit like this with lets players, especially the ones that are there for entertainment or comedy. In a similar vein with people like giant bomb, I notice the dumbest mistakes are made either during quicklooks when they are trying to talk and play at the same time because having an actually entertaining conversation while playing a game is absurdly difficult, the other is the footage of people playing games during expos and events. I can't remember if it was Giant Bomb or someone else that talked about it on one of the podcasts I listen to, but especially these international events, you've been flown out to another country, are jet lagged by 12 hours, you're in a loud setting or were up late trying to get interviews with various devs or having meetings, even in a private showing you've got the devs or PR people hovering over you talking or asking questions, and for any journalist worth the name pumping the person right in front of you for some kind of exclusive tidbit or info is way more important than playing the demo.

Also, in this specific case, you've got a guy who writes for a website where gaming seems to be only a part of their focus asand even then the gaming side seems to be more focused on general tech and business news over any sort of reviews, maybe their mobile site just sucks but I can't see a single review this guy has written in months, so I don't really give a shit how good the news reporter is at games if he's not actually reviewing them, the guy writes about Rockstar getting in to cloud gaming and China's e-sports market breaking a billion in worth, so how good he is at video games means jack and shit to his ability to report the business side of things.

If he was an actual reviewer, then It's one of those interesting questions that kind of depends, I expect reviewers to be good enough to at least experience all or most of the game, even if not on the highest difficulty, I would like the writer to warn me if they had so much difficulty they gave up half way through the game. it's ridiculous to expect general review sites to do so as they can't hire people so good they can beat any game on hard as they would be cycling writers too fast to keep up or have too many writers to afford to pay all of them. Especially for a site like that where gaming is only a piece of their pie and reviews are barely even a footnote to what they do.

With streamers and lets players I prefer entertainment over skill, I would rather watch the game grumps miss tutorial messages and forget basic gameplay mechanics between play sessions than watch a pro player who says basically nothing over the course of an 8 hour game, that's more personal preference though as I can understand the appeal of watching someone skilled play out the game.

Still this is why companies like Konami had a bootcamp for their games. They cant afford a shitty interview so they went and gave the journalists a how to.

gyrobot:
Still this is why companies like Konami had a bootcamp for their games. They cant afford a shitty interview so they went and gave the journalists a how to.

That literally has nothing to do with anything in this thread.

gyrobot:
Still this is why companies like Konami had a bootcamp for their games. They cant afford a shitty interview so they went and gave the journalists a how to.

The only things I can find in regards to Konami boot camps are an old NES game called Boot Camp, and the review event put on for MGS V, not games, one game. Which I would have thought you would be against as it's a big corporate review event meant to manipulate the experience to improve reviews, while not strictly terrible it exists in a very shady ethical grey area.

If that is indeed what you are talking about, that's not a how-to, it was apparently a regimented play marathon in scheduled slots where reviewers had to play 8 hour marathons. Reviewers that wanted to get their reviews out rushed the game in an effort to be first, while those that waited were generally the ones that noticed that the ending was abrupt and the latter half of the game was just repeating old missions, something a lot of players had legitimate issues with and started slagging off the review event journalists that gave the game a 10/10.

Wouldn't ethically questionable practices like that be exactly the sort of thing we should be discouraging, I get that you have a hate boner for games journalists , but turning a blind eye to the practices of publishers seems like a self destructive move.

Thought this quote from the man himself was particularly relevant

Dean: I've watched the comments on this thread just to see how mean they would be. I think it's useful to show my gameplay experience. I did not intentionally play poorly to "troll" anyone. But it serves as an interesting social experiment. I walk into a game cold, and this is the play that results. The video shows it's a notch more difficult than your typical Mario game.

In fact, if you are expecting Mario, as the story says, then you are thrown off. And it shows that the developers are going to leave a lot of people who are worse than me behind. Maybe they're fine with that. Maybe they want to target gamers with a love for difficult games. That's fine. But I think they should signal that. How many games actually come with a tutorial these days? They're not popular. But if it's necessary, that is a signal this is going to require some skill.

As for other comments on this thread, I wonder why they are hostile to someone who is viewing the game as a beginner? Are we that intolerant of people who are not "gamers"? Should I have played the scene over and over again until I was good at it, and then turned the recording on, like so many of those perfect video walkthroughs you see?

I believe that games can be made accessible and inviting to people who are not hardcore fans, and these people can be accommodated inside the same game that is appealing to hardcore fans, through difficulty levels. So when people tell me that I shouldn't be playing this game because, on my first play, I was pretty lousy - that's an attitude that argues that games should be shut off in their own little corner, only played publicly by the masters and the experts. I disagree with that view entirely, and I believe it leads to elitist attitudes that allow gamers to look down on other people, and that only leads to a more fragmented world of haters."

I don't see the big deal. I think we've all been in his place, where for whatever reason you just don't get what the game wants you to do.
He comes across as a dude who gave his honest opinion of the game, and you can't really ask for more than that

erttheking:

Yeah, if you don't play video games that much, or aren't as good at them, your opinion is less valid. For some reason. Hey, I'm not super great at XCOM 2 and savescum a lot, how invalid if my opinion on what's considered balanced in that game?

If it's not more important just because I beat a boss (which is not how The Answer works at all, but whatever), then what exactly does one need to do to have an opinion worth listening to? Where is the invisible line that somehow makes your opinion more valuable than that of the common player? Particularly in games that don't have MLG scenes?

I'm sorry, I'm trying to follow the line of logic that justifies this, and it feels like elitism. Like the same people who get mad at this guy (who people hate because reasons I still don't get) probably have some overlap with the people who are angry at there being smart streering in Mario Kart.

Look pal, all you need to do to have a valid opinion about video games is to be able to play them without getting stuck in a simple tutorial and die 20 times within the first 3 minutes of the game i.e not be completely worthless. It makes you look like a complete amateur that has no idea what you're doing and you're being paid to do it. Is this completely unreasonable to you?

Someone who's able to play through Xcom 2 on ironman obviously knows more about getting around the rng, so why is it weird that I want to listen to that guys opinion more than you for an example? What's wrong with believing opinion has more weight if they mastered the game?

People aren't ''mad'' at this guy simply because he's bad at games but because he's being paid to voice an opinion about a medium that he seemingly have no clue about.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
Snip

You have long since stopped paying attention to what I was actually saying, haven't you? Around one third of what you say here actually responds to what I actually said. I'll say to you what I said to Knightmare. Respond to what I'm saying or don't bother. I'm not your soundboard. I was not talking about this guy at all. If you want to talk about him, that's perfectly fine. But I'm not. So stop wasting my time. You responded to me, I didn't respond to you. If you're going to respond to me and not actually respond to what I say, then why are you even bothering?

As for your bit on XCOM, the bit that actually responds to what I said, he knows about getting around the mg? How does that make his opinion more valid than mine, particularly that opinions on XCOM 2 are not limited to the metagame? Because no one has specified specific types of opinions here, just opinions in general. What, if we get two people in a room, one who plays on Classic, one who plays on Normal, if one says, just off the top of my head, that the Alien Rulers are poorly designed, is the Classic player right? What if the Normal player has played through the entire game fifty times but the Classic player has only done it twice? What if the Normal player has spent more time studying and understanding the game than the Classic player, is his opinion less relevant because he's not as utterly leet at it?

erttheking:

Dreiko:
I think even people terrible at games deserve to have opinions about them. They just should carry weight that is proportional to their skill, because how much of an expert you are at something affects how much credibility you have when talking about it in all other facets of life so it's about time it started doing that here too.

I don't even care about the gamergate stuff, what's most disturbing here is that people even care what this guy who needs 3 minutes to jump and airdash mid air to get over a block has to say about gaming, when I know moderately smart 4 year olds who could figure this out sooner. And no, expecting basic game literacy and competence isn't elitism. You are not an elite by being competent on a basic level, you're just average, so at best it's averagism.

So my opinion of Persona 3 matters more than that of those who couldn't beat the ultra difficult The Anwser epilogue?

The Answer wasn't particularly hard though. Just a bit harder than the main game. And yes, considering it's the true ending of the story, having actually finished the game should mean something, no?

erttheking:

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
Snip

You have long since stopped paying attention to what I was actually saying, haven't you? Around one third of what you say here actually responds to what I actually said. I'll say to you what I said to Knightmare. Respond to what I'm saying or don't bother. I'm not your soundboard. I was not talking about this guy at all. If you want to talk about him, that's perfectly fine. But I'm not. So stop wasting my time. You responded to me, I didn't respond to you. If you're going to respond to me and not actually respond to what I say, then why are you even bothering?

As for your bit on XCOM, the bit that actually responds to what I said, he knows about getting around the mg? How does that make his opinion more valid than mine, particularly that opinions on XCOM 2 are not limited to the metagame? Because no one has specified specific types of opinions here, just opinions in general. What, if we get two people in a room, one who plays on Classic, one who plays on Normal, if one says, just off the top of my head, that the Alien Rulers are poorly designed, is the Classic player right? What if the Normal player has played through the entire game fifty times but the Classic player has only done it twice? What if the Normal player has spent more time studying and understanding the game than the Classic player, is his opinion less relevant because he's not as utterly leet at it?

image

Whatever guy, you don't seem to understand what I'm trying to say so I'll take up on your offer.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
Snip

No, I get what you're saying just fine.

I just don't care. Because it has nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

But hey, I'm glad we've reached an agreement.

Dreiko:
Snip

A bit harder than the hardest difficulty of a game that very few people play on the hardest difficulty you mean? Oh, and a aspect of the game that's semi-canon at best, seeing as how I can think of a grand total of one time the events of the Answer was referenced outside of the Answer. Also, are we talking about skills or knowing what happens in the story? Because I can easily catch everything that happened in the story of the Answer on Youtube. Everyone is sad, Yukari is the dumbest motherfucker alive, Mitsuru gets runoff stupidity from her, it was Shadow Aigis and Minato is keeping the world from going to shit. Not exactly Shakespeare, and I don't see how trudging through around ten hours of frustrating gameplay, of Aigis claiming that she wouldn't miss before she misses because of course she does, adds anything to what I could get from Youtube.

Games are a package, story is big in the answer but also the gameplay parts matter too. And I never played p3 on any other difficulty outside of the default one and had no issues with the answer at all.

gyrobot:
Still this is why companies like Konami had a bootcamp for their games. They cant afford a shitty interview so they went and gave the journalists a how to.

...and that's a bad thing.

Remember that cried period where people got mad at WB for its Shadow of Mordor nonsense? How is giving AAA's even more ability to manipulate reviews going to help anybody but themselves?

This reminds me of the fact that we still have PC gamers getting mad at people who aren't as tech savvy as them. Gaming elitism at its finest.

People seem to forget that most people are bad at videogames. Being bad at something doesn't make your opinion on it invalid. Ifthat were the case we'd only accept chef's as food critics, and film makers as reviewers. And no one would be allowed to be a political reporter unless they were also a serving Senator.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:

People aren't ''mad'' at this guy simply because he's bad at games but because he's being paid to voice an opinion about a medium that he seemingly have no clue about.

So where did this notion that those of us who are anti-GamerGate=scrubs at gaming come from?

gyrobot:
Proof why the most vocal anti gamergate hates the industry, because they suck at games like these and want everything to be walking sims and cinematic shooters that hold their hand all the way from start to finish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=848Y1Uu5Htk

He also made a pathetic damage control post about his incompetence at the game as well.

Really makes you think.

1. His name is Dean, not Dan. And he's one of the most experienced games reporters in the business.

2. The video is literally called "Dean's Shameful 26 Minutes Of Gameplay" [again, his name is Dean, not Dan] so I'm not sure why you and Stillgray think this is some big expose.

3. Why do you care if one games writer failed at one part of one game [which he willingly owns, by the way]?

gyrobot:

He cant even do the basic gameplay mechanics right. Plus VB was part of the media blitz directed at Gamergate so that is another strike made against him.

Ah, so that's why you care. He's "aGG" so let's do whatever we can to embarrass, discredit and smear him.

DrownedAmmet:
Thought this quote from the man himself was particularly relevant

Dean: I?ve watched the comments on this thread just to see how mean they would be. I think it?s useful to show my gameplay experience. I did not intentionally play poorly to ?troll? anyone. But it serves as an interesting social experiment. I walk into a game cold, and this is the play that results. The video shows it?s a notch more difficult than your typical Mario game.

In fact, if you are expecting Mario, as the story says, then you are thrown off. And it shows that the developers are going to leave a lot of people who are worse than me behind. Maybe they?re fine with that. Maybe they want to target gamers with a love for difficult games. That?s fine. But I think they should signal that. How many games actually come with a tutorial these days? They?re not popular. But if it?s necessary, that is a signal this is going to require some skill.

As for other comments on this thread, I wonder why they are hostile to someone who is viewing the game as a beginner? Are we that intolerant of people who are not ?gamers?? Should I have played the scene over and over again until I was good at it, and then turned the recording on, like so many of those perfect video walkthroughs you see?

I believe that games can be made accessible and inviting to people who are not hardcore fans, and these people can be accommodated inside the same game that is appealing to hardcore fans, through difficulty levels. So when people tell me that I shouldn?t be playing this game because, on my first play, I was pretty lousy ? that?s an attitude that argues that games should be shut off in their own little corner, only played publicly by the masters and the experts. I disagree with that view entirely, and I believe it leads to elitist attitudes that allow gamers to look down on other people, and that only leads to a more fragmented world of haters.?

I don't see the big deal. I think we've all been in his place, where for whatever reason you just don't get what the game wants you to do.
He comes across as a dude who gave his honest opinion of the game, and you can't really ask for more than that

No no no, see, it shows that games journalists aren't good at games and if they play bad they should be discredited and disqualified. You're only a good games journalist is you NEVER have a moment where you fail epicly or don't get what the game is asking you to do.
[sarcasm]

Sweet Jesus, I'm glad no one ever recorded video of me fucking up that God of War puzzle over and over, because then I'd have a hord of angry *gamers* coming after me, with f---ing Ian Miles Cheong, internet sleuth, of all people leading the way and lecturing on what journalists should and shouldn't do.

Holy sh*t, what a world we live in.

erttheking:
So my opinion of Persona 3 matters more than that of those who couldn't beat the ultra difficult The Anwser epilogue?

A bit. But then that's not what we're talking about here. We're not talking about needing to be excellent, we're talking about needing to be minimally competent. Dean was having trouble with the tutorial of a game, with written directions on screen.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
On the other hand, I'd rather listen to what a professional CSGO player has to say about CSGO than some guy who only plays matchmaking.

Of course, saying what someone who can't figure out how to fire his gun has to say about CSGO is without value means you're requiring only pro players be allowed to have an opinion at all. There is no space in between. Haven't you been listening? /s

Winnosh:
and film makers as reviewers.

In this case it would be more like requiring your film reviewer be sighted and at least broadly familiar with common conventions in film. I wouldn't think that was too much to ask, but apparently it is.

Schadrach:
[quote="erttheking" post="663.1018328.24114090"]So my opinion of Persona 3 matters more than that of those who couldn't beat the ultra difficult The Anwser epilogue?

A bit. But then that's not what we're talking about here. We're not talking about needing to be excellent, we're talking about needing to be minimally competent. Dean was having trouble with the tutorial of a game, with written directions on screen. [\quote]

The directions on screen are not perfect and I can see how someone who seems to be a business writer not a games reviewer would mess it up, his job isn't to play games. Especially since this likely took place in a crowded con setting with plenty of other things to take attention, much like when a lets player misses basic tutorial text because they are trying to have an entertaining conversation.

The tutorial is compartmentalized, each object existing by itself, the line to duck under, the small box to jump over, the tutorial then changes this up by having you jump on the small box to air dash over the large box however the text never actually makes this connection and exists in two separate boxes, now most people are probably going to figure out pretty quick after 1 or 2 jumps by the tall box that there is no way to make it over the tall box on your own, so sitting back and thinking for a second you should be able to figure out you need more height and thus use the small box, but the tutorial does not actually lay this out in plain text. I've seen other people whose experience playing video games is limited to one or two genres or some very specific games make similar mistakes, they haven't developed the general intuition that people who play a broad range of games seem to have.

As long as he's honest about the issues being largely his own inexperience, and not automatically blame the game, there is some use in perspective written by someone with very little experience, if he wrote a full review it wouldn't likely be very beneficial to you or me, but I could see a niche appeal for it. Given that he doesn't seem to write reviews and the last one he did write that I can find was pretty bad, he seems to acknowledge that he is not a game reviewer and has little desire to be one. A brief glance at his work history and books would seem to indicate his interest is more in the business, history, and tech of video games than actually playing them.

Exley97:

Ah, so that's why you care. He's "aGG" so let's do whatever we can to embarrass, discredit and smear him.

Only because Gamefaqs said so, there I said it. McMarbles can confirm that as he has an account there and puts up with people there who are even more dedicated than I was about GG at one point.

BabyfartsMcgeezaks:
I'm surprised about the amount of people defending this guy here. If you're being paid to review/criticise games you should at least be able to pass a tutorial without struggling this much, it's pathetic. Should I take some game journalist seriously when it looks like they haven't picked up a controller in their entire life? I might as well ask my mom what she thinks about the games I'm interested in.

I like reading and watching the opinions of people who don't like a game genre or aren't good at a particular game. I find that they often pick up on little things that fans of the genre or game simply accept as par of the course.

A lot of the gaming magazines of my youth would have the main review but also small sides by the other members of staff on what they thought of the game. I thought this gave great balance and wouldn't mind seeing more publications (internet or print) adopting a similar approach.

gyrobot:

Exley97:

Ah, so that's why you care. He's "aGG" so let's do whatever we can to embarrass, discredit and smear him.

Only because Gamefaqs said so, there I said it. McMarbles can confirm that as he has an account there and puts up with people there who are even more dedicated than I was about GG at one point.

Why do you care about what people from GameFAQ's think?

I had to look this guy up, and yeah, he seems to simply be bad at gaming. He called Mass Effect 'Mass Defect' and totally shat on it for being too hard, only to learn later he hadn't assigned any upgrade points to anyone.

So he's just a bad gamer. Fine reviewer, in that he reviews what he plays. He's just really bad at gaming in general. Like a blind movie critic complaining they never see anything. Like fair enough, but this isn't the profession for you.

gyrobot:

Exley97:

Ah, so that's why you care. He's "aGG" so let's do whatever we can to embarrass, discredit and smear him.

Only because Gamefaqs said so, there I said it. McMarbles can confirm that as he has an account there and puts up with people there who are even more dedicated than I was about GG at one point.

Oh really? GameFAQS said it? Well that's plenty enough evidence to smear someone, right? Gotta take down the aGGers anyway you can.

Good god, people...

Everyone who is freaking the F&%$ out about this, I implore you: take a moment and listen to yourself. You're hurling shit at a games journalist not because he breached some ethical rule or published something false or libelous. But because he didn't play a game good enough. Because, god forbid, he failed miserably at a game many other people found intuitive (and unfortunately posted a good-natured video called attention to his fail, and thus alerted the vultures). This is what you want to wail about when you flock to KiA? This is how you want to think about gaming? You want to ridicule someone just for playing ONE PART of a SINGLE game poorly? You want to judge someone's entire professional career based on THAT? Really?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here