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

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

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.

Er, I gave you an answer, it was yes and I gave it in detail. I'm not certain what else I can do short of taking off my socks and putting them on my hands for a puppet show.

kurokotetsu:

Metalix Knightmare:

erttheking:

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.

At all of those? In order...
Not at all.
Never Heard of it.
Good LORD no.
Somewhat.
Never heard of it.
Never heard of it.
Good enough to beat the arcade mode, but the finer details such as the engine is WAY beyond me.
Not good, though less because of a lack of ability or experience with platformers and more because that game is a ballbuster.
Can't even muster the energy to care.

Basically, listening to my opinions on most of your list would be like listening to the lady who griped about Mass Effect that even Jack Thompson thought was a loon. I've never played them, so any criticism I'd have would be based on pretty much nothing.

As for Street Fighter, because I'm not much of a fighting game fan I could beat the Arcade mode, and be able to tell you if it's a functional game, but if you wanted anything deeper than that you'd want to look up someone like Maximillian Dood who could tell you, in FINE detail, the differences in all the characters, how they play, the best ways to use their special moves/combos, etc. All of that is WELL above my ability.

Finally, for Meat Boy, I've played and beaten enough platformers to be able to form a solid enough opinion on the game. (Great platformer, controls are solid, but this game will beat you up for your lunch money and the bosses are more about memorization than fighting them). Still doesn't change the fact that, again, someone who has utterly mastered the game could give a lot more detail than me and how it all comes together.

Also, just for reference, if you'd asked me about my skill in something like the Saints Row or GTA games, or the Fallout series I'd have a VERY different picture to paint you.

That all said, you don't NEED to be a master to review a game but a few facts remain. Someone who has or otherwise has a lot of experience with a genre would be able to tell you a lot more about the game, and if you can't make it past the frigging tutorial section then reviewing games is not for you.

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

It was LITERALLY written out for him. The game did everything short of playing itself for him, and he still couldn't manage it. That's even putting aside his screwing up with his Mass Effect review.

There's elitism, and then there's expecting someone who plays games for a living to actually be somewhat competent at it.

Metalix Knightmare:

It was LITERALLY written out for him. The game did everything short of playing itself for him, and he still couldn't manage it. That's even putting aside his screwing up with his Mass Effect review.

There's elitism, and then there's expecting someone who plays games for a living to actually be somewhat competent at it.

Does he though? Play games for a living I mean, he covers the game industry, runs a tech convention that gets devs, investors, and publishers together to network as well as talk about tech topics and business trends in gaming, and runs the team that does games coverage for a general tech and tech business site. According to his Twitter he likes playing games, and has written a few reviews, mostly for story heavy games that he likes, his Mass Effect review sucked, but his more recent Uncharted review had no real faults from what I could see, and I played through the DLC myself so I would know if he was getting anything seriously wrong. I can also only find about 3 reviews he's actually written for VB so he's obviously either being tapped to actually cover games themselves when they are short staffed, or is covering games he is personally interested in. He also wrote two books on the Xbox and Xbox 360, that from what I can see were well received, both detailing the business and politics behind Microsoft's entry into the console market, neither of which likely involved him being paid to actually play any video games.

I would imagine he doesn't actually play that many games at work, very few of his articles would require him to have personally even played the covered game, much less be competent at it, apparently the only reason he even covered this game is because he was the only one from the company there.

Playing games seems to largely be an effect of him liking them and working for a small enough division that he gets tapped for coverage occasionally, his living doesn't seem to require him to be competent at actually playing games at all, most of his articles would indicate his main competency should be interviewing and networking.

I was going to write a big explanation of the significance of the whole "not liking games" thing that the GameJourno crowd got going on, but I'm a little tired now. So, I'm just going to post this fun link I saw on KiA:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080102151117/http://blogs.mercurynews.com/aei/2008/01/a_massive_mea_culpa_and_apology_for_a_bad_mass_effect_review.html

Basically, SuperDean really trashed Mass Effect as a horribly unfair game. But then he was informed that he can assign the "Talent Points" that the player gains during the course of the game to various "Talents", and that makes the game easier! This obscure exploit helped with a do-over, so he apologized for the trashing.

It's just super that this dude is a respected expert in vidya. And if he's like some of these GJP types, he probably believes himself to be a "part of the Industry" itself (like the noted halfwit Matt Lees, for a recent example).

Exley97:

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

In a just world, there would be no further need to embarrass or discredit someone who's "aGG". That infamy alone would suffice for any normal person. But we're still some way off from the Wakening.

Speaking of videos posted on KiA, here's one that really should have its own thread there.

TL;DW, it's a comparison between the time it takes Mr. Takahashi and a pigeon - or, in other words, a paid professional and a bird - to solve puzzles of about the same level of difficulty.

I find it rather illustrative of the problem most people even remotely familiar with playing games have with VentureBeat's gameplay video.

On the topic of judging entire groups of people based on the very specific actions of some, though... it's a deplorable practice, really. Time was, most people who associate with this hobby wouldn't engage in it, and it was all the more friendly and pleasant as a result. Whatever happened to change that, I wonder...?

... Ah, right.

Ogoid:
Speaking of videos posted on KiA, here's one that really should have its own thread there.

TL;DW, it's a comparison between the time it takes Mr. Takahashi and a pigeon - or, in other words, a paid professional and a bird - to solve puzzles of about the same level of difficulty.

I find it rather illustrative of the problem most people even remotely familiar with playing games have with VentureBeat's gameplay video.

It should be noted that the pigeon was the EiC of Eurogamer for four years, and also the Keynote Speaker at the IndieCade Festival in 2015. It called for greater diversity and more accessible games.

erttheking:

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

Of course it does. Just like the opinions of statistics professors on statistics matter more than those of a guy who only took Statistics 101 and for a C. Experience and ability always matter.

Now, if you only cared about P3's mechanics and skipped through all the story bits, in a discussion on the themes and meaning of P3, even somebody who only did one playthrough on Easy would have a more valuable opinion on that subject. Cuz they are more experienced than you about that subject. I'm not a meteorologist. Are you gonna take my word on tomorrow's forecast over someone who is?

In regards to OP though, it's no sin for somebody bad at games to get paid to review them. That just means that someone is willing to pay him for his opinion. That somebody is maybe wrong. What's that matter? Lots of folks are wrong about a lot of things. Whether paying the guy is a waste of money is a matter between the guy and the payer. It has no reflection on the wider state of gaming. Just move on to some other site that you think has better reviews and forget about the old one. It's abundantly clear that critics don't do shit for directing the movement of the industry, just sales and whatever blows up on social media, so there's no moral compunction to inflict demands on them.

EternallyBored:

Does he though? Play games for a living I mean,

He does. He's even quoted as saying that he's been both a journalist and a reviewer for games for 18 years. Doesn't change the fact that screwups of this caliber does NOT reflect well on a person in that profession.

Metalix Knightmare:

EternallyBored:

Does he though? Play games for a living I mean,

He does. He's even quoted as saying that he's been both a journalist and a reviewer for games for 18 years. Doesn't change the fact that screwups of this caliber does NOT reflect well on a person in that profession.

He's got a handful of reviews over years, he calls himself a reviewer but he's definitely not making his living off of it, he could drop everything he does that involves playing video games and would still have the vast majority of his duties and current content.

Also, why does it not reflect well on a person in his profession if all of his noticeable accomplishments in said profession have nothing to do with actually playing games.

Breaking the Blizzard Titan cancellation story? nothing to do with playing games.
Running a convention of small devs and publishers for networking and business news? nothing to do with playing games.
Writing two books at 4/5 stars on Amazons with recommendations from developers in the industry on the history and production of the Xbox and Xbox 360? dick all to do with playing games.
The one person to get an interview with the Chinese chicken company that bought out Brink developer Splash Damage? jack and shit to do with playing games.

He could literally have never played a video game in his life, (although according to Gamesbeat staff defending him he's apparently pretty good at strategy games) and he's still made more contributions to actual games journalism than 90% of IGN's interchangeable review staff even if they can probably play Cuphead halfway competently.

Ogoid:

On the topic of judging entire groups of people based on the very specific actions of some, though... it's a deplorable practice, really.

Ya missed the OP, didn't ya.

Time was, most people who associate with this hobby wouldn't engage in it, and it was all the more friendly and pleasant as a result. Whatever happened to change that, I wonder...?

... Ah, right.

And that justified doing the exact same thing to people who didn't march in step with the GamerGate party....how?

Metalix Knightmare:

EternallyBored:

Does he though? Play games for a living I mean,

He does. He's even quoted as saying that he's been both a journalist and a reviewer for games for 18 years. Doesn't change the fact that screwups of this caliber does NOT reflect well on a person in that profession.

Which is a valid assertion.

Now, with that out of the way, what's valid about Gyrobot asserting that everyone that was anti-GG was as much of a hopeless DarkSydePhil-esque player?

Schadrach:
Snip

What's this "We" stuff. I wasn't talking about that, I was never talking about that. Why are you wasting my time with something I was never talking about?

Dreiko:
Snip

So are you going to reply to the whole post or just vaguely argue past me? Please tell me what you get out of The Answer if you play it the whole way through as opposed to just an hour before watching the story on Youtube? So what, is your experience with the game a universal one one?

Metalix Knightmare:
Snip

I asked a simple yes or no question. You failed to say yes or no.

SupahEwok:
Snip

Beating the epilogue to the game is the same difference between getting a C in statistics and being a professor in the field.

image

Uh, since I'm the professor in the field (apparently) can I say that having beaten the Answer, I feel that my knowledge of Persona 3 has barely grown now that I've done it. I mean, according to you I'm the professor, and as the professor I'm saying that in the jump from me being the C student to this, I've learned maybe one or two things to help change my experience. The gameplay was the exact same, just with enemies that had bigger numbers, more braindead friendly A.I. and smaller numbers on your side. Because, really when you get down to it, it's not hard to understand Persona's mechanics, nor the mechanics of any other game. You may not have the foresight (or patience, I probably could beat most of the games I play on higher difficulty, but when I do the experience becomes more tedious than fun) to get through it in the heat of the moment, but understanding it is not hard. Remember, I'm the professor here, I'm the one with the experience and ability you say matters so much.

Metalix Knightmare:

At all of those? In order...
Not at all.
Never Heard of it.
Good LORD no.
Somewhat.
Never heard of it.
Never heard of it.
Good enough to beat the arcade mode, but the finer details such as the engine is WAY beyond me.
Not good, though less because of a lack of ability or experience with platformers and more because that game is a ballbuster.
Can't even muster the energy to care.

Basically, listening to my opinions on most of your list would be like listening to the lady who griped about Mass Effect that even Jack Thompson thought was a loon. I've never played them, so any criticism I'd have would be based on pretty much nothing.

As for Street Fighter, because I'm not much of a fighting game fan I could beat the Arcade mode, and be able to tell you if it's a functional game, but if you wanted anything deeper than that you'd want to look up someone like Maximillian Dood who could tell you, in FINE detail, the differences in all the characters, how they play, the best ways to use their special moves/combos, etc. All of that is WELL above my ability.

Finally, for Meat Boy, I've played and beaten enough platformers to be able to form a solid enough opinion on the game. (Great platformer, controls are solid, but this game will beat you up for your lunch money and the bosses are more about memorization than fighting them). Still doesn't change the fact that, again, someone who has utterly mastered the game could give a lot more detail than me and how it all comes together.

Also, just for reference, if you'd asked me about my skill in something like the Saints Row or GTA games, or the Fallout series I'd have a VERY different picture to paint you.

That all said, you don't NEED to be a master to review a game but a few facts remain. Someone who has or otherwise has a lot of experience with a genre would be able to tell you a lot more about the game, and if you can't make it past the frigging tutorial section then reviewing games is not for you.

I am not asking your opinion in games, merely critizing the logic. Because if you need to "make it past the tutorial" and you are by your own admission "non-competent" in 7 of the list of videogames (70% of the list) then why should I take your view of the medium and the requirements of reviewrs of such, since of you are clearly "incompetent" in videogames, with only a 30% competency in the arbitrary test I mde up, such as the "incompetent" opinion of the reviewer being mentioned here.

That is a very flawed logic, as per that, there is no one in this thread or mediu (or probably any medium) that is competent enough to review anything ever. And even less teachers, as the amount that we know about anything is a miniscule amount.

I tend to beleive that reviews are to see a person's opnion of the article in question, so the "skill" is irrelevant because I will not play like a pro in my life, so thier point of view is as "relevant" to me as a 5 year old child's impression.

SupahEwok:

Of course it does. Just like the opinions of statistics professors on statistics matter more than those of a guy who only took Statistics 101 and for a C. Experience and ability always matter.

Now, if you only cared about P3's mechanics and skipped through all the story bits, in a discussion on the themes and meaning of P3, even somebody who only did one playthrough on Easy would have a more valuable opinion on that subject. Cuz they are more experienced than you about that subject. I'm not a meteorologist. Are you gonna take my word on tomorrow's forecast over someone who is?

I generally agree with the last paragraph, since as stated I beleive there are opinions and if that specific reviewr doesn't reflect your interest just don't freaking care, but I believe your logic in those paragraphs is a false equivlancy.

Becuase both statistics and meteorologist are exact physical sciences, with specific answers in a lot of the qustions posed (of course there are personal bias, but you have to have your works make provable results). The other is an opinion on a piece of entertainment. I would take the experience of a "unskillful" player more in my interest if i myself are as "unskilled" as him, becasue it might better refelct my possible experience with the game. I don't take the word of my wargaming body as gospel on games to buy, because he is a much better strategist and involved in those games than I am. Because what he enjoys in a game is vastly different than what I do. So it is not the same case at all.

...you know, out of all the things I expected to hear in this thread, a defense on Mass Effect 3 was not it.

Still, it goes to show that mental lapses are still as reviled as ever. God forbid any of you miss something easy in front of an audience.

And also that a depressing number of people take their accumulated gaming experience for granted. Like I said: "small jump to get over the small bump, held jump should get over the big bump" is a perfectly reasonable assumption. Or in other words, if you didn't know how to play modern FPS games, how well would the joke of a "tutorial" that's in, say, Destiny 2 actually help?

erttheking:
snip

...You know, since I gave you a straight answer to the question that you're complaining that others aren't giving you a straight answer to, it's pretty assholish to throw condescension my way for it.

That aside, yes, because of your experience in playing through what you claimed was the hardest part of the game, your opinion on that part of the game is more valid than somebody who hasn't. It's not the only factor, which I never claimed. You could have played the whole game while not understanding how the combat actually works, it's possible. But is it *plausible*?

A professor of statistics who's had several studies published is taken more seriously than a professor who hasn't when they both speak about the same problem. Somebody who's played a game on the hardest difficulty through all of its scenarios is taken more seriously than someone who only played through the first hour on the easiest when they discuss the same mechanics. I don't know why this concept is so contemptible as to preclude civil discussion on your end.

Here's my opinion of P3: as a walking simulator, it's pretty bad. The paths branch off in random directions and I keep getting interrupted by stupid combat that's nonsensical; I hit an enemy, and there's just some numbers, the enemy doesn't fall down, and everything is all stilted, like people and monsters are politely taking turns at attacking, which is stupid. I don't understand the plot, apparently these kids have demons or something and they activate them through suicide? That's just dumb.

Oh, I've never played the game, but I have heard friends talk about it.

Now Ert, give me your opinion of the game. Then tell me whose opinion is more valid. (To be clear, me saying I've never played the game wasn't sarcasm. My "review" really is cobbled together memories of friends discussing the game. I don't think I've ever even seen a screenshot.)

kurokotetsu:
I generally agree with the last paragraph, since as stated I beleive there are opinions and if that specific reviewr doesn't reflect your interest just don't freaking care, but I believe your logic in those paragraphs is a false equivlancy.

Becuase both statistics and meteorologist are exact physical sciences, with specific answers in a lot of the qustions posed (of course there are personal bias, but you have to have your works make provable results). The other is an opinion on a piece of entertainment. I would take the experience of a "unskillful" player more in my interest if i myself are as "unskilled" as him, becasue it might better refelct my possible experience with the game. I don't take the word of my wargaming body as gospel on games to buy, because he is a much better strategist and involved in those games than I am. Because what he enjoys in a game is vastly different than what I do. So it is not the same case at all.

It's not at all a false equivalency. If you want to make it more comfortable for you, you can substitute a professor in English Literature analyzing Hamlet compared to the same C grade student. Literary analysis isn't an exact science. Are you going to give more weight to the professor or the student? If you want a concrete example all the way, Roger Ebert is perhaps the most famous movie critic ever. When comparing his analysis to that of a first year film student, whose opinion has greater weight? Which one of them has spent literally decades in a theater and seen everything that's happened in movies for 40 years?

That's what we're talking about here. Does having experience in a subject make you more qualified to speak on a subject? Absolutely it does. Is it a guarantee that they're ultimately correct? Of course not. Maybe the first year film student totally outdoes Ebert on a film critique. But you tell me, is that *likely*? Nobody in the world has time to listen to the opinion of everybody else in the world on every subject. That's why we specialise. People go to college and choose an area of study. People go to work and learn a job and repeat that job and get better at that job. We go to critics because they are supposed to have more experience with game analysis than the rest of us who aren't playing games 6+ hours a day with no educational background in game or narrative design or theory. It's totally fair to call out a critic's opinion because of their lack of ability. It's my opinion that there isn't a point to doing so, but just because there's no point doesn't make the argument invalid.

SupahEwok:

Here's my opinion of P3: as a walking simulator, it's pretty bad. The paths branch off in random directions and I keep getting interrupted by stupid combat that's nonsensical; I hit an enemy, and there's just some numbers, the enemy doesn't fall down, and everything is all stilted, like people and monsters are politely taking turns at attacking, which is stupid. I don't understand the plot, apparently these kids have demons or something and they activate them through suicide? That's just dumb.

Hilariously, your "review" would actually be highly valuable to Atlus, even if technically inaccurate. Because this is the impression of the game that someone on the street got through word of mouth, and it's influenced them not to buy it.

Exley97:

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?

Everytime they do that, they remind me of the kid who calls adults stupid because they don't know the names of his favorite Saturday cartoon characters.

Really makes you think.

To me this is essentially like a journalist being send to interview someone, not checking up what language that person speak and whether they were fluent in it, showing up to find out he only speak Chinese and still trying to do the interview rather than calling the editor and just saying "hey I don't speak Chinese so I can't do a proper interview, send someone qualified". Finally they produce an article based on the interview and completely distort what the person said because they tried to use google translate.

I wouldn't call it un ethical since he came out and posted the gameplay video himself, but it speaks volume as to there skill as a reviewer.

SupahEwok:

It's not at all a false equivalency. If you want to make it more comfortable for you, you can substitute a professor in English Literature analyzing Hamlet compared to the same C grade student. Literary analysis isn't an exact science. Are you going to give more weight to the professor or the student? If you want a concrete example all the way, Roger Ebert is perhaps the most famous movie critic ever. When comparing his analysis to that of a first year film student, whose opinion has greater weight? Which one of them has spent literally decades in a theater and seen everything that's happened in movies for 40 years?

That's what we're talking about here. Does having experience in a subject make you more qualified to speak on a subject? Absolutely it does. Is it a guarantee that they're ultimately correct? Of course not. Maybe the first year film student totally outdoes Ebert on a film critique. But you tell me, is that *likely*? Nobody in the world has time to listen to the opinion of everybody else in the world on every subject. That's why we specialise. People go to college and choose an area of study. People go to work and learn a job and repeat that job and get better at that job. We go to critics because they are supposed to have more experience with game analysis than the rest of us who aren't playing games 6+ hours a day with no educational background in game or narrative design or theory. It's totally fair to call out a critic's opinion because of their lack of ability. It's my opinion that there isn't a point to doing so, but just because there's no point doesn't make the argument invalid.

well, it is a false equivalence because you see I might take the opnion of a film student over that of Roger Ebert. Becuase I don't usually align myself with Ebert's opinion. Beacuse at the emd of the day. Taht is waht reviews are, opinions. And opnions are subjective. Which is why your previous statement is a fals equivalence. Social sciences and humanities and art endevours are mostly grounded on personal opinios and the ability to defend those opnions, not in hard provable facts or perfect logical silogisms. So while I accept your metaphor of an English Lit proffessor I do not accept it with a Stats one.

Also, subjective opnions on things other than facts (scientific facts, rather) are no less valid one from another, in my opinion. The reviewrs job is usually to be articulate their opnion but bot because they are more valid, but becauae they cam explaim amd transmit their opinions in an efficient matter. So their skill or lack there of is of no matter to the job description. To you it does matter, then you are within your right. But I find the logic behind it deeply flawed.

erttheking:

SupahEwok:
Snip

Beating the epilogue to the game is the same difference between getting a C in statistics and being a professor in the field.

image

Uh, since I'm the professor in the field (apparently) can I say that having beaten the Answer, I feel that my knowledge of Persona 3 has barely grown now that I've done it. I mean, according to you I'm the professor, and as the professor I'm saying that in the jump from me being the C student to this, I've learned maybe one or two things to help change my experience. The gameplay was the exact same, just with enemies that had bigger numbers, more braindead friendly A.I. and smaller numbers on your side. Because, really when you get down to it, it's not hard to understand Persona's mechanics, nor the mechanics of any other game. You may not have the foresight (or patience, I probably could beat most of the games I play on higher difficulty, but when I do the experience becomes more tedious than fun) to get through it in the heat of the moment, but understanding it is not hard. Remember, I'm the professor here, I'm the one with the experience and ability you say matters so much.

SupahEwok didn't deserve this kind of response. He was earnest in his attempt to discuss this with you. I don't understand why you felt the need to treat him this way.



OT: I don't know what this has to do with Gamergate, but that certainly was embarrassingly bad. Like that guy playing Doom 2016 a while back. I always wonder why someone would upload a performance like this themselves.

That was pretty funny. I'm rubbish at games like this too, but I'm not THAT rubbish. It was hard not to furrow one's brow watching him repeatedly try to make the same jump.

Even funnier is the sweaty palmed antagonism fueling this thread, though. God willing, one day some of you guys are going to look back at some of the shit you've written/complained about and cringe so hard you're going to pull muscles.

I've been trying to get my head around this issue. If I understand it, he doesn't play 2D platformers, and tried this one out but didn't review it. He did write about how he was bad at it, and gave an account. Am I missing something? Is there a review that he wrote disparaging Cuphead because of the difficulty, or commenting on levels that he didn't play?

I'm going to say that:

a) To review a game you need to be able to play it to at least the same level of competency of the typical purchaser. Otherwise it is impossible to judge the difficulty of the gameplay.

b) Very difficult games (for example, I love Devil Daggers) make it difficult, as almost everyone is hard pressed to get far into the games. In those cases, being average might mean dying after 30 seconds, but that's ok.

c) If you aren't reviewing a game, and aren't good at the style, why should anyone care? We're not all good at all games. I'm not going to judge someone's ability to comment on a specific style of game, or their ability to comment on games in general, based on their ability to play a game in an unrelated genre.

Mostly, this reads like a "let's make fun of the guy who can't play the game" exercise. And that is never a good look.

gyrobot:
Proof why the most vocal anti gamergate hates the industry, because they suck at games

I saw a salty thread title by a known Gamergate apologist, expected a cliched argument against non-Gamergaters that wore out its welcome back in the 90's and you did not disappoint. God forbid you ever learn that I never played Fallout: New Vegas on hardcore mode and choose not to play the Dark Souls games for the simple reason that it's a genre I'm just not that into.

erttheking:
And everyone who's talking about how they aren't good at games, how many of you have beaten The Answer in Persona 3? Because I have, and I doubt many of you have, and you know what that proves? FUCKING NOTHING!

I'm still waiting for the waves of gamer girl pussy that were supposed to be coming after I succeeded at the one-city challenge in Civ 5 back in 2012.

Smithnikov:
I'm not defending the guy in question. I'm simply questioning this notion that those of us who were anti-GamerGate were only anti-GamerGate because we suck at games, when plenty of us probably have more gaming chops in our pinky fingers than guys like RooshV and Milo have in their whole damn bodies.

And that's not getting into those of us who are pen'n'paper fans. Put half these scrub lords in a Pathfinder campaign, I'll have them crying within 5 minutes. Fuckin' fake geek boys...

Ogoid:
Speaking of videos posted on KiA, here's one that really should have its own thread there.

My experience over the last 3 years has been that if GGers think something is important enough to have its own thread, it's not important enough to have its own thread. Glad we're not breaking that rhythm.

altnameJag:
Still, it goes to show that mental lapses are still as reviled as ever. God forbid any of you miss something easy in front of an audience.

Hell, just check out the comment sections on any Game Grumps Sonic playthrough.

So, I just came here from making my own stupid thread about this, 5 days later apparently. I looked at the recent threads, but I guess I didn't look far enough. God damn, I'm just as bad at Dean! If I can't search through a forum for similar topics, I shouldn't be posting on a forum, right?! (Though, my thread didn't turn this into a GG shit show from the first fucking post, jesus christ guys, WHY?!)

BeetleManiac:

And that's not getting into those of us who are pen'n'paper fans. Put half these scrub lords in a Pathfinder campaign, I'll have them crying within 5 minutes. Fuckin' fake geek boys...

Grognard here. I'd love to see them in an 1st ed AD&D or Call of Cthulhu campaign m'self.

Elvis Starburst:
So, I just came here from making my own stupid thread about this, 5 days later apparently. I looked at the recent threads, but I guess I didn't look far enough. God damn, I'm just as bad at Dean! If I can't search through a forum for similar topics, I shouldn't be posting on a forum, right?! (Though, my thread didn't turn this into a GG shit show from the first fucking post, jesus christ guys, WHY?!)

https://venturebeat.com/2017/09/08/the-deanbeat-our-cuphead-runneth-over/amp/
tl;dr: some popular shitlords started saying that this is how all game journalists usually play games, and gamergaters believed it and acted accordingly.

Yeah, I'm failing to see the big deal here. Some people aren't that great at certain games(or indeed, any games) but they still enjoy them. Hell, maybe 2d platformers just aren't the kind of game Dean is good at. I'd probably do just as badly at any sports games or online RTS/FPS.

Smithnikov:
I hate Gamergate, and I finished S.T.A.L.K.E.R on Misery mod.

So where do we go with that?

I made it to lvl 601 in Gauntlet on the sega master system back in the 80s, and I have no idea what gamergate is (and don't care enough to google it). How do I fit in to the equation?

My opinion has nothing to do with GG or anything like that. My opinion on this mess is:

"You wouldn't trust a review of a car from someone who doesn't have a driving licence." (John Bain)

This man should have least have some basic competence in playing games if he wishes to be a game journalist.

Same for if he was writing for cars, or tech review magazines. I'm sure we ALL here would be astonished if he reviewed the Ryzen threadripper for example and complained that it's MUCH larger that the I7, and he doesn't see what the big deal of more threads and cores is...

So, having basic competence in what you wish to comment on is a requirement, otherwise your opinion (whatever it is) means zip. If you're not good at a genre, then DON'T COMMENT ON IT!

I will point out that this is not the 1st time this guy has fucked up. He reviewed the original Mass Effect and gave it a negative review slating the combat.

Turns out his main problem? He didn't distribute his XP points for the characters, so they were all essentially "level 1" still... something that astonishes, considering ME1 clearly explains how this works during the tutorial portion of the game.

So, it's not just platformers for this guy, apparently it's RPG's as well. (sigh) What a prat.

KaraFang:
My opinion has nothing to do with GG or anything like that. My opinion on this mess is:

"You wouldn't trust a review of a car from someone who doesn't have a driving licence." (John Bain)

Well it's a good thing he didn't review it then, isn't it?

Never thought I'd see the day a guy gets seriously attacked for putting out a self-depreciating video on the internet.

Edit: I saw this comparison on Twitter, I think, but can you imagine people hounding a sportscaster for flubbing a pass?

"Highly talented tech writer is bad at videogames" is a controversy now? Really? How is this... "aGG" Ah. Now it makes sense. This is a sad attempt at a gotcha by people who can't accept that no one has cared about them in years.

The real comedy to me is Total Bitchquick jumping on the bandwagon to try and score internet points in his running spat with professional journalists, apparently somehow missing the comical hypocrisy. I don't think the internet's premier graphics whore and PC snob who somehow doesn't actually know jack dick about graphics settings and can't hook up a cooling system without blowing up his PC has any room to be shitting on someone else for their lack of expertise. At least Dean never claimed to be great at vidoegames.

major_chaos:
*snip*

Genuinely, none of that made sense to me. What are you actually talking about? I've watched Mr Bain's videos for many years, and have never seen him "jump on a bandwagon" or seen him not know what he's talking about regarding video settings on a game. Are you projecting some kind of personal inadequacy here? I've also never seen Mr Bain claim to be "great at" video games.

I'm really sorry, but nothing you've said seems to me to be anything beyond "i don't like this youtuber/weird internet thing and will spout nonsense because of it".

After spending far more of my time than I should have looking at this "issue", should the alleged "games journalist" have been able to read and follow the tutorial instructions given to him in game? Yes, he should have. If you want to write articles about video games, then you should at least have the competence of a 5 year old and be able to follow explicit directions that a game gives you. This alleged "games journalist" was, best, terrible at his job.

DarthCoercis:
After spending far more of my time than I should have looking at this "issue", should the alleged "games journalist" have been able to read and follow the tutorial instructions given to him in game? Yes, he should have. If you want to write articles about video games, then you should at least have the competence of a 5 year old and be able to follow explicit directions that a game gives you. This alleged "games journalist" was, best, terrible at his job.

It was a self-deprecating video posted as a gag. You guys will live a lot longer if you stop taking yourselves and your hobby so deathly serious.

At first I was confused as to what the point of this thread was and why it's three pages now, but then I realized it's just people beating the dead horse of GorbleGip yet again, and it all made sense. So I'm gonna ignore whatever the OP was trying to do with this thread and use this as a jumping point instead:

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"?

Being bad at certain games for specific, simple reasons are certainly reason enough for people who have extensive knowledge of games in the same genre to decide that the person is not worth their time. If I were to be looking up criticism of Sonic Mania and I found someone who couldn't beat Green Hill Zone, for instance, I doubt I'd find anything worth hearing from that person on the subject of Sonic games generally or Sonic Mania specifically.

That, however, doesn't mean their opinion is entirely worthless. While I may not get any value from their experience, other people who are also bad at Sonic games or otherwise have little experience with them would likely find that the opinion of someone in a similar position would provide a much better evaluation for whether they would like the game or not. If someone who is bad at Sonic Mania or typically doesn't enjoy Sonic games still expresses joy and excitement while playing it, that might be an indication that it's a game to try even for those who normally avoid Sonic games; conversely, if they're frustrated or bored that might be a good indication that it won't be the game which convinces someone to love Sonic.

He was rubbish. He knew he was rubbish, thought people might find it funny, so posted the video. It was self-deprecating.

This kind of response-- mega-serious, questioning his credentials and slating his professionalism-- is exactly why people don't feel like they can be self-deprecating.

What a horrible reaction.

DarthCoercis:

Smithnikov:
I hate Gamergate, and I finished S.T.A.L.K.E.R on Misery mod.

So where do we go with that?

I made it to lvl 601 in Gauntlet on the sega master system back in the 80s, and I have no idea what gamergate is (and don't care enough to google it). How do I fit in to the equation?

Well, Gyro is the representative of the Gatekeppers as pertains to this question, so ask him.

 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