Do you ever agree with Extra Credits?
Yes
70.7% (533)
70.7% (533)
No
5.8% (44)
5.8% (44)
Depends
22% (166)
22% (166)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Do you ever agree with Extra Credits?

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

It's such a reliable source on creating games, and yet so many of you don't seem to agree with him.

I liked how he said that games without moral-choices still have them anyway, from Mario balancing between himself and the princess, to Missile Command where you balance between missiles and cities, and so on. And, it's through this that I think of myself when I try to over-generalize anything I see. You know, when I do this:

War/Chaos=RTS-units; warriors and rogues; soldiers and snipers
Peace/Law=RTS-bases; mages and clerics; engineers and medics

I then say that war strengthens people at the expense of killing them, while peace unites people at the expense of weakening them. Neither war nor peace are in any way good or evil, as it all depends on each person's point-of-view.

You see? Just like that! The people behind Extra Credits is so much like me, as we're both interested in the portrayal of moral-ambiguity and ethical-issues in video games. So how come when I explained to you the same things I learned from Extra Credits, none of you agree with me? You know, when I said the original 2D Sonic games were the first Sonic games until Shadow's game to introduce moral-choices, where Sonic has a choice between either fighting Eggman or collecting the Chaos Emeralds? Not to mention, any game that has me either save-up time at the expense of help with the main-quests, or save-up help at the expense of time with the side-quests.

I do, at times.

Doesn't mean I like the show all that much - he's either preaching something obvious or calling to arms in every second episode.

And, that one time, the words "CoD clones" were uttered, accompanied by pictures of ArmA, Frontlines and Battlefield 2.

Good job, guys.

Very rational guy, so there's not much in which I couldn't agree on.

They're very smart fellows, but sometimes they can overthink things somewhat, like with that Missle Command episode.

I agree with them most of the time though.

Their insistence that the "Skinner Box" in games is bad, but that operant conditioning is great in terms of productivity had me rolling. So no, I tend to not agree with them.

The show bores me. It also strikes me as rather pretentious.

Sometimes, it's not exactly very controversial opinions they hold though. EA marketing is bad, gaming is a great medium for storytelling, kids on X-box Live are rude etc.

But I DON'T agree with killing the Geth in Mass Effect.

And I don't like how they assume that their viewers are Americans, but now I'm getting off topic...

Casual Shinji:
They're very smart fellows, but sometimes they can overthink things somewhat, like with that Missle Command episode.

I agree with them most of the time though.

Well, guess what? I overthink a lot of things as well?

Remember that thread I created relating to how the original 2D Sonic games for the Genesis were the first Sonic games until Shadow's game, that had moral-choices? Seriously, you're either collecting the Chaos Emeralds at the expense of the small animals, or rescue the small animals at the expense of the Chaos Emeralds. Sure, it doesn't matter much, as if it were me making a 2D Sonic, I'd make these two choices and their respective consequences matter. However, at least the choice between forest-animals and Chaos Emeralds is several-times a better idea than Shadow siding with or fighting against Black Doom, in my personal opinion at least.

I don't have a lot of knowledge about the video game industry, so in most situations I'm hearing things that I know nothing or little about. Because of this, I tend to take their word on a lot of issues, but on the other hand, I never hear the other side of what they argue, so I tend not to try to preach it to others, as I don't have enough information to back it up yet.

I agree with a lot of their points, but sometimes they come across as too preachy, and they can sometimes just go over the obvious.

I agreed with everything they put in their piracy video though.

Ekit:

And I don't like how they assume that their viewers are Americans, but now I'm getting off topic...

I don't like that either, it is a very poor idea unless you wish to alienate people. Obviously if they are using an American system/institution/whatever as an example it's fine, but don't assume we are all Americans and know what you are talking about.

You do have to remember that here on the Escapist people love being "the odd one out" and disagreeing with everything and everyone. We are the place to be for anyone who hates anything popular.

...What? There's nothing to agree or disagree with about Extra Credits. It's not an opinion show, for the most part. Most of what they say is fact. Are you saying you can disagree with facts?

EternalNothingness:

Casual Shinji:
They're very smart fellows, but sometimes they can overthink things somewhat, like with that Missle Command episode.

I agree with them most of the time though.

Remember that thread I created relating to how the original 2D Sonic games for the Genesis were the first Sonic games until Shadow's game, that had moral-choices?

Um........no, I hardly remember the last thread I posted on. Unless it's quoted, however, like this one was.

It's kind of hard not to agree with them considering how nearly everything they say is just preaching to the choir and stating the obvious.

I am a personal fan. What they have to say is very logical, and I trust them when it comes to game design advice. They see games as art and that is where most of their philosophy comes from this basis. this philosophy is one that I share with them. The show gave me a completely new view on missile command as well as other games. it helps me strive to make the most out of every artistic thing I do. I strive to make the choices that the characters make to be difficult decisions that have grey area...etc.

Although I often agree on a theoretical level, I doubt I would find the games produced by putting that theory into practice any fun.

Like so much in game design theory, the variant Extra Credit proposes included, I find it questionable if what the theory describes can really be applied to discern "good" design from "bad" design, or to quantify any measurements that would describe what a fun game is, even.

I'm not sure theories on computer games should be like theories on art in that regard. Gaming is a much more concrete phenomenon than whatever artistic value one could ascribe to computer games. The mode of interaction is quite different, and I think any theory that will succesfully describe computer games, in particular as a social intaraction, needs a different phenomenology. Computer games can also be competetive and I think analysis of narrative or presentation won't be enough to capture such diverse types of interactions.

A computer scientist's 0.2€

I'm honestly surprised someone somewhere didn't pick 'no' just to be "that guy."

I can find them too preachy, and they don't really discuss topics I'm that interested in. The most interesting one was in relation to stories where they mentioned God of War 3; I wish they'd do more stuff around that then the whole "fighting the good fight" thing. Whenever gamers do that it just reeks of insecurity.

Can't we just make actually mature games and get on with it, instead of ranting on about how games are "art" whilst simultaneously wanking ourselves over how "cool" DNF looks?

Yvl9921:
...What? There's nothing to agree or disagree with about Extra Credits. It's not an opinion show, for the most part. Most of what they say is fact. Are you saying you can disagree with facts?

There's plenty to agree and disagree on.

Honestly, I think of their videos as more of part experience(james) and part opinion(predictions, events that have happened). So it's not like they are holding the truth but instead starting a discussion to make you the viewer think about the games industry and what video games do to us as consumers, developers and the industry at large.

There are only very certain points where someone can simply go "I agree" or "disagree" because you the viewer really needs to know when to filter the experience with the opinion and that is never easy.

I find myself that despite my lack of knowledge from the corporate side of game development that I would probably agree with the experience of James and the episodes presented to us. They make logical points and often give good concrete examples.

So I don't think that what you are seeing is actually disagreement but more of a further inquiry of each episode to gain a clearer understanding of their nuanced stance. Bringing up examples contrary to their episode isn't disagreement but a form of dissent to make both you and the staff of EC think and discuss.

EternalNothingness:
It's such a reliable source on creating games, and yet so many of you don't seem to agree with him.

I think the issue is that those of us who do agree just nod and go on with our day. Or, like myself, spend hours thinking about how to bring gamification to my classroom. Which I really need to go e-mail them about.

Anyway, I think the only people who bother posting are the people who disagree. Those of us who agree... don't have much to add.

Also, I'm not a game designer, so I'm often like "oh, that was interesting - and it has nothing to do with me at all, so I'll just go play a video game now" **shrug**

EternalNothingness:
It's such a reliable source on creating games, and yet so many of you don't seem to agree with him.

Its is a reliable source for developers, but i'm not a developer, I'm a consumer and I often find that i'm wanting things other than they're pushing.

However many of the episodes get my full agreement.

Wait...There are people who disagree with Extra Credits?

Yvl9921:
...What? There's nothing to agree or disagree with about Extra Credits. It's not an opinion show, for the most part. Most of what they say is fact. Are you saying you can disagree with facts?

It's completely possible to disagree with facts. It's called being a a douchebag.

OT: ^ this guy is right, though. EC does stick mostly to facts and only rarely lets out an opinion so I tend to agree more than I disagree.

JourneyThroughHell:
I do, at times.

Doesn't mean I like the show all that much - he's either preaching something obvious or calling to arms in every second episode.

And, that one time, the words "CoD clones" were uttered, accompanied by pictures of ArmA, Frontlines and Battlefield 2.

Good job, guys.

Yea, this episode was the only one I watched. I never watched it since. That show annoys me

The one episode I absolutely did NOT agree with was when they criticized EA for its Dante's Inferno advertising. Personally, I thought the fake protesting was really clever and got a lot of people to look at the game. The "Go to Hell" might have been a little bit much, but it was also catchy and at least stuck in your mind. The night of sin or whatever went over the line, but they really shouldn't have criticized it that much. Not all games are art.

Thats also another thing, NOT ALL GAMES ARE ART. NOT ALL MOVIES ARE ART. NOT ALL BOOKS ARE ART. NOT ALL PAINTINGS ARE ART. They get too caught up in the "We're an art form" movement sometimes. I completely agree that a lot of games are art (most of them I would actually call art), but they aren't all.

Edit- Oh yea, and (as the person above me mentioned) calling Battlefield 2 (or even Bad Comapny) CoD clones was completely idiotic.

They have solid content and I generally agree with the messages they try to get across.

They can be a bit pretentious sometimes, saying things like "if only big publishers would take chances on indie games, etc..." as if THQ, EA, and Activision don't ever do that at all (hint: they all do).

But again, solid messages in general, high regard for games, thought provoking issues, etc., it's all good stuff.

Giantpanda602:

Thats also another thing, NOT ALL GAMES ARE ART. NOT ALL MOVIES ARE ART. NOT ALL BOOKS ARE ART. NOT ALL PAINTINGS ARE ART. They get too caught up in the "We're an art form" movement sometimes. I completely agree that a lot of games are art (most of them I would actually call art), but they aren't all.

Aye.
I'm not sure where the absolutism arguments for all games (or not)being art came from, but it certainly needs to stop.

Extra Credits at least tries to present evidence about their subjects, rather than linking a random article and spinning a story, or ranting about a game to absolutely no objective end.
Is Extra Credits preachy and pretentious? Oh, certainly. But that doesn't automatically make them right/wrong either.

Not all the time, but it gets me thinking and I think that's what it's meant for.

Macgyvercas:
Wait...There are people who disagree with Extra Credits?

Wow, shocking right?

I don't agree with them a lot. As a student of game design, a lot of their topics seem to amount to nothing more than hot air and fluff, to be endlessly regurgitated by the forumites with no-one coming to their own opinions on the matter, and with anyone who comes to a dissenting opinion being called a "troll." I didn't have a problem with the show until it started to get really preachy and pretentious, which I think was around the episode on Mass Effect.

Yvl9921:
...What? There's nothing to agree or disagree with about Extra Credits. It's not an opinion show, for the most part. Most of what they say is fact. Are you saying you can disagree with facts?

Except it is an opinion show. The Missile Command episode wasn't built up from facts, but rather from the premise that "a game can tell a story purely through its mechanics," and their argument completely fell flat on its face once they started depicting the story through elements of the game that weren't gameplay mechanics. The episode on EA's marketing was an overblown "gamer call-to-arms," and one of their main arguments--that EA was marketing Dead Space 2 to children--wasn't actually backed up by any sources. The Skinner Box episode had the theory behind Skinner's experiments, yeah, but the Extra Credits team them proceeded to list off all the operant conditioning techniques that they didn't like, and then started with a laundry list of operant conditioning techniques that they did like.

Ever?

That seems like kind of a rhetorical question, he's too rational about what he says for anyone to always disagree with him.

I do occasionally disagree with him (and feel that he's too nice about what he's saying) but for the most part, what he says makes sense.

Yes, I do agree with them.

The only thing they've done that I've disagreed with was to show a picture of Battlefield 2 with the statement of "Call of Duty Clones".

O_e;

i do agree with them to a certain degree, although from time to time i feel they can be very condescending.
also i believe i have a different opinion to them on what i find entertaining, where as they value the narrative above all else, i find jjust as much fun in mindless games with little to no plot.

EternalNothingness:
It's such a reliable source on creating games, and yet so many of you don't seem to agree with him.

I liked how he said that games without moral-choices still have them anyway, from Mario balancing between himself and the princess, to Missile Command where you balance between missiles and cities, and so on. And, it's through this that I think of myself when I try to over-generalize anything I see. You know, when I do this:

War/Chaos=RTS-units; warriors and rogues; soldiers and snipers
Peace/Law=RTS-bases; mages and clerics; engineers and medics

I then say that war strengthens people at the expense of killing them, while peace unites people at the expense of weakening them. Neither war nor peace are in any way good or evil, as it all depends on each person's point-of-view.

You see? Just like that! The people behind Extra Credits is so much like me, as we're both interested in the portrayal of moral-ambiguity and ethical-issues in video games. So how come when I explained to you the same things I learned from Extra Credits, none of you agree with me? You know, when I said the original 2D Sonic games were the first Sonic games until Shadow's game to introduce moral-choices, where Sonic has a choice between either fighting Eggman or collecting the Chaos Emeralds? Not to mention, any game that has me either save-up time at the expense of help with the main-quests, or save-up help at the expense of time with the side-quests.

I agree with them on some things, disagree on others. The thing is that I think it's largely an opinion piece, bordering on corperate propaganda at times, masquerading as something that is setting out to be educational.

It might just be the cynic in me, but a lot of the time I feel like the Extra Credits crew has a definate agenda that goes beyond wanting to see the best games possible made. While it occasionally makes a show out of "calling" the industry on something, in alot of cases it seems like it's out to justify what I see as negative trends within the industry.

I've responded to most, if not all, of the videos, so what I think in response to various issues they have brought up is a matter of record.

This is all just my opinion, I know a lot of people really like the video justsas much as people criticize them. There definatly seem to be a decent number of positive responses to each episode, probably more than are critical, or negative.

Not sure if I agree with them or not, most of the time I watch the show and wait to read the forums where there will be 30+ topics spring up about the exact same thing they say with nothing more to back it up than "Watch this Extra Credits video". They appeal to the hipster/games as art/game=/=fun crowd that would rather bitch about a commercial for a game or if they made Sonics eyes green or black instead of if the game is worth playing or not based on the game itself.

With that said, I can't wait for Jim Sterling's show to start either this coming week or the next.

I know about as much about what's going on in The Industry as much as I know about Kevin Costner not being an awful actor.
So I like the show because it gives us INfo On the Industry we never wouldn've figured out of something Interesting.

The only thign I don't like about the show is the Art-Style, I think it's too cartoony, and it's off-topic on the subject. Maybe if the Art-Style Actually had something in Common with what it's based on (The Industry, How games work, ECT ECT) Then I'd apreciate it more.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked