Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Angry joe you mean? I meant pewdiepie
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Angry Joe gets called out by IGNs review editor for misquoting their Titanfall review
- Thread starter Dawg
- Start date
Angry joe you mean? I meant pewdiepie
I was talking about pewdiepie as well, Angry Joe isn't really that annoying. Although I'm not a huge fan of Joe's work I can tell he truly enjoys and loves what he does, and I respect that. What I've seen of Pewdiepie was very frustrating to watch.
Wow, sorry for the further offtopic but for such "grown ups" some of you sure are quick shit on anyone who dares to watch and even like Pewdiepie's videos. People have different tastes, get over it. I've watched a handful of his videos and yes, liked some of them enough to watch more stuff from him if I'm interested in the game he's playing. He's very hit-and-miss and definitely not for everyone but to question people's intelligence over something like that - come on guys, seriously?
jim-jam bongs
Member
One day we'll find out the largest demographic for PewDiePie is 25-35yo males.
To be fair, that's the My Little Pony demographic too. Has PewDiePie ever worn a fedora?
Mobius and pet octopus
Member
Ok, I'm not really that familiar with either of their work. Just my initial impression of a few vids I did watch of pewdiepie was extremely cheesey jokes aimed perhaps at 10yr olds lol... didn't think he'd be doing rape jokes.
So true. I teach elementary and can to you all that grade 5-8 students love this guy.
What I mean is that it's not very smart to act all holier-than-thou on the Internet while judging people based on what entertainment they like. It has nothing to do with what I like or feeling personally insulted, I really don't care that much. I haven't seen those movies, but I can say that I don't think less of people who like COD the way it is nowadays or Skyrim's combat for example. Both are dumb and simplistic and I wouldn't trust those people to give me advice on which games to buy, but it's okay to like them.
Ugh. I keep seeing this argument of "pandering", and it kind of bothers me. So at what point do we declare that someone is pandering, rather than just having an opinion that happens to line up with *gasp* other people? I mean realistically speaking, critics/commentators tend to attract an audience that....agrees with their views. It's human nature. People gravitate to those that voice similar opinions or have the same likes.
This idea of "pandering", would suggest that these people strategically go out of there way to hold opinions that they know a specific audience will eat up. Are you REALLY that cynical about Jim Sterling for instance? I hate taking this view as well, because then the suggestion is that WE personally know these people, and know what their intentions are behind their work. How the hell would you ever know this? To me, the quality of the work speaks for itself. Sterling does really incredible work (whether you disagree with him or not). He's well spoken, and does a good job conveying his views, as well as framing discussions.
But I keep seeing people say he's "pandering", just because NeoGAF tends to agree with a lot of his views. And yet, Sterling has always had these views, prior to his recent popularity on GAF. And even now, people can get upset and disagree vehemently with him. So I don't really get this argument. To bring this back to Angry Joe, I don't know the guy personally. He seems like he's really passionate about gaming. He brings a lot of energy to what he does. I'm not a fan of his "angry" persona, but truth be told, I've seen a lot of videos where he isn't angry. So I don't really agree that he's an immature kid either. Maybe his "persona" is kind of immature and tired, but it's not like that "angry" persona is sum of his work either.
Anyways, just my rant on this. I've seen people accuse others of pandering lately, and it just kind of irks me. Because again, we don't know these people personally. We have no idea what their actual intentions are. And I just don't buy into the fact that, because they have opinions that others also share, they are only doing so to pander. I can agree that if what they are saying lacks substance (or if their quality of work is poor), that's totally fair game to criticize. But saying that people are "pandering", feels like a weak argument that people throw at someone, because they don't agree with their opinions, or they just don't like their work.
EDIT: Okay, I guess this is unreasonable. What I mean is, I don't think you have to know someone personally to judge their work. Obviously not. So if you want to suggest that someone is pandering based on the quality of their work (such as a lack of substance), that is fair. I just kind of hate the idea of speaking for someone else though. Or rather, suggesting that someone has an opinion, or wrote something, purely because they wanted to appeal to a specific audience rather than I. naturally having that view. and II. Thinking its something worth talking about. I can't do it. I'd rather just judge someone on the quality of the work, rather than determine what their motivation/intentions are behind their work. *shrugs*
fvng
Member
Wait, are you advocating less articulate GAF posts and more snappy retorts? This is where we're at now?
Except I don't frequent IGN and so I don't know abou their "descriptors". For the rest of us that don't know about them, this makes them look petty.
Regginator3
Neo Member
I disagree with Joe's view that it's a 7/10 but IGN is making itself look really stupid and petty by arguing over a 0.1 difference...
fvng
Member
This has been the best dissection and analysis of what happened here..I"m actually siding with Angry Joe more with all the evidence laid out like it, even though he made some errors himself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKC8Unj9Xlo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NKC8Unj9Xlo
I think 7 is very fair.
It's a great game for shooter fans that brings back some elements of long past arena shooters, but is very light on content for a $60 game.
Granted if you aren't a fan of CoD style shooters I would be open to people rating it lower than that, but only if they established that during the review.
HI. BILLY MAYS HERE
Banned
Video seems to have a good take on the situation.
This definitely falls in the realm of journalism integrity. Even if some think "games journalism" is an oxymoron, it sure wouldn't hurt to have more people who follow journalistic ethics code.
It's not about the .1 differential. Misquoting, non-vetted sources, implied misrepresentation - these are all pretty basic industry fails that happen all too often. If you're quoting reviews then fucking quote the reviews, don't paraphrase or flash shots of other material. Mistakes happen but he chose to flip out instead of owning up to it.
At the least, Angry Joe exercised sloppy journalism...which seems pretty consistent with the rest of his work/schtick.
It's not about the .1 differential. Misquoting, non-vetted sources, implied misrepresentation - these are all pretty basic industry fails that happen all too often. If you're quoting reviews then fucking quote the reviews, don't paraphrase or flash shots of other material. Mistakes happen but he chose to flip out instead of owning up to it.
At the least, Angry Joe exercised sloppy journalism...which seems pretty consistent with the rest of his work/schtick.
Agree 100%