Support NeoGAF

[turcy]

they're both idiots for;

a) posting on twitter at all
b) engaging in argument over the internet

i'm not going to bother reading this, and i think it's ridiculous that any videogame journalist would make a habit of posting on twitter.

the character limit is not exactly conducive to real discussion, that's what GAF is for.

 

[BRocknRolla]

This is truly moronic. I kept expecting to see what the "misquote" was, but if it's really about calling something a 9 rather than an 8.9, it's just idiotic. IGN is the People Magazine or E - Entertainment News of the video games industry; zero substance and a weird sense of self importance.

 

[Tom Nook Sawyer]

Perhaps the most surprising issue is that .1 is all there is that separates "Great" from "AMAZING." Is it just me, or is that kind of a big gap? I feel like there should be another word in there to serve as a middle-ground. And what the hell's better than amazing anyway?

 

[blast processed]

Lot of anger over a dot.

 

[antitrop]

Perhaps the most surprising issue is that .1 is all there is that separates "Great" from "AMAZING." Is it just me, or is that kind of a big gap? I feel like there should be another word in there to serve as a middle-ground. And what the hell's better than amazing anyway?

Hate to beat a dead horse, but 1% is all that separates a B+ from an A-.

 

[Jeff-DSA]

Hate to beat a dead horse, but 1% is all that separates a B+ from an A-.

Sure, but that's not a change from great to amazing...

Time for everybody to adopt .5 intervals or star ratings. This .1 to .4 difference nonsense needs to stop. It's ridiculous.

 

[Kintaro]

Joe is an enthusiast/advocate...IGN is supposed to be the professional. I get that the line is thin, but one is corporate, the other is a guy in his bedroom. Guys like Joe should be fighting back against IGN and how broken coverage has become.

One would argue that the moment you start getting paid money for your work, you stop being "a guy in his bedroom" and become something else. It's not too much to ask for more professional from BOTH sides here. It's not too much to ask that Joe cite his sources properly either.

Where does "a guy in his bedroom" end and "professional" begins when both do the same job for money?

 

[Rickenslacker]

Hate to beat a dead horse, but 1% is all that separates a B+ from an A-.

Review scores aren't school grades but the whole 7-10 scale is born out of this line of thought. Eh.

 

[Jeff-DSA]

One would argue that the moment you start getting paid money for your work, you stop being "a guy in his bedroom" and become something else. It's not too much to ask for more professional from BOTH sides here. It's not too much to ask that Joe cite his sources properly either.

Where does "a guy in his bedroom" end and "professional" begins when both do the same job for money?

IGN has to answer to people other than themselves, Joe is 100% independent. IGN reviewers have to answer to legal, to marketing, to editorial, to brand, and so on.

 

[Rogue_Ledr]

To be fair to IGN they were hardly the only ones lauding and exalting the game to kingdom come. Plenty of other guilty sits out there.

 

[Rannta]

I hate ign but i support the editor's statement. Misrepresenting is a huge problem in the medium.

 

[unbias]

Hate to beat a dead horse, but 1% is all that separates a B+ from an A-.

Ya, but the point of a 4.0 scale is the GPA, which in turn gives you a 3.7 GPA vs a 3.3 GPA, and both of those are easily quantifiable. The comparison does not work. If the game scored multiple components then averaged them out a decimal system would make sense, however IGN does not do this. So the difference between a B+ and a A- with this grading scale is pointless, and is completely dependent on preconceptions.

 

[Vylsith]

Hate to beat a dead horse, but 1% is all that separates a B+ from an A-.

Sure, but a B+ on a test is almost identical to a A- as far as your overall grade is concerned. There's a slight difference sure, but the letter only matters when it's your final grade. Besides, why are we comparing grades in school to video games? Obviously a 8.9 will be viewed as a 9 by most consumers. Just like we round $3.99 to $4 when we're buying something. .9 is almost universally rounded up to the next whole number. If IGN can't understand why someone might see a 8.9 as a 9, then they're just being naive. Not to mention that Angry Joe never once pretended that IGN gave Titanfall a 9, and even showed the score in his review. Dan is accusing Angry Joe of insinuating something that was never insinuated. He's just being immature. Angry Joe was too, but he was being attacked. Generally people respond immaturely when being attacked, especially when it was over something as ridiculous as the difference between 8.9 and 9 and quoting them faithfully. Dan took what Angry Joe said out of context and then hilariously accused him of taking them out of context. Not the brightest crayon in the box.

 

[TheOMan]

What's not to get? Obviously there's a distinction between an 8.9 and 9.0 and their descriptors back that up.

It isn't. 9 is 9
Oh god, I'm defending IGN...

Hmm - I guess I wasn't clear about what my lol was about - I meant that it's hilarious this all blew up from 8.9 vs 9.0, not that 8.9 = 9.0. Is Stapleton trying to say that if Angry Joe had said 8.9 instead of 9 (or even better, just under 9) everything would have been okay? Please.

As an aside, when I'm at a store and something costs 8.99, or even 8.90, you best believe I'm rounding that up and calling it 9 bucks.

 

[antitrop]

Ya, but the point of a 4.0 scale is the GPA, which in turn gives you a 3.7 GPA vs a 3.3 GPA, and both of those are easily quantifiable. The comparison does not work. If the game scored multiple components then averaged them out a decimal system would make sense, however IGN does not do this. So the difference between a B+ and a A- with this grading scale is pointless, and is completely dependent on preconceptions.

We're going in circles, because I made this argument like 10 pages ago, but I would compare the review more to something like a subjective scoring of an English paper, rather than something more objectively quantifiable like a GPA.

I see it just like as if an English teacher wrote an 89 and circled it at the top of my paper. I understand exactly what they're trying to tell me with that score.

But for some reason, people can't apply that context to a video game review.

 

[Loakum]

Joe is an enthusiast/advocate...IGN is supposed to be the professional. I get that the line is thin, but one is corporate, the other is a guy in his bedroom. Guys like Joe should be fighting back against IGN and how broken coverage has become.

I admire and respect Angry Joe (I even agree with his argument, in this case). But that twitter war went on way too long. lol

 

[Kintaro]

IGN has to answer to people other than themselves, Joe is 100% independent. IGN reviewers have to answer to legal, to marketing, to editorial, to brand, and so on.

Of course. However, once money gets involved, the standards of independents should be raised as well. Lest they slip up and see themselves behind someone's legal department. It's not too much to ask for. You can keep your schtick/hook and still be professional.

 

[Astrates]

Let's be honest, no one won here. Two people just lost and made fools of themselves along the way.

 

[elcapitan]

There are no winners in a Twitter war. Only losers. Both sides come off as immature.

 

[unbias]

One would argue that the moment you start getting paid money for your work, you stop being "a guy in his bedroom" and become something else. It's not too much to ask for more professional from BOTH sides here. It's not too much to ask that Joe cite his sources properly either.

Where does "a guy in his bedroom" end and "professional" begins when both do the same job for money?

I don't get what the upside to caring about professionalism in regard to reviews and ect. I dont look to peoples opinions because of how professional they are, I look to see if I agree with them or they have a stronger argument that sways me. I work in an industry with a metric-ton of professional idiots. You shouldn't get "I agree points" or "that argument is better because he is polite". Professionalism is greatly needed when you are in a board room with a CEO you want to convince to hire your firm to manage their money. Beyond the monetary advantage to being professional, all that should really matter is who you agree with or who is right.

 

[Mr. Luchador]

i stopped halfway through their tirade thinking to myself, "they both need to grow the fuck up."

Pretty much!

 

[unbias]

We're going in circles, because I made this argument like 10 pages ago, but I would compare the review more to something like a subjective scoring of an English paper, rather than something more objectively quantifiable like a GPA.

I see it just like as if an English teacher wrote an 89 and circled it at the top of my paper. I understand exactly what they're trying to tell me with that score.

But for some reason, people can't apply that context to a video game review.

Because the context is different. With subjective reports like book reports and essay's teachers give reasons for the mark downs, and rarely are they subjective. And in college you can talk about your grades with term papers and the like, and it's not that uncommon for a teacher to give you points back if you made a solid point(or at least it was like that a few years ago at my college). Rarely are markdowns in school subjective, you normally dont run into that until college.

 

[Jeff-DSA]

Of course. However, once money gets involved, the standards of independents should be raised as well. Lest they slip up and see themselves behind someone's legal department. It's not too much to ask for. You can keep your schtick/hook and still be professional.

Yeah, you're correct there. I definitely concede that point.

 

[Vylsith]

I don't get what the upside to caring about professionalism in regard to reviews and ect. I dont look to peoples opinions because of how professional they are, I look to see if I agree with them or they have a stronger argument that sways me. I work in an industry with a metricton of professional idiots. You shouldn't get "I agree points" or "that argument is better because he is polite". Professionalism is greatly needed when you are in a board room with a CEO you want to convince to hire your firm to manage their money, beyond the monetary advantage to being professional, all that should really matter is who you agree with or who is right.

It's about being respectful to other people. You may not like the game, and you may have problems with the game, but other people may not share your opinions. As when you share any opinion with another person, you should always be aware that the method by which you communicate your opinion can upset others around you. It's just polite. I've read some pretty terrible reviews. While it's understood that the review is just one person's opinion, there's something to be said for tact. If you can't express your opinion over something as trivial as a video game without offending lots of people, then you probably need to learn some etiquette.

 

[antitrop]

Because the context is different. With subjective reports like book reports and essay's teachers give reasons for the mark downs, and rarely are they subjective. And in college you can talk about your grades with term papers and the like, and it's not that uncommon for a teacher to give you points back if you made a solid point(or at least it was like that a few years ago at my college). Rarely are markdowns in school subjective, you normally dont run into that until college.

Isn't what you describe exactly what Ryan does in the text of his review?

 

[Water]

One would argue that the moment you start getting paid money for your work, you stop being "a guy in his bedroom" and become something else. It's not too much to ask for more professional from BOTH sides here. It's not too much to ask that Joe cite his sources properly either.

Where does "a guy in his bedroom" end and "professional" begins when both do the same job for money?

You are making the weird assumption that every professional must be a professional journalist. That is not the case.

Joe's a professional media personality, game critic and entertainer (as far as I know; I haven't watched him much at all because I find him grating). None of those things require him to be clearer or more diligent with attribution than he was on the Titanfall video.

 

[R_thanatos]

So stupid and pointless.

Buy/Skip is all you need. Even five stars is better than fractions. WTF is the difference between 8.8, 8.9 and 9.0?

i would love a rating like

1)BUY IT
2)ONLY IF YOU'RE A FAN
3)ONLY IF YOU LIKE THE FRANCHISE
4)SKIP

Those 4 steps are the only things necessary , everything else is pointless.

 

[hipbabboom]

Everyone who argues over reviews needs to grow up. A review of a creative work is by no means an objective thing and it will never be. People like Angry Joe who go after others over differing opinions are the cancers of critical thinking in this medium. People need to stop giving attention to opinions that differ from their own if they don't have the ability to approach it like adults. The immaturity in this medium is largely due to the mentalities of people involved and less due to the age of the medium it seems. People want to treat critical thinking like a game in itself and compete over who's more objective as that's something realistic. At some point, it became the prevailing mentality that speaking about something critically is being negative about it and calling out bad journalism is attacking people who actually enjoy what they've played.

There's just not enough people thinking for themselves.

 

[ghst]

#UFAIL

 

[unbias]

It's about being respectful to other people. You may not like the game, and you may have problems with the game, but other people may not share your opinions. As when you share any opinion with another person, you should always be aware of how the method in which you communicate your opinion can upset others around you. It's just polite. I've read some pretty terrible reviews. While it's understood that the review is just one person's opinion, there's something to be said for tact. If you can't express your opinion over something as trivial as a video game without offending lots of people, then you probably need to learn some etiquette.

I get why its nice to have, I don't understand what it has to do with who's argument is better or worse. And I'm not sure how important etiquette is, because I've personally met a lot of people who own pretty large companies or have a company that has generated them a lot of cash and many of them are far from polite. I think etiquette is good to have when having a discussion, and I think it makes the discussion enjoyable, but imo, it should have no bearing on whether you agree with someone or not, in regards to an opinion not dependent on etiquette.

 

[Delta Assault]

I don't even like Angry Joe, but he's right. An 8.9 is pretty much a 9. Arguing otherwise is splitting hairs down to their subatomic components.

 

[wildfire]

To be fair to IGN they were hardly the only ones lauding and exalting the game to kingdom come. Plenty of other guilty sits out there.

Now you understand how IGN misrepresented AngryJoe's statements?

 

[Ominym]

What a terrible read that was. Joe comes off as a petulant child, which is no surprise. And IGN employees appear to be huffing paint, which is no surprise.

Everyone is now less intelligent for reading that.

 

[unbias]

Isn't what you describe exactly what Ryan does in the text of his review?

No, he does not. He describes stuff in the game, but his breakdown of what is good and bad, what works what doesn't, what is missing what is there to be pretty terrible. I already showed a link that, imo, actually supports their opinion. Ryans review isnt helpful unless you already knew you liked what you saw before reading his review.

I dont think it was possible to guess his score was under 90, until after you saw the score.

 

[Big-E]

Joe did quote the review and misinterpreted nothing. A reviews job is to inform readers whether or not to purchase a game. If your preview says you will buy the game and you should buy it for the inferior platform even, that is not a preview any more and is a review.

 

[Vylsith]

Isn't what you describe exactly what Ryan does in the text of his review?

Dan is arguing there's a big difference between a 8.9 and a 9, which doesn't correlate to your example at all. There's not a big difference between a 89% and a 90% on a test or paper. They're almost exactly the same score. While you may understand what the teacher is trying to tell you, in reality they both have almost the same effect on your overall grade. If you're talking about overall grade in the class, then percentages obviously don't matter. A B+ is the same as a B. The same is not true of review scores. Dan tells Angry Joe that the difference between 8.9 and 9 are substantial, but does an incredibly poor job of explaining the difference. So extremely great is somehow very different than barely amazing? It's just semantic nonsense. There's obviously a difference between 8.9 and 9, it's just a very minor one. A 8.9 will be viewed as basically a 9 by most people who see the score.

 

[antitrop]

I dont think it was possible to guess his score was under 90, until after you saw the score.

Though Titanfall is somewhat regrettably a barebones game in terms of modes and customization features available at launch, its intense action is almost as exciting to watch a friend play as it is to pick up the controller yourself. It’s surprisingly lacking many accoutrements we’ve come to expect in a multiplayer shooter, but it nevertheless unites its elements in a cohesive, approachable way. Titanfall earns a seat at the table with the genre’s entrenched powerhouses.

The 8.9 sounds high after reading his closing paragraph.

It speaks to how much fun Titanfall is, though, because I think it deserves something close to the score he gave it, despite the lacking content.

 

[Kintaro]

You are making the weird assumption that every professional must be a professional journalist. That is not the case.

Joe's a professional media personality, game critic and entertainer (as far as I know; I haven't watched him much at all because I find him grating). None of those things require him to be clearer or more diligent with attribution than he was on the Titanfall video.

No where did I say he was a journalist. There is that word again. Christ.

Its been pointed out several times in this thread already. If you're going to quote people, quote them properly and clearly. It's pretty damn simple. Tossing aside the fact that criticizing opinions in order to prop up your own review within said review is bush league, if you're going to criticize properly, say which website said what. Be clear who you are directing your ire to and none of this would have even happened.

Media personalities and entertainers can do at least this. And they do.

 

[Froli]

I never connected that Believe the Hype thing with a review specifically when I watched it the first time and rewatching it now. He's talking about the media in general. He doesn't even mention IGN personally, just puts the screenshot up.

I'd side with Joe on this for the most part but he really should have taken the high road on the twitter conversations to make IGN look dumber.

This.

 

[SpinningBirdKick]

YouTube 'celebrity' argues with videogame 'journalist'.

I really couldn't care less about this.

It's the media equivalent of "what's your favourite disease?".

 

[unbias]

The 8.9 sounds high after reading his closing paragraph.

It speaks to how much fun Titanfall is, though, because I think it deserves something close to the score he gave it, despite the lacking content.

Hindsight. I don't think reviews properly explain scores or anywhere close to it, specially the fractional differences. Also, I disagree with it deserving the score. That game is a lot of fun, but it is missing a lot of features plus the gameplay(specifically the mobility) isn't quite as good as Tribes Ascend. The review didn't justify the score high or low. And a lot of it is because the standards of what titanfall should have attained isn't quantifiable. A great game and an amazing game is a useless difference when numerical value is assigned to it. If someone gets an 89% and another person gets a 90% on a subjective paper there needs to be a very substantiated reasoning behind it. There wasnt enough there to explain the difference between an 89 and a 90 and honestly, rarely ever do reviewers properly contextualize why a game in the same genre deserved a fraction of a better score.

If you want to numerate games for comparison from one another, you need to have a incredibly defined and detailed standard from genre to genre or else you make the grading system utterly useless in its fractional differences.

 

[vgJames]

It's a sad state of affairs when an argument like that occurs. It's an even sadder state of affairs when that 'drama' creates a 28 page thread on NeoGaf.

 

[Mobius and pet octopus]

I think angry joe's response is infantile, especially name calling. That was pretty immature. Stapleton wasn't much better, but he approached this wrong I suppose. I don't know what he wanted to result from this so I can't say.

 

[Rickenslacker]

It's a sad state of affairs when an argument like that occurs. It's an even sadder state of affairs when that 'drama' creates a 28 page thread on NeoGaf.

I don't watch Angry Joe, I don't read IGN, and I certainly have no interest in Titanfall.

Yet, I was compelled.

 

[Chaos17]

I think angry joe's response is infantile, especially name calling. That was pretty immature. Stapleton wasn't much better, but he approached this wrong I suppose. I don't know what he wanted to result from this so I can't say.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=108510153&postcount=803

 

[unbias]

No where did I say he was a journalist. There is that word again. Christ.

Its been pointed out several times in this thread already. If you're going to quote people, quote them properly and clearly. It's pretty damn simple. Tossing aside the fact that criticizing opinions in order to prop up your own review within said review is bush league, if you're going to criticize properly, say which website said what. Be clear who you are directing your ire to and none of this would have even happened.

Media personalities and entertainers can do at least this. And they do.

Nothing Joe did in that, imo, was bush league. He used an overused saying for titanfall to describe the level of hype he believed was used to ignore flaws being talked about enough. To which I agree. He didnt criticize IGN's review to prop up his own, he criticized alot of the big review sites reviews because the hype was stupid, and probably also becasue he knew his fans would love it. His popularity isnt based on "propping up his reviews" its based on how indepth he goes and his entertainment. If you are going to create buzz words as press to hype a game, dont be pissed when people use it to try and counter act the hype, imo.

 

[Extra Sauce]

When Joe put that preview quote on the screen, he knew everyone would think it came from the review. Hyperbole looks significantly more embarrassing inside a review than in a preview article. Joe questioned journalistic integrity while knowingly inducing people in error.

 

[rudieboy77]

No one wins in an internet argument.

 

[atr0cious]

When Joe put that preview quote on the screen, he knew everyone would think it came from the review. Hyperbole looks significantly more embarrassing inside a review than in a preview article. He questioned journalistic integrity while knowingly inducing people in error.

http://a.pomf.se/wcrrhr.webm

He actually shows their review score, so you are both giving Joe more credit, and discrediting his viewers at the same time. He never names anyone and just shows pictures and text while talking, so they would have to read all of that as well, just to get any semblance of comprehension. Especially to suggest that IGN gave a 9/10, 10/10, and an 8.9 at the same time, which would have to also be a part of this reasoning for it to make sense, when lamenting what a strawman viewer might perceive.

 

[Alo81]

Him being upset about AngryJoe showing text from a preview while referencing reviews is understandable.

That preview is absolutely a joke, but they cooled on the review and a review should be taken much more seriously than a preview.

Looking at the video, it looks like IGN had written that preview quote in the review which isn't the case and I think it's justifiable to be upset about that misrepresentation.