• 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.

Jim Sterlings PS4 Top Ten(MS PR wont talk to him?)

M

maxiell

Member
In order to solve this problem just give Ryse a 10. Everyone will know what it actually means except Edelman PR.

Respect to Jim for bringing a real issue out in the open; shame on those criticizing him. Transparency should be the standard.
 
F

FuturusX

Member
Amir0x said:
Behind him in this situation. Against MS PR bullies who think they can pull shit like this. The same goes for any company who thinks they can ask to put a leash on a critic. Especially one as pathetic as to do it behind the critic in question's back.
Click to expand...

That's the thing. I get a sense of not wanting to bite the hand that feeds them. But it's our hands that do the feeding and we should never be afraid to call out this kind of corporate behaviour.

The literal voice of gamers / consumers changed the direction of this product. Xbox one is better for it. What exactly are we afraid of?
 
F

FuturusX

Member
And what ever we think of Polygon (Sim City ---- wow). They should get fair access to material to review in the same regard as any other "media" outlet. Let the games speak for themselves.

Gamers have noses, well some of them, they can smell a bad review and critic, eventually.
 
S

SeventhSon

Member
EmptySpace said:
that's the problem with sterling. his reviews revolve around whether or not he liked the game. he throws objectivity out of the window. was it actually good, whether or not he liked it? who cares. as long as he had fun, he'll give it a good score. doesn't matter if it's the 10th reiteration, if the same problems still persisted, etc. as long as he had fun because that's all that matters to him.

then, if he didn't like the game, he'll use ever negative metaphor he can think of and pick apart the smallest little details and puts on his know-it-all persona, while he easily ignores the same problems on games that he liked playing.

is that really how critiques should work?
Click to expand...
Yes.

Grading a game on production values is what created the 7-9 scale, which isn't useful as criticism.
 
A

antitrop

Member
Ingueferroque said:
And in doing so they have un-leashed the beast instead.
Click to expand...

I have never thought of Jim Sterling and "Unleashing The Beast" in the same sentence, but now I wish it was his tag.

By the way, Jim Sterling kicks ass, I used to hate him for giving Modern Warfare 3 a 9.5, but I've gotten the fuck over it.
 
K

Kingbrave

Member
EmptySpace said:
that's the problem with sterling. his reviews revolve around whether or not he liked the game. he throws objectivity out of the window. was it actually good, whether or not he liked it? who cares. as long as he had fun, he'll give it a good score. doesn't matter if it's the 10th reiteration, if the same problems still persisted, etc. as long as he had fun because that's all that matters to him.

then, if he didn't like the game, he'll use ever negative metaphor he can think of and pick apart the smallest little details and puts on his know-it-all persona, while he easily ignores the same problems on games that he liked playing.

is that really how critiques should work? opinions are subjective, but there at least has to have some objectivity and an effort to understand what the game is before calling it trash and slapping it a low score just because you didn't enjoy it. a lot of people don't like to play certain games but they wouldn't really give it low scores just because.
Click to expand...

How else are reviews supposed to work? Give good scores even though they don't like the game? If the game was good then they would like it. Right?

Just because a certain game is trying to make some kind of message doesn't mean it gets a pass if I don't like it. Yay for trying to be artistic but shitty games are shitty games.
 
W

Whools

Member
Massively respect Jim for holding his ground when he's undoubtedly costing himself income by expressing his views. Games writing is better for it. Liking these absurdist videos too.
 
U

unbias

Member
EmptySpace said:
running with an unfunny post once confronted with what's wrong with your reviews. keep up the shtick.
Click to expand...

To be frank, you said you can be objective with games(like a video card?) without giving examples of how it is possible to have objective reviews.
 
K

Kingbrave

Member
EmptySpace said:
running with an unfunny post once confronted with what's wrong with your reviews. keep up the shtick.
Click to expand...

How else is he supposed to review? Is he supposed to give others reviews instead of his own? A review is just someone's opinion about a product. Don't we read them to just get a baseline about what we should expect? If you don't like the way he does it then don't pay him any attention.

Personally, he cracks me up.
 
E

EmptySpace

Banned
unbias said:
To be frank, you said you can be objective with games(like a video card?) without giving examples of how it is possible to have objective reviews.
Click to expand...

not everyone likes starcraft. heck i don't like starcraft myself. that doesn't mean i should write paragraphs of hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration while i ignore the same things that i don't like in starcraft in the other games that I enjoy.
 
K

Kerned

Banned
EmptySpace said:
not everyone likes starcraft. heck i don't like starcraft myself. that doesn't mean i should write paragraphs of hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration while i ignore the same things that i don't like in starcraft in the other games that I enjoy.
Click to expand...

I'm having a hard time figuring out what the point is that you are trying to make. I'm trying though, honestly.
 
T

Turin Turambar

Member
EmptySpace said:
that's the problem with sterling. his reviews revolve around whether or not he liked the game. he throws objectivity out of the window. was it actually good, whether or not he liked it? who cares. as long as he had fun, he'll give it a good score. doesn't matter if it's the 10th reiteration, if the same problems still persisted, etc. as long as he had fun because that's all that matters to him.

then, if he didn't like the game, he'll use ever negative metaphor he can think of and pick apart the smallest little details and puts on his know-it-all persona, while he easily ignores the same problems on games that he liked playing.

is that really how critiques should work? opinions are subjective, but there at least has to have some objectivity and an effort to understand what the game is before calling it trash and slapping it a low score just because you didn't enjoy it. a lot of people don't like to play certain games but they wouldn't really give it low scores just because.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you, but I like good games and I dislike bad games.
Therefore if I like a game or not, that's a good indicator if it's good or bad.

What's the theoretical case when you play a game and say "Mmmm this game is real good. I don't like it"? Supposing you like every genre (as you should, if you are a game journalist).
 
T

tsumineko

Member
EmptySpace said:
running with an unfunny post once confronted with what's wrong with your reviews. keep up the shtick.
Click to expand...

There is nothing wrong with his reviews. There is only something wrong with the people who think there is something wrong with his reviews.

If you don't like them, you don't have to read them. So easy.
 
K

Kingbrave

Member
EmptySpace said:
not everyone likes starcraft. heck i don't like starcraft myself. that doesn't mean i should write paragraphs of hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration while i ignore the same things that i don't like in starcraft in the other games that I enjoy.
Click to expand...

It's possible to like the way things work in one game and not liking them in another. Lot's of people like WOW and hate other MMO's.
 
U

unbias

Member
Faustek said:
can't watch that...blocked link for me...what is it?
Click to expand...

FTA:
Even though I knew we had it good at 1UP, I didn’t quite realize how good. Even IGN has to deal with publisher shenanigans, but their travails generally amount to PR guys trying to pressure them into making compromises in return for exclusives (trying in vain, it should be said). Down at the bottom, the challenge is more about getting PR guys to recognize you exist. And even then, I have an advantage over a genuine startup in a bit of Eurogamer clout and a healthy rolodex of contacts from my past decade of work.

Going from the single biggest media outlet in the industry to a startup has been a useful exercise in discovering which publishers (and really, their gatekeepers, the PR people) respect folks in the press for their work and perspectives, and which see us as traffic stats. There are definitely companies I’ve dealt with in the past half year where I can tell they’re looking at me and seeing a vision like in those old cartoons where a hungry character hallucinates his friend as a steak, except here my body metamorphoses into a Comscore number (and is deemed unworthy). On the other hand, there are some publishers who don’t really care about the traffic stats and are simply happy to work with writers they trust to be fair, even when that fairness means calling them out on bad ideas. This hasn’t really come as any surprise, nor have the breakdowns of which companies fell where on that scale, but it does add a new layer of complexity to the job.

I’m not sure what this really contributes to the ongoing message board rage-debate about how games journalism is broken and terrible. I guess it proves the point on one level, because this meritocracy-by-traffic as determined by corporate public relations gatekeepers isn’t exactly a level playing field. Then again, can you really blame them? They have a few thousand assholes clamoring for games and systems every day, and somehow they have to sort out who legitimately wants to cover them and who just wants a free handout.

The reality is that publishers really do have all the power over their industry of interactive toys, which means that if you want early access for reviews, or even to talk to the people who make said toys, you have to go through the company. Worse, as the traditional AAA packaged retail game industry shrinks in around itself, those gatekeepers guard that shriveling power with ever more jealousy. These days, the gaming press doesn’t hold nearly as much interest for a lot of them as overnight YouTube stars who set up a video feed from a basement somewhere and blew the doors off IGN and Machinima’s video traffic combined on a budget of about $300… and who are likely to be a lot more easily swayed by gifts and attention from the people who make their favorite games than us jaded jerks in the press.
Click to expand...

Overall a good read.
 
U

unbias

Member
EmptySpace said:
not everyone likes starcraft. heck i don't like starcraft myself. that doesn't mean i should write paragraphs of hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration while i ignore the same things that i don't like in starcraft in the other games that I enjoy.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make sense really, though. The same things in one game doesn't directly compare to the same thing in the other game; because other things are different, and the weight that 1 thing has is measured by the other things. The weight of a issue is measured by the entirety of a game, if through the course of playing a game you care less about that 1 thing that bothered you in that other game, that does actually represent a significant difference for the person playing the game, be it professional or consumer.
 
H

hwateber

Member
EmptySpace said:
not everyone likes starcraft. heck i don't like starcraft myself. that doesn't mean i should write paragraphs of hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration while i ignore the same things that i don't like in starcraft in the other games that I enjoy.
Click to expand...
I liked juggles in tekken. Hated them in SFxT. I'm a shitty games reviewer though.
 
U

Uno Venova

Banned
EmptySpace said:
that's the problem with sterling. his reviews revolve around whether or not he liked the game.
Click to expand...

cAIGf.png
 
F

FuturusX

Member
How reviews work:

Reviewer uses or assesses product thingy. They tell you their opinion. Is it a good thing or one of those bad things and how much of a bad thing or how much of a good thing it is.

They then proceed to detail exactly why it's a good thing or bad thing. Mostly through descriptive accounts of the good bits and bad bits.

Your job, as a consumer, is to evaluate the ultimate conclusions and decide if their evaluation is meaningful to your buying decisions.

Simple.
 
D

Darth Sonik

we need more FPS games
It's a difference in review philosophies, are you reviewing a "technological achievement" or a "piece of art".

A "technological achievement" can be broken down into its constituent parts, in the case of games, framerate, graphics, gameplay, balance etc. each quantifiable and making a whole product.

Art can be innovative, stimulating, touching, tense, moving, uplifting, fun, scary, reassuring, relaxing etc. and may leave an overall impression you can assign a value to.

At this point in the games industry, where tech is becoming less and less important its high time we made the shift to treating games as artistic endeavors, and reviewing accordingly.
 
K

Kerned

Banned
Whenever someone complains about a reviewer being too "subjective," I' think what they are actually complaining about is that the reviewer has a different opinion than them.
 
P

Pappasman

Member
Kerned said:
It just so happens that none other than Jim Sterling himself once wrote one. You can read it here.
Click to expand...

"The videogame has graphics and sound. The graphics are seen with your eyes and the sound is heard by your ears. When you start the game the graphics and the sound will occur almost at the same time, letting you know that the game has started. There is also text which players can read."

so good. hahahaha
 
E

Empty

Member
EmptySpace said:
not everyone likes starcraft. heck i don't like starcraft myself. that doesn't mean i should write paragraphs of hyperbole, metaphor, and exaggeration while i ignore the same things that i don't like in starcraft in the other games that I enjoy.
Click to expand...

this just means that you need to distinguish between good critics and bad critics

the solution isn't to try and create a scientific survey of the game in a review, that's unworkable and just leads to nothing being truly said. it's for a reviewer to write honestly about their experience and for you to read widely. then you can find out that one person is generally thoughtful and open minded and able to cogently break down the game and another person is arthur gies and then adjust who you pay attention to accordingly. if you don't like sterling because you think his reviews are bad or don't help you personally then don't read him. you're on the internet, there's hundreds of reviews.
 
K

Kingbrave

Member
Kerned said:
Whenever someone complains about a reviewer being too "subjective," I' think what they are actually complaining about is that the reviewer has a different opinion than them.
Click to expand...

Waaah they don't like a game I like. That's what it amounts to. If you continually dislike someone's reviews then stop reading them. It's what I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The man who owes Nintendo $14m: Gary Bowser and gaming’s most infamous piracy case
2
85
5K
SHA replied
RDR2 is almost a perfect game for me. (SPOILERS!!!!!!!!!)
2 3
112
5K
danklord replied
Ok, let's talk about this Persona 3 scene...
Cringe
25
3K
Shut0wen replied
Dragon's Dogma II |🐉| You done fucked it up, Capcom
Opinion Analysis 2 3
110
6K
Chiggs replied
Interactivity > graphics
2 3 4
197
10K
Grildon Tundy replied
Top Bottom