Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

My only discontent is the lack of humour though
Satire usually implies wit

1. The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

I didn't lol not because of outrage, just that there was not a lot to lol at imho. There was plenty of derision but sneering is easy, and I know having had plenty of practice.

He needs to work on the humour bit imho


edit:
Also he can sneer away at GW as merrily as he likes as far as I am concerned.
Unfortunately much of the diatribe is directed at the hobbyists. So he is on dodgy ground as I have alluded to above.

Admittedly, it wasn't one of his better pieces. I can't help but chuckle on his videos though.

My point is though, you just can't take people like that seriously. Life's too short.

I agree with all the people who say Yahtzee was completely misinformed and unfair in his criticism of WH40k and video games.

On that note, why does Don Rickles need to be so mean to everyone? Does Metallica have to play so darned loud all the time? Can't Michael Bay stop with the damend explosions already?

daedalus wrote:

It's ironic that GW would now sport this many white knights from the same source as so much GW hate. You guys need to grow tougher skin yourselves and quell the 'outrage'. Seriously.

I haven't read a lot of White Knight reactions in this thread.

The guy is a self-absorbed tool. The fact that he apparently hates GW or wants to get a rise out of those that do is largely irrelevant...

Sure it is. The multiplayer base isn't a general cesspool because it's small. Online gaming and automated matchmaking in particular is the proverbial steak around the neck of the lowest common denominator which, as you can imagine, only encourages them to flock to it more.

Instead of using hyperbole, try explaining why you believe what you do. It'll make you look like less of a troll.

And I made no claims about the quality of any online multiplayer game, merely the quality of the experience with its unpleasant players (who certainly seem to be the majority).

Those are inseparable, you are inherently talking of one when you speak of the other. Mulitplayer implies multiple players.

It is a testament to the competitive spirit of humanity that player counts are high despite the incredible ratio of ... unpleasant opponents. Also note that I did not, at any point, indicate that the general multiplayer experience is the fault of the game developers. It's simply a fact of online gaming life. That doesn't make it "good" or "acceptable", call a spade a spade my good man and be done with it.

For someone who doesn't partake of the experiences he speaks of by his own admission you sure seem quite certain of what you're talking about.

I've long held the opinion that the best thing about online gaming is the ability to play against or with other human players. Unfortunately, that is also the worst thing about online gaming.

Mute them? If it pains you to hear other people speak that much then I'm not sure what you're doing attempting to play such games at all.

Seriously? Try taking a moment to step back and look at what I wrote. I did not attack you in any way, shape, or form. So why did you choose to do so?

Because you did. You have repeatedly insisted that the population that enjoys mutliplayer gaming is the grimy streak at the bottom of the barrel. You'll remember that one, it was your second sentence. Don't be lambastic and derogatory then backpedal, it's bad form. If you want to advocate calling a spade a spade stop making exceptions for the people you're speaking directly to. You've never played me in an online game, presumably you would find the experience pleasant but since you don't know that I'm just going to assume I'm lumped into the majority. How else would you know?

You may want to reconsider your previous post then. Or broadcast hipocrisy, either way, it's no skin off my back.

Online in multiplayer games. This is a discussion forum. I'm going to call you out for being a troll when you act like one.

How is his skill relevant?

If someone is bad in a competitive environment at that competitive environment they will not enjoy it the environment they find themselves in. It follows that people who are bad at video games, who lack good hand eye coordination, or who are inexperienced derive less enjoyment from competition as those who are not so afflicted. It's not as much fun to lose.

I've always found it quite clear that his "reviews" are just entertaining rants that provide very little information. I'd gathered that his "reviews" were just there for entertainment. Is this not a common view of Zero Punctuation?

I've said as much several times now. Thats not in contention.

Worth noting, I haven't kept on his stuff for quite some time now (over a year, at least), so if the quality of his stuff has gone down, or his act has gotten stale, I'm not aware of it. Also, I currently have a copy of Space Marine sitting atop my media cabinet. I found Yahtzee entertaining, but if I based my purchases off of his reviews, I wouldn't own any games.

It's gotten stale. Every once in a while i'll sit for half an hour and catch up. He's whinier and less logical then he used to be and I suspect he's become bitter after his other abortive attempts at internet stardom (his show was god awful).

Edit - I mistook you for someone else earlier in the thread, most of your posts have been polite. Your response to me above where you insinuate that I have no friends, am easily insulted, and am probably bad at videogames is the only rude thing I can spot from you on this page. Edited my post to reflect that. And a final note, relax mate. I've got no beef with you, so I'd appreciate it if you directed no heat at me.

I should of read that before writing all that stuff. Whelp, it's there now and it took a while so it's gettin' posted. I don't think it's too inflammatory so whatever.

ShumaGorath wrote:Instead of using hyperbole, try explaining why you believe what you do. It'll make you look like less of a troll.

And now apparently I'm a troll. You really like to take swipes at anyone who even seems like they disagree with you, don't you?

My belief is based of the experience of both myself and my friends and acquaintances. That may in and of itself not seem like a large sample set, but it certainly seems to mesh with the reported experiences I've read on the internet (not that the Internet is a great source for unbiased information mind you). Hell, it's been lamented and lampooned for a few years at least (for the most recent humorous example I read, check out Penny Arcades "Greater Internet F-wad Theory"). This has all lead me to believe that the general experience you can expect when playing multiplayer with random strangers is as I have depicted it. Is your experience truly different? If so, I envy you. You may want to consider the possibility that your experience has been "out of the norm". It's possible that mine has been uncommon, I'll admit, but from what I've heard, seen, read, and experienced, it does not seem to be.

ShumaGorath wrote:

And I made no claims about the quality of any online multiplayer game, merely the quality of the experience with its unpleasant players (who certainly seem to be the majority).

Those are inseparable, you are inherently talking of one when you speak of the other. Mulitplayer implies multiple players.

I find it hard to believe you are unable to separate the game from those who play it. Is this really true or are you trolling me? Or are we having some sort of disconnect here? In the event I wasn't clear, the gameplay controls, graphics, audio, general design, story, etc. are all aspects of the game (I even said as much earlier). So no, I am not "inherently" talking about one when I speak of the other. If you are taking it that way, you should stop and read what I actually wrote. I am not so perfect that you need to invent reasons to argue with me.

ShumaGorath wrote:For someone who doesn't partake of the experiences he speaks of by his own admission you sure seem quite certain of what you're talking about.

I do partake in them (reasonably often), what gave you the impression that I didn't? I even said as much in my first post in this thread. Did you confuse me for someone else?

ShumaGorath wrote:Mute them? If it pains you to hear other people speak that much then I'm not sure what you're doing attempting to play such games at all.

Some days, I'm not really sure why either. Muting/ignoring isn't always an option, depending on the game. For the most part, I try to stick to games against or with people I know, rather than random strangers. Sadly, they aren't always available when I am, and so sometimes I delve into the cesspool. It is rarely pleasant.

I'm also not into punishing developers for the faults of their unpleasant players, especially when I can find a way to enjoy their game despite the flaws of the online community.

ShumaGorath wrote:Because you did. You have repeatedly insisted that the population that enjoys mutliplayer gaming is the grimy streak at the bottom of the barrel. You'll remember that one, it was your second sentence. Don't be lambastic and derogatory then backpedal, it's bad form. If you want to advocate calling a spade a spade stop making exceptions for the people you're speaking directly to. You've never played me in an online game, presumably you would find the experience pleasant but since you don't know that I'm just going to assume I'm lumped into the majority. How else would you know?

Ah, this seems to be the crux of your issue with me. If you are the sort of person whom Ouze describes in his last post in this thread, then yes, I am talking about you. If you are not, and are truly polite, then I am not. I'm not sure how you could take this as a personal attack unless you are in the former group. I made it quite clear as to who I was talking about. If you choose to assume that I wasn't talking about unpleasant players and was instead talking about you specifically, I'm not sure how that's my problem?

Also, it should be plain to anyone who reads my post that I said I felt the majority of the online gaming community, given my experiences, are sadly very unpleasant to play against or with. In case that isn't clear that means there are some players who are pleasant to game with (because that's what I actually said). And presumably members of either group can and do enjoy playing online games (I enjoy playing them too, just not with unpleasant players). So your assertion that I somehow said that just the people who enjoy online gaming are terrible people is an argument you seem to have invented out of thin air.

ShumaGorath wrote:

You may want to reconsider your previous post then. Or broadcast hipocrisy, either way, it's no skin off my back.

Online in multiplayer games. This is a discussion forum. I'm going to call you out for being a troll when you act like one.

Ah, I missed the distinction as you only mentioned online. My apologies for the mistake. Why do you not feel the need to be civil and polite in discussion forums? I'm fairly certain it's rule #1 here, isn't it?

ShumaGorath wrote:

How is his skill relevant?

If someone is bad in a competitive environment at that competitive environment they will not enjoy it the environment they find themselves in. It follows that people who are bad at video games, who lack good hand eye coordination, or who are inexperienced derive less enjoyment from competition as those who are not so afflicted. It's not as much fun to lose.

Which would be relevant if Yahtzee were a reviewer, right? But since you don't contend that point, I ask again why his skill is relevant?

ShumaGorath wrote:It's gotten stale. Every once in a while i'll sit for half an hour and catch up. He's whinier and less logical then he used to be and I suspect he's become bitter after his other abortive attempts at internet stardom (his show was god awful).

That's unfortunate, some of his early rants were inspired.

ShumaGorath wrote:I should of read that before writing all that stuff. Whelp, it's there now and it took a while so it's gettin' posted. I don't think it's too inflammatory so whatever.

That edit was regarding my previous statement about all of your posts in this thread being rude. I saw that I was mistaken, only the post in response to me was particularly heated, so corrected it. Given your post, I'm guessing you missed my edit? You quoted the edited text, so I'm not sure if you read it before my edit and quoted, or what. If this whole thing is some sort of genuine misunderstanding, I'm happy to let it be.

daedalus wrote:Admittedly, it wasn't one of his better pieces. I can't help but chuckle on his videos though.

My point is though, you just can't take people like that seriously. Life's too short.

Just because we say "you're wrong" doesn't mean we're taking it too seriously...

IcyCool wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Instead of using hyperbole, try explaining why you believe what you do. It'll make you look like less of a troll.

And now apparently I'm a troll. You really like to take swipes at anyone who even seems like they disagree with you, don't you?

My belief is based of the experience of both myself and my friends and acquaintances. That may in and of itself not seem like a large sample set, but it certainly seems to mesh with the reported experiences I've read on the internet (not that the Internet is a great source for unbiased information mind you). Hell, it's been lamented and lampooned for a few years at least (for the most recent humorous example I read, check out Penny Arcades "Greater Internet F-wad Theory"). This has all lead me to believe that the general experience you can expect when playing multiplayer with random strangers is as I have depicted it. Is your experience truly different? If so, I envy you. You may want to consider the possibility that your experience has been "out of the norm". It's possible that mine has been uncommon, I'll admit, but from what I've heard, seen, read, and experienced, it does not seem to be.

ShumaGorath wrote:

And I made no claims about the quality of any online multiplayer game, merely the quality of the experience with its unpleasant players (who certainly seem to be the majority).

Those are inseparable, you are inherently talking of one when you speak of the other. Mulitplayer implies multiple players.

I find it hard to believe you are unable to separate the game from those who play it. Is this really true or are you trolling me? Or are we having some sort of disconnect here? In the event I wasn't clear, the gameplay controls, graphics, audio, general design, story, etc. are all aspects of the game (I even said as much earlier). So no, I am not "inherently" talking about one when I speak of the other. If you are taking it that way, you should stop and read what I actually wrote. I am not so perfect that you need to invent reasons to argue with me.

ShumaGorath wrote:For someone who doesn't partake of the experiences he speaks of by his own admission you sure seem quite certain of what you're talking about.

I do partake in them (reasonably often), what gave you the impression that I didn't? I even said as much in my first post in this thread. Did you confuse me for someone else?

ShumaGorath wrote:Mute them? If it pains you to hear other people speak that much then I'm not sure what you're doing attempting to play such games at all.

Some days, I'm not really sure why either. Muting/ignoring isn't always an option, depending on the game. For the most part, I try to stick to games against or with people I know, rather than random strangers. Sadly, they aren't always available when I am, and so sometimes I delve into the cesspool. It is rarely pleasant.

I'm also not into punishing developers for the faults of their unpleasant players, especially when I can find a way to enjoy their game despite the flaws of the online community.

ShumaGorath wrote:Because you did. You have repeatedly insisted that the population that enjoys mutliplayer gaming is the grimy streak at the bottom of the barrel. You'll remember that one, it was your second sentence. Don't be lambastic and derogatory then backpedal, it's bad form. If you want to advocate calling a spade a spade stop making exceptions for the people you're speaking directly to. You've never played me in an online game, presumably you would find the experience pleasant but since you don't know that I'm just going to assume I'm lumped into the majority. How else would you know?

Ah, this seems to be the crux of your issue with me. If you are the sort of person whom Ouze describes in his last post in this thread, then yes, I am talking about you. If you are not, and are truly polite, then I am not. I'm not sure how you could take this as a personal attack unless you are in the former group. I made it quite clear as to who I was talking about. If you choose to assume that I wasn't talking about unpleasant players and was instead talking about you specifically, I'm not sure how that's my problem?

Also, it should be plain to anyone who reads my post that I said I felt the majority of the online gaming community, given my experiences, are sadly very unpleasant to play against or with. In case that isn't clear that means there are some players who are pleasant to game with (because that's what I actually said). And presumably members of either group can and do enjoy playing online games (I enjoy playing them too, just not with unpleasant players). So your assertion that I somehow said that just the people who enjoy online gaming are terrible people is an argument you seem to have invented out of thin air.

ShumaGorath wrote:

You may want to reconsider your previous post then. Or broadcast hipocrisy, either way, it's no skin off my back.

Online in multiplayer games. This is a discussion forum. I'm going to call you out for being a troll when you act like one.

Ah, I missed the distinction as you only mentioned online. My apologies for the mistake. Why do you not feel the need to be civil and polite in discussion forums? I'm fairly certain it's rule #1 here, isn't it?

ShumaGorath wrote:

How is his skill relevant?

If someone is bad in a competitive environment at that competitive environment they will not enjoy it the environment they find themselves in. It follows that people who are bad at video games, who lack good hand eye coordination, or who are inexperienced derive less enjoyment from competition as those who are not so afflicted. It's not as much fun to lose.

Which would be relevant if Yahtzee were a reviewer, right? But since you don't contend that point, I ask again why his skill is relevant?

ShumaGorath wrote:It's gotten stale. Every once in a while i'll sit for half an hour and catch up. He's whinier and less logical then he used to be and I suspect he's become bitter after his other abortive attempts at internet stardom (his show was god awful).

That's unfortunate, some of his early rants were inspired.

ShumaGorath wrote:I should of read that before writing all that stuff. Whelp, it's there now and it took a while so it's gettin' posted. I don't think it's too inflammatory so whatever.

That edit was regarding my previous statement about all of your posts in this thread being rude. I saw that I was mistaken, only the post in response to me was particularly heated, so corrected it. Given your post, I'm guessing you missed my edit? You quoted the edited text, so I'm not sure if you read it before my edit and quoted, or what. If this whole thing is some sort of genuine misunderstanding, I'm happy to let it be.

Whats your point here?

Did you really need to continue this cherade?


Simple answer? !@#$ Yatzee. He's still a nub without any idea on what he spouts off at the hole about. He spent more time diming on table top players then he did discussing the game. He didn't even say anything worth reading or going on with cut and paste threds about.
Don't call people out, and then backpeddle, next time. Embrace the hate, and make it part of you.

The whole point of the guy is that he complains. His job is quite literally to be a whiny nitpicker who gaks all over everything that isn't near perfect. That is actually how he makes his living, not liking things and ranting about it.

I like space marine, but am disappointing it got off so easy. I actually enjoy him taking the piss out of games I like.

Grot 6 wrote:Whats your point here?

Did you really need to continue this cherade?

You mean charade? I'm not sure what you are talking about. I think I was very clear in my first post in this thread:

1. Yahtzee isn't a game reviewer, so spewing hate about his rant seems pointless. Or at least spew hate about how you don't find his stuff entertaining, that seems like it would be on the mark.

2. Random strangers in online environments (gaming, in this specific example), are unpleasant most of the time. I didn't think this even qualified as old news as it's been an internet truism for quite some time. I mentioned it as a defense of why someone might not like to delve into that situation.

Grot 6 wrote:Don't call people out, and then backpeddle, next time. Embrace the hate, and make it part of you.

Please, point out where I did that.

And hate is overrated, apathy is nirvana

Melissia wrote:

daedalus wrote:Admittedly, it wasn't one of his better pieces. I can't help but chuckle on his videos though.

My point is though, you just can't take people like that seriously. Life's too short.

Just because we say "you're wrong" doesn't mean we're taking it too seriously...

The way I see it, regardless of where you do it in a place he can see or on a forum he'll never visit, why feed the troll? You don't like a guy who makes a living off being known and getting heard, the last thing you should do is spread his name around.

And now apparently I'm a troll. You really like to take swipes at anyone who even seems like they disagree with you, don't you?

I do when they make blanket and insulting generalizations about large populations that they admit to having little interface with.

My belief is based of the experience of both myself and my friends and acquaintances. That may in and of itself not seem like a large sample set, but it certainly seems to mesh with the reported experiences I've read on the internet (not that the Internet is a great source for unbiased information mind you). Hell, it's been lamented and lampooned for a few years at least (for the most recent humorous example I read, check out Penny Arcades "Greater Internet F-wad Theory"). This has all lead me to believe that the general experience you can expect when playing multiplayer with random strangers is as I have depicted it. Is your experience truly different? If so, I envy you. You may want to consider the possibility that your experience has been "out of the norm". It's possible that mine has been uncommon, I'll admit, but from what I've heard, seen, read, and experienced, it does not seem to be.

No, our experiences are likely nearly identical. What differs is our ability to handle negative stimulus without reacting adversely. Hence my repeated insistence that you 'grow thicker skin'. Being able to look through circumstance to find enjoyment in your surroundings is a key ability in being able to survive the human experience. If you can't handle hearing someone on a microphone from 500 miles away for five minutes what hope have you in life?

I find it hard to believe you are unable to separate the game from those who play it. Is this really true or are you trolling me? Or are we having some sort of disconnect here?

I'm talking about multiplayer. I thought we both were.

In the event I wasn't clear, the gameplay controls, graphics, audio, general design, story, etc. are all aspects of the game (I even said as much earlier). So no, I am not "inherently" talking about one when I speak of the other. If you are taking it that way, you should stop and read what I actually wrote. I am not so perfect that you need to invent reasons to argue with me.

No thanks. You were talking about multiplayer games and the experiences therein. That is the crux of this discussion and has been from the start. You can't backpedal and suddenly start talking about how you like the level design in oblivion because that's got nothing to do with the previous line of conversation. My assumptions are logical and do not conflict with what you've written. They are derived directly from your current postings and previous ones. I think it's you that needs to figure out what you're trying to say if what is on the screen somehow differs from your intended point.

I do partake in them (reasonably often), what gave you the impression that I didn't? I even said as much in my first post in this thread. Did you confuse me for someone else?

In Yahtzee's defense, my experience with online multiplayer generally equals "playing a potentially good game with braying donkey-caves". Since no amount of awesome rendering and careful game-craft can surmount having to play with idiots, the experience is pretty much going to be the same no matter what multiplayer game you play (doesn't stop me from trying, but then I'm not an embittered game reviewer). If you have a solid group of friends you play with rather than random strangers, that seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

I guess I was confused as to the degree of 'trying' going on.

Some days, I'm not really sure why either. Muting/ignoring isn't always an option, depending on the game. For the most part, I try to stick to games against or with people I know, rather than random strangers. Sadly, they aren't always available when I am, and so sometimes I delve into the cesspool. It is rarely pleasant.

I'm also not into punishing developers for the faults of their unpleasant players, especially when I can find a way to enjoy their game despite the flaws of the online community.

What are you playing with a terrible community and no ability to mute them? There are truly few games with those two things at the same time. Nothing on any console at least.

Ah, this seems to be the crux of your issue with me. If you are the sort of person whom Ouze describes in his last post in this thread, then yes, I am talking about you. If you are not, and are truly polite, then I am not. I'm not sure how you could take this as a personal attack unless you are in the former group. I made it quite clear as to who I was talking about. If you choose to assume that I wasn't talking about unpleasant players and was instead talking about you specifically, I'm not sure how that's my problem?

Be more direct about it. If you're going to insult a vast group that you have little contact with full of anonymous people at least do it with some gusto from your ivory tower. It's hard to hear you with all this scum scumming up the scumville where the peons live!

Also, it should be plain to anyone who reads my post that I said I felt the majority of the online gaming community, given my experiences, are sadly very unpleasant to play against or with. In case that isn't clear that means there are some players who are pleasant to game with (because that's what I actually said). And presumably members of either group can and do enjoy playing online games (I enjoy playing them too, just not with unpleasant players). So your assertion that I somehow said that just the people who enjoy online gaming are terrible people is an argument you seem to have invented out of thin air.

Time for some quotes!

Sure it is. The multiplayer base isn't a general cesspool because it's small.

And I made no claims about the quality of any online multiplayer game, merely the quality of the experience with its unpleasant players (who certainly seem to be the majority).

In Yahtzee's defense, my experience with online multiplayer generally equals "playing a potentially good game with braying donkey-caves". Since no amount of awesome rendering and careful game-craft can surmount having to play with idiots

I see that you've thrown in a lot of caveats in your blanket dismissal of the majority. It's very nice. I mean, I haven't been debating the sheer lack of logic in your posts given your badly sourced arguments and the indirectness of your approach (at its peak only one in three people will actually use their mics in xbox live in a day, so who knows how you came to the conclusion more then half were ass holes). I've just been debating how you present your inflammatory opinions in a grand scale while hiding them behind weasel wording. Look at your own opinions, you haven't communicated with likely even a quarter of the people you've played with yet you're claiming the majority is bad. You're opinions are (probably) simply wrong. (note the probably! I can do it to!)

Ah, I missed the distinction as you only mentioned online. My apologies for the mistake. Why do you not feel the need to be civil and polite in discussion forums? I'm fairly certain it's rule #1 here, isn't it?

Says the man blanketly insulting a group of over one hundred million people who he has never met or interacted with.

That's unfortunate, some of his early rants were inspired.

I think they were more novel then good. His shtick has kinda gotten old in my eyes and he's been going to greater lengths to try and keep it edgy.

That edit was regarding my previous statement about all of your posts in this thread being rude. I saw that I was mistaken, only the post in response to me was particularly heated, so corrected it. Given your post, I'm guessing you missed my edit? You quoted the edited text, so I'm not sure if you read it before my edit and quoted, or what. If this whole thing is some sort of genuine misunderstanding, I'm happy to let it be.

I wrote a lot of text. I wasn't just gonna delete it all!

Wow. I'm really surprised that the word "troll" is being thrown about so casually here.

Is it so inconceivable that someone would dislike your toy soldiers game, and the only possible explanation for it that they are a bad person who wants to make you angry?

Remember, it's only ok to make fun of something on the internet if you like it.

When someone else makes fun of what you like, then it's trolling.

Cause the interblag is serious business.

Just ignore Yahtzee.

Zero Punctuation stopped being funny years ago. The jokes have largely stagnated, and since his "reviews" never mattered in the first place and were always kinda crappy, there's no real point to watching him. He was a competent presenter, but that is all he really has now. Plus, his self-righteousness on off-topic issues (And his tendency to troll) started to grate, even when I agreed with him. It's like watching an environmentalist movie, except the environmentalist is an Australian gamer with a goatee and fedora.

Extra Punctuation is literally "Zero Punctuation without the things that made Zero Punctuation good." So there's even less point to reading that crap.

Oh yes, and I haven't read the Space Marine review. Judging from the comments here, Yahtzee made another trolling attempt, which are always very boring for the ones not being trolled. That he misses the appeal of 40k doesn't matter; I just hate reading a person's opinion about something they're not even interested in.

I used to be a fan, but I just stopped liking it and now only feel a sort of "Whatever" feeling towards it.

infinite_array wrote:When someone else makes fun of what you like, then it's trolling.

Yahtzee trolls. He's done it for a very long time. See his Brawl response video. Plenty of internet reviewers (Including the guys behind the Retsupurae videos) do the same thing to get hits.

I almost never read opinion pieces on the internet, especially not of the "use lots of swearing and metaphors in a pathetic attempt to be funny" type that guys like this peddle.

Hawww, look at all the hate going on in this thread, how cute.

Every review he's done (barring maybe one) has been ripped into, for comic effect. I think it's not him who has missed the point . Pity he hates everything, Theres a couple I thought weren't bad, but still laughed at the review.
Besides I got my review from someone who does know 40k, and games. His was "So bad I returned it." Nuff said methinks.

Vermillion wrote:Pity he hates everything,

He doesn't actually hate everything. What Yahtzee does is try to push the status quo of the industry. He's so harsh on games because he wants designers to aspire toward new ideas rather than follow each other sheep-like from one gaming trend to the next. Some people interpret him as being impossible to please or being negative just because it's "cool", but having followed him from the beginning I don't think that's true at all. Much of his negativity is quite tongue-in-cheek, and on more than one video he has commented on his audience's inability to comprehend when he points out things wrong with a game but still likes. And keep in mind, Yahtzee has always seen himself as a critic, not a reviewer. To him these are two very different things.

I do kind of wonder if the response of the 40K fandom to his little article didn't reinforce his claim that the game is juvenile, rather than refute it.

JOHIRA wrote:

Vermillion wrote:Pity he hates everything,

He doesn't actually hate everything. What Yahtzee does is try to push the status quo of the industry. He's so harsh on games because he wants designers to aspire toward new ideas rather than follow each other sheep-like from one gaming trend to the next. Some people interpret him as being impossible to please or being negative just because it's "cool", but having followed him from the beginning I don't think that's true at all. Much of his negativity is quite tongue-in-cheek, and on more than one video he has commented on his audience's inability to comprehend when he points out things wrong with a game but still likes. And keep in mind, Yahtzee has always seen himself as a critic, not a reviewer. To him these are two very different things.

I do kind of wonder if the response of the 40K fandom to his little article didn't reinforce his claim that the game is juvenile, rather than refute it.

. I just go for the laughs it gives me everything else is a bonus. Your point of the response however does highlight the internet perfectly, theres always someone willing to overreact and argue. Usually childishly in an amusing way .

He doesn't actually hate everything. What Yahtzee does is try to push the status quo of the industry. He's so harsh on games because he wants designers to aspire toward new ideas rather than follow each other sheep-like from one gaming trend to the next.

Is that why his favorite genre is the PS1 survival horror and he demands a return of the old style FPS where everyone has a set health counter, health packs, and the ability to hold 15 weapons at the same time? Is that why he wants a return to old, menu driven, turn based combat in RPGs?

The dude doesn't push anything, he wants his childhood back.

And keep in mind, Yahtzee has always seen himself as a critic, not a reviewer. To him these are two very different things.

Except they aren't actually different things, he just doesn't want to have to do the job impartially or with any level of accuracy.

I do kind of wonder if the response of the 40K fandom to his little article didn't reinforce his claim that the game is juvenile, rather than refute it.

He spent a page and a half commenting on the 40k community before giving a one paragraph review. A lot of the response is justified. The man is a career troll of communities that he goes out of his way to avoid.

We can say that Yahtzee was unfair because he hates the universe, but, in all honesty, Space Marine really wouldn't be a very good game if it weren't set in the 40k universe; if we took the same plot, characters and general blandness and pasted them into a new setting, there wouldn't be a game I like.

ShumaGorath, I'm not sure what your beef is with me. You've repeatedly claimed I said things that I didn't, and when I've asked you to prove I said them, you post quotes that prove I didn't, and quickly change tactics to hurling insults and fabricating more things I didn't say to rage against. I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you aren't clearly understanding me, which is partially my fault. You claim I've backpedaled repeatedly, but fail to provide any evidence of my having done so.

To address your specific points (at least as I understand them):

1. My assertion is that the majority of online gamers are unpleasant. This is based off my sample size.
* As near as I can tell, you agree with this (please explain what you mean by "our experiences are likely nearly identical" if you do not agree).

2. My discussion of unpleasant online gamers is clearly game-independent.
* So your assertion that I am somehow bad-mouthing the games themselves is incorrect.

3. I can see no point where I "backpedaled" (i.e. said one thing, and then backed away from it to try and say another).
* It is possible that either not fully reading my posts or not fully understanding my posts has led to this claim. If it is the latter, I am more than happy to clear up any misunderstanding you may have.

4. My claim about online gamers is not specific to consoles, and most certainly not specific to one game.
* You've repeatedly talked about consoles and x-box live in particular. I just want to be clear that I am not singling out one particular game here.

5. I'm not sure where you are getting the "has had little interaction with" (it's possible my sample size is too small to make an accurate inference, but I don't believe that it is). I used to spend quite a bit of my time gaming online. And the majority of random players I met were unpleasant. Over the years, I have spent less time gaming with random strangers online, and instead focusing my online gaming with friends as that is more pleasant. I do still venture into gaming with random strangers, and every experience simply reinforces the experiences of my past. And as I stated before, my experiences are very similar to those I know in person who game online. This certainly seems to be the case online as well. I suppose a poll and discussion thread might actually be the right place for this argument to move to, I'll go start that before our discussion drives this thread any further down that path. The new thread is here.

ShumaGorath wrote:I guess I was confused as to the degree of 'trying' going on.

Thank you for that acknowledgement, and my apologies it wasn't more clear to you.

ShumaGorath wrote:

He doesn't actually hate everything. What Yahtzee does is try to push the status quo of the industry. He's so harsh on games because he wants designers to aspire toward new ideas rather than follow each other sheep-like from one gaming trend to the next.

Is that why his favorite genre is the PS1 survival horror and he demands a return of the old style FPS where everyone has a set health counter, health packs, and the ability to hold 15 weapons at the same time? Is that why he wants a return to old, menu driven, turn based combat in RPGs?

His favorite game is actually Magicland Dizzy. But I'm not sure where you're getting that he wants to return to menu-driven, turn-based combat in RPGs. Turn-based combat is one of the aspects of JRPGs he rags on the most. He's even marveled at the rare games he didn't mind it in, like the Paper Mario series.

Now, this brings up an interesting point. You have been misinformed about an ancilliary detail of the person you are criticizing. Following the pattern set in this thread, we should declare you a troll who attacks things he doesn't understand simply because it's cool on the internet to be negative. We should disregard any possibility that you might have an opinion, and simply regard you as a bad person.

But let's rise above that pattern and come up with a better one, shall we?

You're welcome to dislike Yahtzee and more than welcome to disagree with his opinions. But let's not go overboard in the personal attacks, shall we?

And keep in mind, Yahtzee has always seen himself as a critic, not a reviewer. To him these are two very different things.

Except they aren't actually different things, he just doesn't want to have to do the job impartially or with any level of accuracy.

They are different, though people often confuse them. A reviewer's job is to objectively go over a work and evaluate it as good or bad based on the criteria that are most likely to be relevant to their audience. So a restaurant reviewer might conceivably give McDonald's a good review based on for example if their audience wanted to know about fast food. A critic's job is to criticize. They should never accept that the things they review are "good enough", even if the vast majority of their audience is likely to be quite satisfied with them. A critic isn't so much thinking about what their audience wants, but for how things can be improved. So a critic should never let McDonald's escape criticism because no McDonald's product is going to be flawless.

You seem to want Yahtzee to stop criticizing things he dislikes. And yet you clearly dislike Yahtzee, and have spent much of this thread personally attacking him. Doesn't that sound odd to you?

Decent article, it had a few good laughs tucked away in there.

@ all of the people who are hating on Yahtzee: you do realize that his critic/review persona is just an act right?

He's always doom and gloom and hate on everything he reviews for the sake of entertainment.

If he actually hated everything as much as he claims to he just wouldn't bother playing anything.

ShumaGorath wrote:

He doesn't actually hate everything. What Yahtzee does is try to push the status quo of the industry. He's so harsh on games because he wants designers to aspire toward new ideas rather than follow each other sheep-like from one gaming trend to the next.

Is that why his favorite genre is the PS1 survival horror and he demands a return of the old style FPS where everyone has a set health counter, health packs, and the ability to hold 15 weapons at the same time? Is that why he wants a return to old, menu driven, turn based combat in RPGs?

But status quo at the present IS that health bars regenerate and that you can hold two weapons. He wants something different. If this was in the 'golden age' of the FPS back in about 2000-2006, he would be bitching about how tired the health system is then, and how much we need something different, like possibly a regenerating bar. He's complaining about the thing that you're accusing him of; which is a single novel idea that comes out and then it is subsequently raped to death by every last game developer out there. Killing Floor is the last FPS I can think of that didn't actually have Halo-style auto-regenerating health. Admittedly, I don't play many FPS anymore though, there's a reason for that. I'd love for a return to the 'fixed health system'. Even just one game. ESPECIALLY just one game.

I can honestly say, I don't care about this spiel of his.

Hell, I've never even heard of this guy until this thread, so ignoring this one post of his is pretty easy.

More Dakka wrote:Decent article, it had a few good laughs tucked away in there.

@ all of the people who are hating on Yahtzee: you do realize that his critic/review persona is just an act right?

He's always doom and gloom and hate on everything he reviews for the sake of entertainment.

It would help if it was actually entertaining...

Just because the interwebz gives every nub an easy means to blog/podcast/etc. , doesn't mean that everyone should do so...

He reminds me of that guy everybody knows that feel far more clever and informed then they actually are, and who are constantly spouting off even though nobody really gave two s**ts

plastictrees wrote:Was about to read it, unfortunately I have a personal rule against reading anything on the internet written by anyone under 50 with a goatee and wearing a fedora.

or in this case, you still look like a complete tool and a 40 year old virgin:


This dude is an inspiration to foreveraloners all around the world

I love 40k.

I love zero punctuation game reviews.

Lets be honest 40k fiction is very colorful and broad but seldom very intellectually stimulating (40k intellectually really doesn't have anything to 'say').

Space Marine is a very droll game that was essentially fun for an evening, I think the review was spot on. I played it for 2 hours and was basically done. It has about the same concept and depth as quake in a new skin, basically.

The only thing more shallow than the Space Marine game is the Space Marine movie.

... and I liked it mostly, in the right frame of mind.

Lighten up and enjoy all I say!