So basically what you are telling us is that a person shouldn't put up negative reviews of Minecraft on Youtube, but people should use Youtube to figure out if they'd like Minecraft or not
jesus christ
No what I'm saying is you should watch gameplay of a game before you buy it. If you don't like it, you don't have to tell the whole f***ing world that you hate it and then hate on people that do like it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.
No what I'm saying is you should watch gameplay of a game before you buy it. If you don't like it, you don't have to tell the whole f***ing world that you hate it and then hate on people that do like it.
I'm not hating on people who like it. In fact it sounds like you're hating on people who don't like it.
But I'm not playing the game. There's plenty of games out there that look boring to watch but are fun to play. And a review is a review. Are you saying that for every review it has to be a game that you like? Cause I don't find that necessarily fair. I might as well not review anything at all since it will be biased if I do.
This is the psychology of the sycophantic fans of many modern video games. "Don't say anything if you don't have anything positive to say!" As if endlessly rubbing the balls of the developers is going to improve the games anymore than someone who tirelessly critiques them. Thanks to Minecraft fans' maintenance of the status quo and utter fear of thinking there could be anything wrong with a game they've invested so much in (I've played the hell out of this game btw), it is rated as one of the best games of all time on Metacritic and notch probably honestly believes that also. What motivation does he have to fix the problems?
No what I'm saying is you should watch gameplay of a game before you buy it. If you don't like it, you don't have to tell the whole f***ing world that you hate it and then hate on people that do like it.
"When we release a pure bugfix update, people get VERY upset ("NOTHING CHANGED!").. Adding features gives us much happier users. But I do realize that it's only happier users in the short term." - Notch
This is the most objective and arrogant rant of this game by someone who most likely got blown up by a creeper on his first day damn hater. Probably plays MW3.
This is the psychology of the sycophantic fans of many modern video games. "Don't say anything if you don't have anything positive to say!" As if endlessly rubbing the balls of the developers is going to improve the games anymore than someone who tirelessly critiques them. Thanks to Minecraft fans' maintenance of the status quo and utter fear of thinking there could be anything wrong with a game they've invested so much in (I've played the hell out of this game btw), it is rated as one of the best games of all time on Metacritic and notch probably honestly believes that also. What motivation does he have to fix the problems?
I'm hating on people who hate on people who like it. It's like hateception.
I don't know why you hate on people so easily, you seem like a really nice person, so stop the hate train man! Just take everything with a grain of salt.
This is the most objective and arrogant rant of this game by someone who most likely got blown up by a creeper on his first day damn hater. Probably plays MW3.
Most intelligent thing I've heard on these forums. +1 to you good sir.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.
This is the most objective and arrogant rant of this game by someone who most likely got blown up by a creeper on his first day damn hater. Probably plays MW3.
I don't see anything wrong with people who play MW3. They play what they like.
I don't know why you hate on people so easily, you seem like a really nice person, so stop the hate train man! Just take everything with a grain of salt.
Well I've never hated on anybody before. That review just really pissed me off. I've just never seen so much hate on something so great before.
This is the most objective and arrogant rant of this game by someone who most likely got blown up by a creeper on his first day damn hater. Probably plays MW3.
The funny thing is that in this reply you not only implied that he was being unbiased but then you used a subjectively-loaded term (arrogant, judging whether his amount of pride is excessive) to follow it up, and probably don't realize it
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BETA
"When we release a pure bugfix update, people get VERY upset ("NOTHING CHANGED!").. Adding features gives us much happier users. But I do realize that it's only happier users in the short term." - Notch
I don't see anything wrong with people who play MW3. They play what they like.
That is not my point this is too one-sided and it was not honest at-all just your opinion of the game. In my eyes a review should show the gameplay and leave personal objective comments to themselves. It should not persuade or deter the game in any way.
That is not my point this is too one-sided and it was not honest at-all just your opinion of the game. In my eyes a review should show the gameplay and leave personal objective comments to themselves. It should not persuade or deter the game in any way.
This.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see.
I can agree that from some perspectives minecraft doesn't keep up to other games, however, it seems that the reviewer play Minecraft for all of the wrong reasons. The game is not about fighting mobs, so you can't expect the most inspiring fighting system either.
The funny thing is that in this reply you not only implied that he was being unbiased but then you used a subjectively-loaded term (arrogant, judging whether his amount of pride is excessive) to follow it up, and probably don't realize it
I can't believe reviewers are giving this a 10/10. I can see why people enjoy it. It's basically Lego as a multiplayer computer game, and that can be fun. But as an actual video game it's pretty awful. I'm just glad I didn't pay any more than what I did when it was in alpha.
I got bored a few minutes in. Then I decided it was pointless to watch a review for a game that I already decided I liked. It's even more pointless to post a review for a game on that games forum, because people who have joined that forum will have already played the game and thus be outside the target demographic of people to view the review- that is, people that haven't played it.
I do love the labeling of subjective opinion as objectivity. Delightful! "Here's an objective review" defended by "it's just my opinion"... haha.
I honestly think game reviews are ****ing stupid- or more precisely, people who would need to watch them would be. They are supposed to be for people who haven't played the game at all. And yet, you can just buy the game and see if you like it. I swear people spend more time trying to decide what game they want to buy than they do on what they will eat for dinner, even when they cost the same. The only other case for a game review would be for niche games or indie games. Minecraft is indie but it's rather well-covered.
Another problem I have with Game "reviews" is that they only come in two varieties most of the time: it's either somebody telling you the game will cure cancer and brought all their pets back from the dead, or It's somebody bitching about pointless crap that is neither relevant to the gameplay nor anything even close, such as this one. Very rarely can you find somebody able to actually be objective. The only person I've found able to do that in all youtube is Totalbiscuit/TotalHalibut.
You want to know why I hardly watch reviews for games? Because it's pointless. You can't just assign a number on a linear scale for a game to decide whether it's good or bad. You should present facts, not opinions, and then let the people watching decide if they like it- obviously you can offer your own opinion on features. I find reviews that give games a score annoying because it's basically "here, we know you're too stupid to think of whether you like this game based on it's merits/faults, so we've assigned a nice easy to read number for you".
That, and nowadays those scores to end to cluster at the high end for commercial game-type things like IGM or EuroGamer or whatever, or at the low end for minor youtube wannabes who start their videos with a 80's style intro, because they decided to try the game based on the number given by the former and discovered "holy ****! whether a game is good or bad is not something that can be measured with a single value". Of course they instead decide that the game is **** and make sure to dig up irrelevant dirt and tangential information on the creator for no good reason to support their otherwise absurd claims. I mean, if you have to go into this huge backstory about why Minecraft's art is bad, and can't just show a screenshot and say "it's bad" than... it's not bad. That, combined with the fact that regardless of the expertise of the person creating the art, in Minecraft's case, they only have 16x16 pixels to work with.
I also like the label "pro gamer" on the title. The oxymoron in that statement never fails to amuse me.
That is not my point this is too one-sided and it was not honest at-all just your opinion of the game. In my eyes a review should show the gameplay and leave personal objective comments to themselves. It should not persuade or deter the game in any way.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
And a review is supposed to be a critical evaluation, not an unabridged exhibit of the game's entire content. Where do you think Ebert or Shalit would be if they just showed entire movies instead of commenting on their craftsmanship? The whole point of a review is to bring up poignant observations about the piece, including comparing qualities of its parts to other products in the market, assess its artistic merit, and place a value on the thing as a whole. The critic, usually an expert or long-time patron of whatever area, gives his insights into the piece so you can find out his SUBJECTIVE (what you mean by "objective") opinion of the subject is, since he probably has more interesting things to say about it than you do. I don't know how old you are, but yes, naturally as people experience more of something they become more cynical. It makes sense for a critic that knows as much about video games as "ROCKCOCK64" does to be relentlessly harsh on this game, because he can much more easily recognize the inherent failures in its design.
Let us also not forget the reason he actually did this review - it was because his ****-take comedy sketch of the first Minecraft review he did (which you undoubtedly would have fallen for) was noticed by the hordes of unimaginative Minecraft fans, who told him to be more objective and serious, so he did just that, producing perhaps one of the only serious reviews he's done for TBG. Are you really surprised that he brought up solid points - points that you will probably rationalize away, nonetheless - in this review?
It was no more one-sided than the hundreds of reviews by the mindless drones out there who rate this game among the best ever. The fact of the matter is that these people are not interested at looking at or discussing faults in the game. They are afraid of something they enjoy being perceived as less than perfect, because they believe that their judgment is perfect. They will rationalize and argue indignantly for an eternity just because someone pointed out a handful of flaws in something they like. That is why reviews like these exist: to say what others (such as yourself) dare not.
I also like the label "pro gamer" on the title. The oxymoron in that statement never fails to amuse me.
A "game" does not necessarily describe a leisure activity, and there are probably professional gamers that make more money than you do, statistically speaking. Very ironic that you should choose to define these words so rigidly after your dissertation on how one can't assign numerical values to things based on their preference.
I can read, and guess what? You are the one that is being arrogant. Your stupid child mind can't even commit to the contextually appropriate definition of "objective", and you expect us to read your mind and take you seriously? What you mean to say is that he is being subjective. The only reason the other guy agreed with you was because you disparaged ROCKCOCK64, and not surprisingly he was also not intellectually fit enough to notice your failure to communicate in a logical fashion.
But yes, you are done here, as are the other guys who got so butthurt at this video.
"When we release a pure bugfix update, people get VERY upset ("NOTHING CHANGED!").. Adding features gives us much happier users. But I do realize that it's only happier users in the short term." - Notch
Anyway, I was just showing you guys a different perspective instead of all those 10/10s reviews! Its good sometimes to see different opinions.
I'm sorry to take the steam out of your "It's a Good Honest Review! DON'T HATE!" machine, but perhaps you should look at how they rated Portal 2, universally acclaimed as one of the best games of the year: http://thebestgamers.net/viewarticle.php?pg_id=portal2article
Or perhaps check out their LAST review of Minecraft, in which they blasted it for having a poor physics engine while using a mod for strange physics...
They're a satire group. You're using a SATIRE group to prove your point, which is like using Stephen Colbert to prove that Republicans have a point. (BUT HE AGREES WITH THEM!!1!)
No what I'm saying is you should watch gameplay of a game before you buy it. If you don't like it, you don't have to tell the whole f***ing world that you hate it and then hate on people that do like it.
Texture packs are not part of a game, and reviewing a game with a texture pack is disrespectful for the person who made the texture pack.
I'm not hating on people who like it. In fact it sounds like you're hating on people who don't like it.
I'm hating on people who hate on people who like it. It's like hateception.
This is the psychology of the sycophantic fans of many modern video games. "Don't say anything if you don't have anything positive to say!" As if endlessly rubbing the balls of the developers is going to improve the games anymore than someone who tirelessly critiques them. Thanks to Minecraft fans' maintenance of the status quo and utter fear of thinking there could be anything wrong with a game they've invested so much in (I've played the hell out of this game btw), it is rated as one of the best games of all time on Metacritic and notch probably honestly believes that also. What motivation does he have to fix the problems?
Ok, but what if you like to think logically?
"When we release a pure bugfix update, people get VERY upset ("NOTHING CHANGED!").. Adding features gives us much happier users. But I do realize that it's only happier users in the short term." - Notch
Yeap! Its called being a critic for a reason!
I don't know why you hate on people so easily, you seem like a really nice person, so stop the hate train man! Just take everything with a grain of salt.
Most intelligent thing I've heard on these forums. +1 to you good sir.
I don't see anything wrong with people who play MW3. They play what they like.
Well I've never hated on anybody before. That review just really pissed me off. I've just never seen so much hate on something so great before.
Actually I've played a little MW3 too. Me and some pals play survival a lot. It's also a pretty good game.
The funny thing is that in this reply you not only implied that he was being unbiased but then you used a subjectively-loaded term (arrogant, judging whether his amount of pride is excessive) to follow it up, and probably don't realize it
"When we release a pure bugfix update, people get VERY upset ("NOTHING CHANGED!").. Adding features gives us much happier users. But I do realize that it's only happier users in the short term." - Notch
That is not my point this is too one-sided and it was not honest at-all just your opinion of the game. In my eyes a review should show the gameplay and leave personal objective comments to themselves. It should not persuade or deter the game in any way.
This.
What about, I don't know... BUILDING?
No i am implying he is bias
if you can read.Edit: I wont be rude, and I am done here.
I do love the labeling of subjective opinion as objectivity. Delightful! "Here's an objective review" defended by "it's just my opinion"... haha.
I honestly think game reviews are ****ing stupid- or more precisely, people who would need to watch them would be. They are supposed to be for people who haven't played the game at all. And yet, you can just buy the game and see if you like it. I swear people spend more time trying to decide what game they want to buy than they do on what they will eat for dinner, even when they cost the same. The only other case for a game review would be for niche games or indie games. Minecraft is indie but it's rather well-covered.
Another problem I have with Game "reviews" is that they only come in two varieties most of the time: it's either somebody telling you the game will cure cancer and brought all their pets back from the dead, or It's somebody bitching about pointless crap that is neither relevant to the gameplay nor anything even close, such as this one. Very rarely can you find somebody able to actually be objective. The only person I've found able to do that in all youtube is Totalbiscuit/TotalHalibut.
You want to know why I hardly watch reviews for games? Because it's pointless. You can't just assign a number on a linear scale for a game to decide whether it's good or bad. You should present facts, not opinions, and then let the people watching decide if they like it- obviously you can offer your own opinion on features. I find reviews that give games a score annoying because it's basically "here, we know you're too stupid to think of whether you like this game based on it's merits/faults, so we've assigned a nice easy to read number for you".
That, and nowadays those scores to end to cluster at the high end for commercial game-type things like IGM or EuroGamer or whatever, or at the low end for minor youtube wannabes who start their videos with a 80's style intro, because they decided to try the game based on the number given by the former and discovered "holy ****! whether a game is good or bad is not something that can be measured with a single value". Of course they instead decide that the game is **** and make sure to dig up irrelevant dirt and tangential information on the creator for no good reason to support their otherwise absurd claims. I mean, if you have to go into this huge backstory about why Minecraft's art is bad, and can't just show a screenshot and say "it's bad" than... it's not bad. That, combined with the fact that regardless of the expertise of the person creating the art, in Minecraft's case, they only have 16x16 pixels to work with.
I also like the label "pro gamer" on the title. The oxymoron in that statement never fails to amuse me.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
And a review is supposed to be a critical evaluation, not an unabridged exhibit of the game's entire content. Where do you think Ebert or Shalit would be if they just showed entire movies instead of commenting on their craftsmanship? The whole point of a review is to bring up poignant observations about the piece, including comparing qualities of its parts to other products in the market, assess its artistic merit, and place a value on the thing as a whole. The critic, usually an expert or long-time patron of whatever area, gives his insights into the piece so you can find out his SUBJECTIVE (what you mean by "objective") opinion of the subject is, since he probably has more interesting things to say about it than you do. I don't know how old you are, but yes, naturally as people experience more of something they become more cynical. It makes sense for a critic that knows as much about video games as "ROCKCOCK64" does to be relentlessly harsh on this game, because he can much more easily recognize the inherent failures in its design.
Let us also not forget the reason he actually did this review - it was because his ****-take comedy sketch of the first Minecraft review he did (which you undoubtedly would have fallen for) was noticed by the hordes of unimaginative Minecraft fans, who told him to be more objective and serious, so he did just that, producing perhaps one of the only serious reviews he's done for TBG. Are you really surprised that he brought up solid points - points that you will probably rationalize away, nonetheless - in this review?
It was no more one-sided than the hundreds of reviews by the mindless drones out there who rate this game among the best ever. The fact of the matter is that these people are not interested at looking at or discussing faults in the game. They are afraid of something they enjoy being perceived as less than perfect, because they believe that their judgment is perfect. They will rationalize and argue indignantly for an eternity just because someone pointed out a handful of flaws in something they like. That is why reviews like these exist: to say what others (such as yourself) dare not.
A "game" does not necessarily describe a leisure activity, and there are probably professional gamers that make more money than you do, statistically speaking. Very ironic that you should choose to define these words so rigidly after your dissertation on how one can't assign numerical values to things based on their preference.
I can read, and guess what? You are the one that is being arrogant. Your stupid child mind can't even commit to the contextually appropriate definition of "objective", and you expect us to read your mind and take you seriously? What you mean to say is that he is being subjective. The only reason the other guy agreed with you was because you disparaged ROCKCOCK64, and not surprisingly he was also not intellectually fit enough to notice your failure to communicate in a logical fashion.
But yes, you are done here, as are the other guys who got so butthurt at this video.
"When we release a pure bugfix update, people get VERY upset ("NOTHING CHANGED!").. Adding features gives us much happier users. But I do realize that it's only happier users in the short term." - Notch
I'm sorry to take the steam out of your "It's a Good Honest Review! DON'T HATE!" machine, but perhaps you should look at how they rated Portal 2, universally acclaimed as one of the best games of the year: http://thebestgamers.net/viewarticle.php?pg_id=portal2article
Or perhaps check out their LAST review of Minecraft, in which they blasted it for having a poor physics engine while using a mod for strange physics...
They're a satire group. You're using a SATIRE group to prove your point, which is like using Stephen Colbert to prove that Republicans have a point. (BUT HE AGREES WITH THEM!!1!)
I'm sorry, but I rate your argument a 2/10