Traditional games media and YouTubers are pretty consistently at each others necks when
it comes to who does what well or wrong or who knows what it is that their respective
prospective audiences are looking for.
It's been going on for as long as games media as we knew it's decline and the rise
of YouTube began.
More than ever, that's been thoroughly exemplified by this whole Dunkey v Journalists thing that's
developed recently.
For those who don't know because the internet is giant.
Dunkey is a pretty big gaming YouTuber that made a video criticizing games critics.
Well, I'm a YouTuber.
I consume traditional games media content regularly.
&, I think everyone is involved are being big dumb stupid idiots and should kiss and
make up….. and also babies….
To clear the air, I like Dunkey.
I think his video's are hilarious and really well thought out.
This isn't about hating on him or aiming up at the big guy to get some clicks or whatever.
& on the other end, I like the personalities from sites like IGN, Kotaku, Polygon, etc.
This, however, doesn't prevent me from seeing that they all have some pretty big holes in
their arguments for and against the ways each side of the pond goes about critiquing games
differently (spoilers, they ain't all that different.)
The catalyst for this whole thing was the positive reception of the Crash Bandicoot
N Sane trilogy, & on this end, I gotta say, I'm with Dunkey on not agreeing with the
high scores it got, at least, as a game being sold to modern video game players in 2017.
The Crash Bandicoot trilogy just isn't something that works by current standards, platformers
are better and smarter now.
Hell, they were SMARTER back then if you consider Nintendo and Rare's offerings.
Those other games understood what worked in 3D spaces and designed accordingly rather
than just chalking up bad design decisions to being "hard" or even more egregious
"challenging."
Let me explain something to you.
Difficulty in games is valid when it comes to games like Super Meat Boy or Dark Souls.
Those games challenge (or test.
you know, that thing we do to establish skill) the player in a way that teaches them to better
themselves not only in the specific portion of the game that they struggled through but
they also arm you with the knowledge necessary to play through the rest of the game with
skill.
These games are DESIGNED to be learned AND again, TESTED in difficult scenarios and for
that difficulty to make you better by getting through it.
Crash can't teach the player to effectively gauge jumps, only a better perspective could've
done that.
Crash can't teach the player to control Crash better, only better controls could've
done that.Crash Bandicoot was NOT designed to be difficult, it was just designed poorly
for the medium.
Which, for a lot of people, was acceptable back then.
After all, it was a new frontier.
3D Mascot platformers hadn't been done before.
So everybody was learning.
&, that's fine but, it doesn't mean they're GOOD.
Your first drawing most likely sucked, the first meal you cooked likely sucked, and for
most, their first 3D game: sucked.
Sometimes you get lucky and end up with something that isn't GREAT, but, it's workable "this
is fine.
i-ca i can work with this.
i'm gonna save this to show my mom. maybe we can hang it up on the fridge."
Crash did a lot that was *fine*.
Those things were also done just as well (if not better) in Donkey Kong Country games.
You don't learn actionable skills because the game isn't designed in a way that would
facilitate that.
This part isn't hard because you need to be better at platforming, it's hard because
the designers didn't understand that square pegs shouldn't go in round holes no matter
HOW big you make the hole.
What I mean by that is "is it POSSIBLE to beat these levels?"
Sure.
Is it possible to eat steak with a spoon?
ABSOLUTELY!
Does that mean it's an effective approach?
HELL no!
But, don't get me wrong, it did some new things, just, not any *good* new things.
Except for boxes.
We can save those.
But, for the most part, nothing worth other devs taking notes on.
Unless they're making a "do not do ever" list.
So, yeah. on that, I agree with Dunkey.
But, he's also wrong.
Dunkey's video goes into how critics are bad at their jobs, but, I think the onus is
on Dunkey to better understand how they do their job in the 1st place, and WHY they do
it like that.
With IGN in particular they approach their reviews with the aim of the game in mind.
They know Crash Bandicoot N-Sane Trilogy isn't FOR a player like me that didn't really
like the original Crash games, or even necessarily for players that love the modern platformers
of today.
It's a game SPECIFICALLY for the fans and also any poor soul unfortunate enough to be
a Crash fan's offspring.
Activision's blog confirms this by way of comments like these: "Now, we can all agree
that some of the Crash levels were, and still are, not easy.
The challenge of the games is one of the things we all love, and that's why it feels so,
so good when you beat them.
Our goal for the Trilogy was to reduce any points of frustration while preserving the
challenge of the originals, and we feel we've done that.
. . An increased precision is now required in the first game, which makes the gameplay
experience different.
Particularly if you are a new player, you may want to start with the second and third
games first, and then come back to try Crash Bandicoot.
. ."
The word that puts this game into perspective for ME is "preserving."
& yeah, sure, that's obvious for a remake but not ALL remakes actually keep the original
experience unabated.
USUALLY because that original experience doesn't work anymore.
The Legend of Zelda remakes in particular rework or completely axe a lot of the original
content in favor of implementing practices that have since proven to be more effective.
Ratchet & Clank on the PS4 made HUGE changes not only to the gameplay but also its story
and level design to bring the game into modern day.
Those remakes are great because they aim to make games that WE remember fondly something
that fans accustomed to modern game design can appreciate without the "this was great
for its time" asterisk I'm sure many of you have already thrown into the comments,
but, that's just it!
There's plenty of people like YOU, angry or at the very least annoyed commenter!
People that just want to have the same experience as they did in the 90s with the new visual
flourishes of the now, and THOSE people are who this game is for.
Contrary to what many people on YouTube would tell you, there's some pretty smart people
over at IGN and THEY knew that this is what the N Sane trilogy is going for & as a result
assigned it to a reviewer in the target audience for the game.
IMAGINE THAT!
Someone that loves the original, reviewing a replica, of the original!
WHO WOULD'VE DONE SUCH A THING!
Some may say doing so threatens objectivity, but, in all honesty objectivity is limited,
it's boring, and in criticism it doesn't exist.
You get all the objective truths you'll ever find on a game on the back of it's
box, and even that has subjectivity.
People are subjective, get over it.
The BEST you can hope for is to find people with opinions that are honest and well sourced
in regards to WHY they feel a certain way about a game.
THIS WAY even if you disagree with them you know whether or not a game is worth considering
because the problems THEY had with a game may not deter you personally.
Where Dunkey's argument starts showing flaws is in his assertion that an outlet and a YouTuber
should start approaching their business in the same way, this implies that they don't
already… but, like I just said, they do.
Games media is just bigger.
Sites like IGN have consistent voices.
Just as consistent if not MORE than a lot of YouTubers.
This is because traditional media has established rules and ethics.
YouTubers aren't beholden to these.
Media outlets cover every major release.
Independent content creators don't have the bandwidth to do that and a lot of them
only cover a very specific kind of game, which isn't BAD.
Dunkey is right when he says this approach allows viewers the ability to know where you
stand as a critic, but, IGN does a version of the same thing.
& they always have.
Everybody's favorite review to hate, the INFAMOUS Kallie Plagge 7.9 "too much water"
Pokemon Omega & Alpha Sapphire review is another example of this approach, the only difference
being, with that: people THOUGHT she WASN'T a fan of Pokemon and ironically enough in
THIS conversation that made her unfit to review that game.
It almost seems as if game review skeptics just want reviews to echo THEIR opinions….
hmmmmm…..
NAH!
You guys are objective whaddamitalkinabout.
But anyway, this, however is SEPARATE from when a game is reviewed poorly on IGN but
is then praised or vice versa on one of their many podcasts by a DIFFERENT personality.
Generally one that doesn't even review games for IGN at all let alone that game in particular.
They're allowed to have their own opinion about a game that's separate from the IGN
review and if you have the wherewithal to watch (or read) and understand what a reviewer
says about a game I'm positive you can take note that that person's public facing accounts
are there for you to peruse, their IGN account allows you to see everything they've published
on the site.
So essentially you can see the same things you'd be able to see had they been a solo
YouTuber and you scrolled through their channel.
SO you should be able to come to the conclusion that just because a former IGN reviewer like
Jack Davries likes Sonic, or that current host Brian Altano likes or respects Sonic
that doesn't mean that Justin Davis likes Sonic.
EVEN WITH that clip in Dunkey's video, it's kinda clear Justin's trying to move the
conversation along.
Y'know.
Yes And and all of that.
To wrap this up.
Let's talk about scores.
Dunkey says in his video that game critics generally restrict their scores to 7, 8, or
9, which in most cases these days is true, and I agree that's pretty dumb, BUT I'd
like to present to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury that ONE: games are better now
than they ever were so, I mean, yeah, even by Dunkey's standard of comparing games
to more than recent feats in the industry, the average game is bound to be better than
games that belong in the 6 5 4 and below territory.
EVEN MASS EFFECT (which anyone that knows me will tell you I'm not a huge fan of)
but I'm not blind enough to tell you it deserves a TERRIBLE score for some shortcomings.
Just, an average one, which, it has.
& TWO that ALL game scoring is dumb, ESPECIALLY when you consider that all people DO with
said score is use it as leverage in pissing contests with their fellow fanboy friends.
IGN's General Manager Peer Schneider has said himself that eye tracking on the site
points to the majority of clicks on reviews coming from people that IMMEDIATELY scroll
to the score.
The score means NOTHING without the words said EVEN IF you think that the number isn't
inline with your interpretation of what was said.
For instance a game having a problem doesn't bar it from being a 10/10, a proposed 10/10
game having a problem just means it's not perfect BUT what it aims to do it does SO
well that the low points don't hinder the overall experience of the game, reading the
full review generally shows that.
All the actual number does is provides people with a straw man to jump down the reviewers
throat if the number isn't pretty enough to them.
So, too long didn't watch.
YouTube content creation and games media are 2 sides of the same coin, people are allowed
different opinions as long as they back them up and stand by them, and game scores are
dumb.
WE LEARNED A LOT TODAY
But what do YOU think about game critics PICK A SIDE!
YouTubers versus Games media!
I'll have a poll click up here to cast YOUR vote!
Thanks for watching if you liked this video why not share it with a friend or on social
media, I don't maybe tweet it at dunkey, kanye west or IGN.
Your call.
& if you're new here click the subscribe button and leave a comment telling me what
you had for breakfast last Tuesday.
ALSO I'LL BE STREAMING ON THIS CHANNEL TONIGHT!
Come hang out @ midnight eastern time for a Splatoon 2 launch stream with Bob Wulff
from the Wulff Den.
Ok, that's it for me.
See you on stream.
For more infomation >> #Отзыв_НатальеКРАЕВОЙ на консультацию | Как снять видео для Инстаграм | Анализ аккаунта в Инстаграм - Duration: 0:38. 
For more infomation >> Wonderstruck (2017) - Türkçe Altyazılı 1. Teaser Fragman / Todd Haynes, Julianne Moore - Duration: 1:38. 
For more infomation >> Last News #41 - Entrevista Ana Carolina (Mourning Sun) - Subtítulos disponibles - Duration: 23:08. 
For more infomation >> karaoke 2017 HD Sen hồng - karaoke nhạc sống - nhạc thiếu nhi hay nhất chương trình ngoại khóa lớp 3 - Duration: 3:31. 
For more infomation >> Nana Schewski www.nana-schewski.com - Duration: 2:57. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét