A Fanboy's Guide to Fanboying

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

So, I just read your latest Stolen Pixels. And then I read this.

...

I gotta say. You're a man of many talents Mr. Young. *Clap clap*

I expected the word Chime for 3 pages. I am sad now.
But great article nonetheless I suppose.

And its sad. Some of those may actually have been reasonable arguments in the past, but fanboys just twisted and mutated them into something else...

I haven't bothered to read the article, yet I find it trite and pretentious.

I personally stick to the "wait until you've played it" and "don't be such a graphics whore" arguments.

I mean, seriously, spelunky has proven to be fun as hell, but none of my crysis loving buddy's will even try it because of the graphics.

What's our 'missing the satire' count at now?

I think I've seen 4 or 5...

I find it funny that Spider Jerusalem of all people is too naive to catch on :)

I noticed you didn't have a counter-point for #3, but I can't really think of what a good counter-point might be so let's just say it covers both bases. I think the problem with this entire argument is that it's usually not the same people making contrary arguments to defend their game. People tend to latch onto one side or the other, even if both can be applied.

Take for instance the idea that a person who hates rock probably shouldn't review a rock concert. It only makes sense to try for an unbiased review. On the other hand the problem with fans is that they will label a reviewer as "a hater" and claim they never liked/understood the genre in the first place.

I've never quite understood why people respond to reviews with a review of the reviewer rather than with their own thoughts on the product/event.

Shamus Young:
Snip

THEN WHAT ARE WE ALLOWED TO JUDGE IT BY? THE BO-

Oh, I see what you did there.

Bravo sir, it's been a while since I read good sarcasm.

I had this weird, long, semi-argue-y post kicking about, but.. now I just can't shake the question:

Who reviews the reviewer?

At first, I thought this was serious.
Thought it was a little crazy, but serious. Lol

Onyx Oblivion:
So, you can't judge a game!

Got it!

I am now safe from fanboys.

Right?

What did you say about my absolute favorite game of all time Final Metal Halo: A Link to the Sequel 26, that just came out on the Sontendosoft PSBox 4-720ii? I'll have you know you're a hack! You've obviously never played it and shouldn't be allowed to say bad things about it! And just because people mysteriously come back to life after being killed by marauding Darth Teddy Space Marines with absolutely no explanation, doesn't make it bad writing. You're just too thick skulled to understand the subtleties of the experience. And just because it you have to evade every enemy in the game, because you start with a toothpick and they all have 10,000,000 Hp, does not mean the game is bad. Nor is the multiplayer broken when you start with a slingshot and everyone else has BFG 9000's. You obviously just suck at multiplayer! Practice you noob!

No one is safe from the fan boys. Not even the fanboys of games that I just made up.

Shamus Young:
Let's keep a running count of how many people completely miss the satire.

The count is at: 1

I also picked up on the thinly veiled contempt (for fanboys).

Can I get a certificate saying I completed this course? I figure it'll look good on my CV. I can then brag about being a certified Fanboy! For the scientifically inclined:

image

I think this explains it all. Hilarious shit.

I've actually seen all of these while I was on Metacritic this morning. I was looking up reviews for MMetroid.

I feel like a lot of these contradict some of the stuff that Yahtzee does when he reviews a game. :D Anyone else notice that by chance?

*Still giggling*

Onyx Oblivion:
So, you can't judge a game!

Got it!

I am now safe from fanboys.

Right?

Not at all.

Think of a game series you like... Now think of your favourite title from that series. Got it? Good. There are fans of this very same series who will consider you a monster and a mental aberration for liking that particular title instead of another one from the same series, ready to vomit out paragraphs detailing why you are both wrong and EVIL and probably a poser who came late to the series or an old timer who refuses to accept the new directions of the series. You're worse to them than people who don't like the series at all, like some parasitic worm attached to their favourite thing... unless their favourite thing is a parasitic worm in which case feel free to supply your own metaphor.

Straying Bullet:

I think this explains it all. Hilarious shit.

Which is why I posted it on the second comment ;)

Shamus Young:
Let's keep a running count of how many people completely miss the satire.

The count is at: 1

I'm sure the count will end up being way more than one. The true punchline of this piece will be the fanboys that respond to congratulate you because "somebody finally got it right"

The_root_of_all_evil:

Straying Bullet:

I think this explains it all. Hilarious shit.

Which is why I posted it on the second comment ;)

Seriously, didn't notice man. Sorry if you feel ripped. =3

My sarcasm detector is going off the charts!

Bah! TLDNR.

The secret to proper fanboyism is none of those things: it is incandescent incoherent rage. Period. This not about showing the idiot that his/her opinion is wrong, this is about showing the Interwebs that the idiot is worthy of eternal horrific torture for daring to have an opinion at all. This is best accomplished through carefully misspelled words and typographical errors - research shows that the average forum reader spends more time reading these posts, and is thus obviously paying more attention to them - and through the prolific reference to sex, which kindles interest by association with the unknown, and rage... again, mostly by reminding the reader that they have, in fact, never had any. It also helps to maintain almost toxicly high levels of self-loathing while writing the post; childs play for the true fanboy. But those are merely ways of expressing the rage in text; its the rage itself that is important. Logic of any flavor need not apply, much the less rules.

Straying Bullet:

The_root_of_all_evil:

Straying Bullet:

I think this explains it all. Hilarious shit.

Which is why I posted it on the second comment ;)

Seriously, didn't notice man. Sorry if you feel ripped. =3

Not at all. Just goes to show great minds think alike.

Shamus Young:
Let's keep a running count of how many people completely miss the satire.

The count is at: 1

I was wondering whether or not you were serious until about the second page. Good job, sir!

Shamus Young:

I agree with some of your points, although I think that you are outright wrong on other ones or at least not clear enough, which would be:

You're not allowed to review games you know you won't like.

Up to a certain point you might be right about this one... although if you are almost entirely against a certain genre you can be pretty sure of the outcome...

Take Yahtzee for instance, who "refused" to review StarCraft II because he knows about as much about RTS'es as (probably) about knitting socks. I respect him for that and wish he would resort to that option more when it comes to his "RPG" reviews he usually has something deeply against.

It's kind of like a protective mechanism... it's why I usually try to prevent going to romantic comedies in the cinema or why I won't play "Barbie's Horse Adventure", because I'm already pretty sure what I'd think about it...

You're not allowed to judge games by their single-player gameplay.
You're not allowed to judge games by their multiplayer gameplay.

I feel strongly about how wrong you are with this one.
It might fit some games... but honestly there are a lot of titles that either have a strong multiplayer focus with a tacked on singleplayer-story and other titles that have a strong singleplayer focus with a tacked on multiplayer mode. As a thinking human being one should be able to discern the two and make an informed decision on which one is present at the moment.
I find judging a Battlefield or Unreal Tournament game by its Singleplayer about as ridiculous as judging...err Bioshock 2 (can't think of a better example at the moment) for its Multiplayer values?

You're not allowed to criticize a game because the graphics are too primitive.
You're not allowed to criticize a game because the graphics are too advanced.

I will concede that you are somewhat right with this one, but by just judging a game by its "graphics" one will miss a lot of timeless classics like Fallout, Monkey Island or Beyond Good & Evil, I usually also have a certain barrier I don't really tend to cross when it comes to graphical presentation and on some older games there is a certain reluctance for the first few hours... but if it is really good and sucks you in you usually forget all about the graphics and enjoy the game for what it is.

On the other side, you might be able to bitch that your "brand new PC" doesn't play something on Very High at 1080p and whatnot, but when I see someone that in 2010 is complaining that newish games don't work on their GeForce 3 TI and Athlon XP on their Windows 7 and they "tried emulating Pixel Shaders using 3D Analyser" (true story) or expect something new to run really well on their Pre-X360 machine I really have to facepalm myself... those things called "System Requirements" (Minimum & Recommended) are there for a reason you know...

Hah, almost got me. Read the first page and was thinking over an argument in my head. Read the second page and had a good laugh.

I think I might have just developed a brain tumor.

I gonna link this text to the Bioware forums.

Lovely! I was a couple paragraphs in thinking you'd lost your mind before I realized what was going on here....very subtle and well-played!

I hope you have a follow-up article for that curious reversal, the fan hater, and how he can get the most out of his poignant, scathing critiques to send the teeming masses in to a frothing boil...!

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FanHater?from=Main.FanHaters

(Yes, technically it would be the same article with a very slight change of context....)

I almost missed the satire (sad to say), but then I hit the end of the article. Well played, Shamus. Well played.

I get that this is supposed to be a joke, but I legitimately agree with some of the points, such as you can't judge a game until you've played it.

I think a fair ground rule should be that you can't fault a game for being what it is trying to be. If you know a game is unrealistic, you can't fault it for that because it was trying to be that way. Same with the graphics. It's not fair to use what is supposed to be an integral part of the game as a complaint, unless they failed at making said part good. If it I'd done poorly, that's a fault that can be criticized.

I always like these kind of articles, but it's so much funnier reading the replies of people who completely miss the satire.

*munches popcorn*

You just don't get it. A real Fangirl or guy knows whats best based entirely on how they and their favorite game designer feel about a game, not on all that "merits and flaws" junk!

Lolz, he acted like the wrong stuff was right, but I saw what he did there :D

yeah... everybody knows the internet was actually invented for porn. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go correct some idiot on the reviews section who said Halo: Reach is overrated.

chozo_hybrid:
My sarcasm detector is going off the charts!

A sarcasm detector... What a useful invention. cookie for reference

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here