Jim & Yahtzee's Rhymedown Spectacular: Confessions of a Game Reviewer

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

I thought the actual "Line" in Spec Ops was actually better than the phosphorous event. It, at least, wasn't hyped to the point that it might as well have been spoiled.

As per Jim, more power to you. I don't agree with all your views, and therefore don't turn to you for reviews that often--I tend to like some of the crapper games, they have a kind of charm to them. I still think it's good for you to stand up like that; after all, a review is just one person's opinion.

It's nice to see yahztee hasn't forgotten about one the most significant games of last year.
Disclaimer: that's my opinion.

Excellent wordsmithing. Yahtzee's description of weapons was clear and enjoyable and the "ball/party' theme was great. Jim went straight to the point. Mayhaps, Yahtzee's poem was off topic, but I'm new and not sure if poems come 1st and then the video is named or if the topic is set 1st and then the words are smithed into perfection.

I never get tired of Jim's Cage impression.

Emotion, emotions emotions.

Amazing job, both of you. Jim's was short and sweet, and Yahtzee's was an absolute blast; I wasn't ready for the punchlines in either. Can't wait for next week

Really liked Jim this month. This needs to be the response any journalist with integrity gives to people demanding they change their opinion to suit others needs. I enjoyed Ben's as well but I sadly haven't played Spec Ops and so must have missed out on something.

No "Miss Shurikens & Lightning" Yahtzee? I am disappointed.

I'm on Jim's side when the Witcher 2 comes up. I bought it two weeks ago when it was on sale on GOG and i really don't like it.
I cannot fathom how they could #### up the controls so bad. I actually made a list with all things that annoy me, i'm at 92 points.

Example:
Why can i only change the assignment of the keys in the starting menu ?
Why can i not change all keys ?
We have the year 2013 and CD projekt seems to think every gamer has a mouse with only 2 buttons, because i cannot set actions to other buttons but left and right mouse.
....
....

The list goes on and on.
The story is not bad, not great, but not bad. Everything else is just a disappointment.

I really liked Witcher 1, i completed it 7 times, but Witcher 2 is just bad.
And Jim seems to be the only reviewer who did not let himself be blinded by the grafics.

Sorry for my english, i'm a kraut.

I want to pick up a history book and hit myself with it...

MichaelMaverick:

slash2x:
There is no BS "oh someone reviewed this game. BTW the page was paid for by the people who made the game, it got a 10 SURPRISE!"

Look up the Company of Heroes 2 review.

Meh that game was all over the review charts. Either people loved it or hated it. I am more talking about how they are willing to do this http://www.destructoid.com/review-retro-city-rampage-237235.phtml

Jim, respect man. Holding strong to your beliefs, and that's what a review is, a persons opinions and beliefs about a game.

Sonic Colors was shit. Thank god for you, Jim!

Also, I didn't see the white phosphorus thing coming, well played Yahtzee.

I felt uncomfortable with white phosphorous before it was cool.

I always felt slightly guilty using it against infantry in World in Conflict. If they could've just left my tanks in peace...

Sure, in reality Jim calmly placed the tablet down and sipped his drink, but in my mind he dropped the mic and walked away.

Bravo, gentlemen! In Yahtzee's poem, I felt sorry for the plasma gun and BFG and the other "unrealistic" weapons stuck on the balcony. And as for Ms. White-phosphorous, stop inviting her! that crazy bitch always ruins everyone else's good times.

JarinArenos:
No "Miss Shurikens & Lightning" Yahtzee? I am disappointed.

Did he mention that? I'll have to listen again! I know he didn't bring up the gun from Resistance 3, which he called "The Jimmy Hendrix Experience." I can see how that would be hard to find rhymes for.
As for Jim, what's his review style like? When most other critics like a game, he says he hates it, just to be contrarian?

Good poems, both you blokes!

Also, Yahtzee is a damn-fine looking guy, although in a suit, va-va-voom! (Yes, I am well aware he is asexual, still not gonna lie, he's a fine looking guy.)

Shooter's ball really felt ironic since most shooters have no playable women, especially in console games.

But we do have an affinity for weapons and it makes sense with guns being a typically a guy thing. Typically, as in this tomboy appreciates the smell of expended gunpowder, rendering raiders into piles of ash, or goo, and the screams caused by incendiary grenades, and chaos!!

Still Rainbow Six's MG36, or most any gun with a beta mag doesn't exactly resemble something a woman has.

Having played both, I'd say I prefer Wet over Vanquish in terms of rockstar slides in combat. <.<

And I'm in the camp of knowing full well reviews are opinions, even in pointing out things that could be considered facts.

captcha: i'm batman
No one will ever suspect!! MWAHAHAHAHA!

wai-wai-wai-wai-wai-wai-wait. That was a mask!? I thought you really got David to go on your show.

Jim used music from the Witcher 2 for the background. Or maybe someone else did but it's there.
I dunno why I found that amusing.

In terms with Jim's poem, all I could think of was:

image

"Because I don't fuckiing check that SHIIIT!"

impocalyptic:
Thank you Yahtzee for reminding us all about how we chose to do a bad thing.

We didn't choose shit. The game basically said, "Now dump tons of incendiary chemicals on these baddies, or you don't get to continue." So I do it and then the game goes, "Psyche! There were civilians down there the whole time, and even though you can clearly see them even through your thermal scope, the WP artificially expands to kill them anyway! Trollolol!" And then I yelled, "Bullshit," and threw the game across the room.

geier:

We have the year 2013 and CD projekt seems to think every gamer has a mouse with only 2 buttons, because i cannot set actions to other buttons but left and right mouse.

I think there might be a problem with your copy/mouse, because I'm able to do that just fine (eg, I have the circular menu set to middle mouse button, "cast sign" set to thumb button 1, and block set to thumb button 2)

So Ben ends the party early and Jim gave us the finger. I feel so... enriched! :)

I must be one of the silent minority, because whenever I tried a game that Jim had rated average or under I ended up agreeing with him. Also, as much as I admit that it's refreshing to have games like the Witcher 2 show up again, it just wasn't my kind of game.

viggih7:
[quote="AC10" post="6.821426.19851466"]OT: the Shooter poem had me giggling at the metaphors but when wp was mentioned I got kind of depressed and shit. God damnit Spec Ops.

most of us got depressed.

also, he forgot rocket launcher.

and miss eridium :)

I think this segment has peak replaced the ZP reviews as my new favourite. Amazing work, keep it up guys :)

I think this one was Yahtzee's best thus far, topping even the "Cover Lover" episode. I had to pause at 1:34 because I couldn't hear the words over my laughter.

Ms. White Phosphorus turned me off of military shooters, thought I think it was for the best.

Also, Jim poem was awesome

Darth_Payn:

As for Jim, what's his review style like? When most other critics like a game, he says he hates it, just to be contrarian?

Not really, he's just honest. And he uses 5 as the average score instead of 7.

I think he gave The Last of Us a 9 or a 10, so he's not a contrarian.

I enjoyed the gun/weapon personification. Great job. This episode has been refreshing.

Machine Man 1992:

impocalyptic:
Thank you Yahtzee for reminding us all about how we chose to do a bad thing.

We didn't choose shit. The game basically said, "Now dump tons of incendiary chemicals on these baddies, or you don't get to continue." So I do it and then the game goes, "Psyche! There were civilians down there the whole time, and even though you can clearly see them even through your thermal scope, the WP artificially expands to kill them anyway! Trollolol!" And then I yelled, "Bullshit," and threw the game across the room.

Even if you knew they were civilians or not, you still made the conscious decision to fire the launcher. You could've turned off the game. There is always a choice. Every one of us who completed spec ops chose it whether we knew what was coming or not.

Both were great, but I liked Yahtzee's more.

The last line with white phosphorus really had me thinking back at that scene in Spec Ops that shook me quite a bit. I tend not to be emotionally involved when playing military shooters, but that one scene really elevated the game for me. That and end mindfuck of an ending.

MichaelMaverick:
No Jim, I assure you that your biggest mishap by far was indeed Vanquish, which is objectively good at the very least. Don't worry though, I can't even get angry at your reviews any more. :D

"Objectively good"? What, did it have an unusually high StC time or something?

impocalyptic:

Machine Man 1992:

impocalyptic:
Thank you Yahtzee for reminding us all about how we chose to do a bad thing.

We didn't choose shit. The game basically said, "Now dump tons of incendiary chemicals on these baddies, or you don't get to continue." So I do it and then the game goes, "Psyche! There were civilians down there the whole time, and even though you can clearly see them even through your thermal scope, the WP artificially expands to kill them anyway! Trollolol!" And then I yelled, "Bullshit," and threw the game across the room.

Even if you knew they were civilians or not, you still made the conscious decision to fire the launcher. You could've turned off the game. There is always a choice. Every one of us who completed spec ops chose it whether we knew what was coming or not.

The problem with your logic of just turning off the game is that you've already killed tons of bad guys by other means, but suddenly its wrong to kill some more with a different kind of weapon. Killing bad guys is what these kind of games are about. For them to suddenly throw in some kind of moral quandary about it is utter horse shit. To avoid killing the civs would have required clairvoyant abilities to know the civs where there beforehand so there was no moral choice there. The soldiers and unknown civilians could have just as easily been killed by artillery, but the game forced you to use a method of destruction they felt is morally wrong. I felt the whole phosphorus event was bullshit on so many levels.

First, it was a prime example of the game writers story once again usurping the free will of the player so said writer could make a dramatic point. Second, I feel it cheapened the true horror of white phosphorus in combat as in game it looks as if most of the casualties died quite quickly, while in reality white phosphorous injuries offer a gruesome lingering agony. Third, how dare a game franchise that has the player mowing down thousands of faceless adversaries as a form of fun suddenly try to get moralistic and preachy on the player, by adding some unavoidable and surprise genocide of civilians. I'm not sure what picture perfect reality the game makers live in but war is rarely if ever like two teams on a football pitch where everyone else is just an uninvolved spectator. The sad reality, especially when urban combat is involved, is civilian casualties as usually quite high. For games that attempt to make war a fun past time to ignore this most of the time, and then railroad their players to face it in a "surprise son you done fucked up" way, I find completely disingenuous and self serving. Not to mention self defeating to whatever moral message they are trying to convey.

Scripted gritty realism isn't realism at all. And a game that has you essentially happily murder thousands for entertainment value to then turn around and try mindfuck you by putting you in a situation where accidental murder is somehow suddenly a bad thing, is a game that badly needs to pull is pretentious head out of its own ass.

Anyway, I totally understand Ben's gritty realistic shooter fatigue. Seen the real thing, and these so called realistic shooters don't have a fucking clue. Games are supposed to be about fun, if game makers want to try to add an element of self regret and give the player a case of PTSD in a game where the objective of entertainment is mass carnage, then I feel that game maker needs to move on to some other genre, because you can't have it both ways.

And Jim, you not being afraid of telling people what you really think is the main reason I like you. Don't go a changin.

impocalyptic:

Machine Man 1992:

impocalyptic:
Thank you Yahtzee for reminding us all about how we chose to do a bad thing.

We didn't choose shit. The game basically said, "Now dump tons of incendiary chemicals on these baddies, or you don't get to continue." So I do it and then the game goes, "Psyche! There were civilians down there the whole time, and even though you can clearly see them even through your thermal scope, the WP artificially expands to kill them anyway! Trollolol!" And then I yelled, "Bullshit," and threw the game across the room.

Even if you knew they were civilians or not, you still made the conscious decision to fire the launcher. You could've turned off the game. There is always a choice. Every one of us who completed spec ops chose it whether we knew what was coming or not.

Bullshit. "Turning off the game" doesn't solve shit. I didn't choose to burn the civilians; I chose to burn the humvee that was shooting at me and they burned anyway.

tardcore:

impocalyptic:

Machine Man 1992:

We didn't choose shit. The game basically said, "Now dump tons of incendiary chemicals on these baddies, or you don't get to continue." So I do it and then the game goes, "Psyche! There were civilians down there the whole time, and even though you can clearly see them even through your thermal scope, the WP artificially expands to kill them anyway! Trollolol!" And then I yelled, "Bullshit," and threw the game across the room.

Even if you knew they were civilians or not, you still made the conscious decision to fire the launcher. You could've turned off the game. There is always a choice. Every one of us who completed spec ops chose it whether we knew what was coming or not.

The problem with your logic of just turning off the game is that you've already killed tons of bad guys by other means, but suddenly its wrong to kill some more with a different kind of weapon. Killing bad guys is what these kind of games are about. For them to suddenly throw in some kind of moral quandary about it is utter horse shit. To avoid killing the civs would have required clairvoyant abilities to know the civs where there beforehand so there was no moral choice there. The soldiers and unknown civilians could have just as easily been killed by artillery, but the game forced you to use a method of destruction they felt is morally wrong. I felt the whole phosphorus event was bullshit on so many levels.

First, it was a prime example of the game writers story once again usurping the free will of the player so said writer could make a dramatic point. Second, I feel it cheapened the true horror of white phosphorus in combat as in game it looks as if most of the casualties died quite quickly, while in reality white phosphorous injuries offer a gruesome lingering agony. Third, how dare a game franchise that has the player mowing down thousands of faceless adversaries as a form of fun suddenly try to get moralistic and preachy on the player, by adding some unavoidable and surprise genocide of civilians. I'm not sure what picture perfect reality the game makers live in but war is rarely if ever like two teams on a football pitch where everyone else is just an uninvolved spectator. The sad reality, especially when urban combat is involved, is civilian casualties as usually quite high. For games that attempt to make war a fun past time to ignore this most of the time, and then railroad their players to face it in a "surprise son you done fucked up" way, I find completely disingenuous and self serving. Not to mention self defeating to whatever moral message they are trying to convey.

Scripted gritty realism isn't realism at all. And a game that has you essentially happily murder thousands for entertainment value to then turn around and try mindfuck you by putting you in a situation where accidental murder is somehow suddenly a bad thing, is a game that badly needs to pull is pretentious head out of its own ass.

Anyway, I totally understand Ben's gritty realistic shooter fatigue. Seen the real thing, and these so called realistic shooters don't have a fucking clue. Games are supposed to be about fun, if game makers want to try to add an element of self regret and give the player a case of PTSD in a game where the objective of entertainment is mass carnage, then I feel that game maker needs to move on to some other genre, because you can't have it both ways.

And Jim, you not being afraid of telling people what you really think is the main reason I like you. Don't go a changin.

It was hyped and hinted at vehemently. Most knew something bad would happen and the horror of the WP grenade was shown earlier in the game. For the most part, I do agree with you though. Most shooters make the killing to be fun when we all know that war is ugly regardless of the cause.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 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